My comments on the Matrix Forum [Archive]

thewood

14 Jun 06, 23:45

This is a message I just left on the Matrix forums after finally getting the download to work.

I have been playing and buying H1, 2, and 3 through all its iterations and tribulations. I have probably spent over $300 on versions os harpoon and its battlesets. With that said, even though I qualified for a $15 discount, I bought the $50 version just to get the game and show support for Matrix.

After getting the game, I am a little disappointed that no database editor is included, but I am more disappointed in all the links referring back to an AGSI website that is not ready for prime time. The readme link just takes to a "to be completed later" message and the database editor manual takes to an AGSI page that says no editor is available. The discount link from the Matrix page takes you to another AGSI page that says the discount page will be added later.

Come on. If you're not ready, you're not ready. Are Matrix and AGSI so desperate for revenue that they release a product to a VERY loyal fan base that is just not ready to be released.

I am not going to take advantage of multiplayer. I thought I was spending $50 for bug fixes. Instead, I see many of the bugs still listed as to be fixed later. Not only that, realistic developments from the community like variable ready times for aircraft not being integrated.

Herman Hum

15 Jun 06, 00:04

After getting the game, I am a little disappointed that no database editor is included, but I am more disappointed in all the links referring back to an AGSI website that is not ready for prime time. The readme link just takes to a "to be completed later" message and the database editor manual takes to an AGSI page that says no editor is available. The discount link from the Matrix page takes you to another AGSI page that says the discount page will be added later.

<< snip >>

I am not going to take advantage of multiplayer. I thought I was spending $50 for bug fixes. Instead, I see many of the bugs still listed as to be fixed later. Not only that, realistic developments from the community like variable ready times for aircraft not being integrated.
Is there something specific about the ANW DB editor that you are looking for? The H3 Access Editor created Jon Reimer works just fine from my experience. I have had a chance to try the ANW Beta H3Editor and there are some new functions, but it isn't a generational leap, IMO. Can you elaborate? Do you need a copy of the old H3 editor to tide you over until the ANW editor is released?

I am in the same boat as you. I have no intention of using multi-player (mainly because I am on a dial-up connection). I helped Freek out in hopes of getting better bug repairs.

Is your concern that the Official DB does not use Custom Ready Times, at all? H4DB does have CRTs implemented for some of the aircraft and loadouts, but not all of them. Is this what bothers you?

Sunburn

15 Jun 06, 03:11

Jon Reimer's H3 DB-editor is still available, here:

http://www.advancedgaming.biz/index.php?cevent=page.view&id=41&sub_id=0&widget_id=1

Custom Ready Times are a DB-specific feature. Some DBs support them for all aircraft, others support them for some aircraft, others do not support them at all.

thewood

15 Jun 06, 06:16

Herman Hum

15 Jun 06, 06:58

The AGSI site says specifically that the available version is for 3.6.3 only.
That may be the claim, but I can attest that I have found no major problems using the 3.6.3 version of the PlayersDB with ANW.

Having said that, there ARE differences. For example, certain settings and values may not have been functional in H3 v3.6.3, but are operational in ANW.

In 3.6.3, installations and facilities could not be inserted by the Scenario Editor because they were disfunctional and caused errors. These land units can now be inserted properly with the ANW ScenEdit.

Herman Hum

15 Jun 06, 07:25

One more big difference between ANW and 3.6.3 (at least for the PlayersDB):

The satellites will not likely work as they do in 3.6.3. We suspect that if this affects scenarios made with the PlayersDB, it will likely affect any other Database that models satellites, too.

Currently, in ANW, we cannot get the satellites to rise above Med Altitude. Hopefully, a database solution will be found. As yet, any scen using satellites is presently crippled if you try to play it in ANW.

Blackcloud6

15 Jun 06, 07:34

Come on. If you're not ready, you're not ready. Are Matrix and AGSI so desperate for revenue that they release a product to a VERY loyal fan base that is just not ready to be released.

I am not going to take advantage of multiplayer. I thought I was spending $50 for bug fixes.

Well after seeing they're charging $40 for their "update" of TOAW it seems that matrix is becoming the rip-off company of computer wargames.

thewood

15 Jun 06, 07:59

Well after seeing they're charging $40 for their "update" of TOAW it seems that matrix is becoming the rip-off company of computer wargames.

I don't begrudge them charging $50 for this. I am more than happy to pay it if it means official support. Same for TOAW. These two great games were orphaned and it takes money to update and support them. TOAW was ready for release. It was communicated quite clearly what was done to the game.

With H3, I am still completely confused about what was fixed, how you modify the database, and how to upgrade from the older versions. While they have tried to explain a lot of it, the links they refer to are either incomplete or don't work.

I expect more out of a $50 upgrade that was being worked on for years.

Pirimeister

15 Jun 06, 08:11

Well, I for one am pretty disapointed with this upgrade policy. I bought my copy of Harpoon 3 a year and a month ago, after asking the guys at AGSI is it was best to wait for the new version. Since they were begining the debugging and testing process that would lead to H3 ANW, I was told that it was best to go ahead and buy the game then, specially, I was told, since only the MP portion of the upgrade would be charged - something I was not (and still am not) interested in. Existing users would get to upgrade the SP game for free, like in previous itinerations.

Now, I now that this was as good a "guestimate"as I could have been given at that time and I'm not saying that the upgrade should be free, even if just included the SP upgrades. It's obvious that a great lot of work went into this new version and it should be charged accordingly.

But I find it really hard to justify to myself spending $35 + VAT, when I've already spent €45,22 (€38 + 7.22 VAT) a year ago in what is essencially the same game.:cry: It's just too much money to spend on a single game - a game I could have easily waited for a bit longer, if that meant getting a less buggy version.

So I feel really disapointed and I think I'll let this game pass, as much as I regret it (for all the bugs removed). My old H3 will have to do.

Just my thoughts...

Paulo

Herman Hum

15 Jun 06, 08:23

So I feel really disapointed and I think I'll let this game pass, as much as I regret it (for all the bugs removed). My old H3 will have to do.

Just my thoughts...

Paulo
But, but, but,... you Promised me a head-to-head match! :D

I totally understand your sentiment. I am saddened that we will not have the pleasure of meeting on the electronic seas...

CPangracs

15 Jun 06, 09:51

Well after seeing they're charging $40 for their "update" of TOAW it seems that matrix is becoming the rip-off company of computer wargames.

I don't know about that, but they ARE making it clear that, to keep an old wargame alive, it's going to take a great deal of committment, in time AND money, from the communities.

Pirimeister

15 Jun 06, 10:00

I don't know about that, but they ARE making it clear that, to keep an old wargame alive, it's going to take a great deal of committment, in time AND money, from the communities.

I can understand that Curt, but do you think that the full price tag will help bring new members to teh Harpoon comunity? I'm a baby in the woods regarding the ins and outs of the wargaming buiseness, but I have a hard time thinking of someone exposed for the first time to Harpoon and willing to let go of $50 to buy something that for all purposes still looks like a "DOS-thing", no matter what the reputed quality of the gameplay might be...

But then again, what do I know...

CPangracs

15 Jun 06, 15:27

I can understand that Curt, but do you think that the full price tag will help bring new members to teh Harpoon comunity? I'm a baby in the woods regarding the ins and outs of the wargaming buiseness, but I have a hard time thinking of someone exposed for the first time to Harpoon and willing to let go of $50 to buy something that for all purposes still looks like a "DOS-thing", no matter what the reputed quality of the gameplay might be...

But then again, what do I know...

I will refrain from saying anything about H3 or its look because some people would regard it as "professional jealousy" instead of consumer opinion.

However, looking at the "business model", I think it may be a tough go of it. H3, in all fairness, is much like TOAW and even my games - they are NOT for the faint of heart or the uninitiated. They are involved and require dedication to properly learn and play, and therefore will probably NEVER be poster children for the wargame initiate.

That being said, requiring people to pay for minimal increases in content, functionality, etc, may alienate some fans, but then they were never REALLY fans (fanatics) in the first place were they? ;)

I predict H3 will do fine, and I sincerely hope it does well enough to support continued effort in making the game better.

Curt

Blackcloud6

15 Jun 06, 16:35

That being said, requiring people to pay for minimal increases in content, functionality, etc, may alienate some fans, but then they were never REALLY fans (fanatics) in the first place were they?

Charging a mininmal fee for a minimal increase is ok and appropriate, charging full price for a what amounts to is an update and not full new product is not something I feel like paying. It's like paying twice for the same game. I hope this current matrix business model fails.

Don Maddox

15 Jun 06, 17:30

A distinction ought to be made between publisher and developer. These two entities serve different functions.

thewood

15 Jun 06, 19:40

A distinction ought to be made between publisher and developer. These two entities serve different functions.

Maybe to the publisher and developer, but to a buyer, they should be treated the same. They entered into an agreement to work together to deliver. If one is not doing his part, the end user doesn't and shouldn't have to pick the person to blame. The blame falls on who charged you on the promise to deliver. Let them sort out who is at fault between them.

Boats

16 Jun 06, 00:53

I don't know about that, but they ARE making it clear that, to keep an old wargame alive, it's going to take a great deal of committment, in time AND money, from the communities.

It's already taken a considerable amount of fan committment and time to get H3 ANW to the marketplace...and if Don Gilman had to pay for all the time that fans spent testing, there would be NO H3 ANW. I know that for a fact. My time almost cost me a marriage, and kept me up real late at night, when I was already holding down a high-pressure, very much full time job.

Boats,
aka, Byron Audler,
ex-project manager, Harpoon 2002, and Harpoon2002 Gold

Boats

16 Jun 06, 01:02

One more thing...it took a hell of a lot of work to get Harpooners the holy grail of Harpoon, MP. They've been lusting for this ever since the days of Kesmai and Harpoon Classic Online. It was just as big an effort to get H3 MP, as it was to get Harpoon Classic a database editor...because the code was never meant to be edited by individuals. In both cases, it's a minor miracle that this ever happened. Thus, this very accurate, very intense, very challenging game is now even more so, when you add the human factor in. It's WORTH the money. Most of you don't blink an eye when you pay $50 for a new PS2 game, so why ***** about the BEST naval sim ever made?

Lastly, a bit of arm twisting convinced Don Gilman to issue discounts. He didn't have to. But he was convinced of the wisdom, that in the long run, you need to take care of your core players as much as you can. Harpoon has never done this before.

If you don't want the game, then don't buy it. If you do, and have a problem, then go to the AGSI site and send Don an email. Give him a day or two, and he'll get back to you.

Nuttin' to it. Let's get this workin' party moving again, I want these decks to shine, you swab jockeys!:laugh:

Boats

Don Maddox

16 Jun 06, 16:28

Knowing only a little about Harpoon, my first reaction is to agree with Boats. I think some of you may be way underestimating how important multiplayer is these days. Be it live TCP/IP, PBEM, or hotseat, today's games simply must include some kind of multiplayer capability if you expect to sell more than 2,000 copies. And games that sell less than this don't last very long as they are not worth the programming effort.

Pirimeister

16 Jun 06, 18:25

But, but, but,... you Promised me a head-to-head match! :D

I totally understand your sentiment. I am saddened that we will not have the pleasure of meeting on the electronic seas...

Well, we can still go head-to-head with a salt water flavour, if you feel like giving DW a go...

Cheers!
Paulo

Pirimeister

16 Jun 06, 18:36

Be it live TCP/IP, PBEM, or hotseat, today's games simply must include some kind of multiplayer capability if you expect to sell more than 2,000 copies. And games that sell less than this don't last very long as they are not worth the programming effort.

But I have to ask again (and forgive me if it looks like I have some grudge against the folks at AGSI/Matrix):

Do you see this kind of princing policy helping to expand the Harpon comunity? I keep getting back to the same thought: if even I, that enjoy the "Harpoon experience" warts and all,look at the official price tag and think that the price is way too steep for what's on offer, what's the chance of drawing new customers that look to the screenshots and the price tag and star to make comparisons with more recent products (even if those more recent products might not be as realistic or even related to the same subject - kind of "I got myself this money, where am I going to spend it", plain comparisons)

That's what puzzles me...

Pirimeister

16 Jun 06, 18:44

...and even my games - they are NOT for the faint of heart or the uninitiated. They are involved and require dedication to properly learn and play, and therefore will probably NEVER be poster children for the wargame initiate.

Don't lose faith on me Curt, 'cause I still have that "got to have TSATC" bug inside me. ;) In fact, playing the demo made me buy two books on the subject: "The Sword and the Olive" and "the War of Atonement"... So I'm getting in the mood for a more compreensive Israeli/Arab game. The main obstacle to me is the interface. As soon as I get my head around it I'll be more at ease to open my wallet.

Cheers!
Paulo

Hertston

18 Jun 06, 10:13

I hope this current matrix business model fails.

In which case the games involved will simply die a death. Existing players will get no more, new ones will never see them. There is no "rip-off" factor involved; several here seem to seriously underestimate the actual work involved from what are very small development teams.

Consider it from Matrix' point of view. THEY didn't get the money from the original sales, and have no responsibility to provide upgrades for existing users. They have no obligation to provide discounts either.. although where possible (some recent H3 buyers - I understand there is concern from others) they have done so. They have to make a profit from the project, or there is no point in doing it, and will price accordingly. $50 ($40 for TAOW) is quite reasonable for new purchasers (and hence new members of the community) - provided they can live with the GUI, anyway. Existing players are under absolutely no obligation to buy the re-releases; take a look at what's new, chat around the boards and then make your mind up.

In the case of Harpoon, I'm sure both Matrix and AGSI would have been delighted to be able to offer a 'new' H3 with a total new interface and graphics, or indeed a completed H4, or indeed to halve the price in order to get twice the sales and further expand the Harpoon community. But real-life doesn't always grant you what you would like!

Don Maddox

18 Jun 06, 14:09

But I have to ask again (and forgive me if it looks like I have some grudge against the folks at AGSI/Matrix):

Do you see this kind of princing policy helping to expand the Harpon comunity?

I couldn't really answer that question without doing a full review of the product. We'll post a review of the game when the article is complete.

Boats

18 Jun 06, 17:22

The reason why it was suggested to Don (when HC2002 Gold came out) to give everyone who bought HC2002 a big discount (cost only $10 to upgrade) was simply good public relations. The big difference between HC2002 was the database editor, something that was never in Harpoon Classic. And the Westpac was free...that was a biggie too, since we were told it was impossible to do (huh).

Same thing with H3 ANW. A hell of a lot of work done by volunteer beta testers, plus loyal players who bought the game, equals a terrific can core, ready to buy ANW...but don't slap them in the face with the full price, either. It's all about keeping loyal fans loyal, paying them back, and making sure they don't talk smack about your game in forums like this. Just a good business model, and I'm sure Don made David Heath see the sense in it.

Boats

Blackcloud6

18 Jun 06, 18:09

A hell of a lot of work done by volunteer beta testers, plus loyal players who bought the game, equals a terrific can core, ready to buy ANW

Thank you! I wonder how many realize how much "free" labor companies get from the non-paid beta testers. Yeah, you get a free game but that doesn't make up for the time spent.

For TOAW III, I would have paid $25 for the upgrade but I'm turned off by full price for a game I've already purchased.

Consider it from Matrix' point of view. THEY didn't get the money from the original sales, and have no responsibility to provide upgrades for existing users.

You have no idea how much they paid for the rights, or the royalty scheme or amything about the deal unless you were part of it.

Hertston

20 Jun 06, 19:07

You have no idea how much they paid for the rights, or the royalty scheme or amything about the deal unless you were part of it.

Which is relevant to what I said how, exactly?

For TOAW III, I would have paid $25 for the upgrade but I'm turned off by full price for a game I've already purchased.

Fair enough. I didn't feel like that about TOAW, but probably will regarding the Battleground and Campaign games.

We return to my original point. You would have paid that, but could Matrix afford to sell it for that? A separate upgrade (from what? the original release? CoW?) could hardly be developed at a cost at which a relatively small number of sales could turn a profit - whatever the terms of the deal. Trying to work out who was an existing owner or not would be a nightmare in a game so old. So that leaves selling to everybody at $25 as the only option - again, there goes a large chunk of the profit. No, I don't know the terms of the deal, but I don't have to - I know the basics of business and Matrix is a business. They will sell at the price they consider will produce the biggest profit on their investment. If the business model "fails" it will not be replaced by one that makes future re-releases cheaper to existing users or new ones, it will be replaced by one that doesn't include such re-releases at all.

Boats

20 Jun 06, 20:31

Thank you! I wonder how many realize how much "free" labor companies get from the non-paid beta testers. Yeah, you get a free game but that doesn't make up for the time spent.

For TOAW III, I would have paid $25 for the upgrade but I'm turned off by full price for a game I've already purchased.

You have no idea how much they paid for the rights, or the royalty scheme or amything about the deal unless you were part of it.

Well, I've been gaming for a while now, and most fans I know will gladly work long hours for free, just to get their name "on the box". I know when I bought Harpoon, I read all those names, and wondered if I'd ever be able to contribute enough to be recognized. I did. And I'd do it again, for Harpoon. Bunch of crazy guys, that Harpoon community. Been chatting about since the Stanford BBS days, we've been at a while, heh.

And you STILL don't get it. Since 1989, Harpooners have lusted after the one pearl beyond price: multi-player. We had it for a while and had to pay for it, dearly. Now all we got to do to play against a real live human opponent, is fire the old box up...and fork over a lousy $50. I paid that much for Harpoon Classic in early 94. And I didn't think twice. Blackcloud, if you don't want to pay for the game, we won't worry about it. I'm pretty sure that there will be more than enough people who WILL pay for it, to make up for your lost sale.

Now, go rant somewhere else.

Boats
Byron Audler,
moderator HULL
I have NO connection whatsoever to Harpoon 3 ANW

Blackcloud6

20 Jun 06, 20:38

Which is relevant to what I said how, exactly?

You kind of answe that question in the last part of the same post in that you don't know what they paid for the rights, so you don't know what their profit margin will be. So your arguement that they chose $50 as their profit point gained by analysis of profit to be gain is only supposition. They could have also said, heck we could sell this at $30 and make a profit, but these geeks will pay $50 and thus make tiwce as much.

What I'm saying is that I don't see $40 or $50 in a re-hacked 10 5 to 10 year old game so I won't buy it. Consumers have power to drive markets.

Your argument that if they don't sell it for $50, (and not make the required profit) and there fore if $25 is what the market will bear, thus they will not do such a future project doesn't fully hold either. It may make them be smarter next time in negotiating the fee and what they pay to develop the game.

Blackcloud6

20 Jun 06, 20:40

Now, go rant somewhere else.

I'll go "rant" anywhere I want to. You think because you are "Harpoon Groopie" (or addict) you're something special?

Boats

20 Jun 06, 20:58

I'll go "rant" anywhere I want to. You think because you are "Harpoon Groopie" (or addict) you're something special?

Well, I'm not exactly a groopie (sic):

http://www.harpoonpages.com/pooner2000.htm

http://www.harpoonpages.com/h2002info.htm

Yah, I'm a bit more than a groupie. I'm someone who bought the original game, bought the new versions (Windows, and Harpoon97), participated in the weekly IRC chats, the mailing list, found a whole world of friends I've seen grow older, grow up, get married and have kids, lose their loved ones, and always, always, help out fellow Harpooners to enjoy the game a bit more. From Tom Wenks Pfedit, Calum Gibsons Dosbox, or John Reimers Platform Editor for both Harpoon3 and HC2002, we've all pitched in to keep a great game alive. We also worked our tails off to keep both versions living growing things, to get them to be the games we always knew we could. Some of us were testers, some database creators, some programmers extraordinare (that's a no shitter, there), and some were orginizers like me.

Like I said, you've already made yourself plain about your lack of enthusiam for buying the game. So really, after this point, you're just venting hot steam, shipmate.

Boats

Blackcloud6

20 Jun 06, 21:13

So really, after this point, you're just venting hot steam, shipmate.

Now, that's a better slam than a mere "just go away" one.

tooot toooot

Blackcloud6

20 Jun 06, 21:15

http://www.harpoonpages.com/pooner2000.htm

Man, do you display that right up their with your PhD?

Boats

21 Jun 06, 04:36

Man, do you display that right up their with your PhD?

Naw, only thing I got on display is my autographed #12 Ryan Newman photo. And most shipyard workers I know don't have PhDs.

Boats

Blackcloud6

21 Jun 06, 07:29

And most shipyard workers I know don't have PhDs.

Bet you have the knowledge and experience to have one though.

BTW how is the WWII variant of Harpoon?

Pirimeister

21 Jun 06, 08:34

Since 1989, Harpooners have lusted after the one pearl beyond price: multi-player.

Judging from the posts I've read over at Matrix's forum and over here - as limited as this "sample" might be- the feelling is that MP Harpoon, as interesting as it must be isn't the thing making people buy ANW. The most frequent reason seems to be having less bugs to deal with. It seems to me, and feel free to correct me, that it's essencially the hardcore group of H3 fans that are craving for this fixture.

Now, go rant somewhere else.

This is really not called for. Why is it that people involved with Harpoon quickly begin to use this tone to answer people's doubts and reasonable criticisms about the game?
Over at Matrix's the same has already happend: someone asked a quastion and got a rude answer, totally unnecessary. Come on people! If we're discussing the recent developments regarding this great game is not because we have some axe to grin or whatever.
Speaking for myself, if this pricing/finished product preceived relationship is upseting me is just because I trully enjoy the game but don't have that money to spend -again! If I was indiferent to it I couldn't care less if it costed $50 or $500!

Cheers!
Paulo

CV32

21 Jun 06, 10:18

This is really not called for. Why is it that people involved with Harpoon quickly begin to use this tone to answer people's doubts and reasonable criticisms about the game? Over at Matrix's the same has already happend: someone asked a quastion and got a rude answer, totally unnecessary. Come on people! If we're discussing the recent developments regarding this great game is not because we have some axe to grin or whatever.

Not all Harpooners, Paulo. :) But I can certainly appreciate why some people could get this impression, and I concur with your sentiment.

Herman Hum

21 Jun 06, 16:01

Judging from the posts I've read over at Matrix's forum and over here - as limited as this "sample" might be- the feelling is that MP Harpoon, as interesting as it must be isn't the thing making people buy ANW. The most frequent reason seems to be having less bugs to deal with. It seems to me, and feel free to correct me, that it's essencially the hardcore group of H3 fans that are craving for this fixture.

A good indicator might be the Opponents Wanted (Opponents Wanted) forum. I don't see a lot of folks looking for human opponents, either.

I think that many of the 'new features' for ANW have been just that - accommodations for a few requests.

i.e. VCR function - how many guys in other games sit around watching the success of their last game over and over again?

H4Db - We've got 15 other DBs out there already. Who was clamouring for ANOTHER one?

New DB and ScenEditors - Were the old ones really 'broken'? Or totally disfunctional? Personally, I found them just fine, but that is just one man's opinion.

New scenario Victory Conditions possible - Well, except for the fact that some seem to have been broken along the way, I think that the new ones are actually worse than the old ones! :laugh: At least the old ones worked!

This is really not called for. Why is it that people involved with Harpoon quickly begin to use this tone to answer people's doubts and reasonable criticisms about the game?
Over at Matrix's the same has already happend: someone asked a quastion and got a rude answer, totally unnecessary. Come on people! If we're discussing the recent developments regarding this great game is not because we have some axe to grin or whatever.

One man's opinion is just one man's opinion (regardless of how many players he claims to represent). Sorry if anyone takes offense to mine. Mr. Heath seems to have rectified the situation in no uncertain terms on Matrix, though. :smoke:

Pirimeister

21 Jun 06, 16:53

Not all Harpooners, Paulo. :) But I can certainly appreciate why some people could get this impression, and I concur with your sentiment.

Sorry, it was my mistake; I should have writen "some" right before "people", but I thought I didn't want it sounding like it's a specific group of people, rather that "people at large", in a 100% general sense, have strong feelings for this game.

Mr. Heath seems to have rectified the situation in no uncertain terms on Matrix, though.

I thought so too and in a very nice way!

Paulo

Sunburn

21 Jun 06, 17:41

I think that many of the 'new features' for ANW have been just that - accommodations for a few requests.

Some of these requests could have been made by the military users of the Pro version and thus understandably given priority. This is a point worth keeping in mind; Harpoon has been quite unique (in its niche anyway) in having to accomodate both Joe Admiral *and* the real Admiral. This is how design compromises and seemingly "strange" priorities happen.

i.e. VCR function - how many guys in other games sit around watching the success of their last game over and over again?

Military trainees who want to travel back in time, view their mistakes and learn from them, and literally jump into their enemy's shoes and POV. Also a lot of regular players would love to see (for example) just how their super-powerful carrier got ambushed and sunk by a little Kilo sub. Not to mention that a replay file is just the thing to accompany an AAR. "Red Storm Rising" (the Microprose subsim) had VCR back in 1988 and it was wonderful.

H4Db - We've got 15 other DBs out there already. Who was clamouring for ANOTHER one?

Diversity is good, remember? Unless that holds true only where the "PlayersDB" is concerned :devious:

New DB and ScenEditors - Were the old ones really 'broken'? Or totally disfunctional? Personally, I found them just fine, but that is just one man's opinion.

New game mechanics and new DB elements dictate upgraded editors or else you cannot take advantage of them. Common sense.

New scenario Victory Conditions possible - Well, except for the fact that some seem to have been broken along the way, I think that the new ones are actually worse than the old ones! :laugh: At least the old ones worked!

Cannot comment on that, but IIRC the new VCs allow some more complexity in setting up the "winning" situation. Presumably a Pro request but cannot know for sure.

Dimitris, speaking strictly for himself

Pirimeister

21 Jun 06, 19:24

Some of these requests could have been made by the military users of the Pro version and thus understandably given priority. This is a point worth keeping in mind; Harpoon has been quite unique (in its niche anyway) in having to accomodate both Joe Admiral *and* the real Admiral. This is how design compromises and seemingly "strange" priorities happen.

Putting things in that light sure makes some of those design decisions more understandable. I hadn't thought of that. Some good points you made there, Dimitris.

I've finally made up my mind and will be definitly sitting this out. I'll be joining the "convoy" most probably when v3.8 comes out. Until then I hope all those of you who do get ANW have fun with it and let us know about it.

Cheers!
Paulo