Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865



Message


arttu77 -> Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (11/25/2007 4:14:40 PM)

Hi all

This game Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 is in all good game.
But detailed battles grafik is poor. Why?

Therefore because now unit is all too tiny.
But if game detailed battle grafiks make better, then game is excellent.

Suggestion:

In future patch please make better grafiks or different picture size in detailed battles.









ericbabe -> RE: Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (11/25/2007 6:29:46 PM)

In our other game Crown of Glory the figures are much larger, but based on the feedback I've seen, most people seem to prefer the smaller figures in Forge of Freedom.




Gray_Lensman -> RE: Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (11/26/2007 10:27:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: arttu77

Hi all

This game Forge of Freedom: The American Civil War 1861-1865 is in all good game.
But detailed battles grafik is poor. Why?

Therefore because now unit is all too tiny.
But if game detailed battle grafiks make better, then game is excellent.

Suggestion:

In future patch please make better grafiks or different picture size in detailed battles.


I don't want to repost pics and such concerning zoom capabilities, so check out this thread I posted on AGEod's site, that discusses Zoom software. Rather than trying to get WCS to add Zoom capability to FoF, adding one of these Software solutions (one is even Freeware), will solve your problem for all sorts of games at once. And Eric, this software is the absolute berries for all sorts of fine work in your development processes.

see: http://www.ageod.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6561 (this one has the Freeware "Iconico" link in it somewhere)
also: http://www.ageod.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6541 (this one is about Microsoft's Intellipoint v6.1 software for the mouse)

Either one of these products should eliminate most Zoom problems/complaints, except in the case of simulators or software that rapidly updates the screen constantly.









ericbabe -> RE: Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (11/26/2007 2:39:48 PM)

There's a magnifier that can be installed in XP as well, I believe -- maybe that's the Intellipoint software you mention??  I remember they had this for Windows 3.1, at least as some sort of Microsoft add-on as well.




Gray_Lensman -> RE: Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (11/26/2007 4:19:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: ericbabe

There's a magnifier that can be installed in XP as well, I believe -- maybe that's the Intellipoint software you mention??  I remember they had this for Windows 3.1, at least as some sort of Microsoft add-on as well.


ericbabe:

I've looked at it. It's similar in function, but it's rather clumsy to use since it relocates what you are looking at to the top of the monitor screen. These links provided above point to software that literally places the magnifier area directly over what the user is looking at. Follow the links and take a look at the screen pics. They say it all regarding it's uses.




briny_norman -> RE: Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (11/27/2007 1:32:57 AM)

Hm, a zoom function, both for the strategic map and the detailed combat map, has been high on my wish-list since the beginning.
I realize it might be too complicated to make for the detailed combat, but just one extra zoom level on the strategic map would be really great.
Somewhere in between the current zoom level and the overview map, activated by a key command and not through a menu would be preferable (one could use the mousewheel too, of course, but I actually think the wheel works great as a way to control the up/down movement as it is now).
Actually, I've tried out a few other strategy games of rougly the same scope as FOF lately and have sorely missed the ability to scroll the map with the mouse wheel.
Just a small thing, but small things stick.
And, to make a short story a bit longer, I missed quite a few other features too (especially detailed combat), so those other titles (including a certain other ACW game) have been put away again.
I guess good design grows on you. For better and worse [:)].





pixelpusher -> RE: Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (11/27/2007 8:21:52 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: arttu77
Therefore because now unit is all too tiny.
But if game detailed battle grafiks make better, then game is excellent.


Hi arttu77,

As ericbabe says, our previous game, Crown of Glory, had units shown by larger figures and small abstracted dots. People basically got this abstraction, but some thought it strange that the units were represented by a 250-m tall solder, and others preferred chits. Since Forge is at about 2x the scale of CoG, we decided early on to we wanted to show units more in scale, and to show unit strength by the number of those little sub-units. Based on some tests, we found that people recognized the units via the animation motion, and by the color ... and that was more important than, say, anti-aliasing or over-detailing the units. In fact, anti-aliasing them made them LESS recognizable to some people, because they blend w/ the background. (Not to mention taking up 2x the memory.)

Do you have an example of small unit graphics that you think compare more favorably to the FoF units? In your opinion, what should they look like? (please post an image if you are able)

Regards,




pixelpusher -> RE: Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (11/27/2007 8:34:44 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: briny_norman

Hm, a zoom function, both for the strategic map and the detailed combat map, has been high on my wish-list since the beginning.I realize it might be too complicated to make for the detailed combat, but just one extra zoom level on the strategic map would be really great. Somewhere in between the current zoom level and the overview map, activated by a key command and not through a menu would be preferable (one could use the mousewheel too, of course, but I actually think the wheel works great as a way to control the up/down movement as it is now) [:)].


It would be cool to get right down in there and see more detail in the middle of a battle. But we'd have to change how the graphics work for detailed combat. The main problems is memory: all those little units and trees and swamp tiles take up a buku lot of room on your hard drive. If we allowed zooming in 2x, for example, that means we'd need 4x the memory.
Now, if we started building these things around a 3d engine ... then zooming in and out is much more plausible, and there are other economies in the files required.

Regards,

BTW: have you seen the 3dconnexion 6-axis mouse? I love mine: 3d zooming and panning, and tilting. http://www.3dconnexion.com/3dmouse/spacenavigator.php




briny_norman -> RE: Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (11/27/2007 5:13:04 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: briny_norman

BTW: have you seen the 3dconnexion 6-axis mouse? I love mine: 3d zooming and panning, and tilting. http://www.3dconnexion.com/3dmouse/spacenavigator.php


Wow, that contraption really does look interesting. I might have to get one of those.
I don't do much 3-D work, but that gadget looks like a must-have.
By the way - is there a reason you can't use the mouse-wheel for up/down movement in detailed battles?
Would be a nice feature to add, I think. Especially as you've gotten used to the feature from the campaign map...

On the subject of zoom in detailed battles:
Yeah, I already knew zooming wasn't really feasable with the current engine - that you would have to go 3-D to get that effect. But would you even consider that possibility?
I mean, I drool at the thought of what you could do with a 3-D engine for the detailed battles - and as the guy in charge of detailed battle graphics I'm sure you drool too [;)] - but do you think we would ever be able to talk the others into going that way?
Don't take this too seriously, I know it's probably not an option, but if one wanted to improve the detailed battles visually, 3-D would really be the only way to go from here. You've done as much as can be done with 2-D (and nice going, by the way), so any evolution would have to take you into unchartered 3-D territory.
Lot's of pitfalls in there, though (for a badly implemented 3-D engine look at Europa Universalis III).
Do you think you would be up for the challenge...?

EDIT: By the way, while you mention zooming in to see more detail I think the ability to zoom out to get an overview of the battle (or the campaign map for that matter) would be just as welcomed by players. Perhaps even more welcomed.




arttu77 -> RE: Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (11/27/2007 7:13:26 PM)

This game in years 1996. And game is Civil war Generals 2. Game grafiks is 2D and enough good.









[image]local://upfiles/24706/60E841544E6D4C6D9D39B437218EF440.jpg[/image]




Missouri_Rebel -> RE: Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (11/28/2007 3:32:59 AM)

Nice lookin pic. Will that game be released soon? Especially enjoy the old coot firing the cannon and the federal flag with diagional stripes.

[:)]


I would really love to see a zoom out feature in future products. (or a patch for FoF if it were possible) As it stands though, the graphics are quite fine to me.

mo reb





arttu77 -> RE: Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (11/28/2007 6:42:34 PM)

Civil war Generals 2 released 1996.




takati97realm -> RE: Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (12/5/2007 6:13:34 AM)

LOL. I think he was being sarcastic... Matrix has released several old games like eastfront westfront that people used to play. Funny, I never noticed that the american flag had diagonals before.

I'll admit, after playing the detailed combat of forge of freedom, the graphics seemed like a cheap imitation of civil war general and civil war generals II.

The random maps also further diminished the forge of Freedom detailed combat in my eyes.

I think the generic/random maps hurt it more than the troops do.

Given the scale of the strategy map, It would have been nice to see non random battle sites(Historic maps) to choose from using forge's battle system/design, instead of the generic woods, open ground etc. The current random battle design just simply leaves the impression of "I'm to lazy to draw actual historic maps... lets make a random generated tool to make them for me...".

Though I think the intent was to create re playability... not make it like you're playing the same game over and over. Given the current "overall" design...I just don't see why you wouldn't want to design a sequence that allows a player a choice of the type of terrain you'd like to fight on to "narrow" down to choices of what historic battle ground to fight on. Or even what section of a historic battle ground.

That would have been so cool...

I would gladly pay $15-20 dollars to play freedom on the civil war general battle maps. (on top of the already 40-$50 I spent on forge of freedom).

Which leads me to ask any modders or people in the know. Has anyone made historic like maps to play forge of freedom detailed battles on? Is it even possible with the design/coding of the game.




Gil R. -> RE: Why detailed battle grafiks is poor? (12/5/2007 6:22:22 AM)

takati97realm,
It just so happens that several of the issues addressed in your post have recently been discussed in the thread named "What a Fantastic Game." You should definitely check out that discussion.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.0625