Re Dom2 graphics; tactical combat command

[Tian Zi]

Hi, I just downloaded the Dom2 demo and am new to these Boards.

I'm quite impressed with the game and intend to purchase it -- primitive graphics and lack of tactical combat control notwithstanding.

Regarding the two quibbles I mentioned above ...

1. Graphics

The 3-D landscape graphics displayed when setting the options are certainly decent. I have a top notch PC and GPU so the highest settings don't tax my system at all.

But what is the point of these graphics options, and testing frame rate, etc., when the battle graphics use 2D low-res images to display units?!

In fact, even the landscape graphics during battles look nothing like the eagle's eye sweep over 3D terrain displayed at the graphics options screen.

What gives?

2. Tactical Battle Command

Impossible, correct? I wish at least one battle per turn could be controlled by the player.

I suspect this was intended until late in the game's development. Otherwise, what point the light glow under the mouse pointer as I move it across the battlefield?

Am I right?

Any plans for a patch / expansion that permits some tactical control during battles?

This issue ties into the first: the battle graphics don't really matter since there is no option for tactical control in battles.

To further elaborate on my suspicions re a late change to the originally intended design, it appears to me perhaps that the developers had until late in the day planned to implement high quality full 3D graphics to display battles, and allow tactical control during battles.

Supporting this conjecture are some old information I found regarding the game pre-release describing it as featuring "full 3D graphics".

So, were changes made late in development to cut the 3D graphics due to, e.g., a lack of funding / time? And was tactical combat control originally intended, and was this cut (perhaps since there wouldn't be any eye candy)?


I realize developer resources at Shrapnel must be quite limited as compared to, say, Sony, and I think the game is fantastic despite the issues mentioned above. Great graphics and sound are nice and enhance gameplay, but for a PC strategy game are secondary in importance to a deep, sophisticated game system and top notch AI.

Originally posted by Tian Zi:
Hi, I just downloaded the Dom2 demo and am new to these Boards.

Welcome, I hope you enjoy your time here and the company kept.

1. Graphics

The 3-D landscape graphics displayed when setting the options are certainly decent. I have a top notch PC and GPU so the highest settings don't tax my system at all.

But what is the point of these graphics options, and testing frame rate, etc., when the battle graphics use 2D low-res images to display units?!

In fact, even the landscape graphics during battles look nothing like the eagle's eye sweep over 3D terrain displayed at the graphics options screen.

What gives?

It does use it in part, but there is no camera control outside of the keyboard movement and Pgup/Pgdown.

Points for the graphics are: It's much better than Dom1 without much of an upgrade in the IW staff. So the same people devoted more time to the graphics and produced much better results.

The graphics are a minor part that displays the battle represenatation. There are, at least in development, projects to improve the overlay map (non battle) and the battlemap can use quite a few individual units so I feel in part in order to fit most systems (Being able to play on virtually any system is important as this is primarily a PBEM game). Also the graphics are all done by one individual in his spare time, so he doesn't quite have the time to make standard gaming graphics. I believe the consensus is people would rather have the depth provided and not the graphics of a Xbox title.

2. Tactical Battle Command

Impossible, correct? I wish at least one battle per turn could be controlled by the player.

I suspect this was intended until late in the game's development. Otherwise, what point the light glow under the mouse pointer as I move it across the battlefield?

Am I right?

No, I am sorry you are not. The mouse pointer is in order to view individual units and look at their stats/status in order to determine if they are getting afflictions, buffs, losing morale, etc.

The game was intended for no battlefield control outside of previously issued orders before entering combat. Giving you the "General deploys orders, troops carry it out even though the General is miles away in a protected shelter" feel.

Any plans for a patch / expansion that permits some tactical control during battles?

I doubt it sincerely.

To further elaborate on my suspicions re a late change to the originally intended design, it appears to me perhaps that the developers had until late in the day planned to implement high quality full 3D graphics to display battles, and allow tactical control during battles.

The original design was as a combat simulator but I don't feel your conjectures are true, as it there has never been a slant taken to any "RTS" style format, only TBS.

I realize developer resources at Shrapnel must be quite limited as compared to, say, Sony, and I think the game is fantastic despite the issues mentioned above. Great graphics and sound are nice and enhance gameplay, but for a PC strategy game are secondary in importance to a deep, sophisticated game system and top notch AI.

The resources are IW, not Shrapnel. Shrapnel is the publisher (and a damn good one at that) but it is Illwinter, the game designers who have the limited resources. As the game has not yet made their studio self-sufficent in terms of profit. The individuals of IW have normal jobs and this is a secondary source of income so it takes a secondary role in time for all the trivialities (when it comes to a Strategy game) though if you dump a truckload of cash on their door, I'm sure they would invest much more time in it. Though most teachers I know love their jobs for reasons outside of money.