Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

Veldor -> Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/29/2005 9:05:00 PM)

For those of you who are Mad Minute fans, they have finalized things with Paradox recently for Take Command: 2nd Manassas to be released April 18th in most markets.





Hertston -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/29/2005 10:34:54 PM)

As long as Paradox keep their noses out of the coding and design, good news, I suppose. It will get the game a wider distribution, which is good.. but the four month delay in publishing it is a bit of a disappointment.



Confederate_Beagler -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/29/2005 11:43:20 PM)

Don't worry about the coding. This is still very much MMG's baby. Paradox just happens to be putting the game in boxes and getting store shelf space for them. Oh, and advertizing too. Unlike the SNAFU that was Activision Value and the first game.



Sarge -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 1:35:09 AM)

Paradox !

Good luck with that ,They are going to need it [8|]





ravinhood -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 6:46:10 AM)

Yeah, I won't touch a paradox game upon release no matter who coded the game. It's the principle behind the publisher. Boycott the publisher for their past crimes to customers. ;)



benpark -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 7:26:22 AM)

I have the beta(since I preordered). It's an amazing game. I understand the publisher thing(I can't stand CDV)-but it is one that shouldn't be missed.



ravinhood -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 8:13:53 AM)

Oh I believe you Ben and it's nothing against Mad Minute. I just have a principle about/against Paradox products and I will not give them one dime of my money retail again. And besides in 2 months after release 2nd Manassas will be less than $10 on ebay, all of the other Paradoxs games are.



Sarge -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 8:51:24 AM)

I loved the first title, and will most defiantly will be getting this one also. I just don't see the why they picked Paradox, its probable a very- very good thing the code was about wraped up before the deal was done



Pippin -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 9:44:48 AM)

I agree, with a label like Paradox, a small percentage of the population will be too cautious.




Veldor -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 9:45:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sarge

I just don't see the why they picked Paradox


Probably because its a non-grog title and Paradox is, thought too anyway, have a larger fanbase of non-grog strategy players where-as, say Matrix, is thought to have a larger fanbase of grog players.

Paradox is, I believe, trying to gain more favor amongst wargamers by doing more turn-based titles and games of better crossover appeal like the Mad Minute title.

Its one of the things that makes playing Diplomacy so much fun. Its a chatty game by nature and its interesting to see what some say about the game (many having come from other paradox titles and never having playing any sort of turn based game or even "wargame" before not that Diplomacy really even is one) and they shake in fear at my mention of buying HTTR and think instantly I'm some sort of hardcore grog (interesting to me that some of those sorts would even know the term).

Some of those same hardcore Paradox fans playing Diplomacy for the first time have also bought GGWaW and its perhaps their only knowledge of Matrix Games.

The "True Grogs" may never well play a pure strategy type title and the strategy fanatics that come from the click-fest extreme may very well never play even the lightest of wargames.. But I do believe there is an every growing segment in the middle where a lot of crossover potential exists on both ends.

And both Matrix & Paradox are wise to try to tap into that and that is why we see some of the titles that we do from both of them. Just that in Paradox's case its a somewhat new direction (trying to appeal more to the "true wargamer" crowd)

Just my worthless opinion of course.

Final thought is ANY company, regardless of what you might think of them, is probably a better choice than Mad Minutes last publisher.

But then again if Atari can be associated with games like Diplomacy and Squad Leader, then why not have Activision putting out wargames too lol...

Donkey Kong Squad Leader anyone? [:D]



benpark -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 10:01:24 AM)

"Non-grog"? I'm as groggy as they concerning on 19th century warfare and tactics, and this is the best wargame I've seen on this period, no contest.

Have you have played the first game by MMG, Veldor? There is none of the "RTS" wood gathering thing going on, if that's your impression. This is a wargame.

Also-as someone that heralds a new second coming of computer gaming AI, you might take some notes on what these two guys have achieved, it's pretty amazing.




Veldor -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 10:20:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: benpark
"Non-grog"? I'm as groggy as they concerning on 19th century warfare and tactics, and this is the best wargame I've seen on this period, no contest.

Have you have played the first game by MMG, Veldor? There is none of the "RTS" wood gathering thing going on, if that's your impression. This is a wargame.

Also-as someone that heralds a new second coming of computer gaming AI, you might take some notes on what these two guys have achieved, it's pretty amazing.

Oh. No. Somehow you missed my point entirely. I'm sure its my fault. I type too fast and too much.

All I meant was that the game is not as hardcore as say WITP and that it therefore has better crossover appeal for both fans of Pardox's other titles and wargamer fans alike. Plus that Paradox is trying to appease wargamers more and these additions to their line are part of that.

I was in no way knocking the game or the development company. If anything I was stating the exact opposite.

I for one also have no problem with Paradox. Personally I've only ever bought one game from then (Diplomacy) though I've played most of the others via demo or whatever (Did not decide to purchase HOI2 based on the demo for instance). Though I have nothing against their "old" lineup, this new direction of Diplomacy, Squad Leader, and now Mad Minute Games makes me a lot lot happier.

So I guess to make it simple all I meant to say is:

ITS DAMN OBVIOUS why Paradox would want to sign Mad Minutes new title. It can only help them and its obviously going to be a great game.

As for why Mad Minute decided on Paradox, I'm sure thats far more open to debate and speculation... And I simply gave my own best shot at that...

Mad Minute proves just how much a couple of guys in a basement can achieve on their own. You can't not respect that.

PS. Perhaps some of the confusion comes from my use of the word grog and its varying definition out there. For the record I don't consider myself a Grog. And this after having spent years playing games like ASL and UV. Though, like I said, to most Paradox and Diplomacy players I'm as grog as grog gets. Yet my preferences in games and such are not in line with the average WiTP player etc. Thus I, and many others out there, really don't feel we are "true grogs" and as un-cool a wargamer as that makes me I am more than happy with that. Grog to me isn't defined by what wargames you do or dont choose to play but rather is based upon your attitude towards the genre and what you value most in wargames etc. And in this there are two mostly disparate schools of thought and I simply often lean too much in opinion towards what the opposite of current grogs opinions and preferences would be to ever consider myself one. [&:]



Hertston -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 10:25:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: benpark

"Non-grog"? I'm as groggy as they concerning on 19th century warfare and tactics, and this is the best wargame I've seen on this period, no contest.



"Non-grog" should be considered a compliment in this instance, I think. Based on my experience of the first one, I suspect you are probably right, but either way the game is more far accessible to general gamers than, say, the HPS Civil War titles. Its the sort of game that gets people into the hobby, which has to be good in my book.

I wouldn't consider Paradox the best choice either, but we have no idea how much "choice" was actually involved. TC:2ndM, good as I'm sure it is, isn't a game Ubi or EA would be fighting to get their hands on. I assume from Benpark's comment CDV were a possibility.. and I share his opinion of them, so Paradox wasn't the worst choice, either!



*Lava* -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 1:56:08 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Boycott the publisher for their past crimes to customers. ;)


And in so doing destroy a garage designer... nice.

Don't ever complain about the lack of wargaming titles.

Ray (alias Lava)



*Lava* -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 2:01:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sarge

I loved the first title, and will most defiantly will be getting this one also. I just don't see the why they picked Paradox, its probable a very- very good thing the code was about wraped up before the deal was done


Actually, Paradox picked them.

Now if you were working 16 hours a day (your regular job plus trying to make a game) and a producer with some muscle offered to change your distribution for online downloads to games in stores.. what would you have done?

If you had kept up on their forums, you would have seen they were even working on Christmas.

These guys need a break to get into the mainstream. Hopefully Paradox's marketing muscle will do that.

Ray (alias Lava)



*Lava* -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 2:03:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veldor

Probably because its a non-grog title


You obviously haven't played any of their stuff. These guys are diehards when it comes to historical accuracy.

Ray (alias Lava)



ravinhood -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 2:23:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lava

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Boycott the publisher for their past crimes to customers. ;)


And in so doing destroy a garage designer... nice.

Don't ever complain about the lack of wargaming titles.

Ray (alias Lava)


Nah, Ron Dockal can do it, so can they. Just keep their day jobs and make games by nights and weekends. He's done it for quite awhlle now. ;)



*Lava* -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 3:35:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Nah, Ron Dockal can do it, so can they. Just keep their day jobs and make games by nights and weekends. He's done it for quite awhlle now. ;)


They've done that now for almost four years. They have families. Adam a new born. WTF do you expect these people to be SUPERMEN.

I repeat, don't ever complain about the lack of wargame titles.

Ray (alias Lava)



ASHBERY76 -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 6:04:11 PM)

These Paradox haters are small and post under the same name in many forums.3 or 4 names seem to pop up.



ravinhood -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 6:23:13 PM)

quote:

Don't ever complain about the lack of wargaming titles.


My complaints aren't about the "lack" of wargame titles, it's games like CWBR/2nd Manassas, just another CIVIL WAR game. (ho hum yawn).

Now, Tin Soldiers series, yeah boy, love those. Slitherines Ancients series wahooo yeah boy love those.

Civil War, Napoleon, WWII (yawn stretch nami nami nami) same ole same ole.

Also RTS games aren't really my cup of tea anyways and CWBR fits into that catagory. Just not a full blown rts game...YET!



Adam@madminutegames.com -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 7:42:38 PM)

Some folks like RTS...some like Turn-Based...some like WWII only..whatever. The main thing is that Wargames are great fun and there's a flavor for everyone. We started MadMinute Games because we wanted to add more flavor! Wargamers, whether they're Grogs or newbies, need to stick together. There's not that much content out there for the wargamers who love this stuff. We all need to support eachother! Matrix, Battlefront, Paradox, Shrapnel, etc all have games that are great and should be supported if those companies make a game (flavor) that appeals to you.

If it's not yer cup of tea...fine...no worries! But it is to another fellow wargamer! Diversity can be a strength or a huge weakness. Wargames will never see attention by major publishers if we continue to splinter ourselves with bickering and infighting over ridiculous particulars all the while missing the big picture! A house divided cannot stand!




mogami -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 8:00:06 PM)

Hi, I really like Midminutes Take Command. I had to get a new computer to run it but it is a very good game. It feels like you are a brigade or division commander.



Veldor -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 8:49:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lava

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veldor

Probably because its a non-grog title


You obviously haven't played any of their stuff. These guys are diehards when it comes to historical accuracy.

Ray (alias Lava)


Two strikes for me now. I guess I'll just reserve the right to have my own definition of the term "grog" until someone points me to whatever is the authoritative source on that definition. I know I am not alone in my defining of the term, though possibly still in the minority.

Like I said, to the wargamer masses, its "uncool" to be a non-grog or call anything that.

In my book I was complementing the game, but I can see how it would look like an insult to some of you.

Diehards in historical accuracy or not its still a non-grog title to me. Doesn't mean grogs won't like/love it.

A grog title is a title like WiTP. One that no "Non-grog" could likely ever like or play, and certainly not the average Paradox fan.

The title in question simply has far far broader appeal than that. It's also the reason it can show up on store shelves whereas again these days any "true" grog title could never do that.

Thats just how it is...



mogami -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 8:57:58 PM)

Hi, I think the game is very accurate. I really like moving my brigade up to the battle and seeing the actual historic regt on my flank commanded by the actual Brigade commanders. It is not the kind of game where you plan every units movement every turn. You don't even have control of many friendly units and you must execute orders from higher command.

It is a game where you are not "God" controlling the exact movement of your forces. If you can't see the enemy you can't react. If you can't see a friendly unit you must wait for a messanger to ride over and then hope they follow directions. I like the feel of being involved in the battle. I like hex and map games and consider myself a Grognard but this game "feels" like you are part of a civil war battle and that is what I think they intended. I look forward to the time when it has developed to where a player can begin in 1861 and command a Brigade or Division from start to finish. (I don't really play as Corps or Army commander)

I think it will be a gas to play against another human or even as teams.



ravinhood -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 9:09:01 PM)

I think there are "levels" of grog. I consider myself part of the grog community I'm an intermediate grog, but, even I don't like WitP type games. I've never liked monster games, time is a big element when I play a wargame. But, I do like both historical AND ahistorical scenarios in games. I also like random maps and random setups, never been a big fan of "simulations" since these basically remain unchanged game after game. When you add variants like random maps or random armies/units then you have variety of the situation. This is where the ahsitorical part comes in. I still want the units to be historically accurate though. I don't want to see tanks in 200bc though. heh Something that can quite often happen in Civilization games.

Also to me a grog game of my type of grog game is a turn based game and doesn't require glitzy graphics. Just sufficient enough to know what the counters are and the map terrain is. Like the Bafflefield games Normany, Italy, Korsun, whatever, I don't require that much glitz in a game. Ron Dockals Schwerpunkt provides sufficient and really more than required to be sufficient to play his game/scenarios. The unit counters are colorful and easy to read while not having to open little popup windows to read all the independent unit information of each different type of unit in the hex. That's just over doing it to me.

I've wanted a D-Day game like AH made where I get the "choice" of landing area and not be confined to always launching the attack from Normandy Beach. We all know what happened from that situation. I'd like to explore other situaltion and invasion areas like AH D-Day gave you.

To me there are catagories of grogs as well. Turn based grogs, RTS grogs, FPSer grogs and then those can be broken down into tactical grogs, strategical grogs, operational grogs and then those broken down into entry level, intermediate and advanced. Cause grogs comes from grognards which means if I recall "grumblers and complainers" and heh we get that in all catagories of wargaming/strategy gaming. ;)



mogami -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 9:19:19 PM)

Hi, I am an all levels Grog. I really want games where I do the Operational Level planning on large maps and then shift to smaller maps when a tactical encounter has to be resolved. COG does this.
I like squad level games and monster games like WITP.



ravinhood -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 9:39:00 PM)

Yep you're a full blown grog I would say Mogami. ;)



Veldor -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 9:39:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
I'm an intermediate grog

That works
quote:


I've wanted a D-Day game like AH made where I get the "choice" of landing area and not be confined to always launching the attack from Normandy Beach. We all know what happened from that situation. I'd like to explore other situaltion and invasion areas like AH D-Day gave you.

I've tried to argue in the past that any truly historically accurate game would pretty much force you into an exact recreation of historical events. And anything less than that is not historically accurate. So I agree you should be able to do things like your saying. There are those that just like to play a strategy game with historically accurate units and OOB's etc. and there are those that like to have more of a historical simulation. But to many of the later type games do feel awfully repetative and lack variety in play.

One person wrote me recently that his ideal game would be one where "A wargame with AI of its own units and enemy units is so advanced that it will allow you to sit back and simulate a historical event at a detailed tacical level without the player having to do anything. In other words a game that lets you watch a realistic war movie where you choose the subject."

That's definitely one extreme thats in the "historically accurate" camp.

I personally couldn't be further from that though...



ravinhood -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 9:59:29 PM)

quote:

One person wrote me recently that his ideal game would be one where "A wargame with AI of its own units and enemy units is so advanced that it will allow you to sit back and simulate a historical event at a detailed tacical level without the player having to do anything. In other words a game that lets you watch a realistic war movie where you choose the subject."


Heh, in that respect I'd just as soon be god and be able to travel in time and just watch the real battles unfold as they did. But, the real fun of games, any game for that matter is the individuals control the godlike nature of being in command and "doing as I say" and not as it was historical done. But, some games just don't give you that much leeway to do "as I say" or when they do, they are so one sided and out of historical proportions that it's a rediculous slaughter or over-run of what would never have been possible in the historical situation. That's why I like random maps and setups. There's no history to contradict the outcome. You make the history.

But, games like Paradox's Hoi's make the game laughable in that I can take a minor like Brazil and stomp Italy and parts of Germany without any allied intervention (although I did get some help from Russia taking out Germany). That's where distorting history with an historical classed wargame causes issues with a lot of historical accurate grogs. Playing the minors is more fun and a laugh than playing the actual historical majors. I actually liked the ahistorical value of HOI, I just didn't like having to wait a year and a half for it to be fixed!! It's a fun ahistorical little game to play like Civilization takes a time stop during WWII to me. But, PARADOX still suks to me. ;)

EU II on the other hand was believeable enough because of the time period and at that time anything or anyone could have become prominent with a futuristic mind as my own controlling the situation. heh But, really it too falls out of the historically accurate dept as soon as the human mind takes over a nation. In fact just about all games do to a point. As soon as you move one unit, one division, one corp, whatever differently from what it actually did, it becomes ahistorical. Even so, simulations don't change the scene enough to garner more than a play or two out of them. I wonder how many will play WitP more than a few times? Then I would ask how many have played Combat Mission and/or SPWAW a bunch of times and still continue to play it to this very day? ;)



Zap -> RE: Paradox signs Mad Minute Games (12/30/2005 10:32:47 PM)

To take the negative stigma away from the term grog. Some knowlegable person should make a list of identifiable positive characteristics of what a grog might be. So I could then see what level of grog I am, if at all. I probablay am a mixed breed.

To me however, as it was stated above I just want to see the wargame develop and stay healthy



Page: [1] 2 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.875