graphics

[jnpoint]

ORIGINAL: fsp1978

I think games like WITW could do with small animations like in WITP:AE. Those are very, very nice and add a lot to the immersion. Some eye candy (and sounds) are really helpful. What I would also like for grognard games are some little screens or maybe even historic footage for say capturing Stalingrad, Moscow, Berlin, breaching the west wall, the first Russian winter arriving, etc.

I have no idea how many resources this will take up though.

But little men digging on the map are not my cup of tea either.

What I would wish for: Every strategy game should have the possibility to choose between NATO symbols and icons. While I for the life of me cannot understand why anyone would want icons, I have a couple of friends who flat-out refuse to play anything with NATO symbols. They would surely enjoy the underlying game, but the will not give it a go without icons. Driving me nuts.

I really love these games too, but I hate NATO symbols. But I have learned to live with that because I love to play games like WitW.

[zakblood]

i love all wargames, but do get frustrated not knowing at a glance what some units are, and too old now to learn new ones so like the choice which has been given here in this game....

once i get it, i'll play more with the editor than the game itself, but we all like what we like...

this is a great game, and will evolve into a classic

[fsp1978]

Thanks so much for making these counters and for pointing me to them!

[Banquet]

I was thinking about the comparison between WitW and Hearts of Iron 4, where it looks like there will be no option for NATO counters and instead players will be forced to play with giant men and tanks running across a map of Europe. The map, while looking graphically sophisticated, looks more like something from Age of Empires or Civ than a serious WWII strategy game. As a Hearts of Iron fan, I'm disappointed with the direction they're taking and find it refreshing to play a wargame such as WitW, whose map I think is appealing to look at, functional and has that 'stare at it for hours planning strategies' factor which the HoI4 map, for all it's whizzbangery, completely lacks IMHO.

Maybe it's my age but WitW looks good to me, and exactly like a proper WWII wargame should look like. My only gripe is I wish there was just one more level of zoom. When looking at all the units coming ashore on D-Day I wish I could get just that little closer to see what's where.

[fsp1978]

I loved HOI1 and HOI2, didn't like HOI3. A serious strategy game without NATO counters is a no buy for me. But that's why I think game developers should always provide both options - icons and NATO counters. This cannot take up too many resources.

[zakblood]

it's good to see so many new views on counters / icons and graphics, and some say they don't matter, well keep those views coming either way as it's a choice that's been offered, not many do give you that[;)]

and already seen a few that have said others wouldn't buy it without them [;)][:D]

makes me so happy to read that[8|][&o]

see jnpoint, you have opened a can of worms, and now the worm has turned[:D][;)]

[jnpoint]

ORIGINAL: Banquet

I was thinking about the comparison between WitW and Hearts of Iron 4, where it looks like there will be no option for NATO counters and instead players will be forced to play with giant men and tanks running across a map of Europe. The map, while looking graphically sophisticated, looks more like something from Age of Empires or Civ than a serious WWII strategy game. As a Hearts of Iron fan, I'm disappointed with the direction they're taking and find it refreshing to play a wargame such as WitW, whose map I think is appealing to look at, functional and has that 'stare at it for hours planning strategies' factor which the HoI4 map, for all it's whizzbangery, completely lacks IMHO.

Maybe it's my age but WitW looks good to me, and exactly like a proper WWII wargame should look like. My only gripe is I wish there was just one more level of zoom. When looking at all the units coming ashore on D-Day I wish I could get just that little closer to see what's where.

I like both types of games, WitW and HoI, although I never liked HoI3 - don't know why. HoI 4 looks great to me (the graphics especially ) so I'm looking forward to that one. It has nothing to do with age, I am almost 50 myself.

I do agree that it would be nice with one more zoom level.

[RedLancer]

Most of the GUI is moddable and I have hinted in the Editor manual as to what is possible.  The setup in in WitW is very similar to WitE and Jison's mods show what can be done with time and application.  The only hardcode bit are the numbers that appear in F2/F3, AA and Depot symbols.
 
For the stylised counters that I made I deliberately chose to retain the outline of the NATO symbols as this meant that I did not have to embed alpha masks or reposition the unit size or soft factors and that saved hours of work that I'd rather be spending on other parts of the game - particularly as I love NATO counters. 

[chemkid]

.

[zakblood]

for a game that uses terrain hight as it does, the heads worked for me, but not everyone cup of tea maybe

[Nico165b165]

Interesting that HoI is cited as an example here. The last version HoI 4 is under development, and the simple word "counter" has become a running gag on their forums because every time someone says "counter", it starts a flaming wars of 10s and 10s of posts debating if sprites instead of counters is acceptable, if the proposition on the table really is "counters" and not too much "sprites"... Only conclusion is : wargamer love debating graphics [:D]

I'm personnaly not that interested in more graphic works from the devs here. I already find myself constantly looking at things in Wikipedia or elsewhere to see "what really happened here" because the game FEELS real, even with lesser graphics. My sense of immersion is more hurt by something like the italian auto surrender than by the absence of more animations. More animations may be cool, but I know that after seeing them a few times I would turn them off because a cool animation seen a few times is good, but a cool animation seen 100s of times becomes not so cool...

I'm certain that the community will provide some better looking map like the ones for WITE and I will happily use it. But I'd rather see the devs use their time on the core engine.

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

The issue is the graphics really do not matter as much as you think. No matter how great the graphics are it is the underlying mechanics that matter the most. Plus even if there all sorts of cute sprites in the game, that would not increase sales enough to matter. It is not like someone used to Civ, a RPG, etc. is going to pick up a game like this just because of graphics.

So the developers know their target market and know that spending time on cute graphics is not a good use of their limited resources. Even if enhanced graphic sold another 500 copies of the game it still would not be worth it.

Plus it has nothing to do with people being stuck in the past either. I find that comment condescending and adds nothing to the discussion btw. For the record I love graphic games. I'm playing Borderlands 2 right now as well and enjoy it a lot. Plus Panzer Corp, Battle Academy, etc. So I definitely appreciate the graphics in games. But just because a lot of games have them, does not mean ALL of them have to have them.

I'm not young and I play WITP:AE as well as Skyrim and Civ 5 and Kerbal Space. FWIW, the two biggest reasons I never got into WitE and may not buy WitW are counters and a lack of AE-style combat animations. Without some graphics it becomes a spreadsheet game. I need some visceral excitement even in a deep, thoughtful wargame.

[jnpoint]

ORIGINAL: Red Lancer

Most of the GUI is moddable and I have hinted in the Editor manual as to what is possible.  The setup in in WitW is very similar to WitE and Jison's mods show what can be done with time and application.  The only hardcode bit are the numbers that appear in F2/F3, AA and Depot symbols.

For the stylised counters that I made I deliberately chose to retain the outline of the NATO symbols as this meant that I did not have to embed alpha masks or reposition the unit size or soft factors and that saved hours of work that I'd rather be spending on other parts of the game - particularly as I love NATO counters. 

Thank you for the stylised counters - it does matter for me and my enjoyment of the game.

[sfbaytf]

Personally I love the map and the counters. Both are very well done. At the some time I also realize that as a whole things are moving in an opposite direction and it seems like people who play these sorts of game are declining and that has all sort of implications.

In the late 70's and a part of the 80's board war games dominated. A thing called the PC started to become popular. Young risk taking entrepreneurs started making software driven war games. The major game publishers of board war games didn't adapt to the new reality and soon many folded up-even though some very well designed and produced board war games got produced.

By the 90's it was pretty much the PC that drove the war gaming industry. For those of use raised on board war games and young enough to easily adapt to the PC, that was where we spent a good part of our disposable income.

Today its a different story. I can't say if increasing the graphics will guarantee more younger players will get interested in complex war games. There are no guarantees in life. Sometimes you have to take risks to get ahead and not all of them will succeed. Unfortunately for many of the younger generation BattleFleet on a tablet or mobile device is what represents WW2 naval combat, not War in The Pacific.

Today of you want to by the board version of War in the Pacific you can get it on EBay for $200-300 or buy the newer version for the same if not more. The cost to produce and lack of demand dictates that price.

If the trend continues you will likely see price increases down the road for games like this.

[KWG]

Ive been experimenting with unit colors, icon style, sizes.

[Grotius]

Ooh, that looks promising, KWG. If anyone can figure out a way to sneak unit IDs onto counters along with CV/movement, I'd be eternally grateful.

Do you think modders could make WITP-style animations? My guess is that would be a bridge too far.

My only gripe is I wish there was just one more level of zoom. When looking at all the units coming ashore on D-Day I wish I could get just that little closer to see what's where.

I was about to post the same thing. I'm constantly wishing I could zoom in closer. Is *that* something a modder could do?

[KWG]

Thanks, you can set units to show ID, by itself, in user preferences - unit value display type.

More zoom would be nice.

Ive got lots of unit changes... especially SS. I use colors from actual pics of that nation's regalia.

SS units with real SS cameo. Luftwaffe blue, camo, eagle. U.S, British uniform colors.

Made a nice Polish eagle unit.

[Grotius]

Yep, I know I can toggle on the display unit ID. But I'm greedy -- I want to display it at the same time I see CV/movement. Elsewhere, the devs said this wasn't moddable, but you strike me as the kind of guy who can make the impossible happen.

In any case, I'm liking your efforts so far.

[KWG]

impossible happen.... the Wizard morvael

[Banquet]

ORIGINAL: Grotius

Do you think modders could make WITP-style animations? My guess is that would be a bridge too far.

The battle animations in WitP do really make the battles more interesting to watch and it would be great to see them in WitW. I suppose it's another load of work, getting the side pictures done for all the aircraft, so perhaps didn't make the cut