The "Uber" Command: Modern Air/Naval Ops Thread

[Grim.Reaper]

It will be interesting to see how steam community reacts to this.  The feature is still listed there as well.  Since by default steam auto updates games, lot of customers will auto see things disappear without a choice.  Of course developers will say somehow they should know this is coming and disable auto updates forever.  Messy...

Its not in beta there. Right now you can only download the update in the Release Candidate string and manually run the executable to update.  Once we go live and push the final updates you'll see the change.

Thanks!

Mike

Yes, I understand that...when do you plan to tell the steam community the next update will remove a feature and if they don't want that to occur, they must turn auto updates off forever and will never receive any other updates?

[RyanE]

One of the reasons not many bug reports show up is that the files are quite large on even medium-sized scenarios.  I had a file from the other night at over 100Mb for 10 minutes of recording on 500 units.

The largest I have seen was over 1.5 Gb.  Not exactly easy to move around.  But still very valuable for debugging scenarios.

[bostonmyk]

To be quite honest I've never noticed the replay feature even existed but that's partly because I only scraped the surface of the game so far, it looks such a great product that I've been saving it till I can devote the time to it that it deserves. That said I can understand peoples annoyance that a feature that they have had access to for a number of years suddenly being removed to justify a pricing structure that didn't even exist when they supported the project in it's early days.

However of more concern to me is the way the company are handling this. Since launch I have been hugely impressed by  Warfaresims/Dimitris commitment and willingness to engage with the users. (God knows it must be annoying to deal with the likes of H and the 'Why is this game not $1?' brigade on Steam.) Not to mention the continuing stream of fine updates.  This has really marked them out in my estimation as an AAA outfit and one who I look forward to purchasing future products from. However suddenly its as if the customer PR department has been outsourced to Battlefront and potential customers are marking it as a no buy. Presumably the more they sell the more chance we have of new versions  (And Warfaresims directors driving round in Porsches) so I think it would be in everyone's interest to learn from the mistakes made in this.

I definitely understand and respect your opinion on this.

To be fair we did include it in the notes of a Release Candidate for all to see. To say we were somehow being shifty is not true but it makes good fodder for those who think developers are shifty in general.

I don't see this being an issue in the future but we've definitely learned something.

Thanks!

Mike

[RyanE]

You assurances about losing other features are not reinforced by the other dev.  He left it kind of open ended that other features are considered.

So are you as a representative of the company guaranteeing that no more features will be taken out the retail edition solely for the purpose of being added to the pro edition?

[mirth]

Its more like figuring out what feature is more valuable to what product and I'd agree its about making sure Pro's buy the correct edition for them. Bottom line is I've never seen a bug report or post with a recording in it. We've even had it broken for a short period and nobody said a thing. What does that tell you?

It tells me you will continue to remove existing features if you think your customers won't notice.

Now that we've established both editions I don't see many more shifts if any.

What other features, currently in the commercial version, you are considering removing in future "updates"

It was a feature that, from the feedback we had, was used very little by commercial players but very much appreciated by professional customers. So we decided to reserve this for the professional version moving forward. There were several candidates for this "fate", and you probably would not have been happy with any of the others missing.

[bostonmyk]

It will be interesting to see how steam community reacts to this.  The feature is still listed there as well.  Since by default steam auto updates games, lot of customers will auto see things disappear without a choice.  Of course developers will say somehow they should know this is coming and disable auto updates forever.  Messy...

Its not in beta there. Right now you can only download the update in the Release Candidate string and manually run the executable to update.  Once we go live and push the final updates you'll see the change.

Thanks!

Mike

Yes, I understand that...when do you plan to tell the steam community the next update will remove a feature and if they don't want that to occur, they must turn auto updates off forever and will never receive any other updates?

Similar to past updates it will show up in the release notes. Do you think that is the correct approach? If not what is?

Thanks!

Mike

[Grim.Reaper]

It will be interesting to see how steam community reacts to this.  The feature is still listed there as well.  Since by default steam auto updates games, lot of customers will auto see things disappear without a choice.  Of course developers will say somehow they should know this is coming and disable auto updates forever.  Messy...

Its not in beta there. Right now you can only download the update in the Release Candidate string and manually run the executable to update.  Once we go live and push the final updates you'll see the change.

Thanks!

Mike

I think removal of paid features require more than a small single line in release notes.  You should have an entire separate communication that clearly tells people this.  Plus on your product page you should start warning people this will be removed in next update.  Need to be ver transparent and not treat as a casual thing in release notes.

Yes, I understand that...when do you plan to tell the steam community the next update will remove a feature and if they don't want that to occur, they must turn auto updates off forever and will never receive any other updates?

Similar to past updates it will show up in the release notes. Do you think that is the correct approach? If not what is?

Thanks!

Mike

[RyanE]

I would respectfully point out that removing a feature solely for the purpose of trying to sell another product is kind of shifty, on its own.  But the fact it was buried down the notes a ways and was never even broached with your customers just adds to it.  Also the fact you can't see the issue, when confronted here and on your own forum, does not bode well for customer-centric actions on your part.

I would hope when you do this again, you would at least talk to your customers to gauge reception on it.  And I don't mean beta testers.  That is an issue BFC got into with all of its changes.  If you only talk to beta testers, you are biasing the conversation from the get-go.

[bostonmyk]

You assurances about losing other features are not reinforced by the other dev.  He left it kind of open ended that other features are considered.

So are you as a representative of the company guaranteeing that no more features will be taken out the retail edition solely for the purpose of being added to the pro edition?

You are trying way to hard to put us and our product in a bad light. If I think your intent is bad what incentive is there to respond to you at all?

Mike

[mirth]

You assurances about losing other features are not reinforced by the other dev.  He left it kind of open ended that other features are considered.

So are you as a representative of the company guaranteeing that no more features will be taken out the retail edition solely for the purpose of being added to the pro edition?

You are trying way to hard to put us and our product in a bad light. If I think your intent is bad what incentive is there to respond to you at all?

Mike

Why is the intent bad? You're planning to remove an existing feature from the game. Why shouldn't your customers ask about future plans to remove other features when one of your own devs has indicated it is being considered?

[Dimitris]

You assurances about losing other features are not reinforced by the other dev.  He left it kind of open ended that other features are considered.

That's not what I said at all.

What I did say, and I ask you to go back and read it, is that a number of features were candidates on the chopping block and the recorder was the one we ended up with.

FWIW, our initial pick was something else. One of our pro customers flat out told us "you HAVE to reserve this for Pro". If we had listened to him you would have a legitimate complaint because it's a " core" sim mechanic. But we opted for something that has low commercial impact but is in great demand with the pro crowd. In our position you would likely have done the same.

[bostonmyk]

I would respectfully point out that removing a feature solely for the purpose of trying to sell another product is kind of shifty, on its own.  But the fact it was buried down the notes a ways and was never even broached with your customers just adds to it.  Also the fact you can't see the issue, when confronted here and on your own forum, does not bode well for customer-centric actions on your part.

I would hope when you do this again, you would at least talk to your customers to gauge reception on it.  And I don't mean beta testers.  That is an issue BFC got into with all of its changes.  If you only talk to beta testers, you are biasing the conversation from the get-go.

We disagree. It was in the notes of a beta candidate and we're responding here and now.

Guy I can only sink so much time into this. At a certain point I just need to assume you're a hater and move forward. Nobody in our company or any other is evil, needs to be perfect or whatever else you think. People just do their jobs the best they can and try and produce good game for people to play.

Thanks

Mike

[RyanE]

Look, I didn't start this conversation.  I just pointed out a fact around the release.  It was you guys as devs that came in and got this ramped up.  I can't think of a single game, other than Command and POA2, where a feature was removed from one version and then added to another to make the other one more valuable.  I was really sure it was that big a deal until you guys came in all defensive and pointed out other features were under consideration.

[mirth]

What I did say, and I ask you to go back and read it, is that a number of features were candidates on the chopping block and the recorder was the one we ended up with.

FWIW, our initial pick was something else. One of our pro customers flat out told us "you HAVE to reserve this for Pro". If we had listened to him you would have a legitimate complaint because it's a " core" sim mechanic. But we opted for something that has low commercial impact but is in great demand with the pro crowd. In our position you would likely have done the same.

Will you continue to remove existing game features as necessary to satisfy the demands of your Pro Edition clients? What other features are potentially on the chopping block?

[Grim.Reaper]

You should have been proactive, not reactive to something being removed from the game.  Deservered much more than a release note but I suspect you had an idea of the potential negative reaction.

No haters of the game here, I own everything you released from the start.  But removing features from the game and reasoning is something I don't agree with, including how it was communicated.

It's obvious your not going to change your mind, which unfortunately will make me choose to support other games and developers.  No problem...