Matrix Games Forums

Most games would have the option to turn off video clips anyway.

Also I really cant see a wargamer walking away from lets say Combat Leader because it looks good.

The real issue here is what is ment by fancy graphics. If you mean games like SS and Blitz then its not the graphics which are a problem its the fact its an RTS which doesnt give games any real tactical problems.

You cant get fancy graphics and game mechanics mixed up at all.

How many turn based computer wargames have these fancy graphics anyway? I think COTD and KP and BIN all have fancy graphics. They look amazing. But you dont see that as fancy graphics you see 3d or isometric rts games having fancy graphics and the problem lies with the game mechanics NOT the graphics.

I love tabletop wargames. However I dont like the Total War games. As they are Real time which isnt my think at all. Id prefer the drama and uniforms etc etc but in a either WEGO or trun based system.

DIdz what you are saying is. If you want fancy graphics play RTS. If you want tactical/strategic play turn based. But you cant have fancy graphics if you want turn based games.

This is wrong. MAny people dont get on with RTS games. They prefer the slower approach of turn based and wego. WHy should I if I want to play a game which is similar to a tabletop wargame have to play RTS games. Because Thats what ID have to do to get the uniforms and drama etc I want. BUT I dont like RTS. I like turn based. Tabletop games are turn based.

Can you clarify what board game style computer games have fancy graphics?

Sorry for the rant I have repeated myself here.

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager

I dont give a damn what its called...if its a good game, I will play it.
We as a genre need to be alot more openminded about the games we play. The genre is way to small for us to splinter into small groups and have developers make games just for small groups.
They will never make money that way.

Exactly

I just looked at the screenshots of "Tin Soldiers", the latest announcement for publication by Matrix. Now this is a perfect example of bad, bad graphics. [:-] The game may play well but it looks horrible. This is what happens when designers try too hard to get that "3D" look. I hope the folks at Matrix will improve those graphics or they are going to have a dead fish on thier hands. Cleaner more recognizable graphics would make for a much better game in my opinion.

I've been waiting and waitng for you guys to publish an "ancients" game, but sorry guys at Matrix. The graphics for "Tin Soldiers" look abominable. This is in my opinion a perfect example of taking what might be an excellent game and ruining it by trying to make it look "state of the art".

ORIGINAL: Didz

ORIGINAL: Fallschirmjager
I dont give a damn what its called...if its a good game, I will play it.
We as a genre need to be alot more openminded about the games we play. The genre is way to small for us to splinter into small groups and have developers make games just for small groups.
They will never make money that way.

I would have to disagree and say that one sure way to avoid making money is for developer to try and make wargames which cater for every possible taste.

I think one has to be clear axactly which market you are aiming for and produce a game that gives that market what it wants.

If you are producing a wargame for the 'tabletop players' market then forget the hexgrids and counters. Those guys want the drama of conflict, they want to see the uniforms, the battle smoke, and the tactic's of battle unfold on their computer screen. Give 'em hex grids and counters and they'll walk away back to Totalwar.

On the other hand if your producing a wargame for the 'baordgamers' market then make sure it is intellectually stimulating and provides them with plenty of logictical and intelligence detail to get their teeth into, don't clutcher the presentation up with 3D graphic's and movie clips which will just delay gameplay and cause distraction. Otherwise you risk your game getting labelled as not a 'real wargame' and your market will walk away.

As I said earlier the big mistake being made at present is that developer are trying to produce a universally acceptable wargame and the market isn't like that 'its horse for courses' and trying to integrate both into one will satisfy neither. Therefore sales will drop.

This is not to offend anyone. But some of the people in this thread need to get out of the 1970's
If they would actualy try some of these new 'fancy' games. They would find that they would probably enjoy them a great deal.
I feel that we are in wargaming Nirvana right now. The Airborne Assault engine is the best engine of its type right now IMO. Korsun Pocket is a game concept that is old as wargaming itself. But it was one of the best game last year. The Combat Mission series commited the cardinal sin and went with 3-D graphics. But the games are universaly brilliant. I could dish out a few more examples but ill stop here.
Pehaps since im only 19 I am a bit more openminded than many here. But I cant see how in the name of hell that you can tell me what you played 20 years ago is better than what we have today. Our hobby has evolved leaps and bounds since then
I still look back on the game of my youth which was games for the 8-bit NES and SNES and I recognize them as classic games. But I realize that the games of today are better than those. As technology moves forward...so does our hobby in terms of quality and fun. People shouldnt be so quick to refuse new games out right. They should actualy try them and then pass judgement.

I believe that it is only a matter of time before one of the big name gaming companies decided to take a chance...and makes a true to life war game that uses cutting edge 3-D graphics and has a polished, professional presenentation and high dollar production value. The game will sell many many copies and thats the moment when wargames will hit the mainstream.
The perception with wargames is that they have to be graphicly dull and have low quality production values.
I dont know where that perception came from. But it is dead wrong. One one of the bigger companies catches on to the market...the small companies that exist now might as well close up shop.
We as the hobbiest shouldnt hold back the developers from trying to implement new ideas and new technology into their games. None of us win when they dont have enough money left in which to operate.

Ravin,

Check out Tin Soldiers for an acient wargame setting.


Others,

You cant compare fancy graphics of an RTS/FPS with what may be fancy graphics of a Wargame. They both use totally different graphics formats. Due to the game mechanics. Tin Soldier sfor me has fancy graphics, but compared to an FPS they are totally different in look but not in quality. Korsun Pocket has great graphics for the map and ther eare other games which have great graphics for unit counters.

Fallschirmjager,

The trouble here is people are confused by graphics and game mechanics. Most RTS games just dont cut it even more so if they are 3D. They look good but dont offer what a wargamer eally wants. This doesnt mean wargames have to look dull and boring though. The only game that would benefit from state of the art 3D graphics and will also play like a dream is the Combat Mission series. Great graphics would not effect the gameplay.
So the problem lies with game mechanics not the graphics you see.

BUT we dont want companies to churn out the same old RTS gameplay games with better and better graphics as they just dont cut it. It could look as real as life it wouldnt make any difference to the actual game.

We want companies like Matrix who help smaller developers and bring out great wargames which appeal to the wargamer. The graphics in Korsun Pocket and BIN are far superior than say Red Lightening on the Atari. So wargamers are getting graphical upgrades as the years go by. This in my mind helps with the atmosphere aswell as good sound effects which are the most overlooked side of wargames, far worse than any graphical issues.

This thread is really do you prefer RTS,Wego or Turn based.

Wodin, I agree there is yet to be a period wargame better than AoR for handling Napoleonic/Jominian tactics.....

The newer games get FAR too wrapped up in eye candy and do not even integrate formation shifts to the play style.

Good post,
sven

Can you gemme a link to "Tin Soldiers" I don't see it in the select games list up at the top.

Thank you in advance.

Just click on the home button and there is a story and links on the matrix home page.

This thread is really do you prefer RTS,Wego or Turn based.

That's not all it is about Wodin if you re-read my origioanl post, it's also about II's III's and IV's of the "same" games many of us already have in another form as well, it's also about the same games of II's III's and IV's of the same ERA's. There's no movement at least in the Matrix, HPS, Shrapnel games that I have seen from these ERA's, where's the ANCIENTS?

Cmon I'm not asking for much and you all know you'd love to play an operational/strategic/tactical game of the Roman Empire, and the Fall of the Roman Empire or Alexander the Greatest, or Hannibal, or the Spartans, or Persians, now come on, wouldn't you?

My points there are why do I need to buy Battles in Normandy when I already have Battle FOR Normandy? Why do I need to buy "The Russian Front", when I already have "Second Front"? Why do I need to buy another version of "The Pacific War", when I already have a version of "The Pacific War"? And the list goes on an on.

I put a plethora of information of what the wargaming market needs, putting graphics in it's place was just one small example. But, most everyone in this thread seems to harp on "graphics" alone. Go back and read my initial post, it hardly put graphics as my number one reason for "Not gonna take it anymore"

My statements about graphics were broad terms drawn into the picture, not only turn based games but, RTS, FPS, wego, igougo, everybody goes, and it's great if a game can have great grapics, that wasn't my point of origional statement, it's the fact that the AI and the gameplay and the ERA's basically remains the same after 24+ years and II's and III's and IV's just keep sprouting up of the same basic game ideas, but, nothing really new.

I have a little commodore 64 game called "Combat Leader", and it plays just as good as any RTS game of today, no fancy graphics, pretty putrid greens and greys in fact, but, the little game was a blast to play, not complex, not complicated, not 40 thousand popup windows of all kinds of various stats to rifle through, just a down to earth hour to two hour battle game. It by the way was the very first RTS game I ever played, Dune doesn't own that title like many think it does. DUNE added to what Combat Leader was, but, Combat Leader had the first real time action of any other game I know, came out around 82 or 83.

Then we can look at a game called "Computer Ambush" little squad level game, same map every time, but, very simular to Close Combat in "idea". No fancy graphics, took about an hour to play if that, and against another person was fun as hell.

Kampfgruppe/Battlegroup, Typhoon of Steel and the Western/Eastern front of the same engine are very much alike in "idea" and really even in play, and their sisters/brothers are...tadah dah dat dah daaaa....Steel Panthers and soon "Combat Leader".

David is "Combat Leader" of the 80's your game also?

So my overall point is computer wargames today are too samey of wargames of yesterday, except "graphics lift" (this is where I emphasis graphics), graphics are great, but, what have you given me really new in "idea" and "era", other than a graphics facelift and added some neat bells and whistles and UI?? Huh? Cmon tell me??

I'll even add this, leaving OUT graphics, what makes todays computer wargames "better" than yesterdays computer wargames?? Heh, and don't tell me the AI, or I'll have tah shoot yah!

Ok, I'll shut my mouth now, I just saw the screenshots of the game TIN SOLDIERS and I AM ELATED!! When's it coming out? Is there a DEMO? Do you need any BETA testers???

Finally Finally someone above heard me.

See it does pay to say what you like and what you want.

Man, can't wait, I have nooooooo Alexander computer games. WOOHOO

Dances around chair......lights up cigar.......gloats just a little.

Ravin,

True the subject moved off topic some what and I apologise.


I agree squels are killing movies and games aswell.

New developers on a whole are re hashing the same old thing just with better graphics here I agree.

Glad you like the sound of Tin Soldiers.

ORIGINAL: wodin

Most games would have the option to turn off video clips anyway.

Exactly, I mean how many people who played Talonsofts games kept the movie clips running.

Nobody! Because they were trivial, irrelevant and after a while bloody annoying. The point is the developer wasted time and money putting those stupid clips into the games, which at the end of the day only added cost to the product, wasted disk space, lowered the performance of the game, pushed the minimum PC spec up and got turned off after five minutes.

Why bother, nobodies interested.

ORIGINAL: wodin
Also I really cant see a wargamer walking away from lets say Combat Leader because it looks good.

I can especially if these added details push the minimum PC spec up so that he has to upgrade his PC to play it and yet has no interest in the benefits these graphic's are supposed to be giving him.

For example take CotD:

This is an excellent operational level Napoleonic board game.

Would it be any better if Frank had decided to insert movies clips into it every time there was a battle?

Or cute little soldiers icons that marched resolutely along the roads?

Or fancy animated map details such as the Danube flowing and little birds flying back and forth?

Why do I need that sort of crap in order to play the game, its perfectly adequate just the way it is.

I don't want to pay from some computer nut to go all creative and play with his new animation tool at my expense. I have limited space on my hard drive and I don't want it filled with crap.

ORIGINAL: wodin
How many turn based computer wargames have these fancy graphics anyway? I think COTD and KP and BIN all have fancy graphics. They look amazing. But you dont see that as fancy graphics you see 3d or isometric rts games having fancy graphics and the problem lies with the game mechanics NOT the graphics.

We obviously have very different definitions of fancy graphic's. COTD's graphic's are adequate, they are certainly not fancy, they are appropriate.

ORIGINAL: wodin
DIdz what you are saying is. If you want fancy graphics play RTS. If you want tactical/strategic play turn based. But you cant have fancy graphics if you want turn based games.

No, thats not what I'm saying at all.

ORIGINAL: wodin
This is wrong. Many people dont get on with RTS games. They prefer the slower approach of turn based and wego. WHy should I if I want to play a game which is similar to a tabletop wargame have to play RTS games. Because Thats what ID have to do to get the uniforms and drama etc I want. BUT I dont like RTS. I like turn based. Tabletop games are turn based.

Good. I'm glad you agree with me.

I actually enjoy RTS games, but I don't want real time interfering in my enjoyment of wargames.

What we need is a clear distinction between computer boardgames and computer tabletop games then everyone can have what they want.

ORIGINAL: wodin
Can you clarify what board game style computer games have fancy graphics?

I think we already went round this loop once. Les gave some examples earlier.

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Ok, I'll shut my mouth now, I just saw the screenshots of the game TIN SOLDIERS and I AM ELATED!! When's it coming out? Is there a DEMO? Do you need any BETA testers???

Finally Finally someone above heard me.

See it does pay to say what you like and what you want.

Man, can't wait, I have nooooooo Alexander computer games. WOOHOO

Dances around chair......lights up cigar.......gloats just a little.

The game looks pretty good.

I hope they have an option to allow us to remove the bases from the units. . .

The game engine should allow for more ancient time periods, too [:)]

Didz,

I call KP and COTD fancy as compared to games similar from a few years ago they look awesome. I to dont want rivers moving, birds flying etc etc in a game like COTD. I do love realistic terrian and good looking counters which show the uniforms of the relevant unit as I feel it adds to the atmosphere and gives a feeling of era.

If I play a game I want to get the atmosphere of the time from it which I think COTD and EIA goes through the detailed counters etc.

Good thread this.

Thanks to Ravin and Didz and all the others for a great discussion.

ORIGINAL: wodin
I call KP and COTD fancy as compared to games similar from a few years ago they look awesome. I to dont want rivers moving, birds flying etc etc in a game like COTD. I do love realistic terrian and good looking counters which show the uniforms of the relevant unit as I feel it adds to the atmosphere and gives a feeling of era.

If I play a game I want to get the atmosphere of the time from it which I think COTD and EIA goes through the detailed counters etc.

I think we agree on CotD, but I don't class this level of graphic as 'fancy' in terms of being unecessary or clever. As you say it adds value to the game.

The only problem with the counter images in CotD at present is that they seem to change for some reason during play. So, one minute Friant may be commanding a French infantry Division, the next a Bavarian one. Likewise Artillery batteries sometimes become Engineer units. I suspect its a bit of gliche tied into the morale or fatique state of the unit but its quite off-putting at first.

I thought Panzer General III "Scorched Earth" had fancy graphics, but, I couldn't believe it when it said it did not support my video card. Nvidia ti4200.

Boy did they get a nasty letter from me.

Here we have practically the reverse of what we have been discussing in graphics, here we have a game with "improved graphics" that doesn't even work on some of the latest graphics cards. If I want to play it I have to go back to a voodoo 4500 pci card.

And that's another thing "I'm not gonna take anymore" lol, when are ALL games going to work on ONE OS and ANY type of graphics card? This is getting rediculous having to own so many different types of systems and hardware and config/autobat settings to get them to run properly.

Why can't B. Gates create an OS that runs them all? It's not like we don't have the hard-drive space anymore. And if some garage group of kids can create a dos operating system that works with WinXP and allows you to play old dos games on it, how come B. Gates can't?

I'd give my left, no wait, I'd give my right testie, to be able to have "one" system, "one" video card, "one" sound card and "one" operating system that would play anything in the past and able to be upgraded to play anything in the future, is this so much to ask for? lol

ORIGINAL: Les_the_Sarge_9_1
Real wargames are board games, or miniatures collections

What a silly statement.

The US military when it run Wargames simulations doesn’t use board games or miniatures neither of which accurately reflect the battlefield.

You have confused Wargamers with hobbists.

ORIGINAL: Culiacan Mexico

ORIGINAL: Les_the_Sarge_9_1
Real wargames are board games, or miniatures collections

What a silly statement.

The US military when it run Wargames simulations doesn’t use board games or miniatures neither of which accurately reflect the battlefield.

You have confused Wargamers with hobbists.

NONSENSE!

Why just the other day I saw stormin' Norman doing a reenactment of planning the end around the RG in GW1 with pewter and dice eh?

ORIGINAL: .50Kerry

ORIGINAL: Culiacan Mexico

ORIGINAL: Les_the_Sarge_9_1
Real wargames are board games, or miniatures collections

What a silly statement.

The US military when it run Wargames simulations doesn’t use board games or miniatures neither of which accurately reflect the battlefield.

You have confused Wargamers with hobbists.

NONSENSE!

Why just the other day I saw stormin' Norman doing a reenactment of planning the end around the RG in GW1 with pewter and dice eh?

[:D]

In the early 70’s, I had some friends who reject the whole board game concept as not being “Real Wargames” or “War gamers” (Miniature Hobbyists). In the early 80’s, I had other friends who rejected the whole concept of computer wargames as not being “Real Wargames” or “Wargamers” (Boardgame Hobbyists). Hobbyist spend a lot of time complaining about why their system/beliefs are the only true path.

Real “Wargamers” ([;)]) don’t place the emphasis on the tools used to create the simulation, but on the simulation itself.

ORIGINAL: Culiacan Mexico
Real “Wargamers” ([;)]) don’t place the emphasis on the tools used to create the simulation, but on the simulation itself.

That's a very clever statement. I cannot agree more and I will drink a beer to that sentence.
It is becoming evident to me that people pursues different things while (war?)gaming. To me, it looks like some people finds pleasure in the mere fact of looking at a board full of counters, rolling the dice, checking a thick rules book, seeing the face of the oponent while they execute an unussually sharp move, or looking at a painstakingly painted miniature sitting on a gorgeous sandbox. It looks to me like the things cited above are for some people the main (and only?) goal while (war?)gaming. I could easily be wrong, but I cannot explain why some people appears to be so fundamentalist about their favorite system. I respect and welcome all opinions on the matter. Also, I am always eager to learn from veterans. But it bugs me really deeply when I am told "you are not a wargamer" because I am not using a "good ole-true-wargame" system. I will say it again, I do respect the veterans, but the "I have been moving counters since you were in diapers" argument as a holy grail for reference is senseless. Sons will exceed fathers achievements, that's the base of human progress. And if we insist in shadowing our sons dreams and pursuits, we can easily say goodbye to the hobby. It will die with us.
I put myself in the camp of people who (war?)game to re-create or learn history and people who are fascinated with the complexities of decision-making in a battlefield/operational theater. As Culiacan cleverly suggests, I don't care if my units are represented by cardboard chips, fruit loop cereals or a bunch of memory addresses in a computer. It is the fact of defeating an opponent in the framework of rules that simulate the dynamics of war and battles, that's what's makes me to come back.