Release Date ?

[coregames]

I must admit you the right to your opinions. The forums of a game company that only does computer games is clearly not representative however. Moving pieces is important because it's simple. We need not computerize chess or go over a table, though having internet play available does make opponents available.

I am not that old. Your convictions do not stem from your youth in this matter; you said yourself that you used to play board games. I play chess over the internet, but looking at a nice rendering of a knight on the board before I click with the mouse falls far short of the experience of feeling a knight in my fingers. I don't want to only feel computer mice for the rest of my life, nor would I want to wish that on my children. That is the advantage I keep stating, and you keep missing -- board games are physical.

[Veldor]

The forums of a game company that only does computer games is clearly not representative however.

Consimworld is made up of predominately board wargamers. Many also play computer wargames. War-Forums is at least a 50/50 split as well. Matrix itself its hard to say.

Moving pieces is important because it's simple.

So are computers to most of the younger generations.

I am not that old.

Whats "not that old"? 40? 45? 55? 60?

I play chess over the internet, but looking at a nice rendering of a knight on the board before I click with the mouse falls far short of the experience of feeling a knight in my fingers.

Precisely. You remember the "good old days" To the "more youthful" as you put it there is no relevance to such things. No preference for moving physical pieces vs virtual ones. If anything the preference is for the opposite.. The greater detail the graphical animations and such provide nowadays.

I don't want to only feel computer mice for the rest of my life, nor would I want to wish that on my children.

You imply something would be wrong with that? Children take well to computers. In many cases learning easier and faster from them than from an actual teacher. Usually also having a more enriching experience in the process. And a much more immersive one at that.

That is the advantage I keep stating, and you keep missing -- board games are physical.

The only thing I'm missing is why you think there is something a boardgame can offer that a computer version can't also offer, either now or a few years from now.

[coregames]

The only thing I'm missing is why you think there is something a boardgame can offer that a computer version can't also offer, either now or a few years from now.

Well I'm glad you are hopeful that computers will offer the feeling of a chess piece in your hand soon, and that will be a great accomplishment. I enjoy tactile diversity in my experience. None of the surveys you have taken account for the dramatic upsurge in board game sales.

[Veldor]

ORIGINAL: coregames

None of the surveys you have taken account for the dramatic upsurge in board game sales.

Much of that is due to the success of games like "Scene-It" and "Trivial Pursuit DVD Edition" etc. DVD games get counted in boardgame sales and since they are still a fairly new invention sales are initially high. These games can also be played with the "older folks" and "younger folks" alike.

Point being boardgames are now and will continue to be predominately dumbed-down vs computer counterparts. Simplicity is their only possible attraction.

Why are you here at all if you don't want a fully computerized version of WiF? A computerized version can offer everything the board version can plus dozens of other things (rules enforcement, opponent finding, artificial opponent, all calculations, etc. etc.). If you really like the feel of carboard better than why be here?

[fahdiz]

ORIGINAL: Veldor
If you really like the feel of carboard better than why be here?

Because some people really like both.

There is something about 1) tactile gaming, and 2) face-to-face interaction which computers simply cannot match. Likewise, there are things about computer gaming (and you've mentioned a few) which boardgames cannot do.

It's a good thing both are there, in my opinion. Long live boardgames, long live computer games.

[Veldor]

ORIGINAL: fahdiz

ORIGINAL: Veldor
If you really like the feel of carboard better than why be here?

Because some people really like both.

There is something about 1) tactile gaming, and 2) face-to-face interaction which computers simply cannot match. Likewise, there are things about computer gaming (and you've mentioned a few) which boardgames cannot do.

It's a good thing both are there, in my opinion. Long live boardgames, long live computer games.

Alright. But to likewise sum up my points.

1) I believe the younger generation values tactile gaming and face-to-face interaction in gaming far less that you or even I might.
2) Boardgames have NO hope of achieving most of the things computer games can while computer games can achieve, if only eventually all of the things boardgames can do.
3) Point 1 combined with Point 2 does little to ensure the CONTINUED growth of board gaming especially board wargaming.

And since I'm mostly talking about board wargames I'll add touching cardboard is highly overrated. These days we don't even get mounted mapboards.

And finally.. I see little benefit, from any perspective, to future designs that might incorporate a combination of board wargaming with computer gaming. Not only would they not make any financial sense, but few are interested in any such things beyond anything and everything they can get for existing boardgames they adore. Most of whom would eagerly take a full computerized version should one ever be made for their particular favorite games.

Unfortuneately not many computer wargames are made period. Too many that are probably shouldn't even be really considered computer wargames, and some of the rest just aren't good wargames period. That doesn't leave a whole lot.

That's one reason I've compiled my own complaints and those of many many others and started my own computer wargame design & development company.

With some key design & development points in mind that I think too many others miss. I've even detailed some of the more important ones on our website.

[coregames]

If you really like the feel of carboard better than why be here?

What is it with you and cardboard? You don't seem to want to hear anything that doesn't fit neatly into your world view. I want CWiF so I can try out strategies before I unlease them on my over-the-board opponents. I love computer games and play them often; I just try to balance my experience. A person can like both board games and computer games, it's not so hard to fathom is it? I'm not going anywhere because I care about WiF and I want to see CWiF done right.

According to the news articles I linked to, some of the recent growth in board gaming can be attributed to DVD games (not all though). As long as a board is being used and there are pieces on it, even if technology is assisting, it is a board game. You say yourself that those games are counted in the board game category, as though that was a technicality. Not true; these games anticipate the synergy you reject out of hand.

As far as the younger generation, I think my nine year old son counts, and from what he sees among his friends, non-computer games continue to do well (in his case Yu-Gi-Oh). Of course he enjoys his Game Cube, but for Christmas, he wanted Star Munchkin (from the great Steve Jackson, who probably hasn't done enough to integrate computers into his profit model) and his own Monopoly set, as well as Tony Hawx Pro Skater 4. The first two combined cost about half of what the video game cost, and neither required a separate platform for them to be played. Love how the cardboard doggy feels when I move it.

As to why am I here, I could easily ask you why you are interested in a computer adaptation of a lowly board game like WiF, when computers are capable of so much more? Shouldn't you be playing a game designed from scratch for the computer?

[coregames]

Any further dwelling on the topic of the purported impending demise of board gaming should be in its own thread, so we don't drown out discussion of the release date.

[fahdiz]

ORIGINAL: Veldor
1) I believe the younger generation values tactile gaming and face-to-face interaction in gaming far less that you or even I might.

I have children, and disagree heartily.

You certainly have the right to your opinion. As I said before, I hope both traditional boardgames and quality computer games continue to be made for a long time.

[Veldor]

As to why am I here, I could easily ask you why you are interested in a computer adaptation of a lowly board game like WiF, when computers are capable of so much more? Shouldn't you be playing a game designed from scratch for the computer?

You've done much to avoid many of the direct questions I've asked you and confuse my statements about wargames/complex games with games in general. I'm mostly not disaggreing with you about the simple board games. But as such we aren't getting anywhere.

So since you've asked me this last direct question I will make sure to answer myself. I've spent a long time on your question (years). I've talked to board wargamers, computer wargamers, designer's for both. I've looked at sales figures where they were available. I've analyzed and participated in game design & playtesting since before I was even a teen. I've also talked to many in the industry working for much larger game development companies.

And the basic findings are that your statement is correct. Porting boardgames to the computer more often than not results in lousy computer games. I would say for exactly the reason you gave. Because computers ARE capable of so much more yet you are stuck with a game design that didn't take any of that into account. And you can only mold it so much while still staying faithful to the original design. So, in those cases, at best you do have a sophisticated though limited tool.

If I were to have to select a game for that, CWiF is not by far the worse choice. Because it is hard to get a lot of wargame playing opponents together for most anyone these days.

But the problem is.. The WiF audience is not all that big too begin with. And say you get 60% of them to buy the computer version then what? The others out there that have never played it may not find CWiF all that great a game vs something done fresh with computers in mind.

But then you have game's designed for the computer that suck too. Maybe even more so. But thats due to other reasons that are mostly controllable by smaller developers.

The end result is what has been communicated to me the most is a desire for the ADVANCEMENT OF THE WARGAMING HOBBY.

This nearly everyone is in agreement on. There is little that can be done in the way of board wargames that would be an advancement. They already got as complex as possible over time. Board wargame designer's were running out of ideas in the late 80's early 90's. The best way for advancement there would now all be totally impractical things... Fancier pieces (plastics,metals,whatever), DVD enhanced versions, maybe your half-computer half-boardgame hybrids(which has been done before).

But all those things would be financial suicide. MATRIX can't even afford to ship a box, how are they going to ship a mapboard and pieces to go along with a computer game? Boardgames and Cardgames alone can hardly break even for wargaming without the software development costs. IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. Not unless wargaming somehow takes off again 10 fold what it is today at least. So board wargaming cannot advance, stuck in sort of a catch-22.

So the best that can be done for ADVANCEMENT OF THE WARGAMING HOBBY is to use the nearly endless ability of computers to make better computer wargames. These, as I would agree and many have indicated, should have much of the flavor and feel of the board wargames (turn-based, hexes more often than not, and so forth) but NOT be those old wargames.

Really leverage what a computer can do but with better gameplay, better user interfaces, BETTER A.I., etc. etc.

This is how wargaming will continue to advance...

[Veldor]

ORIGINAL: fahdiz

ORIGINAL: Veldor
1) I believe the younger generation values tactile gaming and face-to-face interaction in gaming far less that you or even I might.

I have children, and disagree heartily.

You certainly have the right to your opinion. As I said before, I hope both traditional boardgames and quality computer games continue to be made for a long time.

By boargame I mean NON WARGAMES and NON COMPLEX games. No I dont think people are ever really going to start play charades on the computer (though Im sure someone has tried). But boardgames are now restricted to very very simple games in comparison to what computer games are and will continue to be.

Your telling me if you give a kid some cardboard counters and a mapboard to push them around on with his friends that he is going to prefer that HOWEVER TACTILE and HOWEVER SOCIAL to getting on a computer and playing the same game (note not some shoot 'em up)?

Maybe when they are 4yrs old. But no 8yr old on up has any chance of that (prefering it not doing it).

We did it because it was all we had. Don't read anymore into what I am saying than what I am actually saying. Do you honestly disagree with my above statement?

[geozero]

this thread has mutated to a wholly different discussion.

[Veldor]

ORIGINAL: geozero

this thread has mutated to a wholly different discussion.

It's ETF's fault. [:-]

[geozero]

I'm not blaming anyone, just pointing the obviously senseless discussion digressing from the original thread and perpetuated by others. It really does not do any good to continue to divert threads into some non-productive discussion about irrelevant subjects that are based solely on opinions. [:-]

[Veldor]

ORIGINAL: geozero

I'm not blaming anyone, just pointing the obviously senseless discussion digressing from the original thread and perpetuated by others. It really does not do any good to continue to divert threads into some non-productive discussion about irrelevant subjects that are based solely on opinions. [:-]

Actually the original subject of this thread is probably, in my opinion, more pointless and senseless than what its digressed into given that there is no way we would get an answer and if we did it would be a meaningless and a totally inaccurate one.

Also the subject is not based soley on opinions. There are facts involved. Many at that.

We may not have gotten anywhere or made much progress but I'd rather discuss stuff like this on the forums then participate in another endless thread of moaning about release dates.

Heck the very first day my own website was up the first email that trickled in..."When will your games be released!?!"

Then there is the person who started 7 threads in just over a week asking the release date for Maximum Football.

No, however unproductive this discussion has been, its much more productive than another release date conversation.

Besides it is on-topic in that I was attempting to state that a computer version of WiF could achieve everything the non-computer version could and more and would easily replace the game entirely not only for those that no longer own or play it but also for some if not many of the ones that do. Obviously not for everyone, but for a certain sizeable percentage it well could.

[pasternakski]

You couldn't even reproduce as simple a game as Up Front on the computer.

[Veldor]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski
You couldn't even reproduce as simple a game as Up Front on the computer.

I'd have to say this is the most uninformed and mean spirited statement I've seen yet in this thread. Clearly you have not read the information available on said topic.

1. I wanted to truly leverage what computers could do and that meant altering aspects of the system. As one example to support modern day combat as well. This does not make sense to do with only electronic rights as then MMP and I are both taking the game in different directions and which one is going to be considered official? Not mine. I couldn't work with MMP because no one at MMP knows what the hell is going on with the title because they are letting someone else do it entirely and are too busy to care at present. I also think they were upset to find out they didn't have the rights they thought they did in the first place.

2. It would have cost me $$,$$$.$$ just to have the e-rights. Something we were funded to do but made no sense unless it were to be exploited (along the lines of what Paradox will do with Squad Leader no offense to them). Our intention from day one was to make a faithful product FOR the fans, not a game for OTHERS. I had most of the graphics redone or in the process of being redone. A few of the earlier style stuff that was completed is posted on my website as an example. It makes no sense to spend that kind of money for what amounts to rights to the trademarked name "Up Front" which is as crappy a name possible from an internet search perspective and many others anyway.

3. Too look at it a different way. I could call it something else, use all the different graphics, and still make it basically UP FRONT. But why? Why not just enhance it then? And then you get to why not just make a completely unique game in the first place that truly leverages the power of computers and doesn't bring undo baggage along (Like the silly way from a computer perspective that combat is resolved in Up Front).

4. No one can love UP FRONT more than I. I've been an official playtester for a game in the system. I even designed my own game based on the system (completed other than graphics work) that verly likely could have seen publication had AH not gone under first. I would never wish the title disservice. My collection has gone from 500+ games down to 1 and back up to various levels at times. That 1 game was always Up Front.

5. Everyone, including DAVID HEATH of Matrix, told me not to do it and to make a game (in the spirit of it) instead and put the licensing money into better graphics, better sound, anything. Which is what we are doing now with SNIPER AMBUSH (TM). Now we can also fund 3 games and not just one.

A win win.

Now I think a friendly apology is due...

[Greyshaft]

Guys, could you move this discussion somewhere else? While it may have an artistic merit of its own, it has nothing to do with WiF and keeps dragging me back into this Forum to see what's getting written about WiF.

There's a General Discussion group elsewhere on this board.

Thanks

[coregames]

ORIGINAL: Veldor
Besides it is on-topic in that I was attempting to state that a computer version of WiF could achieve everything the non-computer version could and more and would easily replace the game entirely not only for those that no longer own or play it but also for some if not many of the ones that do. Obviously not for everyone, but for a certain sizeable percentage it well could.

I'm sure that will comfort ADG. Even if you believe your subject is more relevant than what this thread is about, it's time to move the discussion somewhere else.

[BumMcFluff]

Meanwhile...we continue to WAIT!

When CWiF was with ADG, at least we got semi-regular updates where we could see (and play) the current version. So far with Matrix, all we have is nothing. Lots and lots of nothing.

Now its 2005.

See you next year. [>:]