what do people like more?

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

what do people like more?

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> what do people like more?

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

what do people like more? - 9/16/2000 7:12:00 AM

panzerfist

Posts: 60
Joined: 9/14/2000
From: fresno, ca
Status: offline

just out of curiousity, do you think gamers genrally like to play scenarios that are based on factual events? or do you think they like to play scenarios that are more what if? OR, is it do you think more people would rather create their own situations from scratch? just wondering thanks

_____________________________

Post #: 1

- 9/16/2000 7:24:00 AM

Wild Bill

Posts: 6821
Joined: 4/7/2000
From: Smyrna, Ga, 30080
Status: offline

A fascinating subject. I think most would know my preference, which leans strongly toward the historical. Reliving the tension of a gripping historical battle and catching the feel of that battle from the commander's point of view just can't be beat! Hypotheticals are good too, of course. What if the Japanese Home islands, Midway, or Malta had been invaded? What if Rommel had reached Alexandria, what if the US and Russia had locked horns at the Elbe? Or fighting had reached the avenues in front of the Kremlin? A WELL DONE historical scenario, playable and challenging, gets my vote. I do play and design the others, butnot that much....Wild Bill ------------------ In Arduis Fidelis Wild Bill Wilder Coordinator, Scenario Design Matrix Games

_____________________________

In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant

(in reply to panzerfist)

Post #: 2

- 9/16/2000 10:07:00 AM

Grisha

Posts: 355
Joined: 5/11/2000
From: Seattle
Status: offline

I'm with Wild Bill on this one. Replaying an historical scenario is always a learning experience for me. If it's a well done scenario it can impress on one the conditions and concerns that the actual commanders had long ago, giving new appreciations and insights.

_____________________________

Best regards,
Greg Guerrero

(in reply to panzerfist)

Post #: 3

- 9/16/2000 10:26:00 PM

Rickenbacker

Posts: 54
Joined: 7/3/2000
From: �rebro, Sweden
Status: offline

Yep, what WB said

. I definitely prefer historical scenarios, trying to see if you can do better than the real commanders is an added thrill, IMO. ------------------ Rickenbacker ------------ rickenbacker@innocent.com

_____________________________

Mats 'Rickenbacker' Nylund -------------------------- rickenbacker@innocent.com

(in reply to panzerfist)

Post #: 4

- 9/16/2000 10:46:00 PM

Nikademus

Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline

I like both, though in terms of originality and challenge the historical scenerios tend to be more meaty. In addition, though i acknowledge its *totally* illogical

there is always that sense of acomplishment that one feels when they take the reins of a battle that was actually fought to see if they can either do better, do the same or whatever vs what the historical commanders were able to do (yeah, like those commanders had our er....'unique' point of view of the battlefield?

) and i'm still taking that town in Russia. just wait!

_____________________________

(in reply to panzerfist)

Post #: 5

- 9/16/2000 11:48:00 PM

troopie

Posts: 996
Joined: 4/8/2000
From: Directly above the centre of the Earth.
Status: offline

Both. troopie ------------------ Pamwe Chete

_____________________________

Pamwe Chete

(in reply to panzerfist)

Post #: 6

- 9/17/2000 12:04:00 AM

fdlu

Posts: 36
Joined: 5/19/2000
From: germany
Status: offline

I especially like what if.... scenarios. Because they can use experimental equipment, add a lot of uncertainity. Allow some kind of alternate history ( I am a big SF/F fan) And because they are not often done, and with SPWaW they can be very well done. On a personal level i like shorter ones. But i like historical ones also. ( I am interested in history in general) Quite some very contraticting interests.

_____________________________

(in reply to panzerfist)

Post #: 7

- 9/17/2000 12:11:00 AM

Major_Johnson

Posts: 280
Joined: 6/29/2000
From: Beach Haven, NJ, USA
Status: offline

My vote is for the historical!! There is more than enough documentation to pull from. But the game should have both to suit all tastes. ------------------ MJ We serve others best when at the same time we serve ourselves.

_____________________________

M.J.!
We serve others best when at the same time we serve ourselves.

(in reply to panzerfist)

Post #: 8

- 9/17/2000 4:22:00 AM

nikb

Posts: 95
Joined: 4/15/2000
Status: offline

Well I like both, though I tend to play the historical ones first. The good historical scenarios are the ones that make you want to learn more about them. Actually, some of Wild Bills make me go an look up info prior to actually playing the scenario. Interesting as well as fun playing. Nik

_____________________________

Nik

(in reply to panzerfist)

Post #: 9

- 9/17/2000 4:23:00 AM

waynef

Posts: 128
Joined: 8/25/2000
From: plano, tx,usa
Status: offline

In SP2 I really enjoyed "what if" scenario's. I enjoyed putting different equipment from countries against each other. In SPW2W I enjoy the historical "events".

_____________________________

"At My Signal...Unleash Hell" Thanks, Wayne

(in reply to panzerfist)

Post #: 10

- 9/17/2000 6:12:00 AM

Fabs

Posts: 444
Joined: 6/5/2000
From: London, U.K.
Status: offline

I enjoy historical scenarios, but I also like a hybrid type of scenario where although units and places are fictional they try to portray the feel of engagements in the theatre in question. In other words, a fictional situation that could well have happened. The advantage of these scenarios is that they take less time to design, because the map can be made from fantasy taking into account ideas from pictures and accounts about real engagements, and you can invent the names of the units involved. The challenge is then to make it feel as real as possible. Having said this, nothing beats a well researched and well produced historical scenario. ------------------ Fabs [This message has been edited by Fabs (edited September 16, 2000).]

_____________________________

Fabs

(in reply to panzerfist)

Post #: 11

- 9/17/2000 11:34:00 AM

Kerg

Posts: 81
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: Joliet IL
Status: offline

I will take anything as long as it is well written.

_____________________________

Field Marshal Kerg, Combat Command Stats-> Games Played = 141, Points/game = 4179, <br />Average Placing = 3.4, W% = 28%, L% = 29%, D% = 44%, Total Points 589,232, Leagues Entered = 10, Top Three Finish % = 80

(in reply to panzerfist)

Post #: 12

- 9/17/2000 12:46:00 PM

Supervisor

Posts: 5166
Joined: 3/2/2004
Status: offline

My preference is for historical scenarios, but I do set up a lot of battles. My primary purpose in doing an historical scenario is to play out how the actual battle happened. When I design a scenario. I strive to get a computer vs computer to play out as the battle happened, then I tweak it to make it a better playing as human vs AI or for PBEM. By watching the computer play itself, it is like watching the writing of Paul Carell or Werner Haupt come to life ------------------ Grenadier SPWAW Beta Team

_____________________________

(in reply to panzerfist)

Post #: 13