Ezekiel 2517 Ezekiel 2517

OT - - Ford Hovercraft III - Insubordination MOO3 Forums (long)

OT - - Ford Hovercraft III - Insubordination MOO3 Forums (long)

Talk about fanatical moderators on the MOO3 forums. Note below is a post which I posted on the MOO3 forums as a joke, and the thread was promptly closed. I queried why it was closed and I received 3 warning points for insubordination from Sencho. (It does have a small reference to GalCiv, hope you enjoy :D)

I'm just killing time until the substantial patch comes out or Galactic Civ hits Australia.


"This is called an attempt at humour and is by popular demand. The patch is out and maybe its even half as good as it claims although one is still awaiting the data patch. If you don't appreciate humour, look away now.

For background, this is in response to a comment made that MOO3 is like a hovercraft and we should appreciate its unpolished revolutionary design.

Without further ado, let me present: Ford Hovercraft III

"Pre-stage Design"

1. You love the Ford brand of car. You have fond memories of the original car you purchased, and you very much enjoyed Ford Car Mark II which was simple, elegant and addictive to drive. Even if it was slightly cheesy, you appreciated it for its sleekness and all around handling.

2. You hear the designers are coming out with a Ford Mark III which is going to revolutionise the industry of Ford.

3. The customer is a little wary as they hear a new designer is taking over, but with features such as a built in television, sauna, spa, automated computer, and a thousand neat gadgets the car is meant to be a real Xperience to drive. In particular, a car which supposedly will take away all the headaches of tedious manual driving on the road and automatically hover along.

4. Halfway through the lengthy design stage, the designers realise their plans are not feasible and that perhaps a sauna isn't a necessary requirement of the average customer. They begin to take out all their excess design and fire the person who initially designed the car without bothering to appoint a new lead designer. Why would they need to? All the parts are there, they just need to be assembled.

6. They slot pieces here, they slot pieces there and the designers soon realise this process is taking an eternity. The distributors and their customers are getting extremely impatient.

7. Close to the final completion of the car, one of the designers justifiably proud of his creation takes the car home. His 12 year old son sneaks into the car and after pressing 50 buttons, and adjusting 25 switches to start the car radio, notes to his dad that this car may not appeal to the average person.

8. The designers rip out the spa, the television and 950 of the other gadgets, but decide to leave the television remote and spa controls in the side. They figure that the customer will be glad that they can add their own features to the car.

9. To decide if this car is any good, they decide to choose the most impartial and objective people to test the car. They gather their close personal friends and family, and draw lots until 20 lucky people are chosen. The testers drive and play with the car for a few days and note just how cool it is that the car hovers, whilst ignoring the random swerves the car sometimes takes into passing trees. (They have their first born children locked away and sign declarations in blood not to reveal these swerves)

10. However, the testers do indicate to the designers that the headlights are too bright. The designers decide that this is a very important concern and automatically dim the headlights down. Due to the hectic deadline they do not test the vehicle in night time conditions. (I can drive during the day with headlights on, SURELY I can drive at night also)

11. The company website proudly announces the 'vehicle has been completed' and links to IGN Car International which proclaims it to be 'the Car of the Year'. The review announces that the headlights are amazingly bright and that it is a must-have car for all.

Release

1. The hover-craft is released to massive pre-orders worldwide at comparable prices to a top of the line BMW or Mercedes.

2. The driving manual is from 2000 and describes the history of Fords but has little explanation as to what each of the switches, and statistic screens in the car do. The Supplementary driving manual is extra and details how the spas and saunas are supposed to work.

3. Some initial complaints come in from customers:
(a)'i don't understand how to drive the car and its too complex'
(b) 'why do I need to press 30 buttons to start the car and another 30 to use the windscreen wiper?'
(c) 'this car is no fun to drive'
(d) 'Why does the car alarm keep turning itself on every 2 hours?'
(e) 'how come when i try to move the seats back, the car crashes?
(f) 'how come everytime i load the onboard computer, it doesn't save my detailed programmed instructions?'
(g) 'the car is driving itself and not obeying my decisions (i want to turn left, and the car goes straight).

4. Ford remains silent but responses from other customers are as follows:
(a) You haven't driven the car enough to enjoy it. Read the manual and the supplementary manual, check the company website and take 30 hours to test-drive the car, then you will really love the car
(b) I LIKE pressing 30 buttons to use the windscreen wiper, and you'll like it soon after 30 more hours!
(c) That is because you haven't driven the car long enough. You can't make any comments until you have driven the car at least 30 hours.
(d) Don't you understand? That is a feature of the car. It was designed like that to drive away burgulars, how ingenious is that? The designers even thought ahead and prevent you from disabling the alarm, as they realised you wouldn't understand their brilliance.
(e) Although movable seats are in most modern cars, we didn't feel it necessary to enable them in the hovercraft. Get used to it and stop moving your seat.
(f) We used our ingenuity and decided that you would be much better off re-progamming your onboard computer everytime you start your car, it will add to your driving pleasure.
(g) You are not meant to drive the car, let the car drive itself! Didn't you listen to our pre-release hype. If you don't like the car driving itself, TOUGH, this is how WE like the car to be, and besides it has the smartest AI ever and KNOWS exactly where you want to go. This car is not meant to be like the previous Fords you liked, its meant to be revolutionary. If you don't like it, go back to your Ford Mark II.

5.There is one response from Ford. It reads "We don't enjoy all the criticism of our well-designed car, and the more you keep complaining the less likely we are to listen to you". "In fact, keep complaining and we will sulk and go home and tell our parents."

6. Meanwhile, some of the Ford designers go to Gamespy Motor Magazine and note that they really wanted another 2 years to finish designing the Ford and that nobody had any idea what the final product was meant to look like.

7. Later on, more complaints come in:
(a) How come the car only comes in one colour?
(b) How come the exterior of the car looks like a Beetle?
(c) How come when I switch the headlights on at night it is not bright enough? Also, the car keeps wanting to turn right for no reason I can discern and sometimes the brakes stop working.
(d) Why were all the fluffy dice taken out of Ford?
(e) Why does the temperature gauge go hot and cold for no reason?
(f) I try and try to switch off the auto-pilot but the car is far too complicated to manually drive?
(g) I have now driven the car for 30 hours, and I still don't like it.

8. Ford remains silent (presumably at home with their parents or on vacation) and the responses from the customers come as follows:
(a) That was what the original distributor of the car wanted and the designers didn't want to argue with them. The new distributor chained and whipped the designers, and if anyone body queried this decision, they would receive the dreaded "NO DESIGN FOR YOU!."
(b) Visual beauty isn't important for a car of this sort.
(c) We don't think this is the case, but we will look into it and fix it in a few months, they are not major problems. Besides people are fixing it themselves already, I'm sure you can do the same, why should Ford fix it?
(d) We wanted to make a realistic car, and fluffy dice are just cheesy. However I don't consider a hovering car and purple and yellow upholstery cheesy.
(e) The temperature gauge is simply brilliant. It replicates real life weather conditions, where it is hot at day and cold at night. It is simply insane in its brilliance and its a car feature and it can't possibly be an error in design. If it gets too hot or cold, its probably YOUR fault. Don't try to understand, just rise to the challenge and add or remove clothes at your leisure.
(f) Stop trying to fight the AI, the AI knows best. You are simply not capable of driving the car by yourself, let the AI handle the driving and remember, the pavement and random trees are part of your driving enjoyment. It is simply not feasible to allow you to drive your car and also have auto-pilot. We PREFER autopilot, get used to it or go away. In fact, to satisfy our customers, we decided to allow manual driving but make it painstakingly tedious with no instructions that you just won't do it. That's Ford ingenuity at work.
(g) You are not smart enough to drive our car.

9. The customer complaints start ringing in to the Ford phone lines, raising numerous questions about the car.

10. The answering service replies as follows: "Many dedicated designers went to work on this car for YOU our customer. We are now extremely tired and are on holiday and at a key car
conference, please wait until we come back to answer your queries. Note if you keep annoying us, we will never address your queries."

11. The grumbling of customers grows more audible and flames spring up over the neighbourhood. However, some people love the hovercar and tell the unsatisfied customers that they've heard the complaints many times and to get the hell out of THEIR neighbourhood. In fact, the satisfied customers start throwing firebombs at the unsatisfied customers to end all the complaints.

12. The customers wait and wait, meanwhile another smaller car company releases a similar car to the original Ford Mark I's and II's. It is a car based on the same beauty and simplicity of those models, has plenty of additional features and lets you drive the car (in fact its headlights are super intelligent and adjust accordingly). Unfortunately only one person can drive the car at any time and you can't custom fit parts into the car.

13. However, this smaller rival car company answers all customer phone ins, fixes minor scratches on the car for free, and after the day of release rewards all its customers with flowers and chocolate whilst promising and actually fixing their complaints.

14. Some Ford customers love the hovercraft, and note that they still like driving it despite its flaws (such as difficulty driving at night and failing brakes), and some have even modified the car themselves to make it more drivable.

15. Many more customers realise that at the end of the day, what they really want is a car they can drive and enjoy and not something that is revolutionary and broken. The amazing hovercraft may be wonderful when fixed, but currently does not drive at night, has sometimes failing brakes and really isn't that pretty.

16. Moral of this story? Revolutionary is good, but only if it works properly

Disclaimer: This is not spam, as I have made many amendments to the original and it is also not re-opening a closed thread, as it has nothing whatsoever to do with the original thread. Oh, and my apologies to Ford.

I didn't realise just how many gripes and bugs there are in Ford until this point

Good luck to the patch "
7,405 views 106 replies
Reply #51 Top
Judging from the direction this post is headed, I must say I support Sencho's decision to lock the post when it appeared on the MOO3 forums... No good is coming out of it it appears :notsure:

~SDC~
Reply #52 Top
Phaedyme, quit whining like a sensitive little girl. If you don't like how the boys play in the sandbox, go dress some Barbies with the other girls. Textually abuse? What? Bwahahahhah!! You must be from California?

"Sir, sir, please stop textually abusing sir, I find your tone combative, please sir, stop, you are hurting my feelings, my mood is becoming opaque, sir, your not listening sir, I'm going to hang up if you, sir, sir, 3,3,3,3,3,9,3,3,3, sir stop textually abusing sir, SIR... :sniff!: :sniff!: :sniff!:

(to shoujo: something good is coming out, this thread is hilarious!) ;) A few of you need to fucking relax, turn off your computer, go outside, and darken that paste colored skin of yours.

~SDC~
Reply #53 Top
Ahh, knuckledraggers play GalCiv too.

~SDC~
Reply #54 Top
Guns don't kill people. People kill people.

Shoujo

Shall we pre-emptively close and delete any thread which is likely to cause controversy?

Who will be the final judge?

This post was noted as a joke. It has its exaggerations and it has a few subtle digs at the truth.

If it brightened your day then enjoy it and move on.
If it made you angry, then so be it, you were warned, move on.

At the end of the day, its a game, don't take it so seriously :CONGRAT:
Reply #55 Top
"Ahh, knuckledraggers play GalCiv too."

As "Fist of John" has so 'manfully' proven.

Ezekiel: None of my comments were aimed at you, btw. My reactions were directed at a few of your respondents.

Fist of John:

See, it's like "verbal abuse," except that it's done with text - like this message is (text, that is, not abuse). Or like your message is - an attempt at it, at any rate. I'm sorry that you're incapable of rational rebuttal and must resort to misogynist rhetoric to cover your inadequacies of vocabulary and learning. Please do us all a favor and *don't tell anyone* you like GalCiv. We don't want to chase them off.

~SDC~
Reply #56 Top
Phaedyme, while I agree with your point, your forced use of "fancy words" seems a little childish :)
Reply #57 Top
If someone posted a similar "funny" article about GalCiv here, they would be accused of trolling.
Reply #58 Top
Those aren't "fancy words." Fancy words are beasts like "sesquipedalianistic" and "onomatopoeia." Words like "misogynist" and "rhetoric" are fairly straightforward. Admittedly, it was probably incorrect to say that his misogynist rhetoric concealed any inadequacies of vocabulary. More like they concealed any inadequacies of having a point.

It is unfortunate that people frown upon the use of multisyllabic words as "fake" or "forced." I think that's a bit silly. Or perhaps a lot silly.

~SDC~
Reply #59 Top
I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Besides, what goes on in this thread can't ever be 'abuse' as you term it. It may violate board rules and the sensibilities of the persons running the board, at which point they're within rights to ban, delete, edit, or whatever. In that sense it's an abuse of some TOS.

But to call mere speech 'abuse' akin to physical abuse is just nonsense. Just ignore the douchebags. It's your choice to read and respond, and no one but you has any control over how you feel and how you chose to express it.
Reply #61 Top
Duodecimal,

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=abuse

Specifically, meaning #4: "To assail with contemptuous, coarse, or insulting words; revile."

You will note I was rather specific about defining the abuse as something other than physical. I do have to say that, if you think that the only kind of abuse that's really is abuse is physical, you have a *lot* to learn about life. (not saying the stuff on this thread is worse than a punch, but that's beside the point).

Some examples from this very thread:

"I'm beginning to think of the MOO3 site geeks more and more as a group of brainwashed, goosestepping, facists. I was a huge fan of MOO2 (my girlfriend actually liked it and would play against me!) But MOO3 is unrefined and coated in goat-bile and molasses. I think the problem with those Moo3 nuts is they've all got a serious case of blue balls."

Lots of good points in this thread about MoO3. Lots of pure abusive vulgarity. Some of the first is mixed up in the second. The first doesn't bother me (I'm not about to claim that MoO3 is a great game, or even what it set out to be) but the latter does.

I'm not really here to discuss MoO3 anyway, and the only reason I got into this thread was because I accidentally clicked on it in the first place. No, I don't think Ezekiel needed to be warned, or his thread closed. I think lots of the fans are overzealous in their defense. I also think many of the would-be critics are overzealous in their condemnations of both the *game* and the *fans*.

In any event, it's true, I don't have to respond to the posts or even read this thread. It's my choice. Which means I can do so or not do so as I desire. It cuts both ways.

To be honest, given the way things have gone, I rather hope someone at Stardock erases this thread.



~SDC~
Reply #62 Top
I didn't mean the word "abuse", I meant "misogynist". Unless I missed the post where he attacked women...
Reply #63 Top
Ok, after reading all the posts here and being a frequent visitor to the MOO forums, I'll say my piece and be done.

1) Anyone who paid $50 for something that has all the problems that MOO3 has has a RIGHT to complain. Now all out cussing and repetative posting are one thing, but you better believe I have a right to go to their forums (or any) and give my 2 cents about a game that let me down AND cost too much.

2) Has anyone here played WW2 Online?? MOO3 reminds me very vividly of this game upon it's retail release. And don't bother saying "but they're 2 different games!" Any moron can point that out, but the similarities are to be found in the states of both games at release, and the designer's delivering on promises at release. Both of these games were horrible at release, and both were either drastically different from what was initially planned or had elements of gameplay that were poorly implemented.

3) I paid $50 to hear that MODDERS are supposed to make the BASE GAME more playable until a patch is released? That's not modding... that is only doing QS' job for them. And even then, patches can only do so much for a game like this! Now what I see in these forums, THAT is true modding... Things done to enhance the game, not fix it

4) The MOO3 fiasco DID prompt me to buy Galciv, and I'm happier for having done so. And in terms of gameplay, the premise behind MOO3 (with the emphasis on macromanagement) still intrigues me, but the design is so fundamentally flawed and without direction that it comes off as nothing more than a beta with potential.

5) I've been with the MOO series since day one, so I KNOW what I should have been expecting from MOO3. The fact that the devs tried to do something so grand with the game was noble, but keep in mind that most people like myself want to play a GAME, not a spreadsheet with some cool animations here and there. MOO3 is simply not accessable enough to a wide spectrum of gamers.

I could go on and on about MOO3 problems and GALCIV great points, but again, the bottom line is that I feel my money was poorly spent on MOO3 and wisely used to buy GALCIV. Kudos to Stardock, and you've earned my money for expansions and sequels! :)
Reply #64 Top
Bobo have great idea.
Bobo say people who dont like thread dont read thread.
Bobo think only makes people mad. Mad people write more bad things on thread. Then people look thread again to see what others say about it. then get mad again.
Bobo say read thread if want to stir shit. Some time Bobo think that fun. Sometime not fun.
Bobo think, if dont want to stir shit, stay away. Bobo think, no can win anyway. Nobody agree. Nobody wrong. Only other wrong. They always right.
So Bobo say like stir shit, come here. Dont like dont come.
Bobo smart. One day Bobo learn big words but smart ok for now.
Bobo want fruit. he leave now.
Reply #65 Top
The Original post and it's very nice analogy to the MooIII fiasco . . . Was some great humor . . And amazing accurate too . . Anyone getting mad over it must have other issues . .
Deleting the Thread and giving the warning points just show that they are Very sensitive to there failure and the post was too close to the truth for there comfort.
It is really funny watching small minded people . . .
:)
Reply #66 Top
"It is really funny watching small minded people . . ."

Yup got to agree with that. And the moo3 people are about as small minded as possible.

And Phaedyme anyone who uses "onomatopoeia" should understand their logical fallacies better. Especially when they state them in Latin. I do however find you, and please don't take this as an insult, to be stereotypical of moo3 supporters. They think, falsely, that they are somehow smarter, chosen perhaps, and that they "need" very complex games to satisfy them.

Perhaps I am stating it incorrectly, I think it may be more like, they believe that people who like very complex game systems are intelligent. They want to be intelligent. Hence, they convince themselves that they like moo. And finally, thus they are intelligent. Q.E.D.


Reply #67 Top
In my humble opinion, this thread is degenerating rather quickly. In retrospect, I should have left out my "knuckledragger" comment. I should have clarified that some folks are getting pretty rude on here, which is not necessarily an action that denotes their intelligence level or whole mentality. I think it's not likely for anyone to be able to summarize a person's intelligence or whole personality by a few posts on a forum board. Forum boards / newsgroups tend to bring out the "bad" side of people due to safety and anonymity. Certainly their posts can determine whether or not you give them any credibility within the context of the forum boards. And perhaps, it is a small reflection of what that person is like outside of this venue.

And for the record, I don't believe that using a larger vocabulary makes anyone false, insincere, or childish. While I'm not in agreement with everything Phaedyme has said in this thread, I do believe his ability to express himself in less commonly used words is perfectly legitimate.

However, as a Duodecimel pointed out, misogynist means "hater of women", or variations thereof.

I'm outta this thread...

~SDC~
Reply #68 Top
The straight-up MOO3/GalCiv thread on the MOO3 boards was actually doing quite well, as far as thoughtful discussion goes. Though it's getting a little snippy at the end because someone's falling into the usual 'don't like? don't post!' routine.

http://www.ina-community.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=285738&perpage=30&pagenumber=2
Reply #69 Top
Phaedyme you're frothing at the mouth. Put the dictionary down and step away from the thread. wipe the pie and spittle off your face and sit DOWN.

Now I KNOW you're from California. LOL

For the record, I love women. I have nipples which makes me part woman. I love my nipples as I love myself. I am not chewbacca. I am not a plastic sponge. I have a rotten fork. I use a bookshelf to drink cement. I have to eat some more Kalles now. (:(

~SDC~
Reply #70 Top
Bobo think Fist eating rotten fruit. Bobo not eat rotten fruit. Make Bobo act wrong. Say silly things. zzmaske Bobo look stupid. Bobo not like stupid so Bobo not eat rotten fruit. Bobo say Fist not eat rotten fruit no more.
Reply #71 Top
Being a SQA engineer and dealing with software quality, user interfaces, Good and bad features, testy programmers, time and budget problems as a way of life . . I understand the problems that MooIII went through. . Having said that and having been on their forums for >2 years and interacting with the regulars and developers . .I have a good perspective on the game, its development, the developers themselves and the forum.
And to say it a nicely as possible . . almost every aspect of and around MooIII is disappointing, rather nasty and frankly poor.
This goes from the quality of the product to the attitude of the people surrounding it and the madness of the forum. Having experienced this mess for some time, and also experiencing quite a few first hand examples of better products, developer’s and forums, I have found that criticism done intelligently and politely (when possible) is entirely understood, justified and even expected and very needed . . . anything less then this (I feel rather constructive criticism) or even massive praise of that mess call MooIII to be either damage control propaganda or simply the misguided.
In every way the project is a mess, the people are rude (a few of the developers and most regular forum goers). The game bares very little resemblance to the game they where originally making (to its detriment, as stated BY the developers) and is not playable in the way it was intended to be played (by any reach) at release or even more then a month after its release. And in such a poor useable state that I am quite glad I was not on the QA team, because if I ever had let a product leave in that condition, I would be along with my entire team would be immediately fired for frankly doing absolutely nothing.
I have no bone to pick here and could care less if they sink or swim and I am constructively using the experience, information and ongoing forum as an example to the people I work for and with of how NOT to be under any circumstances. LOL

(Note. Some statements above are generalizations and I do concede that there are some good people, parts of the game and forum goers. but since these are so rare I only will note that they do, to some extent, exist)
;) ;)
Reply #72 Top
Although I contributed to this thread my making negative remarks about MOO3, IMHO Phaedyme has made some fine points. Fist of John, it's quite unnecessary to resort to personal attacks on Phaedyme. It weakens your argument substantially. You don't need to feel intimidated by the use of "big" words. I'm not going to get into the finer points of effective debating here, but I will say that it bothers me to see a valued member of this forum being demeaned simply because you don't agree with her. Unfortunately, your behavior seems no different than that of the rabid MOO3 fanboys. >:(

~SDC~
Reply #73 Top
Hey erog, I'm Darkrenown from the moo3 forums. Either someone else took my nick here or I signed up long ago and forgot what email/password I used.
Since we've already argued about moo3 over there I'll just say I still think Moo3 is a good game and that this thread proves rabid galciv fanboys are just as bad as the moo3 ones :)
Reply #74 Top
Bravo, bravo!!! :D

Very much sums up the goings on with MOO3. I logged about 30 hours or so in Moo3 and quite disappointed, with nary a shred of fun to be had, I took the darn thing back to Media Play and stated "er....this game is not working right on my machine. The fonts are messed up, among other things." True, if not very forthcoming. Used the resulting store credit to pick up Freelancer (an actual FUN game - shocking, I know). Would've picked up Galciv, but it hadn't yet been released. Picked up ole' Galciv a few weeks later and been in turn-based bliss ever since.

Don't blame IG for cutting their losses, either. I imagine the development costs being incurred weekly was giving out a giant sucking sound. It's not uncommon for software development (games or other) to go over budget and schedule, sometimes significantly, but there must've been truly incompetent directors and project managers over there at Quicksilver to put out crap like that after all that development time.

Seeya,

Offholdr :p

~SDC~