They are not bugs if it just bugs you

from GalCiv2 Forums
you know i have read a lot of posts and just had to make one of my own here. Th emost i see is this is a bug that is a bug fix this fix that. I have been playing for a while and really like this game. You get to research then build ships how you want. At least you are not stuck with static designs teh AI will respond by altering their ships to stop yours. Most of what i see is just suggestions and not bugs. I like the game some of the best money i have spent on a game in a while. Plus you cant go wrong stardock is great support staff. The best i have ever seen already 2 patches for the game. i will defintly be a return buyer of there other games especially if they do more of there 4x games (there just aint enough of them around). So in conclusion guys good job on teh game.... Also as far as suggestions go i would like some tactical choice in combat like strafe evade retreat that gives minor bonuses but doesent effect the game and a few more ship components plz other then that great game
9,632 views 11 replies
Reply #1 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I will say one thing ,,,,once EA or Activisoin, or Atari release a game ... It may get a patch ... but it certainly will not evolve much if any....

With the Gal Civs they evolve a bit over time .. the designers are not afraid to dial it in so to speak after reading all the feed back.

And some things design choices can look like a bug if you dont expect it to work the way you think it should. One comes to mind ...captured planes have special building built on a great tile but you can't upgrade/destroy the building.
Could be they designed it that way ... could be a bug.. Odds are this late stage its a design choice, but does look like a bug as well.

If its a bug they will fix it .. if its a design choice they may change it ... but certainly with the big companies after the first workable patch they move on. Atari dosent even host their own patch downloads, go figure.....
Reply #2 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Yeah, I am sure that most people have got bored of responding to these posts.... I tend to start a reply with a dry "it's not a bug it's a....." because I dont want people to get into an argument over this daily and to have 40 post threads about it while more important matters and strategy talks etc are pushed off the front page and end up with 0 replies.

I think that most people who do it simply dont understand the word bug. That's not just me criticising their intelligence, I mean it in a very literal sense. Bug has come to mean something other than the intended word - i.e. something that is not working as intended. Basically here people use it to mean anything from it doesnt do what I expect, want or hoped it would do.

Frustrating at times.... very frustrating!

I have said it before and will keep saying it..... the biggest bug in this game are the Thalans!!
Elemental: Reforged
Reply #3 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
A feature that many players hate should be complained about. If nobody complains then it won't be changed.
Reply #4 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
A feature that many players hate should be complained about. If nobody complains then it won't be changed.


You are right. But it still must not be called a bug.
Reply #5 from GalCiv2 Forums Top

Also, may I add, as a regular viewer of these forums, that properly identifying bugs vs. feature requests vs. gameplay tweaks helps us quickly sort out the stuff that NEEDS to be fixed, opposed to the stuff that would be nice to fix.

That's all I'll say...back to fixing bugs (read: the legitimate kind) 

Reply #6 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
That's all I'll say...back to fixing bugs (read: the legitimate kind


Are you inferring that the Thalans are illegitimate bugs?

Hmm actually, they probably just have a queen and never get to meet their fathers.... so, ok... that's acceptable!
Reply #7 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
In response to spearthrower - SNORT!

For the rest complaining about bugs that aren't.

A 'BUG' is an error in the program, something not working the way it is supposed to.

Legend has it that the name came from the old computers that filled entire rooms with vacuum tubes and mechanical thingees. Sometimes an actual insect - probably a moth attracted to the light and heat of the vacuum tubes - would get into something, most likely get fried or squished, and thus prevent a connection from working and thus prevent the computer from working. Thus there was a bug in the computer - literally.

There is also a concept called WAD - Works As Designed.

You may not agree with a design decision, and are free to say so, but it is not a BUG, it is WAD, and you simply don't like the design. Or perhaps simply don't understand the design.

The difference between the two - as the glorious Stardock persona above (all bow) indicated - is an important distinction.

If something is a BUG, then it needs to be fixed. It is a high priority, and the bug should be squahed and extracted as soon as possible. Stardock has done a good job on debugging the code, but anyone with an understanding of the scale of modern software also knows that you can't get everything. So they need to be accurately informed of what the error is, and under what circumstances it occurs so they can find and correct it.

If it is a design decision, then it is a matter of opinion if it needs to be changed. You may be able to convince the devs that it should be changed, but it is not as big a priority as fixing actual bugs. These are requests, it is up to Stardock if they want to change the code. Stardock is very responsive to their customers, so will change things if there is reason. But one person complaining is not reason.

It is best if the two are kept seperate so that they can be handled appropriately, and efficiently.

There is also a third concept that is worth noting. It has many common names, my favourites are PEBCAK (Problem Exists Between Chair And Keyboard), and ID10T error (pronounced 'eye dee ten tee error'). A polite term is 'User Error'.

It is common to see users make mistakes and blame the program. As the saying goes, we try to make software fool proof, but there is no way to make anything damn-fool proof.

I admit to doing this myself on occassion. It is embarrassing, and should be avoided.

It happens, you don't understand how something works, or make a stupid mistake, and then decide that the program did it. It is important before crying 'WOLF!' (or in this case, 'BUG!') to determine that in fact it is a bug and not an error on your part. Beleive me, you'll feel like less of a boob if you realize that the problem is on your end without first screaming 'BUG!', and then having it pointed out what YOU did wrong.
Reply #8 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Whilst I do not disagree with any of that, I feel I must fight the corner of (some of) those who complain...

I agree, things should be clearly defined as bugs or requests, but what if a person does not know which it is? Or if a person sees something and believes it to be a bug because the feature in question does not work as they thought it would? (Note: Not how they think it would be good, but how they understand the manner in which it is supposed to work).

I think it's very good that Stardock have tried to implement new features, and all credit to them for doing this. But in some cases these features might not be explained clearly enough (often because they are different from 'commonly-accepted' methods, and often because they are more involved than such practices).

This is why in the list of requested features for the next release, I've actually requested that Stardock provide not only a list of bug-fixes and new features, but also a list of known bugs and requested features that they are aware of and working on (perhaps they planned to provide this anyway, but it doesn't exactly seem standard practice in the industry...) Perhaps an additional clarifcation of features that are working features and not bugs could also be useful?

Perhaps also as well as fixing the bugs, Stardock could take a look at the manual and make portions of that clearer? Alas, I know few people read them, and those who already have would probably not want to read new versions!

Ultimately, though, I'm just annoyed V1.1 is due out on Thursday when I have Wednesday off - argh!
Reply #9 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I agree, things should be clearly defined as bugs or requests, but what if a person does not know which it is? Or if a person sees something and believes it to be a bug because the feature in question does not work as they thought it would? (Note: Not how they think it would be good, but how they understand the manner in which it is supposed to work).


I agree in principal.... but there's a sublte variation between knowing something's a bug and not knowing. If you don't know why something's happening you post a thread asking for explanation or further details or a "is this happening to anyone else?" type thread. That way multiple users can relate their experiences and the mass can determine what is or isn't working as intended.

It seems part of the culture of this forum for some reason. I've been on plenty of fan site where this just didn't happen at all. Not that I am saying it's unique to this forum either!
Reply #10 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I disagree, Spearthrower. You may honestly think a feature is supposed to be working a certain way because there is only one sane way that you think someone would ever implement it. When you see it not working that way, in your mind it has to be a bug, because there is no way someone would have thought that was a good idea to implement it the way it was. Even when told that it is intentional you have to shake your head and wonder. The game developers I know (and I work with them everyday) are normal guys who don't even realize that some ideas they have are boneheaded (and I'm sure they've said that about me also).
Reply #11 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I disagree, Spearthrower. You may honestly think a feature is supposed to be working a certain way because there is only one sane way that you think someone would ever implement it. When you see it not working that way, in your mind it has to be a bug, because there is no way someone would have thought that was a good idea to implement it the way it was. Even when told that it is intentional you have to shake your head and wonder. The game developers I know (and I work with them everyday) are normal guys who don't even realize that some ideas they have are boneheaded (and I'm sure they've said that about me also).


Heheh that's quite funny!

I see what you are saying.... but in the same respect, if everything we see and dont really understand why they made it work like that becomes a de facto bug, then it really doesnt help the developers to look through the forum and find posts that relate to legitimate bugs (i.e. Ones they really didn't intend to do!). In my opinion these are better described as tweaks, performance enhancement or feature requests. Or just flat out "Did you guys really mean for X to happen this way?"

If we just post all those unsure ones as bugs, we end up with pages of bug reports that aren't actually bugs and which the dev reader opens to try to help and ends up closing in (depending on their mood) disgust when it is working as intended and merely a matter of opinion as to which way it should be done.

I've got a whole list developing here of things I think could be done better, but when the time comes to post them, I wont label them as bugs but as potential enhancements or tweaks to the game. I've also seen a lot of posters take the time to sit and write out things they think would make the game better for them and never once use the word bug.

I have to admit, I think that the word bug is the thing that is bugging me most hehe!