posted 08-03-99 09:23 AM ET            

I can hardly find words to express my revulsion with this article. Its pathetic combination of self-pitying martyrdom and self-serving allocation of blame to everyone in the world but the programers for a sub-standard product is a tour de force in narcissism. "We've got everyone to blame, but ourselves" appears to be the motto of the day.

posted 08-03-99 12:22 PM ET            

There are two issues here: (i) is JKM's assessment of the quality issue correct as applied to the product he's associated with; and (ii) is the content and tenor of the article he wrote appropriate from the point of view of marketing to his audience?

As to issue (i), JKM's article would imply that the world of "bugs" begins and ends with the way that the software interfaces with the hardware. He proceeds to explain away the reasons for these bugs' occurance, ascribing them almost exclusively to factors outside his control.

The world of "bugs", however, is not so limited. There is a second class of bugs: those that are internal flaws within the program. None of the excuses he offered for the appearance of bugs in a program explain away or excuse the appearance of bugs of this type. I previously said that listing these would be too tedious, but I see we are in need of a refesher. Upon this game's release, there were the following internal programming problems, which had nothing to do with anyone's machine configuration:

1. One of the victory conditions did not work correctly.

2. More than one Secret Project did not work as advertised.

3. More than one Base Improvement did not work as advertised.

4. Combat odds were not being correctly calculated in common game situations.

5. More than one unit action in the menus did not work at all (e.g. the bombing run and goto features).

6. More than one unit action in the menus did not work within game rules (e.g. former cheats related to auto functions and repeated reassignment).

7. The Unit Design Workshop could be used to bypass stated game rules on cost and movement limitations in upgrading (some fixed, some still available).

8. Unit design costs were not being correctly calculated in the Workshop.

9. Multiple game menus/screens did not correctly display important game data.

10. The base trading feature in the Diplomacy screen was subject to gross abuse.

11. The infamous unlimited range missile bug.

12. Enemy units which do not obey human player game rules (some are admittedly features, but others--such as AI building bases and improvements where human players cannot--have been admitted to be bugs).

13. Numerous bugs related to multiplayer too numerous to mention, but many (most?) of which depend on user system configurations, and many of which are fatal to a game in progress.

And this is only a partial list. I do not see how the rationalizations offered in JKM's article apply to the numerous strictly internal flaws a game that has been literally years in development, and so many of which go to basic and elementary game play and features. In fact, there is hardly a basic game function which is unmarred by these bugs.

I simply cannot name another example of a computer game or application of any type that I purchased that had so many broken or flawed applications of its own features and rules.

As to JKM's rationalizations regarding the *other* class of bugs, it sounds correct as a theoretical matter, but two things are true. First, their poor track record on finishing the internal mechanics of the game undermines their position that the machine interfacing bugs were no greater than to be expected and, at any rate, a matter beyond their control. Second, the problems that Firaxis faces in a competitive market are no greater than any other of their competitors. The rationalizations only go so far. If their competitors are suffering less from these type of bug issues than they are, all the rationalizations about industry pressures don't explain that away.

Even the specific example that JKM chose for his article (the video resolution example) is a poor one, since the video resolution issue is directly related to the design decision to use the so-called "caviar graphics" in the game. These caviar graphics have proved so problematic to the game's performance (and even inhibited game design flexibility) that IIRC, Brian Reynolds himself as much as admitted that this was a design mistake. I won't get into a semantics debate about whether such mistakes constitute "bugs". To use the video resolution incompatability issue as an example of something that isn't *really* Firaxis' fault, however, demonstrates a serious inability to take responsibility for the consequences of their own design decisions.

posted 08-03-99 12:46 PM ET            

Decidedly not.

When you are marketing a good or service there is no differentiation, from the POV of your client base, between yourself and the thing you are marketing. Whenever you speak or write in public, you are representing your organization and its product--regardless of the context. The rationalization that MikeH II offers JKM, that he is entitled as a person to express his anger/frustration at a group of people who have attacked him, is a non-starter. JKM is entitled to do nothing which harms the image of his company or their product in the name of his own personal satisfaction.

If JKM's article began and ended with an explanation of why consumers had to realistically expect a certain amount of flaws in their software products, I'd have been willing to consider the points of the article. But it doesn't end there. Not even close. He positively belittles the average consumer of his product, and especially belittles those whose loyalty to his product is highest. His behavior in that respect is inexcusable. He strongly implies that whether his company's product is flawed is a debatable matter--simply a POV. The list of flaws that I set forth in the prior post are not debatable. JKM seems monumentally indifferent to the reality that his most loyal consumer base is dissapointed that they paid top dollar for an internally unfinished product that was rushed out the door. Indeed, he paints such legitimately dissapointed persons as people with an inherent need to whine, based on the lack of other fulfillment in their lives.

Stripped of its niceties, what the JKM aritcle is saying in response to dissatisfied customers is "quit whining and get a life". I expect that kind of crap from certain elements of posters to this forum, but I never would sanction it coming from a member of my organization representing my product in public.

posted 08-03-99 01:14 PM ET            

If I may be so bold as to be a little more blunt with your points?

JKM,

Perhaps your time whining about the demands of those that pay good money for your product would be better served addressing obvious design flaws(see Analyst's list). Yes, you can never please eveyone all of the time, but 4 patches is an insult to the intelligence of your customers. In short, look into the mirror and you will see the solution to your problem.

Also, I will be so far reaching to say that it is a personal insult to all of us who have taken the time to send in thousands of improvements and game ideas. Clearly, you are a hypocrite as you only want to hear how great your game is rather than how it could be better or work properly.

Finally, if you are this thin skinned, I suggest a new line of work. The job of QA is to put out a quality product and to handle the customer problems and complaints that arise. Obviously, you find these responsibilities irritating.

regretfully,

posted 08-03-99 01:44 PM ET            

Bravo Analyst! Bravo Player2! Bravo Uncleroggy!

You cannot dis the customer. If JKM wants to express some anger and strike back at the people that have attacked him and insulted him so much here on the forum, he can make an ID and flame the hell out of them. We wouldn't know the difference. But you can never say "Its the stupid users!" even WHEN its the stupid users. I've done Tech Support. I've done Q&A. Hell, I've done some PR along my career path. You can never, ever, ever, tell the user "You're stupid and whine too much." When that happens, you alienate them, and ruin your company.

The article seemed to me to be one big diaper... it implied all problems and bugs were either due to the user's local machine, or just that the user was too stupid to know that was suppose to be the way it worked. You know what? Even if I am an IDIOT and stick the SMAC CD into the 5.25" drive slot, they are suppose to help me understand that's not how to make the program work, and use the OTHER drive spot that is big enough (I've walked a customer through that exact thing. It happens.). That is the problem of being the vendor... they are the whore, and I am the john that is paying their bills.

To imply that Firaxis had to go to market is to ignore the fact that many of the people at EA have a great respect for Sid Meyers, and anything with his name. They extended Will Wright's Maxis schedule. Why? Because he needed it to not produce a rushed, buggy game. Since they put Will and Sid on the same level, I am confident they could have had an extension despite the potential competition of Civ: Call to Power. After all, SMAC is a Sid Meyers signed game.

JKM went too far to paint the Internet community as nothing but whiners with nothing better to do than criticize whatever crosses their small and limited minds. Why? Or money paid his paycheck... and his bosses... and everyone else at Firaxis.

I think Jeff owes us a formal apology (and needs a 6 week vacation, to restore his spirits and thick-skin and/or balance.). Or Firaxis owes us his job.

SMACAX? Civ3? Not on their freaking life as a company. Not until JKM apologies for being over the top, or is no longer an employee. Their choice.

posted 08-03-99 01:54 PM ET            

Firaxis might have had me as a loyal customer, willing to buy their products simply because their name was stamped on it. The potential for that loyalty has been crushed.

I won't be putting another dime in the pockets of Firaxis. Alien Crossfire, and any other Firaxis add-on, could sprout blue sunshine and I would not buy it.

Morris, I won't be sending SMAC back to you (along with a dead fish). I will, however, be voting with my feet, or at least my wallet.

posted 08-03-99 02:19 PM ET            

Flame away...

posted 08-03-99 02:45 PM ET            

>> "Now, don't worry. I'm not going in the direction you might think. For the purposes of this discussion, let's say a bug is anything a player considers a bug. "<<

Nice little bit of condescension there.

>> "Other games worked on the consumer's system, and they paid money for the new one to work on their system, but it doesn't work. It is a rare person faced with this prospect who will consider the possibility that his computer may be to blame. "<<

Apparently it is a rare QA person who will consider the possibility that his game may be to blame.

>> "some products are rushed out the door because if they don't hit that final milestone, the company will tank and the game will never be released" <<

Let us take this at face value. A game is released early it is good but has some bugs, (mostly caused by the liscensee's computer)
The game makes money, generates interest. The company decides to patch some bugs...

4 Patches - 6 Months later...
The game still has some good concepts but is largely unmet potential still riddled with bugs. The company has neither attempted to educate the consumer (other than with the back of the hand) that the "bugs" are features the consumer doesn't understand, or fix the bugs.

>> "Slip gold by a few weeks, even when it's to fix a critical problem, and the product may not be finished for many months, if ever." <<

Which is better for the consumer? I Do Not Want You To Publish A Game That Has A "CRITICAL PROBLEM"! Do you honestly want me to buy such a game?

>> "There's a saying that a title can only be late for awhile, but it can suck forever" <<

I'm sorry but I take this to mean that you should fix the game, making it late possibly but keeping it from being a game that "suck(s) forever".

>> "My final and most radical point is that the online gaming community, which most frequently identifies and evangelizes bugs, have strong interests in games not being 100 percent bug free. " <<

WHOOO HOOO!!!

>> "The offering is highly anticipated and has a roll out of a quarter of a million units and 20 active fan sites eagerly digesting every bit of news. In this situation, the final product is actually an ending, and those who spent the last year or two following it are faced with saying goodbye to the friends they've made online and moving on to another title. "<<

God knows I wake every morning with but one thought... "Maybe Darkstar has written another blistering diatribe on the inadaquecies and bugs of SMAC", or "maybe today someone will be thouroughly disgusted with the Customer Service of Firaxis." Shivers run down my spine.

Yes, our experiences with SMAC and other games are knots that bind some of us together. It is strange though that most of the company I keep maintain a positive attitude, (Darkstar, Trippin'you may be a notable exceptions)and the threads that I seek out are usually light hearted.

There is a social interaction here but it is totally independent of SMAC and Firaxis. When the next big TBS game comes out I fully expect to find familiar faces camped out on forums discussing the cons AND the Pros of the new "gotta play it game".

>> "By focusing on negative aspects, real or fabricated, the customer can initiate a dialogue with the developers. While this is a potent and useful tool for improvement, the more gratifying use is to generate news, which in turn fuels the society. " <<

Most critical discussions of SMAC turn on the design aspects of the game. The vast majority of the people who post are interested in the MetaGame, not soley the micro one.

The great Posts and Discussions of the TI's and those who discussed Faction strategy and Social Engineering theories, and of course the Builder/Conqueror debate and Offense v. Defense threads. These are the meat around here.

Then there are the humor filled threads, with excellent posters too numerous to mention (except of course Nell's girlie threads ) The story threads, the blah threads, The heartfelt ones, and more.

Posts and posters who are here despite the bugs.

>> "Developers who want to stay in business need to deliver a product that works as advertised and satisfies the customer to the point they tell all their friends to buy it." <<

A pity that JKM did little more than pay lip service to this thought.

I enjoy SMAC despite its flaws, I do not like the attitude that I see from the company. And I do not like the persistence of the flaws.

Firaxis You can do better, if you want to.

posted 08-03-99 03:20 PM ET            

I think the closest you will come to a flame from this crowd is the old adage of "if you can't take the heat, then get out of the kitchen".

JKM put himself into the cooker with his mindless comments and if he makes SW for a living, then he should understand the dynamics of the marketplace. In short, at $50 bucks US, people will deservedly expect a quality product. They certainly don't want to pay to be beta testers at the very least.

Please understand, I own a service related business and I have to deal with happy and unhappy customers everyday. Even if I disagree with their wants and expectations, I always let them know that I am dedicated to doing everything within my abilities to satisfy them. You see, without customers, I have no business and this is something that JKM so easily forgets.

posted 08-03-99 04:23 PM ET            

However, I think the harshest critics have missed the point of the editorial. Morris was explaining why it was not realistic to expect a $50 computer game that would perform flawlessly on all types of computer equipment. The economics of the industry and the vast multitude of platforms that it must serve leave little room for criticism of this simple point, and I have not read anyone rational who disagrees with it.

It seems that most of the critics interpret the editorial as a veiled defense of SMAC and assault on critical customers. That seems like a bit of a stretch to me. Nowhere does Morris suggest that SMAC was flawless, that it was the best product that could possibly be released, or that customers who identified bugs were incorrect. As Analyst points out, FIRAXIS has admitted that the bugs in SMAC go beyond the hardware compatibility problems that Morris cites in the editorial. Thus, if the editorial can be read as claiming that the errors in SMAC were unavoidable or strictly a matter of hardware compatability, Morris has deviated seriously from the company's public position.

posted 08-03-99 07:47 PM ET            

A buggy game is Sierra's Civil War (firsat version). A buggy game is Activision's Mechwarrior Titanium edition. Hell, a bug is the way that units try to get from one point to another in Age of Empires.

I have one frustration with the game, and I consider that to be less a bug than a feature I'd like to see incorporated...

Basilisk

posted 08-03-99 09:42 PM ET         

Having said so--JKM was right that some bugs are caused by software/hardware incompatibility problems. . .Anyone remember the memory leak in Windows?--when the game SAID it's windows 9.x compatible yet there were still problems. . .EXE problems, compatibility and stability problems. . .I've never had these problems because I had a "standard" bootup version tailored for SMAc. . .WHEN it was on my harddrive.

posted 08-04-99 05:10 AM ET            

Do I think that it was a good idea for JKM to write the article?

Well yes but he should have resisted mentioning the on-line community, it comes across as an attack on certain posters here. The generalisations don't work because what he says so closely mirrors experiences here but doesn't respect the posters on the forums. The comment about bugs giving people something to talk about might be meant as a joke or a terrible misjudgement it's impossible to tell from the tone either way, not a good idea.

The thing is his points about the on-line community never being satisfied and screaming for patches and fixes IS true. People don't allow him any time to do anything and everything he does do is criticised. Almost certainly the first thread after the "Great 'enhancement' 4 is here" is a thread called "What we want in patch 5". Then a couple of days later "When's patch 5 going to be out?" It pisses me off, maybe I'm not a Trancended Ironman hard core player I play SMAC and it's fun. I've had a few graphical glitches but no other real problems, maybe I'm not good enough at the game to notice all these game problems, I just potter along happily beating the AI just accepting the way things work. So what? I probably should play 12 hours a day checking the value and effects of every minor detail of the game just in case I manage to discover a bug. Does a secret project or base improvement working slightly differently to the manual mean that the game is buggy or that Firaxis tweaked the game for better balance after the manual was written? I don't know or care as long as the game works and is fun to play.

The worst thing about it all is that people make personal attacks on JKM as if he is not working his arse off trying to help people with getting SMAC running better and getting patches out. Of course he cares, of course he is trying to help. Yin submits a list of enhancements and they all get implemented. Jeffrey himself spent a lot of time on the support forum working to help people with configuration problems. What do you want?

So whilst I acknowledge that some the comments about the on-line community might have been misguided a lot of them have got people so angry here because they were so close to the bone. JKM is, after all, only human and a mild venting of anger like this is totally understandable after all the abuse he has recieved. He shouldn't have done it but he did. Get over it.

posted 08-04-99 05:10 AM ET            

Do I think that it was a good idea for JKM to write the article?

Well yes but he should have resisted mentioning the on-line community, it comes across as an attack on certain posters here. The generalisations don't work because what he says so closely mirrors experiences here but doesn't respect the posters on the forums. The comment about bugs giving people something to talk about might be meant as a joke or a terrible misjudgement it's impossible to tell from the tone either way, not a good idea.

The thing is his points about the on-line community never being satisfied and screaming for patches and fixes IS true. People don't allow him any time to do anything and everything he does do is criticised. Almost certainly the first thread after the "Great 'enhancement' 4 is here" is a thread called "What we want in patch 5". Then a couple of days later "When's patch 5 going to be out?" It pisses me off, maybe I'm not a Trancended Ironman hard core player I play SMAC and it's fun. I've had a few graphical glitches but no other real problems, maybe I'm not good enough at the game to notice all these game problems, I just potter along happily beating the AI just accepting the way things work. So what? I probably should play 12 hours a day checking the value and effects of every minor detail of the game just in case I manage to discover a bug. Does a secret project or base improvement working slightly differently to the manual mean that the game is buggy or that Firaxis tweaked the game for better balance after the manual was written? I don't know or care as long as the game works and is fun to play.

The worst thing about it all is that people make personal attacks on JKM as if he is not working his arse off trying to help people with getting SMAC running better and getting patches out. Of course he cares, of course he is trying to help. Yin submits a list of enhancements and they all get implemented. Jeffrey himself spent a lot of time on the support forum working to help people with configuration problems. What do you want?

So whilst I acknowledge that some the comments about the on-line community might have been misguided a lot of them have got people so angry here because they were so close to the bone. JKM is, after all, only human and a mild venting of anger like this is totally understandable after all the abuse he has recieved. He shouldn't have done it but he did. Get over it.

posted 08-04-99 07:09 AM ET            

Several good points. I, too, appreciated the way Patch List 4 was addressed and was also discouraged by the number of people who entirely missed the point and yelled bloody murder that more wasn't fixed. Don't get me wrong, there are still issues out there that never should have made it this far.

But what I think the real problem, as evidenced by his article, is the cavalier attitude he has about QA and PR. Those things are not extras just to make us happy. Those are money makers. True, a balance has to be struck so the product can get out the door. And if his job is tough, so what? He begged for it. Now he is wasting it away. Make money for the company, Jeff. Stop crying about the on-line community. As I posted elsewhere, this crappy site and the crappy PR here is the cause of all this.

Finally, Jeff fundamentally see us as an ignorant mass, some wicked monster that has to be fed table scraps. In short, he has lost touch with his 15 years of gaming experience and is now firmly of the notion that the mighty Firaxis machine can never be derailed--certainly not by a bunch of ingorant whiners. Once the QA department starts publically proclaiming that attitude, we have clear indications that the people who make the decisions at Firaxis are not paying close enough attention.

posted 08-04-99 08:28 AM ET            

The problem really is that QA and PR are two totally different jobs which require totally different skills. There has long been a call from people on these forums for someone from Firaxis to be a spokesperson and make time to talk to us. I, certainly at first at least, thought that would be a webmaster. Now with Dan Magaha taking on the site at Firaxis it becomes more obvious that what we really needed all along and what Brother Greg and I were asking for at the time little posts from the Firaxians doing the job.

To give some positive examples. Some of the best (read most useful) threads ever on the forums have been ones that were started or contributed to by Firaxis.

Great examples:

Brian asks for base names and permission to use some peoples locations from the first Chronicle of future history. Result 200+ posts of base names including some great suggestions by Russian posters for Russian base names for the University.

The Menu colour thread, one of the Firaxis artists (can't remember who, sorry) responds to our comments that the interface is hard to read saying that it's not the final design and a week later there are some new interface screenshots which look much clearer.

The thread in the Antietam forum where Jeff Briggs asks if anyone uses the F1 view in Gettysburg.

The thread where I was discussing the problems with distinguishing units with Jason Beaudoin and one of the Firaxians said they were very interested in the discussion and were always looking for ways to improve user enjoyment of the game or some such.

Now this is where it seems Firaxis and you and I disagree I think, the attitude of Firaxis seems to be that as long as they read the threads and do something about it quietly it's OK and posting takes longer than just reading a thread and they are very busy. Right that's one argument. Assuming they are reading the threads then if they find one which is useful (unlikely at the moment in this forum but possible in Antietam or CivIII) it only takes a second to say, "actually idea X sounds interesting" and they would achieve three things.

1. A much better focused debate on what they were interested in, admittedly with a lot more posts because they had mentioned it.

2. An end to having to respond to rants complaining about the lack of Firaxis participation which surface every couple of months.

3. A more reasonable attitude from the posters, the more Firaxis are seen to respond, no matter how briefly, the more confident people that their problems or ideas are not being ignored.

Plus we are the people who play games, we DO have something to offer. The attitude that Firaxis doesn't have time to post on the Forums is all wrong. Make time. As Yin says it is a money making/losing issue. Peoples purchasing of SMAX will be influenced by opinion on this forum and elsewhere. It is important. That isn't self importance from Yin and myself, it's just sensible.

The whole point you and I are trying to make is that we are an invaluable resource to Firaxis, we are here at least initially to try and help Firaxis make a game everyone wants to play. We've got some good ideas, we've got some terrible naive ideas but in all that there are some little gems of information. We might talk a lot of rubbish but we'd rather be talking about some proposed functionality for SMAX or how the new factions will play rather than arguing about Jeff's attitude to the forum posters.

What I would like to see happen is the whole Firaxis crew sit down and have a serious meeting to discuss the forums and their policy on it. Get everyone to read Yin's posts on the subject and discuss them. Then come back and give us a clear statement to make Firaxis policy clear. If the policy is "We are not posting on the forums anymore." then that needs to be said however much the public will hate it. This IS a very important issue and at the moment I think some people are already beyond the point where they can get back into the Firaxis fold. There needs to be good, clear, sincere damage control very quickly.

If Jeff remembers an e-mail he sent to Brother Greg a long while ago on this issue and he still has it he should go back, read it and think about what he said. I did promise Greg I wouldn't say what was in it if he showed me so I wont but it is a great bit of evidence to show that Firaxis have the right attitude to the forums.

posted 08-04-99 08:32 AM ET            

I did promise Greg I wouldn't say what was in it if he showed me so I wont but it is NOT a great bit of evidence to show that Firaxis have the right attitude to the forums.

posted 08-04-99 12:41 PM ET            

Will, see response to Bishop. Further, your sample for comparing SMAC to other games is interesting. You assert that there were no greater bugs in SMAC than in Civ or Civ II, rather conveniently overlooking the fact that these are the prior games of the same programers. That's little more than an observation that their skills have not improved and certainly does not constitute a comparison with the larger market. So Baldurs' Gate locks up on you, eh? JKM says that's very likely not a bug at all, but your own fault (or your machine's). I'll repeat the observation that I made earlier, slightly modified: other than prior games made by this same design team, I've never purchased software that was so *internally* riddled with bugs in the nature of failures to execute it's own features, rules and design. This is an aspect of SMAC's bugginess that JKM conveniently ignores. And Will, I don't think it's a stretch to associate JKM's comments with SMAC specifically. I think it's a stretch to regard them any other way.

posted 08-04-99 01:42 PM ET            

Some of Jeff's comments were close to the bone. Not the ones about leaving bugs in to give us something to talk about obviously but the ones about the never satisfied unreasonable internet crowd were. My argument is that as long as Firaxis are distant and out there this will continue. It's amazung the difference in attitude on the Firaxis forums where there have been a few recent forum postings. Stephen Lee especially has been joining in a bit with the fun he's not been out of control but he seems to realise that the posters are just people wanting to share ideas with people who like similar things to themselves. Maybe it's because he comes from a fan site background. In fact in my view he is the Firaxis expert in communication with the forums.

posted 08-04-99 02:13 PM ET            

Mike, I am not focusing on specific issues of bugs. Rather, I was focusing on expressed attitude, and the amount of spin control and PR that seemed to be executed. Obviously, an article by JM is going to be PR. And a little Spin. We all like to put up a pretty face. But there were ways to do so without being insulting. And there is a LOT of us out there that knows the ins and outs of Software manufacturing world. Go check the "Boycott" thread, again.

I can understand Jeff not focussing on the implementation "bugs" or design "bugs" that are in products. But he didn't mention those. People are using specifics here (on the forums) as examples of these, but that's all they are. Unfortunately for JM, those are the bugs and issues that Q&A is suppose to identify, and get worked. Had he included them, the "SMAC" community would have focused on that with a laser's clarity for a few posts, and moved on. Mostly in the vein of "Well, at least he knows there there!" and "Do you think he knows about bug x?" Poof. Then, it might turn into a bash the buggy game. Or maybe not. However, by NOT mentioning it, but including how Q&A gets its time cut short, he is making excuses. And not taking responsibility for his department. THAT'S a CYA (Cover your arse) move classic. Why does he need a diaper so big, it appears in adrenilin vault? What was the point? Is he trying to make SMAC's community to look like whiners so the new customer will disregard what they hear and buy his product? Is he just putting it out to the public that he is good at his job and nothing is his fault? Is he trying to tell it like it is, but doesn't dare touch on how some things are Firaxian's issues but doesn't dare for fear of losing his job? We can't know what motivated him to write such a piece. That just means we are going to fill in the blanks on are on. The answer may be right. It may be wrong. But its probably NOT an answer that a company would want its customers to be thinking of in the first place. Bad for business.

I whine. I moan and groan. I analyze SMAC to death. I even make suggestions for improving SMAC in a small degree (Would it be possible to make the Opp Eng to launch its missiles BEFORE other Unit movement?) and large degrees. Heck, I even suggest things for SMAC's descendants (Civ3, SMAC2, BrianX, SidX). I am a member of that silly SMAC community. But probably not for much longer. The lack of support and basic respect that Firaxis has shown in the past, and seems to be continuing to show, makes me more and more inclined to not bother helping their economic survival. At first, the amount of fun I had playing their games was enough to counter-balance their strangeness. But their strangeness continues, wherein their entertainment value doesn't. Our wallets are the bottom line voters for how good something is. And mine my not be opening anymore for anything with the Firaxis name on it.

posted 08-04-99 03:18 PM ET            

Perhaps he really enjoys talking about bugs, as he suggests we do. Maybe becoming a developer was just his way of perpetuating his twisted desire to chit-chat online about game mechanics and bug fixes.

posted 08-05-99 10:24 AM ET         

I read the article. There was nothing there to get upset about - unless you're one of the people covered by Droste's Second Law: "Some people are happiest when most offended."

Of course, there's a corollary: "Since they'll be offended no matter what you do, you might as well help offend them."

posted 08-05-99 11:45 AM ET            

Question for you: why don't you give proper credit to Firaxis and JKM for everything they've done (and, more importantly, haven't done) that contibutes to the current climate? Perhaps you do, but when you say that JKM has been "unfairly savaged" I don't think you give credit where credit is due. Yes, he's been "savaged". I agree. But "unfairly" is where I differ with you.

Reduced to it's elementary terms, JKM's article is a straw man argument ("It's impossible to make a bugless game--here are the reasons"; when the real issue--what level of error is or should be acceptable--is altogether different), illustrated by half-truths (defining bugs in terms that conveniently ignore the genuine programming and design failures in the product whose experience he is drawing on for his observations) and buttressed by an attempt at ad hominem refutation of those who would disagree (the assertion that people complain, not out of simple dissatisfaction with your product, but to fulfill a bizarre, hidden need).

Last I checked, an argument that was entirely built on deception and logical fallacies deserved to be savaged.

JKM's castles-in-the-sky theories need a good shave with Occam's Razor. The simplest explanation for people's complaints about your product is that your product has problems. Any honest look at this product would reveal enough evidence in support of this simple explanation to validate it. No complex theories regarding the pressures of the marketplace, the impossiblity of complete system compatability or the complexities of the human psyche are required to solve the problem. Indulge yourself in the much simpler explanation that if people are unhappy with you, there is likely a reason for it and, amazingly enough, you usually discover that reason.

posted 08-05-99 01:42 PM ET            

"Keeping quiet on the forums is not a shooting offence. Nor is expressing your opinion in an article."--MikeH II

Quoting you just so we're both clear on what I'm responding to. We're not talking about offense and punishment here (at least I'm not--can't speak for others). What I said about JKM and Firaxis taking responsibility for the atmosphere in here is my pragmatic judgment that actions have predictable results. When Firaxis staff largely ignores it's opportunities to positively interact with the forum society at their own website, it is entirely predictable that regular forum posters would come to regard Firaxians as aloof, cold and uncaring. When you express your opinion in third party publications that most people are too uniformed to understand your job and that the clientelle you are paid to service are a collection of social misfits and professional malcontents, the reactions of those self-same malcontents are entirely predictable.

Remarking on whether these actions are a "shooting offense" is beside the point of whether Firaxis must bear responsibility for their official forums developing a negative atmosphere regarding themselves. Cause does not require a moral link to create effect. Cause and effect is a mercilessly amoral relationship.

I will, however, address, your "shooting offense" comment directly. Speaking as someone who, in a former life, managed a team within a customer service department and who, in his present life, competes within an enormously competitive service profession in which you live and die on your reputation for client satisfaction and your ability to market same, if JKM were my employee, what he did definately would be a firing offense. If anyone who worked for me ever published, in a trade journal or popular magazine read by any part of my client base, that he believed that most of his clients were too uninformed to understand how hard his job was, that doing his job was made all the harder by their stupidity, and that, ultimately, anyone who remained unsatisfied with the work product of our organization was nothing more than a malcontent, I would fire him on the spot. I would then be sure to communicate to my entire client base that his opinions in no way shape or form were reflected in the culture of my organization and that, in fact, there was no room in my organization for people who thought in this fashion.

Harsh? Yes. Unfair? Decidedly not. It would be unfair to all of the other members of my enterprise, who service their clients without complaint and who do *not* jeopardize everyone's income stream with the loss of those clients via their reaction to ill-considered public remarks, to keep him around. This is the way the business world works--present business excepted apparently.

posted 08-05-99 06:58 PM ET            

Firaxis sucks at dealing with their fans. They only positive things they do is the PR Hyping dance of chats and articles just before a product release. That's it. BR reaching out to Yin and family to organize a Civ3 lists positive Karma was snapped when their new Webmaster kicked out Yin and everyone else from the "new" official Civ3 fori. Smashed it. Most people would have called it quits right there, but Yin is too much a masochist.

Firaxis has TAUGHT us that the only way to get a reaction RELIABLY from them is to set the board on fire with flames. We had every other thread here about the missile bug for many weeks when FINALLY we heard... "If you guys would make a list and put the missile bug on it, we are doing a path and will see what we can find and work." And so we did. And so they did.

But even the Sup&Trb posting by Firaxis is a general non-event. There have been times that JM has responded. But its usually on his own time, not business, isn't it? What does that say? That he has nothing to do, or does feel for us? Hard to tell, since he doesn't speak or interact with us as a rule.

Analyst, I think I need to be a member of your fan club. I find I agree with you much too much, too often.

posted 08-05-99 11:31 PM ET            

My theory is that they'll give him a slap on the wrist, wait until things die down a bit, and then announce some new feature or faction for SMAX to give everyone something else to talk about. Kind of a "Wag the Dog" scenario, if you will.

posted 08-06-99 12:11 AM ET            

Seeing as SMACAX wasn't making much of a dent in the lack of SMAC "activity", its more likely that they like the attention. After all, bad publicity is better than none.

posted 08-06-99 07:42 AM ET            

JKM has lampooned us, but we also contributed many of SMAC's good ideas. Where are the thanks for that?

The beta testers were thanked in the manual, which was honorable. But there was no mention at all of contributions from anyone else in these outer regions.

It's as if in Firaxis's worldview, the minds of the forum dwellers were a resource to be mined, then unceremoniously discarded.

posted 08-07-99 05:04 AM ET            

They might bop out and make a couple of nice comments. They will do a little PR dance, and then, most likely, no more. Not until after Civ3. Then, they'll do a little PR dance about the hook between the two games...

posted 08-07-99 02:06 PM ET            

As a humble knave with less than 150 posts, may a present a mere morsel for consideration?

In my business(Insurance) an old tactic that has since landed many a scumbag in the pokey is what is called bait-and-switch. As you know, I do think that JKM remarks were heartfelt and not some attempt to generate interest(conspiracy).

Assuming that at least some of his remarks were annoying to his peers at FX's, what better way to avoid the question entirely than to toss out a few seeds and see what sprouts. This is the baiting and switching that I see them doing. IMHO that is why you have seen BR politely discussing a few ICS issues. It is also why this whole thing will soon pass. Well except if Imran is foolish enough to stir it all up again.

In reality, this is the best public approach for them at this time. Time will tell if there are any internal repercussions and we will not likely hear of them anyway as the people at FX's are a pretty tight group(to their credit).

OTOH, it is also likely that SM, BR and JB have had a little talk with JKM and have impressed upon him that it sometimes better to say "no comment".

have a good weekend

posted 08-08-99 07:11 AM ET            

Still, this doesn't mean I want to talk about bugs. I'd rather talk about why the game was good enough to be more interesting than the forum bull****.

As for what he said about profitablity, I can believe it. Still, companies *are* in bussiness to make money, if a company had to release a crappy game to make deadlines I'm not going to light a candle for them, or even go buy it. Hey, Capitalism involves *alot* of failed companies, that's the whole principal. Still it does sort of explain one or two games...

Still, none of this applies to Firaxis. They missed their deadlines by many months because they redesigned the graphics over the summer, and the game really is not all that buggy.

Anyway, it made interesting reading. With any luck though Alien Crossfire will fix some of the bugs which have been harder to fix thourgh small patches.

posted 08-09-99 01:59 AM ET            

And when I said I expected a few comments from Firaxis, I don't expect them to do much of the PR Hyping for Alien Crossfire. They are really busy with Civ3 and Sid3. But they are liable to get a couple of questions about this fiasco on the "Developer IRC Chats" that seem part of the Hype Machine.