PDA

View Full Version : Camera cannot rotate?



sdrga
15th Apr 2005, 01:57
Just loaded up the demo. Terrain looks fantastic. Tell me I'm just missing something: I can move the camera from side to side, but I cannot pivot on a point or rotate the camera angle? What am I missing?

sdrga
15th Apr 2005, 02:21
Never mind, I figured it out. Is there a guide somewhere for all the available hotkeys, etc? The only rotate I found was the arrow keys, would be nice if there was a way to do it with the mouse.

I'm guessing from reading posts that a lot of folks are here from the TW world. It would be shocking if they were not here. I'm trying things the way I'd do them in a TW game, I guess.

Berdan
15th Apr 2005, 02:25
here ya go, some aren't implemented in the demo

[ .LKEY_BATALLA_CHANGE_TACTICS KEY_T .MKEYS [ L_ALT ] ]

[ .LKEY_BATALLA_HOLD_POSITION KEY_H .MKEYS [ L_CTRL L_ALT ] ]
##[ .LKEY_BATALLA_DEFENSIVE_MODE KEY_O .MKEYS [ L_CTRL L_ALT ] ]
##[ .LKEY_BATALLA_AGGRESSIVE_MODE KEY_P .MKEYS [ L_CTRL L_ALT ] ]
[ .LKEY_BATALLA_TOGGLE_MODE KEY_F .MKEYS [ ] ]
[ .LKEY_BATALLA_TOGGLE_RUN KEY_R .MKEYS [ ] ]
[ .LKEY_BATALLA_ANCLAR KEY_B .MKEYS [ ] ]
[ .LKEY_BATALLA_COLUMN_FORM KEY_J .MKEYS [ ] ]
[ .LKEY_BATALLA_LINE_FORM KEY_L .MKEYS [ ] ]
[ .LKEY_BATALLA_SQUARE_FORM KEY_K .MKEYS [ ] ]

[ .LKEY_BATALLA_IAC_GROUP KEY_F1 .MKEYS [ ] ]
[ .LKEY_BATALLA_CIA_GROUP KEY_F2 .MKEYS [ ] ]
[ .LKEY_BATALLA_ACI_GROUP KEY_F3 .MKEYS [ ] ]
[ .LKEY_BATALLA_TGA_GROUP KEY_F4 .MKEYS [ ] ]
[ .LKEY_BATALLA_TGB_GROUP KEY_F5 .MKEYS [ ] ]
[ .LKEY_BATALLA_TGC_GROUP KEY_F6 .MKEYS [ ] ]

##[ .LKEY_BATALLA_ATTACK_DISTANCE KEY_Z .MKEYS [ ] ]
##[ .LKEY_BATALLA_ATTACK_HAND KEY_X .MKEYS [ ] ]
[ .LKEY_BATALLA_STOP KEY_BACK ]
##[ .LKEY_BATALLA_GO_TO KEY_G .MKEYS [ ] ]
[ .LKEY_BATALLA_GET_OUT KEY_D .MKEYS [ ] ]
##[ .LKEY_BATALLA_REINFORCEMENT KEY_R .MKEYS [ L_CTRL L_ALT ] ]
##[ .LKEY_BATALLA_RETREAT KEY_K .MKEYS [ L_CTRL L_ALT ] ]

sdrga
15th Apr 2005, 03:18
I just finished my first battle. Got my ass kicked. That's OK, I'm learning. This game looks like it has great potential. I've wanted this era in history to be represented for a long, long, time. I think it's fine that these guys have copied from Creative Assembly. I've been hoping that CA defined a new genre with the TW games, and if these developers pick it up from there and go with it, that's good for everyone. It's obvious that they've copied stuff, but it's also quite clear that they're putting their own spin on the concept.

It looks, at least as a new player, that they've managed to get a lot packed in to this so far. I think as I've been reading posts that maybe the developers have decided to implement PAUSE and some other stuff and that is why the game is delayed until May 19th. Am I correct? I was a little shocked that my troops seemed to have no problem with going across the creek or river in the easy battle. Is that by design or is it something that needs to be polished before going gold?

I guess I'm lucky in a way, because I didn't know about this game until about a month ago. I haven't had to wait and wait and wait. I know how that is: I did it massively for RTW.

Lt.Phoenix
16th Apr 2005, 04:08
I'm still not quite sure about this. Everyone is saying they want a pause button, yet, everytime I press space, like they say, It pauses, am I just missing something?

Joe 98
16th Apr 2005, 08:53
Yes, that the pause.

I suspect they want "pause and issue orders".

Wellington never had a "pause and issue orders" :)

mob
16th Apr 2005, 09:43
these noobs who want a pause and order will win every game and get bored of it in a weak
but there should be an online pause but everyones gota agree and no one can order units then

Arctic_Wolf
16th Apr 2005, 14:40
Wellington never had a "pause and issue orders" :)

Yes but Wellington never had a battle lasting 10 minuites or faced an enemy that could issue all its orders simultaniously. Having the ability to issue orders while the game is paused whould be quite and it would compensate for the time difference.

Though I would never suggest it be allowed during a multiplayer game, besdies at the very start of a battle, it would make it quite boring indeed.

sdrga
16th Apr 2005, 17:55
Yes but Wellington never had a battle lasting 10 minuites or faced an enemy that could issue all its orders simultaniously. Having the ability to issue orders while the game is paused whould be quite and it would compensate for the time difference.

Though I would never suggest it be allowed during a multiplayer game, besdies at the very start of a battle, it would make it quite boring indeed.

That is precisely the point Arctic_Wolf: it's a player preference issue, not a matter of one being better than the other. I believe in some cases, developers are shying away from "Active Pause" in SP games to compensate for weak AI. The fact is obvious: on a battlefield, not only are their multiple commanders, but there are people that commander can delegate things to. Can you imagine Waterloo and Napoleon having to be the one to issue orders to every single formation on the field while Wellington had a normal command structure? Think about it.

That being said, the people that mainly do MP do not relate to the need for a pause, because their whole gaming experience is based on quickness: hotkeys practiced dilligently, and game functions memorized for quick action. It's a mainly a younger man's style. I'm pushing 50 and I like to sit and think and make my moves. Nor do I have the time to pull together 5 or 6 buddies to play. The college guys can do that all day long. When you're older and have a mortgage to pay, you take your gaming in 45 minute or hour-long chunks. There's room for both kinds of players and developers would do well to take that into account.

Berdan
16th Apr 2005, 18:16
That is precisely the point Arctic_Wolf: it's a player preference issue, not a matter of one being better than the other. I believe in some cases, developers are shying away from "Active Pause" in SP games to compensate for weak AI. The fact is obvious: on a battlefield, not only are their multiple commanders, but there are people that commander can delegate things to. Can you imagine Waterloo and Napoleon having to be the one to issue orders to every single formation on the field while Wellington had a normal command structure? Think about it.

That being said, the people that mainly do MP do not relate to the need for a pause, because their whole gaming experience is based on quickness: hotkeys practiced dilligently, and game functions memorized for quick action. It's a mainly a younger man's style. I'm pushing 50 and I like to sit and think and make my moves. Nor do I have the time to pull together 5 or 6 buddies to play. The college guys can do that all day long. When you're older and have a mortgage to pay, you take your gaming in 45 minute or hour-long chunks. There's room for both kinds of players and developers would do well to take that into account.


well said sdrga, i agree. it is a challenging undertaking to design a game that appeals to a wide audience. in the end i feel it would be in the best interest of a devoloper to leave the game open ended for the player to customize it to his own liking.

sdrga
16th Apr 2005, 18:55
Thanks, Berdan. And thanks for the hot keys. If you've got any other handy inside info, I wouldn't mind getting it here or via PM. You seem to be one of the ones that's got a handle on things around here.

BANANAMAN
16th Apr 2005, 18:57
Yes, but are the developers (Pyrostudios) listening?? ... at all? :confused: :mad:

Lt.Phoenix
16th Apr 2005, 19:03
I don't know Banana, is the stuff you're saying worth listening to?

BANANAMAN
16th Apr 2005, 19:28
Lt., are you working for Pyrostudios? I hope so, if not.. then nobody is listening to our cries & woes. :(

See wishlist:

* hold/stand ground option
* pause & giving orders during pause option

That's all I'm asking (Pyrostudios) for. :D

sdrga
16th Apr 2005, 19:38
Lt., are you working for Pyrostudios? I hope so, if not.. then nobody is listening to our cries & woes. :(

See wishlist:

* hold/stand ground option
* pause & giving orders during pause option

That's all I'm asking (Pyrostudios) for. :D

We can agree on that. I'm guessing they're watching. That's the main reason developers put forums up. They just know that if they jump into the conversation, they're likely to get pulled in a lot of directions, some of which because of NDA's and other legal stuff, would get them in trouble. They know what they're going to fix and what not, and as hard as it is, and I know it is, they really have no obligation to keep us informed. They probably feel that the product will speak for itself, (or it won't)

jaywalker2309
16th Apr 2005, 22:42
We can agree on that. I'm guessing they're watching. That's the main reason developers put forums up. They just know that if they jump into the conversation, they're likely to get pulled in a lot of directions, some of which because of NDA's and other legal stuff, would get them in trouble. They know what they're going to fix and what not, and as hard as it is, and I know it is, they really have no obligation to keep us informed. They probably feel that the product will speak for itself, (or it won't)

We are definitely on the forums, reading all postings. You are right in saying we have to be careful what we say :)

BANANAMAN
17th Apr 2005, 00:51
If Eidos & Pyrostudios are listening then where is the official statement that they are fixing the problems mentioned by us about their demo? Because if the demo is no good then the full version is no good. Bringing on a new fixed demo is the best thing to do right now.

Lt.Phoenix
17th Apr 2005, 00:53
so you're saying you'd rather they waste their time making another demo than working on the game? :)

sdrga
17th Apr 2005, 21:09
PC gaming is a great hobby to teach you to be satisfied with what you have instead of constantly looking at the next greener pasture. Here's reality: a year ago, none of us had ever heard of Imperial Glory and couldn't have cared less about what this developer was doing. However, many of us were dying for every day longer we had to wait for the RTW demo, then it came out. It wasn't perfect. Great wailing and knashing of teeth. We all died as we waited for the game. Game was released. Great rejoicing. There couldn't possibly be a cloud in the sky forever. Uh oh: game wasn't perfect. Great wailing and knashing of teeth. Everyone demanded a patch. Great anger at world's imperfection, and especially the audacity of CA to release an imperfect game. The countdown for the patch started... HOSSANNA IN THE HIGHEST... the patch was released (the big one, not the first one). Oh, life will be wonderful now.... we will be in joy-land forever more. Hmmm... the patch it turns out (amazingly) did not make RTW perfect. Go visit www.totalwar.com and go to the RTW General discussion forum and read the complaints about no more patches. A year from now, RTW will be a fond memory. A year after that, so will Imperial Glory, no matter how good it becomes.

There is a lesson here:

Learn to take joy in inperfection, since that's all you'll ever see until the day you die: from yourself, from those you love, from the people you encounter, and finally, with virtually anything else you find in the universe, whether it be a thing, thought, feeling, person, or place.

That lesson came the hard way for me, and I still find myself re-learning it. I was right there in the middle of it last year with everyone else on the run-up to the RTW release.

Not understanding this principle is the basis for every addiction known to man.

Lt.Phoenix
17th Apr 2005, 21:30
three words. I agree completely.

jaywalker2309
17th Apr 2005, 22:03
PC gaming is a great hobby to teach you to be satisfied with what you have instead of constantly looking at the next greener pasture. Here's reality: a year ago, none of us had ever heard of Imperial Glory and couldn't have cared less about what this developer was doing. However, many of us were dying for every day longer we had to wait for the RTW demo, then it came out. It wasn't perfect. Great wailing and knashing of teeth. We all died as we waited for the game. Game was released. Great rejoicing. There couldn't possibly be a cloud in the sky forever. Uh oh: game wasn't perfect. Great wailing and knashing of teeth. Everyone demanded a patch. Great anger at world's imperfection, and especially the audacity of CA to release an imperfect game. The countdown for the patch started... HOSSANNA IN THE HIGHEST... the patch was released (the big one, not the first one). Oh, life will be wonderful now.... we will be in joy-land forever more. Hmmm... the patch it turns out (amazingly) did not make RTW perfect. Go visit www.totalwar.com and go to the RTW General discussion forum and read the complaints about no more patches. A year from now, RTW will be a fond memory. A year after that, so will Imperial Glory, no matter how good it becomes.

There is a lesson here:

Learn to take joy in inperfection, since that's all you'll ever see until the day you die: from yourself, from those you love, from the people you encounter, and finally, with virtually anything else you find in the universe, whether it be a thing, thought, feeling, person, or place.

That lesson came the hard way for me, and I still find myself re-learning it. I was right there in the middle of it last year with everyone else on the run-up to the RTW release.

Not understanding this principle is the basis for every addiction known to man.

So amazinginly true.. So many games have come out hailed as the 2nd coming of `insert holy name here` yet guarenteed on the forums, if you only believed what you read from the people on there, they are all severe disappointments.

For every game one person thinks is the greatest game, someone somewhere hates it in equal measures. I guess its actually that `balance` that keeps the industry going like it does.. imagine if 1 game came out that was `perfect` to all then ALL games companies would bring out games like that, and guess what, then every one would complain about no variety..

sdrga
18th Apr 2005, 00:28
So amazinginly true.. So many games have come out hailed as the 2nd coming of `insert holy name here` yet guarenteed on the forums, if you only believed what you read from the people on there, they are all severe disappointments.

..

Yeah, and I think the one thing that can start a gaming title or series into a decline is forgetting that you once defined your audience and agreed internally to stay loyal to that audience. In my opinion, CA was pressured by Activision to make their next TW title (after MTW) appeal to a broader audience. So they did. That would've been fine if they'd started out appealing to a younger (or more casual) demographic, but they didn't. STW and MTW typically appealed to those gamers who liked in-depth strategy first, but also liked the intensity of battle that had the taste of RTS. They also didn't go out of their way to appeal to the MP crowd. Not right or wrong, just a marketing focus.

The end result of trying to redefine their audience in midstream with RTW was they traded away a significant portion (not all, I'm still a diehard fan of all three titles, but I'm an exception to the rule), a significant portion of a loyal audience for a totally unknown quantity: X number of younger, more casual gamers. I think Activision forced their hand and that's why they in the end CA allowed Sega to acquire them. Now maybe they can rebuild that loyalty: time will tell.

Now, in my opinion, jaycw2309, and granted I'm just getting used to you guys at Pyro, you're making all the right moves. You looked out there at the strategy gaming universe and recognized that CA had blazed a trail, and saw what many of us saw: CA was creating a new genre, just as surely as the first C & C games created the RTS genre years ago. Many titles followed in C & C's footsteps (and even that franchise still has some legs) from many fine companies. Now, the younger gamers that wanted more action went the FPS route. Gamers that wanted more RPG went that way. Really pure historical strategy gamer went towards the Paradox titles (I’m a member of that demographic as well).

You guys look like the second company to recognize the synergy you get by the blended genre that CA defined. Who the hell cares if they call you a TW knockoff? That's what was said about Total Annihilation, Age of Empires, Dark Reign, Empire Earth etc: that they all copied Command & Conquer. Still, all of 'em have happy user bases and fat bank accounts. Everyone is happy and the gaming industry and long-time hobbyists such as myself have benefited greatly from the diversity of titles. If CA didn't think they were going to be copied, they were incredibly naive, and I doubt they were.

There was a kind of a mindset within the CA/TW community that the game series didn't lend itself to the gunpowder or later era, but I always questioned that, especially when you saw the quality the modders got out of the NTW mod, which I'd bet money was part of your inspiration for IG. Keep doing what you're doing. Watch what CA did to improve the in-game documentation for units and buildings in RTW: extremely important and adds a lot to a game. In that regard, I'm going to be sending you a PM on several issues, so watch for that. It may be tomorrow because I'm getting progressively more slammed today, because I'm enjoying myself with this thread: your industry fascinates me, if that's not blatantly obvious.

Finally: three pieces of free advice, hopefully more valuable than most free advice. :) :

ONE: Allow for an Active Pause in your SP during battle mode. It shouldn't cost you much programmatically (I'm a VB.NET & C# programmer professionally) Also, as hard as it may be, you'll gain some big kudos from the TW community if you can swing a SAVE during battles. CA could never pull that off, and maybe it's just too damn hard to serialize all the 3d action detail, but hell, you have to do it to record battles don't you? They managed that.

TWO: If you want to see the industry's best example of building an online community that's healthy and loyal, look no further than Trainz Railroad Simulator. http://forums.auran.com/TRS2004/forum/default.htm

THREE: If you want to see how a company keeps its eye on the ball and is super-loyal to its (admittedly niche) user-base, look no further than Paradox:

http://www.paradoxplaza.com/

I just checked, and their site is down just this minute, but that happens to them from time to time: Sweden: go figure; maybe their backbone's not up to snuff.

These are the most complex strategy games in existence, but, they know that's their base, and there's no pressure (probably because there's no big bean-counter distributor like Activision) to dumb down or widen the demographic. Their latest, Heart of Iron 2, a WW2 Grand Strategy game of monumental complexity, took me five days to read the manual, but to the legion of strategy/history guys out there like me, they'll sell every unit they produce.

The junior high crowd will almost unanimously hate these games, but Paradox couldn't care less, when they decided to put a toe in the FPS waters to capture that demographic, they were smart enough to re-brand:

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/valhallachronicles/news_2821785.html

OK, this post is long enough: I've gotta make some money. Look out for the PM, jaycw2309.