Friday Official Update, June 22, 2012

[No601_Merlin]

. . . but they are actively banning people that show them up, expecting us to accept this incomplete production, that we paid for a year ago that's still unusable in any way similar the to IL2 that we have loved for years.

I feel cheated and taken advantage of expecting me or anyone else to buy the next instalment.

You lot are clueless when it comes to lifetime customer value.

Best you could do is sell the right to 777 who know to cultivate a regular income stream and continue to develop what has now become an exceptional product 'Rise of Flight'

Ban away, and if anyone disagrees you have got the game you deserve.

[Fjordmonkey]

Originally Posted by No601_Merlin

. . . but they are actively banning people that show them up, expecting us to accept this incomplete production, that we paid for a year ago that's still unusable in any way similar the to IL2 that we have loved for years.

I feel cheated and taken advantage of expecting me or anyone else to buy the next instalment.

You lot are clueless when it comes to lifetime customer value.

Best you could do is sell the right to 777 who know to cultivate a regular income stream and continue to develop what has now become an exceptional product 'Rise of Flight'

Ban away, and if anyone disagrees you have got the game you deserve.

Nobody is getting banned for voicing their opinion, but people ARE getting banned because of HOW they voice their opinion. There's a difference there that few people seem to realize.

If you stay constructive (i.e. don't go balls-out with cursing, insulting the devs/other posters and generally being a tosspot), then you won't get banned. Staying constructive even when giving negative feedback is, it seems, a lost and/or arcane art that few people seem to grasp these days.

[Volksieg]

Originally Posted by Fjordmonkey

Nobody is getting banned for voicing their opinion, but people ARE getting banned because of HOW they voice their opinion. There's a difference there that few people seem to realize.

If you stay constructive (i.e. don't go balls-out with cursing, insulting the devs/other posters and generally being a tosspot), then you won't get banned. Staying constructive even when giving negative feedback is, it seems, a lost and/or arcane art that few people seem to grasp these days.

This is totally true. In many ways I have had an awful lot of fun with CloD but, by the same token, I'm not happy about the state it is in... I'm not happy about CTDs ruining any attempt to play the game as it as, supposedly, meant to be... I'm not happy about a lot of things with CloD or how it has been handled. I've stated this many, many times! Not one infraction. Nada. Nothing. No threat of banning, no "ticking off" from a moderator... niet!

As Fjordmonkey states: Noone gets banned for simply stating their annoyance. It is HOW that annoyance is expressed.

[No601_Merlin]

only governments accept products that do not reasonable satisfy the stated aims a year after purchase. If you sell a product that is known to still need a great deal of development, then its reasonable for people who having given them a whole year to get it right to complain about promoting a new product before the original one is finished.

No amount of cajoling or semi condescending rhetoric will change that Fjordmonkey.

I suspect their funding was cut off by the publishers and they just had to release as it was. Read my previous posts I was happy to give them the benefit of the doubt, you will see I have only just given up hope brought on by them banning a squad member for voicing a very similar reply.

[Fjordmonkey]

Originally Posted by No601_Merlin

only governments accept products that do not reasonable satisfy the stated aims a year after purchase. If you sell a product that is known to still need a great deal of development, then its reasonable for people who having given them a whole year to get it right to complain about promoting a new product before the original one is finished.

Reasonable, yes. But at the same coin, it's also reasonable to expect people to express their displeasure with the product in a manner befitting some semblance of adultness, i.e. not with some of the temper-tantrums people have been throwing around here. As others have stated, I'm also not happy about the product in it's current state. But that doesn't mean that I'll go out of my way to behave like a 4-year old denied of sweets.

Originally Posted by No601_Merlin

No amount of cajoling or semi condescending rhetoric will change that Fjordmonkey.

If you think my responses cajoling or semi-condescending, Merlin, that's up to you. You're free to interpret my responses as you see fit, but that doesn't change the fact that people seem unable to not behave like children denied of sweets just because a software-product isn't up to the standard they'd like it to be.

Originally Posted by No601_Merlin

I suspect their funding was cut off by the publishers and they just had to release as it was. Read my previous posts I was happy to give them the benefit of the doubt, you will see I have only just given up hope brought on by them banning a squad member for voicing a very similar reply.

Again, your squad-member was most likely banned because of HOW he let his displeasure be know, not because he did so. There's a subtle difference there, and it seems that as soon as people get on the 'net, they forget or overlook that.

[banned]

I don't know what world you live in mate but you really need to get out from behind your comp. Bleating your definition of adult behaviour just makes you sound silly and naive. This 'acting like children not getting a thing is getting a bit old and, itself, childish.

[FS~Phat]

Stay on topic please gents, these posts are about to moved or deleted if they continue in this fashion.

[SiThSpAwN]

Originally Posted by FS~Phat

Stay on topic please gents, these posts are about to moved or deleted if they continue in this fashion.

Next update can we take the discussion thread a step farther?

As an example:

B6 posts an update, only questions concerning the update info are allowed (and of course B6's answers)

And then a separate discussion thread for all other discussion based on that?

Only reason I ask is, 1) the language barrier/communication issues and 2) the fact that alot of good info just seems to get lost in a s**t storm of garbage.

just a suggestion...

[pstyle]

Originally Posted by No601_Merlin

only governments accept products that do not reasonable satisfy the stated aims a year after purchase. If you sell a product that is known to still need a great deal of development, then its reasonable for people who having given them a whole year to get it right to complain about promoting a new product before the original one is finished.
.

This has been brought up before..... but, here goes again;

I wonder, has anyone actually tested whether or not the product meets the description, by trying to get a return? Most countries (at least in the EU) have consumer law that protects consumer against faulty product. As yet I'm not aware of anyone actually reporting a successful return of CloD. Is this because;
1. No-one really thinks it is faulty enough to succeed in a return,
2. People are actually happy to sit and wait for what they believe will be eventual fixes to the game
3. People are playing it happily enough in spite of the reported issues

I suspect (2) is the main reason. Folks do believe the messages from 1C/ MG, and are holding on for the fixes. How long will they wait before using their legal protections and requesting refund? Will they likely succeed if they ask for refund?

[Skoshi Tiger]

Originally Posted by No601_Merlin

only governments accept products that do not reasonable satisfy the stated aims a year after purchase. If you sell a product that is known to still need a great deal of development, then its reasonable for people who having given them a whole year to get it right to complain about promoting a new product before the original one is finished.

Not true! All non-trivial Softwares are a complex beast that have problems and requires fixes, patches and updates.

Even Microsoft has been selling opperating systems and application software since 1975, knowning full well that every single one of their products require a 'great deal of development' and don't quite meet their aims.

In fact they have turned it into a marketing ploy and even stop supporting their older version of their software and force you to buy the newer flawed version just to get their support. And Flight sims just like office software are far from perfect. For the forseable future they will all be patched and updated and evolve. Either that or they will stagnate and die.

I think we are lucky that COD's developers are looking to the future and the long term viability of the series.

The patches don't come as much as I would like true. But at least they are still working on them. I've got boxes of Sim sitting in my shed that are not being supported.

Each and every one of the titles below were great sims or games. How many are still being supported by their developers?