Battlefront gets Theatre of War (old name was WW2RTS).

[VicKevlar]

Supposed to be released by end of year. Dynamic battlefield is what really appeals to me as well as campaign system. Think CC3D!

http://battlefront.com/products/tow/index.html

[Marc von Martial]

Well, I followed this game (that is at it's 4th name IIRC) pretty close. I don't hold my breath untill I really see something physical on a shelf [;)]

Cool graphics, but they allways have been in the various screenshots they posted over the years. But the problem is that you won't be that close to the units if you fight RTS battles of the scale the game promises [;)]

It will all come down to the interface and how you really manage your units.

[VicKevlar]

Yeah....it's definitely been up an down over it's lifecycle. Martin has the release date now in December. Apparently, it's all but done and in full beta.......it should be given it's lifespan in development.

I thought the same way too on the camera issue with EYSA, of course, I started parking the camera on individual units all the time. TOW will have the same ability so up close and personal will look good.

Only downside I see so far is non-enterable buildings. Full dynamic battlefields with scars, shellholes, penetration marks on vehicles, destructible buildings but NO ability to enter buildings.

[Marc von Martial]

Wow, really, no buildings to enter? I did not know this.

[VicKevlar]

Yeah...quote from developer:
"The engine is definitely capable of handling soldiers in buildings. The interiors are fully modelled for example. It is possible for the engine, we had this feature, but we dropped it about a year ago - smth with gameplay and balancing. However could be one of the features for the addon.
So currently soldiers are not entering buildings. "
 
 
 

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: Marc Schwanebeck

I don't hold my breath untill I really see something physical on a shelf

Likewise. Its been vaporware for an awfully long time now, although hopefully Battlefront will kick it along.

It's a little worrying it ended up at BF, I think. I've certainly nothing against Battlefront by any means, but with the Maddox pedigree I'm surprised Ubi didn't take it on if it was as good as it was cracked up to be; I doubt very much BF was the sort of publisher considered when development started. I guess its possible Ubi and the other large publishers just thought it was too "hardcore" or "wargamey" for them, which would probably be very good news, I suppose.

[junk2drive]

I think the HIGH minimum system requirements have scared off some publishers.

[old man of the sea]

well, at least it isn't this Theatre of War
 
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000BJQR3O/sr=1-2/qid=1154111124/ref=sr_1_2/104-2769849-9470335?ie=UTF8&s=videogames
 
That's the first thing I thought of when I read it. Theatre of War and Patriot where the games that killed 360 Pacific.
 
E

[WITPgamer]

double post

[WITPgamer]

Very interesting, it looks something like a 3D version of Close Comat which would be great if so. There looks to be an interview over with the Armchair General folks, too.

Armchair General Interview Link

The game sure looks pretty, if for nothing else Im tempted to buy it just to see these old vehicles in a 3D environment such as this.



Mike

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: WITPgamer
Very interesting, it looks something like a 3D version of Close Comat which would be great if so.

Eric Young Squad Assault should have been 3D version of Close Combat (by the same people who made CC no less) and it failed miserably....

I am very suspicious that this game will fare any better. It has been in the development for bloody ages, and as Hertston said, I doubt Battlefront was developer's first choice of publisher couple years ago, for all the wrong reasons.

BTW, even though Red Orchestra is nominally not an RTS, is there anything this vaporware game has, that RO doesn't have already in terms of features, tactics and realism??

Oleg

[WITPgamer]

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Eric Young Squad Assault should have been 3D version of Close Combat (by the same people who made CC no less) and it failed miserably....

I am very suspicious that this game will fare any better. It has been in the development for bloody ages, and as Hertston said, I doubt Battlefront was developer's first choice of publisher couple years ago, for all the wrong reasons.

BTW, even though Red Orchestra is nominally not an RTS, is there anything this vaporware game has, that RO doesn't have already in terms of features, tactics and realism??

Oleg

Well personally I dont think that you are giving the 1C/IL-2 guys enough credit, they have made what is about the best flight sim on the market and I dont see why after that success they would release something comparible to what Matrix had with Squad Assault.

As for battlefront being the publishers, beats me, Im hoping it means that they are targeting a different audience. You could also ask the same question of any developer going with a distributer such as Battlefront or Matrix I guess. PC games are getting less and less shelf space lately from what Ive seen and we are seeing more and more developers trying alternate distribution methods. Im my opinion this is good news, not bad, as otherwise these games and particually war games would likely not exist or would be dumbed down for the mass market. Anyways, Ive noticed someone has asked that same question over on the TOW forums, so hopefully we will see an answer straight from the horses mouth.

And as for comparing RO to any type of wargame I think you are comparing apples and oranges...one is an FPS (a good one Ill add) and the other is a command style game. Yes they both have WW2 units in there and varying degrees of realism, but that’s about where the comparison ends.

[Reiryc]

Looks pretty good, but am holding judgement until I see how infantry combat works. I hope it's not just an armor-fest game and is a solid infantry combat game with armor being more supportive in nature.

[Arnir]

The non-enterable buildings is a red flag for me.  Eliminated a lot of the battles I would have like to have played.

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: WITPgamer

Well personally I dont think that you are giving the 1C/IL-2 guys enough credit, they have made what is about the best flight sim on the market and I dont see why after that success they would release something comparible to what Matrix had with Squad Assault.

Heck, I LIKED Squad Assault. It wasn't perfect by any means, but what is?

I may be wide of the mark, but I suspect one reason ToW has been hanging around so long is that the "1C/IL-2 guys" became far more interested in THIS.

[WITPgamer]

ORIGINAL: Hertston

Heck, I LIKED Squad Assault. It wasn't perfect by any means, but what is?

I may be wide of the mark, but I suspect one reason ToW has been hanging around so long is that the "1C/IL-2 guys" became far more interested in THIS.

As I understand it they are being worked on by two totally seperate teams, at least thats the impression I got from what I read early. As for EYSA I guess maybe Im a little jaded on the matter as I also bought GIC previous to it...[X(]

[Hortlund]

Battlefront is really the ideal publisher for ToW. The CM series has been the leader of the tactical wargames genre since it first came out in 2000. No one has ever been close since. There has been plenty of games trying to dethrone CM, but all Ive seen so far are failed attempts, some more spectacular than others.
 
BF is not only publishing ToW though, they are included in the final stages of development aswell, and given BFs track record, that is something very good. Simply put, BF knows what is required for a game like this to work gameplay-wise, while 1c has made one of the most amazing and stunning gameengines yet.
 
This game will be the benchmark for ww2 tactical wargames for the next cycle, just like CM was between 00-06.

[Oleg Mastruko]

ORIGINAL: Panzerjaeger Hortlund
BF is not only publishing ToW though, they are included in the final stages of development aswell, and given BFs track record, that is something very good. Simply put, BF knows what is required for a game like this to work gameplay-wise, while 1c has made one of the most amazing and stunning gameengines yet.

Battlefront's track record for any game other than their own CM series has been pretty bad in my opinion. Lots of products mis-handled, mis-advertised (or not advertised at all), and their "publisher's influence" on *other* developers has been far far from "very good" IMO.

Hats down to BF for their own CM series which revitalized wargaming and was/is a top notch product, and which they handled well (its their child after all), but all other games have been either mis-handled, or bad, or both.

BF = good as developers/designers, pretty bad as publishers of other people's games. Just my opinion.

O.

[Les_the_Sarge_9_1]

I'll agree, Battlefront thanks to Combat Mission, can be said to "own" 3d graphics based squad level tactical wargaming to a large extent. Regardless of their game's age, I can't think of a 3d tactical wargame (that's not a shooter) that really has the same "impact" on the hobby.

But, the Il2 guys, they made a flight sim. I won't claim to know how close in programming a flight sim is to a 3d tactical squad level wargame, but, game egines are like vehicles I would assume. Just because you can make a great formula 1 racer, doesn't mean you have practical knowledge of how to make large scale construction equipment. There's more to it, than saying both are gas power vehicles with wheels.

I think over all, what Battlefront has to offer the project, is a good understanding of what wargamers will and will not tolerate in a squad level tactical wargame that uses 3d graphics. Beyond that, the software is either good or it isn't. And the guys making it can either achieve the expected results, or not. But, just because the Battlefront guys made a great game in Combat Mission, doesn't mean every developer they take on to publish will magically be able to equal them.

Which is why, even though we all think highly of Matrix Games, just because they can produce several great wargames, from several great developers, doesn't mean that every developer they bring in, can magically be as good as the others.
Case in point EYSA. It simply didn't fly. Nice looking attempt, but, it didn't actually work in the end.

[ravinhood]

Boy Battlefront really slapped Matrixgames in the face with this paragraph.

{It’s no surprise that Battlefront is now the publisher of this amazing game, to be honest, I feel that we are the only company that COULD publish it. With our extensive background in not only wargames, but this specific era, we bring to the table over 7 years of experience in publishing and since this game offers so much, in such an incredible way, we will be drawing on all of that experience and passion to make it the success it undoubtedly deserves to be. }

You gonna take that Keith, David, most especially MARC?

But, then I read this paragraph:

{What’s interesting is that when I recently demoed the game, I noticed that everyone initially paused very frequently and gave units orders at a nearly constant pace. As they played though, and grew most accustomed to the interface, they noticed, as I did, that the AI is so good, that it would usually have the new orders, that I was thinking about issuing, already assigned. In }

And what we have here is another "movie type game" where the AI plays the game and you watch basically like other games I have noted this change in. Once again if you have to pause a game every few seconds it might as well be "turn based" anyways and then if the AI is going to issue the same orders as the player, welp that just makes it a "movie watching" game. Baah just another HTTR/COTA/Bullrun type of game. Not a wargame. A MOVIE!