 |
|
WFHermans
|
|
Unfortunately that forum blocks access to some of its paying customers without giving any reason. Seems to have somethng to do with some Swedish law that we all are supposed to know. I hope that won't happen to you.
In the meantime, make sure the autosave is set at one year. (You probably did that).
The crashing always seems to happen in the middle of long complicated wars.
You can try to pick up a version that doesn't check if the CD with the copy protection is in, maybe we are rquired by Swedish law to have a Swedish CD player. You are allowed to have a copy if you own the game. Check http://www.gamecopyworld.com/ or www.kazaa.com to see if other users have it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
WFHermans
|
|
Nothing personal, strictly business. Read again.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mordoch
|
|
Denver, Colorado
Jan 2002
time: 05:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by WFHermans
Nothing personal, strictly business. Read again. |
The problem is that both me and Uglyduck have played the closed beta which does not check the CD, and stability problems still occur sometimes. While he still could give your suggestion a try, it is likely to be a hardware compatability specific problem. That Swedish cheapshot was uncalled for, other than the fact the game company is based on Sweden, there are no real differences in how the game is programed based on this fact. Copy protection is actually determined by the publisher not Paradox itself. I can say that I have not seen any other of the very large number of members of the board get banned in the manner you say you did, and I would hope you would not be so childish as to bring this up everytime someone comes to this board with a qustion since it is increadibly unlikely to be an issue for them.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
WFHermans
|
|
There's no way for me to know that when i cannot read the forum. I only bring up Sweden because I have been banned from reading the forum because I broke some unknown Swedish law. That this is a rare event I can believe, if Paradox would do this to a few thousand customers it would be very fast out of business.
It's interesting that Paradox knew about the stability problems, as you state, and still decided to go ahead with their release of EU2. You think that a hardware compatibility causes the problems.
The only sure way of knowing whether the copy protection causes the error is to play the game without the copy protection.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RobRoy
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mordoch
The problem is that both me and Uglyduck have played the closed beta which does not check the CD, and stability problems still occur sometimes. While he still could give your suggestion a try, it is likely to be a hardware compatability specific problem. That Swedish cheapshot was uncalled for, other than the fact the game company is based on Sweden, there are no real differences in how the game is programed based on this fact. Copy protection is actually determined by the publisher not Paradox itself. I can say that I have not seen any other of the very large number of members of the board get banned in the manner you say you did, and I would hope you would not be so childish as to bring this up everytime someone comes to this board with a qustion since it is increadibly unlikely to be an issue for them. |
Gosh, someone is upset about being banned! Imagine that! How odd! How unusual! How dare he?
I'm not aware of the specifics of WFHermans situation, but I'd reserve the terms "cheapshot" and "childish" for your buddy who enjoys permanently banning people for...for...well he actually leaves it up to you to guess what your crime might be, but any criticism of him is obviously verbotten, whether justified or not.
Funny, how his attempts to help people here always involve them coming over to his playground (where he tolerates no dissent or criticism that I can see).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mordoch
|
|
Denver, Colorado
Jan 2002
time: 05:18
|
|
Gosh, just about the only two people I know of who were banned from the EU2 official forums are sticking together! Given the fact that there are thousands of members on the official boards, I can conclude that such an occurance is very rare. In your case you DID dare Uglyduck to ban you after he warned you to stop posting the same topic repeatly after the thread was closed. Obviously given the fact there are far more people on the official forum who play EU2 means that he is much more likely to quickly get a solution to his problem if he goes there. Would you think it was a good idea to go to the EU2 forums for tech help with Civ 3 instead of Apolyton.net? I know you two have a personal vendetta against Paradox, but can you try to avoid bringing it up everytime a new thread about EU2 crops up on these forums?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mordoch
|
|
Denver, Colorado
Jan 2002
time: 05:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by WFHermans
There's no way for me to know that when i cannot read the forum. I only bring up Sweden because I have been banned from reading the forum because I broke some unknown Swedish law. That this is a rare event I can believe, if Paradox would do this to a few thousand customers it would be very fast out of business.
It's interesting that Paradox knew about the stability problems, as you state, and still decided to go ahead with their release of EU2. You think that a hardware compatibility causes the problems.
The only sure way of knowing whether the copy protection causes the error is to play the game without the copy protection. |
You might want to realize that these stability problems are relatively rare and my primary point was that I knew they were very likely to not be related to copy protection. I also know that for most people, as long a they autosave occasionally, the occasional crash is no big deal. It might have been better to have a slightly larger selection of closed beta testers so that more hardware configurations could have been tester, but Paradox is a small company with limited resources and I reason to believe that future games will have a greater number of beta testers testing different hardware configurations.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
WFHermans
|
|
The little dictators at the Paradox forum are the ones that have personal vendettas. And Murdoch is still surprised that quote:
Paradox is a small company with limited resources |
...
Any company that treats its customers like dirt will stay that way and will go under if it is persistent. Don't they realise that every screwed customer will warn his friends never to deal with that company again?
Your response is again an example of the arrogance of Paradox. A customer states that quote:
It is so frustrating to speed an hour working on a game and then to have it crash on you. |
and your reply is quote:
I also know that for most people, as long a they autosave occasionally, the occasional crash is no big deal. |
In this thread at Apolyton two customers complain about them being banned from a forum they paid for. I cannot read why RobRoy was banned, but I do know that the knowledge of english language amongst Paradox is minimal.
And you point out that there are quote:
thousands of members on the official boards, I can conclude that such an occurance is very rare. |
Do you at Paradox have a personal vendetta against your customers? Or only against some of them.?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RobRoy
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mordoch
Gosh, just about the only two people I know of who were banned from the EU2 official forums are sticking together! Given the fact that there are thousands of members on the official boards, I can conclude that such an occurance is very rare. |
If pointing out that banning tends to upset people is "sticking together", than I guess I'm guilty. As to how rare it is, only Uglyduck and Patric know. I might trust a stat from Patric, I haven't seen him state anything demonstrably false. But I wonder about your conclusion and why you would find such numbers relevant either way? Clearly banning happens there. Clearly the official forum mods forbid any public criticism or challenges, no matter how justified. Overall, I can conclude that tolerance for anything negative on the official boards is very rare.
quote:
Originally posted by Mordoch
In your case you DID dare Uglyduck to ban you after he warned you to stop posting the same topic repeatly after the thread was closed. |
That's an intersesting bit of fantasy. Is that your understanding or some of the duck's misrepresentation? I commented ONCE about the implications of Uglyduck's closure/removal of a thread, clarifying what the issue was (since HE professed to be mystified). My only other thread after that was a single, highly sarcastic post about the lovely warning earned by that thread (which was also closed/moved. It would amaze me if he (or you) could call that post a "dare", or use the word "repeatedly", but I guess you just did. If you're not a native English speaker, you might want to review the definitions of "dare" and "repeatedly" and reconsider if your choice of words was appropriate.
quote:
Originally posted by Mordoch
Obviously given the fact there are far more people on the official forum who play EU2 means that he is much more likely to quickly get a solution to his problem if he goes there. |
Obviously. Why are you implying someone said otherwise?
One caveat, though, as far as crashes go: I've see the fan club getting defensive about crash complaints and vociferously denying they're a problem, but crashes are far more frequent with 1.04 than 1.03. I haven't tested a no-CD version to determine whether it crashes more or less frequently, but it's an interesting idea.
quote:
Originally posted by Mordoch
I know you two have a personal vendetta against Paradox, but can you try to avoid bringing it up everytime a new thread about EU2 crops up on these forums? |
How can you "know" something counterfactual? I have an ax to grind with the Duck's egregious behavior, nothing more. Despite your assertions to the contrary, I've said nothing about it in weeks (months actually). I've even resisted responding to Uglyduck's continued shilling about the Nirvana that is the official site. Perhaps I'll find the time to remedy that silence in the future.
But your assertion that people who are banned should shut up about it is simply incredible. You may not like to hear it, but, outside the Duck's playground, posters actually have wide latitude to voice their discontent. It's simply not reasonable to expect people who have been subjected to the internet equivalent of the death penalty to be happy about it. Yes, I know it's a trivial matter to get a new e:mail, ID, ISP, etc., if I really wanted to post again, but I shouldn't have to, nor should I have been subjected to such capricious and arbitrary behavior in the first place. Obviously I can't speak for the other gentleman (again, despite your assertions to the contrary), but if I understand his complaints correctly, he cannot even read the site, which is tough to justify even if his offense warranted a ban (mine didn't).
And since this is an area in which Uglyduck can disarm the critic in a heartbeat, your request that the victims keep silent seems doubly inappropriate.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mordoch
|
|
Denver, Colorado
Jan 2002
time: 05:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by WFHermans
Do you at Paradox have a personal vendetta against your customers? Or only against some of them.? |
Just to clarify something you seem really confused about here. I am not an employee of Paradox in any way. I have volunteered to be a closed beta tester for EU2 and Legion, but I merely may receive a free copy of the finished game in compensation some day. I think that your issue really is unique, and if you had contacted Paradox and calmly explained the problem, you certainly would be able to read the forum if not post in it right now.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mordoch
|
|
Denver, Colorado
Jan 2002
time: 05:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by RobRoy
Clearly banning happens there. Clearly the official forum mods forbid any public criticism or challenges, no matter how justified. Overall, I can conclude that tolerance for anything negative on the official boards is very rare.
. |
You reasoning seems very faulty to me. I certainly have seen plenty of people criticize the mods for plenty of reasons without anything happening to them. I would feel confident that I could criticize a mod on a reasonable manner on the EU2 boards without anything happening to me. If a rogue mod abused his power to ban me, I would contract Patric and get the situation sorted out. If anyone gets banned and can convincing demonstrated that the ban was unreasonable, I would personally contact Patric on their behalf. The mods have forumulated a policy of warning anyone who goes really over the line before banning them now, and I see them tolerate plenty of complaints an criticism. What got you in trouble was repeatedly posting new threads with the same topic after the old ones got locked and you were told to stop posting new ones with that subject by multiple mods. I am confident that simular behavior would get you banned here too. My complaint is that anytime you post anything on this board it seems like you grind your axe against Paradox a bit more. Sure you are unhappy about being banned, but you don't have to bring it up everytime you post about EU2.
Last edited by Mordoch on 10-04-2002 at 04:15
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RobRoy
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mordoch
You reasoning seems very faulty to me. |
As does yours to me. Funny how that perception stuff works.
quote:
Originally posted by Mordoch
I certainly have seen plenty of people criticize the mods for plenty of reasons without anything happening to them. |
Guess I just hit a nerve, huh? Not showing proper respect and what not...
quote:
Originally posted by Mordoch
The mods have forumulated a policy of warning anyone who goes really over the line before banning them now, and I see them tolerate plenty of complaints an criticism. |
Glad to hear they've mended their ways, but I'd be surprised if they could clearly articulate what that "line" is. I guess making a (ONE, SINGLE, UNITARY) sarcastic post about an inappropriate warning is "really over the line", huh?
But I wonder if you and I are looking at different forums? Perhaps a token amount of complaints are tolerated. But it strikes me as an atmosphere in which dissent and criticism are actively discouraged (especially from me).
quote:
Originally posted by Mordoch
What got you in trouble was repeatedly posting new threads with the same topic after the old ones got lock and you were told to stop posting new ones with that subject. |
Not quite. And we still seem to have different definitions of that word "repeatedly". ONE thread clarifying the issues, and challenging the mods actions seemed entirely appropriate, especially when the mods' actions and comments were inappropriate. The subject in that ONE additional thread was different, anyway, in case you missed it - I was questioning the appropriateness of a complete prohibition on any challenges to moderator actions or comments (especially when the much-vaulted PM system can't accomodate messages). Guess I know where that got me.
It's nice to see they've changed the rules and now have the balls to publish their blanket prohibition against public criticism of moderator behavior, regardless of how egregious that behavior may be (still conveniently ignoring the the deficiencies of their PM system, of course). Of course the fact that such a prohibition wasn't against the rules until my banning, or the fact that such a prohibition is ridiculously self-serving aren't really relevant, right?
But then again, as the duck is fond of saying, free speech has no place on his forum, even at it's most fundamental level (the ability to challenge and dissent from those in positions of authority).
quote:
Originally posted by Mordoch
I am confident that simular behavior would get you banned here too. |
LOL. You're confidence is severely misplaced. But then again, your understanding of my crimes seems flawed, also. If you hang around awhile, you'll see that Dan and Ming aren't quite so thin-skinned, and I've already voiced more criticism of the duck's behavior in this post that I ever did in a year of posting at the official site.
quote:
Originally posted by Mordoch
My complaint is that anytime you post anything on this board it seems like you grind your axe against Paradox a bit more. |
Which ax is that? Obviously I failed to make myself clear before or you are choosing to read selectively. The ax is regarding the duck's behavior. Paradox clearly allows him way too much latitude, and perhaps I should be upset at them for that. Paradox as a firm, and Patric as their forum point, have abrogated their responsibilities to him, but the ax is reserved for the individual who consciously, deliberately engages in behavior that I find reprehensible. If you'd like to contact Patric, feel free, but I already sent him an e:mail, which he clearly didn't read (his response made it obvious; but it was admittedly long, he is understandablly busy, and in a business situation appointing/supporting a dictator is often the easiest solution). So I suspect it's a waste of time trying to revoke Uglyduck's carte blanche (though Patric blithely assured that the reasonable Mr. duck would surely return my privleges if I contacted him directly - a possibility I find laughably remote, even if Mr. duck didn't hide his e:mail address). Perhaps I should use that fine PM system?
I'll be happy to reiterate a few more times if repetition would help? Perhaps, if people weren't coming around casually misrepresenting things, I wouldn't feel obliged to correct them. So look to yourself if you'd like the ax to stop grinding, and the forum's weaknesses to stay under most people's radar screens.
Last edited by RobRoy on 10-04-2002 at 05:46
|
|
| |
|
|
|
WFHermans
|
|
Yes, the people at Paradox apparently learned that it doesn't pay to treat the customers like ****. And you are profiting from the free lessons I gave to Paradox.
Does your game still crash all the fooking time?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
WFHermans
|
|
*** should be f.u.c.k.i.n.g. s.h.i.t.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
WFHermans
|
|
By the way, RobRoy, this duckperson doesn't reply to emails. Nor does the Paradox forum.
And I am still not sure whether they consciously misrepresent what people say or whether it is just them being "linguistically challenged". They are Swedes and Danes after all. This is not a cheap shot, but a factual observation; the pundits at the forum thought that "negro" was a term of racist abuse, and they thought that Gary Condit was a Republican because they saw Rep. written after his name.
Real gamecompanies applaud criticism because it helps them to improve their products. Paradox on the other hand punishes the critics. Well if that's the way they want it....
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
PCRefugee
|
|
Scotland
Apr 2002
time: 05:18
|
|
Err, just thought I'd get back to the topic.
Don't know if this helps you Oerdin but my copy crashes if I set the resolution higher than 800x600. I'm pretty sure it's because I'm running a Voodoo 5 card (I tried it on my other machine with a Gforce and it's never crashed on me). So, if you're running a Voodoo card, I thought that this might be where your problem lies. Hope this helps.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-04-2002 09:32
. Ah...if only the folks at Paradox would use some kind reminders about what the rules are instead of banning away their critics... 
|