This game is not ready for market yet

[Clovis]

I should add, after taking a look to the files, This game will be eminently moddable: all cobat, diplomaty, economical factors can be edited. AI is too moddable, nation by nation.

[Seven]

I am always blunt to speak the truth, sure, game has some errors for a few (like me) and like anyone, if I didnt know better I would see a red mist but - we are talking about a company here who makes excellent and beautiful games.

For American Civil War alone, I would gladly have lent my attractive 25-year-old sister (actually 50) to the developers for a week of passion and champagne and allowed them to tatoo her.

Maybe its because I have worked in France, that I love France and I was once French in a former life (Claude Debussy) that I am certain it will be fixed!

[Emeg]

<..> Perhaps a more detailed AAR like some of them for NC and AACW? apy:

My 18 months old computer is not the fastest working machine you can have now. So I fear the reported problems with the extreme slow working (hanging) AI. It is my intention to play this very intresting game after a released patch that hopefully solve the reported problems. It is for me somewhat pity that my own language is different from English or French. But I will try later to write a clear AAR, describing the game mechanism as far as I have understood.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Emeg]

<..> BTW, who is the guy willing to write the manual...I missed his message and would be glad to discuss that point with him

I mean Alan Bernardo, you wrote him "Would you like to help in doing such a document ? "

His answer was "Certainly I would. <...>

Your answer "OK, let's proceed then...tell me what you need and I'll help gladly. Send me a PM with all your requirements "

See; http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=11356

[Clovis]

Just a suggestion. 2 video tutorials are urgently needed: one explaining GUI, another describing first turn action. Forget tutorial scenarios for now...too long. 2 videos and most of the complaints will be toned down.

[arsan]

I mean Alan Bernardo, you wrote him "Would you like to help in doing such a document ? "

His answer was "Certainly I would. <...>

Your answer "OK, let's proceed then...tell me what you need and I'll help gladly. Send me a PM with all your requirements "

See; http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?t=11356

On that thread, Alan and Philippe were talking about doing a pdf explaining the tutorial.
Not the full game manual. Check Alan first post

[Emeg]

And you will kill the wargaming PC market. <..>

I don't believe that this will work in such way if the most people are as me.

To be open to the (hardcore) customers, by example to let them straight know that the game developers need also their playing experience during the final test and polishing stages of the game development, will create extra understanding and goodwill for the wargame developers. That is i.m.o. not bad but good for the wargaming marked, the more then common openness in communication will tie customers and developers more together.

[Adam Parker]

And you will kill the wargaming PC market.

You may not have noticed but this market is already all but dead due to sloppy releases like this, cost cutting and AI's that have nothing intelligent about them.

As someone I trust on another forum wrote: "You don't get a second chance to make a good first impression".

I really had my wallet open for this one. I've bought all three of my prior AGEOD purchases from AGEOD's own shop front to support them. I've had the ACW manual professionally printed at cost to me. My wallet is closed now.

[rwenstrup]

PhilThib,

First let me say, I know you guys will fix this game. Not a doubt in my mind.

Replacements handling would benefit from using your historic approach. Or just put them in a major city and let them move to the front. Current process is unnecessarily complex.

Combat is very hard to understand out of the box. Either have a clear explaination of what's happening or go to the other AGEOD games' approach, which the bulk of your customers are already familiar.

Primarily I think a list of shortcuts that enable a person to access units, etc. like you have in your other games would be helpful. The list in the abbreviated manual is very limited...

I'll communicate more as I get more familiar with the game...the crashes are making it hard to play right now...four attempts and I need to do something else for my sanity...

You have a good company...we all believe in you.

[Generalisimo]

[color="Red"]Pocus[/color],

First let me say...

Well, first let me say that Pocus is not involved directly in the development of this engine.
This is NOT the AGE engine, this is a NEW engine made specifically for this game... so, most of the problems comes from this "little" issue. This is ALL new.
Pocus is the Lead Developer of the AGE Engine. The Lead Developer of this engine is calvinus.

Maybe you were trying to speak with "PhilThib", but that's another person.

[Clovis]

You may not have noticed but this market is already all but dead due to sloppy releases like this, cost cutting and AI's that have nothing intelligent about them.

As someone I trust on another forum wrote: "You don't get a second chance to make a good first impression".

I really had my wallet open for this one. I've bought all three of my prior AGEOD purchases from AGEOD's own shop front to support them. I've had the ACW manual professionally printed at cost to me. My wallet is closed now.

And then, afrter the demise of PC Wargame market? You will play Spore? Sims 3?

Frankly, I find such reactions to be superficial. but that's maybe the problem. We're living in a very superficial world, without long term interest; my interest is, whatever the first bad impression, to get some good wargames in the next years. If Ageod would leave WW1 as is, or launch other games with the same problems, I would agree with you. But overreaction at the first difficulty isn't adapted; from time to time, a long range vision is needed, in economy, in ecology,in politics, in war and even in PC wargaming.

Until now, there is not a single example of lack of support from AGEOD. WW1 would have been delayed and this forum would be full of begging posts for releasing the game ASAP...That's always the same stories each time a game is released: if late, complaints;if bugged, screaming and definitive assertions. and when the dust settles down...you will get a solid game playing well.

I remember what Battleground team took with both Combat mission and its unfortunate successor. it's now from general advice a very good game; is the invested money lost or just delayed? Is it so much important to get always, anytime plain satisfaction? isn't sometimes needed to take into considerationlong time satisfaction, in this case game companies publishing solid works, more important than a 24hours time span prospective? Is confiance, always at the risk to be betrayed, a better base for civilization than consumerist attitude?

[arsan]

You may not have noticed but this market is already all but dead due to sloppy releases like this, cost cutting and AI's that have nothing intelligent about them.

As someone I trust on another forum wrote: "You don't get a second chance to make a good first impression".

I really had my wallet open for this one. I've bought all three of my prior AGEOD purchases from AGEOD's own shop front to support them. I've had the ACW manual professionally printed at cost to me. My wallet is closed now.

Dead? really? so the dozens of wargames published yearly are zombie games or something like this??
For a dead market it seems pretty lively to me... in fact i would need 72 hours a day to have time to play all the nice and new zombie PC wargames that i would like to play.
Probably what is dead is the PC wargamer in you... but in case you have not noticed "the market" goes beyond yourself.
Regards!

[PDF]

Clovis
Don't forget the simple frustration from playing a difficult (if not impossible) to understand and crashing game...
I know it's a hard choice to delay or to release a game, it's never really finished before 2 years after release, but WW1 is currently far more unpolished than any other AGE game, or Combat Mission for that matter (I played all either on 1.00 or before).
So please also understand the tone of some people here, when they can't even finish a turn !
Luckily I mostly can play and have few crashes, but it's so damn slow I sometimes get infuriated too (like when I wait 3-5 min "military IA" before having a message "IA nation activates Army X" ...Gosh, but what did it do during all this time ? :wacko

[animaluk]

Well i have tried but i just cannot understand what the hell is going on in this game. combat is a nightmare i need help. instructions. the tutorials are poor.i have all of ageods previous releases and learned to love them.i will give this game more time { i have added 2 gb of memory just to play this} but at this moment in time i am lost

[Clovis]

Clovis
Don't forget the simple frustration from playing a difficult (if not impossible) to understand and crashing game...
I know it's a hard choice to delay or to release a game, it's never really finished before 2 years after release, but WW1 is currently far more unpolished than any other AGE game, or Combat Mission for that matter (I played all either on 1.00 or before).
So please also understand the tone of some people here, when they can't even finish a turn !
Luckily I mostly can play and have few crashes, but it's so damn slow I sometimes get infuriated too (like when I wait 3-5 min "military IA" before having a message "IA nation activates Army X" ...Gosh, but what did it do during all this time ? :wacko

I understand well, I've the same problems. I'm like anyone I would have prefered a finished game and play it rather than discussing about an unfortunate release. But maybe it's me tonight, or a curious mood, or just I think REALLY unfair the "kill them all" posts for a company which until no has displayed since 3 years an rarely seen fairful attitude for the hobby; at the same time, i'm porting the SVF mod the the 1.12 release candidate patch for AACW. Which company is currently upgrading a game published in 2007?

I know, Ageod lives from our buys. But I persist to think paying for something dosn't totally dispense to be fair or at least indulgent; and hwo much our life would be better if we all were displaying a litle more kindness...

BTW, I suspect the AI to use some sort of neuronal schem, from what I've sen in the data feel ( unless it's just in name). Interesting if confirmed.

[Clovis]

Well i have tried but i just cannot understand what the hell is going on in this game. combat is a nightmare i need help. instructions. the tutorials are poor.i have all of ageods previous releases and learned to love them.i will give this game more time { i have added 2 gb of memory just to play this} but at this moment in time i am lost

Me too And I would be very upset if I'm always unable to play it... in some months. Taking time to go upset isn't ininteresting.

Back to AACW for now.

[PDF]

Didn't that much "kill them all" or such posts... I rather saw "warning" messages stating that with such a release AGEOD may quickly lose some (much?) reputation. And that several publishers also died after releasing crappy wargames (remember AH anyone ?)

Now the team really has not much time and no room for error, a big patch solving the main problems and a solid documentation are damn urgent.

And think about reviews ... If anyone, even the most indulgent reviewer, tests WW1 1.03 (it's even a 1.03...), he just cannot put any rating above average.
Thus the game will be categorized everywhere as an incomprehensible bug-ridden p.o.s ("s" standing for ..."software" :neener , will that really help ?

At Cyberstratege we decided to give the game a little more time and will wait for the patch for our review, but who else will do that ?
Even us don't think it's normal...

[Franciscus]

Interesting discussion, and also getting a little "hard" which is also nice... .

But let's not forget, life is short, time to play is even shorter, and the objective of games is to have fun. Sure, some of us get much fun out of just tweaking, modding, improving, coordinating, etc, rather than just playing. Fine. But let's not forget that the majority of players, specially the less "hardcore" ones, just like to...play .
Let's face it, WW1 is indeed in a far worse shape than other previous AGEOD games on day 1; and that is bad. It seems that the designer/programmer and/or beta team did not do a good enough job (and this is of course nothing personal). Indeed probably we are just now entering the real beta...
I agree with Clovis when he speaks of long range visions being needed (although I must take pause when ecology and politics are mixed in the same phrase with PC wargaming...:wacko . That's why I truely believe that the future of small "niche" games is assuming what in fact is de facto happening not only with AGEOD but with other developers: Release a public beta version, but one that the interested - and there are still lots of them, as we saw with WW1 pre-order - would be able to get for a discount price, that we would pay, knowing that we are purchasing a beta that we want to help improve to a good release date game. This would be good for the developers - advance cash, larger beta team - and for the enthusiasts, "hardcore" gamers (or whatever you call them) that would get an added incentive for doing what we are already doing...

Just my 2 cents

[Clovis]

Didn't that much "kill them all" or such posts... I rather saw "warning" messages stating that with such a release AGEOD may quickly lose some (much?) reputation. And that several publishers also died after releasing crappy wargames (remember AH anyone ?)

Now the team really has not much time and no room for error, a big patch solving the main problems and a solid documentation are damn urgent.

And think about reviews ... If anyone, even the most indulgent reviewer, tests WW1 1.03 (it's even a 1.03...), he just cannot put any rating above average.
Thus the game will be categorized everywhere as an incomprehensible bug-ridden p.o.s ("s" standing for ..."software" :neener , will that really help ?

At Cyberstratege we decided to give the game a little more time and will wait for the patch for our review, but who else will do that ?
Even us don't think it's normal...

I've seen some. Not much I agree.

[Clovis]

Interesting discussion, and also getting a little "hard" which is also nice... .

But let's not forget, life is short, time to play is even shorter, and the objective of games is to have fun. Sure, some of us get much fun out of just tweaking, modding, improving, coordinating, etc, rather than just playing. Fine. But let's not forget that the majority of players, specially the less "hardcore" ones, just like to...play .
Let's face it, WW1 is indeed in a far worse shape than other previous AGEOD games on day 1; and that is bad. It seems that the designer/programmer and/or beta team did not do a good enough job (and this is of course nothing personal). Indeed probably we are just now entering the real beta...
I agree with Clovis when he speaks of long range visions being needed (although I must take pause when ecology and politics are mixed in the same phrase with PC wargaming...:wacko . That's why I truely believe that the future of small "niche" games is assuming what in fact is de facto happening not only with AGEOD but with other developers: Release a public beta version, but one that the interested - and there are still lots of them, as we saw with WW1 pre-order - would be able to get for a discount price, that we would pay, knowing that we are purchasing a beta that we want to help improve to a good release date game. This would be good for the developers - advance cash, larger beta team - and for the enthusiasts, "hardcore" gamers (or whatever you call them) that would get an added incentive for doing what we are already doing...

Just my 2 cents

That's because the AGE engine development was more progressive. BOA 1 had much less complexity than the current AGE engine. And many have forgotten BOA 1 has in the end a sort of flatal flaw with the "monster stack" tactic... WW1 is a very complex design and the port of a boardgame, an exercise which have recently be illustrated by a real failure (EIA).

The mount and blade system: why not?

[vonRocko]

Why does the computer game industry get a pass to release incomplete products? Imagine purchasing just about anything else like this. What if cars were sold that didn't perform,and the company tells you they still have to work out technical details? Or you buy shoes but only get the left foot and the promise from the company that in a few weeks you will get the right! Maybe a music cd with half the songs,and the others come one a week?
Ok we are dealing with complex programing here,but too not even take the time to print a complete manual is beyond me. Ageod is not alone here,this is business as usual for PC games.
Even as of 24 hrs. ago I was excited for this game,and was only waiting for the boxed version to purchase it. But since I can't even read the manual while waiting for patches, I will hold off buying.
I am certain ageod will eventually fix things,they are great! But really, the excuse that the boardgame manual was just too big, is pathetic. There is no reason for the lack of decent rulebook!

[PhilThib]

All these exchanges are interesting for sure. We'll make an official announcement on that game tomorrow. But AGEOD will live up to its reputation and fight not to disappoint fellow players.

[animaluk]

I would like to add what a great company you are i love the games and support you have giving. i know you will sort these problems out.i was just very dissapointed and frustrated with the product i had so looked forward to owning

[Elmo]

All these exchanges are interesting for sure...But AGEOD will live up to its reputation and fight not to disappoint fellow players.

That's good to know. At that point I'll take a serious look at the game. Thanks.

[Tamas]

As to relfect a bit on this: I think the biggest "debacle" here is the apparently steep learning curve.

Yes, there are bugs, for some people quite severe ones, but most of the complaint I get to read here is people not being able to figure stuff out.


What you need to see here, is that altough this is partly because of the interface, it is also because WW1 is not only based on a boardgame, but was intended to be a faithful recreation of that boardgame.
Almost all mechanics work exactly like in La Grande Guerre, which was a very complex system, designed to be managed by a group of people around a table.

So at one hand, Calvinus had to design a game which would keep faithful to the original boardgame, while also making it a smoother process to play it. And believe it or not, it is much smoother!

As it was mentioned, there are examples to see how this conversion thing is not an easy project. Computer version of Empires in Arms was in development for several years, and ended up being quite a failure, with a brain dead AI that is too bad to even be compared to the one in WW1, and dont get me started on World In Flames.

I came to the beta already being a huge fan of LGG. As such, I was very familiar with all the underlying rules of the game. As a matter of fact, my first reaction to that early build was satisfaction and happyness to see one of my favourite boardgames (but one which I could not get to play due to complexity) were so faithfully adopted. Other betas were the same, I have to say that complete newbies to the concept were the minority in our team. Yet we did all we could, and I am glad to be part of this project because I am quite satisfied with the end result. Especially knowing that it will be even better with the coming patches.

So I think our biggest shortcoming is documentation.
The game is logically built up, behind its system there is not "only" Calvinus' design work, but also the work and testing put into the LGG boardgame.
But obviously, in an attempt to save the players from having to learn the rules of the boardgame, we ended up confusing many newcomers.
This is something that can and will be corrected.

[tagwyn]

First Impression?!! What are you talking about. AGEOD and P.T. have an excellent and well earned reputation from previous efforts. Are you serious! How can you be? t

[Franciscus]

(...) Other betas were the same, I have to say that complete newbies to the concept were the minority in our team. (...)

I may be wrong, but I would say that IMHO this may have been one important mistake in the beta team formation...
Really hope that in the future, specially relating to the most ambitious AGEOD project (VGN) this is not repeated...

[Tamas]

I may be wrong, but I would say that IMHO this may have been one important mistake in the beta team formation...
Really hope that in the future, specially relating to the most ambitious AGEOD project (VGN) this is not repeated...

For VGN you can't repeat that, since VGN was not orignally a boardgame.
We have had some excellent betas. I only referred to betas who never heard of the boardgame before testing WW1.

[Willard]

I may be wrong, but I would say that IMHO this may have been one important mistake in the beta team formation...
Really hope that in the future, specially relating to the most ambitious AGEOD project (VGN) this is not repeated...

I concur. As an AGEOD fan, I have anxiously followed the development of this game. However, I did not have the priviledge of either owning or playing the boardgame that WWI was based upon. Consequently, one of the frustrating things for me has been the lack of information about this game on both the website and forums. It is understandable now that many involved in the development of the game were already familiar the game and mechanics, and as such these issues/concerns were on the backburner as they were second nature to them.

However, myself and others don't have that luxury. This coupled with a buggy release have made me re-think how to view AGEOD. Please don't get me wrong - I in no way want AGEOD to fail. I love their games and think they do a great job. However, after being burned multiple times by Paradox I am a bit gun shy.

To be quite honest and as my signature states, I am not looking to pay the full price for a game for the priviledge of being a beta tester. When I spend full price to purchase a product, than I expect a finished product. I am not looking for a buggy release with little or no/inaccurate documentation on gameplay. I simply don't have the time to invest and go through that process any longer. What little time I do have, I want to spend on PLAYING not rebooting and tweaking to get the game to play out of the box.

IF AGEOD wants to release early with a public beta, than go for it. I think that is the wave the gaming future. Let those pay less for the opportunity to play early and provide input on the game's direction and deal with the inherent bugginess of such releases. However for those paying full price, I do resent being put in that position. As such, until such time as the price is reduced or these issues are resolved, I will not purchase this game.

Good luck and I hope things work out quickly!