Sign of times or just this developer?

Sign of times or just this developer? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Kharkov: Disaster on the Donets

Message

HercMighty -> Sign of times or just this developer? (5/2/2008 2:09:49 AM)
Sorry but this game is just Battlefront with some tweaks. I don't think a price has been named yet but if tradition follows it will be $50.00. Is this what this market is coming to? Or has SSG lost its way? I mean look: 1. Same Engine just tweaked to some new rules. Albeit what I call a tweak may have taking some coding, but they were all things that were drummed down. 2. Same Graphics Engine 3. Same hard to use Scenario Editor 4. 1 new scenario with supposed variations, but I question this as you still have the same end objectives. 5. Same lousy documentation where you have to read the scenario editor and the game manual to understand the game. Sounds to me like it should get at the most an add on price point. For a new game: 1. is fine 2. Needed to be updated to provide more resolution support and zooming. 3. Redone. 4. This is fine as long as other titles could be ported in, or they shouldn't have focused on 1 battle. 5. Redone And I really don't see this with other titles, do you?

Deathtreader -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/2/2008 2:27:38 AM)
I hear you........ Fan based scenarios require an editor that is stable and relatively easy to use. BF did not do too well in this regard. The warcard system provides a decent AI at sea......... it tends to flounder ashore. Even the resident fan based scenario design experts at RUN 5 appear hesitant in trying to provide an AI for their offerings (which are very nice by the way, they just have no AI, and are very few in number). It's depressing that BF was so poor in it's initial state -- buggy editor and lousy documentation. Any hoo, I'll wait and see what the forum feedback is for this game's release before I take a plunge. I'm afraid my unconditional auto purchasing days of SSG products is over. Too bad. [:(] I have every title they've ever produced. SSG - as someone who still wishes you well -- I hope you listen to these forums very carefully this time around. A friendly editor, more graphic support, an AI that is land capable are all key messages from a large number of potential customers. Best wishes! Rob. [:)]

TheHellPatrol -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/2/2008 2:49:42 AM)
My suggestion is shelve the game for another year, spend some more time on meat/scenarios, and give us what we were used to getting. Matrix obviously does not listen to its customers anymore, after Battlefront/CAW i can only guess that SSG is ready to throw in the towel or just plain retire[:(]. I'd gladly pay $60 for a real/full SSG product, and i am NOT ALONE...read the writing on the wall guys or end up like SSI[:'(].

Ola Berli -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/2/2008 2:56:32 AM)
I must say that I am stunned and perplexed by the reaction on this forum. All serious wargamers should support SSG for making a new wargame. It is not too many companies in this business. Please give this game a chance. SSG have always given their gamers quality products!

TheHellPatrol -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/2/2008 3:03:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ola Berli I must say that I am stunned and perplexed by the reaction on this forum. All serious wargamers should support SSG for making a new wargame. It is not too many companies in this business. Please give this game a chance. SSG have always given their gamers quality products! We are tired of empty promises and paying the same amount for less product. The "white lie" of "they'll be more scenarios" with battlefront is not forgotten, although there is no point of posting anything in these forums because nobody gives a damn. Here we go again, another release, maybe there are more new customers to replace the regulars who have lost faith and that will help balance the books[8\|]. One lousy scenario, ie:map, is the same no matter how many variants imo.

Ola Berli -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/2/2008 3:11:45 AM)
And that sce. is the second battle of Kharkov. It is a BIG military battle! I have asked about the unit density but nobody have answered me but I think it will be hundred of units on each side. Hands down this is the biggest landbattle SSG have made. Nobody cried when BIN was out....that was also one battle...and some small sce.

e_barkmann -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/2/2008 3:28:30 AM)
I think it would be productive to reserve judgement on the new game until hearing from players who have.... played the new game [;)] cheers

Hertston -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/2/2008 3:30:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ola Berli I must say that I am stunned and perplexed by the reaction on this forum. All serious wargamers should support SSG for making a new wargame. It is not too many companies in this business. There are a sufficient number so that buying every new wargame release to 'support' all of them is not necessary. Nobody has any ill-will towards SSG and everybody is hoping that this game really is some sort of innovative tour de force that will make it an essential purchase for those "serious wargamers" and hopefully lots of other people as well. If the reviewers rave sufficiently, I will happily part with my cash. What worries me, and seems to worry others as well, is that SSG and Matrix might have significantly misunderstood both where Battlefront went wrong (as they seem intent on repeating the same mistakes) and what their core market actually wants. We may well be wrong, or just confusing the general ("core market") with the specific ("me") and, viewed objectively, Matrix/SSG really ought to be able to make better judgements on both those things than we can. Whether we are being needlessly pessimistic, or delivering a necessary wake-up call, will be determined in the fullness of time. quote: ORIGINAL: TheHellPatrol The "white lie" of "they'll be more scenarios" with battlefront is not forgotten True. It was assumed, presumably, that the same thing would happen with BF as did with BiI, and it didn't - despite, as far as I can judge, BF being a better choice for player scenario development. The big mistake was doing nothing to catalyse the process.. even a couple of new, meaty, 'official' scenarios would have done wonders for the game.

Erik Rutins -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/2/2008 5:55:31 AM)
We are listening folks and have been, there's no need to assume the worst about us and/or SSG. As you may be aware however, software development does not happen quickly and new scenarios researched and designed to this level also don't make themselves out of thin air. Our goal is to both make great wargames and to make our customers happy and we'll continue to do everything we can to achieve both. Regards, - Erik

Gregor_SSG -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/2/2008 7:41:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HercMighty Sorry but this game is just Battlefront with some tweaks. I don't think a price has been named yet but if tradition follows it will be $50.00. Is this what this market is coming to? Or has SSG lost its way? I mean look: 1. Same Engine just tweaked to some new rules. Albeit what I call a tweak may have taking some coding, but they were all things that were drummed down. 2. Same Graphics Engine 3. Same hard to use Scenario Editor 4. 1 new scenario with supposed variations, but I question this as you still have the same end objectives. 5. Same lousy documentation where you have to read the scenario editor and the game manual to understand the game. Sounds to me like it should get at the most an add on price point. For a new game: 1. is fine 2. Needed to be updated to provide more resolution support and zooming. 3. Redone. 4. This is fine as long as other titles could be ported in, or they shouldn't have focused on 1 battle. 5. Redone And I really don't see this with other titles, do you? 1. Mostly the same game engine, but with significant and important changes. which weren't easy or quick to do. 2. An update isn't possible, any real improvements require a totally new engine, which costs big money, something that is hard to get from wargames. When we can do something here, we most certainly will. 3. We have made some Editor improvements requested by the user community and are trying to help with others. I think the fact that this system will also be used for our next game will encourage people to invest their time in scenario production. We will do everything we can to help. 4. The Mystery Variants provide a great deal of excitement and replayability to the game, just as they did when we introduced them into Carriers at War. They also greatly restrict the scope for gamey tactics, especially in PBEM. 5. As I mentioned in another post, the manual is much improved and the game does come with a tutorial. Nobody should need to read the Editor manual, (unless they really want to). Gregor

Adam Parker -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/2/2008 11:24:33 AM)
These similar criticisms were vehemently hurled at HPS so unfairly way back when the Panzer Campaigns series was only at volume 2. Outcry before the game even hit the market. However, there is one big difference here. Sadly, Battlefront has indeed been percieved by many as not good value due to its skimpiness of scenarios and its broken promise on DYO ease. I'm one of those disappointed ranks. You only get to rile up the market once. On a positive note, it does seem that SSG is trying to learn from its past. It forgot to add replayability to its Carriers at War game. The market spoke up again and SSG seems to be responding with Kharkov. My only wish is that SSG would add some new art to its counters. I was excited to see the color scheming of the Russian and German units way back in Korsun Pocket but that sensation has long since worn off.

WhiteOwl -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/2/2008 1:16:52 PM)
What I find disappointing is that there seems to be nothing done to make scenario creation viable again. Not only are very few users using the BF editor, SSG have declined to document the AI creation back then, and said that rather than writing a document they would support a brave soul who took upon himself to write an AI and who would document it. However, when such a brave soul came along, his questions were left hanging in the thin air of the run5 forums. Now, it seems this is going to be repeated. I am not trying to be negative or to flame SSG, I really wish them well, but just look at the difference between what is offered for BiI and what is there for BF, it is a world apart.

Max 86 -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/3/2008 4:31:12 PM)
#2, #3 and #5 are the reasons I did not buy BF even though I am desparate for a TOAW replacement and this sounds like a fine wargame engine. This game failed to address the main issues from the BF game and that is puzzling.

Howard7x -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/4/2008 10:18:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiteOwl I am not trying to be negative or to flame SSG, I really wish them well, but just look at the difference between what is offered for BiI and what is there for BF, it is a world apart. Exactly, now which direction do you think SSG want to go with DotD?

WhiteOwl -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/4/2008 3:03:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Howard7x quote: ORIGINAL: WhiteOwl I am not trying to be negative or to flame SSG, I really wish them well, but just look at the difference between what is offered for BiI and what is there for BF, it is a world apart. Exactly, now which direction do you think SSG want to go with DotD? What I think matters not one bit. The proof will be in the pudding. If this time around the game is supported properly by SSG, there will be many scenarios and the game itself will be the cornerstone for a new lineage just like KP was. I'm hoping that's what happens. Cheers

Otto20000 -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/4/2008 4:05:20 PM)
I love all games SSG is putting out but the big thing people want including me is more scenarios. Fix this and people will be happy. Start off with adding some more scenarios to Battlefront!

HercMighty -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/4/2008 4:42:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: WhiteOwl quote: ORIGINAL: Howard7x quote: ORIGINAL: WhiteOwl I am not trying to be negative or to flame SSG, I really wish them well, but just look at the difference between what is offered for BiI and what is there for BF, it is a world apart. Exactly, now which direction do you think SSG want to go with DotD? What I think matters not one bit. The proof will be in the pudding. If this time around the game is supported properly by SSG, there will be many scenarios and the game itself will be the cornerstone for a new lineage just like KP was. I'm hoping that's what happens. Cheers Look how they have named their newest title. It is named after a single battle. They will charge $50.00 for this game. My guess from here is that there will not be anything added to this title, that rather another title will be sold based on the engine for another $50.00. If we were going to get a game system with addon scenarios they would have stayed with the Battlefront title naming convention I believe. That naming convention was not based on a single battle and was condusive to adding new scenarios to but they dropped that without adding scenarios to it. Why would it be any different this time around? Am I wrong? Possibly, just the way I see things going.

Frank.Costanzo -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/4/2008 5:14:24 PM)
If this is the sign of the times, or the developer, then I am okay with it. I would rather have one well researched, balanced scenario with multiple variants, then 10 or 20 half baked scenarios that may just delay the release. Also, I like the trend towards a focus on one battle, but this is not enough for me to buy this game, I will buy this game because I also enjoy the SSG game system.

TheHellPatrol -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/4/2008 8:01:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: HercMighty Look how they have named their newest title. It is named after a single battle. They will charge $50.00 for this game. My guess from here is that there will not be anything added to this title, that rather another title will be sold based on the engine for another $50.00. If we were going to get a game system with addon scenarios they would have stayed with the Battlefront title naming convention I believe. That naming convention was not based on a single battle and was condusive to adding new scenarios to but they dropped that without adding scenarios to it. Why would it be any different this time around? Am I wrong? Possibly, just the way I see things going. You are absolutely correct, we've seen this coming as well as the writing on the wall. This IS the future; one game...one battle...top dollar...no scenarios...deal with it attitiude. As long as they make one change it's a "new engine" and sadly this game makes BF seem like a great value because it has 5 maps[X(].

Jack1986 -> RE: Sign of times or just this developer? (5/5/2008 1:28:15 AM)
I started computer wargaming by purchasing some of HPS' PzC titles, and SSG's Korsun Pocket, Across the Dnepr and Battles in Italy. Across the Dnepr turned out to be a completely unbalanced game. Korsun Pocket and Battles in Italy were good, except for (what seems to me to be) the supply units masquerading as HQ units, for me a major flaw. When Battlefront was announced, I looked forward to it; my enthusiasm faded as I became more familiar with the Decisive Battles system, and the aforementioned supply units masquerading as HQ units. Now I see this Kharkov game coming, and I really want to be excited about it, but just don't have the enthusiasm. I have in the meantime purchased over ten HPS PzC games, and am spending all of my gaming time with HPS titles. If I buy this title, the purchase will be simply to support Matrix, a company which IS responsive to it's customers, and does publish good games.

Page: [1]

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.609375