Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Licences...

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: Licences... Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Licences... - 5/27/2005 11:50:09 PM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline
No. I was using it as an example of the finest pbem/AI strategic format Matrix was capable of and saying that in terms of a pbem/AI game , it would blow away CWiF. So why try to make CWiF compete with it's own product? The value of CWiF is in it's poker/bridge-like interaction between players as much as anything else. Would you want a global WitP?

quote:

GG & co officially scuttled plans for a Mediterranean version of WitP a few months ago...


Well there you have it. Though I'd say, relative to an AI/pbem version of CWiF, global WitP would be easier to produce -and better to play.

< Message edited by macgregor -- 5/28/2005 12:15:13 AM >

(in reply to Cheesehead)
Post #: 31
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/28/2005 10:35:26 AM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline
Interesting how this thread became the battleground once again for the same old debate. My hope was that posters would think in a constructive way about the idea of using an expansions model, and then give Matrix some options to consider. I am willing to hear any polite (and hopefully fresh) thoughts on the subject.

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 32
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/28/2005 4:14:00 PM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline
Have you worked with the Editor program that was included

I changed the base color for the Chineese. Yellow didn't show up well on the global map.

I also started labeling the names for the sea zones.

I didn't try to create an entire sceanario (I belive this is doable to a greater or lesser degree) but there are a lot of things you can do with the Editor.

< Message edited by Mziln -- 5/28/2005 7:47:36 PM >

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 33
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/28/2005 7:18:59 PM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln

I didn't try to create an entire sceanario (I belive this is doable to a greater or lesser degree) but there are a lot of things you can do with the Editor.



You make an interesting point Mziln. Should Matrix include an editor feature with the program? It would be fun to generate some scenarios to match individual personal tastes. I would enjoy the ability to change the alliance structures, to mix it up (Ge/Ru/France vs. the rest?). Matrix could even post some of the more interesting custom scenarios on the website.

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 34
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/28/2005 7:51:04 PM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline
I don't think it needs a high priority. It is nice to have though.

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 35
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/29/2005 7:07:32 AM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline
I'm for leaving the editor in. I'd like it if players could not only create their own scenarios, but their own units as well. DoD would be an interesting addition. If it's added, I'd like this to be editable as well. I'm not sure how easy that would be, but I tend to like games that have websites with player created scenarios. If I had my choice I would rather see some sort of colored plate dawings featuring soldiers in the uniforms of the different nations rather than grainy black & white photos like in WitP as I think this would be more informative. (I'm assuming they plan on showing more graphical detail than the demo.)

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 36
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/29/2005 7:29:52 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline
There is no editor "in." People have to realize that the code Matrix inherited when it made the gross mistake of ever embarking on this project counts almost nothing toward creating the product they want to sell after they get it developed.

This whole thing is at "square one."

I would like to see Matrix take the stance, on the surface an unpopular one, of saying, "Look, folks, we want to produce a game. We want to finish it within our lifetimes. We want it to be playable when we sell it, and we recognize that, for economic survival, a decent AI is a necessity. Maybe later, an editor and other fancies can be added, but, for now, let's just 'Get 'er Done.'"

This is one of the things that killed WitP. If it had been created as a game, it might have worked. But no. "We wanna have 400 carriers in the game." "What if the Japanese had built Mig-15s in 1933?" "I wanna make my AKs into CVBs."

Gimme a break. Let the designers create a game, then decide if you want to buy and play it. "I like checkers, but 32 squares aren't enough, and two-high kings are boring." Please.

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 37
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/29/2005 7:35:07 AM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline
I agree. I just wanted to post about something different -but you are correct. I'm trying to stay in topic. It's nice to hear someone else say what I've been saying all along.

< Message edited by macgregor -- 5/29/2005 7:40:35 AM >

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 38
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/29/2005 1:22:09 PM   
Greyshaft


Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: macgregor

I agree. I just wanted to post about something different -but you are correct. I'm trying to stay in topic. It's nice to hear someone else say what I've been saying all along.

Hmmm... Macgregor I suggest you reread a few posts. I daresay that what Pasternakski has asked for is NOT what you have been saying all along. He has endorsed a Matrix stance which says that "a decent AI is a necessity" while I recollect that you see an AI as an unnecessary option.

_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 39
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/29/2005 4:47:20 PM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline
I've read your posts enough to realize is that their only common theme is that they're anti-macgregor.(as was this last one) Don't worry, I'll keep posting. I want to give you something to post about. Erik understands my point, so I'll let it rest. Either the logic for what I'm saying exists or it doesn't. It's out of either one of our hands now. I've let you flame my anger enough. Post what you like, but don't expect a reply.

< Message edited by macgregor -- 5/29/2005 4:55:48 PM >

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 40
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/29/2005 7:00:55 PM   
SamuraiProgrmmr

 

Posts: 353
Joined: 10/17/2004
From: Paducah, Kentucky
Status: offline
I agree with pasternakski


_____________________________

Bridge is the best wargame going .. Where else can you find a tournament every weekend?

(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 41
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/29/2005 11:45:27 PM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

There is no editor "in." People have to realize that the code Matrix inherited when it made the gross mistake of ever embarking on this project counts almost nothing toward creating the product they want to sell after they get it developed.

This whole thing is at "square one."

I would like to see Matrix take the stance, on the surface an unpopular one, of saying, "Look, folks, we want to produce a game. We want to finish it within our lifetimes. We want it to be playable when we sell it, and we recognize that, for economic survival, a decent AI is a necessity. Maybe later, an editor and other fancies can be added, but, for now, let's just 'Get 'er Done.'"



Paragraph 1:

There is no editor.

From the CWiF Changes file (September 13, 2002): EDITOR BUGS FIXED Version 0.5.32 You can create elite divisions.

Matrix made a gross mistake embarking on this project. This is obviously your opinion.

The existing code counts almost nothing toward creating the product they want to sell and develope. This is obviously your opinion.

Paragraph 2:

This whole thing is at "square one". This is obviously your opinion.

Paragraph 3:

'Get 'er Done.

Get what done? If we are at "Square One" you must mean "Get 'er Started".

Ignoring last 2 paragraphs.


Where do you find your information to support your opinion and claims? pasternakski I went and read some of your more recent posts/rants. No facts just rants.


< Message edited by Mziln -- 5/29/2005 11:57:44 PM >

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 42
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/30/2005 7:57:26 AM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

Matrix ... made the gross mistake of ever embarking on this project.


Very similar to what Panzerjaeger Hortlund said a while back. Could you please do a favor for those of us who actually like WiF and want to see it developed for the computer? Either be more supportive, or place such comments in the threads where they belong.

(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 43
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/30/2005 9:37:28 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SamuraiProgrammer

I agree with pasternakski


I agree with Pasternakski, too.

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to SamuraiProgrmmr)
Post #: 44
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/30/2005 9:42:59 AM   
pasternakski


Posts: 6565
Joined: 6/29/2002
Status: offline
Well, mziln, all I can tell you is that, if you think the Chris Marinucci beta is going to be the engine for this game, you'd better think again.

That is my opinion.

_____________________________

Put my faith in the people
And the people let me down.
So, I turned the other way,
And I carry on anyhow.

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 45
staying positive - 5/30/2005 1:47:48 PM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline
I think most people who have played CM's beta were impressed by what he accomplished with so little in the way of resources. I agree, however, that MWiF can't use his code as the basis of the program. Of course, Matrix's team will want to consult with him about this project, to learn from both the problems and the working solutions he came across in his journey. But Harry Rowland has tasked Matrix with doing so much more with WiF, including PBEM and AI. Fulfilling Harry's vision for this game will require Robert Crandall and his team to keep these additional features in mind from the beginning.

Rather than continuing to hope for Matrix to suddenly decide to dust off Chris's beta and polish it up for release, we should honor Harry's wishes and support Matrix in this effort; this means being patient and trying to keep our input focused on how to help Matrix accomplish this gargantuan task. Perhaps this is not the road each of us individually would prefer, but Harry's wishes are in keeping with what many posters in this forum feel is required for this game to be as commercially viable as possible.

In keeping with this, I suggest we all try to stay more positive and try to keep our personal feelings more under control. I share the desire of many of you that the final game be playable in a faithful manner (e.g., synchronously). At the same time, I understand that my wishes are not representative of everyone's, and that the game will have wider appeal if effective PBEM mode and solid AI are both included. This means starting from scratch with the code, but always with an eye to the lessons Chris learned during his efforts.

To everyone who follows this project, and in particularly to those Matrix devotees who have achieved some credibility through the years: I appeal to you all to avoid doomsaying and negativity. Constructive criticism can be given without resorting to public pessimism, narrow-mindedness, and/or personal attacks. This is the best way to encourage and assist Matrix in this endeavor. Thanks for taking the time to consider my concerns... I really do want the best possible MWiF, as I'm sure do you all.

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 46
RE: staying positive - 5/30/2005 5:32:36 PM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline
You guys just can't let it rest, can you. I find your post arrogantly presumptive with little or no concrete verification. You have no idea what Harry wishes -and everything I've read from matrix tells me this issue is still undecided. You want to post positive ideas, fine. Then post them. Don't criricize me for being negative, then continue the argument as though you've put my ideas to rest.

It's obvious matrix is quite capable of producing a first-rate global WW2 sim that is pbem/AI from what they've already produced. They can also finish making CWiF. Putting the two together will delay and diminish the capabilities of both games.

< Message edited by macgregor -- 5/30/2005 5:51:16 PM >

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 47
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/30/2005 5:56:15 PM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline
quote:


RE: Screenshots - 7/31/2004 2:47:28 PM
RobertCrandall

Sorry, the existing code base is in Borland Delphi (object pascal, fabulous Implementation!) and that is where it will stay since Delphi is my favourite language. If we had to start over in Java it would never see the light of day! Matrix has said point blank that I am not allowed to start over.

More interesting in my mind is the possibility of making it a Dot Net app in a few years. Delphi has a really nice upgrade path in that regard. It doesn't get you the cross platform compatibility you are looking for but does offer an interesting new direction. That is truly gleem in the eye stuff though so don't hold me to it!

Good question though!

Cheers, Rob.


That is the opinion of Matrix.





(in reply to pasternakski)
Post #: 48
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/30/2005 6:40:41 PM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline
Thanks Mzlin! Where the hell did you dig that up? It seems to me that there's a temptation on the part of the actual programmers (those working for matrix and those who simply post) to make this AI for WiF because 'it can be done'. Well I don't know from Borland Delphi or Java. But I can tell you this: Watching the computer make all these decisions has little appeal for me. Oh it can be done, but I fail to see the resultant value. If the final product is not as good as the best global AI sim matrix can produce outside of the CWiF format, then I feel it will have been a waste of time.

< Message edited by macgregor -- 5/30/2005 6:41:12 PM >

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 49
RE: staying positive - 5/30/2005 7:00:02 PM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: macgregor

You have no idea what Harry wishes -and everything I've read from matrix tells me this issue is still undecided.


Since you haven't read ADG's website, here's what they have to say about MWiF:

quote:

Game Features
Faithful adaptation of the latest Deluxe version of World In Flames
Network play
Play by Email support
Intelligent computer opponent
Many optional rules and game system enhancements


This forum is not the only place dedicated to WiF. I hope that Harry reads these posts, though, so he can clear up for Matrix devotees just what his wishes are. My post was not directed at you Mac... more than anyone, it was directed to the Matrix five-stars who have recently called MWiF "vaporware" and "a gross mistake". Your opinion is very clear (many times over redundantly so), but not every post in this forum is about you. That being said, from now on I just have to let your personal attacks go and stop responding to them.

< Message edited by coregames -- 5/30/2005 7:02:06 PM >

(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 50
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/30/2005 7:13:08 PM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mziln

quote:

ORIGINAL: RobertCrandall

Matrix has said point blank that I am not allowed to start over.





Doesn't using the existing legacy code make the inclusion of the other features more difficult? I don't claim to be an expert in such things (my programming experience is limited to C++ and VBasic), so perhaps they can build the game around CM's code. If that helps the process then I retract my opinion about using the CM beta as the basis for MWiF. I was impressed by what he accomplished.

(in reply to Mziln)
Post #: 51
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/30/2005 9:46:56 PM   
Mziln


Posts: 1107
Joined: 2/9/2004
From: Tulsa Oklahoma
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: macgregor

Thanks Mzlin! Where the hell did you dig that up?


Search > Author: RobertCrandall > search term: code

I remembered that Mr. Crandall had posted about not being allowed to rewrite the game and searched for it.

Please note: there is no space in the author name. It's RobertCrandall or you won't find his posts.



(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 52
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/30/2005 10:52:34 PM   
SamuraiProgrmmr

 

Posts: 353
Joined: 10/17/2004
From: Paducah, Kentucky
Status: offline
I want to make a point that may or may not make a difference to the people involved in this debate.

CWiF is written in Delphi. Delphi is a VERY powerful language. For many years, I have been using Delphi as my primary platform. There have been many innovations that have been done first in Delphi and then emulated in other packages such as Visual Basic. Delphi is also the first non-Microsoft full scale language to handle dotNet. There are successful games that were programmed using Delphi. The folks at Matrix should NOT be villified for using CWiF as a code base IF it has been done properly. They have stated that is was done well. We won't see the code so we might as well take their word for it.

I, for one, am tired of listening to what have become nothing more than childish tirades by pouting whiners who only want their way. I have things I want this project to do and have advocated them. However, I have NEVER said that somone elses pet idea should be completely excluded. I have NEVER threatened not to buy it unless Matrix does exactly what I want.

How foolish!

If a sale to one customer is going to make or break this project, then Matrix made a mistake even starting it.

They have provided us with a forum to air concerns, banter ideas, and tell them what we would like to see.

PLEASE STOP MAKING THEM REGRET IT!



_____________________________

Bridge is the best wargame going .. Where else can you find a tournament every weekend?

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 53
Legacy Code - 5/31/2005 1:08:08 AM   
Greyshaft


Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: coregames
Doesn't using the existing legacy code make the inclusion of the other features more difficult?


Not necessarily.
The vast majority of Chris's work was the creation of the User Interface and the data tables. Given the dedicated fan following for the traditional WiF 'look and feel' I don't see that UI being replaced. There will doubtless be additional work in that area by RobertC to develop the hooks for the AI but that original work that should be (maybe) 80-90% portable to a new incarnation.

I also remember that the ADG website *always* spoke about the original WiF computer game having an AI... their question was whether to release the AI at the same time as the face-to-face module. Therefore the existing code was probably created with AI hooks already in place.



_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 54
RE: staying positive - 5/31/2005 2:08:57 AM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Since you haven't read ADG's website, here's what they have to say about MWiF:


I posted the same exact list from that website on page 1 of this thread.

quote:

I, for one, am tired of listening to what have become nothing more than childish tirades by pouting whiners who only want their way.


I'll admit I've allowed myself to get dragged into this. I didn't realize I was being goaded. I'll steress my point when necesary because I do want people to understand it. So far no one other than the attackers (and Erik Rutins) have even aknowledged it. Let me remind everyone that this game was properly announced as 'should be released' over 5 years ago by ADG. News of it's release predated that list which coregames failed to read on my earlier post. (That announcement has of course since been removed) I'm not saying this to chastise Matrix or ADG but simply to make a point: People that were keeping an eye on the ADG website have since then been waiting a long time for this game. Some impatience is justified.

< Message edited by macgregor -- 5/31/2005 3:02:19 AM >

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 55
RE: staying positive - 5/31/2005 3:08:42 AM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline
I have followed your posts mac, and have been insistently supportive of the synchronous (read here: faithful) mode of play for MWiF from the beginning. I have never fallen into the trap of becoming an attacker of anyone in this forum; I hope you don't put me into that category. When I urge everyone to keep their posts as polite as possible, it isn't directed at you in particular. It does seem that Harry wants the listed features we both posted from ADG's site to be the guiding vision for MWiF, otherwise Chris Marinacci would still be chipping away at this Mount Rushmore of a project. Perhaps PBEM and AI were just too much for him to take on, and Matrix's people excel at both.

I do want the discourse in here to remain positive, and that can hardly be construed as an attack on anyone. Saying that I am arrogantly presumptive might be construed that way; however, I should not rise to that with ire of my own, and I apologize if it seemed to you that way.

(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 56
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/31/2005 3:13:49 AM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SamuraiProgrammer

I, for one, am tired of listening to what have become nothing more than childish tirades by pouting whiners who only want their way. I have things I want this project to do and have advocated them. However, I have NEVER said that somone elses pet idea should be completely excluded. I have NEVER threatened not to buy it unless Matrix does exactly what I want.



This was in response to something I posted SamuraiProgrammer? Please let me know so I can scold myself.

(in reply to SamuraiProgrmmr)
Post #: 57
RE: Legacy Code - 5/31/2005 3:25:17 AM   
coregames


Posts: 470
Joined: 8/12/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Greyshaft

I also remember that the ADG website *always* spoke about the original WiF computer game having an AI... their question was whether to release the AI at the same time as the face-to-face module. Therefore the existing code was probably created with AI hooks already in place.



If that is the case, clearly that makes Robert Crandall's job easier... very good news! Would it be too much to hope that CM did some work on a PBEM mode and has hooks in place for that as well? Not that I'm likely to use that mode much, but it would mean the release of the game might come all-the-sooner.

Thanks again Greyshaft.

< Message edited by coregames -- 5/31/2005 3:28:20 AM >

(in reply to Greyshaft)
Post #: 58
RE: staying positive - 5/31/2005 3:37:01 AM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline
quote:

Saying that I am arrogantly presumptive might be construed that way; however, I should not rise to that with ire of my own, and I apologize if it seemed to you that way.


I am sorry for using the phrase 'arrogantly presumptive'. If I am to make such a digression in the future if you would be so kind as to point it out I will be happy to address it.

I'm not convinced that this quoted list of features that's presently on ADG's website was Harry's original wishes -as there's no indication in the demo. So I do disagree with your 'assumption'.If we were all sitting at a table discussing this I don't think our comments would be taken with quite the same gravity.

quote:

I also remember that the ADG website *always* spoke about the original WiF computer game having an AI...


I also disagree with this, however politely. I don't recall seeing this until the Matrix announcement. (I could be wrong)

< Message edited by macgregor -- 5/31/2005 3:44:50 AM >

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 59
RE: scenarios and expansions - 5/31/2005 4:25:17 AM   
SamuraiProgrmmr

 

Posts: 353
Joined: 10/17/2004
From: Paducah, Kentucky
Status: offline
Coregames,

My post started out as a refutation of the implication that Delphi was not a top-notch programming platform. Maybe I should have stopped there.

It grew into a rant against people who have threatened not to buy the game if Matrix doesn't do exactly what they want - especially those who threatened to gather their minions to boycot Matrix and / or WIF in the same way. Anyone who has crossed that boundary in any of the WIF threads can consider themselves as the 'target' of that portion of the post and have my permission to hate me forever. If you (or anyone else) does not fit that bill, I aplogize for my rant.

I read this forum as a series of e-mails and after glancing back over this thread have come to the realization that the threats of boycott, singular or en masse may have been from another post. I apologize to all for breaking forum etiquitte in that case.

To Everyone,

I have no animosity to anyone on this forum, but the tone has shifted in the last few weeks and I fear what that tone might do to this game.

When I hear about a new game, the first thing I do is find the 'official' forum and try to go back to the beginning and read the threads. It gives me a pretty good idea of how the project is perceived about the people who likely care about it the most. I suspect, that if I were not already introduced to WIF as a table top game, I would quickly move on to the next candidate for a game purchase and never look back.

If that happens, Matrix could take a financial beating.

Before I go on, let me give you my credentials so you will understand that I know what I am talking about. I am a 20 year veteran custom software developer. I have usually worked alone. I have many systems to my credit including (but not limited to) 3 complete accounting systems (including payroll), 2 job cost systems, 2 boat / barge dispatch systems, a car repossesion management package, a customizable commision tracking program, and an agricultural finance/marketing package that totals 150,000 lines - all written solely by yours truly. My claim to fame is that several peices of this software have been in constant usage for over 5 years without having to be touched by a programmer. I even once delivered a project that had 0 bugs. By 0, I mean ZERO - NONE - ZIP - NADA. I know what it takes to write quality software.

Having said that, I will say this:

ANY SOFTWARE CAN BE WRITTEN TO DO ANYTHING IF THERE IS ONLY ENOUGH MONEY AND TIME GIVEN TO COMPETENT PROGRAMMERS!

Before Chris M started work on this game, I considered porting WIF to a PC myself. After a few weeks of thinking about how to put it together and what it would take to accomplish the task, I decided not to. It was just too big to complete in my spare time. It is possible that some of the people at Matrix may feel they have bitten off more than they can chew for a profit. Remember, they are a business. They MUST make profits or they will ALL be looking for new jobs.

I am sure that the people directly involved in this project still feel that it is doable and are looking forward to building a piece of software that fulfills the requirement set out in the initial agreement. However, if there is enough grumbling, naysaying, bitching, moaning, whining, griping, and threats; the managment types may start reconsidering. With the remarks made in this forum, they would be negligent if they did not at least think it through one more time and consider dumping this project before it starts costing red ink.

All of the activity here, especially the threats to gather a group of perspective customers and boycot the product could easily bring that about.

I FEAR that some of the negativist prophecies of doom can become self fulfilling.

Matrix gave us a place to tell them what we wanted. They gave us a place to discuss what will or will not work. I have participated in those discussions. I have my opinion (and agenda). Many others have another. I have consistently tried to point out that there is a possibility for everyone to get their wish list. But even the concept of 'let's all support each other and ask Matrix to do several things' has fallen on deaf ears. There are denizens of this forum that have rejected that and ranted (repeatedly) about how "their way was the only way that this game would ever work and how can anyone be so stupid to think otherwise". This is not a direct quote, but I think anyone who has frequented this forum will agree that the tone has conveyed this at times.

I have stated publicly that I will pre order and PRE PAY for my copy of this game. I have not put any conditions on it such as:

1) If it is done by next Monday
2) If it is done by next Month
3) If it is done by next Year
4) If it has TCP/IP
5) If it has PBEM
6) If it has the full sequence of play
7) If it has a compressed sequence of play
8) If the graphics are redone
9) If the graphcis are the same
10) If a certain supplemental kit is included
11) If it has an AI

and so on.

No, I am ready to pony up right now - unconditionally! Why?

Because World In Flames is simply the BEST Strategic Level World War II game I have ever played. It will be a shame for this game to go unported in a professional manner.

Chris M did a fine job, but apparently was not able to secure financing to treat it as his primary focus of activity. Hell, we all have to earn a living.

I can tell I am getting a full blown rant going now... so I am just going to make one point and then I will stop.

To those of you who are acting like Matrix is harming us by not allowing Chris M's version to continue to be distrubuted - GROW UP! They are about to invest several hundred thousand dollars into this project. Why should they continue to let it be given away?

IF YOU WHINERS CARED ENOUGH ABOUT THIS GAME TO HAVE PARTICIPATED IN THE PLAYTESTING, YOU WOULD HAVE A COPY!

But no, you wanted to sit on your ass while others clicked and typed and groaned after losing some playing time to a new bug. I bet you even planned to get a copy just before it was finished in the hopes that it was 'good enough' and you didn't have to pay the purchase price until it hit the bargain bin.

I said I was going to say one more thing and then quit -- I LIED

We should be doing anything we can to encourage Matrix to complete whatever game they intend to and SUPPORT IT! I mean it! Tell the world how great it is and then, when the revenue starts rolling in we can ask Matrix to add expansion packs, create scenarios, create editors, release new versions or whatever we want. But SUPPORT IT! That will ensure that this piece of software can be as great as possible.

Matrix will make whatever decisions are fiscally responsible. They will listen to our opinions and look to us for suggestions, but when the chips come down, they will make a BUSINESS DECISION. When that happens, the only choice we will have is to make it successful enough that they want to continue expanding it.

One Last thing - I Promise to stop after this.

If any of you are that unhappy about how Matrix is handling this, you do have three valid avenues to effect change

1) Acquire ownership of World In Flames from Harry.
2) Acquire ownership the rights to MWIF from Matrix Games.
3) Acquire ownership of Matrix Games.

Any of those will put you in the decision loop in some fashion. #3 will guarantee that you get just what you want.

Until you are willing and ABLE to pony up the cash to do that, you need to remember that the people who are willing and able to have done those three things are going to make decisions that you may not like. Quit taking actions that may make them make a decision we will all hate.


That is enough for now. I will go get my asbestos boxers 'cause I know my butt is about to be flamed.



DISCLAIMER : I am in no way associated with Matrix Games other than as a possible customer.


_____________________________

Bridge is the best wargame going .. Where else can you find a tournament every weekend?

(in reply to coregames)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: Licences... Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.828