Progress

[GShock]

Can't wait to see them either... hope you guys will choose to release them a few days before going gold.

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Llyranor

... It would be a good idea to have them easily accessible for mass consumption as well though (such as youtube), so that potential customers see what they could look forward to.

Yeah, puttin them on youtube is a must, as well as a decent video quality, imho. This will also save some traffic on the Matrix server where the BFTB website will be located.

@Dave: Even better, you can embed your video as a youtube video on the BFTB webby, means you can use their servers free of charge and still display a decent tutorial/demo website with huuuge video files on say bftb[dot]matrixgames[dot]com, without having to worry about webspace or traffic limits. I recommend to do that.

[dogancan]

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy
Yeah, puttin them on youtube is a must, as well as a decent video quality, imho.

+1

[Arjuna]

Hi all,

Over the last week we have made progress on quashing bugs and on developing the tutorial movies. I have finished the stroyboard for the tutorial movies and actually did a first take of Tutorial Movie #1 - Getting Started. It's been a bit of a steep learning curve working out the right video format to use. But I think I'm on top of that now. Hopefully before XMas arrives I'll have finished a few of the movies. The remaining ones will have to wait till the new year.

[dogancan]

and we will see them on youtube eventually? [:)]

[Arjuna]

dogancan,

Not sure. I need to discuss this with Matrix before I can confirm one way or the other. I'll get back to you.

[dogancan]

thanks... [&o]

[Arjuna]

Hi all,

Just to let you know that I've finished the first cut of the first three tutorial movies. It looks like there will be six in total. So we're about half way through. It took me a while to get into the swing of things with the screen capture and video editing software, but I'm into my stride now and hope to finish off the remaining movies next week. Paul has been tracking down the dreaded out of sync bug with the networked play and is hopeful of stomping on this timorrow. With a bit of luck we'll put out a new build tomorrw for the beta testers.

We're close...very close! [:)]

[FreeBird]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna
We're close...very close! [:)]

Aww, you tease! [:D]

[JudgeDredd]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna
...Paul has been tracking down the dreaded out of sync bug with the networked play and is hopeful of stomping on this timorrow...

Man - Dave that's not good news. I'm sure the out of sync bug was kicking around about a year (or more) ago. The fact that it's still there kind of fills me with dread.

Still....I have a lot of other games to play so will wait patiently (as I have been) for this.

Cheers for the update
Billy

[Arjuna]

Billy,

That was something different again. It was in the AI and has been fixed. The cause this time is in the UI. Finding it is the hard part and that boils down to a massive binary search trying to bracket the are causing the bug with verification code. Trouble is the more places you insert the verification code to trap the error, the slower the game plays and hence the longer it takes to fire. Paul's pretty confident he'll gte to it shortly.

[ETF]

Maybe a late Feb release then is doable. Most likely though a march release?

[Arjuna]

Hi all,

I've made steady progress with the tutorial movies. I'm half way through #5 and have #6 and the Welcome video to complete. Hopefully these will be done by end of next week. I then have to tidy up the manuals. My best guess is that I'll be finished all this in two weeks - ie end of Feb. However, Paul has been battling the dreaded out of sync bug for a number of weeks now to no avail. If he hasn't squashed it by the time I finish the manuals then I'll swing over to work on that too. At this point in time, my best guess is late March for release - but that, as always, is subject to developments.

[ETF]

Excellent thanks for the constant updates. I wish more developers were like that!

[Arjuna]

ETF,

I'm glad you appreciate it. I'm afraid there are others who would prefer I not make constant updates that keep slipping as they say this indicates vaporware. However, our policy is to be as open as we can and we reckon it's better to keep people informed of progress rather than keep them in the mushroom club - ie in the dark and fed on BS. Moreover I think it also educates users that developing complex software that involves a high proportion of orginal R & D, invariably hits snags and problems which can't be seen in advance. It's not a case of having done this before and knowing that if I add X + Y + Z it will take Nth time. It doesn't work like that. Often you go down blind alleys and have to restart on a different tack or you make a change in one part of the program and it has a snowballing impact on other parts. That is the nature of this type of project.

Also I'd like to think that we have a pretty good track record for delivering robust original titles. We've been doing so since 1985. That should mitigate against any vaporware fears. Regardless we will continue to provide regular progress updates and give our best estimates of release based on what we know at the time. Cheers,

[FreeBird]

I have never been worried about this game being "vapor-ware". The past games that you have produced have been superlative in the genre of operational war games. Take your time, develop it to the point that you feel content to release it, and I'll buy it when it is available. Til then, no harping from me!!

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

I'm afraid there are others who would prefer I not make constant updates that keep slipping as they say this indicates vaporware.

Where'd you gather that? I've never seen ANY comment like that, and Adam's, Freeboy's or my posts in the general forum didn't suggest that either.
Sometimes I tend to think that you want to misunderstand things or to read between the lines, although there's nothing to see there. [:)] It's not my job to interpret their comments, but I can tell you that I -for one- never suggested something like that.
Also, I don't follow Adam where he says that he seems to feel rather bored by regular dev updates, like it turns the game into a well known piece of software, for him.

Freeboy hit the nail in the gen. forum:

ORIGINAL: freeboy

"It has such a great appeal, both the interest in the battle and the interest in this particular model that from purely a MARKETING perspective releasing a discussion about a game and then not having it be released is causing folks to respond negatively, if it was something less valued the negative feelings of dissappointment would not be there.."

It may not be easy for you as a programmer to walk on a fine line where it takes a good mix of building up anticipation and taking along customers (and keep them informed). People just tried to point that out, you shouldn't take it personal.

Also I'd like to think that we have a pretty good track record for delivering robust original titles. We've been doing so since 1985.

No doubt. Impressive record. That's rare in the software world.
Hopefully there won't be such a code-slip like in the stock version of COTA, in particular the arty-thing, which made the game so unenjoyable for me, that I did not pick up the game again until after the release of the first patch, which corrected that arty behaviour.
And to make sure you don't get this wrong now, I am not suggesting COTA was bug-ridden, but I am expressing that I could not enjoy the stock game (at all), because my personal play-style heavily depends on micromanagement of artillery units. If I can't plaster woods and river banks with arty shells, I get unhappy (unlike the enemy units). [;)]

That should mitigate against any vaporware fears. Regardless we will continue to provide regular progress updates and give our best estimates of release based on what we know at the time. Cheers

I don't think there are any fears like that. Comments from ppl rather aimed at the list of ETAs that started to disappoint some ppl after a while. I, for one, think that your dev updates coupled with screenshots are very informative and make ppl look forward to the release. Some people may feel that the ETAs take away from that fun, though, as your "estimates" tend to be a tiny bit off, I think. *cough*. [;)]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

...Moreover I think it also educates users that developing complex software that involves a high proportion of orginal R & D, invariably hits snags and problems which can't be seen in advance.

Yeah, a good attitude, but we have a saying here, sometimes "less is more" ("weniger ist mehr"), means less (ETAs) would do more good PR-wise, at times.

Re: R & D : Hist. data in PG titles appears to be well researched.
What I found to be quite amusing and surprising, though, that Simo, when he gave a lecture (in the games.historical newsgroup) on how PG enhanced historical accuracy and realism of the upcoming installment, pointed out that PG ("we") had researched how much fuel had been fed/allocated to the Bulge theater.
Quite amusing, if I think about the fact that I had to invest some 2-3 days to verify and actually prove (in order to convince you of) what most Germans with some historical interest (not necessarily with an interest in military details) know:

That lack of fuel appeared to be the major problem during the course of the battle, that quite some armored units started out with 60% fuel in their tanks, that then the distribution often failed, that deliveries came late, or that they were even horse-drawn (starting around 18th/19th of December) later on. I even delivered the exact total amount of fuel (in gallons IIRC) that had been allocated for the offensive by the OKW and pointed out that stocks had been "parked" at the Rhine, somewhere near my hometown. So, if I'm not mistaken, it was me and not "we".
But hey, it's ok, as long as the game will be as accurate as possible.

Another details is, and this goes for other contributors as well, that although it's not your customers' job to contribute with additional research, it usually takes around 3 "inruns" (like we say), where one has to work hard and gather hard facts or details each time, until you "buy" a "claim". You're critical and careful (which is a good thing here), but this also involves a lot of convincing in case someone happens to know better regarding one or another detail, mind you for stuff the DDT group could (should) have come up with, actually. So, instead of assigning a bunny to verify a sound claim from the community, you have a tendency to dismiss or challenge a request/claim, at first.
I would then totally understand if someone would cease to share thoughts, after his very first attempt to contribute.

That said, you deliver fine and stable products, but you also have one of the nicest fan communities in the Matrix (if not wargaming) universe, plus you have committed people like the Panther bunnies, but also committed customers like TMO, POE, ElSavior, for example, and there are many other ppl who love this game and who contribute in one or another way, and you may want to treasure that. That said, there's no need to act like the "beleidigte Leberwurst", no real translation for that, but it means stop sulking. [:)]

[simovitch]

What I found to be quite amusing and surprising, though, that Simo, when he gave a lecture (in the games.historical newsgroup) on how PG enhanced historical accuracy and realism of the upcoming installment, pointed out that PG ("we") had researched how much fuel had been fed/allocated to the Bulge theater.

Paul van Doren provided me with the detailed daily fuel allocation stuff from the NA. The general information about the German fuel shortages I learned ad nauseum from reading Cole and Toland back in the '70's, Parker and Mac Donald in the '80's, etc... long before Goodguy and the internet came along.[;)]

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: simovitch

Paul van Doren provided me with the detailed daily fuel allocation stuff from the NA. The general information about the German fuel shortages I learned ad nauseum from reading Cole and Toland back in the '70's, Parker and Mac Donald in the '80's, etc... long before Goodguy and the internet came along.[;)]

Oh I didn't claim that I invented the internet [:D], or that you guys never read Cole et al, but looking at your Materialschlacht thread, I am sure that my input got the ball rolling either for review or a general double-check, to say the least. [:)]

[simovitch]

Fair enough - constructive input is always appreciated.