When?

[petracelli]

Steve

Keep up the good work.

Phil

[rhondabrwn]

ORIGINAL: jaimain

Another year without MWIF[>:][>:][>:][>:]...will 2010 the YEAR?  [&o]

I'm thinking worst case scenario is 2012... the day before the world ends [:D]

Double disaster... world ending and an unplayed MWIF waiting to be installed [:(][:(][:(]

[bo]

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Hello.

I understand that the deadline of the first week of november will not be met, but I don't know if there was another that I may have missed.

No hurry on my side, just wanted if maybe I will be able to have it as a Christmas present or no, since it doesn't seem I'll have it for my birhtday Nov19th. [:D]

If not, no problem, summer holidays maybe a good moment to play too, from the swimming pool of the hotel...

HI Jose how are you, just dropped by [lucky arent you] to see how things are going but alas everyones got their heads still stuck you know where about a release date, I feel for you guys and gals, " sorta" HAH!

Bo

[winky51]

I still feel an AI was not needed and the game should have been focused on email/network/hotseat play. The AI could come later.

Personally I dont know how the hell they are going to make an AI for a game this advanced and make it work. I wrote a global scenario for Strategic Command 2 (SC2) and the AI was tough to write. I am still writing it as I keep finding easy loopholes in their strategy. SC2 is far simplier than WIF.

Ive been following but not posting. I posted when it was 1st being developed and gave my suggestions and frankly, they all got implemented and I was most impressed. Im just waiting for it to come out so I can play via network with my Friends back in Florida. I moved to North Carolina.

[Kham]

It is in good hands but it is just one guy.

I think settling for a mediocre AI would be necessary. Other wargames have had pretty poor AIs and done well enough (Heart of Iron etc.). The real game starts when you get a flesh-and-blood opponent, but even a terrible AI can help you learn the mechanics of the game - which in WIFs case are not exactly trivial.

In my opinion, people happy to just play the AI will be equally happy to walk all over it every game.

[Joseignacio]

Not at all.  I am a frequent poster in the spanish leader website for videogames forum www.meristation.com , strategy section, and people are more and more angered with bugs and bad or mediocre IA. After all, in an average videogame at least 50% of the people play against AI, maybe 90% in games which are not RTS, no matter what the polls among freakies (like me) say.
 
In a website where I was literally stoned 3 or 4 years ago when complaining about this on Paradox games like EU2, I was seriously butt-kicked a couple of years ago for complaining about the same with Ageod games like WiA or BoA, and now massively backed up when shooting Paradox for HoI3 and Matrix for Empire:TW. In this latter, there was also a seed of disconformity starting from Medieval TW II.
 
There is no longer a blank check for developers, neither in bugs nor in AI.

[Lützow]

Where should be the point of a non-ai WiF? Whoever owns the boardgame can already play it over the i-net by using Suntzu and stuff.

[lavisj]

I agree an AI is necessary for the commercial success of the game. Without it, it would remain in a very small fringe market.
With it, it stands a chance. But I am also worried about how well the AI will perform in a game that is so difficult to play well....

Jerome

[Custer1961]

I will not buy it without an AI on release.

[winky51]

I look at it that if you cant meet the expectations of the user then you should push his expectations back because he wont notice.

Developer: "X game will come out with an AI and network play, internet play, PBEM"
User: "oh boy it has an AI it will be challenging"
Users always expect more from an AI than is suggested.

When the user gets the game they are disappointed and will play once then bad mouth the game to others ignoring the good parts. The game developer failed to meet the expectation of the user, indirectly, because users expect more. We all hope for an awesome AI.

Now...
Developer: "X game will not have an AI in this current version but we will have one in a later patch. We have over the internet play, network play, PBEM.
User: "oh boy network play, too bad it doesnt have AI play so I better start getting some opponents."

In this case the developer has to make it as easy as possible to make sure users can get opponents which is far simpler, and less time consuming, then writing a soso or crappy AI. In the end the user will talk about the "fun game over the internet" they had with their opponents. Their focus will be on the positive not the negative. You gave them a product that met their expectations, you got it out faster which allowed for free word of mouth advertising, and you provided a forum for users to get a very advanced opponent (other users).

But now there is the marketing side which happens in all industries.

If lets say in Jan of 2010 for the 1st year you can sell 1,000 copies @ $100 with an AI, not make the user completely happy and that is more than.

Coming out with the product in Jan 2009 with no AI and selling 800 copies in 2 years but making the user happy... well then its a simple money equation.

But now toss in future sales and a different twist even if a sale ISNT made on WIF....

X user buys product and is dissapointed because the AI is weak. Y user asks "how is WIF?" X user says "the AI sucks dont bother".... now Y user wont buy product. Future sales lost and maybe even future sales from the company is lost for other products.

now with no AI installed meeting expectations

X user doesnt buy product. Y user asks "did you buy WIF?", X user says "no it doesnt have AI", Y user might still inquire to the product realizing "well how does it play then? ooo network play. ooo they have GREAT support for finding opponents" Y user buys it, or at worst doesnt but doesnt hold a negative view of the developer.

Take War in Europe by Decision Games. They came out with the original with NO AI. Now they remade it better than their DOS version which was fairly good for its time.

People tend to focus on the negative and only remember that. Everyday we are bombarded by negative news, constantly, non-stop. Our brains are naturally attracted to it. People love to say whats wrong with something far more than whats right. So I think products should be geared to avoid that situation. I work in IT and we work that same way.

An executive has a broken laptop. He tells us he has a meeting in 2h30m and he needs it by then. We know we can fix it in 30m. We tell him it will take 1hr to fix it. So we get it done in 45m due to complications and he is happy because we exceeded his expectations of 1hr. If we told him 30m and took 35m he would only focus on the negative and file a complaint even though we were 5m late.

I think if WIF was put out before the AI was done word of mouth alone would make it sell more. AI could come out later. Also the programmer would get far more feedback from a wider field of players.

Im not an expert on marketing and it could very well be Im wrong in this case and even if the AI is poor people would still buy more than if it had no AI at all and this wouldnt affect future customers or products.

[paulderynck]

ORIGINAL: winky51

I look at it that if you cant meet the expectations of the user then you should push his expectations back because he wont notice.

Developer: "X game will come out with an AI and network play, internet play, PBEM"
User: "oh boy it has an AI it will be challenging"
Users always expect more from an AI than is suggested.

When the user gets the game they are disappointed and will play once then bad mouth the game to others ignoring the good parts. The game developer failed to meet the expectation of the user, indirectly, because users expect more. We all hope for an awesome AI.

Now...
Developer: "X game will not have an AI in this current version but we will have one in a later patch. We have over the internet play, network play, PBEM.
User: "oh boy network play, too bad it doesnt have AI play so I better start getting some opponents."

In this case the developer has to make it as easy as possible to make sure users can get opponents which is far simpler, and less time consuming, then writing a soso or crappy AI. In the end the user will talk about the "fun game over the internet" they had with their opponents. Their focus will be on the positive not the negative. You gave them a product that met their expectations, you got it out faster which allowed for free word of mouth advertising, and you provided a forum for users to get a very advanced opponent (other users).

But now there is the marketing side which happens in all industries.

If lets say in Jan of 2010 for the 1st year you can sell 1,000 copies @ $100 with an AI, not make the user completely happy and that is more than.

Coming out with the product in Jan 2009 with no AI and selling 800 copies in 2 years but making the user happy... well then its a simple money equation.

But now toss in future sales and a different twist even if a sale ISNT made on WIF....

X user buys product and is dissapointed because the AI is weak. Y user asks "how is WIF?" X user says "the AI sucks dont bother".... now Y user wont buy product. Future sales lost and maybe even future sales from the company is lost for other products.

now with no AI installed meeting expectations

X user doesnt buy product. Y user asks "did you buy WIF?", X user says "no it doesnt have AI", Y user might still inquire to the product realizing "well how does it play then? ooo network play. ooo they have GREAT support for finding opponents" Y user buys it, or at worst doesnt but doesnt hold a negative view of the developer.

Take War in Europe by Decision Games. They came out with the original with NO AI. Now they remade it better than their DOS version which was fairly good for its time.

People tend to focus on the negative and only remember that. Everyday we are bombarded by negative news, constantly, non-stop. Our brains are naturally attracted to it. People love to say whats wrong with something far more than whats right. So I think products should be geared to avoid that situation. I work in IT and we work that same way.

An executive has a broken laptop. He tells us he has a meeting in 2h30m and he needs it by then. We know we can fix it in 30m. We tell him it will take 1hr to fix it. So we get it done in 45m due to complications and he is happy because we exceeded his expectations of 1hr. If we told him 30m and took 35m he would only focus on the negative and file a complaint even though we were 5m late.

I think if WIF was put out before the AI was done word of mouth alone would make it sell more. AI could come out later. Also the programmer would get far more feedback from a wider field of players.

Im not an expert on marketing and it could very well be Im wrong in this case and even if the AI is poor people would still buy more than if it had no AI at all and this wouldnt affect future customers or products.

I couldn't agree more. Setting up and encouraging a player community for finding opponents is something that could be done by volunteer ravenous WiF fans that follow this forum rather than by Matrix or the developer.

[Lützow]

Even a mediocre AI is better than no AI, as it gives new players the opportunity to learn the basics before they possibly switch to PBEM. If Matrix delivers a non-ai WiF, it will solely sell to those already being familiar with it's ruleset, while the rest is probably going to refrain.

See it as a chance to increase the current player base and aside of this, Matrix released several grognard-style wargames in 2009, so some have to be left over for next year. Actually I rather prefer to wait for something, than knowing there will be no interesting stuff for the near future.

[norvandave]

Matrix will not be able to charge what they want for this game without an AI.  People are not going to shell out $59 for a game that has no AI on the promise that perhaps down the road it may have an AI.
 
I for one, will not buy this game without a reasonable AI.  I haven't got the schedule to coordinate with others, especially for a game like this one which would take several months (years?) to play by email. 

[winky51]

http://www.decisiongames.com/wwii/europe/europe.htm
$60 WiE no AI

One thing that can be done is to write some scenarios for WIF.

Germany vs Russia, Germany vs France, Germany vs Poland.

3 turns of the Pacific.

Thats easy AI to write or certainly EASIER than the whole game.

I just gave my thoughts, Im not in marketing. You see all these ads on TV for junk product and think "what idiot would buy that?" then they appear on "How I Got Rich" show next year and you scratch your head. Not saying Matrix is junk BTW, I like all their games. They did a good job on em.

[macgregor]

Is someone trying to steal my old argument? We discussed this. Steve explained that making MWiF without an AI and then trying to add the AI was like trying to make a peanut butter and jelly sandwich before adding the bread. with Steve's style however, we get to somewhat see that 'the wheels are(indeed) in motion'. It's like watching sausage being made or for some, like watching paint dry. As much as one may want to explode like a limpet,we must maintain. Ask yourself, 'have you helped?' I offered but now admit I've been terribly slow at providing the requested task. How can I expect more from others when I offer so little? Steve is plodding along on course and on target. It's a long journey however.

[Joseignacio]

ORIGINAL: norvandave

Matrix will not be able to charge what they want for this game without an AI.  People are not going to shell out $59 for a game that has no AI on the promise that perhaps down the road it may have an AI.

I for one, will not buy this game without a reasonable AI.  I haven't got the schedule to coordinate with others, especially for a game like this one which would take several months (years?) to play by email. 

Yes, that is another blank check that is no longer working. People are fed up with promises, mainly because they are not met along the time.

[Joseignacio]

ORIGINAL: winky51

I look at it that if you cant meet the expectations of the user then you should push his expectations back because he wont notice.

Developer: "X game will come out with an AI and network play, internet play, PBEM"
User: "oh boy it has an AI it will be challenging"
Users always expect more from an AI than is suggested.

When the user gets the game they are disappointed and will play once then bad mouth the game to others ignoring the good parts. The game developer failed to meet the expectation of the user, indirectly, because users expect more. We all hope for an awesome AI.

Now...
Developer: "X game will not have an AI in this current version but we will have one in a later patch. We have over the internet play, network play, PBEM.
User: "oh boy network play, too bad it doesnt have AI play so I better start getting some opponents."

In this case the developer has to make it as easy as possible to make sure users can get opponents which is far simpler, and less time consuming, then writing a soso or crappy AI. In the end the user will talk about the "fun game over the internet" they had with their opponents. Their focus will be on the positive not the negative. You gave them a product that met their expectations, you got it out faster which allowed for free word of mouth advertising, and you provided a forum for users to get a very advanced opponent (other users).

But now there is the marketing side which happens in all industries.

If lets say in Jan of 2010 for the 1st year you can sell 1,000 copies @ $100 with an AI, not make the user completely happy and that is more than.

Coming out with the product in Jan 2009 with no AI and selling 800 copies in 2 years but making the user happy... well then its a simple money equation.

But now toss in future sales and a different twist even if a sale ISNT made on WIF....

X user buys product and is dissapointed because the AI is weak. Y user asks "how is WIF?" X user says "the AI sucks dont bother".... now Y user wont buy product. Future sales lost and maybe even future sales from the company is lost for other products.

now with no AI installed meeting expectations

X user doesnt buy product. Y user asks "did you buy WIF?", X user says "no it doesnt have AI", Y user might still inquire to the product realizing "well how does it play then? ooo network play. ooo they have GREAT support for finding opponents" Y user buys it, or at worst doesnt but doesnt hold a negative view of the developer.

Take War in Europe by Decision Games. They came out with the original with NO AI. Now they remade it better than their DOS version which was fairly good for its time.

People tend to focus on the negative and only remember that. Everyday we are bombarded by negative news, constantly, non-stop. Our brains are naturally attracted to it. People love to say whats wrong with something far more than whats right. So I think products should be geared to avoid that situation. I work in IT and we work that same way.

An executive has a broken laptop. He tells us he has a meeting in 2h30m and he needs it by then. We know we can fix it in 30m. We tell him it will take 1hr to fix it. So we get it done in 45m due to complications and he is happy because we exceeded his expectations of 1hr. If we told him 30m and took 35m he would only focus on the negative and file a complaint even though we were 5m late.

I think if WIF was put out before the AI was done word of mouth alone would make it sell more. AI could come out later. Also the programmer would get far more feedback from a wider field of players.

Im not an expert on marketing and it could very well be Im wrong in this case and even if the AI is poor people would still buy more than if it had no AI at all and this wouldnt affect future customers or products.

I agree that when expectations are low it easier to satisfy the customer, but if somebody tells me that the apple cake has no apple or maybe they will be able to serve some apple jam by the middle of my dessert, maybe I will simply have no dessert or eat ice-cream.

[oscar72se]

ORIGINAL: winky51

I look at it that if you cant meet the expectations of the user then you should push his expectations back because he wont notice.

Developer: "X game will come out with an AI and network play, internet play, PBEM"
User: "oh boy it has an AI it will be challenging"
Users always expect more from an AI than is suggested.

When the user gets the game they are disappointed and will play once then bad mouth the game to others ignoring the good parts. The game developer failed to meet the expectation of the user, indirectly, because users expect more. We all hope for an awesome AI.

Now...
Developer: "X game will not have an AI in this current version but we will have one in a later patch. We have over the internet play, network play, PBEM.
User: "oh boy network play, too bad it doesnt have AI play so I better start getting some opponents."

In this case the developer has to make it as easy as possible to make sure users can get opponents which is far simpler, and less time consuming, then writing a soso or crappy AI. In the end the user will talk about the "fun game over the internet" they had with their opponents. Their focus will be on the positive not the negative. You gave them a product that met their expectations, you got it out faster which allowed for free word of mouth advertising, and you provided a forum for users to get a very advanced opponent (other users).

But now there is the marketing side which happens in all industries.

If lets say in Jan of 2010 for the 1st year you can sell 1,000 copies @ $100 with an AI, not make the user completely happy and that is more than.

Coming out with the product in Jan 2009 with no AI and selling 800 copies in 2 years but making the user happy... well then its a simple money equation.

But now toss in future sales and a different twist even if a sale ISNT made on WIF....

X user buys product and is dissapointed because the AI is weak. Y user asks "how is WIF?" X user says "the AI sucks dont bother".... now Y user wont buy product. Future sales lost and maybe even future sales from the company is lost for other products.

now with no AI installed meeting expectations

X user doesnt buy product. Y user asks "did you buy WIF?", X user says "no it doesnt have AI", Y user might still inquire to the product realizing "well how does it play then? ooo network play. ooo they have GREAT support for finding opponents" Y user buys it, or at worst doesnt but doesnt hold a negative view of the developer.

Take War in Europe by Decision Games. They came out with the original with NO AI. Now they remade it better than their DOS version which was fairly good for its time.

People tend to focus on the negative and only remember that. Everyday we are bombarded by negative news, constantly, non-stop. Our brains are naturally attracted to it. People love to say whats wrong with something far more than whats right. So I think products should be geared to avoid that situation. I work in IT and we work that same way.

An executive has a broken laptop. He tells us he has a meeting in 2h30m and he needs it by then. We know we can fix it in 30m. We tell him it will take 1hr to fix it. So we get it done in 45m due to complications and he is happy because we exceeded his expectations of 1hr. If we told him 30m and took 35m he would only focus on the negative and file a complaint even though we were 5m late.

I think if WIF was put out before the AI was done word of mouth alone would make it sell more. AI could come out later. Also the programmer would get far more feedback from a wider field of players.

Im not an expert on marketing and it could very well be Im wrong in this case and even if the AI is poor people would still buy more than if it had no AI at all and this wouldnt affect future customers or products.

I can only speak for myself when I say that I wouldn't purchase this product if it doesn't contain an AI. Partly because I would be so dissapointed with the fact that we have been promised this from the start, but also because I have already spent 400-500 dollars on the boardgame. Buying the computer game without an AI would be like buying the computerized version of the same thing that I already own.

Regards,
Oscar

[BallyJ]

That is what I am waiting for.
The computerised version of the game!!!

[Joseignacio]

ORIGINAL: BallyJ

That is what I am waiting for.
The computerised version of the game!!!

http://www.vassalengine.org/community/index.php