From: United Kingdom
The interface is the most awkward, clunky, unfriendly, and unnecessarily complicated I've come across in a wargame for Windows, comparable only to equally abysmal user interfaces in the wargames produced in the DOS era. It relies on numerous pesky, totally unintuitive key combinations (e.g. including combinations with Shift, Control, Alt!!! ). It's really hard to design a wargame whose interface would be more off-putting...
The producer must have forgotten they're making it for Windows, not DOS. That's really the main problem with this game. The UI screws everything else up...
Well, I can only speak for myself, and I've come across many more obscure UI's in wargames than RGW presents. The one example you speak of is the selection of units in a stack, and I agree this is a bit cumbersome and not ideal, but the right click context menu's are pretty much standard Windows UI basics. If you want obscure UI's look no further than the likes of other boardgame representations such as Empires in Arms. RGW is a joy to use as far as I'm concerned. Its straight forward and very newbie friendly - you right click and choose the action and place the unit. Can't get any more simpler than that.
The RGW map was quite basic, but 11 years ago it was probably a masterpiece.
It was as lousy as it is today.
For instance, RGW was released in 2001, while in 1998 (i.e. 3 years earlier) Talonsoft had brought out TOAW, which was (and is) superior to RGW in every respect, including the quality of the maps.
Well, speaking as a person who has dabbled in numerous wargames and is always on the lookout of new experiences (even if they are old ones) - I can't say TOAW's UI has set my heart on fire with enthusiasm - its overly geared towards the 1990's, and has terrible unit information. Even with the new upgrade patch. I can't even get it to hold off throwing up hover boxes detailing terrain, when scrolling around the map. Movement arrows are drawn on the map as you scroll around it with a unit selected.. I've certainly found RGW easier to approach and more logical in its approach. If you're holding up TOAW as a prime example of a decent UI then we must agree to differ.
Tiller's UI is obtuse also, I found the right click context menu for RGW much more intuitive with standard Windows UI practices than Tiller's selection mechanism and right clicking to advance a unit, hex by hex (and some of the terrible zoom modes and crude simply ugly unit sprites). Or the precarious left click and drag across the map. RGW is much more straight forward in its approach.
I just can't understand the hostility for this title.
I's not hostility. I bought RGW, and was RALLY disappointed. I'm just voicing my opinion about this game.
I'm interested in your opinions, as a wargamer, but your response seemed to be pure vitriol. In my experience, I've just not seen the UI or the Map for that matter to be such a masochistic barrier to my enjoyment of the game.
I've purchased subsequent Schwerpunkt titles and AGW builds upon RGW with its interface, and the MDE game gives you a more guided UI approach. With stack selection being simply a matter of clicking the ones you want. Stack limit in MDE isn't limited to 3 also.
I think RGW stacks up, against the likes of TOAW to be honest. Its one guy, with a sterling design philosophy (results in comparison with history being a major selling point for me).
I guess the proof is in the pudding, and I'm more likely to load up RGW/AGW or MDE than I am some of Tiller's stuff or TOAW. Although rather than knocking wargames against each other, I'd rather embrace all the variety we have - I own them all - I just wanted to address your quite ascerbic comments on RGW.
Its been a trial to get hold of the games for me, having to import them. But its also been an adventure, finally finding operational wargames that I click with.
Anyway, just my two penneth.
< Message edited by spelk -- 6/30/2011 11:25:47 PM >