ralphtricky
Posts: 6685
Joined: 7/27/2003 From: Colorado Springs Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: molotov_billy I think if you'd ask any game developer if a free copy of the game was compensation enough for the number of hours required to create good, historical gameplay, they'd say you're crazy. That said, I would still have done it, because I love wargames and I want to see them furthered along. I would still create a scenario if it meant a free copy of a matrix game. I don't quite understand this comment. The games were offered to the people after the scenario scelection was completed. It was in no way offered as payment. I'd agree that the number of hours run up by the people that created by the scenarios in no way offset the number of hours they spent on creating the scenarios. That does double for the scenario selection team and the beta testers. quote:
I, as well as others, are upset with the scenario selection of TAOW III. You can tell me that my opinion is wrong, and that everyone is perfectly happy, but that's just pointless. I'm not really interested in those arguments; they don't go anywhere. I'm trying to come up with a solution to a problem that many customers are upset with. That's all. Burning bridges isn't going to accomplish anything, especially when the wargaming community is so small as-is. Please, if you're upset by it, that's something that's very easy to undo. Start a thread (or blog, or some other medium) and list the scenarios along with a description of them, whether they're good for PBEM, whether they're good for PO, how complex they are and what short-comings they have. Heck, collaborate with Oleg on getting his site up to date. That's something that's sorely missing from the community. Figuring out which scenarios you want to play is a daunting task. Ralph It's better to light a candle than curse the darkness.
|