Matrix Games Forums

Good deal SMK where did you get them that cheap? I want some.

ORIGINAL: highpocrisy

What a disappointment... here I was, ready to shell out a hard earned $50 bones on a half decent wargame and I get the 1024x bombshell again.
Now I am not one that will put graphics, sound or even interface above gameplay, but come on!
No one sports a CRT anymore!
I understand it's too much code to redesign older games to please everyone's native resolution and people should deal with a black stripe if they went for a wide screen,but how many of your costumers still run anything at 1024?!
Me and my friends already missed out on a whole bunch of games from Matrix and other publishers but I refuse to pay 50 for a game that doesn't at least support 1280 anymore.
No matter how good the gameplay.
And that's a shame because that has already meant a lot of older republished games, but now I see even recent wargames go the same route.
Obviously this genre has some of the most hardcore fans willing to put up with with ASCII graphics in 2007 just so the genre doesn't die out, but eventually people will vote with their money...
Anyhow, this is not a bitching rant, just word to the wise.
Doesn't make sense designing games in a resolution not even ~10% of your consumer base runs.

Me. I do. My FP runs at 1024x768 and I like it that way.

ORIGINAL: Major Victory

Just play the game, get over it, your tears are unbecoming!

ROFL. Well said! [:D]

If this were a new 1st person, I could understand the complaint. But for a 2D wargame, what difference does screen res make?! That's a genuine question btw. Why would running this game at 1280 make it better?

Cheers,
Jim

ORIGINAL: Jim_H

ORIGINAL: Major Victory

Just play the game, get over it, your tears are unbecoming!

ROFL. Well said! [:D]

If this were a new 1st person, I could understand the complaint. But for a 2D wargame, what difference does screen res make?! That's a genuine question btw. Why would running this game at 1280 make it better?

Cheers,
Jim

Higher resolution gives you more of the game map on screen which is always good for strategy. Looks like this game uses zoom methods to compensate for lack of multiresolution support but I would love to see this game first hand before I purchase as I dont know if the zoom method will satisfy me.

I've been sitting on the fence for this one waiting for the price to come down as it looks too similar to Strategic Command but a few of the things I like are oil which seems to add a nice strategic touch and the bigger map. Just wish it had more diplomacy and weather and the lack of consequences for player actions is a definite negative. A demo would be nice so I can really see what I might be missing here but of course that is not an option which I really do not understand but that has been debated so I'll just keep waiting.

fh - Yes, a higher res than 1024 will give you more of the map on screen, but it's hardly a reason for diatribe of the op, which was my point. I think it was way over the top. As someone else said (from Slitherine iirc), the problem of scaling a 2D game according to screen res is a lot more complex than a 3D game. I think that's particularly true if the game uses gdi too. All the people who've posted here (that I've read) who have the game say it matters not that it runs at 1024. If everyone who runs it was complaining, then I'd probably take more notice.
 
Regards,
Jim

just for the record since mr old fart there wants to bring up who buys more matrix games and that i shouldn't complain
My Registered Games

Games Registered
Campaigns On The Danube 21 JUN 2006 Private Downloads
Steel Panthers: World at War - Generals Edition 21 JUN 2006 Private Downloads
Battles In Normandy 21 JUN 2006 Private Downloads
Highway to the Reich 21 JUN 2006 Private Downloads
Across the Dnepr: Korsun Pocket Add-on 21 JUN 2006 No Downloads Available
Korsun Pocket 21 JUN 2006 No Downloads Available
Uncommon Valor 21 JUN 2006 Private Downloads
Tin Soldiers: Julius Caesar 21 JUN 2006 Private Downloads
Battles in Italy 21 JUN 2006 Private Downloads
Titans of Steel: Warring Suns 21 JUN 2006 Private Downloads
Battleground Europe - World War II Online 21 JUN 2006 Private Downloads
Norm Koger's The Operational Art of War III 21 JUN 2006 Private Downloads
Conquest of the Aegean 21 JUN 2006 No Downloads Available
Harpoon 3 - Advanced Naval Warfare 21 JUN 2006 Private Downloads
Panzer Command: Operation Winter Storm 30 JUN 2006 No Downloads Available
Gary Grigsby's World at War: A World Divided 24 OCT 2006 Private Downloads
Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 1 DEC 2006 Private Downloads
Battlefront 28 FEB 2007 Private Downloads
Close Combat - Cross of Iron 28 FEB 2007 No Downloads Available
John Tiller's Campaign Series 6 JUN 2007 Private Downloads
Carriers at War 8 JUN 2007 Private Downloads
Guns Of August 1914 - 1918 21 AUG 2007 Private Downloads

My Registered Serial Numbers
To ensure the security and privacy of your serial numbers, they will not be displayed on this webpage. By completing the following request, your registered serial numbers will be sent to your account email address.

Please send my serial numbers to my email address.

So I think I've earned the right to a little constructive criticism...
crappy graphics is one thing.. stretched out crappy graphics...well let's just say I don't play Korsun pocket since I went LCD.
And excuse me for running this 3l33t |<-r4d machine.I mean I know I'm way of an early adopted of this LCD tech.I understand some ppl still adopting a waint and see with that high tech stuff but me I just gotta have that SMOKIN' 1280x1024 athlon 64 3200.I know that makes me a poser and all since to be trully hardcore wargamer you gotta run a zx spectrum or a c64 with a tape drive and 32kb of ram.anyhow I still play BiI, BiN and Battlefront you see cause it doesn't look like sh_t on my space age nasa supercomputer.That's all I was saying, no need to get your panties in a bunch.I'm a sucker for wargames too and I buy them things even thogh half of what I buy just colletcs virtual dust after half an hour as I go back on a Panzer Campaigns/TOAW binge.But sometimes I see myself st00pid as even the magazines say if you keep buying the same 'ol same 'ol, they'll keep puting out the same 'ol.But I guess in the back of my mind I'm still somewhere about 10 years ago worrying my fav genre will go the way of adventure games and dinosaurs So yeah mr "Matrixgames should well cater to it's old guard of consumers us old farts with the money to buy their games (when we feel like it) as oppose to some whiney techie who thinks everything should be made to his systems standards instead of anyone elses lol." ravinhood; chill dude.

P.S.
THAT was a bitching rant
deal wit it

Hmm, I&nbsp;seem to remember&nbsp;everyone, ok lots and lots of&nbsp;people,&nbsp;raved about Doom 3. Oh, the hype. Oh, the super PC you needed to get the best out of the game. In the end, it did look extremely good, but boy was it predictable and boring. Talk about lack of substance! There have been any number of games over the years, and still are, that are supposedly the next best thing to run on your super duper 10k rig. But, what's the point of all that hype for something that is effectively a showcase for the latest gfx or other effects when the gameplay has actually been an afterthought? There is no point afaic.
&nbsp;
Wargames have never, ever been the right genre to show off graphics or expensive computers. The enthusiastic devs are more interested in features and simulation quality than what the interface looks like. Sometimes, that's probably a mistake and a good game may go by the wayside because it looks bad. However, for a game like this one that does look good and has been reviewed favourably, perhaps you are doing it a disservice? You haven't bought the game or seen it on your PC, yet you have already acted as judge and jury.&nbsp;I thought the whole point of being a wargame enthusiast was for the challenge of playing against the AI or other human to see if you can do better than a historical General? Maybe there's been a paradigm shift in the past ten minutes, but most wargamers (that I know) are happy with a functional gui, reasonable maps and unit icons that can be customised and great gameplay. Judging by the review I read by someone, unlike you, who has actually played the game, this is worth buying. If you don't agree, fine. Save your money and go buy the latest EA offering instead.
&nbsp;
So, why did you buy such a high spec PC to play wargames on? Bit of a waste of resources if you ask me. It wont' make you enjoy the game any better, because the game probably runs just as well on a 5yr old spare I have sat next to my main PC on my desk here. Which, incidentally, cost me nothing hehe! [;)]&nbsp;[:'(]
&nbsp;
Regards,
Jim

I have a pretty good PC and a widescreen - I would love to have the resolution, maybe sometime in the future they can do it.&nbsp; Meanwhile it does not appear to stretch all that much on my screen - it is elongated, but you hardly notice it once you get used to it.&nbsp; I kind of like it now.

ORIGINAL: highpocrisy

P.S.
THAT was a bitching rant
deal wit it

You ranted about the graphics of a game you don't have.

The rest of us with LCD monitors have no problem with the graphics as stated in the posts above.
-

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Good deal SMK where did you get them that cheap? I want some.

Surplus to req'ts at my place of employment - every year or so they sell off a bit of gear - these were probably used for 4 or 5 years & were fully depreciated. They don't tend to sell off boxes tho for some reason.

What method does TOAW3 use for this type of scaling? Isn't it 2D? I love this game but I too am frustrated with the zoom levels and the amount I can see onscreen at once. Widescreen might have been difficult to support, but 1600 x 1200? I have games from 2001 that support that resolution. Can this not be added with a patch?

Sorry, but the devleopment cycle is closed so we only do patch and support for bugs and balancing currently. Have you tried the game because from screenshots and game it does look nice at 1024x768 there is no much need for higher. You can run in Full Screen mode anyway and get the maximum size on your screen. In fact I use full screen on my 21 inch wide display, looks nice being larger and getting used to the stretched view.

Yes, I own the game and love it. Sorry, I just have a pet peeve about stretched interfaces, and with mine being 1440x900, it stretches too much for my taste. I think I'll start going into my Nvidia control panel and doing that fixed, non-scaling res trick, so that it's maximized but not stretched. That might be a good workaround. Thanks, Johan.

Why do not you run in windowed mode?

Right now I am, but there's a lot of dead space around the window and I'd like to at least fill up the 900 height part of my aspect ratio.

I use nothing but 1024x768 when I play games, and I have a very high-end computer (the latest Intel quad core chip, NVidia 8800 Ultra graphics card, 4 gig RAM, etc.) that can run anything.

I have a 19 inch 4:3 CRT by choice, it can go up to 1600x1200, but I never use that res because that makes everything on the screen too miniaturized. The highest res I would even consider playing a game at is 1280x960, anything higher than that and the objects on screen become annoyingly tiny. I played Crysis in DirectX 10 mode at max quality at this res and it looks fantastic. I certainly don't mind if a wargame comes with the option to run in widescreen mode, but the regular 4:3 aspect ratio resolution support should be maintained (1024x768, 1280x960, 1600x1200, etc).

I use a CRT because image quality is better, and because with an LCD you have to run at the monitor's full native resolution or else you get artifacts in the image. With a CRT the image looks perfect, no matter what res you run. And since these LCD monitors often have very high native resolutions, this would mean taking a massive hit in frame rate in first-person-shooter games like Crysis. Which would mean having to waste thousands of dollars upgrading PC hardware much more frequently just because the stupid LCD is forcing you to run everything at it's maximum resolution all the time.

CRT all the way, unless they can make LCD's where there are no image problems at all if you run at less than full resolution. Or until OLED monitors arrive (maybe in 2 or 3 years), which should have none of the LCD problems.

I am with the thread opener. He choosed strong words, but basically he is right. I shelled out 30 Euros and I certainly expected to have at least a higher resolution than 1024x768 which was probably fine 5-10 years ago, but is not acceptable for a modern standard computer system with todays 20"+ monitors. This approach to game developement is highly unprofessional and it angers me because I payed a full price for a product which looks like shareware. (Even Battle of Wesnoth which is freeware looks finer)

I was ready to buy Commander Napoleon too, but after this first look at the horrible resolution of CEAW I fear to be disappointed again with a mediocre pixelated and distorted screen. No thanks. Just because I am a Wargamer, means not that I am satisfied with every crappy graphic or that I own a sub-par monitor/graphic card combo.

ORIGINAL: enpeze1
I shelled out 30 Euros and I certainly expected to have at least a higher resolution than 1024x768

http://www.matrixgames.com/products/362 ... eon.at.War

Screen Resolution : 1024x768

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

thanks for the info. while I really like the commander game, now I have to think about a purchase of Napoleon. 80% that I will buy it, but not wholeheartly and with a bitter taste. I cannot understand why anybody would design a game with only 1024x768 in times where every standard monitor has higher resolutions? Does this guy/guys think that most of the customers have mediocre computer systems? He should have put a label on the box: "retro wargame, not suited for users with systems purchased after 2003".&nbsp; No wonder that our hobby is shunned by the younger crowd.&nbsp;

ORIGINAL: enpeze1
I cannot understand why anybody would design a game with only 1024x768 in times where every standard monitor has higher resolutions? Does this guy/guys think that most of the customers have mediocre computer systems?  

Yes - and he'd be right. You'll find more wargamers going "uh, this game doesn't run on my Win2K computer" in here than people who have a problem running a 1024x768 game on their 24 inch monitor.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx