Balor said:
Burn.
The previews of HoI3's map is gorgeous so this argument against 3d is double plus moot. And besides, EU3's map can be gorgeous too with mods. Even without, it looks and runs fine.
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Burn.
The previews of HoI3's map is gorgeous so this argument against 3d is double plus moot. And besides, EU3's map can be gorgeous too with mods. Even without, it looks and runs fine.
Moltke said:
Are those the previews of the geographic map mode that no one ever uses when they actually play the game?
The argument against 3d is never moot, because it's an issue larger than just HoI3. People blindly worship 3d when it has no inherent superiority to 2d at all. Anything that helps open their eyes to the truth is worthwhile.
3d has its place. For certain applications, its characteristics are desirable. But 2d also has its place, because it's characteristics are preferable for certain applications - yet thanks to mindless trend-following, 2d is disappearing. Some people are getting sick of it.
It doesn't surprise me in the least that those people bring up 3d in a thread about what they don't want in a new game.
Von Paulous said:
Wait ... you mean, there are people out there, real people, who don't play zoomed out like that?
I fail to see what's "gorgeous" about that screenshot... The colors are ugly, the units are too small and do not contrast effectively with the background. The design is mediocre at best.
Definitely not something to get excited about.
Definitely not something to get excited about.
The one thing I really don't want is the infantry-only tactics of HoI2. You can not use airpower or navy for the whole game and you would still do decent. Combined arms, please!
Define 'simplified'. There are quite a few things they could do to make the game both simpler and better-ability to deploy multiple units at once, ability to chose provinces off of a map during peace negotiations.SirGrotius said:
Would that be simplifying the game?
I assume it would be like getting rid of trade, resources, leaders, ministers, etc. without very suitable replacementssbr said:
Some quick response:
1. The espionage / counterespionage bit needs some serious rework. It is not interesting or rewarding enough as it is.
2. In an open game like HOI, precoded deathdates makes little sense to me. Generals should die/become pow from surrendering, accidents and actual fighting. Not just because a bunch of them died in RL in 45 (Stalin and his purges is an exception - as long as you get the choice).
3. The trade system also needs a rethinking. It borders on repetitious micromanagement today.
4. I rely would like to see something else then the HOI2 Civ-style tech tree. Maybe we could choose between an starter level and an experienced level in the start menu?
5. I would like to see the possibility for the larger nations to research more then five technologies at any given time.
6. The inability to direct bombers is frustrating. There should be one more option in the order-box for tac/cas/str, targeting a specified single province. It could be unlocked by tech and doctrines.
Maybe you could target an area by researching basic radio/communication and some doctrines. Then you could get the possibility to target a single province with advanced radio/communication and blitzkrieg doctrines and some air doctrines for tac/cas. Only air doctrines for str.
Or something like that...
1. The espionage / counterespionage bit needs some serious rework. It is not interesting or rewarding enough as it is.
2. In an open game like HOI, precoded deathdates makes little sense to me. Generals should die/become pow from surrendering, accidents and actual fighting. Not just because a bunch of them died in RL in 45 (Stalin and his purges is an exception - as long as you get the choice).
3. The trade system also needs a rethinking. It borders on repetitious micromanagement today.
4. I rely would like to see something else then the HOI2 Civ-style tech tree. Maybe we could choose between an starter level and an experienced level in the start menu?
5. I would like to see the possibility for the larger nations to research more then five technologies at any given time.
6. The inability to direct bombers is frustrating. There should be one more option in the order-box for tac/cas/str, targeting a specified single province. It could be unlocked by tech and doctrines.
Maybe you could target an area by researching basic radio/communication and some doctrines. Then you could get the possibility to target a single province with advanced radio/communication and blitzkrieg doctrines and some air doctrines for tac/cas. Only air doctrines for str.
Or something like that...
I zoom in and change into terrain mapmode for wars. It's much clearer that way because marching soldiers provide more information about movement than static flags and the weather is actually visible.Akjosch said:Wait ... you mean, there are people out there, real people, who don't play zoomed out like that?
For HoI3 I don't want unneccessary 'bling' that slows down the computer. And I don't mean 3D graphics but just simplyfying the engine to do minimal number of operations while keeping AI smart and the game realistic.
Maciek
Kirth Gersen said:
I think with the fact that they already have the EU3 engine, refined through Rome and various expansions, it would give a lot more time to concentrate on gameplay if they didn't need to think of doing a 2D option.
Besides, if you get a free moving camera, you can use a top-down view to get pretty much 2D.
cheers
Yes while we're on the 2d question, what about going back to Black and White, it would surely save system resources for strategic meat rather than wasting them on eye - candy.
Why stop there? Plain text all the way! HoI3 as an excel file!Rich Oliver said:Yes while we're on the 2d question, what about going back to Black and White, it would surely save system resources for strategic meat rather than wasting them on eye - candy.
Seriously, though, this 2d discussion is really annoying. Move over, people! System requirements for EUIII are not that high, they're higher than HoI2, that's for sure, but time passes and things evolve. And, as for the prettiness of 2d vs 3d, you can always install a graphic mod.
hito1 said:
We know HOI3 will be based on something like the EU3 engine.
So it's going to be 3d.
The Perfect Grand Strategy Game might well work fine without 3d graphics, but that's never been what Paradox has been about.
I think Paradox is well aware of that fact that most of their customers prefer quality gameplay over quality graphics. Yes Paradox will take the time to make sure their game looks good (the initial sceenshots look great to me). Knowing them, though, I'm sure they will never sacrifice gameplay for graphics. I'm also sure they won't dumb down or over simplify the game so that it appeals more to a mass market. Paradox has proven their loyalty to the grand strategy genre.
Aircraft that travel in snaky routes, we want aircraft that stravel in straight lines for a change!
Well, I do anyway.
Well, I do anyway.
One very simple thing we DONT want for HoI3 - a slap in the face to the series, much like Rome was. Please dont screw up HoI in any fashion - its a kick ass series
And I dont want a time limit at all. Put an option in there to turn it off. I also dont want to have to deploy 80 ships, one at a time. Its needless. I dont want my planes to be idiotic and wander around an entire area when I need them in a specific territory. I dont want Flak to be useless, and I especially dont want Coastal fortifications to leave naval attackers undamaged.
And I dont want a time limit at all. Put an option in there to turn it off. I also dont want to have to deploy 80 ships, one at a time. Its needless. I dont want my planes to be idiotic and wander around an entire area when I need them in a specific territory. I dont want Flak to be useless, and I especially dont want Coastal fortifications to leave naval attackers undamaged.
Kruniac said:
This isnt Civilization. :rofl:
The Atlantikwall wasn't damaging aircraft carriers who sailed through the channel.
UniversalWolf said:
That last part is quite telling: everyone else has been brainwashed and lied to about the superiority of that evil Depth! but you sir are a paragon of truth who is fighting the conspiracy against 2D gaming!
Whats next, are you going to post about how NASA really didn't make it to the moon? JFK was shot by the FBI? Elvis is still alive and kicking? Batboy is running for president?
Nobody worships 3D. You cannot point to one example of it here, so don't embarass yourself by trying. Instead, we get people like you who favor graphics over gameplay: I want 2D graphics in my game, no matter the cost and time in development that it might cost them! Who cares if the AI doesn't improve, I want my game to look like its the late 90's! That was the pinnacle of gaming perfection! Any kind of change is bad, because I don't like it!
3D is in. Period. It would cost lots of time and money to impliment a 2D system. Therefor, if you want or demand the game to be in or have 2D graphics, you are putting graphics ahead of gameplay.
Funny how hypocritical that is of you.
Back on subject: I would like to see an improved replacement system myself. Replenishing planes and tanks should cost many more ICs than infantry divisions, and if those units are not rested for a length of time it should be much lower rates of replenishment.