new wargame "War across the Pacific 1941-1945"

[andy11]

Did you see this?

www.microgeo.pl

(in polish)
http://www.gry-online.pl/S013.asp?ID=19839
http://gry.o2.pl/zapowiedzi/?co=pokaz&id=368

[sterckxe]

ORIGINAL: andy11
Did you see this?

www.microgeo.pl

Registered myself months ago at their website - never got an email with an update ...

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

[wodin]

SOme people over at Warfare HQ sent an email and got a reply next day.

Price supposed to be $35.

[ravinhood]

Heh the map reminds me of "Empire Deluxe", but, watching the little movies one can see the abundance of detail to the battles. Clearly looks much simplier and more fun to play than WitP to me. I'll probably get this one.

[33Vyper]

yes I have seen it....and the lovely 1990 Graphics too

[pasternakski]

Laugh all you want. From what I see, this game is a simple, straightforward attempt at doing what WitP tried to do: create a fun, interesting, historically-based simulation of WWII in the Pacific. I enjoyed the two "movie" presentations (and, for the edification of someone who criticized this game as not realizing that Coral Sea was the first carrier battle of the war, the first movie presents Coral Sea, not Midway). If it has a full campaign scenario (instead of individual battles like Carriers at War and Carrier Strike), and it continues to look interesting, I will buy this game.

My WitP days are very numbered anyway, considering how fooked oop it continues to be.

[wodin]

With such indepth gaems as WiTP or always going to have problems, some very big ones even.

I know many love it but for me where is the fun at?

This on the other hand looks fun to play, only time will tell how good or bad it is.

[Terminus]

And what'll you do if it fails to live up to your expectations? It's unlikely that the people behind it have access to any black magic that will conjure up the mythical PERFECT Pacific War game. And then you'd be stuck with those, shall we say, rudimentary graphics.

Back in the old days, I had a very high tolerance for primitive graphics. As I've gotten older, this has gradually faded away...

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And what'll you do if it fails to live up to your expectations? It's unlikely that the people behind it have access to any black magic that will conjure up the mythical PERFECT Pacific War game. And then you'd be stuck with those, shall we say, rudimentary graphics.

Back in the old days, I had a very high tolerance for primitive graphics. As I've gotten older, this has gradually faded away...

If it costs $35 and fails to live up to my expectations, I'll be less than half as disappointed as I have been with WitP. I'm not interested in perfection. I want a game I can play that at least keeps the leaders on the correct side of the war. As for graphics, if they are for "gee whiz" effect, there is no such thing on a CDT. Function always comes before style for me.

How truncated your view of time is. "The old days" to which you refer are only a few years ago. I have seen nothing in the way of breakthroughs that have negated the simple pleasure of seeing military units displayed in a utilitarian way intended to help me understand and play the game rather than make me sit back in my chair and say, "Gee, whiz, that's even more beautiful than my mistress's tushie."

[Terminus]

Actually, I count the "good old days" as 10-15 years ago. I'm not as much of a young whippersnapper as you seem to think...

AND I play WitP with the animations turned off. So nyah to you, sirrah!

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: wodin

With such indepth gaems as WiTP or always going to have problems, some very big ones even.

I know many love it but for me where is the fun at?

This on the other hand looks fun to play, only time will tell how good or bad it is.

Where is the fun of witp? [X(]

Oh man... playing that pbem is a great time. The suspense of wondering whether or not your defense on an island will withstand an assault or whether or not your carrier group will wipe out the enemy's carriers.

I haven't had such tense and thoroughly enjoyable moments since cc1 like I've had in UV/WiTP.

WiTP does have some parts that are a pain the arse, such as getting operations and/or bases established with the attendant needs such as finding and shipping engineer units/fuel/supplies etc. However, the overall gameplay is, imo, a lot of fun pbem.

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Terminus
So nyah to you, sirrah!

Man, you Danes curse weird.

[pasternakski]

ORIGINAL: Reiryc
WiTP does have some parts that are a pain the arse, such as getting operations and/or bases established with the attendant needs such as finding and shipping engineer units/fuel/supplies etc.

These are the best parts of the game. This should have been the basis for the game. Everybody wanted an editor, and mods, and tactical control, and "I want my this" and "I want my that" and ...

Now we've got what we've got. An unintelligible, directionless, permanently garbled mess.

[Reiryc]

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

ORIGINAL: Reiryc
WiTP does have some parts that are a pain the arse, such as getting operations and/or bases established with the attendant needs such as finding and shipping engineer units/fuel/supplies etc.

These are the best parts of the game. This should have been the basis for the game. Everybody wanted an editor, and mods, and tactical control, and "I want my this" and "I want my that" and ...

Now we've got what we've got. An unintelligible, directionless, permanently garbled mess.

One man's mess is another's well placed belongings...

Many of those "I want this and that's" have made the game that much more fun for me.

[ravinhood]

Personally I can stand the "old days" graphics, if the meat of the game is challenging and fun and not overly complex like WitP. I passed on it because of TOO MUCH detail, my gawd I can't see playing one game for a years time just to play one game out. Forget that, too many other great games out there to waste a whole year on one production that from the sounds of it has many problems still.

Even with the Empire Deluxe graphics of this new version of a War in the Pacific, the detail of the movies is enough for me to take an interest in it and shell out my $35 (half of what WitP cost by the way). I still play EMPIRE DELUXE and still enjoy the heck out of it, the Expert AI is definitely still challenging to me and that's one of the most important things to me in any game, how challenging the AI remains over the years. Graphics certainly comes in last place.

I'm also not a big fan of naval battles, still looking for the ultimate land based game besides "Rising Sun" and "Squad Battles "Pacific War" that depicts more of the ground based warfare of the Pacific War on a "tactical" level instead of operational. I found a mod for CMBO that has Pacific Theater units and I enjoy it much, just wish someone would do it for either CMBB or CMAK so I can use the updated tweaks of those two games.

Anyway this new game looks interesting and simple enough in my book for my $$, I'd rather have something I can play in a couple of days time or a week than something that takes months to a year to play, especially by PBEM. And as far as WitP graphics, I didn't see anything overly spectacular about them anyway. For 10 to 15 years later, hardly state of the art. "The Grandest Fleet" by QQP old as it is has better graphics I think.

[Arckon]

You know I used to agree about graphics in turn based war games, but I honestly think we are at a stage now where much more can be done.

The Decisive Battles Series have done it, and Anglo-German War looks to have improved (though certainly not superb) graphics compared to 5+ yrs ago in its soon to be released game.

Yes gameplay, interface, and AI are the most important, but I think some are starting to cop out on the graphics because of the belief that these type of games have never had great graphics due to other areas being more important.

It is constantly being talked about how to bring in new people to what is classed as a niche genre, and improved graphics could also help do that.

For the record I still play Rising Sun, Panzer General etc.

[Terminus]

I'm not looking for good graphics in this type of game for the "gee whiz" factor, but I do expect (and think I have a right to expect) graphics that are visually pleasing. This is 2005, for God's sake!

War Across the Pacific's graphics remind me of Carriers at War. It was a good game, and one which I was a big fan of, but it got OLD. WitP has a buttload of flaws, but bad graphics aren't one of them.

ORIGINAL: pasternakski

Man, you Danes curse weird.

Well, I could have called your mother a hamster, and claimed that your father smelled of elderberries, before threatening to unclog my nostrils on you and make castagnets out of your testicles, but that's SO 1974.

[ravinhood]

I really think graphics candy is a age factor thing. Nearly 50 here and graphics have never impressed me to buy a game. The gameplay itself has always been the influence. PRICE plays a big part also, and mainly the reason I don't own a lot of Matrixgames titles to this day.

Plus, improving graphics takes time and time is money, thus, games with improved graphics will tend to cost "more". Matrixgames are a prime example of that, just look at the cost of some of their more recent titles. When it comes to more of a board game to computer type of game, nope, graphics aren't important. Now, games like Medieval Total War and Combat Mission and perhaps SPWAW those are a different story and a different type of game. I would expect better graphics in them because they are not board game to computer type games. They are more "action oriented" with minature figures, thus graphics adds more to the immersion value, but, a board game to computer type game, nah, graphics have nothing to do with immersion, it's a strategy game pure then, just counters and hexes and enough color to tell the difference between the sides and the terrain is all I need. AGW is certainly going to give more than required in the graphics department I can already see that and for $29.99 also.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Plus, improving graphics takes time and time is money, thus, games with improved graphics will tend to cost "more". Matrixgames are a prime example of that, just look at the cost of some of their more recent titles.

Right, like Tin Soldiers: Julius Caesar $29.99, Gates of Troy $19.99, GGWaW $39.99, Supremacy $34.99, Flashpoint Germany $34.99, Starshatter $29.99 [;)]. I realize there are a few titles with higher prices in our catalog, for good reason, and some prices have come down over time, but the great majority of our titles are currently priced at or below market/competitor prices.

You're right that graphics take time and money, but the majority of the development cost for historical wargames at least is not in the graphics. One of the reasons other genres have more time to spend on graphics and effects, in many cases, is because everything else is fictional. Researching, designing and coding historical accuracy combined with playability represents the majority of a wargame's cost, together with creating an AI that will play a reasonably challenging yet historically believable game against you.

Regards,

- Erik

[Marc von Martial]

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
Plus, improving graphics takes time and time is money, thus, games with improved graphics will tend to cost "more". Matrixgames are a prime example of that, just look at the cost of some of their more recent titles.

If that would be true the me personally would be a rich man. Care to provide proof for your broad statement?


ps.: If it were for me and I had the budget our games would look way better. You don´t want to know the ammount of compromises I have to deal with.