Topic: Mr Ferrett (Read 17992 times)

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

Tannhauser · « **Reply #49 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 #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

News:

Topic: Mr Ferrett (Read 17992 times) var addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};

Dash Jones

Whiplash

Vysander

moosefoof

Semper

BuckStrider

Vysander

Corbomite

Aenigma

Tannhauser

3dot14

troycheek

Hale

moosefoof

Subspace

Jackal99

S'Talon tr'Khev

BuckStrider

mathcubeguy

DoggieMon

Topic: Mr Ferrett (Read 17992 times)