rwcanuck Posted October 15, 1999 Share Posted October 15, 1999 As reported on the Gamers net news: http://204.85.35.5/newswire.html My own personal feeling is the way Steve and Charles are going about it with an OPEN CM beta is the best solution to avoid the unfortunate developments that has beseiged Atomic/SSi over there CC4 beta. RW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 15, 1999 Share Posted October 15, 1999 I really, really feel bad for those guys. Piracy, especially Beta pircay, is a crime that hurts EVERYBODY. Such a thing won't kill SSI, but it could destroy a small company like ours. And for what? Getting a game a couple of months ahead of time, when it isn't even finished? Such a selfish waste... Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted October 16, 1999 Share Posted October 16, 1999 What a bunch of losers. What do they gain by doing what was described in the article? Not money or positive notice. I guess it comes back to them having no lives outside of messing with people. DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Davie Posted October 16, 1999 Share Posted October 16, 1999 Doug; This is of course totally unverifiable, but some of the beta testers were pissed off at the absolute unresponsiveness of the company when it came time to correcting some problems. The response that the testers received with respect to certain issues was 'screw you; it's shipping' or 'screw you, you're wrong'. When this happened to me in a beta testing program, I simply quit and sent an email indicating that I would honor the nda. Obviously, these people have differing conceptions of what constitutes moraility. So be it. C'est la vie. I still plan on buying CC4 Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted October 16, 1999 Share Posted October 16, 1999 For what its worth a person who beta tested several Close Combat games contacted me recently and spoke (without violating NDA I am at pains to state) of his disgust with the amount of attention beta testers were given by Atomic. He quit. I've heard from a couple of beta testers who just had their betas cancelled and I must admit they all seem extremely annoyed at what has happened (most of them were trying to do a proper job) AND also quite umm worn out from trying to convince Atomic that certain things were broken. Thank god I've never done a beta in which that company attitude prevailed. If I did I'd simply withdraw from it. It's not worth the stress. OTOH here we're being spoiled for choice... Martin, Steve, Charles and I were discussing something about terrain (I forget what) and I asked for a change in the editor to allow more values for a certain factor... I thought it was a good idea and the others agreed. Next build, literally a couple of days later, that factor had become 210% (roughly) more variable. Compare this with a company which is well-known for almost totally ignoring beta testers. All those data errors in CCIII were pointed out to Atomic before x-mas last year yet it was still released with them and it still retains them. That's just plain-minded obtuseness and obstinacy. It's not even as though there is doubt over some of these factual errors. They are known to almost all wargamers but Atomic was unwilling to change the data once it was entered. End result: they knowingly ship an innacurate and flawed game out whose flaws their testers spotted, quantified and offered the correct data for. ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Lokesa Posted October 16, 1999 Share Posted October 16, 1999 There have been some interesting questions about this whole affair brought up over at the CC3 gamestats site. If anyone is following the scandal I would recommend browsing the posts there to get another perspective. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest L Tankersley Posted October 16, 1999 Share Posted October 16, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>For what its worth a person who beta tested several Close Combat games contacted me recently and spoke (without violating NDA I am at pains to state) of his disgust with the amount of attention beta testers were given by Atomic. He quit.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The only thing I'd like to bring up here is the fact that Atomic (or any company) doesn't owe _anything_ to their beta testers. Companies conduct external beta tests for their own reasons and with their own objectives. In many cases, those objectives involve identifying problems with the software prior to shipping. But it is _not_ the testers' decision to make about how problems (or perceived problems) are to be fixed. [To clarify, I don't have a problem with people quitting a betatest because they feel the developer isn't being responsive; I just object to the notion that the developer in this case is failing to live up to an obligation.] A tester's job is usually to play with and evaluate software and report bugs, crashes, or other problems (such as data or realism issues). The job of the developer is to assess these reports, prioritize them, and act on them (or not) as they see fit. While my personal belief is that serious consideration of the points made by testers ultimately leads to a better product, I am _very_ reluctant to start making representations about where the best interest of a particular developer might be. It's easy to second-guess from outside the box when you've got little or no investment; when it's YOUR income and livelihood that's on the line, things get a bit more serious. Leland J. Tankersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted October 16, 1999 Share Posted October 16, 1999 Tankersley, Good points but some of what went on in the CC3 beta test was extremely poor manners and uncalled for. Anyways, the kinds of errors I'm speaking about are pointing out typos and simple and obvious errors (eg the Elefants with roof-mounted machineguns (unrealistic) WHICH can be fired while the commander is buttoned (although in reality this was impossible) )... Its simple things like that which were pointed out and completely ignored.. Ignoring obvious errors like that as opposed to ignoring testers pleas for new features is what I object to. Anyways, its not so much what is done but how it is done that most testers feel upset about (that I've talked to). ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest L Tankersley Posted October 16, 1999 Share Posted October 16, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Good points but some of what went on in the CC3 beta test was extremely poor manners and uncalled for.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Poor manners are rarely excusable. On the flipside, though, in the past I have seen beta testers and others display pretty poor manners of their own. One of my personal pet peeves is the false sense of entitlement a lot of people seem to display nowadays. [i'm not following CC4's development and I'm not criticizing anybody in particular; this is just something I've noticed over the past few years.] As far as the realism issue goes, my point is just that ultimately it is the game designer/developer that decides on the scope of the game and how much they care about perceived problems like this. You can disagree with their decisions or criticize their claims of realism, but at the core it's THEIR game. If the product they produce isn't to your liking, don't buy it. [Don't pirate it, either.] Leland J. Tankersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 17, 1999 Share Posted October 17, 1999 Leland is absolutely correct. A game developer doesn't owe its testers ANYTHING. Even PAID testers don't have any rights. One of my testers (at Impressions) drafted a letter accusing the designer of RUINING "his" game. See, he was in love the the designer's original game and hated the sequel. Well, I gave him a good yelling, tore the letter up into little tiny pieces, and mentioned it in his review only as a general item. I wasn't the designer, but *I* wanted to fire the guy for what he wrote! I was furious. If the designer had seen that, he would have been fired before he finished reading the second paragraph. His job was to test, report, and deal. That is it. If the designer listens to him (and he did, but didn't really show it most of the time) fine, if not, fine. The tester wasn't the one with the responsibilities of making the thing, so he wasn't entitled to say boo! And it was no small pleasure to watch him become the designer and go through the agony of trying to ship a game If the developer wants to be a pigheaded butthead about testing and their treatment of testers, then the tester should quit. That is it. Plain and simple. There is NO obligational arrangement other than that. If Atomic wanted to put M1A1 tanks into the game because it would be "cool", that is their decision to make. The market will decide if they should be punished, not the tester. In the case I mentioned above, the game in question that this guy was sure would suck eggs, went on to be one of the biggest sellers that Sierra ever had in its entire history. The market obviously didn't have a problem with the game, and that is the ultimate test (for better or worse). Having said all that, any company that treats its testers, and customers for that matter, as if they were scum that had to be dealt with every so often when absolutely necessary, then that company deserves all the scorn, abuse, ridicule, and lack of business that those people can throw at them. But pirating a beta is the most immature, irresponsible, unreasonable, unacceptable action I can think of. If they find the tester that did that, I honest hope he/they come before a judge with a big, heavy book in his hand ready to be tossed. Vigilanties are a menece to society and should be dealt with harshly lest someone else gets it into their head that laws and decency are there to be broken and trashed. My 2 cents Steve [This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 10-16-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Preacher Posted October 17, 1999 Share Posted October 17, 1999 a pigheaded butthead er, Steve, would that mean he had 2 ugly heads or just one really funky-ugly looking one? I'm trying to imagine this.... Preacher [This message has been edited by Preacher (edited 10-16-99).] [This message has been edited by Preacher (edited 10-16-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rook Posted October 18, 1999 Share Posted October 18, 1999 Anyone ever been part of a focus group? I was cornered into giving feedback on a new type of gum flavor. Pretty much Beta testing for gum, anyway Never once did I feel like I had a stake in the Gum. Not even when the gum tasted like cardboard did I think that I had anymore than an obligation to say what it tasted like. The point is that this phenomena seems to exist only in the computer gaming world. You never see anyone tell an engineer how to build a car, or tell a baker what ingredients he/she should add to the current kids cereal just because you think that tail fins are great or that a little more sugar is necessary. Why is it that in computer games people think that just because they were asked what they thought of it, they now own a piece of (or at least have intellectual rights) it? Piracy is inexcusable in any case and trying to justify it by claiming that you were treated badly as a tester is just as nonsensical as saying you burned down the theatre just because the movie you just saw really stunk (WWW comes to mind) Brian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest L Tankersley Posted October 18, 1999 Share Posted October 18, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>... just as nonsensical as saying you burned down the theatre just because the movie you just saw really stunk (WWW comes to mind)<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Actually, more so - the movie theater example makes a bit of sense from a cathartic, gaining closure point of view. Leland J. Tankersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hieronymus Posted November 4, 1999 Share Posted November 4, 1999 Some might say, much ado about nothing...I remember how Atomic used to frame itself before the Close Combat series became the monster that it is today. It is funny how the pressures of success, and the public hunger for more and more of the same can stifle the Innovative spirit that led to success in the first place. The software industry is quickly becoming just one more realm of rampant capitolism, offering little more than "widgets" to a consumer base already pre-programmed to want the latest "widget", as quickly as they can be rushed through production... I seem to remember certain individuals at Atomic expressing a desire to explore other creative avenues. The mention of a sci-fi strategy game, prior to the release of CC2 comes to mind. There was always something about Atomic that made them seem approachable to me...Perhaps my impressions were mistaken. What a sad chapter for those of us that value originality and vision, over marketing strategy and a clutching sense of corporate propriety. How sad that a few self righteous thieves should further deepen an already gaping, nearly paranoid sensitivity for intellectual property, that will eventually choke any creative collaboration between designers and players. We can only hope that the same pressures do not mount against the people at Battlefront. Who needs Hasbro!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomm Posted November 4, 1999 Share Posted November 4, 1999 Since this thread came up again: Can somebody please give me the URL of the (former cc3.gamestats.com) discussion forum ! I know there is a new forum for CC4, but I do not have the URL !! Thanks in advance, Thomm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Mixalot Posted November 4, 1999 Share Posted November 4, 1999 www.closecombat.net Sir Mix-A-Lot ------------------ Warhammer 40k Scenario Page http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/3805 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Webs Posted November 4, 1999 Share Posted November 4, 1999 It all started going downhill when they gave up on the Mac. ------------------ Laurie Nyveen a.k.a. Webs, member of the WarBirds training staff ___________________ Editor, Netsurfer Digest - http://www.netsurf.com/nsd/index.html 101 Sqn opus-in-progress - http://101.warbirds.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster Posted November 4, 1999 Share Posted November 4, 1999 FYI, closecombat.net is temporarily down. Close Combat discussions are happening at http://www.clubssi.com/closecombat/ until ccnet comes back online in about a week. Rooster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts