(Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

AlBW -> (1/9/2003 2:06:05 AM)

Here's a little psychoanalysis for you IJN-Shinano. I find it interesting that your Matrix handle is that of a ship got sunk before it's first battle.



IJN_Shinano -> (1/9/2003 2:49:18 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by AlBW
[B]Here's a little psychoanalysis for you IJN-Shinano. I find it interesting that your Matrix handle is that of a ship got sunk before it's first battle. [/B][/QUOTE]

Ha!
But man, it looked spiffy for the thirty minutes she sailed after launch!

Gotta love those [I]Yamato[/I]-class hulls.



brent_2 -> (1/9/2003 3:02:07 AM)

[IMG]http://www.warships1.com/JAPcv07_Shinano_art.jpg[/IMG]



Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (1/9/2003 3:27:03 AM)

Once upon a time the world was flat, of course it wasn't, but everyone knew it was.

Thats said, no matter how many people you can get to like an idea, sometimes the truth is totally different.

Now I have a room full of wargames that CAN and DO appeal to total non wargamers. Its all in how you approach them.

There are soooo many movies made today that are nothing but flash bang special effects.
Joe movie goer likes them, and they sell lots of tickets. Which is fine if you don't mind calling Joe movie goer a dumb ox in the process for some easy money.
But those films ARE insultingly inaccurate all the same. And all they are about, is making money, by making glitzy flash bang special effects dripping movies for some money.
All perfectly legal, there isn't any a law against making grossly inaccurate movies.

Same with wargames. Go ahead dummy them down, appeal to the base nature of the common masses, make some money. It is all legal after all.

But don't expect to stand there (or sit there) and tell me about how you are doing it for the good of the hobby.

THAT is arrogance, not what you are saying of me.

Every glitzy glamour filled graphically dependent wargame is really saying that to appeal to Joe non grognard old school gamer, you have to sell him with cheap base nature tricks.

I have taken several persons with zero wargaming experience, and shown them that for all its intimidating manaul size, ASL is not that hard to learn. I didn't make it cute to sucker him in.

Disguising a game in colourful prettiness is the same as putting sexy broads in the packaging.
Hell if you reeeeeally want to attract attention fast, why not just put sexy broads on the packaging. You could even say that wargaming instills confidence and women love confident males. So play our game and you can increase your chances of scoring.



pasternakski -> (1/9/2003 3:34:40 AM)

Les, that gives me a great idea. The next box art for UV should show an SBD diving not on a Japanese carrier, but on a buxom naked blonde with her legs spread and that thousand pounder headed straight for tuna town ... I can't think of a single grognard I know who wouldn't be attracted to that.



Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (1/9/2003 4:08:21 AM)

Well it would add to the phrase "divide and conquer".

It increases the marketability of terms like "penetration", "defense capability"and "replay value".

Some terms like hardware and software would be interesting to discuss. You would get a lot of amusing cross talk on the best operating system to use.

And yer wife would likely not like your games as always.



CCB -> (1/9/2003 4:28:17 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]Dave who do you have doing your PR eh?

I mention VASL all the time, but you get all the blessings hehe.

Darn cute pictures, hey I posted the link first on this thread too:( [/B][/QUOTE]

I'm sorry Les, I thought VASL was only for ASL. I didn't know it could be used for other games as well, such as Panzerblitz:

[IMG]http://www.vasl.org/vassal/PZB/PB_screenshot.gif[/IMG]

As well as making your own games, as Dave pointed out.



Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (1/9/2003 4:31:38 AM)

Yah but the guys making these programs are all misguided fools that will never amount to anything I guess. Or at least that is what is apparently the case, or so I am told.

No one wants to play simple board games anymore, just dingbats like me that are to few to number.

What do I know about marketing wargames.



carllafong -> (1/9/2003 4:57:45 AM)

:confused: I'am new to "Forums", and would like to say that this discussion is a bit childish. I have played face to face wargames for years (ASL, PanzerBlitz, etc...), and Computer Wargames for years (PACWAR, War in Russia, Battleground series etc...). There is NOTHING like playing against a Human opponent; However, TCP/IP and PBEM are much easier to "DO" for people with "A Life". I got really sick of doing line of sight with a string or rubberband, leaving a game set-up in my living room for weeks. The computer wargame market is a godsend. You can look at food as fuel only, and live off of Mac and Cheese, and you can fill your home with motel "art", and be quite content. But to imply that someone with a more complex palette is somehow less than a "Grognard", is a sad thing.

Me

P.S. I play "Combat Mission" and found it much more enjoyable than "Close Combat".



Marc von Martial -> (1/9/2003 5:30:23 AM)

Les,

nobody here ever doubted that good gameplay and historical accuracy is something that should not be held as a major goal in developing a wargame. Obviously something that you didnīt really catch during this discussion.

[QUOTE]Same with wargames. Go ahead dummy them down, appeal to the base nature of the common masses, make some money. It is all legal after all.

But don't expect to stand there (or sit there) and tell me about how you are doing it for the good of the hobby.

THAT is arrogance, not what you are saying of me.[/QUOTE]

Nobody wants to dummy them down. That is why you have

- Designers / Developers
- Programmers
- Graphic Artists (last but not least)

developing games together.

I donīt see how artists doing their job to make the game "look good" destracts the Designers from developing a good wargame. Thatīs what itīs all about.

[QUOTE]Yah but the guys making these programs are all misguided fools that will never amount to anything I guess. Or at least that is what is apparently the case, or so I am told.

No one wants to play simple board games anymore, just dingbats like me that are to few to number.

What do I know about marketing wargames.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]Disguising a game in colourful prettiness is the same as putting sexy broads in the packaging.
Hell if you reeeeeally want to attract attention fast, why not just put sexy broads on the packaging. You could even say that wargaming instills confidence and women love confident males. So play our game and you can increase your chances of scoring.[/QUOTE]

Sorry but thatīs just pathetic. You obviously have no interest in seeing the points of making a wargame also look good.



Ludovic Coval -> (1/9/2003 6:19:23 AM)

Les,

Like most players, I want good graphics for wargames that I play. Trying to use latest graphics tools may be not as critical than in RTS game but is still, IMHO, an important factor : Players will spend hours front of their screen.

But to anwser initial Joe98 question, graphics in wargame cannot rivalize with RTS one. Not because developers/artist are lazzy but because a wargame need to show far more informations.

And as monitor is the only way to show informations, there is a critical need to have them visible before having them nice. The HPS game may look ugly (question of taste however) if compared to others, non-wargames, products but they suceed pretty well in balancing informations/readability.

LC.



SwampYankee68 -> (1/9/2003 7:11:23 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Marc Schwanebeck
[B]Les,

nobody here ever doubted that good gameplay and historical accuracy is something that should not be held as a major goal in developing a wargame. Obviously something that you didnīt really catch during this discussion.



Nobody wants to dummy them down. That is why you have

- Designers / Developers
- Programmers
- Graphic Artists (last but not least)

developing games together.

I donīt see how artists doing their job to make the game "look good" destracts the Designers from developing a good wargame. Thatīs what itīs all about.





Sorry but thatīs just pathetic. You obviously have no interest in seeing the points of making a wargame also look good. [/B][/QUOTE]

Uhm, Marc, just an observation here. Do you really think that you are going to change Les' outlook? At this point, you have to just l accept it's the way he feels, while realising (THANKFULLY!!) that he doesn't speak for as many as he claims he does. You're wasting your breath arguing the points of his diatribes, IMHO. It's your breath, if you enjoy arguing the same points over and over, I'll grant, but it'll only cause a restatement of the same points...I'm not knocking Les, I'm just saying his oft stated opinions are heartfelt, and it won't change anything arguing logically on a point by point basis.



BrubakerII -> (1/9/2003 10:54:39 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]The boards would function equally well if drawn with crayons though, I know, because I have drawn a few, and they work as well. But it is more fun using something drawn by a better artist.

Amen Les (though I think this is contrary to your arguement). This is why I like nice artwork in my games - otherwise I could draw on my monitor with crayons and have just as much fun right?

quote:

Fact one, I AM a grognard, so if I say a grognard wants such and such a thing, it's worth remembering a grognard said it.

Fact two, I like board games more than any software wargames. That said, it is unlikely you will be able to add sufficient graphical thrill to matter to a grognard.
Because I am a grognard, and I just said so.


This is where you lose me Les - my head is spinning. Oh well, not to worry, best of luck to you. If you ever 'lower' yourself to play some of these wargames, look me up I would be happy to play.

Brubaker - out.



AlBW -> (1/9/2003 7:53:20 PM)

[QUOTE]But man, it looked spiffy for the thirty minutes she sailed after launch![/QUOTE]

You have a good sense of humor. I take back all those nasty things I said about you. I wouldn't want to appear "childish" or anything. :rolleyes:



Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (1/9/2003 9:28:55 PM)

I have never once said I was "better" than anyone.

I have never once said I was always right.

To assume such, is to merely give me credit for something I have not asked for.

But I am willing to say, that making games full of graphical details, just to make them attractive to non grognards, is the same as prostituting the game.

If you can't make a game viable in the absence of flash, then you are NOT as good as YOU assume you are.

I have made it clear I am NOT a genius in design, but I AM making it clear, that flash is just not a viable alternative.

To say that this is not what is being done, is pure garbage. The number of wargames released for the computer, that have put accuracy first, and appearance second is to small to count.

If all the hobby wants to produce is colourful eye candy games that are nothing better than silly fun, then accept it and stop pretending to be doing otherwise.
If that is all the consumer base wants, then that is all you will get to sell. But don't attempt to state you are doing anything else.

As for how many people I speak for, and how many people like what I have said on this matter, I am not in this conversation to win a popularity poll eh.
I have no idea how many people see it my way. I have no idea how many people have read the thread and agreed and said nothing.
So far there has only been a few posters on this thread that have said anything to the contrary of what I have said. So it is not like my points have been refuted in a large way either.

Computer wargaming is not exactly a hobby that has several decades behind it. I am unwilling to make grand statements of its worth based on 5-10 years of production.
Advances in tech might well render the hobby of computer wargaming defunct in 5 to 10 years just as easily.
Eventually there will be only so much a person can get out of flashy packaging and spiffy graphics.
At that time, you better have a firm reputation for being able to produce games of substance.

Board gaming is already there. So in 10 years from now, it will not have anything to prove to anyone. And it won;'t have a past history of products that were all flash and no substance.

A plate of gravy and a single bite of steak is not a meal guys.



Reiryc -> (1/9/2003 10:38:13 PM)

Les....

quote:

But I am willing to say, that making games full of graphical details, just to make them attractive to non grognards, is the same as prostituting the game.


No it is not prostituting the game. To suggest otherwise is pure stupidity and ignorance. Adding graphical details to increase the enjoyment of the game and increase the potential market size does not in any way detract from it being a good wargame full of details and accuracy.

quote:

If you can't make a game viable in the absence of flash, then you are NOT as good as YOU assume you are.


If you can't see that it doesn't detract from the quality of the game then you are NOT as smart as YOU assume you are.

quote:

I have made it clear I am NOT a genius in design, but I AM making it clear, that flash is just not a viable alternative.


I agree here...you aren't a genious in design...

quote:

To say that this is not what is being done, is pure garbage. The number of wargames released for the computer, that have put accuracy first, and appearance second is to small to count.


Too small to count? How the h'ell can something be too small to count? Is counting beyond 4 a problem for you or something? I can see how something might be too large to count due to time constraints, but too small?

quote:

If all the hobby wants to produce is colourful eye candy games that are nothing better than silly fun, then accept it and stop pretending to be doing otherwise.
If that is all the consumer base wants, then that is all you will get to sell. But don't attempt to state you are doing anything else.


A) It's not just a hobby for some, it's a business.
B) They can produce the games as they see fit and they can still be good solid accurately detailed games, regardless of your opinion.
C) Who the h'ell are you to tell them what they should or shouldn't be doing?

quote:

As for how many people I speak for, and how many people like what I have said on this matter, I am not in this conversation to win a popularity poll eh.


You speak for 1, yourself. Stick to just speaking for yourself okay?

quote:

Computer wargaming is not exactly a hobby that has several decades behind it.


So? Just because the medium is newer than board games, what's the big deal?

quote:

I am unwilling to make grand statements of its worth based on 5-10 years of production.


Try closer to 20 'genius'. Actually, if I were you, and thank God I am not, I wouldn't be making grand statements on much of anything. Better to let people think you're a fool then by saying something and confirming you are.

quote:

Advances in tech might well render the hobby of computer wargaming defunct in 5 to 10 years just as easily.


And you might actually learn how absolutely silly you sound....doubt it though.

quote:

Eventually there will be only so much a person can get out of flashy packaging and spiffy graphics.


Great thing about time...as it advances it brings out a whole new crop of people to sell those flashy games to.

quote:

Board gaming is already there. So in 10 years from now, it will not have anything to prove to anyone. And it won;'t have a past history of products that were all flash and no substance.


And computer wargaming is already there... But board wargaming will have the past history of unclear rules, games lasting weeks while having to be 'maintained' in the living room, lacking in 'excitement', and often difficult for multiple players to complete. So please, spare us your whiney attempts to belittle PC wargaming because you like board gaming better, ok?

Reiryc



Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (1/9/2003 11:21:09 PM)

Ahhh Reiryc always the same never changing opinion. You are always right.

Perhaps I should tell you the same I tell all of the world's religious loonies that are right and that I merely lack faith.

Please go perform an anatomically impossible act upon yourself.
If it pleases you, do it more than once.

You couldn't understand anything I said in the manner I said it if I used pictures.



Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (1/9/2003 11:22:58 PM)

For those that are unaware, Reiryc is my damnit doll, you know that thing you like to pound when you feel like pounding something.

So don't think that I am acting out of character, same ole me, just that I enjoy this damnit doll so much:)



Reiryc -> (1/9/2003 11:25:04 PM)

That the best you've got les?

Keep trying man...maybe you'll convince someone. You are after all, a self proclaimed grognard! A self made man!

Reiryc



Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (1/9/2003 11:34:32 PM)

What you want effort, why should I spend effort on a damnit doll?



Reiryc -> (1/9/2003 11:56:21 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]What you want effort, why should I spend effort on a damnit doll? [/B][/QUOTE]

Well you've just made a 3 post effort, how about some critical thinking effort to the post I made in rebuttal to your points?

Reiryc



Marc von Martial -> (1/9/2003 11:56:38 PM)

Instead of whinnig back and forth you should better tackle a few points made here.

[QUOTE]But I am willing to say, that making games full of graphical details, just to make them attractive to non grognards, is the same as prostituting the game.[/QUOTE]

Which is not a tackle but sheer ingnorance.



Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (1/10/2003 12:14:31 AM)

I have already made all the points useful or otherwise that have any interest to me.

At this point in time, I am just filling in the gaps in my day, in between other posts here and there.

Being that I have been aggressively slagged as well, I have not got much incentive to do much else in the pursuit of the topic.

This also probably explains why there has been no other posters interested in posting anything much in the way of useful comments.
I would assume they are just waiting to see how long it takes for one of us hold outs to get bored enough to go away.



Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (1/10/2003 12:16:32 AM)

Of course if you wish to make me go away, you could always move this to Art of Wargaming, I certainly have no interest in going there myself.



Kanon Fodder -> (1/10/2003 12:19:51 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1
[B]I would assume they are just waiting to see how long it takes for one of us hold outs to get bored enough to go away. [/B][/QUOTE]

Actually, I was wondering if somehow the board indexes got messed up and we were reading posts from 2002 all over again ...

:rolleyes:



Les_the_Sarge_9_1 -> (1/10/2003 12:48:43 AM)

Kannon fodder the more things change the more they stay the same.



Tbone3336 -> A newbie 2 cents. (1/10/2003 2:11:35 AM)

Hello all, I am very new to these boards, however I have been wargaming since 1985. I have nothing to add that would alter anyones opinion at this time except that in the mid to late 80's I played every computer game that SSG and SSI made for the Macintosh. Up to that point I had played various board wargames, and lacking a ready opponent all the time I migrated to the computer more and more. Well SSG published a magazine on a quarterly basis for a while there called Run 5. In just about each issue the editorial was how SSG was struggling with staying afloat in the wargame market and the letters section had people saying the industry would die in a few years. After 1992 I did not have a computer so fell away from wargaming with work and such. Fast forward 11 years or so and I have a new laptop that offered a chance to play wargames again in my decreasingly spare time. I also find SSG is still around and while it focuses on strategy games now (Warlords, etc), they did make TAO which is a great wargame and hopefully very soon Korson Pocket will be for sale. Along with that I find Matrix games and Uncommon Valor (which if anyone tries to say is not an awesome wargame, they do not know one to begin with), Battlefront.com, HPS, all publishing wargames. I also find out that from 1992 through recently I missed out on very good wargames, like (V for Victory, which I downloaded off of a site (forget the name now)), and a host of other games that filled those years. It may very well be that in a few years the industry will be dead, however I am inclined, (using my very limited view of the industry) to believe it will still be going along very nicely. Chess is a very old game, that has not changed in centuries, however the number of chess players H2H and via computers still goes strong, so a genre that can improve such as wargaming must have a future, just one where the business end will have to be tighter and more focused.



CCB -> Re: A newbie 2 cents. (1/10/2003 2:33:29 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Tbone3336
[B]I have been wargaming since 1985. I have nothing to add that would alter anyones opinion at this time except that in the mid to late 80's I played every computer game that SSG and SSI made for the Macintosh. [/B][/QUOTE]

I have SSG's Battlefront and Rommel and SSI's Kampfgruppe for Apple IIe. They were awesome at the time.



U2 -> Re: Re: A newbie 2 cents. (1/10/2003 4:15:36 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by CCB
[B]SSI's Kampfgruppe for Apple IIe. [/B][/QUOTE]

Ah my first wargaming memory. What a game! Though I had it for the C-64



Marc von Martial -> Re: Re: Re: A newbie 2 cents. (1/10/2003 4:42:15 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by U2
[B]Ah my first wargaming memory. What a game! Though I had it for the C-64 [/B][/QUOTE]

Dito on that. Btw, I stil have it running, on both, the c-64 and the machine Iīm typing from ;)



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.796875