The sad state of affairs

[david3k]

Could I suggest that if posts are becoming a personal duel of words that you might take it to PM instead of fanning the flames in public?

+1 & rotfl

[Limith]

Me too. I know PI likes to move toward 3D graphics - assumedly because they feel it attracts a wider customer base who like shiny graphics. But I prefer old-school strategy gamer graphics.

I don't mind 2D graphics. I think 3D graphics by Paradox is a terrible idea (they don't look nice, it wastes system resources).

On the other hand, many of the developer diary pictures for the graphics have been....very dissapointing. Not because they look "old school", but because they look really unclear/pixellated/will be hard to read text. I hope it's just the preview pictures though.

[Woody Man]

I don't mind 2D graphics. I think 3D graphics by Paradox is a terrible idea (they don't look nice, it wastes system resources).

Actually, the 3D graphics took some of the load of the game off the processor and put it into the graphics card, meaning they could expand the game features. Win-Win.

[Korsan82]

@Magna Mundi Team:

I'm following this trhead daily now.
After the project leader from Paradox spoke his mighty words I thought you'd finally keep out of this discussion, but today's and yesterday's posts show me you are insanely focussing in this thread. An advice from me: Don't!
You never can teach haters better. You can never convice fanboys either. As the core developer team I once again advice you to stay completely out of this area of speculations and accusations. Let people talk crap as they desire, but don't interfere. That's not your job and it doesn't help you either. In fact, it only causes more stress for you and some comments here can take a lot from you.
Just don't read it. Ignore it and focus on your work. The best way to deal with accusations is to present a well polished game - not answers to wild speculations.

Something must have happened meanwhile as you guys came out of your nutshell. Must be in relation with the cancelled cancellation but again I can only advice you to keep calm, modest and most important- stay out of this topic.

[Naselus]

The problem was never with MP alone. The was a fatal regression with MP in the last release candidate which signaled Paradox that something is not right with QA in this project which is 100% true. We are implementing stricter and more organized testing with defined test plans and release acceptance checks. Better late than never.

We should have been in the beta by December, but it didn't happen, practically we have reached beta quality in April/May. I believe for this project to survive we all need to accept that the game is in beta stage and move from that.

To lighten the mood, there is some good progress on MP side. Based on a suggestion from a friend of the project, we have implemented game state checksuming which allows us to isolate MP issues much more efficiently.

This is probably the most useful, honest and informative post in the last 30 pages, and certainly one of the most level-headed from the increasingly irate MM team.

On the 50-year-crash thing - there's been no statement which declares that the game will not run for 50 years without crashing; however, posts like these:

I am going to be dead honest: It's true the game crashes one time or another. On Monday I was able to play 30 years without crashing and yesterday I let it run for more than 40 without crashing. This has been common now. But yes, the game crashes from time to time and you can get crashes after very few time of play. It's also not perfectly balanced - Arbus was thinking about showing the Knights of St. John but discovered the priories were not giving enough money, for instance - and finally, scripts also have bugs. But those things will be ironed out in time. We are here for more than 5 years, no problem if we stay another 5 to support the game.

Just to add my voice over Merse here. The game is playable for 30-40-50 years without CTDs except in multiplayer. The multiplayer part is being addressed and even today was already partly addressed.

Let me answer that: It means that the game runs without CTDs in our 30-50 year test periods. We don't have the time ATM to run longer test scenarios. But according to my experiences even the game crashes, it loads the last save just fine and you can play on, even through the whole game period

from this and the release video 2 thread from the last two weeks certainly imply that UV haven't QA'd well, and also that as recently as 30th of May ubik was pleased to have played 30 years without a crash - not an encouraging thing to hear after several release candidates have already been sent to the publisher. The general concerns regarding the stability of the game are not all based on a single comment.

This is naturally backed up by the fact that Paradox's professional QA team keep knocking back the RCs, and the seemingly contradictory statements from UV (Single player is fine vs you can't form Germany and it's a big achievement to manage 30-40-50 years without a crash) serve to muddy the waters and make dev comments appear at best confused at at worst dishonest. That's generally why companies strictly control who's allowed to communicate what (which is due to professionalism, which does have positive aspects despite Helius' narrow definition - a definition I would join the Florida Bar in disagreeing with, as would any other anthropologist. Tho as a Hegelian Marxist I'm sure he'd readily admit there must be ideological biases in his own statement to the benefit of the developers as a social group).

The replies in this thread, and the situation itself, all give the impression of UV as a group of hugely talented people who have been poorly coordinated and managed - something which an appearance of professionalism would dispel. I think there's valuable lessons for UV on how to operate as a company from this, both in project management terms and also in the value of well-run public relations. The development team engaging in slanging matches with detractors has no benefit whatsoever, and merely makes them appear amateurish, implying a lack of competence which doesn't really represent the quality of their work. Those of us who played MMtM know that they produce good work, but those who don't will be firmly turned off by seeing developers hurling insults at people.

[Sarmatia1871]

Could I suggest that if posts are becoming a personal duel of words that you might take it to PM instead of fanning the flames in public?

Yes.

Might it not be a good idea for the Magna Mundi team to appoint a single spokesperson and only make formal official statements? Pretty much everything which could be said about "the Sad State of Affairs" has been said already, and the current discussion is simply repeating this in a manner which is threatening to become dangerously overheated.

[Don_Quigleone]

The replies in this thread, and the situation itself, all give the impression of UV as a group of hugely talented people who have been poorly coordinated and managed - something which an appearance of professionalism would dispel. I think there's valuable lessons for UV on how to operate as a company from this, both in project management terms and also in the value of well-run public relations. The development team engaging in slanging matches with detractors has no benefit whatsoever, and merely makes them appear amateurish, implying a lack of competence which doesn't really represent the quality of their work. Those of us who played MMtM know that they produce good work, but those who don't will be firmly turned off by seeing developers hurling insults at people.

QFT.

I think there's a lot of behaviour here which is okay in a mod (where the all the people posting are somewhat involved in the production of the "product"), but not okay in public relations (where only a fraction of the posters are involved in "production", the rest are consumers).

Being personable, and answering questions is a fine quality, even giving lengthy reasoning for why a feature is as planned. But getting into arguments with posters achieves nothing, it only isolates consumers, because other consumers will always naturally identify with the consumer in the argument, not the dev, even if the dev is more correct. Rather then showing the devs to be open, personable and friendly, it shows them to be thin skinned, unpleasant and hostile.

From having spent extensive time with many of you playing (and occasionally testing) the mod, I know that you are all great people, and you're all probably quite stressed right now,but the people coming into this thread uninitiated, with no prior knowledge of you guys, won't know that. Mudslinging matches with trollish posters isn't going to help you. It's only wasting your own time, and sowing bad seeds of mistrust.

I think the best course of action is to temporarily lock/hide this thread, and when things stabilise in a month or so, give the community an update.

[Peter Ebbesen]

But getting into arguments with posters achieves nothing,

Unless the developer aspires to be a second Derek Smart.

[Ivashanko]

Actually you posted in this thread 6 times and only one was deleted, and that post was about an entirely different game unrelated to this thread, lets not exaggerate and attempt to make it look like the discussion is being censored. Although technically I should remove that post as well since it violates rule#2, if you have a comment about staff action discuss it by PM.

Oh, I actually wasn't complaining. I could have sworn I posted something on page 50 and I couldn't find it when I looked for it, not is it in my 'latest posts' section, along with another post from earlier that I thought I posted (not the KOTOR2 one). If those were never posted it is likely that my internet is simply messing up again. That does happen from time to time.

Anyways this topic is just rehashing what has been said before. I'll keep checking up on this board to see the progress, and I wish the MM dev. team the best of all possible luck.

[Ciccillo Rre]

Sic transit gloria magnae mundi.

Sic transit gloria magnorum mundi

(Or: 'Sic transit gloria magnarum rerum mundi')

[Homero]

We will leave this thread open unless people in here really want us to close it

What purpose does it serve? stop this nonsense. Close it.

When a decision has been made and we are ready, whatever that decision may be, we will communicate it here

Until then, close this thread.

[Ellesthyan]

Please close the thread.

[SerialCereal]

Please close the thread.

Not gonna happen...

[stt0002]

They're waiting until it surpasses the "questions to the developers" thread

[Col.HoganGer90]

Sic transit gloria magnorum mundi

(Or: 'Sic transit gloria magnarum rerum mundi')

I wasn't sure about this myself, because "magna" lacks connection to a noun. So "Magna mundi" is in fact an abbrevation of "magna res mundi" ??? Seems strange.
I always thought of it as a faulty medieval latin attempt to substitute "magnitudo".
Can you clarify that for me, pls?

[Arbus]

Magna Mundi is an abreviation of Magna Carta Mundi.

(if you close this thread 2/3 more will be opened, so live and let live)

[PPetrus]

try to construct "Magna" as plural neuter - (the) great (things) of the world

[Ciccillo Rre]

try to construct "Magna" as plural neuter - (the) great (things) of the world

Right, so you need the genitive plural - magnorum, as in Latin, neuter plural for standalone adjectives (substantivized adjectives) means the "insert-adjective things".

However, in the three indirect cases - genitive, dative and ablative - the distinction with the masculine form is impossible and often not even possible from the context, hence the use of the feminine adjective declined together with the fifth declension plural form of res - "thing", as I guess you know.

[T.j. Arnold]

Hi MM fans.

Just to add my voice over Merse here. The game is playable for 30-40-50 years without CTDs except in multiplayer. The multiplayer part is being addressed and even today was already partly addressed.

To sum it up, the game is on a good normal release state. Considering the fact that we have one more month of development ahead, I don't see a problem with all this. There's nothing sad about Magna Mundi state of affairs.

Anyway, let me stress that I sent last week my opinion about what should be done with the game given the debt I consider we at UV and me personally have to the community. Of course, that's up to Paradox to decide what to do.

Expect at least two new "lets play" until the 15th May. Showing the game working is the best way to dismiss your doubts.

So, you're saying that you were aware of the fact that the game "only" starts crashing a fraction of the way through it's projected length, and you thought that was in a near releasable state? Well I'll be, that's issue one.

[dskod1]

So, you're saying that you were aware of the fact that the game "only" starts crashing a fraction of the way through it's projected length, and you thought that was in a near releasable state? Well I'll be, that's issue one.

that is not what he said but okay. We have had members from the MM team go over and over this with everyone who keeps bringing this up and misreading what it says. The developers actually talk about this only a couple of pages.


EDIT:
Here is a post by K Merse in response to people saying exactly what you have said about Ubik's statement

Which still means that it DOES NOT crash in every 50 years. If it's playable for 50 years it doesn't mean automatically that it is not beyond that.

This was on page 51...........