Matrix Games Forums

Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual previewThe fight for Armageddon begins! The Matrix Holiday sales are starting today!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

What is fun?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> What is fun? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
What is fun? - 1/13/2013 6:38:05 AM   
Gary Childress


Posts: 5827
Joined: 7/17/2005
From: United States
Status: offline
Just out of curiosity, what does everyone think of WitP as a "game". I know there is dispute over the title "simulation". So let's stay off that, but as far as having a "game" what do players think?

It seems like a forgone conclusion that Japan never stood a chance against the combined forces of the US, UK and finally the USSR. Would the game be more fun if things were roughly even, if there were a 50/50 chance that either side could dominate in the end? I've been on and off toying around with a scenario to give both sides something closer to parity. I don't pretend that this scenario is remotely realistic, except that it will be using the standard game mechanics devised by the developers. But the OOBs will be pure fiction. So basically the mod sacrifices realism in favor of hopefully being more fun. What do you think? Would WITP be more fun if it were winnable by both sides or is the "seesaw" effect actually more fun, where both players get the opportunity (Japan early and Allies later) to have a glorious heyday of uncontested dominance.

What makes a game interesting? Does being on the edge of your seat with every turn, not knowing what the overall outcome of the game will be more fun or is playing out the historical sequence of the war more fun? Does fantasy ruin it for the game?

_____________________________

Favorite/Awesome games from Matrix

War in the Pacific/AE
Panzer Corps
Commander Europe at War
John Tiller's Campaign Series
The Close Combat Series (all versions)
Post #: 1
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 7:20:17 AM   
Treetop64


Posts: 820
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: 519 Redwood City - BASE (Hex 218, 70)
Status: offline
Deluding myself into thinking I'm actually a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff...

_____________________________



"Junk is something you've kept for years and throw away three weeks before you need it"

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 2
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 9:13:31 AM   
Capt Hornblower


Posts: 215
Joined: 10/29/2010
Status: offline
I thought the point of having Victory Points was to assess one's performance relative to history. If as a player of the Japanese side, one doesn't wish to endure the depressing inevitability of being crushed by the US and its allies, then just end the game somewhere between Jan 1942 and Jan 1943 and then see how the situation compares to that date in history. If you hold significantly more territory than the Japanese did historically, then you won; if about the same, the game was a draw; if less, sorry about that.

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 3
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 9:59:34 AM   
janh

 

Posts: 1227
Joined: 6/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress
What makes a game interesting? Does being on the edge of your seat with every turn, not knowing what the overall outcome of the game will be more fun or is playing out the historical sequence of the war more fun? Does fantasy ruin it for the game?


Damn good questions... I often have a weak spot for underdogs, no matter whether it is the Civil War or WW2, so Japan being vastly inferior to the Allies does add some sort of a challenge. That's of course not the full story, i.e. playing Allies in 1942 and trying to stop the waltzing empire is also something very exciting. I can see the point of scenario 2 or the mods that bump up the IJ side a bit for PBEM, though, and also generally, but I kinda prefer the historical Scen 1.

This game somehow has extreme addictive potential. A lot of it comes from my perspective from the level of detail, OOBs and technical, and the vast logistical and organizational "nightmare" following from that. A positive nightmare, sorts of. There's always new aspects to learn and find some eye openers. It's like a well-researched, interactive book. And it lets you try out things, "what-if" things, and (almost always) gives you even a range of plausible results that very well could have happened in reality. What had happened at Midway had Nagumo's trap worked?

The other aspect that makes this game so addictive for me from the daily turn resolution. It makes it feel so real to watch combats and events unfold "day after day". It is totally different than predecessors with week resolution, or I-Go-U-Go. There is nothing better in this game to watch a critical air combat or major naval battle unfold. Yes, nothing moves, you only read the messages, but it can be very very tense. Perhaps it would be nicer if the ships or planes would move around on a fake map and you could watch them, or the LCU operate as symbols on a random battle map, but it doesn't even need this to be fun. Maybe the latter would be nice, but maybe your fantasy can do a better job there. It often feels like you'd like to jump right into the combat, push a button and fight it a la TF 1942 or IL-2.

On a side note, I know it may sound stupid, but if Matrix/G&G doesn't have the (financial) incentives to put together a (new) team to built a new engine for AE and enhancements, but there seem quite a few people who'd right away buy a successor, how about crowd-funding?

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 4
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 2:30:26 PM   
Chickenboy


Posts: 18473
Joined: 6/29/2002
From: Twin Cities, MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress
What makes a game interesting? Does being on the edge of your seat with every turn, not knowing what the overall outcome of the game will be more fun or is playing out the historical sequence of the war more fun? Does fantasy ruin it for the game?


The long-term knowledge that I'm doing better than historical Japanese performance is satisfying. To see how the Japanese war effort could have been improved if only they focused on.... is also very intellectually satisfying.

Of course, the 3.5 year march towards the endgame is more interesting when sprinkled liberally with frantic and heady action. As other posters have stated-a good carrier battle, major air engagement or naval action gets my blood pumping and is a real shot-in-the-arm to gameplay.

_____________________________


(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 5
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 3:11:40 PM   
nashvillen


Posts: 2903
Joined: 7/3/2006
From: Christiana, TN
Status: offline
I like the long term planning and watching those plans come to fruition. Of course, part of the excitement is when those plans make a hard left hand turn and you have to figure out how to get them back on track.

Running the Japanese economy is a challenge in itself. I have, on more than one occasion, told my opponents that if they would just leave me alone, the game would be enough challenge, just to keep the economy going! Great fun! I enjoy this so much that I took on a 1/3 game as the allies doing all the US logistics, with some minor roles (NOPAC, CENTPAC, China, and USSR). Keeping the beans and bullets moving is fun for me.

Don't get me wrong, having a major carrier engagement in June of 1942 and watching the KB sink four US carriers without batting an eye is also great fun, but I do like the more mundane side of things, also!

_____________________________


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 6
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 3:56:10 PM   
John 3rd


Posts: 11377
Joined: 9/8/2005
From: La Salle, Colorado
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: janh

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress
What makes a game interesting? Does being on the edge of your seat with every turn, not knowing what the overall outcome of the game will be more fun or is playing out the historical sequence of the war more fun? Does fantasy ruin it for the game?


Damn good questions... I often have a weak spot for underdogs, no matter whether it is the Civil War or WW2, so Japan being vastly inferior to the Allies does add some sort of a challenge. That's of course not the full story, i.e. playing Allies in 1942 and trying to stop the waltzing empire is also something very exciting. I can see the point of scenario 2 or the mods that bump up the IJ side a bit for PBEM, though, and also generally, but I kinda prefer the historical Scen 1.

This game somehow has extreme addictive potential. A lot of it comes from my perspective from the level of detail, OOBs and technical, and the vast logistical and organizational "nightmare" following from that. A positive nightmare, sorts of. There's always new aspects to learn and find some eye openers. It's like a well-researched, interactive book. And it lets you try out things, "what-if" things, and (almost always) gives you even a range of plausible results that very well could have happened in reality. What had happened at Midway had Nagumo's trap worked?

The other aspect that makes this game so addictive for me from the daily turn resolution. It makes it feel so real to watch combats and events unfold "day after day". It is totally different than predecessors with week resolution, or I-Go-U-Go. There is nothing better in this game to watch a critical air combat or major naval battle unfold. Yes, nothing moves, you only read the messages, but it can be very very tense. Perhaps it would be nicer if the ships or planes would move around on a fake map and you could watch them, or the LCU operate as symbols on a random battle map, but it doesn't even need this to be fun. Maybe the latter would be nice, but maybe your fantasy can do a better job there. It often feels like you'd like to jump right into the combat, push a button and fight it a la TF 1942 or IL-2.

On a side note, I know it may sound stupid, but if Matrix/G&G doesn't have the (financial) incentives to put together a (new) team to built a new engine for AE and enhancements, but there seem quite a few people who'd right away buy a successor, how about crowd-funding?


Echo these sentiments about the underdog in particular. ALWAYS like to play the South as well in Civil War games. Guess we're just gluttons for punishment!

_____________________________



Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.

Reluctant Admiral Mod:
https://sites.google.com/site/reluctantadmiral/

(in reply to janh)
Post #: 7
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 5:31:48 PM   
Razz


Posts: 2529
Joined: 10/21/2007
From: CaLiForNia
Status: offline
I think a fiction scenario would be fun and relatively easy to implement.

We have the historical scenarios.

With the fiction scenario, having troops in different locations and strength along with everything else being different like economics, reinforcements R$D would be very fun.

Why? Because many of know history therefore we have learned from it. A scenario that is different with a possibility for both sides to win makes its an edge of your seat game.

(in reply to John 3rd)
Post #: 8
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 5:50:28 PM   
mike scholl 1

 

Posts: 1265
Joined: 2/17/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress

Just out of curiosity, what does everyone think of WitP as a "game". I know there is dispute over the title "simulation". So let's stay off that, but as far as having a "game" what do players think?

What makes a game interesting? Does being on the edge of your seat with every turn, not knowing what the overall outcome of the game will be more fun or is playing out the historical sequence of the war more fun? Does fantasy ruin it for the game?



I really don't care for "games", but I'm a big fan of "simulation games". Exploring the possibilities of events that really happened appeals to the historian in me. WW II in the Pacific was NOT an equal struggle. Making it into one simply destroys the notion of it being THE WAR IN THE PACIFIC. I'm not against people doing whatever they want, but I object strongly to calling it WITP. To me, "interesting" means I'm placed as closely as possibly in the same position and facing the same constraints as my historical counterparts. Was MacArthur as big an a-hole as I think he was? I want a chance to prove I could do better. Can't get that in a "game", only in a "simulation".

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 9
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 6:16:50 PM   
Sardaukar


Posts: 6058
Joined: 11/28/2001
From: Finland/now in Israel
Status: offline
I invented fictional title for myself...SACPAC...Supreme Allied Commander, Pacific....

< Message edited by Sardaukar -- 1/13/2013 6:27:20 PM >


_____________________________

"To meaningless French Idealism, Liberty, Fraternity and Equality...we answer with German Realism, Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery" -Prince von Bülov, 1870-


(in reply to mike scholl 1)
Post #: 10
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 6:25:07 PM   
AW1Steve


Posts: 12997
Joined: 3/10/2007
From: ME-FL-DC-GM-WA-NE-IL ?
Status: offline
I perfer "The Grand poo-bah of all allied forces!"

_____________________________

"Geezerhood is a state of mind, attained by being largely out of yours". AW1Steve

"Quit whining and play the game. Or go home". My 7th grade baseball coach. It applies well to WITP AE players.

(in reply to Sardaukar)
Post #: 11
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 10:49:04 PM   
crsutton


Posts: 7419
Joined: 12/6/2002
From: Maryland
Status: offline
I like SOC for me. "Scourge of God." Yeah, that will work just fine.

_____________________________

I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg

(in reply to AW1Steve)
Post #: 12
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 11:03:26 PM   
ilovestrategy


Posts: 3629
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline
Well, I cannot speak for WiTPAE because I just started playing a week ago. But I will say that in strategy games, I absolutely love being the attacked side against high odds and turning the tide with a well oiled war machine. I've done that with all the Civ games and Ascendancy. I just love the struggle of holding on until I have the men and materials to turn the tide.

It just seems so dramatic to me.

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 13
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 11:06:07 PM   
ilovestrategy


Posts: 3629
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline
Oh Crsutton, nice avatar by the way. Thats from a popular comic made in WW2 designed to show the war from the common soldier's point of view isn't it? The artwork looks familiar but the name of the comic and artist escapes me.

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to ilovestrategy)
Post #: 14
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 11:10:23 PM   
CaptDave

 

Posts: 604
Joined: 6/21/2002
From: Federal Way, WA
Status: offline
I don't think I would find it "fun" to play such a non-historical scenario. If a game has a historical setting, I prefer it to be somewhat historical; victory conditions are the means by which to equilibrate (haven't used that word since Chemistry 103, 35 years ago!) the opportunities for each side to win.

At the same time, of course, I see nothing wrong with providing such a scenario to those who would find it entertaining.

(in reply to crsutton)
Post #: 15
RE: What is fun? - 1/13/2013 11:27:24 PM   
Empire101


Posts: 1962
Joined: 5/20/2008
From: Coruscant
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gary Childress
What makes a game interesting? Does being on the edge of your seat with every turn, not knowing what the overall outcome of the game will be more fun or is playing out the historical sequence of the war more fun? Does fantasy ruin it for the game?


The long-term knowledge that I'm doing better than historical Japanese performance is satisfying. To see how the Japanese war effort could have been improved if only they focused on.... is also very intellectually satisfying.

Of course, the 3.5 year march towards the endgame is more interesting when sprinkled liberally with frantic and heady action. As other posters have stated-a good carrier battle, major air engagement or naval action gets my blood pumping and is a real shot-in-the-arm to gameplay.


quote:

ORIGINAL: nashvillen

I like the long term planning and watching those plans come to fruition. Of course, part of the excitement is when those plans make a hard left hand turn and you have to figure out how to get them back on track.

Running the Japanese economy is a challenge in itself. I have, on more than one occasion, told my opponents that if they would just leave me alone, the game would be enough challenge, just to keep the economy going! Great fun! I enjoy this so much that I took on a 1/3 game as the allies doing all the US logistics, with some minor roles (NOPAC, CENTPAC, China, and USSR). Keeping the beans and bullets moving is fun for me.

Don't get me wrong, having a major carrier engagement in June of 1942 and watching the KB sink four US carriers without batting an eye is also great fun, but I do like the more mundane side of things, also!


quote:

ORIGINAL: John 3rd

Echo these sentiments about the underdog in particular. ALWAYS like to play the South as well in Civil War games. Guess we're just gluttons for punishment!


+1

I agree wholeheartedly with CB, Nasvillen and John 3rd on this one.
Just running the economy is a challenge in itself.

The logistical side can be very rewarding, getting units, ships, planes supplies etc in the right place at the right time, if at times a little time consuming

And then of course there are the inevitable jabs to the head, the right hooks and even the occasional haymakers that my opponent throws at me, that can completely bugger up my best laid plans!!

< Message edited by Empire101 -- 1/14/2013 11:38:18 PM >


_____________________________

Our lives may be more boring than those who lived in apocalyptic times,
but being bored is greatly preferable to being prematurely dead because of some ideological fantasy.
- Michael Burleigh


(in reply to Chickenboy)
Post #: 16
RE: What is fun? - 1/14/2013 1:35:23 AM   
Mike Solli


Posts: 14156
Joined: 10/18/2000
From: the flight deck of the Zuikaku
Status: offline
I love the challenge of playing the Japanese. They're doomed, but doing better than they did historically is the goal for me.

I love to tinker with the production system to make it as efficient as I can.

Surprising my long time opponent where he least expects it is always enjoyable. I particularly love when he sends me an email describing how he swore at the computer while watching the replay.

I've made many very good friends here, and I've never seen or met any of them (yet).

Finally, sinking the Boise!

_____________________________


Created by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Empire101)
Post #: 17
RE: What is fun? - 1/14/2013 2:54:08 AM   
bradfordkay

 

Posts: 8252
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: AW1Steve

I perfer "The Grand poo-bah of all allied forces!"


So did MacArthur...


One aspect I haven't seen mentioned here is that I enjoy watching the replay - it as if I am the CinC watching all the reports coming in and am trying to make sense of what's happening...

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to AW1Steve)
Post #: 18
RE: What is fun? - 1/14/2013 5:55:00 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2187
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Northern Virginia
Status: offline
Bill Mauldin's works of Willie and Joe. As an infantry officer I kept a complete copy of his works on my desk and would copy an approriate cartoon out when farewelling soldiers NCOs and junior officers.

Used the one Csutton for my driver when he departed given all the trouble we had with my HMMWV.....

And I am with Nashvillen on this one. Love the long range planning mixed with the excitement of short term operations that evolve from that planning in a historical context.

quote:

ORIGINAL: ilovestrategy

Oh Crsutton, nice avatar by the way. Thats from a popular comic made in WW2 designed to show the war from the common soldier's point of view isn't it? The artwork looks familiar but the name of the comic and artist escapes me.



_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to ilovestrategy)
Post #: 19
RE: What is fun? - 1/14/2013 6:22:41 AM   
ilovestrategy


Posts: 3629
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline
Thanks Den!

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to denisonh)
Post #: 20
RE: What is fun? - 1/14/2013 7:41:13 PM   
Icedawg


Posts: 1582
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: Upstate New York
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Solli

I love the challenge of playing the Japanese. They're doomed, but doing better than they did historically is the goal for me.

I love to tinker with the production system to make it as efficient as I can.

Surprising my long time opponent where he least expects it is always enjoyable. I particularly love when he sends me an email describing how he swore at the computer while watching the replay.

I've made many very good friends here, and I've never seen or met any of them (yet).

Finally, sinking the Boise!


Sinking the Boise? Is that possible? I'd put that right up there with finding a sasquatch or the Holy Grail.

(in reply to Mike Solli)
Post #: 21
RE: What is fun? - 1/15/2013 1:39:15 AM   
DivePac88


Posts: 3123
Joined: 10/9/2008
From: Somewhere in the South Pacific.
Status: offline
As to what WitP is, a game or a simulation; well for me I think that it is both, in that it is a game of simulation of the operation level of warfare of the World War Two Allied/Japanese theater. But thats just for me, and for anyone-else as with other beliefs in life, it can ether a game or a simulation doesn't really matter.

I remember when I started with the original WitP, and I was learning how to play it. The more I got into it the game, the more I would find. It really has so many layers to it, learn the mechanics of one layer, and you find another layer underneath. It just the sort of game that hits you over the head, and then it’s too late and you’re addicted for life.

I’ve had a few health problems in the last five years, and spent many months in hospital. For some of that time I was unable to play this wonderful game, and I sort of thought of it as been exiled. Because I wasn’t allowed to play it, I learned the data-base inside out . Because the editor just looked like a word to the medical staff and Mrs DivePac program and fooled them.

As to why I play this game, well I think it’s maybe for me like this; I once asked my Chinese toaster, who is very wise, the vexing question on ‘what is the meaning life’. The toaster after some thought answered that the meaning of life ‘is in the living of it’. So I think that for me the reason I play this game is in the enjoyment I get from each and every turn, even the bad ones.

As to why I like this game; well for me it seems slightly real in the inputs and results you get. That it is an honest game in that if you make a mistake, or scrimp on preparation you pay for it, especially in Pbem. Then that brings me to the real clincher, WitP is probably the best operational Pbem wargame around, as nothing else come close at present in my humble opinion.

< Message edited by DivePac88 -- 1/15/2013 1:41:46 AM >


_____________________________


When you see the Southern Cross, For the first time
You understand now, Why you came this way

(in reply to Gary Childress)
Post #: 22
RE: What is fun? - 1/15/2013 2:07:31 AM   
denisonh


Posts: 2187
Joined: 12/21/2001
From: Northern Virginia
Status: offline
Well said
quote:

ORIGINAL: DivePac88

As to what WitP is, a game or a simulation; well for me I think that it is both, in that it is a game of simulation of the operation level of warfare of the World War Two Allied/Japanese theater. But thats just for me, and for anyone-else as with other beliefs in life, it can ether a game or a simulation doesn't really matter.

I remember when I started with the original WitP, and I was learning how to play it. The more I got into it the game, the more I would find. It really has so many layers to it, learn the mechanics of one layer, and you find another layer underneath. It just the sort of game that hits you over the head, and then it’s too late and you’re addicted for life.

I’ve had a few health problems in the last five years, and spent many months in hospital. For some of that time I was unable to play this wonderful game, and I sort of thought of it as been exiled. Because I wasn’t allowed to play it, I learned the data-base inside out . Because the editor just looked like a word to the medical staff and Mrs DivePac program and fooled them.

As to why I play this game, well I think it’s maybe for me like this; I once asked my Chinese toaster, who is very wise, the vexing question on ‘what is the meaning life’. The toaster after some thought answered that the meaning of life ‘is in the living of it’. So I think that for me the reason I play this game is in the enjoyment I get from each and every turn, even the bad ones.

As to why I like this game; well for me it seems slightly real in the inputs and results you get. That it is an honest game in that if you make a mistake, or scrimp on preparation you pay for it, especially in Pbem. Then that brings me to the real clincher, WitP is probably the best operational Pbem wargame around, as nothing else come close at present in my humble opinion.



_____________________________


"Life is tough, it's even tougher when you're stupid" -SGT John M. Stryker, USMC

(in reply to DivePac88)
Post #: 23
RE: What is fun? - 1/15/2013 4:07:41 AM   
Tone


Posts: 161
Joined: 9/2/2009
From: Around The Sun
Status: offline
Very good Divepac88 I bow to you, for you are indeed very wise.

_____________________________

Both the victor
and the vanquished are
but drops of dew,
but bolts of lightning -
thus should we view the world.
Ôuchi Yoshitaka
1507-1551

(in reply to DivePac88)
Post #: 24
RE: What is fun? - 1/15/2013 4:31:43 AM   
Kull


Posts: 1066
Joined: 7/3/2007
From: El Paso, TX
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: denisonh

Bill Mauldin's works of Willie and Joe. As an infantry officer I kept a complete copy of his works on my desk and would copy an approriate cartoon out when farewelling soldiers NCOs and junior officers.

Used the one Csutton for my driver when he departed given all the trouble we had with my HMMWV.....


I've got a little cabin in High Rolls, a tiny village in the hills of SE New Mexico - Bill Mauldin grew up there and is still celebrated as their most famous boy-done-good. Like Den, I'd always enjoyed his work and was tickled to learn of the connection. Spend any time there at all, and it's pretty obvious where his Willy & Joe sensibilities comes from.

< Message edited by Kull -- 1/15/2013 7:56:45 AM >


_____________________________

AE-Japan Setup

AE-Allied Setup

Japan Air-Engine Plan

(in reply to denisonh)
Post #: 25
RE: What is fun? - 1/15/2013 6:41:25 AM   
sanch

 

Posts: 307
Joined: 10/30/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: denisonh

Bill Mauldin's works of Willie and Joe. As an infantry officer I kept a complete copy of his works on my desk and would copy an approriate cartoon out when farewelling soldiers NCOs and junior officers.

...


A little OT, but for a while in high school, I thought I was going to be a cartoonist. I actually developed a character, and got it to show emotions and move and such. And while doing so, my reference works were Willie and Joe.

(in reply to denisonh)
Post #: 26
RE: What is fun? - 1/15/2013 9:15:40 PM   
aphrochine


Posts: 187
Joined: 3/24/2008
From: Phoenix, AZ
Status: offline
It's hard to label WitP as a "fun" game. By all definitions, I think what we think of traditionally as "fun" definitely does not constitute what we (me) experience when we play. I think Joy or Satisfaction would much better labels for the experience. I get great joy from concerting an amphibious operations, and great satisfaction as well. I get satisfaction from wrapping my head around all the ins and outs of the rules and the game engine, which translates into joy when I get to parade my CVTF around the pacific looking for trouble.

I dont think "Fun" is, or ever will be the right word for WITP. If someone else touched on this above, my apologies, I didn't read through the thread before posting

_____________________________

VMF-422 fanboy
Grog Virgin fanboy

(in reply to sanch)
Post #: 27
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> What is fun? Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.118