posted 04-30-99 10:42 PM ET        

"The patch is in Quality Assurance, undergoing testing on various machine configurations. We have addressed all of the issues mentioned in the FAQ on the Activision CTP page, and will release an updated list on Monday with a few other fixes added in.

We are planning on releasing the art file format or some sort of graphics editor soon after the patch so that players can modify or import their own graphics into the game. More details will be released as this plan firms up.

Will Westwater will be providing an essay to Apolyton about play balance early next week. He will answer the forum favorite "why does a tank lose to a phalanx?"

The demo has started production, and we expect to release it at the end of May.

After the demo, we intend on another upgrade to add more things into the game (hotseat, Play by email, more scenario editing tools).

That's it for now. Have a good weekend."
______________________

Brian:

How long do you think it took them to do this? You know, all the "Oh, we're so busy" nonsense is getting REALLY old from you guys. You'll spend thousands of man hours getting a game out the door, patching it, working on expansions, getting the next game ready--but you won't have somebody spend 15 minutes a week on updating us? Silly. And in the long run very costly to your image.

The fact of the matter is that Activision, though it may have lost the war, is winning some big battles lately in the customer relations department. If you're not careful, you might just FORCE Activision into making a better game, a game played by happier--certainly more informed--gamers...

posted 04-30-99 11:39 PM ET            

Here by contrast is Firaxis' method of customer service (posted 4/30/99 in Troubleshootin):

In a message dated 4-30-99, "Mark fed up of crashes" wrote:

"I am still experienceing a horrendus number of crashes and the number of bugs in the game is still unacceptable. When will the next patch be available??"

In a message dated 4-30-99, "Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS" responded:

"Not anytime soon. Most (if not all) of the terran.exe fatals are system configuration problems ..."

-------------------

Sorry, but I am fed up with this. They won't tell us when the patch is coming. They won't tell us what is in the patch. And it ain't coming "anytime soon". Are they working on it at all?

My advice to anyone salivating about SMACX and posting your suggestions, save your fingers. I don't think anyone is listening, and there is reason to doubt that they really are giving anything more than lip service to taking our suggestions.

posted 05-01-99 12:47 AM ET         

-Your Excellency, how was the meeting with BR?

-BR is a troubled man. There is a disturbing force which may. . .well, that is not your concern. Has there been additional information concerning Yin26?

-Yes, your Excellency. . .Yin26 had been in a coma since the accident. He has awakened since and has been seen leaving the hospital with another. Also, we do not believe he was the one responsible for substituting the cow in his coffin. We believe he has an accomplice. Perhaps the same one which helped him escape the hospital.

-That is most disturbing. Yin26 has gained some followers.

-There was something unusual about how the cow died. It seems the cow's death was caused by tipping.

-Tipping?! Are you sure?! Why wasn't I told this before?!

-Yes, your Excellency. . . we only discovered this while you were gone. Does this mean something to you?

posted 05-01-99 03:11 AM ET            

Yin, how could you? Aren't you the one that posted the letters from the SMAC team that said: "We are testing-testing-testing the new future patch 4.0."? Maybe I misread that... I suspect that they would like to keep the 4.0 Patch/Enhancement closer between US/UK/French/German/Spanish/Whatever. There was a WIDE seperation for 3. Have the French even received "enhancement" version 3?

Now, as I said in tfs99's thread... keep those voices in shape. We are going to want to whine, cry, beg, plead, bluster, bitch, and swear after patch 4 comes out--- IF we discover that it needs patching. Having just discovered TWO more bugs in US 3.0, I'm off to report it in the Bug Board...

posted 05-01-99 04:18 AM ET            

Not that that means anything. I lived across from a small family farm that had cows, and they got tipped. Lots of people know about tipping, and many have done it. Tipping is at least as old as domesticated cows...

posted 05-01-99 04:43 PM ET            

jkm

posted 05-01-99 05:00 PM ET            

***** In a message dated 5/1/99, Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS wrote:

"About patch 4.0, let me again clarify. If I had to guess, I'd say all code work for patch 4.0 could be complete in about a month. What will most likely delay it's release however is a simultaneous language release (which for smac means English/French/German/Spanish/Italian)."

Commentary:

A nice vague estimate. Not really what we were looking for, but better than nothing. But then JM goes on to backpedal because of the simultaneous language release goal.

A laudable goal, mind you, but seeing how it took 1 1/2 months to get German 3.0 out the door, and French and Italian 3.0 are still unavailable, does this mean the "[coding] complete in about a month" becomes more like 2.5+ months?

Also, no mention is made of a testing or QA pass at the patch, is that part of the "code work"? Or are we looking at 3.5+ months now?

Let's see, 3 1/2 months puts us well into _AUGUST_.

I stand by my statements/rants in the Troubleshooting Forum. Firaxis has minimal resources assigned to patch 4.0 and always has. Maybe only just "interns?"

We can all exhale now. There was no point in holding our breath in the first place.

***** In the same message dated 5/1/99, Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS also wrote:

"Firaxis takes great pride in it's customer support, as do I. This forum is one such element of that pride ..."

The forums are great. But, as Yin and I have repeatedly pointed out, how Firaxis uses them to keep their loyal customers informed as to patch content and status is pathetic.

All we have to go on for patch 4.0 status are a couple of nebulous statements, squirreled away in the Troubleshooting forum!

All we have to go on for patch 4.0 content is vague 2nd hand information passed along by, not Firaxis Customer Support, but Yin26!

IF THE ABOVE TWO ITEMS ARE CUSTOMER SUPPORT TO BE PROUD OF ... sheesh, take a look at it from our side of the street guys!

posted 05-01-99 05:19 PM ET            

We do the best customer service that we can, without having any dedicate customer service staff on site. EA does all of our customer service, and the support on this forum is done when we can help (thus this saturday vigil on my part), but completely unofficially. I'll try to provide more information on future patches, but I won't provide much in the way of guestimates. It's been proven time and time again that no information is better than wrong information.

Is there any part of that that you think is unfair?

jkm

posted 05-01-99 05:22 PM ET            

Don't you think you are pointing at the wrong guys in this case ('Damn Germans! Bitching about...')?

posted 05-01-99 06:18 PM ET            

You could go to dinner at a nice restaurant, spend $50.00, get bad service, indigestion and have nothing to remember it by except for 10 minutes on the pot the next morning. How many of you whiners out there would complain for two months at the front door of the restaurant for an hour a day? None of you would. But, that is what you're doing here. If you're not happy with the meal or the service go somewhere else that you think will better serve you. Or give a few polite words of disappointment to the waiter or the chef. Don't annoy the other patrons or scare off other potential customers because your gut was too full of bile to have enjoyed the dinner in the first place.

posted 05-01-99 06:35 PM ET            

First, we appreciate your Saturday night vigil, and I know Firaxis has no dedicated staff to handle us--that's the problem.

It's not a matter of "fair" or "unfair." It's a simple matter of customer relations. Of course making up information is wrong, as you said. Building false expectations is obviously the wrong thing to do.

But you know what? All this silence on Firaxis' end IS building expectations--very bad ones: Oh, we might never see patch 4. Oh, they've given up on SMAC and moved on. So, contrary to what Brian might think, we are all not just happily playing SMAC and putting great faith in the silence of the forum.

This is ALL we want, perhaps on a weekly/bi-weekly basis:

[Patch 4 Update, May 1, 1999]

"Hi all,

Patch 4 is coming along smoothly. We have 5 members of the staff still dedicated to its release. At this point, nothing new will be added. We are now entering the final programming phase based on your suggestions, but we want to ensure that we don't fix some things and break others, or, like the missile bug, tell you we fixed something only to realize we didn't fix it completely. Please bear with us.

To this point, and this is not a promise, the following issues should be addressed in the patch:

1.
2.
3.
4.
.....

Of course, I have to stress that our team might have to remove some of these items if time or other concerns push us to do so.

My best guess--and it's still only a guess--is that this will take until August. Why? We have decided to release all language versions at the same time. Our previous habit of releasing the English patches first was simply unfair to our customers around the world. I realize this will be a hard adjustment for many of you, but that's our fault for releasing English patches early. I hope you can understand our reasons for the change.

I'll keep you all posted on these details. Thanks again for all your input. I think you'll see in patch 4 and SMACX just how much we rely on you guys.

If you have any questions, please post them here and I'll answer you as soon as I can.

jkm

firaxis games"

Jeff--that took me 5 minutes. 5.

The problem is that you are not trained in customer relations, and Brian isn't either. God knows I've tried to convince him that his "patch and ignore" tactics are deadly. He's missing one of the most important--and easiest, frankly speaking--pieces of the puzzle. So, Jeff, to answer your question:

None of this silence is unfair--it's just bad customer relations. It's sad to me at any rate that you are here on your own initiative and not as part of Firaxis' general policy of keeping its gamers informed. Please tell Brian he's making a mistake.

Thanks Jeff,

posted 05-01-99 06:43 PM ET            

Thanks for a few nice words. A gentle admonishment is so much more effective. Now, the rest of you out there. If yin can change, so can you!

posted 05-01-99 06:47 PM ET            

If the restaurant had an Internet site, you damn well better believe I'd hound them. The fact of the matter is that the Internet is allowing for consumers to gather and voice their opinions much more readily than with, say, a letter writing campaign or what have you.

You probably don't own a business. If you did, ESPECIALLY a restaurant, you'd want to know why a customer didn't like the meal. You'd want to know this so you could build upon input and double your profits. Simple.

Of course, you can't satisfy every little request--but you should listen to every little request and let people know that they are being heard.

Tell me, what would you do if that waiter simply walked away from you and never came back? What if he told you, "No. It's not too salty. We fixed that already." You might go to the manager? Well, the manager is too busy opening the next restaurant to be bothered by you right now, sir.

posted 05-01-99 06:50 PM ET            

We posted at the same time. Now you probably hate me again.

Anyway, I understand your point. Some people, like me, are just very uptight about the customer service issue. To normal people like you, I must look like a freak. But I'd like to think that it's the vocal people in this world that get listened to.

It's kind of hard to listen to a customer who's not talking.

posted 05-01-99 07:03 PM ET            

Another point is that many of the issues that hold up patches are mundane and dull office communication mechanisms. Would people be interested in learning that patch beta paperwork for the French version needs to be resubmitted because it didn't update the beta version number from the last submission? Things like this are common and frequent roadblocks, ones that often add up to produce very real delays. Is it even my right to publish such information?

Regardless, believe that everyone at Firaxis takes the happiness of the customers very seriously. To paint the image that certain camps are flippant about those who buy our game is simply misinformed. But there needs to be a line, one that services the entire customer community, not only vocal ones.

I think an excellent example of this is the concept of holding the v4.0 patch for a worldwide release. This obviously will iritate many English speaking customers, but will satisfy perhaps even more non-English speaking customers. In this instance a policy must be choosen, and one we recognise, regardless of the decision, will annoy some customers. Which way would be best serve all the customers?

Your thoughts?

jkm

posted 05-01-99 07:37 PM ET            

Your efforts to satisfy Firaxis customers are genuinely appreciated. Your honesty and leveling about patch 4.0 are also much appreciated. It's nice to have a frame of reference, even if it is worse than what you wanted.

I don't like ranting and raving. And I must admit to having been in a quite foul mood yesterday and earlier today. (That's what I get for exhausting myself preparing the May Madness SMAC Tournament ) However, it is a little disconcerting that very little attention is paid _UNTIL_ such ranting occurs. But I guess I can live with that, too.

I agree with Yin that silence has built up expectations. Perhaps a misinformed or poor estimate may have raised them further, hard to say, as that isn't the situation here.

As for me, it really wouldn't take weekly patch status updates. Every other week, every three weeks -- that would be fine. Even if the content of the post does not change significantly, at least we would know where things lie and we wouldn't have to wonder. I think this would be (has been) especially true for the European customers.

Of even greater importance to me would be a patch content posting like this:

a) Bugs reported to Firaxis

b) Bugs that can't be verified/reproduced

b) Fixes expected to be included in next patch

Then we would know:

1) What problems have been noticed and recorded -- this saves us from endlessly posting problems that Firaxis is already aware of.

2) What problems Firaxis is having trouble with -- this gives those of us who are so inclined a chance to send further information or .SAV files to Firaxis as an aid in their efforts

3) What problems Firaxis has under control -- this gives us something to look forward to.

And overall it reassures us that Firaxis really _IS_ working on the next patch, and not just on SMACX.

Thanks again for your posts Jeff.

posted 05-01-99 08:02 PM ET            

jkm

posted 05-01-99 08:35 PM ET            

The forums exist to make money, quite simply firaxis would sell fewer copies without these forums. I'm not saying this is a greedy thing but I do not consider these forums a gift, especially since they didn't make these forums.

Yeah I can sort of understand them not posting much here, after all they don't have a dedicated webmaster and they are looking to hire one. Maybe they should hire someone from a fansite like Apolyton. Firaxis quite simply does not have enough people for all the work that needs to be done.

posted 05-01-99 08:50 PM ET            

We definately learned some lessons about multi-language patching. On one hand, we selected RTPatch because of the potential to keep the patch size down (it being a "delta" patch). Another was the ability to upgrade multiple versions to the most current with a single, small patch. In practice however, it didn't quite work as well as we hoped. Besides numerous customer service issues, it also doesn't offer much of a download advantage when you "history" patch more than two versions.

If you know of a strong patching program/product, don't hold out on us. Which company are you talking about?

jkm

posted 05-01-99 09:09 PM ET            

I'm back. Wish I could have stayed awake, but I really needed my nappy nap. I lose so much sleep at night playing SMAC solo and MP that I've got to catch my winks when I can. BTW I'm never nastier than right before I drop off, so I apologize for my testy-ness earlier.

Yin,

No, I don't hate you. Especially not for anything so petty as posting simultaneously. I actually thought that was pretty cool. So cool, in fact, that given the large number of strange coincidences that I've experienced today, I'm gonna go out and by a lotto ticket!

No, I don't own a business. But I do manage a very successful one. A self storage facility, as a matter of fact. I know over 500 of my 800+ customers by name. I also have a great deal of experience in customer service/relations. So all of my previous missives on the topic (this thread and others) are based on real world expertise. I have dealt with every walk of life in my business and have had the exquisite challenge of balancing the often contradictory needs and wants of that incredibly diverse customer base.

You are absolutely right when you admit that not every customer's request can be met but that they should all be listened to. It is essential to knowing your customers that you listen to them. It is essential to your business that they know you're listening to them. However, it is also essential to your business that you not allow the contradictory demands of that half percent of truly "impossible to please" customers ruin the smooth operation that keeps 99.5% of your customers happy. I would be happy to give you dozens of examples of the compromises that are made in the face of these conflicts but it would waste a lot of forum bandwidth explaining in detail, so that people would understand. And I run on enough already.

I guess what I take issue to the most in the rants that I see on this forum is the lack of perspective shown by so many posters. Again, $50.00... for a game...
How many of you out there have never gambled ? You go to the tables and and you can drop $50 in less than an hour. You can go for dinner and spend $50 for one evening's pleasure. A nice dinner this time, for the sake of argument. You can get a good phone sex mistress for 15 minutes for $50. Not that I would know, being married and all that. All of these things are fleeting pleasures that you might burn $50 on. How many sane people are going to hang around bemoaning the fact that they spent that $50 and it didn't do *everything* everything that they thought it should do for them?... for 2 months?... for hours each day?...
This is what I don't understand. Why spend so much of your short lives in a perpetual bitchfest over such an insignificant (in the cosmic sense) slight. Make your complaints in a rational and reasonable fashion. See if you get results. If the results are not to your liking, move on. Get a life! (I hate that phrase but it is, here, apropos) But, to spend 10 times as much time complaining about how and why you don't like something as you do experiencing it just seems silly.

Now, to my pbem partners, where are my turns?

SMAC, like sex, is more fulfilling when performed with a partner. Try it. You'll like it.

JAMiAM

posted 05-01-99 10:05 PM ET            

I reassert that we've learned some important lessons about supporting multiple versions of a patch and will definately make some changes in the future schemes we use. Blizzard is an exemplary example of ease of use, though I think they have slightly different requirements because the nature of their product.

jkm

posted 05-01-99 10:22 PM ET            

Your point is well taken. I apologize if I come across as being flippant about other people's money. Again, it is perspective. Some of the people bashing SMAC and Firaxis spent *hundreds* of hours trolling through this forum (again, provided by Firaxis) and whining. I don't see how they could honestly say they have spent any significant amount of time actually *playing* the game. Now, if you spend 100 hours in the forum on a game that that you don't like, does that make sense? If you didn't have the $50 to burn and you're pissed about it being wasted, get a second job flipping burgers at minumum wage. Quit your job after a shift and a half then buy yourself another game. Net savings = 88 hours and about 20 points of bloodpressure.

posted 05-01-99 10:50 PM ET            

Thanks for the kind words.

jkm

posted 05-02-99 12:43 AM ET            

First, thanks for your time. It is much appreciated.

Maybe I am just strange, but I loved hearing about the paperwork. Why?

1) In essence, you are "educating the client." Most of the way we react comes out of ignorance. When I used to work as the Personnel Coordinator at a police station, more often than not the client simply didn't understand our situation--how could they? But when I explained, "I'm sorry mam, we just won't be able to assign 15 armed officers to your son's birthday party. The President is in town and needs all our staff--could you take 2 officers?" the reaction was always the same. "Oh, I see. Well, anything you can do will be much appreciated." We are no different here. Educate us.

2) I got my money out of SMAC a long time ago. The exciting thing now, more exciting than winning AGAIN, is watching the game get better. Even helping the game get better. Feeling, in some maybe delusional way, that I am helping Firaxis or that I understand the way Firaxis works toward making better games. THAT's the fun part for me. Maybe most people don't care and you'd be wasting your time.

But for 20 minutes a week spent keeping us upated (even with trivial details), you would not only educate us to become more understanding and appreciative, you also "include" us in the process of making the game. What more could you want from us? What more could we ask of you?

posted 05-02-99 01:01 AM ET            

I forgot to mention, even though it is obvious when I think about it now, SMAC does have a lot of text, which would necessarily delay the release of patches (by the way, I agree with releasing all language versions at once--good call).

It's obvious, but I wouldn't have considered it. Not only am I a little more informed, I am more patient now regarding Patch 4.

posted 05-02-99 01:13 AM ET            

Nice to have you participating. I have stayed out of this debate until now, choosing instead to concentrate my efforts on troubleshooting the sound problems, which are more up my alley. But flames aside, long-time active participants like Yin26, cousLee, ts99, JamIam, et al are all singing the same tune. Just not in harmony.

You asked if posting the same info week after week had any value. DAMN RIGHT IT DOES. It tells us you are listening, and tells us you and Firaxis still care about the customer base. If we know that Fridays at 4 (for example) we get the regularly-scheduled update on patches, SMACX, and what you folks in Hunt Valley are doing, a lot of the flaming and anxiety attacks disappear from the forums. And you guys justify our loyalty. What we have heard from you today in 3 messages exceeds what we have heard during the previous 3-4 weeks. Creating warm fuzzies for your customers is a VERY GOOD THING. (See how much Yin and Imran calmed down when they heard from the company?)

What I think is being missed by Firaxis is that Sid (and Brian)have created an Internet/PC culture dedicated (addicted?) to their turn-based games. It is the most loyal (and demanding) user base in all of gaming. Unlike the Doomsters, we can't take our frustration out by indulging in 2 hours of shoot'em up. We HATED Microprose, because they never gave a damn about the consumer. You guys DO. We are the LINUX community of gaming - we all want to help make it better - just because we love it. As you observed, maybe Firaxis needs to take better advantage of this resource.

I, for one, have probably spent about 100 hours of my own time troubleshooting and researching your sound problems under Win95, NT, and now Win2K. (I don't come cheap, by the way) I have not asked Firaxis for help in this endeavor. But if there were an open communications channel to your patch development staff, we might have resolved the issue some time ago. (See my posts in Support/Troubleshooting, under JTCullen's Stutter Sound post).

It is now the first of May. Most of us have been posting to these forums regularly since January. Four months is an eternity on the Internet, for crissakes. Yin26, et al are not flamers, curmudgeons, rabblerouser, etc. They are your loyal customers. Loyal to a fault. They are proof that your product is the real deal - and frustrated that it is always the little things that fall through the cracks.

My self-serving suggestion would be, that one hour of your test-playing of the competitor's games each week instead be dedicated to customer service issues, particularly these forums. Rejoin the community you have helped create. We apologize for the Evks of the world in advance - assholeism is usually genetic or environmental, and in some cases, both. The rest of us really value your sense of pride, quality, and dedication to your work and your products.

posted 05-02-99 01:21 AM ET            

Ha! Try June for me! . Actually June 6th, 1998. My one year anniversary is coming up! Yeah!

I agree. Give us updates, maybe not once a week, but once every two weeks or so. It would be very benefitial!

posted 05-02-99 04:41 AM ET            

As far as Mutliplayer goes, guess what? I couldn't care less about such things. I have found that in general I am either a Butt Kicker Extraordinare God or a Big Big Big Butt in the Air and my head in the ground for games. Most times, its the butt kicker. Makes most games incredibly boring, and with the rate games come out, there is no reason to troll through all the idiots that think they understand the game. Its more fun to learn a new game.

And yes, when I get fired up, I don't back off. Ever. I got my Vice-Principle tossed out of my high school as a sophomore. You raise a cry loud enough, and people *listen*. What they do is based on the person listening, but they do listen.

Jeff - Thanks for your time and attention. Having been, and still frequently on, the other side in my professional life, I understand Information is the dreaded Double Edged Sword. But keeping quiet ALWAYS cuts you. The pessimist beat the bushes and get the less than Faithful or the Excitable, Excited and [Very] Worried. Never Good. This causes a lot of raised blood pressure. There is also continual loss of faith for those customers.

The only advantage is that you don't make the mistake of saying "We are fixing bug X and have it eliminated it in the next patch". So when that bug is still there due to a design decision (Take to long to fix CORRECTLY due to having to rearrange a significant portion of code and make the release date), your customers lose even more faith. The only thing more embarassing than that is to truly fix a bug, but the bug BEHAVIOR is still in the patch (due to different bug or same bug in second code path).

As a customer, I can accept waiting for the next patch, so long as I know that it is PROGRESSING. Making version 4 available across languages is a bit gutsy, but considering how long it has taken to get version 3 out to the various non-English markets makes it more a principle of fairness. And gives Firaxis longer to confirm those bugs were squashed.

I think the BEST thing would be to allow us, the customer, access to a bug list somewhere that informs us what bugs have been reported and fixed, been reported and being worked, been reported but haven't been reproduced, been reported and will be looked into, and been reported and closed. When I discover a bug, I first look through the resources provided by the publisher/developer to see if it has been reported (and possibly patched). If it has a workaround, I use that until the next version is out. If the bug isn't listed I open a new Trouble Ticket/Bug Report. Your and your co-workers should be familiar with this process. I realize this isn't the way the COMMON user does thing, but Microsoft, Oracle, Borland, Ingres, Sun, XVT, and Remedy have trained me well over the years. Not to mention other departments in the companies I have worked in over the years.

Not only does such bug knowledge cut down on re-reporting of bugs fixed, but at the minimum lets users know what benefits they get for going through the pains of downloading 500K plus files through their 28.8 and 33.3 modems. At least post the READ-ME file so that your users can see what was and wasn't addressed.

Well, its late, and I want to go SMAC so more before I go to sleep tonight.

Thanks for your time Jeff! And thanks for posting, even if it only changed the tone of our whining, we really *DO* appreciate it.

posted 05-02-99 01:13 PM ET         

Maybe, FIRAXIS could upload some kind of 'language'-patch including necessary files like terran.exe and some of the .txt files,
so that everybody who can't wait can 'convert' his version of SMAC to the English version and APPLY ANY NEW english PATCH.

How hard could that be...It would be something like a beta..

posted 05-02-99 03:32 PM ET         

That would be very easy Yin, but I personally think that the body of your faux-update would change very little every other week. Is posting what is essentially identical information week after week worthwhile? It's a question worth discussing.

Jeffrey:

Thank you for being a presence on these lists. I want to address the issues you brought up from a customer-relations perspective. Your post was fascinating, because it highlighted the problems that I think generate a lot of the dissatisfaction around here.

First off, and with no insult intended, it is obvious that you are coming from a programming perspective. You ask if such postings are "worthwhile" and if "people would be interested," in other words, "why say something if there's nothing to say"--you're concerned with the content of the communication. Whereas, from a customer relations perspective, there is no such thing as content-less communication.

For instance, say a message appeared on the 'news' section: 'patch team still hard at work--argument over Hawaiian-style pizza holds up all-nighter,' or even a more mundane statement, like, 'patch team enters dull paper-shuffling phase.' From one point of view, this is a meaningless message--so why post it? But from the customer-relations point of view, it is the communication *itself* that is important. The message has much more than its literal content; it has meta-content, if you will. Just by existing, just that one sentence, it shows that Firaxis is listening to the customers, and that Firaxis cares enough to let its customers know the current status of things they worry about.

And on the flip side, the *absence* of such messages has meta-content, and says the opposite thing; it communicates that no one is listening, and that no one cares about the customers' worries.

Think about a conversation in real life. Even when the other person is talking for a long time, you are not inactive. You do many things to show you are listening. You look at them, you nod, often you interject little 'meaningless' phrases like "uh-huh," or "mmm". If you were talking to someone and they did not give you these responses, you would conclude they weren't listening, and stop talking (or, judging by some posters, you might YELL AT THEM REALLY LOUDLY...)

Firaxis does not need to become fully engaged in this on-line conversation; it is completely appropriate to let us do most of the talking. But Firaxis risks embittering customers by dropping their "uh-huhs" and "mmms." I think the analogy is very apt; small, trivial signs that just let customers know you're listening.

Now, let me take continue this comparison ad absurdium. In real life, where do you adress a person? You do not speak to their back, or to their ankle. You speak to their face. I would submit that the current set-up of the Forums has us all talking to Firaxis's ankle. All I mean is that it is difficult to tell where to post communication that you want heard. Look how many responses are on this one thread. Why? Because a representative of Firaxis has replied to it. Everybody who sees that thinks, "Ah, here's the face!" and starts talking to it, (myself included, obviously). Looking around, it seems to me that all sorts of comments are scattered around the forums; it is hard to tell where to post different kinds of comments. So, to switch analogies mid-stream (and mix metaphors wile I'm at it), it's like a bunch of people yelling down hallways, with echoes spilling over into every room. Once in a while a thin voice comes back from far away, at which point everybody yells at once down that particular hallway, drowning out all coherence.

It seems to me, then, that there are problems on both sides of the communication loop; the comments coming from the customers and the responses from Firaxis. I think the format of the Forums determines the nature of the comments coming from customers. Structured like a newsgroup, it naturally behaves like a newsgroup; rambling, hard to organize, at times tedious, often off-topic, often rabidly obsessed with triviality. This is not the best way for Firaxis to generate customer response. And on Firaxis' end, though Jeffrey Morris must be commended, there needs to be a bit more obvious indication that comments are heard.

Solutions? These are my ideas:

As I said, I think even a bi-weekly *sentence* would do wonders to show that Firaxis is listening. And I think the best place for it would be the News page, not buried here in the Forums where only the most hardy adventurers wander.

And as to the Forums... I'm not sure to what extent you at Firaxis are willing to re-work your comment-generating approach, but if you decide to take a new shot at it, remember: the format you use to encourage communication will determine the kind of communication you recieve. From this it follows that you should define as specifically as possible the kind of communication you want to recieve.

I'm going to make a couple suggestions based on my guesses as to what you want. (I've tried to keep all my comments realistic, because I get annoyed by posts that say things like, "and then you should cut to a cool interactive 3-D cutscene that lets you see all the trees in your forests!!"--but this is the one part in which I'm going to pipe dream a little.)

Certainly, on one hand, you want all that chaotic, generalized newsgroup-y stuff. It's kind of fun, and it lets us talk to each other and feel like there's a community. So you want to keep the Forums around.

On the other hand, when it comes to bugs, I think you want much more focused information. You want bug reports that a) are as specific as possible, b) are non-redundant with already known bugs, and c)give you some idea of how important they are--that is, do they ruin the game or are they just a minor annoyance? To get that kind of input, I think you need a much more formalized approach. By formalized, I mean both somewhat imposing as well as specific.

A web page that required you to register your system information and some personal info would, I think, be imposing enough to deter flamers and people with *very* minor issues. (Though I'd ask that if you generate a userID and password from that page, you make it be the same as at least *one* of your other pages--I already have 3 userIDs and passwords for your site alone!--one for registering, one for AlphaHQ.net, and one for Forums) It should also encourage specificity; not just a window in which to enter comments, but many little boxes to be filled in, such as "Freqeuncy of occurence:", "How much did this affect gameplay:", and "List any other running programs:". If you structure these windows correctly, you may be able to eliminate a lot of the problem-solving part of bug-fixing.

Also, I would have a section of the Bug Report area devoted to currently known bugs. It shouldn't state anything about the current status of fixes (that'd be a can of worms), just which ones are known or not. It might even be helpful to allow users to 'vote' on bugs--once they've registered, let them vote for five bugs they'd most like to see fixed. Again, I'd do this in a formal way, not on the Forums. You could use the page that lists the known bugs, and have them click radio buttons numbered 1-5 next to the bugs they 'vote' for.

Ideally, you would have the submission of Bug Reports be a three part process: review, registration, report. A user would click "Bug Report", and be presented with the option of voting on the current list or submitting a new bug. If they wanted to submit a new bug, they would first do the REVIEW; the bug list would come up, preceeded by a message like: "Thank you for contacing FIRAXIS. We try to make our products as bug-free as possible, and we value all customer input. This is the list of bugs we currently know about. Please review this list carefully to be sure you are submitting a NEW bug. If you see your bug on this list, clicking on it will take you to the 'voting' section of our Bug Report, where you can tell us how annoying that bug is to you. If you do not see your bug here, please click the "Submit Bug" button at the bottom of the report." And of course that button would be at the very bottom, encouraging people to really look at the list.

Once they got through the list, they'd go to the REGISTRATION page, where they'd enter as much personal and system configuration information as you need to accomplish the dual goals of giving you data and making sure that bozos chicken out. Once done with that, they'd finally be able to REPORT. As outlined above, you'd want to structure this page to encourage micro-specific information.

Well, that's my million cents. Oh, about SMACX suggestions--that's probably something handled capably by the Forums. Sorry for running on so long. Someday I'll get around to typing up my patch and SMACX suggestions, once I figure out which Forum to post them to. Smiley.

Once again, Jeffrey, thank you for being around these parts.

posted 05-02-99 04:01 PM ET            

I think the general idea here is that Firaxis needs to start providing regular information regarding patches and general developments in their product. DUH! But it can't be left to that. I'm sure that Firaxis could post a form letter each week saying:
-----
Yes, we're still working on the patch. We don't yet have a firm date of when it will be out. Etc and so on.
-----
Is this going to be enough for you? Maybe the first two weeks. Maybe even for another two. But after a while, the same old party line of non-information will get old, and that's not helping the you any more than getting no information at all. Some would argue that it's even worse because it's taunting. --I'm sorry, I'm not going to stop poking you with a stick this week. Maybe next week.--
Mr. Morris, you're 100% correct. No information is definitely better than non-information or worse, mis-information! You seem content however, to leave it at that. I believe that this is the heart of the issue. For some reason you believe that the updated information you could provide is boring and tedious and couldn't possibly interest your customers. From what I've found, this is a pretty common mistake. You deal with this every day so for you, these details may well be boring and tedious. This information though, regardless of whether it's interesting or understandable, proves to your customers one thing. You are at least making progress! If you truly have no information to share, then just bite the bullet and set a rpatch release date. No information means no problems or obstacles and you'll meet the date, right?

The other issue I feel I need to comment on is price. More than once, the topic came up. Why are you spending all this time complaing about a product you've only paid 50 bucks for and have gotten your time out of already?

----------
JAMiAM Writes:
How many of you out there have never gambled ? You go to the tables and and you can drop $50 in less than an hour. You can go for dinner and spend $50 for one evening's pleasure. A nice dinner this time, for the sake of argument. You can get a good phone sex mistress for 15 minutes for $50. Not that I would know, being married and all that. All of these things are fleeting pleasures that you might burn $50 on. How many sane people are going tohang around bemoaning the fact that they spent that $50 and it didn't do *everything* everything that they thought it should do for them?... for 2 months?... for hours each day?...
----------

The response I've seen to that here is that for some, 50 bucks is a lot of money. It's really more than that though. Regardless of who you are, it's not about how much you spend. It's about the expectation you have for your return on the money. If I go gambling with 50 bucks, I expect that I may leave with more, but will likely leave with less. If I go to a restaurant and spend 50 bucks, I expect that I will get a good meal and decent atmosphere. For those of you who like a good phone mistress - I imagine you expect to pay for it. If I buy a product, I expect to take home a working product that will last me. If the product has flaws, I expect those flaws to be eliminated. Let me make myself clear on that one. I don't expect product enhancements for my money, but I do expect a product without flaws or in this case - bugs.

That's my two cents - ended up to be a couple bucks - flame on.

posted 05-02-99 05:29 PM ET            

My point was that you shouldn't have to settle for some form letter because that's exactly the same as not providing any information. It still boils down to now putting any thought into communication with the customer.

posted 05-02-99 05:31 PM ET            

That was: NOT putting any thought into communication with the customer.

posted 05-02-99 05:38 PM ET            

Your 3:32pm posting was perhaps the most intelligent and well written post I've ever seen on this forum. This is precisely the kind of message, in both form and content, that should be sent to Firaxis. I hope that you cc'ed to Jeff at his email address, also. If not, please consider doing so.

posted 05-02-99 06:36 PM ET            

Yeah, I'd have to agree with the forum members who say that they want feedback on patches.

"There's a huge difference between a small amount of something and none at all."

Meaning that a wee note every couple of weeks, or even just one when starting on patch 4.0, would have made this thread completely irrelevant. Though any post by firaxis containing 'information' tends to trigger a flood of replies, failing to post AT ALL leaves a void of information that, as darkstar mentions, usually gets filled by negatives.

While weekly updates are a great way to waste time that could be better spent on doing work, you still have to do enough to make a small amount of information available, instead of none.

It seems this thread has already taken care of this need.

P.S How the hell can you afford a lurker rush? Those things are so overpriced it's not funny...

posted 05-02-99 07:29 PM ET            

he didn't use the standard lurker rush though, normally six lings are sent out fairly early as a disruption tactic and sunkens are not made.

posted 05-02-99 07:45 PM ET            

Let me thank everyone for their thoughtful contributions, and to encourage this kind of dialogue to take place into the future. While threats and grandstanding can often get Firaxian's attention, it can potentially cripple serious and meaningful progress. We all share the same hobby, and I think we all agree it's one that can completely consume our lives. Let's make sure we emphasize our similiarities so that we can actually benefit from this forum, rather than goad and prod each other's conforming to the other's will. Everybody here want's to play top-notch, engrossing computer games, it's as simple as that. Everybody.

jkm

posted 05-02-99 08:19 PM ET            

This is wonderful news. As a person who caused you some trouble back when I first came on here, I agree that making for a tense situation accomplishes nothing. I applaud your initiative on this issue. Most guys in your position would probably just do what is asked of him, nothing more, and go home.

Could you do me a favor, though?

When you finally get that Webmaster position filled, could you make him or her read this thread and recite it from memory at the beginning of each staff meeting?

posted 05-02-99 08:21 PM ET            

OTOH, against a psychotic marine + Firebat rush strategy, the lurkers will be an absolute killer. And they'll do okay against zerglings and Hydralisks, too.

Hmmm. The anti-rush rush tactic. I must investigate this...

JKM: We all agree. It's as simple as that. Everybody .

P.S referring to Yin's press release at the start, I'd like to ask what the hell is going on at activision? Did they decide to write the game by majority decision and not tell anyone?

"Hell, we don't know what we're doing here. Let's just release it, get the feedback, and finish it from that. It's obvious the public is smarter than we are."

Which makes everyone who's bought CTP a kind of 'shareholder' in this process. Given enough time (say two years) and enough hard work and input by the shareholders, and they could get a pretty good game out of it.

I know, it's insane. But it seems to be happening.

FOR SALE
"Civilisation - long running title with good track record, one previous owner, somewhat weather beaten but a good fixer upper. Price: $50, phone Acti Vision at 555-5555."

posted 05-02-99 10:13 PM ET            

I can see how an expert player could lose to it - once. The medic rush does sound like a reasonably effective counter, provided you get all the lurkers quickly, including any overlords the player has brought with them - a bit tricky, but cheap enough to make it reasonable.

(At any rate, medics and marines/firebats already do a superb job on the zerg early on in the game).

So, just how many lurkers do you need for this? I'm thinking around 8-12 with virtually nothing else (original base of two hatcheries, 1 extractor, spawning pool and Hydra den, with an expansion of 1 hatchery and 1 extractor). But that would require a slow expansion by the terran, or an over-emphasis on marines (not unlikely, I admit).

Naw, it's too risky a tactic to use often - unless your Zergling scout finds upwards of 2 barracks at the terran base - then it might be worth a try, in combination with something else, like a few waves of zerglings (which would wipe out the medic rush, too) before and after.

posted 05-03-99 01:02 AM ET            

Oh, you mean not everybody knows Latin? In that case...

It is very strange that the patch is being held up by internationalisation.

posted 05-03-99 01:06 AM ET            

Well, at least finally the message has gotten through. And maybe now that they're listening, something good may come of our involvement.

posted 05-03-99 01:13 AM ET            

Right now, somehow many companies are following Microsoft's lead, that all patches contain enhancements to existing products.

Strictly speaking, that is not necessarily. What people want are bug fixes (which could include corrections to previous design flaws)and not more features.

Adding more features have a tendency to break existing code, and create more mess in the process. We all see what happens with Microsoft patches.

So here's my suggestion: unless it is absolutely to add something to fix a design flaw, don't jam in more features.

posted 05-03-99 04:22 AM ET            

I'll have a read of the battle report.

Yin: ??? Amusing. Dumb, but amusing.

Greg: !!! Maybe it's just coming around to another golden age. And Mike Ely did shoot you down quite nicely in that thread - but I agree, the lack of firaxis input in these forums isn't a good thing.

Urban: Personally, I liked the Borehole cluster. And the A.I upgrade, which wasn't really a bug in the traditional sense. And I'm not sure that Microsoft started this process either - Cavedog certainly does it best, with the free unit downloads after completion of the game (and there were similar requests made to firaxis during the development of SMAC, like for more weapons and techs).

posted 05-03-99 09:24 AM ET            

By the way, that french bug is fixed in v3.0, which I understand signed off over the weekend.

jkm

posted 05-03-99 10:16 AM ET            

I'm the first person to thank Jeff for the trivial update!

Actually, I keep learning a little bit at a time, here, Jeff. Buffer size problems. See, I would have just figured you update a word document and stick it in the new patch!

posted 05-03-99 06:04 PM ET            

Rather the finger should be pointed at the one who allowed too much data to be copied into that buffer in the first place.

Every 'C' (or C++) programmer should learn early on to cover their heiny and double check how much data is going into a limited size buffer. Especially if this is code that is going into production. Then you can either truncate that data or refuse to copy it.

I hope the error was fixed by improving the code rather than just shortening the string!

posted 05-04-99 04:39 AM ET            

tfs99, I am sure that the Firaxians know all about checking for too long strings and putting all constants on the left, etc etc etc. But aside from some of the code had to be written in the crunch, so its not as pretty (and bulletproof) as it should be, you have to remember that a LOT of the APIs don't bulletproof or sanity check ANYTHING. Jeff was just giving us SMACultists a tidbit. And here you go and insult Jeff and friends intelligence... If you are going to pick on them, find something more significant. Like the crummy text overlays of non-Player events...

posted 05-04-99 05:57 PM ET            

The only reason I posted my "buffer overrun" post was that it seemed like Jeff was implying that the bug was "caused" by the translators, when in reality it was poor code implementation.

And of course I understand the limitations of deadlines (just ask the contestants in my tournament about the "bug" in _their_ scenarios). And of course I understand that Jeff and the programmers know that they _SHOULD_ use robust techniques.

I only went into detail to illustrate (and perhaps confuse) for those who might not be aware. It was not my intention to insult his or anyone else's intelligence. And if I did, I apologize. <sniff, grovel>

And I guess it was also a gut-level, knee-jerk reaction to all of the lazy *ss, immature programmers I've personally dealt with over the years who consistently blame the data, rather than their own sloppy code for system failures.

Nothing personal, Jeff and Firaxis. Just had my fill o' spaghetti over the years. Didn't mean to let my indigestion spill over onto you!