RE: Status Report? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [American Civil War] >> John Tiller's Battleground Series



Message

Luciano B -> RE: Status Report? (2/13/2007 11:20:56 AM)

All games which allow large modding capabilities have a longer life than the locked ones; That's the reason why the Battleground games are still played. Lock down the games is never a good choice... and the best game companies know it very well ....but some others would like to sell the same product again and again adding few scenarios to the same engine selling it with a different title... but average players aren't stupid...

Lock down the games will bring to the death of such a kind of games.

...however, let's discuss about the Battleground games and Matrix, please...

I really hope that Matrix boys tell something more to their fans about their re-issue of the Battleground games, because this board starts to become a promotional site of the other companies:)

Luciano

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rich Walker

Many complain about how HPS locked the OOBs, etc... I submit to you that one reason BG games failed to produce more titles and upgrade the engine is because of the "valuable features" mentioned below.

HPS has continued to grow it's ACW library because it locked it OOBs and Maps. New engine upgrades are constantly being evaluated and implemented.

And several new titles are under developement.

I could be wrong, but I suspect that Matrix will be taking note of the BG experience and I for one will be surprised if the "new" releases will allow the same OOB freedom now experienced wth the old BG games.

How about it Matrix? Will the new releases allow for buyers to change key components?

Rich

quote:

ORIGINAL: Luciano B

...news???

One of the most interesting and valuable features of the old BG games is that they are completely liable to modification (editable oob's, addition of new maps, creation of new add-on battles) ...I hope that also the new version of the games will retain that feature.






Rich Walker -> RE: Status Report? (2/13/2007 5:36:27 PM)

Luciano,

You may be right, but my point wasn't that the games aren't being played by players that already own them, but rather the producing companies no longer produce due to the loss in profits.

But I look forward to seeing what ultimately comes from Matrix.

Rich



Luciano B -> RE: Status Report? (2/13/2007 8:03:20 PM)

Sorry if I seem a bit harsh Rich, but I really love these games, and I'm taking care of the future of the game community which grew up around them; it is a matter of love, and I'll be really disappointed if this discussion would be affected by matters of money.

"loss in profits" ...I really can't understand this statement.
I really think that a professional work like the one provided by a game company should be always better than the amateurish work of a modder who can spend only his free time for a game.
If a company is afraid of the work of the modders because they overshadow thier "official" work, I may have some great doubts about the actual value of the product they are selling.
I'm convinced that the quality of a product is the true key ot the succes of a game and so of the profits for the company, and that the modders are a great resource for a game and for a game community; modders will be a threat only if a company is going to sell an amateurish-level work and not a professional one.

I guess that a good modding community may provide a work which is complementary to the one made by the company who produces the game, since the modders bring up the interest of the players unitil the company goes out with another further game; the wonderful "hand-painted" maps of the original BG games worth the purchase of every further title of the serie, nothwistanding if one or more of the scnearios provided will be already covered by a custom add-on or a mod.

Luciano



lancerunolfsson -> RE: Status Report? (2/13/2007 8:48:53 PM)

Luciano
You are right, mods in my case certainly don't cut down on my chances of buying a game they increase it. In fact even though I have several mods of the BG games they are such a royal hassel to install that I would pay for the mods to be added by the the original developper in an easey install package. I will definately get the BG matrix eddition if for no other reason they should be patched up to the 32 bit mode out of the box(at least I hope.
In general robust editors and modability add, I belive to sales rather than detract.



Hertston -> RE: Status Report? (2/13/2007 8:58:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ashantai

As far as I can see, at the moment, the two big things separating the TS and HPS games is not graphics, sound or music, but the engine and the campaign.



Agreed on the superiority of the HPS games, as I've said before. I don't think there is any real competition, though. We know BG is going to be released as a compilation, not as seperate products. That will be very appealing to new players, and there are a lot of old ones who will just want to play some of their old favourites again. Major alterations just aren't part of the Matrix project - if they were going to sink resources into that I'd far rather see a whole new ACW and Napoleonic tactical system that might prove superior to the HPS games in all respects.



quote:

ORIGINAL: Rich Walker

I submit to you that one reason BG games failed to produce more titles and upgrade the engine is because of the "valuable features" mentioned below.


I think the series just ran its course, to be honest. In terms of numbers of games (particularly in a niche genre) they did pretty well out of the engine.


quote:

I could be wrong, but I suspect that Matrix will be taking note of the BG experience and I for one will be surprised if the "new" releases will allow the same OOB freedom now experienced wth the old BG games.


I suspect you are wrong. Firstly, there is no intention to release further games in the series. Second, from what we have heard, the changes being made are primarily just compatibility upgrades; they are very much re-releases rather than remakes. I can't see any reason to nerf modding.. quite the opposite, in fact.




bubbak -> RE: Status Report? (2/13/2007 10:59:38 PM)

I have 7 of the 9 titles
Ardennes
Gettysburg
Waterloo
Shiloh
Antietam
Bull Run
Prelude to Waterloo
I'm looking for a inexpensive copy of Chiclamauga.
Question are all of these titles going to be re-issued, if so what changes can I expect.
I have these loaded on a new laptop and they seem to run fine so far so why should I buy a new copy since they seem to run 32 bit. Not a Computer Geek, I mostly use a computer at home for my e-mail and these games.
I'm an old TSS player. My first Computer War Game was Gettysburg Turning Point by SSI OK Floopy Disk Commadore 64 any body remember those. The thing I liked about GTP was it was man for man combat result fire, the thing I did Like was this game took 3 days to play and you couldn't get anybody to fire every other turn because of battlefield smoke.



Ashantai -> RE: Status Report? (2/14/2007 1:18:08 AM)

I am interested though about the OOB locking - after all, not ALL HPS games block OOB editing. The WWII ones even include a OOB editor! I am tempted to ask how the editing of those files is different to the ones in the ACW and NW games.

I think the previous poster said it right when they said that a company's product will ALWAYS be superior to a modder, simply because of resources, time and research. So the unlocking of OOBs could in theory have a positive effect by giving people a taste of sothething, then the company could see this and provide a better version!

That's in theory, natch! [;)]



Rich Walker -> RE: Status Report? (2/14/2007 6:29:39 AM)

I hope you guys are right.

BTW, Luciano,

I've never doubted you love for the games.  In fact I admire your work.

I'm curious, do you own any HPS ACW games?  If so, which ones do you own?

Rich



Luciano B -> RE: Status Report? (2/14/2007 1:58:46 PM)

Thanks Rich. I own almost all of the early titles of the HPS Campaign series. Let me say that all are fine products, deeply researched whit great accuracy; probably the historical accuracy is the best thing in these games.

As I told before, it is not a matter of which serie is the "best one", the old BG or the new HPS, they are different things in my opinion, and it depends upon what a player is looking for in a game. Would be a great error to try to find what you have in the BG games in the HPS titles, because the two series follow different paths and have different goals.
If a gamer is looking for large manoeuvres on the battlefield and the chance to cover an entire campaign, the HPS titles fit in the best way the aspectations.

But if your are looking for something which gives you a full immersion in the atmosphere of a great battle, the old BG games are still the top. It happens for some reasons, the main is the graphics, in particular the wonderful "hand-painted" 3D view maps of the BG serie. The map is centered in the portion of the territory in which was actually fought the battle: for example, if you are fighting at Borodino, you are able to follow a different course for your battle, but you are still at Borodino, with the terrain features beautifully reproduced with great, unique graphics: the redoubt, the fletches, the ravines, every village rendered in a different way ...you feel there, at Borodino.

My personal opinion is that a good wargame experience is determined by the synthesis of different factors:
- historical accuracy
- playability
- atmosphere, it means beautiful graphics and other quality media contents

In my opinion the BG games still have the best ensemble of the factors mentioned above.

Luciano



Rich Walker -> RE: Status Report? (2/14/2007 5:45:50 PM)

No doubting the hand painted 3D maps are indeed beautiful, but I've alway had difficulty moving troops in 3D, so I almost always use 2D.  So for me, the 3D maps aren't that important.  And since the HPS games continue to implement engine upgrades that can't be duplicated in the BG series, I play HPS.  But I still own every BG game 1-9.



bubbak -> RE: Status Report? (2/14/2007 10:28:45 PM)

I use 3D Normal to make my movement, and 3D zoom to view what is happening when the computer is making it's move or combat, thats my FOW. The 3D maps give the game that mini feel where the 2D maps give it that board game or old computer game feel. The thing I like about BG is that it is not a campagin it's just the battle or a portion of the battle. I just bought a copy of FOF when I want a campagin I'll play that.
Where would you start a campagin of Gettysburg, me I would start it right after the battle of Chancellorville because that is when it started for the South.



Ashantai -> RE: Status Report? (2/15/2007 1:57:03 AM)

That's where the HPS game DOES start that Campaign.

I never used to move troops in 3D either. The graphics were pretty...but not THAT pretty, if it was more animated it would have been better.

I have all the BG games, glad I got them too.



rhondabrwn -> RE: Status Report? (2/15/2007 5:40:13 AM)

I use the 2D view for moving troops in column on the roadnet. When in contact with the enemy I use the 3D Zoom mode exclusively. I also tend to use the extreme 2D view in place of the Jump screen if I want to move quickly around the battlefield or to get the big picture. I use the 1,2,3,4 keyboard commands constantly to change views as needed.



1NWCG -> RE: Status Report? (2/18/2007 7:32:24 PM)

I use all 3D Mode for all my games.  Just like it alot. [:D]  Take a look at other modding communities for games like Total War and Battlefield, the modding community shot the interest in the games through the roof. [:)]  Not all components were locked in those games either and in fact Total War until the recent release was quite easy to build custom scenarios, games and such.



Bloodfeud -> RE: Any Idea........... (2/20/2007 11:48:28 PM)

Has there been ANY further word on when Matrix will reissue the Battleground Civil War games?



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.59375