|
Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (12/1/2002 9:34:38 PM)
|
Well Hearts of Iron is NOT turn based of course, but I was aware of that. A bit unforunate of course.
That it is RTS, is a term that might be open to argument, but then it is merely an argument over the worth of term really.
If the game can be paused, if the game's time factor pace can be paced down slow enough so that it makes a difference, I might be willing to grant that the "time" is sufficiently "real" to warrant the term having any practical meaning.
If the time simulation is reasonable, then there might be a point to the term "strategy" having some merit. If there is no realistic time simulation, then there won't be any point to "strategic" thinking. You will be limited to "tactics".
From what I have heard around though, there might be enough to satisfy my basic needs. Of course if the game was turn based, my needs would be met even more so. But then the time factor as designed for Hearts of Iron would have to be adjusted to standard increments.
Still, the only meaningful detail will be (for me), is the AI capable of making this game (even if the "time" is sufficiently "real") worth playing. Because an accurately scaled game with a dumb AI is really just as bad as a poorly designed game with a dumb AI correct?
Now as it goes, we still have a window for a game company/designer to provide us with a good turn based fully global WW2 game that incorporates research and production, economics and politics as well as a detailed military simulation.
Of course some game companies are going to look and see Axis and Allies and say ok the schmuck consumer already has his game, and the supposedly superior gamer has his Strategic Command (and they will no doubt settle for disagreeing with me, that the game doesn't cut it).
A lot will conclude that there is no money in satisfying a small niche market that wants a game up to A3R standards.
So Kuniworth, your burden (and as this is your thread, you are in charge, hence it is your burden) is to show not us, but the wargaming market that you can actually make money off of this dream.
As it goes, after being here for about 2 years, a normal response to a forum poll is lucky to get 30 or so replies (regardless of the question).
If you can get 30 guys to say they will support your game, guess what, you still have nothing.
If you can get someone to front you 50-100,000 bucks, you might have a chance (at what we are not certain of though).
Of course you might also have merely found a wierd way to spend all that cash making a wargame for a few hundred guys, and in the end, not see you making any sort of profit.
Can you find enough cash in the first place?
I know I don't have any.
|
|
|
|
