Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Postpone Netplay Development

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: Postpone Netplay Development Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/24/2017 5:06:51 PM   
toltesi

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 5/16/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: michaelbaldur


it is simple, looking at the timeline the game should have a working solitaire and netplay, by now.

going back now and fixing solitaire, would mean that the company have to admit, that they released a unfinished game. (and it is still unfinished)

really nice that people have payed big buck, years ago, at it is still unfinished
warspite1

Well what is done is done and there is no point dragging the mistakes of the past up. But what can be done is deal with the now. Matrix view is that netplay has to be adopted. Forgetting regression bugs for the moment, this has meant that many big problems that were there on day one still remain.

Someone said above that if one doesn't want to test net play then they should go to an earlier version of the game. Well that is all I ask for - provided that that earlier version gets appropriate treatment to make it workable. Netplay has taken 2-3 years and could well take another 2-3 years. Why not set aside the next 6 months (or whatever) in order to get the non-netplay version in good working order?

At least Matrix can then say they have a game that is workable for solitaire and PBEM. Instead, this insistence on netplay to the exclusion of all else (optionals, production, supply, one map games etc) means that players suffer the worst of both worlds. Solitaire/PBEM (which could be got working) doesn't and Netplay (which is more of a challenge - definitely doesn't).



I have never posted here because well, what's the point? It seemed like a waiting game.

However I was one of the initial purchasers and kept waiting and waiting for the bugs to be fixed so I could actually play the game in solitaire having never played the boardgame version.

I don't understand why Matrix never actually looked into whether the game could get done by a single programmer. It's a monumental task and one that Steve has done a huge amount on his own. But it's been on his own.

EDIT: Glad to hear that bugs are going to get fixed, thank-you.

< Message edited by toltesi -- 3/24/2017 5:22:26 PM >

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 61
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/27/2017 8:31:51 PM   
AllenK


Posts: 5934
Joined: 2/17/2014
From: England
Status: offline
Just to acknowledge and thank Steve and Eric for their response.

The latest 2.4.3 hot-patch appears to have got manual convoy over-rides working again and also fixed the factory repair .

I hope we shall be shortly resuming gaming with the patch and then future updates in order to contribute to the testing programme (but from the Solitaire perspective).

< Message edited by AllenK -- 3/27/2017 8:33:43 PM >

(in reply to toltesi)
Post #: 62
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/28/2017 12:47:17 AM   
Cataphract88


Posts: 722
Joined: 10/5/2012
From: Britannia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AllenK

Just to acknowledge and thank Steve and Eric for their response.

The latest 2.4.3 hot-patch appears to have got manual convoy over-rides working again and also fixed the factory repair .

I hope we shall be shortly resuming gaming with the patch and then future updates in order to contribute to the testing programme (but from the Solitaire perspective).


+1

A step in the right direction.

_____________________________

Richard

(in reply to AllenK)
Post #: 63
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/28/2017 3:56:43 AM   
joshuamnave

 

Posts: 966
Joined: 1/8/2014
Status: offline
There are some other new bugs that popped up but other than the gearing issue (which was quickly fixed) nothing game breaking. A weird popup message when the Axis allies Hungary that has no impact (maybe a debugging tool? Not sure) and the game keeps trying to get me to call out the non existent Vichy reserves. In another game I'm playing after establishing Vichy I get a pop up message each reinforcement phase about a non existent Marseilles militia unit. But non of this actually effects game play, so *shrug*.

(in reply to Cataphract88)
Post #: 64
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/28/2017 8:53:37 PM   
AllenK


Posts: 5934
Joined: 2/17/2014
From: England
Status: offline
I've managed to complete a set-up in Solitaire using 2.4.3 without any MadEx's. It looks like the problems we are getting with the existing game files may be a legacy of bugs with the previous versions.

(in reply to joshuamnave)
Post #: 65
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/29/2017 7:39:00 AM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 1885
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
Hope you enjoy playing against yourself, must be fascinating.

< Message edited by Joseignacio -- 3/29/2017 7:46:27 AM >

(in reply to AllenK)
Post #: 66
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/29/2017 2:50:46 PM   
Cataphract88


Posts: 722
Joined: 10/5/2012
From: Britannia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Hope you enjoy playing against yourself, must be fascinating.

At least you always get to win!

_____________________________

Richard

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 67
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/29/2017 3:53:39 PM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 1885
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
OTOH, you always get to lose! :)

(in reply to Cataphract88)
Post #: 68
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/29/2017 4:18:53 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 37636
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Hope you enjoy playing against yourself, must be fascinating.
warspite1

Give it a rest

We've done all this for crying out loud. Those who want netplay resolved have had netplay progress stalled for a week or so (although not really stalled because any progress on the game helps netplay too as AllenK has just shown (thanks AllenK )) in order that those who don't want to be a beta tester can have an official update having waited 14 months for it so far. What is sooooo difficult to understand here, what is sooooo unfair here????

This presumably follows on from Post 37 with:

quote:

what you are proposing is that those who don't enjoy Solitaire (¡!) or PBEM will have to wait even more time to play the game. At the moment, what we have got is nothing.

We paid our money for the game too. Just sayin'...


....and those who are using the last official and can't play an entire game have effectively got nothing too. Those people paid their money too remember. Just sayin'.......

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 69
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/29/2017 8:27:14 PM   
AllenK


Posts: 5934
Joined: 2/17/2014
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Hope you enjoy playing against yourself, must be fascinating.


I haven't been playing against myself. Four of us have been using Solitaire mode to enjoy MWiF as World in Flames was meant to be played: Multiplayer. The gaming experience, playing as teams, with such honourable and fair minded players as Warspite1, Orm and Mayhemizer has been by far my most enjoyable experience of this game.

Brian Brian's two thoughtful posts provide a very good summary of the current problems with Netplay. It's only 1 vs 1 and the non-phasing player has a lot of waiting around while having to remain logged in online. These constraints will not change anytime soon, if ever.

Playing as we do, there is no necessity for everyone to be online together. As long as one person from each team is online during the phases where interaction is needed, it isn't that much slower than Netplay. The difference is the necessity to take a screen shot, post it and wait for the response, rather than having the dialogue box appearing on the other player's computer. The difference can be as little as a couple of minutes and, playing as we do, we have AAR's that pretty much write themselves. We can also be playing several games simultaneously.

It's all a compromise. For us, the primary importance is the team play, which we can only do in Solitaire. Others may well differ in their priorities (which is fine) but the basic game mechanics have to work or there is no game at all.

I posted the positive report about set-up without MadEx's, using 2.4.3, because other players, as well as ourselves, had reported or confirmed the MadEx's in setup with previous versions. If you can't get past setup without a MadEx, you haven't got a game for anyone to play, Solitaire or Netplay. The post both acknowledges the ongoing work and commitment Steve gives to the development of the game and lets him know changes appear to be successful.

If you know of a better way for progress to be made then perhaps you should enlighten us instead of resorting to the type of post quoted above.


< Message edited by AllenK -- 3/29/2017 8:52:08 PM >

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 70
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/30/2017 1:24:18 PM   
Centuur


Posts: 7962
Joined: 6/3/2011
From: Hoorn (NED).
Status: offline
I side with Joseignacio on this one. The cumbersome process of sending mails to one another is something which seems to be slowing the game quite a lot, if I compare this with netplay in a two player game. It's faster and if you don't run into nasty bugs, one can easily have three to four impulses in an evening.

But I side with you when you are saying that multiplayer is the way to play this game and that it would be nice if one could have a system where not all players on a side needs to be logged in when that part gets developed.

_____________________________

Peter

(in reply to AllenK)
Post #: 71
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/30/2017 2:09:31 PM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 1885
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: AllenK

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Hope you enjoy playing against yourself, must be fascinating.


I haven't been playing against myself. Four of us have been using Solitaire mode to enjoy MWiF as World in Flames was meant to be played: Multiplayer. The gaming experience, playing as teams, with such honourable and fair minded players as Warspite1, Orm and Mayhemizer has been by far my most enjoyable experience of this game.

Brian Brian's two thoughtful posts provide a very good summary of the current problems with Netplay. It's only 1 vs 1 and the non-phasing player has a lot of waiting around while having to remain logged in online. These constraints will not change anytime soon, if ever.

Playing as we do, there is no necessity for everyone to be online together. As long as one person from each team is online during the phases where interaction is needed, it isn't that much slower than Netplay. The difference is the necessity to take a screen shot, post it and wait for the response, rather than having the dialogue box appearing on the other player's computer. The difference can be as little as a couple of minutes and, playing as we do, we have AAR's that pretty much write themselves. We can also be playing several games simultaneously.

It's all a compromise. For us, the primary importance is the team play, which we can only do in Solitaire. Others may well differ in their priorities (which is fine) but the basic game mechanics have to work or there is no game at all.

I posted the positive report about set-up without MadEx's, using 2.4.3, because other players, as well as ourselves, had reported or confirmed the MadEx's in setup with previous versions. If you can't get past setup without a MadEx, you haven't got a game for anyone to play, Solitaire or Netplay. The post both acknowledges the ongoing work and commitment Steve gives to the development of the game and lets him know changes appear to be successful.

If you know of a better way for progress to be made then perhaps you should enlighten us instead of resorting to the type of post quoted above.



All of us are still here because we understood that before there was a multiplayer there should be a solitaire. This sounded reasonable and the experts said so as well.

What IMO is not so reasonable is that, because of a few glitches of the (supposedly) depurated solitaire, the agonizingly slow process of making a multiplayer (after everything else except AI is made) is stopped almost as soon as it was started.

If you are starting to test a multiplayer, basing yourself on a solitaire that is supposed to be working fine (almost perfect), to step back and repair a couple of issues cuts the testing process in two. Or more than two, because I fear that every time a patch creates a new problem, the same people (the solitaire - 5%- gamers) will cry "bloody murder" if Steve doesn't stop everything and solve those problems. I doubt it is possible to program efficiently like this, I know you cannot test a game like this.

But also saying that people claim that they need to be helped earlier because they paid for it years ago sounds like a bad joke, especially for those like me who bought the game right when it was created and have not had even one hour of fun, unlike the former.

Anyway I don't blame Steve so much about this one, he has to try to please everybody and I guess Matrix too, and he is just trying to do his best. He also believes that this will take 2 weeks (we'll see, bugs are tricky).

But I would suggest him to make a stable version and then not recommend any more newer versions for solitaire, to develop directly for MP or he will have the same problem all the time. Had he done this now people who like solitaire couldn't complain, because their version would be still there for them, while he develops ours. In fact, that's what he should have done here, IMO, it's not the latest solitaire version the one not working, it was the first multiplayer version which was giving you problems with the solitaire.

Regardless that he may later make a new solitaire version upgrading the features that need to.



< Message edited by Joseignacio -- 3/30/2017 2:28:21 PM >

(in reply to AllenK)
Post #: 72
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/30/2017 3:23:50 PM   
Klydon


Posts: 2292
Joined: 11/28/2010
Status: offline
I believe the mark given (only 5% are solitaire) is way below the mark. It seems to me that there are far more players using the solitaire version than doing the net play. One of the big reasons why is the solitaire version is the one being used for multiplayer and also by people that believe it is further along than the net play version. They simply use the solitaire version with other devices/work arounds instead of the net version.

I also believe that Joseignacio may misunderstand the issues from the solitaire point of view.

Working towards net play has broken the solitaire version of the game to the point it isn't really playable (until some of these recent fixes went in). To go back to the previous stand alone solitaire version would be going back well over a year and have that version be missing a lot of things that were taken care of in subsequent versions of the game.

The bottom line is until some work is done on game stability to eliminate some of these game breaking bugs, neither version is going to be any good. It makes sense to get the simpler version (solitaire) going first, then get back to work on the net play version.


< Message edited by Klydon -- 3/30/2017 3:24:06 PM >

(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 73
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/30/2017 4:44:12 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 7544
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
I agree with Klydon completely. Perhaps the best course of action, once these bugs in solitaire are fixed, is people who want to try the next public beta should ensure they have a path back to where they were since they are enjoying playing the game with others albeit using the Solitaire mode, either by screen-sharing or by email or both.

If you don't go back to an MWiF EXE that is before 2.3.1, then it is a simple matter to edit the version number in the game file so you can use an earlier MWiF version that you found was more stable. So my advice is: don't overwrite the last EXE, back it up instead.

I want people to test all the public betas in Solitaire and I feel grateful for them doing so because let's face it, there is one EXE here not one for each mode, and regression bugs - although extremely unfortunate and disheartening - seem to be a fact of life. If we had five or so new EXEs that we only tested for NetPlay, then it is possible, (although I think unlikely) that a bad regression bug for Solitaire would slip through. Then imagine the furor that would occur if that version is released as a public "official" release with the claim that "NetPlay is now working great - fill your boots!" and then those either happy with Solitaire or happy using Solitaire to play with others hit these Solitaire-only bugs?

So I'm spending a lot of time testing NetPlay but I'm also grateful to those who use the newest releases and play Solitaire or Head-to-Head with them. Both are necessary to get where we want to get to. But leave yourself an escape route for when times get frustrating.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Klydon)
Post #: 74
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/30/2017 5:49:54 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 37636
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

quote:

ORIGINAL: AllenK

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

Hope you enjoy playing against yourself, must be fascinating.


I haven't been playing against myself. Four of us have been using Solitaire mode to enjoy MWiF as World in Flames was meant to be played: Multiplayer. The gaming experience, playing as teams, with such honourable and fair minded players as Warspite1, Orm and Mayhemizer has been by far my most enjoyable experience of this game.

Brian Brian's two thoughtful posts provide a very good summary of the current problems with Netplay. It's only 1 vs 1 and the non-phasing player has a lot of waiting around while having to remain logged in online. These constraints will not change anytime soon, if ever.

Playing as we do, there is no necessity for everyone to be online together. As long as one person from each team is online during the phases where interaction is needed, it isn't that much slower than Netplay. The difference is the necessity to take a screen shot, post it and wait for the response, rather than having the dialogue box appearing on the other player's computer. The difference can be as little as a couple of minutes and, playing as we do, we have AAR's that pretty much write themselves. We can also be playing several games simultaneously.

It's all a compromise. For us, the primary importance is the team play, which we can only do in Solitaire. Others may well differ in their priorities (which is fine) but the basic game mechanics have to work or there is no game at all.

I posted the positive report about set-up without MadEx's, using 2.4.3, because other players, as well as ourselves, had reported or confirmed the MadEx's in setup with previous versions. If you can't get past setup without a MadEx, you haven't got a game for anyone to play, Solitaire or Netplay. The post both acknowledges the ongoing work and commitment Steve gives to the development of the game and lets him know changes appear to be successful.

If you know of a better way for progress to be made then perhaps you should enlighten us instead of resorting to the type of post quoted above.



All of us are still here because we understood that before there was a multiplayer there should be a solitaire. This sounded reasonable and the experts said so as well.

What IMO is not so reasonable is that, because of a few glitches [A few glitches? So that would be the effectively game ending ones then?] of the (supposedly) depurated [that understanding is based on what exactly??] solitaire, the agonizingly slow process of making a multiplayer (after everything else except AI is made) [Total and utter nonsense - everything is made? What except for the bugs that still exist, except for the rules that haven't been coded, except for the scenarios that haven't been coded. So everything else is made apart from those you mean?] is stopped almost as soon as it was started [so when did the focus turn mainly to netplay? And you say it has been stopped as soon as it started???? - what crazy definition is that????]

If you are starting to test a multiplayer, basing yourself on a solitaire that is supposed to be working fine (almost perfect) [I think you need to read a few more threads on this game], to step back and repair a couple of issues [same wrong analysis and conclusion as above] cuts the testing process in two. Or more than two, because I fear that every time a patch creates a new problem, the same people (the solitaire - 5%- gamers) will cry "bloody murder" if Steve doesn't stop everything and solve those problems [then you believe wrong because once again you haven't concerned yourself with the facts, or what has been written and explained by Erik and Steve i.e. the point of this is to get an official version out for those who purchased the game, do not want to be a beta tester, but do want to be able to take advantage of any progress in the last 14 MONTHS]. I doubt it is possible to program efficiently like this, I know you cannot test a game like this. [Not according to the programmer of this project - I think I'll take his word over yours thanks]

But also saying that people claim that they need to be helped earlier because they paid for it years ago sounds like a bad joke, especially for those like me who bought the game right when it was created and have not had even one hour of fun, unlike the former. [So let's be crystal here. Anyone who bought the game from the start, but have had some enjoyment playing the game solitaire (or even PBEM) (even though unable to finish a game - and with no means of hoping to play to the end) should just suck it up and not ask for anything else because they had the temerity to get some enjoyment from a game in solitaire that they bought supposedly with a working solitaire game - unlike those who bought netplay on spec. But YOU of course are more deserving yes?]

Anyway I don't blame Steve so much about this one, he has to try to please everybody and I guess Matrix too, and he is just trying to do his best. He also believes that this will take 2 weeks (we'll see, bugs are tricky).[No you choose to blame the likes of AllenK and I because we asked for a fair, reasonable and very sight deviation from the plan that doesn't really affect netplay development for the worse???? Go figure]

But I would suggest him to make a stable version and then not recommend any more newer versions for solitaire [Good plan - so long as you and your needs are taken care of that is completely fair and equitable yes? So if we are here in another 12 months and netplay still isn't working properly, you want no new official version so players cannot take advantage of bug fixes in the meantime?], to develop directly for MP or he will have the same problem all the time. Had he done this now people who like solitaire couldn't complain, because their version would be still there for them, while he develops ours. In fact, that's what he should have done here, IMO, it's not the latest solitaire version the one not working, it was the first multiplayer version which was giving you problems with the solitaire. [As I said, you haven't properly understood the state of the game presently]

Regardless that he may later make a new solitaire version upgrading the features that need to.


warspite1

Comments in red


< Message edited by warspite1 -- 3/30/2017 5:54:44 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 75
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/30/2017 6:19:16 PM   
joshuamnave

 

Posts: 966
Joined: 1/8/2014
Status: offline
I think a lot of the tension in this thread comes from an unfortunate title. As I understand it the bugs that prompted the OP were gamebreaking in both solitaire and netplay. Fixing them *was* working on netplay, but it also helped solitaire players. The point was that fixing issues that only affected netplay while ignoring the regression bugs that were breaking both versions of the game seemed pointless. Why does it matter if players screens are out of synch if you can't convoy resources anyway? I can't think of any bugs in solitaire that wouldn't also affect netplay, and when they are game breaking, they hurt everyone. So the decision was very properly made to address the worst of the regression bugs before tackling new stuff. Why is this even an issue?

(in reply to AllenK)
Post #: 76
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/30/2017 7:49:00 PM   
AllenK


Posts: 5934
Joined: 2/17/2014
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zartacla

I think a lot of the tension in this thread comes from an unfortunate title. As I understand it the bugs that prompted the OP were gamebreaking in both solitaire and netplay. Fixing them *was* working on netplay, but it also helped solitaire players. The point was that fixing issues that only affected netplay while ignoring the regression bugs that were breaking both versions of the game seemed pointless. Why does it matter if players screens are out of synch if you can't convoy resources anyway? I can't think of any bugs in solitaire that wouldn't also affect netplay, and when they are game breaking, they hurt everyone. So the decision was very properly made to address the worst of the regression bugs before tackling new stuff. Why is this even an issue?


Thank you, sir. Very well surmised .

I thought long and hard about the title of the thread and am sorry you think it "unfortunate". I knew it may well prove provocative but I believed the points you summarise so well needed to be made and the thread doing so needed a title with impact. However, I think much of the tension has arisen because some contributors appear to interpret "postpone" as "stop". I've never advocated that approach. If this game is to survive and thrive, it needs a working online module. To get to that position, the basic game mechanics have to work and that applies to whatever mode a player chooses to use.

If this can't be accomplished within a single version, then I fully agree with Joseignacio. Once Solitaire is stable and bug free, freeze this until such time as additional options, scenarios or AI are coded and then release these as upgrades. Meanwhile, Netplay development can proceed in parallel and perhaps need a separate exe file

(in reply to joshuamnave)
Post #: 77
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 3/30/2017 10:04:37 PM   
Cataphract88


Posts: 722
Joined: 10/5/2012
From: Britannia
Status: offline
quote:

Once Solitaire is stable and bug free, freeze this until such time as additional options, scenarios or AI are coded and then release these as upgrades. Meanwhile, Netplay development can proceed in parallel and perhaps need a separate exe file


+1

_____________________________

Richard

(in reply to AllenK)
Post #: 78
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 4/1/2017 6:33:32 PM   
Joseignacio


Posts: 1885
Joined: 5/8/2009
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

---


Sad to see a fellow member answer like this without ptovocation or even comments on my part on his posts.

I guess Valium is at the order. Orfidal may be good too.

Dissapointed.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 79
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 4/1/2017 7:31:05 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 37636
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joseignacio

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

---


Sad to see a fellow member answer like this without ptovocation or even comments on my part on his posts.

I guess Valium is at the order. Orfidal may be good too.

Dissapointed.
warspite1

Well I guess we are both disappointed. Aside from the fact you totally misrepresented the state of the last official release, and ignored Steve and Erik's comments on what is being done here (and how it benefits both solitaire and netplay players), for my part the disappointment comes not least because you refer to my comments as a bad joke (and then try and make out you weren't responding to something I specifically said) or your response to AllenK's helpful positive post (that was of equal help to netplay) with an unhelpful sarcastic response.

Yes, you are right, it was a shame to see a fellow member post like that.

Not sure why you think Valium is the order of the day but sure, you can try it if you think it helps.

Equally disappointed.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to Joseignacio)
Post #: 80
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 4/1/2017 8:54:36 PM   
Orm


Posts: 16608
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline


Can we, please, move on now?

_____________________________

Have a bit more patience with newbies. Of course some of them act dumb -- they're often students, for heaven's sake. - Terry Pratchett

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 81
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 4/1/2017 9:01:36 PM   
paulderynck


Posts: 7544
Joined: 3/24/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
I think of all the comments here, the most sensible were those in Post #74.

_____________________________

Paul

(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 82
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 4/2/2017 2:21:51 AM   
RFalvo69


Posts: 356
Joined: 7/11/2013
From: Lamezia Terme (Italy)
Status: online
There is a fantastic video on Youtube about the "Beauty and the Beast" which argues, in all seriousness, that Belle is simply a victim of the "Stockholm Syndrome".

The video, of course, is made in good fun, but it is quite amazing to see how much of the analysis is factual.

Now, I didn't post a lot on this forum, but when I did it was easy to see how my approach to the whole MWIF situation could be labeled as "satirical cynicism". Sadly, not only my overall point of view is still the same, but... let's say how that fun video about "Stockholm Syndrome" is now partially integrated in my overall assessment of the situation.

Did MWIF improved since... uhm... 2013? Sure, it did. Erik, tackling the remaining problems two years after his last message, basically laid out an embryonic plan aimed at how to proceed from the current state of "early beta".

Now, before answering with comments that I could write by myself right now, right here (because they are always the same), let's remember that we are not talking about bugs like "Artillery doesn't work" or "Additional Cinese Cities is broken" or "Every time we try amphibious landings in Netplay the game crashes".

What we are talking about is "OK, we have a game with the solitaire part still incomplete (missing optional rules, missing half-map scenarios, bugs...), with Netplay just starting to creak on, and with "EU talking about what to do after Brexit"-level debates about how to proceed.

I was a beta-tester of "Command". I still consider myself under NDA, but I think there is one thing I can say: we had this sort of debates when the game was in late Alpha. When Command 1.0 was released it was by no means "perfect and totally playable", but you could play it. Eleven patches aimed at both polishing the outstanding bugs, improving the UI and the fluidity of the gameplay, and adding contents followed.

Why I enrolled in the Navy? Because, since I was a kid, the sea always held a peculiar fascination on me. I actually read "The Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner" by Coleridge over and over when I was in Eight Grade, and by high-school I was able to read it in English.

Why I do mention this? Because nothing like MWIF made me understand the full meaning of the expression "Having an albatross around your neck". I think that this is how Matrix is feeling about the game.

Now, as I wrote, I do fully expect the usual answers that I get after these posts of mine. Feel free to express your opinions.

Just, please, before doing that think a minute about what I mentioned at the beginning: Stockholm Syndrome.

_____________________________

"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")

(in reply to paulderynck)
Post #: 83
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 4/2/2017 9:55:28 AM   
vonpaul


Posts: 174
Joined: 8/5/2004
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline
Still waiting for fascist tide scenario so i can seriously play the game i paid for years ago :(

Even if multiplayer was working 2 player global war is way too much game.

Occasionally i break out the books and dream.

(in reply to RFalvo69)
Post #: 84
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 4/2/2017 11:45:53 AM   
AllenK


Posts: 5934
Joined: 2/17/2014
From: England
Status: offline
Stockholm Syndrome eh? It's been quite sometime since I was last considered as being a Beauty. I think I'll take it .

Oh well, the guards are calling, back to the cell.

< Message edited by AllenK -- 4/2/2017 1:58:57 PM >

(in reply to vonpaul)
Post #: 85
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 4/2/2017 12:09:55 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 37636
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
I totally agree with the response (below) to the preposterous idea that Beauty and the Beast is about Stockholm Syndrome.

I haven't seen the new version yet - hopefully will go in the next few weeks - but the 1991 animated version is a tale as old as time about love and looking beyond superficial appearances. It is a beautiful film, wonderful music, clever - very clever - lyrics, a fine script and a great adaptation of a classic fairy tale that was fully deserving of the Oscar for best film for which it was nominated - but which it didn't get only through snobbery toward animation (and perhaps because Silence of the Lambs was quite good too ).

Belle is NOT suffering from Stockholm Syndrome and if anyone says she is I'll grab my torch and pitchfork!

http://thefederalist.com/2016/08/10/7-reasons-beauty-and-the-beast-is-not-a-tale-of-stockholm-syndrome/

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 4/2/2017 12:52:21 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to AllenK)
Post #: 86
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 4/3/2017 6:05:30 AM   
RFalvo69


Posts: 356
Joined: 7/11/2013
From: Lamezia Terme (Italy)
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1
Belle is NOT suffering from Stockholm Syndrome and if anyone says she is I'll grab my torch and pitchfork!

http://thefederalist.com/2016/08/10/7-reasons-beauty-and-the-beast-is-not-a-tale-of-stockholm-syndrome/


Whoa! Some people do seem to take everything seriously these days

The video I watched was made in good fun. However, the "answer" you linked (which, IIUC, refers to people seriously considering the idea) also mentions all these "angry, sad, reviewers playing the “victimization of woman” and “male domination” card, trying to ruin another great movie (RIP Ghostbusters)."

Now, there is a very important point to make here: Ghostbusters 2016 sucked a golf ball through a watering cane - end of the story. It was Sony who, after the dire reactions to the first trailer (the most disliked video ever on Youtube) tried to play the card "These people just hate the fact that the movie empowers women!"

To say that this backfired spectacularly is an understatement. People were quick to cite movies ranging from Alien/Aliens, to Kill Bill, to Buffy, to Mad Max: Fury Road, to how "Resident Evil" became the highest grossing horror franchise ever (which, considering the average quality of the RE movies, it means that GB2016 doesn't even belongs to the "guilty pleasures" genre).

Even worse, Sony pulled this fumble at the height of the Clinton vs. Trump campaign. Go figure.

Some people fell for the scam (I was pretty amazed to see, among them, journalists from "The Guardian"). However, and more importantly, it were the feminists who filled the streets (or Youtube - which is the same thing), pointing out how it was important to state the truth: i.e. that the movie sucked so hard that you left the theatre physically stunned. Because if you tie your cause to a lie your cause will suffer. It is as simple as that.

This comes from someone who loves both Kate McKinnon and... er... Milla Jovovich

Anyway, my daughter just sent me this other hilarious video about TBatB; just think about the implications to this girl's reasoning:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGRmTmA6znk

To put things in perspective, she is the same girl who did this side-splitting video about the implications if Rey is the daughter of Luke Skywalker. I hope she will become a script doctor someday:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjHEHuNyvME

Now, back to the people who still cling to "Matrix's promises for the future of MWIF" (I want to be clear: me among them) and how we can become a case-study.

_____________________________

"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")

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 87
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 4/3/2017 7:37:32 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 37636
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

There is a fantastic video on Youtube about the "Beauty and the Beast" which argues, in all seriousness, that Belle is simply a victim of the "Stockholm Syndrome



quote:

Whoa! Some people do seem to take everything seriously these days.........The video I watched was made in good fun.



You said the video - and thus the message - was made in all seriousness. There was no link so I did not see what exactly was said and simply took what you said on face value. But then you said it was just for fun so am a little confused by that.

But regardless, we are talking about a fairy tale here so all comments should be seen in that context. If some people (like those in the link I provided) want to bring in all sorts of baggage and their own personal crusades against this or that, well that's up to them, but for the avoidance of doubt in posting a response with a link, that link was only designed to counter the "in all seriousness" suggestion that Belle was a victim of Stockholm Syndrome. I am certainly not supporting any of the wider views made in that article. The only reason that I even vaguely care about that is because, as said, Beauty and the Beast is a beautiful film.

I liked the first video you provided a link for - cute kid - who made some reasoned arguments in an entertaining way. Of course, as said, this is a fairy tale so there are always going to be holes in the plot as big as planets, but the video was worth 8 minutes of anyone's time.

< Message edited by warspite1 -- 4/3/2017 10:55:19 AM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to RFalvo69)
Post #: 88
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 4/3/2017 1:22:50 PM   
RFalvo69


Posts: 356
Joined: 7/11/2013
From: Lamezia Terme (Italy)
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

There is a fantastic video on Youtube about the "Beauty and the Beast" which argues, in all seriousness, that Belle is simply a victim of the "Stockholm Syndrome



quote:

Whoa! Some people do seem to take everything seriously these days.........The video I watched was made in good fun.



You said the video - and thus the message - was made in all seriousness. There was no link so I did not see what exactly was said and simply took what you said on face value. But then you said it was just for fun so am a little confused by that.


In satire, the form is not the content.

That girl I linked the videos of (I checked: her name is Jenny Nicholson) made a video where "in all seriousness" she examines the "unfortunate implications of TBatB". Yet, her intent is satirical.

Watch her video about what went wrong with "Batman vs. Superman". She notices how Henry Cavill's face never shows any kind of emotion - and so all the subplot about "I'm a human being!" obviously fails. Then, in all seriousness she proposes this solution: just put small animatronic devices under Cavill's face, so that - off screen - puppeteers can make him show emotion when needed.

Again, the style of the delivery is serious - and this is what makes the satire even more side-splitting.

I'm starting to guess, at the old age of 47 years old, that some people, by being unable to take things in a way different from the literal one, are actually missing a lot about what is going on around them.

Now, let's return to talk about the "now we are serious - no really!" plans about finishing MWIF - and let's the satire emerge by itself

_____________________________

"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")

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 89
RE: Postpone Netplay Development - 4/3/2017 1:54:35 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 37636
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

quote:

There is a fantastic video on Youtube about the "Beauty and the Beast" which argues, in all seriousness, that Belle is simply a victim of the "Stockholm Syndrome



quote:

Whoa! Some people do seem to take everything seriously these days.........The video I watched was made in good fun.



You said the video - and thus the message - was made in all seriousness. There was no link so I did not see what exactly was said and simply took what you said on face value. But then you said it was just for fun so am a little confused by that.


In satire, the form is not the content.

That girl I linked the videos of (I checked: her name is Jenny Nicholson) made a video where "in all seriousness" she examines the "unfortunate implications of TBatB". Yet, her intent is satirical.

Watch her video about what went wrong with "Batman vs. Superman". She notices how Henry Cavill's face never shows any kind of emotion - and so all the subplot about "I'm a human being!" obviously fails. Then, in all seriousness she proposes this solution: just put small animatronic devices under Cavill's face, so that - off screen - puppeteers can make him show emotion when needed.

Again, the style of the delivery is serious - and this is what makes the satire even more side-splitting.

I'm starting to guess, at the old age of 47 years old, that some people, by being unable to take things in a way different from the literal one, are actually missing a lot about what is going on around them.

Now, let's return to talk about the "now we are serious - no really!" plans about finishing MWIF - and let's the satire emerge by itself
Warspite1

If one doesn't know it's satire - because one hasn't seen the video (there was no link) and there was no or similar to suggest the comment about seriousness was not meant - then one only has what they are told to go by.

There may well be some people who do not understand satire - I am not one of those.


< Message edited by warspite1 -- 4/3/2017 1:59:47 PM >


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805



(in reply to RFalvo69)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: Postpone Netplay Development Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.156