Ageod's AACW has been out about 4 or 5 days and has been patched twice. These have been minor limited patches, "quick fixes" for certain obvious problems. That is exactly my point.
FOF's last beta was wonderful; but it took months to get made. Why not issue patches as problems are fixed. For example, the ANV wondering away from Richmond is an issue. Why not fix that and issue a patch. That particular issue is not connected to, nor need it wait on, a review of whether or not there is an issue with the Union AI's blockading.
Western Civilization's staff can't be smaller than AGEOD's, which, I understand is tiny. I think, however, that its patching philosophy is different and should be revised.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, I think FOF is among the best computer wargames ever made.
Patching Philosophies
Moderator: Gil R.
RE: Patching Philosophies
I have been following the forums on AACW. I was surprised to see that a patch was just issued for it. So I bought it. I really like BOA so I figured that AACW has to be better. I also think that FOF is an excellent game and I will be playing it as long as PC's work!
I have also wondered why some patches can't be released sooner and solo to make playing a bit easier. However I never had the guts to ask why... [&o]
I have also wondered why some patches can't be released sooner and solo to make playing a bit easier. However I never had the guts to ask why... [&o]
-
Gray_Lensman
- Posts: 640
- Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2003 3:40 am
RE: Patching Philosophies
I agree with Johnnie, it has been somewhat frustrating waiting for weeks for features that are discussed and then mentioned that they are going to appear in the patch, yet we continue to wait. I purchased FOF based on Matrix's reputation for good support and timely patches, WITP being one of the best examples of any game and update patches. WITP released many small Beta patches and then "Comprehensive" patches every so often. Why can't the same be done with FOF? Also, as far as I'm concerned, if a patch is clearly marked "beta", I have no problem if for some reason it malfunctions after all it was a beta. Once a "Comprehensive" is released I reinstall and repatch to the latest Comprehensive, anyhow.
You've GOT to hold them back!
-
Erik Rutins
- Posts: 39650
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Vermont, USA
- Contact:
RE: Patching Philosophies
Guys,
We also released an "issues" fix for FOF within about a week of its release. What we have now is a "content update" which improves the game in some pretty massive ways. Much as I'd like to say that fixing the issue with the ANV wandering away from Richmond is simple, it's not. Eric fixed that, but we are still trying to "unfix" a few other things that fix caused the AI to do. We expected to have another public beta update out to you by now and I hope it will be this week (and the last one before the update is official).
I can't overstate that the quantity of changes in this update is equivalent to a 2.0 version rather than a typical update and if we'd tried to release it in smaller chunks, not nearly as much would have gotten done. If you're going to make a lot of changes, it's much more efficient to make then and then test them rather than doing a constant test-release cycle. For some of the changes, to really test them testers have to play through an entire campaign or multiple campaigns. I assume you all do want these changes tested first? [;)]
With that said, we've heard you and we are hustling. In fact, it's been a non-stop hustle behind the scenes even though it might not look that way from here.
Regards,
- Erik
We also released an "issues" fix for FOF within about a week of its release. What we have now is a "content update" which improves the game in some pretty massive ways. Much as I'd like to say that fixing the issue with the ANV wandering away from Richmond is simple, it's not. Eric fixed that, but we are still trying to "unfix" a few other things that fix caused the AI to do. We expected to have another public beta update out to you by now and I hope it will be this week (and the last one before the update is official).
I can't overstate that the quantity of changes in this update is equivalent to a 2.0 version rather than a typical update and if we'd tried to release it in smaller chunks, not nearly as much would have gotten done. If you're going to make a lot of changes, it's much more efficient to make then and then test them rather than doing a constant test-release cycle. For some of the changes, to really test them testers have to play through an entire campaign or multiple campaigns. I assume you all do want these changes tested first? [;)]
With that said, we've heard you and we are hustling. In fact, it's been a non-stop hustle behind the scenes even though it might not look that way from here.
Regards,
- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
RE: Patching Philosophies
Why is it that I feel just like I did at ten years-old right after a bad whipping?! [:-]
RE: Patching Philosophies
My dad used his belt.
Col Saito: "Don't speak to me of rules! This is war! It is not a game of cricket!"
RE: Patching Philosophies
Erik, I really think you need to re-think your strategy.
Waiting a long time for a "content update" while there are gamebreaker bugs means the game stagnates unplayed on hardrives... new games come out in the meantime... people don't return... forums die... new purchasers shy away...
And then there's the underlying issue that this "content" should have been there at the start when people put their money down....
This really is a lesson.
Waiting a long time for a "content update" while there are gamebreaker bugs means the game stagnates unplayed on hardrives... new games come out in the meantime... people don't return... forums die... new purchasers shy away...
And then there's the underlying issue that this "content" should have been there at the start when people put their money down....
This really is a lesson.
RE: Patching Philosophies
Kipper,
I certainly understand your point. I disagree about there having been "gamebreaker bugs" -- and the proof that that's subjective is that plenty of people have continued to play the game the whole time, and were perfectly happy in doing so. But you're right that there were some glitches affecting playability, and that ideally these would have been stamped out long ago.
The main point I'd make is that most of this new content is being put in because of customer feedback. Admittedly, some of the added features should have been there at the time of release (e.g., our new screen showing unit by unit casualties after a battle), but more than 80% of our new features are being added as bonuses to make players happy rather than because we left something important out of the original release. Moreover, one doesn't have to search too far back in history to think of games that have been missing content that the developers then added through patches; but I can't think of anyone who has added so much new stuff that the developers arguably could claim that an upgrades patch really represents a free 2.0 version. And that's what this patch represents, even if we won't be calling it that.
I certainly understand your point. I disagree about there having been "gamebreaker bugs" -- and the proof that that's subjective is that plenty of people have continued to play the game the whole time, and were perfectly happy in doing so. But you're right that there were some glitches affecting playability, and that ideally these would have been stamped out long ago.
The main point I'd make is that most of this new content is being put in because of customer feedback. Admittedly, some of the added features should have been there at the time of release (e.g., our new screen showing unit by unit casualties after a battle), but more than 80% of our new features are being added as bonuses to make players happy rather than because we left something important out of the original release. Moreover, one doesn't have to search too far back in history to think of games that have been missing content that the developers then added through patches; but I can't think of anyone who has added so much new stuff that the developers arguably could claim that an upgrades patch really represents a free 2.0 version. And that's what this patch represents, even if we won't be calling it that.
Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.
RE: Patching Philosophies
I hear you Gil, but the main point remains that gamebreaker bug fixes should not wait for major content updates. Patch the serious issues and keep the game alive while you produce the new content.
"Gamebreaker bugs" is subjective like most other things in this business - but there are a lot of people not playing this title because they perceive gamebreakers. Whether they are gamebreakers or not is beside the point - there are players who perceive them to be and that is the most important thing.
It's a really good game and the fruit of a lot of work and the patch sounds great. I am just saying that bug fixes should be have #1 priority and certainly should not be delayed by long periods as new content is developed and tested.
"Gamebreaker bugs" is subjective like most other things in this business - but there are a lot of people not playing this title because they perceive gamebreakers. Whether they are gamebreakers or not is beside the point - there are players who perceive them to be and that is the most important thing.
It's a really good game and the fruit of a lot of work and the patch sounds great. I am just saying that bug fixes should be have #1 priority and certainly should not be delayed by long periods as new content is developed and tested.
-
desertstorm
- Posts: 50
- Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2007 11:06 am
- Location: Germany/Niedersachsen
RE: Patching Philosophies
"Gamebreaker" bugs fixed first or later........, the big question is now, when comes the new beta Patch??????
Manfred Meyer
-
Erik Rutins
- Posts: 39650
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Vermont, USA
- Contact:
RE: Patching Philosophies
Kipper,
Your comments are well taken. We never intended the second update to take as long as it has, but one thing led to another. The result is far beyond what was originally planned and serves as a major and free improvement to the game. I agree it would have been better to release a second issues update and then make this a third content update, but that did not work out. With that said, the public beta is available and has been for three weeks and if you haven't installed it yet you should!
Regards,
- Erik
Your comments are well taken. We never intended the second update to take as long as it has, but one thing led to another. The result is far beyond what was originally planned and serves as a major and free improvement to the game. I agree it would have been better to release a second issues update and then make this a third content update, but that did not work out. With that said, the public beta is available and has been for three weeks and if you haven't installed it yet you should!
Regards,
- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
-
Erik Rutins
- Posts: 39650
- Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
- Location: Vermont, USA
- Contact:
RE: Patching Philosophies
desertstorm,
Eric's (the main developer's) computer was hit by a virus and required a rebuild. I was hopeful we'd have the next public beta out this week and make it official next week, but I'd say now we're aiming for having out next week and official the week after. The current build looks pretty good but came with a new save game bug that is unreleasable.
Regards,
- Erik
Eric's (the main developer's) computer was hit by a virus and required a rebuild. I was hopeful we'd have the next public beta out this week and make it official next week, but I'd say now we're aiming for having out next week and official the week after. The current build looks pretty good but came with a new save game bug that is unreleasable.
Regards,
- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
CEO, Matrix Games LLC
For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/
Freedom is not Free.
RE: Patching Philosophies
ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
desertstorm,
Eric's (the main developer's) computer was hit by a virus and required a rebuild. I was hopeful we'd have the next public beta out this week and make it official next week, but I'd say now we're aiming for having out next week and official the week after. The current build looks pretty good but came with a new save game bug that is unreleasable.
Regards,
- Erik
I know what Eric's gone through. I just got hit three weeks ago with two trojans and a few viruses! What a job it is! Sorry to hear that and it can happen no matter how safe you think you operate.
RE: Patching Philosophies
That's bad luck!
I hope you have a good marketing campaign lined up and sell this as a re-launch of FOF because that is what it is, essentially.
I hope you have a good marketing campaign lined up and sell this as a re-launch of FOF because that is what it is, essentially.
RE: Patching Philosophies
ORIGINAL: Kipper
That's bad luck!
Good thing I don't believe in luck then. [;)]
RE: Patching Philosophies
ORIGINAL: Kipper
That's bad luck!
I hope you have a good marketing campaign lined up and sell this as a re-launch of FOF because that is what it is, essentially.
Yeah, we won't be keeping it secret.[;)]
One thing we plan, and I mentioned this elsewhere on the forum, is a big "Forge of Freedom" AAR contest, with the first prize to be a replica cavalry saber. (And not some cheap thing from Toys 'r' Us, I assure you.) Details will follow once the patch is officially released. The contest will permit either AAR's of full campaigns or single battles.
And I definitely understand your points above. It's just that a lot of unanticipated things happened to make the patch take far longer than was ever intended. Once the patch is out, this will be behind us. But we will definitely be remembering this for our next game.
Michael Jordan plays ball. Charles Manson kills people. I torment eager potential customers by not sharing screenshots of "Brother Against Brother." Everyone has a talent.
RE: Patching Philosophies
Gil;
I really admire your patience when answering some of these posts. You were made for the Administrators job. Not me!
I couldn't resist using some of your smileys to reinforce my point.
I really admire your patience when answering some of these posts. You were made for the Administrators job. Not me!
I couldn't resist using some of your smileys to reinforce my point.
RE: Patching Philosophies
LarryP
Heheh - stay away from customer service as a career
Kipper
Heheh - stay away from customer service as a career
Kipper
RE: Patching Philosophies
Kipper;
I avoided it like syphillus. [;)]
I avoided it like syphillus. [;)]
RE: Patching Philosophies
Dear Erik, eric and Gil:
The fact remains that the new beta is going the way of the first beta; it is taking a long time. This is not a complaint, nor do I mean to tell you your business. But I agree with Kipper, a gamebreaker is whatever one thinks it is. When a player puts a game aside, it can't be good for business.
I want the game to do well and I think it may end up a classic. I do still believe, however, that your (whoever makes this type of decision) patching philosophy is wrong.
Ageod has just issued its fourth patch for AACW, a game which is one week old. To be fair, these are quick fix patches. But what is wrong with that ?? See a problem, fix a problem and on to the next problem.
Just my two cents.
The fact remains that the new beta is going the way of the first beta; it is taking a long time. This is not a complaint, nor do I mean to tell you your business. But I agree with Kipper, a gamebreaker is whatever one thinks it is. When a player puts a game aside, it can't be good for business.
I want the game to do well and I think it may end up a classic. I do still believe, however, that your (whoever makes this type of decision) patching philosophy is wrong.
Ageod has just issued its fourth patch for AACW, a game which is one week old. To be fair, these are quick fix patches. But what is wrong with that ?? See a problem, fix a problem and on to the next problem.
Just my two cents.