RE: RE:

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: RE:

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] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> RE: RE:

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: RE: - 5/24/2008 3:47:25 AM

Sheytan

Posts: 863
Joined: 11/28/2006
Status: offline

How long was WITP in development? Im curious since one comment here asserted it was vaporware

(in reply to Feinder)

Post #: 31

RE: RE: - 5/24/2008 3:54:42 AM

Feinder

Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline

Obviously best for WitP Dev to answer that. But I think it was about 2 - 3 years. I remember hearing about it about 18 months before it came out. I heard "every friggin' SC and DE in the Pacific will be represented, and thought, "They've got to be insane.. But I've got to buy it to see just how insane they really are...!"

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

(in reply to Sheytan)

Post #: 32

RE: RE: - 5/24/2008 4:01:12 AM

Sheytan

Posts: 863
Joined: 11/28/2006
Status: offline

Even with the omissions of various units as have been pointed out in other threads its a remarkable piece of work. 2-3 years constitutes vaporware? rofl...apparently that poster had a bad rash that day, likely on his posterior.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Feinder

Obviously best for WitP Dev to answer that.� But I think it was about 2 - 3 years.� I remember hearing about it about 18 months before it came out.� I heard "every friggin' SC and DE in the Pacific will be represented, and thought, "They've got to be insane..� But I've got to buy it to see just how insane they really are...!"

-F-

(in reply to Feinder)

Post #: 33

RE: RE: - 5/24/2008 4:13:56 AM

Feinder

Posts: 6589
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Land o' Lakes, FL
Status: offline

You also have to figure that Gary Grigsby was originally the lead on the project (in name at least). And leant a great deal of credability it. I had the free copy of PacWar on my box and piddled with it occasionally, and was playing WW2O at the time. Somebody from my squadron mentioned that PacWar was being re-written and punted me in the direction of UV. Not to take anything from UV (an excellent game), but I always got the feeling that UV was "lets see if we prove the engine works, and then blow it up on a big scale..." So when I say 2 - 3 years, I am including the time for UV in that. Basically, they rolled out UV, and about a year(?) later, they rolled out WitP.

-F-

_____________________________

"It is obvious that you have greatly over-estimated my regard for your opinion." - Me

(in reply to Sheytan)

Post #: 34

RE: RE: - 5/24/2008 9:24:23 AM

bradfordkay

Posts: 8683
Joined: 3/24/2002
From: Olympia, WA
Status: offline

I thought that it was two years between them. We had UV in 2002, didn't we?

_____________________________

fair winds,
Brad

(in reply to Feinder)

Post #: 35

RE: RE: - 5/24/2008 10:42:51 PM

Yamato hugger

Posts: 5475
Joined: 10/5/2004
Status: offline

Truth be told, there is a lot about PacWar that is superior to WitP.

No, really.

HQ and who controls a base actually mean something in PacWar. HQs are little more than a bunch of support squads in this game. Which HQ controls a base means nothing in this game other than for restricted HQs.

Sig Int means something in PacWar. You get so many points to spend based on randoms and time of year, and YOU chose how you spend them points (ie what targets you want more info on).

The 2 biggest killers of PacWar are the weekly turns and the "hiway system" that ships move on. IMHO anyways.

(in reply to bradfordkay)

Post #: 36