RE: When? (Full Version)

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



Message

Extraneous -> RE: When? (11/23/2012 8:44:19 PM)

[:D] Sorry CrusssDaddy [:D]

[sm=00000003.gif] I have tried and tried to get the people here not to flame people. [sm=00000003.gif]

[sm=00000619.gif] But I'm still probably #1 on their most hated list. You made a good try though. [sm=00000619.gif]



CrusssDaddy -> RE: When? (11/23/2012 8:47:48 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy
Matrash and Steve were not needed to create a playable WiF game -- we already had CWiF. The current iteration of MWiF is functionally identical to CWiF. The version of MWiF that is on track to not be released is no different, save for two unwelcome distinctions: it will cost money and it will not include the Edit Mode that allows you to create your own scenarios or interrupt scenario play to embark upon fanciful "What If?" games or undo the bugs that periodically crop up.

I mean, if you want to get sprung because the graphics have been tweaked and there's a complete user manual and unit bios I guess it will be a very Merry Christmas if MWiF is ever released, but after nearly a decade of "work" this game has not changed in any substantive way.

And you know this because you are a beta tester or somepone developing the game or content in somw way?


I know this from the monthly (now perhaps bimonthly? quarterly?) progress reports, which we all agree are very thorough. CWiF has no A.I., does MWiF have one? Was one promised? CWiF has 3 scenarios, how many does MWiF have? How many were originally intended? I've seen the graphics and play from the playtest AAR, the former laughable the latter unchanged from the game that I downloaded for free 10 years ago.

Perhaps I'm wrong and MWiF is substantively different from CWiF? Please correct me, let me know how these many years have been spent profitably. (SPOILER ALERT: I will be unimpressed by accounts of the convoy system being perfected or Vichy crashes eliminated.)

*Edited to fix quote formatting.



Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/23/2012 9:44:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy
Matrash and Steve were not needed to create a playable WiF game -- we already had CWiF. The current iteration of MWiF is functionally identical to CWiF. The version of MWiF that is on track to not be released is no different, save for two unwelcome distinctions: it will cost money and it will not include the Edit Mode that allows you to create your own scenarios or interrupt scenario play to embark upon fanciful "What If?" games or undo the bugs that periodically crop up.

I mean, if you want to get sprung because the graphics have been tweaked and there's a complete user manual and unit bios I guess it will be a very Merry Christmas if MWiF is ever released, but after nearly a decade of "work" this game has not changed in any substantive way.

And you know this because you are a beta tester or somepone developing the game or content in somw way?


I know this from the monthly (now perhaps bimonthly? quarterly?) progress reports, which we all agree are very thorough. CWiF has no A.I., does MWiF have one? Was one promised? CWiF has 3 scenarios, how many does MWiF have? How many were originally intended? I've seen the graphics and play from the playtest AAR, the former laughable the latter unchanged from the game that I downloaded for free 10 years ago.

Perhaps I'm wrong and MWiF is substantively different from CWiF? Please correct me, let me know how these many years have been spent profitably. (SPOILER ALERT: I will be unimpressed by accounts of the convoy system being perfected or Vichy crashes eliminated.)

*Edited to fix quote formatting.


While I am not allowed to discuss MWiF. I can say CWiF is a bugged nightmare with horrid graphics. I thought it was shameful to ever be released in it's original condition. With that said, complain to ADG on that score. It was their project and their release.

Regarding what has been publicly said about MWiF. IMHO an awful lot is different, beginning with the unified map, better graphics, and improved code. Steve's contract does require an AI as he has stated many times. Will there be an early release without it? I have no idea. That is up to Matrix. How many scenarios, again that is up to them. They might give us all of them or hold some back for paid expansions like so many games do. Those are business decisions to make something profitable.

Now then are people disppointed because they can't have the game when they want it. Yes they are. But so is a 3 year old when they cant have what they want when they want it. Complaining about slow develpoment time is like complaining to GM, Ford etc... that your car doesn't get 100 MPG. Could they do it? Yes, bit it will take awhile before it gets done. How long have they been working on it. Well three plus decades. My grandfather was a VP for GM when it was a solid company in the 70's and 80's. Anyway, complaining about development time becomes pointless and childish in the extreme. Some things just take time. How much who knows.

Critique and constructive criticism are fine and dandy and help to identify real concerns. Flaming is just mean, vindictive and something I expect from bullys and children. Personally I just want the flaming for the sake of trolling to end from anyone who does it. Weather someone (myself, you or anyone else) is a troll reveals itself in the message they present. Does it convey constructive points or is it just a lot of complaints. Do the complaints offer suggestions or solutions? Or is the poster just being mean and ugly towrds people.



vonRocko -> RE: When? (11/23/2012 10:51:02 PM)

[sm=00000280.gif] This is funny! Crussdaddy says the emporer has no clothes, and the minions have a fit![sm=happy0065.gif]



Extraneous -> RE: When? (11/24/2012 1:05:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

I know this from the monthly (now perhaps bimonthly? quarterly?) progress reports, which we all agree are very thorough. CWiF has no A.I., does MWiF have one? Was one promised? CWiF has 3 scenarios, how many does MWiF have? How many were originally intended? I've seen the graphics and play from the playtest AAR, the former laughable the latter unchanged from the game that I downloaded for free 10 years ago.

Perhaps I'm wrong and MWiF is substantively different from CWiF? Please correct me, let me know how these many years have been spent profitably. (SPOILER ALERT: I will be unimpressed by accounts of the convoy system being perfected or Vichy crashes eliminated.)

*Edited to fix quote formatting.




Remember I am still bound by the NDA (even though I dropped out of the beta).

Q) Does MWiF have an AI? Was an AI promised? It would be very strange to report the status of an AI if it wasn't to be offered.

Q) How many scenarios does MWiF have? How many scenarios were originally intended? Sequence of Play Tutorial - #10



quote:

ORIGINAL: vonRocko

[sm=00000280.gif] This is funny! Crussdaddy says the emperor has no clothes, and the minions have a fit![sm=happy0065.gif]


[sm=00000622.gif] I am not a minion. I am not yellow, short, talk gibberish, or work for Grue. [sm=00000622.gif]

Despicable me?

Note: I corrected your spelling its emperor not emporer.

[image]local://upfiles/29440/21F296E9C587473A9A56FB0BF1F148FD.jpg[/image]



bo -> RE: When? (11/24/2012 1:46:22 AM)

Wow, wow, wow crussdaddy sure knows how to pull your chains, [:-] he's wetting himself hearing you people defend Matrix, Steve, ADG and god knows who else. Unfortunately most of what he says is correct to a point but so what, let him gas and we should stop fueling his fire, there is just no point in answering him, I am telling you he will continue to blow steam as long as you posters go after him. Let him die on the line.

Really people he might be a very nice person [:@] with a great passion for this game and he is just frustrated that it is not finished yet and he is using the forums to blow some steam off.

Maybe [&:]

Bo




Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/24/2012 4:48:47 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bo
Wow, wow, wow crussdaddy sure knows how to pull your chains, [:-] he's wetting himself hearing you people defend Matrix, Steve, ADG and god knows who else. Unfortunately most of what he says is correct to a point but so what, let him gas and we should stop fueling his fire, there is just no point in answering him, I am telling you he will continue to blow steam as long as you posters go after him. Let him die on the line.

Really people he might be a very nice person [:@] with a great passion for this game and he is just frustrated that it is not finished yet and he is using the forums to blow some steam off.

Maybe [&:]

Bo

Without going all Sigmund Freud here. Responding to a flamer just ups the ante in their own mind. But not for the resonable poster. A reasonable poster does not get mad and return the flames instead they respond with the truth. The more a flamer is drawn into exhibiting their bad behavior the more self destructive it becomes. Causing some to be banned or face banning. At some point most people lose all respect for the flamer. Therefore responding seems to give them what they want - when it actually just sets them up for a fall (or turns them to the light side in a few cases). I for one do not mind feeding them the truth since the truth is just fuel for them to see the error of their ways or fuel to feed their own funeral pyre.

For example:
Try ignoring a bully, they do not go away. You deal with them head on and isolate them at all costs. Without support of other bullies they eventually slink away. When faced with the truth and no real way to respond, they usually resort to personal attacks. Much like we have seen here today.

As a vet I know many GI's with PTSD and stepping over that line today revealed a lot about crussdaddy. That alone costs him a lot of respect here. Especially from and decent GI from any country who has or knows others with PTSD. After all what he did was similiar to a bully making fun of a mentally disabled person, a child with downs syndrome, or any number of other issues beyond an individuals control.

So if people stay calm and consider the source they usally laugh at the argument as some have done today. Or, they blow off the flamer and in some rare cases they join the flamer as an additional bully on the block. In either case the flamer actually lost as soon as they made the ugly post.

A flamer lives to win the moment, but actually loses the war or the opening salvo. Unless - people let them have their way. And I for one will never give in to a bully.



bo -> RE: When? (11/24/2012 5:06:48 AM)

And I for one will never give in to a bully. [:-]

We have noticed that abj [;)] stay cool please [&o]

Bo



CrusssDaddy -> RE: When? (11/24/2012 5:52:39 AM)

abj, your list of ways in which MWiF exceeds CWiF is a silly one. Perhaps you do not recall that CWiF already had a unified map? The new graphics are terrible, dated and ugly and they have been rightfully laughed at by others elsewhere. "Improved code..." Has a computer game ever been marketed with this characteristic as a selling point? "HALO 4 -- NOW WITH IMPROVED CODE!!!" No, because it is meaningless. The code in MWiF, after nearly a decade of refinement, does exactly the same thing as the code in CWiF. They are functionally identical games.

Bo here are some emoticons for you, I know you enjoy them so: [:@][:D][;)][&o][&o][:o][&o][8D][:(][X(][>:][>:][>:][:-][:'(][:@][:)][:)][:)] Keep on truckin', as the kids these days say...



Orm -> RE: When? (11/24/2012 10:03:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Extraneous

[:D] Sorry CrusssDaddy [:D]

[sm=00000003.gif] I have tried and tried to get the people here not to flame people. [sm=00000003.gif]

[sm=00000619.gif] But I'm still probably #1 on their most hated list. You made a good try though. [sm=00000619.gif]

You are not on my hated list. Your contributions to this site, in my humble opinion, has been invaluable.



Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/24/2012 1:13:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

abj, your list of ways in which MWiF exceeds CWiF is a silly one. Perhaps you do not recall that CWiF already had a unified map? The new graphics are terrible, dated and ugly and they have been rightfully laughed at by others elsewhere. "Improved code..." Has a computer game ever been marketed with this characteristic as a selling point? "HALO 4 -- NOW WITH IMPROVED CODE!!!" No, because it is meaningless. The code in MWiF, after nearly a decade of refinement, does exactly the same thing as the code in CWiF. They are functionally identical games.

Bo here are some emoticons for you, I know you enjoy them so: [:@][:D][;)][&o][&o][:o][&o][8D][:(][X(][>:][>:][>:][:-][:'(][:@][:)][:)][:)] Keep on truckin', as the kids these days say...

Well this post is at least funny and I got a good laugh from the last paragraph.

As to the 1st if you never knew the game was being developed by Matrix you wouldn't have a thing to say about it. Since you do you get to complain. You pick and selectively target what you disagree with. Every game that has ever been released people have cheered and jeered at the graphics. Eye candy is always in the eye of the beholder. Yes all game companies market improved code only the phrase is usuall "GameName_Version" now ready for purchase. Of course the code is improved and the game is improved. Why else release a new version except for theft. Are you accusing Matrix of theft? As to your last point, how are you aware of the code and what it does? Are yo an industrial spy or are you just blowing smoke confusing the landscape to sucker people into an opinion you have made based on 0 facts.

Bo this is why logic wins and flamers lose. They make spurious arguments not based in fact and when exposed they feel the need to retaliate and it draws them even deeper into exposing their opinion as the absolute garbage they are. Personally crussdaddy makes my day every time he posts because I get to laugh at his inability to make a complete post that stands up to scrutiny. Invariably there is a lack of fact, or he wants to use his own opinion (which we all value so highly [8|] ). By the way opinions are fine to use. We all post them all the time. We just need to remember they are like peoples rear ends we all have them and they all smell.

With that, I am gone for a week and will be back around the 6th of December. I will check in on the beta forums but that is about it. See y'all then.



warspite1 -> RE: When? (11/24/2012 1:19:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

abj, your list of ways in which MWiF exceeds CWiF is a silly one. Perhaps you do not recall that CWiF already had a unified map? The new graphics are terrible, dated and ugly and they have been rightfully laughed at by others elsewhere. "Improved code..." Has a computer game ever been marketed with this characteristic as a selling point? "HALO 4 -- NOW WITH IMPROVED CODE!!!" No, because it is meaningless. The code in MWiF, after nearly a decade of refinement, does exactly the same thing as the code in CWiF. They are functionally identical games.

Bo here are some emoticons for you, I know you enjoy them so: [:@][:D][;)][&o][&o][:o][&o][8D][:(][X(][>:][>:][>:][:-][:'(][:@][:)][:)][:)] Keep on truckin', as the kids these days say...

Well this post is at least funny and I got a good laugh from the last paragraph.

As to the 1st if you never knew the game was being developed by Matrix you wouldn't have a thing to say about it. Since you do you get to complain. You pick and selectively target what you disagree with. Every game that has ever been released people have cheered and jeered at the graphics. Eye candy is always in the eye of the beholder. Yes all game companies market improved code only the phrase is usuall "GameName_Version" now ready for purchase. Of course the code is improved and the game is improved. Why else release a new version except for theft. Are you accusing Matrix of theft? As to your last point, how are you aware of the code and what it does? Are yo an industrial spy or are you just blowing smoke confusing the landscape to sucker people into an opinion you have made based on 0 facts.

Bo this is why logic wins and flamers lose. They make spurious arguments not based in fact and when exposed they feel the need to retaliate and it draws them even deeper into exposing their opinion as the absolute garbage they are. Personally crussdaddy makes my day every time he posts because I get to laugh at his inability to make a complete post that stands up to scrutiny. Invariably there is a lack of fact, or he wants to use his own opinion (which we all value so highly [8|] ). By the way opinions are fine to use. We all post them all the time. We just need to remember they are like peoples rear ends we all have them and they all smell.

With that, I am gone for a week and will be back around the 6th of December. I will check in on the beta forums but that is about it. See y'all then.
warspite1

Mine doesn't [:D]



bo -> RE: When? (11/24/2012 4:09:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

abj, your list of ways in which MWiF exceeds CWiF is a silly one. Perhaps you do not recall that CWiF already had a unified map? The new graphics are terrible, dated and ugly and they have been rightfully laughed at by others elsewhere. "Improved code..." Has a computer game ever been marketed with this characteristic as a selling point? "HALO 4 -- NOW WITH IMPROVED CODE!!!" No, because it is meaningless. The code in MWiF, after nearly a decade of refinement, does exactly the same thing as the code in CWiF. They are functionally identical games.

Bo here are some emoticons for you, I know you enjoy them so: [:@][:D][;)][&o][&o][:o][&o][8D][:(][X(][>:][>:][>:][:-][:'(][:@][:)][:)][:)] Keep on truckin', as the kids these days say...


Deeply appreciated crussdaddy, [:@] thank you. I use them because someone back in my past history said that a picture or symbol was worth a thousands useless words, or something like that. I also use them to express my feelings at the time I post. My feelings can run from admiration to utter dislike for a post but not the poster.

I am not exactly a home boy [nothing wrong with that] I have many misgivings about this game and it's completion but instead of demonizing all the effort put into this game by Steve and the beta testers I decided to try to help out in some little way here and there. [;)] Oh well! Just happy to see the general forum posts humming again.

Bo



Extraneous -> RE: When? (11/24/2012 7:50:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

abj, your list of ways in which MWiF exceeds CWiF is a silly one. Perhaps you do not recall that CWiF already had a unified map? The new graphics are terrible, dated and ugly and they have been rightfully laughed at by others elsewhere. "Improved code..." Has a computer game ever been marketed with this characteristic as a selling point? "HALO 4 -- NOW WITH IMPROVED CODE!!!" No, because it is meaningless. The code in MWiF, after nearly a decade of refinement, does exactly the same thing as the code in CWiF. They are functionally identical games.

Bo here are some emoticons for you, I know you enjoy them so: [:@][:D][;)][&o][&o][:o][&o][8D][:(][X(][>:][>:][>:][:-][:'(][:@][:)][:)][:)] Keep on truckin', as the kids these days say...


Yes CWiF has (note has not had) a unified map and it's graphics are worse than MWiF (this is a fact not an opinion).

I'll look you up. What handle did you use to report bugs in the CWiF Open Beta?

To update my lists Patrice gave me a copy of:
CWiF Changes Since Version 04.07 (as of September 18, 2007)
CWiF Changes Since Version 05.00 (as of September 26, 2007)

(yup I still got the lists Patrice [sm=terms.gif])

[:D] Several of us here were in the CWiF Open Beta [:D]

[:D] If you haven't retired yet I'm probably older than you (I am older than Steve the MWiF developer). Kids don't say "Keep on truckin" these days they say "Whatup" [:D]




Patton_71 -> RE: When? (11/24/2012 10:16:59 PM)

Again, at the risk of supporting Crussdaddy, he has a good point. Matzix has done next to nothing to support Steve. Since my last post (2903) I have not seen any support from Matrix admin stating if or how they are aiding Steve in any way in regard to his health or any other kind of support. Silence by Steve on this issue speaks volumes as well.

So for my part of the deal. I have stated I will not purchase a Matrix product until I see some kind of real support from Matrix to Steve. I am now the owner of "Jutland", by Stormpowered games. I have also updated my Blood Bowl library with the Chaos edition. This trend will continue until something changes.

Rest assured, I will purchase MWIF if/when it comes out, but it will be the only product.

Ever.

I mean it.

So Matrix, get off your butts, support your designer, and finish this project.



yvesp -> RE: When? (11/25/2012 9:24:23 PM)

Yes, it's true that Matrix doesn't seem to help much.

Still, we know nothing about what deal was struck when the project started.

It's not really their project, but actually another company's project (ADG.) They may have wanted rules simplifications (because they knew the rules leaflet would be hell to implement) or whatever on which ADG stood adamant...

Actually, take a game like HOI. Rules are very simple.
Combat is dealt on the basis of the game engine, and nobody cares if it is complex or simple, bugged or not : it's a black box that delivers a result. That's not like MWIF where every single modifier is known and the results can be hand checked on existing tables...
Or take the supply rules, which hold in but one WiF page, with some very nice exceptions (Vichy, Sweden...) ; but which are an algorithmic nightmare to implement with no error, especially if you don't want the algorithm to run for minutes every time a supply calculation has to be done.
Or take the myriad of unique units, each one with its own specific capabilities.
The rules are complex enough that when I made a try with some interesting theoretical questions, it was hard to get consistent answers from human beings. Be sure such complexity doesn't occur in more common games!

As a result, such a game is much easier to deliver because you can cut back on specs at any time. Not so with MWIF.

Possibly Matrix even didn't want the project but agreed "as charity" on minimal support and promise to make a serious release if it ever gets finished... Who knows ?

So it is not really fair to attack Matrix as long as we don't know the dirty secrets...

Just my 2 cents...



LiquidSky -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 7:16:19 AM)



Hmm...we have here a thread started on July of 2005 called "When?" A thread that has reached 100 pages long. We have people who question whether the game will ever come out being called trolls for daring to ask the question when in a thread called When?

Is it really a stretch of the imagination to question if a game will ever be released this far along in the thread? That maybe, just maybe, 9 years is a bit long to work on a project?

For example:

May 25th, 1961. John F Kennedy announces that the US will go to the moon.
July 20th, 1969. Apollo 11 lands on the moon.

Apparently putting a man on the moon is easier then porting a boardgame onto the computer.

But then I suppose it doesn't compare to Diablo III which was started in 2001 and took until 2012. I wonder if anyone asked them When?

I guess Wif is more complicated.

Duke nuke'm probably holds the record at 14 years. 6 times winner of the Wired Vaporware award and won the Lifetime Vaporware achievement.
Do you think we can question this game? In this forum? In this thread?

I once thought this game was going to come out years ago. Was even looking forward to it. But you must understand questions will be raised after all this time. Expect them really. And there is no shame in asking them in a forum called [Coming Soon and In Development] in a thread titled When?

If you were afraid of the question the thread would have been locked long before page 100.



Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 12:48:48 PM)

Although I am on vacation, I thought I'd pop in for a second after the last few posts. These are examples of good posts seeking answers and accountability. I don't think anyone has a problem with asking the question of "when" or even prompting for a release date. I am definitely not against people asking or searching for answers to the many issues surrounding MWiF. I am just ardently anti-troll. There is after all a right way and a wrong way to do things.



bo -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 4:06:04 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

Although I am on vacation, I thought I'd pop in for a second after the last few posts. These are examples of good posts seeking answers and accountability. I don't think anyone has a problem with asking the question of "when" or even prompting for a release date. I am definitely not against people asking or searching for answers to the many issues surrounding MWiF. I am just ardently anti-troll. There is after all a right way and a wrong way to do things.


Good lord abj will you please concentrate on your vacation and rewire [:D] You will be needed to get your MWIF web site up and running in the next few months. This game will be completed in 2013 and the AI in 2016 [;)] oops just kidding Steve [about the AI]

Bo



michaelbaldur -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 4:28:06 PM)


just remember, all opinions are welcome here.

I really done like the assault some people experience when they post.

do we really want to have a forum with censure, where some opinions are not allowed.



michaelbaldur -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 4:38:43 PM)

deleted



Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 4:44:26 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur
just remember, all opinions are welcome here.

I really done like the assault some people experience when they post.

do we really want to have a forum with censure, where some opinions are not allowed.

I agree. I think we all want an uncensored forum. Nobody is asking for people to be banned, excluded, or have posts removed. However I will respond when people cross the line with intentional lies, deceipt, misconceptions, attempts to mislead new members, or use mean vicious attacks as the way to express an opinion.



CrusssDaddy -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 4:47:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy

Man, this has turned into a dark place. Depressing. Even the Matrix Militia now sniping within ranks about dopey NDAs and perceived shortcomings in faith to the party line. Poor abj6969 can't even take a joke anymore, his 1000-yard stare is a haunting prelude to a complete PTSD breakdown.

Steve is not going to complete this game, not even a nerfed no-A.I. version. It simply is not going to happen - it's okay to admit the inevitable, doing so is simply an admission of the facts, the steepening trajectory of non-development, and not a slam on Steve. The best case scenario is that Failtrix puts an actual team on the job, but that is unlikely because they clearly don't give a ****. I mean guys, seriously... when you clear away the good wishes and hopeful thoughts and high regard for hard work and our enthusiasm for WiF itself, whats left? Do you have a line at which the importance of results jumps ahead of everything else?


Your cheerfulness is so wonderfully consistent. I just hope that you have the same opinions every time that you look in a mirror.


steve really dont like that kind of answer. you are a moderator and you set the norm for the language on the forum.




For the record, I have no problem with Steve's response. A little bit of salty language and feisty tone should be not only tolerated but celebrated. I dumped on him and am at least heartened that he showed sufficient spirit to fire back. It doesn't change my opinion of the project or my gloomy regards for the future, and I think dumping on Steve is under-represented in this forum (he is not blameless in this mess), but style points count for something.

That applies to anyone who takes issue with my opinions, which are invariably correct.



michaelbaldur -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 5:00:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur
just remember, all opinions are welcome here.

I really done like the assault some people experience when they post.

do we really want to have a forum with censure, where some opinions are not allowed.

I agree. I think we all want an uncensored forum. Nobody is asking for people to be banned, excluded, or have posts removed. However I will respond when people cross the line with intentional lies, deceipt, misconceptions, attempts to mislead new members, or use mean vicious attacks as the way to express an opinion.


I agree that he went over the line. but it is really up to the moderators to correct that.

I really think the moderators lost the control of this forum.



Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 5:07:46 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy
That applies to anyone who takes issue with my opinions, which are invariably correct.

Ok I am definitly recharging. That made me laugh. I do not mean that in a bad way. I accept that you like all of us realize our opinions are just that - our own opinions.

I believe we both disagree on how much is feisty and what may be construed as mean. You probably don't mean for your your comments to be ugly. However they come across to a lot of people as such. If your comments were less antagonizing you might actually get a strong following regarding the progress of MWiF. But dropping nukes to make a point draws people away from your belief and gives them points to attack you with. A different approach might be something you want to consider. In that way you would not need to compromise your position and people might listen more attentively to what you are trying to accomplish. So exactly what is your motivation and what are you are trying to accomplish?

  • Is it to get Matrix to put more dollars vehind the project.?
  • Is it to hurry up the release date at the cost of a poor product?
  • Is it to derail the project completely?
  • Or is it something else and if so what is it?



brian brian -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 5:10:48 PM)

I think wargamers more than most understand the impact of unforeseen chaos on a project, which in the games we like is delivered by rolling dice. Gamers should also understand the basics of a famous quote about war: "The plan is the first casualty of contact with the enemy." (probably not word-for-word perfect there....)

I don't know the nuts and bolts of the deal to create MWiF, and I don't care to. But I do hope to see a pair of gaming companies be able to be flexible with their plan to get this project out to some customers. A lot of very desirable intellectual content has already been created, and I would like to purchase it. I am always frustrated by businesses who won't sell me things that they could sell me. I would pay Matrix and/or ADG almost any amount of money they could realistically name for .pdf map files alone. An engine to manage the counters on that map would be even better. Slap an override feature on top of the whole structure to allow for players to fix any obscure remaining bugs and I would start using such software immediately. The "perfect" version can come along when it is ready.

But at a certain point, the longer this takes, the more work is created. At this point as I write, an ever increasing amount of players will want to play this on a tablet. At a minimum, it will need testing to see if it works delivered to a tablet remotely logged in to an actual PC. This is a design spec/feature not even dreamed of when the project launched. OS development is speeding up fast....hardware is changing quickly too - goodbye mouse, hello touch-screen and voice-activated menu commands. Given that, an old question/suggestion I had for Matrix and ADG I think is worth re-considering. Selling us a copy of the game to own is nice and all, but could more revenue accrue to the people we want it to go to (Harry, Steve) by hosting the game on a powerful server and charging us to play the game? I would pay for such a service, and such a "cloud" model would work very well for multi-player games I think, as players simply log in and issue their commands from any hardware they want. Watching the PC market evolve leads me to these thoughts. If you can't play it on a smart-phone, pretty soon, there will be ever less players who can even play a "hard copy" game (a little ironic to call software a 'hard' asset compared to the paper version), as smart-phones deliver most of the services the average public wants from a computer. Read last week's article in the New York Times on the future of Nintendo for more on that line of thinking......



Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 5:12:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur
I really think the moderators lost the control of this forum.

I agree, but that standard was set years ago to let this be a wide open forum and sort of "user moderated". So to implent that change now would be seen as a form of retaliation or censure rather than moderation.



Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 5:19:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian
... hosting the game on a powerful server and charging us to play the game? I would pay for such a service, and such a "cloud" model would work very well for multi-player games...

I missed that post but it is a very good idea with the new emerging technologies. However adding that to MWiF at this point and adding another delay...?
That alone would force me to say no. But as the next version It would absolutely get my vote. Especially if marketed as a flat fee for all games. Say 15$ (USD) a month. Matrix might increase their monthly revenues by quite a bit.
If only half the mebers of the forum signed up that would over a quarter of a million a month for Matrix.



CrusssDaddy -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 5:36:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: abj9562

quote:

ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy
That applies to anyone who takes issue with my opinions, which are invariably correct.

Ok I am definitly recharging. That made me laugh. I do not mean that in a bad way. I accept that you like all of us realize our opinions are just that - our own opinions.

I believe we both disagree on how much is feisty and what may be construed as mean. You probably don't mean for your your comments to be ugly. However they come across to a lot of people as such. If your comments were less antagonizing you might actually get a strong following regarding the progress of MWiF. But dropping nukes to make a point draws people away from your belief and gives them points to attack you with. A different approach might be something you want to consider. In that way you would not need to compromise your position and people might listen more attentively to what you are trying to accomplish. So exactly what is your motivation and what are you are trying to accomplish?

  • Is it to get Matrix to put more dollars vehind the project.?
  • Is it to hurry up the release date at the cost of a poor product?
  • Is it to derail the project completely?
  • Or is it something else and if so what is it?



You guys are keeping me busy today! Emails, PMs, posts... First, I disagree with you that my tactics drive people away - the volume of responses here and in my inbox are proof that a strongly-worded, even "ugly" perspective is very efficient at driving discussion and much of it is positioned squarely in my corner.

I wanted MWiF to be CWiF with the following included: A.I., complete optional rules and add-ons from the various editions, and a complete roster of scenarios. It is understood that would include improved functionality and bugs squashed. I didn't need "improved" graphics. I didn't need a user's manual. I didn't need an "improved" interface. If those things come along for the ride, fine, but the important things are those three I mentioned.

The MWiF that may or may not be released provides all the things I don't need and none of the things I do. This disappoints me. I would rather see one of the following:

1. Matrix gets involved in a positive way and brings in a team to take over and give me those things (it goes without saying that Steve and the roster of volunteers alone are incapable of delivering them).

2. Matrix steps away and some other team comes in to give me those things. Another company, one that is actually motivated to release a complete game? A Kickstarter? Something else?

So to answer your question, I would say "all of the above, except the second option." I understand that those may not be viable options, but I am willing to agitate for them loudly nonetheless. This thing that is currently called MWiF is laughable, the more so for how long is has taken to achieve such a state of ridiculousness.

Also, as a fan of WiF the incompetence and lack of care with which this project has been conducted grieves me; it is restorative to call out the guilty parties publicly and notify them of their multiple and sustained failures. And yeah, that can get "ugly."



CrusssDaddy -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 5:44:10 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: brian brian

I think wargamers more than most understand the impact of unforeseen chaos on a project, which in the games we like is delivered by rolling dice. Gamers should also understand the basics of a famous quote about war: "The plan is the first casualty of contact with the enemy." (probably not word-for-word perfect there....)

I don't know the nuts and bolts of the deal to create MWiF, and I don't care to. But I do hope to see a pair of gaming companies be able to be flexible with their plan to get this project out to some customers. A lot of very desirable intellectual content has already been created, and I would like to purchase it. I am always frustrated by businesses who won't sell me things that they could sell me. I would pay Matrix and/or ADG almost any amount of money they could realistically name for .pdf map files alone. An engine to manage the counters on that map would be even better. Slap an override feature on top of the whole structure to allow for players to fix any obscure remaining bugs and I would start using such software immediately. The "perfect" version can come along when it is ready.

But at a certain point, the longer this takes, the more work is created. At this point as I write, an ever increasing amount of players will want to play this on a tablet. At a minimum, it will need testing to see if it works delivered to a tablet remotely logged in to an actual PC. This is a design spec/feature not even dreamed of when the project launched. OS development is speeding up fast....hardware is changing quickly too - goodbye mouse, hello touch-screen and voice-activated menu commands. Given that, an old question/suggestion I had for Matrix and ADG I think is worth re-considering. Selling us a copy of the game to own is nice and all, but could more revenue accrue to the people we want it to go to (Harry, Steve) by hosting the game on a powerful server and charging us to play the game? I would pay for such a service, and such a "cloud" model would work very well for multi-player games I think, as players simply log in and issue their commands from any hardware they want. Watching the PC market evolve leads me to these thoughts. If you can't play it on a smart-phone, pretty soon, there will be ever less players who can even play a "hard copy" game (a little ironic to call software a 'hard' asset compared to the paper version), as smart-phones deliver most of the services the average public wants from a computer. Read last week's article in the New York Times on the future of Nintendo for more on that line of thinking......


This is a very good idea to discuss and falls under my option "Something else?" Matrix Militia, do you see how this is a better discussion than "It will be ready when it's ready..." and similar head-in-the-sand responses to criticism? More discussion and more ideas like this, please.



Page: <<   < prev  98 99 [100] 101 102   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.671875