The "Uber" Command: Modern Air/Naval Ops Thread

[Herman Hum]

Bugger, I thought Herman would be all over Command and would be doing video tutorials by now. But it seems, because it's NOT Harpoon, theres an axe to grind. :(

All I can say is that, I struggled immensely to get anywhere with Harpoon and its confusing soup of versions and badly designed UI's. I tried. And I even had much welcomed tutelage from Herman himself. But I think after knocking my head against it for a while, I fell back on to Fleet Command - simply because I could play it without having to step back in time.

I have been 'all over it'.  That's why the review is so painstakingly detailed.  :)
I want to like it.  It's just too much of a chore to enjoy in its present state.  My hand just hurts too much after playing this game.

Videos will still be made upon request.  Inquiries for videos have already been received for showing the differences between significant features such as the Formation Editor.  As always, the motto remains: help all who ask.

[Herman Hum]

What's annoying is this - his review is there...like it or lump it - in the public domain...so it should be discredited by pointing out glaring issues with it - by doing anything else suggests there's a disregard for the points he raised.

Actually, I can point to one glaring error that totally unhinges the entire review:

"Most displays such as Weapons, Sensors, and Contacts can only be activated via the mouse-click on a button."

should read:

"Most displays such as Damage Control and Contacts can only be activated via the mouse-click on a button."

:P

[Grim.Reaper]

I don't usually get involved in all the drama of games because I just like playing them, but this topic has struck a nerve with me.  I am 99% with JD on this and believe this situation looks very unprofessional and leaves a negative impression on me for both the developer and publisher.  The only disagreement I have with JD is I actually think taking a moment of their day to thoughtfully and professionally dispute any of the review material is way more important than getting out the first patch.  If the developer/publisher would not have responded like they did, I would think differently, but because of their actions (mentioning past history, making it personal, unwilling to dispute specific detail, etc.) I think it is critical they back up their claims the review is wrong, otherwise it is all here say.  This comes across that only positive reviews are accepted and anything else is wrong.  If this review is not stickied in the official forums like other reviews, I will lose a lot of respect for the publisher/developer, unless they officially respond to the review and specifically point out all the places it is wrong, therefore invalidating the review.  To some degree they acknowledge portions might be true by saying some of it already was addressed in an upcoming patch.  However, the review is based on the "released" version as it should be, not based on future potential and future patches.  The moment you release a "premium" product for sale, your fair game for review, positive or negative.

I have no idea about the past history of Herman and the developers, nor do I care.  If bringing up that stuff is the only counter-argument, that doesn't prove anything to me.  In fact, it actually makes it seem like Herman's review struck a nerve, lending to the possibility it is an accurate representation of current state.  Let's face it, the product was advertised as a "premium" product worth a premium price tag so expectations should be very high.  Personally I do believe it is rough around the edges and not sure it was a "premium" product worth $79 at this point.  However, early indications were the developers being in it for the long haul and over time it would be improved.  That was refreshing to see, but because of this event, now it leaves a bad taste.  I will be the first to acknowledge I am not a great air/naval game expert, but whether you agree with Herman or not, it usually seems he knows what he is talking about and his written review does seem to provide very specific detail, not just throwing out high level thoughts.  Until I see confirmed written disputes of his points by the developer/publisher, there is little reason for me to assume they are not accurate.  I also think it was in very poor taste to lock the thread at the official forums, just disregarding it as past history without really answering it.

If this situation would have arisen before I bought the game over the weekend, I wouldn't have bought it.  Not because of the review itself, but because of how the situation was handled.  In fact, I had my finger over the purchase button for Civil War 2 all weekend and I am glad I did not buy it right now.  If this is going to be the common practice of the publisher, I will need to re-evaluate if its an organization I wish to continue supporting with my money, which everyone knows I am an impulse purchaser.

What a shame this had to come to this.....publishers/developers should never get emotional/involved with reviews, but if they do, they better be ready to back it up with facts, not personal history......

Very disappointed in the situation....

[JudgeDredd]

Ok then - to anyone on here who actually plays Command - explain where he's wrong?

I don't know about the comparisons to Harpoon and don't particularly care - as long as I enjoy playing it - and for the most part I do...but there are issues that make me thing "ffs". And he mentions them in that video - along with other things I am not sure of.

So rather than anyone sling mud at Herman Hum, point out where the review is incorrect...because, whilst I think it was a bit on the harsh side and possibly did focus on Harpoon a bit too much, I have to say, I agreed with a fair whack of it...in particular too many mouse clicks and too cumbersome to get the info you want.

mickeck has already pointed out that that is subjective. And I agreed with that - but it still doesn't help that it hampers my enjoyment.

Dimitris has also agreed that the interface could use some tlc and hopefully it's going to get it.

Can I ask why the comparisons to Harpoon are so out of order? Over at Matrix there's been a price war going on about the price of the game and, specifically IN that thread, there were all sorts of comparisons made to price and other games and even genres....those were discounted by Matrix and Slitherine and many others as being a waste because there's no direct comparison to those other games and Command. So now someone comes out and compares Command to Harpoon - of which there is a HUGE similarity - and all of a sudden it's not appropriate to compare Command to Harpoon.

You can't have it both ways. Either you allow Command to be compared to other games (in relation to whatever) or you discount those but allow direct comparisons to be drawn between Command and Harpoon. So what if Harpoon is a 20 year old game. Matrix and Slitherine have reinvented it a few times - and it is ALMOST identical - and has to be - it's a different engine doing the same game. The comparisons are there to be made.

Herman Hum may be stuck with Harpoon and I don't know why. But he's IS comparing like for like. And many of the things he likely likes in Harpoon he's not seeing in Command. Are we just to trust reviews from people who have never played Harpoon or who haven't played Harpoon in years?

Read/watch the review and itemise it's faults. Discrediting it because of the writer is the wrong avenue to travel and gives no weight to why Command is a great game. You're doing the game and the community no favours

If we're only going to allow favourable reviews here - then I'm not sure what I'm doing reading these forums.  :(

EDIT
I posted this after you GR

[spelk]

I'm sure if anyone else, other than Herman, had made such a "review", then Warfaresims would have responded with reasoned counters. The fact that there is such a history between them, I think, makes the comments made understandable - possibly not the right corporate view - but Dimitris is allowed his opinion here surely, without broad sweep judging his company? He's here as a groghead first, a dev second.

You see, whatever Herman has said about the game, and however Dimitris has responded to him, its not going to change the way I enjoy or not enjoy the game. The game will stand (or fall) on its own merits, and in my opinion, I'd rather have a close contact (and mutual rapport) with the developers than have them chased away by principal-based expectations of how a developer should respond to a supposed review.

Anyway, it certainly feels like our constructive criticism of the game, will help the devs build a better platform - surely we should encourage engaging with the developer here rather than becoming outraged, or slating them for what they did or didn't say?

I feel we need to filter out these past dramas and just look at the game itself, for what it is, and what it could become with our help and consultation - I mean we all want an up to date modern air/naval combat simulator don't we? I think we need to nurture it, otherwise its back to Harpoon with you! ;)

[Grim.Reaper]

I'm sure if anyone else, other than Herman, had made such a "review", then Warfaresims would have responded with reasoned counters. The fact that there is such a history between them, I think, makes the comments made understandable - possibly not the right corporate view - but Dimitris is allowed his opinion here surely, without broad sweep judging his company? He's here as a groghead first, a dev second.

You see, whatever Herman has said about the game, and however Dimitris has responded to him, its not going to change the way I enjoy or not enjoy the game. The game will stand (or fall) on its own merits, and in my opinion, I'd rather have a close contact (and mutual rapport) with the developers than have them chased away by principal-based expectations of how a developer should respond to a supposed review.

Anyway, it certainly feels like our constructive criticism of the game, will help the devs build a better platform - surely we should encourage engaging with the developer here rather than becoming outraged, or slating them for what they did or didn't say?

I feel we need to filter out these past dramas and just look at the game itself, for what it is, and what it could become with our help and consultation - I mean we all want an up to date modern air/naval combat simulator don't we? I think we need to nurture it, otherwise its back to Harpoon with you! ;)

Spelk, we will have to respectfully disagree with this one.....I think it is one thing for game players to dispute games/reviews, etc., but I don't agree developers/publishers should get involved in this kind of mud slinging, unless they are willing to specifically dispute what parts of the review is wrong, versus ask if we want them to work on the patch or spend time addressing this.  If they did not want to address it, they shouldn't have said anything and certainly shouldn't have brought up all the past history.   Just comes across unprofessional.  I am also not a big fan of negative reviews being ignored and not treated the same as positive reviews.  There is little chance this one will be placed at the top of their official forums, like the positive reviews have been.

I agree with your last point about having an engaging relationship with the developer/publisher and that is what it was up until this point.  In this case, I think the developer/publisher overreacted too quickly and strained that relationship.  They should have just ignored it, respectfully disagreed with it, or took the time to specifically point out the wrong items mentioned in the review.  In time I am sure this will blow over depending on the actions from this point out.

[JudgeDredd]

I'm sure if anyone else, other than Herman, had made such a "review", then Warfaresims would have responded with reasoned counters. The fact that there is such a history between them, I think, makes the comments made understandable - possibly not the right corporate view - but Dimitris is allowed his opinion here surely, without broad sweep judging his company? He's here as a groghead first, a dev second.

You see, whatever Herman has said about the game, and however Dimitris has responded to him, its not going to change the way I enjoy or not enjoy the game. The game will stand (or fall) on its own merits, and in my opinion, I'd rather have a close contact (and mutual rapport) with the developers than have them chased away by principal-based expectations of how a developer should respond to a supposed review.

Anyway, it certainly feels like our constructive criticism of the game, will help the devs build a better platform - surely we should encourage engaging with the developer here rather than becoming outraged, or slating them for what they did or didn't say?

I feel we need to filter out these past dramas and just look at the game itself, for what it is, and what it could become with our help and consultation - I mean we all want an up to date modern air/naval combat simulator don't we? I think we need to nurture it, otherwise its back to Harpoon with you! ;)

My bold - so you disagree with his review? If his review means nothing then so be it. As long as you're enjoying it - and that's the important thing, right? Couldn't agree more. But that's different from discrediting someone's review based on history and nothing to do with the game. And just because you (and I to some extent) feel like that, it doesn't mean we stifle reviews does it?

I'm not wanting anyone chased away from anywhere. If anyone's going to leave it'll be me. Someone put a review out. If you disagree with that review, then counter it.

Apparently Herman has committed heresy bv creating a review of a game...a review that apparently goes against the grain...and the way we deal with that is to what? discredit the reviewer?...not counter his review.

I'm gonna bow out now. This has left a bad taste in my mouth.

And yep - I'm a sensitive bastard at heart and therefore scatty at times and I'd rather step away than get dragged in.

[Emir Agic]

It seems that review has been removed. I cannot open SimHQ link to review and video is declared "private". Can someone post review here?

[Jarhead0331]

I'm assuming simhq was unaware of the potential for bias from the author of the review, or they may have actually listened to the horror of the one hour and eleven minute video, finally removing it from the site due to the unavoidable urge it creates to jab sharp pencils into your ears.

[Yskonyn]

Well - I wouldn't expect anything else from the publisher of a game - a game that has been touted as their "big ticket" items and doesn't stack up to that tag.

No disrespect Dimitris - really none intended - but this wasn't worth £65 out the door. It will be I hope - but not out the door. I've already listed my issues in this thread and won't go over them again...and to be fair to you have acknowledged and accepted for the most part and have said you are working on it. So I am happy things are moving forward.

But to everyone - if you want to discredit Herman's review (including you Erik and Dimitris) then do it by pointing out the things that are wrong or things that he doesn't get - RELATING TO HIS REVIEW. Don't discredit it with personal attacks and links to historical crap...we (the paying public) don't give a shit about your past with him...tell me what he's got wrong.

Many of the things in that review I have found myself. He may (given his love/hate relationship with Harpoon and it's development/lack of) have over stated some issues - but I have come across many of the issues myself. Especially the love the devs have put into the game for clicking.

So ffs - don't discredit the man - discredit the review!

No matter all the vitriol and childish remarks in this thread; the above is quoted for truth! Well spoken JD!

[Tuna]

It seems that review has been removed. I cannot open SimHQ link to review and video is declared "private". Can someone post review here?

Nothing like censorship and the power of publishers..

[Grim.Reaper]

It seems that review has been removed. I cannot open SimHQ link to review and video is declared "private". Can someone post review here?

Nothing like censorship and the power of publishers..

Agreed.  Until someone can prove the review was full of errors, this is crazy.

[spelk]

My bold - so you disagree with his review? If his review means nothing then so be it. As long as you're enjoying it - and that's the important thing, right? Couldn't agree more. But that's different from discrediting someone's review based on history and nothing to do with the game. And just because you (and I to some extent) feel like that, it doesn't mean we stifle reviews does it?

I only put "supposed" review, because its not normal practice to make a review so long and I haven't watched it all, because I haven't had time. But I did watch the first few textual points made on the video listing the good, the bad, and the downright ugly. Not sure I agreed with those as they stood.

[helm123]

Have lurked here and never posted to anything on the forum but feel compelled. 

This is becoming a practice that is happening all to often.  A review that falls short of what the publisher/developer expects gets pulled.  If you sell a title that has a $100 price tag you better make certain people don't find short comings or that you can explain\show how they are using the product incorrectly.

[republic]

I am disappointed that SimHQ pulled the review.  I can only guess that they either they didn't watch it before posting it, or submitted to community or publisher pressure.