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

[starwolf3500]

Hey Sorok,

One question:

  CAN YOU DO BETTER?  
 

[Vysander]

Quote:
Hey Sorok,

One question:

  CAN YOU DO BETTER?  
   

i'm going to throw my hat back into the ring temporarily and post a response to this as i've seen this type of rebuttal too many times.

Obviously 99.9% of us can't come close to programming the next version of SFC; but what we can do, and most of us who have been disenchanted have done, is to seriously offer pretty constructive critism at the way that the SFCx projects were produced and supported.  Admittedly there's a number of disappointed fans who just flat out flamed aggressively (I hope I don't fall into that catagory), but truly if you managed a business, and something wasn't working right with your product, wouldn't you like to have a pile of users comments and critisms to plop down at your next management meeting to say 'ok, here's where we're having issues, how can we fix this so that we can make a better product'

Sometimes you need to fix your product's infrastructure before you innovate, as is in this case.

So what I hope the majority of the people who are abandoning this game would do is voice what is causing them to leave (for me, it's the complete lack of a viable patch for just way too long of a period of time.  A product isn't complete the moment it gets onto the market, it's complete when it works as advertised).  Some of 'my' crowd tend to be a bit rowdy and just flame incessently, but having run several reasonably large scale projects, I do create lists of what were the downpoints and then the next time a similar project arises, I pull up that file and go "ok, this is what we need to handle or think about also".

Back in response to other comments above.  I thank David F. for his dedication to making the patch for us yes, but that Taldren/Activision isn't going to put the necessary resources into completing their products leaves a bitter taste in my mouth.  It appears that there was a lack of resources in the first place for a project of this scope, which is why there's so many loose pieces and 'bugs'.  It is my opinion that the scope should have been scaled back to something more reasonable.  Less innovation yes, slightly less happiness for the fans, but those milestone deadlines will be more bearable and we might actually have a product that functions on release.  I am not a true programmer so I can't comment too much on the following, but i'd prefer that a stable, if basic, platform be rushed out if necessary, and then patch to ADD the cute little features.  Give us something to chew on and play with while the spiffy little features are created to add on.

So please Taldren, in your upcoming games... if you're not going to hit the deadline with a strong product that you would say is 'mostly clean' of major bugs, please, PLEASE!  transfer resources from the innovations into the foundation builders!  Complete it by the deadline that the publisher sets!  

Whew ok... *reinforce forward shield, here comes the mauler to blow my arguement to heck*
Vys

[Sorok]

Quote:
Hey Sorok,

One question:

  CAN YOU DO BETTER?  
   

*sigh*
Don't start flaming me for posting my opinions. This is not a private forum. And to answer your question....Of course I couldn't do a better job programming, because I'm not a programmer.  But I've worked in the software industry for 10 years now, so I do have experience witnessing  typical best/worst practices in software product management/development.

So, Starworlf,  if you wanna  publicly state how stable SFC3 is, and how clean the program runs, and how well the title has been marketed and subsequently supported, then by all means go right ahead.  Please, go ahead. No, please, go ahead.
What? I don't hear you.  OK, I'll go then....

 On behalf of Starwolf, I'd just like to say that SFC3 is the best title ever to hit the market.  Having sold hundreds of millions of copies, the developers/publishers have produced the most stable piece of software ever to be created. In fact, they've even demonstrated exceptional forsight by creating a revolutionary concept called the neverending-beta-patch.  To date there's never been a game which has relied so little on the modding community.  In fact, the customers who purchased SFC3 are so happy that they consistently send flowers and monetary donations to both the developers as well as the publishers for all their outstanding ability to set consumer expectations.  

** Sorok dies as lightining strikes him by the hand of God.**

^^^^^ The Truth:
   Well, when I first joined these forums last novemberI remember engaging someone in a heated discussion similar to this one. However, at that point in time I vehemently defended the developers.  However, having suffered all the same frustrations as just about everyone else here (save Starwolf), I've slowly regressed into bashing the quality of this product.  I mean there comes a point where my own needs as a consumer outwiegh my sense of empathy for programmers and developers.  Thus, my opinion has slowly evolved from that of patience and understanding to one of utter frustration and dissappointment.  

IMO, SFC3 has become the Ryan Leaf of gaming titles..... Based on sheer potential, you can help but take him first in the draft.  Before you know it, he's throwing interceptions, blowing up at the press, exposes his immaturity, and, like so many other things, frustration becomes more intense, knowing that he'll never achieve one iota of his potential.  

 

[CmdrK]

Could someone tell me the release date of EAW and/or OP and the release date for their most up to date patch?

Also, how many patches were there for them?

Just curious, you guys seem to track everything, so I thought I'd ask.

Thanks
 

[starwolf3500]

Quote: "So, Starworlf,  if you wanna  publicly state how stable SFC3 is, and how clean the program runs, and how well the title has been marketed and subsequently supported, then by all means go right ahead.  Please, go ahead. No, please, go ahead.
What? I don't hear you.  OK, I'll go then...."

Cute.  I give you points for turning up your sarcasm level.  Now, I have never ONCE disagreed that the SFC series has issues.  I bought SFC 1 kinda late in it's run but I have bought 2, OP, and 3 with 7 days of their release date.  Now, that said, I have seen a lot of poeple start slamming Taldren for buggy games and they have been buggy games but if you look at Taldren's history with SFC2 and OP, they tried to patch things very quickly.  I lost count of the number of EaW patches and they are still patching OP.  I know that there is no new revenue provided for Taldren for doing this by either Interplay or Activision.  So even if the new "official" patch is the Orkin Man of bug killers and suddenly the game becomes everything, everyone wanted it to be, Taldren won't get a dime extra.  Taldren tried to go around Activision and release the beta patch for mass consumption (not to mention the fact that the more people you have looking at something, the more you are going to find) and got blasted by activision.  I know that my memory is suspect but I think it was over 30 days before Activision released the beta patch and based on the README files, they didn't change much.  I STATE again, I know that SFC3 has issues but the people who did most of the work to create it, have not been allowed to do much about fixing it in a timely manner.  As for the point "Activision has released many good, clean games with good support, ect...", good for them.  They are a large corporation with multiple divisions and different groups have different levels of ability.  SFC is not Castle Wolfenstein and cannot be written in the same way.

Finally,  I wish that I had the programming skill and cash and legal knowledge to get the source code, fix it, and get it out to everyone so that SFC3 would be clean and make everyone happy, but I don't.  I have done enough programming to know just how hard it is, however, to make something like SFC3.  It also doesn't help to have an outsider blowing your plans away with late minute changes after you have written thousands of lines of code.  That may be part of the gig, but that doesn't make it any easier.  Now, until something better comes along, I will continue to play SFC3 and to defend it.

    FOR Vysander:  I agree with your point concerning infrastructure and fixing things.  Unfortunately hindsight is always 20/20.

 

[3dot14]

Quote:
I wonder what SFCs could have been developed if Mr. Ferrel had allowed a NON-FAN person to act as the project
coordinator... some1 foreign to SFC world to add some objectivity to it.

Wonder no more.

SFC3 is the example you seek.

SFC1 and 2 were produced by people who are close to the game, and believed in the complexity of the series in accordance of the board game.

SFC3 was not. It was produced by someone involved in Quake 3 (or was it Q3Arena?) who took the "series in a new direction". (which has its own pluses and minuses)

Objectivity is highly overrated.


I defend Taldren because it has done the only games (SFC1/2) I love, or at least came very very close. No other developers have.
If you think the games are not for you? well I am sorry to hear that. May you (all of you) find that which you seek. (Because I have already find mine)

[Vysander]

horse aint' dead yet  gotta beat it some more!

Quote:
FOR Vysander: I agree with your point concerning infrastructure and fixing things. Unfortunately hindsight is always 20/20.

well, can't really say that.. again this is the 4th iteration of the engine.  So they had 3  'hindsight times'...

1 goof past, it's alright

2nd, gets annoying

3rd, well..........  if it was a radical departure in engine mechanics perhaps... but it sure looks like SFC1 and 2 under the hood except with the graphical engine....

not that I have the source code or anything..

/me gives the horse one last wack
Vys

[xCLAVEx]

Quote:

Quote:
Using your logic, if I went to see a movie and one of the workers by the food (if you can call it that) area took a cup of coke and threw it on me, I can't lay blame on them because I don't work there? Please. It is the responsibility of the company, not the customer to make sure the buyer enjoys their product. I have to say that Taldren games are like the Houston Rockets, lots of potential, but they don't have a damn clue how to execute properly.  

That isn't exactly using my logic. Otherwise it would sort of be like the developers chucking a CD at someone and hurting them. Not really the same thing. What I am saying is people don't know the in's and out's of making a game, I don't, so it is not right to blame someone or say it should have been done this way.

Quote:
I have to say that Taldren games are like the Houston Rockets, lots of potential, but they don't have a damn clue how to execute properly.

You make it sound like you could make it 100 times better. These people have most likely put a lot of time and effort into their work. I know I wouldn't like comments like that, would you?

If people are dissapointed in the game fair enough. But they don't need to attack anyone or rubbish their work. It is easy to pick apart anything.

 

Oy, here's the thing...It's not my "job" to do their "job" better. Personally, no I probably could not do better but I do know of many other developers that could and do much higher quality work.  I am expected to do quality work and I feel I do quality work and we rarely get any complaints. However, the work on the SFC games is not quality work. If they gave it to me for free, or I got it through warez, then I would have no right to complain but since I payed hard earned cash for their product, it is my right to voice my concerns. We aren't talking about a $5 product either, when I bought this thing the day it came out it was $50. To some people that may be pocket change but to the people who don't make as much that is perhaps the one little item that we can afford and when we feel we have wasted our money on it we are unable to return the product to the store because once it's opened, we are stuck with it so guess what? Until it gets patched correctly (if it ever does) I, and many others are stuck with a $50 coaster. I hope you see past being a blind fan a little more clearly now...

[WDLL]

I too would like to have the final? patch now.  Unfortunately its out of my hands as to when it will be released.  I do kind of, trust Taldren that they will (through Activision or else) eventualy release the patch.  And when they do I will install it.  I have read all the stories about the patch history and the problems with the one patch policy etc. As a gamer and consumer I am not happy.  We are not talking about an expansion pack, but code that fixes the original code to work as it should.  The thing with Activision is that they have been around for a long time (one of the first I think) and they are big.  They have many companies/developers under their wings.  So, it makes a bit more sense when I say the following.  I will have to wait a lot (a few months at leasts) before I buy any future game from Taldren.  I will visit the forums available (including this one of course) and wait till I can see that people are not complaining again and asking for a patch to fix the game.  After a few months if they release patches that do, I will buy any of Ts future games.  I know that I should be thinking positively and saying that perhaps any future game will not have "major" bugs, but, what are the odds???

I am not angry or anything, I am just protecting my money and my time.  I fully support Taldren and I believe in them to create interesting games.  Good luck Taldren you can do it.

I will propably be around till  Fall.

[32nd Halcyon]

Quote:
Sorry to have to turn up the flames a bit, but I haven't touched SFC 3 in... a couple months now.

Yes, a beta patch was released.. with a big warning saying that this isn't for dial up users.  Well that excludes me.

Been waiting quite a long time for this patch...  Be there a GaW or SFC4, i'm voting with my pocketbook.  I'm not going to buy a Taldren (while under Activision, or probably anyone else) product again unless they manage to release a playable product that doesn't force a reboot of my computer every other battle, crashing single player about every 4th battle (the save button is my friend), and etc within a reasonable amount of time.  

It's both the fault of Taldren and Activision for SFC3.  It's a good game in concept, in execution it just blew.  When a product doesn't deliver, it's the fault of all involved.  Period.  The 4th (counting OP) iteration of SFC is just like the rest of them, buggy.  I should have learned my lesson around the 2nd time, but I am an SFB fan and was hoping for a good and STABLE game that delivers all that is promised on the box at least one of these tries (before patch.... heck, even after patch).  I understand that games are released to literally hundreds of different computer configs, but for crying out loud, there's an abundance of cutting edge games out there that run decently!  (admittedly there's another pile of junk games that don't deliver.  Taldren seems to be throwing their games in this pile).  I can't say that my rig really does deviate far from the 'optimal gaming machine', it's reasonably high end, STANDARD/POPULAR equipment with nothing funky done with the OS/Hardware/anything.

This thing was released over 8 months ago... Barely worked for me ~5 months ago, still barely works for me now.  (definition of barely working is less than 1 hour of playing before something cops out)

This is ridiculous, i'm not enough of a fanboy to keep waiting and looking at this forum every week or so.  I've waited long enough.  I give up.  You win Taldren, you got my 40 bucks (well.. times 4).  Your cd's have turned into expensive coasters.

Vysander, Out.

Edit:  *sigh* used wrong word, all fixed now

I find this sorta Funny! How old is your computer? Are you trying to play something that might be over the Specs of your computer.

I can only imagine someone trying to drive a honda civic through a mud bog wondering why she won't go anywhere. or Trying to do downhill BMX with a tricycle....

In this time as in the past, games are designed for the new technology coming out. It will always be this way. There is no sense screaming about it. It is a matter of business. All programming companies write for tjhe latest tech. Some do try to consider the older technology out there. What they can't truly consider is all the various system configurations available. How I setup my computer may be totally differnt from you or others for that matter.

To assume that all people use Compaq's or HP PC's is silly and I don't pretend to assume you are making that assumtion either.

All I'm trying to say is...it is getting increassingly hard to write quality games that will work for everyone. Thats's one of the issues Game consoles don't have pestering them.

I can also agree that it is frustrating when you want to be able to play a game but your machine can't handle it.    

[Vysander]

*cough*

Quote:
I find this sorta Funny! How old is your computer? Are you trying to play something that might be over the Specs of your computer.

I can only imagine someone trying to drive a honda civic through a mud bog wondering why she won't go anywhere. or Trying to do downhill BMX with a tricycle....

In this time as in the past, games are designed for the new technology coming out. It will always be this way. There is no sense screaming about it. It is a matter of business. All programming companies write for tjhe latest tech. Some do try to consider the older technology out there. What they can't truly consider is all the various system configurations available. How I setup my computer may be totally differnt from you or others for that matter.

To assume that all people use Compaq's or HP PC's is silly and I don't pretend to assume you are making that assumtion either.

All I'm trying to say is...it is getting increassingly hard to write quality games that will work for everyone. Thats's one of the issues Game consoles don't have pestering them.

I can also agree that it is frustrating when you want to be able to play a game but your machine can't handle it.  

Age of computer:  hmmm, I think it's going on about a year now

Athelon 1.8 ghz
768 megs of DDR ram
around 180 gigs of hard drive space, plenty of swap file space
Ran both with a Geforce TI 4600 and a Radeon 9700, no difference in crashes
Soundblaster .... err something can't recall the name.. before the audiology.... Gamer+
Windows XP Professional, ran both Direct X 8 and 9 (ran better on 9, slightly)

Trust me, i'm NOT behind the curve for this game.

Edit:  Custom built too from a respectable company, NOT a piece o (not so good thing) from Compaq/HP/Gateway

[Dash Jones]

Quote:
*cough*

Quote:
I find this sorta Funny! How old is your computer? Are you trying to play something that might be over the Specs of your computer.

I can only imagine someone trying to drive a honda civic through a mud bog wondering why she won't go anywhere. or Trying to do downhill BMX with a tricycle....

In this time as in the past, games are designed for the new technology coming out. It will always be this way. There is no sense screaming about it. It is a matter of business. All programming companies write for tjhe latest tech. Some do try to consider the older technology out there. What they can't truly consider is all the various system configurations available. How I setup my computer may be totally differnt from you or others for that matter.

To assume that all people use Compaq's or HP PC's is silly and I don't pretend to assume you are making that assumtion either.

All I'm trying to say is...it is getting increassingly hard to write quality games that will work for everyone. Thats's one of the issues Game consoles don't have pestering them.

I can also agree that it is frustrating when you want to be able to play a game but your machine can't handle it.  

Age of computer:  hmmm, I think it's going on about 8 months now

Athelon 1.8 ghz
768 megs of DDR ram
around 180 gigs of hard drive space, plenty of swap file space
Ran both with a Geforce TI 4600 and a Radeon 9700, no difference in crashes
Soundblaster .... err something can't recall the name.. before the audiology.... Gamer+
Windows XP Professional, ran both Direct X 8 and 9 (ran better on 9, slightly)

Trust me, i'm NOT behind the curve for this game.

Edit:  Custom built too from a respectable company, NOT a piece o (not so good thing) from Compaq/HP/Gateway

Wasn't going to say anyting, but why are you running on dial up then?  You perked my curiousity slightly.

However, the other comment I was going to say was, it looks like you've waited approximately 5 1/2 months, if you're sign up date is any indication.  You should be glad you don't play...NWN (yes they've patched it...still doesn't work that great, and even patched, overall the machines...still has more bugs overall from what I can tell [of course they probably have more people playing it to discover the bugs...] and some they STILL haven't fixed...and in addition, even more they had fixed, but then REintroduced into the expansion via the publisher...as if they hadn't learned not to include those bugs the first time around...ahem...CDprotection schemes that make the game unplayable for legit players...cough).

Then there's patch 1.10 for D2...I think that one's going on a year.  Then there's the problem with Rise of Nations.  Great game...fortunate for MS (who apparently can't even bug test for their own systems and OS's now) the reviewers don't rate for stability.  Shaky internet code has STILL not been even remotely fixed AFTER they've patched (Lucky they don't have the one patch policy eh...goes for every game I've listed thus far...or we'd still be waiting for a GOOD patch for every single one of them).  In addition, many systems listed that meet it's specs mean that the game will not run on that system...or crash when playing just about every time.  If one has an integrated chip graphics system...the game will not run (or run correctly, ex.  the merchant crashes the game with Intel's chipset), or if you have ATI...forget the colors (supposedly colors run together with ATI cards).

So, there's those.  Then of course, you could join the club and D/L the beta patch with the rest of us, if you really are wanting a patch...it's only been out for a couple months...duh.  Oh, you want an "official" patch with Activision's blessing.  SFC2 hasn't had one of those in what...a few patches down the line.  NWN hasn't really had any true "blessed patches from the publishers...only ones that the publishers aren't going to take legal action against bioware (though some of us held our breaths with, I think it was 1.23 that removed the CD protection scheme that prevented a bunch of people from playing...and has been reinstalled with SOU expansion pack for it).

Sorry you're so frustrated.  Sorry to see you go...but I hardly consider this an extreme situation or any reason to stop playing a good game (or I'd have a ton of what you would call expensive coasters...games that simply don't run great).  Hope you have better luck next time.  By the way...I have you beat on the number of copies bought...yep...you guessed it...I'm a fanboi.

Once again, I hope you have better luck next time.  Have fun on your X-box...or is GameCube your choice?

[Vysander]

entire system was $1400, so this rig doesn't mean i'm a richboy.

Cable in my area of the country... well.. ahh.. sucks (not that dial up is much better), the dial up is a heck of a lot cheaper though than cable (yes, I did my research to find the lowest prices)... I play online yes, but haven't really REQUIRED cable ( I spend more time at LAN parties)

Not worth the expense, not that it would solve the crashing problems anyways (I actually had dl'd the beta patch, and I crashed just as much.. gave up and uninstalled the whole kit'n'kaboodle)

As for the games that you mention, I can open up say.. PC gamer... for this month and maybe find 2 out of the 12-15 games reviewed where bugginess is mentioned (not including bad AI as a bug...it's hard to write AI )... so yes there are games that have horrible bugs, NWN and Rise, but they're in the minority

As for D2, which I actually do play from time to time, I dare say after you do patches 1.1 through 1.9 you would slow down a bit

Blizzard put out between 6-9 patches (don't recall if they skipped any numbers), that's 6-9 more patches than taldren.  By all rights Blizzard should quit working on patches for D2 because it works fine besides for all the hacking that goes on which isn't their fault.  The game is also ancient compared to SFC3.  Taldren for SFC3 has yet to put out a real patch.


And not exactly sure how you got me beat on copies of SFC.. unless there was another SFC game I am unaware of... SFC1, SFC2, SFC2 OP, SFC3... I count 4

unless for some reason you bought multiple copies.... although pets/kids/God's will can make a guy do that

oh.. if you really want to talk fanboi, I have the original (yes, black and white the one that's about 5 by 7 inches) Star fleet command, expansions 1 through 3, then the commander's edition rules with the carriers expansion, and the basic and advanced doomsday rules with new worlds 1 through 3 and module K, battleships.  Not the whole set, but I got the basics down

And I don't own either a cube or an xbox, so don't bother to flame me there.  Have an Nintendo (8 bit) around here somewhere..... I play on my computer morrowind which is quite playable without patches, unreal 2k3 which was playable without patches, Q3 which again was playable without patches, Ghost recon, didn't bother with a patch for that, BF1942, err, played for a while before I got the patch, which made no difference it seemed except gameplay balance, Command and Conquer Generals... nope, no patch needed to play the whole thing through and multiplayer without crashing... blah, what else have I installed recently... only thing in recent memory that NEEDED a patch was this game.   And btw, NWN I think was an anomoly, have balder's gate 1 and 2... unpatched, play great, although I am not much for that type of game, which is why I avoided NWN.

Out of all the games I own, the number that require a patch are very few in comparison.

 "#6 shield holding cap'n!  That was a weak volley!  Specific Shield reinforcement held off most of it!  Photons and phasers reloading!"

Keep trying to make me understand that this is acceptable behavior for a company, good luck.
Vys

[Vysander]

oh.. and MS OS's...

I don't know about you, but I just download the security patches, haven't downloaded Service Pack 1 yet and I seem to be running just fine.... not like Linux or anything like that, but major crashes happen once in a blue moon.  Then again hiding behind a modem lets me get away with lax security and I don't need to download half of the stuff on that list.

I rather like WinXP, blah, so i'm an MS fanboi now too!

[TheSatyr]

Heh,I'm still running a 667MHZ HP PC. And the only game I ever had a problem with was Rise Of Nations...it wouldn't run...period. Supposedly the next patch will fix the "lock up after intro" problem I had...It would be nice to actually get to see the menu in RON someday.

Incidentally,my pc runs NWN with only a slight slow down...runs Freelancer nearly flawlessly(and that's with full graphics enabled). Blitzkrieg,AOM...they all run perfectly fine.

HPs are good PCs...mine just needed more RAM and a better graphics card. The only drawback with a 3 year old HP is that it has no AGP slots...and uses the AC97 sound card. I'm probably not going to get a new PC until this one dies...besides,I'm too used to win98.  

[feargusf]

I'll jump on the "defend HP" bandwagon and say that my 5 year old HP, with a Radeon 7200, runs SFC3 quite well. I will be getting a new computer by the end of this year, or early in the next, and I'm leaning toward another HP, since the one that I have has run like a champion. I'll also miss Win98, but MS is dropping support for it as we speak, so I have few options.  

[korus]

Quote:
I'll jump on the "defend HP" bandwagon and say that my 5 year old HP, with a Radeon 7200, runs SFC3 quite well. I will be getting a new computer by the end of this year, or early in the next, and I'm leaning toward another HP, since the one that I have has run like a champion. I'll also miss Win98, but MS is dropping support for it as we speak, so I have few options.  

  When is "Uncle Bill" going to do this? I currently run 98se... I keep hearing too many horror stories about XP.  Did they get rid of the calling MS for a new serial number?  It's none of MS business if I muck around in my pc... Jeeze...

Korus  

[Vysander]

i've had to call MS twice for new serial numbers... not even a small deal was made about it...  

[feargusf]

Yes, it's true. It's called "Product Life Cycle" by the boys in Washington state. If you don't believe me, then ask yourself a few simple questions
1. Why are the most recent drivers for (insert name of product here) not WHQL cerified for Win98?
2. Why can't I install MediaPlayer 9 on 98, but can on 98SE and every OS thereafter?
3. Whatever became of support, patches, fixes, and other downloads for 95?
4. Hey, wait a second, wasn't 95 released only three years before 98?
5. If they stopped supporting 95 two years ago, or so, does that mean that the bell now tolling tolls for 98?
6. Extrapolating from the above, if 98SE was released about a year after 98, then where does that leave me, the 98SE user?
I hope that I didn't rain on your parade too much, but the sad fact is that Bill and Co. don't make any more money off of those of us using a five-year old OS.  

[WDLL]

Perhaps if they contiinued to sell them they would make some money of them.  I know at least 2 people who want to buy w98.