Some words about the hate against Relic

here we go...

another thread destroyed by Russian nationalists.

You don't have to be a Russian nationalist to think that Relic's idea of history is pure crap. I won't play axis. Maybe that is my problem, but I won't. Why? growing up I had a great uncle who ALWAYS wore long sleeves, even in summer. Sometimes I would get a glimpse of the numbers tattooed on his forearm peeking out from under the sleeve. He was liberated from Auschwitz by the Russians.

My Russian friends here in the US hated the Soviet Union, but they could all tell you stories about how their grandparents fought proudly during the Great Patriotic War. And let's not forget with regards to war crimes that one side started it. To expect the other to not pay back in kind is actually a very modern concept with only a few anomalous anecdotes previously in history.

I don't like how this turns out to become a Political-Thread... Get your shit together guys!

I saw that replay-thread and I think that Brad is just fed up with being called a fucker etc.! He is a human being like all of you, and I would assume that most of you would react in a simillar way when being hated from the start of a match and that I guess every match!

Yeah maybe he uses Spam tactics, and yes it isn't a good thing to do that as an Game Dev, but when alsmost every Players plays it, why wouldn't he play it? Just give them some time I understand why people are angry, but if just one of you would have read what the told during the Gamescom meeting you would understand them WAY better!

its one of the game concept and original company. it not political discussion. me asked, I answered. myths should be dispelled

This isin't really a political discussion. I think it's fairly easy to say that relics idea of history is completely off road and makes no sense and is borderline nazi propoganda.

It's not only an insult to russians , it's pretty much all out slander to anyone who fought in ww2.

The difference between games that bash nazis or someone else is because nobody claims they are historically accurate.

Nobody claims wolfenstein is historically accurate, however relic devs when confronted about why their portrayal of WW2 is so flawed, answered pretty much this :
- Our game is historically accurate, we are sorry you don't like it.


For some reason i fear that the USA campaign will be a kind of "America fuck yeah" style of campaign, which will make this old wound to probaly start bleeding again.

I don't get it why people are hating on Relic. Look at the Call of Duty devs there you see bad support.

Reserved for President Napalms address.

If there is one thing I've learnt it is that nobody likes constructive criticism. In some cases people cant separate the differences between constructive criticism and hate. The trigger point of the latest round of community "hate" was by a developers in game actions against a customer. It was over a small issue in my opinion but speaks to a larger issue with the way Relic is being managed.

At this point in the titles life cycle we are a year after launch, one DLC released with another in the cooker. Issues that were identified after release are still prevalent. Why? Doubting me? Take a trip down memory lane and look at this fine example of a thread. How many issues identified in that thread have been addressed? How many of you say with confidence, right now, that there has been marked improvements in the following areas since launch?

Bug Fixes
Patch notes quality
Patching schedule
Communication
Game Balance

None of these issues can be really "fixed" by any one employee of Relic when they don't have the proper support network in place. How does poor ol' Noun and tell management hes doing a kick ass job? Now, before I get jumped on for being a bitter bear here is some free advice that I normally charge clients tens of thousands of dollars for.

Relic needs to establish key performance indicators for things that are important to the games success. Learn more about key performance indicators here. In normal people words, KPI's are used to measure the success/failure of something in a way that is based on factual information. Let's go through some examples.

Bug Fixes
This is one of the easier ones to establish a measurement for. I believe community member Siberian has a bug counter at 28 so we'll use that as an example. These needs to be tracked, prioritized, and action taken on them. Once the total number is established, 28 in this case, status can be reported on during each patch cycle. It's a win win, the community gets to see progress (14/28 addressed!) and the Relic employee get to communicate to his boss that he/she is doing a kick ass job.

Patch Note Quality
I'm tired of having to seek out the undocumented changes because the patch notes aren't complete. To establish the baseline we could take a look back at the past 4 patches and take a average number of how many items were missed in the patch notes. Lets use 7 for an example. Every time a patch is released and the community double checks Relic's work, we can let them know if they've missed to mention something in the patch notes. Any identified issues that are less than 7 is a marked improvement. This can be reported on every other patch cycle. It's a win win, the community gets to see progress (Hey guyz, last patch we only missed one item on the patch notes! It used to be 7! How kick ass are we?) and the Relic employee get to communicate to his boss that he/she is doing a kick ass job.

See what I'm getting at? By measuring things based on factual information we can remove opinion.

Patching Schedule
I'm unsure if Relic wants there to be a established patching schedule but if there was one a KPI could be written for it. How many patches were on time?

Communication
Shout out to Noun and Cynthia_RE. Communication is key so the community does not feel neglected. There could be a couple KPI to measure communication. Got to establish some goals first!
- It is the goal of Relic to do 3 Twitch casts a month.
- Is it the goal of Relic to do 1 forum post a day.
- Update facebook once a week.
Again, can be reported on during each patch cycle (Hey guyz, if you missed our THREE Twitch casts make sure to check out the reply here) and it's a win win. Community sees progress, Noun and Cynthia_RE get to tell management they've met their goals and are super kick ass.

Game Balance
There are a couple measurements that can be taken here to judge success/failure of balancing. I know Relic has a data analytic staff member so maybe they'd be able to pick up some raw numbers.
- Average numbers of users searching for a game based on faction
- Win/loss ratio for a specific faction
- Win/loss ratio for a specific faction broken down by game mode
All just ideas. Again, can be reported on during each patch cycle (Hey guyz, 1v1 game mode is super amazing right now. We have a tie for win/loss ratios between all the factions) and it's a win win. Community sees progress, PQ BC get to tell management they've met their numbers and are super kick ass.

TLDR: Set KPI's for things important to the community. Report on them regularly to show progress. Most of the issues are a management problem as they do not have a proper frame work in place to show success/failure.

I don't get it why people are hating on Relic. Look at the Call of Duty devs there you see bad support.

No one should be hating on Relic. Making it personal is wrong. But taht doesn't mean fans of the game aren't frustrated with its design (and hence its developers).

And the frustration stems from the fact that we KNOW better can be done but get unhelpful responses about why they aren't done. This is after all the same company that gave us COH1. In COH1 the original campaign was not "'Murica f-ck yeah!" and it didn't villify the Nazis (though that could have been done). And the two first factions looked REMARKABLY similar to each other to the point outside observers would have thought they were mirrors (both sides had Mortars, MGs, basic infantry, AT guns, HTs, mines, MG emplacements, wire, tank traps, medium tanks, AT vehicles, scout vehicles, snipers, infantry AT, grenades, flamers, etc. etc. etc.). Yet COH1 proved games could be designed without huge biases in history and with factions whose small differences made them feel extremely different without being so different they look like they each came from a different game. (And even those small differences made them hard enough to balance.)

This all came off the rails somewhere with the introduction of Opposing fronts. The Brits would have looked different if they never had any trucks or emplacements. And they were probably more powerful when you learned to play with minimal emplacements anyway. But the game-breaking aspect of the trucks was reintroduced in OKW with the addition of automatic self-protection on one of the trucks!

I can't agree with the hate or the way it is expressed. But I understand the frustration. This company is the same that created the greatness that is COH1. They have access to examples of great game design. But they instead choose to move in a different direction.

http://www.coh2.org/replay/24250/me-breaking...brad.

Good thread asshole. Relic style.

Wow.

Sure you are making this political!

But that's none of my business ^^

It is not about them being stupid, cause I have massive respect for them. Its about logical things not happening, things that clearly arent tested that come in the game, sometimes bad design and bad communication.

Take the patch of a few months for example where the bulletins were not visible in the loading screen. That should not happen in professional contexts.
Such things just show the sometimes very unprofessional attitude, and thats my major problem.

But I agree, no one should hate on relic.

Also just a note about being patiënt.

I agree to a certain point, but the game is over a year old and balance is not good. After a while people get tired about the fact that the game always changes, going from left to right and still not being balanced.
Its a gamr you bought to enjoy, not to wait a year and still be frustrated.

Also just a note about being patiënt.

I agree to a certain point, but the game is over a year old and balance is not good. After a while people get tired about the fact that the game always changes, going from left to right and still not being balanced.
Its a gamr you bought to enjoy, not to wait a year and still be frustrated.

It's not about being patient really, it's about expectations.
Expecting that a game of this level of complexity and volatility be balanced is unrealistic. There are too many variables, too many interactions and too many play-styles to consider. The best you can hope for is that it won't be horribly unplayable for too long, and that slowly but surely small steps towards balance are made, until the release of new content or until some fundamental mechanic is altered.

It's also unrealistic to expect the game to not change over time. The market is too oversaturated for a multiplayer game to survive more than a few months without releasing new content or having to re-invent itself. Yes this can cause frustration in people who invested a lot of time in learning the game only to find themselves having to relearn to play again after a new patch, but it's also the only way to maintain a healthy player population.

It's not about being patient really, it's about expectations.
Expecting that a game of this level of complexity and volatility be balanced is unrealistic. There are too many variables, too many interactions and too many play-styles to consider. The best you can hope for is that it won't be horribly unplayable for too long, and that slowly but surely small steps towards balance are made, until the release of new content or until some fundamental mechanic is altered.

It's also unrealistic to expect the game to not change over time. The market is too oversaturated for a multiplayer game to survive more than a few months without releasing new content or having to re-invent itself. Yes this can cause frustration in people who invested a lot of time in learning the game only to find themselves having to relearn to play again after a new patch, but it's also the only way to maintain a healthy player population.

Actually, you can expect a game of this complexity to be balanced. And you can definitely expect them to keep working towards that balance if they want to keep selling DLC to us.

Expecting otherwise is null, you might as well not play anything if you don't expect some level of quality.

And we can point to many, many instances of Relic/Sega's own policies cashing in and sacrificing balance for that.

The people who want balance the most are also the ones most interested in the game changing over time.

I'm more than willing to have a proper level of patience, but don't confuse patience for blind acceptance.

It's not about being patient really, it's about expectations.
Expecting that a game of this level of complexity and volatility be balanced is unrealistic. There are too many variables, too many interactions and too many play-styles to consider. The best you can hope for is that it won't be horribly unplayable for too long, and that slowly but surely small steps towards balance are made, until the release of new content or until some fundamental mechanic is altered.

It's also unrealistic to expect the game to not change over time. The market is too oversaturated for a multiplayer game to survive more than a few months without releasing new content or having to re-invent itself. Yes this can cause frustration in people who invested a lot of time in learning the game only to find themselves having to relearn to play again after a new patch, but it's also the only way to maintain a healthy player population.

Sorry, but there are too many examples of things being done better and having been done better. And one of the best examples is COH1, especially considering that it is was put out by the same company. It was not balanced, and still isn't. But the 8 year old game is still played by 1/3 the number of people who play COH2 despite age and imperfections and no new content. It is much better balanced even with the inclusion of OF factions.

The patches have not been improving the game or the games meta. Many argue it has made it worse. And since we have to wait months for another patch the frustration sets in. (Oh wait, no we don't, they patched the only OP USF unit in the game in 24 hours. Grrrrr.)

That is why I deleted it. Maybe I will reload it if there is a major change, but since it isn't even on the horizon I can only recommend to people that it isn't worth playing.

Added: Oh the irony of those who recommend the ability for axis and allies to mix factions so they can get a game.

Expecting that a game of this level of complexity and volatility be balanced is unrealistic.

Wow, I seriously hope you are trolling or being sarcastic.
Bringing a non-balanced game to the competitive scene is unrealistic.

but it's also the only way to maintain a healthy player population.

The population is going down as we speak, I don't have the table with me but VonIvan posted it somewhere.

Rethink your answer.

While I agree with the OP 100%, I don't understand why this thread was created. It will clearly only make things worse. There's nothing anyone can say or do to stop people from hating on the devs. That's true of absolutely any game of any quality.

You don't have to be a Russian nationalist to think that Relic's idea of history is pure crap. I won't play axis. Maybe that is my problem, but I won't. Why? growing up I had a great uncle who ALWAYS wore long sleeves, even in summer. Sometimes I would get a glimpse of the numbers tattooed on his forearm peeking out from under the sleeve. He was liberated from Auschwitz by the Russians.

My Russian friends here in the US hated the Soviet Union, but they could all tell you stories about how their grandparents fought proudly during the Great Patriotic War. And let's not forget with regards to war crimes that one side started it. To expect the other to not pay back in kind is actually a very modern concept with only a few anomalous anecdotes previously in history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre Maybe you should stop playing COH2 completely?

Lighten up, it's a game. You're not glorifying the Nazis by playing the Axis.

I just wish there was better communication. Companies can mess up, but please communicate my often with the players. Look at League of Legends. Riot, the game developer, messes up all the time. However, they communicate very well with the player base. There are posts everyday, videos, blogs, etc.

Reserved for President Napalms address.

If there is one thing I've learnt it is that nobody likes constructive criticism. In some cases people cant separate the differences between constructive criticism and hate. The trigger point of the latest round of community "hate" was by a developers in game actions against a customer. It was over a small issue in my opinion but speaks to a larger issue with the way Relic is being managed.

At this point in the titles life cycle we are a year after launch, one DLC released with another in the cooker. Issues that were identified after release are still prevalent. Why? Doubting me? Take a trip down memory lane and look at this fine example of a thread. How many issues identified in that thread have been addressed? How many of you say with confidence, right now, that there has been marked improvements in the following areas since launch?

Bug Fixes
Patch notes quality
Patching schedule
Communication
Game Balance

None of these issues can be really "fixed" by any one employee of Relic when they don't have the proper support network in place. How does poor ol' Noun and tell management hes doing a kick ass job? Now, before I get jumped on for being a bitter bear here is some free advice that I normally charge clients tens of thousands of dollars for.

Relic needs to establish key performance indicators for things that are important to the games success. Learn more about key performance indicators here. In normal people words, KPI's are used to measure the success/failure of something in a way that is based on factual information. Let's go through some examples.

Bug Fixes
This is one of the easier ones to establish a measurement for. I believe community member Siberian has a bug counter at 28 so we'll use that as an example. These needs to be tracked, prioritized, and action taken on them. Once the total number is established, 28 in this case, status can be reported on during each patch cycle. It's a win win, the community gets to see progress (14/28 addressed!) and the Relic employee get to communicate to his boss that he/she is doing a kick ass job.

Patch Note Quality
I'm tired of having to seek out the undocumented changes because the patch notes aren't complete. To establish the baseline we could take a look back at the past 4 patches and take a average number of how many items were missed in the patch notes. Lets use 7 for an example. Every time a patch is released and the community double checks Relic's work, we can let them know if they've missed to mention something in the patch notes. Any identified issues that are less than 7 is a marked improvement. This can be reported on every other patch cycle. It's a win win, the community gets to see progress (Hey guyz, last patch we only missed one item on the patch notes! It used to be 7! How kick ass are we?) and the Relic employee get to communicate to his boss that he/she is doing a kick ass job.

See what I'm getting at? By measuring things based on factual information we can remove opinion.

Patching Schedule
I'm unsure if Relic wants there to be a established patching schedule but if there was one a KPI could be written for it. How many patches were on time?

Communication
Shout out to Noun and Cynthia_RE. Communication is key so the community does not feel neglected. There could be a couple KPI to measure communication. Got to establish some goals first!
- It is the goal of Relic to do 3 Twitch casts a month.
- Is it the goal of Relic to do 1 forum post a day.
- Update facebook once a week.
Again, can be reported on during each patch cycle (Hey guyz, if you missed our THREE Twitch casts make sure to check out the reply here) and it's a win win. Community sees progress, Noun and Cynthia_RE get to tell management they've met their goals and are super kick ass.

Game Balance
There are a couple measurements that can be taken here to judge success/failure of balancing. I know Relic has a data analytic staff member so maybe they'd be able to pick up some raw numbers.
- Average numbers of users searching for a game based on faction
- Win/loss ratio for a specific faction
- Win/loss ratio for a specific faction broken down by game mode
All just ideas. Again, can be reported on during each patch cycle (Hey guyz, 1v1 game mode is super amazing right now. We have a tie for win/loss ratios between all the factions) and it's a win win. Community sees progress, PQ BC get to tell management they've met their numbers and are super kick ass.

TLDR: Set KPI's for things important to the community. Report on them regularly to show progress. Most of the issues are a management problem as they do not have a proper frame work in place to show success/failure.

Endorsed but....you get thousands for this? I'm in the wrong job

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katyn_massacre Maybe you should stop playing COH2 completely?

Lighten up, it's a game. You're not glorifying the Nazis by playing the Axis.

you seriously want to compare the Katyn massacre to what the Nazis perpetrated? Was it a war crime? Absolutely. Differing accounts put the dead at 8,000 to 22,000. Do I wish it wasn't done? I would much rather have had a freer Poland than one under the communist regime (and I am not a huge fan of the Poles).

The Katyn massacre is actually small in the panoply of crimes committed by the Soviet Union like Stalin's purges and the famine in the Ukraine.

Want a list of Shtetls with populations of 8,000 or greater that were wiped out? It probably goes into 3 figures. Whole villages with families from the grandparents to the last child and zero survivors. Poland had 3 million Jews when the war started, about 10% of its population, and completely wiped out. The rest of the Poles suffered at the hands of the Nazis as well and I am sure to the tune of many many more than 22,000. The Russians ended that death toll and that inhumane occupation and extermination. After that your average citizen had a chance to survive if they repeated the right dogma to the right people. They would no longer be hunted down like vermin just because of their genetics.

Meet and talk to the number of survivors I have and you might change your tune. The inhumane depravity of the Nazis had was taken to a level never before seen in modern times.