Refund Possible?

[drillerman]

Yeah Sigh lighten up dude, You're becoming a bit of a bore now[>:]. Why don't we all club together and give Sigh a refund so he can go and a buy another game to moan about somewhere else. Sorry, probably uncalled for.[:'(]

[Sigh]

ORIGINAL: themetalcrow

honestly dude, if the game plays than why should you get a refund? if a car works would you get a refund?

Are you kidding me? I car that "worked" like this game "works" would not be aloud on the road.

If you sell software that is this broken to a company they will never hire you again (unless they specifically called for it to be finished ASAP

[Sigh]

ORIGINAL: drillerman

Yeah Sigh lighten up dude, You're becoming a bit of a bore now[>:]. Why don't we all club together and give Sigh a refund so he can go and a buy another game to moan about somewhere else. Sorry, probably uncalled for.[:'(]

Boohoo

That fanboy bullcrap is exactly why game designer know they can get away with selling buggy software.

So thanks for letting them get away with it. But really its ok. Ive learned not to trust the company, You can keep giving them your money for the crap

Oh.. And really If i bore you oh well. My only goal is to make sure people dont get suckered into buying the shitstain of a game. If i had saw this thread before purchasing I wouldnt have

[RViener]

Erik, I think this thread has outlived it's benefit. Bob Viener

[Krelos]

If I were the developer I would give you a refund, then ban you from the forum and blacklist your bank account so you could never buy one of my games again.

But that's just me.

[crazyguy]

Sigh it's a very easy mathematical point to understand:

Facts(irrelevant if you think they are good - they are still facts):

1.) Game development cost money 2.) Testing cost money 3.) It's commonly accepted that software is bugged (every software is bugged also Space Shuttle software) 4.) Public testing increases the risk to get your software on a torrent before release (see Fallout 3 was on torrents MONTHS befor release) 5.) Game developers mostly have a tight budget, only a few have nearly endless amounts of it. 6.) 4x games are a niche market. 7.) 10 customers are worth more than 1 8.) Most game companies release patches at launchday 9.) Patches after the first mostly need some month

If you sum up all the facts in a conclusio:

CF has developed a niche product with a tight budget did a beta and released a game wich was playable with a few bugs. These bugs (found by extended unpayable testing of a lot of dedicated customers) was found and SOLVED after a few days. Since the first patch every 1-2 weeks a patch fixing MINOR bugs and OPTIMIZING gameplay comes out.

Now you can still say there are software companies out that don't have problems with bugs - tell me one!!! comercial software that is bugfree? Is still on version 1.0 because it didn't NEED any update.

As last approach you can say: I am a customer it doesn't have to bother me! Sorry thats not the case - more internal testing needs more money which means it needs the company to earn more money so they must make a higher price... Do you want to pay 99$ for example?

If you don't understand this maybe I should tell ya that every car that was developed in the last 15 years need at minimum 20 patches to their internal software to work also well under special circumstances.

If you think I don't know what I am talking about:

Higher Technical School for Software Development Bachelor degree in Applied Computer Sciences 5 years working at a bank developing high security software 3 years working as system admin (trust me even 1000000$ software has bugs) working with pc's for 20 years

I think I know what I am speaking about

[crazyguy]

ORIGINAL: Sigh



Im not an idiot and im one of the most veteran gamers you'll ever find Erik. I know the flaws of the game and i know how they relate to other games. I know how to program and design games. Pointing out small pluses in the game and trying to wave away the great flaws is NOT going to persuade me in any way.

I am just curious at which game company have you worked ór have you developed an indy game? Which one? I maybe would like to try it [:)]

The game is overpriced and I am very unhappy as a customer.

Just one question here: Why the hell did you buy it if you think it's too expensive? Why didn't you wait until it's going cheaper if you wasn't sure if it will be the game you want? I am just curious as I like to know if you maybe have a point that I don't see.

[hermanhum]

ORIGINAL: Sigh

Im not going to sit here and argue your points. Thats the job of the beta testers BEFORE the game is released. Im not doing their job for you.

ORIGINAL: Fishman

Yes, but you also have "Developer Tunnel Vision". Developers very easily get a tunnel-visioned view of how the game should be played. I know this because I have developed things, only to have users try to do things in a completely strange manner that I had never even thought of doing, because of developer tunnel vision. You get set in this "one true way" of playing the game, and then you encounter someone else, who has an entirely different approach to playing and manipulating the game's data and interface.

Both Sigh and Fishman have been articulate and detailed on the failings of DW.

I have a question for both of you:

How long did it take you to formulate your opinion on what you think are faults within the design of Distant Worlds? Were most of them apparent to you within 30 mins of gameplay? 60 mins? 120 mins? more?

[Aurelian]

$40 for a game is not over priced. Considering that I paid about $60 for Carriers at War when I had a C64 it's a bargain.

[Erik Rutins]

I agree that Sigh has been behaving poorly, all things considered, but I still hold out hope that the 1.0.4 update will turn him around a bit. Let's see how that goes.

[drillerman]

I've never been called a Fanboy before, is that good? Can a 45 year old be a Fanboy, or should I be a Fanman!?!?!?!?![:D]

Sigh, It's not that we don't agree with some of your comments, it's that you just keep going on and on and on! [>:]

We all know there are issues. With this type of game with so many different things interacting with everything else there are bound to be bugs etc. However, because these types of games with this much depth don't come along so often anymore I think we need to make allowances while the game is balanced, patched, tweaked etc.

[Fishman]

ORIGINAL: hermanhum

How long did it take you to formulate your opinion on what you think are faults within the design of Distant Worlds? Were most of them apparent to you within 30 mins of gameplay? 60 mins? 120 mins? more?

The faults in DW aren't really in the design, so much as they are in the implementation. But they started becoming apparent within an hour or two, yes.

[Anthropoid]

I disagree that this game has "faults." I'm curious to see these "steaming pile of dung" level faults or "broken" elements enumerated in clear concise fashion. Having skimmed through all the posts by those who are complaining, I don't see these clear descriptions of these 'major' problems. Until I do, I am not taking such complaints seriously, and I tend to think that what we have here is merely contumeliousness on the part of a newcomer to this publisher's community and gamestyle.

Complex dynamics that are not yet optimally balanced? Yeah, there are some of those in DW, as there are bound to be in any complex strategy game even long after the pre-and post-release periods. It is simply not possible for a publisher to do all possible tests, and that is in large part why games in this genre have increasingly evolved to require longer post-release 'beta, i.e., patch periods.

Some UI operations that are not yet optimally balanced? Yeah, some of those too. Some user functionality that is not yet implemented at all that would make the game a more pleasant experience, i.e., stuff like we see constructive contributors to the forum offering in the Wishlists and other discussion threads? Yeah, there is a need for some of that too.

However, when you compare this game to other space games, it is IMO, head and shoulders above the rest, and simultaneously more challenging. Not to mention that this game has tremendous untapped potential in terms of Matrix being a very supportive publisher that tends to keep improving and patching for long periods after release, that there is a very active and constructive player community who are likely going to become a very productive and creative modder community, and that the possibility for lots of expansions and spinoff mods seems good.

Yes I'm a Matrix regular, but I don't just lurk around tooting their horn on every new game they sell. I just happen to think this one is a good one.

[Wade1000]

ORIGINAL: Sigh 3. Micromanagement.. This is where my forum nick comes from.. For a game that advertises the automation this is way beyond acceptable.. So If I want to build a station somewhere this is what i have to do:

I have to find a constructor ship (yes i know there is a menu for this).. Leave the selection menu.. send it to its destination to build. (maybe even have to zoom in to set it exactly where it should go)... wait for it to get half there.. learn that it has run out of fuel... tell it to refuel at the next refueling station watch it IGNORE the resupply station that is right next to it and zoom off to some other system.. refuel... tell it to go build that damn station... repeat. All the while im being attacked constantly by pirates and whatnot :rolleyes: Also when this retard of a constructor is finished with its cue it is no longer set to automatic. So if i should forget about it (while doing the same with some other constructor) well.. too bad.. Its a waste of a ship/maintenance

Let me show you an alternative method that a sane game would use:

Select location for station, select space station from list, place station, "Automation" takes over the rest.

"...place station..."... or mine, or whatever. This would be GREAT! like in many ground based RTS games, like Starcraft 2. There could be like a shaded or faded "ghost" image of what is being "placed" on the main screen and then it vanishes. A constructor then arrives to begin the construction.

[Wade1000]

Ship order queues balanced/shared.

Maybe ship order queues, like for construction ships, need to be balanced/shared to all construction ships in an empire-wide to do list.. Thus, one construction ship at the nearest to the specified locations will not aquire a huge list of backlog orders for constructions.

ORIGINAL: Fishman

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

ORIGINAL: Sigh Select location for station, select space station from list, place station, "Automation" takes over the rest.

That's exactly how it works for me, using the Expansion Planner.

Well, in order to use this functionality, even under optimal conditions, requires that you go into the expansion planner, a lengthy and often incomplete list, locate a planet with an inscrutable name you cannot remember, and then pick it out of the list. Most likely the user in question has spotted the desired planet visually, by seeing it as he follows the progress of an explorer ship or finding it next to one of his colonies. Given that mineable objects typically have utterly inscrutable names like AA####, having to try to find it again in a list of hundreds of similarly indecipherable objects is not exactly convenient. And, of course, there are all the attendant caveats of order-queuing, such as that orders are not balanced between constructors. If the Order Queue were maintained in a constructor-independent manner, as an empire-level "to do" list, instead of a per-ship queue, this would probably not happen.

If the Order Queue were maintained in a constructor-independent manner, as an empire-level "to do" list, instead of a per-ship queue, this would probably not happen.

tm.asp?m=2435952&mpage=1&key=

[Anthropoid]

ORIGINAL: Wade1000

ORIGINAL: Sigh 3. Micromanagement.. This is where my forum nick comes from.. For a game that advertises the automation this is way beyond acceptable.. So If I want to build a station somewhere this is what i have to do:

I have to find a constructor ship (yes i know there is a menu for this).. Leave the selection menu.. send it to its destination to build. (maybe even have to zoom in to set it exactly where it should go)... wait for it to get half there.. learn that it has run out of fuel... tell it to refuel at the next refueling station watch it IGNORE the resupply station that is right next to it and zoom off to some other system.. refuel... tell it to go build that damn station... repeat. All the while im being attacked constantly by pirates and whatnot :rolleyes: Also when this retard of a constructor is finished with its cue it is no longer set to automatic. So if i should forget about it (while doing the same with some other constructor) well.. too bad.. Its a waste of a ship/maintenance

Let me show you an alternative method that a sane game would use:

Select location for station, select space station from list, place station, "Automation" takes over the rest.

"...place station..."... or mine, or whatever. This would be GREAT! like in many ground based RTS games, like Starcraft 2. There could be like a shaded or faded "ghost" image of what is being "placed" on the main screen and then it vanishes. A constructor then arrives to begin the construction.

The original quote is simply not true, and the fact that you want it to play like an RTS suggests that you are not taking the time to learn how THIS game is designed, and instead are expecting it to play like some other game.

To build a station . . . or mine, or whatever: there are myriad ways to get it done more efficiently than the OP whom you quote describes. Two of them:

1. Go to the Expansion window, sort the list of potential targets (colonies or mines) use the large buttons on the bottom of the screen to either send a free miner or allocate (i.e., build) a colony ship, or queue a miner = 3 clicks.

2. Lets say you notice a planet that you want to exploit while viewing it in the main map. Click on the "scroll through constructor ships" on the lower left till you get to one you want to use (could be a free one that is not currently on a mission, could be one that you want to queue a second mission for). Right-click the target planet/moon and then either give the vessel you have selected the command to work there or the command to Queue--work there. Assuming that the second ship in the Miner scroll screen is suitable: again about 3 clicks.

If you cannot be bothered to play a complex game, then don't: go back to playing Starcraft. But don't pass off your impatience/attentional bias as a "poorly designed game."

[Anthropoid]

Ship order queues balanced/shared.

Maybe ship order queues, like for construction ships, need to be balanced/shared to all construction ships in an empire-wide to do list..

No. This is a bad idea which hinges on the idea that making the game simpler is better. This is not a simple game. If you want it to be simpler then just turn stuff on auto and let the AI decide how to allocate things. Creating exceptions to player controlled and auto functions that combine the two UI mechanics will create more and more exceptions, special circumstances and conflicts which will produce less fun not more.

If someone cannot be bothered to read through some lengthy lists of assets, or to remember unusual ship and planet names then why play this game? Why not just play a game like GalCiv?

I can agree that some of the windows (e.g., ship characteristics in the selection window on lower left of main screen; or ship characteristics in the ship lists) would be improved if more information were provided by mouse-hover over or right-clicky, but trying to simplify the game by mixing more automation into unautomated mode is not going to help.

If for example, you cannot keep your ships fueld, go into the Options and set the alert that ships need refueling to appear as a popup window.

[Wade1000]

Anthropoid, settle down. I know of all those features you mention.

I made suggestions to add to or improve the interface commands. You just seem to be telling others to play one way and not to offer suggestions in fear of the game becomming less complex.

By the way, a simplified, less complex user interface while keeping the GAME complex, in depth, and epic is a good thing.

You seem to be mixing words and assuming what my opinions are.

[Anthropoid]

Wade, I'm sorry if I misunderstood where you stand. Lets just say: there are clearly some folks who have decided they do not like this game, and are making inaccurate and indeed unfairly harsh claims about it being "broken." If you have no intent to make any such claims, then I'm not really responding to you but simply to some of the folks you've quoted up above.

With the way game development works these days, constructive ideas and suggestions seem to be quite important in how much a game actually realizes its full potential, so to the extent that that is your goal, my apologies if I misunderstood you.

I don't think that was the goal of the OP, and I don't think that is necessarily the goal of every poster in this thread. Sour-grapes, poorly informed, else just plain bitchy comments should not be treated as if they are well-intentioned or worthwhile. Again, if that is not your intent, my apologies.

Every game has flaws, even long after it has undergone an assiduous and sincere long span of collaboration among users and developers to patch, fix and refine. Expecting perfection, or expecting a game to fit one's personal ideas of perfection is simply not reasonable; nor is expecting a refund because you didn't like the game, nor is then arguing that it is "broken" and therefore you deserve the refund on the grounds that it was a fault in the product. IMO, Matrix should just lock this thread. There is nothing constructive happening here. If guys want to offer constructive suggestions they can always open other threads or contribute to other ongoing threads.

[Wade1000]

No problem. Maybe you were mostly comenting to Sigh.