Richard, very classy!

[Jason2]

Jonathan,

I think you're a fool You are clearly a person non-grata because you have a chip on your shoulder a mile-long. Others have posted here about the bugs and frustration with AI (including me) but it seems you deserve the award of "most immature" Good Job, Jonathan - every board has to have one - you get the honors here.

J2

[Courageous]

I guess I missed it. What was this fool
comment all about?

C//

[C4]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Jason2:
Jonathan,

I think you're a fool You are clearly a person non-grata because you have a chip on your shoulder a mile-long. Others have posted here about the bugs and frustration with AI (including me) but it seems you deserve the award of "most immature" Good Job, Jonathan - every board has to have one - you get the honors here.

J2

---

I for one do not see Jonathan as trolling at all. He's a very active/experienced gamer and I don't feel he has made any points that are not valid.

IMHO, Jonathan's particular frustration is having his objective criticisms written off by representatives of Shrapnel as "misconceptions."

In fact, the one thing that a majority of people agree on is that the AI is poor. Well, everyone except for Richard and I wouldn't expect him to say it.

However, to write off the feedback of experienced gamers as "misconceptions" on other forums can be perceived as demeaning.

To say that there is nothing wrong with the AI and that you're just tweaking it is what you would expect from a marketing dude, but I don't think anyone posting here would support that opinion.

If there were nothing wrong with the AI, it wouldn't be a number one priority with MM to "tweak" it.

I for one would feel less frustrated if Shrapnel would come out and say, "Yup, the AI can be better and our Users let us know that. We're working on it."

There are other ways to field the question than portraying it as a misconception. For example if this were my game and experienced gamers said the AI sucked, I would probably say something like, "While some Users have found it challenging, we don't feel we've done our jobs until the AI can kick everyone's butt. We're working on it."

In this case, there are major issues with the AI. It's not just a matter of skill. It's certainly not a misconception that the AI is poor.

[Courageous]

I think everyone understands that the AI
still needs quite a bit of work to present
a player with a reasonable challenge. What
I personally object to is characterizing
SEIV as a "bad game" or as "buggy". It's a
stable game with good design; and given
MM's business model of continuous-improvement
based-on-feedback, people really ought to
count their blessings. Few games have
developers which care about them like that.

So instead of posting "this AI sucks" or
whatever, try focusing on specific recommend-
ations for what the AI *ought* to do or
exactly how it might be improved to present
a better challenge.

C//

[Instar]

Um, seeing that I am a beta tester, I have to (and I do) read the fix lists.

"so the opinion may change after that time, and I will gladly share mine again."
And I bet they will be so overjoyed to hear it.

[Richard]

*sigh*

Johnathan I never said a word about banning you. I did mention that I thought folks should lighten up and keep the discussion civil. Again I never even mentioned anything about giving you any sort of personal penalty. As far as my timing I didn't really look at this thread until I recieved an email complaint about the tone from one of the forum readers. Once I recieved that I investigated. As far as the BTS forum I read it every day, I ama big Combat Mission fan.

My point is that the game is not "imcomplete". The game could use some work in several areas, the AI being the most noticable. However (as I said earlier) I will take our game and rate it with any other Space based 4X game at time of release made in the Last 5 years.

In any case the point still stands, I have no issue with dissent here, but at the same time I will pop in to give my POV on the matter. Just keep it civil.

------------------
Sarge is coming...

Richard Arnesen
Director of Covert Ops
Shrapnel Games
http://www.shrapnelgames.com

[Freyland]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Richard:
*sigh*

Johnathan I never said a word about banning you.

---

Richard, I would have emailed this to you rather than waste forum space, but you do not provide your address in your profile. From the "Up to date beta info" thread...

------
Freyland...
I have no problem with you complaining, unlike some other Boards that won't get you Banned. HOwever calling people a "fool" and such can.
------------------

Jar any memories?

Instar, I am glad you are so informed, since you obviously weren't when you posted towards me the first time (about claiming I said the game was unstable, in case your memory is as poor as Richard's). Believe it or not, but I do not enjoy this "baiting" anymore than you. So, if you will keep your Posts realistic instead of exaggerating mine, we'll have one less thing to "keep civil" about, as Richard requests.
My point in the first place is that the game was released incomplete. I made a big deal about this, and everybody calls me a troll. Do you truly expect me to play nice when people act like that? Accept it! The game was released prematurely, whether because the "fanbase" decided, as some posters suggested, or because Shrapnel wanted to get it out before the Holiday (read: money) while there were no other good 4X games out there. I don't claim to know why, I simply stand by the clear fact the game was released incomplete. I mean, look at all the Posts! Look at the list of "fixes"! If you keep badgering me that I am wrong, I will keep proving to you that I am right. The sad part is we just go around and around.

I have said my piece (again), and would like to be done with it. If you wish to argue it, or choose to insult me, we can do it again. I will always have the "Fixed" list to quote. What will you have? Think about it.

Jonathan