 |
|
The differance between CMx1 and "CM"x2. - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Combat Mission (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=10) +--- Thread: The differance between CMx1 and "CM"x2. (/showthread.php?tid=41676) |
RE: The differance between CMx1 and "CM"x2. - The Coil - 08-06-2007 RedDevil Wrote:All part of that abstracted asymmetrical warfare model of the future.. Hehe...BF needs to find some other words to use besides 'abstraction'. Seems to be their canned response to just about any complaint/criticism... RE: The differance between CMx1 and "CM"x2. - Sgt Barker - 08-06-2007 "Abstraction" and "1:1" don't go together. The word they're looking for is "error." If the graphics are 1:1, and a bullet can pass through a solid object as if it's not there, then it's not an "abstraction" it's an "error" in the graphics. If it's not an error, then they are obviously not really 1:1 (a direct representation of what exists in the game context), they are an abstraction. Can't have it both ways. Anyway, an RT tank/team/squad level game is going to flop as a 'serious' wargame. It will devolve into who discovers the gamiest ways to give orders and who is fastest on the keyboard. Hardly what wargamers are after. Ironically WEGO *better* simulates a less than omnipotent commander, in that you're stuck with what you order for at least 60 seconds after you give the order. |
){kind=link}