Re: [OT sorta} SFC?

>>I'd be satisfied with just plain FTMap graphics.
>
>I think we could probably manage an SSI style wargame, aimed at
>wargamers not eye candy junkies.
>
Personally, I've come to appreciate both styles of computer gaming. 
Turn
based stuff is still around - witness Birth of the Federation.	Scalable
real time games, however, take advantage of the computer being able to
make
the game "come to life".  I wouldn't classify those who enjoy good
graphics
as eye-candy junkies.  Most SSI games have lousy graphics, which can
still
make for an acceptable game.  But SSI games have lousy graphics for no
good
reason (read: it's not impossible to program a good looking and deep
computer game - the two are not mutually exclusive).

One of the things I find most ridiculous is the idea that for realistic
control - for a wargame to be truly realistic - it must be a turned
based
game so you can manage all the minutiae to the Nth degree (something of
an
elitist wargamer attitude).  Real combat occurs in real time, with
time-sensitive decisions affecting real lives.	It looks nothing like
the
overweight, unwashed, unshaven guy sitting in a rickety chair taking
time
out to expound on the cross country speed of a T-34 with a full combat
load
before he clicks on the icon one more time (or looks at the counter
again
for boardgamers) to see what the combat value of that Panzerfaust team
is
before moving it one hex closer to the enemy tank because statistically
it
improves its chance to hit by around 12 3/4%.

For me, any game that can balance your ability to control all your units
effectively while maintaining the immediacy and tension of combat is a
good
game.  In my opinion, SFC has done just that - and other game companies
are
apparently trying to do the same with the other games that are coming
out
soon.

Chris