RobRas Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 JJ - "Everything else about SCII looks magnificent" was the last sentence in my first post. I do believe that a lot of the extra featuers look great and a lot of the SC comunity's wishes seem to have been integrated. I have nothing but praise for this. Great piece of work by Hubert. But when I look at the screenshots of the map and try to determine how many hexes are between Helsinki and Leningrad...well, the best I can come up with is a guesstimate. I know there will probably be a grid to make this easier but the only point - as I can see - of these refined graphics must be to make the game more marketable? Does anyone in this forum feel that seeing three small 3D men instead of a simple infantry icon will increase his or her enjoyment of the game? After the first couple of times? Well, perhaps. And perhaps I'm just getting old... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 RobRas You had several excellent posts -- too good to single out the things I agreed with, so I hit the part I felt was the main point of contention. Sorry for the confusion, when there's a lot of material in a thread that tends to be my style. I'll say right now, though, that I also prefer easy to read displays, with units I can identify at a glance. I agree with what you're saying, a lot of it looks downright faggy and sissy stuff I'd be ashamed to show my beer drinking friends, Hubert always starts out that way and from there he gets more rugged. I'm sure he'll put a 2-D in there for guys with our preference. -- Okay, pretty sure. [ April 14, 2004, 05:41 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuniworth Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Originally posted by RobRas: Does anyone in this forum feel that seeing three small 3D men instead of a simple infantry icon will increase his or her enjoyment of the game? After the first couple of times? Well, perhaps. And perhaps I'm just getting old... Not for you and me but maybe it will attract new gamers to sc and make the communty stronger. Thus strenghten the game for future patches etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Kuni --- Regardless of position, your comment doesn't make logical sense. Make something to attract, which will help the future & not the here & now? "Experience is what you get, when you didn't get, what you wanted" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exel Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 The new graphics look just fine to me. I mean, come on, in a game like this the gfx are highly secondary anyway. And they are certainly an improvement over SC1. The only thing that amazes me in a negative way about SC2 is that they gave up hexes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Yeah, but I think the idea was that it would be good to have a tobble so you could use a 2-D display instead with standard map symbols. I'd also like that -- often it's hard for me to focus on 3-D displays where a lot of pieces are crowded together. I don't like that in chess programs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuniworth Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Originally posted by jon_j_rambo: Kuni --- Regardless of position, your comment doesn't make logical sense. Make something to attract, which will help the future & not the here & now? What I say was that 3D-units wont bring me and others to buy the game, we don't care about that. But perhaps it will attract new people into sc, which normally does'nt play BF-games or wargames at all. Therefore 3D-units is a smart move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRas Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Quote by JJ: "...:a lot of it looks downright faggy and sissy stuff I'd be ashamed to show my beer drinking friends, Hubert always starts out that way and from there he gets more rugged". LOL Yeah, let's hope that. I really want SCII to be the truly great strategic WWII wargame it could be. Based on the excellent foundation of SC1 and with respect for serious and dedicated gamers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exel Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Yeah, let's all remember it's still a WIP. Sure some of the unit gfx look rather crude and unfinished, but that's probably because they still are. SC2 wont be coming out before September this year, so there's plenty of time for improvements and stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Please make a 2D option with NATO symbols and simple map graphics. NATO symbols are an option. And like SC1, the bitmap graphics are fully editable. I'll admit that I also expressed some concern about the "eye-candy" upgrades. But after a couple months now of messing around with the editor, the new graphics are growing on me. If you really don't like them, it's always possible to go back and edit in the old SC1 graphics or something more plain. I doubt if many folks will do that though, once they get into it. And there is a younger crowd of potential customers out there so as a marketing decision this isn't such a terrible idea. Don't forget the game mechanics under the hood that make SC1 such an addictive game will remain and be improved upon in SC2. It's the gameplay that really matters. Once we all get into the heat of battle moving and shooting and trying to win the game, a lot of these very minor concerns about "looks" will evaporate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRas Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Posted by pzgndr: "And there is a younger crowd of potential customers out there so as a marketing decision this isn't such a terrible idea". I know and I agree. It's probably a great marketing idea. It will likely end up looking like all the other strategic game titles out there - Panzer General, CIV, Empires etc. I just hoped that at least one company dared to be different Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J P Wagner Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 TalonSoft's series of games such as East Front and West Front, allowed you to toggle between 2D and 3D display so it is not something that is impossible to program..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigRS Posted April 14, 2004 Author Share Posted April 14, 2004 Well this has turned out to be quite a busy post for my first one. You guys must be up all night because when I left my PC at 10:00 last night there were 3 replies, when I got to work at 7:00 there were 34! Well I'm glad I could at least give people something to talk about! I think some of the replies really do match my feelings but even I have to admit after I have thought about the new game for a while I have softened up some but I think people here have brought up some real concerns about the new view. In rethinking I tend to think it is the isometric view even more than the unit graphics that get me. I’m sure there will be unit editors that will help change that. Someone posted a screen shot of PG2 and I agree that was the first thing I thought of. While that is a great game in it’s own right, that’s not what I was hoping for. I’m sure in the end Hubert will end up making a great game but at first glance it just doesn’t look right. I’m not sure about the idea of play the game for a while and you’ll get used to the new look. I guess I’ve just been playing hex games for so long it’s hard to think of anything different. I feel I have so many comments but after reading all of the posts at once I’m sure I have forgotten most of them. I’ll try to do a better job checking in and posting. Thanks again to everyone for the warm welcome to the board!! Craig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRas Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 JPWagner - that's true. I had forgotten those. That was an excellent feature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les the Sarge 9-1 Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 I don't "hate" the younger crowd, but no one can fault us grumpy old guard wargamers sometimes. Look at all the wargames being made out there, all pretty and 3d and real time, just to seem more "real". And when you play them, the AI is about as smart as a 6 year old girl (one of these days I am going to get beaten up by a gang of 6 year old girls for always saying that, likely go to jail for enjoying it to much with my luck ). I am not thinking Huberts game is going to be any sort of "sell out" to the cutesy crowd though. I like playing the Panzer General series, and I am a big fan of Steel Panthers just because I like the visual appeal. Visual is not the end of the world if it is kept under control. I have to admit, the tiles took me soo completely off guard though. I would rather have hexes. Maybe that is just me remembering games that don't have them, seeming to play "weirdly". I know I have not had an easy time adjusting to SCs no stacking design element. I am not sure where tiles will be with that design element. But then, until SC2 gets closer to done, I guess that will be less than concrete. I am hoping to see a demo as well, but I think my sale is more or less in the bag. I wouldn't even be here if I wasn't already sold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRas Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Posted by CraigRS: "In rethinking I tend to think it is the isometric view even more than the unit graphics that get me". I fully agree. The counters can probably easily be modified but we are - probably - stuck with the isometric board. OT: In Denmark it's afternoon now. And I'm at work. Hence the posting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exel Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 I'm with you on the isometric view thing. I don't know, maybe it just reminds too much about all those RTS clicking fests, but I would prefer a straight 90-degree top-down view rather than any form of isometric one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CraigRS Posted April 14, 2004 Author Share Posted April 14, 2004 I think they had to switch to the isometric view in order to accomidate the new look units. The tanks wouldn't look as pretty from a top down view. From a stratagy point though I think the top down view works better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobRas Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 CraigRS - I agree. And if that's the case then purely cosmetical considerations (pretty tanks)have dictated - or partially dictated - game design. Not a good sign in my view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fischkopf Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 I think it looks great and I can't wait to pre-order. Good stuff! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Originally posted by Moon: RobRas - the resources used for making graphics are either used, or not used, but they cannot be used for something else. Fernando cannot help Hubert code the game Let me repeat - the visuals do not come at a price of gameplay. Hubert has been very careful about this. Functionality is first. Martin Let me just reiterate what Moon has said here, consider the current SC2-Announcement a *pre announcement* announcement. Besides the new look, there have been many, many improvements to gameplay that have yet to be listed. Functionality, improved game play, extended options have always been at the top of my list, so consider (for now) the current announcement as just the tip of the iceberg. Once we get closer to finalizing a few items, expect to see a full FAQ that will go into much more juicy detail Hubert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yohan Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 Originally posted by Moon: RobRas - the resources used for making graphics are either used, or not used, but they cannot be used for something else. Fernando cannot help Hubert code the game Let me repeat - the visuals do not come at a price of gameplay. Hubert has been very careful about this. Functionality is first. Martin I think the issue for me is not resources used for what; it is preferred view. I am another old wargamer who likes simple 2D maps and Nato counters. Same goes for map information, don't need pretty pictrues, understand some might, just want the data. Having the option is the key for me. I have complete faith in Hubert et al. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDG Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 I love the new look. Think of how many complaints there would have been if none of the graphics had been changed. The good news for people who don't like the new look is that this can be modded, and surely will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbellamy Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 I want to put in my whine for the loss of hex-based movement. The tile system not only looks ugly, especially when you have a convoluted front line, but it distorts diagonal movement more so than the hex one and prevents the player from getting an intuitive bird's-eye view of the action (are they far away or not? can i reach that or not?) I believe that area-based or location-based movement systems to be the best for computer wargames (like Highway to the Reich) because this allows the computer to be used to it's full capability. However, if you aren't going to go that way, then the hex system beats tiles anyday in many different ways. I love the new graphics and map and icons and etc. I just wish it was hexes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JerseyJohn Posted April 14, 2004 Share Posted April 14, 2004 RobRas & CraigRS Enjoyed the whole thing, you're right Craig, one of the more involved runs for a guy with so few posts but the two of you are obviously knowledgeable about all this. Always a pleasure to deal with people who know what they want to say, regardless of the post count -- which I hope will spiral upwards quickly, people with ideas should express them. Like my buddy Jim Boggs, who came peeking out saying he was only a lurker and four months / 3,000 posts later he was still describing himself that way! I'm glad he isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts