A message everyone should hear

[unmerged(1095)]

Originally posted by InnocentIII


I'm glad to hear that SF is taking this to heart. FWIW SF makes exactly the kinds of games I like, and I haven't had a publisher like that since SSI (before the gold box series showed them where the real money was).

ah - SSI. They were my Gods in the early 80s. I used to buy all their games then and thoroughly enjoyed them all.

 

[Deaghaidh]

We have A new champion

Best...Newbie...EVER!

 

[unmerged(12251)]

Upgrades to HOI

I believe too! I will continue to use mods and will upgrade as SF and Paradox see fit. I would like to express my gratitude for this wonderful idea for a game. I have been looking for this kind of game since I opened my first AH box of Gettysburg. A3

 

[unmerged(4277)]

Thanks for posting that letter. I admit that I was frustrated at first too. However, after seeing the Paradox staff respond to our comments, I felt a lot better. Then I got the game. Sure there are still some problems, but they're working to fix them. Now, after seeing this letter, I'm very happy that I bought through Strategy First instead of buying from Europe like I originally planned to do. It's times like these that I enjoy being proven wrong.

 

[unmerged(9422)]

I just wanted to thank you for sharing this with us. That is great how the president of Strategy First took the time to speak with you! They are a great company indeed!

 

[unmerged(1105)]

While I'm pleased to hear that SF/Paradox care about the state of HOI as released, I have just one question:

Why are we seeing a customer relaying this information to this board and not an official statement from SF or Paradox?

 

[unmerged(11750)]

Not to burst anyone's bubble, but I'm frankly not surprised at the response you got. SF and Paradox are comparatively little fish in the gaming pond, and concentrate on a niche market with few (yet fiercely loyal) fans. While a personal response from a publisher's executive may be unusual, it hardly seems surprising given how difficult it is to make a game that meets the typical strategy gamers' quality standard.

Which is not to say that this story isn't encouraging. But those of us who bought EU2 early on and watched that product's evolution from an interesting, complicated and sometimes kludgey sequel into one of the most replayable grand strategy games ever devised pretty much took it for granted that HoI would be a work-in-progress for at least a few months after we bought it. I for one didn't have a problem with that, either ... many of the improvements (not bug fixes) made to EU2 in its patches came at the suggestion of the players (or at least, those who unlike myself had the guts to suggest them ).

Yes, HoI has problems ... some of which are pretty crippling to what is IMO the most important aspect of a strategy game: replayability. For that reason, HoI is going to stay in its jewel case for a while, and I'll continue beating up the EU2 AI, which, when given enough help, can still provide me with a challenge. When HoI is ready to offer me the same challenge and replayability value as EU2 has (and I have no doubt that it will someday do exactly that), I'll be waiting.

Bombs Away,
CK

 

[unmerged(485)]

Originally posted by Sarkus
While I'm pleased to hear that SF/Paradox care about the state of HOI as released, I have just one question:

Why are we seeing a customer relaying this information to this board and not an official statement from SF or Paradox?

Because it is better PR make promises to a customer rather than just publish a post saying "We're trying to get better". Gives everybody that warm and fuzzy personal feeling.

 

[unmerged(6469)]

More Beta Testers?

Maybe more time and more beta testers are needed.

A complex MMORPG Star Wars Galaxies currently has 2000 beta testers.

 

[unmerged(1095)]

Re: More Beta Testers?

Originally posted by Ryeuken
Maybe more time and more beta testers are needed.

A complex MMORPG Star Wars Galaxies currently has 2000 beta testers.

This is the wrong thread and forum for this post. Please repost in "Constructive Criticism" Forum if you think it is worth it

 

[unmerged(1095)]

I understand that Doug has something he wants to add to the story. He will do so over the weekend - the rocky database disabled his account which is why he has been a little quiet.
The problem is now sorted.

 

[unmerged(12701)]

Impressive post! I would like to say that I was happy with this game from the onset. I had never played EU, but I got hooked on this game right away. I saw many flaws, but I knew that they were going to be fixed immediately. (i.e. not being able to cancel research projects, & having my ground units dumped on "0" infra d'Ouessant when my TP was just passing through. Both fixed with 1.02.) And I know the fixes will keep coming, along with enhancements.

I was frustrated with a lot of the bugs at first (although I was still playing the game until 5 am on a worknight ) - and I'll be the first to admit it. But, being in the video game retail industry, I know how developers can be caught between a rock and a hard place when it comes to actually making their release dates, especially on titles that a company depends on. If they release a product on the release date with bugs, and fix bugs in upcoming patches, they could face returns by the hundreds or thousands (ex. WWII Online). On the other hand, if they push the date out, they lose marketing dollars & presales. "The game keeps getting pushed back. I think I'm going to cancel my preorder and just buy it when it comes out." A lot of money rides on pre-sales - it's how a retail company decides on how much of a product to buy. It could mean the difference between a 75,000 piece order and a 20,000 piece order at launch. And this can make or break a company. (ex. Master of Orion III just got pushed out to Jan. 15th, out of the holiday season, because of a bug affecting less than 1% of gameplay.)

This is just my 2 cents worth - not a rant. Just to let you know that the video game developing industry is not an easy industry to be in. A lot rides on a lot of things. I have seen many companies go belly up for all kinds of reasons.

 

[Marshall Daub]

I believe I was the one that dougmangin referred to about industry standards in the post here at the bottom of page 1. I'm impressed that the President
of the company actually took the time to not just type up a form letter of "Dear concerned customer" but actually called you on the phone. I'd like to think that everything he says is true and that maybe, just maybe SF will learn from its past mistakes and not release games when they should still be in the oven.

On the other hand, I am just as skeptical as some of the others. Sure it was nice of him to say those things to boost our confidence, but uh, isn't that his job as President of a company? To tell you exactly what you want to hear rather than "That's just too freakin bad. " Let's all hope he's a man of his word.

 

[unmerged(1095)]

... on the the other hand SF have never turned a patch around so fast before........... It usually takes a week to 10 days for them to get the copy protection done (an outside company is involved in that) and the patch returned.

 

[unmerged(485)]

Originally posted by Uglyduck
... on the the other hand SF have never turned a patch around so fast before........... It usually takes a week to 10 days for them to get the copy protection done (an outside company is involved in that) and the patch returned.

They certainly did turn it around fast. And I retract my remark about them taking off for the holidays.

 

[unmerged(1095)]

Originally posted by Sonny
They certainly did turn it around fast. And I retract my remark about them taking off for the holidays.

Good man - again

 

[unmerged(12557)]

followup thoughts

To any who may be interested I would like to provide a brief update regarding my dealings with the management of Strategy First, primarily Mr. McFatridge. Since I made the initial post listed here I have received a follow up email from Mr McFatridge as well as another email from someone in their marketing department. Both again apologized for any negative experience I may have had relating to Hearts of Iron. They expressed appreciation for the feedback provided and for the concerns raised.

In responding to Mr Mcfatridge I wrote an email expressing my thanks for his willingness to listen to my, and by extension our, concerns and views regarding this particular game, as well as the process of publishing software titles in general. In my reply I suggested he come to this forum to read some of the related postings others have made. I included a link to this particular discussion, and in a reply he indicated that he has visited here and read the replies that everyone has made. So if nothing else is accomplished at least someone has taken the time to listen to what everyone here has to say. I would say of all people having the president aware of the situation will do a whole lot more to make a difference.

Now in general I would like to mention that I am by no means an employee of Strategy First, although any paycheck they would care to send my way would be gladly received. I wrote the initial posting not to provide some PR for Strategy First, Paradox, or anyone else. I wrote because I felt that the experience I had in this matter had made a difference in my opinion, and I thought it was only fair that others have that opportunity.

I dont wish to condone either the concept or the practice of releasing software prematurely. And I am still dissapointed that the game I purchased was not what I thought it was. I do think that the industry in general needs to re-evaluate its thinking on how it approaches its customers.

But I do feel that the dealings I have had with Strategy First have left me with a better opinion of them. Keep in mind that I sent my letter blindly, not expecting any reply or response. Not only did they respond, but they did so in person, on the phone, and the person responding was the president of the company. Although not erasing the frustration I have had with the game, that effort and degree of concern counts for something.

They could have simply disregarded my letter, or they could have had someone in tech support or customer service reply. But the president of the company himself was concerned enough that he did call. Our discussion did not feel to me like a sales call or some kind of exercise in BS spin control. He seemed sincere and honestly listened to what I had to say. He apologized, and not in one of those corporate blanket statements that are devoid of substance and deliberately worded to avoid any suggestion of guilt. He mentioned some policies and measures Strategy First was going to impliment to improve the process of releasing new software in the future.

In our discussion it was indicated that, although not our problem, there is often more to the process of making and selling a game than is realized by the general public. In this particular case Paradox was the developer, Strategy First the publisher. One knows the nuts and bolts, one puts the game on the market and sells it. It was very much the case of "the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing". Those who were in a position to know the technical issues were not the ones making the marketing choices. Those in a position to do the selling were not the ones who knew what was wrong.

Again although this may help eplain some things, we all agree this is not a valid excuse for turning out a product that does not meet reasonable expectations. And this is not the first game from Strategy First, let alone other publishers, that has had these kinds of issues. This was why I felt the need to write to someone I thought would be in a position to remedy this problem. A family member of mine has a sign hanging in his store - it says "If you like our service, tell others. If you dont, tell us". I did not like what I received in this game, I said something, and suprisingly I got a response.

My intent in making this post was to indicate the efforts that Mr. McFatridge and others went through in dealing with me. They seemed far enough above what anyone would normally expect. I feel that in this era of our AOL/TimeWarner, Chrysler/Daimler/Benz culture to come across a company who does give consideration to the opinions and views of its customers is noteworthy, refreshing, and appreciated. I simply wanted to share that with others.

In the meantime the 2nd patch has come out and although I have not played the game since, in reading the release notes it seems most of the issues we were experiencing have been addressed. I am sure there will be additional patches in the future, and in the end I think the game will turn out to be what we all want and expect it to be. Enjoy!

 

[dsteve3]

It always hard when dealing with 'market-driven forces'. We want all those involved in developement to work toward a mutual standard of creating software that is effective and timely.

We reward the team for their timeliness by purchasing the game as soon as its available. We penalize the lack of effectiveness by complaining about bugs or the behavior of the software. The problem is we need to create an inverse structure to balance this issue: we must penalize over-zelous release temtations and reward thoughtful and careful software design. Its not that one is wrong and the other right, we need to balance these forces to make things equitable.

Those who are designing the software have to be provided with the time necessary to produce the product. Maybe software should not be advertised until its ready to go 'gold'. This is just an example suggestion. What's really needed is a dialog on our behavior, as consumers. If we act in a focused and consistant manner, the market will bend to our demands.

I was in a BIG rush to get this game. I enjoyed playing the game, as well as bringing observations to this board. I also enjoyed trying out Bolt's mods and observing the differences there. For me, the dialog involved was as important as playing the game.

This thread is only the tip of a very large issue. We are all responsible for this, as we are responsible for all the other issues we perceive in our societies.

By the way, MoO3 is pushed back again, now to mid January, and catching royal heat for it too. I bought Neverwinter Nights the week it came out, and had to wait two months before I could really play it. That one didn't "CTD" in the nice and tidy way HoI does, it crashed to the blue screen of death, requiring a hard boot, and eventually fried my OS. I had to tweek and re-tweek my system, chase ATI for new drivers, then old drivers, then newer drivers (ad nausium).

Maybe we need to set up an advocacy group, made up of players and designers (and player/designers, of course!)

 

[fnatnik ii]

positive - but don't let cluetrain techniques soften you up too much!

Hmmm.

I like this thread, there is lots positive about the exchange
between doug and SF.

However, be aware that this is also standard corporate fare:
most modern corporates are aware of the cluetrain manifesto
(www.cluetrain.com) which provides the way forwards for
corporations that need to sustain strong contact with
customers without using corp fluff and the classic distance
problems that entail... especially when the dung is hitting
the fan on something.

I use it myself, and when I use it, I mean it - so I am not imputing
that SF VP is not being genuine, nor am I meaning to suggest that
there is duplicity in this technique. But one thing I believe remains
true:customer pressure, and clear customer communication, is what
keeps businesses honest - unless they have ABSOLUTELY
defined their mission and values and found a way to sustain
those values in the face of often difficult business situations.

So - in a nutshell: great thread, but don't let cluetrain technique
make you guys go all soft and mushy: business decisions, publication
dates, etc. are controlled by hardwires, and if you don't like where
you're at re:HOI, you need to define your own hardwires back to the
decision makers. That this can be done with considerable directness
but also grace is one of the better things in this thread I feel -
so good stuff on that score.

I'm still on EU2; wishing you all good times on HOI
x kabli

 

[KungMarkatta]

Originally posted by Uglyduck
... on the the other hand SF have never turned a patch around so fast before........... It usually takes a week to 10 days for them to get the copy protection done (an outside company is involved in that) and the patch returned.

Yes, and I have a good theory why it came out so fast.... as many others sure has noticed too