|
Veldor -> RE: Gamespy - Game of the year awards 2005 (12/22/2005 12:19:03 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Hertston
quote:
ORIGINAL: Veldor
The only thing wrong is that more wargames aren't being released by Matrix as well. And on that point I agree. For that matter there aren't enough new computer wargames period being made by anyone, much less released.
I don't have the numbers to hand, but I would guess that if you include Matrix (this year? Tin Soldiers: Caesar, Battles in Italy, Flashpoint Germany, War Plan Orange), HPS, and Shrapnel the numbers of computer wargames being released are higher than ever before. There are others, too, like Madminute, and Battlefront were just in between years with two huge releases due in 2006.
Let me clarify then. For those that can't list every Matrix release by name and release date, it would certainly seem as if the Matrix release rate for wargame vs non-wargame is pretty close to 50/50. Less wargames get made then other games so as long as a company is going to publish non-wargames there are going to be lots more great games to pick from. They are generally next to done already when picked up as compared to many wargame titles that we are still sitting around and waiting for. I am not spending much effort in articulating this feeling perfectly, but I do personally understand where the thoughts of many come from in this regard and, wrong as they certainly are, don't feel much differently myself.
But I personally don't blame Matrix for that. I don't see anything they could do differently besides give hordes of cash to would-be developers who might wish to make wargames. And I don't really even think that would help much, if at all, because wargame development has become (or always been) more of a labor of love anyway then money. One day Gary Grigsby and company will "retire" and the already small group of wargame developers will be even smaller. There is little to motivate new developers/programmers. We mostly see the same names over and over again that we have for multiple decades now. And while that has its pluses it doesn't change the fact that there just aren't enough DIFFERENT people making wargames. And if Matrix is going to be a wargame publisher, then they can't publish wargames if no one is making them.
So that is what I am angry about. MORE people should be making wargames thus MATRIX should be publishing more wargames.
Period.
quote:
Why would developers make re-hashes of old board games (isn't that what Vassel is supposed all about?) rather than new and innovative titles like the Combat Mission Games, WitP and HttR?
Because it can very well take less time (perhaps even a lot less) and have a higher chance for success. You also don't have to market it as much since much of the potential buying audience is already at least vaguely familiar with what kind of game it is. Vassel doesn't give you any enforced game mechanics or A.I. and thats just the beginning of issues there. One also shouldn't have to worry what Computer Squad Leader or Computer World in Flames might play like. Many already know the rules and what to expect from the gameplay itself. Also, though you may not agree, to me a boardgame port forces a certain "simplicity" on the game and rules that new more innovative games like WiTP or even HTTR don't have to adhere too. Even some of the most complex boardgames have simpler rules, or at the very least simpler game mechanics, then many newer more innovative titles. Thats not to say more complexity isn't better, but with the freedom in that regard that computers offer, too often the added detail really adds little of value to the gameplay itself or otherwise detracts from what in a boardgame world might have originally been a much better game. Perhaps boardgame ports are just more familiar feeling for the lazy ones among us. I'm not sure but on nastalgic value alone I will pay $49.99 for Paradox's Squad Leader and whatever Matrix decides to charge for games like EiA and CWiF. Many such as I will blindly buy titles like these, whereas my dollar has to be earned with substantially more marketing effort in comparison to get me to buy, say CoTA.
|
|
|
|
