history or not history, that is the question

[walkerd]

ORIGINAL: Jonathan Palfrey
It's a built-in problem with any game forum -- or any product forum of any kind -- that the dissatisfied are over-represented. People who love the game may post once to say so, if they can spare the time from playing the thing, but people who have complaints are more likely to post, and are more likely to post repeatedly. You have to bear that in mind and allow for it. Go on any non-games software product forum and you'll see an immense list of problems that people are having; despite which, most people are using the product quite happily without any problems.

I am not so sure it is the case, we have no way of knowing if the silet majority love or hate the game.. I would also rate (most) of dissatisfied as people with high expectations. These are people who love the game, the era but do not find what they are looking for.

There is a mass of dissatisfied people in the WITP forum but I could see the issues were more player based and bought the game. It looks like if FOF that some design concepts do not address the issues some people have.

[tevans6220]

ORIGINAL: Queeg

ORIGINAL: tevans6220

Every Civil War game, computer or otherwise, that I have ever played has been able to get it right without having to balance or strengthen the South.

What games are those?

Board games: VG's Civil War, The War Between the States, War for the Union, A House Divided
Computer Games: From Sumter to Appomattox, No Greater Glory, HPS Civil War titles (they are operational and tactical level)

The point is that each one of the games I listed got it right. Two more examples are Birth of America and For Liberty!. Granted they are not Civil War era games but the historical situation is very similar. Both games deal with the American Revolution and both have the starting conditions right. The American forces are weak and outclassed by the British forces. As I said in my previous post, all we want is that the starting conditions for the scenarios be as historically accurate as possible. What's wrong with that? This game is supposed to be based on a historical event. It would be nice to actually resemble history.

[General Quarters]

ORIGINAL: walkerd

ORIGINAL: Queeg

While a vocal handful clearly want a more "historical" game (though they have a hard time reaching any consensus on what exactly that means), there may well be hundreds of folks who are playing the game and enjoying the fact that the designers opted for balanced setup that provides a challenging game to each side. ...

I suspect more then a handfull, more like the silent majority. As it stands I will not be buying the game. ...
I only want a "historical" game, otherwise, to me at least, there is no point in buying the game. ...

Let there be no mistake: this IS a historical game, by far the best American Civil War strategic game ever devised and, in my view, the only one actually worth playing. To miss playing the game because it does not reflect a few posters' particular requirements for being "historical," about which they cannot even agree among themselves, would be a mistake.

[TheHellPatrol]

[:)]Well said General Quarters! Bravo!

[tevans6220]

Not trying to flame anybody or start a flamewar but anybody that thinks this game is historical in it's current condition doesn't know their Civil War history. The only thing historical about this game in it's current state is it's a game of the Civil War era and it uses the names of historical leaders. In it's current state, this game is far from being historical and the dev's admitted as much when they stated that a more "historical" scenario would be included in the next patch. This game has a lot of potential but it's not there yet. Nobody is asking for a 100% historically accurate simulation of the Civil War. That's impossible and goes right out the window with the first move of the game. All we ask is that the actual historical starting conditions be put into the game. That means that if the North had a 4 to 1 advantage in manpower it should be reflected in the game. It means the South should start with the same shortcomings and disadvantages that they actually started with. What we have now is the equivalent of giving the Japanese or the Germans nukes at the start of a WWII game. It may make for an interesting scenario but in no way follows history. I think it's time to ask ourselves what type of game this is supposed to be. Is it a game based in the Civil War era where anything can happen? Or is it a game about the Civil War which was an historical event and puts players into the shoes of Davis or Lincoln and the challenges they actually faced? I would venture to say that most people were looking for the latter.

[Nick R]

In my humble opinion, what I believe people want is a historcal simulator with options and not a reenactment. With that said, creating a simulation of any war is a daunting task with all the possible variables. As I posted in another thread, creating a simulation of a battle is fairly simple since the only things that could change is the order of battle but in simulating a war the number of variables are now limitless. From my perspective, what has been created here in FoF is a excellent start to a simulator of the American Civil War and what has sparked this debate is what the variables should be and their impact. Perhaps, placing these "variables" as options and allowing their impact to be adjusted is all that would be required to satisfy both sides.

[TheHellPatrol]

All I am saying is the game is as Historical or Ahistorical as you want it via the options. It's all there...right at your fingertips.

[chris0827]

ORIGINAL: TheHellPatrol

All I am saying is the game is as Historical or Ahistorical as you want it via the options. It's all there...right at your fingertips.

I must be missing the button that gives both sides the correct amount of troops and manpower.

[tc237]

Can't believe you guys are still arguing about this.
 
Consider it $50 down the drain, same as if you had bought a bad DVD or CD box set.
Yeah, it's still $50 wasted but sometimes you just have to cut your losses and move on.
Just leave the Alternative-History Gamers in peace and let them enjoy their game.
 
I deleted this game a month ago, not worth my time anymore.
There are alot better games out now or on the way, see-ya later.
 

[General Quarters]

duplicate post

[christof139]

It's impossible to make a 'pure' historical game because then there would always be the same 'purely' historical result, meaning theat the historical winner would always win and the historical winner would always lose. No fun in that, and that would equal no sales.
 
The key word is 'game' or simulation. FoF is a game based on historical events and not using science fiction, hence it is a historical game in the venecular, even though some details may be a bit off or lacking here and there.
 
The options allow you to make FoF more historical and also harder, or visa versa per your own personal desires.
 
I don't think the game is bad or lousy, and I have a good deal of knowledge ot the ACW and history and military history etc. Some things need to be changed and/or tweaked, but the basic historical foundation is in the game.
 
Chris
 

[Bearcat2]

ORIGINAL: TheHellPatrol

All I am saying is the game is as Historical or Ahistorical as you want it via the options. It's all there...right at your fingertips.

I reread the manual, could you please direct me to the proper setting that removes the Confederate Navy?

[TheHellPatrol]

ORIGINAL: Termite2

I reread the manual, could you please direct me to the proper setting that removes the Confederate Navy?

Which manual? The original or revised? I'm still waiting on my "revised" copy so i don't know what i can tell you without violating my NDA. I do know that is being taken care of...or something similar.

[Bearcat2]

ORIGINAL: TheHellPatrol

ORIGINAL: Termite2

I reread the manual, could you please direct me to the proper setting that removes the Confederate Navy?

Which manual? The original or revised? I'm still waiting on my "revised" copy so i don't know what i can tell you without violating my NDA. I do know that is being taken care of...or something similar.

I misunderstood you, I thought you said that the game is as historical as you want thru the settings.

[TheHellPatrol]

ORIGINAL: Termite2

I misunderstood you, I thought you said that the game is as historical as you want thru the settings.

Your game and mine are two different animals or apples to oranges. Maybe the devs or the next patch could/would shed some light on this matter.

[Titanwarrior89]

You can't ask for more than that. Their trying to come up with a historical campaign in the next patch. So maybe we will "all" be happy.[:)]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

ORIGINAL: walkerd
I suspect more then a handfull, more like the silent majority. As it stands I will not be buying the game. I went to the effort of buying COG just to prepare myself for this game and am still waiting.
I only want a "historical" game, otherwise, to me at least, there is no point in buying the game. While I can play any random game, I am looking for a game of the American Civil War.\
I suspect we will see it eventuate, I just hope it will not take too long.

There are a lot of folks who have posted less frequently who are having a great time with the game just as it is.

One thing I will regret is if the comments here make folks hold off because they believe the game is ahistorical. The only result that will create is a bad one for everyone. In its current form, all you need do is adjust a few of the many provided settings to get a game that is at least as historical as any previous ACW computer grand strategy game around. We're responding to the desire for a scenario that starts with everything exactly as it was, with no need for settings adjustment and have made a number of other changes to also increase the historical accuracy.

FoF remains, from its initial release, historical and fun - with the level of historicity depending largely on how you adjust the optional settings. The upcoming update will improve things in a variety of areas, from historical accuracy to playability and game balance based on customer feedback. Western Civilization Software are among the most open-minded and community-friendly developers I've worked with and they are being very responsive to the early feedback.

Regards,

- Erik

[:)]