Topic: Mr Ferrett (Read 17991 times)

moosefoof · « **on:** January 19, 2003, 01:29:29 pm »

I fail to comprehend how this game was ever released.
The bugs are so numerous, and annoying, that anyone who plays the game for 2 minutes ? ok sorry ? 5 minutes, will encounter a problem.
Given that you people made the thing I?m going ?out on a ledge here? and will assume that you also knew of these problems when you tested it.
So why did you release it? It?s not conceivable that you weren?t aware of all the fixes the game needs.

My conclusion is this.
You simply decided to release this tits up version regardless, fill your pockets, and worry about the problems and the customers later.

Cheers.

Semper · « **Reply #1 on:** January 19, 2003, 01:40:05 pm »

Welcome to the wonderful world of gaming...

BuckStrider · « **Reply #2 on:** January 19, 2003, 01:54:27 pm »

Welcome to the Wonderful World of PC Gaming...Even I wonder why i don't play console games.
Bugs are a part of it because of multiple platforms and components....That I understand
Bugs are part of ISP connections and optimizing them...That I understand

I just dont get why games that seem to be made on the PC platform have so many GAME problems

What I mean by GAME problems are the bugs that are NOT part of PC components and ISP connection issues

Vysander · « **Reply #3 on:** January 19, 2003, 02:00:25 pm »

because you can do so much more with a PC and therefore the games are far more complex (and i'm not talking graphical engine but the variety of user interfaces (mouse, keyboard, joysticks...) along with having 20+ people all in a persistant world trying to interact with a common source at the same time... etc). Also you have many different software configurations.. some linux, some windows 95, 98, me, XP, directx 8.1, 9, other... ati cards, voodoo cards, geforce cards, some with old drivers, some with new ones. Some machines with only 64 megs of ram, others with a gig...

I'm sure the game worked perfectly on their 'standard' machines which represent a broad range of computers, but i'm sure you can get hung up with most of our 'custom configs' a lot.

Game consoles work all the time because the way you program them is so exactly specified and there's no variance from xbox to xbox, but I really don't think you'll find a game like SFC on a game console due to it's complexity but rather straightforward rpgs, 1st person shooters, and sports games.

btw I hated playing simcity on my super nintendo

enjoyed it much more on a computer.

Corbomite · « **Reply #4 on:** January 19, 2003, 02:16:28 pm »

Ummm Who's "Mr. Ferrett"? Some pet of yours or something?

Aenigma · « **Reply #5 on:** January 19, 2003, 03:24:22 pm »

It could be just my imagination, but i think you actually mean mr. Ferrell. That is no pet as far as i know

I always think that it could have been worse (wow even worse? yes even worse lads

)

Aenigma

Tannhauser · « **Reply #6 on:** January 19, 2003, 03:26:20 pm »

Quote:

I always think that it could have been worse (wow even worse? yes even worse lads )

Yep, it could be Starfleet Command 3: Daggerfall, or Starfleet Command 3: Battlecruiser Millenium.

3dot14 · « **Reply #7 on:** January 19, 2003, 03:38:42 pm »

Or even "Starfleet Command 3: starfleet command 2"

moosefoof · « **Reply #10 on:** January 19, 2003, 04:41:11 pm »

no mistake.

ferrett was an intentional joke.

relating to the the furry ferret - a small mamalian creature i believe...

Subspace · « **Reply #11 on:** January 19, 2003, 04:43:10 pm »

I can understand some bugs ... but dam this game has bugs that are so bad you know they knew about them

Stil Great Game

& I hope the patch makes my Romulans better off

Jackal99 · « **Reply #12 on:** January 19, 2003, 06:15:08 pm »

bugs and BUGS are different...

bugs concerning pc-configs are "normal" (sadly) but those concerning simple game features are NOT !

2 examples:

mega bug 1: the ai ships in your fleet that self destruct after something got destroyed
ultima bug 2: after loading a save game in conquest mode the stardate is not advancing anymore

these two examples have NOTHING to do with pc configs! Everybody has these bugs regardless which pc system is used.
20 minutes of gaming in conquest mode are enough to observe bug 1 SEVERAL times.... so I simply don´t believe that this wasn´t discovered by a beta tester or taldren before the game has been released!!!!!!!!!!!

what makes me most angry is not the bug itself, but the fact that the game is out since end november (europe) and these two "specials" haven´t been fixed emmidiatly...
bug1 could be solved by simply denying the ai to use the self destruct feature... (no reason why it takes them 2 month to fix it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

what makes me dieing is what i read in the bug report forum (old forum).. that bug 1 is still NOT fixed in the beta patch.

S'Talon tr'Khev · « **Reply #13 on:** January 19, 2003, 06:37:44 pm »

I said it a while back, that beta testers should all be fired for allowing some of these glaring bugs to sneak through, but I also have the feeling that Taldren crew were aware of them and simply decided to fix them in a latter patch...sucks but I guess that's how gamming co.'s run their show now.

DoggieMon · « **Reply #16 on:** January 19, 2003, 10:28:10 pm »

One thing that ticks me off is that in various interviews Taldren stated that they had actually finished the game a few months prior to release and that they were actually fine tuning the game so the release would be flawless. That seems to me an obvious lie. I can find the magazine where they were quoted if you need proof. I agree that Taldren MUST have been aware a some very obvious shortcomings in their product and it was released anyway. The game was relased in early November in the U.S. It seems to me that 2-3 extra weeks of development could have done wonders for this title and an early december ship date could still made the game available during the holiday shopping season. Interplay pushed the release of SFC2. I can understabd Taldren may have had no option but to swallow that. Now interplay is broke. Maybe Activision pushed the release with the knowledge of the current bugs. I can alo see how Tandren might have just to put up with it. A strong public comment from Taldren and Activision might just decide they have no further use for them in the future. As for patching, Taldren has stated that given the bureaucratic process of going through their publishers QA (I wonder if that's an actual joke) they prefer to fix as many bugs as possile and release a big patch fixing as many things as possible instead of releasing smaller patches and having to through the process for each patch. And the game has plenty to fix so there you go. They did try to relase the public beta patch to appease the public and get insight from their customers, so I think they deserve credit for that evebn if Activision pulled the plug later. But you know, there is justice after all. Activision's stocks are already tumbling in Wall Street after they announced that the next economic report won't fulfill expectations. Keep releasing buggy games Activision and we know where you will end up, bought by a French company and then to read Chapter 11primer. Taldren will find another publisher and sell SFC4: The Buggy Frontier. The people will vote with their wallets and the managers will blame them as "not being ready" or "being saturated."

And BTW, I have bought and enjoyed ALL the SFC titles. Despite their bugs the games are good enough to have a cult following. Not many puclishers achieve that. But I might just wait and see when they release the inevitable expansion pack. Something Activision might actually do to help the franchise is h ave all the bugs fixed by Taldren and then publish SFC3: Gold Edition (I think they did that ffor SFC1) with extra campaigns. That seems to be working for some other games, Tribes 2 come to mind.

just my 2 cents

Doug

Hale · « **Reply #18 on:** January 19, 2003, 10:59:40 pm »

Its all true though.

If Taldren is concerned about people saying their games are buggy, maybe they should put more (some?) effort into making them not buggy in the first place.

This point can be (and has been argued), but I believe Taldren's products are of below average quality. Not even close to the industry standard of "buggyness". SFCII:OP and SFCIII are virtually unplayable IMO.

If they'd like me to stop bitching, please contact me about refunding my $14.95 I overpaid for SFCII:OP in the bargin bin.

Bossman · « **Reply #20 on:** January 19, 2003, 11:27:22 pm »

Kai Lee speaks the truth, the poor chap got banned before like this.

EE · « **Reply #22 on:** January 20, 2003, 01:16:51 am »

I have had only 3 exception errors ( with the code showing after it failed to do something ).

Every other problem I have had was hardware related, a vast majority of the 'bugs' I have come across I fixed with new drivers or unchecking a option in my video drivers that was causing a problem.

Except for the cloak bug and the repair the cloak bug, this game has been the best release to date by Taldren, at least for me. It far more playable then anything I had previous.

If you would update to the DirectX 9, that would fix a ton of problem, I know it has for me, I saw major improvments. I updated my drivers again and again, a majority of the problems went away. In fact, I can now play the game with full graphics and it doesnt chug along like a beached whale.

I think that a majority of the 'bugs' are with customers config's. I wont say all but a majority. This game has a ton of potential with this patch, I cant wait **HINT HINT**

Jackal99 · « **Reply #23 on:** January 20, 2003, 03:43:39 am »

to 3dot14

the stadate-stop bug only happens in single player conquest. After loading a saved conquest game the stardate is "stuck".

The "exploding ship bug" can be observed best in conquest or d3.

Jackal99 · « **Reply #24 on:** January 20, 2003, 03:52:28 am »

oh, to EE

these 2 bugs i used as example ARE NOT depending on pc configs... be serious

Btw, as far as i remember you are a beta tester for the patch, right? so the best thing you could tell me is that these 2 ANNOYING bugs are deffinetly getting fixed in the final patch.

Jackal99 · « **Reply #26 on:** January 20, 2003, 04:22:46 am »

agreed, the ai is far to easy..

but this can be handled via mod.

1. changing the crew for the ai ships in the "defaultloadout" file all to legendary
2. refitting their ships with better equiptment
3. increasing the "startingaivalue" in the ai.gf file
4. producing more ships for the ai

and a few other changes makes the ai a lot more challenging in conquest.

and no, not these modification are responsible for the 2 bugs i mentioned.. you can read many, many posts/replies in the old forum where people are reporting these 2 as well..

Btw, as far as i remember you are a beta tester for the patch, right? so the best thing you could tell me is that these 2 ANNOYING bugs are deffinetly getting fixed in the final patch.
It would be very nice if you could simply test this. Just a matter of a minute. start a conquest game, wait one turn, then save. Quit to main menue and load it again. if the stardate is advancing with your patch/beta patch game then i´m very pleased so far.

EE · « **Reply #27 on:** January 20, 2003, 04:29:52 am »

I am not a beta tester for the patch, I just play one on line

I have heard that tose bugs are fixed in the patch.

As for giving the AI a legendary crew, still.. easy to defeat. The AI offers no challange in the way of intelligence. Thats why I dont bother with AI. In fact, when I play, the time I dread is working up a crew to at least level 4 so I can go out and PvP. I have never found the AI fun to fight in any game and thats why I only play multiplayer games.

Jackal99 · « **Reply #28 on:** January 20, 2003, 05:14:29 am »

from EE "I have heard that tose bugs are fixed in the patch."

well, that gives me some hope..

concerning the ai challenge.
i´m playing fps and other strategie games / simulations online, but star trek is something special. I ever wanted to fight the great fleet battles you saw in the movies from DS9 and in first contact against the borg... but sadly it is not possible in this game (no complain). I totally agree with you saying that the ai never gives you the experience of a good battle, but neither do humans using ALT-F4, tractoring you into a planet/asteroid and pushing you over the sector zone, at least the ai is dieing honestly when defeated

he, but seriously, i used to play d3 online and i can handle these "human mulfunctions" (guess 7of9 would say that now) but it doesn´t satisfy me as well. Therefore I try to mod my game to the point where the ai "will be" a real (or at lest a good) challenge.
Regarding the great fleet battles, i hope that taldren will increase the number of ships possible in battle, or at least makes it possible to mod.

EE · « **Reply #29 on:** January 20, 2003, 11:10:01 am »

If you want good battles, dont play on Activision B or C. Go for GFL:Public, the new Asim ( if its up ) or paravis redux ( run by the same guys as asim ). Those servers have some great players, honorable players and they give great battle

Oh, almost forgot to add in Triangle as well.

SLoweCSL · « **Reply #31 on:** January 20, 2003, 05:57:07 pm »

If any of you have access to the PC magazine "CPU" they have a good article on page 14. It lays out the diffrences between the X-Box and a PC regarding the hardware necessary to display the same game. You'll find it interesting.

matyoung · « **Reply #32 on:** January 20, 2003, 07:10:41 pm »

Yes it is wrong but we are not talking about sony here we,re talking about taldren a very small company and as software companys go they live on a knife edge for instance here in the u.k the mighty rage who made some brill games (anyone played hostile waters very cool) in their time has just been dismantled and the guys are splitting up to go work for other software firms which is very sad they made classic games (mags said hostile waters was one of the next gen games for the millenium and it got reviews of 90% and over but it just not sell well enough unlike that piece of crap the sims )...

Son of Technobabble · « **Reply #33 on:** January 20, 2003, 07:20:28 pm »

Ah, the omnipresent bug complaints... Now, do you really think that posting how unplayable this game is on the devs' forum will encourage them to speed up the release of the patch? Please...

Possibly, Taldren games are over the average in buginess, but i fail to see the point in whining about the same problems over and over again. If you continue to annoy (no offense intended) the devs, then you will simply be ignored.
If you happen to run into a bug, report it, and let them fix it. They will (or at least they did with SFC2). If they don't, then don't buy their next game.

I don't think it's ok that a late beta is sold like a finished product, but the fact is, it has been done. So what. Life isn't fair. After all, if they got your money and you are disappointed by the quality of the product, all you can do is... not to buy the expansion (and come here to complain).
They could seat back and enjoy, because they know that there is a trek fan legion that will buy whatever they throw at them. Instead of that, they read these boards and (supposedly) try to fix the game.

My point after all this crap is that whining is a waste of your time (Hmm... I'm replying so i guess it's a waste of mine too

) and it doesn't really produce anything valuable. This is a proven fact.

BTW I am NOT a fan of Taldren, I just realized that liking SFC3 is much better than hating it.
And I have run into several bugs in both SFC2 and SFC3...

Belchfire · « **Reply #34 on:** January 20, 2003, 09:31:23 pm »

How did this game get released? GREED

The executives at Activision consulted with their bean counters.

Conclusion: Nemesis is being released to theatres at the end of 2002, we want the game "out the door" by then.

Reasoning: Shove a theatre admission in the box, purport a patch to fix all the troubles(100+ at last count) and we
can take the money and run. Hopefully our client base will just piss and moan on the forum sites until we can get
the final version working. This should placate them for the time being.

Result: Star Trek genre gamers feel taken advantage of and generally distrustful of the publisher and designer.

Future: Reduced sales on upcoming releases due to customer loyalty being compromised.

Activision executives fire bean counters to re-coup the losses.

Belch

moosefoof · « **Reply #35 on:** January 21, 2003, 10:08:34 am »

I made this post because I was annoyed at the quality of the game at its release.

I'm not trying to speed up the release of the patch, far from it. I'm saying the game should not have been so flawed.

I'm positive the patch would have been out by now if Taldren didn?t have so many problems to fix in the first place.

As far as the small company issue goes...well...its tough [censored] basically. If Taldren wants to be a big player then they will have to just bring up their game (what a pun!

).
Sorry guys, this is the big league now.

Harold Nez · « **Reply #36 on:** January 21, 2003, 02:43:37 pm »

You know, there is a rising tide of hostility in politics and society in general. It's a damn shame some people think the only way to get things done or solve problems is to yell louder than the next guy. I understand the frustration. I believe you ought to be able to state your opinion. But, come on, purely negative posts amount to nothing. These problems/bugs, you have any idea how to solve them? Get that negative stuff out of the way and make positive suggestions that we all can think about and respond to in turn. Peace.

Whiplash · « **Reply #38 on:** January 21, 2003, 08:11:03 pm »

I disagree completely that you can do so much more with a PC.

PC games are so popular because of one reason only. PCs are the largest market-share by far. PCs are kept the largest market partly because there are so many games for it.

PCs became so popular in the first place because of historical reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with the capabilities of modern machines. IBM chose Bill Gates' DOS system. The IBM PC was a great success and it snowballed from there.

There are operating systems that are far more stable and easy to use, and just as capable (or moreso).

Its not that I have anything against PCs. I have 4 of them, and 1 Mac. Just don't make the mistake of thinking "most popular" is equivalent to "best". Its not.

W.

Vysander · « **Reply #39 on:** January 21, 2003, 08:16:26 pm »

Look at games both sold and produced for consoles vs pc's... far more for consoles. I'll see if I can find the numbers around here.

http://www.geek.com/newsbeta2/geeknews/2002Sep/bga20020925016489.htm

Especially in sports games, PC lines are being dumped for console only (I think it was EA which dropped some sports lines.. i'll see if I can dig out that PC gamer article)

Dash Jones · « **Reply #40 on:** January 21, 2003, 09:20:03 pm »

A little off topic...but I think IBM PC's were rated the best in the business in the yearly end review by a PC Magazine...I think it was PC world? Anyone else see it. It actually was rating tech service I think, and the best computer lines for the tech service, at which IBM rated the highest. It also rated the highest for working out of the box as well. Of course, they were only #2 or #3. The top computer...get this...Macintosh.

I think Dell was #4 or #5. They didn't have a great working out of the box for their computers, but they had an excellent for their technical service.

IBM is also advertising a computer on TV now for $549.

I don't know how they are doing now though, or how good they really are (That's only one magazine's opinion afterall). Interesting that Macintosh is rated so high.

There are a lot more Console games released then PC games, but most consoles don't come with Solitaire.

I don't play...course not....don't ever touch Minesweeper either...nope never, not me, don't know who it was that got 8 seconds on Basic, 54 seconds on Medium...and

565 seconds on Expert. Whoever that was really stunk at Expert mode, not me, never, nope, couldn't be, I deny it, I cannot be guilty until proven so...

What was I talking about again???

Oh yeah, I remember. As for SFC and bugs...Patch...next week? Did I hear right? can't wait. Love PC's right now too, mine is more versatile than the consoles I play on. Actually, my cousins play on consoles, I stick pretty much to the computer. They just beat FF X. Nice pretty graphics, I watched it some...still like my PC best, and it's games...bugs and all.

Whiplash · « **Reply #41 on:** January 21, 2003, 09:38:47 pm »

Don't confuse quality of the software with how good the tech support is, or even the value for the dollar. Certainly PCs will win those categories. My Mac requires far less maintenance than my PCs, so Apple's tech support, while (I hear is) very good, is not as important. You basically can't get on without it if you own a PC, unless you already know as much as they do, of course. I've never even had to call Apple tech support. My Mac crashes so I have to reboot it 2-3 times a year. It stays up and running all the rest of the time. Its a very capable OS, easily as sophisticated as Windows XP.

I'll concede that consoles are beating everything at games. I wasn't even thinking about those guys. My daughter certainly spends more time on her PS2 than she does playing computer games. If we were just comparing PCs and consoles, then yeah, PCs are way more capable. I'll agree with that completely.

W.

Vysander · « **Reply #42 on:** January 21, 2003, 09:44:49 pm »

well with XP I don't crash unless i'm playing a game that locks up (*cough* sfc3)... if I take it easy on the games I have gone a couple months without rebooting or crashing the OS to the ground

Edit: and what were you comparing if not consoles? Rereading the posts above.. that's what we were talking about I thought

moosefoof · « **Reply #43 on:** January 19, 2003, 01:29:29 pm »

I fail to comprehend how this game was ever released.
The bugs are so numerous, and annoying, that anyone who plays the game for 2 minutes ? ok sorry ? 5 minutes, will encounter a problem.
Given that you people made the thing I?m going ?out on a ledge here? and will assume that you also knew of these problems when you tested it.
So why did you release it? It?s not conceivable that you weren?t aware of all the fixes the game needs.

My conclusion is this.
You simply decided to release this tits up version regardless, fill your pockets, and worry about the problems and the customers later.

Cheers.

Semper · « **Reply #44 on:** January 19, 2003, 01:40:05 pm »

Welcome to the wonderful world of gaming...

BuckStrider · « **Reply #45 on:** January 19, 2003, 01:54:27 pm »

Welcome to the Wonderful World of PC Gaming...Even I wonder why i don't play console games.
Bugs are a part of it because of multiple platforms and components....That I understand
Bugs are part of ISP connections and optimizing them...That I understand

I just dont get why games that seem to be made on the PC platform have so many GAME problems

What I mean by GAME problems are the bugs that are NOT part of PC components and ISP connection issues

Vysander · « **Reply #46 on:** January 19, 2003, 02:00:25 pm »

because you can do so much more with a PC and therefore the games are far more complex (and i'm not talking graphical engine but the variety of user interfaces (mouse, keyboard, joysticks...) along with having 20+ people all in a persistant world trying to interact with a common source at the same time... etc). Also you have many different software configurations.. some linux, some windows 95, 98, me, XP, directx 8.1, 9, other... ati cards, voodoo cards, geforce cards, some with old drivers, some with new ones. Some machines with only 64 megs of ram, others with a gig...

I'm sure the game worked perfectly on their 'standard' machines which represent a broad range of computers, but i'm sure you can get hung up with most of our 'custom configs' a lot.

Game consoles work all the time because the way you program them is so exactly specified and there's no variance from xbox to xbox, but I really don't think you'll find a game like SFC on a game console due to it's complexity but rather straightforward rpgs, 1st person shooters, and sports games.

btw I hated playing simcity on my super nintendo

enjoyed it much more on a computer.

Corbomite · « **Reply #47 on:** January 19, 2003, 02:16:28 pm »

Ummm Who's "Mr. Ferrett"? Some pet of yours or something?

Aenigma · « **Reply #48 on:** January 19, 2003, 03:24:22 pm »

It could be just my imagination, but i think you actually mean mr. Ferrell. That is no pet as far as i know

I always think that it could have been worse (wow even worse? yes even worse lads

)

Aenigma

3dot14 · « **Reply #50 on:** January 19, 2003, 03:38:42 pm »

Or even "Starfleet Command 3: starfleet command 2"

moosefoof · « **Reply #53 on:** January 19, 2003, 04:41:11 pm »

no mistake.

ferrett was an intentional joke.

relating to the the furry ferret - a small mamalian creature i believe...

Subspace · « **Reply #54 on:** January 19, 2003, 04:43:10 pm »

I can understand some bugs ... but dam this game has bugs that are so bad you know they knew about them

Stil Great Game

& I hope the patch makes my Romulans better off

Jackal99 · « **Reply #55 on:** January 19, 2003, 06:15:08 pm »

bugs and BUGS are different...

bugs concerning pc-configs are "normal" (sadly) but those concerning simple game features are NOT !

2 examples:

mega bug 1: the ai ships in your fleet that self destruct after something got destroyed
ultima bug 2: after loading a save game in conquest mode the stardate is not advancing anymore

these two examples have NOTHING to do with pc configs! Everybody has these bugs regardless which pc system is used.
20 minutes of gaming in conquest mode are enough to observe bug 1 SEVERAL times.... so I simply don´t believe that this wasn´t discovered by a beta tester or taldren before the game has been released!!!!!!!!!!!

what makes me most angry is not the bug itself, but the fact that the game is out since end november (europe) and these two "specials" haven´t been fixed emmidiatly...
bug1 could be solved by simply denying the ai to use the self destruct feature... (no reason why it takes them 2 month to fix it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

what makes me dieing is what i read in the bug report forum (old forum).. that bug 1 is still NOT fixed in the beta patch.

S'Talon tr'Khev · « **Reply #56 on:** January 19, 2003, 06:37:44 pm »

I said it a while back, that beta testers should all be fired for allowing some of these glaring bugs to sneak through, but I also have the feeling that Taldren crew were aware of them and simply decided to fix them in a latter patch...sucks but I guess that's how gamming co.'s run their show now.

DoggieMon · « **Reply #59 on:** January 19, 2003, 10:28:10 pm »

One thing that ticks me off is that in various interviews Taldren stated that they had actually finished the game a few months prior to release and that they were actually fine tuning the game so the release would be flawless. That seems to me an obvious lie. I can find the magazine where they were quoted if you need proof. I agree that Taldren MUST have been aware a some very obvious shortcomings in their product and it was released anyway. The game was relased in early November in the U.S. It seems to me that 2-3 extra weeks of development could have done wonders for this title and an early december ship date could still made the game available during the holiday shopping season. Interplay pushed the release of SFC2. I can understabd Taldren may have had no option but to swallow that. Now interplay is broke. Maybe Activision pushed the release with the knowledge of the current bugs. I can alo see how Tandren might have just to put up with it. A strong public comment from Taldren and Activision might just decide they have no further use for them in the future. As for patching, Taldren has stated that given the bureaucratic process of going through their publishers QA (I wonder if that's an actual joke) they prefer to fix as many bugs as possile and release a big patch fixing as many things as possible instead of releasing smaller patches and having to through the process for each patch. And the game has plenty to fix so there you go. They did try to relase the public beta patch to appease the public and get insight from their customers, so I think they deserve credit for that evebn if Activision pulled the plug later. But you know, there is justice after all. Activision's stocks are already tumbling in Wall Street after they announced that the next economic report won't fulfill expectations. Keep releasing buggy games Activision and we know where you will end up, bought by a French company and then to read Chapter 11primer. Taldren will find another publisher and sell SFC4: The Buggy Frontier. The people will vote with their wallets and the managers will blame them as "not being ready" or "being saturated."

And BTW, I have bought and enjoyed ALL the SFC titles. Despite their bugs the games are good enough to have a cult following. Not many puclishers achieve that. But I might just wait and see when they release the inevitable expansion pack. Something Activision might actually do to help the franchise is h ave all the bugs fixed by Taldren and then publish SFC3: Gold Edition (I think they did that ffor SFC1) with extra campaigns. That seems to be working for some other games, Tribes 2 come to mind.

just my 2 cents

Doug

Hale · « **Reply #61 on:** January 19, 2003, 10:59:40 pm »

Its all true though.

If Taldren is concerned about people saying their games are buggy, maybe they should put more (some?) effort into making them not buggy in the first place.

This point can be (and has been argued), but I believe Taldren's products are of below average quality. Not even close to the industry standard of "buggyness". SFCII:OP and SFCIII are virtually unplayable IMO.

If they'd like me to stop bitching, please contact me about refunding my $14.95 I overpaid for SFCII:OP in the bargin bin.

Bossman · « **Reply #63 on:** January 19, 2003, 11:27:22 pm »

Kai Lee speaks the truth, the poor chap got banned before like this.

EE · « **Reply #65 on:** January 20, 2003, 01:16:51 am »

I have had only 3 exception errors ( with the code showing after it failed to do something ).

Every other problem I have had was hardware related, a vast majority of the 'bugs' I have come across I fixed with new drivers or unchecking a option in my video drivers that was causing a problem.

Except for the cloak bug and the repair the cloak bug, this game has been the best release to date by Taldren, at least for me. It far more playable then anything I had previous.

If you would update to the DirectX 9, that would fix a ton of problem, I know it has for me, I saw major improvments. I updated my drivers again and again, a majority of the problems went away. In fact, I can now play the game with full graphics and it doesnt chug along like a beached whale.

I think that a majority of the 'bugs' are with customers config's. I wont say all but a majority. This game has a ton of potential with this patch, I cant wait **HINT HINT**

Jackal99 · « **Reply #66 on:** January 20, 2003, 03:43:39 am »

to 3dot14

the stadate-stop bug only happens in single player conquest. After loading a saved conquest game the stardate is "stuck".

The "exploding ship bug" can be observed best in conquest or d3.

Jackal99 · « **Reply #67 on:** January 20, 2003, 03:52:28 am »

oh, to EE

these 2 bugs i used as example ARE NOT depending on pc configs... be serious

Btw, as far as i remember you are a beta tester for the patch, right? so the best thing you could tell me is that these 2 ANNOYING bugs are deffinetly getting fixed in the final patch.

Jackal99 · « **Reply #69 on:** January 20, 2003, 04:22:46 am »

agreed, the ai is far to easy..

but this can be handled via mod.

1. changing the crew for the ai ships in the "defaultloadout" file all to legendary
2. refitting their ships with better equiptment
3. increasing the "startingaivalue" in the ai.gf file
4. producing more ships for the ai

and a few other changes makes the ai a lot more challenging in conquest.

and no, not these modification are responsible for the 2 bugs i mentioned.. you can read many, many posts/replies in the old forum where people are reporting these 2 as well..

Btw, as far as i remember you are a beta tester for the patch, right? so the best thing you could tell me is that these 2 ANNOYING bugs are deffinetly getting fixed in the final patch.
It would be very nice if you could simply test this. Just a matter of a minute. start a conquest game, wait one turn, then save. Quit to main menue and load it again. if the stardate is advancing with your patch/beta patch game then i´m very pleased so far.

EE · « **Reply #70 on:** January 20, 2003, 04:29:52 am »

I am not a beta tester for the patch, I just play one on line

I have heard that tose bugs are fixed in the patch.

As for giving the AI a legendary crew, still.. easy to defeat. The AI offers no challange in the way of intelligence. Thats why I dont bother with AI. In fact, when I play, the time I dread is working up a crew to at least level 4 so I can go out and PvP. I have never found the AI fun to fight in any game and thats why I only play multiplayer games.

Jackal99 · « **Reply #71 on:** January 20, 2003, 05:14:29 am »

from EE "I have heard that tose bugs are fixed in the patch."

well, that gives me some hope..

concerning the ai challenge.
i´m playing fps and other strategie games / simulations online, but star trek is something special. I ever wanted to fight the great fleet battles you saw in the movies from DS9 and in first contact against the borg... but sadly it is not possible in this game (no complain). I totally agree with you saying that the ai never gives you the experience of a good battle, but neither do humans using ALT-F4, tractoring you into a planet/asteroid and pushing you over the sector zone, at least the ai is dieing honestly when defeated

he, but seriously, i used to play d3 online and i can handle these "human mulfunctions" (guess 7of9 would say that now) but it doesn´t satisfy me as well. Therefore I try to mod my game to the point where the ai "will be" a real (or at lest a good) challenge.
Regarding the great fleet battles, i hope that taldren will increase the number of ships possible in battle, or at least makes it possible to mod.

EE · « **Reply #72 on:** January 20, 2003, 11:10:01 am »

If you want good battles, dont play on Activision B or C. Go for GFL:Public, the new Asim ( if its up ) or paravis redux ( run by the same guys as asim ). Those servers have some great players, honorable players and they give great battle

Oh, almost forgot to add in Triangle as well.

SLoweCSL · « **Reply #74 on:** January 20, 2003, 05:57:07 pm »

If any of you have access to the PC magazine "CPU" they have a good article on page 14. It lays out the diffrences between the X-Box and a PC regarding the hardware necessary to display the same game. You'll find it interesting.

matyoung · « **Reply #75 on:** January 20, 2003, 07:10:41 pm »

Yes it is wrong but we are not talking about sony here we,re talking about taldren a very small company and as software companys go they live on a knife edge for instance here in the u.k the mighty rage who made some brill games (anyone played hostile waters very cool) in their time has just been dismantled and the guys are splitting up to go work for other software firms which is very sad they made classic games (mags said hostile waters was one of the next gen games for the millenium and it got reviews of 90% and over but it just not sell well enough unlike that piece of crap the sims )...

Son of Technobabble · « **Reply #76 on:** January 20, 2003, 07:20:28 pm »

Ah, the omnipresent bug complaints... Now, do you really think that posting how unplayable this game is on the devs' forum will encourage them to speed up the release of the patch? Please...

Possibly, Taldren games are over the average in buginess, but i fail to see the point in whining about the same problems over and over again. If you continue to annoy (no offense intended) the devs, then you will simply be ignored.
If you happen to run into a bug, report it, and let them fix it. They will (or at least they did with SFC2). If they don't, then don't buy their next game.

I don't think it's ok that a late beta is sold like a finished product, but the fact is, it has been done. So what. Life isn't fair. After all, if they got your money and you are disappointed by the quality of the product, all you can do is... not to buy the expansion (and come here to complain).
They could seat back and enjoy, because they know that there is a trek fan legion that will buy whatever they throw at them. Instead of that, they read these boards and (supposedly) try to fix the game.

My point after all this crap is that whining is a waste of your time (Hmm... I'm replying so i guess it's a waste of mine too

) and it doesn't really produce anything valuable. This is a proven fact.

BTW I am NOT a fan of Taldren, I just realized that liking SFC3 is much better than hating it.
And I have run into several bugs in both SFC2 and SFC3...

Belchfire · « **Reply #77 on:** January 20, 2003, 09:31:23 pm »

How did this game get released? GREED

The executives at Activision consulted with their bean counters.

Conclusion: Nemesis is being released to theatres at the end of 2002, we want the game "out the door" by then.

Reasoning: Shove a theatre admission in the box, purport a patch to fix all the troubles(100+ at last count) and we
can take the money and run. Hopefully our client base will just piss and moan on the forum sites until we can get
the final version working. This should placate them for the time being.

Result: Star Trek genre gamers feel taken advantage of and generally distrustful of the publisher and designer.

Future: Reduced sales on upcoming releases due to customer loyalty being compromised.

Activision executives fire bean counters to re-coup the losses.

Belch

moosefoof · « **Reply #78 on:** January 21, 2003, 10:08:34 am »

I made this post because I was annoyed at the quality of the game at its release.

I'm not trying to speed up the release of the patch, far from it. I'm saying the game should not have been so flawed.

I'm positive the patch would have been out by now if Taldren didn?t have so many problems to fix in the first place.

As far as the small company issue goes...well...its tough [censored] basically. If Taldren wants to be a big player then they will have to just bring up their game (what a pun!

).
Sorry guys, this is the big league now.

Harold Nez · « **Reply #79 on:** January 21, 2003, 02:43:37 pm »

You know, there is a rising tide of hostility in politics and society in general. It's a damn shame some people think the only way to get things done or solve problems is to yell louder than the next guy. I understand the frustration. I believe you ought to be able to state your opinion. But, come on, purely negative posts amount to nothing. These problems/bugs, you have any idea how to solve them? Get that negative stuff out of the way and make positive suggestions that we all can think about and respond to in turn. Peace.

Whiplash · « **Reply #81 on:** January 21, 2003, 08:11:03 pm »

I disagree completely that you can do so much more with a PC.

PC games are so popular because of one reason only. PCs are the largest market-share by far. PCs are kept the largest market partly because there are so many games for it.

PCs became so popular in the first place because of historical reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with the capabilities of modern machines. IBM chose Bill Gates' DOS system. The IBM PC was a great success and it snowballed from there.

There are operating systems that are far more stable and easy to use, and just as capable (or moreso).

Its not that I have anything against PCs. I have 4 of them, and 1 Mac. Just don't make the mistake of thinking "most popular" is equivalent to "best". Its not.

W.

Vysander · « **Reply #82 on:** January 21, 2003, 08:16:26 pm »

Look at games both sold and produced for consoles vs pc's... far more for consoles. I'll see if I can find the numbers around here.

http://www.geek.com/newsbeta2/geeknews/2002Sep/bga20020925016489.htm

Especially in sports games, PC lines are being dumped for console only (I think it was EA which dropped some sports lines.. i'll see if I can dig out that PC gamer article)

Dash Jones · « **Reply #83 on:** January 21, 2003, 09:20:03 pm »

A little off topic...but I think IBM PC's were rated the best in the business in the yearly end review by a PC Magazine...I think it was PC world? Anyone else see it. It actually was rating tech service I think, and the best computer lines for the tech service, at which IBM rated the highest. It also rated the highest for working out of the box as well. Of course, they were only #2 or #3. The top computer...get this...Macintosh.

I think Dell was #4 or #5. They didn't have a great working out of the box for their computers, but they had an excellent for their technical service.

IBM is also advertising a computer on TV now for $549.

I don't know how they are doing now though, or how good they really are (That's only one magazine's opinion afterall). Interesting that Macintosh is rated so high.

There are a lot more Console games released then PC games, but most consoles don't come with Solitaire.

I don't play...course not....don't ever touch Minesweeper either...nope never, not me, don't know who it was that got 8 seconds on Basic, 54 seconds on Medium...and

565 seconds on Expert. Whoever that was really stunk at Expert mode, not me, never, nope, couldn't be, I deny it, I cannot be guilty until proven so...

What was I talking about again???

Oh yeah, I remember. As for SFC and bugs...Patch...next week? Did I hear right? can't wait. Love PC's right now too, mine is more versatile than the consoles I play on. Actually, my cousins play on consoles, I stick pretty much to the computer. They just beat FF X. Nice pretty graphics, I watched it some...still like my PC best, and it's games...bugs and all.

Whiplash · « **Reply #84 on:** January 21, 2003, 09:38:47 pm »

Don't confuse quality of the software with how good the tech support is, or even the value for the dollar. Certainly PCs will win those categories. My Mac requires far less maintenance than my PCs, so Apple's tech support, while (I hear is) very good, is not as important. You basically can't get on without it if you own a PC, unless you already know as much as they do, of course. I've never even had to call Apple tech support. My Mac crashes so I have to reboot it 2-3 times a year. It stays up and running all the rest of the time. Its a very capable OS, easily as sophisticated as Windows XP.

I'll concede that consoles are beating everything at games. I wasn't even thinking about those guys. My daughter certainly spends more time on her PS2 than she does playing computer games. If we were just comparing PCs and consoles, then yeah, PCs are way more capable. I'll agree with that completely.

W.

Vysander · « **Reply #85 on:** January 21, 2003, 09:44:49 pm »

well with XP I don't crash unless i'm playing a game that locks up (*cough* sfc3)... if I take it easy on the games I have gone a couple months without rebooting or crashing the OS to the ground

Edit: and what were you comparing if not consoles? Rereading the posts above.. that's what we were talking about I thought

News:

Topic: Mr Ferrett (Read 17991 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

moosefoof

Semper

BuckStrider

Vysander

Corbomite

Aenigma

Tannhauser

3dot14

troycheek

Hale

moosefoof

Subspace

Jackal99

S'Talon tr'Khev

BuckStrider

mathcubeguy

DoggieMon

**DONOTDELETE**

Hale

mathcubeguy

Bossman

3dot14

EE

Jackal99

Jackal99

EE

Jackal99

EE

Jackal99

EE

3dot14

SLoweCSL

matyoung

Son of Technobabble

Belchfire

moosefoof

Harold Nez

**DONOTDELETE**

Whiplash

Vysander

Dash Jones

Whiplash

Vysander

moosefoof

Semper

BuckStrider

Vysander

Corbomite

Aenigma

Tannhauser

3dot14

troycheek

Hale

moosefoof

Subspace

Jackal99

S'Talon tr'Khev

BuckStrider

mathcubeguy

DoggieMon

**DONOTDELETE**

Hale

mathcubeguy

Bossman

3dot14

EE

Jackal99

Jackal99

EE

Jackal99

EE

Jackal99

EE

3dot14

Topic: Mr Ferrett (Read 17991 times)

DONOTDELETE

DONOTDELETE

DONOTDELETE