View Full Version : Game Company Reputations
I am placing this in General Games Discussions for a reason. I hereby ask, that if this thread explodes for any reason, just lock it, I have no intention of pursuing it the second it gets made a Rant and Rave forum thread (just saying it now so the moderators no in advance my position).
Anyway, I consider Don's forum a "non company" tool. To my knowledge Don is not selling anything (other than maybe ad space). So I consider this a good place to discuss game companies, as it is not the house organ of any game company, and thus should ideally be fair unbiased ground (other than the membership is free to be as biased to companies as they wish to be).
Why the heck am I even starting this thread you ask?
The other day, I was on Company X's forums, and I saw what can only be a completely hopeless series of complaints leveled against the company (that owns the forums in question) in a fashion that can only be considered "totally without any chance in hell".
Now anyone that has two functioning brain cells CAN identify the identity of Company X, but you ARE on your own to find out hehe.
Anyway, the complainer, I will call him Mr C (C = complainer) went out and got himself a nice new computer (which being new clearer meant a lot to him, even though I think that was naive). Mr C also went and bought himself a game that was on sale at Company X. He bought his game as a digital download. Mr C didn't appear to spend any effort confirming his game would even run on his computer (he seems to think a computer being new means it will obviously run anything, new = capable to him perhaps).
Well heck, for starters, it was a digital download. Anyone actually think you can get a refund for a digitally downloaded product if you "claim" you can't run it? How exactly is he to verify you have deleted it and are not still in possession of unpaid for goods?
But what really is astounding, if the dude, Mr C, appears to have been actually given his unjustifiable refund. Bloody incredible. And get this, looks like the guy's still more than capable of slagging off Company X, and on their own forum no less. Bad mouthing them, whining, and all manner of ungrateful behaviour. Company X should have actually be subjected to excessive glowing praise. But nope, they get slanderous whining instead.
Ok enough of Mr C, he's so worthless, I hope he takes his game, and drops dead personally. Company X should delete the guys account, purge his posts, and tell him to take his non valuable business elsewhere. But they likely won't, because Company X is actually not at all like this jerk describes, and everyone that has seen the thread knows it.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
Ok so now I want to use this space, on a non partisan forum, to tell you about the people I know (companies) that have an iron clad reputation of good service.
I invite everyone to praise all the companies that has done more than "just sell them a product". This is only for companies or even just individuals, that have gone conspicuosly over the limit of what is expected of a proper business transaction.
First up Matrix Games.
I know David Heath personally to a point. Never met him, but I have communicated with him directly.
David along with his company for several years was a site where you could get for FREE, one of the best wargames ever made. Free is usually the same as "not good enough to get anyone to pay for it". Not so with Steel Panthers World at War. This game is still worth what you would pay for it. Yet it's still free.
David went well out of pocket offering this fine example of generosity.
Normally advertising is not something you get so much use out of. Steel Panthers though made his company.
And the service you can expec at Matrix Games is NOT exceeded anywhere else. You might get as good an example of service, but it sure won't exceed Matrix Games.
Are all of their games trouble free, perfection personified experiences? No. But mistakes happen. And Matrix Games will be there to fix them.
A Matrix Games purchase is never money badly spent.
CDV.
I am not really a fan of their products for the most part. But I recieved stellar service from them, when I had difficulties with a Combat Mission disc. To say I had a replacement cd sent to me in record time, is an understatement. Say what you will about their games, but I feel they give a damn about their customers at least. They responded to my emails so fast I was actually taken off guard. I'm used to waiting a lot longer from much larger operations that can afford much more elaborate customer service departments.
Chris of NWS. You've all seen the praise for Chris, and I suppose Chris is occasionally embarrassed by all of it too :) But Chris earns every comment.
The man is not happy with emails, he will actually phone you to discuss your purchase if there is any snags. Every get a phone call before from anything else you purchased from anyone else ever before if there was a complication that needed sorting out? I sure haven't. And Chris won't just solve the matter and then say good bye, he's plenty happy to chat with his customers. The man is truely an asset to our hobby.
He raises the bar of what qualifies as service with a smile to entirely new levels.
Wild Bill William Wilder. Bill's name is on more games than I can easily count :)
Bill's name is often the only reason a bought a game. I am not sure how close Bill is to being a principle of a product, who cares. Bill is perhaps the friendliest name I know of in wargaming. He brings something to wargaming I rarely ever see. I know Bill has many capacities in wargaming. He discusses them, modifies them, generates them, tests them, I only wish I could be as good as him.
Bill is more than just a creator of wargames, he's an icon.
But I am also very pleased to call him a friend.
I don't know the CDV tech that assisted me, but the above gentlemen would be very happy if I was ever to win some large multi million dollar lottery :). I'd be mailing them tickets to the military historical site of their choice as thanks for all they have done to make my pleasure as a wargamer what it is.
And I really couldn't care any less for anyone that ever expects to say anything negative about them in my presence. I will gladly tell them they're full of it.
This is your chance now guys. Tell the world about the companies that you have been given great service from.
Positive things are always good. I wish I had something to contribute but I do not have much to do with game companies. IT applies in all areas of business service is or should be of the highest priority.:smoke:
Herman Hum
07 Jan 07, 13:41
Are all of their games trouble free, perfection personified experiences? No. But mistakes happen. And Matrix Games will be there to fix them.
A Matrix Games purchase is never money badly spent.
I've been following this issue, too. Unfortunately, I think that there may be a first in everything. :cry:
Unless a magical and endless stream of Patches starts to materialize for this game, nothing will change. Mr. C may be a complainer, but he is much more on target than you would think regarding the functional level of this software.
Rifleman95th
07 Jan 07, 23:36
I'm going to put in a plug for HPS. I have purchased many games from them and the service is excellent.
Ordered a few from NWS and they have been very good as well.
Schwerpunkt is always there for you.
In stark contrast with what was posted above, I have just had a very negative and disappointing experience with Matrix "customer service".
The problems were with regard to issues of integrity (honoring their word concerning how they said that they would resolve my complaint, and failure to sell a product at the price posted on their own web site), and competence (confusing the instant issue with an order I made over three years before, and confusion caused by multiple people handling the same problem).
KG-Jag,
Please e-mail me at erikr@matrixgames.com, I'd like to hear what happened and hopefully resolve it for you.
Regards,
- Erik
Erik, I will be happy to do so. However, the information (e-mail exchange and copy of your web page showing the price offered when I tried to place my order) is on my home computer. I will contact you from there in about a week.
Oberst_Hero
23 Jan 07, 22:51
Hello. Shopping is a heartache sometimes. To boot the trustworthiness of the seller is always a Caveat Emptor. I've been lucky. I shop with NWS-online (Naval Warfare Simulations (http://www.navalwarfare.net/)). Good experiences all the way. In my favorites folder for stores they are the only one there. Horror: Imagine having a couple hundred dollars in your pocket to spend. Imagine arriving at the proper location, and time. 1x no one there. 2x no response to emails or phone calls. 3x Present and accounted for but the door remains locked - in full view of one another. (Yet punctual even). Unbelieveable.
I don't see why a company that goes with Digital Downloads would fail to point out the game's hardware requirements. All of the top game sellers prominently display these for their customers. Some believe that to be committed to high tech - digital dloads - requires being true to high standards that all top flight sellers/resellers believe in. When I go to a reputable store the clerks won't let me shop for anything unless I have an understanding of what is needed to run it; can state clearly what I've got for a computer; or intending to buy; or for whom the present is for, plus what they have in computing power/chips/cards gaming time likes/dislikes etc...
If your store doesn't do that for you, aside from providing for their minimum wage, minimum expectations salesmanship, what on earth are you doing there ?!
Matrix Shrapnel ...
EA Games's-no home server, rare patch ... I hear my gaming friends cussing and swearing that their being taken for their green solely and they aren't e-listened or ..
I'm lucky. I got a great online store and a great Ontario Canada Downtown store to go to that even knows it's tech. and to boot they run a game room so you can see your game First Hand!! Heaven for Aries - God of War, and the customer. Soulds alot like car garages or the franchise poblem -
C. D.
I agree, I'd like to know, that I can shop where the staff know more about computer entertainment than I do.
Once upon a time that was no real challenge. But increasingly, I am getting to feel like I know everything when contrasted against a software store or a hardware store or a combination outlet like Futureshop would be.
Most of the staff I encounter in game stores like EB often come out seeming like kids happy for the work, but unable to really converse. They probably know a few games they have played, but the just don't come off sounding overly competent. Maybe they aren't being paid enough to care.
I don't actually expect to get quite the instantaneous response to an internet location though. If I have a product problem I realise it's easy to post an inquiry, but the person won't be hunched in front of a cyber customer service counter just waiting for me either.
Once upon a time whilst living in Toronto (mid 80s) I had the ability to go into a true game store, and some of the staff actually knew what they were talking about. Granted, board games and software don't share the same universe when it comes to "informed advice".
Computers today, soooooooo many variables. I am simply not able to hold accountable a company like Matrix Games for every last permutation under the sun of hardware configurations. Totally unrealistic expectations. It's nice though, that I can post questions and assume answers will be offered.
Now on the minimum requirements of software, I've seen a vast array of examples for that. The good the bad and the ugly. I've seen all sorts of stuff that was represented in varying degrees of clarity over the years.
The biggest over all headache has been with Windows OSs seemingly unable to ever actually get released able to incorporate all that has gone before. It's like Microsoft prefers to wipe the slate clean on every new OS release, and just hope the new one does a good job. The "compatibility" function in XP for instance. That was badly and poorly executed at best. XP should have been able to do EVERYTHING Windows 95, and 98 were able to do, with no fidgeting on the part of the user at all.
This is why I am not onboard to get Vista. Screw Vista. I'm not interested in an OS that will likely screw up my routine, be unable to do ALL of what XP finally managed to do, and likely will just be that much further removed from being able to run 95 and 98 requiring programs.
As long as mr c isn't referring to me I am fine :P
Well, I haven't any real interaction with game companies. And for most games no real complains. (Well, OK except that it wanted to install spyware on my PC (starforce anyone?) and I didn't let it and got my money back from the store, not the firm directly)
Oberst_Hero
24 Jan 07, 15:35
I would disagree Aries. Each new Windows increases function and breadth. There was never a requirement that Windows make itself useable for game makers or any other non MS company. Instead it is the problem that Apple has faced with a dearth of products. MS is more popular. This popularity is resolved by more programmers making products available for MS than any other OS software company.
Take any current MS OS and place it on an older system and it will run like a dream. However, it is not just MS that is improving it's OS and offering different versions for different home/office users. The hardware people are also producing new versions, sometimes in conjunction with a game software company. They also do not worry if their next line will be compatible with MS.
Progress and time elapsed ensures that Direct X people, Open GL people, Wireless/USB, motherboard, anti-spy/malware etc all improve and maintain as much backward compatibility as is necessary in their own scheme of things.
How can it be that so many patches are put out to correct game errors and problems, some of your most favourite games have reprints and patches which are not caused by OS or Hardware. Clearly, the OS people have more to worry about. 15 plus MS OS's later they have not lost their dominant standing. Intel, LG, Talonsoft, etc have not faired so well.
Lastly, (give you some op for return fire by keeping this short) digital downloads and customer service can be made identically, very good.
I can put a Perl or Java page together that has drop boxes, composed of the most capable system items. If you should arrive at any choice where there is uncertainty, an html page is generated. In it would be the problem areas.
Once a red flag goes up, a buyer has clearly been alerted to potential version conflicts and hardware, OS, Online requirements etc as well. It is clearly an industry thing to do that is good, afterall most ladders are this way already. Gone are the days of manual entry and 2 week or longer delays in updates.
A requirement that the buyer research the compatibility once the red flag goes up is definitely in the best interests of any reputeable dealer. This is much like MS going out of it's way to make available to genuine MS customers compatibility lists and best of all system pop-up boxes that warn you that you are about to load untested and non-compatible drivers or similarly for other categories of hardware. They didn't leave it as undone, so that our computers would suddenly melt or explode without an opposing counter handy.
I don't believe any gaming company or hardware manufacturer should sell product without good retail box and webpage dloads pages.
In a world without like fair play. MS is outstripping those who do not keep up.
Oberst.
Trying to digest what you said. Not sure you invalidated my thoughts though.
MS made 95, sure it was revolutionary at that time, now, its an OS that's more than a decade old. It still works, but it's yesterday.
What vexes me, is MS made 95, it's not like someone else made it. So, when they made 98, why was 98 unable to seamlessly provide a capable OS that could run older software that had no secrets to discover?
When MS made XP, why was it XP couldn't just run anything that 95 and 98 had already mastered? Is it possible that MS couldn't give a damn about remembering anything they already did 5 years ago?
I'm not interested in Vista, if all Vista will be, is "new". It won't have any "specialness" I can't do without. I had to upgrade to be able to use XP, but the idea of upgrading again just for Vista is ludicruous.
Now if Vista was made so it COULD do automatically ANYTHING that 95 98 XP could already do, all without me needing to make niggling alterations, that would be noteworthy. It's just simple programming too. Make an OS that can actually identify a program that requires a 95 OS environment, and automatically adjust to fit the needs. Do the same for 98 and XP.
Anyone trying to tell me MS can't master the process to register the presence of a mundane application game or media that will not function outside of an earlier OS, has just told that MS is staffed with incompetent morons.
Nope, I'm not cutting MS ANY slack. They're actually going to ask me for yet another several hundred bucks for an OS just because it provides for prettier interfaces. I don't think so. Even the PS3 as a purchase is easier to defend.
When a game maker gives us a version 2 game that basically just requires us to shell out cash for no real improvement, we rip them apart. We rail at how we are just being shamelessly milked for the sake of pure greed.
You can bet I will accuse MS for doing the same.
Oberst_Hero
24 Jan 07, 19:01
Trying to digest what you said. Not sure you invalidated my thoughts though.
...
You can bet I will accuse MS for doing the same.
Hello Aries.
Well, I can limit it to one sentence then.
You have as much knowledge about MS OS's as you do about Wargames.
If that makes sense to you then it must be true.
If that doesn't make sense to you at all then perhaps your opinion
of MS OS's is based on insufficient knowledge.
Wouldn't that invalidate your premise ?
How do you respond ?
Hmmm, I wouldn't agree I know as much about MS OSs as I do wargaming :)
That's way to much knowledge about OSs hehe.
But while I have never actually done any of the programming of any of the MS OSs, maybe it would have helped if I had.
Then again, most of the MS OSs actually DO look like I made them :)
Oberst_Hero
24 Jan 07, 20:46
Hmmm, I wouldn't agree I know as much about MS OSs as I do wargaming :)
That's way to much knowledge about OSs hehe.
But while I have never actually done any of the programming of any of the MS OSs, maybe it would have helped if I had.
Then again, most of the MS OSs actually DO look like I made them :)
HAHAHAH it's always a pleaseure to read one of your posts.
I agree completely, a real wargamer such as yourself should've been in charge.
This is something that if you and I did it we would be fabulously wealthy overnight - to make an OS that can access any wargame, play any wargame and translate the results into other wargames for Really huge team battles.
Something that even the US Army would use for training CC and unit tactics. in RTstrategy
aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh sigh alas you are not going to do that for me ..
:upset: Oberst/
Well to use an analogy, which I am unsure will be all that great.
How would you feel, if you bought wargame 1 in 1995. It turns out to be great, so much better than any previous wargame.
Then in 3 years time, the same company comes out with wargame 2, but it appears they want to charge full price, even though it's really just an expansion. And for whatever reason, most of the functions of wargame 1 won't work properly in wargame 2.
Then they release wargame 3, and it is very incredible indeed. But again, they want full price, and it's still just an expansion. And most frustrating, wargame 1 is almost 50% unusable with wargame 3, and wargame 2 is not much better.
So you find that in the long run, it would have been better if you had kept that craptastic old computer just to use wargame 1 or 2.
And what vexes you, is that the maker made all 3 games, and yet seems unable or uninterested or worst case scenario seems to just not care, that the newest game seems to have no recollection the previous games ever existed.
MS ENJOYS getting your 300 approx bucks every time they re invent the wheel. They do this out of callous disregard as far as I am concerned.
And what truely pisses me off, is an OS is not a game, it's not "oh you don't HAAAAAVE to buy it". Yeah right. A game is just a game. And OS is something that runs everything on your computer. Not at all equal. Manufacturers will shortly be making their software on the assumption Vista is the norm. They won't be pondering "should I also allow for XP users?" No, they make new software based on the current OS. Not actually getting Vista, is really not truely an option. If you work at home, and they release an application you require for work, and it's made on the assumption you are using Vista, you likely will suffer some lacking if you are not using Vista.
The defense, "Vista is not actually mandatory" is right up there with "the cheque is in the mail".
I bought 95, and I bought 98se. and I feel also like I am being "used".
Not interested in being used.
And certainly not for a product that can't manage to remember what the previous OS was capable of.
This isn't comparable with a user defiantly refusing to get rid of their VHS player for a dvd player either.
But, it would be comparable to a manufacturer making an HD tv that could only play HD discs. Good luck selling that thing too.
I do know this much, if I end up being "forced" to employ Vista, due to lack of any option, due to software being incapable of running properly on an XP OS, I will NOT feel guilty using it via a means where MS doesn't make a bloody cent on the deal.
I don't want Vista.
I like digital downloads for instance. Can you imagine the disgust with the company, if the company declared DD is the future, and it's the only way we plan to sell our product.
Oberst_Hero
26 Jan 07, 15:18
Well to use an analogy, which I am unsure will be all that great. How would you feel, if you bought wargame 1 in 1995. It turns out to be great, so much better than any previous wargame. Then in 3 years time, the same company comes out with wargame 2, but it appears they want to charge full price, even though it's really just an expansion. And for whatever reason, most of the functions of wargame 1 won't work properly in wargame 2. ... ... And what vexes you, is that the maker made all 3 games, and yet ... the newest game seems to have no recollection the previous games ever existed. [So true Aries, so true]
MS ENJOYS ... the wheel. [They do give you the option of buying an OEM System, that can't be upgraded] And what truely pisses me off, is an OS is not a game, it's not "oh you don't HAAAAAVE to buy it". Yeah right. A game is just a game. And OS is something that runs everything on your computer. Not at all equal. Manufacturers will shortly be making their software ... The defense, "Vista is not actually mandatory" is right up there with "the cheque is in the mail". ... I like digital downloads for instance. Can you imagine the disgust with the company, if the company declared DD is the future, and it's the only way we plan to sell our product.
The analogy is fine, great even. It almost sounds like a discussion on ASL. Is it the RB or the modules or the Study Kits that drive the game. But we run the risk of becoming mired in an unwinnable position. The Wargames that we use as an analogy, were made in sequence. What was originally the plan when Wargame 2 or 3 or x was made, is either no longer sufficient, or worse yet, no longer what the buying public wants. [Veterans]. So when I substitute Squad Leader for Wargame 1, I end up reading something that no SL'r wants to see. That ASL should work with SL.
Because Win3.1, 95, 98 were pioneering computer management systems. The burden of development pretty much guarranteed that later versions would replace previous editions - 3.1 & 95 had limits that people wanted eliminated.
98 caps out now, MS looks around and refines NT, 200x, XP, tablet, Media, Professional, etc... [at a fabulous price] ... Each of those systems is a different theatre of operations. To the Joint Chiefs General Staff, MS is milling the core ore of each of these pioneering systems /languages and producing with each Wargame system more punch, generality, while keeping [troop losses and cost low] for those who want Windows in their niche, other components of MS - Office, Outlook, MSN, wordpad, txt, Voice to text, text to speech, compatible with any version, by making them available.
Since Wargame 4 was never thought to have been possible in Wargame 1 those little steps over the years, Direct X, AI hardware support programs, DLL, MFC's, Visual Basic, Java in C, FAT's-DOS-NTFS, highly compressible media files-mpeg, Gif, don't work at all with Wargame 1 - wav, bmp, *.exe.
They can't since Wargame 4 was built on the surviving foundation of Wargame 1. (I like VASL but I know what a computer component can do to a boardgame. Now, we players who don't like learning rules without scens, are starting to apply pressure to have more of the wargame included in the basic computer package-:cry: SAN, linked flips, dice that behave a certain way, 3 full map scens, snow boards, e-overlays, LOS ... Even Worse that the game should be playable without the core Rule Book in any module or Study Kit because it should work with say the first two or 3 SL's. Egad...)
Oberst/
Impressive Oberst, seriously. Good debate.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.