ha, well once again, i'll disagree, what do you think battlefield, medal of honor and all these games are trying to do, theyre riding the border line of sim and game and as a result they ARE successful, if battlefield removed its realistic aspects, it would remove half its fans and same goes if it removed the arcade like... isnt this the point ur making? and if so, isnt that saying ur trying to incorporate players from more than one market?

Wow, thanks guys. I was kind of worried my huge post would scare everyone away, but thanks for taking your time to give great answers!

A few more points I want to make:

The game is intended as an online/mp game. Right now, we're working on a smaller "sandbox" version, which will basically be a large demo of what we have in planning. Our real goal is to eventually turn this into an MMO (I know, don't laugh, lol), but only after we've expanded our team and acquired all the needed software/resources. We know we CAN do it, it's just a matter or being able to build an adequate team and finance development.

That being said, the final retail version wouldn't have things like AI infantry. However, there will most likely be AI machinegun nests, anti-tank guns, supply convoys, and probably ships.

We also plan to have a limited supply system. It's going to be broken down like real militaries, with a high command structure and the whole nine (run by players). Combat units will have a limited number of men and equipment. The point of the game will be an eventual domination of the map, via capturing cities, key positions, chokepoints, etc. Ok, well I don't want to reveal too much of the surprise, lol.

Basically, it's going to start fairly small. We'll do all we can, and just continue to patch in new content and features once things get rolling.

I agree though, we don't want to be 100% in either direction (sim or arcade). That narrows down the market a lot. However, I'd like to stay a step on the "simmy" side of things. Arcade-style gamers will go ahead and learn to play if the game isn't ridiculously difficult. Simmers, however, won't take anything "arcadish" seriously, and would be immediately turned off. I'm the same way.

I want to keep the equipment performance (i.e., tanks, guns, etc) as close to 100% accurate as possible. However, we don't want to expose players to all the true boredom of combat. Soldiers often sat around smoking cigarettes for hours, days, weeks, before they ever saw a fight. We have to cut those dull moments out and create an action packed war. But that's easy enough. Players can just "hop" to the area the battles are going on, jump in, and fight. They don't have to sit around and play cards in the barracks!

i wouldnt give the ability to jump to combat, instead i'd use transports... i remember how it felt in gta when i wass trying to drive to somewhere before the fight was over, it was hectic, plsu think about other soldiers that would be racing to the area.. you'd encounter battles befoe u reached your destination, anyways, goodluck with this..

-dark

dont wanna distract the post by arguing about marketing issues. pick whatever users you want to reach as your customers. neither battlefield nor medal of honor are even near to anything a simulation is. and both have to release a game a year so they dont lose their players.

this sounds to me like flashpoint or the new arma2.
both games are unplayable imo.
there is no necessary connection between realism and complexity.

cheers

Yeah, I counter the "sims don't sell" idea with the fact that there's never been an attempt to make one (WWII), especially like we plan to make. The only WWII sims are flight sims. Never been one for infantry and armor.

One thing I definitely see a need for compromise on is shipping and naval combat, IF we ever decided to integrate it. Who wants to spend two weeks chugging around the ocean/sea to find an enemy vessel? Lol, that's what really used to happen. So something would have to be done to get players in action. With aircraft, you will have to takeoff, fly to target, and return to base (land). The Germans airfields weren't far from those of the Allies in this theatre anyway.

But I find that people who enjoy flight sims like, just that, a flight *sim*. Arcade flight games have never been very successful. Aviation is just one of those all or nothing things. You either love it, or wouldn't be caught dead in a plane. It's also a billion times more rewarding to fly a full mission, land safely, and add some kills to your chalkboard. I sometimes fly "instant action" missions on IL-2, but only offline. There's nothing like a mission on "Full Realism" against human pilots. I love taking a Dora (Fockewulf 190-D) after some B-17s like nothing else :), especially when I'm jumped by 100 P-51 Mustangs (<- gross exaggeration, more like 5-10, lol) and magically come out on top from working together with buddies using voice comms. I want to emulate, not necessarily IL-2 itself, but the fun you experience in that. Flight must wait though. Armor and infantry comes first, for there is no reason for ships and planes to exist with infantry. I've never coded anything remotely flight, but I'll be able to get some IL-2 flight model modders to help out.

I wanted to show a little bit of our artwork. These are some old pics, and all in the WIP stages. But take a look.

An extremely large hunk of Libya, made from space shuttle radar relief mapping. Accurate down to the pebble!



M-1 Carbine. Skin is just a slap on.



Gewehr-43 auto. Once again, skin just image slapped on to parts in MED.



Panzer IV-D:



Italian M-13/40 Light Tank:



That's just a couple things. And those are old. Hopefully I can post some new ones soon.