Harpoon 3 ANW now listed at NWS! :-)
Warship NWS
6/20. CD rom edition for $39.99.
Yet another game on my list to get..;)
Thanks!
Christopher Dean
NWS Online Combat Gaming Store
Warship NWS
eddys...@hotmail.com
Warship NWS wrote:
> Correction, $49.99 for the CD Rom Edition.. thanks! :)
And if you can't wait but want the digital download version right now
check out
http://www.matrixgames.com/news.asp?nid=318
Greetz,
Eddy Sterckx
Giftzwerg
eddys...@hotmail.com says...
> > Correction, $49.99 for the CD Rom Edition.. thanks! :)
>
> And if you can't wait but want the digital download version right now
> check out
>
> http://www.matrixgames.com/news.asp?nid=318
And ... just so I'm clear on this ... that whole "esellerate"
fucknuttery with activation and lok/kee technological apocalypse is
*entirely* gone? It's just a download and serial and that's it?
Because the official site is still listed as advancedgaming.biz, and
those assholes are just worthless; I wouldn't piss on them if they were
afire.
--
Giftzwerg
***
"Any true moralist who cares for the Iraqi people should pray that this
war doesn't devolve into helicopters on the embassy roof - followed by
the old predictable liberal silence when the real killing begins."
- Victor Davis Hanson
Vincenzo Beretta
> fucknuttery with activation and lok/kee technological apocalypse is
> *entirely* gone? It's just a download and serial and that's it?
Yes, it uses the same system of all other Matrix games.
There is a discount, too, if you own previous versions, even if I do not
like very much the details:
http://mediawiki.advancedgaming.biz/index.php/H3ANW_UPGRADE
Giftzwerg
rec...@hotmail.com says...
<chuckle>
It was looking at this "discount" page that got me all nervous and jerky
again, seeing Words Of Evil like "Esellerate" and "Key" in lethal
juxtaposition.
I'm still on the fence about this title. On the one hand, it would be
nice to have a copy of H3 with the bugs fixed, but on the other hand,
*the fucking bugfixes should be ***FREE****. Are there any other
significant improvements to the software?
Like AI? The PO in H3 is almost astoundingly dumb. Threat axis? Just
draw a line between your ships and the enemy's base, and that's the only
15 degrees you need to defend. Coordinated attack? What's that? The
AI just sends out its forces in little penny packets.
The multiplayer angle is a biggie, I suppose ... except that all of my
usual gaming buddies gave up on HARPOON about the time the "Admiral's
Edition" was available at Electronics Boutique for $2.99.
If the only thing(s) the Matrix edition has going for it are fixing the
bugs they should have fixed *a year ago* for *zero money*, as well as
the multiplayer component, I'll probably pass.
Vincenzo Beretta
> draw a line between your ships and the enemy's base, and that's the only
> 15 degrees you need to defend. Coordinated attack? What's that? The
> AI just sends out its forces in little penny packets.
The PO in ANW is the usual H2/3 fare. However, and I'm not pulling it, there
are well designed scenarios out there that manage to make the PO doing a lot
of things - like coordinated attacks, off-axis attacks, surprises and other
cool tricks. To be honest, I almost play third party scenarios by now.
You could check www.harpoonhq.com or
http://www.xtreme-gamer.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=186
and try some of the free scenarios listed for the (now old) H3 - you could
be surprised. However:
> If the only thing(s) the Matrix edition has going for it are fixing the
> bugs they should have fixed *a year ago* for *zero money*, as well as
> the multiplayer component, I'll probably pass.
...Basically, yes, ANW is H3 with a lot of bugs fixed and MP.
Bloodstar
> nice to have a copy of H3 with the bugs fixed, but on the other hand,
> *the fucking bugfixes should be ***FREE****. Are there any other
> significant improvements to the software?
I must agree with you. Same with TOAW 3, but in this case you said that 40
US$ is OK price, I don't agree - as much as I have been huge fan, it is
overpriced....
See for example HoI 2 and HoI 2: DD, they are noth 20 US$. (hmm, HoI2 is in
fact 20 US$ and I doubt that many will buy now HoI 2 because HoI 2: DD have
to offer bigger package than HoI 2 vanilla)
As I said on SZO forum, TOAW 3 should have been priced at 19.99 US$. There
was nice discussion on SZO check it out. Hmm, strange that so many old hands
here didn't in fact objected on Matrix price on TOAW 3. :)
Really strange...
Basically Matrix is charging for the support and wargamers will pay
something many times over... Ubi Soft was much more correct regarding Might
& Magic license and HOMM and other games... Yes they invest much more money
but I doubt that they expect that everything will be get from just one
game...I mean investment for purchasing rights...
I don't like this Matrix policy and in any case policy of some wargaming
companies that very slowly cut prices on their products... Very lame...
Mario
Giftzwerg
george.w...@microsoft.com says...
> > I'm still on the fence about this title. On the one hand, it would be
> > nice to have a copy of H3 with the bugs fixed, but on the other hand,
> > *the fucking bugfixes should be ***FREE****. Are there any other
> > significant improvements to the software?
>
> I must agree with you. Same with TOAW 3, but in this case you said that 40
> US$ is OK price, I don't agree - as much as I have been huge fan, it is
> overpriced....
I argue that the additional $40 is justified in the case of TOAW because
there are - for my purposes - upgrades which I feel are worth $40.
Specifically, the upgrades to the PO are worth the price.
And that's what I'm trying to determine here with ANW, if the upgrade is
something more than just a bugfix and multiplayer, two upgrades which
I've almost concluded aren't worth the price of admission.
> As I said on SZO forum, TOAW 3 should have been priced at 19.99 US$. There
> was nice discussion on SZO check it out. Hmm, strange that so many old hands
> here didn't in fact objected on Matrix price on TOAW 3. :)
> Really strange...
I would have liked the upgrade *better* had it been priced at $20, but
having seen what the new design team did with the game, it's almost like
having a whole new game, at least from the perspective of playing
against the AI. That's important to me. My conclusion was that it was
worth another $40. I conclude differently with respect to ANW.
Heck, I wish Koger and Talonsoft had given me this update for free in
1999. But coulda, woulda, and shoulda - plus 80 cents - will buy me a
small coffee at Phil's Sunoco.
> I don't like this Matrix policy and in any case policy of some wargaming
> companies that very slowly cut prices on their products... Very lame...
Huh?
Bloodstar
> there are - for my purposes - upgrades which I feel are worth $40.
> Specifically, the upgrades to the PO are worth the price.
>
> And that's what I'm trying to determine here with ANW, if the upgrade is
> something more than just a bugfix and multiplayer, two upgrades which
> I've almost concluded aren't worth the price of admission.
OK, I will not try to make you change your mind but TOAW 3 is really
overpriced. No one must agree with me. I am glad that someone did agree.
Paradox was doing it quite fairly - he priced HoI 2 and HoI 2 DD at
19.99$... Both of these games are a little bit newere than TOAW as it
seems...
Changes in TOAW 3 are welcome but again doesn't justify this price. 3D
graphics mode that I play is made crippleware as I see as it cannot display
all new info like in 2D mode. Great.
I will put this to the rest. Only thing that will make me buy TOAW 3 is
because my PBEM buddies will buy it and many will migrate to TOAW 3. That is
only thing that will make me actually pay 40 US$ for this. But of course to
each his own... Of course also doesn't want to make this into some flame...
> I would have liked the upgrade *better* had it been priced at $20, but
> having seen what the new design team did with the game, it's almost like
> having a whole new game, at least from the perspective of playing
> against the AI. That's important to me. My conclusion was that it was
> worth another $40. I conclude differently with respect to ANW.
OK.
> Heck, I wish Koger and Talonsoft had given me this update for free in
> 1999. But coulda, woulda, and shoulda - plus 80 cents - will buy me a
> small coffee at Phil's Sunoco.
Best coffee in USA is in Seattle, well they said to me when I was there :)
Maybe because of port that import it through Pacific?
>> I don't like this Matrix policy and in any case policy of some wargaming
>> companies that very slowly cut prices on their products... Very lame...
>
> Huh?
OK, some companies wait decade to drop price of their game from 59.99 $ to
39.99 $ or 49.99 $ to 39.99$...where is 19.99 $ hehe...
Paradox make it right... He have milked HoI 2 some time for full price and
he choose a strategy to ask 19.99 $ for HoI 2 DD and HoI 2, that way he will
easier attract old players and new ones as well. And maybe even make a few
buck more.
Mario
Giftzwerg
george.w...@microsoft.com says...
> > I argue that the additional $40 is justified in the case of TOAW because
> > there are - for my purposes - upgrades which I feel are worth $40.
> > Specifically, the upgrades to the PO are worth the price.
> >
> > And that's what I'm trying to determine here with ANW, if the upgrade is
> > something more than just a bugfix and multiplayer, two upgrades which
> > I've almost concluded aren't worth the price of admission.
>
> OK, I will not try to make you change your mind but TOAW 3 is really
> overpriced. No one must agree with me. I am glad that someone did agree.
Oh, I *absolutely* think it's overpriced. It's just not so overpriced
that I'm not buying it.
ERutins
> Paradox make it right... He have milked HoI 2 some time for full price and
> he choose a strategy to ask 19.99 $ for HoI 2 DD and HoI 2, that way he will
> easier attract old players and new ones as well. And maybe even make a few
> buck more.
Er... we've also discounted older releases to help folks get them who
didn't or couldn't afford them at the initial release price. Also,
please note that this is not a major retail release like HOI. However,
$39.99 is a fair price for TOAW III. It's been out of development for
five years, we didn't see a nickel of anything TalonSoft or Take 2 got,
we paid good money in order to get it back from limbo to where it could
be improved, fixed and re-released and we're not the only ones making
money off each copy sold. I really don't get where it's not a fair
price or why this bothers you so much Bloodstar. We are far from the
only company charging $39.99 for a game.
Regards,
- Erik
Bloodstar
> didn't or couldn't afford them at the initial release price. Also,
> please note that this is not a major retail release like HOI. However,
> $39.99 is a fair price for TOAW III. It's been out of development for
> five years, we didn't see a nickel of anything TalonSoft or Take 2 got,
> we paid good money in order to get it back from limbo to where it could
> be improved, fixed and re-released and we're not the only ones making
> money off each copy sold. I really don't get where it's not a fair
> price or why this bothers you so much Bloodstar. We are far from the
> only company charging $39.99 for a game.
Er... it don't actually bothers me too much. I knew that someone will pull
argument that Matrix Games didn't make money on TalonSoft or Take 2
releases - but neither you have developed it. Yes, I credit you for get it
back from the limbo, for including community into development, Ralph,
investing money to get it...
It's not so big deal, but I think that more new gamers would have been get
by putting first version for 19.99 $ or 24.95 $ top and then make a much
improved version for 49.99 $. Going Microsoft way is no good, XP and then
Vista. :)
I mean argument that Take 2 and TalonSoft sold old versions for 40 US$ and
then you released it for again 40 US$, means we community pay up front for
continuing development and then in a year will be asked for another 50 $.
HoI was just a general example that lower price is possible. I stay with my
case that lower price would be better (and already stated many argumnets for
that)...but do what you want... it's your property and Internet is free
medium so that we can say what we wish :)
No hard feelings of course :), I plan to buy some games from Matrix, this
included (so i will not act like offended gamer)
Mario
Giftzwerg
george.w...@microsoft.com says...
> > Er... we've also discounted older releases to help folks get them who
> > didn't or couldn't afford them at the initial release price. Also,
> > please note that this is not a major retail release like HOI. However,
> > $39.99 is a fair price for TOAW III. It's been out of development for
> > five years, we didn't see a nickel of anything TalonSoft or Take 2 got,
> > we paid good money in order to get it back from limbo to where it could
> > be improved, fixed and re-released and we're not the only ones making
> > money off each copy sold. I really don't get where it's not a fair
> > price or why this bothers you so much Bloodstar. We are far from the
> > only company charging $39.99 for a game.
>
> Er... it don't actually bothers me too much. I knew that someone will pull
> argument that Matrix Games didn't make money on TalonSoft or Take 2
> releases - but neither you have developed it.
Of course they've "developed it." In fact, TOAW3 is *significantly*
better than any previous incarnation - and the TOAD team managed to get
what Talonsoft, Take2, and Koger *never managed to do* in a ridiculously
short period of time. How can this reasonably be construed as "not
developing it?"
> Yes, I credit you for get it
> back from the limbo, for including community into development, Ralph,
> investing money to get it...
...and making the *only* improvements to AI performance since TOAW I
appeared almost a decade ago. Does this count for *nothing*!?!?!?
Try a TOAW3 game of "Anonymous Heroics: Red PO Attacks," and then tell
me that the AI hasn't been phenomenally upgraded.
> It's not so big deal, but I think that more new gamers would have been get
> by putting first version for 19.99 $ or 24.95 $ top and then make a much
> improved version for 49.99 $.
The version they're selling *now* is "much improved."
> Going Microsoft way is no good, XP and then
> Vista. :)
I've no idea what you mean here. Are you arguing that XP wasn't worth
every single last nickel they charged for it?!?!?!
And if you're saying that Microsoft sucked you into buying crappy
versions of Windows before XP appeared, you need to recall that any
analogy between TOAW and Windows breaks down utterly on the fact that
*Matrix didn't sell a previous version of TOAW*.
> I mean argument that Take 2 and TalonSoft sold old versions for 40 US$ and
> then you released it for again 40 US$, means we community pay up front for
> continuing development and then in a year will be asked for another 50 $.
Matrix is not responsible for anything Take2 and Talonsoft did, and the
fact that you - and I - both purchased weak, near worthless "upgrades"
of the original software from Take2 or Talonsoft says precisely nothing
about the worthiness of the current upgrade.
I'd be the first one screaming if TOAW3 wasn't worth the 40 beans.
Trust me. I have no problem expressing my opinions when I feel cheated
or wronged. If Mr. Trickey and his people had just charged me $40 for a
few bugfixes and a scenario compilation, I'd be calling a spade a spade.
So far, there's three real stars of 2006, so far as I'm concerned:
BIRTH OF AMERICA, CONQUEST OF THE AEGEAN ... and TOAW3. That an upgrade
to a game I've owned three previous versions of makes this list is
serious testimony to the quality of the upgrade the TOAD people
accomplished.
> No hard feelings of course :), I plan to buy some games from Matrix, this
> included (so i will not act like offended gamer)
The problem here is that your only criticism boils down to, "I paid too
much for shitty upgrades to this game *from Take2 and Talonsoft*, and
now I'm complaining to the only developer still in the game."
Weak.
--
Giftzwerg
***
"In the twenty years since the Chernobyl tragedy, the world's worst
nuclear accident, there have been nearly [FILL IN ALARMIST AND
ARMAGEDDONIST FACTOID HERE]."
- Greenpeace "Fact(oid) Sheet" on nuclear power
Giftzwerg
er...@matrixgames.com says...
> Er... we've also discounted older releases to help folks get them who
> didn't or couldn't afford them at the initial release price. Also,
> please note that this is not a major retail release like HOI. However,
> $39.99 is a fair price for TOAW III. It's been out of development for
> five years, we didn't see a nickel of anything TalonSoft or Take 2 got,
> we paid good money in order to get it back from limbo to where it could
> be improved, fixed and re-released and we're not the only ones making
> money off each copy sold. I really don't get where it's not a fair
> price or why this bothers you so much Bloodstar. We are far from the
> only company charging $39.99 for a game.
Not to mention the fact that I paid $40 for TOW:COW, which upgraded
*nothing*. If I were going to be angry at someone, it would hardly be
the mob that produced the only worthwhile upgrade to the original
TOAW/TOAW2.
Ralph Trickey
You had exactly the same chance that Matrix Games had to purchase
TOAW. Anyone could have made Take 2 a serious offer. Feel free
to look for some other old games that you could buy the rights to.
There was nothing magical about it. I think that the fact that Matrix
had the courage to pick up the rights to some old games and republish
them is fantastic, Heck, look around, by now most games that old
are in the public domain. That was a serious gamble.
By your logic, we should have put out 1.06 immediately at 19.95, and
abandoned TOAW again for a couple of years while we developed the
next version? TOAW:MGE at 19.95 would have sold maybe a doven
copies and vanished like a dropped pebble on a streambed. I don't think
the we would have sold enough copies to convert the PBEM market,
and there would have been NO chance of new blood. If we'd
done that, EVERYONE would be screaming that Matrix was just out
for money and a rip-off. By the time the next version was released it
would have vanished the same way.
TOAW III as it is now, has a chance of being reviewd, and of being
favorably reviewed. TOAW:MGE would have been laughed at.
As far as I'm concerned, this was the only viable marketing strategy.
We're not just releasing it and abandoning it. You can expect at least
one more patch, and most probably several others, before TOAW IV.
The landscape of PC gaming is changing. It used to be that you had
to release a game and abandon it to make money, the technology
would be obsolete anyway. I don't believe that's the case anymore.
Look at some of the successful small franchises like GalCiv, one
key ingredient is customer support.
I expect that TOAW III will be just as saleable, if not more, a year from
now, as it is today.
TOAW III is the only game of it's kind on the market, and probably will
be for a long time unless Norm decides to make another one like it.
Or until TOAW IV.
Your comment about paying up front is also a bit crazy. I want people
to buy TOAW III because it's worth it to them now. If it isn't worth it to
you now, then don't buy it. Anybody that buys anything expecting future
enhancements is a bit looney.
Wait until it is worth it, either because we've enhanced it to a point
that
you want it, or because all your friends are playing it, or because there's
a neat scenario that you just have to have.
Ralph Trickey
TOAW III Programmer
Gank
> As I said on SZO forum, TOAW 3 should have been priced at 19.99 US$. There
> was nice discussion on SZO check it out. Hmm, strange that so many old hands
> here didn't in fact objected on Matrix price on TOAW 3. :)
> Really strange...
I agree and the only reason I did'nt make a post complaining about the
price was because I figured I would just get attacked for it. TOAW3 is
worth $20.00 to me and no more. I'll buy it if it is ever priced at $20.00
but never at $40.00.
Gank
> We are far from the
> only company charging $39.99 for a game.
>
> Regards,
>
> - Erik
New games, yes. Old retro-fitted games, no.
CaligulasHorse
Ralph Trickey wrote:
>
> The landscape of PC gaming is changing. It used to be that you had
> to release a game and abandon it to make money, the technology
> would be obsolete anyway. I don't believe that's the case anymore.
> Look at some of the successful small franchises like GalCiv, one
> key ingredient is customer support.
I think that's the interesting point, on a business view. Particularly
as the hardware upgrade cycle starts to plateau out (if it does), a
segment of the games industry can become more like general publishing
where the holy grail is a back-list which continues to sell - helped
along by low-cost/low-risk/regular upgrades.
It's a different risk/return profile than the blockbuster-plus-sequel
movie production model games tend to follow now, but one which is
perfectly valid & FWIW potentially quite interesting to me (as somebody
who does investment stuff for a living).
Major H seems to be doing it like this with TacOps, and I don't see any
particular reason why it can't work well for TOAW (now that it has
class like Ralph working on it) & for Matrix in general.
Andy Brown
> *nothing*. If I were going to be angry at someone, it would hardly be
> the mob that produced the only worthwhile upgrade to the original
> TOAW/TOAW2.
Interesting discussion on the pricing. Just thinking about my personal
reaction which is something like:
At $40, I'm definitely going to get round to buying it, one day, when I
don't feel like playing anything else.
At $20, it would already be sitting on my hard drive waiting for one day
when I don't feel like playing anything else.
Like your reviews, Gifty, find them very useful. Good to see someone's
taken over Henri's role in this ng :-^
Andy Brown
Bloodstar
> price was because I figured I would just get attacked for it. TOAW3 is
> worth $20.00 to me and no more. I'll buy it if it is ever priced at $20.00
> but never at $40.00.
Thanks.
I will reply to others later.
See Raph & Gifty, nothing personal toward both of you (and my respect) but
it's not that wargamers not think with their brain and can have a different
opinion as well, nobody needs a sheperd I assume? I am not telling that you
are trying to be the one. Damn, it good discussion and I am out of time.
Will try to reply later only on some bit's that I don't agree.
Wargamers are not monolite mass, on SZO there was nice discussion and even
one game designer talked and on very intelligent and smart way. Later he was
attacked for merely expressing his thoughts... I hope that Orwel khm
nevermind...
Mario
Bloodstar
> better than any previous incarnation - and the TOAD team managed to get
> what Talonsoft, Take2, and Koger *never managed to do* in a ridiculously
> short period of time. How can this reasonably be construed as "not
> developing it?"
That is not true. I see that you have taken a goodly measured stance against
NK but basically, TOAW 3 is like someone taking a notes of let's say "Air on
a G String" or "Air" from Johann Sebastian Bach and change few things here
and there. Spitrit of the game is Norm Koger no matter what. Changes are not
so significant and there are great deal of bugs still in it, features that
needs fixing etc... I play TOAW almost every day so I know it's soul :)
BTW, don't agree on your observation on COW but more about it later.
>> Yes, I credit you for get it
>> back from the limbo, for including community into development, Ralph,
>> investing money to get it...
>
> ...and making the *only* improvements to AI performance since TOAW I
> appeared almost a decade ago. Does this count for *nothing*!?!?!?
>
> Try a TOAW3 game of "Anonymous Heroics: Red PO Attacks," and then tell
> me that the AI hasn't been phenomenally upgraded.
OK AI was upgraded. OK, that is well done. Again that is not worth for me
40$ price tag. Is that like telling that I should pay for every improved
games AI new price? Heroes V is selling for 30 US$ on some web sites for
Christ sake! I am fan of TOAW but not of certain pricing strategy.
>> It's not so big deal, but I think that more new gamers would have been
>> get
>> by putting first version for 19.99 $ or 24.95 $ top and then make a much
>> improved version for 49.99 $.
>
> The version they're selling *now* is "much improved."
That is your opinion. Mine, and many others is that is not.
>> Going Microsoft way is no good, XP and then
>> Vista. :)
>
> I've no idea what you mean here. Are you arguing that XP wasn't worth
> every single last nickel they charged for it?!?!?!
>
> And if you're saying that Microsoft sucked you into buying crappy
> versions of Windows before XP appeared, you need to recall that any
> analogy between TOAW and Windows breaks down utterly on the fact that
> *Matrix didn't sell a previous version of TOAW*.
OK, wrong analogy maybe. I didn't even meant to "attack" Microsoft because I
think that they are great.
> Matrix is not responsible for anything Take2 and Talonsoft did, and the
> fact that you - and I - both purchased weak, near worthless "upgrades"
> of the original software from Take2 or Talonsoft says precisely nothing
> about the worthiness of the current upgrade.
> I'd be the first one screaming if TOAW3 wasn't worth the 40 beans.
> Trust me. I have no problem expressing my opinions when I feel cheated
> or wronged. If Mr. Trickey and his people had just charged me $40 for a
> few bugfixes and a scenario compilation, I'd be calling a spade a spade.
>
> So far, there's three real stars of 2006, so far as I'm concerned:
> BIRTH OF AMERICA, CONQUEST OF THE AEGEAN ... and TOAW3. That an upgrade
> to a game I've owned three previous versions of makes this list is
> serious testimony to the quality of the upgrade the TOAD people
> accomplished.
As I don't play against AI for me changes are not significant. Only PBEM on
TOAW shines and that is only true quality of this game. Believe it or not.
Those who like AI better play CHESS, like any Chessmaster 10th Edition or
similiar.
>> No hard feelings of course :), I plan to buy some games from Matrix, this
>> included (so i will not act like offended gamer)
>
> The problem here is that your only criticism boils down to, "I paid too
> much for shitty upgrades to this game *from Take2 and Talonsoft*, and
> now I'm complaining to the only developer still in the game."
>
> Weak.
This is not weak and not the end of the world. A little bit criticism will
not kill anybody. The fact that Matrix is developing game again does not
mean that I must worship them and kill a sheep in their honor or does it?
:-)
BTW, I just expressed my thoughts, who have problems with them I always send
them to Mr. Voltaire and his great saying....
There is no bad intentions from me toward Matrix, they can charge 100 $ if
they want. I can say whatever I want on Usenet or on Forum about that.
Mario
Bloodstar
> You had exactly the same chance that Matrix Games had to purchase
> TOAW. Anyone could have made Take 2 a serious offer. Feel free
> to look for some other old games that you could buy the rights to.
Maybe I will thank :)
> There was nothing magical about it. I think that the fact that Matrix
> had the courage to pick up the rights to some old games and republish
> them is fantastic, Heck, look around, by now most games that old
> are in the public domain. That was a serious gamble.
OK.
> By your logic, we should have put out 1.06 immediately at 19.95, and
> abandoned TOAW again for a couple of years while we developed the
> next version? TOAW:MGE at 19.95 would have sold maybe a doven
> copies and vanished like a dropped pebble on a streambed. I don't think
> the we would have sold enough copies to convert the PBEM market,
> and there would have been NO chance of new blood. If we'd
> done that, EVERYONE would be screaming that Matrix was just out
> for money and a rip-off. By the time the next version was released it
> would have vanished the same way.
In fact I think that this version as well is worth 20 $. You may think
differently.
I already said that I respect your work so here is nothing personal against
you. You had done a good job and I appreciate it. But that just don't cut
into my category of "worth 40 $". Are you sure that TOAW 3 for 20$ would not
generate enough money? I doubt it... You see example on this very Usenet
that people would buy it for 20 $ and not for 40 $. So truth is not just
blind or one eyed sometimes.
> TOAW III as it is now, has a chance of being reviewd, and of being
> favorably reviewed. TOAW:MGE would have been laughed at.
>
> As far as I'm concerned, this was the only viable marketing strategy.
> We're not just releasing it and abandoning it. You can expect at least
> one more patch, and most probably several others, before TOAW IV.
>
> The landscape of PC gaming is changing. It used to be that you had
> to release a game and abandon it to make money, the technology
> would be obsolete anyway. I don't believe that's the case anymore.
> Look at some of the successful small franchises like GalCiv, one
> key ingredient is customer support.
>
> I expect that TOAW III will be just as saleable, if not more, a year from
> now, as it is today.
I agree that TOAW have aged well. He have still good tan.Graphics need a
good face lift but nothing fancy like full 3D, good face lift and upgrade in
quality to catch up in visual style with modern computers, resolution etc...
Interesting thoughts on customer support, and technology I could almost
agree :-)
I just feel that adding a substantial changes for *me* warrants price tag of
40 $. Ok, maybe I am spoiled. Or maybe because I know TOAW so well this
don't feel like substantial change. Ralph, turn in FiTE does takes me 7-10
days to make (I play on some occasions and not too much). I know TOAW to
almost last detail. Not like you from programmer side but I from the player
side I know it very, very good. I have already said to you what are needed
changes in TOAW and I am glad that you listening.
That my friend is features that are worth new price tag. We may soon again
open debate what is needed for TOAW IV.
OK, we don't agree on price so we can call this a quit. We don't have to
agree.
I am not killing TOAW if I say that I don't like this price. Or am I? If the
solution is that everybody keep quite and keep their mouth shout then...
well, that's just not me. And I ask that we don't make this into flame war
as I don't want it to be some flame war on this issue.
> TOAW III is the only game of it's kind on the market, and probably will
> be for a long time unless Norm decides to make another one like it.
> Or until TOAW IV.
>
> Your comment about paying up front is also a bit crazy. I want people
> to buy TOAW III because it's worth it to them now. If it isn't worth it to
> you now, then don't buy it. Anybody that buys anything expecting future
> enhancements is a bit looney.
>
> Wait until it is worth it, either because we've enhanced it to a point
> that
> you want it, or because all your friends are playing it, or because
> there's
> a neat scenario that you just have to have.
In fact that is nice argument. At 20 $ I think that you would be happier
Ralph to see that a lot more people have bought TOAW 3.
See, everybody needs bread, bread is cheap but you need it every day. At 20
$ you would sold a lot's, lot's more than now... That way you will be
creating future market for TOAW IV. In essence TOAW 3 would have been good
advertising for TOAW IV. Why the need to make money on TOAW 3? Just cover
the costs. I mean look into future, Matrix will publish 5 (FIVE) games from
TalonSoft catalogue, so investment can be returned in a few years... It
doesn't have to be this way.
So may advice was not bad for Matrix... They don't want to accept it and
they've gone other way, OK, no prob...
Mario
PS. I will not be at home for some time so don't expect quick reply.
Bloodstar
> *nothing*. If I were going to be angry at someone, it would hardly be
> the mob that produced the only worthwhile upgrade to the original
> TOAW/TOAW2.
Certanly not true.
TOAW COW was best invested money for every wargamer. It upgraded TOAW I to
TOAW II and WOTY game mechanics, it merged base of scenario from XIX century
to XXI, it in fact merged TOAW I and TOAW 2 all for one price, that was a
true bargain.
Yell to EA next time when you see new Medal of Honor Deluxe Gold Super
Christmas Edition.
Interesting, TalonSoft was accused for merely doing what all others have
done in retail business and COW was in fact complete TOAW. So certanly not a
patch like some others are saying.
BTW, when will 3D in TOAW 3 have all functionality of 2D, do you call that
crippleware huh Gifty? By your definition.
Mario
Bloodstar
AI in TOAW:
It can be like Tesla, but I really don't care because it's presentation and
implementation is JUST PLAIN UGLY.
It is really fast so you just hear tica-taca aiii... movement sounds, sounds
of AI shuffling his units here and there and attacks or very fast...
So please change the presentation of it, sounds, make it play slower or add
functionality that players choose speed of it...
I don't have anything against AI and in fact in Heroes games we value good
moves of AI very much but this in TOAW is so lousy done (alltogether, sorry
NK) that I cannot play it.
It's just ugly as hell.
Mario
Giftzwerg
george.w...@microsoft.com says...
> BTW, when will 3D in TOAW 3 have all functionality of 2D, do you call that
> crippleware huh Gifty? By your definition.
I looked at the 3D screen option *once*, in 1998, the day I bought the
original TOAW. So the instrument has yet to be invented that can
measure my indifference to this option.
--
Giftzwerg
***
"The 17 men were mainly of South Asian descent"
- NY Times article on arrested Canadian terrorists
"I guess 'South Asian' is the Times new slang for 'towelhead'."
- Giftzwerg
Giftzwerg
george.w...@microsoft.com says...
Are you seriously arguing that *the way the AI moves its counters* is a
real problem!?!?
Vincenzo Beretta
> real problem!?!?
Well, I can sympathize: a switch to make the AI move slower in TOAW would be
welcomed here too: sometimes I'm not sure if the PO is playing a wargame or
a three card game.
Ralph Trickey
"Vincenzo Beretta" <rec...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:JBxkg.11690$bj6....@tornado.fastwebnet.it...
everything in stacks, and play 3 card monty.
Ralph Trickey
"CaligulasHorse" <caligul...@nym.hush.com> wrote in message
news:1150429069.0...@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
The blockbuster + sequel model is stall valid for that A-list games, and
there are many games that will follow it because of the cost of developing
the engine, but I think that we're starting to seriously see the impacts of
the
internet for selling/patches, and the impact of the video games platforms.
If I were developing an A-list computer game right now, I'd be aiming
at the XBox 360/PS3 as the target to shoot for. That target probably
isn't going to change for another 3 or 4 years, until the next one comes
out.
Here's something else to consider. I don't know how many compuers
there are in the western world, but if we can sell TOAW to
1/10 of 1% of the computer users, it will be wildly successful, and
there will still be a potential market out there.
We'll see where things go. We probably will do a TOAW IV, but.
there are still some more things I want to put into TOAW III.
Just my 2c,
Ralph
Rob Pollard
I've got Harpoon3 and Harpoon2. Harpoon3 is just a version of Harpoon2 that
almost works on XP, all of the bugs are in there, plus others like the fact
you can no longer look at scenario descriptions up front without it passing
in front of your eyes in 2 nano's and the scenario starting up....
In some ways I'm a bit peaved. I bought H3 on the understanding that its
bugs will get fixed, now I guess the fixes will dry up (not that there were
many in the first place).
I also have TOAW2, would I buy 3? Hell yes. Go to Matrix website and they
give you a list of all the upgrades (many of them significant).
However, I looked at the Matrix site for information on ANW and guess what?
The only thing it mentions is the addition of multiplayer functionality and
thats it! All the other 'features' it mentions I all ready have. Although
there is the mysterious line on the end saying 'and many more'.
Seems strange that TOAW3 has a page full of fixes and new features and ANW
only has 1 new feature (Maybe 2 if I include spectator mode)...
If the developers of Harpoon think I'm going to shell out cash for what is
essentially the same bug ridden program that I already have they can forget
it!
RobP
<eddys...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1150357609.5...@g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> Warship NWS wrote:
>> Correction, $49.99 for the CD Rom Edition.. thanks! :)
>
> And if you can't wait but want the digital download version right now
> check out
>
> http://www.matrixgames.com/news.asp?nid=318
>
> Greetz,
>
> Eddy Sterckx
>
Vincenzo Beretta
> only has 1 new feature (Maybe 2 if I include spectator mode)...
I noticed that, too. Actually, Harpoon ANW has a lot of fixes (Air-to-Air
refueling finally works, the visual sightings rules are more realistic, the
thermocline is now at the correct depth and so on). I followed (marginally)
the beta process, and I could see new fixes and improvements come out almost
daily - but, for some reason, they didn't compile them in a formal document.
MMQ
http://mediawiki.advancedgaming.biz/index.php/What_is_new_in_Harpoon_3_ANW
Vincenzo Beretta
>
> http://mediawiki.advancedgaming.biz/index.php/What_is_new_in_Harpoon_3_ANW
Thanks! I knew of the Wiki but I hadn't browsed it. I'll put a link on
Matrix's forum.
ERutins
Yes, that's the right link to look at. Given the concerns I've read
about "what is really changed" I think we'll make that one a bit more
visible on our site.
Regards,
- Erik
Jukka O. Kauppinen
> TOAW III as it is now, has a chance of being reviewd, and of being
> favorably reviewed. TOAW:MGE would have been laughed at.
Exactly. I'm right now working on a review of TOAW3. We wouldn't have
reviewed some addon or just a patch, maybe just mentioned it on news.
The game now gets, hopefully, good attention (like
http://plaza.fi/edome/uutiset/the-operational-art-of-war-strategiasarja-saa-jatkoa
).
This way TOAW is now being regarded as a new release, and it has the
chance to attract both new gamers and give old fans something very nice
to play on. And the game is just wonderful. Works flawlessly, runs fast,
excellent scenarios and good challenge even with the AI.
I'm very thankful for having the chance to play TOAW3 and hopefully get
more people to look at the beauty of hexes with tanks. Well worth the money.
jok
MMQ
$50 for the same game". Of course, it will really help when the
database editor is released, it was such a tease to have the database
editor manual in the released game but not the editor itself!
ray o'hara
"Giftzwerg" <giftzw...@NOSPAMZ.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1efc68a17...@news-east.giganews.com...
> Are you seriously arguing that *the way the AI moves its counters* is a
> real problem!?!?
i almost never watch the replay. i don't see where it helps and watching my
guys get wasted depresses me.
Vincenzo Beretta
"MMQ" <masterm...@gmail.com> ha scritto nel messaggio
news:1150482098....@u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com...
> That list does help to answer the arguements about "why am I spending
> $50 for the same game". Of course, it will really help when the
> database editor is released
There is a third-party editor available in the meanwhile:
http://mediawiki.advancedgaming.biz/index.php/H3RE_ReimerEditor
I never used it, but DBs' creators tell me that it works just fine.
Ralph Trickey
Thanks!
You might be interested in knowing that it ships with German and French
verisons of the executable (not the manual or scenarios, unfortunately.)
Beta versions of Italian and Polish were just posted to the matrix site.
I'm hoping to send out the Language Translation Kit soon It's the same
thing that we used to create the existing language packs. It's essentially
a listing of all the strings in the executable and a program to verify that
the format is correct.
There is currently functionality (F6/F7) to dump the scenario event
strings and load them, that would get the news strings translated.
That makes it about as easy as it can be to translate a scenario
into another language, the briefing and victory scripts are about
the only strings that need to be translated..
The major patch (due out sometime this year) should allow people
to play different language versions of any scenario. That is, a Finnish
persoin could play by email a German player, both playing the same
scenario.
HMMM, I'm going to post this in the Scenrio Creation forum too.
Thanks for prodding me.
Ralph Trickey
TOAW III Programmer
"Jukka O. Kauppinen" <jkauppi...@jmp.EISPAMMIA.fi> wrote in message
news:x_Bkg.4630$Fe5...@reader1.news.jippii.net...
Giftzwerg
rec...@hotmail.com says...
I'd like to see it go *faster*. Big scenarios where the PO moves first
can be a serious PIA.
--
Giftzwerg
***
"In the twenty years since the Chernobyl tragedy, the world's worst
nuclear accident, there have been nearly [FILL IN ALARMIST AND
ARMAGEDDONIST FACTOID HERE]."
- Greenpeace "Fact(oid) Sheet" on nuclear power
Giftzwerg
roberta...@hotmail.com says...
> To throw my fuel on the fire....
>
> I've got Harpoon3 and Harpoon2. Harpoon3 is just a version of Harpoon2 that
> almost works on XP, all of the bugs are in there, plus others like the fact
> you can no longer look at scenario descriptions up front without it passing
> in front of your eyes in 2 nano's and the scenario starting up....
>
> In some ways I'm a bit peaved. I bought H3 on the understanding that its
> bugs will get fixed, now I guess the fixes will dry up (not that there were
> many in the first place).
I'm in the same boat. All the fanbois over at the H3 forum assured me
up and down that I'd have to shovel the mountains of incoming patches
for the game out of the way to get to my computer. But the version I
bought - Xmas 2003, IIRC - was the *last* version of that shitware they
released. And I've never seen such a wretched bugfest. The developers
never even *looked at* the release version before they inflicted it on
the world.
> I also have TOAW2, would I buy 3? Hell yes. Go to Matrix website and they
> give you a list of all the upgrades (many of them significant).
I hemmed and hawed about TOAW3 ... but it's seriously worth the bucks.
Even if you own all the other versions.
> However, I looked at the Matrix site for information on ANW and guess what?
> The only thing it mentions is the addition of multiplayer functionality and
> thats it! All the other 'features' it mentions I all ready have. Although
> there is the mysterious line on the end saying 'and many more'.
>
> Seems strange that TOAW3 has a page full of fixes and new features and ANW
> only has 1 new feature (Maybe 2 if I include spectator mode)...
>
> If the developers of Harpoon think I'm going to shell out cash for what is
> essentially the same bug ridden program that I already have they can forget
> it!
What I want to know about HARPOON is whether the same bunch of lusers
who whelped version 3.6.3 are responsible for the Matrix edition. If
Matrix bought the rights, fired the assholes from advancedgaming, and
put it right, that would be one thing. But if this is just the same
shitware with a Matrix label on it ... No sale.
Giftzwerg
er...@matrixgames.com says...
> > > http://mediawiki.advancedgaming.biz/index.php/What_is_new_in_Harpoon_3_ANW
> >
> > Thanks! I knew of the Wiki but I hadn't browsed it. I'll put a link on
> > Matrix's forum.
>
> Yes, that's the right link to look at. Given the concerns I've read
> about "what is really changed" I think we'll make that one a bit more
> visible on our site.
Ah. So the same worthless dimwits who never managed to fix the
blazingly obvious problems with H3 after I bought it are still heading
up the project?
Why would we assume that these assclowns have done any better with a
Matrix label on their useless asses than they did when they were fucking
up on their own?
Ralph Trickey
Somewhere, there's a list of the options.
Email me if you need more info on how to set it.
Ralph
"Giftzwerg" <giftzw...@NOSPAMZ.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1efd1780a...@news-east.giganews.com...
Vincenzo Beretta
> can be a serious PIA.
Well, this is the reason why I asked for a switch. The, if one wants to
simulate the German blitzkrieg in Russia on June, 22nd 1941, can put the
switch on "Fastest" and enjoy an MTV-generation PO =)
But sometimes I have an hard time in tracking which enemy units did what,
and how - and I would like a "PO moves like an human being" option too.
Rob Pollard
fixed I'd have to buy the ANW version!!! GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!
In some ways I would claim that my software (H3) is not fit for purpose as I
cannot browse the scenario descriptions..... I wonder how far I would get
with that one?
RobP
"Giftzwerg" <giftzw...@NOSPAMZ.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1efd19a89...@news-east.giganews.com...
Vincenzo Beretta
> Matrix label on their useless asses than they did when they were fucking
> up on their own?
The ***hope*** (please, note the emphasis) is that Matrix will force a
better QA and more trasparency about the game. I totally agree with you with
the way that Harpoon was managed in the past. I never hid the fact that I
like the game very much, warts et all, and, for this reason, I hope that it
will be supported and expanded.
But make no mistake: I suffered through the previous management like
everyone else. Examples abound, like finding bugs and tracking them only to
be answered "this is a known problem!". Known by who? Did you know that the
guy who firstly published a buglist and a reference for known problems in
Harpoon 3 is among the most hated by the (firmly between quotes) "true
community"? I was banned from a notable Harpoon forum for asking that a
third-party DB would announce changes in its file structure so not to create
problems to the scenario designers. This surreal event is still documented
by a thread on Strategy Zone Online (and, I suspect, led to the new routines
in ANW that check that the Db under which a scenario runs has not been
tampered with). And, talking about SZO and surrealism, you can find there
another buglist for Harpoon 3 with the amazing objection that "Many items in
it have already been fixed in the *next* patch" (the one that never came,
BTW).
So, in my mind it is like if Harpoon suffered until now under a Communist
rule, and I have all the hopes that one can have when a fertile land is now
under Western administration. I played some scenarios in ANW (MP too) and
I'm having a blast; one can only hope.
Meanwhile you can check the beta of Global Conflict Blue: it is amazing for
an independent effort, and it is open source: http://www.gcblue.com/
Giftzwerg
rec...@hotmail.com says...
> > Why would we assume that these assclowns have done any better with a
> > Matrix label on their useless asses than they did when they were fucking
> > up on their own?
>
> The ***hope*** (please, note the emphasis) is that Matrix will force a
> better QA and more trasparency about the game. I totally agree with you with
> the way that Harpoon was managed in the past. I never hid the fact that I
> like the game very much, warts et all, and, for this reason, I hope that it
> will be supported and expanded.
Agreed. But after the brilliant success of TOAW, I was hoping that
exactly the same formula would be followed with ANW, and a whole new
design team would be brought in to handle the update. With the lusers
at advancedgaming still in charge, the change in publisher looks like
nothing more than a corrupt attempt to charge H3 purchasers $35 *for the
fucking bugfixes they promised us years ago*!!!!!!!
Every bloody purchaser of the H3 shitware should get a complimentary
copy. That means free. I really don't give a shit about the money, but
the flagrant lying bullshit of the jerkoffs running the AGS show needs
to be addressed.
> But make no mistake: I suffered through the previous management like
> everyone else. Examples abound, like finding bugs and tracking them only to
> be answered "this is a known problem!". Known by who?
Yeah, I loved this fuckwitted non-answer; as if "it's known" solves
anything.
> So, in my mind it is like if Harpoon suffered until now under a Communist
> rule, and I have all the hopes that one can have when a fertile land is now
> under Western administration. I played some scenarios in ANW (MP too) and
> I'm having a blast; one can only hope.
I dunno. So far as I can see, the same scumbags are still running the
rodeo. The fact that the Matrix label heads the bill could be
irrelevant.
Giftzwerg
roberta...@hotmail.com says...
> I had a reply on another forum that if I wanted the scenario descriptions
> fixed I'd have to buy the ANW version!!! GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!
> In some ways I would claim that my software (H3) is not fit for purpose as I
> cannot browse the scenario descriptions..... I wonder how far I would get
> with that one?
With those clowns? About 2 nanometers.
Vincenzo Beretta
> rodeo. The fact that the Matrix label heads the bill could be
> irrelevant.
Well, on the ANW forum I already see deleted threads (about technical
matters and links to third party sites, not flames or anything), menacing,
"my way or the highway"-like answers to factual questions et. al. Very
unMatrix, IMHO, so I fear that you could be right :^/
Rob Pollard
Hmmm,
I'm not to sure I am happy with this . Does this mean that all further
support for the H3 community is terminated? I'm not asking for the extra
newer (and better) features of ANW, I just want some of the worse bugs in H3
squashed.
Not being able to browse a scenario description is a pretty big problem and
one that is more than just a simple behind-the-scenes bug because it has a
direct impact on the usability of the software. In fact it impacts on the
game even before you start as you don't know what the scenarios are about!
I would probably be so bold as to venture that H3 'is not fit for purpose
and I want my money back' as I cannot even select scenarios properly. What I
find galling, is that all the versions of H2 that I had (I had a lot) did
not suffer from this problem. It seems to be something introduced in H3.
RobP
"Rob Pollard" <roberta...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:yMzkg.408813$tc.6...@fe2.news.blueyonder.co.uk...
Giftzwerg
rec...@hotmail.com says...
At the Matrix site? Ouch.
I don't know what it is about the HARPOON code that turns seemingly
everyone who touches it into an asshole.
CaligulasHorse
Giftzwerg wrote:
>
> I don't know what it is about the HARPOON code that turns seemingly
> everyone who touches it into an asshole.
>
The echt-Matrix people are their normal polite selves, but the
AGSI-types seem a little feral. I get the impression they have severe
cash-flow-absence stress,
Giftzwerg
caligul...@nym.hush.com says...
As well they should, given their appalling lack of performance with the
software program.
Mr. Pollard or Mr. Beretta mentioned the scenario-loading bug. This
ridiculous and fabulously irksome bug has been sitting there,
uncorrected, for *two frigging years*. HOW HARD CAN IT BE TO ALTER A
MENU SO A SINGLE-CLICK HIGHLIGHTS THE SCENARIO AND BRINGS UP THE
DESCRIPTION AND A DOUBLE-CLICK LOADS THE SCENARIO!!?!?!?!
Jesus Tapdancin' Christ, this is only the way every fucking menu in the
civilized world works. You've gotta be a special kind of stupid to get
something like this wrong in the first place - and a special kind of
asshat to not *just fucking fix it*.
Vincenzo Beretta
> something like this wrong in the first place - and a special kind of
> asshat to not *just fucking fix it*.
Yeah, but look at the positive part: it is a known bug =)
Anyway, David Heath himself appeared on the forum and reestablished order
Darth Vader-like, so I take back my skepticism: it would seem that we will
be able to discuss Harpoon the way we discuss other titles. Hooray!
Giftzwerg
rec...@hotmail.com says...
> > You've gotta be a special kind of stupid to get
> > something like this wrong in the first place - and a special kind of
> > asshat to not *just fucking fix it*.
>
> Yeah, but look at the positive part: it is a known bug =)
That one bug flagged AGS forever as a bunch of incompetent boobs; any
programmer who misses a showstopper in *the very first screen* of his
shitware is too stupid to work in this industry.
> Anyway, David Heath himself appeared on the forum and reestablished order
> Darth Vader-like, so I take back my skepticism: it would seem that we will
> be able to discuss Harpoon the way we discuss other titles. Hooray!
I think I might have reached the end of the line with HARPOON II (and
that's what this is, make no mistake). I bought it when it first
appeared, and it was a complete disaster that nobody could keep running
for 15 minutes. Then I bought the "Admiral's Edition" when it hit the
bargain rack. Against my better judgement - and with fanboi assurances
that AGS was universally heralded for software excellence and quickness
of builds and patches - I bought the shitware they were calling "III".
And now they've decided not to fix the shitware they sold me, and they'd
like me to buy another pig in a poke. Lemme guess; *this* time, they're
really going to be fixing things? Just spend another $50 [1] and you'll
have a working HARPOON II game?
<sigh>
What's the old saying, "fool me once..." Well, these assclowns have
fooled me three times now - which gives you some indication how much I'd
really like a new HARPOON game that really works - and I'm really not
looking forward to another butt-reaming.
No sale.
[1] Oh, gee, it's "only" $35 for numbskulls like me who already bought
the game, and assumed that they'd actually make it work ... and only if
I jump through a big pile of hoops *again*? No thanks.
--
Giftzwerg
***
"Any true moralist who cares for the Iraqi people should pray that this
war doesn't devolve into helicopters on the embassy roof - followed by
the old predictable liberal silence when the real killing begins."
- Victor Davis Hanson
MikMyk
Vincenzo Beretta wrote:
> > Why would we assume that these assclowns have done any better with a
> > Matrix label on their useless asses than they did when they were fucking
> > up on their own?
>
> The ***hope*** (please, note the emphasis) is that Matrix will force a
> better QA and more trasparency about the game.
Vinnie you can't have more transparency then an open bug list. Its
still there for everybody to view. There was also an open beta for
almost two years:)
http://mantis.advancedgaming.biz/login_page.php
guest,guest
The bugs are all listed there and AGSI had been fairly open about this
being the way its gonna be along the way. Their pitch is that you're
essentially taking a risk by buying a work in progress. Whether a
customer wants to take the risk is up to them (as Gifty so eloquently
points out) but they sure know what they're getting into when they do:)
Small outfit, small budget trying to fix and improve as they can afford
it step by step. If anybody has some spare cash lying around they can
throw that way and make it into an ideal development cycle by all means
mail it to the AGSI "morons". Although the downside is you'll probably
be labled one as well:(
In terms of why I think you wheren't taken seriously I think it had
more to do with bizarre behavior and the company you keep ;) At some
point it also became very clear that you were less of an outside
observer then an active participant in some of the "junk" that goes on
in Harpoon world. I do realize you are a pretty important guy though;)
Real sure this one bug you keep talking about wasn't ignored and sorry
you feel that way. I have almost 200 logged (most fixed btw) and hope
they are all fixed someday as well (this would be me assuming some
risk).
Fanboy Mike <-- already ready for it:)
Giftzwerg
myky...@yahoo.com says...
> > > Why would we assume that these assclowns have done any better with a
> > > Matrix label on their useless asses than they did when they were fucking
> > > up on their own?
> >
> > The ***hope*** (please, note the emphasis) is that Matrix will force a
> > better QA and more trasparency about the game.
>
> Vinnie you can't have more transparency then an open bug list. Its
> still there for everybody to view.
Of course, merely having a bug list seems to fall a bit short of, you
know, actually *fixing* all the bugs.
> There was also an open beta for
> almost two years:)
>
> http://mantis.advancedgaming.biz/login_page.php
>
> guest,guest
>
> The bugs are all listed there and AGSI had been fairly open about this
> being the way its gonna be along the way. Their pitch is that you're
> essentially taking a risk by buying a work in progress. Whether a
> customer wants to take the risk is up to them (as Gifty so eloquently
> points out) but they sure know what they're getting into when they do:)
We did? I sure as shit didn't. In fact, the game I bought was
portrayed as being continually updated; in one hilarious post, I read
that cracking the activation scheme wouldn't work because of the
constant rain of patches!
Yeah. Right. Not one single patch was released by AGS in the almost
*two years* since I bought the software. Not one. Zero. Nada.
"Work in progress?" What fucking "work" - *exactly* - do they have to
show their paying customers for the past year and a half of "progress?"
> Small outfit, small budget trying to fix and improve as they can afford
> it step by step. If anybody has some spare cash lying around they can
> throw that way and make it into an ideal development cycle by all means
> mail it to the AGSI "morons". Although the downside is you'll probably
> be labled one as well:(
Ah. So AGS is off the hook because they're *too small* to release a
competent, un-bug-fucked, working product?
[And did they suddenly get big and rich now that Matrix is publishing
the shitware? So *now* we should believe they can do it right?!?]
> Real sure this one bug you keep talking about wasn't ignored and sorry
> you feel that way. I have almost 200 logged (most fixed btw) and hope
> they are all fixed someday as well (this would be me assuming some
> risk).
Oh? Can you supply us the link to the fixed executable that does not
feature, say, the scenario-loading bug?
Furthermore, can you provide the estimate date by which "they are all
fixed" for folks who decide to wait for a fix to the software they
already bought?
Would that be something like, "never?"
MikMyk
Yeah essellerate activation was a mess; bugs still exist in the game;
the bug list **changes** regularly (implying work of some sort for
better or worst) and the scenario loading bug is fixed (course the
offending dialog was removed). Probably anything else you can post by
simply cruising the various forums probably has some truth as well.
Were you looking for some kinda debate on these things? :)
Keep in mind though this shitware has lasted on folks hard drive for a
long time (over 10 years in fact). So there must be something good
about it. Course thats for everybody to decide on their own.
Do hope in the future things work out and your opinion changes. Respect
it none the less and yes I've actually bought and not bought games with
good result based on your jibberish;)
Mike
Giftzwerg
myky...@yahoo.com says...
> Giftzwerg wrote: "woof shit fuck woof"
Pretty close. Actually, "Why should that comical bugfest derived from
HARPOON II work any better just because David Heath has a hand in
selling it now?"
> Yeah essellerate activation was a mess; bugs still exist in the game;
> the bug list **changes** regularly (implying work of some sort for
> better or worst)
Perhaps they're just *adding* bugs to the list. But I'm willing to
examine the evidence for bugs being fixed.
Can I see a comprehensive version list, including changes? Because the
version I see at the AGS site is 3.6.3, and this is the same buggy
disaster I'm using, and it has a date over a year old.
> and the scenario loading bug is fixed (course the
> offending dialog was removed).
It is? Again, which exact version fixes this, and where can I obtain
the patch?
> Probably anything else you can post by
> simply cruising the various forums probably has some truth as well.
> Were you looking for some kinda debate on these things? :)
What debate is possible? Isn't the ultimate answer to any "debate"
about the version I bought along the lines of, "Work on this version has
ended: please deposit another 200 quarters?"
> Keep in mind though this shitware has lasted on folks hard drive for a
> long time (over 10 years in fact). So there must be something good
> about it. Course thats for everybody to decide on their own.
I know people who've been using Windows ME for years; that calls into
question their sanity rather than obviating the many concerns about the
suitability of ME for anything.
MikMyk
is an older version of Harpoon 3.
Bugs in mantis reflect this current version but is slowly getting ahead
as new bugs are discovered. An update in the future will address some
of the things found.
Has it ever dawned on you that AGSI draws flak because it posts its
working buglist? Less of course you subscribe to the idea that all
other developers have completed theirs and thus have no need to do it;)
Mike
Vincenzo Beretta
> HARPOON II work any better just because David Heath has a hand in
> selling it now?"
I must say that I'm pretty happy with DavidH recent impersonation of Darth
Vader on Matrix's forum.
The plague of Harpoon has been the management, not the game itself. When I
bought Harpoon 3 I was quite happy with the game, the support and the
community. I understood that Jesse Spear's effort was, basically, a work in
progress financed by fanboys and I accepted that.
Then two things happened: the first one was that the patches suddenly dried
up. It was around April or May 2004 IIRC: until then the flow was almost a
new patch a month - then nothing. It was strange, but I could have lived
with that had some info been given about the situation.
And this leads us to the second, depressing, problem: the "Omerta" in the
community. I do not use the Italian term lightly: you didn't talked about
problems in the game, end of the story; the situation was really like the
"Cowslip Warren" in "Watership Down", for those who know the book.
Now, in the internet era a game grows thanks also to "check and balances",
these being the input of the community, the compilation of buglists for all
to see, vocal support for improvements et. al. Now, just imagine what
happens when the community itself (mostly centered around a single forum),
*actively* tries to hide problems in the game - not only in his own forum,
but in others too!!! O___o Having helped in setting up "guerrilla-like"
alternative webpages for Harpoon (containing stunningly forbidden things
like, GASP!, lists of known problems) I can tell you that the effort
included just that: guerrilla.
I won't delve into the reasons for this: they would involve a detailed and
boring analysis of misguided desires to "protect" the game, personal
rivalries surpassing Sharon vs. Arafat and blurred lines between being a fan
and actively supporting a company (I actually think that there is enough
stuff in all the mess for a doctorate paper in psychopathology of the
collective unconscious). However, to make a short story of a long one, I
feel that the poor game itself was innocent of all of this. Being a fanboy
both of Harpoon and TOAW, let's say that, when I was in my Harpoon mood, I
watched enviously what happened beyond the Berlin Wall - i.e. in the TOAW
community. You have only to look at TOAW III to see what ***a really
commited community*** is capable of doing.
So, as I previously said, I hope that David Heath and the people at Matrix
will be able to take the franchise, improve it and take it to the next
level; this would be impossibile without a new community, transparency and
the kind of efforts/policy Matrix is well known for. The first signs are
encouraging, and if this time AGSI misses the bus - their bad.
Rob Pollard
kee system and as such we do not qualify to use the upgrade price!!!! Grrrr!
I agree about the UI. I'm a software developer in real life and fixing and
finding most UI problems is EASY!!! I can only conclude that they either
have really poor developers or they just don't give a shit.... I'll let them
decide....
"Giftzwerg" <giftzw...@NOSPAMZ.hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1f0051798...@news-east.giganews.com...
Rob Pollard
window.... I got told on the SZO forums that if I wanted it fixed I would
have to buy the ANW edition! WTF? I bought H3 in good faith. I'm also
realistic about bug fixes, not all of them are commercially viable to fix -
But not fixing a quick and easy UI bug? That seems to me to be a low risk,
low resource, hi-gain kind of bug to fix but until ANW it has remained
broken.
I'm currently trying to find out whether support for H3 is continuing or
whether it has been terminated in favour of support for ANW...
"MikMyk" <myky...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1150728684.1...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
Giftzwerg
myky...@yahoo.com says...
> Current version is 3.7 ANW which is being sold by Matrix Games. 3.6.3
> is an older version of Harpoon 3.
Oh, isn't *this* obtuse!
Yes. I know. 3.6.3 is the buggy version which hasn't been updated in
over 18 months. The 3.7 version you so cheerfully mention will cost me
an additional $50.
> Bugs in mantis reflect this current version but is slowly getting ahead
> as new bugs are discovered. An update in the future will address some
> of the things found.
Am I to understand from this mysterious paragraph that I'm exactly
correct in my statement that not a single bug has been *actually fixed*
since the 3.6.3 version appeared?
> Has it ever dawned on you that AGSI draws flak because it posts its
> working buglist?
Has it ever dawned on you that most of this flak stems directly from the
fact that AGS never seems to *fix* any of the posted bugs?
> Less of course you subscribe to the idea that all
> other developers have completed theirs and thus have no need to do it;)
I subscribe to the idea that "posting lists of bugs" is worth exactly
fuck-all to your paying customers, except insofar as this is an aid to
actually fixing the bugs.
Which AGS ain't doing for their unlucky 3.6.3 customers. Not without
another full-pop cash infusion.
MikMyk
> >snip<<
Always amazed at how many times you can use the word "I" in anything
you write. Keep building that tower of babble Vinnie:)
Giftzwerg
rec...@hotmail.com says...
> > Pretty close. Actually, "Why should that comical bugfest derived from
> > HARPOON II work any better just because David Heath has a hand in
> > selling it now?"
>
> I must say that I'm pretty happy with DavidH recent impersonation of Darth
> Vader on Matrix's forum.
But did he restore the deleted threads and posts?
> The plague of Harpoon has been the management, not the game itself. When I
> bought Harpoon 3 I was quite happy with the game, the support and the
> community. I understood that Jesse Spear's effort was, basically, a work in
> progress financed by fanboys and I accepted that.
Here's the problem with that theory, though; *THEY CHARGED $60 FOR THE
GAME*!!!
See, I'm of the mind that there are exactly *two* kinds of software
products:
(1) Labors of love, maintained by unpaid enthusiasts, supported by a
user community. The cost of such software is $zero (or some tiny,
nominal fee). My expectations for this classification is that it'll be
working when it's working, bugs will have to be lived with, and users
have zero recourse for complaint. Example: Gimp.
(2) Commercial software. Sold at full-blown commercial prices. My
expectations for this category are along the lines of, "You charged me
for a 100% working product; don't be amazed when this is what I
expect." Example: PaintShopPro.
AGS is *de facto* trying to create a third, bastardized category that
combines, from my perspective, all the disadvantages of category (1)
with none of the advantages of category (2). Essentially, they're
selling a commercial product at the same prices competent designers
charge, and then profess astonishment when their paying customers refuse
to treat them like some geek in pajamas giving away freeware.
Can't have it both ways, folks.
> Then two things happened: the first one was that the patches suddenly dried
> up. It was around April or May 2004 IIRC: until then the flow was almost a
> new patch a month - then nothing. It was strange, but I could have lived
> with that had some info been given about the situation.
If they'd told me that the haplessly buggy 3.6.3 version I bought was to
be followed by *zero* patches for the next 18 months, I think I'd have
passed on the whole thing.
> However, to make a short story of a long one, I
> feel that the poor game itself was innocent of all of this. Being a fanboy
> both of Harpoon and TOAW, let's say that, when I was in my Harpoon mood, I
> watched enviously what happened beyond the Berlin Wall - i.e. in the TOAW
> community. You have only to look at TOAW III to see what ***a really
> commited community*** is capable of doing.
The key here, though, was that Matrix brought in a fresh team to see how
[the already excellent] TOAW could be improved. And the "old team" with
TOAW was Norm Koger!!
<tilt>
It's a pretty dodgy decisionmaking process that goes, "OK, so we'll
bring in a replacement for Koger, but let's keep the brilliant AGS team
on the case!!!"
<whackawhackawhacka>
> So, as I previously said, I hope that David Heath and the people at Matrix
> will be able to take the franchise, improve it and take it to the next
> level; this would be impossibile without a new community, transparency and
> the kind of efforts/policy Matrix is well known for. The first signs are
> encouraging, and if this time AGSI misses the bus - their bad.
Our bad, though, too.
Giftzwerg
roberta...@hotmail.com says...
> You forget Giftzwerg, that some of us 'previous' owners use the old Lok and
> kee system and as such we do not qualify to use the upgrade price!!!! Grrrr!
> I agree about the UI. I'm a software developer in real life and fixing and
> finding most UI problems is EASY!!! I can only conclude that they either
> have really poor developers or they just don't give a shit.... I'll let them
> decide....
I ended up just hacking the activation myself, once it dawned on me that
they never issued patches.
Guess I don't qualify, either, eh?
MikMyk
> Oh, isn't *this* obtuse!<
Yeah its is obtuse and sorry for that. Just not into tit for tat
posting and not into usenet gangbangs.
I like the game with all its warts and made a decision to invest time,
money and effort into it (as a hobby and part time job at one point).
I'm biased and would like to see it succeed. Thus probably no point in
going back and forth about it really:)
This would be me tapping out;)
Mike
Vincenzo Beretta
>> Darth
>> Vader on Matrix's forum.
He unlocked a thread that had been locked for unfathomable reasons and
basically said that Matrix's policy on the Harpoon forum is the same that on
other fora. After that, links and technical problems (re)popped up and
stayed there -end of the story.
> Here's the problem with that theory, though; *THEY CHARGED $60 FOR THE
> GAME*!!!
No, I was talking about the initial effort by Jesse Spears: it was very
clear that you paid for a work in progress, and you took your chances - so I
could not whine if it turned out bad :o) I took the risk and I was gratified
with an year of monthly patches. I really do not know what happened after
that - i.e. why the support dried up overnight just like that.
> It's a pretty dodgy decisionmaking process that goes, "OK, so we'll
> bring in a replacement for Koger, but let's keep the brilliant AGS team
> on the case!!!"
In all fairness, Norm's *recent* associates do not look as the sharpest
pencils in the bunch ^_^
> if this time AGSI misses the bus - their bad.
>
> Our bad, though, too.
You know, the biggest strenght of Harpoon is that it is the only game around
in his genre, since "Dangerous Waters" is a sim, and "Fleet Command" is only
"Harpoon-lite" (yes, Dean, I know about the patches...) So, no real
competition until now. But every time I look at Global Conflict Blue (*) I
wonder if Matrix should't simply hire that team on the spot - and we have
the coming naval games from NWS too.
(*) Without the 3D graphics, please - in the "Harpoon" genre I like more 10
added platforms than a single 3D model.
Giftzwerg
myky...@yahoo.com says...
> > Oh, isn't *this* obtuse!<
>
> Yeah its is obtuse and sorry for that. Just not into tit for tat
> posting and not into usenet gangbangs.
I'll bet.
Scurry on back to the warm embrace of the game-company forum, where you
can ban "unhelpful" individuals, delete "unconstructive" posts, and lock
"off-topic" threads.
Giftzwerg
rec...@hotmail.com says...
> >> I must say that I'm pretty happy with DavidH recent impersonation of
> >> Darth
> >> Vader on Matrix's forum.
>
> He unlocked a thread that had been locked for unfathomable reasons and
> basically said that Matrix's policy on the Harpoon forum is the same that on
> other fora. After that, links and technical problems (re)popped up and
> stayed there -end of the story.
Are we talking about the same forum? I only see a half-dozen threads in
the ANW forum at the matrixgames.com site.
> > Here's the problem with that theory, though; *THEY CHARGED $60 FOR THE
> > GAME*!!!
>
> No, I was talking about the initial effort by Jesse Spears: it was very
> clear that you paid for a work in progress, and you took your chances - so I
> could not whine if it turned out bad :o) I took the risk and I was gratified
> with an year of monthly patches. I really do not know what happened after
> that - i.e. why the support dried up overnight just like that.
<shrug>
I can only speak to the game *I* was sold, which cost me $59.95. This
is the full-boat price of a commercial package, not some community-
property hobbyist freeware.
> > Our bad, though, too.
>
> You know, the biggest strenght of Harpoon is that it is the only game around
> in his genre, since "Dangerous Waters" is a sim, and "Fleet Command" is only
> "Harpoon-lite" (yes, Dean, I know about the patches...) So, no real
> competition until now.
Yes. Exactly. This is what's kept me buying it through three
successive incarnations which were complete garbage.
MikMyk
the wrong guy. Sounds like Vinnie is working his magic though. I can
see where you might be touchy about forums though. Can't imagine you do
to well on those at all.hehe. .Anyways have a great day.
Mike
Vincenzo Beretta
> the ANW forum at the matrixgames.com site.
No, there are more. However:
Greviances
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1165408
The Great Florida Scenario Recount
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1164614
Problems in converting old scenarios'
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1165360
The link to the list of bugs fixed in ANW from H3
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1162592
And the link to Mantis bug-tracking system
http://mantis.advancedgaming.biz/login_page.php
Username: guest
Password: guest
with all the known bugs and those already fixed for the first patch.
A transparency and freedom of speech in all matters Harpoon unheard of, in
the past, without resorting to guerrilla warfare. O_____o Can one spell
"glasnost"? =)
Giftzwerg
myky...@yahoo.com says...
> Not a moderator at either forum. (AGSI or Matrix) so you're braying at
> the wrong guy. Sounds like Vinnie is working his magic though. I can
> see where you might be touchy about forums though. Can't imagine you do
> to well on those at all.hehe. .Anyways have a great day.
I'm not "touchy about forums," any more than I'm "touchy" about open
sewage. I avoid them for the simple reason that they're generally
populated almost entirely by sycophantic lickspittles who haven't the
stomach for a real discussion. You know, a discussion where they can't
have their interlocutors summarily silenced.
You can't imagine that I'd "do to [sic] well on those" forums? I guess
your shockingly limited intellect fails to register that you just made
my point for me. Hehe. I do, however, "do" quite well for myself in
free and open forums, like this one, where what counts is the quality of
one's argument and not a brown-nosing ability to make the other side's
arguments disappear.
If I were you, I'd stick to forums where the other fanbois can protect
you. You're far too feeble to survive out here. Anyways, have a great
day.
MikMyk
> I'm not "touchy about forums," any more than I'm "touchy" about open
> sewage. I avoid them for the simple reason that they're generally
> populated almost entirely by sycophantic lickspittles who haven't the
> stomach for a real discussion. You know, a discussion where they can't
> have their interlocutors summarily silenced.
Oddly enough much of the meat of your arguments seems to come from
these forums you despise though right;)
> You can't imagine that I'd "do to [sic] well on those" forums? I guess
> your shockingly limited intellect fails to register that you just made
> my point for me. Hehe.
I was stating the obvious wasn't I;)
I do, however, "do" quite well for myself in
> free and open forums, like this one, where what counts is the quality of
> one's argument and not a brown-nosing ability to make the other side's
> arguments disappear.> If I were you, I'd stick to forums where the other fanbois can protect > you. You're far too feeble to survive out here. Anyways, have a great
> day.
Well I'm here now aren't I and rather amused you're wishing me back.
You know for all your noise I wish you'd put your money where your
mouth is. Don't think you'll ever do that though:) Too bad might be
enlightening particularly when some gomer calls you a
moron/cocksucker/asshole/whatever simply because they can. Humbling
experience I guess:)
Mike
Giftzwerg
myky...@yahoo.com says...
> > I'm not "touchy about forums," any more than I'm "touchy" about open
> > sewage. I avoid them for the simple reason that they're generally
> > populated almost entirely by sycophantic lickspittles who haven't the
> > stomach for a real discussion. You know, a discussion where they can't
> > have their interlocutors summarily silenced.
>
> Oddly enough much of the meat of your arguments seems to come from
> these forums you despise though right;)
How so? The only argument I'm proposing is that AGS has produced a
ridiculously buggy product, and has not fixed a single bug in 18 months,
and that potential buyers should consider their woeful performance with
respect to version 3.6.3 (and the unlucky souls who purchased it...)
when evaluating whether to shell out *another* $50 for the new version.
What part of this relies on any forum?
> > You can't imagine that I'd "do to [sic] well on those" forums? I guess
> > your shockingly limited intellect fails to register that you just made
> > my point for me. Hehe.
>
> I was stating the obvious wasn't I;)
Which is exactly my point. And Mr. Beretta's.
Yes. Web forums *do* tend to ensure that folks who fail to toe the
company line "don't do well in the forum." They perform this
prestidigitation by banning posters, deleting posts, and locking
threads. This necessarily fosters a droolingly loyal cadre of drones
and promotes an overall environment we'd need a D.J.L. Bixby to fully
appreciate.
Clue: This is a bug, not a feature.
> Well I'm here now aren't I and rather amused you're wishing me back.
I'm neither "wishing" you away nor back. The extent of my powers here
is the ability to stop listening to you.
If you'd like to defend the zipperheads at AGS, or the rancid slough of
bugs they whelped, then get about it; a necessary first step in
rebutting my argument would be a comprehensive list of all version
upgrades and patches above 3.6.3 released since the beginning of *last
year*.
> You know for all your noise I wish you'd put your money where your
> mouth is.
I already put my money where my mouth is; the only relevant price of
admission to this particular kerfuffle was the $50 or so I shelled out
for the shitware in question.
> Don't think you'll ever do that though:) Too bad might be
> enlightening particularly when some gomer calls you a
> moron/cocksucker/asshole/whatever simply because they can. Humbling
> experience I guess:)
What are you babbling about? Are you actually suggesting that I "step
outside" USENET to some web-forum so you can prove your manhood -
presumably by pouting until some friendly moderator "wins" you the
argument by banning the opposition?
Yeah. Whew. That'll show me.
MikMyk
> How so? The only argument I'm proposing is that AGS has produced a
> ridiculously buggy product, and has not fixed a single bug in 18 months,
> and that potential buyers should consider their woeful performance with
> respect to version 3.6.3 (and the unlucky souls who purchased it...)
> when evaluating whether to shell out *another* $50 for the new version.
>
> What part of this relies on any forum?
The part where you are just regurgitating what you see on them as if
you're doing a **real** review. 90 % percent of what you've drooled on
H3 ANW could be summed up with a mediocre "Yeah me too" in about 12
different places on the internet at this point. This is not to
minimize the complaints as they are all valid but to point out you're
not exactly delivering the news;)
Bugs have been fixed in 13 months and bugs have been made. Overall it
was worth my money as I've bought the thing more than a few times
myself. I'm a admitted fanboy though;) Oddly enough 4 times might just
qualify you too;)
> > I was stating the obvious wasn't I;)
>
> Which is exactly my point. And Mr. Beretta's.
>
> Yes. Web forums *do* tend to ensure that folks who fail to toe the
> company line "don't do well in the forum." They perform this
> prestidigitation by banning posters, deleting posts, and locking
> threads. This necessarily fosters a droolingly loyal cadre of drones
> and promotes an overall environment we'd need a D.J.L. Bixby to fully
> appreciate.
>
> Clue: This is a bug, not a feature.
Yes I get you don't like forums as they "keep the man down". I haven't
actually advocated you going to one just prodding at your displeasure
in them. While you claim to be such a free speech advocate (ala USENET)
you're quick to banish those you deem unworthy to the slums of the
forums. So touche' fuckwit:)
> > Well I'm here now aren't I and rather amused you're wishing me back.
>
> I'm neither "wishing" you away nor back. The extent of my powers here
> is the ability to stop listening to you.
>
> If you'd like to defend the zipperheads at AGS, or the rancid slough of
> bugs they whelped, then get about it; a necessary first step in
> rebutting my argument would be a comprehensive list of all version
> upgrades and patches above 3.6.3 released since the beginning of *last
> year*.
There were no updates after 3.6.3.
This is not news though and that version of the game is substantially
different than 3.7.Work on Harpoon ANW started last year. IIRC close
too a hundred builds and interations. Some major rewrites,
Multiplayer, VCR etc. are not just incremental fixes.
> > You know for all your noise I wish you'd put your money where your
> > mouth is.
>
> I already put my money where my mouth is; the only relevant price of
> admission to this particular kerfuffle was the $50 or so I shelled out
> for the shitware in question.
Thats not what I mean. You posted pages and pages of gobbledeegoop all
over the internet for years and pretty much made a reputation for
yourself as one of the harshest critics of game development. So when
are you starting your own which assumably at this point should be
utopian:)
> What are you babbling about? Are you actually suggesting that I "step
> outside" USENET to some web-forum so you can prove your manhood -
> presumably by pouting until some friendly moderator "wins" you the
> argument by banning the opposition?
No you wouldn't last on a forum of any sort and I'd hardly have to help
getting you kicked. Something about that Otto the Garbageman vernacular
that dwarfs the marvelous points you make.
> Yeah. Whew. That'll show me.
Not in here to show **you** anything just give another opinion:) Should
I go back to "the forums" so you can be comfortable?
Mike Kreuzer
> Giftzwerg wrote:
[snip]
>> I already put my money where my mouth is; the only relevant
>> price of admission to this particular kerfuffle was the $50
>> or so I shelled out for the shitware in question.
>
> Thats not what I mean. You posted pages and pages of
> gobbledeegoop all over the internet for years and pretty much
> made a reputation for yourself as one of the harshest critics
> of game development. So when are you starting your own which
> assumably at this point should be utopian:)
Yep, he's the second harshest critic, after that woman from NZ.
The assumably a woman one. <g>
Regards,
Mike Kreuzer
www.mikekreuzer.com
Giftzwerg
myky...@yahoo.com says...
> > How so? The only argument I'm proposing is that AGS has produced a
> > ridiculously buggy product, and has not fixed a single bug in 18 months,
> > and that potential buyers should consider their woeful performance with
> > respect to version 3.6.3 (and the unlucky souls who purchased it...)
> > when evaluating whether to shell out *another* $50 for the new version.
> >
> > What part of this relies on any forum?
>
> The part where you are just regurgitating what you see on them as if
> you're doing a **real** review. 90 % percent of what you've drooled on
> H3 ANW could be summed up with a mediocre "Yeah me too" in about 12
> different places on the internet at this point. This is not to
> minimize the complaints as they are all valid but to point out you're
> not exactly delivering the news;)
So what? The fact that other folks have previously come to exactly the
same conclusion - that H3 is worthless, buggy shit - might be a a quasi-
interesting footnote (which helps my argument, BTW...), but that the
conclusion itself isn't being seriously questioned is a powerful and
salient point when the current issue is whether AGS can possibly be
trusted to produce an actual working version *this time*.
> Bugs have been fixed in 13 months
Cite? Not in the last 13 months. Not in any patch released to paying
customers of 3.6.3. Not that you've shown.
> and bugs have been made.
They have? How have bugs been *made*, when you can't even show a single
byte of release code or patches in this period. You can't *make* a bug
without making changes, you can only *find* bugs.
[That new bugs have been *found* in the last year, I'm perfectly
certain; I think the absolute number of bugs in H3 must be virtually
infinite.]
> Overall it
> was worth my money as I've bought the thing more than a few times
> myself. I'm a admitted fanboy though;) Oddly enough 4 times might just
> qualify you too;)
Buying patterns are irrelevant; you only qualify as a fanboi if you
pathologically parrot the company line in public.
Which lets me out.
> Yes I get you don't like forums as they "keep the man down".
Actually, I don't like them because they value silencing honest critics
over promoting honest discussion, the better to ensure that the happy-
talk, defanged discussion can't possibly infringe on sales.
> I haven't
> actually advocated you going to one just prodding at your displeasure
> in them. While you claim to be such a free speech advocate (ala USENET)
> you're quick to banish those you deem unworthy to the slums of the
> forums. So touche' fuckwit:)
This doesn't make sense on any level.
Nothing about my advocacy of the freedom of an open newsgroup over the
censorship of a web-forum amounts to "banishing" anyone to anywhere. If
you like forums, fine, you're welcome to them. If you want to hang out
here in a free and open newsgroup, knock yourself out.
I'm simply pointing out that the value of any discussion is directly
proportional to the degree to which the participants are unmuzzled by
heavy-handed "moderation" running the show.
> > If you'd like to defend the zipperheads at AGS, or the rancid slough of
> > bugs they whelped, then get about it; a necessary first step in
> > rebutting my argument would be a comprehensive list of all version
> > upgrades and patches above 3.6.3 released since the beginning of *last
> > year*.
>
> There were no updates after 3.6.3.
Then how - *exactly* - can you claim that bugs were fixed (or "made") in
the last 13 months? I mean, that is what you meant ... or did you have
some *other* randomly-chosen 13 month period in mind?
> This is not news though
It's news to *you*, apparently. See above.
> and that version of the game is substantially
> different than 3.7.Work on Harpoon ANW started last year. IIRC close
> too a hundred builds and interations. Some major rewrites,
> Multiplayer, VCR etc. are not just incremental fixes.
Gee, that's nice, but when I purchased 3.6.3, I was told (you know, by
all the honest folks at the AGS and HHQ forums) that the bugs in *that*
release would be fixed - not that I'd only get the desperately-needed
bugfixes if I shelled out *another* fifty bucks for a whole new version
eighteen months later.
They kinda couldn't have sold me that version if they'd been up front
about it, ya know.
> > I already put my money where my mouth is; the only relevant price of
> > admission to this particular kerfuffle was the $50 or so I shelled out
> > for the shitware in question.
>
> Thats not what I mean. You posted pages and pages of gobbledeegoop all
> over the internet for years and pretty much made a reputation for
> yourself as one of the harshest critics of game development. So when
> are you starting your own which assumably at this point should be
> utopian:)
Oh, puleeeeeeeeaaaze. Not the ancient, thoroughly-discredited,
entirely-lackwitted "argument" that goes, "Only a fully-accredited
architect working currently employed as a plumbing contractor is
qualified to recognize a stopped-up, overflowing toilet!"
> No you wouldn't last on a forum of any sort and I'd hardly have to help
> getting you kicked. Something about that Otto the Garbageman vernacular
> that dwarfs the marvelous points you make.
<laughter>
Pick any moderated company forum you like. I'll stop by at some random
time under a pseudonym. Wanna bet I can get "kicked" - banned, posts
deleted, threads locked - in 24 hours without uttering a single word of
a scatological, insulting, or acrimonious nature, just by laying out
harsh, unyielding, unrelenting, *and 100% accurate* criticism of the
software product?
Ralph Trickey
"Vincenzo Beretta" <rec...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cPAlg.16147$bj6....@tornado.fastwebnet.it...
> In all fairness, Norm's *recent* associates do not look as the sharpest
> pencils in the bunch ^_^
Ralph Trickey
TOAW III Programmer
Mike Kreuzer
MikMyk
> Cite? Not in the last 13 months. Not in any patch released to paying
> customers of 3.6.3. Not that you've shown.
If you subscribe to 3.7 being what you payed for in 3.6 of course you
feel bamboozled. However 3.7 comes with MP, VCR, New H4 Database and
scenarios, New Database Editor(s), and a new scenario editor with some
really outstanding features. This was not promised in 3.6. If you can
cite this please do. You are getting new **stuff** with your purchase
not bugfixes you paid for in 3.6.
Might add that discounts were based on when you bought the last game
which kind of credits you for the amount of value you've gotten out of
your last purchase. Granted that was seemingly a god awful
miscommunicated mess. Anyways...
> > and bugs have been made.
Was trying to be honest that new bugs appeared along the way
(3.6->3,7). Its all in the buglist/mantis so take a lookee. Tons fixed
though.
http://mediawiki.advancedgaming.biz/index.php/What_is_new_in_Harpoon_3_ANW
Yes its true there are alot of bugs left but it is because AGSI allows
its fan base to post and view them endlessly. I mean beyond the Shoots
and Ladder's crowd (yeah I know we're way above that crowd..hehe) have
you ever seen a game group that didn't want something fixed, changed or
improved? So they post often and find alot and it is the working list.
> Oh, puleeeeeeeeaaaze. Not the ancient, thoroughly-discredited,
> entirely-lackwitted "argument" that goes, "Only a fully-accredited
> architect working currently employed as a plumbing contractor is
> qualified to recognize a stopped-up, overflowing toilet!"
Heh..okay maybe just a little unfair but you're response sounded well
rehearsed as well. My first thought was..."quit being a pussy" though:(
> Pick any moderated company forum you like.
Matrix. I dare say you gotta be yourself in this experiment if your
serious. Good Luck Otto;)
Thanks,
Mike
MikMyk
> Cite? Not in the last 13 months. Not in any patch released to paying
> customers of 3.6.3. Not that you've shown.
If you subscribe to 3.7 being what you payed for in 3.6 of course you
feel bamboozled. However 3.7 comes with MP, VCR, New H4 Database and
scenarios, New Database Editor(s), and a new scenario editor with some
really outstanding features. This was not promised in 3.6. If you can
cite this please do. You are getting new **stuff** with your purchase
not bugfixes you paid for in 3.6.
Might add that discounts were based on when you bought the last game
which kind of credits you for the amount of value you've gotten out of
your last purchase. Granted that was seemingly a god awful
miscommunicated mess. Anyways...
> > and bugs have been made.
Was trying to be honest that new bugs appeared along the way
(3.6->3,7). Its all in the buglist/mantis so take a lookee. Tons fixed
though.
http://mediawiki.advancedgaming.biz/index.php/What_is_new_in_Harpoon_3_ANW
Yes its true there are alot of bugs left but it is because AGSI allows
its fan base to post and view them endlessly. I mean beyond the Shoots
and Ladder's crowd (yeah I know we're way above that crowd..hehe) have
you ever seen a game group that didn't want something fixed, changed or
improved? So they post often and find alot and it is the working list.
> Oh, puleeeeeeeeaaaze. Not the ancient, thoroughly-discredited,
> entirely-lackwitted "argument" that goes, "Only a fully-accredited
> architect working currently employed as a plumbing contractor is
> qualified to recognize a stopped-up, overflowing toilet!"
Heh..okay maybe just a little unfair but you're response sounded well
rehearsed as well. My first thought was..."quit being a pussy" though:(
> Pick any moderated company forum you like.
Matrix. I dare say you gotta be yourself in this experiment if your
Ralph Trickey
Thanks,
Ralph
"Mike Kreuzer" <mikek...@SAMEAGAIN.com> wrote in message
news:4497...@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
Vincenzo Beretta
That'$ right.
Vincenzo Beretta
> feel bamboozled. However 3.7 comes with MP, VCR, New H4 Database and
> scenarios, New Database Editor(s), and a new scenario editor with some
> really outstanding features. This was not promised in 3.6.
Then a case can be made for a free, final 3.6.5 for owners of Harpoon 3,
with ANW's bugfixes but without the new features. I think that it would
satisfy everybody.
ThornOfCrowns
> Was trying to be honest that new bugs appeared along the way
> (3.6->3,7). Its all in the buglist/mantis so take a lookee. Tons fixed
> though.
>
Looking at the bug fix list, it shows 132 crash bugs 'closed', with
another 12 'resolved'. Now, as I'm a senior developer for a large IT
company, I have an understanding of testing and bug fixing, which
normally means that Unit, System and User Acceptance testing picks up
all of the crash and major problems with the system, with hopefully
only esoteric errors making it to UAT.
The best part of 150 crash problems? With another 50 odd major bugs?
It went through 100 builds? This shouldn't have got out of testing to
even a beta, never mind a full release.
What's the wages for a Testing Manager over there anyway? :)
Giftzwerg
myky...@yahoo.com says...
> > Cite? Not in the last 13 months. Not in any patch released to paying
> > customers of 3.6.3. Not that you've shown.
>
> If you subscribe to 3.7 being what you payed for in 3.6 of course you
> feel bamboozled.
Feel? Haven't we been *objectively* bamboozled? The exact same bugs
that went on my hard disk the day I paid for 3.6.3 are still there ...
and now they'd like another $50 to fix them.
> However 3.7 comes with MP, VCR, New H4 Database and
> scenarios, New Database Editor(s), and a new scenario editor with some
> really outstanding features. This was not promised in 3.6. If you can
> cite this please do. You are getting new **stuff** with your purchase
> not bugfixes you paid for in 3.6.
Look, there are exactly two overall points I'm making here:
(1) The appropriate way to fix the paying customers' problems with a
software package is *not* to make them re-buy a new version of the same
package for the original price. It's to *fix the fucking software they
already gave you money for*!
(2) What assurances do I have that 3.7 won't be a piece of shit just
like 3.6 - and that AGS's "fix" for *that* won't be issuing, "VERSION
4.0! Only $50! Fixes all bugs *AND* adds wonderful new features!"
The idea is that AGS's track record sucks, and I think every potential
customer had better understand this up front.
> http://mediawiki.advancedgaming.biz/index.php/What_is_new_in_Harpoon_3_ANW
>
> Yes its true there are alot of bugs left but it is because AGSI allows
> its fan base to post and view them endlessly.
<laughter>
I know online activities can be phun, but I was rather hoping for more
of a naval wargaming experience from H3 - rather than a delightful
exercise in "posting and viewing the buglist endlessly."
> I mean beyond the Shoots
> and Ladder's crowd (yeah I know we're way above that crowd..hehe) have
> you ever seen a game group that didn't want something fixed, changed or
> improved? So they post often and find alot and it is the working list.
This is disingenuous in the extreme. Yeah, there's not a group out
there that doesn't want even a near-perfect, complete-classic wargame
tweaked a bit. But this isn't a case of perfectionists run wild,
trampling boorishly over hardworking programmers working desperately to
improve the game - it's a case where this wonderful buglist (that you
seem to imagine amounts to some practical improvement in the actual
software) just sits there, month after month, without the smallest bug
being squashed.
Rob, Vinnie, and I keep referring to the scenario-loading bug. This is
not because it's the worst problem with H3, but because it's so
poignantly emblematic of everything that's wrong with H3 and AGS. This
is a bug which (a) would have been caught by even a buffy-headed
marmoset acting as a QA check - if AGS had even bothered to run the
fucking code before shipping - and (b) could be fixed by a freshman
English major who once *saw* a computer on television.
That this bug still sits there, month after month after month, while
customers who paid full-boat commercial software prices to own this game
are told, "Wait for the next $50 version! We promise we'll <snicker>
really fix that one!!!", just beggars reality.
Giftzwerg
dize...@gmail.com says...
Are you looking at the leadup to 3.7?
ThornOfCrowns
> --
> Giftzwerg
> ***
Yeah, the crash list goes from 5th Jan 2005 to 14th June 2006, a few
days before release on 17th June 2006. I wonder how much testing went
into those bug fixes?
There's still a bunch of 'major' problems unresolved according to the
log, stuff like having problems saving a file to a different directory,
something that would be a showstopper and cause for some late nights
where I work. But then again, I get _paid_ to make sure stuff works
before it goes out. :)
Frank E
<giftzw...@NOSPAMZ.hotmail.com> wrote:
>Look, there are exactly two overall points I'm making here:
>
>(1) The appropriate way to fix the paying customers' problems with a
>software package is *not* to make them re-buy a new version of the same
>package for the original price. It's to *fix the fucking software they
>already gave you money for*!
>
I wonder how much of that, if any, is due to Matrix. I recall the
exact same thing happening with HTTR when they switched publishers to
Matrix. Support for the previous version was dropped immediately and
damn the promises made previously.
Either Matrix won't allow support for previous versions of a product
once they sign a developer or the developers get greedy all of a
sudden. Either way, I think it's a mistake. The extra bucks you earn
isn't worth the bad worth of mouth you get from your earlier
customers.
Rgds, Frank
MikMyk
Giftzwerg wrote:
> Look, there are exactly two overall points I'm making here:
>
> (1) The appropriate way to fix the paying customers' problems with a
> software package is *not* to make them re-buy a new version of the same
> package for the original price. It's to *fix the fucking software they
> already gave you money for*!
If it was the same product which it is not. I'm not going through whats
added again.
> (2) What assurances do I have that 3.7 won't be a piece of shit just
> like 3.6 - and that AGS's "fix" for *that* won't be issuing, "VERSION
> 4.0! Only $50! Fixes all bugs *AND* adds wonderful new features!"
Admittedly none. However like I said in my very first post that AGSI
has always been fairly open about what you're getting and that its a
work in development. Whether you like that business model or not is up
to you. I think given sales and general progress the fans of the game
have been generally happy so it continues. If they get unhappy and
sales decline then the model changes...thats how it works right? :)
BTW any reason why Matrix is left out of the equation in your
discussions? IIRC they're the publisher and most likely most involved
with **price**. Easy to pick on little AGSI though. On a similar note
why didn't Vince's review touch on any of this and why did it plug the
very people he seems to despise... I don't think either one of you has
grounds to call anybody disingenious....
> > I mean beyond the Shoots
> > and Ladder's crowd (yeah I know we're way above that crowd..hehe) have
> > you ever seen a game group that didn't want something fixed, changed or
> > improved? So they post often and find alot and it is the working list.
>
> This is disingenuous in the extreme. Yeah, there's not a group out
> there that doesn't want even a near-perfect, complete-classic wargame
> tweaked a bit. But this isn't a case of perfectionists run wild,
> trampling boorishly over hardworking programmers working desperately to
> improve the game - it's a case where this wonderful buglist (that you
> seem to imagine amounts to some practical improvement in the actual
> software) just sits there, month after month, without the smallest bug
> being squashed.
Bullshit. Bugs are fixed based on the worklist created by fans of the
game. AGSI's only crime may be assigning a public priority which makes
folks wonder why "their bug wasn't fixed first.". Nature of the beast
though.
> Rob, Vinnie, and I keep referring to the scenario-loading bug. This is
> not because it's the worst problem with H3, but because it's so
> poignantly emblematic of everything that's wrong with H3 and AGS.
This is fixed in 3.7. Yes I understand you feel ripped off in that it
should have been fixed pre 3.7 and released as a patch for 3.6. I also
know Rob does interfaces (if he's the same guy I'm thinking of) so of
course it bugs him just a little more.
>This > is a bug which (a) would have been caught by even a buffy-headed
> marmoset acting as a QA check - if AGS had even bothered to run the
> fucking code before shipping - and (b) could be fixed by a freshman
> English major who once *saw* a computer on television.
The bug was logged IIRC. Priority put functional game things ahead of
it because it didn't prohibit folks from playing the game. It was
addressed in 3.7. So the marmoset may have exceeded expectations on
that one. In terms of the fix I don't know...I don't code..do you?
(this goes back to your architect/plumber analogy...its seems easy when
its not you doing it in this case).
> That this bug still sits there, month after month after month, while
> customers who paid full-boat commercial software prices to own this game
> are told, "Wait for the next $50 version! We promise we'll <snicker>
> really fix that one!!!", just beggars reality.
Over the top :)
Thanks,
Mike
MikMyk
You don't really have enough information available to you to make a
great opinion on it although you're certainly entitled to one;) Need
access to a bit more information I think:)
Giftzwerg
dize...@gmail.com says...
> > Are you looking at the leadup to 3.7?
> Yeah, the crash list goes from 5th Jan 2005 to 14th June 2006, a few
> days before release on 17th June 2006. I wonder how much testing went
> into those bug fixes?
And given this, how can we not wonder if anything has changed at AGS?
Is AGS going to respond to bug reports in 3.7 the way they did in 3.6;
by posting them to a list - as if this had some practical effect - and
then not fixing them?
Is AGS going to sit on its collective fat ass for two years and then
"fix" the bugs in 3.7 by asking for another $50 for 3.8 - the same thing
it did with 3.6 vs 3.7?
Is this nonsensical, "It's a work in progress!" refrain forever now at
an end? Or are customers complaining about bugs and difficulties still
going to have to hear this sad shit?
Can we *officially* now regard H3 as a 100% supported commercial
product, and calibrate our expectations to that standard, IE, expect it
to be fully working and suitable to task and that AGS will expeditiously
move to fix any problems?
And *really fix them*, not just "post to the buglist?"
--
Giftzwerg
***
"Irresponsible Democrats are the ones who denounce the administration
and propose ridiculous solutions like shipping our troops to Okinawa.
Responsible Democrats are the ones who propose policies
indistinguishable from the ones now being followed, but denounce the
administration nevertheless."
- John Hinderaker
Giftzwerg
fakea...@hotmail.com says...
> >Look, there are exactly two overall points I'm making here:
> >
> >(1) The appropriate way to fix the paying customers' problems with a
> >software package is *not* to make them re-buy a new version of the same
> >package for the original price. It's to *fix the fucking software they
> >already gave you money for*!
> I wonder how much of that, if any, is due to Matrix. I recall the
> exact same thing happening with HTTR when they switched publishers to
> Matrix. Support for the previous version was dropped immediately and
> damn the promises made previously.
>
> Either Matrix won't allow support for previous versions of a product
> once they sign a developer or the developers get greedy all of a
> sudden. Either way, I think it's a mistake. The extra bucks you earn
> isn't worth the bad worth of mouth you get from your earlier
> customers.
Maybe. I do recall your making the same complaint with respect to RDOA
vs. HTTR.
But lots of developers pull exactly this same shit without Matrix being
on the scene.
Giftzwerg
myky...@yahoo.com says...
> > Look, there are exactly two overall points I'm making here:
> >
> > (1) The appropriate way to fix the paying customers' problems with a
> > software package is *not* to make them re-buy a new version of the same
> > package for the original price. It's to *fix the fucking software they
> > already gave you money for*!
>
> If it was the same product which it is not. I'm not going through whats
> added again.
3.6 is still *exactly* the same product it was. I want them to fix that
version - which I *already paid for* - before they try to sell me
something New! And! Improved!
> > (2) What assurances do I have that 3.7 won't be a piece of shit just
> > like 3.6 - and that AGS's "fix" for *that* won't be issuing, "VERSION
> > 4.0! Only $50! Fixes all bugs *AND* adds wonderful new features!"
>
> Admittedly none. However like I said in my very first post that AGSI
> has always been fairly open about what you're getting and that its a
> work in development.
Nonsense. Had anyone from AGS told me - prior to my plunking down the
$50 for version 3.6, "Now, you understand that this is a 'work in
progress,' and that any bugs you get when you purchase 3.6 are going to
sit there on your disk for 18 months, and will only (maybe!) get fixed
when we release the next $50 version..."
Well, suffice to say they were somewhat less than "open" about this.
And again, what's this "progress" shit you keep spouting? Since I
bought version 3.6, the only "progress" has been comprised of AGS
stiffing me on upgrades to the buggy shit I bought and "progressing" on
the new version they intend to sell me for *another* $50.
"Work in progress?" More like a work that only progresses when
customers stuff additional $50 bills down a rat-hole.
> Whether you like that business model or not is up
> to you.
<laughter>
Of course it is, if they'd like my $50.
> BTW any reason why Matrix is left out of the equation in your
> discussions? IIRC they're the publisher and most likely most involved
> with **price**. Easy to pick on little AGSI though. On a similar note
> why didn't Vince's review touch on any of this and why did it plug the
> very people he seems to despise... I don't think either one of you has
> grounds to call anybody disingenious....
I'm not leaving Matrix out. But I have no illusions about two things:
(1) Matrix is only on the hook for H3 to the extent that they *now* -
with v3.7 - are involved with the project. The fiasco with previous
versions which languish unfixed despite assurances that the "work" would
"progress" is manifestly not their fault.
(2) Publishers have a lot of influence, I suppose, but ultimately it's
not Battlefront who needs to fix a bug I find in TACOPS - it's Major H.
When I have a problem with COTA, I'll go to Arjuna or Golf33 - not David
Heath or Eric Rutins.
> > > I mean beyond the Shoots
> > > and Ladder's crowd (yeah I know we're way above that crowd..hehe) have
> > > you ever seen a game group that didn't want something fixed, changed or
> > > improved? So they post often and find alot and it is the working list.
> >
> > This is disingenuous in the extreme. Yeah, there's not a group out
> > there that doesn't want even a near-perfect, complete-classic wargame
> > tweaked a bit. But this isn't a case of perfectionists run wild,
> > trampling boorishly over hardworking programmers working desperately to
> > improve the game - it's a case where this wonderful buglist (that you
> > seem to imagine amounts to some practical improvement in the actual
> > software) just sits there, month after month, without the smallest bug
> > being squashed.
>
> Bullshit. Bugs are fixed based on the worklist created by fans of the
> game. AGSI's only crime may be assigning a public priority which makes
> folks wonder why "their bug wasn't fixed first.". Nature of the beast
> though.
Bullshit? You already admitted that there hasn't been a bugfix - or a
release of any kind - since 3.6.3! NO BUGS HAVE BEEN FIXED FOR 3.6
OWNERS SINCE THEN. Eighteen months of nothing. Not a single byte of
release code since I purchased the software.
Fixed *first*!? They haven't fixed any *at all*! Not without jamming
another $50 chip in the coin-slot.
> >This > is a bug which (a) would have been caught by even a buffy-headed
> > marmoset acting as a QA check - if AGS had even bothered to run the
> > fucking code before shipping - and (b) could be fixed by a freshman
> > English major who once *saw* a computer on television.
>
> The bug was logged IIRC.
Who. Fucking. Cares.
If I spent my day merely "logging" the myriad issues which crop up here
at $ork - without bothering to *fix* any of them - I could count the
hours until the fancy plastic "Director of IT Services" placard was
ripped from my door.
"Yes, Mr. Jones, I know your whole department is offline because of a
server-cluster outage. I know you can't sell anything now. But I
'logged' the problem! Enjoy!"
Here in the real world, "logging" something is fucking useless; people
care about *fixing* things.
> Priority put functional game things ahead of
> it because it didn't prohibit folks from playing the game. It was
> addressed in 3.7.
Maybe the best idea would be for AGS to simply be honest and charge
customers by the bug-fix. You know, $5 if you'd like to have a working
menu interface, or $10 if you'd like air-to-air refueling to work, or
$15 if you're having multiple CTDs. Shit, they could have sold the
"activation patch" for $20 all by itself.
Vincenzo Beretta
> why didn't Vince's review touch on any of this and why did it plug the
> very people he seems to despise... I don't think either one of you has
> grounds to call anybody disingenious....
It was not a review, it was a *pre*view, i.e. an introduction to the game
and its history for those not knowing what it was about and a description of
the product. I also mentioned that Matrix would have offered a discount to
previous H3 owners, the details of which - at the time of writing - weren't
officially announced, so I couldn't comment about. And I gave the "about 120
scenarios" number, since Dale confirmed that no third party DBs would have
been shipped with ANW.
I feel that there is a lot of confusion and overlapping here. The community,
the developer and the game are three separate entities, no matter how much
interrelated, and thus subject to three separate judgements.
Let's start with the first issue. I never liked the way some members of the
*community* managed things. This is not a secret: unsupported allegations,
banning for pointing out factual problems, omerty, slander et al. I was
banned from a forum for pointing out that a third-party database had some
problems and suggesting an easy fix. The threads are still up at SZO and
everyone can check them. So, my personal view of *a part of the community*
is very, very dim.
Then there is AGSI. I can see why Giftzwerg is angry: in his experience, he
bought a buggy game and it was never fixed. Having bought the game almost
two years before he did, I lived through the period when a new patch was
published every month and Jesse Spears kept a very open development diary on
the internet. We all knew that, by paying $50, we were founding a work in
progress: it is a free world, I choose to do it and I was happy with it. So,
when the patches dried up I supposed that it was a temporary problem. I
still sent bug reports to Jesse and he still answered to them, so I assumed
that the work on H3 was still going on. I really do not know why after 3.6.3
the support dried up with BIG BUGS like air-to-air refueling not working
still outstanding, so I cannot comment. But for someone who bought the game
18 months ago and NEVER saw a single bit of support it must have been really
a maddening experience. However, I really hope that Matrix's edition will
give to AGSI the opportunity to get their act together, due to the simple
fact that Matrix in the past repeatedly showed that the quality and support
standards required to work with them are much higher.
And then there is the game itself. I like it very much - this too is not a
secret (beside it should be obvious: I would not have suffered through the
clownery if the key component wasn't something I really liked). Is ANW a
perfect game even in an hypotetical bugless state? No. Does it portray an
interesting way a fascinating kind of warfare and its unique intellectual
challenge? Yes, big time. Sure, it is time for something more modern, a
better interface, better graphics, and updated DB and much more, but I feel
that ANW is still way better than, for example, "Fleet Command" updated by
NWS, and, IMHO, just now only a finished and tested "Global Conflict Blue"
could beat it in its genre (operational modern naval warfare). This is what
my preview was about. If I ever will do a review (and I'm actually doing it
just now for my magazine, here in Italy), be sure that problems ranging from
confirmed bugs to the kind of expected support will be considered.
Giftzwerg
rec...@hotmail.com says...
> Then there is AGSI. I can see why Giftzwerg is angry: in his experience, he
> bought a buggy game and it was never fixed. Having bought the game almost
> two years before he did, I lived through the period when a new patch was
> published every month and Jesse Spears kept a very open development diary on
> the internet. We all knew that, by paying $50, we were founding a work in
> progress: it is a free world, I choose to do it and I was happy with it. So,
> when the patches dried up I supposed that it was a temporary problem. I
> still sent bug reports to Jesse and he still answered to them, so I assumed
> that the work on H3 was still going on. I really do not know why after 3.6.3
> the support dried up with BIG BUGS like air-to-air refueling not working
> still outstanding, so I cannot comment.
Of course, the obvious inference here, given the timing of the period
where the patches "dried up," is that support for previous versions -
not to mention the previous paying customers - was abandoned the moment
the decision was made to move ahead with 3.7 as a $50 "for pay" version.
3.6.3 was released in January 2005. AGS *announced* their deal with
Matrix in April 2005. Assuming that the deal must have been discussed
and negotiated for a period of X weeks before the announcement ...
... well, we don't have to be gumshoe of Lt. Columbo's ability to
connect such dots, do we? The patches "dried up" at virtually the same
moment that AGS signed with Matrix for a new $50 version.
QED.
Vincenzo Beretta
> Matrix in April 2005. Assuming that the deal must have been discussed
> and negotiated for a period of X weeks before the announcement ...
I have not kept track of patches and issue dates, but I'm sure that I
discovered what caused the air-to-air refueling bug in July 2004 (*). I'm
sure about that because it was while I was on vacation at the seaside. If
so, then AGSI left this feature broken even in the last patch, issued five
months later.
(*) It is worth mentioning that this marked the beginning of the downhill.
AtA refueling actually worked - sometimes - so I wasn't sure if it was me
who did something wrong. I asked on a certain forum about it and, after
being asked to confirm the problem (which I did) I got the unfamous answer
"this is a known problem".
The big GRRRRRRRRRR! was not the bug itself; it was the fact that I spent
hours tracking it down, but then it took only twenty minutes to discover
what caused it - something I could have done up stat hadn't I been asked to
"confirm" something already known. After that I obviously asked for a
permanent bug/issues list to be kept for all to see - only to discover that
it already existed! It was on another site (a Yahoo mailing list actually)
and mantained by a guy not exactly popular on the big forum. I stll wonder
why (rollseyes)