RE: My Reiew (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Napoleonics] >> Commander - Napoleon at War



Message

sterckxe -> RE: My Reiew (11/20/2008 8:46:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins
I agree with Iain and Johan that there's been a need for more introductory wargames and the Commander series fills this need well.


No argument there - on the contrary - it's one of the points I keep harping on that most wargame developers seem to always want to make monster games with a difficulty level off the charts, while there's a significant demand out there for simpler, quick-playing games.

This game fills that demand - absolutely - but the point I was trying to get across is that trying to market it to the "grog" segment is counter-productive.

Companies like Avalon Hill used to categorize their games according to a difficulty level, which really was a "grog" level, so that people looking for a simple game wouldn't buy Third Reich or Squad Leader and be hugely disappointed and never buy from them again. Conversely, people into Squad Leader were told that Tactics II wasn't for them for the same reason.

Or to use an analogy : If you're selling fruit you might convince an apple-buying customer to buy a banana when you tell him it tastes just like an apple, but you'll never see him in your shop again afterwards when he finds out. So what's gained in the short run is lost in the long run.

If your game is a banana, market it as a banana.

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx




Adam Parker -> RE: My Reiew (11/20/2008 9:08:06 AM)

And the other thing that Avalon Hill did with their Level 1 and 2 games was to ensure that their outcomes were historically educational.



sterckxe -> RE: My Reiew (11/20/2008 9:52:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Adam Parker
And the other thing that Avalon Hill did with their Level 1 and 2 games was to ensure that their outcomes were historically educational.


I'm reading the first years of The General magazine currently, and while the educational angle was stressed (no doubt for marketing reasons - wanting parents to buy their kids "educational" games), the historical angle was usually covered by sending a guy to the library an afternoon (literally) to get an OOB and a map. That's why many of their early games have such glaring historical errors.

They did seek out famous generals to go over and endorse their games though - McAuliffe for the Bulge game and IIRC MacArthur for Midway. Now, there's an idea ... [;)]

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx



IainMcNeil -> RE: My Reiew (11/20/2008 3:24:35 PM)

Exactly, its about fun. If you don't get it then fine - don't play. No problem! You don't have to spend time to justify not liking it by picking out historical abstractions you're not comfortable with. Just don't play :)

Fun is sadly lacking in the majority of wargames these days and instead there is excessive detail, accuracy and scale. I don't want a job - I have one already - give me a break and some fun!



vonRocko -> RE: My Reiew (11/20/2008 5:45:35 PM)

Fun is lacking because the computer game industry consistantly put out incomplete games! They always need patches.Very seldom is there a rulebook manual that adaquately explains the game. They hype (lie?) the games capabilities on the box and prior to release, then you find the game rarely matches their description.
Game companies take the fun out the first time I have to mess with files and deal with dead AI,s, Then I have to work at fixing their product! And I PAY for this!
Maybe when companies start releasing complete games, the fun will return!
I might be getting cynical as I age,but after several purchases,just in this year, of incomplete or unplayable games, I'm really getting disgusted.
It seems to be getting worse,not better,industry wide!
JUst my opinion, Thanks



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1