|
berto -> RE: Napoleon's Campaigns (10/22/2007 9:26:21 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Pocus
Immersion... a so evasive concept [:D]
We never wanted to add a tactical engine into our games. This detract from the other focus, which is acting at the strategical and operationnal level. This also mean for the dev team to pour a good amount of resources to make even an average tac engine, so less AI coding time and less sophisticated map, OOBs, events and chrome rules. No, we prefer to focus on one thing and do it right! [:'(]
Here are four things to increase the battle immersiveness, and give the player more emotional payoff for his many hours/minutes of advance, pre-battle planning and maneuvering:
--Show total forces engaged as actual head counts, not just the casualties. And give a casualy breakdown. (For example: "Union 68,419 engaged, 1,288 killed, 5,492 wounded, 992 captured, 573 missing, 8,345 total casualties. Confederate ...")
--Play a greater variety of battle sounds, especially the cries (more than just the same old, same old "Charrrrrge!" or "Retreat!").
--Leave the player in suspense a while longer. That is, play the battle sounds, and delay displaying the battle results, for 30 seconds to a minute (varies by the size of the battle), not just after 2-10 seconds.
--And most importantly: Give a textual running commentary on the battle, with a second or two between comments. (For example: "General Jackson's forces attack... Union 2nd corps panic and route... King's division arrives as reinforcements... Fierce hand-to-hand combat in the center... Gibbon's brigade mauled...") Make this moddable, so that your user community can add variety and spice up the in-battle comments to their heart's content. (That is, make an endlessly expandable database of battle comments, with hooks to the underlying statistics.)
Without going tactical/graphical (which I agree is besides the point in a game like this), how really hard would the above be to add (for all your games, not just AACW)?
|
|
|
|
