mibi wrote: DiM wrote:
Coleman wrote:Also, there have been some weird comments about the art being similar to Seige... What do you expect when the same artist is doing both maps? To call this a siege clone simply because the art is similar is ridiculous.
i don't care if it's the same person doing the map. look at keyogi for example. compare australia to conquer 4 and to revamp of middle east. 3 totally different styles and same artist.
plus mibi is a graphic designer not like the rest of us so he has vast experience and knows what i'm talking about. i don't know his exact field of expertise but i'm sure his projects have different styles.
i have a friend that's a graphic designer and he works in publicity. i'm telling you not a single one of his projects is similar to another. yes you might find some common points but those are so minor only a carefull watcher could observe.
and i'm not calling this a siege clone just because of the graphics but also because of the theme (both are about sieges) because of the perspective and because of the gameplay. this is not d-day it's siege with modern set-up.
again i say that a iwo jima style would suit this map a whole lot better.
and since i used keyogy as an example imagine middle east designed with the same graphics as australia. which would you prefer? a colourful revamp or the parchment one?
if people don't like the Siege! map and don't play it then I will know that there isn't room for two maps in the same style. However, if Siege is more popular than say, Australia, then I will assume that there is an apatite for the style. And seriously DiM, im not sure why your complaining about two maps with the same style of game play, considering all the other maps in for the forge and on the site that are just some land mass split into territories.
if you look at my posts throughout the foundry you'll see i'm not a fan of classic recipe. take acountry split into terits and add borders. there are really rare occasions i like those maps (middle east or coral coast).
again i'm asking you to view this my way. i've worked a lot in management and marketing so maybe it's a professional habit but i tend to view each thing i do as a product or a service and try to find ways of making it presentable, attractive, long lasting and efficient. very rarely a product with the same style as a previous one has had more success and on those rare occasions when it did it was only because it improved some flaws of the previous but i've always thought it could have been even more succesfull with a different approach. yes sometimes a different approach can mean disaster if it's not handled right that's why usually small companies prefer to launch a clone and reap some of the success of the predecessors. but i do appreciate the small companies that have the guts to launch something innovative and bold that make fortunes just because they had balls. now let's say mibi is a company that makes video games. and Siege is their first launch. it gets reviewed by various sites and magazines and gets good grades and praises for the inovative style and gameplay. perfect. then the mibi company decides to announce a new game. people have high hopes especially when they know their debut game was a success. th d-day game is released, it gets reviews in various magazines and sites, it still gets good grades but not as good as the first one. most reviewers think this would have been better launched as an expansion for the previous game not a stand alone release. they already start saying things like maybe that's all they can do, maybe they started doing what EA Sports does and launch updated clones. maybe this d-day game would have been another block buster if it had iwo jima style. questions, doubt, regrets start to appear. while i agree this is not an industry and we all do maps for free i still belive the same principles apply if we want varied state of the art maps.
mibi wrote:And really the two maps arn't that similar in style, sure there is a wall, but that wall ca be breached in 8 of the 9 territories that border it from the beach, so its not about holding a wall like siege. but it is about holding and defending areas, which is what every map is about. i really don't see any similarities besides the perspective and the bottom attacking the top aspect.
here is a list of reasons why i believe the 2 maps are similar.
*graphics are identical.
*they are both about siege.
*top defends bottom attacks.
*same numbered terits without names
mibi wrote:and if you think this is the only style im capable of, coleman or samus will attest to maps i have in development which are 500% different then anything on this site.
if i thought you were capable of only this style i wouldn't even have bothered asking you to change it. in fact i wouldn't have even bothered posting in this thread at all.