Group Think - What the hell were you thinking?

[Lt Belenko]

A while back in work I attended a seminar on "Group Think". Basically it was an analysis of the Challenger disaster. Somebody said "Let's go in the freezing weather" The entire group nodded in concurrence. A few thought the cold could affect the O-rings on the booster rockets, but to conform to the "Group Think" they didn't speak up.

Leap forward to the release of CM Shock Force. Basically it was a disaster. Did no one speak up? Were the beta-checkers all part of the inner circle of the inner circle of BFC fans? Were they all a bunch of automatons programmed to think alike?

Now I read 1.03 or 1.04 is getting to be playable. So everyone that 0.99 ALL judge it to be playable? I can't tell you if these later versions are playable or not, because 1.00 is still on my machine. If I do Add/Remove Programs on CMSF it reads rarely - like twice , dated the day of release.

I guess the old saying "It will be ready when it's ready" Means: "It will be released when it plays without crashing most computers." Not "It will be released when playable/enjoyable game".

Lessons learned:

Perhaps the beta-tester group should be expanded and or disbanded.

Perhaps the programmer should be expanded to a team.

The lesson I learned: Buy the next BFC product AFTER I play the demo and deem it ti be playable/enjoyable.

Back to Spider Solitaire until version 1.07 or 1.08 is released.

[Sixxkiller]

Or perhaps you should design a game that we will all like and then pop off about inner circles.

Or maybe you should apply a patch instead of talking like you know something. Things dont always work out as planned, but things have improved and you would know that if you use your brain instead of your mouth. I mean if you can find control panel and add remove programs you certainly can download and click the executable.........

[JohnO]

Here we go again. Same crap from the peanut gallery who knows best.

JohnO

[jeffsmith]

Originally posted by Lt Belenko:

The lesson I learned: Buy the next BFC product AFTER I play the demo and deem it to be playable/enjoyable.

Since when is this not Standard Operating Procedure for buying ANY game?

I've been accused of drinking the "Kool-aide"

and even I tried the Demo First

[John Catsack]

It's already been said that the game had to be released when it was because of contractual obligations. Besides, why bitch about buying a beta game (which we admittedly did) when we're going to get the full version for free through patches?

[Patrocles]

Originally posted by John Catsack:

It's already been said that the game had to be released when it was because of contractual obligations. Besides, why bitch about buying a beta game (which we admittedly did) when we're going to get the full version for free through patches?

Interesting. Does anyone know how BFC ended up having to sign such a contract (where Paradox tells them when CMSF will be released and not vice versa)? Oversight? Money shortage? something else?

[Martin Krejcirik]

It doesn't really matter what state it was released in. They could have worked for another half year on it behind closed doors, the same way they are working on it now. What would have changed for us ? Nothing, we are still going to end up with a great game

[aka_tom_w]

oops

[Ala11_Kal]

oops

[Huntarr]

Originally posted by Patrocles:

Interesting. Does anyone know how BFC ended up having to sign such a contract (where Paradox tells them when CMSF will be released and not vice versa)? Oversight? Money shortage? something else?

[ChrisND]

I think we have sunk to a new low on this forum; comparing the release to the challenger disaster.

[Chelt]

Originally posted by Lt Belenko:

A while back in work I attended a seminar on "Group Think". Basically it was an analysis of the Challenger disaster. Somebody said "Let's go in the freezing weather" The entire group nodded in concurrence. A few thought the cold could affect the O-rings on the booster rockets, but to conform to the "Group Think" they didn't speak up.

The presenter in your seminar was, at best, passing on a counterfactual folk-history version of the Challenger disaster.

The booster engineers DID speak up; managers discarded the warnings because they deemed the risks acceptable.

This from an paper (by one of the lead engineers, published in Engineering Ethics journal) about the incident:

"NASA and all the other interested parties, including the managers at Morton Thiokol, knew there were problems. So when the engineers gathered together their charts to make their recommendation the night before the Challenger launch, they went into the room to remind everyone in the chain of command what everyone already knew."

And the engineers recommendation? They believed that NASA should hold the launch. That isn't exactly "keeping your mouth shut in order to conform to groupthink."

http://www.onlineethics.org/CMS/profpractice/exempindex/RB-intro/RepMisrep.aspx

[KNac]

just when we saw the same ol moaning dissapeir from first page they strike back in strength.

seriously, we ALL know the problems with the game, reviews have been done, demo is there for these who want to try. so wnhy does not people quit posting non-productive stuff?

[thelmia]

Speculation is pointless. I wasn't in the Beta, so I don't know what happened. I suppose you can make up whatever narrative you want, but it's meaningless without fact.

I think everyone will admit that the game wasn't ready. It will be soon. Worrying about what happened months ago, especially when this is a small comuputer game from a indie developer rather than a national disaster, is a waste of time.

[Sequoia]

Originally posted by Normal Dude:

I think we have sunk to a new low on this forum; comparing the release to the challenger disaster.

I think the new low was in a other thread where game supporters are compared to the Taliban.

[Huntarr]

Originally posted by Cid250:

I'm a bit angry with some people in this community because they are now almost Taliban in practice... if you post your real opinion about the game, you will get insulted by many, just like the Taliban does.

The logic behind it, is... if you post bad realities about the game, they think that you are insulting them as person, (and you doesn't have any right to give your own opinion). That is very similar than if you post historical realities about Muhammad, you get stoned.

Someone may come along and accuse the Taliban of the Challenger disaster.

[thelmia]

Originally posted by Sequoia:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Normal Dude:

I think we have sunk to a new low on this forum; comparing the release to the challenger disaster.

I think the new low was in a other thread where game supporters are compared to the Taliban. </font>

[Hat Trick]

Originally posted by John Catsack:

(W)hy bitch about buying a beta game (which we admittedly did) when we're going to get the full version for free through patches?

Originally posted by Martin Krejcirik:

It doesn't really matter what state it was released in. They could have worked for another half year on it behind closed doors, the same way they are working on it now. What would have changed for us ? Nothing, we are still going to end up with a great game

I find this a bit baffling. I think the buyer of any software has a right to complain if they get a beta version of what is supposed to be a release. I'm willing to cut BFC some slack, but the argument that the problems will eventually get fixed doesn't justify getting a sub-par product up front.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Lt.Belenko,

I understand your disappointment. I guess you, like most of us, hoped for something a bit more finished. However I must profess bafflement as to you still 'playing' v1.00, which shouldn't even be a release version! Why not play 1.03? You are now judging a product without technically ever having played the official release. That's an unreasonable position to take.

As a beta tester I must admit I am somewhat unappreciative of your comments regarding the beta testers. In part because your speculation is off the mark, but also because we testers are under a NDA. So what happens in beta stays in beta. It's kinda hurtful to see such speculation when we have our hands tied in such discussions.

Suffice to say we are neither blind, dimwitted nor so far up BFC's arse we can't see daylight.

[JohnO]

Nicely put Elmar Bijlsma.

JohnO

[dan/california]

They signed a contract that they probably shouldn't have. I would bet a great deal of money they know that now. They may not have realized how much time they needed, they may have just HAD to have a cash infusion. Either way, if they get it all patched up and running right, and there is every indication that they will. I am OK with it.

Total War II was disaster on release too and they took MONTHS to get a first patch out. Battlefront has had two in six weeks and the third is close. That ain't bad

[PLM2]

Total War II wasnt a disaster like this. They didnt change trademark features out of the blue. Total War advanced to a new level of detail. Combat Mission went backwards, the only thing that went forward was 1:1 representation which I never desired at the expense of gameplay and AI. You cant tell me they'll be able to fix this. You simply cant create the commands that give your AI a brain. If you dont want them to expose themself somewhere, they have no way of knowing whereas in CM they at least followed a fixed point as squads even if it wasnt totally realisitc representation.

Ive always been a big CM fan, I tell people on shooter forums to check it out because its such a great representation of the realistic battlefield IMO.

I just dont like the gameplay or the lost features. I dont like that there's no water, you cant fix the AI to behave logically enough in this situations, and its a game designed to rely on that heavily. I'm not even sure I care that the hard copy of the game was sent to my old address, even though it cost me $70 because I dont see the possibility of having the intention to play the game again. Ive never payed $70 for a game, I thought CMSF would be worth it, i didnt not have unrealistic expectations. I expected an advanced level of CM. This is like a different series like CM only in the turn-based gameplay, commands, and delays. Its not what I wanted at all \\and me and many others are upset, quit hating.

Face it, this isnt the Total War forums. Not too many of us are 12 years old. Im really upset about this game. I wouldnt post if there wasnt blatant denial going on here.

I got a friend to play the original CMs, he seemed like the last person that would play that type of game. He was really looking forward to this too since its current and hes infantry, same opinion.

[ September 15, 2007, 03:14 PM: Message edited by: PLM2 ]

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Elmar Bijlsma:

Lt.Belenko,

I understand your disappointment. I guess you, like most of us, hoped for something a bit more finished. However I must profess bafflement as to you still 'playing' v1.00, which shouldn't even be a release version! Why not play 1.03? You are now judging a product without technically ever having played the official release. That's an unreasonable position to take.

As a beta tester I must admit I am somewhat unappreciative of your comments regarding the beta testers. In part because your speculation is off the mark, but also because we testers are under a NDA. So what happens in beta stays in beta. It's kinda hurtful to see such speculation when we have our hands tied in such discussions.

Suffice to say we are neither blind, dimwitted nor so far up BFC's arse we can't see daylight.

I agree with Elmar.

To Lt Belenko, I say this:

There were LOTS of beta testers, they were ALL under NDA, a real legal document to prevent disclosure of private issues in a private process in the development cycle of the game. The NDA is still in effect, and posting here with their hands tied may be about all they can do to respond to your comments. :eek:

[ September 15, 2007, 05:56 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[dan/california]

Total War II wasnt a disaster like this. They didnt change trademark features out of the blue. Total War advanced to a new level of detail.

I would have to completely disagree with that statement. It has/had a lot of the same issues and for many of the same reasons. trying to go to a 3d, coordinated, individual representation made pathfinding and unit coordination absolutely awful for at least two patches. Don't even get me started on the shield bug. Sieges were a bloody joke. :mad:

Those two lousy patches took months by the way.

3D one to one is just a tricky thing to do. I think Battlefront will get it straitened out eventually. I am enjoying it in the meantime, with occasional moments of frustration.

[MikeyD]

Hey, I hate NASCAR - I think its a boring sport. Maybe I'll go find a NASCAR chat group and NEVER STOP POSTING MY OPINIONS ON IT!