Matrix Games Forums

Just call it what it is.

And I did.

Not my fault you don't wish to accept it.

Different opinions, so be it! To each their own.

ORIGINAL: demyansk

All the hps games I own along with Tiller all play in a similar fashion. However, always changes in the content whether it's WW1 or WW2. As far as I am concerned, Vietnam will be a new game compared to middle east. I like it that way, I don't want to learn an entire new system. I have all the Battlefield games from EA. Always somewhat different themes, changes in graphics, New weapons but still me running around trying to survive. All these games being developed and items in general borrow from previous versions. Radios, tv's, computers, auto's, trains and the list goes on. I don't complain too much because these guys know way more than I do about creating games and I always have the choice to buy or leave alone. I tend to buy, it's the American Way, quality is where it's at.

Keep up the good work on the games. I enjoy them very much and I am sure you are making below minimum wage with all the work being done.

Glad you brought those games up. Let's take a look at them. People have created graphics mods for them. They've created new campaigns and scenarios too. Some people even took some of the Squad Battles games and basically modded those games into new theaters of play. Africa at War comes to mind.

The Panzer Campaigns series now has a Gold version which adds new graphics, scenarios etc. New buyers automatically get the enhanced Gold version when they buy from Tiller Software. Anyone with the older versions of those games can get serial numbers for the Gold versions as long as they have a proof of purchase.

The team making the Gold versions aren't claiming that they've made new games even though they've added new graphics, scenarios and changed data. Tiller has even added to and changed some of the code in those games. But they aren't passing what amounts to being older games although enhanced as being brand new games. They tell you right up front that the games have been enhanced. Again that just basically modding. The difference is the team working with Tiller isn't trying to claim that they've made new games.

That team has also made new games. The Panzer Battle series. Kursk and Normandy were based on Panzer Campaigns. The Africa Panzer Battles game was I believe created from the ground up. So it's not just a modding team that enhances older versions of Tiller games. They've shown they can also create new games too. What's happening with the Campaign Series is nothing more than modding an existing game. Nothing wrong with modding or enhancing but I think it's deceitful to claim that what's being created are new games.

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

Just call it what it is.

And I did.

Not my fault you don't wish to accept it.

Different opinions, so be it! To each their own.

Accept what? Explain to me how what you're doing isn't modding given the fact that you're taking an existing game and overhauling and enhancing it. That's pretty much the definition of modding.

I guess then every Tiller game or HPS game after the first or any part two of any game series that uses the same engine is just a mod. That would include many games in many different genre's. I mean all there doing is changing the graphics and adding features,changing a time frame. i just don't see the difference your trying to make.

ORIGINAL: tevans

Accept what? Explain to me how what you're doing isn't modding given the fact that you're taking an existing game and overhauling and enhancing it. That's pretty much the definition of modding.

Fortunately, being on the inside and understanding what we are actually doing, instead of just assuming what we're doing, allows me to say what I say with confidence.

Thank you for your opinion.

ORIGINAL: tevans
Explain to me how what you're doing isn't modding given the fact that you're taking an existing game and overhauling and enhancing it. That's pretty much the definition of modding.

That's not correct. Mods generally change the graphics, some OOBs, some rules via scripting, etc. To change code, as these devs are doing, is generally beyond the scope of modding, because modders do not have access to code.

I don't recall anyone saying that these are "brand new games"...ever notice how they stuck with the "Campaign Series"--these are an extension, update, and improvement over the old games, but not a mere mod.

This section is sort of like talking about
about communism and socialism. [:)] I love Jason's games

ORIGINAL: demyansk

This section is sort of like talking about
about communism and socialism. [:)] I love Jason's games

+1

If you only had some insights in the coding process and the brand new AI (yeah, not modded!) scripts you'd realise very soon it's a different game. I suggest to those who are sceptical to check the sneak previews and sections here on the Forum, as well as on FB and Twitter, that explains what's going on under the hood (literally).

Klink, Oberst

ORIGINAL: budd

I guess then every Tiller game or HPS game after the first or any part two of any game series that uses the same engine is just a mod. That would include many games in many different genre's. I mean all there doing is changing the graphics and adding features,changing a time frame. i just don't see the difference your trying to make.

I don't see that happening here. I see these guys taking the Campaign series and enhancing it then trying to claim they've made a new game. Using Jason's Model T analogy from a previous post basically somebody is trying to take a Model T throw some extra parts on it and sell it as a Ferrari. Nothing wrong with enhancing the games. That's a good thing. But claiming that by enhancing them they're somehow creating brand new games is in my opinion wrong. They aren't new games. They're old games that have been modded and enhanced.

So far nobody has explained the difference between what these guys are doing with the Campaign series and modding. What's the difference? Take any popular mod for a game. What does it change? Some change graphics. Some change code and data. Some add scenarios. Some change everything. Jason claims that's what they're doing with the Campaign series. So how is it not modding? Somebody really needs to explain that to me because I just don't see it.

Let's be honest too. There's a huge difference from a developer like Tiller using the same engine that he created and somebody else tacking things onto one of his games then claiming they've created a new game. Take Divided Ground for instance. Divided Ground was enhanced, modded and overhauled into CS Middle East. I'm sure Jason will claim CS Middle East is a brand new game. How is it new though? They added and/or changed things to the existing game. They didn't just use the engine and build from the ground up like Tiller and his team does. Anybody who has both games should be able to see what I'm talking about. What Jason and his team are doing amounts to nothing more than modding. Modders do the exact same thing.

ORIGINAL: tevans

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

Just call it what it is.

And I did.

Not my fault you don't wish to accept it.

Different opinions, so be it! To each their own.

Accept what? Explain to me how what you're doing isn't modding given the fact that you're taking an existing game and overhauling and enhancing it. That's pretty much the definition of modding.

[:D] Well, well. Welcome back Timmy!

RR

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink

If you only had some insights in the coding process and the brand new AI (yeah, not modded!) scripts you'd realise very soon it's a different game. I suggest to those who are sceptical to check the sneak previews and sections here on the Forum, as well as on FB and Twitter, that explains what's going on under the hood (literally).

Klink, Oberst

You do realize that some mods for certain games change code and even the AI for those games, right? It may make it a different game but it doesn't make it a new game. If so much is changing then why still call it the Campaign Series? Why not start fresh with a brand new title for the series? My point is these guys had something that Tiller created to work with. Unless they scrap every single bit of his code, scrap all the data and everything he created then all they're doing is adding on to his work. That doesn't mean they've created a new game though. Modders do the same thing all the time.

I don't take offense because of what they're doing. Enhancing these games is a good thing. My problem is with Jason claiming that they're brand new games. They aren't. Tiller created the Campaign Series. So how can somebody else come along and change a few things then claim they've created something new. All they've done is change what was there. That's what mods do. There are plenty of examples of that throughout gaming that will back me up.

ORIGINAL: MrRoadrunner

ORIGINAL: tevans

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho



And I did.

Not my fault you don't wish to accept it.

Different opinions, so be it! To each their own.

Accept what? Explain to me how what you're doing isn't modding given the fact that you're taking an existing game and overhauling and enhancing it. That's pretty much the definition of modding.

[:D] Well, well. Welcome back Timmy!

RR

Thanks Roadrunner. Good to be back. How ya doing?

ORIGINAL: 76mm

ORIGINAL: tevans
Explain to me how what you're doing isn't modding given the fact that you're taking an existing game and overhauling and enhancing it. That's pretty much the definition of modding.

That's not correct. Mods generally change the graphics, some OOBs, some rules via scripting, etc. To change code, as these devs are doing, is generally beyond the scope of modding, because modders do not have access to code.

I don't recall anyone saying that these are "brand new games"...ever notice how they stuck with the "Campaign Series"--these are an extension, update, and improvement over the old games, but not a mere mod.

Yet I can show you mods that have changed all you've listed plus code too. Take a look at Long War for X Com 1 & 2. Or some of the Warhammer overhauls for TW Warhammer 1 & 2. They changed code, graphics, data and rules. Some RPG's such as NWN 1 & 2 and Divinity OS have mods that change more than graphics. Some change code too. What difference does it make how it's done? Direct code change or scripting. The point is the code changes and in most cases the game plays differently.

Someone did say they were brand new games too. Jason said it a few posts up. That what caused me to respond in the first place. He was telling somebody that these weren't mods but brand new games.

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

ORIGINAL: tevans

Accept what? Explain to me how what you're doing isn't modding given the fact that you're taking an existing game and overhauling and enhancing it. That's pretty much the definition of modding.

Fortunately, being on the inside and understanding what we are actually doing, instead of just assuming what we're doing, allows me to say what I say with confidence.

Thank you for your opinion.

That's nice. But you still haven't explained to me how what you're doing is different from what modders do. How is it different? I can show you mods for games that change everything that you say you're changing with this series. Quite honestly I think what you're doing is a good thing. I just have a problem with you trying to claim that you're creating new games. Tiller created the Campaign Series. All you're doing is tweaking it and enhancing it. Putting new paint on an old house doesn't make it a new house. A polished turd is still a turd too. Get my point? I like the enhancements you're making. But I think you're being dishonest by claiming they're new games.

It has been explained to you many times. If new code + new lua code engine + new data + new graphics + a new era/war to cover is not a game for you, so be it. For me it sure is.

ORIGINAL: Crossroads

It has been explained to you many times. If new code + new lua code engine + new data + new graphics + a new era/war to cover is not a game for you, so be it. For me it sure is.

+1

ad nauseam

In a way, it is even irrelevant if we've changed the Matrix Campaign Series codebase or not (we have). Games, or games franchise such as Campaign Series especially, are not coded individually for most part, instead they are typically constructed by using a common game engine to them.

Well known game engines include AGEOD, for one. Some game series evolve over several game engines, like Total War, for instance.

The current version of Matrix Campaign Series game engine begun in Talonsoft, which had two quite similar game engines to create new games, the Battle Ground game engine (for both Napoleonic and ACW games), and Campaign Series game engine (for three WW2 and one Middle East game).

The current Matrix Campaign Series game engine is of course based on the earlier version, but as of CS Middle East stopped being compatible with the JTCS game engine. CS Vietnam will have a brand new CS Event Engine to add to it. Under the hood, the core CS game engine actually is not 100% compatible with even CS Middle East anymore, but we're providing a free update for current CS Middle East owners to game graphics and game data together with the latest game engine version (+ the new Lua Event Engine), so that the CS Middle East owners can enkjoy the latest and greatest as well.

Well that was a fun walk in the memory lane, with the early Talonsoft releases. I had totally forgotten that the first Battelground game was not Gettysburg, but the Battle of Ardennes / Bulge instead!





Edit: Here's 3D view to compliment the above 2D view:

ORIGINAL: Crossroads

Well that was a fun walk in the memory lane, with the early Talonsoft releases. I had totally forgotten that the first Battelground game was not Gettysburg, but the Battle of Ardennes / Bulge instead!

What a great little game that was for it's time. A Campaign Series Grandparent.

I still have a copy running on my machine for when I'm feeling nostalgic.