The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Gamers can also use this forum to chat about any game related subject, news, rumours etc.

Moderator: maddog986

Post Reply
Rosseau
Posts: 2947
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:20 am

The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by Rosseau »

The mention of the old V4V series from Atomic Games still gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling: Going into "work" on a Saturday to play Utah Beach on the company's Mac II si. [;)]

I find that "warm, fuzzy feeling" largely absent when considering the State of Digital Wargames 2021.

Utah Beach was released by Atomic 30 years ago! And, in general, I am amazed at how little digital wargames have progressed in the last three decades compared to other technologies.

What matters here is not my opinion, but the observations of some of the most experienced (and brilliant) posters and devs in the wargaming industry right here on Matrix Games.

I own (and love) all of the games mentioned below, but I use them to illustrate my point, assuming I have a valid one. Please skip to the bottom, as the opinions of other players, programmers and devs are much appreciated here.

1. War in the East 2 - Matrix' flagship, if is there is one - based on "1970s batch processing," according to one source. Is that the best we can do?

2. TOAW IV - Please see the future (or lack thereof) of this game in the General Discussions thread.

3. Combat Mission 2 series - not very far evolved from the 30-year-old classic CM: Barbarossa to Berlin.

4. Lock n' Load Tactical Digital series on Steam - taking a literal page from the board game and little else.

5. Campaign Series: Middle East - a somewhat evolved version of John Tiller's Campaign Series. (The upcoming Vietnam release is supposed to be even more special.)

6. HPS Simulations' Tigers Unleashed (recently updated) - my gosh, I appreciate it, but it is 2021! Same goes for Matrix Tigers on the Hunt - great dev, but obtuse interface.

7. Command Ops 2 on Steam - probably in my top five digital games of all time, and criminally ignored in terms of updates and improvements.

I could go on, but it's too painful. ;) Please tell me, what do you think?




User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17765
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by RangerJoe »

ORIGINAL: Rosseau

The mention of the old V4V series from Atomic Games still gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling: Going into "work" on a Saturday to play Utah Beach on the company's Mac II si. [;)]

I find that "warm, fuzzy feeling" largely absent when considering the State of Digital Wargames 2021.

Utah Beach was released by Atomic 30 years ago! And, in general, I am amazed at how little digital wargames have progressed in the last three decades compared to other technologies.

What matters here is not my opinion, but the observations of some of the most experienced (and brilliant) posters and devs in the wargaming industry right here on Matrix Games.

I own (and love) all of the games mentioned below, but I use them to illustrate my point, assuming I have a valid one. Please skip to the bottom, as the opinions of other players, programmers and devs are much appreciated here.

1. War in the East 2 - Matrix' flagship, if is there is one - based on "1970s batch processing," according to one source. Is that the best we can do?

2. TOAW IV - Please see the future (or lack thereof) of this game in the General Discussions thread.

3. Combat Mission 2 series - not very far evolved from the 30-year-old classic CM: Barbarossa to Berlin.

4. Lock n' Load Tactical Digital series on Steam - taking a literal page from the board game and little else.

5. Campaign Series: Middle East - a somewhat evolved version of John Tiller's Campaign Series. (The upcoming Vietnam release is supposed to be even more special.)

6. HPS Simulations' Tigers Unleashed (recently updated) - my gosh, I appreciate it, but it is 2021! Same goes for Matrix Tigers on the Hunt - great dev, but obtuse interface.

7. Command Ops 2 on Steam - probably in my top five digital games of all time, and criminally ignored in terms of updates and improvements.

I could go on, but it's too painful. ;) Please tell me, what do you think?

So when is the game that you are writing coming out?
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
Rosseau
Posts: 2947
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:20 am

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by Rosseau »

My post was not designed to criticize anyone but to generate some ideas on where we stand. From my limited perspective, I don't see the advancements I would have predicted from 30 years ago until now. All of the titles I mentioned are supremely welcome, but seem very derivative.

Consider, for example, Paradox Crusader Kings I (2004) to the recently released Crusader Kings III. A world of difference that I don't see in the wargames genre.

Most probably, it is the limited development funds available for the niche wargaming market, but I was still curious about what other people thought.

With all due respect, asking when the game I am writing will come out misses the point entirely.

User avatar
demyansk
Posts: 2872
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:55 pm

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by demyansk »

I tend to agree, I loved Cmbb bought the Black Sea and rarely ever played it. Maybe, age has something to do with it and the human brain development or disintegration. I have War in the East 1 and not even on my hard drive and the second version, not sure if I will get. Have a 50% coupon but not much available. Got excited about Tigers on the Hunt, but clunky interface. Oh well, getting ready for Battlefield 2042
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17765
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by RangerJoe »

ORIGINAL: Rosseau

My post was not designed to criticize anyone but to generate some ideas on where we stand. From my limited perspective, I don't see the advancements I would have predicted from 30 years ago until now. All of the titles I mentioned are supremely welcome, but seem very derivative.

Consider, for example, Paradox Crusader Kings I (2004) to the recently released Crusader Kings III. A world of difference that I don't see in the wargames genre.

Most probably, it is the limited development funds available for the niche wargaming market, but I was still curious about what other people thought.

With all due respect, asking when the game I am writing will come out misses the point entirely.

Since you seem to think that the wargames should have advanced more, then why did you not write the programs using those advancements?
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
User avatar
z1812
Posts: 1575
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 12:45 pm

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by z1812 »

ORIGINAL: Rosseau

The mention of the old V4V series from Atomic Games still gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling: Going into "work" on a Saturday to play Utah Beach on the company's Mac II si. [;)]

I find that "warm, fuzzy feeling" largely absent when considering the State of Digital Wargames 2021.

Utah Beach was released by Atomic 30 years ago! And, in general, I am amazed at how little digital wargames have progressed in the last three decades compared to other technologies.

What matters here is not my opinion, but the observations of some of the most experienced (and brilliant) posters and devs in the wargaming industry right here on Matrix Games.

Since you are the OP, I am curious as to what improvements you feel should be made. Beyond moving into the holographic world I am not sure what more can be done. I too have experienced the warm fuzzy feeling of Saturday morning wargaming. However that is an emotional response that is generated inside of us, and defines a particular time and place.

I am 70 now and have lived through the advent of digital gaming.....and that is so very amazing. The dream of every wargamer..............no longer having to scout for, and arrange playing with a human if you didn't mind a digital opponent. Before Play by email there was play by snail mail. Writing board co-ordinates for each piece you wished to move and mailing the move to your opponent in a snail mail letter.

I am not sure how much the base design of actual games might change and/or improve, but I am sure that A.I. routines will improve as well as the way we meet to play and the container that we play within.

Certainly Virtual Reality will play a large part in all sorts of wargaming. It has been quite a journey, from Britain's Lead Soldiers to Board Gaming, to Computers and the Interent.
User avatar
RFalvo69
Posts: 1476
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 8:47 pm
Location: Lamezia Terme (Italy)

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by RFalvo69 »

There are some “advanced” war games that we could see right now and that, in all honesty, I can’t explain why we aren’t getting. I’ll make two examples:

Road to Moscow: Does anyone reminds this one? It was a continuous time war game, either division or corps-level, with a realistic representation of the chain of command. It was, basically, Command Ops 2 on a theatre-level. I know that it reached at least alpha or beta stage around 2000 because there was an enthusiastic hands-on preview on a then popular site. Then the project died and no one knew why. HOI 3 uses the same principle on a World-wide scale, so it would be interesting to see it applied to a WitE2 framework.

Flight Commander 3: Do you remember FC2? Air combat in the jet age (with an “energy/energy depletion system” robbed from J.D. Websters’ tabletop games). I do because I’m still running my copy via emulation. Today you could do the same game, but in a real 3D environment with points in the 3D grid representing flying-objects (planes/missiles…) center of gravity. An “Air Strike” supplement could be published via DLC.

These are two examples of games that, IMHO, could have been published 10 years ago. What we get, instead, as the current “masterpiece” is WitE2 - a game that adds something to WitE (after 10+ years) with heated debates about how the F4 model of the Me109 is being introduced on the wrong day of the week as the icing on the cake.

Note: To some the “Holy Grail” of the war gaming on computer is still ASL for PC - but after the whole Matrix World in Flames farce, no. Just no.
"Yes darling, I served in the Navy for eight years. I was a cook..."
"Oh dad... so you were a God-damned cook?"

(My 10 years old daughter after watching "The Hunt for Red October")
User avatar
z1812
Posts: 1575
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 12:45 pm

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by z1812 »

We must remember that War Gaming companies are running a business. It must be difficult to try and satisfy customers since there are so many different periods, different mechanics, and styles of play to consider. Plus it is a niche business.

Then there are profit margins to consider in relation to the games you may produce and hope to sell. At the extreme opposite ends of the spectrum, do you develop the wonderfully realistic yet somewhat complicated game that might be difficult for many to grasp? Or the less wonderful, easier game, that may appeal to a larger group and sell more readily.

The OP states in their post, and I quote, "I don't see the advancements I would have predicted from 30 years ago until now."

Really given the constraints of current technology I would ask the OP to explain exactly what advancements he was predicting 30 years ago. I am curious not critical.
User avatar
RFalvo69
Posts: 1476
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 8:47 pm
Location: Lamezia Terme (Italy)

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by RFalvo69 »

ORIGINAL: z1812
Really given the constraints of current technology I would ask the OP to explain exactly what advancements he was predicting 30 years ago. I am curious not critical.

Personally:

AI: We have AIs managing from if a content on YT contains "dangerous, controversial topics" (with a chess streaming event being shut down because it talked about "blacks vs. white" [8|]) to surgery, but the AI in wargames is unable to go beyond 1995.

Continuous time: I mentioned "Road to Moscow", but Matrix was publishing "Airborne Assault: Highway to the Reich" in 2010. Todays, orgasms (and day-after regrets) are caused by WitE 2 - the marginal upgrade to a system originally published in... 2010. Come on [8|])

Realistic C3: WitP: AE is a wargaming success story. WitP: AE is also a game that assumes that:

- An analysis of the PTO.
- The development of a strategy for the PTO.
- The sending of orders to the various commanders.
- The sending of orders further down the line.
- The execution of such orders.

...Is something that happens in 24 hours. Let's not forget how either Nimitz or Tojo could "click" on an air unit (with perfect knowledge of where it was) and see a perfect portrayal of what the situation was down to the single pilot. In a word: no. Tell me that WitP: AE is a great game but, please, don't tell me that it is a great simulation. Just no.

Amaze me!: This is a catch-it-all topic about something I don't see from around 1998. That was the year when Norm Koger published TOAW and you understood how, all of sudden, the sky was the limit; and when Talonsoft published Western Front (and, after the shenanigans that had marred Eastern Front you understood how, tactically, the sky was the limit). It's no wonder that the two games are still on the frontlines.

Today? "The 4,894,334th game on the Eastern Front will offer a correct count of the rivets produced by the German and Russian factories!" (either that or "Fast playing!!" i.e. "trivial").

Don't make us wait 10 years for an obvious feature: Operation: Flashpoint could be a great game - one of the best Matrix ever produced. Why only "could"? Because something as banal as "Allow the player to decide the engagement range" was never implemented. Panthers in the Shadows had it in 1995. As I write, I'm not even sure if Southern Storm (a game promised for about 2014-15) will have it.

I could add "Please, keep rational publishing times" - but this is a futile hope. WitE 2 came out 10 years after WitE. Not to sound morbid, but how can I be sure that the developers will be alive by the time WitE 3 (the "the rivet count this time is correct - honest!" edition) will be out? Heck, I am not sure that I'll be alive by then.
"Yes darling, I served in the Navy for eight years. I was a cook..."
"Oh dad... so you were a God-damned cook?"

(My 10 years old daughter after watching "The Hunt for Red October")
User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by wodin »

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69

ORIGINAL: z1812
Really given the constraints of current technology I would ask the OP to explain exactly what advancements he was predicting 30 years ago. I am curious not critical.

Personally:

AI: We have AIs managing from if a content on YT contains "dangerous, controversial topics" (with a chess streaming event being shut down because it talked about "blacks vs. white" [8|]) to surgery, but the AI in wargames is unable to go beyond 1995.

Continuous time: I mentioned "Road to Moscow", but Matrix was publishing "Airborne Assault: Highway to the Reich" in 2010. Todays, orgasms (and day-after regrets) are caused by WitE 2 - the marginal upgrade to a system originally published in... 2010. Come on [8|])

Realistic C3: WitP: AE is a wargaming success story. WitP: AE is also a game that assumes that:

- An analysis of the PTO.
- The development of a strategy for the PTO.
- The sending of orders to the various commanders.
- The sending of orders further down the line.
- The execution of such orders.

...Is something that happens in 24 hours. Let's not forget how either Nimitz or Tojo could "click" on an air unit (with perfect knowledge of where it was) and see a perfect portrayal of what the situation was down to the single pilot. In a word: no. Tell me that WitP: AE is a great game but, please, don't tell me that it is a great simulation. Just no.

Amaze me!: This is a catch-it-all topic about something I don't see from around 1998. That was the year when Norm Koger published TOAW and you understood how, all of sudden, the sky was the limit; and when Talonsoft published Western Front (and, after the shenanigans that had marred Eastern Front you understood how, tactically, the sky was the limit). It's no wonder that the two games are still on the frontlines.

Today? "The 4,894,334th game on the Eastern Front will offer a correct count of the rivets produced by the German and Russian factories!" (either that or "Fast playing!!" i.e. "trivial").

Don't make us wait 10 years for an obvious feature: Operation: Flashpoint could be a great game - one of the best Matrix ever produced. Why only "could"? Because something as banal as "Allow the player to decide the engagement range" was never implemented. Panthers in the Shadows had it in 1995. As I write, I'm not even sure if Southern Storm (a game promised for about 2014-15) will have it.

I could add "Please, keep rational publishing times" - but this is a futile hope. WitE 2 came out 10 years after WitE. Not to sound morbid, but how can I be sure that the developers will be alive by the time WitE 3 (the "the rivet count this time is correct - honest!" edition) will be out? Heck, I am not sure that I'll be alive by then.


I've said often that innovation is sadly lacking. I want to play games that offer immersion, detail, depth and innovative core features. Think outside the box. Rewrite the rulebook. Create of whole new way to play. HOWEVER I'm also tiured of seeing new games that not only do things same as always but also DON'T come with all the requested features missing in all previous similar games. Still waiting on a tactical wargame that surpasses Steel Panther feature (not talking about the scope\span of the game but it's mechanics feature set) infact none even match it. Still innovation please! DC Barbarossa did it but very sadly it never continued. Shadow Empire has the depth and detail I love but both games use the old boardgame hex and chit hangover.
User avatar
demyansk
Posts: 2872
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:55 pm

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by demyansk »

I agree with z1812 about the ability to play a game against a computer. I could never find anyone who wanted to play board war games
User avatar
Erik Rutins
Posts: 39641
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA
Contact:

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by Erik Rutins »

ORIGINAL: Rosseau
1. War in the East 2 - Matrix' flagship, if is there is one - based on "1970s batch processing," according to one source. Is that the best we can do?

You're really reducing WITE 2 to "1970s batch processing", ignoring all of its innovations and making assumptions about a code base you haven't seen? I thought your original point was that the V4V series was ahead of its time design-wise and with that I agree, but then you dismiss a remarkably advanced wargame based on armchair analysis of its software architecture without a word about gameplay or design? I don't consider that part of your post in any way a fair or informed analysis, to be frank.
2. TOAW IV - Please see the future (or lack thereof) of this game in the General Discussions thread.

As a fellow fan of TOAW, I wish I had better news for you there as for the future, but we do have TOAW IV.
5. Campaign Series: Middle East - a somewhat evolved version of John Tiller's Campaign Series. (The upcoming Vietnam release is supposed to be even more special.)

When it comes to classic wargames, back to the beginning of Matrix Games we've always been interested in doing our best to make sure these series continue. Campaign Series: Middle East was billed as new content and an evolution.

Where it's possible to keep these series going for fans who enjoy them, we will happily do so even if it does not lead to some revolutionary change.

I can't help but notice that you only mentioned one of our most recent wargame releases (WITE2) and otherwise chose what supported your argument. I'd advise you to also take a look at the past couple of years of wargame releases both here and on Slitherine and I think you'll find you've missed some excellent new wargames that may not have the same classic reputation as those above, but are well worth your time.

I expect you'll find there is a new generation of wargames waiting for you if you give those a try.

Regards,

- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC


Image

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
User avatar
Erik Rutins
Posts: 39641
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA
Contact:

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by Erik Rutins »

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69
Continuous time: I mentioned "Road to Moscow", but Matrix was publishing "Airborne Assault: Highway to the Reich" in 2010. Todays, orgasms (and day-after regrets) are caused by WitE 2 - the marginal upgrade to a system originally published in... 2010. Come on [8|])

I'm sorry, but having worked on WITE2, it is far more than a marginal upgrade. The AI for one is the best ever in a game of that type, but the sum total of all the improvements is an increase in the realistic modeling of the Eastern Front that is IMHO as great as it was for WITE1 compared to what came before it. I'm not sure anyone outside the development team can really understand the amount of work and research that a game like this requires.
Realistic C3: WitP: AE is a wargaming success story. WitP: AE is also a game that assumes that:

- An analysis of the PTO.
- The development of a strategy for the PTO.
- The sending of orders to the various commanders.
- The sending of orders further down the line.
- The execution of such orders.

...Is something that happens in 24 hours. Let's not forget how either Nimitz or Tojo could "click" on an air unit (with perfect knowledge of where it was) and see a perfect portrayal of what the situation was down to the single pilot. In a word: no. Tell me that WitP: AE is a great game but, please, don't tell me that it is a great simulation. Just no.

Well, of course it's a game, but WITP also lets you choose if you want to play in 1 day turns or extend that to multiple days if you would like more of a delay.
Amaze me!: This is a catch-it-all topic about something I don't see from around 1998. That was the year when Norm Koger published TOAW and you understood how, all of sudden, the sky was the limit; and when Talonsoft published Western Front (and, after the shenanigans that had marred Eastern Front you understood how, tactically, the sky was the limit). It's no wonder that the two games are still on the frontlines.

Well, we also love those games and decided to do our best to keep them alive, but that's why they still are relatively current rather than the fact that nothing new has been developed since. I mean, Matrix Games was founded in 1999. If we've done nothing to amaze you wargaming-wise since 1999, then I'm sorry we've failed but I've certainly had a lot of moments of being amazed when working on our titles since then.
I could add "Please, keep rational publishing times" - but this is a futile hope. WitE 2 came out 10 years after WitE. Not to sound morbid, but how can I be sure that the developers will be alive by the time WitE 3 (the "the rivet count this time is correct - honest!" edition) will be out? Heck, I am not sure that I'll be alive by then.

You're aware that multiple WITE1 expansions, plus War in the West and its expansion, came out in between? WITE 2 took five full years of time to develop itself. If you think a game like that can really be done in less time, I wish you good luck with that. The rivet-counting, while amusing, is really also beside the point. The improvements extended far beyond "here's more detail" and in fact made the game easier to play and understand in many ways without requiring dive into the deepest details than WITW or WITE. I wouldn't consider modeling double vs. single rail lines or road networks, just to take two examples of improvements that were made, to be the wargaming equivalent of more precise rivet-counting given the great importance of logistics in the Eastern front.

Regards,

- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC


Image

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
User avatar
Michael T
Posts: 4445
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:35 pm
Location: Queensland, Australia.

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by Michael T »

I agree with the OP's general sentiments. PC wargaming is in a rut, for the last few years IMO. Most games suffer from being too simple or way too complex. Or bug riddled and unsupported. Or the designer totally lacks historical knowledge.

Oddly board games have made a resurgence and my collection is expanding after declining for many years. Thank goodness for vassal.

Steel Tigers is about the only PC game that has my interest at all. Though WOT is fun. But not really a wargame, just Paintball in tank skins.

Aurelian
Posts: 4073
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:08 pm

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by Aurelian »

I just have to compare Avalon Hill's Panzers East or SSG's War in Russia to WiTE2 to see how far they have evolved.

Or PSS's Waterloo compared to SoW Waterloo.

Or SSI's Cosmic Balance 1 and 2 to StarFleet Command 1,2,3 and Distant Worlds and Stellaris.

And for flight sims.... Well, Red Baron compared to Rise of Flight. Or B-1 Nuclear Bomber compared to the IL2 series.
Building a new PC.
User avatar
TitaniumTrout
Posts: 469
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2014 9:06 am
Location: Michigan

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by TitaniumTrout »

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
I'm sorry, but having worked on WITE2, it is far more than a marginal upgrade. The AI for one is the best ever in a game of that type, but the sum total of all the improvements is an increase in the realistic modeling of the Eastern Front that is IMHO as great as it was for WITE1 compared to what came before it. I'm not sure anyone outside the development team can really understand the amount of work and research that a game like this requires.

I'll 2nd the AI in WITE2. I've been encircled in unique and devastating ways more than once when I underestimated the AI. It excels at finding a hole, or realizing you've over extended yourself. Command Ops 2 is another game with an exceptional AI, nothing like "suddenly Panthers" when the sun comes up. Or realizing the Panther Company you're preparing to assault is actually a mechanized recon platoon and your front line units were so fatigued they gave poor intel.

V4V was pretty great, it hits a sweet spot for size and playability.
Rosseau
Posts: 2947
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:20 am

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by Rosseau »

It was unavoidable, but please note that I said that I own (and love) all of the games I mentioned in the initial post.

And yes, the "batch processing" comment was a cheap shot against WitE2. Erik Rutins is my true Matrix hero from day-one, and I am deeply distressed I annoyed him after so many countless hours he and the team worked on that game.

Erik, please accept my sincerest apologies.

One last observation: The latest version of Flashpoint Campaigns (the Red Storm Player's edition) was released seven years ago. The initial release long before that blew me away. But because we are relying on the incredible efforts of a sole developer, the latest version of the game takes forever to release.

The paradigm seems to be that the lonely dev does all the work, releases beta to Matrix for testing (albeit, a significant step) and it's released whenever.

Why can't we change this dreary cycle by using some sort of crowd funding to support the dev's efforts? Maybe I'm a dreamer, but I feel many Matrix customers are fairly well-endowed and would support the efforts of superior games like this with their own cash to speed things along?
User avatar
RangerJoe
Posts: 17765
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 2:39 pm
Location: Who knows?

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by RangerJoe »

ORIGINAL: Rosseau

It was unavoidable, but please note that I said that I own (and love) all of the games I mentioned in the initial post.

And yes, the "batch processing" comment was a cheap shot against WitE2. Erik Rutins is my true Matrix hero from day-one, and I am deeply distressed I annoyed him after so many countless hours he and the team worked on that game.

Erik, please accept my sincerest apologies.

One last observation: The latest version of Flashpoint Campaigns (the Red Storm Player's edition) was released seven years ago. The initial release long before that blew me away. But because we are relying on the incredible efforts of a sole developer, the latest version of the game takes forever to release.

The paradigm seems to be that the lonely dev does all the work, releases beta to Matrix for testing (albeit, a significant step) and it's released whenever.

Why can't we change this dreary cycle by using some sort of crowd funding to support the dev's efforts? Maybe I'm a dreamer, but I feel many Matrix customers are fairly well-endowed and would support the efforts of superior games like this with their own cash to speed things along?

Maybe some are well-endowed and maybe some are not well-endowed but what does that have to do with it?
Seek peace but keep your gun handy.

I'm not a complete idiot, some parts are missing! :o

“Illegitemus non carborundum est (“Don’t let the bastards grind you down”).”
:twisted: ; Julia Child
Image
Rosseau
Posts: 2947
Joined: Sun Sep 13, 2009 2:20 am

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by Rosseau »

"Well-endowed" was the wrong phrase. Let's say I'm willing to not buy some garbage on Steam and use that $40 to invest in a game I love.

So, you and I (and 200 other people) believe so much in Flashpoint Campaigns and its developer, that we are willing to invest say $40 upfront to keep the developer going with no guarantees. That gives the developer $8,000 - and significant motivation to finish the game - while keeping bread on his/her table.

Why Matrix can't initiate a program like this, I will leave it to them to explain.

Best wishes to all!





User avatar
Erik Rutins
Posts: 39641
Joined: Tue Mar 28, 2000 4:00 pm
Location: Vermont, USA
Contact:

RE: The State of Digital Wargames Nov. 2021

Post by Erik Rutins »

Hi Rousseau,
ORIGINAL: Rosseau
It was unavoidable, but please note that I said that I own (and love) all of the games I mentioned in the initial post.

And yes, the "batch processing" comment was a cheap shot against WitE2. Erik Rutins is my true Matrix hero from day-one, and I am deeply distressed I annoyed him after so many countless hours he and the team worked on that game.

Erik, please accept my sincerest apologies.

I understand you meant well and I'm sorry I caused you distress. I think we're all a bit frazzled after the last two years.
One last observation: The latest version of Flashpoint Campaigns (the Red Storm Player's edition) was released seven years ago. The initial release long before that blew me away. But because we are relying on the incredible efforts of a sole developer, the latest version of the game takes forever to release.

The paradigm seems to be that the lonely dev does all the work, releases beta to Matrix for testing (albeit, a significant step) and it's released whenever.

I can help with this observation, which is incorrect. Let's take Flashpoint Campaigns as the example. Flashpoint Campaigns began when we (back then, Dave and I) thought about our fondness for the old Simulations Canada games and proceeded to secure the rights and the old code. As part of that, we got in contact with Rob Crandall, who had worked with Simulations Canada way back in the day. We spoke with Rob and came to an agreement that he would work on a game for us. This idea for a game which started with the Simulations Canada designs eventually changed quite a lot and became Flashpoint Germany. In the process of making Flashpoint Germany, as we did with all of our games back then, we put our whole Matrix team into supporting the development. We were involved in decisions as well as work on the core design, the content, the user interface, helped coordinate and create the graphics and sound (when you year Contact, Wait, Out or Gas Gas Gas, that's my voice :-), project management, did internal testing as well as organizing closed beta testing, etc. Over the course of Flashpoint Germany and after release, we also helped Rob build the beginnings of the Flashpoint Campaigns team. It was a very cooperative endeavour in all of those areas, as most of our games are and while we could not have done it without Rob, I think he would also agree that it would never had happened without us.

Fast forward to Flashpoint Red Storm, now about 8 years ago. Leading up to this, Flashpoint Germany had done reasonably well and had even been recognized and used in some military education. The Flashpoint Team was basically Rob and Jim. Both had full-time day jobs and both were a bit overloaded. We all had discussions about doing a new release and really upgrading the engine and gameplay and Rob and Jim had some fantastic ideas, but they really needed a larger team and more support to realistically make those possible. We worked with them again to match them up with a great scenario designer (Steve Overton) who I'd worked with previously on Panzer Command and also helped them expand the team to add a dedicated map artist and a dedicated test coordinator to help Rob and Jim focus on the core design and data development. We worked with them again throughout Red Storm's development and I remember many late nights I personally put in both on team coordination calls, team building and in testing, validation and feedback to be sure things were coming together. We all pushed hard together to make that release happen and when it did Flashpoint had a great new basis for the future and we'd also succeeded in helping to build a team that was much more self-sufficient and resilient than where we had started with just Rob with external support from us improving on a Simulations Canada game. They've only continued to grow in expertise and experience since then.

After all the Red Storm releases, the team and we were eager to keep going with more commercial releases, but something that was very good for the team but unfortunate for the short-term commercial plans occurred. Our ongoing work with the professional military resulted in a request for OTS to adapt Flashpoint Campaigns for the military's needs. This started with one relatively short project which snowballed into multiple projects and took up at least 90% of the team's time to make sure all requirements and deadlines were met in a complete and timely fashion. We've worked with them throughout this process, adding more personnel both on the team as well as internally to help with coordination, testing and delivery. There has been a constant discussion of getting back to the commercial side as soon as possible, but the professional work has had to come first. An additional obstacle was that due to personal reasons, Steve Overton had to step away from being the lead scenario designer, but we were able to match the team up with a new scenario designer so that things could keep moving.

Late last year, we were finally able to see a path clear to getting some progress on the commercial release again while continuing the Professional work. A lot of effort has gone into that over the course of this year, which is why we're currently recruiting for the beta test, which is about to start. We're expecting it to be finished by early next year, but one of our other policies is that we really try to make sure a game is "done" to the best of our abilities and the feedback we have from our testers, before we release it to the public. This results in release dates periodically moving back, but we'd rather do that as a matter of policy and make sure the quality of the release is as good as we can make it than release games too early as a matter of course just to keep a release date window.

Switching away from Flashpoint for a moment, this story is not unusual among our development teams at Matrix Games. While we cater our support on each project to the developer's needs and wishes, it's never the case that a developer who needs support or help doesn't get it from us and it's typical that this help happens throughout the design and development process. It's quite unusual that a developer has minimal involvement from us until they deliver a beta. This perception that you describe where they then deliver it to us and we "release it whenever" as if we're sitting on it for no good reason is never the case. If a beta is in testing and has not released, that's because there's a good reason for it to receive more testing and polishing before it goes out to the public. When both we and the developer agree that it's ready, that's when it gets a release date and more marketing attention.

Why can't we change this dreary cycle by using some sort of crowd funding to support the dev's efforts? Maybe I'm a dreamer, but I feel many Matrix customers are fairly well-endowed and would support the efforts of superior games like this with their own cash to speed things along?

If you read the above, then it likely would become clear that funding was not the issue for the Flashpoint team and is not the key issue for most teams that work with us. We do our best to make sure that we support our developers by meeting any financial development needs. We also work regularly on team building and increasing the capacity and capability of our developers by supplementing both with our internal staff as well as coordinating external assistance in whatever area is needed.

In our experience, while there are many game designers, developers and programmers in the world, only a very small fraction have the passion for wargaming that leads to the experience and understanding required to really make the games that we all enjoy at a level that moves the state of the art forward.

The main bottleneck then is that there are only so many developers and designers that really understand wargaming and that can really pull off a good game in a reasonable amount of time. We're fortunate to work with many excellent developers and designers, including legends like 2by3 with Joel and Gary, but every wargame developer benefits from additional support and feedback and we do our best to provide that to make sure the result of our involvement is less stress for the developer and better games for the customer.

I hope that helps explain what we do.

Regards,

- Erik
Erik Rutins
CEO, Matrix Games LLC


Image

For official support, please use our Help Desk: http://www.matrixgames.com/helpdesk/

Freedom is not Free.
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”