Page 1 of 1

Best game ever? What else should I try?

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 5:01 am
by JeanBoule
Hi there FireFighters,
Long time no contribution from me. I have been nudged by a TV show. I was watching "Futurama" the other night and it had a little tribute to some electronic games of the past. Do you remember the early Atari tank games and Asteroids? Asteroids had a tiny little spacecraft represented by a triangle with an even tinier set of pulsing triangles that were the rocket exhaust. The asteroids were just irreguler polygons which, when hit, broke up into a cluster of little twigs. This brought to me with a rush what is so good about Firefight. It has a meaningful amount of detail and NO MORE!!

In contrast, one of the first PC games I ever bought was an Asteroids knockoff, in which someone showed their mastery of graphics programming by having asteroids with craters on them, shading, shadows, rivets on the spacecraft etc. The problem was that to show all this detail, all the objects had to be a lot larger in relation to the playing area than in the original arcade game. This increased the level of difficulty to make the game almost unplayable, especially for slow guys like me.

I have been doing a bit of reseach on other games to play, and have seen Close Combat described favourably on a few sites. I have seen a few screen shots and . . . it seems to have that simiar problem of excessive detail, consequently objects are way out of scale. Opponents on the Russian steppe look like they are 20 metres apart when they should be 500 metres apart, if not more.

It appears that FF is about the best game I have ever played so far. What else should I try?

Re: Best game ever? What else should I try?

Posted: Mon Nov 19, 2007 7:47 am
by Andy Brown
JeanBoule wrote: I have been doing a bit of reseach on other games to play, and have seen Close Combat described favourably on a few sites.
The various Close Combat games would be OK if their tactical engines were ripped out and replaced by Firefight. Firefight has been called "Close Combat lite" but, in many ways, it's what Close Combat should have been.

The turn-based Steel Panthers is probably still the most comprehensive WW2 tactical sim in that it's possible to recreate just about any WW2 combat using any kind of nationality, equipment and personnel type.

Combat Mission, of course, is simultaneous resolution 3D. It was seen as the future of serious tac gaming when it came out. However, not everyone likes the 3D approach or finds it more realistic than CC/Firefight's top down viewpoint. I never really got into it myself.

There are newer games with better graphics but they each have their own drawbacks (too arcady, poor weapons/armour modelling, whatever). I just keep hoping Sean will improve FF some more (bigger maps, more realistic terrain, scenario editor etc).



Pour les Belges, y en a plus

Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 8:49 am
by T2K
Sudden Strike (circa 2003?) is a game that reminds me a bit of Firefight.

It is a top down view game with indivual men, tanks and guns. Graphics are better in terms of houses, craters, fences, tanks, etc. But overall playability and especially realism is worse.

Each unit has a certain sighting distance, which is pretty short. So, you end up creeping around trying to spot enemy units, then calling artillery down on them (which is deadly accurate and nearly instantaneous).

This game has a much more realistic feel. Top marks.

Anyone tried Theatre of War?

Posted: Tue Nov 20, 2007 2:32 pm
by JeanBoule
Thanks Andy B and T2k.

I take it you mean by 3D that the players viewpoint is from on the ground looking at the landscape.

I have seen screenshots and reviews of Theatre of War. It has that type of view, and from what I understand of programming, that pretty much means you cannot have very many playing fields (is that the right term?) because the program has to be able to generate many different views. FF seems to be able to have a lot of different terrains or maps. ToW does look wonderful it must be said.

Limited maps means players seem to be playing much the same missions all the time in ToW.

The reviews said the ToW infantry AI was poor. Troops seem to often do silly things unless the player micromanages individual soldiers. I definitely do not want to do that.

Arty support is there but the player cannot control when or where it fires.

Enemy seems to crush with human waves in ToW.

On top of all that, the demo version seemed a huge download. So I havn't tried it myself.

Posted: Wed Nov 21, 2007 8:02 am
by Andy Brown

Sorry. I've been playing tactical computer wargames for so long that it never occurred to me someone might not know what Combat Mission is.

Go here

Click downloads and try out any one of the three CM demos.

Like I said. A bit dated now but Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord was quite impressive when it came out in 1999(?).

Andy (NZ)

Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 5:57 am
by T2K
Andy - Did you ever play Sudden Strike? Did you impression sync with mine (great graphics, poor realism)?

Posted: Thu Nov 22, 2007 6:52 am
by Andy Brown

Afraid not. IIRC, I read a number of opinions similar to yours when it came out and decided to pass.

Wasn't Sudden Strike also the game that turned a bit sci fi after a few missions?

Andy (NZ)

Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 6:07 am
by T2K
No, it was all WWII.

Maybe you are thinking of Castle Wolfenstein? :)

Posted: Fri Nov 23, 2007 9:08 am
by Andy Brown
No. I realise I got Sudden Strike confused with Silent Storm.


Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 2:37 am
by StateRoute170
dude,try close combat,and if you can handle turn based strategy,WinSPWW2,SPWAW,WinSPMBT you can download for free.
Or try S.W.I.N.E.,a great free rtswith a ww2 feel,dont get wrong though,the way the rabbits and pigs speak is ~cuss word~ annoyin that you better turn off the volume when playin the game(sorry,im from LA)
so you wont die of annoience(sorry if i spelled it wrong).