Faces of War, formerly known as Outfront II, places the player in decisive battles of World War II in Europe where the player will command American, English, Soviet or German troops fighting famous conflicts such as the Normandy Invasion, the Battle of the Bulge or the Battle of Berlin. Utilizing a new level of intensity by integrating psychological elements Faces of War, a squad based RTS, offers a variety of ideas where each battle can be won in a different way depending on player's tactical choices.

TVG had the opportunity to speak to Sergey Gerasev from 1C, Producer of the game in Russia, who in his own inimitable style explained many elements of the game and its formation!

Please tell our readers about the development team of 'Faces of War' along with their previous projects and set up? BestWay was founded in 1991 in Severodonetsk, Ukraine. Initially the company specialized in computer engineering, networks and application program development. Later, in 1999, a game development department was created.

BestWay managed to become one of the leading independent development studios in the former USSR. Currently there are 32 people in the development department of BestWay. Most of these people worked on 'Soldiers: Heroes of World War II' and some of them joined the company after we released the game.

'Soldiers: Heroes of WWII' wasn't our debut project. Before we had started working on the game we had already done a lot of research work. Beginning from the moment our studio was founded we have produced several R&D-demos with the purpose of researching the game process in strategy games. Step by step, starting with the demo of a sci-fi strategy 'Xenoform' the studio came closer to the subject of World War II and created 'Soldiers: Heroes of WWII'.

Why was the game name changed from 'Outfront II' to 'Faces of War' and what continuity with 'Outfront' will the new title offer?

'Outfront II' was just a working title. Actually the original game - 'Soldiers: Heroes of World War II' was initially called 'Outfront' and its name was altered after the worldwide publishing deal was signed. The same happened to the sequel.

The RTS gaming scene has a large number of great titles so what does 'Faces of War' add to this mix in your opinion and what are the innovations and highlights of FOW?

Beginning from a certain period of time more and more cross-breeds based on the strategy genre started to emerge and 'Faces of War' is not an exception. The basis of the game is tactics which borders on 3rd person action gameplay (if you take into account the Direct Control mode).

It turns out that such a mix needs a more technologically advanced platform. It is rather difficult to consider 'Faces of War' only as a strategy or as an action game because the game has already merged both of these genres and one might even mention that it has become even a founder of a new genre. But I put it simply that 'Faces of War' is representative of both genres in issues of technology and in-game details.

From many points of view 'Faces of War' clearly stands out from other strategy titles which are currently available on the market. We use the most advanced technologies and these are not just for the sake of fine words. We have managed, as I hope, to keep the balance between eye-candy effects/graphics and realism.

From the point of view of gameplay the engine also allows us to be ahead of our competitors. A complex damage system and a true calculation of ballistic trajectories give players more freedom of action. It means that a player has more possibilities to use the environment in the game.

Please give our readers an insight into the setting for 'Faces of War' and what kind of realism you are going to present? Also with human and emotional enhancements do you believe this will give the game an edge over the competitors?

The storyline of 'Faces of War' covers a period at the end of World War II - from summer 1944 till spring 1945. Players will be able to choose from three campaigns including the Allies, Soviet Army and German Army. Each campaign includes the most well-known and interesting events of that period. The storyline for each campaign is unique, but there are a couple of intersections.

To achieve realism we thoroughly work on all graphics and physics elements. The graphics part of the engine allows us to make a very detailed game-world. This statement is true not only for the landscape of the maps, but also for the objects placed on it. We've created lots of textures, which are chosen according to their appearance. It is done to show the overall idea of the mission, to render all the smallest details of its atmosphere. With the help of special engine technology and different textures we can diversify the landscape, add unique elements: create a flowerbed, scatter rubbish, lay curbs, etc.

Weather in 'Faces of War' will be changing all the time which will be important for the overall level of realism. Time of day, including day and night, wind, fog, rain, sometimes with thunder and lightning, snow - all of these features were added to create realism and give an overall atmosphere to the mission.

The amount of animation sequences (animated actions) which we have created for soldiers can't be estimated by eye. But I can tell you that the overall amount has exceeded 300 and this is not the end! All of it is done for soldiers to act "real" when they are in different types of cover or when they are sitting or standing in different vehicles.

Players will be able to control/command American, English, Soviet and German squads. What kind of units does each army have; what are the basic skills of the units and how do they differ in their playing styles, what makes them unique?

Each side will have a full set of soldiers: submachine-gunners, machine-gunners, flame-thrower operators, snipers, soldiers with anti-tank guns, etc. However this separation is crucial mainly for Multiplayer, as the player will have to recruit soldiers to his squad, having no time and no place to obtain extra weapons. The Single-player mode will give the player an opportunity to rearm his squad with all the weapons he succeeds to find. It will be both captured weapons of killed enemies and dismounted from damaged vehicles and found in multiple boxes on the map (very often they can be found in storehouses or at material supply bases). Soldiers initially have equipment corresponding to their rank. It relates not only to player's soldiers, but to enemy AI as well. It means, the player can be assured that a dead enemy submachine-gunner can "yield" rounds, maybe a couple of grenades and a bandage. It is possible to recognize a submachine-gunner by his uniform. All soldiers have slightly different uniforms that simplify their recognition.

The main hindrance in the process of soldier creation was a search for historical reference materials, which described or illustrated the equipment of soldiers of the WWII period. On the one hand, they were not easy to find, on the other hand it turned out to be that soldiers wore the same uniform (or uniforms, which differed slightly). Thus they looked like clones in the game. We had to make the uniforms of soldiers differ a little bit to let the player tell them apart on the battlefield. We spent time preserving the authenticity and the gameplay. We corrected textures, added packs, bags, strap-on pockets... Once we completely altered all available soldiers' models. Now we are sure, they are real fighters.

Please tell us about the combat system in FOW, its key features and does any other element of RTS gameplay like resource gathering or even construction utilized?

There is no "combat system" in 'Faces of War'. It contradicts the depth of the gaming world and the variety of opportunities in this world. There is a damage system in the game. There are no restrictions, i.e. it allows damages caused not only by bullets and shells. For example your soldier can be a victim to a blast wave from a nearby explosion. The same wave would destroy a part of a nearby building. The, debris, construction pieces, could also crush other soldiers.

The behaviour of soldiers is not restricted by "battle" and "usual" ways of thinking. An enemy soldier thinks at a very high level. Their decisions are influenced by their morale as well. Soldiers can hide, chase you, attack carefully or run away, for example. The game is much more complicated, that many would expect and it doesn't have any separate playing schemes, which can be taken independently.

There is no resource gathering from the point of view of a common RTS. There are no construction/building features at all. The player pays attention to tactics and battle strategies; he keeps an eye on his squad, gives them an opportunity to bandage the injuries and collects ammo, when it is possible and required. All constructions/buildings in the game are mainly covers for the player's soldiers, so he can leave any building standing and use it later for the protection of his squad. Though if this building gets destroyed, he can use another one. It depends on the player's tactics.

Tell us about the variety of tactics and actions that have been integrated into the missions and how the team has gone about designing and creating them?

In Single-player mode the missions are based on a common idea. Often it was taken from real events of WWII. The ideas, which are suggested to players in the missions, vary greatly to offer real immersion. We have prepared some missions with a stealth bias, missions with massive battles, missions which plenty of various vehicles for driving, missions, which assume enormous destructions of all and everything. Despite the fact that the mission dictates the player towards certain types of gameplay, he can act very diversely. For example, during a stealth mission he can go ahead directly to the enemy base. Maybe he will succeed to capture an AFV there and kill a good few of sentries. The game doesn't forbid it. If he makes too much noise, he would draw the enemy's attention and will then have to fight against more powerful forces. We don't offer any difficult or easy ways, just lots of scenarios and eventualities. We just let everyone choose for themselves. And we surely have prepared several surprises, no one apart us know!

How deep did the team focus on the technology? Tell us about some of the technical aspects of the game you are pleased with, for example about the 3D engine you are using?

In 'Faces of War' we use our own GEM engine, a widely modified engine from 'Soldiers: Heroes of WWII'. Apart from optimizing the code in terms of performance we have also significantly modified the AI system. Now we are able to implement textures with higher resolutions and more complex models - it means that the graphics quality has increased. Now we use what previously was considered to be extravagance for strategies games- bump-mapping, masked specular lighting, environment/cube-mapping, which made metal surfaces and water more realistic. Although the general increase of the picture quality depends mostly on the artists and we have very some good ones.

Many RTS games fail to impress due to very ordinary AI and the lack of genuine excitement which does not push the player or make gameplay compulsive. How do you pull the player in and ensure the game has a compelling hook with a strong progression line?

First of all I would like to say that our AI has been worked on with a lot of care and attention. This was important because that complicated and detailed AI, we had developed for 'Soldiers: Heroes of WWII' could be easily ruined through adding multiple new features, demanded by the time and the genre. Compared with the previous project the search for solution and the solution list taken by the units during the battle has been expanded. The eyes and ears of the units allow them to take decisions according to what they hear and what they see. The units can also exchange information and keep the enemy location in mind. This all results in quite realistic behavior of units: they attack or retreat, get into covers, throw grenades and use weapons corresponding with the enemy type. For example a soldier would not attack a tank with a gun, but try to retreat and get to a hideout or try to use a grenade-launcher, if he has one. The logic of the game we believe is perfect!

Besides this the soldiers can lie, sit, hide or look out of the cover positions, they can also swim. However I can not say that swimming would be an interesting activity in the game, as a swimming soldier is absolutely helpless in the battle and is an easy target. Therefore I doubt that anybody would like to jump to the river in the heat of the battle. Sometimes soldiers would have to swim: if they need to swim across a river or pass through a swallow river place and if they need to save themselves out of an ice-hole in case of a misfortune.

Looking ahead a couple of years how do you feel the RTS genre can progress?

I believe the strategies will merge more and more with other genres. New challenges for the game plot and graphics will be targeted and implemented at the same time. The time when the player was deserted in some closed system stuffed with enemies, which were killed one after another has long gone.. The times when strategies, where two struggling forces having to confront each other under player's control, are passing by as well. 'Soldiers: Heroes of WWII' and 'Faces of War' have dipped into the future: a few have practiced that mixing of genres tactics/strategy spiced with action. The objective is certainly not new: to refine and deepen the gameplay of RTS, but the final implementation of its play the important role is here.

Strategy titles will merge with other genres to produce a new hybrid genre, contrasting the strategies with refinement rate to each unit, these strategies would strive to unify larger spaces to one playing area. Such attempts have taken place, however they have far to go before becoming mainstream, with strategic capturing of land, their further use for exploration and resource development, constant territory wars, industrial espionage and development of new equipment types. If somebody succeeds in implementing this gameplay, if it is smooth, interesting and thrilling, I believe, it would be an innovation of a separate genre with further implementation towards MMO. Why not?

What focus has the team placed on the presentation of the game?

If we speak about our physics engine in general we can say that it is an essential part of gameplay because the engine calculates all the destruction and all the hits. By destroying buildings, barricades and other things one can clear the viewing area and hit the enemy from the range that previously wasn't suitable for that. In comparison to 'Soldiers' we use physics a lot more. Now instead of pre-animated destructions we use physical models. Large objects are used just as any other object - they can also become cover for soldiers and they can be destroyed as any other object. Please remember that it is not a wise idea to leave your infantry near the building that is being fired on by the enemy because the falling off pieces can hit them. And this kind of damage might be lethal.

All bullet, projectile and rocket flight paths are calculated honestly, - all according to laws of physics. This means that all objects of the game world are obstacles that can be used as covers for the player or prevent him from destroying enemy forces. Explosions of grenades, high-caliber projectiles may become the cause of a full or partial destruction of an object. For example the openings that are formed by the destruction of a building wall are real holes. It means if you make a hole in a building you start shooting through it. You can drive a tank in it, or send in your infantry. By the way, this is one of the means to capture blocks of buildings with perimeter defense - make holes in walls that are less defended.

TVG would like to thank Sergey Gerasev for his time and providing this insight into the game. Faces of War is scheduled for release on May 26th, keep an eye out for further coverage soon...