Mixed feelings about the actual state of TOW

[DeLaVega]

After watching the last video I had different thoughts, but none of them were too positive ...if I recall.

Reading that it was really in-game music scares me, because I like good in-game music (e.g. Silent Hunter 4, Rise & Fall), but this sounded exactly like the music of "Pacific Storm" and there`s nothing you can do, except turn it off. I really don`t understand why russian products are lacking in this point, though they have really amazing composers.

Whatabout the other sounds? Just a "plop" for tanks and "knick" for infantry weapons? Company of Heroes treated my ears very well lately with so many different and shattering sounds. It was the first tactical game ever where I turned the volume up.

All the changing sound effects from CM 1 to part 3 were more satisfying, than the examples I heard from all the videos.

Why do you see the flashes of the explosions through the trees?

Why do the explosions almost look the same except the size?

Whatabout these small smoke clouds after the tanks are firing?

They look exactly as if taken from IL-2. I loved IL-2, but there are a few years gone now. And when tanks are firing, the smoke after firing should stay there a little longer, not even mentioning the flying dirt around it.

I know that there are limitations, but what`s left of the graphics makes me a little sad. I followed the news about this game right from the start, but after changing the environment from realistic "grey" colors to the golf course "green" with cloned trees and bushes, it lost atmosphere for me.

By the way, the scale of this game is always mentioned, but most times you only see 20-30 infantry men and about 3-5 tanks. What use do big battle maps have, if there are only platoon`s on them?

If the foxholes are really manned by only 5 soldiers, why should I use artillery strikes on them?

I don`t want to be too demanding, it`s just that I compare the actual state with the years of development.

Of course, after all I didn`t lose faith in this product. I even pre-ordered it.

It`s just ... I really hope it`s more than what the videos show. Autumn or snowy landscapes with 20 soldiers and 2 tanks shooting at each other over a few hundred meters with no tactics at all. Just frontal assaults.

I hope it has the atmosphere the CM parts have. That one actual get the feeling of being there with your troops ...and the satisfying AAR afterwards, which shows that you only lost 70% of your men.

Hope TOW is replayable and moddable like your amazing Combat Mission Series.

Then it has the chance to be a classic, otherwise it will be replaced ...by Combat Mission again.

[Capt. Toleran]

I have the feeling it is sort of an interrim product to both satisfy some promises (i.e. RTS CMBB/AK/BO) and satiate some of our hunger before CMSF. CMSF is the flagship product, TOW is just an appetizer, CMBB all cleaned up, individual soldiers, RTS, and actual viewable aircraft. Have fun with it for a few months, have fun with CMSF for years (or at least it and the whole series of modules).

[MikoyanPT]

I dont think ToW is an apettizer for CMSF.

1C company had plenty of success whith IL2 series, and continue to support the product years after its first release. Furthermore i believe IL2 has sold more copies than the CM series. And i dont think the developer teams of ToW and CM-SF are working togheter, so the products will be radically diferent.

I dont think i can make judgements on a game gameplay or ambient sound by watching a video.

For what i saw in previews around the web,and by the quality of previous works of 1C and battlefront i believe ToW will be for me the mother of all strategy games.

I got my pre-order, now it is wait and see, but i am confident. :cool:

[pwncake]

Mikoyan,

IL2 and CMBB are different styles of games. IL2 is more to the liking of many people then cmak/cmbb so more people will buy them. I like strategy more so i bought only cmbb/cmak and NO IL2.

Now that there is an strategy game on IL2 engine ill buy the game not for the graphics (would have bought Crisis)

And for me TOW is an apettizer for CMSF because i still like to do missions like PEIPER in kharkov and this is not possible in TOW.

That stated iam still looking forward for this game (not only because my 8800gtx cannot play CMBB OR CMAK anymore and have to go back to my old pc)

I dont know how the sounds will be but i reccon that they will be modded if the sound is disappointing. But what i read from Moon the sounds will rock so i trust his word.

[Moon]

Yeah, judging the sounds from a monochannel video which, as the title suggests, had the music turned all the way up and the sound effects turned all the way down, is not smart. TOW has some really impressive sounds. Even Matt was impressed, and that means something

Martin

[DeLaVega]

To pwncake:

My 8800GTX can play all the Combat Mission parts. What processor do you have? Mine is an Intel E6600.

To Martin:

I do agree that you shouldn`t get a final result based on the videos, but this was just an example for the whole impression I got until now. And by the way, the COH sounds I referred to

rocked even in the pre-release videos. Maybe anyone here who own "Pacific Storm" can agree to this. The graphics were nice, the sound ... just not right ones for warships. So, it seems that the russian developers haven`t focused on that yet (same with the "Officers" Demo). And this also includes the voice samples. Let`s just say that they shouldn`t have asked their friends to borrow their voices. For americans the germans may sound right, because it`s some kind of foreign language , but as a german (which I am) you hardly can stop smiling. And this forces you not only to turn off the in-game music, but the Krauts, too.

Please, don`t get me wrong. I love realistic tactical and strategic games. Much more than the mainstream RTS games in which you only have to shoot down an energy bar. I can live with minimal graphics and sounds (otherwise I wouldn`t play "Hearts of Iron"), what I just hope is that TOW can catch the atmosphere like "Combat Mission" does. I put my hopes on this game since I saw the first screenshot of it. It shouldn`t be a bridge until CM: Shock Force arrives.

Martin, may I suggest something: Maybe you can provide us with a video which has in-game music turned down and ambient and battle sounds turned up

Or better: Ship out the game at once!

[Scipio]

Moon, all the videos I have seen so far were completly unsharp when I looked them in full screen mode, and I guess FSAA wasn't turned on. Moon, can you confirm that the game is not really that unsharp, and FSAA is not locked out by a magic promming spell/curse?

[Capt. Toleran]

Miyokan, TOW had better be very close to CMBB, or a lot of people are going to be ticked. After all, we could have had the Russian version months ago, which, from what it sounds like, was not very close to CMBB. My impression was that the "Battlefront touch" was specifically to boost realism in ways that we of the CMx1 and CMx2 ilk would like. Otherwise, why waste our time? There are plenty of crappy WWII RTS's out there.

[crazylegsmurphy]

I kinda have to agree with the original poster. Don't get me wrong, the mods/designers are totally awesome when it comes to explaining things and addressing issues.

The thing is that every video I have seen of this game looks choppy and slow. Not only that, but the graphics on some things are simply dated looking.

I admit I have been spoiled by Company of Heroes (releasing a DX10 patch soon) so when I see WWII graphics and animations like that my mouth waters.

When I watched the last video, there was what looked to be an M10, and when it fired, it just didn't feel right to me. The tank didn't react very much with the force of the shot, the "smoke" that came out the front looked "weak" and the explosions were the same 2D looking animation over and over.

I understand as well that there are limitations, but as the OP said, I have yet to see a video where the game justifies the drop in graphics. Like it was already said, it's great if the world is huge, but it means nothing if there are only a few troops and tanks. I would rather see smaller maps, and bumped up graphics.

Anyway, I have a lot of interest in this game, but I am going to have to wait for the demo.

[Capt. Toleran]

Remember, graphics are not the strength of BFC games. It's the content, and why people are still playing CMBO, BB, and AK intensely. We choose BFC because they represent quality and realism, not graphics. COH has superb graphics, but after some mild amount of fun, I put it on the shelf. I'm still playing CMBB, and single player of all things. I'm confident that this appetizer, which is what it is, will be well worth the money and longer lasting than similar dollars invested in competing products. CMSF will be the masterpiece, but this will hold me until then, as I suspect is its intent. Also, remember that many in the CMBO, BB, and AK forums begged for a RTS CM game, which is what I hope this will end up being like. With the BFC touch, I cannot imagine how it would not.

[Cougar_DK]

Originally posted by crazylegsmurphy:

...I would rather see smaller maps, and bumped up graphics.

I would not see smaller maps, thats one of the things Battlefront added to the game, making it more WWII realistic. I really don't want a new WWII RTS where weapons ranges is your screen size or just beyond. I want room for manuvere and time to plan my attack/defense, using weapon types in a realistic way. And it really seems that TOW will give me this.

Cheers

Mark

[pwncake]

@ DeLaVega,

plz tell me what iam doing wrong. I got an e6600 2gig ram @800mhz an 88000gtx. Which drivers do you use because i can install the game then go to the start page can select an mission read the mission but when i start the game i only get an black screen (dont know if i hear sounds)

I had a discussion on an other thread did those things but didnt work.

pls help me

[MikoyanPT]

I loved CMBB and CMAK, so i know the quality of BATTLEFRONT products concerning realistic gameplay.

I never played IL2 ( cant make the damn things take off in flight simulators, but for what i heard is one of the best flight simulators around.

So it looks a good balance between two teams.

I still play combat mission, but its completely outdated. TOW will be quite refreshing.

Just give 1c company some credit guys, they are not rookies, and whith battlefront direction i hope the game will be the very different from the russian version, and by the changes made it will.

And i also believe the graphiks are not the most important thing in this kind of game.

Company of Heroes is a beuty, but i dont like the game. Combat Mission is outdated and i still play it. I will play the next combat mission instalments but when playing ToW i will try not to make comparisons and enjoy the game as it is.

My commentary about ic company and IL2 was to refer they are still making add ons for a game released in 2001, that is a good thing, i hope they whill do the same to ToW 5 years from now. eheh

[Moon]

Originally posted by Capt. Toleran:

Remember, graphics are not the strength of BFC games. It's the content, and why people are still playing CMBO, BB, and AK intensely. We choose BFC because they represent quality and realism, not graphics. COH has superb graphics, but after some mild amount of fun, I put it on the shelf. I'm still playing CMBB, and single player of all things. I'm confident that this appetizer, which is what it is, will be well worth the money and longer lasting than similar dollars invested in competing products. CMSF will be the masterpiece, but this will hold me until then, as I suspect is its intent. Also, remember that many in the CMBO, BB, and AK forums begged for a RTS CM game, which is what I hope this will end up being like. With the BFC touch, I cannot imagine how it would not.

Thanks Capt. Like you say, we don't make games just because of the graphics. This part of the market is filled by, uh, pretty much everybody else out there. And anyway - breakthroughs in video technology would be asking a little bit much of an independent 7 man team competing in a market with billion-dollar companies, wouldn't it?

What we are here for instead is to build a bridge between today's technology and the good games from the past, where other things counted more than what your video card is able to handle. This puts us in the middle between the mainstream publishers who keep chasing the latest visuals, and the hardcore publishers who keep rehashing the same old stuff from 10-20 years ago without significant updates. Our product portfolio I think reflects this fairly well, which is why Theatre of War was a perfect fit for us. The fact that games like TOW and CMSF are more or less up to par with other stuff on the market (and in some aspects even ahead) is quite unbelievable actually, and is all we can hope for.

With 1C and BFC on this project you have two companies collaborating which created some of the most and longest played games in this millenium with the IL-2 series and with Combat Mission. Or which other games do you know which came out in 2000-2001 that are still being played today regularly? I just looked on my games shelf and many if not most of the bestsellers from then have been gathering a lot of dust for years. I wonder how many here will be playing COH in a couple of months.

This is what we're here for and if you like these kinds of games, you've come to the right place. If you're here for the graphics alone, then you're not. If faced with the choice to add more and different shaped smoke puffs or to add a map editor, we're always going to choose the latter.

This isn't what the mainstream wants to hear, which is probably why I am not typing this on a yacht anchoring in the Caribbean, but luckily for us there is a decent sized number of serious gamers out there who still appreciate this approach. Even though many others just spent a few hundred bucks on the new PS3 to be able to buy the same games they already have, again.

Martin

[panzermartin]

I'm a graphics enthusiast and I find the TOW visuals top notch actually. 1c guys have shown from the Il-2 days their artistic abilities. Details are clean and sharp and I love their color pallete. Pleasant without being flashy, balanced and down to earth hues without being too desaturated and drab. I dont like the glossy and overdone visuals of some other more "advanced" titles. It takes more than a superb engine to deliver something visually satisfying and I think 1c guys have that talent and taste to do it.

[DeLaVega]

To pwncake:

Seems we have the same system. Hm, especially for you I installed CM 1 and CM 3 (unpatched), too and they work normally. I only chose the 1024*768 resolution at 75 Hz. I use the Forceware 97.44 driver. Maybe it doesn`t work if you choose a very high resolution. I use Win XP with SP 2.

To crazylegsmurphy:

I agree what you said about that firing M10 and the videos in general. The firing M10 has no impact on me.

And this is not because of the graphics, but the whole feeling about it. When I remember the firing Jagdtiger in CM 1 I get tears in my eyes. Not only the firing sound, but also the exploding shell sound made me rewinding the recording of the turn again and again. Although in Combat Mission 1 the environment and vehicles looked quite static, I could feel some "power".

Maybe this sounds ridiculous, but when I remember my first match in CM 1 with Kampfgruppe Peiper (Night in Cheneux) and I fired the mortar barrages into the woods and moved the camera to that position I felt if I was under fire. Later, in Multiplayer games I got scared, if my opponent purchased the Rocket Artillery. This sound scared me to death and made me worry about my troops.

Years ago, when I actually found the battlefront site (no magazine in germany had reported about that game at this time and it was just luck) and ordered Combat Mission I was excited like a child at christmas and I never stopped playing it. And although the Hi-Res tank textures looked best for me, on the market this series was never about graphics and animation.

But it was an experience to play!

In the first 10 minutes you have the hope that you could win the battle without too many losses. But the enemy keeps coming and coming and slightly you use up your reserves and at the end you are just happy that you turned the tides and reached a draw.

The buildings which caught fire by accident, the Panzerfaust miss which turned a wheat field into a burning hell. The platoon with what you wanted to recon the dense forest and ran into a complete company and even more, realizing that there are more enemy forces inside the forest than you have left on the complete battlefield.

This is an experience.

My opinion is that as long as TOW can create this atmosphere and thrilling experience, too, it has a chance to survive within this community.

But what I cannot forget (until I get this atmosphere from TOW) is that it has quite a long development time and from the screenshots and videos you couldn`t see any progress at all. Just several infantrymen and a few tanks attacking trenches in emptiness.

Yes, Martin, you are right. Just a couple of persons cannot develop like a team of 100 backed by well off publishers.

But what prevents them to use new and fresh sound files like COH did? Why do we always have to wait for mod-creators who work this over for free? It`s like in so many films. They use the same sound files over and over again.

And to be honest, after I bought "Pacific Fighters" I was very disappointed that 1C used the same sound files as in IL-2. But I don`t want to believe that a BF-109 sounds like a F-4 or a Zero.

And then I watched the last video and have to realize that the ...what are they...Thunderbolts?... are going down with the same sound as used in IL-2. Hm.

So, the graphics engine taken from IL-2, the sounds taken from it... but the release was ... oh, sorry, is coming soon?

Why isn`t the name "IL-Theatre of Sturmovik-War"...

Sorry for my provocing. But, as in any relationship, I don`t want to be hurt, after such a long time of dreams and desire.

Anyone who hasn`t checked out www.youtube.com yet. There are short videos with a King- and Jagdtiger from the russian version.

[Moon]

DeLaVega... you're getting ahead of yourself (and everyone else ). You have not yet actually heard the in-game sound. Videos, in case you don't know, use compression for the visuals as well as sounds.

Martin

[DeLaVega]

Hm, Martin. Understood. ...it`s just ...after all these years ...it`s hard to describe what the heart feels.

[Kettenhund]

I have the russian version too and sorry to say this but the sounds are verry verry crap. Game musik is terrible and must be switched off on the first 30 secunds.

For example the firing sound of 122mm russian canon of JS2 is like a air pump.

All sounds are to verry undertoned and not sophisticated enough.

I hope i or anyone else can make a cinema sound modifikation during the fist days of delivery.

Or have BF changed the entire sounds compared to the russian version?

[DeLaVega]

Kettenhund, this is actually what I have been afraid of. :-( Hope anyone who has a feeling for sound can deal with it. Now I can adjust my expectations. Thanks for your post.

[Moon]

Kettenhund, do you have the sound adjusted to your sound configuration? In the Options panel you can set sound output to desktop, surround and a few other options. If the settings there do not match your system, then you might hear very weak sound because e.g. only one channel is displayed out of 4.

Martin

[Elmar Bijlsma]

Yeah, I'm thinking the same as Moon here. There may be something wonky with the way your sound is set up. It's some of the best I've heard and certainly has the "oomph" needed. Obviously tastes differ, but when you describe it as very very bad then I do not believe you are getting the same sound that I'm getting.

[Kettenhund]

Originally posted by Moon:

Kettenhund, do you have the sound adjusted to your sound configuration? In the Options panel you can set sound output to desktop, surround and a few other options. If the settings there do not match your system, then you might hear very weak sound because e.g. only one channel is displayed out of 4.

Martin

Oh, yes i have switched the sound funktions many times to figure out what are the best settings.

But, i am so sorry to say that:

The sounds are to similar, to dinky and to quiet when you know what i mean.

Sounds in games or in motion-picture are one of the essential thinks to get the player/viewer involved with the product.

I will hear that scaring firing sound of a 88 in a battle field over hundreds and hundreds of metres. And this sound is not the same as a 75mm pak40 sound.

I have original sound recordings from a "Wochenschau" and the sound is amazing.

[ April 04, 2007, 05:31 AM: Message edited by: Kettenhund ]

[Elmar Bijlsma]

If you can't tell the difference between a 75mm PAK and an 88 then I'd say you aren't listening to the same sounds as me.

[bruce90]

The little 'Infantry Assault' video which I have just watched on You Tube was,I thought,very atmospheric and the 'gunfire' sounds seemed solid enough to me.