RE: When?

RE: When? (Full Version)

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

Message

Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 6:13:14 PM)
No your previously harsh attacks are not why I am discussing this with you today. In fact you have been civil and that has opened a new door for discussion. Go back to being divissive and we go back to where we were.

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 6:37:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LiquidSky 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. While not disagreeing with your principle point, I would like to note that your logic is somewhat specious: defeating the Axis powers in WW II took ~6 years, so that was 'easier' to accomplish than putting a man on the moon, which took ~8 years.

Centuur -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 7:06:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy 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." Again: why such a language... Calling people "incapable" isn't exactly constructive... Letting Matrix step down will probably mean a very, very long delay (maybe forever?). A team of Matrix has to step in? Is that allowed for by the contract between Steve and Matrix? Is that financially feasable? All kinds of things we don't know anything about (and I don't care to know about this). Also: you don't know the "thing that is currently called MWiF"... So how can you call it laughable? You don't know how ridicule it is (if it is so), because you haven't seen this. So you can't make a reasenable conclusion of it. You talk about incompetence, guilty parties, failures and so on. What failure? To not produce a game? Did it ever occur to you that Matrix may have made the wisest decision possible not to rush this? Wasn't there another boardgame put on the computer that was totally crushed by the public for not being as good as the board game itself? Lack of care? How do you know this to be right? Isn't it possible that Matrix has taken the position of: we want a very good game on the market, not just a lousy one which got the stamp MWiF and isn't delivering what the name WiF promises? The only thing you can conclude (and you do rightly so) is that it takes a very long time to develop this game. That is disappointing, I agree on that. And that's it. You can't force Matrix to publish this game. That's their decision. The game will come, I'm convinced of that. When? Well that's the question... What will be in it, that's Matrix decision too...

Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 7:15:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Centuur Wasn't there another boardgame put on the computer that was totally crushed by the public for not being as good as the board game itself? Can you say Advanced Third Reich by Avalon Hill. It killed the company and basically closed their doors. Hasbro bought them out and at this point is owned by Wizards of the Coast. They no longer develop complex wargames similiar to the Matrix line, * and others. Axis and Allies is now their mainstay. That result alone should make Matrix to take caution concerning an early release before the game is done. *edit: removed SPI from list

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 7:21:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy 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." MWIF has 9 of the 11 scenarios; the 2 that are incomplete are the half-map scenarios, where the ADG rules for the Transfer Pool are a headache. For instance, in Fascist Tide Japan does not officially exist, yet Japan gets to launch attacks against the Transfer Pool. There are several other fishy rules related to the half-map scenarios, mostly to do with production. I am still working on finishing the code for the special rules in these last 2 scenarios, but have scheduled their completion for after the initial release. By the way, the setup details for all scenarios are complete and have been thoroughly tested by the beta testers over the years. While you are happy with the CWIF graphics, the majority of potential buyers would not be. Beyond the mere aesthetics, there is difficulty in understanding what the CWIF graphics communicate. In particular, the different meanings of hexside colors and status indicators are problematic. While you might not 'need' a user's manual, anyone who has never played WIF will. The learning curve for WIF is long and arduous - most players relied on a knowledgeable (and patient) friend to learn the game. If you are including all the optional rules, then the complexity is vastly increased. Without a user's manual, the market for MWIF would be negligible. Separating improved functionality from improved graphics is naive (to my mind). Most of the new functionality in MWIF (versus CWIF) relates to graphics, either on the map or (vastly more common) with the addition of new and improved forms. For instance, CWIF did a poor job of communicating the details of land combat resolution and air-to-air combat. The former had numerous bugs, which players probably didn't notice since the level of information was so sparse. There are hundreds of other improvements from CWIF to MWIF. I did not make these (innumerable) changes on a whim, or because I just love to spend years writing code. The driving forces for new stuff were: (1) the beta testers insisted on it, or (2) as a WIF player (10+ years), I couldn't tolerate the errors and omissions. I want the players to be able to PLAY the game, not spend their time struggling with figuring out what is going on (e.g., map positions, unit capabilities, the sequence of play). But I would say that an enormous amount of my time was spent implementing the rules. Even the WIFFE rules had a lot of problems (~400 questions/answers to/from Harry Rowland). There were a lot (~50) that turned up when I was working on writing the code. Several rules changed back and forth between different interpretations. I probably can't communicate the difficulty in changing code when rules change. As a simple example from my work yesterday, splitting/merging convoys wasn't updating all the forms correctly. When a convoy is split, one or more new units need to be added to the units on the map and in the list of units in any visible form. Merging convoys means one or more of them is removed. The code handled all of this correctly on the map and if the player selected the original convoy unit(s) from the Setup Tray, the Units-in-Hex form, or from the Flyouts form. But it wasn't updating the form lists correctly when the player used the Select Units or the Naval Review Details forms. I fixed the problems with the latter form yesterday and will work on the former today. Note that splitting and merging convoys is a very simple rule, and one that CWIF implemented perfectly (except for the Select Units form). MWIF uses the CWIF code for the basic functionality of these rules, but I had to add code to deal with all the different places/forms where the player could initiate these actions. More complex rules, especially those involving new (not CWIF) unit types from the optional rules impact the code in dozens of places, from such basic stuff as displaying them on the screen and building them to their unique capabilities.

Extraneous -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 8:05:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy 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." What you wanted: A.I. We'll provide more information on that as we get closer to release. There's a lot that we still need to do to inform you all about what the release plans are and future plans after the release. There is no question that the game will have an AI, but the AI will require extra work and our goal it so make sure the AI is competent and can provide a good challenge to new players. In the long run, this game is much better played against human opponents, which is why we are focusing on the multiplayer system first. Erik Rutins Director of Product Development and Business Relations Note: Please notice who posted this and when. List of Optional rules List Add-ons Scenarios Barbarossa, Fascist Tide, Missed the Bus, Lebensraum, Guadalcanal, Waking Giant, Brute Force, And Global War Your #1 has been discussed at length in the forums. The general opinion was a team would slow work on the game (I disagreed). There was a discussion about a development team in Russia that does work for Matrix working on "Breaking the Fortress" (or something like that) but the screen shots were MWlF. But I can no longer find the thread. I've searched the developer's sites. and the net for "breaking the fortress" ww2

Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 8:41:24 PM)
As to crusssdaddy's item 1. I'm not trying to be antagonistic but you make a lot of claims so I am trying to find out what your expierance and motivation is? What makes you an expert on whether someone can complete a software development project? Do you own a sofware company? Do you develop software? Do you work in a business mangement postion for a software development/publishing company? What exactly is your resume of expierance in this regard? Is there a resume at all? Or are all your arguments based on a lack of expierance in the software development field?

CrusssDaddy -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 9:14:02 PM)
Extraneous, your post is not very helpful. It contradicts Steve's reply in places and cites posts dating back to 2006 as supposed proof of what is happening in 2012. Additionally, I am not interested in what Matrixster's marketing department has to say on any topic: they have **** the bed so thoroughly as to be considered unreliable commenting in any capacity. Steve, the list of scenarios is more extensive than I had thought. That these are completed and tested is good news. Additionally, the list of included options and add-ons appears essentially complete, if these are indeed completed and currently working (aside from minor bugs, if any). I withdraw my complaints that those critical components are missing. A.I. appears as yet to be a dream. Re: graphics and user's manual and pace of development, there's a lot of having cake and a lot of eating it too. When I make complaints about the relative lack of need for these things, I am greeted with choruses of "But what about the noobs? All the people who buy this who have never played WiF before need extensive tutorials and graphics and shiny things," as if Matrix is counting on widespread support from the computer wargaming community and broad appeal along with brisk sales. Then when I make complaints that development has taken unreasonably long and that Matrash has not allocated the proper amount of resources and support, the chorus changes to, "Oh but WiF is a specialty game, it's not like it's this big project with broad appeal that is going to sell like gangbusters and justify a proper development team." Well, which is it? I am actually in the glass-half-full camp who believe WiF has the capacity to shine in a marketplace loaded with crappy Grigsby-spam and dopey HOI games, but I am consistently told that I am wrong and the only road to development is one guy and a handful of part-time volunteers. Any concerns are dwarfed by the only one that matters at this point: your health. You are the only option for completion. There is no Plan B. And let's be real here: reports of your demise may be greatly exaggerated, but the trajectory of your health is not encouraging. Are you at an age where a vigorous rebound is more likely, or less likely? Your own stubbornness in accepting volunteer help with the coding/programming up until last year was very much at the root of the problem. So even if we grant that you can hang in to get a reduced MWiF out the door, the optimism required to believe you can also hang in to implement additional scenarios and add-ons and the A.I. is a bridge too far. One other question: can the Edit Mode be retained for MWiF, allowing for DIY scenario building and flights of speculative fancy?

warspite1 -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 9:15:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: abj9562 As to crusssdaddy's item 1. I'm not trying to be antagonistic but you make a lot of claims so I am trying to find out what your expierance and motivation is? What makes you an expert on whether someone can complete a software development project? Do you own a sofware company? Do you develop software? Do you work in a business mangement postion for a software development/publishing company? What exactly is your resume of expierance in this regard? Is there a resume at all? Or are all your arguments based on a lack of expierance in the software development field? warspite1 abj you are wasting your time he is just getting off on all the attention he is receiving. To be clear (and also to answer LiquidSky specifically): - No one (to my knowledge) has been shot down in flames because they happen to enquire When? - No one is shot down in flames for letting off a bit of steam - Is it right that in a thread titled When?, someone queries, when? Er yes - Is it acceptable for someone to show a little frustration on said thread? Er yes again. Its not overly productive but sometimes it makes us feel better. So what is the issue with PusDaddy? (there, CrusssDaddy, you're not the only one that can come up with a *hilarious* [8\|] play on words. The issue is that he is a spoilt child. He wants something, he wants it now, therefore he must have it or he sulks and starts throwing his toys out of the pram. God forbid he might do something constructive. Is Steve happy the game is not out yet? Are the Beta Testers? Are Matrix? The WIF gaming community? or just those who want the chance to play? No of course not. I no longer have the room or the time to devote to WIF. If MWIF does not come out I have probably played my last game. Frustating isn't it, but that's life. But what is the point of trotting out the same old childish nonense that he was banging on about two years ago? - He tells us that Matrix do not want to bring the game out....right.....[>:] - That he's spoken to Harry Rowland and he knows *something*. Funnily enough when I asked him what it was he never responded [>:] - That if only Matrix would give up the rights to the game, there are hundreds of game developers out there who will pick up the pieces and throw all manner of resources, cash, people, whatever is needed, to get the game out. Yes, of course they will. Perfect economic sense [>:] Oh and by the way LiquidSky, re your moon landing example. I wonder what the relative budgets/number of people behind the project were/are?

yvesp -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 9:21:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy 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." Of course, that's your opion. Certainly based on no experience but that of your own fantasy. Handling a semi-complete program to a brand new team is the perfect recipe for failure ; that actually has been imposed to Steve for the result we see now : starting from CWiF (to the contrary of learning from it) was the first big mistake that was done. Steve made it clear he did not choose that. I'm still wondering who actually made that blunder ; Matrix or ADG ? My guess would be ADG who probably thought they already had a fair product, but who knows? As for Matrix stepping away ? well, that's another fantasy dream! First of all, there is a good likehood no other company would want this project (where do you see such games nowadays ?) ; second, such a change would likely cause a legal havoc. So, no ; if you're realistic, you know that won't happen, except in Alice in Wonderland world. Have you anything serious to suggest to help ? Yves

CrusssDaddy -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 9:22:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: abj9562 As to crusssdaddy's item 1. I'm not trying to be antagonistic but you make a lot of claims so I am trying to find out what your expierance and motivation is? What makes you an expert on whether someone can complete a software development project? Do you own a sofware company? Do you develop software? Do you work in a business mangement postion for a software development/publishing company? What exactly is your resume of expierance in this regard? Is there a resume at all? Or are all your arguments based on a lack of expierance in the software development field? ABJect, we're just getting a discussion started here. Now is not the time to expose yourself as an [extremely silly person] with clumsy and mean-spirited attempts to close down the conversation. Integrity is also accomplished in front of an audience, please demonstrate that your comprehension of the concept extends beyond a Successories poster. Edited to change the word "a*" to something else.

warspite1 -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 9:28:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy quote: ORIGINAL: abj9562 As to crusssdaddy's item 1. I'm not trying to be antagonistic but you make a lot of claims so I am trying to find out what your expierance and motivation is? What makes you an expert on whether someone can complete a software development project? Do you own a sofware company? Do you develop software? Do you work in a business mangement postion for a software development/publishing company? What exactly is your resume of expierance in this regard? Is there a resume at all? Or are all your arguments based on a lack of expierance in the software development field? ABJect, we're just getting a discussion started here. Now is not the time to expose yourself as an ass with clumsy and mean-spirited attempts to close down the conversation. Integrity is also accomplished in front of an audience, please demonstrate that your comprehension of the concept extends beyond a Successories poster. warspite1 ABJect - and there's another one!! You are clearly a wordsmith beyond compare [&o] How do you do it?

CrusssDaddy -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 9:49:31 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy quote: ORIGINAL: abj9562 As to crusssdaddy's item 1. I'm not trying to be antagonistic but you make a lot of claims so I am trying to find out what your expierance and motivation is? What makes you an expert on whether someone can complete a software development project? Do you own a sofware company? Do you develop software? Do you work in a business mangement postion for a software development/publishing company? What exactly is your resume of expierance in this regard? Is there a resume at all? Or are all your arguments based on a lack of expierance in the software development field? ABJect, we're just getting a discussion started here. Now is not the time to expose yourself as an ass with clumsy and mean-spirited attempts to close down the conversation. Integrity is also accomplished in front of an audience, please demonstrate that your comprehension of the concept extends beyond a Successories poster. warspite1 ABJect - and there's another one!! You are clearly a wordsmith beyond compare [&o] How do you do it? It's been almost a day and no one has yet acknowledged the brilliance of my Hitler joke on the other thread [sm=nono.gif][sm=nono.gif][:(][:(][:(] [sm=nono.gif][sm=sign0066.gif][sm=sign0066.gif][sm=sign0066.gif]

warspite1 -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 9:53:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy quote: ORIGINAL: abj9562 As to crusssdaddy's item 1. I'm not trying to be antagonistic but you make a lot of claims so I am trying to find out what your expierance and motivation is? What makes you an expert on whether someone can complete a software development project? Do you own a sofware company? Do you develop software? Do you work in a business mangement postion for a software development/publishing company? What exactly is your resume of expierance in this regard? Is there a resume at all? Or are all your arguments based on a lack of expierance in the software development field? ABJect, we're just getting a discussion started here. Now is not the time to expose yourself as an ass with clumsy and mean-spirited attempts to close down the conversation. Integrity is also accomplished in front of an audience, please demonstrate that your comprehension of the concept extends beyond a Successories poster. warspite1 ABJect - and there's another one!! You are clearly a wordsmith beyond compare [&o] How do you do it? It's been almost a day and no one has yet acknowledged the brilliance of my Hitler joke on the other thread [sm=nono.gif][sm=nono.gif][:(][:(][:(] [sm=nono.gif][sm=sign0066.gif][sm=sign0066.gif][sm=sign0066.gif] warspite1 Apologies - how remiss of me. CrusssDaddy that joke was like you - absolutely brilliant. Well done. I probably never told you this, but you are my hero, nay, the wind beneath my wings [&o][&o]

Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 11:01:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CrusssDaddy ABJect, we're just getting a discussion started here. Now is not the time to expose yourself as an ass with clumsy and mean-spirited attempts to close down the conversation. Integrity is also accomplished in front of an audience, please demonstrate that your comprehension of the concept extends beyond a Successories poster. Ok here we go again. I even PM'd you that I was glad you were being more civil. I have not used abusive language as you just did. I explained I just wanted to know what level of expierance you brought to the table. I wanted to know how much validity to give your opinions. Instead of giving validity to your expierance you lowered yourself again calling me a derogotory name. That is a direct violation of forum rules. Therefore I am asking the moderator to ban you not for your opinions but your use of profanity twords someone. A clear and direct violation of the rules of this forum. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/register.asp Quote from that link quote: Bearing that in mind, all Members must agree to follow these simple rules: No foul language or any type of language that would be consider abusive this includes any materials which are knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, sexual oriented, vulgar, obscene, hateful, harassing, profane, racist, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or encourages conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or that otherwise violates any local, state, national or international law or regulation. Moderator please ban him now!

vonRocko -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 11:42:26 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: abj9562 As to crusssdaddy's item 1. I'm not trying to be antagonistic but you make a lot of claims so I am trying to find out what your expierance and motivation is? What makes you an expert on whether someone can complete a software development project? Do you own a sofware company? Do you develop software? Do you work in a business mangement postion for a software development/publishing company? What exactly is your resume of expierance in this regard? Is there a resume at all? Or are all your arguments based on a lack of expierance in the software development field? quote: Bearing that in mind, all Members must agree to follow these simple rules: No foul language or any type of language that would be consider abusive this includes any materials which are knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, sexual oriented, vulgar, obscene, hateful, harassing, profane, racist, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or encourages conduct that would constitute a criminal offense, give rise to civil liability, or that otherwise violates any local, state, national or international law or regulation. Aren't you violating the "invasive of a person's privacy" rule, as stated in above quote? Let's not be so fast in asking for people to be banned. [:)]

Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/26/2012 11:57:05 PM)
Asking for the rules to be upheld is not an invasion of an individuals privacy. His use of foul language directed specifically twords me was public therefore my request is public. As to his statement that it is mean and abusive to ask what software development expierance he has; well, that seems a little strange to me. How can he compare his use of foul language and name calling to those questions is beyond my scope of coprehension. Although I feel he did want to avoid answering the questions. He could have just said it was none of my business after all. Bottom line, in my opinion, I have finally come to believe that it is time for the moderators to step in and moderate. A definitive switch in my opinion since this morning.

CrusssDaddy -> RE: When? (11/27/2012 12:42:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: abj9562 Asking for the rules to be upheld is not an invasion of an individuals privacy. His use of foul language directed specifically twords me was public therefore my request is public. As to his statement that it is mean and abusive to ask what software development expierance he has; well, that seems a little strange to me. How can he compare his use of foul language and name calling to those questions is beyond my scope of coprehension. Although I feel he did want to avoid answering the questions. He could have just said it was none of my business after all. Bottom line, in my opinion, I have finally come to believe that it is time for the moderators to step in and moderate. A definitive switch in my opinion since this morning. "Everyone who does not own a software company, develop software, or work in software development business management, do not post to this forum -- your opinion is not valid." That is your argument. Is that really what you wish to stand by? Is that a position of integrity? When faced with opinions contrary to your own, you should be able to say "No, I disagree." Instead, you are so threatened with the existence of opinions that vary, you seek to deny the validity of the person who expresses them. You seek to remove the opposition through spurious questions of expertise. Failing that, perhaps a clutching of pearls at deployment of a synonym for "fool" can abolish the transgressor? Will that work? After that, maybe point out that I have fewer posts than you on the message board, that makes me less than worthy, right? ABJect, I know you fancy yourself a bully-beater zooming around the skies in your P-51 vanquishing wrongs and extolling only THE TRUTH, but do yourself a favor: find a landing strip and come back down to Planet Earth with the rest of us. Don't be afraid of contrary opinions, trust in your own enough to say "I do not agree" without need to discredit the messenger.

rmdesantis -> RE: When? (11/27/2012 12:48:07 AM)
I'm hoping that this doesn't inflame passions here, but I have a question about the approach Matrix is taking. I agree with the posters above that say that having someone else (or a team of someones) take over from Steve at this point is really asking for trouble re: getting the game out. At the same time, though, this is a large, complicated game unlike nearly anything on the market. It has an entrenched user base of people who have been playing the board version for about a quarter century which provides a loyal following (and a good starting market for the vendor), but at the same time a demanding audience as well. There are requested features that Steve has said will not be in the initial release but there is a demand for them so there will be pressure to deliver those features. Without having a backup, or people who can step in and seamless take over for Steve (should he decide not to continue the project after the launch) then isn't Matrix reducing their profit potential? Is it unreasonable to have someone start looking over Steve's shoulder (I'm saying this in the hypothetical, because I'd hate for someone to do this to me) to learn the product so as to help in the future? Mike

vonRocko -> RE: When? (11/27/2012 1:31:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: abj9562 Asking for the rules to be upheld is not an invasion of an individuals privacy. His use of foul language directed specifically twords me was public therefore my request is public. As to his statement that it is mean and abusive to ask what software development expierance he has; well, that seems a little strange to me. How can he compare his use of foul language and name calling to those questions is beyond my scope of coprehension. Although I feel he did want to avoid answering the questions. He could have just said it was none of my business after all. Bottom line, in my opinion, I have finally come to believe that it is time for the moderators to step in and moderate. A definitive switch in my opinion since this morning. OK, fair enough. I just don't like banning people. We all stretch the rules here sometimes.[;)]

bo -> RE: When? (11/27/2012 1:38:11 AM)
Calm down everyone NOW! or else. [:D] I have a lot more to say to you combatants but crussdaddy gave me so many smileys to think about I have spent the last hour trying to figure out which ones to use in my 500 word post. [:)][:D][8D][;)][&:][:(][:'(][>:][:o][:-][8\|][&o] oh I know which one [:@][:@][:@][:@][:@][:@] knock it off! Bo

bo -> RE: When? (11/27/2012 1:48:03 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vonRocko quote: ORIGINAL: abj9562 Asking for the rules to be upheld is not an invasion of an individuals privacy. His use of foul language directed specifically twords me was public therefore my request is public. As to his statement that it is mean and abusive to ask what software development expierance he has; well, that seems a little strange to me. How can he compare his use of foul language and name calling to those questions is beyond my scope of coprehension. Although I feel he did want to avoid answering the questions. He could have just said it was none of my business after all. Bottom line, in my opinion, I have finally come to believe that it is time for the moderators to step in and moderate. A definitive switch in my opinion since this morning. OK, fair enough. I just don't like banning people. We all stretch the rules here sometimes.[;)] Agreed, no one should be banned as long as no cussing or filthy remarks against another poster are involved, saying that means nothing because only an individual can deem about what is said about him or her is destructive to their nature. bo

Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/27/2012 2:05:09 AM)
@ rmdesantis You are right about the complexity and loyalty of the crowd. It is easy to see the passion we all exhibit crusssdaddy included. I am not privledged to what Steve has to do or report to Matrix. However I would find it absolutely incredulous if Matrix didn't get reports and evaluate progress on a consistent basis. Steve's monthly reports to us have been fairly consistent for many years. Why would Matrix not expect much more than what he delivers to the public at large. As to looking over Steve's shoulder he has indicated his documentation procedures. I can absolutley assure you that he goes way above and beyond in that arena. Steve writes extremely high quality code notation from what he has publically posted here. He even goes so far as to annotate the reasoning behind the coding decisions he has made which is basically something yo never see in most peoples work. Base on what I have publically seen any developer with 5+ years of skill could take over this project after a solid months worth of reading and know exactly what is happening in the code and why. I hope this helps answer your questions. @ crusssdaddy That is not what I am saying. Please do not put words into my mouth. I just asked what validates your opinion. The stronger your validation the stronger your argument is. What I disagree with is using attacks as a method of validating an opinion. When you make calm rational opinions I actually think about them and their validity. For example I do believe the development time for MWiF has been slow. So please understand, I do not necessarily disagree with all of your opinions. I just absolutely disagree with your methods of making your points. There is never ever a reason to use vulgar language, call people names, or make personal attacks upon them. This is why the forum has rules of civility. So please take a deep breath and take a step back and remember that all I am looking for is the following when I evaluate any post. 1. What is the persons background and knowledge. 2. Are they an expert or layman. 3. Are they working for the project, observing it, or positing hypothetical issues. 4. Do they help the community or hinder the community. These help evaluate how much weight to give a persons opinion. For 1 and 2, I value novice layman opinions on all my teams. They represent the vast majority of people after all. Nobody is ever an expert in everything. So that does not preclude or change the value of your arguments . It just allows a rational view of your statements. Number 3 creates a frame of view for what the person is trying to achieve. Number 4 tells me weather to dismiss the individual out of hand or not. Since I do not know your background or knowledge I asked. For the same reason I asked about your development skills to ascertain if you are an expert or layman. For these reasons you made multiple personal attacks on myself violating forum rules. Based on my own evaluation and your own statements I think your background may be scant in software development which means you may not understand what actually goes into developing a software product from beginning to end. If I am wrong please correct that. I also feel you want an excellent product for MWiF and in your own opinion it is not happening. I am unsure as to your motivation though. At times it seems like you have a passion for getting a better game and at times it seems like you just want to drive a stake into the heart of the project. This leave me bewildered and confused when your own arguments are contradictory. For example earlier you said "all of the above, except the second option." Indicating you wanted a better product but also wanted to derail the project. So when I look at the summation of your posts, your resasoning, your expierance, and your percieved motivation, it all becomes background noise compared to the personal attacks you keep leveling at me, Steve, and others. Stop the attacks and we might actually listen.

Anendrue -> RE: When? (11/27/2012 2:23:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bo Agreed, no one should be banned as long as no cussing or filthy remarks against another poster are involved, saying that means nothing because only an individual can deem about what is said about him or her is destructive to their nature. bo At my age and my background calling someone an a-- is cussing, derogatory, and vulgar. For that and only that did I ask for him to be banned. If I ever used such language at any place I have ever worked my employment would have been short. Even in my USAF days it would have been unacceptable to do that to anyone in public. It would have fallen under conduct unbecoming a Non Commissioned Officer. In my church people would probably avoid you unless there was a quick and heartfelt apology. In most professional jobs it would get you fired. I do understand there are some places and people who find that word acceptable. That does not however make it acceptable nor mean that I have to accept it as such.

bo -> RE: When? (11/27/2012 3:20:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: abj9562 quote: ORIGINAL: bo Agreed, no one should be banned as long as no cussing or filthy remarks against another poster are involved, saying that means nothing because only an individual can deem about what is said about him or her is destructive to their nature. bo At my age and my background calling someone an a-- is cussing, derogatory, and vulgar. For that and only that did I ask for him to be banned. If I ever used such language at any place I have ever worked my employment would have been short. Even in my USAF days it would have been unacceptable to do that to anyone in public. It would have fallen under conduct unbecoming a Non Commissioned Officer. In my church people would probably avoid you unless there was a quick and heartfelt apology. In most professional jobs it would get you fired. I do understand there are some places and people who find that word acceptable. That does not however make it acceptable nor mean that I have to accept it as such. Errrrrrrrr abj, should you not be working on the MWIF web site that we are all eagerly awaiting [even crussdaddy] lets get crackin my man. [:-] Bo

warspite1 -> RE: When? (11/27/2012 7:05:24 AM)
Have you read the contradictory, self righteous drivel you spout?? quote: When faced with opinions contrary to your own, you should be able to say "No, I disagree." Yeah, just like you do[8\|] You wouldn't stoop so low as to discredit, what was it? Failtrix, Matrash (Hilarious - [8\|]) "Matrix don't give a ***", "they don't want the game to come out". [X(] quote:* You seek to remove the opposition through spurious questions of expertise. Yeah. Still waiting for that list of megabucks computer wargame companies that you advised us about 2 years ago that you know about and that will throw piles of cash at the game, regardless of economic reality. Oh and still waiting for you to answer post 2984 Mr Expert. [>:] quote: Failing that, perhaps a clutching of pearls at deployment of a synonym for "fool" can abolish the transgressor? Sorry, when I said about you being a genius wordsmith I was being sarcastic - you seem to have taken it to heart - bless [8\|] quote: ....find a landing strip and come back down to Planet Earth with the rest of us. [X(][X(] Let me fix that for you - quote: ....find a landing strip and come back down to Planet Spoiled Child with me - there you go I think that' more accurately deals with that. quote: Don't be afraid of contrary opinions, trust in your own enough to say "I do not agree" without need to discredit the messenger. Listen to yourself. Do you know what irony is? (no Blackadder jokes please). My last question to you - If the game is not coming out, if Steve is out of his depth, if Matrix are doing all they can to keep the rights and not produce the game, why don't you just ****** off? Apart from trolling, why would you stick around if you believe the nonsense you write?

werwolf -> RE: When? (11/27/2012 7:17:53 AM)
When a couple of years ago I posted (or maybe started) a post asking why this game was never released yet and I supposed that Matrix Game never wanted to release it neither in the future I was covered with a lot of insults and words like troll, etc., etc., etc, showing a deep lackage of democracy.... Strange what I am able to read in these days....... Hops,I forgot that the game will be realesd when it will be ready.....maybe for this Christmas.....bla, bla, bla,.... Ah,ah, ah, ah, poor boys....

warspite1 -> RE: When? (11/27/2012 7:21:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: werwolf When a couple of years ago I posted (or maybe started) a post asking why this game was never released yet and I supposed that Matrix Game never wanted to release it neither in the future I was covered with a lot of insults and words like troll, etc., etc., etc, showing a deep lackage of democracy.... Strange what I am able to read in these days....... Hops,I forgot that the game will be realesd when it will be ready.....maybe for this Christmas.....bla, bla, bla,.... Ah,ah, ah, ah, poor boys.... warspite1 I shouldn't bother asking but.... Why would Matrix not want the game released? I don't understand your reasoning. Why would they do that? Maybe you are right - so let's hear your logic please.

werwolf -> RE: When? (11/27/2012 7:32:09 AM)
Probably you should ask Matrix.... In all these years of complaint Matrix has never aswered, try to think why..... And moreover try to think which reasons could lead Matrix not to release this game (economic, avoid to admit a failure, etc. etc., etc.)

warspite1 -> RE: When? (11/27/2012 7:39:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: werwolf Probably you should ask Matrix.... In all these years of complaint Matrix has never aswered, try to think why..... And moreover try to think which reasons could lead Matrix not to release this game (economic, avoid to admit a failure, etc. etc., etc.) warspite1 No, I was asking you. You have made a statement that, by any measure, makes no sense. I'm respectfully asking you to put forward sensible arguments that support your theory.

Page: << < prev 99 100 [101] 102 103 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.84375