Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Iron (HOI)?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Iron (HOI)?

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 >> Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Iron (HOI)?

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Iron (... - 12/16/2004 11:25:41 PM

c.topfer

Posts: 22
Joined: 1/26/2002
Status: offline

I am more of a lurker at this forum, though I enjoy reading it very often. I am one of the guys thinking that Gary Grigsby is GOD

(Oh, how I�ve enjoyed his games, WIR in particular), bur frankly am not too excited about WAW (looks too "lite" for my taste), but I will give it a fair chance (demo would be nice). I tend to agree with those guys saying that WAW looks like it�s being developed for the mass market, and I wish it all the success, so GG can make a "real" game, especially WiR II (drooool).

One thing however has me puzzled - why are so many people here THAT negative when it comes to HOI?

Granted - it was a fiasco when it first came out, but with patch 1.06c it is a very good game, that has considerable realism. I am not saying it�s perfect (no chance), but some of the flak it has gotten here is really unfounded and unfair. Maybe I was lucky only to get into it when it was already patched to 1.04, versions in which Yugoslavia conquered the world have thankfully not been played by me. Now HOI 2 will be out in a couple of weeks and it looks VERY promising, and I have the impression that some people here are on an agenda against that game while not even caring whether their assumptions about that particular game are true. Some, I have the impression, see it as a concurrence to GGWAW, while even the FAQ states that both games rather complement each other (and that�s the way I like to see it, too).

I think we should be happy to have three dedicated companies in our niche (strategy gaming) with Matrix, Battlefront and Paradox, and I hope all of them are doing well and keep providing us with good games.

< Message edited by c.topfer -- 12/16/2004 9:28:22 PM >

Post #: 1

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 12:11:42 AM

ladner

Posts: 338
Joined: 8/24/2001
From: Virginia USA
Status: offline

Paradox is a company that is aptly named, for their games have been exactly that to me. Europa Universailis II and Victoria are two games that I enjoy immensely. HOI...well as my mother always says, "If you cannot say anything nice, do not say anything at all."

HOI II, I will have to take a wait and see approach, I do not see myself pre-ordering or buying the game right on release day. I do concurr with your sentiment regarding GGWaW, but I could be mistaken.

(in reply to c.topfer)

Post #: 2

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 3:44:38 AM

sol_invictus

Posts: 1961
Joined: 10/2/2001
From: Kentucky
Status: offline

I agree, WaW does look a bit lite to me; though I will consider buying it after realease and I get some more info.

I absolutely loved EU and EU2, but was burned by Two Thrones and Victoria. I swore I would never buy a Paradox game until after it had been out for a few months and been thoroughly patched. I did not buy HoI nor do I plan on buying HoI2. I will not buy CK either. I am really afraid that Paradox is a one trick pony. Hope I'm wrong.

(in reply to ladner)

Post #: 3

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 3:58:04 AM

EricGuitarJames

Posts: 957
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: Not far enough away for some!
Status: offline

Apart from the patching fiasco (which wasn't quite so bad over here where it had already reached 1.03 when released), I think the problem is that it's not a wargame. The levels of abstraction that EU and EU2 went to are quite acceptable because we have distance from it ('the past is another country') but for a lot of people, wargamers especially, it isn't for a WW2 game. Shake that off, which isn't easy I'll admit, and HoI can be fun.

_____________________________

It's Just a Ride!

(in reply to sol_invictus)

Post #: 4

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 5:10:22 AM

Fred98

Posts: 4430
Joined: 1/5/2001
From: Wollondilly, Sydney
Status: offline

I too agree with the sentiments re: GG's WaW.

I looks too lite. Its probably heavy under the hood but the looks are a killer for me. It is not possible to become immersed. I made that point months ago on the forum.

_____________________________

(in reply to EricGuitarJames)

Post #: 5

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 6:04:23 AM

Hexed Gamer

Posts: 561
Joined: 6/24/2004
Status: offline

When I edit out all my comments vis a vis anything to do with the game beyond that it is real time and grand strategy, I am still left wondering, not nutjob would want to play grand strategy in real time in the first place?

Civilization (version 3 with two expansions now) is a great game of grand strategy. It can be made to do real world settings, or total flights of fantasy.
But it uses turns for a reason. In this area of strategic gaming, turns are more logical.

But HoI exists for the same reason lost of bad idea products exist. Companies occasionally either don't know better or could care less if they did.

And, as they can always say, well you didn't have to buy it, after the sale is made, they presume they are free of guilt for producing either shabby quality, or shabby thinking in a product.

But I put up a thread at my own forum locating the link to the HoI2 demo. It's not like I won't give it equal time.
But it will be a cold day in hell before I spend money on it, over a real wargame.

_____________________________

There is only one Hexed Gamer
http://s3.invisionfree.com/Les_s_Place

(in reply to Fred98)

Post #: 6

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 7:17:25 AM

Veldor

Posts: 1531
Joined: 12/29/2002
From: King's Landing
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hexed Gamer

... nutjob would want to play grand strategy in real time in the first place?

Exactly. Because while you can potentially argue the benfits of real-time vs turn-based at other scales or even for other time periods, WWII grand strategy is literally by definition the one time and scale wherein turns far more accurately simulate the reality of the time and are actually less of an abstraction than its real-time counterpart.

The game design started backwards from the way it should have been. Just because something hasn't been done before doesn't mean its a good idea. But the goal wasn't one that wargamers really respect. The goal of selling as many copies as possible. Which they probably did achieve. Perhaps they just thought such a goofy idea might result in a game that is a blast to play. While I value the "fun-factor" more than many may, in so many ways HOI takes these "less traditional wargamers values" to an extreme. And that is the why its get the reaction it does from that group.

The problem basically is, from a wargamers perspective, it makes a mockery of what a wargame is/should be much in the same way that the latest Axis & Allies RTS does.

But I, for one, really do think the game has value to wargamers. At least in that it may be a stepping stone for new wargamers. Its in stores, that can't be bad. Likely some will here about places like Matrix/Battleground/etc. and in some way wonder, given that they like HOI alot, how much they might like a "true wargame".

But that still doesn't mean I have to play the game myself.

Although I am downloading the demo for HOI2 right now. It's only fair.

< Message edited by Veldor -- 12/16/2004 11:21:47 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Hexed Gamer)

Post #: 7

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 7:44:38 AM

Bodhi

Posts: 1267
Joined: 8/26/2003
From: Japan
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veldor
WWII grand strategy is literally by definition the one time and scale wherein turns far more accurately simulate the reality of the time and are actually less of an abstraction than its real-time counterpart.

What definition? Why is turn-based more appropriate for WWII but real time fine for other periods? What has scale got to do with real time vs turns? Confused.

_____________________________

Bodhi

(in reply to Veldor)

Post #: 8

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 8:15:59 AM

Veldor

Posts: 1531
Joined: 12/29/2002
From: King's Landing
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Bodhi

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veldor
WWII grand strategy is literally by definition the one time and scale wherein turns far more accurately simulate the reality of the time and are actually less of an abstraction than its real-time counterpart.

What definition? Why is turn-based more appropriate for WWII but real time fine for other periods? What has scale got to do with real time vs turns? Confused.

Because when you are playing a WWII Strategic Level game the person whose "seat" you are filling did not get updates in Real Time but instead on a Daily Basis or thereabouts. Basically an abstractable slice of time that generally fits well with turn-based concepts. In that regard the combination of Strategic Level and WWII is the exception to the rule. It would not apply to Modern Day Strategic nor necessarily to WWII Tactical or Operational Scaled Games.

Make Sense?

< Message edited by Veldor -- 12/17/2004 12:16:27 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Bodhi)

Post #: 9

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 8:30:46 AM

Bodhi

Posts: 1267
Joined: 8/26/2003
From: Japan
Status: offline

OK, I think I see what you're saying now. However, I don't think I'd agree with your analysis about the exceptional nature of WWII Grand Strategy games. Pesonally I think "Real Time Strategy" is an oxymoron.

_____________________________

Bodhi

(in reply to Veldor)

Post #: 10

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 12:42:56 PM

Pippin

Posts: 1233
Joined: 11/9/2002
Status: offline

I believe a lot of people suspect Paradox is just another Hasbro in disguise. I for one do not wish to go through another Iron Blitz disaster. I been burned a few times in the past. Maybe I am a slow learner but I think I finaly have come to mature.

_____________________________

Nelson stood on deck and observed as the last of the Spanish fleets sank below the waves�

(in reply to Bodhi)

Post #: 11

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 2:06:25 PM

c.topfer

Posts: 22
Joined: 1/26/2002
Status: offline

I don�t really think that HOI is real time. I see it more as a turnbased game (1 hour = 1 turn), as you can easily pause every hour and adjust your orders. Turnbased grand strategy games like GGWAW or "Battle for Karelia" have the problem that huge provinces are changing ownership every time your opponent gets to take his turn. There I find the concept of HOI superior, where orders are issued simultaneously and carried out at the appropriate turn (time). I�d still love to see a grand strategy game with hexes though...

HOI certainly does not belong into a comparison with Axis and Allies, it is much more realistic (version 1.06c). What is the "huge unrealism" so many of you are talking about?

(in reply to Pippin)

Post #: 12

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 3:20:54 PM

Charles2222

Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
Status: offline

On a somewhat related note, I'm thinking more and more that I won't buy any more GG products. BTR didn't work out for me and now WITP's spawning not being an option makes me very pensive irrespective of the subject matter. With things like spawning in games of some alleged historical context, then it's only appropriate that he is resorting to WaW where it has a true home; though it's having seasonal turns keeps that miles away from me too.

(in reply to c.topfer)

Post #: 13

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 4:40:35 PM

EricGuitarJames

Posts: 957
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: Not far enough away for some!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: c.topfer

I don�t really think that HOI is real time. I see it more as a turnbased game (1 hour = 1 turn), as you can easily pause every hour and adjust your orders. Turnbased grand strategy games like GGWAW or "Battle for Karelia" have the problem that huge provinces are changing ownership every time your opponent gets to take his turn. There I find the concept of HOI superior, where orders are issued simultaneously and carried out at the appropriate turn (time). I�d still love to see a grand strategy game with hexes though...

HOI certainly does not belong into a comparison with Axis and Allies, it is much more realistic (version 1.06c). What is the "huge unrealism" so many of you are talking about?

Let's call it 'Pausable Continuous Time' (it's what the HTTR people like to call it). I don't entirely agree that 'Turn-based' is more appropriate for WW2 Grand Strategy than PCT although a WEGO system would work equally as well. I could go further but I don't want to wander off topic.

The 'huge unrealism' in HoI is, in my experience, in the combat modelling. This is where the abstraction that I referred to earlier cripples the game in terms of having any relation to reality. It doesn't make it a bad game per se, but it's not a particularly accurate WW2 Grand Strategy game.

_____________________________

It's Just a Ride!

(in reply to c.topfer)

Post #: 14

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 4:45:50 PM

Hexed Gamer

Posts: 561
Joined: 6/24/2004
Status: offline

"I believe a lot of people suspect Paradox is just another Hasbro"

Where's the connection?

Paradox makes predominantly lousy product that fails to even run in a lot of cases.

Hasbro is a massive giant that absorbs everything it touches like the Borg.

Or do you think Axis and Allies the game is even fractionally infinitisimally representative of Hasbro?

Paradox = small company with lame track record.

Hasbro = behemoth that owns every board game I can think of,
Avalon Hill name, TSR name, Wizards of the Coast name, software names to many to remember.
Such illustrious titles like Aadvanced Squad Leader.
More rolegaming products than I can recall.

So it was the people that sold Axis and Allies.
I would not be surprised if you had trouble finding an exec that had even heard of the game.

_____________________________

There is only one Hexed Gamer
http://s3.invisionfree.com/Les_s_Place

(in reply to Charles2222)

Post #: 15

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 6:41:51 PM

ancient doctor

Posts: 152
Joined: 9/21/2004
Status: offline

Since i have atleast 2 games of Paradox i think i can talk about what is wrong with them.

They have some great ideas but they are really bad in putting them to work.
Lets start from Victoria.Well this game was supposed to be a representation of Victorian age and put the players in the spirit and ways of that time.Before comming out it was looking very promosing.BUT after it was published most of gamers realised only 1 thing.It had nothing to do with the timeframe it was about to happen.Now after 3 patches(officials)and some beta ones it it stable and you can play it but you certainly cant feel it like what was supposed to be.From where to start.The very bad tech sustem(in 1890s and i still can only build manowar and wooden frigates simply because some stupid tech ivents wont fire).Very badly designed naval aspect(AGAIN from PARADOX)in which subs are of no use,there is no way to force naval blockade and stop the enemy trading(no try plauying the WW1 senario Victoria has as GB or Germany).Ships can move on untill the end of our time since they have no range(because the AI whould be to stupid to understand tha ships have to return to ports or maybe wooden ships of Vicky era have nuclear reactors to propeler them) plus many many more things which are simply redicoulous like the financial system with not even a close relation to the what things were by the time,the still half working economy and that you cant be a buyer in the world market unless you are 1 of the super powers back then.Otherwise just forget been a modest civilised country and buy steel/paper/sulphur/iron/coal and other goods.Actually Imperialism 1 is still much more interesting that Victoria(and guess what:the old SSI game is a decade old).

As about HoI1 i can say that.Those who made it put 90% of thier time to make ground combat and the rest for naval and air aspect.As a result you will see lots of ground based AAR(Germany/SOV but none finished about Japan)becaus esimply air and naval aspect of game sucks big time.Even more 1.06c patch which you said made things better actually brought problems of its own.Weather is stil ruined since release of game(i once had storms and snow above Sahara desert for months or 1 whole year of raining above Canton and since weather matters for combat guess what happened).There are bugs that simply noone fixes(like the commando or the -20% supply bug).Not to mention that some bugs(like the AI not having air comabt night penalty)are called "FEATURES" once someone discovers them simply because Paradox dont give a s....t to fix them.You want more?Well the AI can simply crash your airforce because the human player only suffers from a tremendous penalty for stacking more than 3 or 4 units.On the other hand AI can stack as much as he likes and nobody cares to fix that instead.Also if you have no fortune and pass your TF from an area that convoy moves you might find your CV or BB sunk by some UNESCORTED convoys.Even worst now with the last patch a half dead surface unit can sink in few days something like 200 convoy and escort points without scratching(really "BRILLIANT" way to fix the problem mentioned above by making a new one as bad as the previous).
Do you really need more?All Paradox games have been more or less like that.Good ideas left out half made and unfinished(not to say buggy).
And i am asking you,they have again a "promising"title to sell?Fine after a couple of months since its release and with several patches out plus in half of its original price i might buy it if i had a good day simply because i tend to respect the money that may work pays me and i dont like giving them to somone who likes doing half job because if i do that my boss will tell my where the exit door is.

< Message edited by Ancient seaman -- 12/17/2004 4:48:22 PM >

(in reply to Hexed Gamer)

Post #: 16

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/17/2004 7:49:39 PM

elmo3

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline

Don't get me started on Paradox, EU, and HOI, ...

I bought EU. Absolutely horrible manual. Buggy as hell. Then about 6 months later they want you to pony up for EU2, the game EU should have been in the first place.

But, I didn't learn my lesson the first time.

Fast forward to HOI. Absolutely horrible manual. Even more buggy than EU out of the box. Now they want me to pony up for HOI2?! No way. Try playing the Soviets in HOI. Every unit in the game starts with an idiot in charge of it. It is a micomanagement nightmare to change every General manually. I also agree with the spirit of the comments above that the naval aspect was an afterthought and very poorly implemented. They've dressed up the graphics and added CORE but that still won't get me to buy it.

Even if GGWaW turns out to be "lite" compared to HOI, I'll buy it rather than HOI2 without a doubt.

Edited for spelling.

< Message edited by elmo3 -- 12/17/2004 5:51:17 PM >

(in reply to ancient doctor)

Post #: 17

HoI 2 demo - see for yourself. - 12/18/2004 12:23:19 PM

Colonel Warden

Posts: 6
Joined: 5/24/2004
Status: offline

A demo version of Heart of Iron 2 has just been released. You can now try before you buy ...

Andrew

(in reply to elmo3)

Post #: 18

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/18/2004 2:29:14 PM

pzgndr

Posts: 3170
Joined: 3/18/2004
From: Maryland
Status: offline

FWIW, I downloaded the HOI2 demo and tried it a couple of times. Like HOI, I cannot stand it. Period. It is now uninstalled. Paradox, good bye and good riddance.

Matrix, I am looking forward to turn-based WWII grand strategy gaming. GGWAW, MWiF, and AWAW. Bring 'em on.

(in reply to c.topfer)

Post #: 19

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/18/2004 11:48:41 PM

Hexed Gamer

Posts: 561
Joined: 6/24/2004
Status: offline

Is it just me, or does it seem like Colonel Warden never read the thread through :)

I think we all know about the demo hehe :)

_____________________________

There is only one Hexed Gamer
http://s3.invisionfree.com/Les_s_Place

(in reply to pzgndr)

Post #: 20

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/19/2004 1:22:53 AM

madflava13

Posts: 1530
Joined: 2/7/2001
From: Alexandria, VA
Status: offline

The problem is that HOI2 is what HOI should have been... In essence, they screwed it up the first time and the gaming community had to fix it... Now the gaming community gets the privilege of paying for HOI2? That's what bothers me the most. If they'd supported the game instead of leaving it in the hands of hardcore gamers to fix, that would be one thing... But they didn't.

_____________________________

"The Paraguayan Air Force's request for spraying subsidies was not as Paraguayan as it were..."

(in reply to Hexed Gamer)

Post #: 21

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/19/2004 1:32:20 AM

Hexed Gamer

Posts: 561
Joined: 6/24/2004
Status: offline

quote:

I think we should be happy to have three dedicated companies in our niche (strategy gaming) with Matrix, Battlefront and Paradox, and I hope all of them are doing well and keep providing us with good games.

What's wrong with that statement.

I'll tell ya, Matrix Games and Battlefront have earned there stripes. Paradox on the other hand deserves all the nasty remarks we think up.
With some luck they won't last much longer and people won't contine to unknowingly be throwing away funds they might have offered to a company that earned them.

_____________________________

There is only one Hexed Gamer
http://s3.invisionfree.com/Les_s_Place

(in reply to madflava13)

Post #: 22

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/19/2004 4:09:22 AM

Hanal

Posts: 2312
Joined: 11/1/2003
Status: offline

Well I uninstalled the demo...like HOI, this version is not for me....even though you can pause the game, I just do not like the simultaneous movement and command actions conducted by all my troops, on all my fronts......

(in reply to Hexed Gamer)

Post #: 23

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/19/2004 9:15:50 AM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

What's quite amusing amid all the Paradox bashing when combined with Matrix adoration is the simple fact that Matrix released War In The Pacific in a similar state to HOI.

I don't like HOI and probably won't pick up HOI2 until it's been fixed, whenever that might be, but anyone claiming Paradox haven't produced a good game hasn't played EU or EU2.

BTW, when EU was finished with patching it had an outstanding bug list of about 50 minor bugs. Hardly unfinished as one poster here claimed.

(in reply to Hanal)

Post #: 24

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/19/2004 2:27:46 PM

ravinhood

Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline

Some liked patch 1.06c, some did not, for myself HOI wasn't good until patch 1.06, but, that was a year and a half later, how would you like to buy a car that isn't complete until a year and a half later? You would return it most likely and never buy from that car dealer again.

This reasoning that all software is flawed and we "SHOULD" buy it that way has got to stop. There's no other product out there we would allow such from and would return it in a heartbeat if faulty or flawed. The problem lies in that somehow, someway the software industry gets away with releasing "faulty, problematic" software without a "regulated" return policy for the consumers. And that's a big reason Paradox and many others get the histories that they have. Now, I can take a simple software issue and live with it until a patch, but, A YEAR AND A HALF LATER?? no way and every one of Paradox's games requires that kind of time frame before they are worthy of purchase.

There's two solutions to defeating the software industry of it's "buy it now, we "MIGHT" fix it later" policies and that is to either not purchase the titles at all or wait until the titles hit "bargain bin" pricing where they do not make a dimes profit off of it and perhaps when their sales are low enough they will take another look at how they market their games. This is the policy I have taken for the last several years now. I no longer "rush" out to buy a newly released product and if I can find it on ebay or amazon.com or any other auction/discount software outlet that is where I will purchase it from now on until there is a "full refund" policy established for newly released software. If they want my "retail dollars" this is what they are going to have to do.

As far a reasoning that with no refund policy it reduces piracy is a load of crap, if someone is going to pirate the game or make a copy and give to their friend, they are going to do it anyway, always. And with high speed internet connections now, software piracy will only grow as more and more games come out in faulty and flawed condition. I do not condone "piracy", I will not "steal" a game, but, I certainly will look for the best deal on buying one now.

As for HOI 2 in general, to me, it's nothing more than HOI 1.07, a few design changes and UI changes, do not make a new game to me, it just makes an incomplete game HOI 1, a little different with a new title and another $40 to $50 price tag for much of the same. That's another thing I am moving away from games that have 2's, 3's, 4's etc. etc. after an origional title. Anything that has a number after the title also makes its way to the "wait for the bargain bin pricing" in a few months.

As far as HOI 2 not being very flawed or require major patching, well hell after nearly two years of playing around with HOI it shouldn't require any patching, it's nothing more than HOI anyway. So, releasing HOI 2 with few bugs or in need of less patching proves nothing to me about Paradox's ways, when they release a complete NEW title with no 2's, III's etc. after it, and requires little or no patching, then I "might" believe Paradox is moving in the right direction. Therefore HOI 2 is a no buy, until bargain bin pricing or perhaps never. Victoria and CK made their way back to my software dealer without question, it certainly helps when you have a close friend that runs a retail software outlet and you can "return" games that are crapola. Unfortunately this is not an advantage for all consumers and it should be.

(in reply to c.topfer)

Post #: 25

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/19/2004 3:51:07 PM

elmo3

Posts: 5820
Joined: 1/22/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: dinsdale

What's quite amusing amid all the Paradox bashing when combined with Matrix adoration is the simple fact that Matrix released War In The Pacific in a similar state to HOI.

I don't like HOI and probably won't pick up HOI2 until it's been fixed, whenever that might be, but anyone claiming Paradox haven't produced a good game hasn't played EU or EU2.

BTW, when EU was finished with patching it had an outstanding bug list of about 50 minor bugs. Hardly unfinished as one poster here claimed.

I didn't get WitP but it does look like there have been a lot of problems "out of the box" (ootb). So that is one game from Matrix with issues vs virtually every game from Paradox with issues ootb. You may be right about what EU finally became but to be honest I gave up on it long before it was "finished". I would also find it hard to believe the WitP manual is anywhere near as bad as the EU manual. Grigsby and company usually do a very good job in that regard.

Paradox deserves their reputatuion for producing crap out of the box. Matrix does not based on WitP alone. And yes I know Matrix is a publisher and until recently Paradox was not but the conclusion is still valid IMO.

(in reply to dinsdale)

Post #: 26

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/19/2004 5:18:33 PM

Hexed Gamer

Posts: 561
Joined: 6/24/2004
Status: offline

I might take issue with someone slagging David Heath directly, but I think I have already made it abundantly clear, David is David, Matrix Games is a company.

I never cut any company any slack if it isn't warranted.

HoI stupid idea right from the beginning.

WitP likely too complex to even consider getting it out the door perfect.

One game comes completely inert day one for many, while the other runs, but has a few glitches.
One game is a parody of WW2, and one perhaps tries to simulate to much.

Now if I couldn't put my finger on a single Matrix Games title that was well worth the cash and a marvel of solid wargaming, chances are I would not visit their forums either.

Steel Panthers Mega Campaigns in addition to several years of free access to one of the best tactical wargames in existence is quite a selling point.
Korsun Pocket is claimed to be one of the best wargames ever. Quite a credential.
I have Battles in Normandy, so Korsun wasn't a fluke.
Highway to the Reich has one of the best real time style designs out there. Models command better than any game I can currently think of.

All of those games have patches. All software has patches. It's what's patched that counts.
An obscure detail that gets missed, is not on par with a game being unstable or inert of just plain inoperative.

And even when you remove bugs glitches and other flubs, fact is, HoI was a bad idea from day one, WitP is perhaps just to dry.
Given a choice though, I would rather be given to much, as opposed to too little in a wargame.

HoI belongs in the same category as Command and Conquer, Axis and Allies, and other games that have nothing in common with a serious wargamers idea of a serious wargame.
It's beer and pretzels all the way, in spite of how much garbage they crammed onto it.

_____________________________

There is only one Hexed Gamer
http://s3.invisionfree.com/Les_s_Place

(in reply to elmo3)

Post #: 27

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/19/2004 6:31:45 PM

EricGuitarJames

Posts: 957
Joined: 2/8/2004
From: Not far enough away for some!
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hexed Gamer

HoI stupid idea right from the beginning.

HoI belongs in the same category as Command and Conquer, Axis and Allies, and other games that have nothing in common with a serious wargamers idea of a serious wargame.

I'd agree with the last bit but HoI wasn't a 'stupid' idea. I really enjoy messing around with the production, research and diplomacy options even more than I do with Civ because at least you're dealing with quasi-real people/products/science. Patching problems aside (and I don't agree that you can compare HoI and WitP on that issue), Paradox screwed the trade and screwed the combat and though these don't make the game unplayable, they make it too unrealistic.

_____________________________

It's Just a Ride!

(in reply to Hexed Gamer)

Post #: 28

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/20/2004 2:47:12 AM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: elmo3
I didn't get WitP but it does look like there have been a lot of problems "out of the box" (ootb). So that is one game from Matrix with issues vs virtually every game from Paradox with issues ootb. You may be right about what EU finally became but to be honest I gave up on it long before it was "finished". I would also find it hard to believe the WitP manual is anywhere near as bad as the EU manual. Grigsby and company usually do a very good job in that regard.

Paradox deserves their reputatuion for producing crap out of the box. Matrix does not based on WitP alone. And yes I know Matrix is a publisher and until recently Paradox was not but the conclusion is still valid IMO.

All valid points, though how many releases does it take to get a bad reputation? Why should one company be absolved and another derided by the same people?

(in reply to elmo3)

Post #: 29

RE: Why all this aversion when it comes to Hearts of Ir... - 12/20/2004 2:54:12 AM

dinsdale

Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hexed Gamer
HoI stupid idea right from the beginning.

In your very subjective opinion. Have you actually played the game Les?

quote:

WitP likely too complex to even consider getting it out the door perfect.

Paradox appologists will trot the same rubbish out about HOI. In fact, that's probably the most popular excuse any fanboys have when their software company of choice in unable to deliver what they were promised.

quote:

One game comes completely inert day one for many, while the other runs, but has a few glitches.
One game is a parody of WW2, and one perhaps tries to simulate to much.

No, WiTP doesn't have few glitches. Until recently it randomly swapped allied leaders onto the Japanese side. A fairly important issue when simulating the war wouldn't you think?

It's not like Bombing the Reich or Battle of Britain were any different. The second of those was never fixed, though fans managed to patch most of the possible holes.

quote:

Korsun Pocket is claimed to be one of the best wargames ever. Quite a credential.
I have Battles in Normandy, so Korsun wasn't a fluke.

Are you playing BiN single player? Making sure to set it to computer- to overcome the step replacement bug, or have they fixed it yet? Those three are excellent games, but then again, that's my subjective opinion too, one I also extend to EU. Have you tried that one Les?

quote:

All of those games have patches. All software has patches. It's what's patched that counts.
An obscure detail that gets missed, is not on par with a game being unstable or inert of just plain inoperative.

So you are the arbiter on when a bug is bad enough to ruin the game? Seems like you're just inventing reasons to maintain bias to me. That's fine, we all have likes and dislikes, but trying to logically prove what is subjective is inane.

quote:

And even when you remove bugs glitches and other flubs, fact is, HoI was a bad idea from day one, WitP is perhaps just to dry.
Given a choice though, I would rather be given to much, as opposed to too little in a wargame.

Have you played either game?

quote:

HoI belongs in the same category as Command and Conquer, Axis and Allies, and other games that have nothing in common with a serious wargamers idea of a serious wargame.
It's beer and pretzels all the way, in spite of how much garbage they crammed onto it.

No. HOI is much more than that. Not a good game, but obviously you don't have much idea what it is. BTW, you're a big proponent of Strategic Command: Beer and Pretzels++, so why would you use that label now as an insult?

(in reply to Hexed Gamer)

Post #: 30