Review @ Out of Eight

[JaguarUSF]

A review of Carriers at War has been posted at Out of Eight PC Game Reviews:
http://jaguarusf.blogspot.com/2007/06/c ... eview.html
Enjoy!

[MarkShot]

I just want to comment on one thing.

I strongly disaggree with your suggestion that wargame developers move towards 3D. Adding 3D just greatly ups the cost and complexity of the programming. The end result being the further drying up of quality titles from small independents and/or the reduction of game play/AI quality due to excessive resources commited to the graphics portion of the project.

I say give me a good 2D game over a flashy and empty 3D game any day. And yes, I just spent a lot of money at a top of the line system from a small boutique PC gaming system vendor.

---

The rest of the review which speak specifically of CAW, I am sure will be endlessly debated.

[Banquet]

10 years ago I'd have disagreed with you, Markshot.. but now I am with you!

Apart from the extra costs and development time, you also have the problem that the game is so much harder to mod. Take Harpoon III for example, which as a plethora of databases available, detailing thousands of ships, aircraft, missiles, etc. Hundreds of player made scenerio's added. If Harpoon were 3d probably none of that would exist due to the difficulty modelling this stuff in 3d.

Further, for some reason, the quality of the wargame usually seems to suffer whenever 3d is brought in. I don't know why.. but there are so many examples of games done in 3d that just don't work well.

In my opinion there is much work that could be done on AI that is far more important to making a better game than adding a 3d engine. Wargames are not like other games, where better graphics often mean a better playing experience (flight sims are an example of a game where better graphics always helps!)

Edit: would like to add - I do generally respect the Out of Eight reviews and appreciate the site reviews games that many other sites don't carry.

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: MarkShot

I just want to comment on one thing.

I strongly disaggree with your suggestion that wargame developers move towards 3D. Adding 2D just greatly ups the cost and complexity of the programming. The end result being the further drying up of quality titles from small independents and/or the reduction of game play/AI quality due to excessive resources commited to the graphics portion of the project.

Agreed. Also, with a lot of wargames 3D wouldn't be desirable anyway. Your prime requirement is maximum information presented clearly in a fashion that can be absorbed quickly and in most cases 2D still does that a lot better (it is something both HttR/CotA and TOAW do exceptionally well); I don't want to have to fanny about with camera controls and such just because someone wants some pretty-but-useless eye candy

It should also be mentioned that wargame designers are quite happy to use 3D when necessary. Combat Mission is 3D but there it's an essential part of the design.. not eye candy. For tactical games where potential extra sales could justify the additional budget that probably is the future, but at the operational and strategic level there is no need, and it would hinder rather than help both gameplay and enjoyment.

[Erik Rutins]

ORIGINAL: MarkShot
I strongly disaggree with your suggestion that wargame developers move towards 3D. Adding 2D just greatly ups the cost and complexity of the programming. The end result being the further drying up of quality titles from small independents and/or the reduction of game play/AI quality due to excessive resources commited to the graphics portion of the project.

Agreed, QFT. I do agree that wargame graphics should continue to improve, but for most wargames, better 2D graphics are where things should go rather than arbitrarily going to 3D.

[dinsdale]

ORIGINAL: Hertston

ORIGINAL: MarkShot

I just want to comment on one thing.

I strongly disaggree with your suggestion that wargame developers move towards 3D. Adding 2D just greatly ups the cost and complexity of the programming. The end result being the further drying up of quality titles from small independents and/or the reduction of game play/AI quality due to excessive resources commited to the graphics portion of the project.

Agreed. Also, with a lot of wargames 3D wouldn't be desirable anyway. Your prime requirement is maximum information presented clearly in a fashion that can be absorbed quickly and in most cases 2D still does that a lot better (it is something both HttR/CotA and TOAW do exceptionally well); I don't want to have to fanny about with camera controls and such just because someone wants some pretty-but-useless eye candy

It should also be mentioned that wargame designers are quite happy to use 3D when necessary. Combat Mission is 3D but there it's an essential part of the design.. not eye candy. For tactical games where potential extra sales could justify the additional budget that probably is the future, but at the operational and strategic level there is no need, and it would hinder rather than help both gameplay and enjoyment.

Great post, and I strongly agree. Wargames and wargamers aren't demanding 1975 graphics, but the best possible solution for presenting information.

Anyone think that Amazon.com would work better if it were 3-D? Then why should wargames dealing with maps and information be forced to implement (usually substandard) 3D because FPS games do?

[Owl]

I know in my case I much prefer that the mechanics "under the hood" are well researched and accurate over pretty graphics.  A competitors naval surface warfare game comes to mind that looks stunning, but seems to have forgotten simple things such as the difference between AP and HE shells (or at least doesn't mention it).  Games like Steel Panthers continue to survive not due to grahics, but because they were built with attention to detail.  If they also had lovely 3D graphics I'd like they still but to me pretty pictures are less important than accuracy - speaking of course of wargames only here.

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: Banquet

Apart from the extra costs and development time, you also have the problem that the game is so much harder to mod. ........ [] If Harpoon were 3d probably none of that would exist due to the difficulty modelling this stuff in 3d.

Hi Banquet....
Nah, it's not necessarily harder, look at Silent Hunter III, a 3D game that had plenty of mods/improvements created by users, since it allowed for adding/changing scripts for vital parts, even the AI scripts could be accessed. Incorporating a 3D engine is rather a question of costs/manpower than anything else, in the wargame sector.

Most of the Wargame developers either don't have the funds to license existing 3D engines, or they don't have the knowledge/tools/time to create a 3D-approach, as the time for developing fancy 3D stuff might take more than 2-3 yrs, keeping in mind the low amount of manpower present in these companies.

If you look at games like "Westfront" (3D, Normandy theater IIRC), you see some 3D engines even in this genre, but most of these gfx in such games have kinda ancient looking gfx, they use to look pretty outdated already upon release. Ppl who support 3D gfx in wargames are convinced that such games could pull additional customers, if they'd have a minimum standard regarding presentation/visual quality, which, quite frankly, 98% of them just do not have. Since the developers stick to use 2D, hexes, stacks of small counters, etc, they won't be able to attract a broader customer base. Sometimes, it feels like a show meant to entertain a limited amount of ppl, where these ppl have to show their invitation at the entrance to get in, if u know what i mean. .

Wargames are not like other games, where better graphics often mean a better playing experience (flight sims are an example of a game where better graphics always helps!)

It depends on the type of approach. The general approach in TOW is very interesting (it seems that it has various bugs + shortcomings which have to be fixed tho), 3D does a good job to reenact armored warfare here, nevertheless.

EDIT: Another example: If you consider the Close Combat series to be simulations, then you'd have to agree that it was one of the most successful games that simulated warfare on a platoon level. Interesting enough, the first 2 games of the series featured what I'd call "fake" 3D (top-down view, using sprites - not 3D objects) and the engine was very demanding, ppl needed fast rigs. The game managed to deliver a pretty authentic (for the most parts) simulation of ... guess what... close combat. And we all know what other wargames/sims looked like when the first CC was released.

[Banquet]

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

ORIGINAL: Banquet

Apart from the extra costs and development time, you also have the problem that the game is so much harder to mod. ........ [] If Harpoon were 3d probably none of that would exist due to the difficulty modelling this stuff in 3d.

Hi Banquet....
Nah, it's not necessarily harder, look at Silent Hunter III, a 3D game that had plenty of mods/improvements created by users, since it allowed for adding/changing scripts for vital parts, even the AI scripts could be accessed. Incorporating a 3D engine is rather a question of costs/manpower than anything else, in the wargame sector.

Most of the Wargame developers either don't have the funds to license existing 3D engines, or they don't have the knowledge/tools/time to create a 3D-approach, as the time for developing fancy 3D stuff might take more than 2-3 yrs, keeping in mind the low amount of manpower present in these companies.

If you look at games like "Westfront" (3D, Normandy theater IIRC), you see some 3D engines even in this genre, but most of these gfx in such games have kinda ancient looking gfx, they use to look pretty outdated already upon release. Ppl who support 3D gfx in wargames are convinced that such games could pull additional customers, if they'd have a minimum standard regarding presentation/visual quality, which, quite frankly, 98% of them just do not have. Since the developers stick to use 2D, hexes, stacks of small counters, etc, they won't be able to attract a broader customer base. Sometimes, it feels like a show meant to entertain a limited amount of ppl, where these ppl have to show their invitation at the entrance to get in, if u know what i mean. .

Wargames are not like other games, where better graphics often mean a better playing experience (flight sims are an example of a game where better graphics always helps!)

It depends on the type of approach. The general approach in TOW is very interesting (it seems that it has various bugs + shortcomings which have to be fixed tho), 3D does a good job to reenact armored warfare here, nevertheless.

Hi GoodGuy,

I know what you mean. There have certainly been a huge amount of mods for SHIII and there is a lot of talented people making those mods. However that seems to be the exception that I can think of..

If you look at 2D, versus 3D games, the 2D seem to have remained more popular. I.e

Close Combat - still got a big following.. An attempt to do a similar game in 3D, Squad Assault never really caught on. ToW has potential, but to use an example in that.. that infantry can't use buildings for cover. There's no way if that game was in 2D that entering buildings would be a problem.

Harpoon III - remains very popular.. a 3D alternative Fleet Command hasn't been so popular.


I have nothing against 3D.. but in my experience they generally don't seem to measure up in wargames. It seems harder to control units in 3D versus 2D. I think sometimes it is asking too much to expect a small dev team to be AI coders, Wargame coders, History experts AND able to code great looking 3D graphics.

A final point. The hardware to run wargames in 2D is a lot lower than the most recent top end 3D games. This means I can run COTA, CC:COI, Harpoon, etc on my budget spec laptop.. where unfortunately SHIII and IV won't run!

[GoodGuy]

@ Banquet: Btw, did you get CAW?

[Banquet]

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

@ Banquet: Btw, did you get CAW?

Not yet (so why am I posting here you may ask! [:D])

I've followed the forum with interest and may well get it in the future. I like the idea of a quick to play game but the lack of scenario's is a concern.

[AlvinS]

The developers behind Battles in Italy have re-released Carriers at War, which was first released in 1992; it’s been such a long time that you can’t really compare the two titles, and most of the people who played the original are probably dead anyway.

Sounds like this was written by a kid.

Now that the European Theater of World War II has been exhausted, developers are looking for new settings in which to place their computer games. Of course, they can’t not be in World War II (that would be silly), so an increasing number of games are switching over to the Pacific. Naval games have been around for a while now, with remarkable titles such as Uncommon Valor, War in the Pacific, and, more recently, Battlestations: Midway.

Glad to here the war in the Pacific was not WWII. [8|]

Sounds like John Belushi on Animal House who said; "Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?"

Just my 2 cents

I'll now return to my game in progress.

[GoodGuy]

Of course, they can’t not be in World War II (that would be silly), so an increasing number of games are switching over to the Pacific. .......[]

ORIGINAL: AlvinS

Glad to here the war in the Pacific was not WWII. [8|]

[/quote]

Glad to heAr that you spotted this part [;)], since I, probably just like the author, overlooked that part when I took a brief look at the article. Such things happen if you change your plan right in the middle of a paragraph/sentence. I've been online editor for a few yrs, it's a typical oversight which happens if you don't have proofreaders. No reason to bash him. The article brings up some valid points, so good job.

[AlvinS]

Glad to heAr that

Your point is well taken. [;)]

Some of us are good at spelling and others history. I understand how it would be easy to miss, as I write for a living also and rely on editors and spell check to bail me out.

Thanks

[BK6583]

Ok - agreed - now how about spending more time on improving 2D map graphics? I think a good example was "Uncommon Valor" where there was a mod that allowed one to see a satellite photo quality representation of the South Pacific. It worked very well in visually giving me a feel for the terrain - desert / jungle / mountain, etc. I'm sorry to say it, but a not so good example, in my view, of 2D map graphics is HTTR and COTA. I LOVE the game systems' combat model but to this day I still don't know what Malta, for example, really looks like from a terrain persective. So this is definitely OT, but I for one would like to see more effort put into map graphics across the board (no pun intended).

[Banquet]

ORIGINAL: BK6583

Ok - agreed - now how about spending more time on improving 2D map graphics? I think a good example was "Uncommon Valor" where there was a mod that allowed one to see a satellite photo quality representation of the South Pacific. It worked very well in visually giving me a feel for the terrain - desert / jungle / mountain, etc. I'm sorry to say it, but a not so good example, in my view, of 2D map graphics is HTTR and COTA. I LOVE the game systems' combat model but to this day I still don't know what Malta, for example, really looks like from a terrain persective. So this is definitely OT, but I for one would like to see more effort put into map graphics across the board (no pun intended).

Aww man, I love the COTA maps.. they're a work of art!!

[CJMello63]

Non War Gamers just don't get it too. We are not trying to be the next Quake. Some Grogs are probably still running Win95.

[Triarii]

quote:



Of course, they can’t not be in World War II (that would be silly), so an increasing number of games are switching over to the Pacific. .......[]

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlvinS

Glad to here the war in the Pacific was not WWII.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

Glad to heAr that you spotted this part , since I, probably just like the author, overlooked that part when I took a brief look at the article. Such things happen if you change your plan right in the middle of a paragraph/sentence. I've been online editor for a few yrs, it's a typical oversight which happens if you don't have proofreaders. No reason to bash him. The article brings up some valid points, so good job.

Sorry gents but "can't not" is a double negative.
English as it is spoken (poorly).
These games ".... can not not be in WWII"; so they are where they can only be i.e. - in WWII.

The reviewer chose a poor way of writing what he/she meant! [8D]

[GoodGuy]

ORIGINAL: CJMello63

Non War Gamers just don't get it too. We are not trying to be the next Quake. Some Grogs are probably still running Win95.

Hmm, rather Win 98, but I don't see why this should hinder developers to come up with new/inventive approaches regarding presentation of infos or animation of actual units.

ORIGINAL: Mick15

The reviewer chose a poor way of writing what he/she meant! [8D]

The actual message of the article got through, imo. So pls cut the knitpicking, ty. [:)]

ORIGINAL: BK6583

I'm sorry to say it, but a not so good example, in my view, of 2D map graphics is HTTR and COTA.

Well, once you get familiar with the map layouts in HTTR or COTA, it allows for faster descision-making, imo. Some greek valleys' topograhies in COTA are hard to imagine, with the few map infos ... I for one would like to have additional contour-lines, or height-values "printed" on the maps here and there, but the clear layout of the map is a strong/good feature of COTA, and a right-click on the terrain delivers all the terrain-infos you need.

[Banquet]

ORIGINAL: Mick15

quote:



Of course, they can’t not be in World War II (that would be silly), so an increasing number of games are switching over to the Pacific. .......[]

quote:

ORIGINAL: AlvinS

Glad to here the war in the Pacific was not WWII.

quote:

ORIGINAL: GoodGuy

Glad to heAr that you spotted this part , since I, probably just like the author, overlooked that part when I took a brief look at the article. Such things happen if you change your plan right in the middle of a paragraph/sentence. I've been online editor for a few yrs, it's a typical oversight which happens if you don't have proofreaders. No reason to bash him. The article brings up some valid points, so good job.

Sorry gents but "can't not" is a double negative.
English as it is spoken (poorly).
These games ".... can not not be in WWII"; so they are where they can only be i.e. - in WWII.

The reviewer chose a poor way of writing what he/she meant! [8D]

No, if you see the way the reviewer was writing that, it's not a double negative..

I.e, This film is so good you can't not enjoy it [:)]