Finally, a Civil War FPS!

S

Stiler

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jun 4, 2002
Messages
10,538
Finally, I've been wanting a decent civil war/revolutionary war/napoleanic era FPS type of game for a while now and it seems like that was never going to happen, however leave it up to the History Channel/Cauldron (under rated developers imo, I liked Chaser/knights of the temple) to step up to the plate.

http://www.3dgamers.com/games/civilwar1/


This is NOT the value-budget civil war game that was already made.

This could be a very fun game. Not quite sure what it's going to be like/what features it will all have yet, as there isn't really much info on it at all (I can't even find a homepage for the game itself).

the screenshots look good imo, hopefully it won't be some "hold you by the hand/follow this one path" type of a shooter.
 
Good find, if they do this right I'll be looking forward to it as well.
 
Wtf? How could this work? You shoot one shot, then you have to spend 30 seconds manually reloading your musket while hoping that no one shoots you in the meantime? It seems like there's a reason a game like that hasn't been made previously. ;)
 
speculative said:
Wtf? How could this work? You shoot one shot, then you have to spend 30 seconds manually reloading your musket while hoping that no one shoots you in the meantime? It seems like there's a reason a game like that hasn't been made previously. ;)
Click to expand...

I disagree, there's always melee combat (bayonet/swords, etc) aswell as ordering your squad (if you are indeed able to). Not to mention if you are able to ride horses, etc on top of all of that.


Plus they might very well probally shorten down the reload a bit (I hope it's not made arcadey, but still).

I played some Battlegrounds (It's a hl/hl2 revolutionary war mod) and it's fun to play even though reloading takes a little bit.

The way i could see it being a lot of fun is if you are like basically a leader of a troop and you can order them on what to do (IE , where to setup, to attack/charge, take cover, etc).
 
Stiler said:
The way i could see it being a lot of fun is if you are like basically a leader of a troop and you can order them on what to do (IE , where to setup, to attack/charge, take cover, etc).
Click to expand...
Potentially fantastic SP, but more than likely horrible MP:(
 
Interesting. I remember playing Battlegrouns as well. It was a fun little mod, but frustrating sometimes to shoot at someone 6 times untill you finally hit them. With a little tweaking though the MP could be fun.
 
speculative said:
Wtf? How could this work? You shoot one shot, then you have to spend 30 seconds manually reloading your musket while hoping that no one shoots you in the meantime? It seems like there's a reason a game like that hasn't been made previously. ;)
Click to expand...

Ever heard of rifles? They had 'em in the civil war (although not a whole lot).

You could play as a rifleman...
 
This could be good, or just be a flop, I will stay tuned though.
 
An fps where you stand with you squad in a line and shot a terribly inaccurate gun at your enemies every thirty seconds and hope that you don't get shot? Pass.
 
Some civil war sharpshooters had a small squad of guys whose job it was to continually reload a series of guns, then pass them off to the sharpshooter, effectively eliminating the reload delay for the shooter. Sucks if your loaders get killed though.

Anyhow, I look forward to seeing how they translate gun line warfare into an FPS.
 
This will be very interesting if it is done well.

I think it'll be a nice refresh from all of the WWII and sci-fi FPS games that have proliferated over the past few years.

I think having a slower reload time (they will probably not have it at 30 seconds, but it'll still be fairly long if it is to be accurate) will make people think twice about every shot they take (which is a good thing IMHO), so they have to make every shot count.

It'll also be interesting to see if/how other weapons such as howitzers, gatling guns (very few were used during the final stages of the war), and of course swords will be incorporated.
 
Jawadali said:
This will be very interesting if it is done well.

I think it'll be a nice refresh from all of the WWII and sci-fi FPS games that have proliferated over the past few years.

I think having a slower reload time (they will probably not have it at 30 seconds, but it'll still be fairly long if it is to be accurate) will make people think twice about every shot they take (which is a good thing IMHO), so they have to make every shot count.

It'll also be interesting to see if/how other weapons such as howitzers, gatling guns (very few were used during the final stages of the war), and of course swords will be incorporated.
Click to expand...

Then there are the world's first functional submarines deployed successfully in combat. And the Ironsides. The Civil War changed a lot of things about the way the world fought wars. I think this could be very cool. Given that it is a History Channel production, I think it has a good chance of not sucking.
 
if it takes that long to load, maybe frame rates won't be much of an issue :D :D :D
 
Interesting. If they make it historically accurate (gun load times not withstanding), it could work. I'm talking cannons, mounted calvary, special missions (missions from Grant or Lee themselves), Buffalo soldiers (the african american battalions), the ability to fight for either the Union or the Confederacy (or even both- certain missions in the game are for either faction), the navy battles (such as the Lincoln naval blockade) and of course the huge battles (antietam, shiloh..etc)...and some nice historically accurate NPC's...

Multiplayer can even be nice if the players are patient and can work as a team.
 
Stiler said:
I disagree, there's always melee combat (bayonet/swords, etc) aswell as ordering your squad (if you are indeed able to). Not to mention if you are able to ride horses, etc on top of all of that.


Plus they might very well probally shorten down the reload a bit (I hope it's not made arcadey, but still).

I played some Battlegrounds (It's a hl/hl2 revolutionary war mod) and it's fun to play even though reloading takes a little bit.

The way i could see it being a lot of fun is if you are like basically a leader of a troop and you can order them on what to do (IE , where to setup, to attack/charge, take cover, etc).
Click to expand...

Well, I for one like realism, so if the graphics are good, like make it open territory like FARCRY (which would be freaking sweet), then I wouldn't mind it taking maybe... 4-5 seconds reloading for one shot (or however long it is). Also, there's a lot you can do in a game like this. Remember the movie the Patriot, and how cannonballs took people's heads, and limbs off? And also, at the end of the movie, the boats who were giving artillery fire? They could incorporate all of that, and make it very good.
 
Dark Prodigy said:
Interesting. If they make it historically accurate (gun load times not withstanding), it could work. I'm talking cannons, mounted calvary, special missions (missions from Grant or Lee themselves), Buffalo soldiers (the african american battalions), the ability to fight for either the Union or the Confederacy (or even both- certain missions in the game are for either faction), the navy battles (such as the Lincoln naval blockade) and of course the huge battles (antietam, shiloh..etc)...and some nice historically accurate NPC's...

Multiplayer can even be nice if the players are patient and can work as a team.
Click to expand...

And let's not forget the ability to rape, and kill Indians for health boosts. lol
 
sounds good but what about the weapons ?

i mean arent guns of that era fire one bullet and take like 2 minutes to reload ?

also i dont think they had grenades and stuff
 
The good thing about slow reloads is that it means you have to gather into large groups of people and all fire at the same time to remain effective, which is basically what they did in the American Civil War, when you're shoulder to shoulder with loads of other guys all firing in large waves it's a lot of fun (i know from playing a HL2 mod that has this theme)
 
I can't believe nobody has brought up the many different revolvers that were used during the war. The time between shots was dependent entirely on how fast you could cock the hammer back. Of course once you did use all your shots you would need a very long time to reload them.... But that's what picking up weapons off fallen friends and foes is for.

Also the Spencer repeating rifle was designed the year before the war started and was not all that uncommon in the North during the war.
 
itd be cool to see realistic recreations of battlefields from the time too.

growing up in the south(and being born in the north) and visiting lots of battlesites all over from florida, to georgia to the carolians to virginias and tennessee and lousiana and mississippi and alabama...i mean theres so much varying terrain and environments to consider and play with....and remember california(where im at now) was part of the union, though no actual battles were fought here again IIRC...

im lookin forward to it personally since this game is being done by the history channel it should be quite accurate :)
 
no you all know that they did have repeating rifles back during the civil war, so it can work, with you getting 12 rounds and then having to reload. so i am totally looking forward to this.
 
Sweet, maybe they will have a mode where you have to fight off dysentary while sitting around at camp!
 
The way i could see it being a lot of fun is if you are like basically a leader of a troop and you can order them on what to do
Click to expand...

Well, then it would be a RTS, not an FPS.
The reasons mentioned above are why Civil War games have historically been tactical simulations, not shooters.

Then again, new things are good... Maybe a hybrid RTS/FPS would work very well, but it would take a ton of playtesting to get the mix correct.
 
sounds interesting. more realism more realism!

so many want games on easy, and "its too hard" or the steps involved to aquiring items and such. all settings and everything given easily cause you can't beat a computer cause you're a wuss! after the opening game credit there should be a option to enter a cheat code that displays the end of the game and that you win :rolleyes:

Be [H] for christ sakes, take it on HARD! game looks great!
 
Dr.Khron said:
Well, then it would be a RTS, not an FPS.
The reasons mentioned above are why Civil War games have historically been tactical simulations, not shooters.

Then again, new things are good... Maybe a hybrid RTS/FPS would work very well, but it would take a ton of playtesting to get the mix correct.
Click to expand...

I meant while it was an fps and you could still order your troops and such.


A la Brothers in Arms/Rainbow six style, where you are still a character in-game and in an fps view/able to shoot and do everything but also on top of that able to order your troops/command them.
 
It'd be sweet if they did recreate the bigass battles. If you receive a fatal hit, you just switch to another person in your line / group. You can't move, just crouch. You only march forward when the rest of the group does, and it's automatic. Crouching makes you reload faster or something.

Then whats you clash in melee or skirmish, it becomes a standard FPS where you can move around and stuff and fix bayonets or pull out your sword or your revolver.

Man that'd rock!

Of course they could also have other maps where its solely a skirmish or something and you move around and stuff to take an objective!

I'd upgrade my comp to play this!
 
Haha, they all look like hillbillies in the screenshots.

Anyways, Age of Empires III did extremely well, and your units had muskets and some rifles and canons and such.

Of course they'll most likely shorten down the reload time to make it playable.

I'm not sure I could be entertained by a game like this.
 
Interesting...

Few things to point out. First, I don't know about the repeater rifles, but the normal rifles would take at least 30 to 45 seconds to reload, maybe up to a minute. Remember, rifle take longer to reload than muskets, but they are more accurate. It could be possible to hit a target at ranges of 150 yards or more (I have to look that up). Also, there were grenades at the time, albiet primitve ones. Some of them were even contact grenades.

This game would be slow and fast paced at the same time. Every shot would have to count, considering the reload times. However, with gatling guns, shell fire, calvary, gunboats, and other things going off all around you, people may not wait around while they reload.

Combat will be interesting. Consider - You and an enemy are 150 yards apart. Both of you fire and miss. There will be at least 30 seconds before either of you can fire. Do you run up and bayonet him? It will take around 20 seconds to reach him on flat ground. Reload and shoot? You may kill him at that range, if he doesn't kill you first. .58 cal rifles are not friendly. Use your pistol? Maybe, but you would have to get relatively close, under 50 yards. You will need to sprint to get there. Your hands will not be steady when you aim. And you are an easy target at that range if he reloads in time. All the while artilary is blowing up around you.

Calvary will also be cool. I believe that the calvary only carried carbines, not rifles, in addition to their sword and pistol. You will be trading firepower and accuracy for speed.

Some of my reasoning or facts may be off, but you can see my point. This game will either be cool and fun, or it will suck. We shall see.
 
Sounds pretty cool if they execute it right. The above poster illustrated my thoughts on the intensity of having standoffs where you have to decide whether to reload and fire or charge and roll the dice. Cavalry would be a blast, but you would absolutely have to be able to kill the horses for balance, I think.

Will have to keep an eye on this. I'm tired of WWII/present day/future stuff, except the best examples of them. The low tech weapons would be an interesting gameplay element.
 
Wouldn't they have to like pack muskets and shit? I thought that's why they never made one.

Everyone bags on WW2 but what's not overdone? Futuristic and laser beams? Oh no, there are none of those. Current times? Nope, zero of those either. Then you have stuff like vietnam, everyone clamored for it, then oh, you can't see through the jungle, that's no fun. Give me a fun game I don't care if they're shooting McNuggets.
 
I'm willing to bet the game will be incredibly boring if it strives to be ultra-"realistic." Repeating rifles were mostly during the Civil War so you will most likely be stuck reloading for 30 seconds. Assuming you spend 5 seconds aiming and shooting, followed by 30 seconds for reloading, you only spend 14.3% of the time actually using your gun - the rest of the time you're reloading. Sounds like... a snooze fest.
 
dotK said:
I'm willing to bet the game will be incredibly boring if it strives to be ultra-"realistic." Repeating rifles were mostly during the Civil War so you will most likely be stuck reloading for 30 seconds. Assuming you spend 5 seconds aiming and shooting, followed by 30 seconds for reloading, you only spend 14.3% of the time actually using your gun - the rest of the time you're reloading. Sounds like... a snooze fest.
Click to expand...

Yea.....you kinda forgot all about the melee combat and rushing, etc....Civil war wasn't simply two lines firing back and fourth and reloading until one side won.
 
Stiler said:
Yea.....you kinda forgot all about the melee combat and rushing, etc....Civil war wasn't simply two lines firing back and fourth and reloading until one side won.
Click to expand...
Melee combat does not always translate well into a FPS... actually, it rarely does. Also, similar to shooting, you won't spend much time actually fighting with your melee weapon as you're most likely going to have to rip it out of whoever you stabbed, which takes time. Rushing simply means it increases the down time between the average shot even more. Not to mention in line formation there's a chance you'll just randomly die from enemy fire - loads of fun.

There's a good reason why we don't see tons of Civil War (and prior) FPSs. The gameplay is just not there.
 
dotK said:
Melee combat does not always translate well into a FPS... actually, it rarely does. Also, similar to shooting, you won't spend much time actually fighting with your melee weapon as you're most likely going to have to rip it out of whoever you stabbed, which takes time. Rushing simply means it increases the down time between the average shot even more. Not to mention in line formation there's a chance you'll just randomly die from enemy fire - loads of fun.

There's a good reason why we don't see tons of Civil War (and prior) FPSs. The gameplay is just not there.
Click to expand...

www.taleworlds.com to see how fun melee combat can be if developers put more time/work into it. Though it can still be done better imo.

the main thing that can help melee combat in this game (imo) is if they give you directional based blocking, attacks, sidesteps, etc.

Like if you see someone rushing toward you with a bayonet you take the butt of your rifle and when he gets into range block it to the right and then hit them or such, among other things.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top