Why wont Matrix concentrate on a Modern wargame?

MacCready · Post by **MacCready** » Fri Dec 21, 2001 6:29 am

Just wondering why Matrix shy away from Modern conflict?

I mean you folks have a heap of titles working and largely your stuck on the ww2 theme.

I know your going to have modern modules for CL and CA someday but your enthusiasm for modern is definetly waining.

Paul Vebber · Post by **Paul Vebber** » Fri Dec 21, 2001 8:05 am

Have faith , we can only go so fast...Are you familiar with some of old SIMCAN stuff? SOme good modern titles in their...

vils · Post by **vils** » Thu Jan 17, 2002 9:53 pm

God i hope not! <img src="smile.gif" border="0">

eaube · Post by **eaube** » Sun Jan 20, 2002 3:26 am

I've been meaning to ask since I heard you were working with SimCan: Will you be doing modern naval games? I still like to play 5th Eskadra, Northern Fleet, and Red Sky at Morning, even those games are in desperate need of modernization.

Of course, by modernization, I mean with the game itself, not the subject. I find nothing more interesting than the naval aspect of WWIII in the mid eighties, and so hope you will be covering this subject. As much as I loved SP:WAW, being in college with $20,000 worth of loans (will probably be $25,000 before the end of the year) meant I simply could not justify purchasing megacampaign with my non-existant money. I can say, though, if you DO make a 80's WWIII naval game, I will try EVERYTHING in my power to scape up the money.

Sorry if I rambled, rough day, I'm exausted. <img src="rolleyes.gif" border="0">

[ January 20, 2002: Message edited by: Lack of Comprehension ]</p>

Blackacre · Post by **Blackacre** » Sun Jan 20, 2002 8:14 am

Or how about ancient conflicts? Come of the most ingrigueing combat I enjoy researching took place in Ancient Egypt (with the Hyksos, etc.)....

eaube · Post by **eaube** » Sat Jan 26, 2002 2:35 am

Bump...

Frank W. · Post by **Frank W.** » Sat Jan 26, 2002 6:25 pm

Originally posted by Lack of Comprehension:
I've been meaning to ask since I heard you were working with SimCan: Will you be doing modern naval games? I still like to play 5th Eskadra, Northern Fleet, and Red Sky at Morning, even those games are in desperate need of modernization.

[ January 20, 2002: Message edited by: Lack of Comprehension ]

harpoon 4 will soon be released i hope.

perhaps excatly that what we want? <img src="confused.gif" border="0">

but we´re lacking a land/air based modern
warfare game,that´s true!!

greetinx

eaube · Post by **eaube** » Sun Jan 27, 2002 5:18 am

I'm certainly looking forward to Harpoon 4, and Harpoon3PC definatly looks interesting (even as a beta!), and certainly improves on Harpoon 2.

Still, I would like to see a turn-based naval game, where you can think about your actions. It also allows for larger scales than could be handled in real-time.

Frank W. · Post by **Frank W.** » Mon Jan 28, 2002 11:06 pm

Originally posted by Lack of Comprehension:
I'm certainly looking forward to Harpoon 4, and Harpoon3PC definatly looks interesting (even as a beta!), and certainly improves on Harpoon 2.

Still, I would like to see a turn-based naval game, where you can think about your actions. It also allows for larger scales than could be handled in real-time.

how is "fighing steel" from SSI?

okay,it´s WW2 but i´m perhaps interested in.

eaube · Post by **eaube** » Wed Jan 30, 2002 10:45 am

I've never played Fighting Steel myself (money being an issue, as I mentioned earlier...). I THINK it's at least partially like the Great Naval Battles series, of which I did play one game (GNB2: Guadalcanal). It was interesting, certainly, but I'm not so good with WWII-style close-in fights.

ratster · Post by **ratster** » Thu Jan 31, 2002 9:43 am

Would love to see a remake of North Atlantic 86. Great turn-based naval-air game(with limited land conflict).

eaube · Post by **eaube** » Sun Feb 03, 2002 8:23 am

I'd like to know the official line on what games will be produced by this new partnership...

ratster · Post by **ratster** » Thu Feb 07, 2002 1:29 am

The original Harpoon was ok(had a good interface and graphics) but it had no A.I. . It was just semi random pathing and strike timimg, which became apparent after you played it for a few hours, and confirmed when they released the editor.

Never played Harpoon 2 enough to get any feel for the AI. I couldn't get past the interface, or the graphics, which were a step backward from the original. Although it was reported to be a more "accurate" simulation.

3 looks good so far, but still to tactical for my tastes.

There have been very few operational level modern era naval/air computer games made. The only ones I can think of are North Atlantic 86(which is 20 years old) and 5th fleet(which was abstract but fun). None on the horizon either as far as I can tell, which is why I'm looking forward to UV(even though its WWII as opposed to modern).

Maybe I should reinstall VB and get to work, where is that old North Atlantic 86 manual...

hingram · Post by **hingram** » Fri Feb 08, 2002 8:28 pm

Harpoon 2002 looks promising. It is easier to master than Harpoon2/3/4. It's a keeper.

Why not Steel Panthers III/Brigade?

Raverdave · Post by **Raverdave** » Sun Feb 10, 2002 10:59 am

Harpoon is still alive???? I thought that after SSI was taken over, the lastest re-make had been killed off.

[ February 10, 2002: Message edited by: Raverdave ]</p>

eaube · Post by **eaube** » Mon Feb 11, 2002 12:09 am

Well, as far as Harpoon 4 dying, here is the latest word that I heard on the NWS forum...

From: "warshipfc" <warshipfc@y...>
Date: Thu Feb 7, 2002 12:11 am
Subject: SPECIAL ANNOUNCEMENT CONCERNING HARPOON4 PC

From Larry Bond, original Harpoon gaming system creator and co-author
of Harpoon4.

An open letter to the online Harpoon community;

Chris Carlson and I have received a lot of emails in the past two
weeks, and have been forwarded others, that all reflect great anxiety
about the progress of SSI's Harpoon4 effort. The thread that runs
through all of them is the fear that SSI will fail to deliver a great
game (i.e., "they're gonna screw it up"), or that it will lack vital
features (at least vital to the sender) and thus not be as good as it
could be.

Chris and I believe part of this is caused by a lack of information
from SSI, and the rest caused by the incredibly protracted development
period. History: Our contract with SSI for the rights to Harpoon4 was
signed in 1997. At that time Carl Norman was assigned as the producer,
and under his supervision a team from SSI began development. However,
Mindscape, which owned SSI, was bought by The Learning Company. Then
The Learning Company was bought by Mattel. Then Mattel found out what
kind of shape The Learning Company was in and was forced to do a major
restructuring. Then Mattel sold SSI to a holding company, which then
sold it to Ubisoft.

Each takeover, and legacy projects (see below) disrupted and delayed
development, so that the game has been pushed to the back burner for
several years. Ultimation and SSI have managed to keep the project
alive during this time, but barely.

Facts:

1) Ubisoft, the present owner of SSI, has formally committed to
Harpoon and has allocated sufficient funds for development of an "A"
list product. Carl Norman, as head of SSI, made it a condition of
SSI's continuing development that Ubisoft properly fund the project.
Full development has now resumed. BTW, "properly" does not
mean "lavishly."

2) The features list (content) includes all the key items that have
appeared on the discussion boards for many years. I am certain that
not everyone will be satisfied by the features set, simply because
you can't please everyone. It has all of OUR favorite features in it,
for what that's worth.

3) The interface is being redesigned to take advantage of the
improvements in the state of the art since the game's original design.
We agree with and approve of the changes. They're designed to reduce
mouse clicks and make commands more accessible to the player, as well
as de-cluttering the screen. Since nobody ever saw the complete
original interface anyway, this change should not affect anyone's
expectations.

4) The combat and detection models faithfully follow the Harpoon4
print rules. Chris and I are in frequent, close contact with both SSI
and Ultimation regarding different aspects of the rules. Chris has
already supplied models of radar, sonar, and other sensors, as well
as weapons systems behavior. Where the models do differ from the
print game, it's to take advantage of the computer's power. Where we
abstract some processes in the manual game, the computer actually
does the math.

5) While the owners of SSI have changed many times, the core
development team has remained unchanged. Carl Norman was the one who
sold SSI on creating Harpoon4. He was originally assigned as the
producer for the game. He's now the head of SSI, and as =FCber-
producer, is still closely involved with the project. Ultimation, the
original developer, is still there. In our many conversions with Carl
and Dave Bringhurst, head of Ultimation, they have shown that they
are extraordinarily committed to the game.

6) Two "legacy" products, Silent Hunter II and Destroyer Command II,
were inherited by SSI and stuffed in Ultimation's queue ahead of
Harpoon (another reason for the extended delay). The designs for
these two game were well advanced by the time SSI inherited them, and
all comparisons between these products and Harpoon4 are pointless. In
addition to having different designers, comparing a single-platform
simulator with a general-purpose naval wargame is like comparing Sim
Tower with Civilization.

To summarize: Full-scale development of Harpoon4 has resumed. Chris
and I are in close touch with the development staff. The design is
based on the miniatures rules, with enhancements allowed by the
transfer to a computer platform.

Observations:

1) The design is complete. No more designing allowed. More than a few
people have offered to participate in the design/alpha testing ("You
don't have to pay me!"), in the belief that their personal involvement
will save the game from disaster. Anyone who's been involved in
programming knows that more designers don't necessarily make a better
product, and you don't go back to step A when you're trying to move
from B to C. No matter how experienced, qualified, or motivated, the
game doesn't need more designers. SSI/Ultimation has been trying very
hard to implement the design that already exists.

2) Chris and I find it interesting that a wave of criticism has
appeared just as development of the game has resumed. The design
hasn't changed, the people haven't changed, but many in the online
community are now critical of SSI. They are making conclusions based
on incomplete evidence, and are then using those conclusions as a
basis for negative comments. What's different?

3) One thread that runs through the discussion is that SSI has "lost
credibility" within the online community. "Nobody believes what they
say anymore." Regardless of what anyone believes or does not believe,
development will continue. There's no credibility required to develop
a game. Nobody at SSI is running for election. When it is released,
Harpoon4 will stand or fall on its quality, not on its reputation.
As a point of fact, none of the many delays and distractions were the
fault of anyone at SSI/Ultimation. The takeovers affected them much
more dramatically than anyone else. For us, Harpoon's just a game.
For them, it's their livelihood.

It's gratifying to know so many people care so deeply about Harpoon,
and have invested so much emotion in it. We'd like to ask that those
emotions stay positive. Attacks on SSI, Ultimation or individuals
there are not helpful. In fact, they're a distraction in what we all
hope is the "home stretch." Another description might be "last
chance." If that's true, then we need to do all we can to help SSI.

I am always amazed at the depth and extent of the online Harpoon
community. That community has been a valuable asset in the past.
Remember how SSI polled everyone extensively when development began,
finding what users wanted in the next game? They have not forgotten
the community's role in beta testing Harpoon, either. That time will
come. Chris and I do not believe the online community can assist
development by participating in the design or alpha testing of the
game. That is the proper province of the developer, and looking over
their shoulders won't make them go any faster.

We do believe that the online community wants a good game, and more
importantly, want to believe NOW that a good game is being developed.
I've tried to explain why we believe that it is. I also believe we
should do everything to support them, so they can get on with the job.

Larry Bond

Raverdave · Post by **Raverdave** » Mon Feb 11, 2002 12:14 pm

So Harpoon 4 is still alive......thank god! I have been waiting 4 years for this (and people are complaining about Uncommon Valour?).

I have great respect for Mr Larry Bond and it seems that come hell or high water he will keep the faith with the gaming community.

..............but please god....not another 4 years!

eaube · Post by **eaube** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 3:48 am

Originally posted by Raverdave:
..............but please god....not another 4 years!

I hear that!

brent_2 · Post by **brent_2** » Tue Feb 12, 2002 6:31 am

that letter is great news - Harpoon 4 has been on my "buy when it comes out" list for a long, long time.

I will be able to finally get rid of that win 95 pc I keep around basically just to play Harpoon 2 on...

CSO_brent

Frank W. · Post by **Frank W.** » Wed Feb 13, 2002 1:36 am

good news for me,too!!

mr. bond sounds very seriously.

i hope the game can stand his words.

frank

ps: was ever a little navy freak,in some way