Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: oto02

I spent some time to re-read this newest statement. Did the meeting result in anything? Can't find anything in this thread.

Even though I agree with the prioritized areas I think at least a discussion should be initialized about Net Play and at least a hint about when any Net Play improvements can be continued.

Apart from fixing the current flow and not run into freezes and crashes, there are other things to consider to improve Net Play to a usable state.

Some suggestions:
- Create a separate "Net Play - Tech support" topic in the forum.
- Change the save game procedure so that when one side saves a game the other is forced to save at the same time. The save game files for both sides should contain the same information (some basic encryption/password protection of US Entry and garrison chits should be all that's needed). Unit comments are personal and should not be included in the shared save game file (see below for another reason).
- Add some form of validation between phases (where needed) so that the unit status for both sides (e.g. disorganized units) is checked and resolved (by the players if the computer cannot determine this).
- It should be possible to open up a saved game without the other side being on-line, to check your units and plan between Net Play sessions. And preferably add comments for your own units (in the separate file suggested above).
- If being the active side, allow that player to perform actions in that phase, but not proceed to the next phase (or why not allow to proceed and send a game save e-mail to the opponent, adding PBEM ability to Net Play).
- After each phase, the non phasing player should be able to replay the opponent actual moves and actions. When playing the board game everyone is present and has the ability to watch what happens and ask questions (did you move that unit? Where did it come from?) and to make sure the opposing side follows the game rules. In the computer game this is enforced by the computer, so players will not spend time watching the opponent move, and should not have to.
- If a game crash occurs, the other player should be notified. Needing to rely on phone text messages, e-mail and actual phone calls should not be necessary, as it is now. No fun having to re-do a move because your oppenents game crashed.
- Add the ability to be able to select to chat with All, Side or Individual. Not needed now, but work that into the interface at least.

This is what I can think of now, but I'm sure this list will grow the more I think about it. And I'm sure many more suggestions will come when the "Net Play - Tech Support" is created.

quote:

ORIGINAL: oto02

quote:

Steve will also meet with our Technical Director next week for a review of the remaining Net Play issues as this remains high on our list of priorities and we will be giving you some feedback on that point after they have met.

I spent some time to re-read this newest statement. Did the meeting result in anything? Can't find anything in this thread.

Even though I agree with the prioritized areas I think at least a discussion should be initialized about Net Play and at least a hint about when any Net Play improvements can be continued.

Apart from fixing the current flow and not run into freezes and crashes, there are other things to consider to improve Net Play to a usable state.

Some suggestions:
- Create a separate "Net Play - Tech support" topic in the forum.
- Change the save game procedure so that when one side saves a game the other is forced to save at the same time. The save game files for both sides should contain the same information (some basic encryption/password protection of US Entry and garrison chits should be all that's needed). Unit comments are personal and should not be included in the shared save game file (see below for another reason).
- Add some form of validation between phases (where needed) so that the unit status for both sides (e.g. disorganized units) is checked and resolved (by the players if the computer cannot determine this).
- It should be possible to open up a saved game without the other side being on-line, to check your units and plan between Net Play sessions. And preferably add comments for your own units (in the separate file suggested above).
- If being the active side, allow that player to perform actions in that phase, but not proceed to the next phase (or why not allow to proceed and send a game save e-mail to the opponent, adding PBEM ability to Net Play).
- After each phase, the non phasing player should be able to replay the opponent actual moves and actions. When playing the board game everyone is present and has the ability to watch what happens and ask questions (did you move that unit? Where did it come from?) and to make sure the opposing side follows the game rules. In the computer game this is enforced by the computer, so players will not spend time watching the opponent move, and should not have to.
- If a game crash occurs, the other player should be notified. Needing to rely on phone text messages, e-mail and actual phone calls should not be necessary, as it is now. No fun having to re-do a move because your oppenents game crashed.
- Add the ability to be able to select to chat with All, Side or Individual. Not needed now, but work that into the interface at least.

This is what I can think of now, but I'm sure this list will grow the more I think about it. And I'm sure many more suggestions will come when the "Net Play - Tech Support" is created.

quote:

ORIGINAL: rsunley

I don't post a lot on this site but I am a MWiF customer and I just wanted to put in my 2 cents on this issue. I purchased this game in full knowledge that it had some issues to iron out. Anyone who has followed Steve's development blog over the last few years would be well aware of the complexity of the project and the amount of work he has put in to get it completed. When the announcement that it was to be released came out I was a bit surprised as the bug count in the blog seemed to be reasonably high, but after waiting so long and getting so close I understood the decision to go ahead with it. I made the decision to purchase because I wanted Steve to get something back for the investment of not only years of work but undoubtedly his personal health as well. I used to play the board game version back in the day but I figured it would take me quite a while to get back up to speed with the system as well as learning to drive the game. Therefore I do not mind how long it takes to resolve problems, I only care that they are resolved. To that end the announcement of renewed focus on this area is welcome. Regarding the available programming resources, it is easy to say what should or should not have happened in the past. Steve did end up getting some help towards the end of the project which no doubt assisted the process. I agree with other posters though that any developer worth his salt should be able to get up to speed with the task at hand reasonably quickly, regardless of the end product.

I think that this product is a magnificent piece of work and I am not going to let a few kinks dissuade me from that view. I look at this period as a post-beta phase, with the amount of testers increased by several orders of magnitude. Often issues can only be seen once a product is out in the wild, just ask any major software company, most of whom spend enormous resources on testing but still things go wrong. It may be valid to say that if people are paying good money they deserve something that works; this is fair enough, but to make an informed decision it does not take too much digging around to find out the current state of the product. If you don't want to buy something you view as being incomplete, you have every right to keep hold of your money. If you feel the product has been misrepresented to you, then you have every right to take that up with the publisher. If, on the other hand you want to support the good work that has already been done and help get the last bits fixed, then that option is available.

Lastly I am ever the optimist and I look forward to seeing the AI at work one day.

Regards
Ralph

quote:

ORIGINAL: oto02

quote:

Steve will also meet with our Technical Director next week for a review of the remaining Net Play issues as this remains high on our list of priorities and we will be giving you some feedback on that point after they have met.

I spent some time to re-read this newest statement. Did the meeting result in anything? Can't find anything in this thread.

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

- It should be possible to open up a saved game without the other side being on-line, to check your units and plan between Net Play sessions. And preferably add comments for your own units (in the separate file suggested above).
Yes. I expected someone to mention this a long time ago. It has been on my "Gee, as a player I sure would want this capability."

- After each phase, the non phasing player should be able to replay the opponent actual moves and actions. When playing the board game everyone is present and has the ability to watch what happens and ask questions (did you move that unit? Where did it come from?) and to make sure the opposing side follows the game rules. In the computer game this is enforced by the computer, so players will not spend time watching the opponent move, and should not have to.
Well. This would require a replay feature which I envisioned many years ago. There is some code in place to support this, but it would require a lot more work be viable.

- If a game crash occurs, the other player should be notified. Needing to rely on phone text messages, e-mail and actual phone calls should not be necessary, as it is now. No fun having to re-do a move because your oppenents game crashed.
Not possible. Sadly the crash causes communications to be lost so sending the other player a message post-crash is not possible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: oto02

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

- It should be possible to open up a saved game without the other side being on-line, to check your units and plan between Net Play sessions. And preferably add comments for your own units (in the separate file suggested above).
Yes. I expected someone to mention this a long time ago. It has been on my "Gee, as a player I sure would want this capability."

- After each phase, the non phasing player should be able to replay the opponent actual moves and actions. When playing the board game everyone is present and has the ability to watch what happens and ask questions (did you move that unit? Where did it come from?) and to make sure the opposing side follows the game rules. In the computer game this is enforced by the computer, so players will not spend time watching the opponent move, and should not have to.
Well. This would require a replay feature which I envisioned many years ago. There is some code in place to support this, but it would require a lot more work be viable.

- If a game crash occurs, the other player should be notified. Needing to rely on phone text messages, e-mail and actual phone calls should not be necessary, as it is now. No fun having to re-do a move because your oppenents game crashed.
Not possible. Sadly the crash causes communications to be lost so sending the other player a message post-crash is not possible.

Opening up the game off-line I think will be necessary when playing weekly sessions with 4-6 players. Of course it's possible to set up a session just for planning but that might be easy for a two player game, but not for six.

The "replay" feature would be nice to have and would save time, but isn't on the top of my list. But the undo feature would most likely include a lot of code to support this at some time in the future. At least highligt units that have moved.

I'm aware that a crashed or malfunctioning program will not be able to let the other side know that it has done just that. But if the program regularly sends game status to the opposing side, expecting a reply within a pre-defined time (and with any inconsistencies resolved), then the non-crashing side would notice if it has lost contact with the opponent (due to a lack of response). So it should be possible to implement.

When I get a little more time I'll post a few saved games under the Net Play - Tech support topic.

I'm enjoying playing around with the Barbarossa scenario, but what I'm really waiting for is being able to run a global war with 5 of my old WIF-buddies from 20 years ago.

Par

quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

I would like to point out that MWiF was released at SPIEL 2013 in Essen, Germany which went on from October 24th to 27th.

Not in November.

quote:

ORIGINAL: oto02

Opening up the game off-line I think will be necessary when playing weekly sessions with 4-6 players. Of course it's possible to set up a session just for planning but that might be easy for a two player game, but not for six.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tacfire

The next supply patch sounds like it will be an important one.
I am looking forward to it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Steve has our confidence and is capable of fixing the reported issues with WIF. I'll repeat again that while we appreciate greatly the patience shown by the community to date, we need to ask for a bit more to put this new plan into effect and hopefully the results will speak for themselves.

Regards,

- Erik

quote:

ORIGINAL: von altair

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Steve has our confidence and is capable of fixing the reported issues with WIF. I'll repeat again that while we appreciate greatly the patience shown by the community to date, we need to ask for a bit more to put this new plan into effect and hopefully the results will speak for themselves.

Regards,

- Erik

I have watched this forum for a long time. I am intrested about the game. However current state is not promising at all. The game is in beta phase. Usually companies offer free betaplay for customers to test the game. Matrixgames on the other hand sells this betagame with a premium price. Explaining that the price comes out from superior manuals (alas, even digital betagame costs the same). They are good, yes, but still the game is in beta. What do you do with pretty manuals without a working game?

- No AI
- No working netplay
- The game is full of bugs. Even pure solitaire game is not possible without constant load/save.

After more than 5 months of release, situation is this and the game price EUR 76.99+tax. Matrixgames is asking patience from
customers... Someone could call all this as scamming.

I would like to buy the game, but even with a good will I can't do that and can't even prefer this title to my friends.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

- If a game crash occurs, the other player should be notified. Needing to rely on phone text messages, e-mail and actual phone calls should not be necessary, as it is now. No fun having to re-do a move because your oppenents game crashed.
Not possible. Sadly the crash causes communications to be lost so sending the other player a message post-crash is not possible.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
To respond to the points above - to our knowledge no such other programmer exists...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

So you have removed yourself from being available since you are unable to work for free. So Eric is still correct in that no one with Steve's experience that will work solely on commission (i.e. not get paid except through sales) is available.

Yes with money to pay people WiF would be in much better shape. But since no one is will or able to spend any, even cheap labor is too costly. Now if someone came along with a wad of cash and said 'Here is some money, please fix WiF ASAP.' then your offer would be very doable. But until that occurs, saying you have all this experience but can't help because you need to get paid (very understandable btw) do not help the situation much. However, it does reaffirm Eric's point that pretty much Steve is it. At least until you can work for free too

quote:

ORIGINAL: waltero

What's the word, are we still waiting for the game to play properly?
Can't see paying full price for a game that doesn't function properly.

This is the first time I heard of WiF, I will wait...check back in a couple years.

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: waltero

What's the word, are we still waiting for the game to play properly?
Can't see paying full price for a game that doesn't function properly.

This is the first time I heard of WiF, I will wait...check back in a couple years.

warspite1

1. Depends on what you mean by function properly. If you mean have an AI, be able to play using Netplay and be bug free then yes, we are still waiting for the game to function properly.
2. Fair enough.
3. Very sensible idea

quote:

ORIGINAL: waltero

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: waltero

What's the word, are we still waiting for the game to play properly?
Can't see paying full price for a game that doesn't function properly.

This is the first time I heard of WiF, I will wait...check back in a couple years.

warspite1

1. Depends on what you mean by function properly. If you mean have an AI, be able to play using Netplay and be bug free then yes, we are still waiting for the game to function properly.
2. Fair enough.
3. Very sensible idea

I hate playing the AI. Is it a functional multiplayer game as of yet?

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805

quote:

ORIGINAL: waltero
What's the word, are we still waiting for the game to play properly?
Can't see paying full price for a game that doesn't function properly.

quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

quote:

ORIGINAL: waltero
What's the word, are we still waiting for the game to play properly?
Can't see paying full price for a game that doesn't function properly.

While the game seems to more or less work for some players for solitaire play, it does not work well for others, such as myself. See this thread:
Frustrations