Great job to all!
I am concerned with SP2WWII. I used to love that game but now with SPWAW I have no reason to play it. I feel sorry for those that will be continuing to work on SP2WW2 because...well... they just can't compete.
Kerg
------------------
[This message has been edited by Kerg (edited 06-23-2000).]
Sight and Sound
Moderator: MOD_SPWaW
I guess I was taking the graphics for granted. The new sounds I've enjoyed from the start. One night for some reason I either zoomed in or got my eyes closer to the screen. The AFV had on the fender skirts same as in it's picture (forgot what they're called), it blew me away.
Outstanding job, all!
------------------
Good hunting,
Pack Rat
Outstanding job, all!
------------------
Good hunting,
Pack Rat
PR
Disagree. Sound and sight alone don't make the game. On my computer, i have games like Half-Life, Q3. So really, that don't impress me much.Originally posted by Kerg:
Great job to all!
I am concerned with SP2WWII. I used to love that game but now with SPWAW I have no reason to play it. I feel sorry for those that will be continuing to work on SP2WW2 because...well... they just can't compete.
Kerg
Remember Panzer General ? Great visuals, good sound, cool videos, and the game was just Axis & Allies with a bit more detail.
What impresses me in SP games is attention to detail, bug fixing, OOB's.... Sure, SPWaW is a step forward.
Spww2 goes in another direction. Where Spwaw makes detailed armor system, Spww2 portrays infantry (IMHO) better. SpWaW has new terrain, sure, but Spww2 generates more logic battle locations in campaign. SpWaW OOB's are very strongly influenced by ASL (Dare Death, tank types etc.) Spww2 uses their own idea of OOB etc etc...
It's hard to compare the games now. I'll wait untill July 10 and see what will Don & Andy come up with.
I guess that any good feature in SPWW2 that would lack in WaW will be included in a future patch, isn't it ? Especially infantry modelling and campaign location (and maybe even it's already in the 2.0 patch ?)
Logically SPWW2 was begun before WaW so they can have a small advance, and they did'nt remake the armor penetration system that makes WaW so great, and full windows integration... only to quote this, Matrix did sooo many features
. SPWW2 has however an edge over WaW : since the game is still DOS, i could play it on my old 486 
Plans to make a DOS version of WaW Matrix ?
I just hope that maybe when the SPCamo guys will have achieved what they think to be a definitive version of SPWW2 they will also give support to WaW. The more the merrier
Logically SPWW2 was begun before WaW so they can have a small advance, and they did'nt remake the armor penetration system that makes WaW so great, and full windows integration... only to quote this, Matrix did sooo many features
. SPWW2 has however an edge over WaW : since the game is still DOS, i could play it on my old 486 Plans to make a DOS version of WaW Matrix ? I just hope that maybe when the SPCamo guys will have achieved what they think to be a definitive version of SPWW2 they will also give support to WaW. The more the merrier
Interesting discussion on SPWAW and SPWW2. I'm going to state my point of view on the matter. Understand, it is my personal point of view. It is not an official statement from TGN or Matrix.
It won't resolve anything but may help understand the "why" of two games.
I have worked on both games since their beginning. In fact it was David Heath and I who gave initial support to the SP-Camo Group to get them started.
Many people are not aware of that since the SP-Camo Workshop has removed nearly all the names of the people who worked on it in its first version.
After the first version was published, SP-Camo Workshop decided that they preferred to work on their own, form their own team and improve the game. They did not really want to work with the Raiders or the TGN staff anymore.
Meanwhile, we saw the handwriting on the wall with DOS. We knew that sooner or later Windows was the way to go.
So SP-Camo went in one direction and we went in another direction. Our first goal was Windows compatibility. As the game evolved we began to see that there were many features needed that had never been included.
Thus we ended up with SPWAW.
It probably should interest you to know that SP-Camo and SPWW2 had its origins and creation right here with TGN and the Raiders.
Look at the list of existing scenarios for the game. Notice that 90% of them were done by the Raiders. That should tell you something.
Of course, with their version 3.0 all the existing SPWW2 scenarios will be trashed.
They have formed a new scenario team, completely apart from the Raiders. I wish them well. I mean that. Their lead scenario designer left the Raiders to work with them.
I hope it all works well for them
One of the strongest features of SPWAW is its stablity and compatability with Windows.
SPWW2 is a DOS game with the inherent limitations and crashes.
SPWAW is Windows based game and will be around when DOS becomes history (and it will).
Play both if you wish. Or you can choose one or the other. They are both out here for your enjoyment.
But either way, I consider it a special privilege to have been involved in the creation of both games.
Wild Bill
------------------
In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Coordinator, Scenario Design
Matrix Games
[This message has been edited by Wild Bill (edited 06-23-2000).]
It won't resolve anything but may help understand the "why" of two games.
I have worked on both games since their beginning. In fact it was David Heath and I who gave initial support to the SP-Camo Group to get them started.
Many people are not aware of that since the SP-Camo Workshop has removed nearly all the names of the people who worked on it in its first version.
After the first version was published, SP-Camo Workshop decided that they preferred to work on their own, form their own team and improve the game. They did not really want to work with the Raiders or the TGN staff anymore.
Meanwhile, we saw the handwriting on the wall with DOS. We knew that sooner or later Windows was the way to go.
So SP-Camo went in one direction and we went in another direction. Our first goal was Windows compatibility. As the game evolved we began to see that there were many features needed that had never been included.
Thus we ended up with SPWAW.
It probably should interest you to know that SP-Camo and SPWW2 had its origins and creation right here with TGN and the Raiders.
Look at the list of existing scenarios for the game. Notice that 90% of them were done by the Raiders. That should tell you something.
Of course, with their version 3.0 all the existing SPWW2 scenarios will be trashed.
They have formed a new scenario team, completely apart from the Raiders. I wish them well. I mean that. Their lead scenario designer left the Raiders to work with them.
I hope it all works well for them
One of the strongest features of SPWAW is its stablity and compatability with Windows.
SPWW2 is a DOS game with the inherent limitations and crashes.
SPWAW is Windows based game and will be around when DOS becomes history (and it will).
Play both if you wish. Or you can choose one or the other. They are both out here for your enjoyment.
But either way, I consider it a special privilege to have been involved in the creation of both games.
Wild Bill
------------------
In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Coordinator, Scenario Design
Matrix Games
[This message has been edited by Wild Bill (edited 06-23-2000).]
In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant
OK. WB, your slipping OT again. No-one is denying work of TGN and the Raiders. If you take a closer look at "Game Guide", included with Spww2 you will find your name, all of the Raiders and many more guys. Put me right if someone is missing. Unless you are feeling cheated by ommiting you all in that short intro-thing everyone skips.Originally posted by Wild Bill:
Interesting discussion on SPWAW and SPWW2. I'm going to state my point of view on the matter. Understand, it is my personal point of view. It is not an official statement from TGN or Matrix.
It won't resolve anything but may help understand the "why" of two games.
I have worked on both games since their beginning. In fact it was David Heath and I who gave initial support to the SP-Camo Group to get them started.
Many people are not aware of that since the SP-Camo Workshop has removed nearly all the names of the people who worked on it in its first version.
After the first version was published, SP-Camo Workshop decided that they preferred to work on their own, form their own team and improve the game. They did not really want to work with the Raiders or the TGN staff anymore.
Meanwhile, we saw the handwriting on the wall with DOS. We knew that sooner or later Windows was the way to go.
So SP-Camo went in one direction and we went in another direction. Our first goal was Windows compatibility. As the game evolved we began to see that there were many features needed that had never been included.
Thus we ended up with SPWAW.
It probably should interest you to know that SP-Camo and SPWW2 had its origins and creation right here with TGN and the Raiders.
Look at the list of existing scenarios for the game. Notice that 90% of them were done by the Raiders. That should tell you something.
Of course, with their version 3.0 all the existing SPWW2 scenarios will be trashed.
They have formed a new scenario team, completely apart from the Raiders. I wish them well. I mean that. Their lead scenario designer left the Raiders to work with them.
I hope it all works well for them
One of the strongest features of SPWAW is its stablity and compatability with Windows.
SPWW2 is a DOS game with the inherent limitations and crashes.
SPWAW is Windows based game and will be around when DOS becomes history (and it will).
Play both if you wish. Or you can choose one or the other. They are both out here for your enjoyment.
But either way, I consider it a special privilege to have been involved in the creation of both games.
Wild Bill
My original post was about that visuals and sound don't make the game. Sure, they're nice, but you can't judge a car by it's shape and color.
As for Winblows compability, i have seldom any problems with that in SPww2. I'm aware that others have trouble, but i prefer 1 crash per hour to sluggish unit movement and 300 MB's of wavs (why not .mel or .mp3 i ask ?) who jerk up HT movement.
You posted your personal opinion, so i post mine. Your post sounded more like "why SP-camo is boo and we are okay". At least it's my opinion. I've picked a few things from Dale during those two years....
PS: if you (i refer to list posters) wish to flame me for "jumping on good old WB", i don't care. It will just prove me a few things...
Its evident you came loaded for bear, Guderian, if you came here to "prove"(your words) something.
Someone wanted an opinion. I gave it. You gave yours. But innuendoes of other motives are wrong. If I have something to say, I say it.
I think I did say in my post that "I wish them well." I meant that, or do you have doubts about my veracity?
I've got nothing to prove. Maybe you have.
So is your post to be considered "jumping on old WB?" Was that your intention or were you trying to present another point of view?
If it is the former, be my guest. I've been jumped on before. If it is to present your preference or advertise for SPWW2, go right ahead.
Both games are out there. I've contributed a lot to both of them. Let the gamer decide. Most of the contributors and readers here are adults and can make their own choices. I think they will, but not based primarily on anything you or I say.
Now I don't intend to see-saw with you on this Guderian. I've said what I have to say and I'll just stand pat with my hand.
------------------
In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Coordinator, Scenario Design
Matrix Games
[This message has been edited by Wild Bill (edited 06-23-2000).]
Someone wanted an opinion. I gave it. You gave yours. But innuendoes of other motives are wrong. If I have something to say, I say it.
I think I did say in my post that "I wish them well." I meant that, or do you have doubts about my veracity?
I've got nothing to prove. Maybe you have.
So is your post to be considered "jumping on old WB?" Was that your intention or were you trying to present another point of view?
If it is the former, be my guest. I've been jumped on before. If it is to present your preference or advertise for SPWW2, go right ahead.
Both games are out there. I've contributed a lot to both of them. Let the gamer decide. Most of the contributors and readers here are adults and can make their own choices. I think they will, but not based primarily on anything you or I say.
Now I don't intend to see-saw with you on this Guderian. I've said what I have to say and I'll just stand pat with my hand.
------------------
In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Coordinator, Scenario Design
Matrix Games
[This message has been edited by Wild Bill (edited 06-23-2000).]
In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant
My two pence probably aren't needed, but since this is a public forum . . .
I just posted two scenarios to the Scenario Depot: one SP:WW2 & one SPWAW.
Each game has its strong points. Some scenarios are better on one game than the other. That's OK. They are both free so everybody can afford to have both of them. They are close enough to each other so that nobody has to relearn how to play. It is to our benefit we have both of them. Competition drives the market -- not monopolism. It is good for the consumer (ie: the gamer) to have both games being worked on. Choice is good. No choice is . . . not good.
By the way, Wild Bill helped me with the SP:WW2 scenario by playtesting it and suggesting ways to make it better. He also was the one who suggested I make it for SP:WW2 in the first place because I could model it better there.
As it happens, I also had Guderian playtest the same scenario . . . he didn't help as much as WB, but that is not jumping on Guderian or pumping up WB -- that's just the way it was.
When SPWAW v2 comes out I will pounce on it. When SP:WW2 v3 comes out I will pounce on that. I have ideas for scenarios for both of them that each one can handle better. I think that's great. Let's enjoy it. It won't always be like this.
I just posted two scenarios to the Scenario Depot: one SP:WW2 & one SPWAW.
Each game has its strong points. Some scenarios are better on one game than the other. That's OK. They are both free so everybody can afford to have both of them. They are close enough to each other so that nobody has to relearn how to play. It is to our benefit we have both of them. Competition drives the market -- not monopolism. It is good for the consumer (ie: the gamer) to have both games being worked on. Choice is good. No choice is . . . not good.
By the way, Wild Bill helped me with the SP:WW2 scenario by playtesting it and suggesting ways to make it better. He also was the one who suggested I make it for SP:WW2 in the first place because I could model it better there.
As it happens, I also had Guderian playtest the same scenario . . . he didn't help as much as WB, but that is not jumping on Guderian or pumping up WB -- that's just the way it was.
When SPWAW v2 comes out I will pounce on it. When SP:WW2 v3 comes out I will pounce on that. I have ideas for scenarios for both of them that each one can handle better. I think that's great. Let's enjoy it. It won't always be like this.
Ed Mortimer
Meglio un Giorno da Leone
Meglio un Giorno da Leone
Originally posted by Moonwolf:
My two pence probably aren't needed, but since this is a public forum . . .
I just posted two scenarios to the Scenario Depot: one SP:WW2 & one SPWAW.
Each game has its strong points. Some scenarios are better on one game than the other. That's OK. They are both free so everybody can afford to have both of them. They are close enough to each other so that nobody has to relearn how to play. It is to our benefit we have both of them. Competition drives the market -- not monopolism. It is good for the consumer (ie: the gamer) to have both games being worked on. Choice is good. No choice is . . . not good.
By the way, Wild Bill helped me with the SP:WW2 scenario by playtesting it and suggesting ways to make it better. He also was the one who suggested I make it for SP:WW2 in the first place because I could model it better there.
As it happens, I also had Guderian playtest the same scenario . . . he didn't help as much as WB, but that is not jumping on Guderian or pumping up WB -- that's just the way it was.
When SPWAW v2 comes out I will pounce on it. When SP:WW2 v3 comes out I will pounce on that. I have ideas for scenarios for both of them that each one can handle better. I think that's great. Let's enjoy it. It won't always be like this.
Bullseye. The best part of 2 Sp games is competition - both groups try their best. And that's gud for us, the wargamers.
WB - no see-sawing from over here, either. We have to agree to disagree on some topics. I won't get us anywhere, only eat up bandwidth...
Wild Bill, I thought your comments and opinions on spww2 and spwaw were put forth in such a manner as to explain how you feel and at the same time totally devoid of any inflammatory remarks. I guess something of a rift must exist between the two games for posts like these to come up. That's too bad, I like both games myself. I like some of the features that SP3 brings to the table so I prefer it currently. What I really enjoy about this forum is the (almost) total lack of negativity and the level of integrity with which people treat each other. Guderian, it's not fair to tell another person what they really meant was, that's their business and if you think that the message would so easily be percieved as flaming ANYONE why not tone it down some?? If there's a conflict between people it should stay private.
Tomo
Tomo