Day 0 Release Backlash
spellman23
NS1 Theorycraft Expert Join Date: 2007-05-17 Member: 60920Members
NS1 Theorycraft Expert Join Date: 2007-05-17 Member: 60920Members
in Off-Topic
<div class="IPBDescription">Stardock's Elemental</div>Original RPS: <a href="http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/08/25/stardock-rescind-own-bill-of-rights/" target="_blank">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/08/25...bill-of-rights/</a>
Follow-up: <a href="http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/08/26/wardell-on-unfinished-controversy/" target="_blank">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/08/26...ed-controversy/</a>
Mostly now that the dust has settled and it's simply become a lame fanboy war, some thoughts we can learn from this.
1) Employees must treat everything they say on the internet as public knowledge and able to be quoted out of context.
2) RPS's 5 group thinkers fail at Google.
3) Releasing buggy Gold versions of a game induces rage, even with a massive Day 0 patch and promises to keep working on it.
3a) Postponed releases lose sales, so don't set a date unless you can really, really deliver.
Follow-up: <a href="http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/08/26/wardell-on-unfinished-controversy/" target="_blank">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/08/26...ed-controversy/</a>
Mostly now that the dust has settled and it's simply become a lame fanboy war, some thoughts we can learn from this.
1) Employees must treat everything they say on the internet as public knowledge and able to be quoted out of context.
2) RPS's 5 group thinkers fail at Google.
3) Releasing buggy Gold versions of a game induces rage, even with a massive Day 0 patch and promises to keep working on it.
3a) Postponed releases lose sales, so don't set a date unless you can really, really deliver.
Comments
Sadly, not really news; this stuff happens all the time.
Also the company name is really familiar, I think I bought an old indie game from them at some point.
Edit: Hmm apparently not, still the name still sounds familiar, don't know why.
Also the company name is really familiar, I think I bought an old indie game from them at some point.
Edit: Hmm apparently not, still the name still sounds familiar, don't know why.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I too am attempting to unravel the pandora's box that is this thread. It is a mystery wrapped in an enigma wrapped in a conundrum. Join me, and together we shall get to the bottom of this!
1) Releasing a severely buggy game, something they 'used' to profess as beign wrong.
2) Removing their gamer's bill of rights (where they said #1 was bad).
3) the CEO making inflammatory comments.
What actually happened:
#2 was incorrect, it was simply at a different web site.
#1 was due to retailers breaking the street date on the dvd copy, thus stardock pushing their digital release up so that people who had preordered were not 'screwed', only problem? no day 0 patch to compensate for releasing the buggy gold code.
#3 was the CEO getting pissed at a friend and posting crap he shouldn't have. He apologized.
basically:
It's a big meh.
I never played GalCiv, so maybe that's decent, but they haven't made a good game in a while.
I never played GalCiv, so maybe that's decent, but they haven't made a good game in a while.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I can't say I have ever really found DRM to be a problem, I don't own any games that have particularly annoying DRM, the only one that kind of annoyed me recently was starcraft 2 and having to register an account with a lot of unneccesary info just to start the game.
Most other games I really don't mind DRM, and in the case of steam it's actually a good thing because it means I don't need the disc in the drive and I can just redownload everything if I have to reformat, no 20 gajillion cd keys, no patches, just click the game, wait a day, and then play it.
Really makes it a lot easier. Plus there are far better companies who don't use DRM like bethesda, oblivion doesn't even have a cd key I think, and fallout runs without the disc most of the time.
Most other games I really don't mind DRM, and in the case of steam it's actually a good thing because it means I don't need the disc in the drive and I can just redownload everything if I have to reformat, no 20 gajillion cd keys, no patches, just click the game, wait a day, and then play it.
Really makes it a lot easier. Plus there are far better companies who don't use DRM like bethesda, oblivion doesn't even have a cd key I think, and fallout runs without the disc most of the time.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think it's funny that you praise steam for not having to worry about cdkeys and such but in the same post say that blizzards way is bothersome.
It's the same thing basically. The only difference is that steam has more games and blizzard only has their own.
For what? I had it for 360 and don't remember anything off the top of my head.
Although I didn't really like the game much so I could have blanked it out.
<!--quoteo(post=1796543:date=Aug 27 2010, 06:12 PM:name=Panigg)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Panigg @ Aug 27 2010, 06:12 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1796543"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think it's funny that you praise steam for not having to worry about cdkeys and such but in the same post say that blizzards way is bothersome.
It's the same thing basically. The only difference is that steam has more games and blizzard only has their own.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Steam doesn't require me to give them my address and telephone and name and a bunch of other crap, and yeah, steam does have a lot more games, which makes all the difference.
The whole point of steam is it's one program for like a third of the games I own, I wouldn't object if starcraft used steam because it's no extra hassle that way, if steam made me make a new account for every game I own then it would annoy me, but the centralisation is what makes it good. Also it has way better community features than any other online system I know of, including starcraft 2.
That and I like all my steam games.
I meant the PC version, there you have to install intrusive and annoying programs to be able to be able to boot it up.
Liiiike?
Games For Windows (needs account)
SecuROM
Rockstar Games Social Club application (needs account)
And the hope that it will recognize your none-scratched official DVD
SecuROM
Rockstar Games Social Club application (needs account)
And the hope that it will recognize your none-scratched official DVD<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
GFWL and securom don't bother me, althoug dunno why you'd need any rockstar crap to go with GFWL.
I never played GalCiv, so maybe that's decent, but they haven't made a good game in a while.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I really liked Sins of a Solar Empire. If nothing it satisfied a serious "Oh hai, I has giant fleet" niche in my life.
Demigod was actually done by Gas Powered Games and flopped due to trying to do too much and not providing enough of what people wanted.
GalCiv was a nice re-think in some ways of the 4X due to the customization and omg tech tree.
They've mentioned Elemental isn't intended to be a huge commercial push. Really it was more of a "Brad wants to make a game like this, let's do it" kinda thing. And heck, they broke even on development cost via pre-orders alone. I haven't bought Elemental, but my housemate is giving me a feed. Overall it's not bad, but not the glorious second coming of 4X+RPG games. Oh, and we need to stab the UI developer in the face. They failed. What you see is even 3x better than the original UI, and still falls short. I have mock-ups and everything.
But yeah, in general Stardock is more of a AA company. They don't create zomg hits, but they haven't had to fold into an external publisher 'cause they do well enough. It's a nice sweet spot where they don't have to push out to survive (*cough* UWE/indies *cough*) and they don't have to appease the publisher' shareholders (EA).
How do you buy stuff on steam? By wishing?
You can just use fictional information if you want to, all they really need is your Paypal email...
How do you buy stuff on steam? By wishing?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You can just use fictional information if you want to, all they really need is your Paypal email...
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Or activate stuff via CD keys.
Bnet is different than steam. Neither of them bother me tbh.
I don't mind giving this information out, if it will be secure, but I still agree with you because I'm giving it to Blizzard. Blizzard showed an <i>incredible</i> (almost unbelievable, as in, I literally cannot believe it was considered) error in judgment with the real name system on forums. Here's the quote when they canceled the system: "As a result of those discussions, we've decided <b>at this time</b> that real names will not be required for posting on official Blizzard forums." That does not sound like a definite "whoa we messed up sorry guys" but rather "well maybe we can try this again later."
The reason they considered this change was reduce trolling / flaming in the forums. So rather than hiring more moderators (blizzard is strapped for cash, lol wut?) and implementing more strict rules they take the lazy road and try to force personal information to be public.
If they're going to be this careless with personal information then I don't want them to have mine.
1) Releasing a severely buggy game, something they 'used' to profess as beign wrong.
#1 was due to retailers breaking the street date on the dvd copy, thus stardock pushing their digital release up so that people who had preordered were not 'screwed', only problem? no day 0 patch to compensate for releasing the buggy gold code.
basically:
It's a big meh.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->The Gold code shouldn't be incredibly buggy, that's what the Silver code is for. Walking the tightrope between fixing bugs and completing features is tricky, but you can't compromise on bugs at that end of the severity scale.
<!--quoteo(post=1796562:date=Aug 27 2010, 06:13 PM:name=Kouji_San)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Kouji_San @ Aug 27 2010, 06:13 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1796562"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Games For Windows (needs account)
SecuROM
Rockstar Games Social Club application (needs account)<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->You mean Games for Windows LIVE. The difference is as pointlessly confusing as it is important. GfW doesn't require an account.
Funny thing about this is that if the game had been released with a GfW sticker it would not have passed submission as it was (you can't agree with MS to fix that quantity of crippling bugs with a day 0 patch), and the end result would have been a less buggy game on release. Counter-argument to that of course is that indie companies paying Microsoft lots of money for a 'seal of (purely functional) quality' would mean significantly (for indie dev) less precious funds to spend on the game.
I mean to use it, obviously buying stuff requires you to give them some info and I'd be kinda daft not to given that they wouldn't be able to contact me if there was a problem with my order, but I bought starcraft from the store, blizzard doesn't need to know my name or where I live or what my phone number is, and if they were based in the UK they actually wouldn't be allowed to ask for it because the laws here forbid the retention of unneccesary information about people.
If I buy a steam game in a box I just put the key in and it works.
<!--quoteo(post=1796492:date=Aug 27 2010, 08:39 AM:name=Chris0132)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chris0132 @ Aug 27 2010, 08:39 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1796492"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Some company released a buggy game, some guy is angry about something.
Also the company name is really familiar, I think I bought an old indie game from them at some point.
Edit: Hmm apparently not, still the name still sounds familiar, don't know why.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Stardock aren't really known as a game company, I know them well and have used their software for years, yet the only game of theirs I can name off the top of my head is Sins of a Solar Empire. Their real claim to fame is Windows UI augmentation software. Things that mimic the ObjectDock from Apple and other UI tweak/overhaul applications, as well as Widgets and the like. Especially before Vista/7 their software let you add a whole bunch of nice-looking, and generally CPU/RAM friendly stuff on your desktop.
As far as I know that is where they make the bulk of their money, and because they are good at what they do they they can afford to also make games on the side, but without having to be beholden to a publisher/distributor. So they've always had a pretty loyal group of customers who feel they do things the "right way". This exchange really flew in the face of a lot of that, and because of their reputation and standing (which might have been largely imagined by their fan base) it got a lot more press than something like this typically would have seen.
As far as I know that is where they make the bulk of their money, and because they are good at what they do they they can afford to also make games on the side, but without having to be beholden to a publisher/distributor. So they've always had a pretty loyal group of customers who feel they do things the "right way". This exchange really flew in the face of a lot of that, and because of their reputation and standing (which might have been largely imagined by their fan base) it got a lot more press than something like this typically would have seen.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Partially true. Especially since Impulse is losing to Steam as a distribution center.
However, a huge component for those in the strategy realm is that Stardock has made Galactic Civilizations and Sins of a Solar Empire. Two huge money-making games that while they may not be a StarCraft or Dawn of War, still really pushed the strategy genres and really satisfied a crucial itch for many people.
In follow-up news, Brad (frogboy) has posted that they made a huge blunder and actually lost vision for what the complete game should be like. This may serve as a warning for UWE that if they get too sucked into coding and developing they mess up understanding what the completed game should be like.
Linky:
<a href="http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/09/03/blindness-caused-elemental-release-fail/" target="_blank">http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/09/03...l-release-fail/</a>
Brad Wardell showed up on the Three Moves Ahead Podcast. I highly recommend UWE listens in plus any other interested in this madness.
<a href="http://threemovesahead.libsyn.com/episode_81_elemental_post_mortem_with_brad_wardell" target="_blank">http://threemovesahead.libsyn.com/episode_...th_brad_wardell</a>
Stardock had effectively infinity Beta testers as well (way more than NS2 has orders) and yet this stuff still happened.
Some of the parallels are frightening. The assurances that it will get fixed eventually, weird edge cases causing problems (and not being submitted properly), etc. And while several issues were resolved (I happen to know personally some of the people involved who helped push some serious changes) there were still so many others.
I actually am intentionally playing Elemental as little as possible so every time my friend shows me it I can instantly call him on UI problems or unclear mechanics.