Interfaces of wargames

[Jeffrey H.]

I think it might be useful for some games to have a 3D "map". MOre intuitive and interesting than a plain topo map.
 
However we've all been through the 3D mania in the past where anything that was done in 3D was most likely trash. It was almost like someone had to check a box off without even thinking how 3D could be integrated into a game and just went for some glitzy nonsense.
 
If it's not taken in context to a game, then forget it. If you think of a great game using 3D as an integral part of the game then I think it could be very cool.
 

[JudgeDredd]

Ludites - from memory it was to to with people resistant to change. I think it was back in the Industrial Revolution in the UK - people resisted change and were called Ludites...cannot remember the reason why.

[JudgeDredd]

From www.fredictionary.com

1. Any of a group of British workers who between 1811 and 1816 rioted and destroyed laborsaving textile machinery in the belief that such machinery would diminish employment.
2. One who opposes technical or technological change.

And it's spelt Luddites.

[madgamer2]

The only real pleasing 3D map I have seen of late is Koei's ROTK 11 which if you have the ngraphic ability Is stunning. It looks a little like a Chinese brush painting done in 3D. You can freeze the rotation but it looks so nice as you zoom in and out.
Combat in the east during the Romance of the Three Kingdoms is different than western combat but the map and the combat and units all compliment each other.
I like well done 3D but exclude HPS from this list. 3D is not really needed to enjoy a good game as most of us are old 2D map and counter players anyway.

Nadganer

[madgamer2]

you may not like the game but Romance of the Three Kingdoms 11 has some good looking 3D looks

Madgamer

[Tomus]

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

ORIGINAL: Tomus

I wish the Airborne Assault Series had 3D maps....

I still struggle to read the terrain correctly in those games despite the large amount of tools they give us. I can't see how difficult it would be implement on the game maps.

Its simple, learn to read a Topograhic map.

I can read a topographic map however whenever I have had to the geographical feature is normally right in front of me.

In COTA it isn't and I have trouble visualising the 3D faeture. Personally I would prefer a 3D map that showed contours.

[Kuokkanen]

ORIGINAL: aknaton

What does you other wargame players think in this matter. Would you also like to see games with 3D interfaces?

I'll demonstrate you with practical examples from MegaMek game. First default 2d view of the map:





And here is experimental 3d version:





Now answer me this: why bother with 3d? What's the point?

2d - it simply works

[V22 Osprey]

Exactly.From the looks of it, I would play Megamek in 2D anyway.

[JudgeDredd]

What you've knocked up there is similar to how JTCS works - and it does work.

However, I'd be more inclined to go with 3D for realtime - and by that I'm mainly speaking of the Panther games.

[gunny]

I think you are referring to 2.5D. Seriously skewing to an isometric pov is more of a two and a half D effect. Its unfortunate more games did not take this approach. Pleasant on the eye, toy can use shadows and other terrain effects without all the 3D gamer scrolling and manouvering.