deanco

My 2c, as a punter : I hope it's toggleable. And I really wonder if the payoff in realism terms is worth the hassle, given that the player MUST know everything that happens on the screen anyway. Otherwise it's not a game anymore, it's letting the little guys fight it out for themselves while you watch. And I'm worried, as a gamer, that the fun factor is going to suffer because of it. Here's the way I picture it. During the move portion, if you have no unit selected, no enemy units are shown on the screen at all. However, you could bandbox the whole map and get an overall view of the action anyway. So lets say a zook off by himself sees a tank but no one else does. When you click on anyone else but the zook, the tank dissapears. No symbol, no nothing. Open terrain. But there's nothing stopping the "gamey" player from diverting a few nearby forces towards that general area, now is there? Instant psychic communication once again. The only difference is, instead of 'click on the enemy and kill that specific unit' it's now 'head (or hunt) in this general direction, a little birdy told me you may find something there, heheh'. It's adding another complexity layer which will only address 10-15% of the gamey issues with absolute spotting. When Steve said, 'It changes everything', I believe him. I'm just worried that CM2 with absolute spotting will turn into, "draw 30 turn Master Strategy on map during Turn 1, then watch movie for turns 2-30" instead of 'use tactical skills to counter and adapt to the enemy as the situation changes on a turn by turn basis'. If this is gamey, it is also 90% of the challenge and dare I say...90% of the fun as well. Having said that, if anyone can do it and make it fun, Steve and Charles can. Maybe there's a way to avoid this drawback of cosmic knowledge of the player, but ah shore cain't figger it out. I just hope it's toggleable.

I just wanna say that Steve might be one of the coolest guys I've ever had the pleasure to work with. A zen master. Lord knows there have been times when I was a total pain in the ass, arguing about this and that, and he has shown incredible restraint and tact in dealing with me. He's got my respect, because I know he's passionate about CM. When you think about the number of things he needs to coordinate... it boggles the mind. Just working on the interface wore me out. Now when you add 3D engine tweaks, front end, AI, historical accuracy, animations, artwork, overall game design, how to implement sewers, dealing with the board, design decisions, contacting magazines and press, etc etc etc...I mean really, this blows me away. The guy has a ton of work to do, no ****. I say, just trust in the fact that he loves what he's doing, and working like a dog at it. Given that, everything oughta turn out OK. Now, I'm waiting for the relative spotting thread to start up...

Oh No!!! PIPPU GONE?? And fed to the dog?Now this REALLY dissappoints me, Capt. Not because he didn't deserve it, I'm sure he did. I know frenchies pretty good. It's just that you don't kill off a strong main character like that! Pippu had the makings of a Pokemon beater IMHO, and if you can pry him out of the dog's clutches, I would suggest having Pippu try to make a Comeback. It's not too late to have Pippu replace Pikatchu in the hearts and minds of 6-year-olds everywhere. And become filthy rich in the process! C'mon, Capt, get with the program!

I love your scenarios, Wild Bill: Glad to see you back! [ 05-06-2001: Message edited by: deanco ]

Science fiction. Alernate reality, but WWII anyway. Hey, Red Alert did it. Use red and blue tanks and soldiers. Allow the player to enter his name, i.e., 'General Deanco'. Use a GREATLY reduced unit set, and reduced calculations for armor penetration. Bigger animation set for the soldiers, showing visually the morale states by animation. And of course, MUCH better graphics. Keep everything else, AI, WEGO, etc the same, and call it "Condition Red" or something flashy, you know. Hey, the fellow posted, I replied.

I can't draw a thing, believe it or not. If it wasn't for technology I'd be totally out of a job. I use photoshop myself, but I'll bet the other programs mentioned here do a good job as well. The real pain in the ass is learning how to use the program in the first place. Once you've learned with one program and are used to it, if you try another prog, you tend to think that that prog is not as good as the prog you know. If that makes sense. But that's not necessesarily true, it's just because you are used to your particular prog.

You guys that want things : For the last time, I have no power to help you out. I'm just a cog in the machinery. Talk to Steve, or Matt maybe. Start a seperate thread. Vanir Ausf B : Yeah! I think we both might have to wait a while for that one... Michael : That's MISTER Unwashed Mass to you from now on, bub! Matt : Please lock this thread up so I can get back to work! Hi Mom!!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: Keep it middle of the road! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hi Michael, I was waiting for this "keep it middle of the road" issue to come up. I know that a few of you might have concerns that the interface might end up looking too 'spacey' 'far out', etc. Most of you know that I am a gamer first and a wargamer second, and perhaps wonder if the interface design will be 'appropriate'. Rest assured that every bmp I do has to get past Steve and Charles. They have the final say in the matter, of course. If they say no, NO is the answer. Well... it's true, sometimes I do argue about it a little. Actually... usually I argue about it quite a lot. Anyway... rest assured folks, after a lot of bitter and acrimonious arguing, when Steve and Charles say no, the answer is NO. Secondly, I DO realize that CM players are a pretty diverse crowd. So I am designing an interface for grogs, gamey bastards, modsluts, newbies, women, the twitch click crowd, eye candy freaks, college professors, sleazebags...and even people who have never heard of Combat Mission in the first place. With such a diverse group it will be impossible to design something that will please everyone equally. All I can say is, you are all there, in the back of my mind, when I am looking at artwork. Finally, let's not kid ourselves. The real action is on the 3D screen. The interface just has a job to do. Get information across to the player. How well the interface does this job can be 'quantified' in some cases. 2 quick examples : the larger the text size, the easier to read. The more contrast between the letters and the background, the easier the letters are to see as well. So as far as the interface passing information goes, certain 'configurations' can be PROVEN to be superior to others. No argument possible. X is better than Y. Even I don't argue about this! This is really the basics of information passing, and getting this stuff right will insure that the interface will be appreciated by the widest number of end users possible. After that it will be a matter of personal taste, and there's certainly enough of that here to go around!! Anyway, I hope this addresses some concerns a few of you might have. Thanks.

Yo dudes, Thanks very much for the kind words. Like Gremlin said, I've been a big fan of all sorts of games, since I was a little kid. Now I'm old, but I still just like games, in general. And out of all the games I've ever played, my whole life, CM ranks... at least in the top 5. In fact it's probably Number 1, but I don't want Steve and Charles to get swelled heads about it, so let's say the top 5. So this is like Sid Meier calling me up and saying, 'Hey dude! Wanna do the interface for Civilization?'. Or Chris Taylor, "Say deanco, we could really use a hand working on these graphics for Total Annihilation". Y'all get the picture? I'm kinda motivated.

At any rate, Hiram, I just about fell outta my chair laughing when I read the thread topic. That's worth at least 15 Victory Points right there, IMO.

WineCape, you're too cool. I figured most people caught the news during Ted's Sidewalk Sale, but I'm happy to see you thought it was important enough to post here. I really don't want to make a big deal about it though. When it comes right down to it, I'm just a fan of the game, like y'all. That's the way I prefer to see it. Franko: Yeah, it can happen. I have no knowledge of Steve and Charles' plans, but I wish you the best of luck.

You're fine, Panzer Leader. All is forgiven. I just have a lot of work to do, pretty important work as far as we both are concerened, and I just wanna get it right, so I'm happy with it. Believe me, I can feel y'all breathing down my neck without any outside help whatsoever. I respect the heck out of y'all as a group and I know that y'all deserve the best interface I can come up with. Because by and large, you're a fine bunch of folks. So that's my motivation. Steve and Matt are the guys to bug about this sort of stuff. That's part of their job description I think. Subject closed. Back to work. :cool:

You're fine, SadBloke. I can dig.

PawBroon is 100% right. That's the second time you've bugged me about this, BTW. Everyone else here seems to have understood. Now...do you?

LOL BloodyBucket!

Don't worry, Panzer Leader. It was a rhetorical question anyway. I'm not serious. I feel pretty silly for getting bent out of shape, really. Sorry folks. Happens to everyone I guess. (edit) Been in contact with Ron, he's a very nice guy, everything is cool. Now back to work. (/edit) [ 04-26-2001: Message edited by: deanco ]

Thank you Ron. I'm glad we are in agreement that the interface should be aesthetically pleasing. But you know what, I'm a little bit worried after reading your post. Now I'm worried I'm spending TOO MUCH TIME working on the interface. Of course Steve and Charles are looking at everything I do, and this is consuming their time. Time that could be spent doing historical research and what have you. They have to answer my emails, clarify, etc etc. So Ron, what I'm asking is this : how much time is too much time, in your opinion? Lemme put it another way. Let's say I'm working on the interface, and it's looking 'not bad'. Should I stop, or should I work on it some more, until I get it to look 'good'? Or maybe should I put even more work in, until it looks 'great'? And of course, I COULD go all out and try to make it look 'perfect'. But hey...is that really necessary? For the lousy interface? Let's say that an equal amount of work is required to go from 'level' to 'level'. Ron, where should I stop working? When does it become counterproductive from a 'taking resources away from gameplay issues' aspect? Should I take a bit less 'pride in my work' to insure that other valuable time resources are not being wasted? Thanks.

Hi Ron, Would you answer my question please? Thank you.

Sorry for the multiple posts but this really peeves me. Because lemme tell you what my philosophy is behind the interfaces I made. It's, "Eye candy, yes. But in the service of gameplay". There are 2 reasons why I color some labels differently than others. It adds color, and it alerts the player to a situation that he might like to be aware of. It looks cool, and it's useful at the same time. But now it's like you're saying, 'don't think about eye candy, just gameplay is important'. So what's the point of being creative then? As long as I make the labels big enough so you can easily read them, is that all you care about? So, If I make a black letters on white background interface for CM2, with no frills at all, just the labels, y'all won't mind one bit? Is this what you're saying? I'm interested in your answer, this is like research.

...and I'm getting a bit tired of hearing, "time that could be spent on core gameplay issues". When are you people going to realize that Good graphics IS a core gameplay issue. As Stacheldraht so eloquently poined out, graphics and gameplay are like 2 playing cards. Each alone can't stand up, but together, propped up against each other, can. Then you could go farther and say that sound, interface, intro movies, cool in game animations, color choices, cool looking menus, and what have you, go hand in hand with good game rules, elegance of implementation, excellent AI, ergonomics, fun factor, and what have you. If you think of all those factors as playing cards too (I do), finally one is capable of creating a quite complex structure. A complex structure where ALL the various elements are interdependant. Ahhhh, Stacheldraht said it best, go read his post again.

Damm good post.

Oh yes! M1 Tank Platoon 1!! What fun I had with that game! And 9 months later, after I thought I was burnt out on it, I fired it up on a whim one day and wound up playing it for 2 weeks straight, again! Only CM beats it for replayability. Man, those were the days... To Mattias: OK. I may not agree with you, but OK. I keep forgetting you have put up with a lot worse in your time. Apparently Advanced Squad Leader is not for the fainthearted. Compared to that, CM must seem like a dream come true to you. You make me think of a man walking around in wintertime with a very thin coat. A man comes up to him and says, "Here is a thick, warm coat. I ask nothing in return. It is yours for the asking." He tries it on, then takes it off again and gives it back, saying, 'No thank you, the pockets are too small.'

Wo ho ho!! Go get 'em, Barleyman! Evidently, what WAS a tiny minority that could be safely ignored, is now a FORCE TO BE RECKONED WITH, and becoming more and more vociferous with each passing day! I'm talking about the "we want the best graphics possible with our wargame, thank you" crowd, of course... Go get 'em!

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mattias: As for medals being an incentive to emotionally connect you with your pixel men, how a bout some willing suspension of disbelief? [ 04-25-2001: Message edited by: Mattias ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> My point exactly. The game is there to help us do that. That's it's job. That's why we're playing a game in the first place, to achieve this willing suspension of disbelief. If you're saying it's MY job to do that, then why bother playing a game in the first place? Why not just print out a line of text? Hetzer at (35806,29716) takes frontal hit at 6° armor facing.......calculating results...... Hetzer destroyed. Now come on and tell me that the line I wrote above is as effective in achieving a willing suspension of disbelief as seeing a Hetzer buy it in CM.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Quenaelin: If you cannot wait untill CM II then answer is simple, just give your men that medal and record it to paper or with notepad or make somekind of database and keep account who will survive and who will not, that is it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Quenaelin, the whole fun is letting the game decide who gets the medals, and looking at the little bmp on the screen. If you don't understand that, you'll never understand why I bothered posting in the first place. But I'm gonna give it a shot. OK, the comp and I both know that my Stuart took out 2 HTs, a tank, and caused 11 infantry casualties. I been watching the game of course and around turn 25, with victory assured, I start thinking ahead to the medal the guy will receive. Will it be the Purple Star with Added Maple Leafs? Or the Bronze Valorious Valor Award? Or if he's lucky, the Silver Pipsqueak? I might even disagree with what the comp decided. That would make it even more fun. "What?? Only the Steel Service Bars?? What a rip!!" Also, I REALLY like seeing the little picture of the medal, in color, displayed in the game. This, I doubt if I can explain to you, Quenaelin. You'll just have to take my word for it that I would get a real kick out of seeing that medal in the game.