Vegeorite Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 This is a terrific game, actually. The more time I give it, the more I get out of it. There are loads of criticisms around but here we have the best game of its kind, as is. Cheers all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avwriter Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 I agree. It has its rough edges, but I reaaly feel that most of the complaints are comign from people who simply have not put enough time into the game yet. This game has mroe depth than meets the eye, and it is reasonable to expect it to take a while to get good at it. This is not the kind of game you are going to beat in a few hours. It's designed to last for months or years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vergeltung Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 same thing (quick-to-judge) happened to a great WWII FPS release, Red Orchestra:Ostfront 1941-45. it was very different from most FPS shooters (read; more difficult and realistic), and it got showers of complaints from johnny-ADD and the twitch & jerk crowd. fast forward to a year after release, and it's still going strong. great modders, dedicated following. I see ToW in that light as well. it must be really tough to be a PC game designer these days. I mean, you get every twerp on the internetz, posting un-informed and ill-considered opinions as if they are worthy of even voicing them. airing their tedious pet peeves as if they really mean anything. it must be discouraging. :eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikoyanPT Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 That is a challenging game, some people dont like to be beaten in games. I just love it more and more. Back to save Poland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TBlaster Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 I disagree, TOW is a half-finished game. besides technical issues such as game freezes (i have no issues in any other games), load times, 1990 era network code that requires you to manually specify the connection speed to synch with the server, the multiplayer part is just a deathmatch with no options to purchase units, objectives, campaign, etc. This game has big potential, and I hope many features are yet to be implemented, but I stand by my opinion that this game is feature lacking and should not have been released as is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frasier Posted April 24, 2007 Share Posted April 24, 2007 I agree this is an outstanding game. I find myself doing a lot of thinking about tactics, and being very careful with my soldiers and equipment, as it should be. I've only played the training sessions and two scenarios, but I keep going back to try new approaches. I read a post yesterday from someone playing the German campaign into Russia and how it had been easy until the T-34s showed up in one scenario. Now that's pretty close to real history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZaPPPa Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 Tactics? What tactics? With an non-functional LoS system, there are no tactics. Every map is a simple wide-open field. Shoot enemy Tanks from max distance, Shoot enemy AT guns from max distance, retreat your infantry out of enemy gun range and mow down or run over enemy infantry with whatever armor you have left. That may be a tactic, but it sure does not resemble a real-life one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeorite Posted April 25, 2007 Author Share Posted April 25, 2007 LoS is functional. It is a bit opaque to the player but I get the idea it's there. Anyway, reading real-life war stories (and watching the news) it's prolly fair to say tactics are pretty basic on the ground! Lowest cunning wins, FoW and all that!! I've paused a D-Day game, trying to wrest this 'ere hill from the Fritz and get the impression I'm not applying tactics near wel enough. Great fun and loads of scope for trying to bamboozle those well-placed, cross-firing enemy units. 'Lovin' it. [Hey, it's a plaudits thread] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Starlight Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 Tactics are definitely there, use the terrain to mask your movement, use reverse slope defence to kill armour. Send lone scouts out to spot the enemy. Great game, no technical problems, looks great on high and medium res. The only issue I have is a replay facility would be good to watch the animations and tank hits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chazman Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 "same thing (quick-to-judge) happened to a great WWII FPS release, Red Orchestra:Ostfront 1941-45. it was very different from most FPS shooters (read; more difficult and realistic), and it got showers of complaints from johnny-ADD and the twitch & jerk crowd." Agree about RO, but comparing this clunker to RO is ridiculus, RO was great to begin with, all one had to do was get used to the different game play, this sinker stinks out of the box, there are no LOS restrictions, tactics? Have your stick men lay down while the tanks and at-guns slug it out from each edge of the map, then order your troops to go forward and watch the ant farm antics. Try to zoom into see some action, opps, too late, it's over. This game is a major disapointment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
franz Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 make the game turn based like Combat Mission and you will have a winner. At the moment it will only be appealing to fan-boys and not proper warmgamers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Percopius Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 franz- so if I don't agree with you, I am not a proper wargamer? And I am a Fan Boy? How old are you, three? Grow up and make an stament or argument with some facts instead of insulting everybody who does not agree with you. "make the game turn based like Combat Mission and you will have a winnner." Umm, your the one who sounds like a CM fan boy franz. So a game must be turn based to be a proper wargame? Do you really belive that? You know, I may not know everything in the world about games, I've only worked on 15 games over the last 10 years with 4 companies, but I am pretty sure there are several proper wargames that are not turn based. Do I have to name them for you? Heck, I'll name one, Panther Games "Conquest of the Aegean". Have you played it? Would you consider that that game is for 'fan boys' and is not a 'proper wargame? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vegeorite Posted April 25, 2007 Author Share Posted April 25, 2007 Fanboys and proper wargamers - they never occupy the same space, do they! Make the game like CM and you will have CM. Make the game like CC and... Those are good sources of inspiration but this is potentially greater than the sum of those parts, IMHO. There's sneaking, backhanded admiration for this game oozing out of some of these critiques. Having said that, here's hoping Close Combat 6 looks like sudden strike but plays like yer Combat Mission... heh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Percopius Posted April 25, 2007 Share Posted April 25, 2007 LOL Vegorite! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidRabbit Posted April 26, 2007 Share Posted April 26, 2007 Originally posted by Vergeltung: same thing (quick-to-judge) happened to a great WWII FPS release, Red Orchestra:Ostfront 1941-45. :eek: Red Orchestra had a functional multiplayer component and it was relatively easy to find players. Not many strictly-single player games remain popular a year after release . . . not to mention single player games with only scripted battles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bongokid Posted April 26, 2007 Share Posted April 26, 2007 Actually, TOW feels to me like a more realistic version of soldiers heroes of WW2 and Faces of war,both very original games IMO, in particular with proper distances between opponents in the country side. I am still only a few hours into it (still trying to beat the 'defense' training mission) and I like it quite much. Cheers, Bongokid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jippo Posted April 26, 2007 Share Posted April 26, 2007 I like too. Performance could be better FPS wise, LOS could be more clear especially with trees and infantry should be able to man buildings. But other than that it is great! Tactics can be applied realistically, and AI is not bad (like CC). It is great to see enemy man their objective and then retreat again in the face of encirclement and counter-attack. Very enjoyable after one learns how to really control the troops (hold position etc.) -jippo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destraex Posted April 26, 2007 Share Posted April 26, 2007 Originally posted by TBlaster: I disagree, TOW is a half-finished game. besides technical issues such as game freezes (i have no issues in any other games), load times, 1990 era network code that requires you to manually specify the connection speed to synch with the server, the multiplayer part is just a deathmatch with no options to purchase units, objectives, campaign, etc. apparently mission designers for multiplayer can add unit choosing so I have read Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwncake Posted April 26, 2007 Share Posted April 26, 2007 @vegeorite Having said that, here's hoping Close Combat 6 looks like sudden strike but plays like yer Combat Mission... heh. ' tnx for the laugh needed that one on my work roflmao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts