Les_the_Sarge_9_1
Posts: 4392
Joined: 12/29/2000
Status: offline
|
Well to answer two points that were raised.
To say that people won't get rich off wargaming is not saying anything.
If I had the needed time (cause it takes a lot), and the needed skills (I can accept that I don't have the needed skills to publish even a board game), and the desire to raise the funds (because it is about cash to some extent), I still would only design and market a wargame just because I like them. I would never start out doing it to make a profit. I would only do it because it is a hobby interest.
Matrix is currently showing how to run a business if obvious indications are anything. You don't concentrate your efforts on just one way to make money.
I am not even remotely interested in suggesting Matrix pin all their hopes on one game at a time. It is a bad idea if a business is the end goal.
For this reason, I am not about to suggest they "hurry up and finish Combat Leader". Because the world doesn't revolve around Combat Leader of its fans.
But I am also not about to sympathise with any individual, that is trying to make a living off of Wargaming. There isn't now a market, and there never will be a market sufficient to make that anything but a foolish notion.
I can say that, because after 25+ years of wargaming, and 12 of that with computers in the equation, it has never once been a big market. There was no "glory days" where large unit sales were the norm.
So if the idea is to be a businessman, and I DO have business experience, then all I can say is, keep wargaming a hobby, and find something else to do to bring in the cash.
A business can do almost anything to bring in cash, and have wargaming as a sideline.
But because Wargaming is a small niche market now, and was a small niche market since it has been a market, I see no reason to assume it is in any danger if tomorrow wonder of wonders, it is still a small niche market.
5 years from now, it would not annoy me a bit, if Matrix was known for some cutting edge technology software that was barely connected with wargaming.
I won't begrudge Matrix in any way for making logical business choices, if the choices are about making money.
Matrix gave me a really nice fixed up game in the form of Steel Panthers WaW. They owe me nothing though. Why the heck would they though.
If tomorrow Matrix announced it was dumping wargaming altogether as it was just not profitable, I would wish them well. There would absolutely no ill feelings from this gamer.
Now on the subject of Grognards hehe, well I am happy to be one, and telling me what I am is silly, I already know.
Comparing a simple even if well drawn artwork mapboard in ASL with excessive graphics design in a computer game though is accomplishing nothing.
Comparing excessive graphics with the physical challenge of assembling a physical tank model is also equally silly. That's not apples and oranges, one is a fruit and the other is not even a plant by analogy. The comparison is pointless.
When you make a board game map, its finite, its drawn and then it remains. It is unchanging, and it can be used until hell freezes over. It doesn't get uprgraded, and it is not subject to the whim of technological advances. it is drawn as best as possible, then it remains.
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.
With models hmmm, well there are myriad ways to make software wargames. Turn based RTS RTT Continuous tactical scale grand strategy. Lousy interfaces, awesome interfaces, large file sizes small file sizes. On cd on 3.5 even on 5.25 disks. Lousy graphics and graphics that don't know when to quit.
Models come in a box usually, and as a bunch of parts on a sprue tree usually, and are made out of plastic generally, although resin is out there was well. And you can assembly hasty or take your time. You can paint them or not. You can add decals or not. You can buy usually exceedingly expensive super detail parts if you are made out of cash, but most modellers won't use that stuff (even I can't say I can indulge that stuff realistically).
But through it all, a model will only look as good as you make it, and the challenge is to make it look acceptable, but most don't really care.
It's the most don't really care that is important here too.
Now I am sure this has been gawdaweful a tedious read, I will be surprised if most have made it this far.
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.
Fact three, if board games were indeed dying out as a hobby, then there would not be more board games being released.
And when I walk into a gaming store, I see new titles. Same small numbers, but we have already established why there are such small numbers. We are remember a niche market.
Fact four, if people were capable of saying that computer wargames were an improvement over board games, then people would not be insistent on making software to play board games on their computers.
I would rather play a proven board game online than any software wargame online in some cases. Because the board game in many cases appeals to the grognard in me more.
One reason that an ASL board can look as nice as it does, was because it was drawn with the aid of a computer. But in that case, the computer was just a publishing tool, it wasn't required to play the game.
I do not expect the graphics in ASL to go any further though, a static image can only go so far. The software used to draw them might get easier to use, but the end picture will be the same.
It's a pity this has not been applied to computer wargames. The hardware as gotten more powerful, but the games insistence on getting flashier and flashier, means that the power of the computer is being squandered on prettier pictures, while the game has remained the same.
I have Patton Strikes Back as one of my oldest computer wargames. It came on both 5.25 as well as 3.5 low density disks. Currently it is a puny data file I store on a cd.
It had a nicely drawn map, and the units were all just stylised arrows denoting current stance. I will stack that game up against anything just released on the market today.
And for once reason only, I have no reason to think anything today will be any more challenging to play. They might look prettier, and they might have nice looking animated images, but the game won't be any harder to beat.
That game came out about 1990. I personally don't think games have gotten any harder since. Only more expensive on my wallet, more demanding on my hardware, and larger in file size. But certainly not harder. And therefore certainly not better.
As a grognard, I will have just as much fun playing Patton's Strikes Back as I will playing Combat Leader. I might even use as much time executing a turn in each game.
One last thought here in my long winded ramble. Wargamers make wargamers, not wargames.
You will never make a non grognard a grognard with a pretty package.
can interest a person in a wargame regardless of how dull looking to an observer merely by making the experience appealing. Maybe that's just me, but I am after all a grognard, who better to make another a grognard than a grognard.
_____________________________
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
|
Printable Version
- 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread