News
NorbsoftDev and Slitherine Inc announce a publishing agreement E-mail
User Rating: / 2
PoorBest 
Written by Matt Clyburn   
Tuesday, 18 September 2012 22:28

NorbsoftDev and Slitherine Inc announce a publishing agreement.

Announcement on Matrix Games Site

This is the business deal that has been in the works. We think that this will be good for both parties and for the wargaming community as a whole.

 

 
Last Updated on Tuesday, 18 September 2012 22:30
 
Posts in discussion
Posted: 9 months ago by Michael Slaunwhite #50672
norb wrote:
We always promised from the very beginning that we would change the protection to be very unobtrusive. We always had every intention of keeping that promise as we kept it with TC2M. So this seemed like a good time to make good on that.


If you remember Norb a discussion (via post) we had about the DRM over 2 years ago, and how reluctant I was about purchasing SOWgb because of the serial activation. You promised me that you would eventually be removing the Serial activation which I took as truth, and purchased the game. I take promises seriously, and you held up your end of the bargain. Not too many people today keep their promises they make, you have Norb.

Thank You very much Norb for keeping your promise you made too me.

Posted: 9 months ago by gunship24 #50665
Good news guys. this wil be great for the future, more games please .
Posted: 9 months ago by norb #50662
Grim.Reaper wrote:

4) For people who have already bought all the games and add-ons, will the DRM be removed? Or would we have to buy new versions at Sliterine/Matrix to get this?

Thanks.


We always promised from the very beginning that we would change the protection to be very unobtrusive. We always had every intention of keeping that promise as we kept it with TC2M. So this seemed like a good time to make good on that.
Posted: 9 months ago by norb #50661
Garnier wrote:
Big question:

Will people who buy the Matrix Chancellorsville standalone game be able to play multiplayer with people who have SOWGB?


I have no answers to any of these questions. SOWCV may only work with SOWCV. I have to figure out the answers to these questions and any solutions very quickly.
Posted: 9 months ago by RebBugler #50653
Garnier wrote:
Can people who buy Chancellorsville standalone use mods in multiplayer with people who have SOWGB?


Good question...not a clue. Once the dust has settled, maybe we'll be able to run some tests. But right now, we're kinda in a Flurry of Transition. And all our efforts are focused on making the various installs and transition codes as painless as possible for our present audience of loyal fans, and our future crowd of new friends...we're hoping for.
Read More...

Discuss this article
You need to log in or register to participate in this discussion.
Gazette du wargamer E-mail
User Rating: / 1
PoorBest 
Written by Norb Timpko   
Saturday, 04 August 2012 23:29
Bertrand emailed me that the French wargaming site Cyberstratege is no more. He has started a new site Gazette du wargamer. Always a great friend to SOW, we did an interview about the concepts behind the SOW AI to help kick off the new site.
http://www.wargamer.fr/ia-t-il-un-wargamer-dans-mon-pc-reponses-de-norbsoftdev/
The english is at the bottom.
Last Updated on Saturday, 04 August 2012 23:29
 
Posts in discussion
Posted: 10 months, 2 weeks ago by Flanyboy #49243
I think the natural thing for them to do is link Chancellorsville and Gettysburg. There is even a dynamic element of choice for the player open because they could choose to fight at Gettysburg or Pipes Creek giving it a slight bit of dynamic effect.

Linking all the battles wouldn't exactly be the campaign that people are hoping for if its just one battle then the next with previous results having little to no impact but Chancellorsville and Gettysburg/Pipe Creek could easily be linked and have crossover casualties and results impact each other easily. The armies were pretty much the same and the units involved as well, given the two were only like 2 months apart.
Posted: 10 months, 2 weeks ago by Saddletank #49228
There was talk of maps for 3 battles in the pack so presumably that's Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville and The Wilderness.

I agree that by releasing 1st/2nd Manassas that then covers all the major battles of the eastern theatre except the far left (Shenandoah Valley) and far right (Peninsula/Seven Days) and the intense siege warfare at the very end around Richmond and Petersburg. Designing that though would need a huge amount of work.
Posted: 10 months, 2 weeks ago by Flanyboy #49224
Chancellorsville actually makes sense. If the maps include Fredricksburg they could easily link all the battles made so far just by making this next scenario Chancellorsville. Even Second Mananas if they want.

Second Manassas feeds into Antietam, which links into Fredricksburg which links into Chancellorsville which then links directly into Gettysburg or Pipe's Creek. Saddletank wrote:
Our next major project is to overhaul the game engine with some great new features to tie all the battles together.
Now that is interesting. That sounds like some form of strategic campaign system. If so, brilliant!
Posted: 10 months, 2 weeks ago by Saddletank #49199
Our next major project is to overhaul the game engine with some great new features to tie all the battles together.
Now that is interesting. That sounds like some form of strategic campaign system. If so, brilliant!
Posted: 10 months, 2 weeks ago by norb #49189
Thanks guys. I actually blew this one, we have some other big news coming up and we're waiting for everything to fall in place before officially announcing anything new.
Read More...

Discuss this article
You need to log in or register to participate in this discussion.
The next Expansion E-mail
User Rating: / 6
PoorBest 
Written by Matt Clyburn   
Sunday, 03 June 2012 20:43

]

CLICK TO ENLARGE
Last Updated on Tuesday, 12 June 2012 18:08
 
Posts in discussion
Posted: 7 months, 3 weeks ago by Meyer #52568
We will see what happens
Posted: 9 months ago by mitra76 #50746
probably it will be sufficient a fix
Posted: 9 months ago by Baldwin #50741
I believe it is intended for Matrix purchasers who just purchased SOW:GB and don't have the two expansions that is why it's not on these forums. Our version will probably show up later.
Posted: 9 months ago by mitra76 #50728
registry entry problem? I saw the game now has a new registry location
Posted: 9 months ago by mitra76 #50726
The game saw the OOB but not the maps of packs
Read More...

Discuss this article
You need to log in or register to participate in this discussion.
Update on the Next Patch E-mail
User Rating: / 6
PoorBest 
Written by Norb Timpko   
Thursday, 17 May 2012 22:08
Here's what's going on. We have been working on the next patch which features a major new item, replay! We have a few more kinks to work out, but this will be an official patch. NSD has been selected by MST Technologies, Inc. to help create a training class for the US Army and provide SOWGB games for the graduates. We still have work to do on this one, but that makes 3 different places in the US Army where they are using SOWGB! The team is also working hard on a new mappack. This will be the first NSD release with maps by our new mapmaker John Bonin. He's doing a fantastic job. If you make it to the Gettysburg Battlefield this year, you should be able to find SOWGB on the store shelves in the museum store and also in one of the downtown stores. If you see the game, please take a picture and post it. It's just cool to be there
 
Posts in discussion
Posted: 1 year ago by norb #47347
We decided that the best way to make sure it's solid is to use it fully during our own pack testing. We really want this to be solid.
Posted: 1 year ago by Grim.Reaper #47332
Little Powell wrote:
Grim.Reaper - I would say months. We are close, but right now we are in serious test mode for the patch... It will be released just prior to the next expansion, which is still a ways away.


Thanks...I appreciate the quick update.
Posted: 1 year ago by Little Powell #47331
Grim.Reaper - I would say months. We are close, but right now we are in serious test mode for the patch... It will be released just prior to the next expansion, which is still a ways away.
Posted: 1 year ago by Grim.Reaper #47328
Are we close yet:)

Are we talking days, weeks, months away for release?

Looking forward to it.
Posted: 1 year, 1 month ago by Michael Slaunwhite #46482
Garnier wrote:
Do you know if there will be an option to jump in at any point in the replay to play the rest of the game?

I highly doubt that would be practical, but it's quite possible there would be a speed-up button like in singleplayer so you can watch the replay faster.


Okay thanks Garnier, this sounds great! Good way to share AAR's.

Read More...

Discuss this article
You need to log in or register to participate in this discussion.
SOWGB - The Research Paper? E-mail
User Rating: / 1
PoorBest 
Written by Norb Timpko   
Saturday, 05 May 2012 03:24

Every once in a while we search the net to see what's being said about the game. During a recent search we were pleasantly surprised to find a research paper written by Mark Mullen at George Washington University. It's cool because he gets it! He knows why we make the game the way we do and you all play. He understands the dedication to creating a realistic experience. Since it's public on the net, I guess it's safe to share:

Realism vs. Reelism: The Scourging of Total War
Last Updated on Saturday, 05 May 2012 03:25
 
Posts in discussion
Posted: 11 months, 2 weeks ago by Saddletank #47899
NY Cavalry wrote:
I believe that SWG is so good is because it is self published. These guys have really given the players a lot of added options/improvements that I wonder would have happened if some big game company was involved.
Creative Arts and SEGA have given a far more open game in their Total War series than NSD have given with SoW.

In some ways, and for sound business ethics (and I'm not saying its a bad thing) small dev houses have to be much more restrictive in what they give away as moddable in their games.

born2see wrote:
garyknowz wrote:

A major factor for NSD's success is that there are no rigid artificial production deadlines (it ships when the creators feel the program is up to their standards). In addition, they don't have to simplify the game to appeal to a mass dummy demographic who are mainly concerned with eye-popping graphics and fast-paced action than a realistic war simulation experience.


Boy, you hit that nail on the head!

B
Well... hmm... there's a few things that are badly and incorrectly implemented in SoW and which could be made better, such as how units wheel, change formation and won't march in a given formation, and the hierarchy of artillery units and how they respond morale-wise. And there's some things which are obviously still busted, like some of the artillery effects. So I don't know that I agree completely with the above sentiments.

I am delighted with the game as it is, but there's niggly things that make me sigh and think "If only they'd seen this and fixed it", etc.
Posted: 11 months, 2 weeks ago by born2see #47873
garyknowz wrote:

A major factor for NSD's success is that there are no rigid artificial production deadlines (it ships when the creators feel the program is up to their standards). In addition, they don't have to simplify the game to appeal to a mass dummy demographic who are mainly concerned with eye-popping graphics and fast-paced action than a realistic war simulation experience.


Boy, you hit that nail on the head!

B
Posted: 11 months, 2 weeks ago by garyknowz #47869
NY Cavalry wrote:
I believe that SWG is so good is because it is self published. These guys have really given the players a lot of added options/improvements that I wonder would have happened if some big game company was involved.


I agree. A major factor for NSD's success is that there are no rigid artificial production deadlines (it ships when the creators feel the program is up to their standards). In addition, they don't have to simplify the game to appeal to a mass dummy demographic who are mainly concerned with eye-popping graphics and fast-paced action than a realistic war simulation experience.
Posted: 1 year, 1 month ago by norb #46194
Mazikainen wrote:
Hmm.. It's difficult to imagine that I'm reading a _research_ paper. The language and content are more like from a blog review, and most of the argumentation is based on the author's own opinions. The game design of wargames is a very fertile topic and I'd like to see more comprehensive research on the subject.

Sorry, I didn't mean to be a grouch. It's not like my own papers are winning universal acclaim either


It's from a university, it's in an academic journal, it's written by a member of the university staff, that's enough for me
Posted: 1 year, 1 month ago by born2see #46186
NY Cavalry wrote:

I believe that SWG is so good is because it is self published. These guys have really given the players a lot of added options/improvements that I wonder would have happened if some big game company was involved.


You're absolutely right on about that. Because of the way NSD is structured, we're able to do things a larger company could never do.

I'm very fortunate to be part of it.

B
Read More...

Discuss this article
You need to log in or register to participate in this discussion.
More Articles...
<< Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>

Page 2 of 14