So is it playable yet?

[Toby42]

ORIGINAL: Dabrion

How is this new tack, all I read is yadda, yadda, same old, same old, can't bind my laces.. tripped over.. oups.. basically the bullshit you wrote in November, December and January until you lost interest. If this is a clumsy attempt at an apology.. it is not accepted!

I know the past.. I don't need you to break it down to me, thank you very much! Follow that post up with some data for my brain to process, because there is nothing in there! Z E R O! How about some results you want to achieve and how long it will take..

What a jerk!! Green button time...

[Grotius]

How about some results you want to achieve and how long it will take..

I think Matrix is being prudent in refraining from over-promising.

[Numdydar]

Agree. Especially how providing schedules worked out in the past concerning this game prior to the actual release.

[Centuur]

Patience, patience is needed. This game seems to me sometimes as a multiheaded monster... You chop off one head and another appears...

[Missouri_Rebel]

Dabrion,

I'm certainly not intending to minimize your concerns, many of them quite valid in the past, but I do have to wonder if anything Erik might have said would be good enough for you. Take a step back for a moment and think about the positives. Matrix has listened to you and others and are reiterating their commitment to make right this situation. How many times in life are errors made? Look around you. I see them all day long with myself, my coworkers, other drivers, contractors etc. What separates the masses are those individuals that acknowledge their mistakes and are willing to correct them. I believe Matrix are doing just that.

You are an asset to this community, one in which you are way more active in than I ever was. There is also no mistaking your intelligence and passion for WiF. What I'd enjoy seeing is you tempering your replies and using those traits to getting MWiF to where we'd all like it to be. Not your responsibility, but something that would benefit all of us.

mo reb

[Centuur]

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel

Dabrion,

I'm certainly not intending to minimize your concerns, many of them quite valid in the past, but I do have to wonder if anything Erik might have said would be good enough for you. Take a step back for a moment and think about the positives. Matrix has listened to you and others and are reiterating their commitment to make right this situation. How many times in life are errors made? Look around you. I see them all day long with myself, my coworkers, other drivers, contractors etc. What separates the masses are those individuals that acknowledge their mistakes and are willing to correct them. I believe Matrix are doing just that.

You are an asset to this community, one in which you are way more active in than I ever was. There is also no mistaking your intelligence and passion for WiF. What I'd enjoy seeing is you tempering your replies and using those traits to getting MWiF to where we'd all like it to be. Not your responsibility, but something that would benefit all of us.

mo reb

+1

[AxelNL]

ORIGINAL: Centuur

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel

Dabrion,

I'm certainly not intending to minimize your concerns, many of them quite valid in the past, but I do have to wonder if anything Erik might have said would be good enough for you. Take a step back for a moment and think about the positives. Matrix has listened to you and others and are reiterating their commitment to make right this situation. How many times in life are errors made? Look around you. I see them all day long with myself, my coworkers, other drivers, contractors etc. What separates the masses are those individuals that acknowledge their mistakes and are willing to correct them. I believe Matrix are doing just that.

You are an asset to this community, one in which you are way more active in than I ever was. There is also no mistaking your intelligence and passion for WiF. What I'd enjoy seeing is you tempering your replies and using those traits to getting MWiF to where we'd all like it to be. Not your responsibility, but something that would benefit all of us.

mo reb

+1

+2

[WarHunter]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
Please see the new "State of the Game" post here:
tm.asp?m=3571077
Thank you all for your patience, we're hopeful that this new tack will give us all good results.
Regards,
- Erik

From the above link.

We will continue to make critical bugs a top priority regardless of where they exist and this will mean a change of approach where we focus on getting each functional area to completion before moving to the next one.

What functional area is currently being worked on?
What is the next functional area to be moved to?
How is this change of approach different from the past?

[joshuamnave]

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel

Dabrion,

I'm certainly not intending to minimize your concerns, many of them quite valid in the past, but I do have to wonder if anything Erik might have said would be good enough for you.

I can't speak for Dabrion, but my own reaction was similar to his so I'll answer your question from my perspective.

First, let me acknowledge the extent to which you are correct - nearly 5 months after release, things are still a mess and to that extent there is very little or anything going forward that will make up for releasing a game with a premium price tag in such a state, or in failing to devote the resources to quickly bring it into shape. To that extent you are correct that nothing Erik could have said would have satisfied. But he could have offered to make it right by offering WiF purchasers a credit toward one of their other games so that we have a positive experience with Matrix while this game is being fixed. For myself, WiF is the only Matrix game I own, and based on my experience with it that is unlikely to change.

Second, although nothing Erik said was going to wipe out the last five months of mismanagement, he also said virtually nothing new. He acknowledged some of the past mistakes but gave no indication that there will be any structural changes made that will help to fix them going forward. He promised continued work at fixing bugs - this isn't new, and if anything he downplayed the severity of those bugs. What could Matrix have done differently? He could have announced that they were bringing on a team to assist Steve in cleaning up the bugs. I have no doubt that Steve is a fantastic coder and don't hold him personally responsible for the state of the game or the pace of the fixes - but he is one person. Matrix could also have announced that they were bringing in some people with a proven track record at adapting games for NetPlay to work on that aspect of problem. Or a crack UI designer to improve the parts of the UI that feel more like the backend of a software application than like a polished interface intended for consumer use. Even something small, like a fix to problem with the updater that prevent most of us from using the in game update tool would have been welcome - but wasn't even mentioned.

Instead, the bulk of his post was spent justifying the decisions of the past - decisions that left us where we are now. Could Dabrion have been more diplomatic with his tone? Sure. His acerbic attacks make it all too easy for people to dismiss him because they don't like the way he says things, even if his underlying points are essentially correct.

[AxelNL]

As you can see in the Tech forum Steve made a roundup of smaller bugs causing game-blocking situations. Erik said:

Steve’s immediate priorities are a few Critical bugs that will be relatively quick to resolve, before looking at some issues relating to Supply, Production Planning and Naval movement/combat

So I expect 1.1.7 to have the result of that round-up, and immediatly afterwards the focus on the last supply bugs.

What is different is that the aim is to complete a functional area. i.e. I expect that 1.1.8 should be supply-bug free. Or at least as free as possible with the extra support of having also a public beta, which is accessible to everybody.

So functional area cleaning and public beta's is new. And the priorities of the functional area's are (also from Erik's post):

... Supply, Production Planning and Naval movement/combat

Disclaimer: This is a personal opinion based on Erik's post. I am not representing Matrix or Steve.

[WarHunter]

ORIGINAL: AxelNL

As you can see in the Tech forum Steve made a roundup of smaller bugs causing game-blocking situations. Erik said:

Steve’s immediate priorities are a few Critical bugs that will be relatively quick to resolve, before looking at some issues relating to Supply, Production Planning and Naval movement/combat

So I expect 1.1.7 to have the result of that round-up, and immediatly afterwards the focus on the last supply bugs.

What is different is that the aim is to complete a functional area. i.e. I expect that 1.1.8 should be supply-bug free. Or at least as free as possible with the extra support of having also a public beta, which is accessible to everybody.

So functional area cleaning and public beta's is new. And the priorities of the functional area's are (also from Erik's post):

... Supply, Production Planning and Naval movement/combat

Disclaimer: This is a personal opinion based on Erik's post. I am not representing Matrix or Steve.

Having a clear understanding of what a "functional area" is, would have been nice in the original statement.

The change of approach will impact the beta tester a lot more. But knowing how this changes from the past is good for us to know also.

Thanks for taking the time to define these terms.

[EisenHammer]

ORIGINAL: Zartacla

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel

Dabrion,

I'm certainly not intending to minimize your concerns, many of them quite valid in the past, but I do have to wonder if anything Erik might have said would be good enough for you.

I can't speak for Dabrion, but my own reaction was similar to his so I'll answer your question from my perspective.

First, let me acknowledge the extent to which you are correct - nearly 5 months after release, things are still a mess and to that extent there is very little or anything going forward that will make up for releasing a game with a premium price tag in such a state, or in failing to devote the resources to quickly bring it into shape. To that extent you are correct that nothing Erik could have said would have satisfied. But he could have offered to make it right by offering WiF purchasers a credit toward one of their other games so that we have a positive experience with Matrix while this game is being fixed. For myself, WiF is the only Matrix game I own, and based on my experience with it that is unlikely to change.

Second, although nothing Erik said was going to wipe out the last five months of mismanagement, he also said virtually nothing new. He acknowledged some of the past mistakes but gave no indication that there will be any structural changes made that will help to fix them going forward. He promised continued work at fixing bugs - this isn't new, and if anything he downplayed the severity of those bugs. What could Matrix have done differently? He could have announced that they were bringing on a team to assist Steve in cleaning up the bugs. I have no doubt that Steve is a fantastic coder and don't hold him personally responsible for the state of the game or the pace of the fixes - but he is one person. Matrix could also have announced that they were bringing in some people with a proven track record at adapting games for NetPlay to work on that aspect of problem. Or a crack UI designer to improve the parts of the UI that feel more like the backend of a software application than like a polished interface intended for consumer use. Even something small, like a fix to problem with the updater that prevent most of us from using the in game update tool would have been welcome - but wasn't even mentioned.

Instead, the bulk of his post was spent justifying the decisions of the past - decisions that left us where we are now. Could Dabrion have been more diplomatic with his tone? Sure. His acerbic attacks make it all too easy for people to dismiss him because they don't like the way he says things, even if his underlying points are essentially correct.

I agree with most of this post. And I wish I purchase Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations with my money.[:(]

[Toby42]

I made the purchase and wish that I didn't. But I'm not upset with anyone except myself! No one forced me to buy. I think that the game is a gem in the rough, but even when fixed it will take more to play than I am willing to give. But that's my fault! I'm not bad mouthing Matrix because of my mistake. I'll live with it. And I'll make other purchases as I see fit. As a matter of fact I just pulled the trigger on Piercing Fortress Europa. I hope that it works out for me?


I just get upset when people think that there is a conspiracy around. I'm not ready to put on the "Tin Foil Hat" just yet!

[76mm]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
The decision to release the game in the first place had to be made months before the release as we had decided that we really wanted to get behind this truly enormous project and give the WIF audience a unique experience. So the decision to add the physical hardbound volumes and maps was taken. These represented the largest and most expensive physical package, by far, that we had ever done for a game. You have told us that these books and map are of the highest quality and this did not come cheaply. We felt that offering World in Flames in this kind of deluxe package was the right move for the World in Flames community and based on the reception, we know that you largely agreed.

OK, so it sounds like the decision to release the game before it was ready was largely due to the fact that Matrix ordered the precious books. A definite case of the tail wagging the dog in my view...

[Magpius]

I'm agreeing with Treale here.
I'm feeling like I got a little caught up in the hype. My most expensive games purchase EVER, and, (arguably), the least playable.
Given consumer laws in Aus, had this been an over the counter purchase for a product of this cost, I'd most likely be returning it for a refund, but I'm patient and will play other games until this gets back on track.
But it seems to be a growing trend.
I'm waiting on several games for patches/ tweaking; WW1 Commander, Command Ops... Still playable but not as bad as say the unusable scenario editors from Wastelands. (Is this a case of some developers overreaching?)
Thank heavens for games like ATG and TOAW, (oh yeah; eagerly awaiting for that patch to come out too! come to think of it).
Patches updates to me used to mean tweaks to A.I or GUI or expanded scenarios to make good games even better. These days patches seem to be more about corrections or balance issues to make games playable.
am I wrong in thinking this?

[Numdydar]

Pretty much [:D]
 
Even games on the Apple II got patched with corrections, etc. But because patches were much harder to apply, these were usiually included extra features to make you want to go through the hassle. However, sending out patches/corrections is so much easier it has become a common thing to do. It also makes sense from a business perspective. Not that Matrix planned this result or anything.
 
QA testing takes a LOT of time and effort. Plus you simply cannot test everything and every combination of hardware. So you get everything to where you THINK it is working and release. Knowing full well that the could be quite a few people that could have issues. In solitare mode, I personally had very few issues with WiF. I just used the workarounds, like reloading the game when I had issues with supply in China. Is this ideal No. Do I consider I wasted my money because of things like that, again No. But that is just me. And $100 is a LOT of cash for me too.
 
So games will continue to be relaesed as unfinished to some portion of the player population. After a few patches, most just abandon the game and move on, while other keep going for waht seems like forever, like War in the Pacific AE which is STILL being patched. While Empire in Arms is completely forgottten. I believe that WiF will be more like AE than EiA so I have no problem waiting and see what happens. If some here think waiting is unacceptable, then I have no issue with that.So it just depends on your expectations. Fortunately my were so low on release, the release actually execeeded mine [:D]

[Missouri_Rebel]

Or a crack UI designer to improve the parts of the UI that feel more like the backend of a software application than like a polished interface intended for consumer use.

Out of curiosity, what would be your improvements to the UI? I would have much preferred that the Main Form be displayed on top of the map but I believe Steve said it can't be done. What are yours?

mo reb

Edit: That and both a 'dragable' map and zoom to cursor. I already use X-mouse Button Control to use my wheel as zoom.

[joshuamnave]

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel

Or a crack UI designer to improve the parts of the UI that feel more like the backend of a software application than like a polished interface intended for consumer use.

Out of curiosity, what would be your improvements to the UI? I would have much preferred that the Main Form be displayed on top of the map but I believe Steve said it can't be done. What are yours?

mo reb

Edit: That and both a 'dragable' map and zoom to cursor. I already use X-mouse Button Control to use my wheel as zoom.

I have a few pages of notes on places where the UI needs serious work. Some of them I've mentioned in the past but for now I'm sitting on them until the functionality issues are ironed out.

The worst form is the production planning form. That one needs a top to bottom overhaul. There are other forms that are mediocre in execution but are inconsistent with each other or with the description in the $100 player handbooks. I've given examples in the past like displaying the carrier air units in the wrong place relative to their carrier units, or transports showing their loaded cargo above the transport in one form, and below the transport in another. Minor issues, sure, but this game has a premium price tag and this is just sloppy. Another is the process for using combat engineers. Start an attack with an engineer unit and the game tells you to use the "unit popup menu" to use the engineers combat ability. The only reference in the manuals to a unit popup menu refers to naval units. Once you figure out how to use the engineers you go through another hassle to select units the engineer confers its benefits on to. Other forms and phases require far more button pushing than is needed, like Naval combat when one side suffers no effects, yet has to go through the step anyway, or submarine combat when the subs have excess surprise points beyond what is needed to eliminate every enemy unit. Mandatory digressions where the closest legal hex is listed by coordinates instead of listing the port (and coordinates). This is particularly egregious when sending the French convoys home after Vichy is declared. Finding legal ports for the units would be far faster if the closest port was listed by name instead of/in addition to by coordinate. A draggable map would be nice. The pop up form listing units available in a given phase blocks the panel on the western edge of the map making mouse movement of the map a pain, and that form is in itself difficult to move. Non-intuitive process for ordering the map view list (not an issue for me now that I know how to do it but easily fixable for any new players that buy the game). Incomplete listing of combat modifiers in the combat resolution form. Especially important since in at least one instance the game doesn't follow the rules as coded, but rather a WiF FAQ not included with the game. The return to base phase not automatically centering on the next unit, particularly when you end the phase and start the next players RTB phase. No "return from whence" (that I've been able to find, at least) function in the RTB phase. Makes convoy escort duty a chore. Surprise point spending for sub warfare handled in a different order than other naval combats (Steve said he's fixing this one soon). HQ reorg form that doesn't show you which hex the units you're choosing from are located in - particularly problematic when trying to maximize your reorg value with multiple HQ's that cover overlapping areas. That's a small sample of my full list.

[Missouri_Rebel]

ORIGINAL: Zartacla

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel

Or a crack UI designer to improve the parts of the UI that feel more like the backend of a software application than like a polished interface intended for consumer use.

Out of curiosity, what would be your improvements to the UI? I would have much preferred that the Main Form be displayed on top of the map but I believe Steve said it can't be done. What are yours?

mo reb

Edit: That and both a 'dragable' map and zoom to cursor. I already use X-mouse Button Control to use my wheel as zoom.

I have a few pages of notes on places where the UI needs serious work. Some of them I've mentioned in the past but for now I'm sitting on them until the functionality issues are ironed out.

The worst form is the production planning form. That one needs a top to bottom overhaul. There are other forms that are mediocre in execution but are inconsistent with each other or with the description in the $100 player handbooks. I've given examples in the past like displaying the carrier air units in the wrong place relative to their carrier units, or transports showing their loaded cargo above the transport in one form, and below the transport in another. Minor issues, sure, but this game has a premium price tag and this is just sloppy. Another is the process for using combat engineers. Start an attack with an engineer unit and the game tells you to use the "unit popup menu" to use the engineers combat ability. The only reference in the manuals to a unit popup menu refers to naval units. Once you figure out how to use the engineers you go through another hassle to select units the engineer confers its benefits on to. Other forms and phases require far more button pushing than is needed, like Naval combat when one side suffers no effects, yet has to go through the step anyway, or submarine combat when the subs have excess surprise points beyond what is needed to eliminate every enemy unit. Mandatory digressions where the closest legal hex is listed by coordinates instead of listing the port (and coordinates). This is particularly egregious when sending the French convoys home after Vichy is declared. Finding legal ports for the units would be far faster if the closest port was listed by name instead of/in addition to by coordinate. A draggable map would be nice. The pop up form listing units available in a given phase blocks the panel on the western edge of the map making mouse movement of the map a pain, and that form is in itself difficult to move. Non-intuitive process for ordering the map view list (not an issue for me now that I know how to do it but easily fixable for any new players that buy the game). Incomplete listing of combat modifiers in the combat resolution form. Especially important since in at least one instance the game doesn't follow the rules as coded, but rather a WiF FAQ not included with the game. The return to base phase not automatically centering on the next unit, particularly when you end the phase and start the next players RTB phase. No "return from whence" (that I've been able to find, at least) function in the RTB phase. Makes convoy escort duty a chore. Surprise point spending for sub warfare handled in a different order than other naval combats (Steve said he's fixing this one soon). HQ reorg form that doesn't show you which hex the units you're choosing from are located in - particularly problematic when trying to maximize your reorg value with multiple HQ's that cover overlapping areas. That's a small sample of my full list.

Thanks. Hopefully one day some of these areas could be improved upon.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: Dabrion
How is this new tack, all I read is yadda, yadda, same old, same old, can't bind my laces.. tripped over.. oups.. basically the bullshit you wrote in November, December and January until you lost interest. If this is a clumsy attempt at an apology.. it is not accepted!

I know the past.. I don't need you to break it down to me, thank you very much! Follow that post up with some data for my brain to process, because there is nothing in there! Z E R O! How about some results you want to achieve and how long it will take..

First, yes it was an apology, you'll see that in there if you read it through, as well as reading the other posts I've made since release.

Second, the goals for what we want to achieve and the order we will aim to achieve it in are there too. We're planning to maintain focus each week to spend some time on the most critical bugs that are reported as stopping games and spend the rest of our time working through one functional area at a time.

We have fixed a LOT of issues since release, but they have been all across the game, with the result that while some areas are entirely fixed, many others still have outstanding issues. We will now be prioritizing by area and working on that area until it is entirely functional. We're starting with the outstanding issues with Supply, then moving on to Production Planning.

I can't give a specific timeline, I don't think it would be wise to do that at this point, but we're hoping this new approach will be more efficient and also allow the community to see the results of our efforts more quickly.

Also, this is a family friendly forum, please refrain from cursing.

Regards,

- Erik