Current state of gaming (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion



Message

Boomer78 -> Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 8:24:43 AM)

Hey guys,
First time poster... long time lurker. You can sometimes find me posting over at the AGEOD forums as Boomer. Love this forum here, and Matrix Games as well.

Rome 2: Total War recently came out to not so good reviews. In fact, the general consensus seems to be that the game is a beautiful disaster, with a moronic AI and a terrible interface, just to name a few problems (like removing old good features and inserting new bad ones).

So far this year we've also seen horrible releases like Aliens: Colonial Marines, the debacle that was Sim City, Omerta, etc. The list is surely objective, but one would have to be hard pressed to find a lot to find positive about this year's gaming releases as a whole.

Now, as a gamer who refuses to use Steam, the problems with Rome 2 don't bother me all that much since I won't be playing it. I am a total mark for older Total War games, though, and this problematic release, it has brought up questions in my mind as to where the gaming industry is going. I gotta say, it kinda scares me. Are they just spending too much time on advertising? Are devs worried more about how games look rather than what's under the hood? The qualities of games in the past seem to be lacking in the current roster. While looking and sounding great, many of the big A list releases seem to be falling like lead bricks. I can't imagine how half of these titles are even making it past QA. Any ideas as to the underlining reasons?



DSWargamer -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 2:43:05 PM)

You answered the question, yes they are worried how they look.

Every time a great game is made, everyone just assumes their opinions are magically valid, and wise, and well thought out and in the end, we so often get version 2 and 3 and 4 ad naseum and really all the companies are doing in most cases is milking an idea to death. It rarely works with movies too.

Most of the great wargames, were made a loooooong time ago, and all of the clones have failed as in the end a clone is just a clone.

Steel Panthers, it escapes me why it hasn't been re released with a new name and able to play nice on a new computer. But I recall Combat Leader, and the reason it failed, they actually thought they needed to 'improve' it. No, they just needed to re make it exactly as it was, but with new code, new proprietary code that is merely the same game inasmuch as looks were concerned. I'd be playing Steel Panthers Mega Campaigns right now, if it was a program made in the last year of so not the last decade or so.

I have seen no small sum of games which were really just lame repeats, and in the end, nothing more than joe developer thinking they were magically capable of doing such a better job than the other guy. It's possible this level of arrogant belief is the problem with gaming as a whole, too many people with the attitude, 'oh the market always has room for another of the same damned game'. Maybe the truth is it doesn't.

The only reason great games get to be great, is when they do something great and no one else has done it before.

You can laugh at games like Angry Birds, but, it was at least not copying anyone.

You might not like a specific version of Civilization, but the truth is, it owns that slot.

Sim City is the same thing.

But there comes a time when the industry really doesn't need a slightly different colour of the same damned game.

And just because computer hardware gets a bit faster, does not mean you can release a new version of the same old game, and pretend that it matters that is is a teeny tiny bit graphically more intensive.



Boomer78 -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 4:03:58 PM)

Yeah, there does seem to be some sort of creative bell curve that has been hit. While some indies are doing amazing stuff (FTL, Plants vs Zombies, Minecraft, etc) the big publishers just seem to spit out the same crap over and over again. I know it's based on the 'if it ain't broke, don't fix it' approach, but what gets me is the amount of success they've had with the 'more of the same' method. Sure, everyone bitched and moaned about the Sim City server disaster, but they still put up with their $59.99, same for all the others. If you look at it from the financial aspect, these companies are doing very well. If you look at QA, price models, customer support, or product longevity, it would paint a totally different picture.

Many of these titles are being released in barely functional form, yet they're being gobbled up like the first keg of beer at a frat party. If a car maker released a car that had a body and tires but no engine or faulty transmission, they'd be burned alive in the PR department, not to mention I'm sure by countless lawsuits. Same goes for printers, cell phones, or power tools. While we do hold a different standard to gaming? Is it just something as simple as the caveat-emptor rule? Are gamers just that foolish to fall for the same thing over and over again?



PipFromSlitherine -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 4:14:05 PM)

Well, I think the industry hasn't looked so good in a long time [:)]. It's always natural to look at problems and say "that never happened in the old days!", but the truth is we had different issues, and different flops or debacles. For every Sim City (which, not having played it, was at least trying to do different things) there are gems like The Last of Us.

So while it's definitely good to keep calling out problems and issues from games, I think that things will keep getting better and better - perhaps haltingly, oddly, and erratically, but better.

/optimism [:)]

Cheers

Pip



Orm -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 4:22:18 PM)

I feel that graphics improve steadily. But other areas are lacking. Improvement on the AI opponent is a rare thing. I feel that the AI opponent in old games could easily match the opponent in many new games.

Matrix games do make a effort to improve the AI opponent but I feel many other developers ignore this.



DSWargamer -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 5:57:08 PM)

I dunno Pip, I think the only good thing to happen to gaming in 3 years is the tablet.

Now people can have their game anywhere they want it, and not be stuck with just a puny screened toy. As much as the controls on a DS are superior, it is still what it is, a small screen. Almost wonder if I should change my account name to tablet gamer :)

I get reeeeeally tired of listening to dummied down this and dummied down that, and when I think about a thread I read about War in the East and I have a hard time not laughing. I am sure sales will be fine for War in the West, but, I hope I am able to refrain from knee jerk buying into it again. I feel like an idiot for getting the rest as it is.

I think we wargamers are really good at lying to ourselves. The dummest thing to happen to computer wargaming, is it has fallen for the same trap that happened to board game wargaming in the late 80s. They got the idea that excessively fancy graphic content made a game better. Fact is, the entirely boring map, and very bland counters of Advanced Third Reich are still making board game looking computer grand strategy wargames eat dust. Because all the fancy hasn't translated to anything of substance.

Look at Strategic Command, except for a few design gaffes, the first release was excellent. SC2 was a BAD idea and I couldn't care less how that sits with anyone. Yeah it might have some benefits under the hood, but the body of that vehicle is an eyesore. I am glad they have decided to release it as SC3 minus the visual disaster. I just hope they don't get too carried away with the makeup, I just want a solid simulation. I want something as good as Advanced Third Reich or I might as well be playing Advanced Third Reich.

Ok enough banter, I have some baking to do :)



GrumpyMel -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 5:59:09 PM)

I find the really big developers underwhelming at best....I won't use the kind of adjectives that really describe some them on this board. However, the smaller to medium developers which include most of the ones featured here at Matrix seem to be consistantly knocking things out of the park, as they have been ever since I've been purchasing games here. There are a few that I haven't much cared for....and a few that seem a bit like retreads of earlier designs, which isn't actualy a bad thing in many cases. Mostly though they are very high quality....and equaly important they don't come with alot of the consumer unfriendly baggage that some of the major developers like to delve into.

I think I could officialy be labled a Matrix fan-boy at this point. There are alot of exciting titles that appear to be in Development at this point as well. At this point my real issue is more limited gaming time then anything else....that's especialy vexing in terms of PBEM or Live PvP matches. Even though those tend to be the most fun, it's unfair to saddle the other player with slow turn-around times or the need to logoff during a match...so I find myself mostly playing against the A.I. when I do game these days.



Boomer78 -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 6:14:06 PM)

Well, I'm sure many of us might disagree on Matrix's pricing model, but they at least release WORKING games. Sure, a patch here or there streamlines the product, but I don't think I ever have seen a Matrix game get the kind of treatment that games get whose publishers have 10 times the manpower and money as Matrix does. So in that sense, it is very much a 'poop rolls uphill' analogy.

Will there be a crisis moment? Could there be another gaming industry collapse like the one in 1982/83? Or is there just too many mouths at the feeding trough to stop the ride?



wodin -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 7:23:56 PM)

DS..yet one of the most common complaints on this forum about the games is the graphics. I really believe you can have lovely 2D graphics, 2D doesn't have to be bland and boring. I don't like 3D icons\units in my wargames as I think a MASSIVE tank thats bigger than a city kicks me so far out of immersion compared to a lovely well done counter.
I do agree though that other aspects of gaming has been neglected like the AI and no one is willing to take a risk or experiment with mechanics..wargames are particularly guilty of this..WEGO was the last innovation...no one is willing to fund a game on a lesser known conflict (though I think the way around this is by make the core game set in a War that will sell well..then make sure the engine is flexible enough to cover other eras and sell scenario packs of the lesser known wars the game that seemed to do this well was TOAW but back then you got extra scenarios for nothing included in a patch or something;). Anyway going off track abit here..

Back in the days of the BBC B, Spectrum,Commodore and Amstrad the developers found better and better techniques to squeeze as much out of those machines as possible..and you could tell the games got better not because of tech upgrades but due to coders skill...these days tech increases so quick that no one really needs to find ways to get the most out of the current machines. It's just become about graphics and little else esp the big AAA games, it's all visual. We have now got to the stage of nostalgia with games, probably for the first time and retro is the rage. I say great to that as some of the old genres like the RPG's still had plenty of evolution to go through but sadly where over taken for the mad rush for 3D graphics. Aslong as when we go back we take the old genre a step further and no just a clone I see some great games coming out of it. Look at the sudden love in the mainstream for turn based, yet us lot always knew turn based = gameplay, tis a shame that people are so fascinated by the latest sparkley thing rather than working on and improving what we already have..until it comes to the point you can do no more with it..then move on.

Sorry this was a long ramble with no real point to it. I suppose there are always the exceptions like OBD who develop Wings Over Flanders Field, a true labour of love and you can tell. They have pushed well beyond what anyone would have thought possible with the tools and engine they have. They are also going to announce some first in simming with regards to the AI. There are a few other projects being developed that seem to be made by people with real passion and love for the game they are making and I have high hopes for these games aswell. The future classics that will have ground breaking mechanics will come from small indy teams that self publish and the games they develop are products of their dream\passion.



jday305 -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 7:32:21 PM)

I agree with Boomer and many of the responders to this post; new games are not all that they could be. With all the disasters that have come out over the past few years I no longer rush out and buy a game at $59.99. I will now wait patiently for a year to eighteen months and see how well it holds up with the players and read their views on it. In fact I just recently bought Elder Scrolls V Skyrim and actually love it. I especially love the fact I not only new a lot about how well it played before I even tried it but only paid $14.99 for it. [:D] The same can not be said for March of the Eagles that I bought as soon as it came out. Talk about a waste of my hard earned money. [:@] I should have followed my own advise but thought it would be worth it. I learned my lesson...hopefully.



catwhoorg -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 7:42:03 PM)

Outside of Matrix games, the only things I have bought recently have been through gog.com

I think that's very telling of my opinion of the current mainstream games.


I did put up for a couple of kickstarters, but as I don't have those games yet, I don't think that quite counts. That's truly buying on a promise.



Boomer78 -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 7:43:30 PM)

That's one area where things have improved. In the old days, when a game came out there would be little in the way of information aside from maybe a small pitch or two in gaming mags, maybe a flyer or poster in a software shop window. Nowadays, you get previews, beta tests, and early bird video reviews WAY before you need to worry about plunking down the money. The flipside to that coin is that the mines in the minefield have increased, so there is no longer that expectation that a game will be a labor of love, rather just a labor of pure labor... bottom line being the bottom line. I suppose it's a fair tradeoff, but I'd rather be ignorant of a game's potential, but still confident enough to know that I won't be getting a lemon.



wodin -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 8:06:11 PM)

Boomer to be honest I find we get told way too much about upcoming games so the magic gets ripped out of them and nothing is left to surprise.



Hertston -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/6/2013 11:00:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Boomer78

So far this year we've also seen horrible releases like Aliens: Colonial Marines, the debacle that was Sim City, Omerta, etc. The list is surely objective, but one would have to be hard pressed to find a lot to find positive about this year's gaming releases as a whole.


Except pick different games as examples, maybe? Bioshock Infinite? Metro Last Light? Splinter Cell: Blacklist? And getting a little more subjective maybe, I've really enjoyed Call of Juarez Gunslinger and the much under-rated Defiance as well. No great strategy game as yet, but there's still time. In short, I see no great difference from previous years, with the same mix of good games, bad games, rushed games, unexpected disappointments and equally unexpected surprises.

I'll offer one positive and one negative, though. The positive is the continued march of real quality indie titles - they get better and better compared with the big-boys every year. The negative is the arrival of 'early access', or at least its establishment under that name on Steam and equivalents elsewhere. The effect seems to be to drastically lower the quality bar of those games on release, and it IS a 'release' - we even have games on sale now while still in alpha, what's up with that?!








histgamer -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/7/2013 6:52:11 AM)

Not sure how many people know but back in the mid 2000s people were writing about the death of PC gaming as well. Great wargames are few and far between but so really are great games for any genre. Still I feel there is definitely progress.

Scourge of War is a "new" wargame that is a pretty darn good game.

Crusader Kings II while a rehash of Crusader Kings I was a huge step forward and by far the best game ever released of it's kind.

War in the Pacific Admirals edition while a remake is a very well done one that makes massive progress.

Panzer Corps was a game that was a remake but it's hardly a re-hash as the original was more than a decade old, it definitely doesn't fit into the category that you're talking about.

DCS has some pretty high quality modern flight sims that are not all that old.

I'd say only a few games really come out every year but that's been the case for ever a decade, nothing has changed there.



Agathosdaimon -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/7/2013 8:09:45 AM)

Why is CA falling so short on AI constantly? Is the company that brought out Wargame ALB and will be bringing our Dragon Rising next which looks to evolve it more, indie company. I think they do alot to get good performance - the graphis in their new game are great and move really smoothly while having alot going on in game. I am finding ALB quite hard in solo play and perhaps thats a good thing.

What happened to the company that made World in Conflict? that was a good game a few years back. What big name companies are actually still around? perhaps they dont innovate because they are afraid to take risks, addicted to whatever established market they believe they have. Indie developers are free to do their own thing on the other hand.



Qwixt -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/7/2013 8:56:35 AM)

It's easy to forget about the failures of the past. Back in the DOS days of gaming, it was a real iffy proposition just getting a game installed at times. Windows made that a thing of the past. The worst game on my list is a game from Sierra called Outpost (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outpost_%28video_game%29). A real swindle job. While you can hate in CA for Rome II, at least you know they will not abandon the game like I have seen happy to many other games.

As far as innovation games, I have read articles saying that for at least 15 years. The industry isn't falling apart or worse than it was. You are simply remembering the gems from the past and forgetting the embarrassments.



Agathosdaimon -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/7/2013 9:33:16 AM)

oh yeah, there were alot badly made war and strategy games in the past too - one just has to look through CGW back issues (which you can find most of which at the CGW Museum - they are great old mags, full of a lot guides for playing old games which can now again on dosbox) and also the reviews by M Evans Brooks - i guess though there were alot of strategy games back then in the time prior to Doom and such.




Boomer78 -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/7/2013 4:22:28 PM)

Sure, there were a lot of failed games back in the day, but that was when there were no industry standards, software designers were making things up as they went along, and there was very little in the way of hardware compatibility... even computer hardware had to be invented and kept up to speed to match new 3D engines, processor demands, etc. So to me current failures are that much more poignant because they speak more to lack of human insight and creativity rather than just a lack of technology or resources (Daikatana, not withstanding LOL).

We've seen hardware tech/prices level off over the last few years, which has been great for software designers who finally have a chance to settle into working with cpu/gpu/os standards. Budgets have never been bigger for the big studios, some matching the budgets of movie studios even. Add to that the largest fan base gaming has ever had and it just doesn't make sense that something like a Rome 2 could even have a chance at failing.

I agree that we should highlight the recent successes, and there are many. However, to see large A list titles flop is just shocking and to me reveals some serious problems running behind the scenes.



Greybriar -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/7/2013 6:04:17 PM)

Speaking of Windows, does anyone remember Plug and Pray? [;)]



histgamer -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/8/2013 12:39:27 AM)

Games getting more expensive is hardly a reason for them to succeed, if anything it's a reason for them to fail. Especially with cheap alternative gaming re-emerging. The gaming industry has always had cheap alternatives but never before has the Free 2 Play and mobile sector posed such a viable alternative to traditional gaming. I don't think mobile will kill big games, hardly, but I do think it narrows their margin for failure, plus YouTube and other outlets allow gamers to become better educated than ever before. In the past a AAA title didn't have to worry about gamers pointing out dozens of game killing bugs, sure there were reviews but not to the extent that there is today, the gaming community while annoying at times allows people to make far more educated choices about their purchases today than ever before which probably makes it harder to make a smash hit today than on the SNES in days gone by.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Boomer78

Sure, there were a lot of failed games back in the day, but that was when there were no industry standards, software designers were making things up as they went along, and there was very little in the way of hardware compatibility... even computer hardware had to be invented and kept up to speed to match new 3D engines, processor demands, etc. So to me current failures are that much more poignant because they speak more to lack of human insight and creativity rather than just a lack of technology or resources (Daikatana, not withstanding LOL).

We've seen hardware tech/prices level off over the last few years, which has been great for software designers who finally have a chance to settle into working with cpu/gpu/os standards. Budgets have never been bigger for the big studios, some matching the budgets of movie studios even. Add to that the largest fan base gaming has ever had and it just doesn't make sense that something like a Rome 2 could even have a chance at failing.

I agree that we should highlight the recent successes, and there are many. However, to see large A list titles flop is just shocking and to me reveals some serious problems running behind the scenes.



histgamer -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/8/2013 12:45:44 AM)

I also wonder what kind of impact self publishing is having on the industry as a whole. In the past if you wanted to get on a Console or even PC you normally needed a Publisher if you were going to have any measure of success, heck the Scourge of War series got its start as Take Command but it was published by Activation's Value brand. With retail drying up and self publishing far more viable than in the past I have to imagine the strain on big publishers is pretty big. Small groups don't need a big AAA publisher anymore, smaller publishers like Matrix are more viable and if you want to go it alone you can do that too. As a result Value publishing houses likely are suffering pretty bad as they no longer have the leverage they use to and while the value brand likely didn't make a big chunk of money for Activition it's still another revenue stream that's likely all but dried up in recent years as smaller studios see very little benefits to turning over creative control to a huge multi billion dollar corporation.



Rtwfreak -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/8/2013 6:50:29 AM)

As long as devs and publishers can get away with this "No Refund' policy they will continue to make sorry games. Sadly as much as I hate to say this Matrixgames and Slitherine havn't been making very quality games and even the ones we like (Field of Glory and Battle Academy and Distant Worlds) don't have very good ai's. Field of Glory doesn't have an ai to speak of hardly at all. They are promoting playing MP now and personally I bought computers to play an ai not a real person. There's so much cheating going on by real people you lose interest in playing them. But, anyways the real problem is that "No Refund" policy. If/when it comes back then things will change for the better.

The other thing that goes along with the "No Refund" policy is ever since 1995 publishers and devs have been releasing unfinished buggy games. Since they don't have to worry about refunds anymore they can release whatever worthless programming they want. It's free fast money when you really think about it. You can change your name, go out of business and basically start over as someone else without repurcussions. Then consumers have been allowing them to do this all those years because they are impatient and want the games now so they say they will accept an unfinished buggy game with the promise of fixing it. No other consumable that I can think of has ever been accepted like that in the history of mankind. The devil is really working his magic here and the consumenr is accepting it. I was always taught if it's broken you take it back and get your money back until it is fixed not buy it broken and wait for the fixing if you get one. Some games (Pax Romana) never get fixed.

So this is what's wrong with PC gaming in a nutshell. "No Refund" policy and releasing broken unfinished bad games to start with



histgamer -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/8/2013 10:13:15 AM)

I just posted a long response which was pretty thought out but the damn PC deleted it. sigh...

The jist of it was.

No refund policy is an issue but I've seen many games be returned for reasons of technical problems, either refunds through digital download purchases or retail. You run into problems however with games and refunds because its feasible to play an entire game in a day or two and then if you accept returns you basically give away your product free. As a company you're setting yourself up for failure if you offer full refunds for non technical reasons.

AI isn't poor on all matrix games, SOW it's excellent, PC it's not bad imho (or maybe the scenarios are just heavily biased against you which I'm not sure) WiTPAE has a great AI for the first year and a half or so but the games so complex its likely not possible to have a great Ai, ai is the hardest thing to code most likely and thus more complex wargames are always going to struggle deeper into the game, maybe it's an excuse, but it's also a fact, the more dynamic the game the less likely you're going to get a perfect game and if you're waiting for the perfect AI on a game like AE you'll likely never see the game released.

Game companies can't release total crap anymore. Technology means word gets around about terrible games and that does impact sales. You act like the consumer has no choice and that's flat out wrong, YouTube and other technological developments also happen to coincide with tons of game publishers going under or struggling. Sure sub standard products still get released but more and more you're going to see that dramatically hinder sales figures and eventually games are going to get better because of this, or the publishers will go out of business. With that said no game will be bug free, they never have been, games in the 80s were often buggy messes just as much as today, technology just lets us have a more dramatic view of the flops today. Fact is no technology tested by 200 testers for a year will work out all the bugs that 1,2,3 million players might run into. That's why the early beta testing is so popular for developers, sure you can say the game releases half finished BUT the gamers know the game isn't done yet and its a trade off between letting the community get involved in the development (good thing) and releasing a product that people still find problems in because its not possible to fully test.



SuluSea -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/8/2013 11:44:05 AM)

I believe the last game I purchased was Don to the Danube. I'm probably going to buy War in the West once they get the kinks ironed out and have interest in Heroes of Stalingrad if that's ever released. Other than those two I have little interest in anything else.

I'd love to see something centered on naval action but developers seem to steer away from those for some reason.



DSWargamer -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/8/2013 1:51:02 PM)

Just because something can be made, is not enough reason to do it.

That is perhaps a key problem in some products. The person providing the product believed in it, but the reality was it had limited real worth.

Real worth is a subjective condition though, and you usually only get the proof after it is too late to employ hindsight.

As for AI, the problem with AI, is the brutal fact that the AI is NOT thinking. Sorry boys, but there is no looming Terminator world or Matrix reality on your horizon just yet.

Because the AI is not actually 'thinking' it is merely coping with a rigid selection of choices and processing the choice rapidly, as a result of machine advantage. But it will not be actually 'thinking'. And while so much of humanity sure seems closer to AI in terms of stupid actions, it's still possible.

And I have seen comments over the years, of how humans have made a total mockery of some wargames limitations all because they were capable of that one action... thinking. They realized something was possible, that the game maker never realized at the time, and then exploited it all out of proportion and in the process destroyed the challenge level of the game. The interesting thing is the idea never works against another human, because unlike the AI, the other person was able to think as well.

Every time I see a game released with no hotseat mode, I want to facepalm. Because that is the same as the game maker truly thinking their AI is so shythot the human couldn't possibly need another human to play the game. I've walked away from several good games, all because the game requires the other human to make it worth the time. VS he AI the game is often too much like kicking puppies.

The recent release of Germany at War - Barbarossa 1941 is a good example. Against another human, you are in for a real treat, against the AI, your time will be a waste of it. And it has no hotseat mode, so my interest in it is divided. Excellent design, but I play too many of my games solo by choice. And if I can't play a computer game the same way I play a board game, chances are I won't own it.

The only computer game currently routinely kicking my butt vs the AI is Battle Academy. And that is likely I am just playing too aggressively and not being careful enough. Once you have played most of the BA scenarios though, and have an idea what comes from where and when, the AI is routinely a lot easier to beat up. Against a fellow human though, you are not going to be so lucky.



wodin -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/8/2013 2:58:59 PM)

CK and CK2 was the last game that really did something different. Huge applause for Paradox for trying and succeeding in doing something new and unique.



TheGrayMouser -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/8/2013 3:15:17 PM)

I too wonder why many current releases have no hotseat mode, especially since PBEm and slithertrixs PBEM++ are usually in place, is it that hard to add an additional mode in?
Its the lack of hotseat that has turned me away from games like legion, chariots at war, Commander WW1 etc.



wodin -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/8/2013 3:26:17 PM)

I've never played any game hotseat..it's something I expect only old boardgamers will bother with so has limited appeal. Not sure I can mentally divide my mind for it.

COmmand Ops is a good example of an decent AI..and if they can do it then others can..it's just a case really of lazy or neglected coding. I must be really awful at games as AI's routinely kicks my ....I also don't play the same game\scenario over and over again to work out what an AI does..no game holds my attention long enough. Saying that when I have played a game PBEM I can never go back to the AI..but I hate being ttied to a game and so end up resenting it and so never play it again..so playing PBEM has in the end ruined the game for me. SO now I never play multiplayer..what you don't know you don't miss.



Boomer78 -> RE: Current state of gaming (9/8/2013 3:35:04 PM)

Definitely CK2. While itself a sequel and based partly on the EU engine, the dynasty and politics mechanics inside the game made it a blast. I still play CK2 quite a bit. Sadly, it will also probably be my last Paradox game since they are now going Steam exclusive.

When it comes to innovation, game studios are always either doing the tried and true method or going the route of 'well let's throw some stuff at the wall and see what sticks'.

I'm ok with been there done that approach or the brand new pioneering stuff... it's all good. The deadly sin that so many studios commit though is putting out a game that doesn't work. Old, new, makes no difference. It has to function as it is intended. With the recent release of Rome 2, we see that all the millions spent on promotion and name recognition can't do squat for your company if no one around has a vision for what should be accomplished.

Plus there's the old adage that familiarity breeds contempt. Perhaps some of these franchises are just too long in the tooth and need to be put out to pasture.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.532227