RE: Enough already!

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Enough already!

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: Enough already!

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Enough already! - 7/15/2009 4:01:54 PM

Arsan

Posts: 409
Joined: 7/1/2005
From: Madrid, Spain
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: L�tzow
CS:Shockforce is a good example about how a former intriguing series went down the drain, as the dev's decided to target a larger audience by introducing real-time. I did not bother with ToW 2 but according to forum activity sales numbers shouldn't be too high as well.

I would say its also a good example about how sometimes "another WW2" game is far better than an unique setting

USA Marines vs Syrians in a completely fictional war??

C'mon!

I woudl had gladly taken another CM Normandy game... like the next one they are making...
Good, Battlefront! Lesson learned!

< Message edited by Arsan -- 7/15/2009 4:02:27 PM >

(in reply to L�tzow)

Post #: 61

RE: Enough already! - 7/15/2009 4:03:58 PM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: L�tzow

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tomus

Companies have tried to mainstream strategy games with depth, Battlefront with Theatre of War and Combat Mission Shockforce have both opted for decent graphics, smooth interfaces and somewhat hyped releases and they have been forced from the retail market and into download only land.

CS:Shockforce is a good example about how a former intriguing series went down the drain, as the dev's decided to target a larger audience by introducing real-time. I did not bother with ToW 2 but according to forum activity sales numbers shouldn't be too high as well.

erm - you are aware it can be played in axactly the same way as the original CM? That argument about they dumped a successful model is getting old.

The game is actually very good and plays surprisingly better in real time than turn based - but for all the "die hard" CM fans - they were catered for too - they just didn't like the new route - personally I couldn't be happier. I loved the CM games, but CM:SF, imo, is far more exciting to play.

(in reply to L�tzow)

Post #: 62

RE: Enough already! - 7/15/2009 4:46:47 PM

Alexander Seil

Posts: 196
Joined: 4/22/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SireChaos

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

You should try Hired Guns, a "Matrix Title" that IMO is pretty innovative. But you're right about the hype factor. It amazes me how unhyped Matrix remains about itself.

I think a major part of the hype factor is that most mainstream games just plain look lots cooler than most "hardcore" wargames. As far as I can tell, the mass market goes more for shiny looks than for deep subjects.

Yet again, I give you HoI3 as an example of a "map and ledger" game that's perfectly mainstream in terms of media coverage. Hell, they were mentioned in a BBC article about E3. Of course, Paradox did put the time and effort into art assets and aesthetics of the map...but frankly every game should do that. Just because you're a high-falutin' "thinking man's" wargame doesn't give you an excuse to look like you've just taken a time trip from the mid-90's. It really doesn't help that many wargames combine bad graphics with bad interface design - in fact, in many cases the two phenomena are really one and the same.

As for doomtrader's assertion about "thinking" games not being fun...why would anyone play a game that's not fun? It's not called a game then, it's called work

Unless your purpose for playing games is to buy yourself the right to revel in elitism on wargaming forums and thumb your nose at the WoW-playing peasants, but I don't think the gaming industry should cater to that type.

< Message edited by Alexander Seil -- 7/15/2009 4:47:39 PM >

(in reply to SireChaos)

Post #: 63

RE: Enough already! - 7/15/2009 6:43:14 PM

SireChaos

Posts: 710
Joined: 8/14/2006
From: Frankfurt, Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alexander Seil

quote:

ORIGINAL: SireChaos

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

You should try Hired Guns, a "Matrix Title" that IMO is pretty innovative. But you're right about the hype factor. It amazes me how unhyped Matrix remains about itself.

I think a major part of the hype factor is that most mainstream games just plain look lots cooler than most "hardcore" wargames. As far as I can tell, the mass market goes more for shiny looks than for deep subjects.

Yet again, I give you HoI3 as an example of a "map and ledger" game that's perfectly mainstream in terms of media coverage. Hell, they were mentioned in a BBC article about E3. Of course, Paradox did put the time and effort into art assets and aesthetics of the map...but frankly every game should do that.

Yes, and I am very surprised the HoI games are so successful, despite being "map and ledger". As opposed to the epic home cinema graphics of, say, Empire Total War.

quote:

Just because you're a high-falutin' "thinking man's" wargame doesn't give you an excuse to look like you've just taken a time trip from the mid-90's. It really doesn't help that many wargames combine bad graphics with bad interface design - in fact, in many cases the two phenomena are really one and the same.

I think that�s because us grognards don�t care so much about graphics. Hell, I still played Pacific War up until a few weeks before I bought WitP in 2005.

quote:

As for doomtrader's assertion about "thinking" games not being fun...why would anyone play a game that's not fun? It's not called a game then, it's called work Unless your purpose for playing games is to buy yourself the right to revel in elitism on wargaming forums and thumb your nose at the WoW-playing peasants, but I don't think the gaming industry should cater to that type.

Different people have different levels of thinking they want to involve themselves in during their free time. Or the same people have different levels at different times. I just played all the way through WitP for the first time some time ago, but sometimes I just fire up X-COM: Enforcer and blast a bunch of aliens to vent some frustration.

(in reply to Alexander Seil)

Post #: 64

RE: Enough already! - 7/15/2009 6:50:27 PM

Alexander Seil

Posts: 196
Joined: 4/22/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SireChaos

I think that�s because us grognards don�t care so much about graphics. Hell, I still played Pacific War up until a few weeks before I bought WitP in 2005.

That's different, you can't compare games between ages any more than you can compare 20th century furniture to that from the Renaissance. We can still appreciate Renaissance wardrobes, but if someone came out with a monstrosity like that today we'd think it tacky and out of place. Same principles apply to graphics - you don't have to have 3D, but be prepared to do a sensible interface and aesthetically pleasing art if you choose to do so. Look at AGEOD's wargames. If nothing else can be done, go for stylish minimalism.

quote:

Different people have different levels of thinking they want to involve themselves in during their free time. Or the same people have different levels at different times. I just played all the way through WitP for the first time some time ago, but sometimes I just fire up X-COM: Enforcer and blast a bunch of aliens to vent some frustration.

Yes, but the point is, if you're comfortable with that level of thinking, you will find the game fun. What doomtrader suggested is a bit different - something akin to persevering through the thinking to get to some well-hidden fun. That's indicative of poor game design, really.

(in reply to SireChaos)

Post #: 65

RE: Enough already! - 7/15/2009 8:39:55 PM

jackx

Posts: 353
Joined: 7/8/2009
From: Germany
Status: offline

Graphics are a money-sink, and quite a bottomless one. That's not meant as an excuse for bad interface or not even trying to get functional graphics, but unless you throw tons of money at it, it'll probably not appeal to the mainstream crowd. Particularly since that crowd seems to be more and more "casual" and basically expects somewhat interactive cinema (most mainstream PC games are basically console games these days, and don't even get me started on "achievements" and the like...)

quote:

What doomtrader suggested is a bit different - something akin to persevering through the thinking to get to some well-hidden fun. That's indicative of poor game design, really.

I don't think he meant it that way, or at least I didn't understand it that way. In a wargame, you typically have a planning phase that preceeds the "action", so to speak, particularly in the first turn (or equivalent). That planning phase is already part of the fun, at least to me, but it's also something I might simply not want if I have only a short amount of time available for gaming, or feel like instant gratification.

I can play a simple hack'n slash like Titan Quest:Immortal Throne for some 15-minute lunchbreak carnage, or I can sink an entire evening into it. Same with most FPS.� With most wargames (and mainstream titles such as the TW series as well) I don't really have that option. Since the average mainstream gamer these days seems to have the attention span of a hyperactive 13-year-old, that presents a serious problem - people will be put off by the fact that they'll have to make up their mind in advance before they sit down to play, because they can't jump back and forth between games every 5-15 minutes. Too much of a commitment for them. (An exaggeration, perhaps, but I do believe this to be a large part of the problem. For me, "fun" and "commitment" aren't opposites, but for an increasing number they seem to be.)

Also, when it comes to single-player games, there seems to have been a huge change in what is considered "difficult". A good example of this would also be the regenerating health that now seems to be the standard in most FPS games. Wargames have a tendency not to throw bucketloads of second chances at you, so that'd presumably make them untolerably difficult, because you might occasionally have to deal with the consequences of your bad decisions.

< Message edited by jackx -- 7/15/2009 8:55:10 PM >

_____________________________

no truth - no justice
all false belief
blinded by morality
there shall be ... no peace

(in reply to Alexander Seil)

Post #: 66

RE: Enough already! - 7/15/2009 9:05:26 PM

V22 Osprey

Posts: 1593
Joined: 4/8/2008
From: Corona, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jackx

Also, when it comes to single-player games, there seems to have been a huge change in what is considered "difficult". A good example of this would also be the regenerating health that now seems to be the standard in most FPS games. Wargames have a tendency not to throw bucketloads of second chances at you, so that'd presumably make them untolerably difficult, because you might occasionally have to deal with the consequences of your bad decisions.

I hated that.In really life when you get shot you dont breath hard and then go back to normal(like in call of duty) In real life if you are shot you are going down and staying down.

In Wargames, you dont build bases and make tanks on spot.In real war a commander only has what he has.If you lose a man, you dont get him back.Wargames stress the player to use actually tactics more as losing a man actually means more.(especially in a Campaign) instead of using rush tactics.In wargame campaigns, it models expierence.Exp makes your men more deadly from battlefield expierence.Lose a man, and he gets replaced with a noob from bootcamp.(if you are lucky to get replacements at all)

< Message edited by V22 Osprey -- 7/15/2009 9:07:58 PM >

(in reply to jackx)

Post #: 67

RE: Enough already! - 7/15/2009 9:13:14 PM

jackx

Posts: 353
Joined: 7/8/2009
From: Germany
Status: offline

RTS games are actually among the more unforgiving, or used to be (the last I bought was Dawn of War: Dark Crusade) - mess up your build order, and you are in serious trouble, even in single player.�

The commitment-based argument I made above is of course even more devastating when it comes to multiplayer wargames. Depending on the game and system used, those could either use up the best part of an evening, or stretch over days or even weeks. Not something that your average 15-30 casual mainstream gamer is going to put up with. :/

< Message edited by jackx -- 7/15/2009 9:20:26 PM >

_____________________________

no truth - no justice
all false belief
blinded by morality
there shall be ... no peace

(in reply to V22 Osprey)

Post #: 68

RE: Enough already! - 7/15/2009 9:31:53 PM

V22 Osprey

Posts: 1593
Joined: 4/8/2008
From: Corona, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: jackx

RTS games are actually among the more unforgiving, or used to be (the last I bought was Dawn of War: Dark Crusade) - mess up your build order, and you are in serious trouble, even in single player.�

The commitment-based argument I made above is of course even more devastating when it comes to multiplayer wargames. Depending on the game and system used, those could either use up the best part of an evening, or stretch over days or even weeks. Not something that your average 15-30 casual mainstream gamer is going to put up with. :/

Well the RTS game games themselves were only designed to last 10 minute multiplayer matches with 20 minutes at the most.However, when I play Conquest of the Aegean(COTA) I played a multiplayer game I had a blast.We got like half way through it took 2 hours to play.I enjoyed that battle.But you are right, a casual gamer would get bored even before the 30 minute mark, let alone 2 hours.

(in reply to jackx)

Post #: 69

RE: Enough already! - 7/15/2009 10:18:19 PM

doomtrader

Posts: 5321
Joined: 7/22/2008
From: Poland
Status: offline

quote:

I don't think he meant it that way, or at least I didn't understand it that way. In a wargame, you typically have a planning phase that preceeds the "action", so to speak, particularly in the first turn (or equivalent). That planning phase is already part of the fun, at least to me, but it's also something I might simply not want if I have only a short amount of time available for gaming, or feel like instant gratification.

This is something what I have in my mind. In other words if I have only 20 minutes I play TDU for example, not Total War. Also many players (as my son) prefere instant action which are slicing, running, crushing, driving etc, not planning where to move your troops.

_____________________________

(in reply to V22 Osprey)

Post #: 70

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 4:35:57 AM

Alexander Seil

Posts: 196
Joined: 4/22/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

quote:

ORIGINAL: jackx

RTS games are actually among the more unforgiving, or used to be (the last I bought was Dawn of War: Dark Crusade) - mess up your build order, and you are in serious trouble, even in single player.�

The commitment-based argument I made above is of course even more devastating when it comes to multiplayer wargames. Depending on the game and system used, those could either use up the best part of an evening, or stretch over days or even weeks. Not something that your average 15-30 casual mainstream gamer is going to put up with. :/

Well the RTS game games themselves were only designed to last 10 minute multiplayer matches with 20 minutes at the most.However, when I play Conquest of the Aegean(COTA) I played a multiplayer game I had a blast.We got like half way through it took 2 hours to play.I enjoyed that battle.But you are right, a casual gamer would get bored even before the 30 minute mark, let alone 2 hours.

You do realize that one of the most profitable genres on PC are MMORPGs, where players routinely sink hours of play (that they pay for monthly, no less, as if buying a new game) into routine, boring activities simply for the sake of a feel of achievement when they're done?

I think most of the opinions in this thread are driven by assumptions about the "casual gamer" that simply don't hold up when examined in light of fact. How come Civilization sells? Is that a twitch game now?

And the twitch games you're describing - real-time strategies like Dawn of War, are notoriously difficult. It's no mean feat to be good at a game like that, and it takes hours of practice to get right. Yes, it's spent in 10 minutes matches, but those people play a lot of matches.

And the REALLY graphics-heavy games like Crysis sometimes are only mainstream in content. How many people can seriously play Crysis on any settings that actually take advantage of the technology, after all?

The truth that no one wants to fess up to is that most wargaming companies are ridiculously elitist in their outlook, and choose not to properly market their games. This fact is then buried in complaints, which are eagerly eaten up by the equally elitist fanbase, that their product is not for the unwashed masses, and only the higher life forms who inhabit wargaming forums are capable of comprehending their brilliant products

And at the end of a long chain of causes, it results in proliferation of safe, boring wargames about the Bulge, D-Day and the American Civil War. All because these companies have such small fan bases that one improper move can ruin them. The reason Paradox could do Victoria was because they could always make up the lost money on other, mainstream projects. It's the same reason someone decided that it was worth taking the risk of adapting a province-based engine from a medieval game to model World War II.

EDIT: All of my examples of good marketing from Paradox...but seriously, the guy who runs Cryptic Comet probably does a better job selling his stuff than most wargame developers who've been in business for a decade. And his company is JUST HIM

< Message edited by Alexander Seil -- 7/16/2009 4:53:48 AM >

(in reply to V22 Osprey)

Post #: 71

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 10:18:35 AM

L�tzow

Posts: 1517
Joined: 7/22/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alexander Seil

You do realize that one of the most profitable genres on PC are MMORPGs, where players routinely sink hours of play (that they pay for monthly, no less, as if buying a new game) into routine, boring activities simply for the sake of a feel of achievement when they're done?

I think most of the opinions in this thread are driven by assumptions about the "casual gamer" that simply don't hold up when examined in light of fact.

You do realize that MMORPG's got adapted to casual gamers as well for some years? I used to play EverQuest pretty hardcore back to the days and even took a longer break from wargaming for this. However, modern MMO's are all about short game phases and transparent game-mechanics, in order to be accessible for a target audience with low perception and attention span. I have to agree with Jackx about the mainstream player and always hated these crowd for their influence on gaming industry.

Actually wargames and certain flight sims have become the last hideaway for hardcore gamers and grognards nowadays. Is it really so hard to understand for you, that we're going to defend this territory?

(in reply to Alexander Seil)

Post #: 72

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 12:31:05 PM

jackx

Posts: 353
Joined: 7/8/2009
From: Germany
Status: offline

MMORPG addicts aren't exactly casual gamers, and probably have about the same level of overall social acceptance as hardcore wargamers, with the added disadvantage that you can probably be the latter a lot easier while maintaining some semblance of a "normal" social life.

Yes, wargamers and wargame developers have a habit to be grognards and act like an arrogant elite. Maybe that cost them the chance to become more accepted by the mainstream, but if that chance was there, it was there in the late '90s/early 2000s, and by now has passed the genre by. While gaming wasn't yet fully acceptable into the "mainstream", establishing a foothold with nich� products could've worked. Now, when you pretty much have to play games (or be aware of them) to "fit in", nich� products are pushed to the side more and more.

Maybe, with demographic change (and the current 15-29 "casual gamers" growing up mentally at some point), there'll be another chance. Wargames also have about 0 marketability for e-sports, which denies them another way in which they could gain more mainstream exposure and acceptance.

< Message edited by jackx -- 7/16/2009 12:35:58 PM >

_____________________________

no truth - no justice
all false belief
blinded by morality
there shall be ... no peace

(in reply to L�tzow)

Post #: 73

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 1:58:20 PM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

Very fascinating discussion, but as a social scientist, and indeed as one specifically doing a bit of research on gaming as a psychosocial phenomenon . . . do you guys have any data to back up any of your impressions about the distributions, compositions, temperament, etc. of these various niches?

Two things I would speculate that are a bit counter to some general themes that are being put forth.

First, these different "crowds" putatively static and 'attached' to their genre or specific game are not likely to be so static at all. Take me for example. 1st computer gaming was Civ I�in college 1991. When I got into Grad School, 1993, I realized that success for me at that time in school and being a Civ Addict would not mix and I quit gaming completely. NO computer games AT ALL from 1993 to 2003 until after I had finished my Ph.D. a lectureship and a postdoc. Next game I bought was Civ3 then Civ3 Conquest, then I discovered mods, and at that point, the doors had been opened.

Pretty soon I got a bit tired of Civ3 in all its myriad modded incarnations and I started snooping around Matrix. Eventually I tried some other stuff too (Age of Empires which I uninstalled in about two hours; Call of Duty which I played through once, etc.). So in the span of about 15 years I have gone of from being a (a) 'standard' college-aged Civ-genre player; to (b) no player at all for ten years; to (c) a very avid Civ player again; to (d) an initiate to the true 'Grog' stuff (Matrix); to (e) a somewhat generalized player who would try various things to see if they appealed to me; to (e) current status as just game slut who'll probably try anything once and tends to get bored with most of them once I figure them out. Am I "Grog" I tend to think so, though I don't ONLY play WiTP or one of these other "speadsheet" addict games like some of these guys, and consequently I don't play those games to a high level of ability. But at this stage I will also try a lot of different things.

The key thing here is that, everyone, or at least most of us with the exception of the guys who play ONE game for centuries on end (WiTP comes to mind) gets bored with the same game and even the same genre eventually. For those of us who do not 'grow out of it' and stop gaming altogether, there is a certain probability we will migrate to other genres, or diversify our gaming 'portfolio' and become at least initiate members of other genres too.

In sum, I would speculate that there is SIGNIFICANT permeability amongst these crowds, and todays 'low perception, low attention' crowd may very readily be tomorrows Grognards who get a woody from manipulating a spreadsheet and running the logistics for an entire theatre of war. The take home message is that: being insular, elitist, and snobby does not serve. It would be smart for any gaming community to encourage newcomers because there is likely to always be some fraction of other communities who might come knocking.

I was gonna say there was a second point but I think that pretty well covers it!

< Message edited by Anthropoid -- 7/16/2009 2:06:15 PM >

_____________________________

The x-ray is her siren song. My ship cannot resist her long. Nearer to my deadly goal. Until the black hole. Gains control...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IkIIlkyZ328&feature=autoplay&list=AL94UKMTqg-9CocLGbd6tpbuQRxyF4FGNr&playnext=3

(in reply to jackx)

Post #: 74

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 2:31:56 PM

vonRocko

Posts: 1447
Joined: 11/4/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

Very fascinating discussion, but as a social scientist, and indeed as one specifically doing a bit of research on gaming as a psychosocial phenomenon . . .

Anthropoid,
As a fellow game slut, I find your post,and the one about the professor who played the online game,fascinating.
There must be some way to profit from this "Research" angle.Perhaps my yearly game purchases can be used as a tax write off! You guys have inspired me to pursue this "research" with renewed vigor.
I will go to the local universety and apply for a grant.

Thanks
"Professor" vonRocko

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 75

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 2:42:30 PM

Anthropoid

Posts: 3107
Joined: 2/22/2005
From: Secret Underground Lair
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: vonRocko

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anthropoid

Very fascinating discussion, but as a social scientist, and indeed as one specifically doing a bit of research on gaming as a psychosocial phenomenon . . .

Anthropoid,
As a fellow game slut, I find your post,and the one about the professor who played the online game,fascinating.
There must be some way to profit from this "Research" angle.Perhaps my yearly game purchases can be used as a tax write off! You guys have inspired me to pursue this "research" with renewed vigor.
I will go to the local universety and apply for a grant.
Thanks
"Professor" vonRocko

Ah, a fellow game slut . . . some advice . . .

Whenever you do 'research,' be sure you wear proper protection when handling your joystick . . . for example, a bib or a doily in case you spill your Doritos or Coca-Cola . . . Also try to be respectful, and sensitive to the feelings of other gamers, even when you realize that you're only playing 'just for fun.' Feelings can get hurt if a false sense of commitment (e.g., especially with PBEM) is conveyed insincerely.

_____________________________

(in reply to vonRocko)

Post #: 76

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 4:08:19 PM

SlickWilhelm

Posts: 1854
Joined: 7/22/2007
From: Rochester, MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arjuna

quote:

ORIGINAL: EdinHouston

I understand people might like to see something different, other than more WW2 games.

But one thing to think about is, maybe the developers are focusing on wars/battles that customers actuallly want to buy. This is already a small niche market, and when you start talking wars/battles like the 30 Years War, well then you are talking about a small niche within a small niche. Good luck trying to make any money on that.

I dont disagree that it wouldnt be fun to see other wars/battles. Personally, I like the ancient, medieval and musket eras more than many wargamers. But i understand that those eras arent as popular, wont sell as well, and therefore are less likely to be made.

Alas this is too true. The facts are that it's a hand to mouth existence for wargame designers. Every title needs to be a winner. Developing titles on esoteric subjects increases the risk that you go out of business. Now we heard this same chorus after HTTR and so we opted to do something different, hence Conquest of the Agean ( COTA ). While this scooped all the awards we kept hearing from potential customers that they were not going to buy it because they were not interested in the Greek or Crete battles. But <G> were they looking forward to our next Bulge game.

I certainly sympathize with this dilemma, Arjuna. And I want you to know that even though I'm not much of a Bulge fan, I'll buy a Bulge game if it's got great gameplay or a fantastic game engine. I bought "Wacht am Rheine" because I love the Close Combat engine, and I'm going to buy BftB because I'm a huge fan of the Panther game engine.

I'm just hoping for a less well-represented battle with your next game for that engine, that's all.

_____________________________

Beta Tester - Brother Against Brother
Beta Tester - Commander: The Great War
Beta Tester - Desert War 1940-42

(in reply to Arjuna)

Post #: 77

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 4:55:26 PM

Alexander Seil

Posts: 196
Joined: 4/22/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: L�tzow

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alexander Seil

You do realize that one of the most profitable genres on PC are MMORPGs, where players routinely sink hours of play (that they pay for monthly, no less, as if buying a new game) into routine, boring activities simply for the sake of a feel of achievement when they're done?

I think most of the opinions in this thread are driven by assumptions about the "casual gamer" that simply don't hold up when examined in light of fact.

You do realize that MMORPG's got adapted to casual gamers as well for some years? I used to play EverQuest pretty hardcore back to the days and even took a longer break from wargaming for this. However, modern MMO's are all about short game phases and transparent game-mechanics, in order to be accessible for a target audience with low perception and attention span. I have to agree with Jackx about the mainstream player and always hated these crowd for their influence on gaming industry.

Actually wargames and certain flight sims have become the last hideaway for hardcore gamers and grognards nowadays. Is it really so hard to understand for you, that we're going to defend this territory?

Defend this territory?

These are GAMES. No, you're not going to be remembered as a martyr for holding the gates against Asiatic Starcraft-playing hordes, sorry

quote:

ORIGINAL: jackx

MMORPG addicts aren't exactly casual gamers, and probably have about the same level of overall social acceptance as hardcore wargamers, with the added disadvantage that you can probably be the latter a lot easier while maintaining some semblance of a "normal" social life.

Do you ever get down from the ivory tower to actually communicate with people? My last gf was a WoW player for a while (with a few lvl 70 characters). Hot as hell, works as a business consultant. What was that about social acceptance? Social acceptance by whom? The only group that deliberately isolates itself are wargamers, who look down on everyone, including other wargamers.

quote:

Yes, wargamers and wargame developers have a habit to be grognards and act like an arrogant elite. Maybe that cost them the chance to become more accepted by the mainstream, but if that chance was there, it was there in the late '90s/early 2000s, and by now has passed the genre by. While gaming wasn't yet fully acceptable into the "mainstream", establishing a foothold with nich� products could've worked. Now, when you pretty much have to play games (or be aware of them) to "fit in", nich� products are pushed to the side more and more.

Tosh. I already gave multiple examples of this being patently false.

Also, playing games to fit in? What kind of a warped high school movie society do you live in? No one cares about what you play. Outside of a handful of wargaming forums.

quote:

Maybe, with demographic change (and the current 15-29 "casual gamers" growing up mentally at some point), there'll be another chance. Wargames also have about 0 marketability for e-sports, which denies them another way in which they could gain more mainstream exposure and acceptance.

Thanks for proving my point about obnoxious elitism. I'm 22 by the way, been playing wargames since the age of 14

EDIT: Also, e-sports are mainstream now? Where, in Korea?

< Message edited by Alexander Seil -- 7/16/2009 4:59:23 PM >

(in reply to L�tzow)

Post #: 78

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 6:24:16 PM

vonRocko

Posts: 1447
Joined: 11/4/2008
Status: offline

[/quote]

Ah, a fellow game slut . . . some advice . . .

Whenever you do 'research,' be sure you wear proper protection when handling your joystick . . . for example, a bib or a doily in case you spill your Doritos or Coca-Cola . . .

[/quote]

Thanks Anthropoid! This is the kind of advice I can use to start my professional career!

(in reply to Anthropoid)

Post #: 79

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 7:19:49 PM

jackx

Posts: 353
Joined: 7/8/2009
From: Germany
Status: offline

Alexander Seil: Not sure how I ticked you off, but I can assure you that I didn't intend to.� I don't leave my ivory tower to go to online forums to pick a fight. ;)

As with what I go by (in general, as anthropoid brought it up also): just personal experience. That's mostly other students, on and off campus, and random people at the bus stop/on the bus etc. And on campus, gaming, and particularly MMORPGs, are absolutely taboo. You'd never ever mention that you did that, because somehow, that'd convey the idea that you're a lazy slacker and don't take your studies seriously at all, and also (possibly) have no social life. It's ridiculous at times, because talking about excessive partying in no way seems to undermine your "seriousness", but gaming can always put it in question, even when your work results clearly show that there is no reason for doubt at all.
And if it's to be girlfriend stories, I have a wonderful one about a date where we were both trying our very best to convince the other we were not playing games. About 5 minutes into the conversation on that subject, it was extremely obvious that we both spent a lot of time playing games, but neither of us wanted to own up and admit it, and it basically ruined the whole thing, because we were both too busy pretending to do much else. Sad, yes, and you may laugh at my expense (looking back, I do, too), but I hope it also helps explain where my perception of "social acceptance" comes from.

(I'm 24 btw., and Alex definitely has me beat when it comes to serious wargaming. I spent too much time on FPS. ;))

The "fitting in" part would come from my two younger half-brothers. I got picked on at school for playing games, because that was "uncool". Now they get picked on because they don't play.

Now that I re-read the mentally growing up comment, I realize that I should've elaborated on that. I meant that as a reference to that groups general avoidance of anything that remotely resembles responsibility. In German, I'd be talking of their "Beliebigkeit", their refusal to make any lasting commitments. That's a general issue, which carries over into gaming as well, of course I wasn't trying to imply that a certain type of gaming behaviour alone caused mental immaturity, but unfortunately, I realize that the post can be read that way. My apologies.

Edit: I'm placing such emphasis on those fairly young age groups because IIRC, that's where most of the video game sales are... if I'm wrong about that, please let me know, as it's been a while since I've debated this subject, and I didn't bother to update my facts for this one. Lunchbreak posting is bad, and I have no excuse. :(

< Message edited by jackx -- 7/16/2009 9:07:44 PM >

_____________________________

no truth - no justice
all false belief
blinded by morality
there shall be ... no peace

(in reply to vonRocko)

Post #: 80

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 7:41:40 PM

hgilmer3

Posts: 530
Joined: 12/28/2008
Status: offline

In my opinion, and I don't post a lot, it is that The Battle of the Bulge is perceived as "sexy" and the Aegean Battles are not. I'm not a marketer, but I could just see one of those fancy marketing guys saying, "I can sell Battle of the Bulge. It rolls off the tongue. I can't sell Conquest of the Aegean. I can sell Germany against the Allies, the U.S., the British and I can sell the U.S. against Japan in the Pacific. I can't sell the Germans against the Greeks."

(in reply to jackx)

Post #: 81

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 7:46:23 PM

V22 Osprey

Posts: 1593
Joined: 4/8/2008
From: Corona, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alexander Seil

Also, playing games to fit in? What kind of a warped high school movie society do you live in? No one cares about what you play. Outside of a handful of wargaming forums.

I'm 16.I have a game club at my school.One day I brought my laptop, and started play John Tiller's Campaign Series.Everyone would come over, but once they would see I was playing a wargame, I would get remarks like ''Go play some real games'' or ''Thats boring, dont you want to play Call of Duty?''.People do seem to care what you play.

(in reply to Alexander Seil)

Post #: 82

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 9:07:02 PM

SlickWilhelm

Posts: 1854
Joined: 7/22/2007
From: Rochester, MN
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alexander Seil

Also, playing games to fit in? What kind of a warped high school movie society do you live in? No one cares about what you play. Outside of a handful of wargaming forums.

I'm 16.I have a game club at my school.One day I brought my laptop, and started play John Tiller's Campaign Series.Everyone would come over, but once they would see I was playing a wargame, I would get remarks like ''Go play some real games'' or ''Thats boring, dont you want to play Call of Duty?''.People do seem to care what you play.

Don't worry, V22. Stick to your guns and play the games that interest you. A very nice thing happens when you get out of high school. The whole peer pressure thing virtually disappears over night.

_____________________________

Beta Tester - Brother Against Brother
Beta Tester - Commander: The Great War
Beta Tester - Desert War 1940-42

(in reply to V22 Osprey)

Post #: 83

RE: Enough already! - 7/16/2009 11:50:44 PM

Hertston

Posts: 3564
Joined: 8/17/2002
From: Cornwall, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: L�tzow

CS:Shockforce is a good example about how a former intriguing series went down the drain, as the dev's decided to target a larger audience by introducing real-time. I did not bother with ToW 2 but according to forum activity sales numbers shouldn't be too high as well.

It's a good example of nothing of the sort, IMHO. I'm a huge fan of Shock Force and have had far more fun from it than CM1... a huge part of that appeal being that it isn't CM1. I'll take evolution rather than stagnation any day, and real-time CM is, frankly, superior to WEGO one as a wargame, not a click-fest. If you want to play it in the same old 'intriguing' way, you still can. As to sales numbers, those for CM:SF were actually much better than expected. ToW2 I don't know about, but that was always a thinking man's RTS rather than a wargame, as was it's predecessor.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Arsan

I would say its also a good example about how sometimes "another WW2" game is far better than an unique setting
USA Marines vs Syrians in a completely fictional war?? C'mon!
I woudl had gladly taken another CM Normandy game... like the next one they are making...
Good, Battlefront! Lesson learned!

Totally disagree, I'm sick of "another WW2 game". Again, in my opinion, that was the last thing the series needed.. the same bloody thing with prettier graphics. Whoopee-doo. The reason for the fictional scenario is actually pretty obvious, they wanted to do contemporary warfare. But our guys were still getting killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, hence a game with either of those settings would have been in pretty poor taste, and would probably get an appropriate reaction from the press.

Sadly BF always intended to go back to WW2 after Shock Force (you could have done CM:Vietnam, guys) although, mercifully, at least we got two expansions (including the the upcoming Brit one) first.

(in reply to Arsan)

Post #: 84

RE: Enough already! - 7/17/2009 12:05:07 AM

V22 Osprey

Posts: 1593
Joined: 4/8/2008
From: Corona, CA
Status: offline

CM:Vietnam would have been nice, but then they would have to find some way to add helicopters to the game, because whats a Vietnam game without Hueys in it?

Or BF could have made a World War 3 type game using CMx2 where you battle russian tanks on the north German Plain.

(in reply to Hertston)

Post #: 85

RE: Enough already! - 7/17/2009 12:20:14 AM

V22 Osprey

Posts: 1593
Joined: 4/8/2008
From: Corona, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Slick Wilhelm

quote:

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alexander Seil

Also, playing games to fit in? What kind of a warped high school movie society do you live in? No one cares about what you play. Outside of a handful of wargaming forums.

I'm 16.I have a game club at my school.One day I brought my laptop, and started play John Tiller's Campaign Series.Everyone would come over, but once they would see I was playing a wargame, I would get remarks like ''Go play some real games'' or ''Thats boring, dont you want to play Call of Duty?''.People do seem to care what you play.

Don't worry, V22. Stick to your guns and play the games that interest you. A very nice thing happens when you get out of high school. The whole peer pressure thing virtually disappears over night.

Yep, definitlylooking forward to the end of High School.

(in reply to SlickWilhelm)

Post #: 86

RE: Enough already! - 7/17/2009 9:12:38 AM

L�tzow

Posts: 1517
Joined: 7/22/2008
From: Germany
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hertston

It's a good example of nothing of the sort, IMHO. I'm a huge fan of Shock Force and have had far more fun from it than CM1... a huge part of that appeal being that it isn't CM1. I'll take evolution rather than stagnation any day, and real-time CM is, frankly, superior to WEGO one as a wargame, not a click-fest. If you want to play it in the same old 'intriguing' way, you still can. As to sales numbers, those for CM:SF were actually much better than expected. ToW2 I don't know about, but that was always a thinking man's RTS rather than a wargame, as was it's predecessor.

It's quite some time ago I looked into Shockforce, but as far as I remember you merely got 1 tank + 1 armored car ( with different layouts) model. In addition to introduction of real-time, the way to command units got changed, the fictional campaign had a generic feeling and asymmetric warfare wasn't implemented well, due to lack of civilians. I have no problems with modern conflicts or innovations but the one thing I dislike is, when a publisher disregards his fan-base in order to approach the mainstream. That's what Battlefront did with their recent titles, in contradiction to Matrix, HPS or Shrapnel, who still stick to their guns. Even Paradox took the other road again with HoI 3, in regard to the blooper of EU:Rome.

(in reply to Hertston)

Post #: 87

RE: Enough already! - 7/17/2009 9:24:48 AM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hertston
Totally disagree, I'm sick of "another WW2 game". Again, in my opinion, that was the last thing the series needed.. the same bloody thing with prettier graphics. Whoopee-doo. The reason for the fictional scenario is actually pretty obvious, they wanted to do contemporary warfare. But our guys were still getting killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, hence a game with either of those settings would have been in pretty poor taste, and would probably get an appropriate reaction from the press.

Sadly BF always intended to go back to WW2 after Shock Force (you could have done CM:Vietnam, guys) although, mercifully, at least we got two expansions (including the the upcoming Brit one) first.

I agree - I was very disappointed they were going back to WWII. Man - CM:Six Day War? CM:Yom Kippur? CM:Vietnam? A little effort and thought.

I suspect they were going back due to the "outcry" of the original CM'ers. They just did not like the new route. Change is always very difficult to take people through.

(in reply to Hertston)

Post #: 88

RE: Enough already! - 7/17/2009 9:26:09 AM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey

CM:Vietnam would have been nice, but then they would have to find some way to add helicopters to the game, because whats a Vietnam game without Hueys in it?

Or BF could have made a World War 3 type game using CMx2 where you battle russian tanks on the north German Plain.

My bold - about the same as a Pacific Air War game without the primary torpedo and dive bombers I'd guess

(in reply to V22 Osprey)

Post #: 89

RE: Enough already! - 7/17/2009 10:43:52 AM

JudgeDredd

Posts: 8573
Joined: 11/14/2003
From: Scotland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: L�tzow
...when a publisher disregards his fan-base in order to approach the mainstream. That's what Battlefront did with their recent titles, in contradiction to Matrix, HPS or Shrapnel, who still stick to their guns. Even Paradox took the other road again with HoI 3, in regard to the blooper of EU:Rome.

I respectfully disagree. Whilst there may have been some "mainstream" thought (and hell why not - they are a company after all), I think they tried damn hard to take on board existing CM lovers. They kept the same WEGO and even introduced the "blue bar" (I still have absolutely no clue what that furore was about) even though the game plays much, much better in real time. Imo the game is a fantastic addition. Not a click fest and not overwhelming and very little micro management.

Also, even if you still want to argue they disregarded their fan base - sometimes that just has to happen. People are resistent to change when they are in their comfort zone - it's left to other bodies to pull us forward.

I enjoy it and cannot wait for the British add on.

(in reply to L�tzow)

Post #: 90