Topic: @ Taldren; Any word on the official SFC3 patch!?

[atdi]

Are there any news? PLEASE answer!

[atdi]

bump  

[Mantis]

What would be nice additions

1. An armor indicator - can use the current hull indicator but draw a line (alpha 1.0) over it in a different color (like yellow). As your armor was depleted the blue of the hull would appear beneath. I do not know if I am explaining this very well. You could also just have another line.
2. Hot keys for operating your tractor.
3. Official hot keys for preset power settings. Really would be nice when playing Romulan.
4. Better bandwidth utilization
 

[Lieutenant_Q]

How about a toggle to take your sheilds down, Taldren seems to have made it where the sheilds will recharge faster when they are offline, like was demonstrated in Equinox Part 1.  I would rather expose my hull for 20-30 seconds of minor fire to get my sehilds back up to around 30-50% rather than let the enemy pummel them down and keep them in that state where they dont add up to much at all.  

[Max Burke]

LOL

Half a Year down the line since launch, and still no official patch to be seen!

Brings back so many memories



Can Ya feel the luv in this forum, well it aint coming from Taldren or Activision!

who was it that was quoting legal action earlier?  That person might have  a point.

 

[Sorok]

Its not activisions fault. They've had plenty of other Trek titles that were  successful and supported.

[Cleaven]

Quote:
Its not activisions fault. They've had plenty of other Trek titles that were  successful and supported.  

You will have to practice a lot more on your sarcasm.  

[Sorok]

Quote:

Quote:
Its not activisions fault. They've had plenty of other Trek titles that were  successful and supported.  

You will have to practice a lot more on your sarcasm.  

Actually that was one of the very few times when I wasnt being sarcastic on this board.  

[Alidar Jarok]

It is Activisions fault

Taldren would have released 2 or 3 patches by now (they've done it with the other games, they are still planning on releasing another OP patch, and very few people bought OP)

The problem is Activision has a policy of one patch only.  And for a long time, didn't Beta test the patch Taldren made.  They would have a couple guys play until they found a bug, and then sent it back because everything wasn't fixed.  Eventually things were worked out, the Beta was posted for public download, and they are working towards the final version.  But they can only make one patch, and that's not their choice

[Sorok]

Quote:
It is Activisions fault

Taldren would have released 2 or 3 patches by now (they've done it with the other games, they are still planning on releasing another OP patch, and very few people bought OP)

The problem is Activision has a policy of one patch only.  And for a long time, didn't Beta test the patch Taldren made.  They would have a couple guys play until they found a bug, and then sent it back because everything wasn't fixed.  Eventually things were worked out, the Beta was posted for public download, and they are working towards the final version.  But they can only make one patch, and that's not their choice  

Alidar Jarok, you've clearly been around here much longer than me, and I'm not trying to get on a flame war about this subject, but stating that Activision has a one-patch policy is false.  You yourself even contradict the one-patch policy by saying that OP will have "another" patch.  And while we're on the subject.... How long has everyone waited for this OP patch?  Unless their policies have changed during the last year, Many Activision-published games have had multiple official  patch releases. Star Trek Voyager Elite Force and both of the games in the Armada series had multiple patch updates.

Maybe you are privy to information which isn't considered common knowledge because of your long-time status here, but I was stating my own personal speculation based on my previous gaming experiences with other Star Trek titles published by Activision. In fact, I have yet to encounter similar problems with any other title I've ever played.  And though Activision may have dragged their feet on the "beta Patch",  my own experience as a software vendor leads me to believe that the recurring issues people have complained about on these boards are symptomatic of Taldren's organizational challenges.

So say what you want, but until you offer some hardcore proof, I won't be convinced that Activision is to blame for this debocle.

[Hale]

So Interplay was the producer it was Interplay's fault, and when Activision is the producer its Activision's fault?  The only constant I see is Taldren and their consistently buggy releases, and failure to fix them.    

I can't  really defend Interplay, but Activision usually does pretty well by their customers.  

[3dot14]

1. OP patch has nothing to do with Activision (thank god). It's still Interplay territory. And therefore "Activision one patch policy" is not applicable at all. So Jarok didn't contradict himself at all.

2. Taldren's releases are buggy, perhaps. But they fixed them all for SFC1 EAW and now OP. SFC3 is an anomoly as far as patching goes. I won't argue about Taldren's release quality, but I will defend its ability and willingness for POST-SALE support (patches).

3. Activision has no Official one patch policy. But it does practices one. I play Medieval Total War (another Activision product) and it needs another patch on top of its 1.1 (Glorious Archievement still borken, it's the main "campaign" mode of the game), but won't get it cause Activision has already moved on to Rome Total War. (see Armada discussion below too)

4. Interplay's fault was to rush up release. But its hands off policy for patchs is much more helpful than Activision. (interplay does not advertise any patchins beyond 2007 and 2501, since those are the last official patches. But it does not get its, ahem, clothing in a knot if Taldren rleases more patches of its volition.) If Interplay is as uptight as Activision, we are still at EAW 2007 and OP 2501. But Taldren/KM took us all the way here. (Remember that Taldren DID try to take a public-beta patch to us months before the ATVI beta, with essentially the same content. But ATVI, namely SFC3's producer, took the initiative down. And that's what soured Taldren and ATVI relations.)

5. Activision is a big corporation and consists of many individual agent/producers. I don't mean to say ALL activision products are bad simply because SFC3 received shoddy treatment. However, the converse is false as well. Just because Armada and EF were good, doesn't mean the person handling SFC3 is as amiable.

6. While we are on the subject of Armada.
Armada 2 is only patched to 1.1.
And someone correct my A1 history if I am wrong. A1 was released with one patch only (1.1), A1's 1.2 patch was put together by Maddoc and the Former A1 dev team and community in an "extracurricular" role. The original patch 1.2's announcement at A1's official site DOES NOT include an Activision download. I remember that very clearly. It has a Fileplanet and a couple 3rd party downloads. No official ATVI server either. (later it was pciked up by Gaming.Startrek.com. Which is a joint site between Paramount and ATVI...)

BTW I am personally convinced that ATVI is holding up the release. As for what you feel, that's up to you, just so we get the facts (the public ones anyhow) of the cases striaght.

[Sorok]

  At the end of the day, the only Activision title that I've had a problem with is SFC3.  As a consumer, that's what concerns me.  Defend whoever you want whenever you want.  But until someone posts some cannon facts, then my feelings remain status quo.

 Ill even go one step further and point out that the  a.) "buggy release", b.) inaccurate setting of consumer expectations regarding a patch, c.) the length of time it took to get our hands on the second patch ***AHEM*** the first "official" Beta patch and D.) the mismanagement of patch distribution     coincidently happened at a time which Taldren was looking to hire someone as a product manager.

[3dot14]

Like I said, Sorok, feel free to draw your own conclusions.

One one more thing, Armada and Elite Force were raised as "good Activision" products. I already talked about Armada (and in relation to one patch policy).

Now onto Elite Force. Elite Force 2 to be sure.

http://www.gamespydaily.com/news/fullstory.asp?id=5165

Ritual lays off Elite Force 2 team.

I wonder how many patches it will get.

BTW I am sorry for the EF2 team. EF2's demo was very good. I hope the best to the team for their next project.  

[Reverend]

Well, it was him, or him or her, but we still don't have an official patch on a half-assed game that doesn't even come close to living up to its advertsied expectations, and sure as heck not up to its competition. Give us the source code, so someone can reprogram it to soemthing decent. I almost hate Star Trek because of these titles. It is like buying the car of your dreams only to find out that doesnt come with seats, wheels, or a steering wheel, and the company doesn't build them, and denies their lack of existence.  

[Toasty0]

Quote:
Well, it was him, or him or her, but we still don't have an official patch on a half-assed game that doesn't even come close to living up to its advertsied expectations, and sure as heck not up to its competition. Give us the source code, so someone can reprogram it to soemthing decent. I almost hate Star Trek because of these titles. It is like buying the car of your dreams only to find out that doesnt come with seats, wheels, or a steering wheel, and the company doesn't build them, and denies their lack of existence.  

What source code? We don't have source code. We don't need no stinkin' source code...

I hope I don't come across as unkind, but I can't help but ask you a question or two; if you're such a seasoned programmer/producer/developer that you could accomplish better (in your humble opinion) why aren't you:
1.) Answering Taldren's help wanted ad?
2.) Raising the money;developing a like game;contacting Harry Lang to negotiate a licsense agreement...ect, then getting to it developing and distributing your vision of a cool Trek sim?

Or, would you rather stand of the shoulders of giants and tell the giants that you could do better than the giants if only the giants would give you their source code?

I don't mean this as flame, but it may come across as one none the less. My apologies if it does.

Best,
Jerry  

[Toasty0]

Quote:
Like I said, Sorok, feel free to draw your own conclusions.

One one more thing, Armada and Elite Force were raised as "good Activision" products. I already talked about Armada (and in relation to one patch policy).

Now onto Elite Force. Elite Force 2 to be sure.

http://www.gamespydaily.com/news/fullstory.asp?id=5165

Ritual lays off Elite Force 2 team.

I wonder how many patches it will get.

BTW I am sorry for the EF2 team. EF2's demo was very good. I hope the best to the team for their next project.  

Sheesh. How do you patch (if needed) without the development team?

My favorite part was about helping the displaced workers find another job. What did they do, buy them a paper?

Best,
Jerry  

[Alexander1701]

  My petition for the release of the source code isn't to correct bugs, but simply to alter certain hard-coded elements for preference in mods.

Alexander  

[Grav]

Sorok A1,A2,BC and EF all received only one patch each up to this point so it would seem activision stick by their one patch policy

[3dot14]

Quote:
Sheesh. How do you patch (if needed) without the development team?

Good point, Toasty.

BTW does anyone else remember Interplay's treatment of the Klingon Academy team? At least they (the KA team were direct employees of Interplay, unlike in EF2's case) had the decency to support the team long enough AFTER ONE PATCH!