RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (Full Version)

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



Message

paulderynck -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/5/2014 3:22:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: oto02

I spent some time to re-read this newest statement. Did the meeting result in anything? Can't find anything in this thread.

Even though I agree with the prioritized areas I think at least a discussion should be initialized about Net Play and at least a hint about when any Net Play improvements can be continued.

Apart from fixing the current flow and not run into freezes and crashes, there are other things to consider to improve Net Play to a usable state.

Some suggestions:
- Create a separate "Net Play - Tech support" topic in the forum.
- Change the save game procedure so that when one side saves a game the other is forced to save at the same time. The save game files for both sides should contain the same information (some basic encryption/password protection of US Entry and garrison chits should be all that's needed). Unit comments are personal and should not be included in the shared save game file (see below for another reason).
- Add some form of validation between phases (where needed) so that the unit status for both sides (e.g. disorganized units) is checked and resolved (by the players if the computer cannot determine this).
- It should be possible to open up a saved game without the other side being on-line, to check your units and plan between Net Play sessions. And preferably add comments for your own units (in the separate file suggested above).
- If being the active side, allow that player to perform actions in that phase, but not proceed to the next phase (or why not allow to proceed and send a game save e-mail to the opponent, adding PBEM ability to Net Play).
- After each phase, the non phasing player should be able to replay the opponent actual moves and actions. When playing the board game everyone is present and has the ability to watch what happens and ask questions (did you move that unit? Where did it come from?) and to make sure the opposing side follows the game rules. In the computer game this is enforced by the computer, so players will not spend time watching the opponent move, and should not have to.
- If a game crash occurs, the other player should be notified. Needing to rely on phone text messages, e-mail and actual phone calls should not be necessary, as it is now. No fun having to re-do a move because your oppenents game crashed.
- Add the ability to be able to select to chat with All, Side or Individual. Not needed now, but work that into the interface at least.

This is what I can think of now, but I'm sure this list will grow the more I think about it. And I'm sure many more suggestions will come when the "Net Play - Tech Support" is created.



Excellent suggestions... although some would be very hard to implement with the current design.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/9/2014 3:44:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: oto02

quote:

Steve will also meet with our Technical Director next week for a review of the remaining Net Play issues as this remains high on our list of priorities and we will be giving you some feedback on that point after they have met.


I spent some time to re-read this newest statement. Did the meeting result in anything? Can't find anything in this thread.

Even though I agree with the prioritized areas I think at least a discussion should be initialized about Net Play and at least a hint about when any Net Play improvements can be continued.

Apart from fixing the current flow and not run into freezes and crashes, there are other things to consider to improve Net Play to a usable state.

Some suggestions:
- Create a separate "Net Play - Tech support" topic in the forum.
- Change the save game procedure so that when one side saves a game the other is forced to save at the same time. The save game files for both sides should contain the same information (some basic encryption/password protection of US Entry and garrison chits should be all that's needed). Unit comments are personal and should not be included in the shared save game file (see below for another reason).
- Add some form of validation between phases (where needed) so that the unit status for both sides (e.g. disorganized units) is checked and resolved (by the players if the computer cannot determine this).
- It should be possible to open up a saved game without the other side being on-line, to check your units and plan between Net Play sessions. And preferably add comments for your own units (in the separate file suggested above).
- If being the active side, allow that player to perform actions in that phase, but not proceed to the next phase (or why not allow to proceed and send a game save e-mail to the opponent, adding PBEM ability to Net Play).
- After each phase, the non phasing player should be able to replay the opponent actual moves and actions. When playing the board game everyone is present and has the ability to watch what happens and ask questions (did you move that unit? Where did it come from?) and to make sure the opposing side follows the game rules. In the computer game this is enforced by the computer, so players will not spend time watching the opponent move, and should not have to.
- If a game crash occurs, the other player should be notified. Needing to rely on phone text messages, e-mail and actual phone calls should not be necessary, as it is now. No fun having to re-do a move because your oppenents game crashed.
- Add the ability to be able to select to chat with All, Side or Individual. Not needed now, but work that into the interface at least.

This is what I can think of now, but I'm sure this list will grow the more I think about it. And I'm sure many more suggestions will come when the "Net Play - Tech Support" is created.




Cherry picking a couple of these:

- It should be possible to open up a saved game without the other side being on-line, to check your units and plan between Net Play sessions. And preferably add comments for your own units (in the separate file suggested above).
Yes. I expected someone to mention this a long time ago. It has been on my "Gee, as a player I sure would want this capability."

- After each phase, the non phasing player should be able to replay the opponent actual moves and actions. When playing the board game everyone is present and has the ability to watch what happens and ask questions (did you move that unit? Where did it come from?) and to make sure the opposing side follows the game rules. In the computer game this is enforced by the computer, so players will not spend time watching the opponent move, and should not have to.
Well. This would require a replay feature which I envisioned many years ago. There is some code in place to support this, but it would require a lot more work be viable.

- If a game crash occurs, the other player should be notified. Needing to rely on phone text messages, e-mail and actual phone calls should not be necessary, as it is now. No fun having to re-do a move because your oppenents game crashed.
Not possible. Sadly the crash causes communications to be lost so sending the other player a message post-crash is not possible.




Walker84 -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/9/2014 7:35:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rsunley

I don't post a lot on this site but I am a MWiF customer and I just wanted to put in my 2 cents on this issue. I purchased this game in full knowledge that it had some issues to iron out. Anyone who has followed Steve's development blog over the last few years would be well aware of the complexity of the project and the amount of work he has put in to get it completed. When the announcement that it was to be released came out I was a bit surprised as the bug count in the blog seemed to be reasonably high, but after waiting so long and getting so close I understood the decision to go ahead with it. I made the decision to purchase because I wanted Steve to get something back for the investment of not only years of work but undoubtedly his personal health as well. I used to play the board game version back in the day but I figured it would take me quite a while to get back up to speed with the system as well as learning to drive the game. Therefore I do not mind how long it takes to resolve problems, I only care that they are resolved. To that end the announcement of renewed focus on this area is welcome. Regarding the available programming resources, it is easy to say what should or should not have happened in the past. Steve did end up getting some help towards the end of the project which no doubt assisted the process. I agree with other posters though that any developer worth his salt should be able to get up to speed with the task at hand reasonably quickly, regardless of the end product.

I think that this product is a magnificent piece of work and I am not going to let a few kinks dissuade me from that view. I look at this period as a post-beta phase, with the amount of testers increased by several orders of magnitude. Often issues can only be seen once a product is out in the wild, just ask any major software company, most of whom spend enormous resources on testing but still things go wrong. It may be valid to say that if people are paying good money they deserve something that works; this is fair enough, but to make an informed decision it does not take too much digging around to find out the current state of the product. If you don't want to buy something you view as being incomplete, you have every right to keep hold of your money. If you feel the product has been misrepresented to you, then you have every right to take that up with the publisher. If, on the other hand you want to support the good work that has already been done and help get the last bits fixed, then that option is available.

Lastly I am ever the optimist and I look forward to seeing the AI at work one day.

Regards
Ralph


+1. This sums up my own feelings exactly.



Erik Rutins -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/9/2014 3:04:34 PM)

Hi oto02,


quote:

ORIGINAL: oto02

quote:

Steve will also meet with our Technical Director next week for a review of the remaining Net Play issues as this remains high on our list of priorities and we will be giving you some feedback on that point after they have met.


I spent some time to re-read this newest statement. Did the meeting result in anything? Can't find anything in this thread.


Here's a summary I posted in the NetPlay Tech Support forum:

We went through the NetPlay architecture and design, discussed the most serious and common issues and reviewed the plan to fix NetPlay. Our goal was to review the design from the ground up and review our bug fixing process since release to make sure there were no fundamental issues that we were overlooking which would get NetPlay working as intended more quickly. The conclusion of the review was that we we are not, but that the sheer complexity of the game has been our biggest enemy in terms of the number of ways things can go wrong and how hard it is to test for all those cases.

Based on that review, we agreed that the current plan to fix the game-wide issues that also affect solitaire first is the best way to proceed as those would still affect NetPlay games as well. As soon as the most serious issues in supply, production planning and naval combat are resolved, the plan is to return focus to NetPlay and keep focus only on NetPlay (per our new functional area approach) until all the remaining NetPlay issues are resolved.

We also have in the works a more thorough internal validation test of client to server communications, but an intial test showed that WIF was communicating with the server as expected and that the issues are not due to server stability or server communications.

Thank you for your suggestions and you can find the new NetPlay Tech Support sub-forum here:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tt.asp?forumid=1388



ParJ -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/11/2014 5:11:28 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

- It should be possible to open up a saved game without the other side being on-line, to check your units and plan between Net Play sessions. And preferably add comments for your own units (in the separate file suggested above).
Yes. I expected someone to mention this a long time ago. It has been on my "Gee, as a player I sure would want this capability."

- After each phase, the non phasing player should be able to replay the opponent actual moves and actions. When playing the board game everyone is present and has the ability to watch what happens and ask questions (did you move that unit? Where did it come from?) and to make sure the opposing side follows the game rules. In the computer game this is enforced by the computer, so players will not spend time watching the opponent move, and should not have to.
Well. This would require a replay feature which I envisioned many years ago. There is some code in place to support this, but it would require a lot more work be viable.

- If a game crash occurs, the other player should be notified. Needing to rely on phone text messages, e-mail and actual phone calls should not be necessary, as it is now. No fun having to re-do a move because your oppenents game crashed.
Not possible. Sadly the crash causes communications to be lost so sending the other player a message post-crash is not possible.


Opening up the game off-line I think will be necessary when playing weekly sessions with 4-6 players. Of course it's possible to set up a session just for planning but that might be easy for a two player game, but not for six.

The "replay" feature would be nice to have and would save time, but isn't on the top of my list. But the undo feature would most likely include a lot of code to support this at some time in the future. At least highligt units that have moved.

I'm aware that a crashed or malfunctioning program will not be able to let the other side know that it has done just that. But if the program regularly sends game status to the opposing side, expecting a reply within a pre-defined time (and with any inconsistencies resolved), then the non-crashing side would notice if it has lost contact with the opponent (due to a lack of response). So it should be possible to implement.

When I get a little more time I'll post a few saved games under the Net Play - Tech support topic.

I'm enjoying playing around with the Barbarossa scenario, but what I'm really waiting for is being able to run a global war with 5 of my old WIF-buddies from 20 years ago.

Par





Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/12/2014 1:55:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: oto02


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

- It should be possible to open up a saved game without the other side being on-line, to check your units and plan between Net Play sessions. And preferably add comments for your own units (in the separate file suggested above).
Yes. I expected someone to mention this a long time ago. It has been on my "Gee, as a player I sure would want this capability."

- After each phase, the non phasing player should be able to replay the opponent actual moves and actions. When playing the board game everyone is present and has the ability to watch what happens and ask questions (did you move that unit? Where did it come from?) and to make sure the opposing side follows the game rules. In the computer game this is enforced by the computer, so players will not spend time watching the opponent move, and should not have to.
Well. This would require a replay feature which I envisioned many years ago. There is some code in place to support this, but it would require a lot more work be viable.

- If a game crash occurs, the other player should be notified. Needing to rely on phone text messages, e-mail and actual phone calls should not be necessary, as it is now. No fun having to re-do a move because your oppenents game crashed.
Not possible. Sadly the crash causes communications to be lost so sending the other player a message post-crash is not possible.


Opening up the game off-line I think will be necessary when playing weekly sessions with 4-6 players. Of course it's possible to set up a session just for planning but that might be easy for a two player game, but not for six.

The "replay" feature would be nice to have and would save time, but isn't on the top of my list. But the undo feature would most likely include a lot of code to support this at some time in the future. At least highligt units that have moved.

I'm aware that a crashed or malfunctioning program will not be able to let the other side know that it has done just that. But if the program regularly sends game status to the opposing side, expecting a reply within a pre-defined time (and with any inconsistencies resolved), then the non-crashing side would notice if it has lost contact with the opponent (due to a lack of response). So it should be possible to implement.

When I get a little more time I'll post a few saved games under the Net Play - Tech support topic.

I'm enjoying playing around with the Barbarossa scenario, but what I'm really waiting for is being able to run a global war with 5 of my old WIF-buddies from 20 years ago.

Par




Thanks for the feedback.



Extraneous -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/12/2014 11:15:19 PM)

I would like to point out that MWiF was released at SPIEL 2013 in Essen, Germany which went on from October 24th to 27th.

Not in November.




AxelNL -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/13/2014 7:13:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

I would like to point out that MWiF was released at SPIEL 2013 in Essen, Germany which went on from October 24th to 27th.

Not in November.




Although we are going in technicalities here - I was there, and it was sold to me as a special pre-release. Price-point was also different (150 Euro), and it included the maps as one package.



Extraneous -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/13/2014 11:52:40 AM)

I can wait till the NDA ends whether its this month or next month.




Boschy -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/14/2014 6:12:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: oto02

Opening up the game off-line I think will be necessary when playing weekly sessions with 4-6 players. Of course it's possible to set up a session just for planning but that might be easy for a two player game, but not for six.


Is it necessary? I never had access to my friend's garage during the week, so I could not plan my next evening's play until I was there on the night when playing the board game.



Erik Rutins -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/17/2014 3:44:16 PM)

Just a bit of additional news. We are making good progress on the supply issues. I'd expect a new public beta for testing supply fixes by the end of next week given the current pace.



joshuamnave -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/17/2014 4:09:43 PM)

I guess when half the people still playing this game are beta testers anyway, there's no real rush in pushing out fixes to the paying customers. The only thing that has changed since you first made this post is that the pace of fixes has gone from just under one per week to just under one per month.

When do you plan to recruit another Delphi coder to help Steve out?



tacfire -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/18/2014 12:55:42 PM)

The next supply patch sounds like it will be an important one.
I am looking forward to it.



AxelNL -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/18/2014 7:42:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: tacfire

The next supply patch sounds like it will be an important one.
I am looking forward to it.


To set the right expectations (and hopefully Matrix/Steve does not mind):

It looks like we cleared all known/registered supply bugs reported by the beta team and in the tech forum. We had a couple of regression issues which we cleared again, and laid bare a very nasty memory-eating and well-hidden bug in the Conquest phase code (which could crash the game in a random place) - which took a major chunk of Steve's time. It took us from release 1.1.7.2 to the current 1.1.7.9 - and Steve is wrapping up the last things on his to-do list before posting a public beta.

Hopefully the supply bugs which were not known/registered or which have been hiding behind others are not present that much when this is released. It is alas timewise not possible to replay a complete Global War scenario between every sub-release. We tested on regression based on savegames where bugs were present, and ran through our own games scouting for appearances of supply bugs or regression of those. It looks like we missed a regression in TRS loading 2 divs from a sea area in 1.1.7.2 already (see tech forum).

Summary: yes this is an important release - and it fixes all Bermuda Triangle appearances I know. But you might still find one or two which we all (beta and tech forum participants) missed.

Best regards,

PS: It is a pity Dabrion never sent me "his" supply bugs - or I could have checked those as well.





von altair -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/30/2014 11:14:38 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Steve has our confidence and is capable of fixing the reported issues with WIF. I'll repeat again that while we appreciate greatly the patience shown by the community to date, we need to ask for a bit more to put this new plan into effect and hopefully the results will speak for themselves.

Regards,

- Erik


I have watched this forum for a long time. I am intrested about the game. However current state is not promising at all. The game is in beta phase. Usually companies offer free betaplay for customers to test the game. Matrixgames on the other hand sells this betagame with a premium price. Explaining that the price comes out from superior manuals (alas, even digital betagame costs the same). They are good, yes, but still the game is in beta. What do you do with pretty manuals without a working game?

- No AI
- No working netplay
- The game is full of bugs. Even pure solitaire game is not possible without constant load/save.

After more than 5 months of release, situation is this and the game price EUR 76.99+tax. Matrixgames is asking patience from
customers... Someone could call all this as scamming.

I would like to buy the game, but even with a good will I can't do that and can't even prefer this title to my friends.




AxelNL -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/30/2014 6:29:07 PM)

on the positive side you might want to check this thread:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3591405



Centuur -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (4/30/2014 6:32:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: von altair

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Steve has our confidence and is capable of fixing the reported issues with WIF. I'll repeat again that while we appreciate greatly the patience shown by the community to date, we need to ask for a bit more to put this new plan into effect and hopefully the results will speak for themselves.

Regards,

- Erik


I have watched this forum for a long time. I am intrested about the game. However current state is not promising at all. The game is in beta phase. Usually companies offer free betaplay for customers to test the game. Matrixgames on the other hand sells this betagame with a premium price. Explaining that the price comes out from superior manuals (alas, even digital betagame costs the same). They are good, yes, but still the game is in beta. What do you do with pretty manuals without a working game?

- No AI
- No working netplay
- The game is full of bugs. Even pure solitaire game is not possible without constant load/save.

After more than 5 months of release, situation is this and the game price EUR 76.99+tax. Matrixgames is asking patience from
customers... Someone could call all this as scamming.

I would like to buy the game, but even with a good will I can't do that and can't even prefer this title to my friends.




You are entitled to have this opinion. So I suggest to wait for another year and than see how things are at that point...



Kitakami -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (6/2/2014 2:45:29 PM)

I have found Matrix Game the best in post-sale customer support, which includes constant updates and tweaks. I own a number of their titles, and it is a constant through ALL of them. Yes, WiF has issues, but I will patiently wait until the most important ones are solved. As I see it, it is definitely worth the wait!



Numdydar -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (6/3/2014 2:12:23 AM)

+1 to this

If you have any doubts head over to the War in the Pacific AE forums and Matrix is still allowing code changes to that game after being out over 5 years in the form of betas.



majordefeat -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (8/11/2014 1:44:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

- If a game crash occurs, the other player should be notified. Needing to rely on phone text messages, e-mail and actual phone calls should not be necessary, as it is now. No fun having to re-do a move because your oppenents game crashed.
Not possible. Sadly the crash causes communications to be lost so sending the other player a message post-crash is not possible.




An analogy might be the IRC system. A command similar to ping to manually test whether a packet sent via the server to the player is deliverable would help. Also, if your own client has lost connection to the server, it would be a case of automated ping response, ping response, ping no response messages that would allow a message to be given to you that you have lost connection. The server would know you have dropped off by similar ping response ping response ping no response messages, and it could tell your opponent. It seemed strange to have to phone a friend when playing via Netplay to ask whether they were still online.



delatbabel -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (8/26/2014 1:57:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
To respond to the points above - to our knowledge no such other programmer exists...


I have extensive experience in programming in Delphi as well as its prior incarnations (Kylix, Borland Pascal, and all the way back to Turbo Pascal for DOS). I consider myself an expert level software engineer and software architect. I am not familiar with the code base for WiF, not having seen it, but I doubt it would take me anything like 12 months to get completely familiar with it.

I am a reasonably competent WiF player, having played a number of games to conclusion, socially, at WiFCons and online via Vassal.

However it's my understanding, having read back through some of his blog entries, that Steve essentially works for free on this project. I can't afford to do that.

In November I will be moving to Vietnam. It's a country which has a huge base of programmers of every level of capability that can be hired extremely cheaply. This is due to the Vietnam government making a commitment to teaching computer science at all levels of school -- read some of Neil Fraser's blogs for more entertaining detail. It wouldn't be difficult for me to obtain and manage a team of reasonably cheap Delphi programmers to fix the bugs and add the remaining features to WiF, provide domain knowledge as well as Delphi knowledge, liaise with Steve and the rest of the team that manages testers, etc, all pretty much in my spare time. Again, this could not be done for free, I'm a software engineer not a charity, but it could be done.

This is primarily in the aim of making WiF a playable game for me -- living where I do now and then in Vietnam from November it will become pretty much impossible for me to find nearby tabletop WiF players, so if I'm going to use the Matrix Games WiF (as opposed to, say, Vassal), then I need to have the bugs fixed, and I need netplay to be working. Sorry to be selfish about that, sue me. :)



Numdydar -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (8/26/2014 3:58:36 AM)

So you have removed yourself from being available since you are unable to work for free. So Eric is still correct in that no one with Steve's experience that will work solely on commission (i.e. not get paid except through sales) is available.

Yes with money to pay people WiF would be in much better shape. But since no one is will or able to spend any, even cheap labor is too costly. Now if someone came along with a wad of cash and said 'Here is some money, please fix WiF ASAP.' then your offer would be very doable. But until that occurs, saying you have all this experience but can't help because you need to get paid (very understandable btw) do not help the situation much. However, it does reaffirm Eric's point that pretty much Steve is it. At least until you can work for free too [:)]



tom730_slith -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (8/28/2014 5:01:54 PM)

I'm amazed (and pleased) that the game has made it to market! This genre isn't like console game "shoot 'em ups" that can expect tens of thousands of units sold. We "serious" war gamers are a relatively small "niche" market that won't produce the kind of sales numbers that justify large up-front development costs. Given that, when I first heard this was in development (several years ago) I was excited. It was a long wait and I'm pleased to have it, pleased to be able to play it whenever I want, and honestly THRILLED that the folks that got this up and running are still working to improve it.
I guess it's understandable to have high expectations, but I honestly feel some have expressed unreasonable expectations given the financial realities.
Just my 2 cents.[:)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

So you have removed yourself from being available since you are unable to work for free. So Eric is still correct in that no one with Steve's experience that will work solely on commission (i.e. not get paid except through sales) is available.

Yes with money to pay people WiF would be in much better shape. But since no one is will or able to spend any, even cheap labor is too costly. Now if someone came along with a wad of cash and said 'Here is some money, please fix WiF ASAP.' then your offer would be very doable. But until that occurs, saying you have all this experience but can't help because you need to get paid (very understandable btw) do not help the situation much. However, it does reaffirm Eric's point that pretty much Steve is it. At least until you can work for free too [:)]



AxelNL -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (8/28/2014 5:30:51 PM)

+1



waltero -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (12/14/2014 8:06:35 PM)

What's the word, are we still waiting for the game to play properly?
Can't see paying full price for a game that doesn't function properly.

This is the first time I heard of WiF, I will wait...check back in a couple years.



warspite1 -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (12/14/2014 8:15:46 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: waltero

What's the word, are we still waiting for the game to play properly?
Can't see paying full price for a game that doesn't function properly.

This is the first time I heard of WiF, I will wait...check back in a couple years.
warspite1

1. Depends on what you mean by function properly. If you mean have an AI, be able to play using Netplay and be bug free then yes, we are still waiting for the game to function properly.
2. Fair enough.
3. Very sensible idea



waltero -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (12/14/2014 8:19:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: waltero

What's the word, are we still waiting for the game to play properly?
Can't see paying full price for a game that doesn't function properly.

This is the first time I heard of WiF, I will wait...check back in a couple years.
warspite1

1. Depends on what you mean by function properly. If you mean have an AI, be able to play using Netplay and be bug free then yes, we are still waiting for the game to function properly.
2. Fair enough.
3. Very sensible idea


I hate playing the AI. Is it a functional multiplayer game as of yet?



warspite1 -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (12/14/2014 8:24:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: waltero


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

ORIGINAL: waltero

What's the word, are we still waiting for the game to play properly?
Can't see paying full price for a game that doesn't function properly.

This is the first time I heard of WiF, I will wait...check back in a couple years.
warspite1

1. Depends on what you mean by function properly. If you mean have an AI, be able to play using Netplay and be bug free then yes, we are still waiting for the game to function properly.
2. Fair enough.
3. Very sensible idea



I hate playing the AI. Is it a functional multiplayer game as of yet?

Warspite1

And I'm not psychic. No there is no functional multiplayer at present.



76mm -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (12/15/2014 2:24:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: waltero
What's the word, are we still waiting for the game to play properly?
Can't see paying full price for a game that doesn't function properly.


While the game seems to more or less work for some players for solitaire play, it does not work well for others, such as myself. See this thread:
Frustrations



bo -> RE: IMPORTANT: State of the Game and Future Plans as of March, 2014 (12/15/2014 4:12:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 76mm

quote:

ORIGINAL: waltero
What's the word, are we still waiting for the game to play properly?
Can't see paying full price for a game that doesn't function properly.


While the game seems to more or less work for some players for solitaire play, it does not work well for others, such as myself. See this thread:
Frustrations


I would tell Putin he seems to have an answer for everything.[:D] Come on Tom, I know the beta testers and myself cannot figure what you are complaining about, it just does not happen when we play, there are a few bugs that's for sure but none in the area your talking about, you mentioned windows 7 home and that might be a problem well I have windows 7 home also and have none of these problems.

We are all trying to help you Tom, what version of MWIF are you running?

Bo



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
3.4375