The interface

[*Lava*]

ORIGINAL: Berkut

ORIGINAL: Lava

ORIGINAL: Berkut

"This is unplayable"

What utter nonsense.

Ray (alias Lava)

Try quoting in context.

Okay...

I'll put it in context.

You're saying "I PREFER this and because that is what YOU WANT you proclaim ... others will think the game is unplayable. Kinda like the chat about having only one resolution being a "game killer."

Utter, unabashed nonsense.

All I can say to folks is, yes, the interface may not be quite what you expect, but then again Frank Hunter is not Relic or EA... he is an independent developer. He also has a different way of doing things and his command concept is quite innovative and worthy of playing. His games attempt to capture the problems of command. So if you just want to push around counters...

Now this game does not take a rocket scientist to learn how to play. I got a stab at it in the Alpha version without either a manual or tutorial and picked it up in no time.

Now I know lots of people are used to being taken by the hand and walked through the process step by step. But in the end, even the best tutorials leave stuff out. Any gamer knows you have to play a couple games just to press buttons and "see what happens."

This game is no different.

Ray (alias Lava)

[Berkut]

See, that wasn't so hard was it?

And if you think I am wrong that people will find the game unpayable due to the interface, well, you could try making an argument rather than a proclamation that it is nonsense, of the unabashed or abashed variety.

Now, I think I made a pretty calm and deliberate argument to support my concern. It was not the argument you are claiming I am making, and not at all based on "WHAT I PREFER". You should try undertanding what the quotation mark means, by the way.

Discourse is pointless, however, if the intent of the participants is to only engage the argument as THEY define it for the other person, rather than what that other person is actually saying.

I think you might be right about his command concept and capturing the problems of command. But that has nothing to do with the interface. Rather the game obscures those decisions behind a clunky and difficult to work with interface. I am glad you find the game worth the trouble of the interface, I hope to come to the same conclusion.

But I have no doubt that many will not.

I am happy to do you the courtesy of responding to your points as they are made, rather than sweeping and grandious statements about your points being "utter, unabashed nonsense". If you cannot do the same, then we really have nothing to discuss. Why even respond to someone who is posting "utter, unabashed nonsense"? Sirely everyone else can see that as well as you, if in fact it is an accurate assessment, and the poster can be safely ignored.

[Erik Rutins]

The game is far from unplayable, Berkut. Certainly, the interface could be improved, but the interface is far from the worst I've seen and also seems fairly consistent with Frank's past games so I'm not sure what folks who've played other Frank Hunter designs were expecting.

[Berkut]

Erik, you and Ray will have to find someone else to argue with if you want to argue whether or not the game is unplayable - I never made that claim, so feel no need to defend it.

[FrankHunter]

On the subject of my interfaces, I would agree they aren't that cute.  Its what I'm used to so that's how I tend to do it.  I'm also not interested in programming interfaces, I write wargames because its the command and other under the hood stuff I'm interested in so that's where I spend my time.  I can see how that would be frustrating though if a player's interests don't coincide with my own.

[Berkut]

I cannot speak for anyone else Mr. Hunter, by my beef with your interface has nothing to do with its cuteness, but simply it's utility.

And I understand your lack of interst in programming the interface - I doubt anyone gets into this because they love programming an elegant interface.

So, my frustration is not that my interest does not coincide with yours at all - I'll bet our interests actually coincide nicely. *I* wouldn't want to be in charge of interface development if I decided to go into wargame programming either.

My frustration is that your interface is dificult to use, and makes the game less enjoyable.

[Aurelian]

While it would be nice if the interface is up to date, I don't think it's really necessary. After a couple of test games, it becomes second nature. To me anyway. But having played games like Second Front, or the old SSI Civil War games, or Pac War, or RFSTA, I'm used to it.
 
Now if it was real time like Paradox's games, it would be a different story.

[FrankHunter]

I am sorry about that Berkut, I really am.  I appreciate your point.  Too often I think I develop tunnel vision and ignore things I probably shouldn't.  Such as screen resolution.  Just because I use 1024x768 on my 19" should not mean I should assume everyone else does for example.  And its the same with the interface, just because I'm used to a certain way of doing things I shouldn't assume that would be the easiest way of doing things for others.  I certainly do apologize for not doing better in that area.

[carnifex]

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

On the subject of my interfaces, I would agree they aren't that cute. Its what I'm used to so that's how I tend to do it. I'm also not interested in programming interfaces, I write wargames because its the command and other under the hood stuff I'm interested in so that's where I spend my time. I can see how that would be frustrating though if a player's interests don't coincide with my own.

Thanks for the head's-up. Interface design and ease of use are primary factors in determining what I will purchase. Take the two Civil War games Matrix has out at the moment. Both pretty good and seem balanced and accurate and flavorful. But one has a much better interface and that's the one I bought.

I don't know how many games I recommended my friends avoid simply because it takes too many mouse clicks to do a simple action.

[Berkut]

Thanks for the considered response, I do apprecate it. I also realize being a critic is easy, and the greatest critic in the world is still a chump compared to anyone he is criticizing.

I don't really know what the solution is though - Matrix is doing about the best job that is being done in this area. There are some games that have some rpetty obvious dedication to interface (for better or worse, sometimes creative interface design is worse than half hearted interface design), but it seems like most of the game development is being done by people like you - essentially a labor of love type thing.

Someone earlier mentioned TOAW and Grigsbys designs. That is kind of ironic considering how much TOAW was panned when it came out for its interface...

[DBeves]

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

I am sorry about that Berkut, I really am.  I appreciate your point.  Too often I think I develop tunnel vision and ignore things I probably shouldn't.  Such as screen resolution.  Just because I use 1024x768 on my 19" should not mean I should assume everyone else does for example.  And its the same with the interface, just because I'm used to a certain way of doing things I shouldn't assume that would be the easiest way of doing things for others.  I certainly do apologize for not doing better in that area.

What a big man FH is ... didn't come to the board with some ignore what everyone is saying just cause I feel I have to defence I have seen on so many other boards at matrix.

Gonna buy the game now just for that ... and perhaps cause it seems to me the only other comments are that there seems to be a good game underneath the interface

[Berkut]

ORIGINAL: carnifex
I don't know how many games I recommended my friends avoid simply because it takes too many mouse clicks to do a simple action.

Beyond my own personal annoyance, this is a major factor in my concern.

I LOVE PBEM wargaming!

I play a lot of stuff. Most of it though, is actually board games played over Cyberboard or VASSAL. Stuff like Paths of Glory, ASL, BtB, etc.

But while a board game over those tools are a lot of fun, it is still a board game, and you are still playing with the limitations of that genre that computers do so well - fog of war, complex numerical interactions, presentation of information. There are some wargames that have done GREAT jobs facilitating PBEM, stuff like Combat Missions, DBWW2, WitP, even FoF. I want more, and I want them to be better and I want to be able to convince my gaming friends who play hours of wargames every week to buy them!

And I know that there will be 2-3 that I game with who I won't - can't - recommend this to, simply because of the interface and resolution.

[darthsmaul]

Nice to see Frank get on the boards, I wont buy it yet but I will be buying it, just a matter of time and maybe a patch or two.

on Interfaces I cant comment on this cuz I dont own this game but I find many are hard to learn until you have played for a while, just my 2 cents

steve

[7th Somersets]

I would also like to add that once you have played the game a few times you will see that the interface really falls into two parts
 
1) The strategic part - a very important part of Game play as you have to plan ahead - as WW1 commanders had to. A good example is as the TE you need to ensure command of the seas to maintain British supplies. You will need to allocate ships to transport your goods. If you are planning another Gallipoli or Salonica you will need to deploy transports to amphibious across the seas that your troops will travel and also gain control over them. You will need to balance shell production with reinforcements etc etc.
It takes a while to click through all of the things that need covering each turn - but while you are doing that, you are deciding your empire's future actions.
 
2) The tactical parts of the game - deploying and activating your HQs so that you can launch and maintain offensives, or be in a position to launch critical counter attacks. Moving cavalry units into unoccupied enemy territory to keep them under pressure. (Cavalry can do that without being activated by an HQ so long as they start the turn stacked with an infantry unit).
 
Personally I find (having worked on the Beta) that both become second nature very quickly. You then spend your time planning and executing your actions rather than worrying about the interface (which never bothered me at all).
 
If you have tried it and been put off - I suggest that you try it again. You are missing out on a great game otherwise, and you will find that you pick it up quickly.
 
Do ask questions on the forum - those of us that have been hammering away at it for a while will no doubt try to help if we can.
 
Regards.
 
 

[*Lava*]

ORIGINAL: Berkut

I LOVE PBEM wargaming!

Well...

If you do love PBEM, you will be shooting yourself and your friends in the foot by not recommending this game.

This game will rock in PBEM.

Ray (alias Lava)

[joblue]

Thank you, Mr. Hunter, for your honesty. In an impersonal world where technology gets shoved down one's throat, your approach is certainly refreshing.

[alejes0202]

I really can't understand how anyone can complain about this interface.  Once you begin using it, the controls quickly become intuitive.  I can only ascertain that those complaining are from the "twitch and click" RTS generation.  I don't say that as a put-down, only to point out that the frame of reference was formed by such conventions as "drag and drop," and not DOS programs that followed laddered menus.  As a veteran gamer of many, many years (I say that only to establish my credentials--I played my first wargame in the late 60's), I find this interface easy.  As a matter of fact, I find it far more user friendly than those put out by most big time developers.

Regarding the game itself, it's a masterpiece.  I have been playing it all day--I have a serious case of "just one more turn."  I find Guns of August to be a very sophisticated design with an interface that makes the depth quite accessible.  This is a very good game on a subject that is difficult to simulate.  I commend the designer.  My two cents, now I gotta go; I just have to play one more turn...!

[FrankHunter]

carnifex, understood and I agree completely.  An interface should not prevent you from playing.  The thing is, I make the interface quite simple so as to avoid extra work when playing.  When you're spending hours and hours trying to find a problem in the AI it doesn't take long to become frustrated with an interface.  I play my games over and over and so I like simple and functional when it comes to the interface.

At times I find areas that I dislike and I do spend time rewriting that code, trying to make it smoother and quicker.  But what I find easy to use is not necessarily what others find easy to use and that's the rub.  I tend to stick to the old way of doing things simply because that's what I'm used to.  I do rely a lot on feedback but perhaps I need to spend more time looking at other people's interfaces and not remain so comfortable with my own.

[pompack]

To try to put things into perspective [:D]

(Disclaimer: I have not yet ordered this game but I will as soon as I have a bit more time to play than at present)

I can well remember the thrill and gratitude I felt when I discovered that there still existed a company that supports the design of true wargames. The exciting thing was that here was an opportunity to resurrect the the good old days when you could buy games that stessed content and historical flavor (and maybe accuracy) rather than eye candy and "true arena competition", games where you were able to worry about strategy rather than frame rate and mouse pointing accuracy.

True, these new wargames might be expensive because of the low potential sales, and good game design might come at the expense of software design expertize since the development shops were very small operations (after all, if you were a top-flight software architect with access to "state-of-the-art software development tools" would you give up your (high) six figure salalry to code and TEST software for the kind of money you could make in this business?).

None the less, I and many others were grateful that the games would be forthcoming even though the designs might be a little clunky and the UI might be a little dated; after all, at the time most of us were still playing ancient games with clunky interfaces and simplistic combat models that were designed to run on a 386 with a 40Mbyte disk because no one was developing our kind of games anymore

While the exact date of all this gratitude is lost in the distant past. it does seem like it falls in this century. Isn't it just amazing how quickly things change these days? [8|]

While I would certainly prefer games with better UI and systems architecture (and even some better math in the basic combat models), I am still glad that there are games like this that I can enjoy. True the learning curve here may be steep (and it certainly is on some others I can mention [:D]) , at least it is associated with a game with strategic depth that I can immerse myself in.

Just my two cents [>:]

[TheWombat_matrixforum]

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

On the subject of my interfaces, I would agree they aren't that cute.  Its what I'm used to so that's how I tend to do it.  I'm also not interested in programming interfaces, I write wargames because its the command and other under the hood stuff I'm interested in so that's where I spend my time.  I can see how that would be frustrating though if a player's interests don't coincide with my own.

Ouch. While I have enormous respect for game developers like Mr. Hunter, working on a shoestring to create labors of love, to hear someone say "I'm not interested in programming interfaces" really hits pretty hard. Like it or not, the interface is a supremely important part of any game, and even more so with data-intensive, detail oriented stuff like wargames. To me it's like saying "I'm not interested in programming combat systems" or "I really don't care for programming logistics."

Just my $.02 but to me the interface is equally as important as the "guts" of the game. If I don't intuitively want to play the game--if it doesn't draw me in or it makes me fight it every inch of the way--chances are I'm not going ot play it. Don't have the time to spend unraveling arcana these days. Lemme spend my time on strategy or tactics, or logistics, not on figuring out an interface.

Caveat: Ain't played this one, and probably won't given its issues with resoution and such.