DaveDash Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Originally posted by Sirocco: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by DaveDash: Blaming the developers in all this is extreme naive, more than likely the blame rests at the publishers feet.How so, when the developers knew the terms of the contract when they signed it? </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewood Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 While I agree with facts stated, remember, BFC's mantra for most years was they were better than other developers specifically because they didn't get in bed with big publishers. I know there must have been cash flow reasons for doing it, but the decision at the time must have been, big publisher with cash infusion or scale back CMSF. Looking at it in hindsight, scaling back to match available resources was probably the way to go. One of first memories of Steve posting on these boards was the disdain he had for developers who sold out and pushed product out the door that was not ready due to pressure from publishers. Most of what I know of the game publishing business (not much) came from Steve's tirades (my choice of words). In the first two weeks of CMSF's release, that was what frustrated me the most. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hev Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 I just hope that what ever deal BFC made with paradox gave them back the abilty to "go it alone" for the next games! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thewood Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 CMSF seems to be following the Paradox model like HOI. I love HOI and HOI2, but it was the most painful game buying experience I remember. HOI was obviously released way, way, too early and took probably six months to become playable in any type of realistic way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Originally posted by DaveDash: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sirocco: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by DaveDash: Blaming the developers in all this is extreme naive, more than likely the blame rests at the publishers feet.How so, when the developers knew the terms of the contract when they signed it? </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 The following are Facts NOT in dispute: Did Paradox meet it's contract Obligations?..Yes Did BFC meet Their contract Obligation?..No Could Paradox have further extended the time to ensure a proper product was published... Yes Could BFC have extended the time to ensure a proper product was delivered to consumers?... No Do anyone BUT BFC and Paradox know the internal discussions that took place prior or after July release? No Does NDA allow the parties to speak? No. The Following IS subject to YOUR interpretation: Does Paradox seem Concerned about product quality? Is BFC Concerned about product quality? Is Paradox to Blame for a shoddy product release? Is BFC to Blame for a Shoddy product release? Are Both to Blame? Will Blame fix the apparent epidemic of unfinished products being published? What type of action...if any... Should consumers take? Do you think there is a relationship between small niche developers and large publishers and buggy games that does not exist in the large Game developers of "popular" games? [ December 02, 2007, 08:18 AM: Message edited by: MarkEzra ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Mark, aside from all the caveats, you're responsible for the things that are under your control. As far as your last point is concerned, if I'm understanding you correctly, that's something I thought about earlier. But we're probably talking about scale not a completely different relationship, IMHO. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Originally posted by Sirocco: Mark, aside from all the caveats, you're responsible for the things that are under your control. As far as your last point is concerned, if I'm understanding you correctly, that's something I thought about earlier. But we're probably talking about scale not a completely different relationship, IMHO. Responsibility for things under my control...like meeting a deadline...Yes...and said so. Things not under my control I try NOT to be responsible for A thought on "scale": There is an old saying in banking: "when you owe to bank $100 THOUSAND you're in trouble, when you owe the Bank $100 MILLION...the banks in trouble. I wonder if a developer of a very popular game franchise (Grand theft auto comes to mind) told it's publisher it wouldn't meet it's contract deadline line and in it's current state the game was barely playable, what the response would be. When the publisher stands to make a very large percentage of it's income from this SINGLE source you'd think they'd be pretty careful. Millions of pissed off fans or in the case of Niche development 1,000's...How can they be treated the same? Let me suggest something else. My understanding of marketing is the best time to introduce a toy or game is before Christmas (in the USA) the worst time to introduce damned near anything is July or August. But Publishers still need new products to release regularly. It's a revenue stream issue. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Originally posted by MarkEzra: Responsibility for things under my control...like meeting a deadline...Yes...and said so. Things not under my control I try NOT to be responsible forThe point isn't in meeting the deadline, it's putting yourself in a position where you have a deadline to begin with. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Caesar Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Sirocco, you try predicting how long software will take to develop sometime. Nobody gets it right. Microsoft with more resources than virtually any other company in the world can't get it right, nor can IBM. Take a look at all the big name game developers. How many of them are released on time - not many. Developers typically make an estimate based on experience and then add a percentage. It is easy enough to do it with smallish projects with fixed parameters but when you are faced with a more sizable project, limited resources and constant changes of the platform you are working on you are likely to get problems. The publisher and the developer need to work together closely with the publisher getting feedback on progress and mounting their campaign based on actual progress rather than initial estimates. This doesn't appear to happen. It seems that a time gets contracted in and that time is fixed in stone. This is the second beta game I have bought where paradox has been involved. In both cases the developers are small, niche and with a very good past record for support. I suspect that unless you are a large developer they simply dictate terms and you sink or swim. I was concerned when I heard that paradox was involved, unfortunately my concerns were well founded. Hopefully BFC will be able to patch this game into a more reasonable finished state soon enough that their credibility is not permanently damaged. IMO 1.04 is playable enough but is in reality still a late beta product. I don't think it is fatally flawed like some suggest. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Originally posted by Caesar: Sirocco, you try predicting how long software will take to develop sometime. Nobody gets it right.Again, that's the whole point. BFC entered into a contract in which they predicted how long development would take, having spent years pointing out how flawed that was, and in the process abandoned the it will be done when it's done ethos. You can argue until the cows come home that publishers should work to a better model, but that wasn't the contract they signed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Originally posted by Sirocco: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MarkEzra: Responsibility for things under my control...like meeting a deadline...Yes...and said so. Things not under my control I try NOT to be responsible forThe point isn't in meeting the deadline, it's putting yourself in a position where you have a deadline to begin with. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveDash Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Well said Mark. While BFC should not be let off the hook, I think the witch-hunt type posts by many people in this forum really goes to show the immaturity (and I mean the word scientifically, not as a personal attack) of the exposure of many here to the gaming industry. It's also somewhat counter intuitive to actually getting a product we are all reasonably happy with. No one knows what goes on behind closed doors, saying BFC should have done this and that and this is one thing, but I know at the end of the day I'd rather a CM:SF that was buggy and eventually fixed than not having one at all. Besides, I'd like to see one poster in this forum, single handidly code a game like CM:SF and do a better job without any investment from a publisher. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Originally posted by DaveDash: While BFC should not be let off the hook, I think the witch-hunt type posts by many people in this forum really goes to show the immaturity (and I mean the word scientifically, not as a personal attack) of the exposure of many here to the gaming industry.I think noting that signing up with a publisher with a pretty hard deadline would in all likelihood produce an unfinished product is a sign of understanding the games industry. YMMV. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acrashb Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Originally posted by Rick: No software is ever 100% bug free.and, no-one expected 100% bug-free. Have a look at the 'beyond patching' thread to refresh yourself as to why bugs aren't the only issue. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Sirocco: I'm curious...what does this stand for: YMMV? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
acrashb Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Originally posted by acrashb: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Rick: No software is ever 100% bug free.and, no-one expected 100% bug-free. Have a look at the 'beyond patching' thread to refresh yourself as to why bugs aren't the only issue, and why many of the concerns aren't "whining". </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sirocco Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Originally posted by MarkEzra: Sirocco: I'm curious...what does this stand for: YMMV? Your Mileage May Vary. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveDash Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Originally posted by MarkEzra: Sirocco: I'm curious...what does this stand for: YMMV? "Your milage may vary". In a forum enviroment it means that your opinion may not nessesarily be the same as the rest of ours. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted December 2, 2007 Share Posted December 2, 2007 Thanks...didn't have a clue and was playing "figure out the Licence tag" My mind does seem to run to the obscene in these cases... Like: You Mindless Mother--Vxxcker... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C'Rogers Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 told it's publisher it wouldn't meet it's contract deadline line and in it's current state the game was barely playable, what the response would be.Probably something along the lines of ... "Well then are contract states you owe us X dollars". or "Well, as per our contract, our percentage of sales will increase to X percent". Or some other kind of penalty written into the contract. That said I think in many cases developers also don't mind set release dates. If made for a big game they increase sales and it gives the company a known time when they can move programmers and such to other projects. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 Originally posted by DaveDash: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by MarkEzra: Sirocco: I'm curious...what does this stand for: YMMV? "Your milage may vary". In a forum enviroment it means that your opinion may not nessesarily be the same as the rest of ours. </font> 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'Card Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 You guys are spending an awful lot of time debating "WHY" the game was delivered in the state that it was, but as far as I'm concerned the "WHY" isn't relevant. - I understand why my next-door neighbor feels like he needs to be outside running his leaf-blower at 7:30AM on Saturday morning, but that doesn't make the damned thing any quieter. - I understand why my wife thinks the dining room walls need to be painted. I promise you that won't inspire in me a sudden love of painting. - I understand why my stupid cat feels compelled to kill birds, bring them in the house, and leave them hidden in unique and interesting places. That doesn't make them smell any sweeter until I find and dispose of them. I can understand why the game shipped the way it did, but I don't really care. I'm not a fan. I am a consumer. I am a consumer who paid money for a product months ago that is only now becoming playable. A product that advertised features that still don't work. A product from a company that claimed they were above that sort of thing. That bugs me, and understanding why doesn't make it bug me any less. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkEzra Posted December 3, 2007 Share Posted December 3, 2007 'Card: I certainly understand how you can feel that way (especially about the painting!!) Many people feel just like you (especially about dead birds in the laundry hamper...a personal favorite in my household). I have found that companies which diligently try to correct mistakes can't assume to satisfy their customers retroactively. Many times the damage done is DONE...sort of like your neighbors leaf blower in too early AM. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted December 3, 2007 Author Share Posted December 3, 2007 'Card, good points definitely. However, this is a business that without some support from the customers, might disappear. Not like making Windows where most of the world hating Microsoft isn't going to mean that next year we won't be able to find an OS to run our computer. As Dave Dash said, I'd rather have a CMSF that needed some serious help at first than none at all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.