Pat Proctor
28 Sep 04, 20:54
Gents,
I would like to start by saying THANKS to everyone who participates in this forum. I know people say sappy stuff like this all the time, but I am being 100% honest when I say I would not make games if you guys were not out there, providing encouragement and ideas to make the system better.
Now on to the graphics and interface debate. I want to be absolutely clear that I value everyone's contributions to this discussion. I only intend to explain why I have done things the way I have, and what you can expect in the future.
Air Assault Task Force will be 100% compatible with all ATF Engine releases. This is very important because when someone says "Pat isn't going to do anything to fix ATF or RT", that just isn't true. In my eyes, Air Assault Task Force is what I am doing about ATF and RT. As soon as that game is done, you can install it over those games and they will be instantly upgraded to "fix" those problems that people have with the interface.
Graphics and Sound. A couple of points here.
I know that this game system will never compete with Command and Conquer: Generals in the "screen shots on the back of the box" competition, which is a large portion of the reason that the game isn't on store shelves.
Every graphical update that I include in the engine (code changes) is preceded by a deep consideration of how it improves game play. Questions I ask are "does it make it easier for the player to know what is going on?", "does it make the interface more intuitive", and "does it add some new dimension to the game". For example, vehicle sounds are implemented because they give you cues you did not have before. The first time you here enemy jets firing up and heading your direction, you will understand my thinking here.
Ever engine game is different. With each of these games, I have encouraged developers to create their own, distinctive look. The first title is behind us now, and we have learned from the experience. But there IS a lot of innovation in this title that might seem "granted" to some extent now. Animated mission briefings, campaign based scenario selection, and locked artillery units seem given now, but I think they have really expanded the game system.
What the Future Holds. I feel AATF has become the "Episode 1" of the wargaming world. It seems that AATF has become all things to all people. I want to let you know, specifically, what things this will add to the game system. These additions are ON TOP of the things in releases through War in Afghanistan, so go back and take a look at those press releases to see what things those engines add.
Full Screen. The game will leave a windows base and run full screen, like most other wargames in the market. This, in itself is pretty superficial, but there are a lot of underlying, pretty big changes here. All of the graphics compatibility issues will be resolved.
Interface. First, it is important to emphasize no features or content will be removed. All of the things you can now do in the ATF engine, you will still be able to do in AATF. But we are going to move from a function-based interface (select function and then select the units to give the function to) to a unit-based interface (select the unit and then select the functions you want it to have). This is inline with most other games in the genre.
Backwards compatibility. Install this game over other ATF Engine games, and they will instantly be updated to this newer, nicer interface.
Light forces and low- and mid-intensity conflict. This is a new game, with a new focus, and tons of new content. In many ways, the game will be a lot more relevant to the kind of warfare we are in for for at least the next couple of years.
I have listened to, and read, all of the posts in the past couple days, and have taken it all into consideration. I have not made any yes-or-no decisions on any of this stuff. But I will say that I am VERY adverse to the idea of "rolling back" any code changes that I have made. I am confident that, thus far, every upgrade to the engine has at least "moved the ball" a few inches forward. Some of these things might be "de-emphasized" or used less in scenario building, if there are strong feelings about them.
I would like to start by saying THANKS to everyone who participates in this forum. I know people say sappy stuff like this all the time, but I am being 100% honest when I say I would not make games if you guys were not out there, providing encouragement and ideas to make the system better.
Now on to the graphics and interface debate. I want to be absolutely clear that I value everyone's contributions to this discussion. I only intend to explain why I have done things the way I have, and what you can expect in the future.
Air Assault Task Force will be 100% compatible with all ATF Engine releases. This is very important because when someone says "Pat isn't going to do anything to fix ATF or RT", that just isn't true. In my eyes, Air Assault Task Force is what I am doing about ATF and RT. As soon as that game is done, you can install it over those games and they will be instantly upgraded to "fix" those problems that people have with the interface.
Graphics and Sound. A couple of points here.
I know that this game system will never compete with Command and Conquer: Generals in the "screen shots on the back of the box" competition, which is a large portion of the reason that the game isn't on store shelves.
Every graphical update that I include in the engine (code changes) is preceded by a deep consideration of how it improves game play. Questions I ask are "does it make it easier for the player to know what is going on?", "does it make the interface more intuitive", and "does it add some new dimension to the game". For example, vehicle sounds are implemented because they give you cues you did not have before. The first time you here enemy jets firing up and heading your direction, you will understand my thinking here.
Ever engine game is different. With each of these games, I have encouraged developers to create their own, distinctive look. The first title is behind us now, and we have learned from the experience. But there IS a lot of innovation in this title that might seem "granted" to some extent now. Animated mission briefings, campaign based scenario selection, and locked artillery units seem given now, but I think they have really expanded the game system.
What the Future Holds. I feel AATF has become the "Episode 1" of the wargaming world. It seems that AATF has become all things to all people. I want to let you know, specifically, what things this will add to the game system. These additions are ON TOP of the things in releases through War in Afghanistan, so go back and take a look at those press releases to see what things those engines add.
Full Screen. The game will leave a windows base and run full screen, like most other wargames in the market. This, in itself is pretty superficial, but there are a lot of underlying, pretty big changes here. All of the graphics compatibility issues will be resolved.
Interface. First, it is important to emphasize no features or content will be removed. All of the things you can now do in the ATF engine, you will still be able to do in AATF. But we are going to move from a function-based interface (select function and then select the units to give the function to) to a unit-based interface (select the unit and then select the functions you want it to have). This is inline with most other games in the genre.
Backwards compatibility. Install this game over other ATF Engine games, and they will instantly be updated to this newer, nicer interface.
Light forces and low- and mid-intensity conflict. This is a new game, with a new focus, and tons of new content. In many ways, the game will be a lot more relevant to the kind of warfare we are in for for at least the next couple of years.
I have listened to, and read, all of the posts in the past couple days, and have taken it all into consideration. I have not made any yes-or-no decisions on any of this stuff. But I will say that I am VERY adverse to the idea of "rolling back" any code changes that I have made. I am confident that, thus far, every upgrade to the engine has at least "moved the ball" a few inches forward. Some of these things might be "de-emphasized" or used less in scenario building, if there are strong feelings about them.