Troops under cover?

[Jim]

There is a difference between Need to Have and Nice to Have. My task is to be the granite-hearted SOB who draws the line between the two. The other factor is that we are pushing the limits of the current generation of systems already. There are things that I would really like that won't make it in because we just don't have the space available. The gameplay comes first, which means historical accuracy and an AI that is just evil. That much with stable MP is what we plan to do for this game.

-Jim

[Hancock the Superb]

I still believe that you should work on creating a perfect game, if practicible.

[JC Edwards]

Hancock the Superb wrote:

I still believe that you should work on creating a perfect game, if practicible.

WE ARE WORKING ON MAKING THE PERFECT GAME! AS PERFECT AS POSSIBLE!

Now. I know you are a young man Mr. Hancock; I was there once myself. But in case you haven't noticed, there is no such thing as "real perfection".

It is a contradiction; and DOES NOT EXIST.

We are doing our very best to give the Community (this would include you) the best RTS Civil War game as practicable. But if you feel it is not up to your standards then perhaps you should not concern yourself with playing it?

Norb (and we, the Team) is doing his utmost at giving you as many bells and whistles in this game as possible.......and Norb to Jim to Louie Raider and all the way down to myself, have been stressing that to all concerned.

Yes, there are some things that will not make it into the innitial release. That, however, does not mean they will not come to be at a later time.

So my young friend, why not sit back, relax and just wait and see what happens?

I truly believe you will enjoy what is coming.

I am young Sir, your most obedient servant

JC

[Hancock the Superb]

I'm trying to go for the good of the team here! I believe that the community of gamers (and myself) would like to have a very fine game, near perfection! If Norb and the rest spend time on everything, think of everything (almost), and get everything down pat, then the community and me will be impress, willing to pay good money for the game, and, future games will have much more publicity! The art of Civil War strategy seems to be a little few on people, so a good game could change all that!

[JC Edwards]

Hancock the Superb wrote:

........ so a good game could change all that!

And that's what I'm sure of all will receive.

[norb]

Hancock the Superb wrote:

I'm trying to go for the good of the team here! I believe that the community of gamers (and myself) would like to have a very fine game, near perfection! If Norb and the rest spend time on everything, think of everything (almost), and get everything down pat, then the community and me will be impress, willing to pay good money for the game, and, future games will have much more publicity! The art of Civil War strategy seems to be a little few on people, so a good game could change all that!

The main problem is that what you want is absolutely 100% impossible. No matter how much money we had or how many people we had there is no way to make a perfect game for everyone. Simply because what is perfect to you is not perfect to someone else. So if I make you 100% happy, then I'm disappointing another person that has a different idea of what the perfect game is about. Perfection is a matter of opinion, this game is based on our own opinions and those that we read and interpret hear. But what I've learned over the years is there is no way to make everyone happy, just can't happen. People are too much of a pain in the A$$ and what one considers a 100% necessary feature, another considers a game breaker and a reason for not buying.

[69th NYSV]

I don't know about anyone else, but honestly I was thinking the new game was going to be more like TC2M on steriods, rather then "new". But I think we can all see that this project, while having it's roots in TC2M, has really moved beyond and is going to be a new game. So, just in that regard I'm going to be getting more then I imagined.

I think we also can see that there is a lot of passion from the team and they want the same things as the rest of us. I mean they are us because they all came from us.:cheer: So unless you guys want this to be another HistWar or WTBS, 10 years in the making, trust our friends and fellow gamers putting this together. Nonbody is saying to stop dreaming or suggesting, just know you might not see it. It could be because of time, coding restrictions, or just that it's not a great idea.

Besides, it's always fun to get the extra bells, whistles, and eye candy in patches, updates, or even future expansions. The last one helping to fund all this fun.

[louie raider]

GShock wrote:

Fences, trenches and stonewalls missing from the game would be very very bad. Extremely bad. These were by no mean ordinary advantages for the defender and should be dealt with appropriately.

oh, there's fences, trust me.
plenty of stonewalls too. not as many trenches but they're there. but don't you worry 'bout fences.

[norb]

69th NYSV wrote:

I don't know about anyone else, but honestly I was thinking the new game was going to be more like TC2M on steriods, rather then "new".

Actually that is probably a good description. All lessons learned from previous games, plus a bunch of stuff that we wanted to do, plus a new graphics engine, plus multiplayer. So on steroids

[estabu2]

But aren't steroids illegal?!?!? All kidding aside, thanks to NSD for trying to accomidate(sp?) the boards and add/look into adding all the suggestions that we make. I know a totally realistic game is impossible,(although I am still going to be waiting for that 120,000 people CW MMO Norb) so I always choose gameplay>realism.

Keep up the good work guys!!

A faithful fan,
estabu