[40k] [Epic] Horus Heresy Revisited
Playa
Hey,
Remember when GW was a game company?
Well, they're a model company now. FFG is a game company:
http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_minisite_sec.asp?eidm=98&esem=2
Playa
Doctor Rock
"Playa" <johnpau...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cecf477b-6df2-4f54...@s3g2000yqs.googlegroups.com...
$100?? not when i still got the free card version that came in WD like 20
years ago, thanks
Playa
Hey,
On Dec 29, 4:56 am, "Doctor Rock" <mala...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> $100?? not when i still got the free card version that came in WD like 20
> years ago, thanks
Oh. How about if it includes 120 models?
+++
Horus Heresy
On the thirteenth day of Secundus, the bombardment began.
Warmaster Horus – once humanity’s greatest general, now corrupted by
Chaos – has turned against the Emperor and hurled the Imperium of Man
into ferocious civil war. The galactic conflict has risen to its
climax. The Warmaster’s ruinous legions have assaulted Holy Terra
itself, the Emperor’s seat. Horus' flagship, the Vengeful Spirit, has
just moved into orbit around Terra. The Emperor has committed to this
final stand against the traitorous forces of his once celebrated son.
Taking the side of traitor or loyalist, two players control either
fearless Space Marine legions or deviant Chaos Space Marines, mighty
Titans, Imperial Armies both loyal and traitorous, and a fearsome
array of other units, including the Emperor and Horus themselves.
As the Imperial player you are the Emperor of Holy Terra himself, the
last beacon of hope for the future of all mankind, who stands within
the Imperial Palace surrounded by a cadre of his elite personal guard,
the Adeptus Custodes. Awaiting your command are loyalist Imperial
forces including three legions of loyal Space Marines, innumerable
mass regiments of infantry and Imperial tank divisions rumbling across
the landscape, defense laser batteries scanning the horizon for any
hint of the forces of Chaos, and lumbering across the landscape – the
last of the massive Imperial Titans, enormous walking temples of war,
towering overhead and bristling with armament.
You may choose instead to personally lead the attack on Terra in the
role of the Warmaster Horus. In orbit high above the planet is the
Vengeful Spirit, the Warmaster's flagship, from which Horus
orchestrates this final assault upon the Imperial Palace. From your
command center you will order forth legions of Chaos Space Marines,
armies of traitors and cultists eager to spread delicious mayhem,
chaotic Thunderhawk gunship squadrons and drop pods that can deliver
destruction with surgical precision, and lurking at the fringes of
sanity – gibbering Chaos hordes and daemon forces from the Warp.
After both players have finished placing their units on the board, it
may appear at first glance that Imperial defenses are impenetrable, as
most of the board will be filled with legions of forces loyal to the
Emperor. However, the first action in the game is called corruption.
The Traitor player selects twelve individual Imperial Army units or
Imperial Tank Divisions, and tests each one in turn. The Traitor
player will draw a bombardment card for each target unit, and refer to
the symbol at the bottom of the card. If the card displays the Chaos
star, the unit has switched its allegiance, and is now under the full
control of the Traitor player!
Once the corruption step is complete, draw upon the same deck as
before, except now you will refer to the top of the card to resolve
bombardments. The corruption and bombardment mechanics do a remarkable
job of setting the stage for a cataclysmic confrontation. An order and
initiative system forces each side to carefully consider the commands
they issue. There are no dice, a card-driven combat system
incorporates escalating damage, gives players the opportunity to
allocate resources between attack and defense, and brings to bear the
unique special powers of each unit type, from Titans to daemons of
Chaos.
Horus Heresy includes six scenarios brought to life with over one
hundred plastic playing pieces. The 3-D map of Terra portrays the
fortifications that offer the Imperial player protection against both
enemy assault and orbital bombardments. Each one of these structures,
as well as the Imperial Palace itself, have been expertly sculpted,
and rise above the landscape to create a truly immersive experience.
In addition to the plasteel encased garrisons, players will struggle
for control of the spaceports positioned at four quadrants across the
map which will determine how easily Horus can bring fresh waves of
assailants to the battle, as well as locations aboard the Vengeful
Spirit.
Finally, the last few sections of the board are used to manage the
sundry details and unique mechanics of gameplay, such as the orders
you issue to units in preparation for future manoeuvres, the heated
turn-by-turn iterations of massed unit combat, the tense ebb and flow
of an initiative track that controls which player will act next, and
even damage suffered by your hero characters as they lead their ever
loyal forward to press the attack.
+++
Pla - Titans, yo! - ya
smcdaniel1
"Playa" <johnpau...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:cecf477b-6df2-4f54...@s3g2000yqs.googlegroups.com...
>
This does look interesting.
I'd like to see the models, though.
--
Sir Scott "Always leery... " McDaniel
Playa
Hey,
On Dec 29, 3:08 pm, "smcdaniel1" <smcdani...@cox.net> wrote:
> I'd like to see the models
They're not the makers of the long awaited Fishmen:
http://www.blogcatalog.com/blog/nauticans-a-new-army-for-use-in-warhammer-fantasy-battles
But FFG produces GW remakes like Fury of Dracula, Talisman, WFRP the
Radio Game and
Chaos Marauders which, interestingly, isn't about Chaos in the Old
World. It's about Orcs.
THIS is the one that's about Chaos in the Old World:
That'll give you some idea of the deal they have with GW re: included
models.
Sculpts are okay- not pre-painted - and the boards are fairly true to
canon.
Models are not on Slotta bases. Ref: Space Hulk.
Cards and Counters look to be of good quality.
The HH board is a bit weird. Ref: link below.
Doesn't it look like two copies of the same map?
Closer looks:
http://picasaweb.google.com/JohnPaulPontiff/CitOWHH_FFG
HTH
Playa
smcdaniel1
"Playa" <johnpau...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:7bb2dce0-1450-477e...@s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com...
>Closer looks:
>http://picasaweb.google.com/JohnPaulPontiff/CitOWHH_FFG
>HTH
I'm in.
--
Sir Scott "Nice... " McDaniel
Doctor Rock
Hey,
On Dec 29, 4:56 am, "Doctor Rock" <mala...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> $100?? not when i still got the free card version that came in WD like 20
> years ago, thanks
Oh. How about if it includes 120 models?
+++
Horus Heresy
On the thirteenth day of Secundus, the bombardment began.
<snip>
=====
yeah that does sound cool but even so... still $100 in one go. i can't even
afford to spend that much on research texts these days, nevermind
hobbyshit...
Phil Bowles
> "Playa" <johnpaulpont...@gmail.com> wrote in message
That was Warmaster. Horus Heresy cost about £15.
Phil
Phil Bowles
> Hey,
>
> On Dec 29, 4:56 am, "Doctor Rock" <mala...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > $100?? not when i still got the free card version that came in WD like 20
> > years ago, thanks
>
> Oh. How about if it includes 120 models?
No thanks, I looked at them. At least the Titan and Terminators they
show on the site.
Phil
Playa
Hey,
On Dec 30, 2:08 pm, Phil Bowles <pbow...@aol.com> wrote:
> On 29 Dec, 10:15, Playa <johnpaulpont...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > if it includes 120 models?
>
> No thanks, I looked at them
Again, FFG is not a model company.
But, as long as you bring it up -
From the GWOLS:
1 Warlord Titan -- $45
1 Reaver Titan --- $35
1 Warhound Titan - $25
Total ------------ $105 for three truly awful models.
Ergo, if HH includes just 3 awful Titan models, the rest is free.
Free seems pretty reasonable for a FFG system.
They're light-years ahead of GW in that area.
Still, as Al points out - a hundred bucks is a hundred bucks.
Playa
smcdaniel1
"Playa" <johnpau...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3dea3f4f-0913-4a9a...@c34g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
Hey,
>Still, as Al points out - a hundred bucks is a hundred bucks.
I can write it off.
--
Sir Scott "NEEENER!!! " McDaniel
BTW: What the Hell is stuck to my screen?
Phil Bowles
> Hey,
>
> On Dec 30, 2:08 pm, Phil Bowles <pbow...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > On 29 Dec, 10:15, Playa <johnpaulpont...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > if it includes 120 models?
>
> > No thanks, I looked at them
>
> Again, FFG is not a model company.
> But, as long as you bring it up -
> From the GWOLS:
>
> 1 Warlord Titan -- $45
> 1 Reaver Titan --- $35
> 1 Warhound Titan - $25
>
> Total ------------ $105 for three truly awful models.
>
> Ergo, if HH includes just 3 awful Titan models, the rest is free.
But why would I want any awful models? I've had the game for years -
if the only selling point of this version is that it adds plastic
playing pieces in place of counters, why would I get it if those
playing pieces are crap, whatever the price? I'm not the sort to buy
dross just because it's good-value dross - if I were, why would I ever
have started buying GW (i.e. quite good but terrible value) in the
first place?
Phil
Playa
Hey,
On Jan 3, 8:06 am, Phil Bowles <pbow...@aol.com> wrote:
> if the only selling point of this version is that it adds plastic
> playing pieces in place of counters, why would I get it
You're the one who said you wouldn't buy HH2 because of the models.
I'd just used the model count thing to contrast GW's usual pricing
scheme.
People won't long play a poor game no matter how pretty you may think
it is.
As a reminder - GW is a model company with low-quality rules.
They will sometimes combine poor models with poor rules.
FF's being the complete opposite is a win/ win for players.
So, let's just wait for Scott's review before deciding.
Playa
Phil Bowles
Hmm? FF makes poor models, and from what it says on the site it uses
the original GW rules for these games - sounds a lose-lose situation
to me; take what GW's fairly bad at (although the low quality of GW
rules is overstated - and Horus Heresy may not have been Battle for
Armageddon, but it was solid enough as a board wargame) and remove
what they're good at.
Phil
Playa
Hey,
On Jan 6, 5:23 am, Phil Bowles <pbow...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> Hmm? FF makes poor models, and from what it says on the site it uses
> the original GW rules for these games - sounds a lose-lose
Is this another 'common language' thing?
GW relegates writing to the lowest bidder:
GW = model co. = good models, indifferent rules.
FF relegates token production to the lowest bidder:
FFG = a game co. = good games, indifferent models.
Ergo, the FFHH game experience is certain to be superior.
HH2 is a diceless system, and so, not a clone of the GW rule set.
It will play like a game - for gamers - not be just another box of
models.
And if the Titans turn out to be as tall as my old Beetlebacks, so
much the better.
Pla - hasn't played Epic since SM - ya
Phil Bowles
> Hey,
>
> On Jan 6, 5:23 am, Phil Bowles <pbow...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Hmm? FF makes poor models, and from what it says on the site it uses
> > the original GW rules for these games - sounds a lose-lose
>
> Is this another 'common language' thing?
No, it's the comments to the effect that FF has to rerelease
discontinued GW games.
> GW relegates writing to the lowest bidder:
Not the point; the quality of the output is what matters. The old GW
boardgames had mostly solid rules systems, and its core games have
consistently shown improvements in the basic engine (and in most cases
in balance) with each new edition, just as you'd expect from a
'proper' games company.
> FF relegates token production to the lowest bidder:
> FFG = a game co. = good games, indifferent models.
> Ergo, the FFHH game experience is certain to be superior.
Only if it's (a) a *good* game company, and (b) isn't licencing a
product that already has its own ruleset developed inhouse by GW. Oh,
and (c) if the above is actually true rather than cynicism. Horus
Heresy was written entirely by Jervis Johnson, a member of a
comparatively large games company with a record of making some
genuinely good games (among them Battle for Armageddon and Epic
Armageddon). Whoever's writing at FF, they're apparently a small
company - who's their in-house talent?
> HH2 is a diceless system, and so, not a clone of the GW rule set.
The GW ruleset was a diceless system - except, as I recall, for
defence batteries firing at battlebarges.
> It will play like a game - for gamers - not be just another box of
> models.
Horus Heresy had no models - it was a board wargame. You do know the
game this new release is developed from?
http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/3170/horus-heresy
Phil
smcdaniel1
"Phil Bowles" <pbo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:23070d94-5169-4b9b...@u7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
On 7 Jan, 19:56, Playa <johnpaulpont...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey,
Only if it's (a) a *good* game company, and (b) isn't licencing a
product that already has its own ruleset developed inhouse by GW. Oh,
and (c) if the above is actually true rather than cynicism. Horus
Heresy was written entirely by Jervis Johnson, a member of a
comparatively large games company with a record of making some
genuinely good games (among them Battle for Armageddon and Epic
Armageddon). Whoever's writing at FF, they're apparently a small
company - who's their in-house talent?
=====================
Brakes. Brakes. Brakes.
When I worked on the original Everquest, we were a small company. I'm sure
I'll be told "That game sucked too.." by the game snobs, but dammit we
brought over 3 million people into the game. Being a small company is
EXACTLY where you want to be to make creative, innovative games. Remember
when Blizzard was small? Or even Bullfrog?
Don't even fuck with me about what happens when companies get "large".
The best games come from small start-ups and young companies; END OF STORY.
--
Sir Scott "I'm right, you are wrong... " McDaniel
Robert Singers
> Only if it's (a) a *good* game company, and (b) isn't licencing a
> product that already has its own ruleset developed inhouse by GW. Oh,
> and (c) if the above is actually true rather than cynicism. Horus
> Heresy was written entirely by Jervis Johnson, a member of a
> comparatively large games company with a record of making some
> genuinely good games (among them Battle for Armageddon and Epic
> Armageddon). Whoever's writing at FF, they're apparently a small
> company - who's their in-house talent?
Phil, you really need to get into the 21st Century. Do you really think
that a modern well run gaming company has to rely on "in-house" talent? Or
do you think that they would contract out to the appropriate people?
And I'll counter your point about JJ with GT.
Robert Singers
> When I worked on the original Everquest, we were a small company. I'm sure
> I'll be told "That game sucked too.." by the game snobs, but dammit we
> brought over 3 million people into the game. Being a small company is
> EXACTLY where you want to be to make creative, innovative games. Remember
> when Blizzard was small? Or even Bullfrog?
>
> Don't even fuck with me about what happens when companies get "large".
>
> The best games come from small start-ups and young companies; END OF
> STORY.
Yes but those small companies fail for exactly the same reason. The point
you're making is that in start ups there is little corporate inertia to
fight against.
FF is not taking that route. It's purchasing successful products - a lot
OOP - and marketing them globally. It's a good example of the long tail
approach to merchandising. And it probably doesn't have to worry about the
talent management.
I was checking their web site before and noticed they're now publishing
Britannia. I love that game but you haven't been able to get it for 20
years. I'll be buying a copy.
Phil Bowles
> "Phil Bowles" <pbow...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> news:23070d94-5169-4b9b...@u7g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
> On 7 Jan, 19:56, Playa <johnpaulpont...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Hey,
>
> Only if it's (a) a *good* game company, and (b) isn't licencing a
> product that already has its own ruleset developed inhouse by GW. Oh,
> and (c) if the above is actually true rather than cynicism. Horus
> Heresy was written entirely by Jervis Johnson, a member of a
> comparatively large games company with a record of making some
> genuinely good games (among them Battle for Armageddon and Epic
> Armageddon). Whoever's writing at FF, they're apparently a small
> company - who's their in-house talent?
>
> =====================
>
> Brakes. Brakes. Brakes.
>
> When I worked on the original Everquest, we were a small company. I'm sure
> I'll be told "That game sucked too.." by the game snobs, but dammit we
> brought over 3 million people into the game. Being a small company is
> EXACTLY where you want to be to make creative, innovative games. Remember
> when Blizzard was small? Or even Bullfrog?
>
> Don't even fuck with me about what happens when companies get "large".
The point was one in response to Playa's assertion that the highest
bidder produces the better games - the smaller companies can't
*afford* the highest bidder, so if his argument holds the small
companies shouldn't be the ones making the better game systems.
And while I agree to a degree that smaller companies can be more
innovative (Wizards of the Coast is probably a better example than
Blizzard - WotC is now completely moribund, while in truth Blizzard
only ever made two game engines - Diablo and War/Starcraft - and
turned out interminable sequels and expansion packs, even when small.
WoW was among their most innovative releases when it first came out,
and they were already huge then. Now they only do WoW and Starcraft II
- not much has changed), it's also not universal - not just Blizzard,
but Games Workshop. Yes, as a smaller company its output was a great
deal more varied, but the loss of variety came from a change in
corporate philosophy, not simply larger size. Its original output
wargame-wise was, well, unoriginal, being basically the standard
historical wargame format of the time with monsters and aliens added -
and quality-wise the newer versions of those games improve massively
over the original small-company efforts.
His argument is also one I disagree with, as I've pointed out. My
issue with this revision of Horus Heresy is that, as I understand it,
this company is licensed to rerelease discontinued games, not to make
new rulesets - i.e. this is Horus Heresy only with crappy models
instead of counters. Now, Horus Heresy was a decent game, regardless
of who's marketing it - but the original point I made on this thread
is that I already have that game, and the models don't give me any
incentive to 'upgrade' if that's the only change. Playa now says it's
a different system, but I don't know what that assertion is based on -
the website seemed fairly clear that the licence only extends to
making formerly OOP GW games available again.
> The best games come from small start-ups and young companies; END OF STORY.
The best games can come from anywhere - small or large, high- or low-
bidding. Battle for Armageddon remains one of GW's best games, and
they were a large company when it came out (granted, it was very far
from being innovative, but innovation does not necessarily equal
better).
Phil
Phil Bowles
> "Phil Bowles" wrote
>
> > Only if it's (a) a *good* game company, and (b) isn't licencing a
> > product that already has its own ruleset developed inhouse by GW. Oh,
> > and (c) if the above is actually true rather than cynicism. Horus
> > Heresy was written entirely by Jervis Johnson, a member of a
> > comparatively large games company with a record of making some
> > genuinely good games (among them Battle for Armageddon and Epic
> > Armageddon). Whoever's writing at FF, they're apparently a small
> > company - who's their in-house talent?
>
> Phil, you really need to get into the 21st Century. Do you really think
> that a modern well run gaming company has to rely on "in-house" talent?
Not necessarily, but they do have to rely on funds if they want to pay
the best rules developers assuming that Playa's case, that the highest
bidder makes the better games, holds true. Knowing who they do have
working for them is nevertheless a preliminary guide to their ability
to recognise and employ designers of good rulesets - I remember the
interest when Mongoose poached Andy Chambers, for instance.
Or
> do you think that they would contract out to the appropriate people?
>
> And I'll counter your point about JJ with GT.
Not very relevant; GT wasn't even on the staff when Horus Heresy came
out. GW also fired him, if I recall correctly (though were far too
slow about it). This isn't a point about whether or not GW has been
unfairly maligned as a company; it's bringing the discussion away from
uninformative generalities and back to the case in hand. After all,
how do you identify whether a ruleset is any good? Do you look at the
rules themselves, or just the size of the cheque given to the writer?
Phil
Phil Bowles
When I was clearing my stuff a few weeks ago, I was very careful to
make sure I restored all the little counters to their rightful place
in the box (in fact now sealed in ziplocs to prevent escape, since the
box is now effectively two-dimensional). I've really got to find
enough players to play Britannia again - I loved it as a kid, but
haven't played for years.
Phil
smcdaniel1
"Robert Singers" <sing...@finger.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:hi5k13$tqc$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> "smcdaniel1" wrote
>> When I worked on the original Everquest, we were a small company. I'm
>> sure I'll be told "That game sucked too.." by the game snobs, but dammit
>> we brought over 3 million people into the game. Being a small company is
>> EXACTLY where you want to be to make creative, innovative games. Remember
>> when Blizzard was small? Or even Bullfrog?
>>
>> Don't even fuck with me about what happens when companies get "large".
>>
>> The best games come from small start-ups and young companies; END OF
>> STORY.
>
> Yes but those small companies fail for exactly the same reason. The point
> you're making is that in start ups there is little corporate inertia to
> fight against.
Yes.
>
> I'll be buying a copy.
I'll be buying it as well. Because it looks to be something a small game
company put out. Not the minis.
--
Sir Scott "Why is my sig at the top now..? " McDaniel
Craig Little
> "Robert Singers" <sing...@finger.hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:hi5k13$tqc$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>>
>> I'll be buying a copy.
>
> I'll be buying it as well. Because it looks to be something a small
> game company put out. Not the minis.
I'll probably end up buying it as I no longer have my copy with the counters
(trans-Atlantic moves are a bitch) that I got in a GW sale for 5 quid (Got
Doom of the Eldar for the same price. Hoped to get Battle For Armageddon to
complete the set but the guy in front of me got the last copy and my ninja
skills weren't refined enough to rip it from him and disappear into the ebon
night.
--
Craig
Doctor Rock
> On 7 Jan, 21:27, "smcdaniel1" <smcdani...@cox.net> wrote:
>> "Phil Bowles" <pbow...@aol.com> wrote in message
>>
>> STORY.
>
> The best games can come from anywhere - small or large, high- or low-
> bidding. Battle for Armageddon remains one of GW's best games, and
> they were a large company when it came out (granted, it was very far
> from being innovative, but innovation does not necessarily equal
> better).
Scott's assertion is correct in general though; the exceptions remain, well,
exceptional. the best and most engaging gaming products tend to come from
companies who still feel they have something to prove--and therefore still
function as companies, rather than process-driven corporate hulks.
Playa
Hey,
On Jan 7, 3:50 pm, Phil Bowles <pbow...@aol.com> wrote:
> On 7 Jan, 19:56, Playa <johnpaulpont...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FF has to rerelease discontinued GW games
Is permitted to ... May opt to ... Is licensed to ...
This may mean something different than I think it does.
I thought it was a get-out-of-gwip-gestapo-harassment card.
> The old GW
> boardgames had mostly solid rules systems, and its core games have
> consistently shown improvement
I'll certainly not argue your first point -
Epic was probably Jervis' finest 'developmental' hour.
Asserting that he's approaching general competence after 20+yrs?
Hmmm ... somewhat less than comforting.
The sure and certain knowledge that his bosses are as clueless as
ever?
Priceless.
> Horus
> Heresy was written entirely by Jervis Johnson, a member of a
> comparatively large games company with a record of making some
> genuinely good games
Perhaps, but not contemporaneously -
Iirc, at the time things were QUITE different.
The global shunning of Epic after SM is a matter of record.
Dat's Me Leg and Sulfa River weren't strong sellers, either . . .
Talisman and the MB co-ops were their high water marks at the time.
Note that Epic's model quality had nothing to do with prevailing
sentiment.
In my area, it's no overstatement to say that Hulk - alone - put GW in
the limelight.
> You do know the
> game this new release is developed from?
No. I was never a player, but saw the boxes in the FLGS.
I bought the Titans box set @the SM era - as Epic augered-in.
"Epic" soon came to mean best-of and houseruling a 'ruined' game.
Interest, iirc, (and consequently support) fell off a cliff soon
thereafter.
Naturally, I speak of regional (MIchigan) conditions. Ymmhv.
No one I knew would touch HH for those reasons.
Pla - can still find 3/5 of those Titans - ya
smcdaniel1
--
Sir Scott " " McDaniel
"Doctor Rock" <mal...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:XVz1n.22125$OI2....@newsfe14.ams2...
There are exceptions namely.... Sorry can't think of one.
They lose their creativity as soon as they are bought by another company.
Work in the games industry for two decades; Then you can tell me about it.
Insane Ranter
>
> news:XVz1n.22125$OI2....@newsfe14.ams2...
>
>
>
> > "Phil Bowles" <pbow...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:df66fc15-8f4d-4c21...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> >> On 7 Jan, 21:27, "smcdaniel1" <smcdani...@cox.net> wrote:
> >>> "Phil Bowles" <pbow...@aol.com> wrote in message
>
> >>> The best games come from small start-ups and young companies; END OF
> >>> STORY.
>
> >> The best games can come from anywhere - small or large, high- or low-
> >> bidding. Battle for Armageddon remains one of GW's best games, and
> >> they were a large company when it came out (granted, it was very far
> >> from being innovative, but innovation does not necessarily equal
> >> better).
>
> > Scott's assertion is correct in general though; the exceptions remain,
> > well, exceptional. the best and most engaging gaming products tend to
> > come from companies who still feel they have something to prove--and
> > therefore still function as companies, rather than process-driven
> > corporate hulks.
>
> There are exceptions namely.... Sorry can't think of one.
> They lose their creativity as soon as they are bought by another company.
> Work in the games industry for two decades; Then you can tell me about it.
So you are to blame for monopoly, chutes and ladders, and candyland????
smcdaniel1
"Insane Ranter" <log...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fe234677-5178-49b0...@21g2000yqj.googlegroups.com...
On Jan 8, 2:26 am, "smcdaniel1" <smcdani...@cox.net> wrote:
> --
> Sir Scott " " McDaniel"Doctor Rock" <mala...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in
> message
>
>So you are to blame for monopoly, chutes and ladders, and candyland????
Don't hold Candyland against me... That was a contract hit.
--
Sir Scott "Coodies was all mine... " McDaniel