Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

An interesting press release came through the wires today, and it would appear that Shrapnel is going to take on the giant that is Wargamer.com, although nobody is yet saying it. A battle of the giants? Also, I notice Matrix Games, a competitor to Shrapnel, has a direct relation to Wargamer.com financially. Of course there's nothing on that site at the moment, and so it does look like a bit of a spoof. What have Shrapnel got planned?

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Sorry, but the idea of a publisher or developer sponsored web site ever being independant, complete, or unbiased seems extremely unlikely to me.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Actually alot of the ones out there are already tied into one. Such as Wargamer tied to Matrix. I mean I see your point but unless you want to do one yourself its hard to see where one will happen that ISNT tied into someone. Gaining that much interest in gaming develops ties. And the "big ones" are considered to be biased by advertising money and shelfware.

Have you read the Shrapnel "About Us" link?
http://www.shrapnelgames.com/about.htm
If not then I highly recommend it in light of this discussion. I liked where it was coming from as far as tackling the publishers, and I think I like it for tackling the game sites.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Actually it's more than a financial relationship, Matrix Games bought Wargamer.com awhile ago. We aren't specifically going after Wargamer.com, but we're being fairly transparent that the site is owned by us from the beginning. That way people can use their own judgement to decide if they think our coverage is biased.

That isn't the main reason for the site. What is frustrating is to see a lot of quality independent games get reviewed by someone who knows nothing of the genre and it reviewing it just to get a free game. Did I tell you the story of the reviewer that I had to explain the concept of turns to (because he had only played RTS's).

We want to start a relationship with the other independent developers and publishers to put an outlet for our products out there with writers who will appreciate the offering. We also will not comment or review games in retail, this is only for those folks who either aren't in retail by chance or by choice.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

And we promise not to vote ourselves "publisher of the year." http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/redface.gif

(Moderators: Feel free to move my post if you see fit!)

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Would you think it fair to say then that Wargamer.com is the "mouthpiece" of Matrix games?

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

I wouldn't say that at all. I know many of the folks who are on staff at Wargamer.com (as a former staff member myself) and I think they try to be fair. However we wanted to be pretty up front with our relationship from the beginning.

The main reason for the site is to give independent games more of a voice.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Very nice, but on the site, www.thegamingnews.com/ I think the design ins't really up to snuff with it's competitors. I'm not saying it should be flashy, but it should look a bit stronger.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

It's a place holder at this point so we can have people contact us who are interested in contributing. It is in no way representative of what the site will actually look like.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Dont change it too quickly. I majorly like what it says. It really puts out the statement right from the beginning what you guys have in mind.

Do you want "the call to go out to all the corners of the earth"? I can drop some "check this out" into some of the newsgroups it would fit in

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Like Mindi said it's just a placeholder, the final site will be much different looks wise.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

I'd like to reiterate what Richard has already said. We are not launching this project as an effort to "take on" wargamer.com or any other site. In fact, our news site will be geared toward all indie gaming news, not just wargames. Our intentions are to help fill a void which we believe exists in independent game coverage.

But you raise an interesting point, and I feel compelled to redirect the question to you (or to anyone reading this), "Would you think it fair to say then that Wargamer.com is the "mouthpiece" of Matrix games?"

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Could we get better descriptions on what exactly the colums will be about that we can apply to write for. Like Coach? I don't even know where to begin wondering what that is gonna be about.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Coach is sports games, Gamer is general gaming (games that don't fit into the other categories would go here) and I think Role-Player and Wargamer are self descriptive.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Alright that makes sense thank you.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Personally, I like the idea. There are many games out there and most of the reviews are in game magazines which I tend to be skeptical of in a number of occasssions, (example, I've seen raving reviews on some games that I've played, and which IMHO were lousy and yet the reviews praised how great they were. Yes I would like to see a review site that is objective and gives fair reviews. As far as starting a war with wargamer, I don't think thats what Shrapnel has in mind. There is always room for another review site, the problem is, getting people, lst to read it, 2nd to believe the reviews are fair and honest and not tied to special interests. You might want to add a write i section where fans can also comment on the games. That way you show your review and also comments from those who've played the game.

My 2 cents

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Good to know it's a placeholder, can't wait to see the real deal.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Check it out now:

The Gaming News

Still only a prototype, but comments are welcome!

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Hey Tim, It looks great, I like the coloring and the set up, looks neat, nice job... when do you think you'll get it actually up and running so we can put the word out?

mac

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

It's starting to look a lot better now! Of course, I still can't wait until its completely done!

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Wargamer does a great job at what it does and I doubt the press release is true. Then again I haven't read all the posts so I could be mistaken.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Just a clarification here, no one said this was in response to or aimed at wargamer.com. A poster came on the boards and asked if this was aimed at wargamer.com. This is in response to other issues in the game review industry.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

How frequently must one post to this site? I might consider posting things, especially about first person shooters.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Indep created first-person shooters? I would actually be interested in that. Its not an area that I enjoy enough to gamble on big-company shelfware uses-the-whole-computer wait-forever-to-load games. But I wouldnt mind seeing some referrals to well-done independent programmers projects I can get for the times when Im just in the mood to shoot things.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/evil.gif

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Oh, that's true; you don't see too many independent FPS games.
For me, the trifecta of FPS games is Doom3, Half-Life2, and FarCry. Those three are the best games ever!

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Sorry, I am a newcomer here and do not whish to be rude, so please do not take this in this manner. I am thiking that this comment leaves something to be desired. Was Wargamer's article not called "Reader's Choice?" Did the reader's not choose who publisher of the year was? How can they readers choose the way any one wants them to - do Matrix pay them for their votes? Seems ridiculous to me.

I have played Shrapnel titles and have come here looking for more info on games of yours comming out soon, and am open minded enough to know wargamer's coverage is not seeming biased to me. If you make comment like this on your own site about your upcoming news site, how biased are you going to be in this regard with your coverage?

If your readers vote you publisher of the year, so be it. I do not think wargamer's Forums are going to have people saying that TheGamingnews.com is a mouthpece for shrapnel's games. Of course it is not. You do not whant this perception of your site. I have gone to wargamer's site for one year now and know it seemes to be balance and fair.

I hope you are not referring to this because whatever ill feeling you two have for each other is going to do nothing for gaming or the gaming worlds. I hope your coverage is not biased, thorought and thoughtfull like wargamer's is. otherwise you are just going to seem like your sour.

again please do not take this wrong way, I am not meaning to be nasty, but really comments like that do nothing for your site in my eye as a customer and potential byyer.

War_Oberst

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

No. Wargamer reviews wargames from ALL publishers.
-

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Welcome to our forums War_Oberst and thank you for posting. I appreciate your thoughtful input and have taken it under advisement. Perhaps I should have held my tongue as my odd sense of humor often leads me to trouble http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/biggrin.gif

I was hoping to make the point that TheGamingNews will be very straightforward about it's relationship with Shrapnel Games and avoid practices which may be misconstrued as self-promotion. I was quite baffled by the title of this thread and "Beverly's" perception that TGN was somehow similar to The Wargamer. TGN is intended as a vehicle for Indie Developers and Indie Gamers to come together. It will not focus on any particular genre and will include coverage of games which are self-published. Sometimes these games don't get a fair shake in mainstream press and are often reviewed by writers who are familiar only with AAA titles and may overlook the value of niche games.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

PLEASE take this as purely a hypothetical answer:
But IF a gaming mag had a slight tendency to provide more reviews about certain games, then it MIGHT gradually affect the redership which keeps returning to it, and it MIGHT slew the votes abit to a foregone conclusion. In fact, since such sites specialize in certain types of games that will oviously be true anyway so certain companys will have an advantage depending on how many of that type game is in their catalog.

Personally I dont read wargamer very much because those arent my kinds of games. Most of the articles dont interest me (strategy yes, war not so much). I AM interested in the new mag site since I am very interested in independents that are developing games. Im hoping this is NOT a site where WarGamer will be the obvious "other choice" because that happen if it becomes another site with a tendency to notice war games over other types. We will see how far across the spectrum they are willing to travel. No, make that able to travel since I believe in their willingness. If they can stretch it as far as... hmm what? Childrens teaching games? Maybe Moraff's games which my wife loves. Oh I know, a writeup on the game "Tranquility". Thats about as opposite from a wargame as it gets.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Will Shrapnel's magazine review ALL new games on the day they are released (to heighten the impact on sales), or just Shrapnel's own releases? What I'm asking is whether or not there will be timing coordination between the magazine and ALL publishers, or just some? http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

(Oops, this post shows up as a response to Gandalf, but it's really to anyone who cares to answer.)

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

(Forgive my English, I go to school in Texas at Rice University and am from Indonesia. I speak well enough but never coud type it well. Papers give me a headache to write them. I glad I'm not English major heh heh.)

I appreciate your reply Annette. I understand your point of view and can see how it makes some sense to a extent, but a sense of humor like that may just make you seem less objectiv. I know Matrix is heard of having spent money on the Wargamer site but I think thier writers are doing a decent job...sure matrix make the gold award (whatever it was) for publisher of the year, but Matrix publish lots of wargames, perhaps with appeael to more peopel in a wargame crowd. Their audience = wargame peopel who eat and live it.

No offence to shrapnel at all because you make good stuff to, just not in same area (make sense??). WWII, it seem, is matrix Specalty and lots of game made in that area. You game like Dragoon and BCT/Tiger are very specific and not broad in general covering a timeperiod of war. 82nd I have highe hope for and look forward to it. Just need $ to get it. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

Anyways my point is tat wargamer seems to do more mainstrem stuff that appael to broader audihence where as yours are good yet appael to those with narrow taste. I hope this is clear.


I am relative new to these Games like this, have played not long of late but schoolwork and programming take up more time than I care to give. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif I read a lot of books but I go a little slow to make it sink. But maybe I am not knowing what games You mean. What small companes do 'niche' games??? I have not heard of any except in game mags.

I will be honest again, I see HORSE and think it looks cool, but a freind say it is just MULE all over again. What is MuLE, I asked, but he said it was done in almost twenty years ago. Why remake this??? I hope not many are like this because origenality is more important than rehashing old Ideas.

Again tanks for your reply and I look forward to more.

War_Oberst

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

I think this hard because there are many peopel who write reviews out there. Is it not their opinion that is posting? It is fair to assume that if a game come out and five hundred buy it. Then say fifty hate it awful and four hundred fifty love it. One of fifty that hate it is the reviewer and writes as such.

Balance of being a good objective writer is knowing you are not the only one who play it and if you hate it there may be peopel that love it. Or other way round. Say you hate the game but ask why can be done to make it better and good. Not telling peopel who make it why they are stupid. http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/wink.gif

When you read opinion of gamer reviewer it is a measure of thier publisher who post reviews as to if they let such garbage out there or not or if they make writer temper it.

As for special interest it would be high prase for gamesite to be owned by publisher and make it have fair review ESPECALLY Of games that compettitors make.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

What is a competitor? As a niche game publisher, we compete with other niche games publishers for developers products. And that is all. Once a competitor has a game it is in the best interest of all publishers to have that game be a success. The more successes the greater the market.

This isn't automobiles we are selling here, where there will only be two or three to a household. Most gamers, those that account for almost 80% of games sold, buy many games. It is not a matter of I can buy x publisher's game or I can buy y publisher's game. If they like both games, they will buy both games.

So, being a publisher and being fair in reviews is not a problem that I really see. Our policy to reviewers is very simple:

1. Write the review to the products audience. (Don't reveiw a hardcore wargame as it applies to a casual gamer, because that is not the market the publisher is going after).

2. Give the pluses and minuses fairly. (Tell the audience what you like and don't like about the game).

3. Don't score it as this is subjective. (Reveiwer A may not have the same interpretation of scoring as reviewer B).

4. Treat every game equally, regardless of publisher.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

By description its supposed to be just about the indies. And I do tend to believe that is what is planned.

Of course a couple of things have to be fought to pull that off. One is that they need to get writers on board who can work on that goal. Another is that they need to find the indies (hence the pre-announcement and a call for contact by any indie developer/publishers). And finally, anyone involved in the project might have to consciously make an effort not to give hints about their own personal preferences.

"Shrapnel" is a great name for a publisher who has their eye on the marketing niche of indie developers doing strategy wargames. And they have done a great job of it. Im not sure if widening their publisher coverage would be good or not. I certainly wouldnt feel pressed to recommend it. So there is a slight dilemma in that we have Shrapnel who obviously loves and actively develops strategy wargames, backing the new magazine for covering all indie products.

They will have a rough go in the early days gathering material. And they will obviously have a wealth of information on their own games, their own developers, and some side surfing on the interest of their own genre. Yet they cant rely on that wealth of material without seeming to have created a biased magazine.

Anyone who believes in their sincerity and wants this project to succeed, feel free to pitch in. Even if its dropping little tidbits of names for your favorite indie developers. Better yet, pitch the mag to indie developers and have them contact the mag for inclusion.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Which indies have you contacted so far?

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

There are many, many companies out there developing and publishing niche games. And you've found the mission behind TheGamingNews: to bring attention to those games not usually covered in the major magazines. In the meantime, you may wish to visit the Independent Games Festival website for more informatation about indie games.

No, not all indie games are remakes of older games. You may find it interesting to read A Note from the Designer in which Todd Gillessie specifically explains why he was inspired by M.U.L.E. to make Space HoRSE. And there's always our free downloadable demo so you may see if the game is right for you prior to making a purchase.

I'm not the person heading up the process but my understanding is we're still collecting contact information from those who have responded to our press release. We have been very pleased with what we've heard so far. If you know of a developer or publisher who is interested but not yet been in touch with us, please ask them to send us their contact information using this form.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Will do. Jeff Lapkoff and Naval Warfare Simulations come to mind.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Thanks, Jim. I've talked to Chris at NWS. I'm not sure about Jeff.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

I’m sure I’ll take some heat for this, but I’m going to play devil’s advocate. The quotes below are the documentation portion of two pc game reviews published on the same review website within a two week period. Both games would be considered wargames from independent publishers. Although written by different authors, one would assume the reviews were held to one editorial policy by one editorial staff. I’ve noted the reviews’ publication dates in relation to the games’ release dates but obviously cannot say when the review copies were made available. I feel safe assuming Game A was not sent seven months prior to release and that Game B was not sent seven months past release. I have removed the games’ titles and replaced them with Game A and Game B respectively.

Game A, reviewed same day as game’s release:
Game B, reviewed 7 months after game’s release : Now, if I told you that one of these games was published by the company which owned the review site, would you believe both reviews were written objectively and without bias?

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Brilliantly stated!

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

I guess 120 pages is the 'just right' size, but 130 pages? Now that "puts the fear of God in you." http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/eek.gif

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Do I get any brownie points for correctly guessing the two titles?

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Sure, let's hear 'em?

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

A - War at World
B - Raging Tiger

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

You've done your homework...Shall I send a t-shirt?:)

But really, I don't think the particular games matter for this discussion. The point I was trying to make is that review sites owned by game publishers should be very careful. I'll never know if the discrepency between saying a 120 page manual and a 130 page manual will was intentional. It's very possible it was not. Do I think it was intentional?

What this says to me is that entities where ownership may be perceived as being biased should exercise extreme caution by holding each review to a static list of criteria. We are very aware of this as we plan the launch of TGN and will expect our readers to hold us to our claims of objectivity. We don't claim that we will always be perfect; no one is. But we promise the relationship between the site and Shrapnel Games will be visible so that you, the reader, will be able to draw informed conclusions. We will expect to hear from you when we're not.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Hi Annette,

I'm Jim Zabek, the Editor-in-Chief for The Wargamer.

You've got some excellent advice: you have to be very careful when you run a review site, though I wouldn't restrict that statement beyond that point. There seem to always be a few folks who can possibly misapprehend a review or statement made on the site. Perhaps I can help clarify a couple of things for you regarding your concern around review times and titles.

First, The Wargamer has never been known to have the fastest turnaround times on reviews. When a title is hot, we do try to get something out on it ASAP. In the case of Gary Grigsby’s World at War we had gold copy several weeks before the game was released commercially. In the case of Raging Tiger, we did not. Before I go further, I'd like to make a formal request: please send any exclusive screen shots, preview code, and review code to us as early as possible, especially for 82nd Airborne. There is a tremendous level of excitement around it and our readers and staff are really excited to see it. If you can get us Gold code three or four weeks before the game comes out I will do my best to get it reviewed before or coinciding with the game's commercial release.

As for timing, and since your concern centers around Matrix products, let me share a couple of examples. I don't keep a calendar as to when a game is commercially released and compare that to when we publish a review. However, I believe it's safe to say that Matrix Games' Starshatter was released sometime early last summer. A quick check of our site (where we do list the date our review was published) shows that review went up on...(drumroll please)

February 3, 2005.

Another "big" Matrix title, War in the Pacific, came out around the middle of last summer. We published its review on....

January 12, 2005.

There's no conspiracy on the part of The Wargamer to slight Shrapnel's games or cause Shrapnel any trouble, and I have to apologize to you if you received that impression. It's simply not true.

Something that is true, and you have rightly pointed that out, is that reviewers have opinions and those opinions can vary from person to person. Let’s talk about game manuals for a moment, since the subject is on many people’s minds:

I haven't seen the manual to Raging Tiger (we only received a single copy and it went to our reviewer) so I can't comment on it. I have seen the manual for Gary Grigsby's World at War and can say that it is lengthy but well written. Criticism of a manual usually isn't limited to its length but rather its quality and, more importantly, the need for it. A strong tutorial will help mitigate the need to flip through page after page of a paper manual. Without having seen Raging Tiger's manual, I can only speak in general terms: that care should be taken to make a manual as user friendly as possible, and ideally almost superfluous.

To illustrate a final point about manuals, perceptions, and game quality, let's take a look at Dominions II. I'll have to ask that you forgive my lack of savvy in quoting; this is my first post in the forums and I'm still learning the interface.

Let's take a look at what our reviewer (a third person who neither reviewed World at War nor Raging Tiger):

QUOTE
Documentation

This is one area that Dominions II could have been stronger. Don't get me wrong - the manual is well written, thorough, and has a complete listing of all the specialty items and spells available in the game. However, it does not go into enough depth to be truly satisfying. I would have appreciated an example of play or some tips about how to get started. By this I mean, what types of magic to specialize in depending on race, battle tactics and use of magic. To a certain extent, some of these shortcomings are addressed in the 'Tip of the Turn' that comes up between turns the orders of the previous turn are processed, especially when tactics are considered. Consequently, I found the learning curve to be steep and at times frustrating as I first delved into the game. A walk-through of the set-up and first few turns of a game is available on Shrapnel's website. I highly recommend it for any newbies.

/QUOTE

Care to guess what he thought of that title? Let's see what his conclusion was:

QUOTE
Summary

Dominions II is a great game. The more I played, the more I liked it not only because I am a strategy game fan, but also because of the challenge it presented. Rarely have I come across a game has made me work as hard as I did to improve my performance. Except for an improved diplomacy screen or at least a system to allow a player to see who they are and aren't at war with, I believe Dominions II has it all. This game won't be for everyone but if you like strategy games and can do without glitz and high tech graphics, Dominions II will be a great choice. I highly recommend it!

/QUOTE

Not only that, but Dominions II received our prestigious Award for Excellence. I think it’s safe to say that the game’s manual doesn’t reflect the overall quality of a game. It’s also safe to say that when we see a great game, we let the world know – irrespective of who the publisher is. It’s also safe to say that when we find a game we don’t like, we won’t hide that fact from our readers, either.

I can understand that some Shrapnel staffers may not have liked our review of Raging Tiger. However, The Wargamer's review isn't the only one on the net. I haven't seen any other reviews which refute it. That doesn't mean that some gamers won't like it - it's ideal for some, but not for others. That point was made in our review, though. And when Dr. Jim Cobb offered to take another look at it and I gladly accepted because I know he’ll be able to speak to the audience who might enjoy the game.

I can't control how my reviewers feel about the games they review. Forcing one to give a positive review to a title he doesn't like would be as bad as forcing one to write something negative about something they loved. I can't allow either.

What I can do is give you all the free press you can get if you send us developer diaries, screen shots, and previews. And when you publish another game as excellent as Dominions II, you'll hear our staff cheering for it, too.

Oh, and good luck launching your independent gaming news site. I look forward to reading it.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Although I DO believe that the timing of reviews does reveal a bias, I DON'T believe the divergent tones taken by these reviewers is due to a lack of objectivity. Rather it is due to what I have already described in the "Kicking the Retail Habit" thread. It is simply a matter of name recognition -- Gary Grigsby vs. some guy.

Not much you can do about it, I guess, except promote the heck out of your stuff and do what you can to get around this attitude -- start your own review site, find where these attitudes are prevalent and avoid them, find reviewers/consumers who aren't so enamored of mainstream stamps of approval and get them all together in an undiluted bunch, whatever.

But as far as Wargamer itself goes, aside from occasional weirdness (such as not mentioning "Prussia's Glory" in their new upcoming releases article and some other stuff I'd rather not go into), it is actually a lot MORE objective than they were under the previous management. A LOT MORE.

I think Annette laid out the problem indies face as well and as clearly as is possible. There IS a problem and I'm happy to see Shrapnel lay it out so clearly. I hope some kind of action will follow, for the sake of the hobby.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Hi Jim:

I am sure Annette will be along with her reply to your post, but I have a couple of questions / concerns from what you said.

How do you know a title is hot before it is released? I ask because Raging Tiger had a short pre-order period, yet was one of our top five pre-order successes. I would have considered that hot.

So, if we had given you the review copy several weeks earlier it wouldn't have taken 7 months? Confused about how that works?

You seemd to have missed the point from what I can tell. I don't think a comparison with Dominions II is relevant, since this is about the heading of the Raging Tiger manual section in the review. We looked at several of the reviews of Wargames on your site and all the headings we saw said something like Installation, Documentation, and Tutorials or Documentation, etc. The only one that we found that headed the documentation section with a snide comment was Raging Tiger (Nothing like a Wargame with a Big Manual to put the Fear of God into You). This seems to be not so much the fault of the reviewer but the fault of the editors for allowing that kind of comment in a sub-heading. Care to comment?

Best regards,

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

We don't know what titles are absolute winners, but I do know which titles my staff jumps for and which ones they don't.

There's no "way things work". Get me 82nd early, I'll ensure it's reviewed promptly.

Dominions II isn't missing the point for three reasons: one, Dominions II was the last Shrapnel game we reviewed prior to Raging Tiger; two, the review was made well after David Heath purchased The Wargamer; and three, it is a respectful reminder folks that Dominions II was given a Award well after David Heath acquired The Wargamer and Shrapnel's good efforts were recognized.

As for "snideness" of the subheader, well, it clearly it was an indication of what the reviewer thought of the documentation. Our writers have made other "witty" remarks about games as the author sees fit; it isn't restricted to the wargaming genre or a particular publisher. I'm sorry you took offense.

Re: Shrapnel to Take on Wargamer.com?
 

Jim:

Well then, we just need to get some Shrapnel people on your staff.

Thanks, but no thanks.

If I had the time or inclination, I would go through the Matrix Games reviews on your site and see if this is true. However, I am pretty sure I already know the answer to this one. But do know that I don't think it is limited to just Shrapnel reviews.

And thank you for the Awards for both Dominions II and Dragoon!

Regards,