Wargamer votes are in

[a white rabbit]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

My, oh my, what a stinging rebuke to shill-meister Jim Cobb, front-man for the joke of the year, Distant Guns, from Storm Eagle Studios! Forgive me, if I scrolled the results too hastily, but it appears as though the REAL wargaming community gave no recognition, WHATSOVER to DG, Cobb's inglorious role in attempting to suppress the genuine nature of the product, notwithstanding.

What is your problem with DG? While I agree that everything about this game except the binary code - marketing, distribution, price, patching policy, community services etc etc . - seems to be taken from some imaginary book named "How NOT to make games", the core game itself is very good, and certainly step in the right direction.

So, again, what's your gripe with DG?

BTW, I applaud them for voting Red Orchestra game of the year in it's category.

..oh come on, we've t3 scens that equal that, Ben's Rhodes for one, Curt's Vietnam for another, and Bob's NA scens deserve bronze, at least**..does a scen get a vote ? if not, why not ?

..**sorry man, you still ain't got the Italians right, and i'm playing the Italians at the moment..think reeeallly badly organised...

[Erik Rutins]

PoE,

A couple of things: Jim Cobb is a good guy and even if you feel he made a mistake in his assessment of DG, that's no reason to get personal. Similarly, you are welcome to discuss DG, but this is not the place to slam it (i.e. calling it a POS), if that's what you want to do. You can post your opinions on it over at the Wargamer or several other wargame sites or forums. I'd appreciate keeping our forums free of this as it can cause people to think that we somehow endorse these comments, which can then lead to inter-developer or inter-publisher flames, etc.

Regards,

- Erik

[a white rabbit]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

PoE,

A couple of things: Jim Cobb is a good guy and even if you feel he made a mistake in his assessment of DG, that's no reason to get personal. Similarly, you are welcome to discuss DG, but this is not the place to slam it (i.e. calling it a POS), if that's what you want to do. You can post your opinions on it over at the Wargamer or several other wargame sites or forums. I'd appreciate keeping our forums free of this as it can cause people to think that we somehow endorse these comments, which can then lead to inter-developer or inter-publisher flames, etc.

Regards,

- Erik

..or inter-scen-designer ????

..[;)]..

[ravinhood]

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck

ORIGINAL: Keke

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Lol how little you know about the world of botting votes.

You seem to know a lot about it.

Yeah, he bought a book about it from the bargain bin once.

Wow, Marc you haven't responded to one of my posts in a long time, I thought you died or something....darn. [:D]

[Huskalator]

Happy to see Red Orchestra get the gold for best action title.  A $20 small developer title crushing major developer titles that cost millions to make and costs $40.  NO WAY!
 
"...Red Orchestra is the action game for grognards"
 
Woot and stuff.
 
 

[ravinhood]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

PoE,

A couple of things: Jim Cobb is a good guy and even if you feel he made a mistake in his assessment of DG, that's no reason to get personal. Similarly, you are welcome to discuss DG, but this is not the place to slam it (i.e. calling it a POS), if that's what you want to do. You can post your opinions on it over at the Wargamer or several other wargame sites or forums. I'd appreciate keeping our forums free of this as it can cause people to think that we somehow endorse these comments, which can then lead to inter-developer or inter-publisher flames, etc.

Regards,

- Erik

But, I thought this was a GENERAL discussion forum for and about "any wargames"? When did you change policy? You used to let us (me) slag Paradox all the time here, I know, I am the biggest slagger of Paradox in the world lol. So, are you saying now we can't slag any other games or publishers on this site except Matrixgames and then you'll ban us if we do that or the other? lol You'd be giving up your title as most well known free speech forum around (well that I visit). I like coming here because it doesn't have gestapolike moderation. Why the about face all of a sudden?

I thought this is a centralized point where gamers that buy wargames see the upfront front info and it is our duty as gamers to inform the uninformed of the good and the bad and the ugly out there in the computer wargaming world, from publishers, to developers and even reviewers. They need to hear it here first before they buy. Plus they need to be informed about bargain bin prices. lol [:D]

[Erik Rutins]

That's not true, Ravinhood. We've always discouraged "slagging". We don't discourage criticism of other products, just as ours can be criticized here and elsewhere, but keep it within that line where you're not making what could be a personal attack or an over the top statement.

[sterckxe]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

That's not true, Ravinhood. We've always discouraged "slagging". We don't discourage criticism of other products, just as ours can be criticized here and elsewhere, but keep it within that line where you're not making what could be a personal attack or an over the top statement.

I think Ravinhood would make a fine contributor to the war-historical newsgroups [;)]

Warning : There be Dragons - and things much, much worse [;)]

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

[Prince of Eckmühl]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

I thought this is a centralized point where gamers that buy wargames see the upfront front info and it is our duty as gamers to inform the uninformed of the good and the bad and the ugly out there in the computer wargaming world, from publishers, to developers and even reviewers. They need to hear it here first before they buy.

This forum belongs to Matrix Games. The particulars of my beef with the cast of characters surrounding Distant Guns and its phenomenal critical success, notwithstanding, I pledge to take MG's interests into account when I post. I do have to say, however, that I find in this situation such profound irony, that for all the lies spread via USENET, it may end up being the only place where certain truths regarding the wargaming business can be aired publicly.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

[ravinhood]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

That's not true, Ravinhood. We've always discouraged "slagging". We don't discourage criticism of other products, just as ours can be criticized here and elsewhere, but keep it within that line where you're not making what could be a personal attack or an over the top statement.

Oh ok so if I say Paradox games suk because they are always buggy out of the box and use the same ole donkey milking engine over n over that's ok still? Or if I say I prefer Trotters reviews over Cobbs because his have historical value and Cobbs are long winded and boring with too much information about the interface features and not enough information about the game and the AI or how much challenge it offers, that's ok also?

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Oh ok so if I say Paradox games suk because they are always buggy out of the box and use the same ole donkey milking engine over n over that's ok still?

I'll ignore the fact that you're trolling for now, but keep it up and you'll get a warning.

This is basically a generalization and a personal one at that ("suk", "donkey milking engine"?), so no, it's not ok. Want to post some specific criticism? Fine. For exampe, "I experienced 10 CTDs in one session with Game X, I'm never playing it again." or "This particular bug in Game Y is a game-breaker for me, I would never recommend it to anyone.", etc. That's fine. "It sucks, because I say so" is not fine. "I don't like it at all" is fine. Get it?

The simple reason for this is that the internet is filled with trolls and we don't want this place to become a free-for-all for anyone to vent and say whatever they want about other publishers' games, even if undeserved. This would pretty quickly get us a reputation as endorsing such attacks and we would then pretty quickly alienate those publishers and communities. This is a small enough market as it is.

Or if I say I prefer Trotters reviews over Cobbs because his have historical value and Cobbs are long winded and boring with too much information about the interface features and not enough information about the game and the AI or how much challenge it offers, that's ok also?

That's actually ok, there's nothing in there that's a personal attack, though very critical. The difference is you're criticing an article instead of a person. Get it?

Regards,

- Erik

[ravinhood]

Actually I wasn't trolling as you percieved I was being serious. Beause when I don't like a game or publisher to me they suk. When they use the same engine over and over to sell the same basic game and just rebox it with a few tweaks and attempt to sell it for a retail price when it is nothing more than a patch and a mod yeah I'm calling that milking the donkey, but, for your benefit I can sure call it trying to rip unknowing customers out of more of their hard earned money for the same product. No generalization but an adamant response of my opinion of the subject matter. I don't believe in beating around the bush or using ring around the rosey wording just to apease someones conscience. When I say a game suks it suks because of the way it is or presented. Why should I have to type out so many words to get my point across?
 

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Why should I have to type out so many words to get my point across?

Might help if you spelled "sucks" correctly, or, even better, used verbiage that is less inflammatory and more conversationally engaging.

[ravinhood]

But that's just it Pat, "suks" does not have the same meaning as "sucks", that's why I use "suks". Just like troll and trolling aren't in the dictionary either by the way it is used on the "internet". So, what's wrong with "suks" for a term used for games we don't like or I don't like?
 

[pasternakski]

My name is not "pat."

The reason you do not find the definition you want in your dictionary is that dictionaries are merely reflections of contemporary usage that become outdated very quickly in these days of rapid, often haphazard change. They are authorities for nothing other than what current fashion dictates in any event.

People who bastardize language for their own insipid purposes feed nothing but their own egoes and add further credence to Eric Blair's belief that what we call "civilization" is nothing more than decadence. They add nothing to dialogue, they only increase the volume of the noise that drowns out sense.

Suks, eh? Sucks so hard it bloze.

[ravinhood]

bloze? Is that a word? or is that decadence on your part?

As far as dictionaries go, we must have something solid to form our languages definitions on and well the dictionary has been around a long long time. Plus there's more people using dictionaries for terms, definitions and spellings than there are WIKIpedia lol. The internet doesn't own the world yet. It just owns most of the pompous and the sinister.

[Brigz]

MOM, DAD..would you stop fighting. For suk sakes, you're giving me the bloze.

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
the dictionary has been around a long long time.

So, perfesser, give us your wisdom on the history of dictionaries, their role in linguistics, and how we humble practitioners of language should be guided by your majesty's understanding.

[Twotribes]

I do so love when Pasternakski " lectures" someone else on how to behave in these forums.

[ravinhood]

Don'tcha though, acts like he's someones mom doesn't he? Mothers day is coming up must get him some flowers.[:D]