Skip to content

Baldur's Gate II: Enhanced Edition 1.3 Release

1456810

Comments

  • GreenWarlockGreenWarlock Member Posts: 1,354
    Yes Mestar, I am assuming that they do not simply forget again. I have been chasing this patch for most of the 14 months it has been missing, originally offline, and I actually joined this forum to see if I would get more progress as the offline route went dead. BeamDog are more communicative now than than at any point in the previous 14 months. Dee posted here promptly on the day they got notification that the patch had been rejected, and we quickly heard about the cause, and confirmation of the obvious - they will fix and resubmit. We similarly know of the two previous rejections, although less telegraphed. Awareness is improving.

    This sounds pretty basic, and is clearly nowhere near as satisfying as actually delivering the patch, but is a huge leap ahead of where we were last March.

    I am frustrated as anyone on this forum, but venting at the folks who are trying to help us will not help (although I recognize the need for a good vent, I have done my share over the last year). The main problem we face is the 2 week Apple turnaround is typically much longer than the development cycle needed to turn around each patch, and it is significantly slowing the process. Apple have rejected 3 times now, for issues that were all present in the first submission. This would go so much faster if Apple did a proper review each time, rather than wait for 2 weeks, and reject at the first sign of any problem - but that does not appear to be the world we get to deal with.

    Right now, these issues are very visible, and I think there is very little chance of BeamDog forgetting to submit, unless we protest so loudly they think it is no longer worth the effort.
  • jackjackjackjack Member Posts: 3,251
    Grum said:

    I remember during Christmas when we couldn't get the game, and thinking: "poor Beamdog. That's a lot of money gone." I'm sure that with each rejection they are as upset as we are.

    This. I think I've made my frustrations clear. As tempting as it may be to lambast the Devs with unnecessary vitriol, it does nobody any good, and I'm quite sure this disappoints them as well. Nobody likes letting down their customers.
  • UnferthUnferth Member Posts: 27
    edited February 2015

    Making this happen, if it can happen at all, is going to take resources I would rather see focused on just getting the patch submitted and working.

    This is, let me emphasize, not a rant at you, @GreenWarlock—I take your well-conceived point—or at anyone, really—but to me, this feels too much like a temporary solution, leaving the devs to push out one extensively delayed patch so they can get to work on the next (it's fair to assume) extensively delayed patch. With due sympathy to iOS customers, I'd much prefer a permanent fix. We don't even need to point fingers: Beamdog and the App Store just haven't proven a good match.

    I'll happily recant if Beamdog will explain how and why this will never happen again, but (and here I will point) they haven't. It’s not even clear that they could: the problems have been many and various; every MAS release is a goat rodeo, and there's no reason to think that will change. No, of course Beamdog can't control Apple—but they can control where their products are sold. Patching, etc. of the desktop versions has gone fine through other vendors, and that’s what irks: not (as those who cry "entitlement" so often claim) that we're not getting patches, but that everyone else is. None of us knew that buying from the MAS would make us second-class customers. I’m sure Beamdog didn’t know, either; the difference is that it’s their responsibility to fix it (not just one patch, but the whole distribution scheme), and not our responsibility to live with it and be grateful for whatever bone we’re thrown by an entity to which we've entrusted our hard-earned cash.

    How many MAS customers are there? Not enough, or not enough who make noise, for the "forgotten" patch to have been resubmitted. (Imagine if the Beamdog or Steam or GOG versions had been similarly afflicted: the forums would burn.) That incident says a lot about our constituency: our ire is negligible. Surely it wouldn't take too much effort to accommodate such an insignificant group. Alas, for that very reason, there's not much motivation to do so.

    How much effort? Who knows? Would getting Apple’s magic list really be that difficult? Is there some more viable alternative? No matter how many discouraging eventualities we can concoct (lots), they are all entirely speculative, and they are no reason not to ask if something can be done. Only Beamdog can know for sure whether this or that kind of redress is even possible, and they won’t know unless they try, and they won't try unless they want to, and they won't want to unless we want them to.

    What would be really, really impressive would be for Beamdog to say, “You know what? We can’t devise an absolutely airtight method to screen MAS buyers, but we've got a pretty good one, and better a few freeloaders slip through the cracks than to have disgruntled customers.” Truly great customer service sometimes means trading profit for goodwill. I certainly don’t wish that on Beamdog—I really don't—but I don’t feel bad about exhorting them to greatness, either.
    Post edited by Unferth on
  • atakdogatakdog Member Posts: 51
    edited February 2015

    The main problem we face is the 2 week Apple turnaround is typically much longer than the development cycle needed to turn around each patch, and it is significantly slowing the process. Apple have rejected 3 times now, for issues that were all present in the first submission.

    I'd say the main problem we face is a combination of the likelihood that Beamdog is simply incapable of satisfying Apple's requirements (and no, I decline to accept that that's Apple's fault; lots of competent developers get their apps through every week), and the apparent indifference Beamdog has to the App Store customers' problems, as evidenced particularly by their callous refusal even to bother trying to submit the last patch. At this point we don't even know that they bothered submitting 1.3; I figure it's odds on they're simply lying to us and hoping we'll go away eventually. No, I have no evidence of that, but I have no evidence that they've done anything for us in over a year, either. How many more mysterious rejections and "It seems the patch wasn't submitted" are we going to be asked to believe?

    Several people have suggested that we should be calm and patient, that vitriol won't help. Perhaps that's true. But I'm taking a different approach: If we don't get a solution, be it a working patch on the App Store, a download link to a patched copy, or a full refund, by the end of February, I will be filing a lawsuit.

    Beamdog, it's about time you got your act together.
  • GrumGrum Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 2,100
    Very few companies would string customers on for a year. That does nothing for anyone. Rather, look at it like this: that is a year's worth of revenue lost and reputation damaged. It makes no sense.

    Look. I'm a lawyer. I remember filing a case, where I thought that I followed all of the court's rules. I made a mistake though. I put my petition and my exhibits together in one folder. The court wanted two folders! I ended up missing a deadline because of that.

    I get it.
  • molloymolloy Member Posts: 105
    Inventing new rejection-reasons every two weeks just to pretend you're submitting patches to Apple? For how long and to what end? Seriously, who would do something like that? That's just silly.

    Yes, I am annoyed too, but they are trying and working on it and that dealing with Apple isn't the easiest thing for developers is no news.

    As @jackjack said, vitriol isn't helping anyone and I had rather liked to see a reaction from @Dee to the suggestions @Adul made (although the objection from @GreenWarlock made sense to me too).
  • MusignyMusigny Member Posts: 1,027
    edited February 2015
    The reasons for such rejections seem quite common.
    Moreover it would be sad to learn that they were rejected because they tried to make the game better on that platform (or less locked or etc...).
    I think the beamdog guys need some love. At least for now.
  • smeagolheartsmeagolheart Member Posts: 7,964
    next time, don't create for apple, it's just not worth the hassle.
  • GrumGrum Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 2,100

    next time, don't create for apple, it's just not worth the hassle.

    As someone who only plays ios, I say heresy my good sir. Heresy.
  • wubblewubble Member Posts: 3,156

    next time, don't create for apple, it's just not worth the hassle.

    Not making future games for apple kind of makes half the process of making the games tablet/phone compatible a waste of time.
  • j5689j5689 Member Posts: 6
    I would also say not to bother with the Mac App Store(the iOS App Store is of course the only way to deploy it on iOS) in the future since it's such a hassle for everybody involved but in fairness to the Mac users who bought the game(s) through the MAS, I don't know how well all the other distribution platforms, like Steam or the Beamdog client, will work on the Mac. If Steam works well on Macs now, I would totally recommend buying it there instead but last I looked on the Steam Mac forums it was still unstable. Your mileage may vary.

    With the app store unfortunately it looks like one way or another, whether it's Apple or Beamdog, you're guaranteed a delay on your patches. Apple also seems to be extremely picky and unclear about what they'll allow through as far as updates and releases go.
  • GreenWarlockGreenWarlock Member Posts: 1,354
    Checking the archives, I suggested to NOT sell IWDEE through the Mac App store precisely because of these support issues. Until last week, I thought that they had listened. Now I am wondering how many submissions that went through before approval, and whether that turned up anything to guide the BG2EE patch rejections.
  • MusignyMusigny Member Posts: 1,027
    wubble said:

    next time, don't create for apple, it's just not worth the hassle.

    Not making future games for apple kind of makes half the process of making the games tablet/phone compatible a waste of time.
    For your analysis:
    http://www.statista.com/statistics/276635/market-share-held-by-tablet-vendors/
    http://www.statista.com/statistics/273268/worldwide-tablet-sales-by-operating-system-since-2nd-quarter-2010/
    http://www.idc.com/prodserv/smartphone-os-market-share.jsp
  • FaydarkFaydark Member Posts: 279
    @Musigny Unfortunately, as many app developers find out, marketshare for OS/Hardware means didly squat when it comes to revenue. It seems that even now, iOS users are still the majority of app revenue. Very rarely does anyone give out actual data on sales, but anecdotally that seems to be the case. Consider the number of mobile games that don't even get a release on Android, purely because they wouldn't be expected to recover their development cost.

    I say this as both a mobile games developer and Android supporter. I've worked on many released mobile games for various publishers and our own IP, and rarely do we ever release on Android.

    It's a sad truth, but there it is. @wubble is spot on.
  • MusignyMusigny Member Posts: 1,027
    @Faydark
    Please don't over interpret or misconstrue what I wrote : just three words "for your analysis".
    Btw I agree with you, for the most part. I have figures to support your own arguments (revenues, paid app versus free/freemium ratio, this is easy to find).
    However things are changing and I wanted to highlight such a fast change. No one can ignore a major and global company owning 70%-80% of the mobile OS market shares... unless you want to repeat the PC versus Mac precedent.

    End of digression as far as I am concerned.
  • Quoting couple of posts up:

    "No, of course Beamdog can't control Apple—but they can control where their products are sold. Patching, etc. of the desktop versions has gone fine through other vendors, and that’s what irks: not that we're not getting patches, but that everyone else is. None of us knew that buying from the MAS would make us second-class customers. I’m sure Beamdog didn’t know, either; the difference is that it’s their responsibility to fix it (not just one patch, but the whole distribution scheme), and not our responsibility to live with it and be grateful for whatever bone we’re thrown by an entity to which we've entrusted our hard-earned cash."

    Perfectly expressed.
    I don't mean to be rude but: Beamdog, you're a disgrace. I gave you 40€, you gave me one good game (a bit buggy) and a very very buggy one. Still quite enjoyable I have to say but if I knew... I wouldn't do it again. And mostly because of how you handled the whole thing.

    Now I tell you: if the savegames are compatible, upon showing the invoice, give me (us) back our money or a coupon for the steam version, for example, and END this delusional thread about a patch that you're not able to provide.

    End the MAS product and distribute just the working one, and let us all be happy, yes?
    Give us the 1.3 version in the quickest way and end this disgraceful waste.

    No one thought of that? Is it so hard to do? Are you really going to ignore all you MAS clients? That's shameful.
  • mormegil27mormegil27 Member Posts: 27
    Warlock, are you worried about steam because the Russians/North Koreans/Chinese/Anonymous might one day hack their servers, then hack every personal computer with Steam installed?

    Is there some reason the same couldn't occur with Apple? And didnt all those Hollywood women get their pics stollen off of iCloud?

    I think at this point nothing is safe. Perhaps networked computers should be only used for games /info surfing, and personal docs only kept on disconnected computers?

    Then Beamdog has no issues with where they choose to market.
  • GreenWarlockGreenWarlock Member Posts: 1,354
    Simple caution that I don't want my details spread far and wide. The more places are hooked up with my Ccard info and ability to spend money, the more vulnerable I am - and I don't trust anyone when it comes to online security (I have been in the software game myself too long to trust anyone's code, especially my own, and that barely scratches the issues of security).

    So I limit myself to a single app store, and hope all those high st. restaurants are not doing crazy things storing transaction details each time I make a physical purchase. It is not 'safe' but it minimizes the risk I am happy taking, especially for something as discretionary as games purchases. My music and movie collections are still disk based rather than online too, for example.

    The only way to be completely secure is to not have a bank account and credit cards in the first place, but that brings its own problems of physical security, so there is no perfect solution - just find the balance you are happy with.

    And this is getting totally off-topic for this thread, other than to reaffirm that, for at least some of us, ongoing Mac App Store support is a big deal.
  • GrumGrum Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 2,100
    That is the exact news that I was waiting for. I approve!
Sign In or Register to comment.