customer satisfaction poll

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

apart from the fact that correspondence hasn't increased.

How much more proof do you need?

[philip.ed]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

How much more proof do you need?

My point is that that is the only proof the devs don't listen to the community. In short, they choose to follow whatever path they think will help their development scheme. Clearly they don't have the time to monitor the forum as we would want, however it would ease a lot of tension and help us to understand their status a lot better (it wouldn't take long to post a proper development update, as I have shown elsewhere)

[David Hayward]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

however it would ease a lot of tension and help us to understand their status a lot better

No, it wouldn't. Have you seen my summary of the progress report process? It always ends with people complaining that Luthier does not respect them. Lots of info, or very little info, the result is the same. It's actually quite humorous.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by David Hayward

No, it wouldn't. Have you seen my summary of the progress report process? It always ends with people complaining that Luthier does not respect them. Lots of info, or very little info, the result is the same. It's actually quite humorous.

it's a known fact that Luthier's sarcasm is often out of place. He can't take criticisms, IMHO he's worse than Oleg in this aspect.

I quoted before his corrected bugslist where he was doing sarcastic comments on the accuracy of stuff, a professional should refrain from doing it.

Again, this is my opinion and has little or nothing to do with the sim, but kinda tells a lot about the current issue with situation updates.

[Vengeanze]

Sternjaeger II, welcome to my ignore list.
Feels good to be reknown in the IL-2 community for ruining this forum?
Why do I guess you fly using another nick!?

Btw no need to reply as I can't read your posts anymore. Thank God.

[Sternjaeger II]

Originally Posted by Vengeanze

Sternjaeger II, welcome to my ignore list.
Feels good to be reknown in the IL-2 community for ruining this forum?
Why do I guess you fly using another nick!?

Btw no need to reply as I can't read your posts anymore. Thank God.

..this troll-detector plug-in I installed on Google Chrome actually works!

Too bad you put me in the ignore list, it says a lot about what open minded person you are. Best of luck.

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by Robert

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=23532


Hi everyone,

We've been hard at work on a whole bunch of stuff here. Quicker fixes are now a thing of the past; we're working on larger more complex stuff and so patches, updates and improvements will be coming at a slower pace.

Our next BETA patch is tentatively scheduled for two weeks from now for Friday the 17th, and the release version of it is scheduled for the Friday after that, June 24th.

The next patch will contain:

* Improved streamlined multiplayer GUI
* Other multiplayer improvements - more stability, all plane settings like convergence and paintscheme working at all times, less rare bugs, etc.
* Various graphical improvements. The distant clouds are finally back - i.e. the flat representations of clouds you saw on beta screenshots with pretty sunlit borders. Finally fixed the landscape stripes bug, etc.
* Improvements to FM and DM and various cockpit systems, as usual - long list there.
* AI improvements, including at least the majority, if not all, of the order system working.
* A new warship!

Other things that are in the pipeline:

* Sound. This is probably the biggest issue we're facing. We're taking a very drastic approach to the issue and pretty much redoing our sound from scratch. This means you won't see the new sound for a few more months.
* FPS. The final remaining performance issues, which fortunately are comparatively minor, lie very deep in the engine, and require us to do a significant amount of work. Probably at least 2 months of it.
* Online stability, more anti-cheating controls, and server and aircraft SDK - also a few months out. Dedicated Server SDK and documentation is probably going to be done the quickest.

NOTE: this isn't an exhaustive list, but rather the main bullet points.

So stay tuned for more patch info next week. I'll try to do more regular weekly Friday updates from now on.
Edit/Delete Message



So in my opinion SOUND, FPS, and Online Stability are the next foundational problems to be tackled within the game. Addressing other issues without ensuring these mentioned are implemented correctly would be like adding window dressings to a house whose foundation is faulty. Discussing the new problems would be foolish and time wasting. If significant progress isn't made or if progress that most of us wouldn't understand is attained, what good would talking about it be? A waste of time IMO.

I guess I don't understand what you folks want as far as a future road map and progress updates. If there's nothing new to report do you really think this crowd is going to sit down for, "There's no new news folks?" I doubt it.

Damned if he does. Damned if he doesn't. I guess for me, this is enough for now. I'd expect updates closer to when these things are finalized or they've reached a development plateau. As he wrote: "Quicker fixes are now a thing of the past; we're working on larger more complex stuff and so patches, updates and improvements will be coming at a slower pace."



If it matters. I abstained from voting.

Originally Posted by Robert

So then I'd obviously vote yes, because I WANT updates in a regular manner. I'm just not sure if updates can be done on a regular basis when the road map is so fluid ATM. One man's regular interval. may be anothers desert of information.


Being that I'm satisfied with the updates for now, and knowing many aren't, I don't think that's how the poll would be perceived. I think many will use it as a 'war cry' to muster up support and try to strong arm information or updates, when for me the regularity (or lack thereof) is fine with me.

I want updates. I'm fine with the way they are coming out. I don't think that's how the poll reads.



Say you get 100 yeahs.... 5 nays.... and 1 maybe. That says 100 want information. Fine. We all do. But it doesn't say that out of 100 there may be 50 who are satisfied with update progress. It CAN be construed to mean that 100 people want regular updates and all 100 think you're not doing a good job of it. That's why I abstained.

You just saved me a lot of typing, +1.

If there's nothing new to report, a simple "hey guys, we're still working on feature X and it's coming along at such and such pace" is the only thing that can be reasonably reported to us in an update.

That's what, 2-3 lines? Well that's exactly what we got yesterday in the last update and it's what can reasonably be expected until the next milestone in the roadmap is reached (banjo video notwithstanding), yet people flail about nonetheless.

If a road map changes every week it's not much of a roadmap, so i guess we're also out of things to report on that front as well.

As such, i didn't vote because i consider the poll options unsuitable to reflect the true conditions of the current situation: there's not much to report until something is finished, a beta sample is ready for testing, or the majority of the forum are professional programmers with prior knowledge of the CoD source code so that they will be able to understand a block of C++ posted in a future update where Luthier tells us how they go about implementing dynamic weather or something similar

What do you think the reaction would be?:

1) "wow, i don't know what this means but thanks for being so open about it?"

or

2) "what in god's name is this technical jargon mambo jumbo/you call this an update/it's clear they are mocking us/ we want a preview video and a patch release date"

Here's another poll for us all

In other words, updates just for the sake of getting them is only a recipe for repetitive or empty posts, unless there is something tangible to report.

It's not a matter of whether we want updates or not, everyone does. It's a matter of whether there's anything to update us on that the majority of the forum can make sense of without seeing a final, complete result.

I seriously doubt there currently is such a thing, especially seeing how hung up the loudest crowd is on easy to spot superficial details and completely misses all the gameplay-relevant details and fixes needed under the hood (where they haven't bothered to look much because the fields are too green and the tracers too thick) so the way updates are currently handled is fine for me: it seems the majority of people who create the "want updates" wave is mostly focused on things they can see or hear, but there's no new pretty pictures to show and the sounds are not ready yet.

You know what fixes i would be ecstatic about? Fixing the gyrocompass in the Ju88 so that it can use its level bombing autopilot and actually fly the mission it's intended to, tweak the CEM to correct the current inaccuracies in FM, adjust the turret behaviour on bombers with powered turrets so they can be used as intented and redo the anthropomoprhic controls to filter out controller spikes and take into account control proximity instead of having an arbitrary "two hand limit".

However, these are not fixes that can be displayed until they are done and a demo video is uploaded for us to see. I wouldn't understand a thing about how they do it in the code, so a simple "we're fixing the issues with the bombers" is all i need to hear.



To start wrapping this up, if the poll had a "none of the above, i have another opinion (please elaborate in post)" option, i would have gone with that. I think the options are a bit too "railroaded" for me and while it's true we can't have polls with 19765 options to reflect every opinion, i think the current choices are a bit too limited: they will result in an overwhelming "yes, we want updates" verdict without making any mention of the issues presented above in the rest of my post and the quotes provided, which is actually the biggest part of why there are no regular updates at this time.

As such, i consider it a non-representative poll (there's no immediately visible way to know how many people read the poll but abstained, which would be a good indication of how the community gauges the validity of the poll, unless we start comparing the amount of views and votes), abstain from voting and i will openly challenge the interpretation of its very predictable results if it ends up being used as a "leverage point" further down the road. Nothing personal of course, i'm just taking the clinical approach here and telling it how i see it:

The poll is skewed (i'm not saying it's done on purpose, it's just skewed), the results will be the same and as such, it doesn't qualify for much of an argument/evidence. For example, people may vote "i don't want updates" if they think it's skewed on purpose, just to spite off the ones who demand the updates, if it happened to be a majority would the result be valid?

Some people may like to make fun of him, but the guy in the below quote got it all right in much fewer words than i used:

Originally Posted by raaaid

this poll reminded me of this:

i bet you one million internetz at a toss of a coin:

heads i win

tails you lose

toss the coin and give me the internets if you lose

[Sternjaeger II]

Blackdog, I always get kinda scared by the length of your posts, but I generally agree with with you, you always come out as a well balanced member. Let me explain what I meant with this poll, cos I believe there's a lot of second guessing and misunderstanding of my purpose:

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

You just saved me a lot of typing, +1.

If there's nothing new to report, a simple "hey guys, we're still working on feature X and it's coming along at such and such pace" is the only thing that can be reasonably reported to us in an update.

That's what, 2-3 lines? Well that's exactly what we got yesterday in the last update and it's what can reasonably be expected until the next milestone in the roadmap is reached (banjo video notwithstanding), yet people flail about nonetheless.

If a road map changes every week it's not much of a roadmap, so i guess we're also out of things to report on that front as well.

I don't think there's a need to change the roadmap, all I'm saying is that an update of the work status towards the next patch would be very appreciated, cos it puts us in a perspective of knowing what's happening.

Again, as a customer and a fan of one of the (potentially) best sims on the market, I feel that, because of the relentless support, help and investment (I personally bought two copies of every single game released by the guys, publicised their work and ran the first Italian community website back in the times when the first IL-2 came out) that we made in Maddox Games, the least that we could receive is the same treatment we received over the past years, with constant feedback, updates and interaction. Yes, there have been dark times and bright ones, but the result (IL-2 1946) was a gem of rare beauty.

The air is different now, the screwing up that came with the poor distributor managing (and here I curse you, Ubisoft!), brought us to a release of a half finished game. I'm sure that the guys made a miracle in terms of logistic and programming work, but the sad reality is that they were forced to sell an alpha for a complete game. We were ready to put up with it too, but 5 months along the line, and after years of "family work", the last thing I accept is to see a new development manager behaving in a bit of an unprofessional manner, using sarcasm when really uncalled for and giving less and less updates, until the embarrassing silence of the last weeks, broken only by a very poor stunt that is only buying him time. And again, it's not the action per se, it's the fact that he thinks he can pull such a number to the "old school" members that really leaves me disappointed.

As such, i didn't vote because i consider the poll options unsuitable to reflect the true conditions of the current situation: there's not much to report until something is finished, a beta sample is ready for testing, or the majority of the forum are professional programmers with prior knowledge of the CoD source code so that they will be able to understand a block of C++ posted in a future update where Luthier tells us how they go about implementing dynamic weather or something similar

What do you think the reaction would be?:

1) "wow, i don't know what this means but thanks for being so open about it?"

or

2) "what in god's name is this technical jargon mambo jumbo/you call this an update/it's clear they are mocking us/ we want a preview video and a patch release date"

this is just speculation, and I'd be the first to corner the real trolls that come here and look for some trouble whenever Luthier posts a genuine update that is respectful to the community.

Here's another poll for us all

In other words, updates just for the sake of getting them is only a recipe for repetitive or empty posts, unless there is something tangible to report.

It's not a matter of whether we want updates or not, everyone does. It's a matter of whether there's anything to update us on that the majority of the forum can make sense of without seeing a final, complete result.

I seriously doubt there currently is such a thing, especially seeing how hung up the loudest crowd is on easy to spot superficial details and completely misses all the gameplay-relevant details and fixes needed under the hood (where they haven't bothered to look much because the fields are too green and the tracers too thick) so the way updates are currently handled is fine for me: it seems the majority of people who create the "want updates" wave is mostly focused on things they can see or hear, but there's no new pretty pictures to show and the sounds are not ready yet.

You know what fixes i would be ecstatic about? Fixing the gyrocompass in the Ju88 so that it can use its level bombing autopilot and actually fly the mission it's intended to, tweak the CEM to correct the current inaccuracies in FM, adjust the turret behaviour on bombers with powered turrets so they can be used as intented and redo the anthropomoprhic controls to filter out controller spikes and take into account control proximity instead of having an arbitrary "two hand limit".

However, these are not fixes that can be displayed until they are done and a demo video is uploaded for us to see. I wouldn't understand a thing about how they do it in the code, so a simple "we're fixing the issues with the bombers" is all i need to hear.



To start wrapping this up, if the poll had a "none of the above, i have another opinion (please elaborate in post)" option, i would have gone with that. I think the options are a bit too "railroaded" for me and while it's true we can't have polls with 19765 options to reflect every opinion, i think the current choices are a bit too limited: they will result in an overwhelming "yes, we want updates" verdict without making any mention of the issues presented above in the rest of my post and the quotes provided, which is actually the biggest part of why there are no regular updates at this time.

As such, i consider it a non-representative poll (there's no immediately visible way to know how many people read the poll but abstained, which would be a good indication of how the community gauges the validity of the poll, unless we start comparing the amount of views and votes), abstain from voting and i will openly challenge the interpretation of its very predictable results if it ends up being used as a "leverage point" further down the road. Nothing personal of course, i'm just taking the clinical approach here and telling it how i see it:

The poll is skewed (i'm not saying it's done on purpose, it's just skewed), the results will be the same and as such, it doesn't qualify for much of an argument/evidence. For example, people may vote "i don't want updates" if they think it's skewed on purpose, just to spite off the ones who demand the updates, if it happened to be a majority would the result be valid?

Some people may like to make fun of him, but the guy in the below quote got it all right in much fewer words than i used:

I think the magic of the poll is that once you vote you can explain why you did it. Like I said to Robert, any opinion is valid, as long as there's polite, civil and intelligent conversation coming with it. I have no mercy or sympathy for trolls or agitators, my flaw is that I get to their level, but I can't help it.

I hope you will consider my words and maybe understand that mine is a genuine call to see how many people would like to be updated on this long, unusual and somehow worrying silence.

[Robert]

I'll quote Luthier's June 3rd, 2011 update again (sorry):

"Other things that are in the pipeline:

* Sound. This is probably the biggest issue we're facing. We're taking a very drastic approach to the issue and pretty much redoing our sound from scratch. This means you won't see the new sound for a few more months.
* FPS. The final remaining performance issues, which fortunately are comparatively minor, lie very deep in the engine, and require us to do a significant amount of work. Probably at least 2 months of it.
* Online stability, more anti-cheating controls, and server and aircraft SDK - also a few months out. Dedicated Server SDK and documentation is probably going to be done the quickest."


It's been almost two months since this was posted when Luthier mentioned the sound and online stability won't be ready for a couple/few months. The same for final FPS issues. (I'm still hedging a bet that this new sound is going to help a good deal in the FPS category.) Since that time we are almost two months closer to that goal. Does that mean another month? Two? Three? IDK. But does the development team even know?

I'd like to assume Luthier's banjo routine was a positive sign that things are going good. After all that's what he said.... which I hope means we are close. That doesn't mean they know how close to patch release they are, but it is an indication things are going well

While some don't recognize yesterday's post as an update, I do. The other things people are waiting for do not compare in necessity as these fixes now. When it's time to address them I'm confident 1C will advise.

Again. While others feel there is no communication, I see a road map. We're not going to get any closer or any faster to our destination by knowing what less important bugs/issues are being worked on further on down that road map.


On a long trip it's great to wonder about the Grand Canyon, but what good does it do if you're stuck 2000 miles away on the Tappen Zee Bridge?

[Blackdog_kt]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

Blackdog, I always get kinda scared by the length of your posts, but I generally agree with with you, you always come out as a well balanced member. Let me explain what I meant with this poll, cos I believe there's a lot of second guessing and misunderstanding of my purpose:



I don't think there's a need to change the roadmap, all I'm saying is that an update of the work status towards the next patch would be very appreciated, cos it puts us in a perspective of knowing what's happening.

Again, as a customer and a fan of one of the (potentially) best sims on the market, I feel that, because of the relentless support, help and investment (I personally bought two copies of every single game released by the guys, publicised their work and ran the first Italian community website back in the times when the first IL-2 came out) that we made in Maddox Games, the least that we could receive is the same treatment we received over the past years, with constant feedback, updates and interaction. Yes, there have been dark times and bright ones, but the result (IL-2 1946) was a gem of rare beauty.

The air is different now, the screwing up that came with the poor distributor managing (and here I curse you, Ubisoft!), brought us to a release of a half finished game. I'm sure that the guys made a miracle in terms of logistic and programming work, but the sad reality is that they were forced to sell an alpha for a complete game. We were ready to put up with it too, but 5 months along the line, and after years of "family work", the last thing I accept is to see a new development manager behaving in a bit of an unprofessional manner, using sarcasm when really uncalled for and giving less and less updates, until the embarrassing silence of the last weeks, broken only by a very poor stunt that is only buying him time. And again, it's not the action per se, it's the fact that he thinks he can pull such a number to the "old school" members that really leaves me disappointed.



this is just speculation, and I'd be the first to corner the real trolls that come here and look for some trouble whenever Luthier posts a genuine update that is respectful to the community.



I think the magic of the poll is that once you vote you can explain why you did it. Like I said to Robert, any opinion is valid, as long as there's polite, civil and intelligent conversation coming with it. I have no mercy or sympathy for trolls or agitators, my flaw is that I get to their level, but I can't help it.

I hope you will consider my words and maybe understand that mine is a genuine call to see how many people would like to be updated on this long, unusual and somehow worrying silence.

Fain enough. We all get dragged into the mud pit from time to time (i guess today is my day for it ), so thanks for explaining it in a more level headed manner