I would love to get a look at the source code. As obsessive as many of us are, who knows how many free hours of debugging they'd get out of the community.

Unfortunately, I also fully understand why it will probably never be distributed, at least not any time soon.

And you know this about me how?



There is no such thing as a cheap and easy alternative. Ever. Anyone who actually IS in business knows the old adage about "the customer is always right" is bollux.

In reality, no, sometimes the customer is very very wrong. The successful business man is the one who can identify when that is.

Giving the squeakiest wheels the grease is actually the quickest path to economic ruin there is.

Sometimes you just have to look your customer in the eye and say "sorry, we aren't doing that for you at this time".
Bruce

I don't think the source code would help anyone. First of all, source code is the propriety of Stardock, it IS the game, and they probably don't want to deliver it so anyone can copy the game and make Galciv2 without their consent.
Then, they patch/debug the code. That means that you would have to setup all sorts of things to have a current version of the code. And how do they check your modification can be retrieved?
Last, you would require a lot of time to understand even half of it. I mean, I code an ai and it is not somehting simple. Even documented code, when the algorithms are complex, gets hard to understand. So when you have understood the algorithm, chances are ti will have evolved beyond the point where your understanding of the details may be of any use.

I think showing the code was just an act of showing good faith and providing proof of what Brad said.

I'm very perceptive. You may, of course, deny it and claim you have a successful business. (The average person does not, so it's a fair assumption when you meet someone.)



I never said the customer is always right. But you're wrong about there never being a cheap and easy alternative. There often is; this is why many businesses will often give away some (cheap) stuff for free just to satisfy you.



And you identified one incorrectly when you said the people on this list [sic] are economically insignificant.



No, it's one of the best paths to economic success there is, so long as you do *other* things as well. But what you proposed was *not* giving squeaky wheels *any* grease because they are in your opinion economically insignificant.



Yes, and telling that that because you wronly think they are economically insignficant would be a big mistake.

Bruce

Bruce, I don't really want to argue with you. But given the field I'm in, I'm pretty confident that I know a good bit about what makes business works.

But do the match. GalCiv is a tiny fraction of StarDocks overall earnings. Every person who's ever posted to this forum is a tiny fraction of GalCiv's overall sales. The most vocal few, who's names are immediately recognizeable on this list, represent a tiny fraction of that. To then claim, as the original poster did that this forum ARE their customers is in fact absurd, as I pointed out. If you think otherwise you are delusional.

Take the total number of regular posters here, multiply by $30 and compare that to StarDocks annual revenue. You will get a number that is so small that spending an exhorbitant amount of time and effort dealing with squeaky wheel issues raised here is not good business.

We do not have access to the information that will enable us to determine what consistitues an exhorbitant amount of time and effort. Brad does. He has indicated that this issue is in the queue but not a high priority item.

That's it. Done deal. The opinions of you or others not withstanding, we do not represent a sizeable enough fraction of Star Dock's business to demand anything and expect to be catered to. This is what I meant by economically insignificant. To think otherwise is foolish.

OK, now that we appear to be on a completely different tangent, I hope I can safely reply again

Re: economically insignificant
In terms of raw numbers, those of us on this list are insignificant even if every single one of us was hovering on the edge of purchasing some obscenely expensive lifetime Stardock Complete sub just because of the total numbers of Stardock's customer base.

In terms of representative power, I don't think we're as insignificant as the numbers themselves make it appear. Stardock is not your average software company by a huge magnitude. With rare exceptions (GalCiv being a good example), they're not making their sales by moving units to the impulse buyer in a computer store because throughout most of the world their products are direct sales only.

Their core market IS the computer and internet saavy slice of the public - those people who don't just use their computer the way it came out of the box with IE and OE because, hey, MS gave it to them "free".

As such, they are depending on word of mouth both in the physical and the electronic world for generating a lot of their sales. They also depend upon their reputation for prolonged support of their products to not just generate sales, but more importantly to generate renewed subscriptions to their software as that is their bread and butter model: don't just sell a 'boxed' product, sell the product as a continually funded, continually supported and developed work in progress.

I purchased GalCiv partially due to my positive experiences with the continued development of Object Desktop. If even 5% of their GalCiv customers turn around and do the same for OD, that represents significant direct revenue for NO extra work or advertising on their part.

This board is not just the couple of hundred posters, but the thousands of people who just lurk, read a slice of the posts, and download their patches. What we say about Stardock and what Stardock says about us does represent the word of mouth to a large number of genuinely potential customers - since the current poll shows the majority of GalCivers weren't Stardock customers/fans prior to getting this fine game but this game is generating lots of good buzz, those folks are almost certainly statistically more likely to be buying another Stardock product now or down the road than any other random person on the net.

So, while I don't think Stardock is going to become filthy rich and successful (or utterly bankrupt) because of how they treat me personally, how they treat the people on this board collectively will have some measurable effect on their future business for good or bad (quessing good but people are a fickle lot .

Valamir,

My point is not that we're significant in and of ourselves. My point is that GalCiv has not sold to the mass market. The only people that have bought it are those of us who tend to post in the forums. Therefore, to dismiss us as insignificant is dismissing the entire demographic of the game.

Even if Brad thinks we're insignificant to the profit his company makes, his dismissal of several people as "Star Trek" dweebs was uncalled for.


[Message Edited]
[Message Edited]

"In terms of representative power, I don't think we're as insignificant as the numbers themselves make it appear."

Well obviously, everyone wants to think they're opinion is important.... but I think many people delude themselves into thinking that 1, they speak for some group of people other than themselves, and 2, that their opinion has an impact on the sucess of the company.
I find the thought that everyone who buys this game is coming the the forums absurd, as that scenario is never even close to true for any other game, but even given that its still only a minority of posters that feel so strongly.

Also, I'd ask you to check the lastest poll- the vast majority of people who own GalCiv don't own any other stardock products and have no intention of getting any. So clearly, the people who buy GalCiv, for the most part, are not the same people that buy their other- more profitable products.

Anyway you slice it, the only reason brad posts on this forum and does so much to support it is because he loves his creation. That doesn't mean that we cant point out bugs/imbalances in the game, I think he wants this kind of input, but it does mean that its arrogant in the extreme to "demand" action on some problem that is bothering you personally.

Thats how I see it anyway.

You mean like how I used that poll to justify my stand. I do not mistake how important *I* am, you on the other hand have little understanding of how Stardock got where it is today. It wasn't through massive advertising and bundling with other vendors, or flashy packaging and rebates in CompUSA. It's by applealing to the "computer geek" and reaching them through word of mouth.

Or how I pointed out that their sales and support model with the "more profitable" Stardock products that I already owned contributed greatly to me buying GalCiv. Or how I pointed out that similar cross-over from GalCiv to OD for people in the opposite situation of me equals bonus sales and profit for NO extra effort or marketing on their part. As has been pointed out, the people on this forum are pretty much exactly who Stardock's target customer base is. All that poll shows is that they've got some more people to win over.

[Message Edited]

Unlikely, since you continue to make statements like this:



This is just completely wrong. Business does not work this way. One dissatisfied customer does not equal one lost customer. I've told you this before, and yet here you are again, repeating it. This is why I doubt your keen business sense.

Bruce

No one is suggesting that thought. But there are a lot more lurkers, and further more those people who ARE here, communicate with potential customers in far more ways that via the board.



This actually works *against* StarDock, not for them. If existing Galciv customers bought a lot of other StarDock products, then disparaging their Galciv complaints would be less destructive, because they already have made an investment in the company. If they stopped playing Galciv, they'd still buy other products. If they boycotted the company entirely, StarDock would still have their money.

But given that many Galciv customers are *potential* customers of other StarDock products, then jerking their chain is actually much worse, because it's a lot easier for them to say "To Hell with StarDock" and tell everyone they know about how bad their customer service is and not to buy anything from them, Galciv or not.

It may seem counter-intuitive, but that's the way it is.

Bruce

Whole lot O snippy-ness going on! Relax people.. just a game. just a game...

That said, people still are not getting it.

"but it's not nearly as big of issue as the AI skipping key techs in their tech tree."

Try.. 'it is not nearly a big an issue as the AI skipping trees.. TO ME'.

Again, as hardcore as some players such as CM and others are about this game, and no matter HOW much they play it, the game STILL does not revolve around those players, which are 'the few'. Brad was simply saying that if there is indeed a bug, as he believes there is, it does not affect the *enjoyment* of the majority of players, thus it is lower in the queue. This makes perfect sense. Getting the free expansion done is a priority, as it will make a much larger percentage of GalCiv players happy. I myself actually am not thrilled about the AI skipping techs.. but it is not as critical to me. I am quite capable of reducing the difficulty one notch without it being a blow to my ego. Winning at higher difficulty levels is simply a more rewarding challange. It isn't as if previous TBS strategy games were devoid of cheating AIs. Quite the contrary. In fact, you will be hard pressed to find one that does NOT get many advantages. GalCiv imo, sets a new precedent for straight shooting AIs.

It is quite possible that the # of people who think it is critical that the AI in no way 'cheats' is equal to or LESS than the # of people that could care less, and in fact, endorse the AI cheating to make the game more difficult, and in turn, more enjoyable to them. The world does not revolve around one group of people, no matter how important they think their cause is *shrug*

I for one would much rather have the expansion and additional (new) features added, than to correct a bug that doesn't affect my enjoyment of the game. I have a feeling many people feel this way. If you are looking for the perfect game.. good luck to ya! LOL

I'll settle for a FUN game, 10 times out of 10. There are freeware games I enjoy more than some supposedly complex games put out by big name companies. I could really care less if the AI cheats if the end result means I am having fun, and the game is challanging.

So by all means report the bugs. But as Valimar said, no need to start explaining to the game devs how to program, and in what order they should quash bugs. I think they have it covered.


fleabitfox

Incidentally, 1.04.60 is now up which has a lot of AI changes into it including tech tree stuff. We didn't specifically go out and verify whether the old tech tree system was buggy or not but there is a reasonable chance that if there was a bug in the old one, the new system will fix it. Of course, it probably introduces different bugs.

~SDC~

Pretty classy note there, Frogboy. Sigh. I can see I'm
about to lose another weekend on this game.

One thing I can say is that for most of the AI personalities, you can't use the debug.err to determine whether it's doing the right path. It only outputs to the debug.err when it does weighted AI searches as opposed to the metaverse pathing method.

Thanks alot Frogboy

~SDC~

Damn! I just decided that this will be the first night this week I WON'T play galciv... but a new update...?
Okay! Here we go... LOL

That's ok, we'll be here to tell you about them

In all serious, thankyou very much for another update.

off to download I go ...

... or maybe not. Just read the thread about 250K scores for a single game. Looks like one new bug just got identified

Fixing presently. The release build metaverse calculation had a typo.

Thanks for the revised AI Frogboy. I'll have to upgrade after I finish my current game.

Bruce

re: #48

Brad... is the ParentKnown check making sure that it only takes into account the player in question? It seems that if it wasn't, it would explain at least a few times I've seen the computer get something that wasn't available *to it*.

Mind you, I'm not picking on anyone's code or anything. I code, I know it's easy to look at code and see what you know its supposed to do, and therefore miss a minor typo, and whatnot. This is just a simple theory of mine though... And what with the HUMAN having Interstellar Tactics and the computer not, but having Battleship...

Oops! A bit late! Oh well. Thanks for the support!