Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

scenarios and expansions

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> scenarios and expansions Page: [1] 2 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
scenarios and expansions - 5/25/2005 8:19:11 PM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline 		MWiF could be designed and marketed on an expansions model. Many options regarding how much to include in the basic game are available.

For example:
Perhaps they could implement the current WiFFE version of the game at a slightly lower initial price. This basic version could be for network or TCP/IP play, without PBEM mode. This version would be available earlier in the development process, while continuing development of a PBEM mode and AI, as well as expansions for DoD, Fatal Alliances, America in Flames and Patton in Flames.

Or:
Matrix could release the entire application, fully tested and integrated with all features, but include only the basic maps from WiFFE and the counter mixes from WiFFE Classic in particular. This would be more akin to the way ADG does it. In this option, Africa, Scandinavia, and the Americas could each be an expansion, as could the various PiF, SiF type expansions. The additional maps would be at European scale, allowing the gamer to assemble a WiF cyllindrical world projection, as in the CM beta. This version of CWiF would require a lot of work up-front, but would have a continuous flow of additional products in the line. It would also have the advantage of continuing synergy with ADG, since the expansions would be based on the ADG line.

Just some ideas I've been kicking around... more food for thought.

Of course, my preference would be to have the whole dream package for MWiF right now, with all of the features fully tested and integrated.

< Message edited by coregames -- 5/25/2005 11:17:40 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/25/2005 10:57:48 PM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Perhaps they could implement the current WiFFE version of the game at a slightly lower initial price. This basic verion could be for network or TCP/IP play, without PBEM mode.


I'd be all for that!(loud belch)

< Message edited by macgregor -- 5/26/2005 2:04:30 AM >

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 2
Why not PBEM first? - 5/26/2005 12:34:58 AM   
Greyshaft


Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames
Perhaps they could implement the current WiFFE version of the game at a slightly lower initial price. This basic version could be for network or TCP/IP play, without PBEM mode.


On the other hand, the basic version could be for PBEM mode without network or TCP/IP play. Other modes could be in the version 2 release after all the bugs were worked out of PBEM play... say about 2 years after the PBEM version was released.

Kinda sucks when the boot is on the other foot, doesn't it? Lets work towards an INCLUSIVE community here rather than just ditching the playters whose playing style is different to our own.



_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 3
RE: Why not PBEM first? - 5/26/2005 12:56:38 AM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft
On the other hand, the basic version could be for PBEM mode without network or TCP/IP play. Other modes could be in the version 2 release after all the bugs were worked out of PBEM play... say about 2 years after the PBEM version was released.

Kinda sucks when the boot is on the other foot, doesn't it? Lets work towards an INCLUSIVE community here rather than just ditching the playters whose playing style is different to our own.



I offered two alternatives in my post, both merely as examples of what Matrix might do. One of them was full implementation of all features (PBEM, TCIP/IP, AI) before any release, my preference of the two options I suggested. In case you haven't notice, I have been encouraging the approach of being inclusive.

The reason for releasing the game for synchronous play first (assuming they take the route of a preliminary release) is that the game WiF does not lend itself as readily to PBEM, and so, that mode of play will be more problematic. This is not based on prejudice against any point of view, but based rather on the game as it currently stands. If they want to get an early edition of the game out with limited functionality, PBEM would likely not be the mode chosen, nor would AI likely be a part of it. If they are willing to wait for more features to be implemented before release, I am fine with that.

If they did release the game with PBEM suitability intitially, I can't imagine why they would wait two years to offer synchronous play, since that mode is much easier to implement. If we don't see synchronous play in the initial release, we will likely never see it.

You seem very testy suddenly Greyshaft... I wasn't personally attacking your views, just putting out some ideas based on an expansion model of the game. I don't think my post had the content to be construed as wanting to "ditch" anyone.

< Message edited by coregames -- 5/26/2005 1:04:56 AM >

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 4
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/26/2005 1:15:42 AM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames

Or:
Matrix could release the entire application, fully tested and integrated with all features, but include only the basic maps from WiFFE and the counter mixes from WiFFE Classic in particular. This would be more akin to the way ADG does it. In this option, Africa, Scandinavia, and the Americas could each be an expansion, as could the various PiF, SiF type expansions. The additional maps would be at European scale, allowing the gamer to assemble a WiF cyllindrical world projection, as in the CM beta. This version of CWiF would require a lot of work up-front, but would have a continuous flow of additional products in the line. It would also have the advantage of continuing synergy with ADG, since the expansions would be based on the ADG line.


First I'm not going to flame anybodys style of play or try to out guess Matrix.

But If you have a copy or were in the testing process for CWiF you realize "WiFFE Classic" is the wrong definition of the game.

CWiF was somewhere between "World in Flames Deluxe" and "World in Flames Super Deluxe".
(see: 1. Introduction WiF-RaW-7-aug-04)


My preference would be to get into the testing stage again and work from there.

(1) Debug the game. I've found 2 new diferences in RaW and CWiF today while finishing up my production spreadsheet. Yes, I know this is handled by the CWiF but I wanted to check it anyway. I was also making a document that would list all the options (I only got as far as 16 today.

(2) AI, TCP/IP, and PBE next (and not necessarily in this order).

< Message edited by Mziln -- 5/26/2005 1:26:30 AM >

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 5
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/26/2005 1:24:17 AM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln

First I'm not going to flame anybodys style of play or try to out guess Matrix.

But If you have a copy or were in the testing process for CWiF you realize "WiFFE Classic" is the wrong definition of the game.

CWiF was somewhere between "World in Flames Deluxe" and "World in Flames Super Deluxe".


Yes I've played the CM beta extensively. My reference was to possible marketing strategies for the Matrix version of the game, not to the CM beta. WiFFE Classic is still available from ADG, as a less expensive way to start getting into WiFFE. I mentioned it merely as one way they might approach it.

These are just ideas, examples I would like everyone to take at face value. What are other people's ideas of how Matrix might market the game? Should it all be in the initial release? Should they use expansions to fill in the product line? That was what I was hoping people would get from my post.

< Message edited by coregames -- 5/26/2005 1:25:30 AM >

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 6
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/26/2005 1:42:32 AM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline 		But we can't go back. All I'm saying is unless you were to strip or turn off a lot of code...

Things Diferent in "The World in Flames Classic game":

Option 1: Map scale is diferent.
Option 2: Divisional sized units (still optional).
Option 3: Air and anti-air rules.
Option 4: Pacific & Asian ZoCs are handled diferently.
Option 5: Fortifications.
Option 6: Supply units.
Option 7: Engineer Divisions (still optional).
Option 8: Flying boats.
Option 9: Naval stacking.
Option 10: Territorial units.
Option 11: Overseas supply.
Option 12: Limited access across straits.
Option 13: HQ's that are out of supply.
Option 14: Synthetic oil plants and saved oil.
Option 15 & 16: Handling Reinforcements.

"(still optional)" means it can be turned off or on in CWiF.

I could even see DoD as an expansion.



< Message edited by Mziln -- 5/26/2005 1:54:08 AM >

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 7
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/26/2005 1:54:57 AM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln

But we can't go back. All I'm saying is unless you were to strip or turn off a lot of code...



The idea I mentioned didn't involve stripping any code, but obviously if they did release a limited version (such as Classic) some options would be turned off at first. I understand that what you want is Marinacci's version, with the existing bugs taken out. That is not what I'm talking about. As far as going back, if they implement PBEM and AI, in some ways they are going to have to start from scratch anyway (but with the lessons learned from Chris in mind). I honestly don't see them dusting off the CM beta and polishing it up for release. That being the case, many options are available for how they do market the game.

As far as map scales, the suggestion I put forward did not include variable scale (All maps included would still be at European scale), except for the use of off-map boxes and the American minimap. As other maps were included, more of the planet could be depicted at the unified scale. This emulates the approach of ADG's game, but does not directly duplicate it (no Asian scale). This is only if they go with this approach to expansions; they could very well just include the whole planet at the small scale from the beginning and I would be fine with it. Part of my thinking was to find ways to keep the product line profitable for Matrix in the long term.

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 8
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/26/2005 2:01:25 AM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline 		Yes, all the options and features (eventualy)

Matrix Games and Australian Design Group Seal Deal for World In Flames

Game Features

· Faithful adaptation of the latest Deluxe version of World In Flames

· Network play

· Play by Email support

· Intelligent computer opponent

· Many optional rules and game system enhancements






< Message edited by Mziln -- 5/26/2005 2:09:19 AM >

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 9
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/26/2005 2:16:12 AM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline 		I'll be interested to see how much this eventually costs, I mean, a big chunk of the price tag should rightfully go to that which cost matrix the most money - the AI and the entire redesign towards pbem. I for one don't want to pay for all that -and would rather save my computer the hassle of loading it all -if I could. I don't know. Is that selfish?

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 10
selfish? - 5/26/2005 4:29:47 AM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: macgregor

I for one don't want to pay for all that -and would rather save my computer the hassle of loading it all -if I could. I don't know. Is that selfish?


I don't think that's selfish. I think really all of us want essentially the same thing: what we want individually. All of us have to look at the big picture at the same time, realizing that if MWiF does not have wide appeal, then we are not likely to see it, with or without what we want.

I want to help Matrix get this right where I can, as I'm sure do most of you. My advice to them is to do some market research on and off these forums, along with focus groups (perhaps on yahoo), all while reading this forum often. All of this should be to discern who are their most likely customers, then balance this with what they already know (or can learn) about the WiF community. This should keep them on the right track.

(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 11
RE: Why not PBEM first? - 5/26/2005 6:34:51 AM   
Greyshaft


Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames
You seem very testy suddenly Greyshaft... I wasn't personally attacking your views, just putting out some ideas based on an expansion model of the game. I don't think my post had the content to be construed as wanting to "ditch" anyone.


Not at all upset... I was actually grinning while I wrote that post. It's just rare that an issue fits so neatly into black and white categories which can be easily inverted.

I really can't see Matrix ditching either PBEM or simultaneous play. I believe that they will do what they have promised to do all along which is (to quote Mziln)

· Faithful adaptation of the latest Deluxe version of World In Flames
· Network play
· Play by Email support
· Intelligent computer opponent
· Many optional rules and game system enhancements

_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 12
RE: Why not PBEM first? - 5/26/2005 6:55:47 AM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft

I really can't see Matrix ditching either PBEM or simultaneous play. I believe that they will do what they have promised to do all along which is (to quote Mziln)

· Faithful adaptation of the latest Deluxe version of World In Flames
· Network play
· Play by Email support
· Intelligent computer opponent
· Many optional rules and game system enhancements


I hope that is what the final product looks like too. Seems we are all in agreement that would be the ideal, appealing to the most people.

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 13
RE: Why not PBEM first? - 5/26/2005 8:04:54 AM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline 		So in order for me to buy WiF on the computer, I have to buy this other game that will take more than a couple years to develope, add greatly to the weight of the program, inevitably drive up the price, and in the end offer me little more than the 5 year old beta, since that's the version I'll play. How does matrix expect me to feel I wonder? They spend all this time and work to change what I already like, and then ask me to pay for it by making it a condition of my purchase. If that's what pans out, and so far it looks like it, I may just stick to the games I have.

< Message edited by macgregor -- 5/26/2005 8:24:23 AM >

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 14
RE: Why not PBEM first? - 5/26/2005 9:14:44 AM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: macgregor

So in order for me to buy WiF on the computer, I have to buy this other game that will take more than a couple years to develope, add greatly to the weight of the program, inevitably drive up the price, and in the end offer me little more than the 5 year old beta, since that's the version I'll play. How does matrix expect me to feel I wonder? They spend all this time and work to change what I already like, and then ask me to pay for it by making it a condition of my purchase. If that's what pans out, and so far it looks like it, I may just stick to the games I have.


I wish I had a game company that tailored their products to my needs in particular too, but wishing and expecting are two completely different things. Wishing is understandable, while expecting is unreasonable. If I have to wait two years and have PBEM to get the features of WiF I prefer, I will be patient, and happy when the game is released.

Why is it that so few people have a balanced perspective of this? Many of the posts in this forum have adamantly been either anti-PBEM or anti-synchronous. The best chance of success is to appeal to as many players as possible, not to cater to a limited niche. As Greyshaft said, we need to be more inclusive of the desires of other gamers, whichever side of this debate we each fall on. Open-mindedness and trying to find common ground would go a lot farther than rancor, don't you think?

(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 15
Licences... - 5/26/2005 9:41:33 AM   
Greyshaft


Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: macgregor

So in order for me to buy WiF on the computer, I have to buy this other game that will take more than a couple years to develope, add greatly to the weight of the program, inevitably drive up the price, and in the end offer me little more than the 5 year old beta, since that's the version I'll play. How does matrix expect me to feel I wonder? They spend all this time and work to change what I already like, and then ask me to pay for it by making it a condition of my purchase. If that's what pans out, and so far it looks like it, I may just stick to the games I have.


I think you're missing the point that the product that you want doesn't exist and never did exist as a saleable product. Matrix can only develop and sell what Harry licences them to sell and to this point he has asked them to produce a complete PBEM + AI computer game with bells and whistles. Complaining that you can't buy the CWiF you specify is no more valid than trying to buy half a hamburger from MacDonalds.

MacDonald doesn't sell half-hamburgers and Matrix doesn't sell incomplete games.
If you don't like, it then complain to Harry and ask him to change the terms under which he licensed the design to Matrix.

On any other matter please feel free to add your voice to the crowd (you can stand next to me if you want - I'm second from the left at the back) and ask for your favorite feature.

_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 16
RE: Licences... - 5/26/2005 5:13:56 PM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline 		As long as they get that I'm not buying it -I'll get that they're not making the game I want. And you can point fingers, and couch the terminology however you want. This smooth running, faithful adaption, tailored now to my specific needs (I thought there were more WiF fans -though apparently not) known as the CWiF demo is now auswitzware. And somewhere between the time of the demo's release and this 10/21/03 announcement either ADG or Matrix decided to terminate this almost complete project in favor of something the marketing guys were happier with. Well I hope all you marketing geniuses are happy paying for this monster. I figure if you save a dollar a week, by the time it's completed you ought to have enough.

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 17
RE: Licences... - 5/26/2005 7:35:43 PM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: macgregor

(1) As long as they get that I'm not buying it - I'll get that they're not making the game I want. And you can point fingers, and couch the terminology however you want.

(2) This smooth running, faithful adaption, tailored now to my specific needs (I thought there were more WiF fans -though apparently not) known as the CWiF demo is now auswitzware.

(3) And somewhere between the time of the demo's release and this 10/21/03 announcement either ADG or Matrix decided to terminate this almost complete project in favor of something the marketing guys were happier with. Well I hope all you marketing geniuses are happy paying for this monster. I figure if you save a dollar a week, by the time it's completed you ought to have enough.




(1) What you buy/don't buy is totaly up to you.

(2) Your joking right? "Tailored now to my specific needs" where did this come from?

More WiF fans? Have you checked the list of contribtors of CWiF? They are listed in CWiF under the "Help" main menu under "About". Oh, and how about a link for you: WiFCON 2005

If you like you can surf the web for the links for WiFCon West, Euro WiFCon, and the Australian WiFCon.

"Auswitzware" an interesting term meaning exactly what?

(3) You have absolutely no proof this game has been terminated or held up as a marketing strategy. This is contrary to all posts from Matrix games. True, Matrix has had other prioritys and hasn't been able to allocate resources to continue this project. Matrix has repeatedly stated this and advised this forum of changes in MWiF's status.


< Message edited by Mziln -- 5/26/2005 7:49:54 PM >

(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 18
RE: Licences... - 5/26/2005 8:05:22 PM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Your joking right? "Tailored now to my specific needs" where did this come from?


As I appear to be the only one who wants to have a working version of the demo. This was somewhat facetious. I've read posts to the contrary.

quote:

"Auswitzware" an interesting term meaning exactly what?


The demo is now locked up and being kept from view. It will most likely die while helpling to build a 'greater Matrix' game. ADG put it on a train...do I need to go on?

quote:

You have absolutely no proof this game has been terminated or held up as a marketing strategy


If it's a marketing strategy, then it's not very good. The demo is being held up for not meeting certain 'viability standards'. My point is that if you indict the 'viability' of the demo, you indict the 'viability' of computer WiF. Another point is that if you simply want to make the best global WW2 simulation that is asynch/AI, what business do you have buying CWiF, that never was asynch or pbem. Matrix did take it out of circulation, that's reality. It's been over a year and a half in which Matrix admits little or nothing has been done, aside from their develpment of a completely different game that I'll probably have to buy as ransome for my CWiF, that's reality. From the moment ADG announced Matrix was taking over,they then added:
Faithful adaptation of the latest Deluxe version of World In Flames
Network play
Play by Email support
Intelligent computer opponent
Many optional rules and game system enhancements

This list is unrealistic -unless you're open for a completely different game.
I'm not -and I want everyone to know it.

"....isn't this an indictment of our entire American society? Well, you can do whatever you want to us, but we're not going to sit here and listen to you badmouth the United States of America. Gentlemen!"


< Message edited by macgregor -- 5/26/2005 8:58:40 PM >

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 19
RE: Licences... - 5/26/2005 8:34:30 PM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: macgregor

The demo is now locked up and being kept from view. It will most likely die while helpling to build a 'greater Matrix' game. ADG put it on a train...do I need to go on?


Programs do not have racial or religious ethnicity, are immune to gas chambers and can't be forced to do slave labor. "Hostageware" I could accept. I find the term "Auswitzware" abhorrent.

Patience Is A Virtue. Nothing happens before its time.



(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 20
RE: Licences... - 5/26/2005 10:07:23 PM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline 		Abhorrent... perhaps I was conveying some of my own sentiment.
I'd probably buy a global version of WitP. And I'd definitely buy a working version of the CWiF demo. Melding the 2 would be tantamount to pissing on me and telling me it's raining out. The onus is on Matrix to explain to me how they didn't buy WiF to keep it from competing with this global asynch/AI game. And if I have to wait and eventually pay for this asynch/pbem/AI game to get my CWiF make no mistake. It's ransome -and until this point becomes moot, I shall sustain it.

< Message edited by macgregor -- 5/26/2005 10:26:04 PM >

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 21
RE: Licences... - 5/26/2005 11:42:15 PM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline 		"Auschwitzware"? I thought we called them "shower clogs."

_____________________________

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 macgregor)
Post #: 22
Incoming Lockdown - 5/27/2005 12:32:03 AM   
Greyshaft


Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline 		Gentlemen I fear this thread is hurtling towards a Matrix lockdown. I think we know where everyone stands on this issue so can we get back to discussing issues that might assist Matrix to get this game out the door rather than just flaming each other?

And it really doesn't matter who started it...


_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 23
RE: Incoming Lockdown - 5/27/2005 1:10:56 AM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline 		If I do not speak my mind, openly and honestly, how can that possibly serve Matrix. I'll admit not everyone of my comments warrants an answer, but my view of this project that started ....eight years ago is entirely valid. It's not like I don't like the game. And in the end, my dollars are closer to matrix's pockets than supporters of this other game, as it will cost much more in time and money than what I want. It's my faith in this website's purpose that compells me to continue posting.

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 24
RE: Incoming Lockdown - 5/27/2005 3:12:54 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline 		Oh, stop congratulating yourself on how valid your viewpoint is, already. When the game comes out, make an informed decision about whether you want to buy it for the price you would have to pay.

_____________________________

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 macgregor)
Post #: 25
RE: Incoming Lockdown - 5/27/2005 7:09:59 PM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline 		Everybody has a viewpoint. Some are shared. I suppose I used 'valid' when I should've used 'correct'. Without the detail of WitP, it won't be that great of a pbem/AI game. This will not only delay and drive up the price of the game I love, CWiF, but will hamstring a potentially great, global, pbem/AI WW2 sim into a lesser game. I only wish there was someone else who realized this. And don't ask me to 'go with the flow' on this. I believe Matrix is making a mistake.

< Message edited by macgregor -- 5/27/2005 7:54:55 PM >

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 26
RE: Incoming Lockdown - 5/27/2005 8:34:54 PM   
Erik Rutins

 

Posts: 37503
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: Vermont, USA
Status: offline 		Macgregor,

As I've posted in other threads, we still have flexibility and we are listening to feedback. I believe your point has been clearly understood and we will take it into consideration. The final format, price or play options (or whether there will be modular releases for different customer markets with different play options) remains to be determined and is a subject of discussions that will likely not conclude until after Origins this year.

I realize some folks are upset with us because we didn't take Chris' beta, package it up and release it. All I can say about that is wait until after Origins. In July, we should have more information to present to you on what you can expect and when it will be delivered. We will also try to explain the decisions involved so that our goals, challenges and motives are understood as clearly as possible.

We're wargamers and we want to see WiF for the computer completed as well. However, this has been and remains a very challenging project, much more so than the majority of posters here seem to realize, from a development perspective.

Regards,

- Erik

_____________________________

Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC



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

Freedom is not Free.

(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 27
RE: Incoming Lockdown - 5/27/2005 11:02:20 PM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline 		Thank you Erik. That means alot to hear it from you. I feel like I have now articulated this as best I can and can let it rest. I started to get upset the game wasn't released about a year after having the demo. Which was some years before Matrix took over. This is the first time I've had the opportunity to post my ideas on an ongoing project, and for that I'm grateful.

(in reply to Erik Rutins)
Post #: 28
RE: Licences... - 5/27/2005 11:13:57 PM   
Cheesehead

 

Posts: 418
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Appleton, Wisconsin
Status: offline
quote:

I'd probably buy a global version of WitP


Whats that? Are there plans to make a global WWII game based on WitP?

_____________________________

You can't fight in here...this is the war room!

(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 29
Global WitP - 5/27/2005 11:39:02 PM   
Greyshaft


Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cheesehead

quote:

I'd probably buy a global version of WitP


Whats that? Are there plans to make a global WWII game based on WitP?

I have never heard any Matrix person say anything like that. GG & co officially scuttled plans for a Mediterranean version of WitP a few months ago so I'd say the global version is just a fantasy tossed around by some other members of the Forum

_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to Cheesehead)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> scenarios and expansions Page: [1] 2 3   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

1.609