It's been mentioned in a thread over there that fraud has taken place - taking peoples money knowing the game is currently not fit for purpose (that purpose being - having a decent gaming experience).
Now - I do not think that fraud has taken place, because I genuinely do not think it was wilful - in that they knew they were taking money for a product which would be broken for this length of time (4.5 months).
Having said that - could it be considered such now? By that I mean they know the extent to which it's broken now and have done for some time - and yet it's still on sale at Matrix - still at full price (rather cheekily imo) and presumably anyone can go there and buy the broken product.
It's not just netplay either. I've read about supply and oil being issues - apparently both of which are big parts of the game.
Regardless...lets say it's not fraud and ever has been - and I'd be fine with that because I actually think Matrix are a decent company - but...at the very least is it not rather misleading that the page for the game is not updated to reflect what they know now? They know the state of the game and the extent of the major issues...should the product page not be updated to reflect this?
Also - does no-one else but me think that Matrix, given how long this game has been "unplayable" - and I grant you that not all issues are experienced by all players from what I gather - that they should offer people who bought this product a good will gesture - some sort of rebate or voucher?
It's all well and good to say we're sorry, we got it wrong, the problems were more and bigger than we thought - but to no put that on a product page which advertises the game is kind of disingenuous to me.
Just wondered what your thoughts were - and in particular perhaps, your's JH with regards to the comments made about fraud...at what point is fraud proven?
I'm not starting a flame war about Matrix here - I do like the company and have done for many years - but when it comes to issues like this - I wonder where their customer relations department goes.
Ta.
I don't think you could reasonably expect Matrix to splash a big "Game is broken - purchase at your own risk!" sign on a product page. What they COULD do is re-label the game as an early-access beta, cut the price in half, and issue a credit to everyone who already purchased. That would serve as both a warning to new customers, a mea culpa to those who already purchased, while still generating income from early adapters who don't care.
I'll leave it to the lawyers as to what they want to call it, but certainly my experience with the game is one of the most single reasons I have curbed my spending habits of late. Reading the forum, certainly seems netplay is pretty broken and it seems the solitaire play also has its fair share of issues. I am not a WIF expert, I bought in so I could learn the game since everyone always praised the board game. But I can't even bring myself to load the game. This being a monster game, I can't bring myself to invest a large amount of time in a game where there is a good chance I will run into an issue later in the game.....just deflates my interest.
With all that said, it has been released for just about five months now and each patch list is long, but it also seems issues continue to happen. For a "premium" game as they called it, fell well short of deserving that title. I am not someone who typically demands a refund or rants in the forums, but I do think my $100+ could have been better spent elsewhere. I do think there are times when refunds or some kind of offering is needed and this is one of those times. They said some kind of internal review is going on right now and they will update us by the end of the week, but not sure what to expect. I doubt they will offer anything besides they are working hard to make it respectable, which to me seems like it is still a ways off.
I hate the arguments its a large complex game and they should be cut slack because of it and there is only one developer....that's not my problem. When I purchase something, I should be able to play it within a reasonable amount of time.
One of my most disappointing experiences when you consider the current price and quality....
tgb - I agree it's not something a company would do - and you do go on to offer alternatives. But given the lack of those alternatives being on offer - given the current advertising of the game - is it not at least, currently, disingenuous and misleading to have the product page as is and charging full price for it?
GR - I feel for you. I remember when it was being released and I was too-ing and fro-ing. I remember how eager you were to get on it. Having it as a present probably sucked even more.
I also agree that "cutting slack" due to the size or complexity of a project is nowhere in the realms of good advice...in fact that kind of advice is more a slap in the face as the price ticket is "reward" for it being a huge "premium" product...not your patience as a gamer. I also totally understand why you aren't remotely interested in even starting it up - if you know it's that bugged - you would wonder how far you'd get into it before you hit a bug - and that would constantly play on your mind.
It sounds like a great game and I've said before I love the style. I do hope they get it together...for myself as well as people who have bought it. Of course I was always "adamant" (as adamant as I can be) that I wouldn't buy without an AI and even then it's going to depend on the price of the game and the AI...but it looks like the AI might be many, many moons off.
I think what would compound the issue is if they turned round in a few months time and said "Look - we've got the AI working"...and charged people for it. New players, yes - existing owners...really shouldn't - as a good will gesture.
It just seems to me their PR department have went on holiday. There's a lot of gamers bought that game based on it's reputation as a boardgame and the list of features. They paid for a premium product and didn't receive it.
I suppose for new gamers, one could argue that they should read the forums before going ahead with the purchase...but I don't think it should be down to user research when the magnitude of the issue is known.
Just my opinion of course...that's not worth a hill of beans in corporate land.
Knowing the state of the game at release time, they should never have asked that price..
A lot of games the like to say premium game at a premium price.. but then to charge even more and it's just crap.. Just glad I didn't 'fall for it'..
And to leave a broken "Premium" Game up on their site still for sale for that "Premium" price is a real nice way to treat your new potential customers.. NOT...
.
Quote from: eyebiter on March 12, 2014, 06:39:17 PM
Recall the hard cover color WiF manuals
I bought because of those books. Having WiF rules in one single publication, along with a run-down of the routines required to play the game got my attention.
Hi Judge and everyone else,
Please keep an eye on the World in Flames forum later this week. I've been posting this week to discuss community concerns. We've been doing a review of the game and the post-release update process and we'll be posting an update on the state of the game and future plans by the end of this week.
regards,
- Erik
Thanks for the update Erik. I'm also an early buyer but I had to put WiF on the back burner for a bit so I'll be interested to find out what's going on.
I just don't know how people couldn't see this coming from a mile away. It seemed pretty obvious it was going to be an even bigger mess than Empire at Arms was. Shame too, because they are both excellent board games, and I say that as someone who has given a lot of money to Matrix over the years. Kudos to them on giving Steam keys to previous owners of Panzer Corps though.
Quote from: ERutins on March 12, 2014, 07:02:35 PM
Hi Judge and everyone else,
Please keep an eye on the World in Flames forum later this week. I've been posting this week to discuss community concerns. We've been doing a review of the game and the post-release update process and we'll be posting an update on the state of the game and future plans by the end of this week.
regards,
- Erik
Thanks Erik.
I truly expect that one day I'll buy this game. For me, at that time, price will obviously be important, but my post is really about current purchasers and any new ones that stumble through there. I'm not pretending I'm flag waving on behalf of the little people here. Absolutely not. What I do hope comes from this is a new process given the knowledge of this release. Something where when you say something is a premium product and you slap a big price tag on it, players get what they expect...and by that I mean a minimum of a playable game.
That's what I really hope comes out of this so that in the future when I do jump the gun and buy one of your big products, which I have in the past and almost did with this...almost £130 worth of "jumping the gun", then I won't be disappointed.
As always, looking over there, there's heated posts (which you can only really appreciate) and you as always keep your cool and post very sensibly. Hopefully things have been learned.
It's not like it's the first big ticket release you've made...WitE, WitP:AE, Command Ops:BftB...all pretty stable on release. No sensible person ever expects a fully bug free experience. But this one has been pretty unique.
Possibly what might help (and it may be posted over there, I certainly haven't been through all the threads, is exactly, specifically what the netplay problems are.
I'll be reading with interest as ever.
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 13, 2014, 02:50:20 AM
Possibly what might help (and it may be posted over there, I certainly haven't been through all the threads, is exactly, specifically what the netplay problems are.
Hi JD
I believe that the issues arose when they initiated the connection with the Slitherine servers. Well thats what i originally read and i'm sure it was official.
I have MWIF and am so dissapointed. I have un-installed it and don't even bother looking at the updates now as it just seems to break more!
I agree that there should be better information for prospective buyers as to the state of the code. The negativity towards any critiscism, even justified, is terrible! You are told to re-assess or lower your expectations etc :o ...
The problems do exist in solitaire as well as Netplay.
I would be very dissapointed/angry if i bought the game now and experienced these issues. issues which have been there since November 2013!
Regards
Quote from: vyshka on March 12, 2014, 11:11:35 PM
I just don't know how people couldn't see this coming from a mile away. It seemed pretty obvious it was going to be an even bigger mess than Empire at Arms was. Shame too, because they are both excellent board games, and I say that as someone who has given a lot of money to Matrix over the years. Kudos to them on giving Steam keys to previous owners of Panzer Corps though.
Agreed. It seemed pretty obvious that the game was in no condition to be played before it was put up for sale. Perhaps all the excitement got the better of people.
I also want to say that it was nice of them to give previous PzCorps owners Steam keys. I got the impression that they were trying to shut down any competing stores who carried their titles after some of the other stuff was taken down elsewhere.
I enjoyed going through the tutorial, and tinkering around solitaire. Not sure I have much interest in Netplay, though the fact that it's taking so long to resolve, as well as all the bugs & general clunkiness in the UI makes me think I've wasted my money, since it doesn't bode well for how long the AI will take or if it will ever be competent. They need to make this right with all the people who bought the game in such a poor state.
Consumer law and policy is usually a product with a known defect has to be recalled or marked with known defects. It is mostly self-policed. It is only when people start dying that the government gets involved.
I think the assumption is that most people check forums before buying SW online.
Can unfinished software, ever meet customer expectations?
Seeing a product in Alpha/Beta state some are going to have expectations if this or that being added/changed in the game and even have a sense of entitlement because they already paid for it. The developer may not even have full control of what get's added/changed or finished if there's a publisher involved.
Just more reason not to sell unfinished software.
Quote from: SgtRock on March 13, 2014, 10:37:29 AM
Can unfinished software, ever meet customer expectations?
Seeing a product in Alpha/Beta state some are going to have expectations if this or that being added/changed in the game and even have a sense of entitlement because they already paid for it. The developer may not even have full control of what get's added/changed or finished if there's a publisher involved.
Just more reason not to sell unfinished software.
understandable but Matrix are selling WIF as a finished product
Exactly my point.
I know it's difficult for a company to say "This isn't finished - keep checking back" on a product page. But surely the absolute decent thing to do is exactly that? If customers mean anything to a company - surely that is the right thing to do?
I know Matrix are a decent company. I've been hanging around there since 2003 I think it was. They come across more often than not as a caring company willing to listen (sometimes...more often than not) which makes this a bit more stuck in my throat and hard to swallow.
Of course I have my own opinion of what's gone wrong - and I will keep that to myself because it is purely that - an opinion.
I'm trying desperately to stay away from analogies - but there are a plethora out there that apply!
I just think the decent thing to do is ward off potential purchasers until it's remotely working. Maybe even not ward off - but just inform in a clearer fashion rather than pointing to a 4 month old post. Otherwise it just seems like "come into my parlour said the spider to the fly".
I think the rise of the digital distribution model, coupled with the concept of public beta patches and now even pay-for-beta programs, has led to developers being generally more willing to get a product out the door, finished or not. There's just a general erosion, across the industry, of the idea that "it's not released until it's finished." Now, it's more "it's released when it's probably not too broken to be fixed."
I'm really surprised to see this with Matrix, but it strikes me as just more evidence that even the most reputable companies are getting a bit lazy because of the ease with which they can deliver patches and the continued willingness of their customers to pay to be beta testers.
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 13, 2014, 10:56:02 AM
Of course I have my own opinion of what's gone wrong - and I will keep that to myself because it is purely that - an opinion.
Well, the hamsters that run through the Internet Tubes feed on
opinion. We don't want those poor hamsters to starve, do we? :)
Seriously, I do also have an opinion. I'm looking forward to the update that Erik has promised, before voicing it.
One question I have often wondered....with it being so big and taking so long to complete a grand campaign.....during testing, were they ever able to test a complete campaign from start to finish? I realize it would take a lot of effort, but if they didn't, how could they be so sure the game was solid in the late stages of the game? I would be a little putt off if I found out they have never completed a grand campaign (although I would think they should have completed a lot more than 1) from start to finish and still released.
hhhmmm....
Quote from: undercovergeek on March 13, 2014, 10:42:34 AM
Quote from: SgtRock on March 13, 2014, 10:37:29 AM
Can unfinished software, ever meet customer expectations?
Seeing a product in Alpha/Beta state some are going to have expectations if this or that being added/changed in the game and even have a sense of entitlement because they already paid for it. The developer may not even have full control of what get's added/changed or finished if there's a publisher involved.
Just more reason not to sell unfinished software.
understandable but Matrix are selling WIF as a finished product
Anyone who thought WIF was a finished product was wearing rose colored glasses, the project has been in trouble for years, just read the WIF forums. Matrix should have put more resources on it 2 years ago or canned it!
Quote from: SgtRock on March 13, 2014, 10:30:07 PM
Quote from: undercovergeek on March 13, 2014, 10:42:34 AM
Quote from: SgtRock on March 13, 2014, 10:37:29 AM
Can unfinished software, ever meet customer expectations?
Seeing a product in Alpha/Beta state some are going to have expectations if this or that being added/changed in the game and even have a sense of entitlement because they already paid for it. The developer may not even have full control of what get's added/changed or finished if there's a publisher involved.
Just more reason not to sell unfinished software.
understandable but Matrix are selling WIF as a finished product
Anyone who thought WIF was a finished product was wearing rose colored glasses, the project has been in trouble for years, just read the WIF forums. Matrix should have put more resources on it 2 years ago or canned it!
I didn't read every post up to release, but I'm pretty sure the general conception was that it was ready...cut down...but ready apart from the on release bombshell about Netplay. I don't remember reading any posts about anything being broke or not working correctly....but then my memory is pretty poor!
Was does seem very weird was how the Netplay bomb was dropped on the day...or at least the problem might have been known, but that the magnitude of the issue wasn't announced until the day. What happened through testing up to release that either so broke Netplay or made the Netplay issue suddenly jump out at them.
Quote from: SgtRock on March 13, 2014, 10:30:07 PM
Quote from: undercovergeek on March 13, 2014, 10:42:34 AM
Quote from: SgtRock on March 13, 2014, 10:37:29 AM
Can unfinished software, ever meet customer expectations?
Seeing a product in Alpha/Beta state some are going to have expectations if this or that being added/changed in the game and even have a sense of entitlement because they already paid for it. The developer may not even have full control of what get's added/changed or finished if there's a publisher involved.
Just more reason not to sell unfinished software.
Anyone who thought WIF was a finished product was wearing rose colored glasses, the project has been in trouble for years, just read the WIF forums. Matrix should have put more resources on it 2 years ago or canned it!
thats easy for me, you and JD to say though - but ill bet theres 100s more out there, sons, daughters, mums and wives who hear on the grapevine their dads/husband favourite board game is now on PC, google it, find it at Matrix, click and buy without doing any research
Why, when the companys best premier product is there in the shop store window on a revolving plynth, must the customer make sure it actually works
I know fk all about golf apart from you hit balls with sticks, my dad plays it everyday, if at fathers day i go into the golf shop and say 'i want to see your best, most expensive golf club' and i get taken to the back of the store, here it is in all its glory, 50% more expensive than the rest - i really, really shouldnt have to ask - 'yeah, but does it actually work'
and the answer better not be 'well, it doesnt hit balls properly and will likely snap if you play with your friends!!!'
thats why matrix are raping their customers and it needs taking out of the window
lol - "hit balls with sticks"
I really stopped following WiF once I learned it would ship with no A.I., and was glad I did when the price was announced. But I thought the rap on it was that you could at least play multiplayer while the A.I. was being worked on. Are you guys saying you can't even do that?
It's not playable multi player from what I gather - unless you are "hot seating". Netplay is porked....for all? I don't honestly know. All I know is I can't recall seeing anyone report they were able to complete a full turn
So it's solitaire only at present, or hot seat...even then though your game will apparently not be trouble free.
I'm sure it will get there...and I'm sure everyone has faith - but I would think a roadmap would be handy...let people know where exactly it is and what the plan is to get it to where it should be
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 14, 2014, 06:51:40 AM
It's not playable multi player from what I gather - unless you are "hot seating". Netplay is porked....for all? I don't honestly know. All I know is I can't recall seeing anyone report they were able to complete a full turn
I don't believe that anyone has ever completed a full game/turn over netplay. The question has been asked on the MWIF forums recently.
Generally speaking, I find that Matrix's quality control and customer service have diminished since their merger with Slitherine.
It seems the focus is more on quantity and less on quality.
Quote from: z1812 on March 14, 2014, 08:48:17 AM
Generally speaking, I find that Matrix's quality control and customer service have diminished since their merger with Slitherine.
It seems the focus is more on quantity and less on quality.
And there is exactly the opinion I was holding onto!
I'll just say that Erik and Ian seem to have different approaches to customer relations, and leave it at that.
Quote from: z1812 on March 14, 2014, 08:48:17 AM
Generally speaking, I find that Matrix's quality control and customer service have diminished since their merger with Slitherine.
It seems the focus is more on quantity and less on quality.
+1
Quote from: Barthheart on March 14, 2014, 08:53:31 AM
Quote from: z1812 on March 14, 2014, 08:48:17 AM
Generally speaking, I find that Matrix's quality control and customer service have diminished since their merger with Slitherine.
It seems the focus is more on quantity and less on quality.
+1
theyre paradox from 10 years ago
To be fair - alot of their releases are fairly problem free...as problem free as one expects computer games to be. I mean - most games are released without game stopping bugs though every game has bugs. Obviously the more complex the game, the more likely there will be more bugs...but game stoppers should've gone before release - otherwise it just isn't ready.
Their recent release of Heroes of Stalingrad is in great condition for a new release, as was Flashpoint Campaigns and, to a lesser extent, CMANO...although most of my problems with CMANO were interface related (which I see still haven't all been ironed out - I'm still having to resize the damn platform window everytime I open it!
But overall, I think they have more of a success rate than not.
This one just seemed like money needed to come in and they went the wrong way about it imo.
I said before (on release or roundabout) and I'll say again - releasing it as a BETA would've got money in the door and a lot less pissed off customers. They likely wouldn't even have had to reduce the price for the BETA - there were apparently so many hardcore board game fans that would pay a bazillion pounds for it on release...at least, that's what they were professing when anyone asked about the price!
Enough. I'll be reading with interest at the Matrix site.
My recent (over the past year) purchases from Matrix have all been very satisfying and playable right out of the gate (I only play solo against the AI so any MP issues are unknown to me)....this includes Pandora, ACW2, Heroes of Stalingrad and Flashpoint Campaigns. I understand this hasn't been the case for others with other purchases. I guess it's luck of the draw? But you can avoid really bad releases by waiting a week or two after release to see what others are saying and what issues have come up. WiF would seem to be a perfect example of this. It is also the reason why I never pre-order. The horror stories I've read on these forums about pre-orders are nothing short of epic.
I don't know if this is THE announcement from Erik - I believe it is though
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3571077
Yep, I suspect that's it.....
All he really seems to be saying is that Matrix is aware of problems and they are working to get them fixed. I would assume that's been the case all along, so I'm not really seeing any great revelations here.
Not that I have a dog in this fight, but I see a distinct lack of "We will be issuing some credit to buyers who thought that they were getting something other than a semi-stable mid-range beta, and we will be changing our offering of the current product to new buyers so as to reflect the state of the game that they will receive. We need a return on investment now, so paying us to help us beta test the game will be great, but to be fair we want buyers to know that this is what they're doing so that they can make a clearly informed choice about what they're getting into. WIF is an awesome game and if you want to be a part of it early, you can!"
Current store price: $99 for download version, $99 for boxed with maps. Maps also available for sale separately, for an extra $99 (http://www.matrixgames.com/products/519/details/World.in.Flames.Map.Pack), in case you want an extra set.
QuoteWorld in Flames is Matrix Games' computer version of Australian Design Group's classic board game. Covering both the European and Pacific Theaters of Operations during World War II, World in Flames is global in scope while simulating each branch of service in detail. Land units are corps and army level, supplemented with specialized divisions. Naval units include individual counters for every carrier, battleship, cruiser, and light cruiser in the war. Using 1000+ unique bitmapped images, air units represent groups of 250 to 500 airplanes. With 6000+ unique units, 250+ countries, and a global map of 70,200 hexes, World in Flames is the premier World War II grand strategy game.
Harry Rowland, Game Designer of the original World in Flames boardgame, said: "ADG have produced some high quality games over the years but nothing compares to the top-notch components included in World in Flames: the computer game. It includes 24 full-colour maps, and 3 hard-covered books of over 600 pages, a real collector's gem".
Harry Rowland on the game's own sales store page says the computer game includes 24 full-colour maps plus 3 hard-covered books of over 600 pages.
QuoteNine of the eleven scenarios from Australian Design Group's World in Flames Final Edition are included, and they range from the small 5 turn Barbarossa offensive in Russia and the 5 turn Guadalcanal battle in the Pacific, through to the 36 turn Global War campaign which spans all of Europe, Africa, the Middle East, Asia, the Atlantic, and the Pacific. You can play either the Axis or the Allied side or take the role of one of the 8 major powers. Besides solitaire and head-to-head, you can play over the Internet. The last mode of play is for two players, Axis versus Allies.
If the game doesn't really include a solitaire mode, as the quick note below admits, the advertisement shouldn't say so here.
QuoteIn addition to the full set of rules from World in Flames, Final Edition, there are 58 optional rules. Australian Design Group's expansion modules Ships in Flames and Planes in Flames are incorporated into the basic game, but the inclusion of other expansion modules, such as Mech in Flames, Carrier Planes in Flames, and Cruisers in Flames, depends on which optional rules are selected.
This simulation models national production from conveying raw resources to factories using rail lines and overseas pipelines for producing infantry, armor, naval, and air combat units. Because oil was so important during World War II, there are separate optional rules for synthetic oil plants and deployment of oil reserves to the front lines.
Game units represent armies and corps, aircraft carriers, naval task forces, and air groups that took part in World War II. Everything you need to re-fight the greatest conflict in history is provided in World in Flames. The players make the strategic decisions that decide the fate of nations. What forces to produce, where to commit them, when and how? No two games of World in Flames play the same, no strategy is foolproof, any decision may have unforeseen, long-term consequences.
If you want to change the world then World in Flames is for you.
IMPORTANT: For news on the state of Multiplayer at release and World in Flames, please read this Forum post.
For more information on physical copy shipment and customs costs, please read this Forum post.
For more in-game content, read the "Seven Moments of WoW"!
IMPORTANT NOTE: This title does not include an AI player in the initial release. It is designed as a computerized, automated and online multiplayer-capable World in Flames, including an integrated multiplayer forum and an official multiplayer server for easy player matching and networking.
WHAT YOU GET - An amazing physical package! [etc.]
Gosh, looks to me like the game provides, and is intended for, an integrated online multiplayer-capable WiF, including an integrated mp form and easy player etc., and is ready to play right out of the box! They wouldn't charge $100 for downloading a game that was still deep in beta for the only intended way to play the game, would they?
... oh, they're charging $99 for the maps (whether you want them or not), and the game is actually free right now? That's why they say you get an amazing physical package, yeah I remember the designer saying it had 24 full scale maps, scrolling down to read more, GIANT EYECATCHING SCALE PHOTO OF HOW LARGE THE PHYSICAL MAPS ARE! PLUS PHOTOS OF THE RULE BOOKS!
So whether the game works sufficiently well in its only intended mode of play is kind of irrelevant -- it isn't like customers are actually paying
for the game yet, only for the maps. That would explain why the only way to buy the game in-store is to pay $99 for the maps.
(Note: the site does say between the amazing physical package and the large eyecatching graphic about the amazing physical maps, that the physical maps are an optional purchase.)
Hi JasonPratt
It is $99 for Download only
or
$99 for Download + Physical (Includes 3 manuals + Game disc)
The maps are an extra $99
Remember though that depending on where you live the Postage can be considerable... then there is customs and duty on top :o
Regards
Out of curiosity, I clicked to buy the separate map pack. Apparently I was wrong, the game itself also costs $99 to buy separately along with the map pack, although they're willing to give me a 25% discount for buying them separately together: $99 (for map pack) + $74.99 for the game.
I really just want to have an "amazing physical package", though, not the game. I won't click to add the game and see what happens.
Redirecting to Plimus... taking a while, must be server load for the guys interested in having an amazing physical package...
Yep, there we go, the physical maps, $99.
[Edited to add: Asid confirmed this while I was composing.]
Gosh, I dunno. Now that I think about it, maybe it would be nice to have a fun multiplayer game with an integrated and stable multiplayer experience. I mean, I can play single-player WW2 on a global map pretty stably on several other games, even some with several thousand hexes on the map; but I'd like to be able to play the super-huge 10Khex+ map set board game with my brother and it would be handy to have that ability on the computer. Naturally, we'll still both have to buy the physical maps anyway from Matrix, even though we're never going to use them and don't really want them; and we'll both have to pay an extra $99 (or $75 rather) to play the computer version of those maps, but the game should competently allow us to do so. They wouldn't charge $99 $75 to each of us for a game we couldn't be reasonably sure would abritrate our game for us between our computers, right?
So I'll go back to the map page, order again, click on the box to add the game -- oh, good, the system realized I didn't actually want two sets of the maps, because that would be ridiculous. $99 for the physical maps, $74.99 for the game in a physical box. $174.98 + shipping & handlng. I CAN FEEL MY PHYSICAL AMAZINGNESS SWELLING AS I LOOK AT IT!!
Or... I dunno, I get the impression from the other store window that I could buy the maps there for $99 and get the game for free. That would seem to make more sense. But if that's the case, what am I buying here for $74.99? {squinting} It says I'm buying a "promo physical".
... am I buying a $75 box to put the maps in? Is that being offered as a special deal to promote the game?
Oh well. Continue shopping, back to the store window for the game, click on download -- I don't understand the distinction between getting a download for free plus $99 of maps, and buying a physical copy of the game plus a download for free and $99 of maps. Maybe they're sending me a physical backup disk. Okay, wait, that's a good idea. Matrix usually charges, like, $10 for a backup disc. I'll go back and get that, instead.
Huh. Okay, when I click on a physical copy of the game (presumably meaning a CD or DVD, whatever), I get taken back to the store window for the maps by themselves. To which I can add a copy of the game for a reduced price of $75. I'm back where I started. This is silly, I'll just go to my checkout.
What? Checkout comes back here again! Fine, I'll proceed without clicking on a copy of the game. I'll delete the extra map pack when I get to the store.
So... dang, which of these is just the game for free, and which are the $99 map packs? I don't want to pay for extra map packs -- honestly, I could do without the maps at all -- but I certainly don't want to pay $75 for the game plus $99 for a map pack if I can get the game for free plus a $99 map pack. But which one(s) do I delete, and which do I keep? Can't I just buy the game for free if it's free?
Sigh. My physical impressiveness is feeling so large my brain is dizzy. HELP ME O INTERNETS!!
(Click on an image below to swell its physical AMAZINGNESS. For free.)
Sarcasm off: my points are...
(1) The store could do a better job explaining that the maps cost $100 by themselves and are a totally separate purchase, and the game costs $100 by itself as a totally separate purchase (or rather $200 as two totally separate purchases) but with an option to mail a free printed copy of the manuals and a physical disc -- but if someone buys the maps they can get the game at a 25% discount (not the other way around because obviously the maps are the most important thing for fans of the game who already have physical maps most likely SARCASM OFF SARCASM OFF!). The information is there, but is mixed in with the confusing original advertisement copy.
Far more importantly: (2) The store could do a much better job explaining that for $200 (or for $275 if one set of maps are also bought), two players who have bought the game solely for its only intended purpose, to play WiF against each other on the computer, will be buying a mid-grade beta product with tons of bugs still in it and a good chance of being unable to play the game against each other although they can solitaire around by themselves without an opponent at all on each of their computers if they want. And run into the tons of bugs that way, too.
I can totally understand why customers are torqued over this. I would be rage vomiting.
lol JasonPratt
If you are not hit by the poatage and customs/duty issue (like the Europeans are) then buy the physical for $99 + postage ($10 in USA i think). In this package you will recieve:
3 Game manuals
1 Game disc
NO MAPS
Download only gives you just the software as is included in the above package.
There is no way to get the software for free and the maps are $99 minus a discount if bought with the game.
Hope this helps....
But first read in the Matrix forums as to the state of the game... long term!
Regards
Quote from: Asid on March 14, 2014, 12:18:54 PMThere is no way to get the software for free and the maps are $99 minus a discount if bought with the game.
I know, I was commenting on the unclarity of the store pages, and how someone trying to suss out what's being bought where could get confused because paying $175 for a game plus maps seems unintuitive and unlikely.
Customers should not have to click on the forums to find out the state of a game that costs, by itself, $100. Vague "important" hints on the store page to click on a link don't offset this problem.
Customers, in my opinion, shouldn't pay $100 to play a game where the prime functionality stands a good chance, or even a moderate chance, or even a small chance, of being broken. But if they want to take that risk, they ought to be given information about it first. That's why there are early-beta sales programs.
Correction to my screed: the store page for the game, when buying the physical collection, offers to sell the map collection at 25% off; it doesn't link as though the customer tried to buy the maps first.
Despite how it may seem, I do appreciate Asid trying to be fair to the Matrix store pages. :D It's possible my brain was just stunned by the concept of paying no less than $200 ($100 per person) for a game that doesn't reliably work in its prime function (not even counting the bugs), while the Matrix PR guys are still trying to distract customers from that by waving around a set of maps for an extra $100 above and beyond the minimum $200 game cost which do, admittedly, work so far as they go.
Quote from: JasonPratt on March 14, 2014, 12:50:15 PM
It's possible my brain was just stunned by the concept of paying no less than $200 ($100 per person) for a game that doesn't reliably work in its prime function (not even counting the bugs), while the Matrix PR guys are still trying to distract customers from that by waving around a set of maps for an extra $100 above and beyond the minimum $200 game cost which do, admittedly, work so far as they go.
+1
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 14, 2014, 10:47:46 AM
I don't know if this is THE announcement from Erik - I believe it is though
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3571077
Big disappointment if this is it. Nothing new here and states the obvious. Gives me no idea as to when it will be fully playable to get my money's worth.
Think I will just have to write this one off as a bad investment and more strongly scrutinize my future matrix purchases....
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on March 14, 2014, 05:31:29 PM
Big disappointment if this is it. Nothing new here and states the obvious. Gives me no idea as to when it will be fully playable to get my money's worth.
Maybe your expectations are to high ;) :P
Quote from: Asid on March 14, 2014, 05:57:22 PM
Quote from: Grim.Reaper on March 14, 2014, 05:31:29 PM
Big disappointment if this is it. Nothing new here and states the obvious. Gives me no idea as to when it will be fully playable to get my money's worth.
Maybe your expectations are to high ;) :P
That must be the case....
Well Erik came on here and said to watch out for a post. I did and that post is up and I just don't get how that addresses anything in my original post.
There's a "cheeky" answer on the thread with Erik's post which says Netplay is broken and that he thought that was clear - but it was only clear if you read the whole of that post, which to be honest just came off as a lot of excuses and very little to do with the problems or an apology.
Yes - I know there's an apology in there, but like the netplay isn't working statement, it's so surrounded by so much fluff as to be virtually undetectable.
I think that probably is one of the poorest official posts to come out from Matrix...basically asking the public, who paid premium price for a premium product to continue testing it and reporting with absolutely nothing heading their way for the original disastrous release or for having to beta test over the coming months.
Very poor imo. :(
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 18, 2014, 11:15:11 AM
Very poor imo. :(
Have you tried expressing your opinion/dissapointment over on the MWIF forum?
Quote from: Asid on March 18, 2014, 11:33:43 AM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 18, 2014, 11:15:11 AM
Very poor imo. :(
Have you tried expressing your opinion/dissapointment over on the MWIF forum?
He's certainly done so for other games in the past, there. Probably one of the most vocal about the poor state of the CMANO interface on release, and understandably so.
At this point, I would think complaining about a broken overpriced game that has been in development limbo for years would be wasted effort. May as well write it off and be done with it. I would think most potential customers with an inkling of it's state had done so before it was even released.
Quote from: Asid on March 18, 2014, 11:33:43 AM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 18, 2014, 11:15:11 AM
Very poor imo. :(
Have you tried expressing your opinion/dissapointment over on the MWIF forum?
Are you taking the piss?
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 18, 2014, 05:04:33 PM
Quote from: Asid on March 18, 2014, 11:33:43 AM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 18, 2014, 11:15:11 AM
Very poor imo. :(
Have you tried expressing your opinion/dissapointment over on the MWIF forum?
Are you taking the piss?
No of course not.
I do however recognise the fact that any "negative" comment is aggresively handled.
*I should've apologised for my curt response. I did actually think you were having a laugh though.*
That's exactly why I asked the question.
I have posted many times over at Matrix. Most in defence of the company and some, in the last couple of 3 years, against some decisions. You are jumped on from a great height. There is a "rear guard" there that I simply do not want to get involved with and that's one of the reasons I all but left there a couple of years ago. I post occasionally
I saw one person over there ask if it was ready yet and there were several that jumped down his throat. One of them stated "Nice troll post"!
I don't express it here because there is no recourse to my postings here. It's not a sniper attack. I am well aware that Matrix/Slitherine watch threads here...as Erik has pointed out by posting in this very thread.
Quote from: Nefaro on March 18, 2014, 01:05:40 PM
Quote from: Asid on March 18, 2014, 11:33:43 AM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 18, 2014, 11:15:11 AM
Very poor imo. :(
Have you tried expressing your opinion/dissapointment over on the MWIF forum?
He's certainly done so for other games in the past, there. Probably one of the most vocal about the poor state of the CMANO interface on release, and understandably so.
At this point, I would think complaining about a broken overpriced game that has been in development limbo for years would be wasted effort. May as well write it off and be done with it. I would think most potential customers with an inkling of it's state had done so before it was even released.
Thank you :)
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 18, 2014, 05:20:28 PM
That's exactly why I asked the question.
I have posted many times over at Matrix. Most in defence of the company and some, in the last couple of 3 years, against some decisions. You are jumped on from a great height. There is a "rear guard" there that I simply do not want to get involved with and that's one of the reasons I all but left there a couple of years ago. I post occasionally
Understood and agree with you. I have read a lot of the MWIF forum, especially after release and it's amazing how they handle anything even remotely regarded as negative. It keeps me away as well.
Respect for expressing your opinion in such a hostile environment 8)
Quote from: Nefaro on March 18, 2014, 01:05:40 PM
Quote from: Asid on March 18, 2014, 11:33:43 AM
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 18, 2014, 11:15:11 AM
Very poor imo. :(
Have you tried expressing your opinion/dissapointment over on the MWIF forum?
He's certainly done so for other games in the past, there. Probably one of the most vocal about the poor state of the CMANO interface on release, and understandably so.
At this point, I would think complaining about a broken overpriced game that has been in development limbo for years would be wasted effort. May as well write it off and be done with it. I would think most potential customers with an inkling of it's state had done so before it was even released.
Consider me one of the people that fully didn't understand the true shape of the game....I knew there would be no AI, but had no idea a lot of issues were still existing with solitaire and netplay (besides the ones Matrix said would be fixed in a week or so). Initially I was more worried about the price of the game versus doing my homework I guess.....they certainly fooled me on this one. My negative experience has helped me become less of an impulse buyer so I don't make that mistake again.
I've read that solo play is going pretty well and it's possible for two to run a game using a number of remote desktop programs. If you have an opponent that you trust sharing control of your machine with, it's a viable stop gap.
Quote from: Ubercat on March 18, 2014, 07:18:23 PM
I've read that solo play is going pretty well and it's possible for two to run a game using a number of remote desktop programs. If you have an opponent that you trust sharing control of your machine with, it's a viable stop gap.
I believe solo play has issues still... supply for example. As for the Multiplayer "workaround" i read about it a while ago and it was just to much messing about and involved quite a bit. I also think there may be 2 "work arounds" both equally unsatisfactory in my opinion.
Quote from: JudgeDredd on March 18, 2014, 05:20:28 PM
*I should've apologised for my curt response. I did actually think you were having a laugh though.*
That's exactly why I asked the question.
The typed word is often misinterpreted due to the absence of emotional cues. It's all good :)
Quote from: Ubercat on March 18, 2014, 07:18:23 PM
a viable stop gap
Quite a few of those, in WiF. Viable, as long as your upload bandwith allows you to 'stream' your desktop on real-time. Given how, ehm,
agile WiF interface is in general, I am not looking forward to try that.
To be honest, I am not either impressed with the official statement. It's interesting to see beta testers like bo, publicly stating that they're not happy with the state the game was released. But as Sgt Rock says, there have been signs of this state of affairs for years. Steve kept posting religiously on the progress he was making on WiF, and I did indeed spot quite a few red flags over the years - I've got white hairs in my chin meanwhile - pointing out that things weren't well at all.
First, that the whole thing is programmed in Delphi, which isn't renowned precisely for game development (I liked it, it used to be a good alternative to the typeless zanyness of VisualBasic, but then VB.Net came, saw and conquered) nor widely used any more (it was discontinued a while ago by Borland). I also got the impression that Steve is one of those programmers that fix problems by adding a new ELSE IF, rather than taking a step back and tearing things down to start from scratch when it's necessary. This thing of trying to be as faithful to the ruleset is also a problem: rulesets written in
English,
structured for humans that can read the language and can use
human powers of reasoning to execute the mechanics encoded in the rules. That sounds like a reasonable thing to translate into code, but the Devil lies in the bits I marked in italic.
Second, that the work on the AI was stopped at some point - I do remember that Steve had invented an scripting language to program the AI behavior, LAIO, was its name I reckon - after a massive investment of time, not to mention that inventing an scripting language for that was reinventing the wheel. I can also recall clearly posts by Steve - or beta-testers - showcasing the AI for Nationalist China, quite a few years ago. Probably it wasn't a WIF master level of play, but sure it could do a better job that the AI in WITP:AE or early iterations of HOI.
Third, Steve got hit hard by health issues - an eye cancer, no less - and that most likely threw him off rails for a while (yet I can't help but admire Steve resilience, after that, if I were him I would have given up or passed the torch of development to someone else and adopt a more 'managerial' position). That's a problem since the technical team had, precisely, one member, Steve.
So I can't - personally - blame other than myself for having acquired WiF. I wanted the books, and I wasn't very sure about the software. My concerns regarding the software have been confirmed, yet it's much less tight than I'd expect from a product developed behind closed doors for so long.
Perhaps the problem has been this "developed behind closed doors for so long" bit. A "release early, release often" approach usually works better than developing in a cocoon to come out and get bitten in the a** by furious, rabid clients asking for refunds and otherwise heaping all kinds of sh*t on you and your project. Been there myself, a long time ago, and it isn't a very happy situation.
For those that didn't have any information whatsoever - the example mentioned on this thread about "wifes and relatives getting it as a present" may sound dramatic but I reckon it's cutting very close to the bone for a few - I'd expect the possibility to get some kind of discount or reedeemable reward, based on
realistic expectations about WiF future development. Compared with the possible cost of recalling all those books or, let's hope things don't get there, a class action suit, I think Slitherine/Matrix would be wise to take the opportunity to generate good will while they can.
I should probably clarify that I don't even remotely blame Steve; and that I normally support Matrix strongly, and that I even like Erik and the other chief guys there. And after all, I haven't been burned (but only because I had enough sense not to buy another WW2 strategy game after all the other ones I've bought, many from Matrix not incidentally).
Maybe all this comes down to Matrix wanting to try to get some money to Steve after all his work under harsh r-l conditions. :-\