RE: My POV (Full Version)

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



Message

macgregor -> RE: My POV (5/11/2005 1:22:09 PM)

quote:

LOL... Yeah, GGWaW is fun, but the comparison is akin to that between checkers and go.


Hey...it's new. It's global. It's Matrix. I just thought...

quote:

1) keep the current sequence of play
- will make pbem impossible, and tcp/ip as only possible multiplayer variant


I guess my IM idea is out. What do I know-I'm just a guitar player!

quote:

Honestly I think cwif is vaporware.


Now you're talking fighting words. If this is the case then Matrix ought to at least let the WiF fans know how much they want for it -and stop yanking us around. This asynch pbem game everyone is talking about may be vaporware -as they're still years away. But what I want -to expedite the non-phasing decisions through TCP/IP (or IM) should not be that difficult. I mean...presumably CM had some kind of interface in mind!

Matrix bought this demo for one of three reasons:

1) To keep it from potentially hurting their sales of similar products. (which so far have recieved less than a heartening endorsment on this thread at least)This is at least a 'booby prize' to their inaction.

2) To rescue WiF fans from years of waiting. So far this does not appear to be the case.

3) In a moment of boyish enthusiasm, made a huge mistake which they now regret. I'll remind them -Take Two still has the TOAW series! That's PBEM! And a good game at that. If so,let the WiF fans buy it from you. Hell, if Green Bay can buy the Packers...

There was some talk earlier about this 'Origins' convention. Did it produce anything concrete in regards to this project?



Hortlund -> RE: My POV (5/11/2005 2:38:40 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: macgregor
I guess my IM idea is out. What do I know-I'm just a guitar player!


I apologize, I had no intention to critizise your idea. I guess my point is that the current seqence of play requires too much action by the non-phasing player. Too much to be able to solve via IM (instant messages? like msn?). If you require the players to be avaliable online to answer questions via IM, you might as well have the players log on to the same game and have it taken care of inside the game. So it would seem that we somewhat agree, we both want the "real" sequence of play, but I am of the opinion that it cannot be done via pbem.

quote:


Now you're talking fighting words. If this is the case then Matrix ought to at least let the WiF fans know how much they want for it -and stop yanking us around. This asynch pbem game everyone is talking about may be vaporware -as they're still years away. But what I want -to expedite the non-phasing decisions through TCP/IP (or IM) should not be that difficult. I mean...presumably CM had some kind of interface in mind!


Well, Im sorry, but I dont know how else to put it really. Ive kept a close eye on cwif, because at first I thought it would be a great contender to a game I was involved in (HoI2), both were announced roughly at the same time. HoI2 has been out for 6 months now, while cwif has yet to hit pre-alpha. I mean look at these boards, look at what the developers are saying, I would bet good money that they havent even finished the GDDs yet (general design documents) and that puts the first alpha AT BEST in Q1-Q2 2006 if they nail the GDDs at Origins or whatever. And that is a very optimistic timeline, considering the limited resources of Matrix.

quote:


Matrix bought this demo for one of three reasons:

1) To keep it from potentially hurting their sales of similar products. (which so far have recieved less than a heartening endorsment on this thread at least)This is at least a 'booby prize' to their inaction.

2) To rescue WiF fans from years of waiting. So far this does not appear to be the case.

3) In a moment of boyish enthusiasm, made a huge mistake which they now regret. I'll remind them -Take Two still has the TOAW series! That's PBEM! And a good game at that. If so,let the WiF fans buy it from you. Hell, if Green Bay can buy the Packers...

There was some talk earlier about this 'Origins' convention. Did it produce anything concrete in regards to this project?


I think Matrix bought the game with good intentions. I have never doubted the honesty or sincerity of Matrix. I do believe they are stretched too thin at the moment though. Look at the first page of the forums. That is alot of games to cover for a very small game company. I would bet that the resources are focused elsewhere for now, and cwif remains on the to-do list...somewhere slighly below Combat Leader (which we have been waiting for since...2000 or something like that).




macgregor -> RE: My POV (5/11/2005 3:40:59 PM)

quote:

I apologize, I had no intention to critizise your idea. I guess my point is that the current seqence of play requires too much action by the non-phasing player. Too much to be able to solve via IM (instant messages? like msn?). If you require the players to be avaliable online to answer questions via IM, you might as well have the players log on to the same game and have it taken care of inside the game. So it would seem that we somewhat agree, we both want the "real" sequence of play, but I am of the opinion that it cannot be done via pbem.


Coregames said something similar to this. I suppose you're right. There needs to be a line of communication. So TCP/IP is the way to go.

quote:

I would bet good money that they havent even finished the GDDs yet (general design documents) and that puts the first alpha AT BEST in Q1-Q2 2006 if they nail the GDDs at Origins or whatever. And that is a very optimistic timeline, considering the limited resources of Matrix.


I guess my problem with Matrix started when, instead of releasing a savefile we could mail to each other to kick off playtesting the demo, they tried to rub it out. Insisting we don't share it or offer it. Then they tell us they're starting from scratch and things could take years. Well, if that's the case they haven't given us a game at all -but indeed have taken one away! I have nothing against them developing an AI -but not at the cost of them delaying the release of a non AI version. To me this is insane.

quote:

The computer saves time with beancounting and computation not to mention clarity of placement. You cannot cheat and should not have to be looking up rules quite as often -and you don't have to be near an opponent. Space is yet another issue. A father could watch his kids and still play -and not a cat, toddler, or jealous girlfriend can mess up your board. This isn't enough for you guys?


I'm quoting myself here -as not to repeat.

quote:

I think Matrix bought the game with good intentions. I have never doubted the honesty or sincerity of Matrix.


I have no reason to disagree. If a player on my baseball team(the Phillies -which might tell you something) missed a fly ball and didn't realize it was right behind him I'd yell and scream at him too. It doesn't mean I don't want him to win. If they leave the door open to unfavorable speculation -I'm going to let them know what it is. The bottom line is that I'm willing to do something to get this done -whatever it takes. And vaporware is not an option!



Hortlund -> RE: My POV (5/11/2005 5:28:06 PM)

Well, I think what we need is for David Heath or someone else to give us the bottom line.

Either the GDDs are in place or they are not.

If the GDDs are set, then Matrix can tell us lots of stuff. At least they can tell us whether it will be pbem with changed sequence of play, or tcp/ip with the correct sequence of play.

if the GDDs are not in place, then they should give us an honest timeline.

I think that if Im right about the current state of cwif, then we are looking at a possible...POSSIBLE 2007 release at the earliest. That or vaporware.

Now there are interesting alternatives to make cwif playable as a sort of cross between pbem and tcp/ip, and I'd love to discuss those things, but not until I know that someone will listen, and listen more than what we see in this forum right now.



macgregor -> RE: My POV (5/11/2005 8:11:42 PM)

What? No sense of humor? I had posted a little non-serious satire.It's hard to make fun of things in a post. You're never sure if people are laughing or organizing a lynching. So I removed it.



Cheesehead -> RE: My POV (5/11/2005 8:30:45 PM)

quote:

Hell, if Green Bay can buy the Packers...


Hey, now we're talking! Combining my two favorite interests: WiF and the Green Bay Packers [:D]

Last Fall, because of a scheduling mix up I had to choose between the two. Play WiF or stay home and watch the Packers beat up on the Vikings....I chose WiF



coregames -> RE: ...say 18,000 emails (5/11/2005 11:35:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

Basically there are two options here.

1) keep the current sequence of play
- will make pbem impossible, and tcp/ip as only possible multiplayer variant

2) rework the sequence of play
- will make pbem possible, will remove *alot* of what wif is.


I dont know which route Matrix will take. Honestly I think cwif is vaporware.


So, a dual mode approach is out of the question... no toggling between full sequence and streamlined PBEM sequence? Hearing a Matrix five-star say the project is vaporware is less than encouraging. I hope someone from the staff says something in here to contradict that opinion soon.



Greyshaft -> RE: ...say 18,000 emails (5/12/2005 1:11:28 AM)

I'm posting a *possible* CWiF sequence of play in another thread.



Hortlund -> RE: ...say 18,000 emails (5/12/2005 9:49:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames
So, a dual mode approach is out of the question... no toggling between full sequence and streamlined PBEM sequence? Hearing a Matrix five-star say the project is vaporware is less than encouraging. I hope someone from the staff says something in here to contradict that opinion soon.



Dont look too much at my stars now, all they say is that Ive got more than 1000 posts in this forum. And I think we all know that there doesnt exactly have to be a correlation between a posters number of posts and his knowledge about things [:D] I am associated with matrixgames in no way, shape or form.



SamuraiProgrmmr -> RE: ...say 18,000 emails (5/12/2005 5:17:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund

there doesnt exactly have to be a correlation between a posters number of posts and his knowledge about things



True, but your posts usually show a high level of intelligence and thoughtfulness.

Good to see you posting again!



macgregor -> RE: My POV (5/19/2005 7:21:45 PM)

I'm beginning to think this website's pupose is not to imput ideas from the consumers to matrix, but from matrix to the consumers -and I for one have had enough.



Hortlund -> RE: My POV (5/19/2005 11:31:10 PM)

Well, right now they are all pretty busy with E3 I suppose. And they did say they would meet up at E3 and talk things through. Migh as well give them a week or so to get things settled down and communicated to the community.

Im betting my original thought wasnt too far off the mark. I dont think they know how to deal with the sequence of play yet, thus the GDDs are still hanging, and that is why they are quiet. There is nothing strange about this, nor is it dishonest in any way. Its just not something they like to parade infront of the community.

Stick around a week or two, after all, if you've been waiting for all these months, you might aswell wait another week, right :) If its still no news in a week, I'll leave with you. Fair enough?



Erik Rutins -> RE: My POV (5/19/2005 11:45:06 PM)

This project is not vaporware. We also did not promise an update after E3, but after Origins, so you can expect to hear something by mid-July. We will be meeting in person with Rob Crandall at that point and going over the release plans. Until that time, all I can say is it's not vaporware, we are not trying to keep it from the community and these forums most certainly exist for two-way communications.

Regards,

- Erik



Hortlund -> RE: My POV (5/20/2005 9:15:13 AM)

Sorry about that, got E3 and Origins confused.

I have just one question Eric, while you are here, are the GDDs set?



macgregor -> RE: My POV (5/20/2005 7:42:16 PM)

Thanks Eric. You Matrix guys have been very responsive. I think I've spent far too much energy trying to affect this project. If I've appeared hostile, I apologize. I hope I've made some valid points. I'm not as irate as many seem to think.I just like to speak my mind. I'm realizing I've done more than is appreciated.



Cheesehead -> RE: My POV (5/20/2005 8:20:03 PM)

Mac, it is much easier to wait for this project if you're currently playing the board game. Do you have any local opponents?



macgregor -> RE: My POV (5/20/2005 11:27:50 PM)

Unfortunately ,no.



Froonp -> RE: My POV (5/22/2005 12:34:59 PM)

quote:

This project is not vaporware. We also did not promise an update after E3, but after Origins, so you can expect to hear something by mid-July. We will be meeting in person with Rob Crandall at that point and going over the release plans. Until that time, all I can say is it's not vaporware, we are not trying to keep it from the community and these forums most certainly exist for two-way communications.


I'm wondering why we have to wait for a physical meeting between persons to make the project advance.
Using the modern world communication facilities is also a convenient way to discuss & advance.
Maybe there is something is R Crandall agenda that prevent this, but what ?

Just wondering...

Regards

Patrice



Mziln -> RE: My POV (5/23/2005 4:47:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

I'm wondering why we have to wait for a physical meeting between persons to make the project advance.
Using the modern world communication facilities is also a convenient way to discuss & advance.
Maybe there is something is R Crandall agenda that prevent this, but what ?

Just wondering...

Regards

Patrice


Sounds like a product status meeting.

Also note "going over the release plans". This may signal someting is going to happen.



pak19652002 -> RE: My POV (5/23/2005 5:39:28 PM)

If you have no local opponents, you should join our expanding group of Cyberboard players. We've got three dozen players and spectators and I know of another half dozen playing a separate game. Also, Ken Griffiths is working on a VASSAL version, as you probably already know.

I'm sure you could get a game going the Cyberboard way to tide you over until this whle Matrix thing is resolved. It's clunky, but it's better than nothing.

Peter



macgregor -> RE: My POV (5/23/2005 8:01:29 PM)

Thanks pak. I certainly appreciate your thoughtfulness. I suppose I'd have to learn how cyberboard worked. I'll try and google it. If I like it , perhaps I'll give it a shot.



Samsonite -> RE: My POV (8/4/2008 10:41:02 AM)

I'm back. 4 years ago I started this topic... Where's the game?



michaelbaldur -> RE: My POV (8/4/2008 10:45:42 AM)

there is a december release date .......[:-]



jesperpehrson -> RE: My POV (8/4/2008 11:04:31 AM)

haha this was quite a funny thread to read knowing where we are now! Samsonite I suggest you read the monthly updates in the "When"-thread. The game is coming and it is better than anyone can dream of. [:)]



Froonp -> RE: My POV (8/4/2008 12:59:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Samsonite

I'm back. 4 years ago I started this topic... Where's the game?

When you wrote your first post in early August 2004, the agreement between ADG & Matrix Games had been passed since 1 year (October 2003), and I think that Matrix did not appoint someone to really work on the game.

But this changed 1 year later (July 2005), when Matrix appointed Steven Hokanson to finish the game. Now it's been 3 years that Steve works on the project, and since then the game is progressing. But there was a lot to add & change from the original CWiF program.



oscar72se -> RE: My POV (8/6/2008 8:05:07 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Samsonite

I'm back. 4 years ago I started this topic... Where's the game?

Stop whining! you cry baby! I grow sooo sick of people who do nothing but complain... Your post only shows how little you understand about the complexity of landning a project of this size. Instead of complaining you should be impressed of the people who is still hanging in there. You should also understand that a product such as this probably doesn´t have a super-duper market potential, which is why no company could invest zillions of dollars to complete it.

Personally, I am imensely impressed by Steve, Patrice and all the other guys who´s persistency never seizes to amaze me!

Regards
Oscar



panzers -> RE: My POV (8/7/2008 3:02:15 AM)

That's right, samsonite. Rather than come to all these wild conclusions, it would be very helpful for you to see what's going on with the game and only then can you appreciate the enormous efforts that people are putting into this. Just take a look. You already know how complex this game is. You could never expect a game of this magniture to be designed overnight. Give these guys a break. Read all the when postings and then look at all the information about the maps. I think you might be surprised at what you look at and might better understand why it is taking so long.



pasternakski -> RE: My POV (8/7/2008 5:52:11 AM)

Well, now, easy, everybody, let's give the luggage a break here. Still...

Many have followed the development of the various Matrix-related attempts at "porting" cardboard-and-paper games to the computer, and many have been disappointed with the results so far.

Consider EiA. It started many years ago as a project that would involve creation of a brand-new system that would present the Napoleonic age on a grand scale. Many of us, me included, oohed and aahed at the prospect.

A year or so down the road, the project folded, and Matrix decided to figure out how to take the old EiA board game and turn it to the purpose. A dedicated little warrior named Marshall Ellis wound up saddled with the task. He and the limited resources available to him labored mightily and came up, at long last, with a product most feel is deeply flawed and certainly not faithful to the "beloved" board game.

There have been other abortive attempts at this kind of adaptation, and I think that one lesson Matrix has learned is not to be in any hurry about putting something out there on the market, as another disaster is just not needed. I recall some time back one of the Matrix "wheels" stating almost in passing that it would be a cold day in he11 before he ever gets involved in a board game porting project again.

So, Steve (Shannon O'keets) has more of a problem on his hands than just bringing forth a workable design that people will buy and respect. The future of boardgame-to-computer game conversion is likely at stake here, at least from the Matrix end (Decision games is finally finishing a long, wandering project of converting War in Europe, although it does not contain an AI and is not likely to sell many copies as a result).

Give 'em time. It looks like it's going well. There will be plenty of b1tching about the finished product I'm sure, and many patches will ensue, but those responsible are being careful to "get it right," and I'm glad they are.

I hope, though, that they get it done before I have to have 'em send my copy to the boneyard to be interred with me post mortem.



Samsonite -> RE: Marinacci's code (2/18/2010 12:28:13 PM)

I'm back, Ladies! What's the new date? 2016?



Joseignacio -> RE: Marinacci's code (2/18/2010 12:38:55 PM)

quote:

Please don't feed the troll. The kid who calls himself Samsonite has posted several other posts in English and "Finnish" at various time all of them complaining that MWIF is not out yet.


http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=627428&mpage=1&key=&#627428



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.984375