Magua
Posts: 112
Joined: 7/31/2005
From: Phoenix, AZ
Status: offline
|
Enough already with the "get used to it." That is a far too cavalier response considering the number of complaints concerning this issue, and the price of the game. In fact, if I told the consumers of the materials I publish that they'd "get used to it," my butt would be canned out the door so fast it would take the rest of me a week to catch up.
And it quite frankly blows me away that at least two members of the development team have admitted they didn't like it either, but "got used to it." In fact, it baffles me that so many involved in this project see so much wrong with this thing, and still defend it. This has the distinct sound of a pet idea ordered by the boss, and everyone else is afraid to call him on it.
The fact is, you don't "get used" to it. You accept it because you have no choice, and you use and hopefully enjoy the game inspite of it.
But forget aesthetics. Let's look at functionality. Referring to Bull's graphic, does someone want to tell me where the wall is in the map on the left? Ironically the same thing occurred in my Foucarville game. When I stated that my unit was behind the hedge, my novice friend asked "What hedge?" "This one here," I replied pointing with a pencil. "Jeez, you can hardly see it. That's a hedge?" It seems nutty to me to let design get in the way of function unless one feels that having the hexes jump off the map, neon-like enhances function. Maybe I should try putting training wheels on my mountain bike.
Ichi here points out another issue, that the dots and lines are now so wide as to create a rather less specific method for determining LOS than I believe was intended.
Both Ichi and Mark feel that the maps, without the halos look "plain-jane." So, the map graphics as they stand alone are plain-jane? Dull? Boring? That the halos make the difference between an otherwise "plain-jane" map, and a slick map? I'll bet your map artist is thrilled to hear this.
Now, if you aske me, the map on the right looks clean, almost photographic with the terrian icons easy to see and understand. While the map on the left looks cluttered and obscured by the hex-grid, and the terrain icons difficult and in some cases almost impossible to see.
Often, it is a collection of little things that leads to the failure of an idea or product. I doubt this single issue would prevent me from buying future games or additions, but this type of thing coupled with the flip responses from the developers that we've seen towards those consumers who have taken the time to provide well-meaning feedback is very disappointing.
I apologize for the tenor end length of this post., but I felt compelled to respond to several of the statements mad in this thread.
Now, I'll go over to one of the other threads and try to post something that everyone will like.
< Message edited by Magua -- 9/10/2005 9:53:03 PM >
|
Printable Version
Map Graphics - 
RE: Map Graphics - 
RE: Map Graphics - 
) i think they add a nice 3D feeling : You have the terrain and you have the grid, very separated, like if you add a grid on a photo on a headquarter table if you see what i mean (my english...). To me, it adds to the terrain realism effect. 
. Sincerely 
But this extra white outlines effectively hides nearly all of the wall! 
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