ezolak ezolak

I really want to like this game, but...

▼

I really want to like this game, but...

from GalCiv2 Forums
I am a big fan of the original GC, I love the design of GC2, and I'm glad it's getting such good reviews. But am I the only one who thinks it is too buggy?

I have what many people might consider an unreasonable expectation -- I expect the software I pay for to work. Some people may consider my attitude to be too pessimistic, and perhaps it is. I'm sure my experience as an IT manager -- where I know I would be embarrassed to release something this unpolished -- has clouded my judgment.

As for GC2, I stopped playing almost immediately after I loaded it. The main reason was because I couldn't save and reload without my production skipping a turn, but there were countless other "minor" bugs as documented in these forums. Now I just check in every once in a while to see if the game looks finished yet, but it clearly wasn't when it was released. I see we are now on the third beta. Guess I will wait a while longer. Kudos to Stardock for being so responsive and communicative -- and I mean this sincerely -- but the QA process leaves a lot to be desired.

Will someone do me a favor and make a post called "The game works!" when it finally does, that way I know it is safe to come back to it. Seriously, great game concept and I look forward to playing it again, but for now the bug frustrations outweigh the fun.
25,644 views 41 replies
Reply #26 from GalCiv2 Forums Top



Thank you, Reklam, for reading my mind. Now that you've established your extra-sensory perceptions, please let us know whether Bush really wanted war with Iraq.

Actually, what I wanted was open discussion about how others felt about the quality of the game. This I got, and a bit more. Read my posts, which were complimentary where I felt appropriate and critical likewise -- then yours, which is a personal attack -- and tell me who is the troll.

I am glad so many people are having positive experiences with the game. I appreciate that kind of discussion. Not so much the ones that call me names. Not terribly constructive, but hey...we all get to express our opinions.
Reply #27 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
What's really amazing about this game is that the releases are not just about fixing bugs people have found. It's about adding new features that we the gamers have suggested. Top players even submitted how they were beating the AI's at the top level and the AI's are being changed to counter the tactics. This will prolong the games shelf life by providing new challenges.

There are amazing things happening here that far out way the odd bug. Get in and enjoy.
WindowBlinds - Free yourself of the default settings, customize your desktop.
Reply #28 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
the game is full of 'bugs' no doubt. and debate over whos game has more 'bugs' is stupid. the good news is that stardock fixes the stuff.

i watched it with GS 1. the people at stardock stand behind their work 100%. ive said in other threads that i think that the game wasnt finished when it shiped. and ive yet too read anything that changes my mind on the subject. just scaning the HUGE list of 'fixed a bug' items in the upcoming patch is enough to close the mouth of even the biggest fan boy.

the only REAL question is will the game be fixed and polished when stardock is done? im betting yes like they did with GS 1

now i could list a few pages of bugs myself but im betting that the people at stardock know atleast 70% of them , indeed 70% of them are covered on their 'too do' post allread. i also have atleast 5 or 6 CTD in a 4 hr gaming stretch (the irony is that it seems to be caused by auto save)

and all the talk about drivers and resolutions and color bits. doesnt explane all (or even most) of the bugs

Processor: Intel Pentium Processor 840 w/ Dual Core Technology 3.2GHz 800MHz FSB

Operating System: Microsoft Windows XP Home Edition with Service Pack 2

Power Supply: Alienware Approved 650 Watt ATX 2.0 Power Supply with Active PFC

Chassis Upgrades: Alienware Liquid Cooling with AlienIce 2.0 Video Cooling System

Motherboard: Alienware nForce 4 SLI Intel Edition Chipset Motherboard PCI Express SLI

Graphics Processor: NVIDIA GeForce 7800 GTX Extreme PCI-E 256MB DDR3

Memory: 2GB Dual Channel DDR2 SDRAM at 667MHz - 2 x 1024MB

System Drive: High Performance - Serial ATA - 160GB Serial ATA 7,200 RPM w/8MB Cache

Primary CD ROM/DVD ROM: 16x Dual Layer DVD±R/W Drive

Sound Card: Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS High Definition 7.1 Surround Firewire (IEEE 1394

thats my system, all drivers are up to date and all OS patches are up to date as of sunday. my last full format was a month ago and i dont have any spyware or viruses that could cause any form of slow down. and for anyone here who might no know who 'alienware' is they are a computer company that makes gaming specific computers. they 'tweek' your machine at the factory to set it up for gaming before it ships.

i said all that to say this. the bugs i experiance are NOT because of a lack of anything to do with MY computers ability to run games at the very best performance possable. in other words, in my case its the game not my computer.

but ill end with once more saying . that the guys at stardock have a really solid reputation for standing behind their stuff. i think if the annoyances are that bad that you really cant play the game as is, the good news is you just have to wate a bit and they will be delt with. you have the right attitude ezolak. dont give up just wate and see.
Reply #29 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
ive said in other threads that i think that the game wasnt finished when it shiped


Really? What are those nice shiny things on the side of the forum? oh they're awards.
For the shipped game.

please let us know whether Bush really wanted war with Iraq.


Well duh, of course he did. What? You mean George Dubbya? Does he even get a say?

And ezolak, do us a few favours. List ALL your bugs, it doesn't matter if they have been answered, it helps to know. Give us a debug.err instead of trolling, to be honest I would have expected some technical evidence from a, what was it,
IT manager


Kindly name this software you shipped out which was so much better than galciv2. Stardock don't get those 4 million new viewers a month for nothing. They're so far beyond you, you can't even imagine it.

Don't EVER expect any help when all you're doing is complaning without the god damn decency to give any real information.
Reply #30 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Bugs are a part of any software be it a game or not (any1 wanna start on winme?). And the number of bugs of a particular game relative to any other game is purely subjective unless you happen to know intimately those games you are talking about. Actually, stopping "almost immediately" has voided any validity your post might have had. The bottom line is that this game is very playable and yes, well designed. Attested to by the number of "fanbois" it has accumulated without much marketing muscle.

Mr. op, (it manager? do u develop games? bec if u dnt then y even mention your credentials other than to satisfy your juvenile LSE problems? if u develop games then specifically cite them and compare y they are better. That would make decent people want to listen to you. If u dont then any good it mngr (such as urself) would know that you probably know diddly squat abt developing games. Your opinion as a game player would have been enough to inform the forum of you dissatisfaction.

man i need to get a life...
Reply #31 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
well ezolak, I would like to see how bug free your product would be if your budget was like Stardocks.
With the game being critically acclaimed as it is, I bet you thought the game would be perfect now, did you?

I can't say too much about the buggs. I didn't get the game until the 1.1beta 2 was out. A lot of the bugs must have been fixed or someting. Did you dl the new patches? What version are you playing?

When all your bugs are finally fixed , I'm sure you'll love this game.

Reply #32 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
Greetings all,

I develop software and manage a team of five engineers for a living and I just wanted to chime in a little. To the fellow who called software engineering a disgrace to the other engineering professions...I understand your frustration.

Sure, there are a lot of moron programmers out there; between that and the fact that marketing departments often force software out the door before it's ready...these alone can explain at least some of the shoddy software that's out there. But what about the rest of it? I work with a lot of really intelligent and talented people, and I can tell you it is still extremely difficult to develop high-quality, low-defect software. And based on the Stardock dev journals (I've been following their development), these people know what they're doing, too. So...how is it that companies with talented staff end up releasing buggy software? (And I'm not knocking the SD devs...on the contrary, I think they've done a great job)

Honestly, there are a lot of reasons why so much software is buggy, but to avoid boring everyone, I think two of the biggest reasons are system complexity and changing design requirements. Most engineering fields are complex, but unlike most of their brother disciplines, software engineers typically have to contend with multiple, serious changes to the design specifications after "construction" (so to speak) has started. Putting it mildly, this can be tricky when you're dealing with a system containing a million lines of code. Software engineers have to regularly agree to change things mid-course and (quickly) find ways to make the stuff work when other engineers in analogous situations would find these requests to be insane.

For instance, try telling a civil engineer that the suspension bridge he's already started construction on needs to be 300 feet longer...and there's no budget for additional cable. Or try telling propulsion engineers that the space probe they designed to go to Mars actually now has to reach Europa...and they have to use the original Mars probe design because it's already partially built and there's not enough money left to scrap the probe and build one from scratch. Now, I'm not claiming that software engineering is as complex as engineering a space probe, but the scale of requirements changes is accurate. Software engineers have to cope with insane requests to redesign software on the fly...often to make it do things it was never designed to do and sometimes, to even make it do the opposite of what it was designed to do! (Trust me on that one.)

And, just to take it one level further, software development doesn't end when you release and publish a game or an application. You have to put out patches, revisions, and new versions of the software...but you have to work with the same foundation, even if that foundation is totally unsuitable and you really need to start from scratch to do it right. It's like building a wooden shack and gradually building extensions on it and refactoring it until it becomes a 50-story skyscraper. Only you (the software engineers) aren't told from the start that you're building a skyscraper. You were told to build a shack. So, if you'll pardon the pun, that's why a lot of software comes crashing down a lot. (Not all software. A lot of software is just crap.)

Now, on to GC2. Yes, the game was buggy when released, and although I was expecting bugs, I have to admit that I there were more than I thought there would be. That said, the Stardock devs have got it right. If I had to summarize what I wrote above, I'd say the biggest problem with software engineering it's easy to develop high-quality, bug-free software if you know what you're building from the very start and what you're building never changes....but that NEVER happens in reality! The design always changes. Okay. So how do you cope with constant design changes and still build software that doesn't crash? You do what the Stardock devs are currently doing...fix and tweak the code just a little bit, every week, and then show the results to us, the customers. We get to follow them along in the development process and we give them feedback...we tell them what works and what doesn't work. If they built ALL of the changes for GCII 1.1 all at once and just released the final product to us, we might not have a fleet manager, or the game might not be as balanced as it currently is. Certainly the AI wouldn't be nearly as good. It might still be running around with (more) unescorted transports and little fighter fleets when the human player has battleships. And it might be even worse...without feedback, the SD devs might go off and build a surprise feature and when they finally unveil it after months of effort...they might find out that we hate it! Ouch.

So, it's a double-edged sword. On the forums, we get to see some of the ugliness of software development. And yeah, it can get very ugly, and that takes some of the magic out of the gameplay. But imagine the flipside: someone who just today picked up the game and upgrades to 1.1. They're going to be floored with the game, because they didn't see how far it's come since the initial release....which, considering it was only released less than two months ago, is astounding.

IMHO, the SD devs deserve a lot of credit (and they're certainly getting it, I think). Even if you still think the game is too buggy to play, you at least have to give them a LOT of credit for their dedication to you, the customers. Most large, commercial software companies don't care about making the best game possible; SD is something of a rarity in the industry. As if further proof were needed, SD felt the game wasn't ready for release and postponed the release even though the price was missing the Christmas season. No self-respecting Evil Corporation would do that.
Reply #33 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
BTW the production skipping "bug" is by design. It's to keep people from saving every turn in case something doesn't go your way.
Are you sure it's by design? Did one of the developers say that, or is that just a guess someone came up to explain the situation.

Sure the devs never have said something about this. But this was spotted during the open beta in november - december and hasn't changed since. So it must be a feature. The social production waste was spotted near the same time. And look how long it has taken to change since it was a design decision
Reply #34 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
It's my belief that there are two types of customers who spams the forum without posting anything constructive to improve the game, whiners and fanboys.
I have seen a couple of fanboys but no whiners in this thread yet.
Reply #35 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I have seen a couple of fanboys but no whiners in this thread yet.


That's because no-one, save the orignal poster, has posted anything negative. And you discredit people who really like, and will defend, stardock for making a great game? Pfft. Why should we listen to you, when you can read things from people who enjoy this game, have no problems with it, and will defend it, and say "Oh, those fanboys".

The game isn't perfect. Nothing is. However, it runs well. The only design flaw (not human error) that was anywhere near game breaking was the heat ctd, fixed in the first patch. What can you say to that? As knute says, it's full of what could be called bugs, which stardock work to fix. They don't abandon it.

What more proof of a good company do you want, before you go around with your label gun, marking happy customers "Fanboy"?
Reply #36 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
That's because no-one, save the orignal poster, has posted anything negative.


LOL

Moving right along, I appreciate the comments by the engineer manager. I agree with you for the most part -- BTW a lot of people seem to want to know whether I developed games, and the answer is no, my team developed and supported internal business software -- and I think I would break things down into 3 types of bugs:

1. hardware related bugs -- heat, CTDs and other errors because of video/sound problems, etc...
2. functional bugs -- production skipped on reload (I don't buy this being by design), bonuses not working, etc...
3. cosmetic bugs -- misspellings, grammatical errors, description mismatches, etc...

Thankfully, I didn't experience any of the first type. Clearly some did, and for those people that was probably the biggest concern. My frustrations were more from 2 and 3. Some I expect, but I guess there were more than I was comfortable with. Many of you will say #3 is a non-issue -- who cares if something is misspelled or says "Influence" when it should say "Economy", right? That is certainly a valid opinion, but so is that of those who do care and think it contributed to an overall unpolished feel. I think that a certain amount of #1 is going to slip through QA, simply because you cannot test on every platform possible, but the majority of 2s and 3s should not. I felt that more did than should have in the case of GC2 and thus my post. Again, each player has their own threshold and mine is undoubtedly lower than most. For this reason, I am deliberately not playing the beta versions of the game, because I know it will diminish my enjoyment -- so I instead await a more polished version. Hopefully 1.2.

I will say I agree with everyone that SD does a great job with support and especially communication. Not intending to criticize them on that, I simply feel that there should have been more thorough QA done. I appreciate that they are a small company who conducts their business in a very refreshing manner, and as I mentioned right off the bat I am glad they're getting such good reviews, and I wish them continued success. Just more emphasis on QA next time around.
Reply #37 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
That's because no-one, save the orignal poster, has posted anything negative. And you discredit people who really like, and will defend, stardock for making a great game? Pfft. Why should we listen to you, when you can read things from people who enjoy this game, have no problems with it, and will defend it, and say "Oh, those fanboys".

The game isn't perfect. Nothing is. However, it runs well. The only design flaw (not human error) that was anywhere near game breaking was the heat ctd, fixed in the first patch. What can you say to that? As knute says, it's full of what could be called bugs, which stardock work to fix. They don't abandon it.

What more proof of a good company do you want, before you go around with your label gun, marking happy customers "Fanboy"?

Typical overzealous fanboy.
I like the game, alot. I have never said anything negative about Stardock, in fact I think they are doing a great job at fixing bugs and improving the game.
That doesn't mean I like fanboys who seems to think that Stardocks survival and reputation is dependant on their defence though, not only harassing the idiots who come here but also people with legitimate complaints that doesn't "love" the game as much as they do.
I have posted lots of bugs etc that might have helped to improve the game. Can you say the same?
Reply #38 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
I will say I agree with everyone that SD does a great job with support and especially communication. Not intending to criticize them on that, I simply feel that there should have been more thorough QA done. I appreciate that they are a small company who conducts their business in a very refreshing manner, and as I mentioned right off the bat I am glad they're getting such good reviews, and I wish them continued success. Just more emphasis on QA next time around.


hey ezolak, after reading your other posts it seems that i better understand what you were trying to say. everyone is entitled to an opinion. it was just that your op sounded very close to trolling and that may have gotten a few of those who want a clean, friendly forum started. probably what oldstatesman thought up there. but now you dnt sound like a troll at all. so sorry for trying to bite your head off.

now since we are talking about bugs, kindly check brad's "OH, yea, I fixed THAT alright!" forum post. it seems with his attempt to fix the starbase trading issue he then created a CRASH bug whenever u try to trade one on the latest beta release. so since u have such a low threshold for bugs id suggest u DONT play galciv2 just yet. LOL. This game IS BUGGY! j/k
Reply #39 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
@Danes

The fix for that was posted tonight. Beta 4.

And all trolls are not nasty mouthed poor grammered yammerers. Some are of the intelligent, smooth talking passive/aggressive types. A wolf in sheeps clothing is still a wolf. (I'm not referring to anyone in particular - just making a general comment. )
Reply #40 from GalCiv2 Forums Top
oldstatesman, thanks. its still daytime here in tokyo so i havent DLed the latest beta yet. so thanks and ill be sure to get the latest tonight.

as for your other comment. yeah i know. it would be nice to give people the benefit of the doubt though.. again, this is a general comment