Makes sense now :) Thanks. Also was happy to see in the other topic that LAN was planned...that is further than most devs these days seem to get. Here's hoping LAN is in the next game!

Aaand this is how it should be done. If there's a PR person responsible for this statement, I hope you're paying them enough. TBS is my least favorite genre, and I'll still be buying this game now.

Thank you for this post . I also hope that this problem will not happen again. Especially since he has another game that you edit, which looks very promising Daymare: 1998.

I hope to see him landed a day on gog.

While I didn't preorder, I would've bought this game on day one release, and I will be honest when I saw the game pop up as being avalible my first thought was: "A little too late", but I decided to jump on to the forums and see what people were saying, and then happened upon this thread.

So I just want to say, we all make mistakes, so I am willing to forgive this one(which was primarily a serious communication issue rather than anything else). If the game is still 50% of when I get paid(sometime around Wensday next week) I'll definitly buy it, if not I'll hold out until a christmas sale or something.

Hope you guys learn from this and do better in the future!

I tried it on Steam beta and it leans more to the RTT side. Heavy emphasis is on tactical battles. Economy is similar to COH by capturing points aka building for ressources acquisiton. Base building is similar to how it was done in Battle for Middle Earth 1+2 where you have preexisting points where you can build a particular building. There is no free placement of buildings. Just you are more limited on what type of buildings you can build in a particular spot then in other games. The non tactical part is more barebone then COH games.

Units have emphasis on morale so they can break faster then in other games.

I bought the game, although prefer games that emphasise more the full RTS expirience. Still downloading at the moment its 17GB big.

Just to report. There are some issues with the story introduction videos when the mission starts. I mean the videos that tell the story not the ones before it zooms on your troops. They seem to lag for some reason. And the text doesn't match time wise the story being told.

Hey guys, author of that infamous 1-star review here.

Now before I dip into why I wrote it, let me tell you that it wasn't the game (obviously). In fact I played the game - temptation not to was simply too great - and absolutely loved it. Would recommend it to everyone that ever asked me about it.

Now with that out of the way, here's why I did write it:
There simply wasn't any communication from you guys. Nothing about what's up, or when we might expect something - anything - at all. We had to go to another platform to get answers, if we got any at all.

But that's not actually the real reason, just the justification (sort of). The real reason being, I'm a fellow software engineer myself (low-level UNIX) and I know quite a bit about our predicament with the "business people". It often does not matter how much internal complaining there is, but what they usually listen to is external critic. Especially so when it harms the bottom line.

Case study: Ubisoft, Activision, Electronic Arts.
A lot of really talented engineers work at these companies, yet the result of their work is quite often sub-par. Or so I heard. Wouldn't really know because it's been years since I last bought a game from either of them.
The reason their games are often (always?) sub-par isn't because of the people doing the ground work, it's because of the people in charge. Deadline after deadline, constantly changing specifications and having to rush things just to make the release.
Actually, that's more a representative accounting of software engineering across the board as it is just about game development. If there's a Master of Business Administration (MBA) aka. Master Bullshit Artist anywhere near the decision making, you're usually in for a tough ride.

So to wrap it up, I wrote my review for these purposes:

1. To warn potential customers about what they might expect, e.g. having to wait days / weeks for a patch after it's Steam release, if it ever comes. Obviously I haven't read your apology piece here before writing that review, because after reading it now I'm about 98% certain that those fears are unfounded here. But still, you could have entirely avoided that by just describing the situation on release day or a few days after that. Total silence for months was the worst possible option to choose.

2. To give you ammunition. Valid critic you give whoever MBA is in charge / responsible. Trust me, if it hurts their bottom line enough, they *will* listen. It's not about the product quality for them, it's all just about the money. If they believe they can sell you a turd for 10 bucks, they absolutely will try that.

and 3., I did some digging a few days after the supposed release day and found out that pulling stunts like these is custom for your publisher, 1C Company.

That's why I deliberately left out any criticism regarding the game. I could only have written great things about it and thus would have only undermined my purpose for writing the review in the first place.

So, to summarize, you spammed a non-revocable 1-star non-review for 1) a wrong reason, 2) a presumptuous reason, and 3) an irrelevant reason. Cool.

All reviews on gog are revocable. All he needs to do is to write to gog support and ask for the removal of that review.

Oh, they do? I've only ever seen the reviews where people promise to remove or change on certain conditions and it never seems to happen. Well, then. Strike that. :)