Review @ Out of Eight

[E]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

ORIGINAL: JaguarUSF
Just because it was never promised doesn't mean you shouldn't expect it, especially if you did not know it was never promised. Or something [:D]

Nobody expects the interface inquisition! [;)] [:D]

To the comfy chair with him?

[harley]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121

HS, to be fair to the reviewer ( and others ) I don't think that this is an issue of not wanting menus. I think this is an issue of there being a BETTER way to present the menus than we currently have.

E.g. Imagine, if you would, a menu for production featuring, along the top, generic pictures of "single-engined day fighter", "twin-engined day fighter", "night fighter", "Jabo"

Click on "night fighter" and below these generic pictures a new page pops up with pictures of the planes on the left in one column, a second column showing a picture of avionics etc ( parts ) and a third column showing a generic picture of plane engines ( 1 engine for single-engined planes, two engines for twin-engined planes )

There's a number below each plane, part and engine which shows the number required at present for that plane type and the total number being produced in total.

Click on a picture and a new box pops up showing you a list of the factories ( and their sizes ) producing that plane assembly or avionics or engine. If you want to change production you can select more than one of the factories at a time and then when you select change all of the selected factories will change to whatever you want at the same time. When you close this sub-menu the main page will update all the figures letting you instantly see the effect of what you are doing on night-fighter production, assembly,m parts and engine requirements.

On one page you have all of the data you need to change production for ALL of your night fighters. Same for the other types. It is displayed somewhat graphically with a clear communication to players of what engine and parts types are required for which planes, how many of each you need and what the total production for each is.

In two and a half weeks since the release this is the first time a critic of the interface has bothered to take the time to envsion something better. I give no credit to anyone - reviewer or player - who throws their hands up in the air and says "it's terrible, I hate it". Tell me what's wrong, tell me what you think can be done about it, and I'll see if it's possible.

Even better - mock up a screenshot. Use the email or PM buttons in my profile.

Thanks for your ideas, Nemo121.

FWIW - my initial mockups did have image buttons for actions (I actually had working the 5 for Bomb, Sweep, Recon, NI and Night Bomb, and animated them), I don't remember why we dropped them.

[Rugens]

First and formost sincere thanks should go to everyone on this project and WITP AE. These games are not for the faint of heart. They are for the hard core fan of the specific periods they cover. Almost regardless of a crappy interface I would still play both games. In our hobby, like it or not, games such as these will be a work in process because the customer base is small compared to most mainstream games. This means we the gamers are basically paying to keep the folks involved fed and housed so they can continue the development of these games. The detail that has been added is tremendous and in my opinion wonderful. You know there has to be a "but" though and here it comes. With all the added detail, flavor and information (think in terms of the original USAAF developing into this current title) there is simply a lot more to process while playing your turns. Actually a "lot" does not do justice to all the wonderful things that have been added. Staggering is perhaps more descriptive. The problem is that with this huge increase, improvements in the UI have not kept pace. To give us all the superb advancements without improving the interface is perhaps an unfortunate necessity. At least for me it is now time to place some effort in that direction. I am glad to continue supporting the games development by pruchasing remakes/improvements but they are reaching the point of overload when played with essentially the old interface. You have developed two wonderful monsters. It is now time for you to create the tools to allow us to manage those monsters. Yes, I have and can again become comfortable with the current interface. That misses the point though (and I believe the implied point of the first review listed). You have the ability to make a great gaming experience so much better by bringing the interface up to the new standards you have set with the core of the game.

[vonRocko]

IMO a more informative manual would aleviate much of the interface concerns. As it is,the manual is not very helpful for even basic instructions. Some important game aspects and buttons are not even mentioned. The interface would be no big deal,if I could reference it with the manual. A lot of work goes into improving these games, but no one seems to care about updating the manual.
Thanks

[terry1040]

ORIGINAL: Nemo121
I think this is an issue of there being a BETTER way to present the menus than we currently have.
(...)
Click on a picture and a new box pops up showing you a list of the factories ( and their sizes ) producing that plane assembly or avionics or engine. If you want to change production you can select more than one of the factories at a time and then when you select change all of the selected factories will change to whatever you want at the same time.
(...)
Is the current aspergery menu a game-breaker for me? No but neither is it even close to being as user-friendly as something along the lines of what is outlined above.

There is a lot of truth in the statements above.
I would really appreciate to enhance the user-interface by inter-linking the different screen. Actually this is what Gary Grigsby did in his later games (PW-AE) as well.
Within the limitations of the EDBTR interface, I suggest to add more clickable buttons that would lead quicker to others screens. As I already have suggested elsewhere, if you are in the details of an aircraft or squadron it should not hurt to much to add a "next" or "previous" button. Also why not include the production button on an aircraft details screen?

In my opinion with only a few simple extra buttons, we potentially could improve the interface to an acceptable level.
At this moment, it is really the biggest issue I have with the game (and yes, I have indeed learned to live with it), next to having now real OOB / status export functionality.

IMHO Matrix Games could improve the user-experience tremendously with some limited effort as described above.

Just my two cents.

Terry

[TechSgt]

Carl;

Excellent statement!

At first I've been thinking I was having troubles just because of the new UI placements, I had grown so use to the old UI.
But, in triuth there is just so much more of everything, targets, units, planes, pilots, etc.

TS

[daft]

If the interface takes away from or adds to the game to such an extent that it deters or enhances the gameplay, I think it is quite fair to give the UI experience extra focus. I haven't played the new version yet, but I'm tempted. My lasting impression of the original is that the UI was a real chore and made the game harder to interact with than it had to. Bottom line though, I'm very grateful for all the hard work put into the update, and I hope to be able to enjoy the new game very soon.

[Reg]

One of the things that always bemused me about the original was that you had absolutely masses of information available and some of it really useful/necessary for playing your turns but the really clunky interface prevented you from extracting it in any sort of efficient manner. What I though was needed is an interface directly into the database to allow the creation of custom queries. I seem to remember posting a suggestion along these lines quite a while ago. Of course up to now something like that requiring code changes was totally out of the question.

I wonder if now an equivalent to WitpStaff, WitpTracker or the OpenOffice ability to connect to the WitpStaff database could be implemented. This is not a bid for more information but a more efficient method of accessing and presenting the information already available. Probably way out of scope but maybe a thought for the future.

[kaybayray]

Uhh... I think this is the same review I read way back in like 2000 when this game was first released. Sounds pretty much like what I recall from then. Looking back the reviewer back then IMHO was looking for a First Person Shooter WWII Air Combat Simm and since this was not that he didnt like it. I read that review back then and stupidly accepted it and did not purchase the game. Many years later I found a copy of just the BTR game and bought it for a few bucks. Man I was ticked at that reviewer. What a brain twisting treasure this game is. [8D]

And as for this new guy. Dont mean to offend anybody here. So with that said, IMHO this new guy is looking for some HALO game he can throw into is XBOX unit, slamm a few cheap and crappy beers and have some Light n Easy fun. Just like the last guy. Keep in mind this is just My opinion of the review but if you are looking for Mario Brothers in a Multi-Lobe Use Required game you aint gona find much you like. [8D]

Just my thoughts and please dont be offended by them.

Later,
KayBay

[Tuk]

For my part, I never played or heard of the original games but bought this after playing and discarding WITP. I've only played the 1940 game so far as German and I love it, but when something detracts from something so good, as the interface does, it's only natural to focus on it. I think the review is balanced and spot on, the interface is embarasing.
 
Let's take German pilot fatigue. After a bit of exploring, it takes five clicks to get to it-
 
1. List air units
2. Pick type of aircraft
3 Pick unit from list
4 Out of two senseless choices, take "detail" (move units is included in "detail" anyway and has its own menu on the main screen)
5 Go to "pilots"
 
Ok so I got there in the end. But can I access it when I'm assigning units to a raid, when I need it? Not as far as I can see.  My workaround to date is to write down a list of all the JG/KG that I want to rest in the up coming day, before I plan missions. And that's one example of what's giving me major butt pains and it's not what I signed up and paid for. It's frankly sub standard in an updated game, whatever was or was not promised. There's no accurate description of the interface in any Matrix promotional material. I wonder why not?
 
It should be quite possible to have all units listed on the first click, "list air units" indented under their A/C type so its readable. From there you could pick a unit which would access its details at a click, from details to pilots. Just three clicks. Better, why not have a fatigue average like for morale and experience? Or why not program the game to flag up units which gain a certain level of fatigue or lose a certain degree of morale so you can decide whether or not to comit them to a battle? Pointless fiddleing with menues does not make a man of you or imbue you with some quality of "hardcore wargamer". It uses up your precious life for no good purpose.
 
What about the lists? You can filter them by morale, experience, unit, whatever, but none of these filters are intelligent. The unit filter doesn't order the units into their component parts at all, but into some kind of alphabetical system nonsensical to the information you're looking for. The same applies for ranks in the pilot screen. Given that morale and fatigue work as reversed qualities, why does the filter not put low fatigue units to the top along with high morale and experience units? Why can't you use multiple filters to get quick access to your best, most combat ready units? Even Office Excel can do that.
 
Great game concept, with so many good points, but what a missed opportunity to bring it into the 21st century. No excuses accepted, it's literally money for old rope,
 

[TechSgt]

Tuk;

Odd how something very minor can add up to a lot.

I play as Allies, so each time I call up an aircraft/unit list it seems I'm looking for something different.
When I pick lead unit the game filter is distance, while I'm usually looking for Command or Unit number.
When I pick escorts, the filter is unit number, while I'm looking for distance and/or type.
Yet, when I'm checking status in the Debrief. I'm checking for Unit number. But I already know the type!
This is because of my style of plotting.

For the MOVE, I use the main menu move command. I make a list of units that are to change base that turn and do it before I ever plot a raid. So the two other MOVE buttons are of little use to me.

Anyways, I wonder if there should be survey of styles and see what works "best".

BTW: Whoever changed the altitude setting from the old 30K to 10K thank you. [&o]
This works better for my "style" of plotting... less clicks to set my standard altitudes.

TS

Edit: Since I've gotten a few more days with the new version, I'm finding that clicking on the unit page MOVE commands works well!
Who says an OLD dog can't learn new tricks"

[Lützow]

While complaints about interface are thoroughly eligible, the gameplay itself outweighs engine limitations by so far, that I don't realize the inconveniences anymore after a week of spending with EDBTR now. Considering WitP AE functionality, variable resolution according to screen size and some inevitable patches I would give it a plain 10/10, but even with the limitations it's still worth a 8/10.