.
Thought to comment sooner. Was inspired over the last couple weeks to work compulsively on one of my projects. A natural break came up this week and the urge to get back to Cam 4 arose in its stead.
Over the course of being away from playing the latest version of Cam 4, I thought it was just as well so as not to monopolize feedback with my perspectives. In any case.....
Continueing with some reflections started in v. 22 feedback that hold in v. 24 - as well those insights just arisen in my v. 24 play experience.
I'll divide them into three brief sections: Story, GPMs & Mapping.
~ Story:
* When last I mentioned gameplay suspension for mission briefs it was only at completion of a mission and before begining the next mission and not for Sit Rep briefs within missions. I wasn't clear on that score first time around.
* I've found myself wondering about the state of the world preceding the opening of Cam 4. The Project, the factions, what has brought us to this far flung region so distant from Project HQ in Colorado, etc. ?
The Pumpkin Cam addressed this state of the world, setting the stage before opening up with missions proper, in 2 ways. The opening montage FMV brief with voice over narrative which is then partly reused in the WZ Comic, with some added details. This narrative backstory primes the player imagination with texture and density in conjuring the world within which gameplay unfolds. The immersive visual art of the mapping, the new eye candy of units and structures, these alone will not trigger this imagination density primeing. The extant briefs, along with their well balanced and diverse conflict opportunities, will support an imagination already thus primed at the outset.
This last is not the same as crafting, through suggestive omission, a thread of mystery throughout which contributes to creating that tantalizing atmosphere which drives immersion desire to momentum.
~ GPMs:
* I like that the structure of Cam 4 allows for rewarding canny coordinated maneuvers between multiple combat groups such that inferior force strength has a chance against entrenched superior opposition. I find the challenges, and variety, of such asymmetric engagements fresher than typical monolithic clashes.
One thing I have noted is that when my combat groups clash with the opposition, thier units donot bird dog mine when I retreat. Ever. So far. Which amounts to 2 consequences. One - if I'm weakened, they do not press the advantage. Two - I cannot set up ambushes.
* When I attain control of the NE Base there are some issues.
First - I enter from the north west. The base is divided in half by a scripting boundry such that my units cannot move across to the eastern part of the base.
Second - None of these structs are functional: pumping derricks, factory, power gens, research facilities.
~ Mapping:
* So far, all my maneuver clashes and challenges are at sea level. An occasional dealing with the oppostion having the High Ground advantage (minimum 3 tile vertical elevation) would break up the combat flow in an interesting way, I think. Perhaps, you've done this in the later missions I've yet to get to.
- Regards, Rman.
.