Dissapointed

[Olaf the Unsure]

It's easy to betatest a game that's basically just a rehash of a tired old concept - i.e., 90% of the new games released today. Unique games present unique issues. And, frankly, Paradox games turn out much better in the long run because the developer actively solicits input from its customers and then actually listens to them.

 

[backrow]

But yeah its a good point that this game is the only game from this time period worth playing, and maybe i wouldnt have been too picky with it if it hadnt been for the games they made before.

well, i also enjoy Medieval Total War, while different kind of strategy, definitely is worth playing... just my two cents

 

[unmerged(23737)]

...
I got just the game for you! MOO 3. They’re done patching that one (of course the game is dead but …).
...

Good suggestion!
I was thinking of the days i've bought Heroes of Might and Magic 3!
I couldn't install the game, because i had an AMD K6 2 processor and called their support.
The only thing what they tell me was "Oh man... you should have bought better hardware...!!!
So this is the reason why i like(or better LOVE) Paradox games and their support.
Sure their games aren't perfect at the date of release...but no game of paradox becoming worser after patching!

 

[november]

Spot on, Olaf.

If Paradox releases their epic games after exhausting their QA recourses, only the most jaded could ascribe cynical motives to them. Their games are immense!

As an ex game designer, I know that the classic beta test has its limits. Good testers are rare and remember testing is part-time, voluntary.

I really don’t see what else they can do. My personal contract with them is to accept bumps and rough patches confident they’ll listen to users and respond with alacrity. And really, what more can any consumer expect?

One option would be to have public betas, but with the amount of piracy in the game world that’s no option at all.

I remember when I got EU II, I was shocked that some of the suggested nations for the GC had impossible (to me) positions compared to others. Coming from the RTS world, I assumed the game was balanced for every nation. It took me awhile to get it.

And by the way, I left the RTS world when the designers of my favorite game—Age of Conquerors—gave up patching what they admitted was a hopelessly imbalanced game. I thought that was cynical. The designers promised better balance in their next effort, Age of Mythology, but if anything the problem is worse because that game is more complex than its earlier brothers. They can’t balance the game—a game much much simpler than CK (and easier to test; games only take 30 minutes to play).

Another option Paradox has is to stop making complex games. If they cut back the scale and breadth of their games to make them easier to test and debug in order to placate the whiners here, I won’t be around long. And neither will the whiners.

 

[Belissarius]

I don’t see any way Paradox can beta test to the degree you demand, Belissarius. Which epic game producer does? Well, name them.

Their other option is to throttle down scope and features, say Lord of the Realms III. Is that you beau ideal?

Of course you can always play other games that don’t require patches. Such as Civ III. No wait, they’re still patching that.

How about ES games then, such as Age of Mythology? They’re published by Microsoft. Oops, sorry—they’re still patching that too (if you want to see REALLY pissed users, visit those forums).

Oh wait! You could always try Blizzard games—they’re known for being stable. Oh crap, they’re up to about patch 1000 with Warcraft III.

I got just the game for you! MOO 3. They’re done patching that one (of course the game is dead but …).

Geez. What to do?

You could avoid games and just play with the op system. No wait a minute, I have to download the Windows XP latest patch.

yawn yet again someone who doesnt actually address what i say and simply equates what i say as patch = bad. If you cant see the difference between relase now patch later and the policy of releasing a finished game and patching minor bugs. Then i can never explain that difference to you.

I do see a distressing number of CTD reports. I consider those should not be here especily the save game issues thats something that you dont need 100s or 1000s of people playing the game to discover. Now in turn i dont think that the problem with weapon upgades being lost on a reload is an issue you can blame paradox for as that is a minor bug that could have been missed.
Its quite clear that i'm making a distinction between problems in a game. I think that problems with the orthadox being excuminated or told to crusade are issues that are not bugs but unfinished game mechanic issues. Technicaly the bishop of rome (ie the pope) is excumunicated by the orthadox church. Now i deliberatly didnt go into specific detail on these issues on my otehr post because i dont have the game but you have force me to yet again show people that try to equate what i say to patching = bad. when time and time again i make the distinction that critical bugs are at issue and not minor bugs.

Its easy to attack what i say by claiming i said something that i didnt and the mock me for this false statement. but its alot harder to actually address my issues.

 

[november]

I assumed you were responding to my points. My mistake for assuming you where discussing the thread topic.

I’ve addressed beta testing and QA several times now. No point in restating them. If you’re tired, do what I do—take a np.

 

[unmerged(23737)]

Can someone remember a game that produces no ctd's short after it was released?
I can't!!!

 

[arcorelli]

I dont begrudge you for buying the game right away or from paradox i just dont see why anyone should feel its important to give the company more money for testing an unfinished game.

Since Paradox makes the games I want to play, I guess the most efficient way to get games interesting to me is giving money to Paradox. In the last few years I had bought and tried several games, but really I only had played a lot the ones made by Paradox and a couple of others (Medieval and Highway to the Reich).

 

[Belissarius]

It's easy to betatest a game that's basically just a rehash of a tired old concept - i.e., 90% of the new games released today. Unique games present unique issues. And, frankly, Paradox games turn out much better in the long run because the developer actively solicits input from its customers and then actually listens to them.

hahaha ok but to be honest the basic engine of ALL paradox games are the same as eu1. they all have the same look they all have the same feel the interface is similar the province/real time aspects are the same. Its not like paradox is not taking an old concept of their first game and making improvements to it. They are not starting from scratch with each game.

I'm not bashing paradox for this but their engine is getting old and they should be doing things to change things. having more options during the battles would be nice. Not anything radical like going to a new screen to fight the battle but the ability to add and subtract specific units easily from the battle. Now I'm not saying that pardox hasnt made improvements but they are doing the same thing you bash other companies for doing taking a tried and tested methode and imporve on that for their next game. this is the typical fanboi stuff that angers many otehr posters you go raw raw raw paradox and spin every possible thing to make paradox look great and otehr companies look bad.

Paradox isnt doing anything wrong with taking the basic eu1 engine and making improvements on it each game. But dont make it sound like that other companies are doing something wrong by doing this either and dont make it sound like paradox isnt doing the very thing you praise them for not doing. paradox will have to design a new engine sometime in the next few years I think as they will have two things happen. it will one begine to get old and two they will reach the limit of the engine.

 

[Belissarius]

Since Paradox makes the games I want to play, I guess the most efficient way to get games interesting to me is giving money to Paradox. In the last few years I had bought and tried several games, but really I only had played a lot the ones made by Paradox and a couple of others (Medieval and Highway to the Reich).

I'm not disputing that but i do think that paradox needs to make changes from their current mode of business. People on these boards have consistanly defended paradox for everything and attacked anyone that says paradox is not doing things in the best way. I remember when the fanbois all attacked the negative posters when the negative posters said;

"x" should not have been released in the game.

reponce - you expect too much paradox doesnt have the money to do that kind of development they dont make much money from each sale. that goes to the retailer/publisher/then to paradox.

well paradox should sell games direct to make more money

reponce- you cant expect a small company like paradox to be able to sell direct it take far more personal then you know and you saying this is evident that you dont know what you are talking about.

And guess what happen low and behold paradox has direct sales now hmm but i thought paradox couldnt do this and we negative posters are just too dumb to realise that paradox does everything right.


This is the general tone of almost all the fanbois on this board. Everything paradox does is golden and to critise paradox is to commit herasy.

If you want the game asap and what to buy from paradox then more power to you. But when i get people telling me that i should buy a game either right away or direct from paradox even though the game isnt finished or wont be fully enjoyable until 6 months from now, i have a problem with that. I dont think i should be impelled to buy from paradox or buy the game right away if i know i wont get MY moneys worth until the 4th or 5th patch.

Its seems that some poeple are incapible of understanding why some customers dont think paradox games are worth the money out of the box. If you cant understand this then you will never understand most consumers. Most people dont want to buy a book and wait months for it to be finished most people dont want to buy a toaster the doesnt tast both sides of teh bread. Most people dont want to buy a toaster that pops up earlt multiple times. most people dont want a book thats has its binding fall apart. Most people dont like to buy games that are unfinished or unstable. I cant understand why some many posters cant see why customers might be upset about state of things.

I cant imagine why people think its not big deal about the save game files. These things are too big and its not like paradox didnt know about this and these files are causing multiple CTDs issues and other problems like sluggishness. this is something that is a fundemental issue and should be addressed before the game was released. SAVEGAME FIELS people this is a fundemental issue for the game. and its not a minor bug thing causing a rare problem with teh save game files but a fundemental design flaw that creates multiple problems. Is there any issue that fanbois will say "hey paradox this is not up to standard?" Seriously at what point do you critize paradox? at what point is a problem sufficent that these people will speak out? is there any issue that these people wont come to the support of paradox? if there isnt then... well what can i say?

 

[arcorelli]

If you want the game asap and what to buy from paradox then more power to you. But when i get people telling me that i should buy a game either right away or direct from paradox even though the game isnt finished or wont be fully enjoyable until 6 months from now, i have a problem with that. I dont think i should be impelled to buy from paradox or buy the game right away if i know i wont get MY moneys worth until the 4th or 5th patch.

I agree. For me, buying the game ASAP makes sense, since, in general, I like a lot the games (and it is a genre that I specially like and there is not a lot of alternatives) so I am willing to put with, well CTDs, a lot of bugs and the like. People with do not think that way about the games got no reason for that, and no reason then for spend their money in them.

 

[unmerged(27112)]

If you want the game asap and what to buy from paradox then more power to you. But when i get people telling me that i should buy a game either right away or direct from paradox even though the game isnt finished or wont be fully enjoyable until 6 months from now, i have a problem with that. I dont think i should be impelled to buy from paradox or buy the game right away if i know i wont get MY moneys worth until the 4th or 5th patch.

Well. You have the right to not buy the game until 4th or 5th patch.... But I don't see why you're telling every one who does buy the game at release that they shouldn't.
Becaus they're actualy the ones testing the game, and giving paradox all this info so that paradox can make many and good patches. Wich means that at the time you buy it the game is close to perfection.

Actualy you should be thanking us.

ps. How long do you think it would take 30 beta testers to test the game untill it's as good as 1.06 patch. Compared to all the people playing and "testing" the game now. ds.

 

[november]

Belissarius,

You don’t have the game and you’re here knocking Paradox and making fun of the people who like CK? You’re just a troll and, to here you tell it, a poor misunderstood one too. Bah!

Funny, when I read this forum my impression is a lot of people are having a whale of a time with CK. I know I am. The biggest complaint by far is from those people frustrated they don’t have the game yet.

I guess you’re one of those glass half-empty people I hear about.


--fanboi

 

[Theodotus1]

Belissarius,

You don’t have the game and you’re here knocking Paradox and making fun of the people who like CK? You’re just a troll and, to here you tell it, a poor misunderstood one too. Bah!

Funny, when I read this forum my impression is a lot of people are having a whale of a time with CK. I know I am. The biggest complaint by far is from those people frustrated they don’t have the game yet.

I guess you’re one of those glass half-empty people I hear about.


--fanboi

He's a huge troll. What he's saying is a total rehash of what he posted on the Victoria boards -- probably because he lost the debate there and is seeking a second bite at the apple. Just ignore him.

 

[unmerged(27112)]

Yes I know that the quote i used in my last post didn't show u saying that we shouldn't buy the game at release.

But from reading all your posts in this thread, I now think that your message is clear: you don't want to buy the game until the people who do buy the game at release has tested it and made it a great game. this is very clever becaus you don't have to help making this into a better game but you get the fruit of their work.

Well I can't blame you for not buying the game on release. I didn't buy CK at release to help make it a better game. I bought it becaus I couldn't wait. :rofl:
And I am not helping the patch work by posting about bugs or CTD's.

My point is: Don't tell the people who do buy the game early and then help improve the game that they shouldn't becaus then you and me would have to wait longer for a finished and good Game.

 

[Duuk]

You know, I thought I recognized his nick from Victoria's disaster.

I'll admit that EU1 roped me in, EU2 got me addicted. HoI and Vicky (and Two Thrones, which I bought out of pity ) left me a little flat.

I decided after placing the pre-order for CK that if CK didn't live up to what I wanted, I was done with Paradox.

I am madly in love with this game. When the bugs are squished and the difficulty is ratcheted up a bit, this will be the only Paradox game I keep installed.

 

[Demetrios]

Please keep the discussion nice and civil! Just a friendly reminder from the mods....

 

[unmerged(7197)]

... the distinction that critical bugs are at issue and not minor bugs...

Resume my thoughts, a crucial thing like a slider not working properly or a major event going wrong or a scenario called Age of Exploration with no Spanish colonisation....cough, better stop I get mad.Why?, cuz I like "historic" game, I like to encourage the "small guy".But there is a limit.

 

[unmerged(28237)]

Medieval was a complicated game with two different game engines and was very stable. It's only had one minor patch. Of course, CA does not release a game every year like Paradox, so they have more time.

If you go over to their forums you get the opposite backlash. Some people complain bitterly that Rome Total War is not out yet, but the majority support CA's decision to have a very finished game.

I'm guessing it's a loyalty issue. Those who love the games the most support whatever the developer does.

As for me, I don't care. If it needs to be patched I'll look on the forums to see if the issues are addressed. If not, I'll play the game. Not a big worry to me.

On the CTD issue, I believe many of them are caused by hardware configurations. Since their are many different configurations out their, no QA crew could get them all. Some are bound to get through. The repeatable, across the board CTD's though should not be there, period.

Any corrections are welcome.

 

[unmerged(6777)]

hahaha ok but to be honest the basic engine of ALL paradox games are the same as eu1. they all have the same look they all have the same feel the interface is similar the province/real time aspects are the same. Its not like paradox is not taking an old concept of their first game and making improvements to it. They are not starting from scratch with each game.

Perhaps it is here that you are in greatest error about CK.

I will not debate your other points. Your mind is made up, you have a valid concern (from a consumer's POV) and you are free to do what you like with your money. I can make a case that shows that Paradox could never be released in 1.04/1.05 condition, but why do so again when I've already presented that argument several times without it being rebutted. You could, for entertainment value if you like, go and look them up and read them.

But it's your assertion that CK employs a tired old engine, puffing its way up the hill saying "I think I can, I think I can". Let's have a look under the hood and see what we've got:

1. CK's event engine is 100% different than any game they've released in the past. It's dynamic, flexible, non-predeterministic, robust...
2. CK does not employ a static kingdom system with its line of predetermined, scripted rulers and its individual kingdom event files. Instead, it shifts the focus to a character-driven model that involves inheritance, succession, no scripted kingdom-specific events, no scripted rulers, no (well...almost no) fixed borders...
3. EU-gengine had scripted monarchs with set stats and all game play revolved around these as far as your economy and military went. In CK, it is the characters who rule, advise lieges, and lead your armies. These are created through a birth system that relies on genetics and the way they interact with one another has a significant impact in almost every aspect of the game.
4. The EU engine treats a kingdom as an amorphos blod of equivalence. Everything that happens within a kingdom happens to the entire kingdom. CK breaks this down and treats each individual province and character independantly. It is possible (almost inevitable) that a kingdom will be comprised of an assortment of demesne holders and that they will struggle internally to as much (or greater) a degree as the kingdom will strive with its neighbours.
5. In EU technology progressed in a linear fashion with a set number of research "credits" being required to reach the next level of advancement, and at certain points tis would jack you up a notch on the CRTs or bump up your trade or income. CK throws that out the window and uses a large tech tree of advances, each of which has a specific and limited effect. In CK, this happens by directed randomization of an advance's discovery that is only marginally predictable (in the same way that the next earthquake in California is predictable).
6. In EU, a kingdom possesses a technology and it is instantly applied to every province in the realm once you know it. In CK each province has its own technology and it is entirely possible that certain parts of a realm (or even just a demesne) will be a technological backwater relative to other parts of the realm (or demesne).
7. In EU, there is an "adjacency" bonus to research that helps less developed countries along with its research by adding a fixed amount of additional monthly research credits. In CK, technology (and other things such as disease ) spread via a directed random complex series of equations that are modified by a wide variety of factors.
8. In EU, armies can be shuffled and combined easily, with little regard to where they came from - since they're basically all the same, with the odd allowance made for a scripted leader as oppsed to a generic one. In CK, each regiment is unique (depending on where it comes from, what the power structure of the province is, what the various advances in the province are, what you rkingdom laws are, etc.) and will be commanded mostly by characters drawn from yuour court. Further, if your character is higher up the "food chain" he may call upon the services of his vassals - who may or may not agree to such a request and who may have hidden agendas of their own.
9. In EU2, a kingdom's budget is set on a national scale and applies to all provinces within the kingdom. In CK there is also a kingdom budget, but this is further modified by individual provincial budgets.
10. My fingers are getting tired so I won't continue this list any further, although there are probably at least another dozen or more points that could be added. Things like traits, assasination, marriage, begetting children...

Yeah...it's pretty hard to fathom how Paradox can have bugs creep into this tired old engine. Probably a case of those damned betas sitting on their asses all day... :wacko: