RE: please get this right (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames



Message

Grymme -> RE: please get this right (5/7/2008 9:41:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: borner

Hello,

I am sure someone in one of these threads has brought this up, but felt it was worth saying here. As I am sure some of you know, there is an ongoing discussion about Emipres in Arms being released too soon on that fourm. I know that many of us have been waiting for this WiF to get released so we can take a crack at it. However, for me, I urge Matrix to resist the public presure to get this out there too fast, and will gladly wait the extra time is needed to get it right. A game this large and complex, a huge challenge I am sure, but hopefully many of the bumps and bugs can get fixed the first time around.

Just my 2 cents of input.

Which brings to mind one of my favorite personal phrases: "perfection is an elusive goal."

If I fix everything that the beta testers report, we should be in pretty good shape.

There will undoubtedly be multiple passes at improving the play of the AI Opponent after the original release of MWIF. But that is preferable to the alternative of having everyone who wants to play over the Internet or PBEM wait for the AIO's tactical, operational, and strategic abilities to be honed to a fine edge.




This, to me, is a VERY troubling statement. One of the biggest letdowns of the EIA-product is the severly inadequate AI (as far as i can tell). To hear such a statement from the designer seems to spell trouble. Are we going to get another AI that is good only for "training purpose" or "for the beginner"????? then i will surely not by the game. Even if i will cry when i push the cancel order button.



Anendrue -> RE: please get this right (5/7/2008 10:12:30 PM)

I think anything in the US $100 to $200 range is acceptable.



YohanTM2 -> RE: please get this right (5/7/2008 11:21:34 PM)

Hey Grymme.

I don't think you can compare this to the EiA fiasco on any level. Having said that I don't see how there is any way this game will be playable versus the AI for other than tutorial and learning purposes.

If you are unfamiliar with WiF it is a highly complex game with a massive amount of options, decisions and strategies. My strongest hope for the game's AI is that it will be a great learning tool to intorduce WiF to a broader audience and to develop many great PBEM opponents.

DISCLAIMER - soley my opinion.

Yohan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Grymme


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: borner

Hello,

I am sure someone in one of these threads has brought this up, but felt it was worth saying here. As I am sure some of you know, there is an ongoing discussion about Emipres in Arms being released too soon on that fourm. I know that many of us have been waiting for this WiF to get released so we can take a crack at it. However, for me, I urge Matrix to resist the public presure to get this out there too fast, and will gladly wait the extra time is needed to get it right. A game this large and complex, a huge challenge I am sure, but hopefully many of the bumps and bugs can get fixed the first time around.

Just my 2 cents of input.

Which brings to mind one of my favorite personal phrases: "perfection is an elusive goal."

If I fix everything that the beta testers report, we should be in pretty good shape.

There will undoubtedly be multiple passes at improving the play of the AI Opponent after the original release of MWIF. But that is preferable to the alternative of having everyone who wants to play over the Internet or PBEM wait for the AIO's tactical, operational, and strategic abilities to be honed to a fine edge.




This, to me, is a VERY troubling statement. One of the biggest letdowns of the EIA-product is the severly inadequate AI (as far as i can tell). To hear such a statement from the designer seems to spell trouble. Are we going to get another AI that is good only for "training purpose" or "for the beginner"????? then i will surely not by the game. Even if i will cry when i push the cancel order button.





Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: please get this right (5/7/2008 11:50:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Grymme


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: borner

Hello,

I am sure someone in one of these threads has brought this up, but felt it was worth saying here. As I am sure some of you know, there is an ongoing discussion about Emipres in Arms being released too soon on that fourm. I know that many of us have been waiting for this WiF to get released so we can take a crack at it. However, for me, I urge Matrix to resist the public presure to get this out there too fast, and will gladly wait the extra time is needed to get it right. A game this large and complex, a huge challenge I am sure, but hopefully many of the bumps and bugs can get fixed the first time around.

Just my 2 cents of input.

Which brings to mind one of my favorite personal phrases: "perfection is an elusive goal."

If I fix everything that the beta testers report, we should be in pretty good shape.

There will undoubtedly be multiple passes at improving the play of the AI Opponent after the original release of MWIF. But that is preferable to the alternative of having everyone who wants to play over the Internet or PBEM wait for the AIO's tactical, operational, and strategic abilities to be honed to a fine edge.




This, to me, is a VERY troubling statement. One of the biggest letdowns of the EIA-product is the severly inadequate AI (as far as i can tell). To hear such a statement from the designer seems to spell trouble. Are we going to get another AI that is good only for "training purpose" or "for the beginner"????? then i will surely not by the game. Even if i will cry when i push the cancel order button.


Well, the statement doesn't bother me in the least. I believe how it is interpretted depends a lot on the reader.

In chess there are measured skill levels ranging from 1600 (I know there are lower ranges, but I have trouble understanding them). It took me several years to get above 1800, and another 6 years to get above 2000. I never reached 2100, but a friend of mine plays at 2400. He and I stopped playing because it wasn't competetive. If the difference in ratings is more than 350 points, then the better player wins 92% of the time and draws the other 8%. That is because the rating system is statistically based on tournament performance.

Which brings me back to the AIO for MWIF. As in chess, there should always be room for improvement.

Now if you are an experienced WIF player with a decade of experience playing the game (and there are a lot of those types around), perhaps you will find the first version of the AIO unworthy - "only good for training purposes".

But if you have only played WIF for a year or two, or use to play back in the 1990's and haven't had a chance to do so since, well, I hope the AIO can teach you a thing or two.

But to assume that the AIO will play at the expert level (2000+ to use chess terminology) in the first release is unrealistic. No one wants the game delayed while the AIO play is honed to a fine edge.



warspite1 -> RE: please get this right (5/8/2008 1:10:31 AM)

But to assume that the AIO will play at the expert level (2000+ to use chess terminology) in the first release is unrealistic. No one wants the game delayed while the AIO play is honed to a fine edge.

Now the first part of that sentence is what I call a VERY sensible statement! With such a complex game surely its better to get the mechanics right so that there are no EIA type problems e.g. ships that won`t go to port, units that disappear etc etc - now that is frustrating. But the AI can be developed over time - AND IT WILL TAKE TIME.

The second part of the sentence is music to my ears. Despite the best efforts of Steve, Patrice, the beta testers et al, in my opinion its only when the game is on the market that we will really see the game put through its paces and some additional problems surface. So long as Matrix do all they can to minimise those and promise to support development afterwards, then great - that tactic gets my vote.  



Mingus Roberts -> RE: please get this right (5/8/2008 2:15:33 AM)

Not to tell you how to live your life Steve, but there is a fine line between responsive developer feedback and just responding to everyone's whinge of the day (I think the topic 'please get this right' is textbook). I know you have plenty on your plate without feeling obliged to chat with the clientelle. Pat and the boys do a good job fending off the better part of the time eating questions anyhow.

Note my silent lurking despite many years of pent up wifstration.

"Aviate. Navigate. Communicate. In that order." is what I used to say before punching my student pilots in the head for responding to ATC's random requests while trying to land the airplane. Maybe for you we can make it: Code. Compile. Communicate. It'll be hard to punch you from here though;)

I know that I speak for all of your arctic pilot customers (we had a meeting) when I say: we wants a playable game before the icecap melts and the polar bears all starve to death... dammit... too late.

MR

PS Maui no ka 'oi

PPS I'll send pics from the flight deck of me playing on my laptop as soon as I can get hold of the program. Now if you wouldn't mind setting it up so I can play with my pilot/controller buddies via cockpit datalink.... that's in product 1 right?



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: please get this right (5/8/2008 4:34:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mingus Roberts

Not to tell you how to live your life Steve, but there is a fine line between responsive developer feedback and just responding to everyone's whinge of the day (I think the topic 'please get this right' is textbook). I know you have plenty on your plate without feeling obliged to chat with the clientelle. Pat and the boys do a good job fending off the better part of the time eating questions anyhow.

Note my silent lurking despite many years of pent up wifstration.

"Aviate. Navigate. Communicate. In that order." is what I used to say before punching my student pilots in the head for responding to ATC's random requests while trying to land the airplane. Maybe for you we can make it: Code. Compile. Communicate. It'll be hard to punch you from here though;)

I know that I speak for all of your arctic pilot customers (we had a meeting) when I say: we wants a playable game before the icecap melts and the polar bears all starve to death... dammit... too late.

MR

PS Maui no ka 'oi

PPS I'll send pics from the flight deck of me playing on my laptop as soon as I can get hold of the program. Now if you wouldn't mind setting it up so I can play with my pilot/controller buddies via cockpit datalink.... that's in product 1 right?

I would but the FAA said not to.[:-]

Practically my only communication is via posts and email. I have never met anyone who works at Matrix. There was one Swedish forum member who helped out with the map of scandinavian a bit who lived on-island (on Oahu) but he moved back to California - and I only met him once face to face. I had to go to Provence to meet Patrice!

And I have less than 10 phone calls a year about what I am working on.

On the plus side, there are never any meetings to attend, nor minutes to writeup.[:)]

I do weekly reports to Matrix and smash them altogether for the monthly report.

Responding to what people post is a sanity check for me. I do worry at times that I am skewing too hard in the direction of grognards, so comments from new people are very helpful, even if some of them seem a little off-base.[8|]

Oh, and welcome to the forum!



undercovergeek -> RE: please get this right (5/8/2008 9:12:26 PM)

a game this big is never going to have a perfect AI as seen in Witp - and i may be wrong but i think, also as in Witp, most people, at least those who have never played the game before (like me) will play a few games aginst the AI for practice and jump straight into PBEM - surely thats what we're all waiting for............... PBEM WiF!!!!!



Ingtar -> RE: please get this right (5/8/2008 11:49:04 PM)

Not me. I play almost exclusively solo or hot seat. If I have to, I'll do what I did with the board version and try to play all the sides fairly.



Sewerlobster -> RE: please get this right (5/9/2008 2:24:34 AM)

I too am with Ingtar. I'll be more the solitaire or even "solo" hotseater.
Not that I wouldn't love to play email. I just don't know if I can commit the time necessary to keep other players happy. In truth I am generally pessimistic, so as long as the AI isn't flawed with glaring defects, I'll be pleased.<Maybe even pleasantly surprised>. Since my own strategies tend to have somewhat fatal flaws I'd expect the AI to muff some things too. [sm=00000007.gif]



Grymme -> RE: please get this right (5/9/2008 11:01:25 AM)

I did own the boardgame although we didnt play it very much (difficult to get people to make the time commitment), so i now what im talking about. Of course its possible to make an AI that can handle it (look at the Civilization series which has excellent AI).

The thing is that around the EIA community people are starting to hint at excuses that the AI was never supposed to be anything other than for training purposes. Well, If that will be the case for WIF it should be stated so very clearly in my opinion.

I do understand that the best boardgameplayers will beat the AI and that there should still be room for improvement when the game is released, but it would be relly sad to discover that the game has an beginners AI when released and then to be forced to wait maybe another year for a "maybe better AI".

A computergame without an functioning AI will always be at most 40 % of a finished computer game, at least in my book.




Ingtar -> RE: please get this right (5/9/2008 6:27:16 PM)

quote:

The thing is that around the EIA community people are starting to hint at excuses that the AI was never supposed to be anything other than for training purposes. Well, If that will be the case for WIF it should be stated so very clearly in my opinion.


Had I known this about EIA, I'd have not purchased it. I am already planning to wait on WIF to see if it has a decent AI before I will buy it. This is quite a change from being ready to preorder it when the first announcement came out. I've been burned by things that I found distasteful in several games lately. I also believe that I will need to see a demo to convince me now.



SamuraiProgrmmr -> RE: please get this right (5/9/2008 6:55:34 PM)

This is not directed at anyone in particular... It is just an observation.  I hope that we can all keep the appropriate perspective.

I have been following both forums (EIA and WIF) for several years.

From my point of view, the EIA community complained and complained and complained about slow release until there was enough pressure to force a release before it was ready.  I understand that the development team and testors felt it was ready but obviously their focus was multiplayer for those who understood the game.  (Again, they caterered to the vocal elements of the community)

It is intuitively obvious to the most casual observer that Steve is approaching the development of WIF from a different perspective than the EIA team.    This is not a slam against anyone, but is simply an observation.

It is also noteworthy that the pressure by the WIF forum community to release is not as great as it was with EIA.

WIF is one of the best wargames I have ever played.  It has one drawback--- it is so big as to be cumbersome to play.

MWIF will address that issue whether there is an 'acceptable' AI or not.

Programmers are notorious for being optimistic.  If not, we would never start some of the projects we attempt.

In my opinion, the following things will happen.

1.  Steve will work hard on creating an AI that will be (at least) useful for beginning players and casual play.
2.  Steve will attempt to create an AI that will be competitive for expert players
3.  The AI will improve after release IF there are enough sales to warrant continued development.
4.  After release, imbalance issues due to RAW (rules as written) will be exposed and the AI will take the initial blame for some of those.
5.  Innovative players will find 'secret knocks' that will allow them to whip the AI like a rented mule
6.  Steve will fix them IF there are enough sales to warrant continued development
7.  There will be vocal elements of the community that will claim 'foul' because they want the AI to be as polished as Deep Blue (IBM's chess program)
8.  If Steve is successful in points 1, 2, 3, and 6, the same vocal elements of the community will claim that the AI cheats.

and finally....

Steve will have moved heaven and earth to create something wonderful and if we are not careful, a few loud voices will prevent the continuation of development and the additions of Days Of Decision (a very wonderful addition, IMO). 

When the time comes, we need to remember how hard it was to learn to play this game well.  We need to remember, that an AI is nothing more than a computer program.  We need to realize that this game has so many exceptions to rules and fluid situations that a savvy player may always be able to outsmart the AI with feints, gambits, and such. 

We need to realize that if Steve accomplishes point 2 from above, that he will deserve to be installed as a minor deity in the pantheon of computer programmers.

Don't fault him for attempting the insanely difficult with an inadequate budget of time and money.  If it weren't for people like Steve, Marshall, and the folks at matrix games, we would have little or no option to pushing cardboard when we want our wargaming fix.  Vassal will never have an AI.  Cyberboard will never have an AI. 

For the record, I bought Empires in Arms the day it was released.  I have not been able to play it because (having never played the board game) I am lost.  Someday, I hope to find the time to study the tutorial and gain some understanding of the game.

BUT - I am not complaining.  Every now and then, we have to vote with our wallets to encourage private industry to attempt new things.

I will do the same with WIF.

I encourage others who feel the same way to be vocal as well.  Our opinions are valid too.

Good Luck Steve!!!!



Remember - anyone who wants may participate in the AI threads.  I haven't because I was never any good at this game.  What few things I felt I could add were covered already by others.

Have a nice day!




NeverMan -> RE: please get this right (5/9/2008 10:32:10 PM)

Why keep comparing EiA to WiF?

These are TWO totally different games. If you have to compare them at all, then the "difficulty" factor goes to EiA by far. EiA is a much more complex (and when I say that word I mean it in a strategical sense) game, thus making the AI much, much, much more difficult due to the diplomacy factor.

This is just my opinion. I hope MWiF is good, I'm sure I will buy it when NetPlay is adapted. PBEM is unacceptable for this type of game, IMO (and I think 1v1 WiF games are boring), it's bad enough for EiA.



Grapeshot Bob -> RE: please get this right (5/11/2008 8:45:46 PM)

Please God, don't release this until it is absolutely, completely, totally playable.

Please make sure the AI works well enough to give a solo player a good game.

Please, oh please don't drop another EiA on us.



GSB



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: please get this right (5/11/2008 9:39:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Grapeshot Bob

Please God, don't release this until it is absolutely, completely, totally playable.

Please make sure the AI works well enough to give a solo player a good game.

Please, oh please don't drop another EiA on us.



GSB

Ok.



Ingtar -> RE: please get this right (5/12/2008 3:33:06 AM)

I'm encouraged by my reading and the screen shots on here that this is much more playable than EIA was at release.



NeverMan -> RE: please get this right (5/12/2008 6:24:14 AM)

WiF is a much simpler game than EiA, so that shouldn't be a problem I wouldn't think. EiA is complex and not nearly as straightforward as WiF.



panzers -> RE: please get this right (5/24/2008 9:39:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SamuraiProgrammer

This is not directed at anyone in particular... It is just an observation.  I hope that we can all keep the appropriate perspective.

I have been following both forums (EIA and WIF) for several years.

From my point of view, the EIA community complained and complained and complained about slow release until there was enough pressure to force a release before it was ready.  I understand that the development team and testors felt it was ready but obviously their focus was multiplayer for those who understood the game.  (Again, they caterered to the vocal elements of the community)

It is intuitively obvious to the most casual observer that Steve is approaching the development of WIF from a different perspective than the EIA team.    This is not a slam against anyone, but is simply an observation.

It is also noteworthy that the pressure by the WIF forum community to release is not as great as it was with EIA.

WIF is one of the best wargames I have ever played.  It has one drawback--- it is so big as to be cumbersome to play.

MWIF will address that issue whether there is an 'acceptable' AI or not.

Programmers are notorious for being optimistic.  If not, we would never start some of the projects we attempt.

In my opinion, the following things will happen.

1.  Steve will work hard on creating an AI that will be (at least) useful for beginning players and casual play.
2.  Steve will attempt to create an AI that will be competitive for expert players
3.  The AI will improve after release IF there are enough sales to warrant continued development.
4.  After release, imbalance issues due to RAW (rules as written) will be exposed and the AI will take the initial blame for some of those.
5.  Innovative players will find 'secret knocks' that will allow them to whip the AI like a rented mule
6.  Steve will fix them IF there are enough sales to warrant continued development
7.  There will be vocal elements of the community that will claim 'foul' because they want the AI to be as polished as Deep Blue (IBM's chess program)
8.  If Steve is successful in points 1, 2, 3, and 6, the same vocal elements of the community will claim that the AI cheats.

and finally....

Steve will have moved heaven and earth to create something wonderful and if we are not careful, a few loud voices will prevent the continuation of development and the additions of Days Of Decision (a very wonderful addition, IMO). 

When the time comes, we need to remember how hard it was to learn to play this game well.  We need to remember, that an AI is nothing more than a computer program.  We need to realize that this game has so many exceptions to rules and fluid situations that a savvy player may always be able to outsmart the AI with feints, gambits, and such. 

We need to realize that if Steve accomplishes point 2 from above, that he will deserve to be installed as a minor deity in the pantheon of computer programmers.

Don't fault him for attempting the insanely difficult with an inadequate budget of time and money.  If it weren't for people like Steve, Marshall, and the folks at matrix games, we would have little or no option to pushing cardboard when we want our wargaming fix.  Vassal will never have an AI.  Cyberboard will never have an AI. 

For the record, I bought Empires in Arms the day it was released.  I have not been able to play it because (having never played the board game) I am lost.  Someday, I hope to find the time to study the tutorial and gain some understanding of the game.

BUT - I am not complaining.  Every now and then, we have to vote with our wallets to encourage private industry to attempt new things.

I will do the same with WIF.

I encourage others who feel the same way to be vocal as well.  Our opinions are valid too.

Good Luck Steve!!!!



Remember - anyone who wants may participate in the AI threads.  I haven't because I was never any good at this game.  What few things I felt I could add were covered already by others.

Have a nice day!



Samurai: I could not have put it any better if I tried. Steve is putting effort on this project that I believe should go down as one of the great computer game if not the greatest computer game accomplishments of all time. I think it is worthy to note for all of you, that I am quite certain he knows it too. So we all have to trust him on this because he has a lot to gain here in making such a game as this. If everything goes as planned(even if it takes more years) he will be the envy of the pc world. Make no mistake, he is going to deliver and BIG for us!



borner -> RE: please get this right (6/1/2008 1:19:18 AM)

IMHO, the good thing about the EiA problems, is that Matrix can learn from that going forward in relation to WiF. If it takes an extra 6 months or year, so be it. I am sure the silent majority of us would be much happier.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.233887