PDA

View Full Version : Great job! My suggestions.



Kurita
22nd Feb 2007, 20:55
Hi Guys,

I want to say thank you for a great game. I am having a blast. You have done an amazing job in so many ways.

Here are my gripes. Probably most of them have been covered already:

- the english speaking voice actors come accross very poorly. well below the overall standard of the game. next time, hire professionals. the japanese and dutch voice actors (I have not heard the english ones yet) are fine.
- the way the single player missions end is very unsatisfying. I have seen this in a 'professional' review so i am sure you know what i mean by this
- the 'view' compass at the top was done backwards. north should stay fixed and the 'field of view' should move based on where you are viewing. i can't imagine who designed it the other way.
- the whole business of flying airplanes is lame. there is very little good to be said about the whole thing, except for that the planes have interesting (though generally completely inaccurate) liveries. i am sure this was put in by some marketing person, but, well, you know what i mean.
- what do you call a cruiser without torpedoes? a battleship.
- when viewing through binoculars there should be a lubber line indicating where your vessel is heading.
- multiplayer i have not yet tried.
- where do i download some large jpgs of the nice pinup girl from the back of the manual?

I understand the economics of this game means that this game is more "action" and less "sim." while not what some of us would have liked, heck, it's much better than getting no game at all. it's great fun steering a 4-stack destroyer--heck, just looking at it is great. i sure hope there will be a japanese campaign and expansion into the later war and other theaters in the future. while early war pacific is my favorite, the basic engine is so good that really any combat involving metal ships and/or rotating guns would be suitable.




thank you again for a great game.

joesmaname
23rd Feb 2007, 05:05
Good post, though I disagree with some of your opinions.

I thought all voice acting was at least good.
I like being able to control the aircraft and would gripe if I couldn't.
I like the compass as is.
I agree the single player ending sounds weak but this is based on what I've heard and read - I haven't finished yet!

I think you'll like multiplayer I've spent most of my time with the game playing it, it's a hoot and yup them pinup girls would make a great addition to my game room walls.

I easily could have written your wrap-up comments:

"it's great fun steering a 4-stack destroyer--heck, just looking at it is great. i sure hope there will be a Japanese campaign and expansion into the later war and other theaters in the future. while early war pacific is my favorite, the basic engine is so good that really any combat involving metal ships and/or rotating guns would be suitable."So true.

Congratulations to the Eidos developers - You've made a fantastic game, one I'll be coming back to for years.
That said, here's my wish list!:
- Option for Bigger Maps!
- More accurate damage effects on ships, with 2% health they often can still manage max speed.
- A scenario editor.

Those are my Big 3.
Please do release a Japanese campaign (I felt one should have been included with the base game so you better throw in a mission builder!). Mid and Late war campaigns would be welcome if they were for both sides and include more scenarios (if no builder is coming)
HOWEVER - I will not be interested in buying a Japanese campaign, a separate Allied mid war campaign, a separate Japanese mid war campaign, a separate Allied late war campaign....

Cypher666
23rd Feb 2007, 18:17
Yeah, a scenario editor would be good and a random mission generator, or being able to play the multiplayer maps in SP against the ai. Its still pretty good but the dogfighting is really difficult, if your fighting fighters. And submarines are too slow and can't outmanuvore destroyers, and their artillery is bog-standard. And the story is WAY too short.

Still, i still like it.

Cypher666
24th Feb 2007, 13:21
Another thing that would be good is whilst playing the SP map thing is changeable weather and time, so like to have a sea battle in a storm instead of the normal "the suns out for this battle, how convienient"

Rheinpfeil
24th Feb 2007, 13:44
Well I think controlling the planes is not bad at all. It's just a must to use at least a good gamepad to control them. While mouse/keyboard is great for naval units, it is a really bad combination - especially for fighters.

I would've liked much better multiplayer options, since this game is obviously built up around multiplayer gaming:
- Password option when you create a server
- Being able to kick players (never seen a host being able to do that)
- Definatly a better ingame browser, which also greys out servers with different game version (demo, patched, etc.)
- More customization for multiplayer maps. Decide which ships and planes you want to have in the slots, based on a point and cost system. And maybe even the possibility to set your own starting point for your ships - in a limited radius of course.

Other general things I would have liked to see:
- A unit database, where you can view the units and their data in all their beauty
- A skirmish mode, where you can setup quick battles
- Map or at least scenario editor for existing maps would be great
- Different camera controls for the ships, so that you can have a more scenic view on them when there is less action
- Of course a japanese campaign :(


Despite from these things, I definatly enjoy multiplayer at the moment. Gaming is great and the different players add quite some fun to it. In general, this game has also a good community. Those of you who play World of Warcraft should know what I mean...

About the damage thing:
In general, I would agree. But judging from the overall game design, this is somekind of naval first-person shooter. In these games your character is also able to run fast and jump like a basketball star even though he is almost dead.

Cypher666
24th Feb 2007, 14:11
I've been kicked before, for no aparent reason most of the time. :mad2:

joesmaname
24th Feb 2007, 15:07
I read earlier that you kick a player from the main multiplayer game start screen. I believe the host just highlights the player to be booted and presses the delete key. Not sure if that’s the way but it can be done. Good comment with the Naval FPS statement, that is pretty accurate and I guess its part of the attraction. With all the other calls on reduced realism vs. playability, I like the choice made. The speed thing just bugs me. So perhaps a config screen for realism settings is the answer.

Some more great ideas you made:
- A unit database, where you can view the units and their data in all their beauty (And maybe a history blurb)
- Different camera controls for the ships, so that you can have a more scenic view on them when there is less action (Yes – at least the ability to turn off the game UI controls, for screen capture proposes - or does this exist?)

joesmaname
4th Mar 2007, 04:58
...
HOWEVER - I will not be interested in buying a Japanese campaign, a separate Allied mid war campaign, a separate Japanese mid war campaign, a separate Allied late war campaign....

With my above statement in mind you can guess my feelings when I read this article (http://kotaku.com/gaming/360/new-battlestations-content-tomorrow-240332.php)
a small snippet of which I've quoted below:

"How much will two maps and five vehicles set you back? 600 MS points, or roughly $7.50, for far less content than many other publishers hand out for free"

The most offensive aspect of this marketing strategy is; it doesn't lend it's self to any kind of scenario editor. What a shame that would be as this game has great potential for broad user supported/produced add on content - the type of value added, shelf life prolonging material, that only hundreds of unpaid dedicated users can provide.

Drawde
4th Mar 2007, 09:52
Some more great ideas you made:
- A unit database, where you can view the units and their data in all their beauty (And maybe a history blurb)


There is actually a unit database in the game (at least in the PC version). Though you can only view information on ships, aircraft and weapons which you've "unlocked" (i.e played or encountered in a mission)



The most offensive aspect of this marketing strategy is; it doesn't lend it's self to any kind of scenario editor. What a shame that would be as this game has great potential for broad user supported/produced add on content - the type of value added, shelf life prolonging material, that only hundreds of unpaid dedicated users can provide.


I agree entirely, when I first played the BS:M campaign I thought how much potential it had for user-created missions. The way things are going at the minute I'm inclined to sell my copy and wait for Pacific Storm:Allies (I'd buy the original Pacific Storm if it were available here in the UK).

joesmaname
4th Mar 2007, 18:59
...
I'd buy the original Pacific Storm if it were available here in the UK
I had this thought as well but first visited their web boards - after seeing the bug issues they have I decided to hold off for a bit... From what I saw it makes BS:M look positively solid. :)

P.S. If you really want Pacific Storm I'm sure you can get it used from eBay or Amazon.

XLR
5th Mar 2007, 19:15
well i got this game on friday and been playing it all weekend, i just wish it had a skirmish mode or some way to play against the AI without doing the campaign, which i finished in my second day, but was fun

Online is fun too, when you can get a group of people that dont leave half way threw the game, or you can even find a room

MudMarine
14th Mar 2007, 22:49
When one sees the name Midway in a title of a game of naval warfare, what picture comes to mind. For me Carrier action not ship to ship surface action. I know the game has carriers and land base air but they are toned down as to their dominace and capabilities. The game favors surface action of BB,CA,CL,DD and PT Boats.

BattleStations: Pacific/ Surface Action would have been a better name that would have described the game not Midway.

As a surface action FPS, the game is great. Needs as said, senario and map editor, Japanese campaign and quick and custom battle modes. Larger maps and search and range capabilities for land base and carrier aircraft base on fuel limits simular to what has been set for oxygen for the subs but set to type aircraft. That Zero had the best range of all in 41 and 42.

Sonar screen for escorts and subs.
The ability to turn off Japanese Radar and give them only a visual mode. The Japanese had no radar in the begining, and mid war. They did not have the capability tell 1944.

Also on ships ability to have turn off radar. This was not a major ability for ships until late 42 and 43.

If there is a BattleStations:Midway2 please let it be based more for the carrier enthusiast in a historical setting. Lets face one fact, the Pacific Theater was mainly a Carrier, Naval Air and Submarine War. The ship drivers had to take up a supporting role after 43. The major ship to ship surface action was in the South Pacific arround Gaudacanel. The name Iron Bottom Sound ring any bells or the Slot.

After 1942 the only surface action battle that toook place was at Lettye Gulf. This was the deathnel of the IJN surface fleet.

Reaves
15th Mar 2007, 03:01
Wow, you certainly repeat yourself with that comment about BS:M only being surface action. ****

I disagree.