Guest Big Time Software Posted April 14, 1999 Share Posted April 14, 1999 I typed up these thoughts in response to Fionn's great articles on misrepresentation in game marketing. It seemed only natural that we make some kind of "offical" commentary on the issue and where we stand on it. So here it is! The upshot is that if a game company makes the claim of absolute realism, they are doomed. As Fionn says, this is the same as saying that we in the US have a 100% perfect democracy Sure, it is probably the best on Earth (taking into account its size and diverse nature), but perfect it certainly ain't! Perfection is a goal that can never be reached. A marketing claim that a game is "a really detailed, highly accurate" representation of warfare has wiggle room to allow for limitations of game design, hardware, playability, and economic realities. But if a developer can't get the basic stuff right, or worse deny that the basic stuff is important for a historically correct game, then they don't deserve to tout even this qualified statement. If they said, "a really cool game with tanks and stuff, set in a WWII surrounding" then they are off the hook so long as it is fun. This is the road Panzer General went down and I think the marketing and product matched up nicely. However, if the game isn't cool or fun, they can't make even this claim Combat Mission is in the "insanely accurate and historically correct, but not 100% realistic" category of games. Very few shortcuts or historical stretches are to be found in it, and those that are must be to satisfy reality, not because we are ignorant, rushed, or lazy. Sure, there are some of the standard abstractions (like you can actually control all of your troops on a good day, not to mention see them!) that all wargames have. Without some "inaccuracies" like this the game would fall apart and nobody would want to play it (gameplay), or be able to play it (hardware). And that is why we say it isn't "100% accurate". Perhaps 99% What you *won't* find in CM are gross historical mistakes, like Elephants having MGs, or two Wundermäner running around with a platoon's worth of tank busters. These are absolutely unforgivable mistakes for any game that wants to use "realistic" as part of a marketing slogan. It is just lazy data and/or lame workarounds for game balancing issues, and has nothing to do with realism. We know we can do better than that, and have. However, we are bound to make a mistake or two. From a typo in some data table all the way up to a false assumption about how things really were, something is going to slip through. We are taking active steps to make sure that the fundamentals are tight and that the data is sound, but we aren't perfect. If after release we, or anybody else, find a problem we WILL fix it, and with thanks to whomever pointed it out. Unlike some others, we want CM to be as perfect as possible, but aren't so egotistical or marketing driven that we will pretend to be perfect by ignoring the truth. Constructive complaints will always be greeted with an open ear, and if the case can be made, a patch will follow. Who could ask for more? Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted April 14, 1999 Share Posted April 14, 1999 Not me . I for one have no problem with typos and other errors as long as they are admitted OR with game design issues (as long as they are owned up to). For example, Fighting Steel by SSI (a WW2 naval simulator which I will be testing) doesn't have land. Now it is taking and will take a lot of flak for that BUT at least they have been honest and said "We would have liked it but couldn't add it in... We are going to try to minimise its impact in the game..." We all have our own ideas about how important or not land is (I think we can easily get by without it although it would be nice) BUT at least they owned up... I have absolute confidence in BTS to do exactly the same. I've been very impressed by the general level of knowledge exhibited and I expect CM to be one of my stand-out games of 99. HPS which has been the grognard benchmark over recent years has had to release 47 patches for Tigers on the Prowl to correct database errors so no-one can get it right BUT they have won great loyalty by admitting this and patching. I know BTS is committed to the same idea and isn't treating us like ignorant fools (unlike.. ahem.. some companies ). Keep on trucking. You've won me over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sten Posted April 15, 1999 Share Posted April 15, 1999 Good points, BTS. It sounds like you've got more than a great game, you've also got a fairly accurate marketing slogan. On the issue of typos, I assume that the sentence ".... [the US] democracy Sure, it is probably the best on Earth..." was supposed to read something like ".... [the US] democracy Sure, it is probably AMONG the best on Earth...". This post could go on and on and on about definitions of democracy and the pros and cons of different approaches to it. Let's not. The US has a fine system, but so do scores of other countries. Proclaiming yourself 'above' them, democracy-wise, is probably not only unfair, but also shows a very unbecoming lack of humility (or knowledge in other democracies). Since you never before have come across as either self-righteous or ignorant, I assume that it was a typo. Regards, Sten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted April 15, 1999 Share Posted April 15, 1999 Murrica is nummer ONE, mannn!!! Wooo hooo!! [takes gulp of bud lite] U.S. of freakin' AYYYYY, buddy! [paints face with red white and blue] Wooowooo! [dances on hood of Ford automobile, lets bare sunburned belly jiggle] Aw, man! I'm tired. Gonna go watch some TV. Isn't the first amendment a wonderful thing? [EDITOR'S NOTE: The above is a joke. Please, no flames.] Charles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted April 15, 1999 Share Posted April 15, 1999 Sten, sometimes my hands and brain don't really link up very well What I meant is that it is amazing that the US democratic system works as well as it does taking into account the geographical and population size, not to mention the ethnic, religious, political, and other differences. There are only a handful of nations that have these sorts of problems, democratic or otherwise. So it at least puts the US system in a league of its own. On a side note, I lived in London for 6 months and got a pretty good dose of British Democracy. It isn't bad, but not my "cup of tea" I even went to Parliament to see the monkey business that goes on there <g> I've also spent several months in other countries, including a month in Germany and 3 weeks in what was Yugoslavia. And I graduated with a degree in History, with my concentration on 20th century Europe. I think I have a pretty fair view of the world and DO NOT think that US über alles is a good position to take. Better in some cases, not as good in others. But the US has, in general, a whole lot more problems to take care of than other democratic nations, even if it is only because of scale. Therefore, the US is, in my opinion, largely above direct comparison with any other democracy on the planet. Doesn't make it the "best", though I do feel it is the "best" empire the world has ever seen (I use empire very loosely here). Just think of all the trouble we could cause if we WEREN'T a democracy Steve [This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 04-15-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted April 15, 1999 Share Posted April 15, 1999 As a Saudi prince said a few years back "If there is only to be one superpower then we are lucky it is America." I'm most certainly not the leader of a USA cheerleading team (I have issues with some of what it does etc) but I kind of agree with his sentiment. I'd rather have the US be the only superpower than have Russia or China. At least if America is umm "directing things" it does so in a relatively benign manner most of the time and not the draconian manner other nations have often used... Please note the liberal use of the word most and other qualifiers ok? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted April 16, 1999 Share Posted April 16, 1999 So here it goes, the discussion about US democracy starts... I am living in Germany for many years now and having studied journalism ran into a lot of the other European democracies. I support Steve's view 100%. If any European country would be the size of the US, they would run into A LOT of problems. The US system is not perfect by far, but with its own limitations (which mostly are just human) works amazingly well anyway. Take GErmany as an example. They do claim to have one of the best democratic systems (social democratic actually), but what democracy is this when you don't even get to elect your chancellor directly? (The chancellor is pre-determined by the party and you are able to elect the party, c'est tout) Well, don't want to get into more details since we're slightly off-topic here anyway... BTS: if we don't see the beta soon, we are going to end up discussing world economy, Pepsi vs. Coca Cola issues and beers here soon (oops, had beer already...) BTW: I prefer Coca Cola... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted April 16, 1999 Share Posted April 16, 1999 Coca Cola. Definitely .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Wilson Posted April 16, 1999 Share Posted April 16, 1999 Moon: We here in the USA don't get to elect our president directly, either. (I'm not sure if this goes for more than the presidential race, but it might.) We elect an "electoral college" for each state (I think it is state), and their votes are the ones that are actually counted. And guess who chooses the electoral college? That's right, the party. This means that ALL of the electorial votes from a particular state go to a particular cantidate, they do not reflect the divided oppinion of the people in the state. The number of people in the electoral college for each state is, of course, determined by that state's population, so states like California carry more weight than those like Rhode Island, Montana, and Alaska. These procedures are in our Constitution. This means that if, in the ACTUAL vote by the people, a presidential cantidate could win small states, with their small electoral colleges, by large margins, but lose large states by small margins, losing the large electoral colleges. This can cause a presidential cantidate to win the popular vote (actual numbers from actual poeple) yet LOSE the election! I have heard that this happened in the '92 election between Bush and Clinton, Bush having actually won the popular vote, but lost the election. So... I think that's all right. Anyone have any corrections? [This message has been edited by Andy Wilson (edited 04-16-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Arabian Posted April 16, 1999 Share Posted April 16, 1999 Oooh ooh - Trivia - I know this one! The only case in which the electoral college vote resulted in a different presidential selection was 1888, Benjiman Harrison beating Grover Cleveland, in spite of a 100,000 vote margin in favor of Pres. Cleveland's re-election. Course, as I recall, Harrison died shortly thereafter of pneumonia since he gave a 3 hour speech in the rain, but thats neither here nor there. The reason we have it is a bit more sordid - Apparently Alexander Hamilton really didn't think that the 'masses' would be educated enough to elect properly, so the middlemen were established (EC) to be the 'voice of reason'. There is also the notable case of FDR's election in (er, 44? 40?) which was the only case of an electoral college member NOT voting with his state - apparently FDR won in such a landslide that his opponent didnt get a single EC vote - the EC member felt that George Washinton should be the only one ever elected unanimously, and hence voted against FDR on that basis. Its a stupid system, but until there is a case of the president being elected differently than the popular vote, it'll probably last. Wow. This is so unrelated to CM.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Wilson Posted April 16, 1999 Share Posted April 16, 1999 I know that the system was established to counter the rule of the masses, but the statement that I made about it being set forth in the constitution was correct, wasn't it? That's what I was getting at, that the funky system is more than just some policy, it is part of the foundation of the country (whether we still need that bit or not) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted April 17, 1999 Share Posted April 17, 1999 The german political system was set up by the Allies (specifically the US) with basically the same pretext (to counter the rule of the masses - which, historically, at that point were considered to be Nazis). Effectively, the people have even less power in their votes than in US (because NONE of our politicians is elected directly, they all come off the party's list). The idea is that people are supposed to vote for a party's program rather than the people... Anyway, this is the last thing I am going to say to this. Now on with the more serious matters of life - without even looking at all the details of CM, it simply HAS to be the most realistic game so far because of it's unique real-time action turns. This eliminates a lot of the problems "normal" wargames are running into, while avoiding the "click-feasts" which ruin Real-time strategy games. THAT alone is 'nuff to blow any current competition away. Add to this the attention to detail we're seeing here, and without even having seen the game yet I am convinced of the 99% reality-factor Steve mentioned earlier. Well, let's say 98,5%, ok? (0,5% off for not modelling german night vision systems) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted April 17, 1999 Share Posted April 17, 1999 and - another 0.5 for not modelling lens flare (it's an inside joke on the cdmag forums .. it seems all the latest flight sims model lens flare and trumpet it. Of course, the flight models are hosed BUT they model lens flare so that's ok ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike T Posted April 17, 1999 Share Posted April 17, 1999 Great Editorial Fionn. This reminded me of the debate we had a few months back on this board with Bruce Geryk of Games Domain concerning realism and detail in wargames. Unlike most Grognards (I've been playing for 20 years now), I don't tend to strip a game down to its basic numbers to determine how realistic it is, I go by feeling. If it doesn't match up with something I've read about, heard about, or experienced, it isn't realistic. Of course some allowances have to be made for the fact that no historical wargame can be 100% realistic, but if a games company admits that and can justify any alterations to reality or abstractions that it implements rationally to its customers then it can be excused for any shortcomings. On the other hand any company that takes a stand where they say 'that's the way it is because we say so and no one is going to change our mind about it' is too arrogant to deserve the attention of consumers. Unfortunately, with the near monopolistic practises of some of these Gigacorporations we tend to be held ransom to their needs rather than have them cater to our needs - The tail wags the dog. By the way BTS, I think its about time to start a new forum on general topics. This is far too good an opportunity to pass up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moon Posted April 18, 1999 Share Posted April 18, 1999 Great idea, Mike! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Rock Posted April 18, 1999 Share Posted April 18, 1999 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>What I meant is that it is amazing that the US democratic system works as well as it does taking into account the geographical and population size, not to mention the ethnic, religious, political, and other differences. There are only a handful of nations that have these sorts of problems, democratic or otherwise. So it at least puts the US system in a league of its own. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> You think the US is "a league of its own"? Ever look at India? The World's Largest Democracy has more ethnic, religious and political differences than about 10 Americas. Maybe 12. Now critics may argue it has its problems as a democracy... (The current news is interesting - the recent instability may lead to a new government led by Sonya Gandhi, Italian wife of one of the Gandhis. When you need an *Italian* to provide political stability, you know ther are problems afoot). ...the amazing thing to me is that it works at all. Anyhow, enought off-topic blather from me. For now. [This message has been edited by Brian Rock (edited 04-18-99).] [This message has been edited by Brian Rock (edited 04-18-99).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wadepm Posted April 18, 1999 Share Posted April 18, 1999 If you have ever been to India you would see that it doesn't work, not even a little bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wadepm Posted April 18, 1999 Share Posted April 18, 1999 If you have ever been to India you would see that it doesn't work, not even a little bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Jenkins Posted April 19, 1999 Share Posted April 19, 1999 Granted, India's democracy leaves much to be desired (food, human rights, ect.). Still, at least the women are HOT! Ever seen those women? WOW! Central Asian women have incredible eyes. They leap right out at you. ------------------ Climb to Glory! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted April 19, 1999 Share Posted April 19, 1999 Well, I think maybe I ought to close this thread. It tried to get more on topic, but didn't *quite* get there BTW, I thought of India in particular when I wrote this up. I suppose if we compare pre-1960s US to today's India there is more room for comparison, but even then it is a stretch. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts