Fionn Posted October 18, 1999 Author Share Posted October 18, 1999 Mike, I hope its a misunderstanding too. I admit that I didn't consider he was making a joke possibly. Especially since he's on the CC forum and he's seen what has happened there in recent days regarding my willingness to take on a major company over a game I simply couldn't understand how he could think that of me. Maybe it was just a poorly considered joke. I hope it was, I'd really like it to be. Well Mick(xe5), I guess its up to you to tell us how you mean it? Do you really think I'm the sort of person who would kow-tow to anyone (given the evidence here and on the CC forum? ) I find it kinda hard to believe you could given that As you say I don't know Mick(xe5) well so unlike jokey comments from people I know well which I instantly understand how they meant them I really just interpreted his one way. I hope he comes back to clear this up.. Cheers, ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mick Conmy Posted October 18, 1999 Share Posted October 18, 1999 I apologize. Really no offense offered. My "hype" hyperbole a direct result of my reading of the Lorien Newman's editorial "Stop blaming companys for hype!" at GA-Source.com along with all your analyses of wargame related issues. I fully subscribe to your "reality expectation" premise and agree more needs be done to satisfy the grog w/o discouraging the casual gamer. A transparent or cascading U/I offering deeper levels of info and data for the grog while retaining a simple opaque interface for the general audience would go a long way toward meeting both sets of expectations. The point is to aim high, as CM is doing, to ensure exceeding all. I place no negative connotation on "hype", indeed, lap it up from gaming sources eagerly while applying the my own mental preferences and filters. The bias I allude to, only your involvement with CM as outside consultant and play tester. Obviously you consider the game to be living up to its promise. I'd hoped the bit about being paid would reflect on the good job I thought you were doing [the AARs an inspired technique for fully describing game features & mechanics as well as building good buzz] but I now see youve encountered accusations to the opposite. Had I been more aware I certainly woulda changed the slant to that chuckle. My concluding remark assuredly an endorsement of shared opinions concerning game design and phiosophy. I did want to take a poke at the much discussed turn based vs real [continuous] time difference between CM and CC partly w/r/t CM breaking the hex barrier with its 3D environment [CC using hidden 10 pixel square 'hexes'] as, IMO, time and space are interelated w/in the framework of game simulation. The issue of LOS in CC has long been a thorn. I did a set of illustrated posts on terrain/LOS anomalies in CC stemming from a lack of graphic correlation between the map on screen and the unseen [except for right clikking] terrain map underneath. The worst example being Moscow1 where part of the graphic map [the hill top right center] and the terrain map beneath are completely different. This problem was noted in the CC3 beta but never addressed. I also did a post on non-reciprocal LOS, tracing the bug to the fact its measured from turret center of rotation [hot spot] to any point on the target. Add to this the bug that allows the target reticle to light up when the cursor merely comes w/in the unit "select" radius and youve got wacky play effects. Another facet of my post here was to "hype" an aspect of my favorite wargame that I found most engaging after having spent a wargaming lifetime tied to hexes and turns. A little CC RT 'cheek' if you will on a 'rival' TB games forum. Plenty of room on my HD for both as I believe they will make for complementary, not exclusive, experiences. So forgive my 'gonzo journalism' as its intent was tribute rather than trial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 18, 1999 Share Posted October 18, 1999 Glad that was cleared up Thank you Mick for coming back and posting that. I too have found you a breath of fresh air over at the CC3 forum and took what you said to be a joke. But I also have seen Fionn's credability attacked in the most ruthless, and unfounded, ways possible, so I understand his hightened sensitivity to this issue (especially because he tries harder than anybody I know to be objective). Therefore I am glad that you both now understand that it was just a misunderstanding. Happy to have you posting on our CM BBS Mick. I expect that you will have many positive (i.e. thoughtfull, not suck up ) posts to contribute here. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Clinton Posted October 18, 1999 Share Posted October 18, 1999 Now that that has died down...someone tell me... What the HELLS the deal with John's fishing picture in the middle of this thread?!?!? ------------------ The Grumbling Grognard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted October 18, 1999 Author Share Posted October 18, 1999 Mick, Well I'm really glad that's cleared up. I'm sorry I seem to have interpreted what you said wrongly but Steve is right when he says that I've been subject to these sorts of attacks from people with malicious intent and absolutely no proof or anything many times before and given the brouhaha at cc3.gamestats I guess I just figured "here we go again". Anyways, now that it's cleared up there's absolutely no harm done and I look forward to having more chats with you on here in the future. Thanks for clearing it up and BTW those are some very good points regarding the interrelation between time and space. I would also add game engine as the limitations in a game engine vastly limit the extent to which realistic interactions between time and space can occur in any game. This thread is probably way over the 140Kb ? limit now so it'll probably be best to continue discussion of that point in another thread. I'd be interested to hear what you think those interrelations are specifically and how they are handled. I have my own ideas of them but I'd be interested to hear what yours are before you hear my thoughts. And BTW I REALLY am glad we cleared this up ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted October 18, 1999 Author Share Posted October 18, 1999 Personally I think it refers to someone else taking the bait "hook line and sinker". Read Scott's excellent post above containing some words Oscar wrote before even coming here I think it refers to that. It's either that or John was fishing for compliments (ooh bad joke ).. Although I think just about ANYONE would be better looking than the salmon.. That was who you were comparing yourself to right John? ------------------ ___________ Fionn Kelly Manager of Historical Research, The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted October 18, 1999 Share Posted October 18, 1999 Scott, you obviously haven't been around long enough. John does this sort of thing from time to time. He knows to go easy on them to keep thread load times down, so they come infrequently. It is not for us to question why, but just chuckle at the images when they show up Fionn, thank you for bringing this full circle. And you are correct, thread size is above where we like it to be, so this one is shut down. Thanks for the, er, lively post but its time is done. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts