Matrix Games Forums

Time to chime in and let the developers know what is going on.
 
For 30 dollars we need a game that plays or gets an update that fixes a majority of the issues the first go around. I like the game quite a bit. I have no issues with anything except the repeated crashes. I find myself playing the game and trying to avoid events or situations that lead to a crash. I hope the project gets all the neccessary updates and makes it easy to get those updates. I bought the game off of Impulse and can't get the latest patch (yet), and from what I see on the forums that patch doesn't neccessarily fix the problems people have been encountering.
 
I understand these games tend to be a labor of love, but those of us encountering repeated crashes spent money and want it justified if we are to buy further products.
 
To those who have no issues and have played a campaign straight through. I am jealous!

ORIGINAL: perkyle

I don't usually like to complain much, but I feel I have to.

I bought the game to have something to do in the boring holliday season, but there is no way I'll be able to play this game. There are some issues which make me consider this game to be an alpha-release, definitely not a beta or a commercial release. Please bear in mind that I've tried v1.60 - I don't even want to think how unfinnished the first released version was.

• The very first time I ran the game, it seemed to think I had screen resolution of 2500*1500 or something like that, instead of 1440*900 - browsing through the forums helped me to make a small edit to the configuration file with a text editor. Very bad sign.
• Then I noticed that the user interface is not too good. Too many clicks needed to do simple things like deploying a unit. Scrolling doesn't really work (erratic and jumpy), especially hard to scroll up (windowed mode).
• CPU use is very high all the time, yet the interface is s l u g g i s h .
• I have yet not managed to exit without a crash.

I am sure there is much more than this I could complain as there is no way I am trying anything serious with something that is clearly an unffinnished product - I am not a beta-, or an alphatester, but a customer who did expect to get a game that is actually ready for release, which this game clearly is not. (And not, it is not my machine's configuration (which is rathel normal) - all other software, games, applications, lightweight, heavyweight, they all run flawlessly.)

I do realize that there is a 1.7 version coming up, but I am not hoping too much from it - simply, there is so much work left to be done with this game.

I do hope this message is not demoralizing, but I did feel I needed to let my opinion out.

Back in October I complained about the "rough edges" this game had; much rougher than a release version should be. I have played it intermittently since then, but it's hard to fall in love with this thing. In fact, it's hard to fall into "like".

I quite agree with you Perkyle, that when you pay your money, it should be for a finished product, not an alpha or beta version. TOW is a travesty in my opinion, for all of the reasons that you have set out in your posts, and more.

However, a word of advice. There is not much point in engaging with the people on this forum who seem to think this game is very good. They don't really listen.

Erik Rutins offered me a refund in late October. In retrospect, I should have taken it.
Another game that will sit on my drive for six months, won't get played, and eventually be deleted.

There is not much point in engaging with the people on this forum who seem to think this game is very good. They don't really listen.

Just what, exactly, do you expect "the people on this forum" to say in response to your unhappiness, Happycat? Hmm?

Thanks for coming in and disaparaging a product some of us enjoy, and also the people who like it?

Perhaps if you had read the entire thread you might have noticed that some of "the people on this forum" did in fact read (listen) to perkyle and make attempts to help him out.

Nope, I don't think so. Instead, I'll say Thanks for taking the low road by insulting the game designers and any who happen to like this product developed by them. I would expect no less from the perpetual and widespread use of internet anonymity to spew garbage one would otherwise not have the courage to do.

I wonder, but don't really care, which it is: Do you have such a high opinion of yourself, or just a low opinion of eveyone else?

ORIGINAL: Harbinger

There is not much point in engaging with the people on this forum who seem to think this game is very good. They don't really listen.

Just what, exactly, do you expect "the people on this forum" to say in response to your unhappiness, Happycat? Hmm?

Thanks for coming in and disaparaging a product some of us enjoy, and also the people who like it?

Perhaps if you had read the entire thread you might have noticed that some of "the people on this forum" did in fact read (listen) to perkyle and make attempts to help him out.

Nope, I don't think so. Instead, I'll say Thanks for taking the low road by insulting the game designers and any who happen to like this product developed by them. I would expect no less from the perpetual and widespread use of internet anonymity to spew garbage one would otherwise not have the courage to do.

I wonder, but don't really care, which it is: Do you have such a high opinion of yourself, or just a low opinion of eveyone else?

It doesn't come down to my opinion of myself or of anyone else. The issue is my opinion of the game. And as for spewing garbage and hiding behind internet anonymity, why don't you go and visit the Slitherine website or the Battlefront website, and you will find "happycat" there too. If you take the time to go through all of the posts involving me, you will find that my real name is occasionally mentioned and that I am just as outspoken there as anywhere else (including real life).

I am one of the developers of the just released "Grand Strategy" expansion for CEAW---so I do, in fact, know the difference between a finished game and a not-so-finished one. In addition, I have beta tested many games, and had I been a tester for TOW, would have been quite unhappy to see it "roll out the door" when it did. It was NOT ready.

Yes I can see that some people tried to help Perkyle. The suggestion to go in and start editing a text file was particularly useful; I'm sure that's what most purchasers of games want to do, finish programming an unfinished product. In my opinion, Texashorns and Gardner were particularly unhelpful and condescending to Perkyle, who in my opinion presented himself quite politely. I think their snide response was uncalled for, but not surprising. As you so aptly pointed out, it's the "internet anonymity" syndrome.

The developers of this game are probably well intentioned, and nice guys, but the fact is I think the game was rough in October, and here we are in January and it isn't appreciably better. Some might say that the CTD makes it worse.

As for disparaging a product that you and others like, so what? You're defending a product that I dislike, and I'm not getting my shorts in a knot about it. If you can't handle opinions that differ from your own, good luck with the rest of your life [:)]

ORIGINAL: Happycat

I am one of the developers of the just released "Grand Strategy" expansion for CEAW

Heh that’s good! A developer of rival game came and just said "this game is at very bad condition".... Don`t you think that your you credibility just has gone away?

ORIGINAL: Anraz

ORIGINAL: Happycat

I am one of the developers of the just released "Grand Strategy" expansion for CEAW

Heh that’s good! A developer of rival game came and just said "this game is at very bad condition".... Don`t you think that your you credibility just has gone away?

I'm constantly amazed at the human capacity for leaping to conclusions, although I suppose I could have been clearer in my previous post: I, together with some other dedicated gamers, worked on developing an expansion CEAW. It started life as a "mod", and we spent TWO years of our own time refining it. None of us has asked for or received a penny for our efforts; it was done to make a good game better.

TOW could have benefitted from spending more time in development and testing. Instead, it was released, imo, too early and suffers because ot that.

I am retired, I do not now and never did work in anything remotely connected to the gaming or software industry. Like most of us here, I am a hobbyist. And you know, I don't really give a crap about your, or anyone's perception of my credibility. I'm not trying to convert anyone to my point of view.

This current dialogue all started because I empathized with the original poster's plight. And in reading the thread, including advice from developers of TOW, it showed me that in three months, nothing has changed. TOW is flawed and needs some real fixes, not work arounds such as having purchasers tinker with the text files.

I purchase many games, including from Matrix. With rare exception, those games are worth the expenditure, and demonstrate that sound beta testing procedures can and do ensure a stable product.

If you're happy with TOW, I am happy for you---really. The problem with this thread is that one guy started by saying he was unhappy with the game. And then people like Texashorns and Gardner responded by telling him what a wonderful game it is, and implied that there must be something wrong with HIM for not liking it. One wonders what the agenda of posters like them might be.

I know what my agenda is, and it has nothing to do with selling a "rival" game. My agenda is that I would like to see companies that sell games that clearly suffer from deficient testing to step up to the plate and (a) either give the unhappy purchasers something, such as a credit for a future game purchase, or (b) exert pressure upon the developers to quickly "get it right". Platitudes such as I have read on this forum about how the developers are "dedicated" to fixing the problem don't help me one iota. Only results matter, and to date I have seen none.

[Deleted by Admins]