Any idea when?

David Heath · Post by **David Heath** » Mon Jan 14, 2002 7:54 pm

Hi Guys

UV is very different game and engine design over BOB or BTR. We will be showing some new screenshot very shortly.

FlightDoc · Post by **FlightDoc** » Wed Jan 16, 2002 2:27 am

I hope it is not too different a game as far as the ideas go compared to 12'o clock high. That is a great game that could just use a better interface!

Charles2222 · Post by **Charles2222** » Wed Jan 16, 2002 9:41 pm

www.wargamer.com has an article as of yesterday, that has details of the release date, as well as screenshots.

Blackacre · Post by **Blackacre** » Sat Jan 19, 2002 1:25 pm

Okay, okay, okay. Computers = Graphics. Otherwise, go back to board games. I made my way to Matrix by way of the attrocious (sp?) review at Gamespot for Matrix's Fortress Europe. What is the allure, exactly, of this Pacific War game? The graphics look like something I could do over the weekend, much worse than the original Panzer General of like a decade ago. Is Matrix something like the game version of Linux (sp?), something peeps root for just to have some variety in the gameworld? If not, it looks like some kind of impala with all the leopards, cheetahs and lions of the war game world circling. Please educate me if I'm wrong.

=D

Peace out...

USSMaine · Post by **USSMaine** » Sat Jan 19, 2002 4:36 pm

Well for me, I am far more interested in the topic than the graphics and I am much more interested in functional graphics. This is not Duke Nukem 3d or whatever the latest and greatest 1st person shooter is out there. I personally found the graphics very appealing for the type of gaming I like best. For example the silhouttes of the ships were very nicely done in my opinion. There was a definite difference between the various classes of ships and destroyers and I will admit I have no idea which cruisers carried float planes amidships rather than the stern but that was reflected well in the graphics.

I feel the reason for a lot of the excitement can be derived from the lack of titles covering this subject matter. What is the last game covering operational surface/carrier battles in the South Pacific ? Carrier Strike and Carriers at War come to my mind but those ran on my 386 which is out back in cold storage.

Sorry to ramble on <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

Paul Goodman · Post by **Paul Goodman** » Sat Jan 19, 2002 9:50 pm

Hmmm, I must have low expectations. I thought the graphics looked great. Made me mad at Matrix for wasting their time on Fortress Europe. Although interesting, I am not looking for an animated graphic of the battle line plowing through a full gale. Get the Victory at Sea tapes and play them.

The U.S. Navy issued a small book of photographs right after the end of the war. One of those photographs showed a long line of fleet carriers anchored beam to beam in the Ulithi lagoon. The caption was simply "Murderers Row." Brave men in fast ships going in harms way. That's the interest in this game.

Paul

JWW · Post by **JWW** » Sun Jan 20, 2002 1:19 am

Originally posted by Blackacre:
Okay, okay, okay. Computers = Graphics. Otherwise, go back to board games. I made my way to Matrix by way of the attrocious (sp?) review at Gamespot for Matrix's Fortress Europe. What is the allure, exactly, of this Pacific War game? The graphics look like something I could do over the weekend, much worse than the original Panzer General of like a decade ago. Is Matrix something like the game version of Linux (sp?), something peeps root for just to have some variety in the gameworld? If not, it looks like some kind of impala with all the leopards, cheetahs and lions of the war game world circling. Please educate me if I'm wrong.

=D

Peace out...

Matrix Games products require using your brain rather than your reflexes. If you want to go further, you might compare it to the minimilist movement in music and art. More is not always better. Matrix gamers are looking for an experience that is pleasing visually but primarily cerebral, IMHO.

Kent Pfeiffer · Post by **Kent Pfeiffer** » Sun Jan 20, 2002 3:30 am

Who exactly are these "leopards, cheetahs, and lions of the wargaming world". I'd say the graphics for UV are pretty comparable any recent wargame, better than most, in fact.

Grouchy · Post by **Grouchy** » Sun Jan 20, 2002 5:41 am

Graphics looked good imo. Nice, very clear, functional and also a lot of details.

And I Agree with JW's and those other posts. It's the main reason why I buy and play this kind of games.

What worries me more is that I'm pretty sure that after this game we have to wait another 10 years before we see another UV (or pacific war or War in Russia) being published <img src="wink.gif" border="0">

So everyone who is working at this game, take your time, do it right, because in 2010 we still playing it!

[ January 19, 2002: Message edited by: Grouchy ]</p>

Blackacre · Post by **Blackacre** » Sun Jan 20, 2002 8:00 am

I have to apologize, I was a little tipsy when I posted the above comment, didn't mean to be so harsh, heh.

I have a great interest in the WWII Pacific Theater, as I spent several years on a tiny pacific isle (3 miles X .5 miles) as a kid, one that the Japanese were kicked off of, Kwajalein.

When I was there, we could still walk out on the reef at low tide and find expended ammo, bomb framents, etc. On occasions, rifles, etc. were still unearthed. Even bodies. Our sponsor there found an old Japanese machine gun and had it on display in his living room, but I can't remember the type. Not to mention the sunk LST's, etc., around the lagoon that were available for diving.

I would LOVE to get my hands on a game that comes close to what UV hopes to be.

I was quite struck, tho, by the dated graphics, a similar criticism leveled by many reviewers against Fortress Europe. Graphics have come a long way from the 2D screenshots I have seen so far, and good graphics always enhance gameplay.

I'm not talking about state-of-the-art stuff found in the latest Castle Wolfenstein, or even that in Everquest, Dark Age of Camelot or even Empire Earth, but at least I think graphics along the Civilization line of titles stuff or heck, even something along the lines of what we saw in Pacific General a few years back, to stay sorta within the genre. The years-old Operational Art of War, with its very limited graphics, is another example of what should at the very least be considered a minimalist effort with regard to graphics.

My two cents. =D

Nimits · Post by **Nimits** » Sun Jan 20, 2002 9:25 am

About those Scenarios, is "Yamamoto's Prophecy" a Midway Scenario?

Also, will there be a Central Pacific map/maps in the game?

Paul Goodman · Post by **Paul Goodman** » Sun Jan 20, 2002 6:43 pm

Gee, Grouchy, I'm not at all worried about waiting ten years for the next game. I'm worried about waiting ten years for this one!

Paul

Joel Billings · Post by **Joel Billings** » Mon Jan 21, 2002 8:06 am

Yamamoto's Prophecy is a scenario that begins on June 1, 1942 and runs to the end of 1943. It gives players the historical forces as of June 1 and assumes a historical Midway battle and result so surviving carriers from both sides begin to appear in the South Pacific as they did historically after Midway.

As for 10 years for the next game, let's hope not. Maybe not another South Pacific game for 10 years, but we hope to do a lot of other games during those years.

Joel

pdyers · Post by **pdyers** » Sun Jan 27, 2002 6:22 pm

Catdaddy
Take some Alka-Seltzer for that Belly ake

New York Jets · Post by **New York Jets** » Tue Jan 29, 2002 10:41 pm

Having spent hours pouring over the map for Battleline's old title "Flat Top" with one of my old wargaming buddies, I must say this. I can't wait for this game to release. I think the screen shots look wonderful. As for the gripes about graphics, FUHGEDDABOUTIT! It's about the gameplay, as far as I'm concerned. In fact, one of my old wargaming buddies just got his first (yes first) computer. We are already planning when to make time for this title when it releases. I will pre-order this as soon as Matrix starts taking them.