Les_the_Sarge_9_1
Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000 Status: offline
|
200 counters or 2000 as long as the game is fun. ASL or Fire in the East, both are great (but I can't set up Fire in the East currently). But miscellaneous counters on a computer game does sound odd. I mean ASL used a lot of memory aid misc. counters for a reason, it was a board game, and the humans got to do all the work. If a hex is subject to "barbed wire" I find it odd for it to be indicated with a "counter" image. Not the end of the world, but it does strike me as ignoring the reason for making the game a computer game. I thought computers were supposed to make the games easier? Map graphics, hmmm if I want to suffer sexual arrousal, forget wasting your time on wargame graphics. I thought the map in the image looked great (but what would be the purpose of putting "more" in that image). A good game might as well make use of the power of a computer to give us colourful maps, instead of those bleak dawn of computer wargaming views. But I only require the maps to look as stunning as the board game maps. 3 dimensional is possible, but so what it's possible, it doesn't contribute anything useful. As far as the "future" of wargaming is concerned. I see the "future" like this. Eventually the RTS crowd (RTS or Continous or RTT whatever, anything not turn based), and the Shooter mob, that want more and more and more, will in time progress so far away from our dull wargames (that look like board games), that they will eventually be no longer sufficiently similar enough looking to be mistaken for "wargamers. To me a wargame will always be something that looks like a board game. A computer might allow me to play it sans other humans, or it might allow me to play it online against persons not physically present, but I require it to look like a board game. A board game's worth is not measured in the cool looking counters. It is not measured by its graphically intense mapsheet/board. It is not determined by the size and or complexity of it's manual. Afrika Korps is a great game. It has dull looking counters, a bland as hell map, and it has a rules pamphlet (it isn't really a manual, not enough pages for that term really). ASL is a great game. The counters are legion, and possess incredible detailed images. The maps are stunning. And the manual, well I have a core rules binder, an optional rules binder (both 3 inch binders), a scenarios binder, a binder with my Annuals in it. But that doesn't mean the game has a problem, just that it requires a lot of shelf space hehe. If the conditions were "you will pay me to play an RTS game, or, I can pay you to play a board game", can I get a price reduction if I stock your brand of beer in the fridge. I will ALWAYS pick a board game experience over a computer game experience. A dull looking board game will always be better than the glitziest computer game to me. No amount of simulation on my computer will ever rival actually playing you a game at my table. I have met numerous guys online here. I have numerous I am glad to call friend. But nothing will ever replace having that person stare at me on the other side of the table. There is something about playing my turn, while my oponent thumbs the manual looking for the thing he has missed that will give him an edge. There is a special charm to watching him roll the dice knowing all my work depends on what happens next. Watching him either jump up and holler in triumph or curse his luck. You just don't get that with online. Getting to actually know the person, and get inside their head. To see them think out their move. And all this is possible with a dull looking wargame. And the people that like a game such as this will always be small in number. And that small number is here now. It was here 10 years ago. It was here during the golden age of wargaming. We have never been a large audience. Our numbers look swelled artificially. it is thanks to the glitz and glamour of fancy looking games. Those that need that glitz will eventually want more, and more and more. In time they will scorn us grognards and are dull games. And then the hybrids will die out, and once more we will be a distinct hobby, with small numbers. None of all this really bothers me eh. I have a lot of interests that only interest a small audience. You can please some of the people some of the time, and some of the people most of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time. I am in the some of the people some of the time category. I am not drawn to RTS or Shooters. It has no charm for me. I am a dull turn based gamer, and I am part of a minority. So there is little point trying to get rich off of me. I will only buy at best one computer game out of an entire years market potential.
_____________________________
I LIKE that my life bothers them, Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
|