unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War I] >> World War One Gold



Message


JastaV -> unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/6/2009 10:41:11 PM)

I was wandering where is the "unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels" stated in game box as in public, official presentation.

But the fact it's hard to play two game turns is sequence without game crashes and fatal errors, the game does not offer any of the anticipated features.

This link to AGEod site says many:
http://www.ageod.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12358

At first I noticed few of WWI air aces were in the game: I offered my cooperation to search.
Then I underlined that no care for historical detail was present as regard that matter!
At first PhilThib posted to blame me stating most air aces are historical!
I replied quoting specific examples then documented by fonts......
Put in front of evidenced PhilThib stated "It does not matter, this is a game...".
So whre is the stated "unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels".
It looks like WWI is having same historical accuracy level as RisiK!

But that Risik has clear rules, and when played on PC version is a stable game....
WWI but beeing a complex game was release without a game-manual support: the paper manual included in the box does not even include basic rules. The electronic rules-book quoted in the paper manual was not included in the installation DVD because not yet edited!

Then WWI is in a pre-beta state, severely bugged, unstable and unfinished!
That two month more after his release.

WWI could be in perspective a great WWI game: actually is the worst PC game I bought!




pasternakski -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/6/2009 11:23:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JastaV

I was wandering

Obviously, you're still wandering.

Where is this "Risik" game? I might want to buy it.

WWI needed better development, yes, but it's coming. Unfortunately, this seems to be de rigeur for designers and publishers these days. I keep my pocketbook closed for at least six months after noticing publication of a computer wargame I might like, and say nothing about it.

I advise reticence, Watson. The single loose word may alert the prey.




JastaV -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/7/2009 9:06:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

Where is this "Risik" game? I might want to buy it.



No need you buy it it's for free:
http://www.tuttogratis.it/giochi_gratis/risiko_gratis.html
http://www.shockwave.com/gamelanding/risk.jsp

Indeed, it's like with WW1 bugs: you have all of them for free![:D]




AndrewKurtz -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/8/2009 1:52:12 AM)

A little better representation of the actual conversation than presented in the original post:)

---

JastaV: Yes: names are historical, but not dates!
Most WWI aces were in service later mid' 1916.. others were already died at that time.
In your xls file all careers start at 1914 and end at 1920!
Check it please

---

PhilThib: It does not matter, this is a game.... The dates indicate the game's time frame, and aces can show up at anytime during this time frame...in any order... there was no 'gaming' reason to decide whether such ace would show up before such another one, just because it was so in History... in the boardgame, the ace counter was picked up randomly in a pool, and we did the 'same' here

---




AndrewKurtz -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/8/2009 2:44:42 AM)

My take of the response (and this is only my interpretation...all should make their own)...

WWI is a computer game and the rules are based on an original board game. In the original board game, aces appeared randomly and the computer game kept that mechanism. One reason the mechanism was selected was because in history, events occur randomly and not in some pre-ordained order (now we're getting philosophical) and the game has those aces again occur randomly. It is not trying to recreate the war as it occurred but recreate the flavor of the war.

Not sure about the rest of you, but other games I play and love, such as GMT's For the People, do not force things to happen exactly as they did in the event they are simulating. Each game designer chooses elements they consider to be the historical boundaries (some with tighter boundaries than others) and then each allows play (both from players and randomness) to create the game flow. If they simply followed history, why have players? Instead, you would just sit back and watch the computer show you what really happened. To be a game, some elements need to not be forced to follow history and, in each game, the game designer has to set these boundaries.

In the case of WWI, the game designer did not consider when an ace appeared as a boundry but, instead, simply their ability to appear.

That's at least my interpretation, but obviously all of you can decide for yourself if the original post accurately reflects the actual designer comments and intentions or whether the original thread post was filled with emotion and perhaps some (or even a lot of) distortion.




Stwa -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/8/2009 8:34:28 AM)

Actually, that's not atypical.

Most games of this genre simply give you a historical starting point or deployment and order of battle, and then after that, its pure fiction. Which, for playablity sake, is what people want.

Other games may give you reinforcements (or maybe pilots [:)]), but will allow you to specify a date range for when these will enter. That way the game seems more historical, but allows for differing results each time you play.




JastaV -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/8/2009 12:13:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewKurtz

A little better representation of the actual conversation than presented in the original post:)

---

JastaV: Yes: names are historical, but not dates!
Most WWI aces were in service later mid' 1916.. others were already died at that time.
In your xls file all careers start at 1914 and end at 1920!
Check it please

---

PhilThib: It does not matter, this is a game.... The dates indicate the game's time frame, and aces can show up at anytime during this time frame...in any order... there was no 'gaming' reason to decide whether such ace would show up before such another one, just because it was so in History... in the boardgame, the ace counter was picked up randomly in a pool, and we did the 'same' here

---



In my opening post I already included the link to the original thread at AGEod site:
http://www.ageod.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12358

No intention on my own to manipulate things and worlds, or I'd have not posted the link.




JastaV -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/8/2009 12:31:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewKurtz

My take of the response (and this is only my interpretation...all should make their own)...

WWI is a computer game and the rules are based on an original board game. In the original board game, aces appeared randomly and the computer game kept that mechanism. One reason the mechanism was selected was because in history, events occur randomly and not in some pre-ordained order (now we're getting philosophical) and the game has those aces again occur randomly. It is not trying to recreate the war as it occurred but recreate the flavor of the war.

Not sure about the rest of you, but other games I play and love, such as GMT's For the People, do not force things to happen exactly as they did in the event they are simulating. Each game designer chooses elements they consider to be the historical boundaries (some with tighter boundaries than others) and then each allows play (both from players and randomness) to create the game flow. If they simply followed history, why have players? Instead, you would just sit back and watch the computer show you what really happened. To be a game, some elements need to not be forced to follow history and, in each game, the game designer has to set these boundaries.

In the case of WWI, the game designer did not consider when an ace appeared as a boundry but, instead, simply their ability to appear.

That's at least my interpretation, but obviously all of you can decide for yourself if the original post accurately reflects the actual designer comments and intentions or whether the original thread post was filled with emotion and perhaps some (or even a lot of) distortion.


You opinion is worth of respect: No doubt![:)]

Anyway it was AGEod to state the "uniqualled historically-flavoured detail and design" of the game they sold.
They also added: "Over 200 historical leaders with unique abilities".
It's printed on the back of the game box we bought!
It's stated on game features descritpion at sites solding the game!

They had change to go after their statements adding more leaders (Aces), and reducing the spawning date according to history!
That has been done with other AGEod games: Wia, AACW, NCP,......
No doubt errors can occur, as occurred in the games I mentioned: most such errors have been then fixed.
With WWI we had a different trouble: the game has been released in a hurry to rise money, but without respect for buyers: it's uncomplete, bugged, instable, pretentious when stating features but disappointing in the facts.[:D]









AndrewKurtz -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/8/2009 1:13:30 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JastaV
With WWI we had a different trouble: the game has been released in a hurry to rise money, but without respect for buyers: it's uncomplete, bugged, instable, pretentious when stating features but disappointing in the facts.[:D]


No one has ever argued that the game was not released too early. It was and it had WAY too many bugs to be playable. I've never seen anyone argue that. And it should have been released with a good manual. I've never seen anyone argue that. In fact, the game developers believed it so much that a full refund was quickly offered for those not happy. Everyone had a chance to get their money back and wait to see how the developers handled the poor launch before commiting their money.

As for the marketing statements, I personally am not disppointed with the game mechanics/level of details when compared to what I expected based on the marketing. So many marketing items are open to interpretation, such as the term "unequalled". What is unequalled to me may not be to you. Welcome to marketing 101. Now, if you want to go through the marketing statements for every game and compare them with the game, I predict you'll find marketing hyperbole in almost every game, even your favorites. That doesn't change the fact that, in some areas, you want more historical boundaries. But it also doesn't make the developers or the marketing statement wrong.

Finally, to insinuate that WWI bugs are not being fixed is simply inaccurate. They are being fixed continuously and at a fast pace. Do I wish WWI had been released later? Yes. Do I wish it had been bug free? Yes. Do I wish the big manual about to be released had been with the original game? Yes. However, and I speak only for myself here, I continue to see a gem that is quickly being polished and I expect WWI will be a game I am playing for many years.

I repeat..."That's at least my interpretation, but obviously all of you can decide for yourself if the original post...was filled with emotion and perhaps some (or even a lot of) distortion. "





JastaV -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/8/2009 3:53:28 PM)

I trust too errors could be fixed and in part they have been.
I stated that:
No doubt errors can occur, as occurred in the games I mentioned: most such errors have been then fixed.

None the way I cannot understand such an enthusiasm after a game it was a Fiaso at time it was released!

[:-]




AndrewKurtz -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/8/2009 6:15:31 PM)

quote:

None the way I cannot understand such an enthusiasm after a game it was a Fiaso at time it was released!


Got it. You can't understand how people can accept that others have made a mistake and move on. You can't understand how people can accept things as they are instead of how they were.

I sense much therapy in your future. [:D]




JastaV -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/8/2009 9:50:00 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewKurtz

Got it. You can't understand how people can accept that others have made a mistake and move on. You can't understand how people can accept things as they are instead of how they were.

I sense much therapy in your future. [:D]


The condition to accept that others have made a mistake is that they admit their fault!
Looking at AGEod pages it seems like the mistake is with ones who payed for a rotten game and are then expecting for it to works![:-]




06 Maestro -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/8/2009 11:40:35 PM)

JastaV

You may have a valid complaint about the claim of being "unequaled historically-flavored look and detail levels". However, to complain about fighter aces dates and names seems a little out of place in a strategic level game. Air combat (along with all other combat) is conducted on a large to very large scale. What would individual aces have to do with anything anyway? A guy could be a great aviator, but a horrible commanding officer. What attributes should take priority? Were all C Os aces?

It would not bother me at all if all aces had exactly historical dates for their appearance, but actually I would not even notice if they did. It does not matter to me. What matters to me is that they squash the air combat bug and straighten out the events mess.




habakuk -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/8/2009 11:48:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JastaV

The condition to accept that others have made a mistake is that they admit their fault!



Actually I think I have never seen a case when a game company more openly admitted its fault, followed by the offer of a refund. I do appreciate that, although I did not want my money back, hoping and trusting that they would fix the remaining problems, which they continue to to.
Now I expect them to move on and do their work, not to discuss the same things again and again, only because some people can't get enough of it ...




Stwa -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/9/2009 5:21:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JastaV
They had change to go after their statements adding more leaders (Aces), and reducing the spawning date according to history!
That has been done with other AGEod games: Wia, AACW, NCP,......


Actaully for BoA and WiA, entry dates for reinforcements could be subject to chance based on a ranged probablity, or in some cases game events themselves might delay or accellerate the arrival date. This way, the same scenario has a good chance of playing out differently each time you play. This was done in many of the larger scenarios.

quote:

ORIGINAL: JastaV
No doubt errors can occur, as occurred in the games I mentioned: most such errors have been then fixed.
With WWI we had a different trouble: the game has been released in a hurry to rise money, but without respect for buyers: it's uncomplete, bugged, instable, pretentious when stating features but disappointing in the facts.[:D]


Actually, you are very correct here, even if many people will disagree just for the pure pleasure of it. The company needed cash flow, and released the game, with the full knowledge it was not complete. It's their call, and it was a business decision after all, but me thinks most people around here don't care about that, so long as Ageods keeps working on the game. I saw one user somewhere on the board here that was very happy with Ageod, even though he had spent weeks trying to complete a single turn, and apparently was unable to do so.




Stwa -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/9/2009 5:42:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewKurtz
No one has ever argued that the game was not released too early. It was and it had WAY too many bugs to be playable. I've never seen anyone argue that. And it should have been released with a good manual. I've never seen anyone argue that. In fact, the game developers believed it so much that a full refund was quickly offered for those not happy. Everyone had a chance to get their money back and wait to see how the developers handled the poor launch before commiting their money.


You are so right AndrewKurtz. No one would argue your description of the facts. The agrument centers around whether or not they released the game with full knowledge that it was not playable by anyone. Some people would describe this behavior as "ripping customers off". It was only after the "____ hit the fan" that Ageod offered a refund. And remember, Matrix said they tested the game, and that it worked "fine" on their systems... go figure, eh?

They could have stated prior to release all the things they stated one week after release, right? Anyway, they are just trying to hang in there and solidify the position of their company. It was all business, nothing personal.




JudgeDredd -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/9/2009 7:52:42 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Stwa

quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewKurtz
No one has ever argued that the game was not released too early. It was and it had WAY too many bugs to be playable. I've never seen anyone argue that. And it should have been released with a good manual. I've never seen anyone argue that. In fact, the game developers believed it so much that a full refund was quickly offered for those not happy. Everyone had a chance to get their money back and wait to see how the developers handled the poor launch before commiting their money.


You are so right AndrewKurtz. No one would argue your description of the facts. The agrument centers around whether or not they released the game with full knowledge that it was not playable by anyone. Some people would describe this behavior as "ripping customers off". It was only after the "____ hit the fan" that Ageod offered a refund. And remember, Matrix said they tested the game, and that it worked "fine" on their systems... go figure, eh?

They could have stated prior to release all the things they stated one week after release, right? Anyway, they are just trying to hang in there and solidify the position of their company. It was all business, nothing personal.


I don't recall any figures being released showing the game worked for no-one.

There were surely a lot of complaints and the forums were very active...but I don't think that's an indication that it didn't work for anyone and basically a wild assumption on your part.

What I do recall was there was a specific issue with a chipset or some sort of hardware/software compatability issue (I cannot remember the exact details) which caused the hangs for alot of people experiencing those...so a specific configuration wasn't tested and caused issues...that happens.

Of course, the game was released with many other issues. So the basic premise of "it was released too early" is absolutely correct. I'm just pointing out the point you made is a wild inaccuracy.




Stwa -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/9/2009 9:47:23 AM)

Maybe,

But I am not really making the argument one way or another, remember this thread? Its just one of many, where plenty of people claim the game didn't work at all.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1955645 [:D]

And remember, I don't own the game. So I don't need a refund, and therefore I am not as emotionally attached as you are.

Hey! Now that I think about it, aren't you the guy that couldn't get past turn 1. Please tell me you made it eventually. [;)]




AndrewKurtz -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/9/2009 12:26:06 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JastaV
The condition to accept that others have made a mistake is that they admit their fault!
Looking at AGEod pages it seems like the mistake is with ones who payed for a rotten game and are then expecting for it to works![:-]


It's easy to say things like that, but I think backing it up will be difficult.

First of all, there is the way AGEOD handled the issues a few days after release. I just reread the "Official Communique", which is one reason I defend them (because they did take the blame quickly), http://www.ageod.com/forums/showthread.php?t=11464, and with phrases like "Some of you are experiencing various problems (freezes, CTDs, bugs, unclear rules, and/or a lack of adequate documentation)" and "I am deeply sorry for these problems." and "Please accept my personal apologies for any inconvenience and disappointment" and "Quite a few of our games have received awards and wide spread acclaim. Ambition has driven us to raise the bar with each new game. However, no company can continuously push the edge of the envelope without occasionally stumbling as has happened here.", I'd have to disagree that AGEOD didn't take the blame and admit their mistake.

Then there are the (all to frequent) situations where customers report issues and the programmer quickly responds that he will check and also reports back whether it was confirmed and/or fixed or if it is a misuderstanding. Again, reality doesn't match your description. (Kind of reminds me of one of my favorite lines from the old TV show Cheers..."What color is the sky in your world?")

Instead of just typing what you want to type, back things up with facts. Can you site a single actual example where AGEOD acts like "the mistake is with ones who payed for a rotten game and are then expecting for it to works"? And please don't use your ACES issue which isn't a bug.

I repeat..."That's at least my interpretation, but obviously all of you can decide for yourself if the original post...was filled with emotion and perhaps some (or even a lot of) distortion. "




JudgeDredd -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/9/2009 12:52:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Stwa

Maybe,

But I am not really making the argument one way or another, remember this thread? Its just one of many, where plenty of people claim the game didn't work at all.

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1955645 [:D]

And remember, I don't own the game. So I don't need a refund, and therefore I am not as emotionally attached as you are.

Hey! Now that I think about it, aren't you the guy that couldn't get past turn 1. Please tell me you made it eventually. [;)]



Indeed I was.

Unfortunately, that was down to my own concern about the game...lack of documentation.

I was able to get through turn one, and several more turns. I like the game very much. Quite a few things bug me, but I like the flow.

I'm not making excuses for AGEoD, it was shoddy...my biggest beef is lack of info on how to use it and I am patiently waiting for the manual...but the times I've started a game, I like the mechanics and I enjoy the game. There are lots of things I'd like to see changed (show me where the battles occur instead of me having to hunt all over the place), but apart from that, it doesn't really detract from me enjoyig it at the moment.

I just hope they hold good their promise and stick with it...after all, I purchased it knowing it was broken because I trust AGEoD...I hope they earn that trust.




Stwa -> RE: unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels (1/9/2009 1:41:36 PM)

They will, if they make it through this BS economy.
[:)]




AndrewKurtz -> It's the MAP!!! (1/11/2009 9:48:27 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: JastaV
I was wandering where is the "unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels" stated in game box as in public, official presentation.


Had to laugh when I realized where the quoted line and title of the discussion came from. It's a description of the MAP!!!

From the feature list:

* The largest World War One map ever, with unequalled historically flavored look and detail levels

Makes the entire original post even more distorted IMHO.

Also for those interested, another beta patch was just released along with the first 14 sections of the manual (80 pages or so).




JastaV -> RE: It's the MAP!!! (1/12/2009 10:12:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AndrewKurtz

quote:

ORIGINAL: JastaV
I was wandering where is the "unequalled historically-flavored look and detail levels" stated in game box as in public, official presentation.


Had to laugh when I realized where the quoted line and title of the discussion came from. It's a description of the MAP!!!

From the feature list:

* The largest World War One map ever, with unequalled historically flavored look and detail levels

Makes the entire original post even more distorted IMHO.

Also for those interested, another beta patch was just released along with the first 14 sections of the manual (80 pages or so).


Another quote:
-5 Scenarios and 4 Campaigns
Why has not been reported in part unfinished?

The game out of the box does not work.
If I buy a product I expect it should work!
If AGEod decided to sell a bugged, unfinished program they have to state it clearly on the box, warning buyers will have to wait time for game completion and fixing.
I bet WW1 custumers are not laughing with pleasure after WW1 deficiencies.[:-]






Blueprint -> RE: It's the MAP!!! (1/12/2009 7:29:24 PM)

JastaV,

at least there's hope they will laugh by reading your posts.

Thanks for them.




flanyboy -> RE: It's the MAP!!! (1/13/2009 2:52:32 AM)

Actually right now the game is working just fine for me and I am happy with my purchase thanks for your concern JastaV though...




06 Maestro -> RE: It's the MAP!!! (1/13/2009 3:46:54 AM)

It seems to me that there must be more to this than the release of a buggy game. The big question is what it was- a women perhaps? Maybe there some land deal gone sour. Did Jasta 5 have a financial stake in the release of WW1? Questions, questions.

I certinly would have prefered a good manual and a few less bugs in the initial release. Due to the apparent good faith effort to fix the game (which has succeeded to a reasonable point-and is ongoing) from the begining, I can overlook Ageods transgressions ([:)]) with ease-this time. If one did not like what they got for their money in November, they could have been reimbursed. I do not see what is to be gained by attacking that company-especially in veiw of the fact that the game is now in a good playble condition (not perfet, but good). Now, if one was an associate of a competing company such attacks would make some sense. It would not be very sportsmen like (well, ok-maybe in soccer), but would make sense.

So, the question is; what is her name? Also, is there swamp land in France?[:'(]




Stwa -> RE: It's the MAP!!! (1/13/2009 8:04:54 AM)

True,

This project won't be the first or last project that did not come in on time. Its just in this case, after the intial release it probably didn't work at all.

Nevertheless, its always been my experience, that if the programmers keep working on the project, and it can be finished up quickly, albeit, late, then all will be forgiven. All's well that ends well, right?




AndrewKurtz -> RE: It's the MAP!!! (1/13/2009 3:36:18 PM)


quote:

All's well that ends well, right?


To most, but not always to all.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.0390625