Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
- 1/10/2003 4:48:15 AM   
U2


Posts: 3332
Joined: 7/17/2001
From: Västerås,Sweden
Status: offline 		Hi Marc

My copy was consumed in a fire sadly. But I also have my old C-64 plus my all time favourite, the Spectrum, left:)

Ah those were the days...

Dan

_____________________________


(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 91
Re: A newbie 2 cents. - 1/10/2003 6:07:00 AM   
SwampYankee68


Posts: 1186
Joined: 5/8/2002
From: Connecticut, U.S.
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tbone3336
[B]Hello all, I am very new to these boards, however I have been wargaming since 1985. I have nothing to add that would alter anyones opinion at this time except that in the mid to late 80's I played every computer game that SSG and SSI made for the Macintosh. Up to that point I had played various board wargames, and lacking a ready opponent all the time I migrated to the computer more and more. Well SSG published a magazine on a quarterly basis for a while there called Run 5. In just about each issue the editorial was how SSG was struggling with staying afloat in the wargame market and the letters section had people saying the industry would die in a few years. After 1992 I did not have a computer so fell away from wargaming with work and such. Fast forward 11 years or so and I have a new laptop that offered a chance to play wargames again in my decreasingly spare time. I also find SSG is still around and while it focuses on strategy games now (Warlords, etc), they did make TAO which is a great wargame and hopefully very soon Korson Pocket will be for sale. Along with that I find Matrix games and Uncommon Valor (which if anyone tries to say is not an awesome wargame, they do not know one to begin with), Battlefront.com, HPS, all publishing wargames. I also find out that from 1992 through recently I missed out on very good wargames, like (V for Victory, which I downloaded off of a site (forget the name now)), and a host of other games that filled those years. It may very well be that in a few years the industry will be dead, however I am inclined, (using my very limited view of the industry) to believe it will still be going along very nicely. Chess is a very old game, that has not changed in centuries, however the number of chess players H2H and via computers still goes strong, so a genre that can improve such as wargaming must have a future, just one where the business end will have to be tighter and more focused. [/B][/QUOTE]

Well met, T-Bone. I too cut my teeth on computer wargames in the mid 80's (SSI's Mech Brigade, Kampgruffe, the "Clash of superpowers" series by SSI [or somthing to that effect, a series of modern USSR/USA games SSI did], "The Nam" by SSI and more), and started in boardgames with a few I forget the names of, but are now on EBAY for big bucks. I started getting into the more advanced board games like Blitzkrieg and ASL, but found the computer made wargaming easier ( I guess that means I fail some people's "Grognard test", EH?). IU agree with you that in my admitedly small experiences, I have looked forward to evolution in wargaming, better production values wrapped around a good and realistic engine. To stop growing and innovating is to atrophy and die, a concept as true in wargaming, computer and board, as anywhere else in life. Certain people may disagree, but they are being small minded. At any rate, if you are sorry you missed out on the Vfor Victory series (Take my word for it, in it's day it was great! - I still have fond memories of my campaigns) check out Matrix' Battlefields! project. I am chomping at the bit for that puppy. It proves my point in that it looks to be an innovative successor to V4V (same scale, subject matter, better looks, multiplayer capabilities, AI, speed, and interface). Welcome to the boards, and don't worry, most threads are not this inane.

_____________________________

"The only way I got to keep them Tigers busy is to let them shoot holes in me!"

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 92
- 1/10/2003 10:16:35 AM   
Les_the_Sarge_9_1

 

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline 		Well I suppose in the grand scheme of things, some comments will become just "I told you so's", and others will just become embarassments.

But in the end, all that will matter, is whether anyone will care.

Me I am onboard awaiting Combat Leader. That much is unlikely to change.
I had to upgrade a perfectly good computer in order to play it though.
But that was not a problem, as my son has an interest in games like most kids his age, and I have been endeavouring to locate somethign i can call "the wife's game". She appears to be interested in just about anything. Translation, she will likely have me get Baldur's Gate which did not require any form of upgrade.

My son will likely go the route that most kids in time have to walk, ie he will get the pleasure of getting his own computer.

Me, I am likely ending my computer wargaming journey with Combat Leader. I am not purchasing Combat Leader out of any manner of undying love for matrix though. My purchase will be about buying a good game, from a company that has shown me it can make a good game at the scale.

Combat Leader if successful, will likely go to 3 or more add ons. But as technology doesn't stand still, and its the nature of the business, that games exploit where possible those advances, it is not automatic that a person being able to run the first release of Combat Leader, will automatically be able to run the last offering wearing the Combat Leader label.
Currently, my computer has differing opinions of differing Steel Panthers incarnations. Fortunately it likes the versions I like the most. The others require some effort on my part.

But where the future of computer wargaming is concerned....well I guess it will continue on.

Next years games will require faster processors, more ram, better video cards. New hardware will like always not always be totally in love with all of your old hardware. Some parts will drag you back. You will yet again have to watch the horror and the carnage down to your wallet.

But through it all, each wargame made, will have been capable of being entirely capable, with yesterdays technology. It will be capable of being just a challenging, just as good looking and just as marketable. But if doesn't have the latest look it will I guess not be as "cool".

This thread has been about "looking cool".

I suppose if all you want, is to "look cool" then you have my scorn.
I know you will call me names, but then I have had to deal with that before. In the winter for instance I wear what works, not which looks "cool". I have never been the sort to "follow the crowd". I stand out, I look "odd" I do it MY way.

Most of wargaming's past has been about odd guys playing odd games. I have been looked at as being geekish most of my life. It doesn't bother me to look that way. I like to laugh at the "cool people" in my own way.

Some have even questioned why I am here. Frankly I am questioning why I am here.
At this moment I am looking more and more longingly at my board games. Each and everyone one of them still fully compatible as the day I bought them. And each and every bopard game I see on the shelf today, is every bit as compatible with all of my older games.

Maybe the world of computers and it's future, and my future have nothing to offer each other. If that is so, then that is the way it will be. I don't feel like a stick in the mud, I don't believe I am better superior or any of that nonsense.
Making comments like that only indicates I have touched a nerve and the person saying it has gone defensive.

I have access to a lot of cool software that allows me to play board games online. I think it is cool that I can play my useless, boring, unfun, tedious board games online in direct dontradiction to all those that say board games are the past and have no future.
I think it is interesting that I am obviously not the only one that thinks that board games are not boring and unfun. Because I have not been the one driving forward the creation of this sort of software. So obviously I am not alone.

But I will let the world of computer wargaming have what it wants. I will wish it well. I will continue to play my boring dull tedious wargames on perfectly good tables.
You guys can pursue your endless need to endlessly upgrade your computers, so you can play yet another game with graphics that are only about looking cool. Because that is where its at right now.
More is not better, it is just more. And that more will require more and more upgrades.

I will not be uprgrading my system just to play the latest game regardless of how cool, when I can just purchase a good board game and play it whereever I wish.
There is a lot of perfectly good computer wargames out there now, and most of them are fairly immune to wear and tear. So there is no danger that excessive playings will cause them to wear out.

I offer these latest remarks. The thread is called Why wargaming can never grow, maybe the right statement should be to ask, Why does it even need to. Everyone should ask themselves if they are really accomplishing what they think they are accomplishing.

This thread so far has made me see why Bill Gates releases new versions of Windows so regularly.
Part is new options, but part is because people are dumb enough to buy it without question. Its the latest thing, it has to be cool.

XP is the first OS I have used since 3.1 that actually did anything useful. Every version in between has been just about exploiting the consumer.

Line up people, buy the latest game with the latest features. Don't be shy, you want this stuff. You "need" this stuff. You can't hope to go on without it.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 93
- 1/10/2003 10:48:57 AM   
Raindog101


Posts: 1209
Joined: 11/17/2002
From: Hole-in-the-Wall
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]Well I suppose in the grand scheme of things, some comments will become just "I told you so's", and others will just become embarassments.

But in the end, all that will matter, is whether anyone will care.

Me I am onboard awaiting Combat Leader. That much is unlikely to change.
I had to upgrade a perfectly good computer in order to play it though.
But that was not a problem, as my son has an interest in games like most kids his age, and I have been endeavouring to locate somethign i can call "the wife's game". She appears to be interested in just about anything. Translation, she will likely have me get Baldur's Gate which did not require any form of upgrade.

My son will likely go the route that most kids in time have to walk, ie he will get the pleasure of getting his own computer.

Me, I am likely ending my computer wargaming journey with Combat Leader. I am not purchasing Combat Leader out of any manner of undying love for matrix though. My purchase will be about buying a good game, from a company that has shown me it can make a good game at the scale.

Combat Leader if successful, will likely go to 3 or more add ons. But as technology doesn't stand still, and its the nature of the business, that games exploit where possible those advances, it is not automatic that a person being able to run the first release of Combat Leader, will automatically be able to run the last offering wearing the Combat Leader label.
Currently, my computer has differing opinions of differing Steel Panthers incarnations. Fortunately it likes the versions I like the most. The others require some effort on my part.

But where the future of computer wargaming is concerned....well I guess it will continue on.

Next years games will require faster processors, more ram, better video cards. New hardware will like always not always be totally in love with all of your old hardware. Some parts will drag you back. You will yet again have to watch the horror and the carnage down to your wallet.

But through it all, each wargame made, will have been capable of being entirely capable, with yesterdays technology. It will be capable of being just a challenging, just as good looking and just as marketable. But if doesn't have the latest look it will I guess not be as "cool".

This thread has been about "looking cool".

I suppose if all you want, is to "look cool" then you have my scorn.
I know you will call me names, but then I have had to deal with that before. In the winter for instance I wear what works, not which looks "cool". I have never been the sort to "follow the crowd". I stand out, I look "odd" I do it MY way.

Most of wargaming's past has been about odd guys playing odd games. I have been looked at as being geekish most of my life. It doesn't bother me to look that way. I like to laugh at the "cool people" in my own way.

Some have even questioned why I am here. Frankly I am questioning why I am here.
At this moment I am looking more and more longingly at my board games. Each and everyone one of them still fully compatible as the day I bought them. And each and every bopard game I see on the shelf today, is every bit as compatible with all of my older games.

Maybe the world of computers and it's future, and my future have nothing to offer each other. If that is so, then that is the way it will be. I don't feel like a stick in the mud, I don't believe I am better superior or any of that nonsense.
Making comments like that only indicates I have touched a nerve and the person saying it has gone defensive.

I have access to a lot of cool software that allows me to play board games online. I think it is cool that I can play my useless, boring, unfun, tedious board games online in direct dontradiction to all those that say board games are the past and have no future.
I think it is interesting that I am obviously not the only one that thinks that board games are not boring and unfun. Because I have not been the one driving forward the creation of this sort of software. So obviously I am not alone.

But I will let the world of computer wargaming have what it wants. I will wish it well. I will continue to play my boring dull tedious wargames on perfectly good tables.
You guys can pursue your endless need to endlessly upgrade your computers, so you can play yet another game with graphics that are only about looking cool. Because that is where its at right now.
More is not better, it is just more. And that more will require more and more upgrades.

I will not be uprgrading my system just to play the latest game regardless of how cool, when I can just purchase a good board game and play it whereever I wish.
There is a lot of perfectly good computer wargames out there now, and most of them are fairly immune to wear and tear. So there is no danger that excessive playings will cause them to wear out.

I offer these latest remarks. The thread is called Why wargaming can never grow, maybe the right statement should be to ask, Why does it even need to. Everyone should ask themselves if they are really accomplishing what they think they are accomplishing.

This thread so far has made me see why Bill Gates releases new versions of Windows so regularly.
Part is new options, but part is because people are dumb enough to buy it without question. Its the latest thing, it has to be cool.

XP is the first OS I have used since 3.1 that actually did anything useful. Every version in between has been just about exploiting the consumer.

Line up people, buy the latest game with the latest features. Don't be shy, you want this stuff. You "need" this stuff. You can't hope to go on without it. [/B][/QUOTE]
I have never heard anyone in this thread say they prefer graphics to gameplay. Everyone has said it should be “gameplay” first.

I was puzzled reading your posts as to why you are so vehemently against up-to-date software or games. Your post makes it clear that the real reason you detest modern graphics is you’re just to cheap to upgrade your PC.

Maybe you should stick to playing “bored” games” because upgrading your PC is just part of PC gaming. It’s called progress, and comes with the territory.

_____________________________


(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 94
- 1/10/2003 11:10:51 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Old Eagle101
[B]I have never heard anyone in this thread say they prefer graphics to gameplay. Everyone has said it should be “gameplay” first.

I was puzzled reading your posts as to why you are so vehemently against up-to-date software or games. Your post makes it clear that the real reason you detest modern graphics is you’re just to cheap to upgrade your PC.

Maybe you should stick to playing “bored” games” because upgrading your PC is just part of PC gaming. It’s called progress, and comes with the territory. [/B][/QUOTE]

Aw, fer chrissake, leave Les alone, willya? He's a ramblin', obsolete kinda guy after my own heart. He's not "vehement" against anything. I, too, am spending more time with my old (and, for that matter, new) paper-and-cardboard games. So are my friends. I've got my C-64 up and running again FOR FUN DAMMIT because I found a place that will repair it for me when it - inevitably - goes blooie (like Pepperland).

That old stuff was great then and maybe even greater now that we have seen what the Huxleyesque world has to offer. I am hip to the Matrix thing because they are working with what I like. When it stops being that, I will wander off again, strumming my lute and singing songs to the stars.

I hate the new Cadillacs with their homage to the parallelogram. I love my compact pickup and its simple utility. I can buy either. I choose the latter. It works for me, and I don't need to be insulted for it.

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 95
- 1/10/2003 11:32:21 AM   
Les_the_Sarge_9_1

 

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline 		"I have never heard anyone in this thread say they prefer graphics to gameplay. Everyone has said it should be “gameplay” first."

I might as well just call that an outright case of pure bull, a bold faced lie even.

If gameplay first meant anything to this argument, then I would have no ammo to work with would I.

But the truth of it is, that people want that glamour, because the feel they can't compete without it.

I am not to "cheap" to purchase new hardware, no on the contrary I am not dumb enough to purchase a new system ranging in the $1000 plus range, just so I can play a new game each year.

I am constantly hearing how great this game or that game is. The games that require you to have a vintage computer just to run it.
And then in the same post, the person tries to tell me I need a new graphically intense game to remain competitive, or else the hobby is in danger.

One comment totally contradicts the other.
If that old C64 game IS truely any good, then you have just shown that the latest the neatest the more graphically intense game is NOT in need of those graphics.

So which is it people.

I prefer gameplay above all else. That means that I won't play a game if it can't be played on this machine. If your software won't run on my current computer, then you wasted your effort on this gamer that's for sure.

Because I already know this computer can run perfectly good wargames. And if you can't make a wargame attractive, and within the limits of this machine, if you have to incorporate the latest graphics, then you are saying you value those graphics above gameplay regardless if you say you don't.

Ramble, yes I might ramble, but at least I am not contradicting my own comments with my own comments.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 96
- 1/10/2003 11:36:39 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline 		As Led Zeppelin put it, Les, "Ramble on!"

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 97
- 1/10/2003 11:38:40 AM   
Reiryc

 

Posts: 4991
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by pasternakski
[B]As Led Zeppelin put it, Les, "Ramble on!" [/B][/QUOTE]

LoL....

;)

_____________________________


(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 98
- 1/10/2003 3:00:52 PM   
Raindog101


Posts: 1209
Joined: 11/17/2002
From: Hole-in-the-Wall
Status: offline 		Les the Sarge 9-1 sez;
[QUOTE]I might as well just call that an outright case of pure bull, a bold faced lie even.[/QUOTE]
Could you point out the post where someone thought graphics more important than gameplay? Who's opinion was it?

_____________________________


(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 99
- 1/10/2003 3:29:34 PM   
BrubakerII


Posts: 538
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Adelaide Australia
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Old Eagle101
[B]Les the Sarge 9-1 sez;

Could you point out the post where someone thought graphics more important than gameplay? Who's opinion was it? [/B][/QUOTE]

Ah, you beat me to it Eagle :D

I cannot believe that someone is actually arguing that an old genre dressed up by nice artwork is 'prostituting' it :o Maybe Les is the only true Grognard here if being a Grognard means putting your hands over your eyes and ears and hoping the new world wil go away.

I remember an eon ago when I first bought 'Decision in the Desert' and thought to myself, Wow, this computer thingy (C64)has got potential !

On that topic I remember my first SSG games - they were 'Halls of Montezuma' and 'Carrier's at War' (Uncommon Valour fans please look away ;) ).

Les a question for you: If you were to take a chess game and dress it up in a new display that not only pleased existing fans but also brought one hundred new to the genre, would that be a good or bad thing? Would the game play any differently?

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 100
- 1/10/2003 4:35:09 PM   
Marc von Martial


Posts: 10875
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Bonn, Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]I might as well just call that an outright case of pure bull, a bold faced lie even.

If gameplay first meant anything to this argument, then I would have no ammo to work with would I.

But the truth of it is, that people want that glamour, because the feel they can't compete without it.[/QUOTE]

That is just plain hillarious. The initial post in this thread was about a game which was found good in gameplay but with not so good graphics. That was the initital complaint in this thread. Then you came Les and turned it the other way around, all you do is impliying that everybody here says "Gimme glamor before gameplay". A lot of times people here tried to point out that they want nice graphics with good gamplay !!! I even pointed out that with the help of nice graphics, boxart, whatsoever, you even able to raise new wargaming recruits.

You´re so rock solid in your so called "points" that you totally miss that it seems. I guess you brainwashed yourself.

And then this pathetic "everybody is picking on my boardgames", what a load of BS. When did somebody here say that boardgames are boring or suck ???

Now some new ammo for the graphics part. How comes that boardgame reviews mention when the game comes with an extraordinary nice box, counters map and manual , hmmmm ;) ? I think because it´s not important.

[QUOTE]Les a question for you: If you were to take a chess game and dress it up in a new display that not only pleased existing fans but also brought one hundred new to the genre, would that be a good or bad thing? Would the game play any differently?[/QUOTE]

No, it would be prostituting the Game of Kings. You would be a heretic to be doomed for eternal pains and suffer in the hottest spot of the purgatory.

_____________________________

Marc von Martial
instagram stream

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 101
Les is an ol' dog. - 1/10/2003 4:43:35 PM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline 		I think that les is just an old dog that can't learn new tricks.....I had another post in which I said that WarHammer modelling was good because it brough new blood to the art of model making....Les said no, warhammer stuff was crap and over priced and as such was a waste of time.

Well just some six months on from last discussing this, my son whom used to be a warhammer nut, has now moved onto making WW2 tanks (Oh my poor wallet).

It is my contention that it does not matter how some one is hooked, it is the fact that you GET someone hooked that matters....be it modelling or wargaming.

Just my 2 cents worth.

_____________________________




Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 102
- 1/10/2003 4:44:21 PM   
Marc von Martial


Posts: 10875
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Bonn, Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]I am constantly hearing how great this game or that game is. The games that require you to have a vintage computer just to run it.

One comment totally contradicts the other.
If that old C64 game IS truely any good, then you have just shown that the latest the neatest the more graphically intense game is NOT in need of those graphics.

So which is it people.[/QUOTE]

That´s no contradiction at all Les, since this classic games were mostly up the standards when they where released. They still play good although the graphics and such are obsolete.

You will have major difficulties to sell a game with superb gameplay and the graphics of Kampfgruppe these days. That is a fact. When I speak about sales, I´m speaking about sales that allow you to compete and produce the next game you invision, thus keeping wargaming alive with new releases and provide games to the people that want them.

I don´t see a contradiction at all here.

_____________________________

Marc von Martial
instagram stream

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 103
- 1/10/2003 5:06:00 PM   
Raindog101


Posts: 1209
Joined: 11/17/2002
From: Hole-in-the-Wall
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Marc Schwanebeck
[B]You will have major difficulties to sell a game with superb gameplay and the graphics of Kampfgruppe these days. That is a fact. When I speak about sales, I´m speaking about sales that allow you to compete and produce the next game you invision, thus keeping wargaming alive with new releases and provide games to the people that want them.[/B][/QUOTE]
I don’t understand how “Les the Sarge” can expect a game company to stay in business making new wargames with 80’s era graphics for the 6 or 7 people on Earth demanding them.

Even if the company has to make a mass market game now and then to pays the bills, it’s fine with me as long as they keep making games like Uncommon Valor.

_____________________________


(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 104
- 1/10/2003 6:30:49 PM   
BrubakerII


Posts: 538
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Adelaide Australia
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Old Eagle101
[B]Even if the company has to make a mass market game now and then to pays the bills, it’s fine with me as long as they keep making games like Uncommon Valor. [/B][/QUOTE]

Amen Eagle. The mass (gaming) market is often criticised but never forget it is the purse that drives the production of these games and allows us to even be here discussing it. If not for a Sudden Strike or Medal of Honour there may well be no Combat Mission or Uncommon Valour. Having said that I will state that even at 39 years of age I enjoy FPS and RTS games. God if they were around in the mid seventies then the older guys teaching me D@D and Third Reich would be playing them too. God bless computers and god bless the joy they bring us, may they continue to till we are as old as our grandparents.


@Old Eagle101: Personal question. I am presuming here you are a vet of sorts - do you mind sharing a service history? Just interested.

Brubaker

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 105
- 1/10/2003 6:44:50 PM   
Les_the_Sarge_9_1

 

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline 		I find it odd how you guys can carry on an entire conversation, then assume that certain comments were never made, that certain points were never raised.

Then you expect the world to be unable to read the course of the entire thread, and assume that I am the only one on my side of the opinion. That as I am the only one speaking my side of the coin, I am clearly the only one supporting it.

You seem comfortable with the fact that as I never quote anyone, I am therefore unable to prove I have never read anyones comments.

Sorry guys, I don't waste space in my posts with your posts.

As for games that were up to standards when they were released, they are still up to standards now. Otherwise they are not. But I have been told by fans that they are.

Now seeing as we are dragging outside comments in here let me drag this one in.

Yes I was not to "pro" SC for a time, because I wanted the game to be very much like A3R when I stated checking out the demo. I have the game though currently. I have been playing it, and I can say it is still not A3R in game play, but it also has its own merits.

It is A not over priced. It has B a very clean interface. C it looks like a board game, and this has apparently not done thing one to hinder it. D the game has no pointless graphical enhancements. So E you can design a good well liked game that say F you guys are all wrong.

As for Warhammer. I see you son making models after playing Wahammer, with several friends that started to play and then realised the game was crap and left the hobby entirely.
Oh and lets put a different slant on that lad. Maybe he is making model tanks and not playing Warhammer because he doesn't like Warhammer because Warhammer sucks like I said it does.
If it was any good, he might still be playing Warhammer.
After several years lots of people still play Steel panthers for a reason eh, it doesn't suck. Lots of people have tweaked the hell out of it, why, because the original game was so much fun.

But as Marc has pointed out, we have drifted from the original post. Guess what Marc, there isn't a forum in existence that has a single thread tha stays glued rock solid to the original post.
Come to think of it, I have also never once in my life had a single conversation after 40 years, where the original comment was the sole focus of the conversation.

So that point was a waste of your time to type it. It was in effect a pointless point.

Difficulty in making sales with older graphics, what a hoot. Thats why modern film has such incredible graphics and special effects (all grossly innaccurate in most cases). The people are only interested in making money.
Basing a business around making decent credible wargames and just credible wargames, is not exactly a strong basis for making money. I don't like the fact that wargaming is a small numbers hobby, but I can live with it. Reality bites.

Brain washed, no I ain't brain washed, why do you think you are having such difficulty selling me on all your obvious hoggwash.

You say this conversation is about people saying gameplay is where you want it, that graphics is important but it isn't the be all and end all of the process. I suggest you tape record your self saying those remarks you post hear, maybe your ears work better than your eyes.

People are NOT picking on board games, who said that, not me.
People are playing board games just fine.

I find it funny people need to insert quotes, you must think that those silent readers can't remember my posts correctly. Maybe you are afraid they won't read through the whole thread.
Maybe you guys should also insert the full text of all my posts start to finish each and every time. At least that way the post readership would get to hear all of what I said and not snippets you decide to take out of context.

Thats the same way the world's religious loonies manage to distort the original messages normally. It's amazing how you can make a new message by singling out and carefully omitting parts of the full comment.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 106
Re: Re: A newbie 2 cents. - 1/10/2003 6:50:51 PM   
Tbone3336

 

Posts: 129
Joined: 11/26/2002
From: Philadelphia, PA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Welcome to the boards, and don't worry, most threads are not this inane. [/B][/QUOTE]

Thanks Swamp Yankee, nice to meet you and the others. Most threads like this are ok, if it stays mostly in fun. I have surfed these boards since Nov, and have just gotten back to wargaming as I mentioned so I did not have much to add to most threads. The battlefront games were a whole lot of fun and since there were few Mac wargames, I had a chance to really get into them. Another point that goes along with this thread is I have seen a vast improvement in how the computer in certain games can put you in a forced role as commander (Uncommon Valor, Airborne Assualt) and really enhance the feeling of what command of units was like when you do not have direct control, IE orders delays and such. The battlefront games tried to convey this years ago but fell short a bit IMO, but were still great games. I will concur though that when I did boardgame it was alot of fun to have a few friends hang out and laugh and BS together over the games (just like this forum and thread allows us to do though just not face to face), unfortunatley as I aged that became something that could be done once every three or so months. Again thanks for the welcome!:)

_____________________________

We aim to please, unless there is a clear headshot.

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 107
- 1/10/2003 7:06:18 PM   
Marc von Martial


Posts: 10875
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Bonn, Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]It's amazing how you can make a new message by singling out and carefully omitting parts of the full comment.[/QUOTE]

You´re a master of this yourself, even without quoting ;).

One could think you are a lawyer with a cum laude diploma on content and word twisting, hey maybe a job opportunity for you ;)

Now this get´s really tiresome ... off to make some spicy graphics

_____________________________

Marc von Martial
instagram stream

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 108
- 1/10/2003 7:09:49 PM   
BrubakerII


Posts: 538
Joined: 9/15/2002
From: Adelaide Australia
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]I find it odd how you guys can carry on an entire conversation, then assume that certain comments were never made, that certain points were never raised.

Then you expect the world to be unable to read the course of the entire thread, and assume that I am the only one on my side of the opinion. That as I am the only one speaking my side of the coin, I am clearly the only one supporting it.

You seem comfortable with the fact that as I never quote anyone, I am therefore unable to prove I have never read anyones comments.

Ha ha. Okay Les I am comfortable that this is not taken out of context. In fact of anyone wants to read this post in its entiret, it is but two posts above this one :p

The fact is Les you stated only a few posts back that people here prefer graphiocs to gameplay. It was Marc(?) who called you to show where that was the case. You have not done so. In fact you have not done so because it is simply BS. Perhaps you do not like quoting posts simply because there is nothing in those posts to support your argument and that by doing so you might embarass yourself?

quote:

Sorry guys, I don't waste space in my posts with your posts.


Clearly :rolleyes:

quote:

As for games that were up to standards when they were released, they are still up to standards now. Otherwise they are not. But I have been told by fans that they are.


Okay well I call your bluff here - exactly what fans and where?

quote:

Now seeing as we are dragging outside comments in here let me drag this one in.


By all means. This is called substantiation.

quote:

I find it funny people need to insert quotes, you must think that those silent readers can't remember my posts correctly. Maybe you are afraid they won't read through the whole thread.
Maybe you guys should also insert the full text of all my posts start to finish each and every time. At least that way the post readership would get to hear all of what I said and not snippets you decide to take out of context.


You have a point here Les but the fact remains that by quoting people from there own posts made only hours earlier, it is easy and effective to call people to account for their anonymous ramblings. Take your claim that people want graphics and not gameplay for instance, something you have stated but yet to substantiate.

Brubaker

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 109
- 1/10/2003 7:27:16 PM   
Les_the_Sarge_9_1

 

Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline 		Well it was an interesting way to waste thursday.

Well maybe not interesting. But I have plans for today.

So you guys will have to make use of what I have said in whatever fashion you will.

Largely for the same reason, that I will eventually walk away from religious loonies as well. Some conversations are not worth winning, so fighting them is a waste in time resources.

_____________________________

I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 110
- 1/10/2003 7:30:29 PM   
Raindog101


Posts: 1209
Joined: 11/17/2002
From: Hole-in-the-Wall
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by BrubakerII
[B]Ha ha. Okay Les I am comfortable that this is not taken out of context. In fact of anyone wants to read this post in its entiret, it is but two posts above this one :p

The fact is Les you stated only a few posts back that people here prefer graphiocs to gameplay. It was Marc(?) who called you to show where that was the case. You have not done so. In fact you have not done so because it is simply BS. Perhaps you do not like quoting posts simply because there is nothing in those posts to support your argument and that by doing so you might embarass yourself?



Clearly :rolleyes:



Okay well I call your bluff here - exactly what fans and where?



By all means. This is called substantiation.



You have a point here Les but the fact remains that by quoting people from there own posts made only hours earlier, it is easy and effective to call people to account for their anonymous ramblings. Take your claim that people want graphics and not gameplay for instance, something you have stated but yet to substantiate.

Brubaker [/B][/QUOTE]
Brubaker you deserve a Silver Star for deciphering the “Sarge’s” ramble. He lost me with this one;
__________________________
quote:

"As for games that were up to standards when they were released, they are still up to standards now. Otherwise they are not. But I have been told by fans that they are."
____________________________

Huh?.

_____________________________


(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 111
- 1/10/2003 9:38:07 PM   
Raverdave


Posts: 6520
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Melb. Australia
Status: offline 		[QUOTE][B]
As for Warhammer. I see you son making models after playing Wahammer, with several friends that started to play and then realised the game was crap and left the hobby entirely.
Oh and lets put a different slant on that lad. Maybe he is making model tanks and not playing Warhammer because he doesn't like Warhammer because Warhammer sucks like I said it does.
If it was any good, he might still be playing Warhammer.
After several years lots of people still play Steel panthers for a reason eh, it doesn't suck. Lots of people have tweaked the hell out of it, why, because the original game was so much fun.
[/B][/QUOTE]


Yes he may well have thought that the game was crap, but you are missing the point, and this is what I was trying to put across last time we talked on this. The interest that was started with the crap warhammer gaming has sparked an interest in other areas of modelling and WarGaming. It does not matter how you hook them, just solong as you do hook them.......Cigarette companies have known this for years.

[QUOTE][B]
I find it funny people need to insert quotes, you must think that those silent readers can't remember my posts correctly. Maybe you are afraid they won't read through the whole thread.
[/B][/QUOTE]


Nah....I just love wasting some one else's bandwidth;)

_____________________________




Never argue with an idiot, he will only drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 112
- 1/10/2003 10:00:43 PM   
CCB


Posts: 4208
Joined: 3/21/2002
Status: offline 		Oh how I wish there was a wooden stake I could drive through the heart of this thread! :D

Or maybe its immortal like in that movie Highlander, "There can only be one!" :p

_____________________________

Peux Ce Que Veux
in den vereinigten staaten hergestellt

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 113
- 1/10/2003 10:17:36 PM   
SwampYankee68


Posts: 1186
Joined: 5/8/2002
From: Connecticut, U.S.
Status: offline 		3 entries found for curmudgeon.
cur·mudg·eon ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kr-mjn)
n.
An ill-tempered person full of resentment and stubborn notions.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Origin unknown.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
cur·mudgeon·ly adj.
cur·mudgeon·ry n.

Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
[Buy it]


curmudgeon

\Cur*mudg"eon\ (k?r-m?j"?n), n. [OE. cornmudgin, where -mudgin is prob. from OF. muchier, mucier, F. musser to hide; of uncertain origin; cf. OE. muchares skulking thieves, E. miche, micher.] An avaricious, grasping fellow; a miser; a niggard; a churl.

A gray-headed curmudgeon of a negro. --W. Irving.


Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary, © 1996, 1998 MICRA, Inc.


curmudgeon

n : a crusty irascible cantankerous old person full of stubborn ideas


I yield the floor for further discussion... ;)

_____________________________

"The only way I got to keep them Tigers busy is to let them shoot holes in me!"

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 114
- 1/10/2003 11:36:12 PM   
Kanon Fodder

 

Posts: 196
Joined: 9/8/2001
From: Portland, Orrygun
Status: offline 		To put things another way :

If I originally saw a movie in black-and-white (because we didn't own a colour TV when I was a kid) should I refuse to watch the DVD on a state-of-the-art home theatre ?

(Not that I have one of those ...)
;)

(But I don't have a B&W TV any more either ...)

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 115
Deja vu! - 1/11/2003 12:13:12 AM   
Mikimoto

 

Posts: 511
Joined: 11/6/2000
From: Barcelona, Catalunya
Status: offline 		Hi, nah!

Seems that everybody has understanding problems with the same person, lately! Crappy people, eh??? I don't post so much in Matrix forums guys... but I coudn't resist... Sorry, eh, eh?

Best regards
Mikimoto

_____________________________

Desperta ferro!
Miquel Guasch Aparicio

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 116
- 1/11/2003 12:50:55 AM   
Reiryc

 

Posts: 4991
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline
quote:

I remember an eon ago when I first bought 'Decision in the Desert' and thought to myself, Wow, this computer thingy (C64)has got potential !


Wow....one of my favorite games for the c128! I miss that game =\

_____________________________


(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 117
- 1/11/2003 1:02:04 AM   
Reiryc

 

Posts: 4991
Joined: 1/5/2001
Status: offline
quote:

Seems that everybody has understanding problems with the same person, lately


Yes and he still doesn't get it...

The definition posted of curmudgeon is dead on....

Reiryc

_____________________________


(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 118
- 1/11/2003 1:34:08 AM   
CCB


Posts: 4208
Joined: 3/21/2002
Status: offline 		Ah come on guys! Don't give Les a hard time, he's a cool dude. He's just very passionate about his wargames. ;)

_____________________________

Peux Ce Que Veux
in den vereinigten staaten hergestellt

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 119
- 1/11/2003 3:25:53 AM   
carllafong

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 1/6/2003
Status: offline 		Les, some people really do not have the time , nor the space to keep up with board games. I used to play them and they were time consuming, space consuming and sometimes very frustrating. I think as some of us get older, start careers, get married, children, etc...we have to put things in perspective. I don't know anyone anymore who can spend the time to play boardgames, but can play TCP/IP, or PBEM. It works for alot of us. Graphics do not a game make. The playability, and replayability is what makes it, graphics can and do enhance an already good game. You may not agee, and that is fine. To each his own.

Res Ipsa Loquitor

(in reply to Fred98)
Post #: 120
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.531