Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: benpark

ORIGINAL: killroyishere

2nd would be That Walker game that's been in production for like 5 years now I think. It's the one that looks a bit like Squad Leader with the units it uses. Been so long I forgot the name of it.

What game is this?

Lock n Load Brothers in arms or Band of Brothers something like that.

ORIGINAL: Chris Trog

Gary Grigsby's War in the East. Hands down.

Ooooo I did not know about this! [&o]

Germantown 1777 along with Pensacola 1781 from GMT .

ORIGINAL: jaxpac

-  A working version of Hearts of Iron 3....

Yes, that would be nice. As much as I like to play new games, I really would like to be able to play those I have already purchased.

I am still undecided about which upcoming game I am looking forward to the most in 2010.

I'm looking forward to the mystery release from WCS. Come on early American wars or Medieval theme.

If we’re filling out the 010 wish list ,I’ll ditto anything colonial era from WCS.

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker
PC - Panther's Bulge (a possibility only now as its production has taken so long to bring to fruition. I will likely buy it for the hype it will develop but is it old hat without being born?).

That's a pretty cheap shot Adam and factually incorrect. First off we haven't even entered production yet. That occurs when development finishes, we sign off and hand it to Matrix, who "produce it" ready for sale. The reasons for why it has taken so long are many as with any complex project. We are only a very small outfit but we have high standards. I'm sure if we had rushed this out the door, we would have received a ton of criticism about the lack of professionalism, attention to detail and qaulity assurance. But that is not how we work. Rest assured the birth of BFTB is imminent. We are just bug fixing at the moment and preparing the tutorial movies.

As to your charge of being "old hat", I find this an incredible statement. Yes we have provided a good deal of sneak peaks on our BFTB forum but these have mainly focussed on the UI. The UI changes have focussed on providing the user with greater access to data with more control and more options for tasking and developing plans.

But you have not had access to the program, could not have seen how the game plays nor be able to appreciate the massive amount of changes we have made to the AI. How could you be in a position to appreciate the benefits of the new force allocation code, the changes to the strategic AI in selecting and culling objectives, the new reinforcement code that takes advantage of partial replans to avoid massive disruptions to existing operations when a sizeable reinforcement arrives. Nor would you be aware of how well the new formation movement code works in managing road moves, or of how well complex attacks are now conducted with automated slippage and cribbage of attack tasks and the automated commitment of reserves. And these are just a few of the AI mods made over the development period. All of which have contributed to making the AI a more competent subordinate and a more challenging opponent.

I truly believe that past users will find a hell of a lot of new features, both in terms of UI and AI. Moreover, BFTB will also be breaking new ground in terms of the inclusion of a suite of tutorial movies that will make learning the game and appreciating how to make operational level command decisions.

Rise of Rome Expansion - FoG

GG WitE

Combat Mission: Normandy

BftB


These I will buy for sure, others will be wait and see.

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker
PC - Panther's Bulge (a possibility only now as its production has taken so long to bring to fruition. I will likely buy it for the hype it will develop but is it old hat without being born?).

That's a pretty cheap shot Adam...

As to your charge of being "old hat", I find this an incredible statement... you have not had access to the program, could not have seen how the game plays nor be able to appreciate the massive amount of changes... How could you be in a position to appreciate the benefits of the new...

Cheap shot???

Of course I have not had access to the program because I'm a consumer. How would I know how wonderful the game will be? Once you've announced a development, you need to keep telling me! Start thinking about marketing and selling Dave. There was nothing cheap at all in my comment - but any savvy business person would see it as a buyer perception.

Sheesh on November 20th 2008 you told the forum that the game would be out February 2009 but it "will be worth the wait"! Because of that I had your game on my "must buy list of 2009". Well that's come and gone and I'm asking no one in particular but my own wallet, will it still be worth the while? The cachet of anticipation in this million-mile-an-hour world I find myself in, is washing thin. To me the game is years old already.

Arjuna Post 20

Kudos for striving to make your game rock solid but don't post an ETA in 2008. Better yet, don't post a game in development until you can be sure it's coming soon. That way you can keep it fresh.

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker
Kudos for striving to make your game rock solid but don't post an ETA in 2008. Better yet, don't post a game in development until you can be sure it's coming soon. That way you can keep it fresh.

If only that statement was workable with thousands of people shouting for release dates and estimates!! [:'(]

Adam,

Fair enough. I accept your statement that you were not trying to make a cheap shot. I also acknowledge that back in 2008 we were aiming for an early 2009 release. But when you are doing original research and development, as we are, you do run the risk of encountering unforseen problems as we did then when we discovered the need to provide automated bridge building. This was not envisaged as being necessary, but testing proved otherwise and this feature alone took many months ( 6+ ) of work. Add to that the need to virtually redo the formation movement code so large divisional sized forces could achieve the rates of advance they did. Again this cost us three months of work. And both of these impacted heavily on the Move doctrine, which went from a fairly simple algorythm to a very complex one. With increasing complexity, comes increased development time.

I'd also like to point out that through 2009 we provided fairly constant progress reports, on the BFTB forum ( tt.asp?forumid=414&p=&tmode=1&smode=1 ) and on war-historical newsgroup ( http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys ... cal/topics ), with the very aim of keeping everyone informed. I don't hold to your view that we should refrain from posting a game in development until its almost ready. If we did that, we would receive flak as other developers do that we treat our loyal customers like mushrooms - ie in the dark and fed on BS. Our policy is to be as open about our plans as we possibly can be. We encourage user feedback and involvement in the various discussions about options for moving ahead. I think this approach engenders not only two way respect but also a loyal following who feel their part of the development process rather than just users.

It shouldn't really matter how long a game takes to develop. What really matters is the quality of the product once it is released and that is what it should be judged on. Your original statement sounded to me like the pronouncement of a judgement and because I knew you hadn't had the opportunity to actually play the product that is why it struck me as a cheap shot. As I said, I accept your statement that this was not your intention. So let's leave it at that. All the best,

ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd

If only that statement was workable with thousands of people shouting for release dates and estimates!! [:'(]

True! I was thinking about this too and there's at least one game doing this that I know of and forgot about till someone posted somewhere here - Flashpoint Middle East IIRC. The successor to the game set in WW3 Germany of some years back.

I'm eager to see that one. Yet, though it's a sequel it's a very fresh thing because I know nothing more of it.

Deleted: Sorry wrong thread

1. Ancient Conquests 1500BC-300BC_Empire building with provincial movement and tactical combat.
2. Power of Rome 300BC-600AD_Empire building with provincial movement and tactical combat.
3. Western Civilization 600AD-1400AD_Empire building with provincial movement and tactical combat.
4. Mercantilism 1400AD-1850AD_Sea Zones with provincial movement, operational combat.
5. Industrial Revolution 1850AD-1950AD_Sea Zones with provincial movement, operational combat.
6. Hundred Years War_Empire building with provincial movement and tactical combat.
7. Crimean War_Hex based with tactical combat.

1-5 Need to be linked together as expansions to replay the entire "Rise of Civilization Series"
6-7 Are stand alone games.[:D]

For the Asian developers:

I'd like to see a similar series done for "The Rise of Asian Culture 500BC-1900AD".
Done in 3-4 installments.[;)][:D]

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

It shouldn't really matter how long a game takes to develop.

I think Adam worded his one-liner (from his game list) somewhat harshly, but I can see where he was coming from.
You, as a developer, decide when you're satisfied with the state of the game and when it's ready to go gold, not the customers.
And there's no doubt that BFTB is NOT something like Duke Nukem Forever (means that it takes like what... 6 years?, or like a planned and wishful light-speed-release like Daikatana - scheduled for a 1997 release [that would have meant 7 months for development only], which was totally unrealistic, as Romero had just switched to the all-new QuakeII-Engine, and which made people think it would be vaporware. Final release: 2000).

I can imagine that BFTB will have hit the shelf until April/May.

But, during the last 3 years, one detail was almost amusing for me here, namely the fact that you suggested several ETAs during the course of 3 years (more than the one you admitted here [:)]). While it may be hard to resist questions from users ("when?") who are really looking forward to this title, your statements may have frustrated some of them (probably not just Adam), as they realized (each christmas) that the game would not materialize (in time) for some holiday action.

Still, you really don't have to sum up all the details here to explain why the development had been delayed. The amount of development insights you share in the BFTB-Forum is exemplary and sufficient, but the amount of ETAs and other statements shows that you're an able programmer, but only an average PR guy (no offense [:)]).

I'd refrain from providing such "wandering" ETA in the future.

Oh, and that noone gets me wrong: The BFTB-engine displays the crown of all operational wargames. !!! [:)]

one that looks good, plays good, great AI, repayable, no bugs......but then we know that is not possible (SIGH)

Madgamer

"But it does seem to take forever".....I think we have been hearing that around here till last summer.

Madgamer

ORIGINAL: madgamer

one that looks good, plays good, great AI, repayable, no bugs......but then we know that is not possible (SIGH)

Madgamer

I think it's possible it's just that nobody wants to put the time and money into it. Just like in the fast food industry everyone is in a hurry for the product and the income from it, but, they still forget to salt the fries from time to time.

re the discussion about Bulge, 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.. so we are still interested in  Pnther games and the Bulge work, just has taken a long time.... truth.
If it lives up to HALF the expectations I have it will be twice as much fun as other games of this type... good luck guys...
It is still in my top five games for 2010
 
 
Now what are we NOT seeing we would like.. I know new thread time... starting one now...