A review of Multiwinia has been posted at Out of Eight PC Game Reviews:
http://jaguarusf.blogspot.com/2008/09/m ... eview.html
Enjoy!
Out of Eight Review
Moderators: jelco, bert_the_turtle
I don't really see where you're coming from with this as the amount of control you have over troops is the same (if not more) than what you had in Darwinia. But anyway, 'twas a good review which addressed the shortcomings of the game and where it stood out well, an interesting readYou can tell that the control scheme of Multiwinia was designed for an Xbox controller
I do hope
Is addressed. Seems a strange decision to have made, hopefully will become clear why when I start playing
Tals
In another strange shortcoming, you cannot chat or say that you are ready in the game lobby; these features are enabled once you enter a game, but not being able to communicate with others in your server before the game begins is very weird
Is addressed. Seems a strange decision to have made, hopefully will become clear why when I start playing
Tals
-
The GoldFish
- level5
- Posts: 3961
- Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2002 9:01 pm
- Location: Bowl / South UK
- Contact:
Firstly, this IS a minor point, but I'm worried that if it goes around the block a few times it might inpsire some degree of animosity if it were to remain unchallenged.
The language in the review implies that standard RTS style controls is what should have been being expected in multiwinia, but because it was going to work with the xbox360 pad, the whole design was focussed on making that work, like it was the priority. I strongly disagree with that.
If for example, Darwinia had a similar viewport and control scheme to Multiwinia (it might, how could I possibly know for sure, you tell me), and yet it was designed without even imagining the 360 style pad, it might suggest that the predominance of the control scheme design was in fact, not designed for the 360 pad but had its roots in making sense with the eg, action/shooter style fast paced gameplay (which was prevalent in Darwinia) - where mostly you just move and shoot, a lot like cannon fodder. If cannon fodder behaved like an RTS, it would entirely betray the gameplay.
Now, Multiwinia sounds like it's much more a move towards a strategy game than Darwinia was, and I would expect the controls to evolve from what they were in Darwinia in order to account for that, moving more in the direction of supporting RTS gameplay (there were no shift click shortcuts in Darwinia, after all). I doubt however that they scrapped the whole ui/control element, switched conceptually to full RTS controls and then moved backwards to the 360 pad, which is what the statement really implies to me. It also, to me, implies that that's what they should have done and that it's a bad thing that they didn't, and it's because of the 360 controller design target, but that's because we know how badly rts game controls play out with gamepads, and how MUCH BETTER rts games are when they have their controls working properly, and that the gamepad is totally outside that realm and designing for it is basically using the lowest common denominator, mostly, because we're jaded about this - strategy games are won and lost by the minor unit functions which the lack of keyboard shortcuts effectively cuts off from the 360 pad user. This might not be your implication, and at surface value, you do have a point, but this jaded outlook is the sort of attitude people who might become frustrated with the lack of fine control will probably take. Darwinia's controls mapped nearly perfectly cleanly over to the 360 pad, but they weren't designed for it - I expect more that the controls for multiwinia were designed for the way the game and engine works and for ease of use (something that has come up several times in the blog posts), and it is merely by coincidence that they would (again) fit onto the 360 pad with little effort because there were so few controls in the first place.
Design decisions like fine control over Darwinian movements and are not simply ommitted from the 360 controls; They're ommited from the game and this has always been part of the "character" of Darwinia's gameplay - logically the conclusion, if these ommissions was the arguement, would therefore be that the whole core gameplay and character behavoir concept was designed with the 360 controller in mind.
Basically my point is, it seems like the conclusion that "You can tell that the control scheme of Multiwinia was designed for an Xbox controller " is flawed in that it seems based on the idea that if the 360 pad didn't even exist, it would be any different - that's something we really don't know, and with Darwinia and the blog posts as precedent, seems unlikely.
This of course, doesn't mean that the controls are therefore good or apporpriate; if there were a failing here (not that you or I are suggesting there are any, though many people might claim there to be), then it would be more a failing in fundamental design, or lack of greater redesign to better apply to the gameplay scope, rather than a failing because they wanted to fit it on the 360 pad, and I'd hate to see the 360 pad be blamed for anything when for once it's probably innocent.
Otherwise though, I thought the review was good and related sound information about the game. I of course, can't explain what it is that gives me that impression.
The language in the review implies that standard RTS style controls is what should have been being expected in multiwinia, but because it was going to work with the xbox360 pad, the whole design was focussed on making that work, like it was the priority. I strongly disagree with that.
If for example, Darwinia had a similar viewport and control scheme to Multiwinia (it might, how could I possibly know for sure, you tell me), and yet it was designed without even imagining the 360 style pad, it might suggest that the predominance of the control scheme design was in fact, not designed for the 360 pad but had its roots in making sense with the eg, action/shooter style fast paced gameplay (which was prevalent in Darwinia) - where mostly you just move and shoot, a lot like cannon fodder. If cannon fodder behaved like an RTS, it would entirely betray the gameplay.
Now, Multiwinia sounds like it's much more a move towards a strategy game than Darwinia was, and I would expect the controls to evolve from what they were in Darwinia in order to account for that, moving more in the direction of supporting RTS gameplay (there were no shift click shortcuts in Darwinia, after all). I doubt however that they scrapped the whole ui/control element, switched conceptually to full RTS controls and then moved backwards to the 360 pad, which is what the statement really implies to me. It also, to me, implies that that's what they should have done and that it's a bad thing that they didn't, and it's because of the 360 controller design target, but that's because we know how badly rts game controls play out with gamepads, and how MUCH BETTER rts games are when they have their controls working properly, and that the gamepad is totally outside that realm and designing for it is basically using the lowest common denominator, mostly, because we're jaded about this - strategy games are won and lost by the minor unit functions which the lack of keyboard shortcuts effectively cuts off from the 360 pad user. This might not be your implication, and at surface value, you do have a point, but this jaded outlook is the sort of attitude people who might become frustrated with the lack of fine control will probably take. Darwinia's controls mapped nearly perfectly cleanly over to the 360 pad, but they weren't designed for it - I expect more that the controls for multiwinia were designed for the way the game and engine works and for ease of use (something that has come up several times in the blog posts), and it is merely by coincidence that they would (again) fit onto the 360 pad with little effort because there were so few controls in the first place.
Design decisions like fine control over Darwinian movements and are not simply ommitted from the 360 controls; They're ommited from the game and this has always been part of the "character" of Darwinia's gameplay - logically the conclusion, if these ommissions was the arguement, would therefore be that the whole core gameplay and character behavoir concept was designed with the 360 controller in mind.
Basically my point is, it seems like the conclusion that "You can tell that the control scheme of Multiwinia was designed for an Xbox controller " is flawed in that it seems based on the idea that if the 360 pad didn't even exist, it would be any different - that's something we really don't know, and with Darwinia and the blog posts as precedent, seems unlikely.
This of course, doesn't mean that the controls are therefore good or apporpriate; if there were a failing here (not that you or I are suggesting there are any, though many people might claim there to be), then it would be more a failing in fundamental design, or lack of greater redesign to better apply to the gameplay scope, rather than a failing because they wanted to fit it on the 360 pad, and I'd hate to see the 360 pad be blamed for anything when for once it's probably innocent.
Otherwise though, I thought the review was good and related sound information about the game. I of course, can't explain what it is that gives me that impression.
The developers noted in one of the IGN Introversion movies that Multiwinia was brought about because releasing Darwinia on Xbox Live required a multiplayer component. Then, after experiencing the streamlined control scheme (which works very well, except you can't change any of the controls) I inferred that a gamepad was the starting reference point. It's certainly easier to adapt from a gamepad to a mouse and keyboard rather than vice versa.
From what I have played so far I would say the review gives a good feel for the game. The control scheme I don't agree with the reviewer. The selection of squad (left and hold) and the officer controls (once I had worked out that one right click did direction, the next did formation and then the next off) work very well imho. Camera control is exactly the same as WIC which I play a lot so very much at home on that one.
I do agree with some of the critisms, I would like to see some stats at the end of the game - even if they were relatively simple. Not yet hit MP but have had a quick look and a chat area in the lobby would be helpful.
Performance in sp against the ai I have found absolutely fine, so not sure what the issue was there - unless that effects the MP element more, so far i'm on all settings high and no slow down.
I also disagree re the crates - the crates add the randomness to the game, once spawn points start to go down it is very hard (in my noob level) to reverse this. The crates add the ability to score a quick hit back and keep a form of balance in game.
Loving the game - hopefully it will get some tweaks here and there but pleased with purchase - kudos to beta testers and Introversion.
Tals
I do agree with some of the critisms, I would like to see some stats at the end of the game - even if they were relatively simple. Not yet hit MP but have had a quick look and a chat area in the lobby would be helpful.
Performance in sp against the ai I have found absolutely fine, so not sure what the issue was there - unless that effects the MP element more, so far i'm on all settings high and no slow down.
I also disagree re the crates - the crates add the randomness to the game, once spawn points start to go down it is very hard (in my noob level) to reverse this. The crates add the ability to score a quick hit back and keep a form of balance in game.
Loving the game - hopefully it will get some tweaks here and there but pleased with purchase - kudos to beta testers and Introversion.
Tals
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests