Open Letter To The Online Harpoon Community

Chris Carlson and I have received a lot of emails in the past two weeks, and have been forwarded others, that all reflect great anxiety about the progress of SSI's Harpoon4 effort. The thread that runs through all of them is the fear that SSI will fail to deliver a great game (i.e., "they're gonna screw it up"), or that it will lack vital features (at least vital to the sender) and thus not be as good as it could be.

Chris and I believe part of this is caused by a lack of information from SSI, and the rest caused by the incredibly protracted development period.

History: Our contract with SSI for the rights to Harpoon4 was signed in 1997. At that time Carl Norman was assigned as the producer, and under his supervision a team from SSI began development. However, Mindscape, which owned SSI, was bought by The Learning Company. Then The Learning Company was bought by Mattel. Then Mattel found out what kind of shape The Learning Company was in and was forced to do a major restructuring. Then Mattel sold SSI to a holding company, which then sold it to Ubisoft.

Each takover, and legacy projects (see below) disrupted and delayed development, so that the game has been pushed to the back burner for several years. Ultimation and SSI have managed to keep the project alive during this time, but barely.

Facts:

1) Ubisoft, the present owner of SSI, has formally committed to Harpoon and has allocated sufficient funds for development of an "A" list product. Carl Norman, as head of SSI, made it a condition of SSI's continuing development that Ubisoft properly fund the project. Full development has now resumed. BTW, "properly" does not mean "lavishly."

2) The features list (content) includes all the key items that have appeared on the discussion boards for many years. I am certain that not everyone will be satifsied by the features set, simply because you can't please everyone. It has all of OUR favorite features in it, for what that's worth.

3) The interface is being redesigned to take advantage of the improvements in the state of the art since the game's original design. We agree with and approve of the changes. They're designed to reduce mouse clicks and make commands more accessible to the player, as well as decluttering the screen. Since nobody ever saw the complete original interface anyway, this change should not affect anyone's expectations.

4) The combat and detection models faithfully follow the Harpoon4 print rules. Chris and I are in frequent, close contact with both SSI and Ultimation regarding different aspects of the rules. Chris has already supplied models of radar, sonar, and other sensors, as well as weapons systems behavior. Where the models do differ from the print game, it's to take advantage of the computer's power. Where we abstract some processes in the manual game, the computer actually does the math.

5) While the owners of SSI have changed many times, the core development team has remained unchanged. Carl Norman was the one who sold SSI on creating Harpoon4. He was originally assigned as the producer for the game. He's now the head of SSI, and as =FCber-producer, is still closely involved with the project. Ultimation, the original developer, is still there. In our many conversions with Carl and Dave Bringhurst, head of Ultimation, they have shown that they are extraordinarily committed to the game.

6) Two "legacy" products, Silent Hunter II and Destroyer Command II, were inherited by SSI and stuffed in Ultimation's queue ahead of Harpoon (another reason for the extended delay). The designs for these two game were well advanced by the time SSI inherited them, and all comparisons between these products and Harpoon4 are pointless. In addition to having different designers, comparing a single-platform simulator with a general-purpose naval wargame is like comparing Sim Tower with Civilization.

To summarize: Full-scale development of Harpoon4 has resumed. Chris and I are in close touch with the development staff. The design is based on the miniatures rules, with enhancements allowed by the transfer to a computer platform.

Observations:

1) The design is complete. No more designing allowed. More than a few people have offered to participate in the design/alpha testing ("You don't have to pay me!"), in the belief that their personal involvement will save the game from disaster. Anyone who's been involved in programming knows that more designers don't necessarily make a better product, and you don't go back to step A when you're trying to move from B to C. No matter how experienced, qualified, or motivated, the game doesn't need more designers. SSI/Ultimation has been trying very hard to implement the design that already exists.

2) Chris and I find it interesting that a wave of criticism has appeared just as development of the game has resumed. The design hasn't changed, the people haven't changed, but many in the online community are now critical of SSI. They are making conclusions based on incomplete evidence, and are then using those conclusions as a basis for negative comments. What's different?

3) One thread that runs through the discussion is that SSI has "lost credibility" within the online community. "Nobody believes what they say anymore." Regardless of what anyone believes or does not believe, development will continue. There's no credibility required to develop a game. Nobody at SSI is running for election. When it is released, Harpoon4 will stand or fall on its quality, not on its reputation.

As a point of fact, none of the many delays and distractions were the fault of anyone at SSI/Ultimation. The takeovers affected them much more dramatically than anyone else. For us, Harpoon's just a game. For them, it's their livelihood. It's gratifying to know so many people care so deeply about Harpoon, and have invested so much emotion in it. We'd like to ask that those emotions stay positive. Attacks on SSI, Ultimation or individuals there are not helpful. In fact, they're a distraction in what we all hope is the "home stretch." Another description might be "last chance." If that's true, then we need to do all we can to help SSI.

I am always amazed at the depth and extent of the online Harpoon community. That community has been a valuable asset in the past. Remember how SSI polled everyone extensively when development began, finding what users wanted in the next game? They have not forgotten the community's role in beta testing Harpoon, either. That time will come.

Chris and I do not believe the online community can assist development by participating in the design or alpha testing of the game. That is the proper province of the developer, and looking over their shoulders won't make them go any faster. We do believe that the online community wants a good game, and more importantly, want to believe NOW that a good game is being developed. I've tried to explain why we believe that it is. I also believe we should do everything to support them, so they can get on with the job.

Larry Bond