Kriegsmarine - Thumbs Down

[bru888]

To be fair, there was a pretty significant annual game dev conference that was just held. I would think the lead up to, and attending, this event would occupy a lot of time and attention.

I trust that you may have cause to reflect on this and find it to be a rather lame excuse, if applicable at all. Picture this: You work for months on a project, release it to the public, then go on sabbatical to attend a conference? What, they have no wi-fi where it was held? Wouldn't you think that they would be all over these forums, trying to address issues and bolster their fans? Wouldn't you think that they would be in this thread, swinging away at their detractors?

This did not start with Kriegsmarine. I have been noticing their lack of engagement and follow-up for a while. Stuff that is pointed out to them, things that are handed to them are ignored. That and the usual ghost town feel of this forum have me thinking that OOB is a dead duck. The final straw will be when PZC2 is released, and I think the developers are aware of this.

Am I wrong? Well then, go ahead and tell me so, Artistocrats.

[adherbal]

Am I wrong? Well then, go ahead and tell me so, Artistocrats.

*sigh*

Then I wish it was more obvious that we are constantly releasing major new features and DLC ever since the release of the original game 2 years ago. And no matter what I say or try to defend design decisions, I feel I'm just going to be dragged into an endless discussion and I rather spend my time on developing, expanding and improving the game. That being said, while it's just not possible to please everyone we always read feedback and take it into account.

I strongly suggest everyone who feels the game design is diverting from their own expectations to take part of beta testing. That is the time and place to affect game design decisions. We are obviously all passionate about the game so I'm sure this would benefit us all.

Another major beta test will start in 2 or 3 weeks.

[bru888]

Thank you. At long last, this is some consolation. Please at least take care of all reported typos and errors and think about updating the game manual.

[Andy2012]

Am I wrong? Well then, go ahead and tell me so, Artistocrats.

*sigh*

Then I wish it was more obvious that we are constantly releasing major new features and DLC ever since the release of the original game 2 years ago. And no matter what I say or try to defend design decisions, I feel I'm just going to be dragged into an endless discussion and I rather spend my time on developing, expanding and improving the game. That being said, while it's just not possible to please everyone we always read feedback and take it into account.

I strongly suggest everyone who feels the game design is diverting from their own expectations to take part of beta testing. That is the time and place to affect game design decisions. We are obviously all passionate about the game so I'm sure this would benefit us all.

Another major beta test will start in 2 or 3 weeks.

I agree with your project management, development time and troll management statements. There is just so many nerves to go around. And I also quite vehemently disagree with the tone of some of the criticism here (Slogkrieg, Kindermarine, Sabbatical...tone it done guys, there are people on the other end, too. Be nice.).
But this is definitely not about making everybody happy, most people around here arent weirdo trolls with too much time on their hands. (Some might be.) The complaints about lack of manuals, typos in mission goals, broken game mechanics in some areas and sometimes rather bad mission design plague Kriegsmarine quite vehemently. (Blitzkrieg was fine. I liked it and apart from the initial Kiev mission (which you guys changed, thanks), I could not find any fault with it.)
And I know you did not want to come across this way, but the statement "Well, then be a betatester" is a bit rich. We are your customers, not your unpaid employees. I really like this game and I applaud your work (dont know anything about programming), but customers complaining about the state of a finished product should not be asked to repair it themselves.
That being said, even though I am quite curious about your new beta, I think cranking out DLC after DLC ('constantly realeasing new dlcs and new content') has had those results. Some tweaks in Surface raiders, maybe more SP points and some tweaks for the BBs (a Kriegsmarine DLC which makes the mighty battleships useless..come on) might have taken a month more, but it would have been magnificent. (Enjoyed Scapa Flow a lot, BTW. )

[kondi754]

Andy wrote:
And I know you did not want to come across this way, but the statement "Well, then be a betatester" is a bit rich. We are your customers, not your unpaid employees. I really like this game and I applaud your work (dont know anything about programming), but customers complaining about the state of a finished product should not be asked to repair it themselves.

It seems to me that Adherbal is not talking about bugs in the game but yours complaining about the solutions used.
The truth is that in beta-tests there are involved true fans of the game (like me) who basically accept almost everything. There are some new ideas proposed but maybe we are not demanding (critical, evaluative) enough for the developers.
Everyone has their own reason, as I see Andy would like to pay him for participation in Beta tests, then help ...

[Andy2012]

Andy wrote:
And I know you did not want to come across this way, but the statement "Well, then be a betatester" is a bit rich. We are your customers, not your unpaid employees. I really like this game and I applaud your work (dont know anything about programming), but customers complaining about the state of a finished product should not be asked to repair it themselves.

It seems to me that Adherbal is not talking about bugs in the game but yours complaining about the solutions used.
The truth is that in beta-tests there are involved true fans of the game (like me) who basically accept almost everything. There are some new ideas proposed but maybe we are not demanding enough for the developers.
Everyone has their own reason, as I see Andy would like to pay him for participation in Beta tests, then help ...

I am not quite sure I understand everything here (sorry, it's your English). But I'd like to stay a customer. Betatesting is an important part in a business like this and thus should not be done by amateurs in their spare time. (No offense.) I feel like the kinks I saw in Kriegsmarine would have vanished mostly with a week or two more time.

[kondi754]

I understand that, in your opinion, the reason all the bad things in OoB is that the developers don't employ professional testers only use such amateurs like me?

[Andy2012]

I understand that, in your opinion, the reason all the bad things in OoB is that the developers don't employ professional testers only use such amateurs like me?

Nope. Man, you do read the worst in everything. I think more time would be needed. And that I wouldnt beta test for free.

[kondi754]

I understand that, in your opinion, the reason all the bad things in OoB is that the developers don't employ professional testers only use such amateurs like me?

Nope. Man, you do read the worst in everything. I think more time would be needed. And that I wouldnt beta test for free.

Ok ok , I was kidding.
This game is really okay, sometimes it has weaker elements but generally keeps proper level. I agree more time would be needed.

[kondi754]

One more thing which maybe convinces someone to participate in the Beta tests is the lack of problems with the game after its purchase.
I don't see most of the errors you report now, because they were eliminated at the test stage for my hardware configuration.

[bru888]

Andy, I got your good advice in that other forum, and I replied. Thanks.

[Horst]

Let me defend adherbal a bit: I have no idea how the work is specifically distributed among this developer team here besides what's written in the game's credits, but if anything falls into coding and file management (adding units and all the many effects) then it’s likely that adherbal is heavily busy most of the time. I mean, if the vanilla game also takes historical data of war machines into account then research about these things can take up a lot of time. I know that too well from my own wargame mods. If you also add the team leadership stuff to this, checking out the work of others and telling them what to do all the time, then you can imagine how much time is left to entertain the customers here.
There are other dev teams in the gaming industry where the lead-designers and producers have no real job but basically only leadership to do. These guys are often yaking all the time with forum members and game magazines and can produce one youtube vid after the other. So, let's have some mercy and sympathy for our little dev team here.

If a next beta-test is already coming in the next weeks then we can expect the dev-dudes aren't only busy driving around their new Porsches with their chicks. No reason to already become a cheerleader for PzC2 now which doesn't exist yet besides propaganda.

[pipfromslitherine]

Andy wrote:
And I know you did not want to come across this way, but the statement "Well, then be a betatester" is a bit rich. We are your customers, not your unpaid employees. I really like this game and I applaud your work (dont know anything about programming), but customers complaining about the state of a finished product should not be asked to repair it themselves.

It seems to me that Adherbal is not talking about bugs in the game but yours complaining about the solutions used.
The truth is that in beta-tests there are involved true fans of the game (like me) who basically accept almost everything. There are some new ideas proposed but maybe we are not demanding enough for the developers.
Everyone has their own reason, as I see Andy would like to pay him for participation in Beta tests, then help ...

I am not quite sure I understand everything here (sorry, it's your English). But I'd like to stay a customer. Betatesting is an important part in a business like this and thus should not be done by amateurs in their spare time. (No offense.) I feel like the kinks I saw in Kriegsmarine would have vanished mostly with a week or two more time.

Just FYI, Beta-testing is ALWAYS done by 'amateurs'. This is because internal testers will always tend to learn the game and the systems and the UI, and the whole point of beta testing is to put the game in front of as many people as possible who are going to play it like a player, not like a guy who is testing the game 9-5.

Cheers

Pip

[bru888]

One thing that I am curious about. Is The Artistocrats just adherbal? His avatar is the only one that I have seen which indicates that. We have a bunch of other officials who occasionally post in this forum but they seem to be Slitherine, not Artistocrats.

[Horst]

Check out the "View full credits" in the main menu down below.
Next to adherbal, bebro is the busiest team-slave doing all the 3d models and some scenarios.
I have no clue who of all these scenario-design guys created which campaign or scenario. We better don't point fingers...

[bru888]

Actually, I stumbled upon a way to call up The Artistocrats as a group. It appears they are these three fellows, that's all:

[NightPhoenix]

Hmm, although it's not altogether unsurprising i think that it might be misunderstood what some people are trying to say here. I don't think anybody in this particular topic is claiming that there isn't enough DLC being released. I also don't think that most people who claim that things are unrealistic or whatever really have a point.
What people are saying in this topic is that upon release of the game there were still considerable amounts of bugs, quite visible and that it might have been better to fix these before release and postpone that for say a week. Now it seems another DLC is coming again very soon, and it's already the question whether we will even see the bugs in this DLC fixed. It's not a design decision to keep bugs in your game upon release. (unless you did it purposefully?) Nor would i call delivering a sound product without obvious defects "pleasing everyone". I do agree with Andy2012 as well. We are customers buying a product and expect the just bought product to work in a certain degree. If the camera you just bought has certain features simply not working, and the added manual doesn't explain how to use it properly what do you do? You go back to the store to talk about it, people complain. It's not about design features in this case.

Nobody is claiming the developers aren't working hard or anything, and the effort they put in is much appreciated, but putting on the market a product which visibly still has many defects, problems that could have been removed had more diligence been put into it is a marketing or financial choice that i think understandably raises some criticisms. I do not know who made that choice ultimately and so it is impossible to blame anyone, but that doesn't stop people from speaking out in the only place they can.

[Andy2012]

Just FYI, Beta-testing is ALWAYS done by 'amateurs'. This is because internal testers will always tend to learn the game and the systems and the UI, and the whole point of beta testing is to put the game in front of as many people as possible who are going to play it like a player, not like a guy who is testing the game 9-5.

Cheers

Pip

I think that is fine when your product is already fairly polished and about to hit the shelves. But I tried betatesting with Morning Sun once and found the state of the game with a lot of triggers not working, photo events as blanks pretty far from that. Also, the updates made testing exhausting. At least it felt more like a job to me. So I can see your point, but this just doesnt work for me. The few gaming time I have, I prefer to not feel like doing chores. (I have my job for that.)

[Andy2012]

Hmm, although it's not altogether unsurprising i think that it might be misunderstood what some people are trying to say here. I don't think anybody in this particular topic is claiming that there isn't enough DLC being released. I also don't think that most people who claim that things are unrealistic or whatever really have a point.
What people are saying in this topic is that upon release of the game there were still considerable amounts of bugs, quite visible and that it might have been better to fix these before release and postpone that for say a week. Now it seems another DLC is coming again very soon, and it's already the question whether we will even see the bugs in this DLC fixed. It's not a design decision to keep bugs in your game upon release. (unless you did it purposefully?) Nor would i call delivering a sound product without obvious defects "pleasing everyone". I do agree with Andy2012 as well. We are customers buying a product and expect the just bought product to work in a certain degree. If the camera you just bought has certain features simply not working, and the added manual doesn't explain how to use it properly what do you do? You go back to the store to talk about it, people complain. It's not about design features in this case.

Nobody is claiming the developers aren't working hard or anything, and the effort they put in is much appreciated, but putting on the market a product which visibly still has many defects, problems that could have been removed had more diligence been put into it is a marketing or financial choice that i think understandably raises some criticisms. I do not know who made that choice ultimately and so it is impossible to blame anyone, but that doesn't stop people from speaking out in the only place they can.

Couldnt have said it better.
I mean, for three guys and some computers, they are doing a great job.
But the pace of DLCs might just be too much for this brand and might destroy its customer base, which would be sad. I think there was a Mad Men episode during which they devise a campaign for Jaguar and some guy says: "They (Jaguar cars) just look marvelous. But they are lemons. You actually need a second car to go anywhere." Would be sad if that happens to OoB. Looks great, but you have to play Panzercorps 1 or 2 to actually have fun.

[Mojko]

Hmm, although it's not altogether unsurprising i think that it might be misunderstood what some people are trying to say here. I don't think anybody in this particular topic is claiming that there isn't enough DLC being released. I also don't think that most people who claim that things are unrealistic or whatever really have a point.
What people are saying in this topic is that upon release of the game there were still considerable amounts of bugs, quite visible and that it might have been better to fix these before release and postpone that for say a week.

It seems to me that there are 3 groups of complaints:

1 - Historical accuracy

I personally I don't care too much about this, for me these are nitpicks. For example I suggested to add planing hull trait to all submarines because using a torpedo to take down a submarine would be silly in WW2, but the effect on gameplay is very marginal.

2 - Gameplay mechanics

New naval combat was a big point of discussion and I personally like it because you need to make constant tradeoffs between dealing damage and receiving damage. Both these factors depend on your ship's movements. Having the option to make predictable tactical choices is good for the game. To be fair it's not perfect. As before I found cruisers to be far better compared to battleships. Ideally I would like each unit in the game to have a role and be useful in some situations (even if it's not historically accurate).

3 - Too many bugs

The DLCs often contain bugs and the last release was not an exception. I personally reported several bugs and they were really annoying and I had to play around them in some situations. On the other hand we should not forget that it's not that easy to test all cases. Just consider how many test cases there are, here are some factors that contribute:

- hardware configuration (OS, Graphic card...)
- difficulty level (yes this can effect units on the map, it's not just AI behaviour and resource settings)
- deployment of core forces (some scenarios change AI units based on your deployment)
- order of objective steps relative to each other and relative to turn number

I could go on but I think now it's quite clear that it's unreasonable to demand completely bug free game. I think the most important thing is not how many bugs are present, but of which type. This is my list of bug types:

A - breaks the game (the game can't be played after bug happens)
B - breaks the game, but game can be resumed after restart
C - part of the game content can't be reached (secondary objective that effects another scenario)
D - part of the game scenario can't be reached (secondary objective that effects only current scenario)
E - minor functionality doesn't work (objective counters display incorrect data but are working fine internally)
F - marginal issues (event picture is missing)

The game on the release state should not contain bugs of A, B, and C type. In the case of Kriegsmarine in my playthrough I found no bugs of these types. Yes, there were lot of bugs of D, E and F types, so overall release state wasn't great but I think it was ok.