What I have found is that starting with V 1.1, the save times are dramatically longer the first time in a game especially for larger universes. One I timed was over 13 mins. But every save after that first one is reasonably short similar to previous versions. The load time is still really long which I don't understand but I can live with that if necessary. I am hoping it is only the very first save not any first save after any load but I need to confirm.

Is this a BASH EA THREAD? If so I would like to put in my *HATE* of EA

So far I found Stardock to be a wonderful company, the best software company in the world. I just hope they dont sell in the future to the likes of EA, UBIsoft or Microsoft, or as I like to refer to them collectively "the Trifecta of Suck."

EA took the thing I loved the most in the whole world (Ultima Online) and turned it into total absolute POS craporama that only works to milk you of money and provides totally ununique gameplay. UO used to be the most unique MMORPG out there, they got their filthy hands on it and they turned it into a pathetic mix of EQ/Diablo2/SB/DAoC/some other random crap.

Stardock I can respect. It's a little company that does it big. The dedication of the programmers makes me believe they actually enjoy working for the company and all the overtime is voluntary.

Alfb - Yup, it's being investigated, but the v1.2 patch won't be ready for a few weeks yet.

A couple of people brought up complaints at the beginning of this thread and have been flamed for it just like anyone else that has said anything similar in other threads. While I think the Stardock Sucks title is unfair it is aguable that they have the right to complain.

You should get what you pay for and are entitled to get a good product for a fair price. At this point, there are enough issues to outstanding with GalCiv2 to justify my expectation of free updates for now.

Alfb, I couldn't have said it better, in both quotes. I have praised Stardock's patch efforts in several posts, but it is obvious that they still have work to do on this game. And I see no reason that I should be "grateful" that they haven't charged us for an update or patch. In fact, if they had tried that, I problably would be trying to get a refund by now. I am pleased so far with what they are doing, but there is nothing wrong with expecting them to do this in the first place. Let's hope Stardock keeps up the good work and I am looking forward to a great game getting even better.

Why did i make this post?

Because of your admiration for a game company that takes a different approach than most other game companies? Particularly, how interactive they are with their gamer base regarding support and suggestions to improve their products.

Alfb, I couldn't have said it better, in both quotes. I have praised Stardock's patch efforts in several posts, but it is obvious that they still have work to do on this game. And I see no reason that I should be "grateful" that they haven't charged us for an update or patch. In fact, if they had tried that, I problably would be trying to get a refund by now. I am pleased so far with what they are doing, but there is nothing wrong with expecting them to do this in the first place. Let's hope Stardock keeps up the good work and I am looking forward to a great game getting even better.

Every game out there could always use "more work". The difference is that Stardock is providing "more work" that they don't need/have to provide.

They could just point to the dazzling reviews from players and magazines, great sales, and call it a day with the tiny fraction of disappointed users to move on to the next game to complain on.

The reason why people get flamed when they rip on Stardock is becaue they make us all look like a bunch of whiney, ungrateful users who won't be satisifed no matter what.

A sampling of some of the things I get annoyed seeing.

- No copy protection unlike every other game. No need to download some CD crack. Is that good enough for some people? No. They scream because they have to,gasp, enter a serial number (once) to use updates.

- Free updates that add lots of new features not just bug fixes. Is that good enough for some people? No. Sure, "patches" to fix bugs is expected to a certain degree but acting like the tons of new features are part of some entitlement is disgusting.

I really have to agree to most of the people here. Stardocks support is awesome! There is not only one, but multiple employees reading the forums and I mean not just clicking here or there...really reading them.
Which other game company does that?

I will definately buy an addon if there will be one!
Btw: What about the multiplayer addon? Will there be one or not?

I have a gig of RAM and have not had any problems at all with save times. But I also have my computer streamlined so it doesn't eat RAM for breakfast and my pagefile is setup to be nice and big.

I also want to say that I've been gaming and involved in developing some games for many, many years now. All games come out with bugs, no matter how hard or long you test. Sometimes games MUST be rushed to meet a deadline and there is no choice, and those often come out with more bugs than those not under a rushed deadline. I honestly don't know what GalCiv2's situation was, but that's just something to think about.

The amount of serious bugs in GalCiv2 seems rather modest to me. There's a lot of little stuff, sure, but there always is in every game. A lot of the problems people have are actually not the game's fault, but their own, whether it's software conflicts, hardware conflicts, bad drivers, not enough RAM, mutli-tasking when they shouldn't be, and so on. Those are end user issues, not game issues.

But beyond that, the most important thing is to have developers that care about the quality of their game and make an effort to see problems fixed. With all of my experience, I'm still astounded that Stardock seems to care this much about getting their problems ironed out. And not only that, they seem very interested in player feedback for additional changes and options. That's important enough to me that I'll certainly take a hard look at every Stardock game that comes out from now on, for no other reason than I think a group that puts this much effort into their games is worth my time.

Every game out there could always use "more work". The difference is that Stardock is providing "more work" that they don't need/have to provide

Xan, for the most part I agree with what you are saying. But you need to think about the don't need/have to provide. What you are saying to everyone is that the current state of the game is acceptable for a paid for game. I disagree with that statement. I wholy agree the support at this point is very good and access to developers is better than I have seen. I just can't understand why everyone wants to confuse great support and access with a finished product. As it stands, GalCiv2 is not currently a finished product and we as paying customers should expect a higher level. If you don't expect a higher level, you will never get it. Before I get flamed here, just think a minute about what I am saying. The game is great, the support is great, developers are great and have been on this forum way more than any other gaming company I have seen and free updates are great. But until the product is finished, we deserve them. If everyone's attitude reflects this, we will get better software in the long run.

Alfb - Yup, it's being investigated, but the v1.2 patch won't be ready for a few weeks yet.

Thanks Yarlen. I appreciate the hard work you guys are putting in. I also realize that things like this don't get fixed overnight. Maybe the next day!

You may deserve to get those updates and that work because you paid for the game, but that way of thinking only works in a utopian, idealized world. In the real, corporate-driven world, you paid for the product and got it. Period. End of story. That is the way things work. I'm not saying it's necessarily right, but it's reality.

It is simply unrealistic to think a game can ship without some issues. Every once in a great while it does happen, but there are so many reasons a game can ship with a host of bugs that are not the developers fault at all. Keep in mind there is a big difference between minor bugs and those bugs that make the game near unplayable.

Going back to the corporate world, it's entirely feasible to think that since you bought the game and got the game, the company's obligation ends there. There is no written contract between the company and the consumer obligating them to update the game and fix things.

Yes, there is nothing wrong with expecting and hoping a game will come out with as few bugs as possible. From what I've seen, GalCiv2 really doesn't have that many crippling issues (again, many are end user problems whether they believe it or not). However, one must understand high expectations are often unrealistic for a number of reasons the average consumer simply can't understand because he/she is not in the business.

What's important is the game doesn't have a terrible number of crippling problems, and the developers obviously care about user input and about fixing the problems (big and small) that crop up. That's far more than most groups are willing to go. As I'm sure you've noticed, most groups are willing to fix crippling problems because if they don't, they'll lose customers on their future games. Little problems are typically ignored along with user input. The attitude seems very different here.

Ideally we're entitled to the amount of work they're putting in. In the real world, we're most certainly not entitled to it in any way. I'm glad they're willing to put in the effort they are for us and take pride in their work.

You think a software company actually gives a rats ass what you think? They are concerned with the bottom line pal. Wiseup! It's about sales, nothing more than sales. Companies don't go into business to please the masses, they do it to make money. You actually think Stardock makes a good product? Can you not read these forums? Are you that naive or ignorant to blissfully wish away the latent defects of this game so often posted? How many Sierra games have this much problem? How many EA games? How about Firaxis? Nothing? That's what I thought. Get a clue kid, while your enthusiastic loyalty is inspiring, it means

haha you talk of ignorance yet you are.
A publisher has how much say in a game? oh thats right 0 pretty much. Its just like a record producer, instead of looking at who produces the cd you look at the artist. Maybe you should look at the specific team cause when EA publishes a game, they have very little to do with it. Every bit of code written for the game, is done by the creators not EA the publishers.

What you are saying to everyone is that the current state of the game is acceptable for a paid for game. I disagree with that statement. I wholy agree the support at this point is very good and access to developers is better than I have seen. I just can't understand why everyone wants to confuse great support and access with a finished product. As it stands, GalCiv2 is not currently a finished product and we as paying customers should expect a higher level.

This is exactly the kind of attitude that developers see and throw up their hands with a "why bother"? The game isn't finished? What a load of crap. The game most certainly is finished and was finished with 1.0.

When people like you define "finished" as being some impossible to reach perfection that nothing can reach, then devs might as well just put out whatever crap they can.

The 1.0 version of this game worked fine, got tons of editor's choice awards, strong sales on word of mouth from players. Stating that the game isn't done as if it's a fact is the height of arrogance.

wow interesting thread. I have enjoiyed using Stardocks products regardless of bugs or not. I have also enjoyed Stardocks attempts to be "out there". Its cool to see developers/employees frequent message boards and chat with their client base. Thats the way it should be. Personable. LOL I have been doing software development almost 30 years. from machine code to C++ to whatever. I believe Stardock really does care about those of us who purchase their products and the fact they have patience enough to deal with hecklers is awesome too.

Keep up the good work.

(plus the fact their company is only an hour away from where I live is cool too!!! )

bump. You think a software company actually gives a rats ass what you think? They are concerned with the bottom line pal. Wiseup! It's about sales, nothing more than sales. Companies don't go into business to please the masses, they do it to make money. You actually think Stardock makes a good product? Can you not read these forums? Are you that naive or ignorant to blissfully wish away the latent defects of this game so often posted? How many Sierra games have this much problem? How many EA games? How about Firaxis? Nothing? That's what I thought. Get a clue kid, while your enthusiastic loyalty is inspiring, it means little to the owner's of this company when it comes to cashing their paycheck. lol. Again I am simply amazed... I will give a little props to them though for their last patch which has cured my text issue somewhat. Now instead of constant scrolling through all the text of my game, the scrolling is faster so it's kind of a refresh fast which makes the text a little more legible. Woohoo, thanks for the partial fix to my month old problem. George

ahem, i think this is the first time i've used this word here, and i'm coming into this dicussuions late, but still...

TROLL

my bottom line is this.

if you feel you didn't get your money's worth in buying this game, then it sucks to be you. caveat emptor: buyer beware.

if you feel they haven't made a quality product, then i think you should release a better game before you open your big pie-hole. it's easy to sit in judgement of others. it's much more difficult to show them they can do better, because first you have to do better. have you done better?

stardock not only produced a very strong initial release, they have gone above and beyond the industry standard for patches. a patch, in the very connotation of the name, is a fix to problems. SD's makes small patches to fix problems. their major patches improve and expand the game's playability. in the industry, that's usually marketed and referred to as an expansion.

finally, i have never seen a company in any industry be so honest and up-front about the limitations of their resources, and the ways profit margin factor into their decisions. i'm sure there are things they don't share, but if EA or Sierra were to say "we didn't do that because we didn't want to spend the money on it", their sales would plummit. that's because what's left of their public image would be shattered. SD's public image is very different. maybe a newcomer who doesn't follow up on posts and whatnot will experience difficulty here. however, this is the only developer-run only video game website in know of in which many of the fans know the devs on first name bases. we voluntarily help them out with customer services issues, which doesn't speak to our naivety, but their integrity.

if you think $50 is a lot to pay for a piece of software that comes with continuous updates and support, check out the cost of getting an SDSS (statistical database for social sciences) or an Adobe product.

and if you think $50 is enough to pay to act like god and demand whatever you want from whomever you want, whenever you want, then you should have spent your money on a copy of Black and White.

This is exactly the kind of attitude that developers see and throw up their hands with a "why bother"? The game isn't finished? What a load of crap. The game most certainly is finished and was finished with 1.0. When people like you define "finished" as being some impossible to reach perfection that nothing can reach, then devs might as well just put out whatever crap they can. The 1.0 version of this game worked fine, got tons of editor's choice awards, strong sales on word of mouth from players. Stating that the game isn't done as if it's a fact is the height of arrogance.

Its interesting that you and others tend to always think that what I say above is referring to the developers and the job they are doing. It only indirectly refers to that and I have stated that fact before. What it has to do with is you and me and our expectations. Someone above talked about the corporate world and how it does not work this way. Well let me tell you something, it works exactly this way. The corporate world can only sell you what you buy. Your expectations and whether they are met or not is what you at least partially base buying decisions on. All I am saying here is that you should not have low expectations as that will lead to low quality on ANY product you buy. If you think V 1.0 was perfectly fine, great, keep using it and don't upgrade. But some of us feel some things were needed, I didn't say a must. All the posts discussing problems and improvements at least make me think I am at least partially right that V 1.0 was not complete. In any case, always remember that if you expect a low quality product, thats probably what you will wind up with. Expect and demand high quality and you might just get it. And no I am not saying that GC2 fits in the low quality category to all you fanboys out there.

As to the comment "why bother", for money, fame and enjoyment. Sure the devs are frustrated at some of the comments. Sure some of the comments are unfair and sometimes downright wrong. But they are still here to gain our business and get rewarded for that.

Do you think GM and Ford have improved their product over the past years. Yes. Enough? No. But without their improvements, everyone would be buying Japanese now. These improvements were driven by people that expected high quality and were not willing to buy without it. Some of you are not old enough to remember when Japanese cars were junk. Now they lead the world in quality. Why? They found a way to meet expectations and got rewarded for it. Is building cars like writing software? In some respects yes. Again its about expectations and quality. Never, never, never expect and accept low quality if you have any choice.

Let me finish with my main point before everyone jumps in and cooks me well done. I am NOT saying GC2 is a poor, low quality product. I bought it and am happy that I did. If I were doing it over, I would buy again. Was it a complete product? In my opinion, no. Compared to other games that are out there, probably. But don't compare GC2 to some of the poorly done games out there and claim its better and feel good about it. All you have then is a product that is better that junk.

Now let me go get my spray on flame retardant before anyone reads this. By the way, I wish someone could change the title of this thread since it is really misleading I think.

if you feel they haven't made a quality product, then i think you should release a better game before you open your big pie-hole. it's easy to sit in judgement of others. it's much more difficult to show them they can do better, because first you have to do better. have you done better? and if you think $50 is enough to pay to act like god and demand whatever you want from whomever you want, whenever you want, then you should have spent your money on a copy of Black and White.

I started not to respond to this as I am not sure it deserves a response however, please read the post. I do not feel that the product is low quality, just that it needed some improvement and that I nor anyone else are wrong to expect high quality. I have never said anything here to DEMAND that anything specific be done yet I have people like you tell me to shut my big pie-hole, I'm arrogant and I act like a god. Boy the arrogance sure seems to be elsewhere here. And where do I even insinuate that the game was too expensive (I paid $40 by the way). I do not proclaim to be a game developer, but I do program for a living. I have been writing programs for about 28 years going back to assembly language under CPM days and going through the original MS Basic, PLM, Cobol, Pascal, Prolog, Quickbasic, Quick C, C, Visual Basic, Perl, Java and C++ under various systems such as DOS, OS2, VxWorks, QNX, Linux and Windows. I currently do real time control of equipment using C/C++ and PLCs. If you think I don't understand programming and its problems, you are mentally challenged and need to start riding the short bus to school.

hi goerge,

i was responding to your original post in this thread. some of your subsequent posts become more civil, however your language and tone in your original bump to this thread and some of the other responses is extremely agressive and insulting. i called you a troll for that specific behavior, and was sarcastic in my subsequent response for the same reason, but i wouldn't have called you a troll had i simply disagreed with a civilly argued opinion. i just happen to think you're acting like a troll and disagree with you.

thanks for following up,

nik

PS: i had no idea you actually had advanced programming ability, and in that light my statement loses its sarcasm but takes on the bite of reality. for being such a harsh but capable critic, why haven't you made a better game? or have you?

language and tone in your original bump to this thread and some of the other responses is extremely agressive and insulting.

I went back and read my earlier posts to make sure of this. Not one of my posts are rude or insulting unlike yours. I state essentially the same concept in all of them. Feel free to reread all posts by me, Alfb.

why haven't you made a better game?

I state in a previous post that I am not a game developer. Programming like most things have different areas. I personally have an electrical engineering degree and while power transmission can fall under that category, I do not have expertise in that area eventhough I know the general concepts. The same goes in this case. I do programming for real time control which is significantly different than game programming. There are many similarities and concepts that are the same for both, but they are different. In any case, I have only done simple games myself which do not count in comparison to a game such as GalCiv2. I have, however, done numerous programs that are on a similar complexity level to a game such as this. I will also say that if I put a program into my projects that had the same level of bugs that is in the typical PC program, I would have been fired long ago because there are significant dollars involved if I screw up.

Psio,

(1) I believe you when you say that you spent 350+ days in one year playing games, because your complete lack of social skills is evident. In particular, you're "whine" about whether Stardock cares for its customers. Get real. No company would stay in business long if they didn't care about their customers. If you ever left the basement of your house, you would know that.

(2) GALCIV2 is nowhere near as buggy as you make it out to be. Clearly, you have no experience in software development. If you had, you would have known that bugs are categorized - you do not judge by the number of bugs, but the number of sev 1 bugs. I have played many games, some from Big Name Publishers, that had very serious bugs right out of the box, and it took a long time to get patches, Fallout Tactics somes to mind.

(3) I must say that I have been working in the computer business 30 years (approximately) and your assessment is entirely unfair to the extreme. You will rarely find a company that cares as much for its customer base as this one does apparently. The programmers are extremely receptive to suggestions.

I must, in closing, say that you are in the minority. You need to step away from the computer every now and then and meet people. You might learn something.

GALCIV2 is nowhere near as buggy as you make it out to be. Clearly, you have no experience in software development. If you had, you would have known that bugs are categorized - you do not judge by the number of bugs, but the number of sev 1 bugs. I have played many games, some from Big Name Publishers, that had very serious bugs right out of the box, and it took a long time to get patches, Fallout Tactics somes to mind.

I do software development for a living, and I think where Stardock could improve quite a bit is in prioritizing which bugs to fix. I mean their already busy adding enhancements in the patches when there are very annoying gameplay bugs that have existed since day one that seem like they should be easy to fix.

I've bought computer programs and games that were so buggy and people complained so much that the developers just gave up and publishers just pulled the plug without ever fixing them. I remember one game, I can't remember what it was called, but it was kind of like a Star Trek-themed Masters of Orion; anyway the developers just announced one day in the support forums that they were fed up with all the complaints about bugs, so to punish us they decided not to give us any patches as they originally had planned. So it could be worse.

BTW, did they ever fix Fallout Tactics? I loved that game, but the bugs were so bad that I never could finish it. I still have the CD somewhere I think. If there is a patch that makes it playable, I may have to load it up again.