Damn...

I'd hate to see frogboy leaving this community.

I can't think of any other company where the CEO comes to the forums as often as you did Frogboy. But I see your point though.

People always complain. And to the guy that said SD support post release was mediocre ... come on man.

They're the freaking publishers, but still show this extremely passion and enthusiasm for a game they didn't even create.

And even promised new maps and demigods. I think it's incredibly support from their side.

I haven't been reading the forums for the past month or so, but it seems many people are just unbelievable ungrateful toward SD and Frogboy. Which is a shame.

I honestly hope you reconsider as you're pretty much the only reason I even come here to read these forums. This kind of trash talk happens in all competitive game communities but I hope you'll stick around.

Was demigod self funded by GPG or was it funded by Stardock?  When a company A funds another company B to develop a game, company A is the publisher.  When a company B fully funds the game but needs help from company A to print the discs/etc, company A is the distributor.

If the game was entirely funded by the publisher, the publisher has complete control over everything and the final say in any issue.  They can even fire the developer and get a new one.  They can even sue the developer if the developer breaches contract by not delivering at the milestones.

If the game was a jointly funded effort, than yes, the publisher has less say.  However, the publisher can still excersice some of the above to a lesser degree if the developer isn't doing their job.

In either case, to say that the publisher is blameless is a fallacy.  I'm not saying Demigod is a failure of a game or anything like that.  However, what you're saying is that the blame for any and all problems Demigod has lies squarely on GPG's shoulders. 

That's horribly incorrect.

If Stardock funded the project, they are responsible for the problems too. 

If you've ever done project management, you know that you can't blame a subordinate for poor work when the project doesn't deliver.  It is your fault if the project doesn't deliever, just as it's your success when it does deliever.

P.S.

I love it when people use the words absolute words like "undisputable" in arguments and debates.  If you want to look asinine, that's almost the fastest way to do so.

What I took from that link was that Stardock took over the project at some point, provided the capital to finish development, provided the capital to market and distribute the game, put their name on the box, took on the customer service and support, and gets a fat share of the proceeds. Stardock does not get a free pass for some one-sided vague contract references. I don't care to research the (non-public) intricacies of all the related contracts every time I purchase a game. Stardock is the publisher, their name is on the product, they are the ones ultimately responsible for seeing the product to fruition.. The publisher takes the risk, they have to fill in the gaps where the developer does not, and they get to financially rape the developer in the process.

Look at my profile and see.

http://pantheon.demigodthegame.com/games/player/22215/

Hmmm. I would say pretty often

 Fact is Frogboy doesn't have to take all this crap and he is no longer going to.

I've played quite a few 5v5 games. This only works when all the people you are playing with are from roughly the same region in your continent. It is not DGs fault if you chose to play with someone in the US when you are from europe. All the 5v5 games i've played (all on Brothers, for some reason) were at ping <150 which was not that bad. The only problem is, where there is more people, there is a greater chance you can run into rage quitters, trollers etc. That being said, if a 5v5 does not work it's because of someone's connection to the "interwebs" not a DG issue.

True. However, I have never had an error with the game. The thing is, you might say that it's not THAT hard to make a game when there are only Win xp and Win vista to make it compatible with. Every computer is different regardless of the operating sistem. The more it is used, the more it will be changed, either it's software ( installing all sorts of applications ) or hardware (changing some of it's parts). Even out-of-the-box computers are different from each other. Not as unique as people are, but still...

For DG to work on EVERY computer 100%, GPG and SD will need to go house to house, analyze a particular computer and make the game run perfectly on it ALONE. And even then, stuff can go wrong. Trust me, I know how hard it is. This only reinforces my point. These guys did the best they could trying to make the game work on as many computers as possible and are still working on it (Stardock, at least). It is not their fault that a PARTICULAR computer can't handle it. It's not the user's fault either. Stuff like that can't realistically be predicted.

That being said, my point remains the same. It is not DGs fault for _most_ (not all) of the stuff that happens. Neither did I say that it is the user's fault ( I appologize if I have implied it ). It's simply bad luck, or karma, or whatever you want to call it.

Actually that is not true.

The forums for games like Civilization, GalCiv, Bethesda games (Morrowind/Oblivion/Fallout3), Sins and so forth are all very good communities.  Sure there are a couple here and there that complain but overall the forums are all about the community coming up with new strats and helping each other out.  They aren't out for blood.

But perhaps it's the nature of the *type* of game.  Multiplayer games, shooters and RTS's tend to have more "toxic" forums while games more focused on single player (city builders, Civ, RPG) games have more of a true community.

This is probably why I have quit playing Demigod.  I typically don't get into online multiplayer games because of all these things along with too many toxic people actually in game.  I did give this game a chance and it just reinforced to me why online muliplayer games just aren't for me.

1. Yes, they aren't going to test every hardware/software config. That was my point. No one can. And as such, some sistems will have bugs that others do not. This is neither the producer nor the players fault. So a player should be thankful when the producer takes time to fix these individual bugs

2. Also true. No, I was not here when the game came out. As such I do not disagree when you or anyone says how horrible the connection issues and matchmakings were. I am here now, though. And I see the game as it is now. As I said in a previous reply, I love playing it. I do find myself to have problems which other people don't seem to have, and not have other problems that other people might have. What I am trying to say is that it's a good game. The bugs that it has are NORMAL. Just as you can't satisfy every person in the world, nor can you "satisfy" every computer. The bugs are going to be fixed, new content will be added. I am not saying that you or anyone else has too many expectations of the game. But just give it time. It's like asking a baby to do the dishes. Let the game develop a bit. I am a programmer so I can tell you from experience. No matter how much testing you do, how many scenarios you prepare for you are NEVER going to put out a decent enough product on the first try. All you can hope for is, that if you plant the seed, with the help of constructive criticism it will blossom into something great. Anything other than that is pure fantasy.

3. I am not letting them off the hook. I do hold them accountable for some of the problems here. I don't, however, hammer them constantly, insult or troll. I do my job posting the problem, if it has not been posted yet and let them do their job. If I keep nagging I won't accomplish anything other than piss a bunch of people off.

As am I, and I disagree with you. Proper QA allows just for this. At my past jobs when we had the best QA workflow I had ever seen. Very rarely did a customer complain to us (I can only think of one, and the fault was on her end). Did it come at a cost? Yes, money. However this game was tested, bugs were found, reported, and nothing was done while the game was still released. Normally bugs that aren't fixed, are bugs that are either A) too costly, or unknown. I know what reasonable expectations are in terms of development, and they had not been met. Is the game up to standard in the bug department now for how the game should have been released? I would say yes, and I respect them for fixing their messup. However, this game lacks lots of features that make it have a hard time competeing in this age.

That has nothing to do with Stardock. It's call the Internet.