|
Neilster -> RE: Best WWII Grand Stratigy Game (8/5/2008 7:40:11 PM)
|
quote:
I've no game at all to play in that category. It's so sad really. I still cry out for ASL some nights [sm=sign0063.gif]. If only Matrix would finally rescue me from that by finishing Lock'n Load and other WWII Tactical Games...
On the original note it will be interesting to see how many people actually buy MWiF... I get this awful feeling like only those who have knowledge of the board game will buy it. Though I've owned hundreds if not a thousand board games.. I never owned or played that one... My loss I'm sure but I wonder how much harder it will be to learn it... to risk money on it... and to spend the $100+ people are talking about.
I can completely understand though. Having played ASL I'd pay $250 easily for a faithful PC conversion. But try getting the non-initiated to even consider that...
No, I think its going to have to be $70-$80 at an extreme to have any chance. But who knows.. I guess if its really perfect upon release they could garner $99 out of me.. I still don't see $100+ though, unless it was some sort of collectors edition with a cloth map and what not [:D]
From my selfish perspective I can think of all kinds of things it should have (learning tutorials to teach at least 50% of the rules and not just bare bones basics, strategy guide to give newbies some clue how to proceed, toggles to turn off ridiculously mundane and monatenous micromanagement tasks to make the game play faster, etc.) but given how extremely complicated the game is in the first place I'll drop all requirements and just ask for a mostly bug-free Vista-capable game that I can actually play before this time next year. [:D]
I'm not privy to inside info re price (if there even is any yet) but more than $100 sounds unlikely.
About learning MWiF...
1. There will be extensive tutorials, designed to help newbies into MWiF. Some already exist so if you're keen you can start now. Extensive strategy guides for the boardgame exist and will basically be relevant but I'm sure strategy guides will be included.
2. It'll be easier to learn than the boardgame. So much stuff will be done for you that you'll be able to concentrate on the core mechanics (which will be pretty familiar to most wargamers anyway).
3. Apart from the automated rule checking and book-keeping, much of the complication is confined to the end of turns and is stepped through sequentially and logically. Again, the CPU will do most of the work here.
4. I learned board World in Flames by myself and it was only my second wargame. Now, it took some effort but I'm no genius, so with your experience I wouldn't worry at all. Most of the game is taken up with phases (a wave of Axis, then Allied movement) of grand operational manoeuvring that, due to the sheer scale of the game, has a strangely "tactical" feel.
For the above reasons and since it's such a faithful conversion of a tried and true and award-winning boardgame, I don't think there's much risk. I've never seen such attention to detail in game development. Playtesting should be extensive, as it has been occurring on the working components for many months, with Steve gradually fixing bugs and fleshing out the game.
There will be automatic settings to reduce micro-management and because of the mostly corps-level/air-fleet/capital ship (or flotilla of smaller vessels) scale, the number of potential units to move is not ludicrously high.
I don't want to break this page so hit this link for a bit of an example of this...hopefully [;)]
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=915054&mpage=43&key=#
Cheers, Neilster
|
|
|
|
