Comprehensive Wishlist

[Panama]

I don't know if overlooked is accurate. I believe dismissed out of hand would be more descriptive.

There are some discussions that suddenly end. Nothing is resolved. The individual who would appear to be responsible for presenting ideas for inclusion simply stops responding. End of discussion. There is no, 'Nope, not going to happen'. There is just silence or 'This has been discussed to death'.

It would be nice to get a yes or no and why without the vague, 'not enough bang for the buck'.

[Panama]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Telumar

TOAW 3 was released 5 years ago. Seems normal to me that forum traffic decreases.

...

I know several people who still play this game and still post avidly on the internet. They just don't post here.

Perhaps if they did post here it might help. I can go to China and complain about the potholes in the streets at home. That won't get them fixed.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: Panama

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

ORIGINAL: Telumar

TOAW 3 was released 5 years ago. Seems normal to me that forum traffic decreases.

...

I know several people who still play this game and still post avidly on the internet. They just don't post here.

Perhaps if they did post here it might help. I can go to China and complain about the potholes in the streets at home. That won't get them fixed.

Well, it ain't much fun to post here. 'Golden Delicious,' for example, just stays away.

I personally find submissive and docile right out. On the other hand -- particularly during the 'river Matrix' firefight -- I found myself taking quite a bit of baggage with me when I left this site. Kept wanting to give perfectly inoffensive family members a hard time at dinner, etc.

I don't need that. Neither do they. And -- for me -- it doesn't necessarily happen elsewhere. I participate in another site where various of us disagree completely about everything from Jesus Christ to drugs. Occasionally there's some raised hackles and some growling -- but nothing like the sustained malevolence that this site seems to offer. And we are just talking about a game. It should be possible to engage in a reasonably dispassionate exchange of views.

Largely, 'he made a desert and called it victory' seems to be an apt quote. While I've never taken home the Miss Congeniality award, I don't think I'm the problem here.

[berto]

Yes, the TOAW forum ... no, let me clarify that ... this Comprehensive Wishlist thread is now overly quarrelsome and at times downright nasty. Ad hominem attacks abound. Not a nice place to hang out.

The rancor flows not from just one person or one faction. Both sides (all sides?) share the blame equally. Tit for tat, blow for blow, will anyone be left standing?

[jmlima]

ORIGINAL: berto

Yes, the TOAW forum ... no, let me clarify that ... this Comprehensive Wishlist thread is now overly quarrelsome and at times downright nasty. Ad hominem attacks abound. Not a nice place to hang out.

The rancor flows not from just one person or one faction. Both sides (all sides?) share the blame equally. Tit for tat, blow for blow, will anyone be left standing?

As Harry Hill would say, there's only one way to find out...

I for example, don't bother too much posting here as I see the 'wishlist' as nothing more than a random compilation of ideas for which there is no plan of implementation. Some of them seem to randomly make it into the game, whilst circumventing other far more relevant ones. And when 'TOAW 4' is thrown in the mix, then I lose any interest whatsoever.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: jmlima

ORIGINAL: berto

Yes, the TOAW forum ... no, let me clarify that ... this Comprehensive Wishlist thread is now overly quarrelsome and at times downright nasty. Ad hominem attacks abound. Not a nice place to hang out.

The rancor flows not from just one person or one faction. Both sides (all sides?) share the blame equally. Tit for tat, blow for blow, will anyone be left standing?

As Harry Hill would say, there's only one way to find out...

I for example, don't bother too much posting here as I see the 'wishlist' as nothing more than a random compilation of ideas for which there is no plan of implementation. Some of them seem to randomly make it into the game, whilst circumventing other far more relevant ones. And when 'TOAW 4' is thrown in the mix, then I lose any interest whatsoever.

Yeah. Given its length, I would guess almost any conceivable change has been suggested at some point in some form in the 'wishlist.' I could dream up almost any change imaginable, impose it, and then point to the date in 2007 when it or something like was discussed.

[Panama]

I believe someone went through the list, picked out the easy to do stuff and implemented those that made some sort of sense. The more difficult to program ones will never get done.

What has been said time and again is to make everything already in the game available to the scenario designers so they may vary effects during a scenario.

I doubt much more will ever get done as the number of posts in the forum have an impact on how many people actually buy the game and how Matrix views the game's potential financial health.

And yes, if a post becomes a vile bucket of poo it tends to drive folks out into the fields.

[berto]

ORIGINAL: Panama

What has been said time and again is to make everything [emphasis added] already in the game available to the scenario designers so they may vary effects during a scenario.

everything [emphasizing it even more]

Without doubt, right there is the biggest bang for the programming buck.

Everything else is just sniping. (In more ways than one. [;)] )

Hanging by a thread here. Hoping against hope that The Powers That Be make the right and quick decisions to save this game, for me, and possibly for many others as well.

[macgregor]

All the stuff I basically want is in the wishlist. I've tried to become more specific as I think about my requests more. And while I've received a lot of flak, it's always been by the forum naysayers, namely Curtis and Colin NOT Ralph nor anyone whose response could be considered the final word. Ralph always mentions in the few exchanges we've had that he appreciates my 'passion'.

If Ralph or someone from Matrix staff were to post that no more changes would be made would I be upset? I suppose, though the length of time it appears to require to improve a game I may likely have to fork out another $50 for ...let's put it this way. The game I envision; a complete operational warfare simulator the way I believe Norm originally targeted, would indeed be coveted by a large demographic, as indicated by the original forum traffic. I truly believe that if Ralph doesn't 'git'er done' that in a year or two -or more, some other company will eventually. I don't think David Heath or Eric Rutins are fielding proposals by programmers that want Ralph's job. So I am resolved that this game will live or die with what Ralph does or doesn't do.

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: macgregor

All the stuff I basically want is in the wishlist. I've tried to become more specific as I think about my requests more. And while I've received a lot of flak, it's always been by the forum naysayers, namely Curtis and Colin...

?

That's the first time I've heard myself called a 'forum naysayer.'

Well, I think the epithet is spectacularly misplaced -- but it's fairly innocuous so use it if you must.

[berto]

ORIGINAL: berto

ORIGINAL: Panama

What has been said time and again is to make everything [emphasis added] already in the game available to the scenario designers so they may vary effects during a scenario.

everything [emphasizing it even more]

Without doubt, right there is the biggest bang for the programming buck.

Everything else is just sniping. (In more ways than one. [;)] )

Hanging by a thread here. Hoping against hope that The Powers That Be make the right and quick decisions to save this game, for me, and possibly for many others as well.

A universal scenario file(s) translator, as described in http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2802854, post #2.

The second biggest bang for the buck?

[Telumar]

ORIGINAL: Panama

I believe someone went through the list, picked out the easy to do stuff and implemented those that made some sort of sense. The more difficult to program ones will never get done.

Keep in mind that Ralph has a day job and a family.

ORIGINAL: Panama

What has been said time and again is to make everything already in the game available to the scenario designers so they may vary effects during a scenario.

This i can second!

ORIGINAL: Panama
I doubt much more will ever get done as the number of posts in the forum have an impact on how many people actually buy the game and how Matrix views the game's potential financial health.

I don't know how it's in other games' forums five years after the release. But what i can see is that traffic even is fewer than in the "dark days" before TOAW 3.

ORIGINAL: Panama
And yes, if a post becomes a vile bucket of poo it tends to drive folks out into the fields.

yup.

[Telumar]

ORIGINAL: macgregor

All the stuff I basically want is in the wishlist. I've tried to become more specific as I think about my requests more. And while I've received a lot of flak, it's always been by the forum naysayers, namely Curtis and Colin NOT Ralph nor anyone whose response could be considered the final word. Ralph always mentions in the few exchanges we've had that he appreciates my 'passion'.

If Ralph or someone from Matrix staff were to post that no more changes would be made would I be upset? I suppose, though the length of time it appears to require to improve a game I may likely have to fork out another $50 for ...let's put it this way. The game I envision; a complete operational warfare simulator the way I believe Norm originally targeted, would indeed be coveted by a large demographic, as indicated by the original forum traffic. I truly believe that if Ralph doesn't 'git'er done' that in a year or two -or more, some other company will eventually. I don't think David Heath or Eric Rutins are fielding proposals by programmers that want Ralph's job. So I am resolved that this game will live or die with what Ralph does or doesn't do.

Colin a nay-sayer? He's only a nay-sayer when it comes to your naval engine proposals, so you might be a bit biased.

As far as Ralph and Matrix is concerned i can just wildly guess. As you. This leads to nothing. Face the fact: We have a part-time programmer. Neither you and i can change this. And i think Ralph has done an excellent job until now. Of course more could have been done (couldn't it always ), but this undefined "more" would have required a full time job. Why Matrix didn't invest in this i could again only wildly guess.

[berto]

ORIGINAL: Panama

What has been said time and again is to make everything already in the game available to the scenario designers so they may vary effects during a scenario.

And effectively no limits whatsoever on the number of in-game events.

Has this been said?

[berto]

ORIGINAL: Telumar

Face the fact: We have a part-time programmer. Neither you and i can change this.

Immutable fact? Is adding to the programmer resources (i.e., paid or unpaid programmers joining the "team") really beyond all expectation or hope?

[Telumar]

ORIGINAL: berto

ORIGINAL: Telumar

Face the fact: We have a part-time programmer. Neither you and i can change this.

Immutable fact? Is adding to the programmer resources (i.e., paid or unpaid programmers joining the "team") really beyond all expectation or hope?

Absolutely not. I meant it's just not in our hands to change this. Was i so misunderstanding?

The only thing we can do is keeping the game alive (forums, sces etc). Which we do. I think...

[ColinWright]

ORIGINAL: berto

ORIGINAL: Telumar

Face the fact: We have a part-time programmer. Neither you and i can change this.

Immutable fact? Is adding to the programmer resources (i.e., paid or unpaid programmers joining the "team") really beyond all expectation or hope?

What Telumar said was that neither he nor you can change this.

You'll have to take his word for it that he can't. Can you?

I'd be worried that if we were to get a full-time programmer, then Matrix would want to see how this was going to result in another 10,000 unit sales.

That in turn implies a greater emphasis on mass-market appeal.

And that suggests graphic action sequences -- not quantitative supply.

Mind, if Matrix decides to go for it, it does open up some exciting possibilities. But I think there's a contradiction between demanding more programming resources and expecting a renewed emphasis on accurate simulation.

Curtis aside, the situation right now isn't too bad. We do have movement -- just rather glacial movement. Moreover, it could be in the right direction. Not that it necessarily is -- but it could be.

Most people here seem to agree on some desirable changes that don't involve more resources. A clear recognition of the principle that the designer should be able to modify as many parameters as possible, for example. We don't have that yet.

[berto]

ORIGINAL: berto

ORIGINAL: Telumar

Face the fact: We have a part-time programmer. Neither you and i can change this.

Immutable fact? Is adding to the programmer resources (i.e., paid or unpaid programmers joining the "team") really beyond all expectation or hope?

Would Ralph and/or possibly Erik Rutins weigh in here about how and whether TOAW might be similarly constrained?

[jmlima]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright
...

Mind, if Matrix decides to go for it, it does open up some exciting possibilities. But I think there's a contradiction between demanding more programming resources and expecting a renewed emphasis on accurate simulation.
...

There might be a middle path, where the available resources get focused into significant features currently perceived as flaws.

For example, I would venture, that a middle way of having a 'super patch' for TOAW 3 that would be sold for a fee (less than a new game), would probably be more successful, time and cost effective, than heading towards an hypothetical TOAW 4.

Of course, there really is no substitute for investment. But the game is mature enough that we can do without a new version, only adding to the existing one. Matrix on the other hand, might very well say that commercially this is not viable, and that they prefer to spend 5 years developing TOAW 4 to sell it for $150 (assuming current increases in average prices continue).

My guess is that TOAW reached as far as it can go, and from now onwards it's minor tweaks, when and if Ralph has time and continues interested.

[Telumar]

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

I'd be worried that if we were to get a full-time programmer, then Matrix would want to see how this was going to result in another 10,000 unit sales.

That in turn implies a greater emphasis on mass-market appeal.

And that suggests graphic action sequences -- not quantitative supply.

Mind, if Matrix decides to go for it, it does open up some exciting possibilities. But I think there's a contradiction between demanding more programming resources and expecting a renewed emphasis on accurate simulation.

Hm, i see your worry, but it wouldn't be a design from scratch. So ressources could go into both, accurate simulation and graphics stuff.

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

Curtis aside, the situation right now isn't too bad.

We already know that you two are fighting your bush war here, you don't need to emphasize it over and over (same goes to Bob). I can happily live with both of you part of the TOAW coummunity. [:D]