Just found this--
http://www.wargamer.com/article/2917/ba ... d-acadmemy
From this short description, I want this even more! In my opinion, a great, glowing preview. Cannot wait to get my hands on this.
Preview a wargamer.com
Moderators: Slitherine Core, BA Moderators
It shows that the reviewer has no clue what he is talking about.... just look at the word "solid", if you never played it you can't make any type of comparision (comparison misspelled) at all. I think anyone that has heard of Panzer General knows that we are talking apples and oranges... So when someone says something that stupid how can you believe anything else in his review.. Why not compare this game to Call of Duty while we are at it..Tpek wrote:Why does that statement worry you?Obsolete wrote:That reviewer worries me. I also am surprised he didn't throw in A.S.L. into the mix.I never played much Panzer General so I can’t really make a solid comparision with it.
here is another telling statement, and I quote:
"Comparisons immediately come to mind: Steel Panthers, the granddaddy of them all."
tell me honestly did anyone think of Steel Panthers when looking at this?
I never played Steel Panthers so I can’t really make a solid comparision with ittell me honestly did anyone think of Steel Panthers when looking at this?
but looking at screenshots it looks comparable to BBC BA? In terms of scale anyway.Panzer General looks like a whole different ballgame though, so agree with you it's a bit strange to bring that up.
-
junk2drive
- BA Moderator
- Posts: 1478
- Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 4:47 pm
- Location: Arizona USA -7GMT
-
MrsWargamer
- 1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
- Posts: 822
- Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 3:17 pm
- Location: Canada
The preview isn't too bad guys.
Just thought I should also mention, I am a veteran player of Steel Panthers (I've done beta work on one of the Mega Campaigns too).
I am also a long time veteran ASL player as well as a fan of Panzer General.
I didn't quite like his use of the term 'cartoon' though as that is misleading.
The graphics in this game are rendered in 3d as opposed to the view you get from Steel Panthers which is what some of us term 2d look down ie you see what you see from a vertical perspective. This is the same perspective used in ASL by the way which is why ASL is able to be thought of as a source for Steel Panthers even though in truth Close Combat and Combat Mission were the two games the ASL experience was supposed to become on the PC.
Panzer General really only has one connection with BBC Battlefield Academy and that is they are both fun games.
The scale of action is not the same. Panzer General is an upper end tactical experience that generally remains theatre specific.
BBC Battlefield Academy remains done at the same scope of action you get with ASL or Steel Panthers.
A tank icon is a tank. And buildings are actual buildings. The woods symbol is a tree, not an icon for a woods hex.
I think they are very fine graphics myself and not 'cartoonish' as is implied. It was a poor choice of terms.
Will this game appeal to everyone? Well it will a great deal more than War in the Pacific of War in the East will.
Those two titles will only appeal to the ENTIRELY detail obsessed crowd that place obsessively levels of microscopic detail as paramount over anything, including a fun experience. Then again, everyone defines fun in their own way.
If you like ASL or Steel Panthers, you will like this title. If you like Panzer General you will like this title.
I suspect this title will have a lot of fans that will bitch about something, but in the end, they will still be playing it.
Hey look at Close Combat and Combat Mission. Both of those games have annoying aspects to them (I know, I've read about them). But they are also considered the greats among greats too.
The mark of a great game, is when you can lose a battle and laugh at how you got owned, and then start it up again, and declare, try doing that to me a second time.
And be able to play it in a sitting, not mired in month after month drudgery never really ever finishing a game, because it just drags on and on and you lose interest and just decide to start a fresh never gets finished attempt.
During the play test, I have enjoyed finishing battle after battle, and what is nice, is they don't always happen the same way twice.
You lose some you win some. And that's vs the AI even.
Just thought I should also mention, I am a veteran player of Steel Panthers (I've done beta work on one of the Mega Campaigns too).
I am also a long time veteran ASL player as well as a fan of Panzer General.
I didn't quite like his use of the term 'cartoon' though as that is misleading.
The graphics in this game are rendered in 3d as opposed to the view you get from Steel Panthers which is what some of us term 2d look down ie you see what you see from a vertical perspective. This is the same perspective used in ASL by the way which is why ASL is able to be thought of as a source for Steel Panthers even though in truth Close Combat and Combat Mission were the two games the ASL experience was supposed to become on the PC.
Panzer General really only has one connection with BBC Battlefield Academy and that is they are both fun games.
The scale of action is not the same. Panzer General is an upper end tactical experience that generally remains theatre specific.
BBC Battlefield Academy remains done at the same scope of action you get with ASL or Steel Panthers.
A tank icon is a tank. And buildings are actual buildings. The woods symbol is a tree, not an icon for a woods hex.
I think they are very fine graphics myself and not 'cartoonish' as is implied. It was a poor choice of terms.
Will this game appeal to everyone? Well it will a great deal more than War in the Pacific of War in the East will.
Those two titles will only appeal to the ENTIRELY detail obsessed crowd that place obsessively levels of microscopic detail as paramount over anything, including a fun experience. Then again, everyone defines fun in their own way.
If you like ASL or Steel Panthers, you will like this title. If you like Panzer General you will like this title.
I suspect this title will have a lot of fans that will bitch about something, but in the end, they will still be playing it.
Hey look at Close Combat and Combat Mission. Both of those games have annoying aspects to them (I know, I've read about them). But they are also considered the greats among greats too.
The mark of a great game, is when you can lose a battle and laugh at how you got owned, and then start it up again, and declare, try doing that to me a second time.
And be able to play it in a sitting, not mired in month after month drudgery never really ever finishing a game, because it just drags on and on and you lose interest and just decide to start a fresh never gets finished attempt.
During the play test, I have enjoyed finishing battle after battle, and what is nice, is they don't always happen the same way twice.
You lose some you win some. And that's vs the AI even.
I too play the steel panthers series and the mega campaigns, along with panzer general and am really looking forward to this.
I can see the concern with the reference to panzer general, in particular that they are obviously at a different scale, although I do believe, as the previous post infers, that the reviewer was referring to the fun aspect.
Cartoon is an unfortunate term of phrase, however, the briefings are certainly "cartoony" in that they are in the style of a cartoon/comic strip, I hasten to add, thats not a problem for me.
Reading the previous post, I only encourages me that this is shaping up to be a great game.
I can see the concern with the reference to panzer general, in particular that they are obviously at a different scale, although I do believe, as the previous post infers, that the reviewer was referring to the fun aspect.
Cartoon is an unfortunate term of phrase, however, the briefings are certainly "cartoony" in that they are in the style of a cartoon/comic strip, I hasten to add, thats not a problem for me.
Reading the previous post, I only encourages me that this is shaping up to be a great game.
Found this.
http://www.wargamer.com/forums/tm.aspx? ... 17&mpage=1
further discussion from the guy who previewed it with some additional information and screenshots.
http://www.wargamer.com/forums/tm.aspx? ... 17&mpage=1
further discussion from the guy who previewed it with some additional information and screenshots.
I honestly got to disagree, graphics are indeed 'cartoonish'. I am not implying they are bad or inferior in any way, and cartoonish doesn't mean 3D. The game's graphics just look more like a cartoon or cartoon game than other games with the same theme. Whether it is the scale&proportions of the units, the colour scheme, or even the briefings done in comics.
And saying that since he, the reviewer, should not use the term 'solid', is quite nitpicking.
I believe you are making too big a deal out of your disagreement with the review.
What is important is that the reviewer liked the game, and you seem to like it as well. And the game will, very hopefully, get released next week and we can all sit along and enjoy playing it.
And then you can really trade bullets and shells with the reviewer
And saying that since he, the reviewer, should not use the term 'solid', is quite nitpicking.
I believe you are making too big a deal out of your disagreement with the review.
What is important is that the reviewer liked the game, and you seem to like it as well. And the game will, very hopefully, get released next week and we can all sit along and enjoy playing it.
And then you can really trade bullets and shells with the reviewer
-
MrsWargamer
- 1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
- Posts: 822
- Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 3:17 pm
- Location: Canada
I would disagree with the word 'solid' just on principle.
Solid, it's one of those words you should be given a smack over the head for if you were writing for a real editor.
It's the sort of term that empty headed movie reviewers employ. And frankly I would think the reviewer, a known regular at Wargamer should have known better than to use.
Solid, it makes me think of the craps my son leaves in the toilet making it difficult to flush
I don't want a wargame that is 'solid'.
I want a wargame that 'has a future'. Why can't reviewers actually write like they understand the point of language?
Solid, it's one of those words you should be given a smack over the head for if you were writing for a real editor.
It's the sort of term that empty headed movie reviewers employ. And frankly I would think the reviewer, a known regular at Wargamer should have known better than to use.
Solid, it makes me think of the craps my son leaves in the toilet making it difficult to flush
I don't want a wargame that is 'solid'.
I want a wargame that 'has a future'. Why can't reviewers actually write like they understand the point of language?
-
MrsWargamer
- 1st Lieutenant - 15 cm sFH 18
- Posts: 822
- Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2008 3:17 pm
- Location: Canada
Cartoon is a term with negative connotations and baggage.
It implies less serious. A casual disregard for accuracy.
I think he could have stated 'the art has a visual style that was engaging'.
Cartoon = kids = not likely to interest an adult = wrong impression.
I own a Nintendo DS, trust me, I know the power of clumsy when it comes to marketing. The Nintendo DS isn't just a kids toy, but that is the market perception.
Graphics CAN be highly detailed and they can be stylized and not hyper detailed.
I've seen mods offered for Steel Panthers fanatics that go so far as to ensure the camo routine on a vehicle is specific to vehicle and time and theatre, when in other games, it's just an image that looks like a generic panzer.
I've seen a lot of wargames also go waaaaaay out of their way with awesome video cut scenes to attempt to over play the game's in game graphics, and then all you get is lame graphics.
The between game graphics of BBC Battlefield Academy are artwork stills. There are in game artwork stills in messages. But the games actual game graphics, deserve better than the term 'cartoon'.
They're animated 3d graphics on par with anything I have seen out there. Just as good as my son's MMO games for instance.
It implies less serious. A casual disregard for accuracy.
I think he could have stated 'the art has a visual style that was engaging'.
Cartoon = kids = not likely to interest an adult = wrong impression.
I own a Nintendo DS, trust me, I know the power of clumsy when it comes to marketing. The Nintendo DS isn't just a kids toy, but that is the market perception.
Graphics CAN be highly detailed and they can be stylized and not hyper detailed.
I've seen mods offered for Steel Panthers fanatics that go so far as to ensure the camo routine on a vehicle is specific to vehicle and time and theatre, when in other games, it's just an image that looks like a generic panzer.
I've seen a lot of wargames also go waaaaaay out of their way with awesome video cut scenes to attempt to over play the game's in game graphics, and then all you get is lame graphics.
The between game graphics of BBC Battlefield Academy are artwork stills. There are in game artwork stills in messages. But the games actual game graphics, deserve better than the term 'cartoon'.
They're animated 3d graphics on par with anything I have seen out there. Just as good as my son's MMO games for instance.
Just the isometric viewpoint, not really refering to the gameplay as such, as SaW was individual soldiers as you quite rightly point out which you equiped as required. Much like the tactical side of Xcom.Tpek wrote:How so?
I still have that game on CD, and from what I remember it is a tactical squad game with infantry only.
Ooops
this is sounding bit like a really bad comparison, something along the lines of which we may have had already. If memory serves, you could enter the tanks. Yes, I`ve still got it also in the old style "big box" packaging.
-
Igorputski
- Staff Sergeant - Kavallerie
- Posts: 300
- Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 1:08 pm
