CoG and EiA

[9thlegere]

No I just personally don't like it when people over-exagerate a problem. I have no problem speaking out against those kinds of 'problems'.

So you don't think not being able to reliably fight the tactical battles is a problem? Seems a good few paying customers think it is and the game designers do as well but according to you they are just a bunch of whiners and exagerators!

Depends... what are they?

My wife for starters.[;)]

[Reiryc]

So you don't think not being able to reliably fight the tactical battles is a problem?

Either you didn't read my other posts or you are being facetious...which one is it?

Seems a good few paying customers think it is and the game designers do as well but according to you they are just a bunch of whiners and exagerators!

Yes, when someone says they can't play at all, that is an exageration. Such as when someone said, "You buy a product with the expectation it will work." The product works, I've played it from start to victory. How could I have done that if it didn't work even though I am experiencing ctd's in detailed battles? Now if there were no quick battles or if quick battles also caused ctd's, then no, the product would not work. However this is not the case.

Does this ring a bell? "... suppose I am being a little harsh but I am getting a little frustrated." Sounds like exageration due to frustration to me.

They said the ctd should be now fixed in their first patch and prior to this the game was able to be completed from start to end. So yes, I think it's pretty clear that you and a couple others are exagerating and whining.

My wife for starters.

Hmm... maybe. Need to check under the hood though to see exactly what needs to be fixed! [;)]

[9thlegere]

I bought the game with the expectation of playing tactical battles, not to by pass them. I never said at any point the game never worked at all. You believe that becasue you can bypass the tactical battles the game is still playable, I don't think that I ought to skip any part of the game as it was advertised just so that I can get it to the end.

I vented my frustrations about this on the EIA board as hopefully it will be read by some and they can use this to decide whether or not to buy the game (and maybe the EIA will not have such a serious bug in it too which will spoil peoples enjoyment of it).

Had I known that the tactical parts would crash so often, I may have waited until it was fixed before buying it. I at least thought it was fair that others knew this.

But you seem to have taken it upon yourself to go on some crusade and attack anyone who dared say the game had serious problems.

We differ on what we view as problems

but whatever [>:]

I'm getting bored with you petty jibes now.

you can have the last word.

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: 9thlegere

I bought the game with the expectation of playing tactical battles, not to by pass them. I never said at any point the game never worked at all. You believe that becasue you can bypass the tactical battles the game is still playable, I don't think that I ought to skip any part of the game as it was advertised just so that I can get it to the end.

I vented my frustrations about this on the EIA board as hopefully it will be read by some and they can use this to decide whether or not to buy the game (and maybe the EIA will not have such a serious bug in it too which will spoil peoples enjoyment of it).

Had I known that the tactical parts would crash so often, I may have waited until it was fixed before buying it. I at least thought it was fair that others knew this.

But you seem to have taken it upon yourself to go on some crusade and attack anyone who dared say the game had serious problems.

We differ on what we view as problems

but whatever [>:]

I'm getting bored with you petty jibes now.

you can have the last word.

Why is holding you to your own comments a 'petty jibe'?

Explain to me how this sentence, "You buy a product with the expectation it will work." doesn't indicate that the product doesn't work?

You vented your frustrations here and I decided they needed counter-balance due to their over-exagerations. You are entitled to post your views and I am entitled to post mine (while following the board rules of course). Spare me the drama-queen bit about a crusade. If I was on a crusade against anyone who "who dared say the game had serious problems" then you'd find the support board full of posts from my 'crusade'. When you first posted your problem on the support board, I posted what help suggestions were available at that time to give you a hand since we both were experiencing the same problems. Hardly the actions of someone on a crusade "who dared say the game had serious problems".

I think you should learn to differentiate the difference between someone criticizing another for a problem and criticizing another for how they go about expressing that problem.

We don't differ on what we view as problems, we differ on how we go about expressing our issues with those problems.

[dinsdale]

Only on Matrix fora could a fanboi be so rabid as to defend a game where about 1/2 the game doesn't work for poeple [X(]

If tactical battles aren't necessary, then why did the developers bother putting it in the game?

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: dinsdale

Only on Matrix fora could a fanboi be so rabid as to defend a game where about 1/2 the game doesn't work for poeple [X(]

If tactical battles aren't necessary, then why did the developers bother putting it in the game?

[8|]


Probably to add some entertainment value. They aren't necessary though, ask anyone.

[Hanal]

The biggest frustration for me continues to be the poorly prepared manaul...too many little known rules and issues are cropping up, and if it wasn't for the forum help, playing the game would be more confusing than necessary and unenjoyable, and I do not consider that an exageration....

If any EiA people are actually reading this thread, please take the time to do the manual properly. I know I'm repeating myself here but this is the EiA forum not CoG's, so I want to bring us back to what is relavent to THIS game.......explaining a rule is not enough but how one implements a rule is, and remember there will be an audience for this game who have never played EiA the board game, so do not assume a sketchy description will be understood by people because of their board game pedigree.....sometimes the nuts and bolts of how to play the game gets buried in the minutia so I'll take a plain detailed manual, berift of fancy photos and historical anecdotes, any day, than something fancy which glosses over too many of the game points in order to keep the page count down....

[dinsdale]

ORIGINAL: Reiryc
to add some entertainment value. They aren't necessary though, ask anyone.

[:D]
Isn't the game's purpose to be entertainment value? I suppose if the loading screen worked and nothing else, your statement would still be true.

But keep up the good work, it's very entertaining. Perhaps you'll get a pat on the head from someone for your steadfast defence of the game.

[jchastain]

Just to clarify a few points:

1. It isn't that tactical battles in CoG do not work at all. For most people, they work fine the vast majority of the time. A few people are experiencing significant problems and occasional currupt savegames seem to make tactical battles unplayable. This situation is clearly unacceptable and the game should always work for everyone, but it also would be unfair to say that they do not work at all. To their credit, the Dev team has promised to address this in the first patch and beta testers are reporting that they think the problem has been solved. We'll see.

2. The manual certainly doesn't explain everything clearly. Even worse, in a few instances it is outright wrong. Clearly some of the late beta changes did not get addressed in the manual. However, again, the game is playable. It requires you to learn and discover some things that many may prefer to have explained to them. And again the Devs have committed to provide additional details in a future patch.

While we as consumers may not enjoy it, software quality standards in the PC gaming industry have gone done significantly as patch distribution has become easier and more widespread. If you compare PC products to cartridge based systems where patches are not available, the difference in quality at release is striking. Essentially all companies are using us as their unpaid testers and counting on the fact that they can issue a patch to correct any problems. Of course, this development is our fault as consumers since we have generally accepted the lower level of quality and continue to buy products that are not truly ready for prime time.

So, with that as a backdrop, I would say that CoG isn't perfect but it is at least as good as most products released these days. I personally think it is unfair to criticize that game too much as I believe they are the norm rather than the exception. However, I can only applaud those who make a stand and decide not to buy products until the are truly finished. As for me, I'm weak. I'm part of the problem. I bought the game and I am enjoying it thoroughly.

[Naomi]

I desire all the threads in this section coming into the eyes of CoG's developers.

[Ron]

Well I, and the handfull of those I know who bought and are playing CoG right now, will state unequivically the game works as advertised without any crashes or errors, whether in the strategic phase or in the detailed battles.(knock on wood) And no I am not a fanboy and from what I have read of this thread neither is Reiryc. The 'rabid' ones are those saying CoG is 'broke', it isn't. Does it work perfectly for everyone? No of course not and I am sure that can be said for just about every other major game released today. Are the developers working to correct things in a patch? From all reports yes, so while I can sympathize with those having problems, been in the same boat myself with some games, the best course obviously is to wait and take a chill pill. Then again this is the EIA forum so perhaps, just maybe, some poster's motives are a little more than 'technical issues' with CoG. [;)]



Ron

[Jabba]

This thread belongs in the COG forum. It should be moved.

[Hanal]

ORIGINAL: Jabba

This thread belongs in the COG forum. It should be moved.

That's a riot!.......This is the only active thread in this forum and you want it moved?...[:D]

[malcolm_mccallum]

ORIGINAL: Jabba

This thread belongs in the COG forum. It should be moved.

It may have strayed once or twice but fundamentally this thread is about whether CoG does everything those of us are waiting for EiA does. It is talking about CoG's problems and strengths from the EiA player's perspective and so certainly belongs in an EiA forum.

[Naomi]

ORIGINAL: malcolm_mccallum

ORIGINAL: Jabba

This thread belongs in the COG forum. It should be moved.

It may have strayed once or twice but fundamentally this thread is about whether CoG does everything those of us are waiting for EiA does. It is talking about CoG's problems and strengths from the EiA player's perspective and so certainly belongs in an EiA forum.

It should've be posted on the other side as well, as both teams are sharing, and working to, the common goal of letting out an ideal Napoleonic genre.

[oldtimer]

If you compare PC products to cartridge based systems where patches are not available, the difference in quality at release is striking. Essentially all companies are using us as their unpaid testers and counting on the fact that they can issue a patch to correct any problems. Of course, this development is our fault as consumers since we have generally accepted the lower level of quality and continue to buy products that are not truly ready for prime time.

Jchastain, you have to remember when you are programming in a cartridge environment you don't have to worry as much about all the variables of hardware and software that one must consider for a PC. That makes programming a little easier.

[Hanal]

ORIGINAL: Naomi

ORIGINAL: malcolm_mccallum

ORIGINAL: Jabba

This thread belongs in the COG forum. It should be moved.

It may have strayed once or twice but fundamentally this thread is about whether CoG does everything those of us are waiting for EiA does. It is talking about CoG's problems and strengths from the EiA player's perspective and so certainly belongs in an EiA forum.

It should've be posted on the other side as well, as both teams are sharing, and working to, the common goal of letting out an ideal Napoleonic genre.

I believe many of the questions raised here have cropped up on the CoG forum as well so both sides have it covered. The benefit on this end however is that, unlike CoG, EiA has not yet been released, so there is a chance, albiet a small one, that something in this thread might prove helpful to EiA at the outset, and not await the need for the first patch....

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: dinsdale

ORIGINAL: Reiryc
to add some entertainment value. They aren't necessary though, ask anyone.

[:D]
Isn't the game's purpose to be entertainment value? I suppose if the loading screen worked and nothing else, your statement would still be true.

But keep up the good work, it's very entertaining. Perhaps you'll get a pat on the head from someone for your steadfast defence of the game.

Do you own the game?

Or are you speaking in ignorance?

Btw... you might find some others here who are speaking the same language as me:

tm.asp?m=902978

The first and second posts echo my sentiments. Guess that makes us fanboys... [8|]

[dinsdale]

ORIGINAL: Reiryc


Do you own the game?

Or are you speaking in ignorance?

Btw... you might find some others here who are speaking the same language as me:

tm.asp?m=902978

The first and second posts echo my sentiments. Guess that makes us fanboys... [8|]

Your denial that a significant piece of the game (tactical battles) which does not work universally, is a major problem is what I contend.

Fortunately I haven't bought the game yet, that must make me ignorant. Although you seem to have similar venomous language for anyone who criticises it, here and in the CoG forum.

Seriously, you're doing great work keep it up!

[Reiryc]

Your denial that a significant piece of the game (tactical battles) which does not work universally, is a major problem is what I contend.

If I read your statement correctly, that tactical battles does not work universally, then you are wrong. They work for most people but a few have issues that cause a crash, myself included. If I have read your statement accurately, then it only reinforces the view that you are ignorant of the situation as I contend.

Additionally, there are plenty of people who do not use the tactical battles because they prefer the quicker and simpler resolution of the 'quick battles' format.

Fortunately I haven't bought the game yet, that must make me ignorant.

Indeed it does...as evidenced by your posts.

Although you seem to have similar venomous language for anyone who criticises it, here and in the CoG forum.

Venomous language? [8|] Please... I haven't used any venomous language yet, although I wouldn't mind with a couple people who, imo, have earned some.

Seriously, you're doing great work keep it up!

Yes I am and will continue! So I guess you ignored the link provided and they must all be fanboys as well, especially the first two that mirror my sentiments. Keep on babbling in ignorance, it's keeping me quite entertained on the forum. [:D]