Review @ Out of Eight

[JaguarUSF]

The Operational Art of War III review has been posted at Out of Eight PC Game Reviews:
http://jaguarusf.blogspot.com/2006/06/n ... r-iii.html
Enjoy!

[ralphtricky]

Thanks, I find that to be an excellent, balanced review of the strengths and weaknesses. (except for the "nerds" comment.)[:D]

Ralph Trickey
TOAW III Programmer

[FlipTrac_511]

The review comments negatively about the 'dated' graphics inherent in wargames.  But really, how fancy can you make the graphics on a 2D map with units represented by square counters?  SSI's Panzer General looked wonderful, but similar graphics would be out of place in advanced wargames such as TOAW IMO.  The best looking advanced strategy wargame I've seen yet happens to be Flashpoint Germany. I own earlier TOAW titles and the graphics in those were not bad at all. However, the 3D icons were terrible.

[JaguarUSF]

Who says you have to use a 2D map with square counters?

He he....nerds.

[ralphtricky]

FlipTrac,
I'm going to hate myself in the morning, but I'm going to disagree with you.

I should be able to use the mouse wheel to zoom in and out, from twice the detail out to the minimap scale. There's no reason that I can't make the map spin around and even tilt(if that makes sense,) etc. You should have some control over the font, you should be able to move the windows around on the screen, and dock them where ever you want to. You should have a dockable window that shows the terrain effects.

Heck, I should be able to play on a topo or other map instead of the graphics that are there.

I'd love an option to independently size the counters, and make them a bit bigger.

The sounds should sound like they're coming from where they are on the map (left, right, up, down.) Heck, I'd love to steal the SPWAW graphics and use them <g>.

I'd love to have 'tooltips' following the cursor instead of having to look at the bottom of the screen.

In the end, it's going to be counters on a map, if it wasn't, it wouldn't be TOAW, but there is a lot that can be done to the presentation to bring it up to modern standards. I'm not saying that a 3D presentation isn't possible, and that I won't try to improve the 3D presention too, or even make it real 3D, but it's never going to be the main display for most people.

Ralph Trickey
TOAW III Programmer

[ralphtricky]

ORIGINAL: JaguarUSF

Who says you have to use a 2D map with square counters?

He he....nerds.

Hey! It's not 'Nerdy' It's 'Traditional'<g>.

I actually did want to update the 3D, but ran out of time. I figured that if I added bars for attack, defense, and movement, people might switch to it <evil grin> They'd have to decide between the denser information of the 3d view, and the traditional counters. That would be fun to watch!

Ralph

[JAMiAM]

Of course, all that fancy, schmanzy graphics may have to wait for TOAW IV, after we've brought TOAW III to its evolutionary zenith...[;)]

Plus, I want CAP overlays, defineable air interdiction zones, discrete supplies, intelligent reserves...

[ralphtricky]

ORIGINAL: JaguarUSF

Who says you have to use a 2D map with square counters?

He he....nerds.

Thanks, excellent idea. I've got to add horizontal and vertical map folds, 'finger factor', fold mountains, and some other things to break up the symmetry and add to the realism.<g>

[JaguarUSF]

I think TOAW should have a chewy, nougat center. In 3-D, of course.

[liuzg150181]

ORIGINAL: ralphtrick

ORIGINAL: JaguarUSF

Who says you have to use a 2D map with square counters?

He he....nerds.

Hey! It's not 'Nerdy' It's 'Traditional'<g>.

I actually did want to update the 3D, but ran out of time. I figured that if I added bars for attack, defense, and movement, people might switch to it <evil grin> They'd have to decide between the denser information of the 3d view, and the traditional counters. That would be fun to watch!

Ralph

Let's call a spade a spade,if one really loves the like of TOAW series he or she is very likely to be a nerd.[&o]

[*Lava*]

Hmm..

Another review that can't escape the "graphics trap."

Personally, one of the major selling points of TOAW for me is its' simplicity.

Yep, you can go for fancy-smancy map graphics... but then would it be so easy to create your own maps? Doubt it.

Yep, you can make counters with reams of information on them which look great... but may cause you to lose your eyesight.

TOAW isn't a classic for nothing. It is flexible, simple to manipulate and the BIG BONUS (which reviewers always seem to forget)... FUN!

FUN is why I play games. FUN is why I love TOAW. You can make it more fancy smancy, but if you start entering into the relm of needing a programming degree to edit/design scenarios or make maps, then the FUN goes away... no thanks.

Ray (alias Lava)

[Bossy573]

Seems to be a question of your target audience. I would venture to say 95% of the people who buy "classic" wargames would prefer playability over gloss. The question is whether adding gloss is going to widen your audience enough to justify the time and expense. Personally, I would doubt it BUT games like HOI and even the Combat Mission series might suggest otherwise. Those games have definitely expanded beyond the gronard and quasi-gronard crowd.
I'm just thrilled to death to hear the words "TOAW IV." [:)]

[*Lava*]

Well..

My point wasn't that enhanced graphics wouldn't help sell the game more... probably would.

As for myself, the last adjective I would use to describe me is "nerd." So if things get to complex... I drop it like a hot potato.

If Ralph can figure an "easy" way to import topo maps... great! But if you have to take a course in "TOAW IV map creation".. you'll probably lose me.

Ray (alias Lava)

[JaguarUSF]

ORIGINAL: Lava
Another review that can't escape the "graphics trap."

I talk about the graphics in every game I review. Personally, I don't weigh the graphics heavily at all (especially in wargames); TOAW3 did get a 7/8, I don't give many of those. I try to approach the game from the perspective of a more general audience, because:
(a) people who really like the game are going to get it anyway
(b) most of the people on the Internet fall into this category
I do say "Of course, most people who play wargames don&#8217;t care about cutting-edge 3-D graphics"
I've played plenty of games that looked good but had no content and I rated them as such (UberSoldier is a good example).
Of course, on the flipside, why can't (or don't) wargames have the same graphics as a real time strategy game?

[liuzg150181]

ORIGINAL: JaguarUSF

Of course, on the flipside, why can't (or don't) wargames have the same graphics as a real time strategy game?

Partly coz the higher up the echelon of command it goes,the more abstracted it is.
As from TOAW manual:"The title “Operational Art of War” is based on a Soviet era military term meaning,essentially, “the theory and practice of army level combat”. There isn’t really a hard definition of “operational level” scale. The term is generally used to describe anything in the gray area between strategy (overall conduct of a war, including non-combat factors such as industrial production) and tactics
(the details of the actions of small units). If your primary focus is the battlefield, it isn’t strategy. If you can’t smell the smoke, you aren’t really dealing with tactics. Think of the operational level as a view of the battlefield on a scale just exceeding that at which differing ranges of various direct fire weapons are significant."
Thus while tactical wargames would benefit easily and the most from a graphical overhaul,the less is true for operational games like TOAW3,unless it is a hybrid level wargame which goes to and fro btw tactical and operational levels.

[JReb]

In a turn based game what are the alternatives? Having 3D fidgeting units standing tall, out of proportion to their surroundings? Civ comes to mind. Love the game and graphics but for a wargame the scale of the map is critical to the display of the units. In the campaign series, 3D works because the map scale is small enough to keep the units in proportion. In TOAW it just doesn't work.

[liuzg150181]

ORIGINAL: JReb

In a turn based game what are the alternatives? Having 3D fidgeting units standing tall, out of proportion to their surroundings? Civ comes to mind. Love the game and graphics but for a wargame the scale of the map is critical to the display of the units. In the campaign series, 3D works because the map scale is small enough to keep the units in proportion. In TOAW it just doesn't work.

If you are referring to my reply,then a graphical overhaul doesnt do much even for a Real-time operational wargame like HttR in terms of aesthetic function.

[JReb]

ORIGINAL: liuzg150181

ORIGINAL: JReb

In a turn based game what are the alternatives? Having 3D fidgeting units standing tall, out of proportion to their surroundings? Civ comes to mind. Love the game and graphics but for a wargame the scale of the map is critical to the display of the units. In the campaign series, 3D works because the map scale is small enough to keep the units in proportion. In TOAW it just doesn't work.

If you are referring to my reply,then a graphical overhaul doesnt do much even for a Real-time operational wargame like HttR in terms of aesthetic function.

No, just making general observations. I can't see 3D for TOAW but you never know. Once you stack units in a hex, 3D becomes irrelevant.

[JaguarUSF]

ORIGINAL: JReb
Civ comes to mind.

Excellent example.

[golden delicious]

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM
Plus, I want CAP overlays, defineable air interdiction zones, discrete supplies, intelligent reserves...

Yeah. All these things are more important than purely aesthetic improvements. No doubt TOAW could look better- but it looks good enough for now.