Hasbro's Squad Leader

[Holdit]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by jdmorse:

A whole group of people (former SL and ASL players) are a potential market. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

But are they? Even an (A)SL player who just happens on it in his local game shop will know as soon as he looks at the back of the box that this isn't the real McCoy. That's why the purchase of the name seems odd, because this game that's going to be produced could be called anything. It makes sense when you think about that marketing suits scenario, though...

[Holdit]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wayne:

Has anybody heard anything about Hasro's Squad Leader? Is it dead or in a coma?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Neither. It's suffering the death of a thousand cuts.

[dNorwood]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Flipper:

starship troopers the movie that killed casper van dien's acting career <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You know? You're right. Some good DID come out of that...

[Guest olebooya]

I've heard the first scenarios is a Raid By British Commandos (excuse me for not being politically correct- Com-person-dos).

Anyway the Brits must rescue Barbie and her dreamboat which has been captured and sent to the submarine pens at Kiel.

[Wayne]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Holdit:

Neither. It's suffering the death of a thousand cuts.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I see what you mean. Hey! All I did was ask a simple question. Hasbro's Squad Leader will sink or swim on it's own. If it is a good game, then great. It will do well and make money for it's producers. If it's a piece of garbage, then it will soon be history. No problem except that a great name in boardgame history will have died a tragic death. However we who own the game will hold it's memory in honor and transfer that loyalty to the hiers of it's legacy, Big Time Software.

------------------

Blessed be the Lord my strength who teaches my hands to war and my fingers to fight.

[Spook]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by olebooya:

Anyway the Brits must rescue Barbie and her dreamboat which has been captured and sent to the submarine pens at Kiel.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Must....maintain.....self-control........

ah, screw it.

[Seany B]

My, how hasbro continue to destroy the good names they take over. Anybody else here been waiting for years for the multiplay options of B17 2?!!!

[pzvg]

Right you are Wayne, however, it's that tragic death you refer to that has so many of us pissed off.

------------------

Pzvg

"Confucious say, it is better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt"

[Wayne]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by pzvg:

Right you are Wayne, however, it's that tragic death you refer to that has so many of us pissed off.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's the way the free market works whether you like it or not. I felt the same way when the old SPI wargame company went out of the business of making boxed wargames. I still cherish the many games of their's that I own.

In regards to Hasbro and Squad Leader, at least the MMP group has preserved the ASL line of games and, you never know, if Computer Squad Leader bombs maybe MMP can resurrect the project and come out with a computer ASL. You never know in this business what will happen.

------------------

Blessed be the Lord my strength who teaches my hands to war and my fingers to fight.

[Guest TomServo]

Personally i liked Soldiers At War and am half-heartidly looking forward to Squad Leader. Only becuase i like that type of game and no one else is putting games out like that.

------------------

Formerly TomServo who was formerly Tom punkrawk

[Flipper]

ahh spi the good old day's...yes I too have many of there game's still

[gashford]

I played the game at ECTS (European Computer Trade Show) and it was awful, now I only got about ten minutes play without the aid of a manual. But bearing in mind that this was the games presentation to the industry (gaming) it crashed twice whilst I played and generally had a very old looking interface and game engine, movement and so forth was based upon a very abstracted action points regime.

Not very good in my books at all. But then the final version may be much better who knows, just initial views did not make me worry about disk space on my PC.

[pzvg]

Well, not sure I'd call megacorps buying out the competition and putting out garbage for the masses to consume a "free market"

Still, you are correct in that it's my point of view, of course, the main object of my posts was to spread my POV, as I'd rather like it if the "free market" managed to keep it's ugly hands off small operations like BTS, who IMHO produce the superior product because they make games they would like to play, not because some yoyo in marketing played a demo of Diablo2.

Remember folks, you might say that's your 2 cents on the matter, but actually the whole wallet's yours, shouldn't you have a say in deciding how it's spent?

------------------

Pzvg

"Confucious say, it is better to remain silent, and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt"

[patboivin]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Lindan:

Hasbro means death to everything that doesn't appeal to the millions-strong masses.

Avalon Hill, Microprose... destroyed, the only thing remaining are their names.

Everything has to be colorful enough for children, easy enough to be played by morons, big enough to be packed in a huge box filled with plastic crap, fast enough to be played in a short evening...

It's simply disgusting.

"Family Wargame" - makes me throw up.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

They focus on these games because the best-selling games are not Quake, Doom, or any high-graphics games out there, the best-selling games are things like Who Wants to Be A Millionnaire, that Russian game with shapes falling down (what's the name of that game again?), card games, checkers, etc.

I think I heard somewhere that one of the big selling features of Windows95 was that it came with Solitaire.

It's not good for people who like games that require the latest video cards, etc. The market is smaller, and companies don't want to take as many risks, so they go the "safe" route. Instead of taking the well-aimed, better-designed, best-quality-product route. You have to know your market for that, you have to know what you are doing, i.e. you must have an emotional attachment to what you do. But in business being emotionally involved (for M.B.A. types at least) is seen as unprofessional.

So we get what we see from the big companies.

Thankfully, because the big companies only produce so-so products at best, there is a niche for smaller companies that want to produce high-quality, well-designed, intelligent games.

CM is one of them. I am not sure but I think Starfleet Command may be another, I say "may" be because I only played the demo for that one, when I bought CM all the other games just weren't important enough to buy anymore. I had to play CM!!

My $0.02.

I would be curious to know how Avalon Hill ended up being gobbled up by Hasbro, why did they sell out?

[patboivin]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tone:

pzvg -- you convinced me. I'm calling my upcoming game about the gunfight in Mogadishu "Checkers". Or perhaps, "Barbie's Totally Cool Checkers".

tone<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What about G.I. Barbie?

That would be politically correct. They could sell the doll with vehicles, in an M2 Bradley, or something. Girls would love to have M1 Abrams and so on to play with, heck who knows girls and boys might start playing together instead of staying apart.

Women are in the military now, rightly so, why don't they reflect that if they are "governed" by political correctness.

By keeping swastikas etc. out of the computer SL game, they will be helping people forget.

You don't WANT people to forget. Otherwise they will fall for that line all over again. We have to REMEMBER.

"there's nothing you can do about the past, best to just forget about it and move on." or "Put it behind you and move on" just doesn't wash with me.

I'm sure there is a university course somewhere (anthropology, sociology, or psychology) that looks at why somethings are included in political correctness and others are not, that would be interesting to see.

It's OK to want to improve society and so on, but reality does exist -- somewhere.

[Holdit]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by patboivin:

What about G.I. Barbie?

That would be politically correct. They could sell the doll with vehicles, in an M2 Bradley, or something<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

A pink one.

[patboivin]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by XPav:

I'm sorry, but I'm going to have to disagree with you.

Anti-Hasbro Jihads against Hasbro (for SL, Falcon, M1TP3, B17 whatever) don't serve any purpose. Writing hate filled emailed to the support mailboxes at Hasbro and Microprose doesn't help either.

And its not worth your time, or my time. We could be playing Combat Mission.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Someone else mentioned Star Trek in this thread as being just a name, etc.

A few years ago there was a campaign building up to get one of the Paramount executives fired. You may have seen the Save Trek logo on some web sites. That was when DS9 was at its worst, and Next Generation was literally stuck in a time loop. Every week the show was about a time loop!

Can't find any of those sites now, Paramount clamped down I think.

Rather than do the right thing and improve their product, they preferred to apply "tried-and-true" TV formulas to the shows instead of improving the series.

I was surprised that the Shatner books for Star Trek are exactly what I would have liked to see in the series and in the movies, but the chances of that happening are just about zero. Why? Because they want to cater to a family audience, unlike the original series where there were brawls in almost every show.

Anyway, complaining often doesn't do anything, because big companies just carry on with their agenda, to them everything is about marketing and image, not substance.

The fastest way to boost share value is to sell vapourware or names of products, instead of quality products.

The fastest way is not the better way, though.

[patboivin]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wayne:

I felt the same way when the old SPI wargame company went out of the business of making boxed wargames. I still cherish the many games of their's that I own.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah, I still remember Panzer '44, I played that against a friend when I was in grade 11.

Great game!

[patboivin]

Sorry about all the posts, I took a day off from work and this thread made the hairs on the back of my neck stand on end.

[Philistine]

I think people are being a bit harsh on Squad Leader. Yes it is using the name Squad Leader, but IMHO it's not so much to "fool" people in to buying the game as it is using a name that they have in their title stable that is a good name that fits the product. "Squad Leader" actually seems more appropriate to a squad level game then it does to something the level of the board game. IMHO, the only people who will be "fooled" into buying the computer game thinking it is a direct port of the board game will be a spouse/parent of an avid Squad Leader board-gamer who gets it for their child/spouse as a present. Anyone who cares can tell from a cursory review of the box online discussions of the game that this is not like the board game. Hasbro has been making no secret of many of the differences (touting their letters home "feature" among other things). Let the game stand or fall on whether it is a good game (essentially Soldiers at War 2).

I'm not sure a commercial computer-game of ASL can ever be effectively made. If it is true to the board game, it will likely be clunky and limited in appeal to those who are avid players of the game. If changes are made, people would make the same type of comments being made. Isn't there already a [freeware?] multi-player only version of ASL out? (VASL?).

I would imagine Charles could (and I believe he has on a couple of occasions) explain some of the major problems with trying to port over ASL to the computer.

Hasbro, as a public corporation (I think) has a duty to its shareholders to maximize its profit. If it makes a game for x amount (say $1 Million) and makes a profit of y (say $2 Million), but it could have made a different game for the same amount that would have sold twice as much, it's likely someone will get fired for failing in their duty to the shareholders [actually not likely for one game, but if a consistent practice]. That's why we see games that pander to the least common denominator. It's not malice, its just big companies doing what big companies do to get and stay big--maximize sales of mass-produced bland products to the detriment of the more discerning consumer.

The answer isn't to castigate Hasbor (it'll have no effect. They don't care about your business. They know you won't buy the game.) It's to support those developers who are providing the types of games you want so they don't have to sell out to a big company.

Didn't mean to be pedantic, but I just can't help myself

--Philistine

[This message has been edited by Philistine (edited 09-15-2000).]

[Daveman]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by patboivin:

Thankfully, because the big companies only produce so-so products at best, there is a niche for smaller companies that want to produce high-quality, well-designed, intelligent games.

CM is one of them. I am not sure but I think Starfleet Command may be another, I say "may" be because I only played the demo for that one, when I bought CM all the other games just weren't important enough to buy anymore. I had to play CM!!

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I think the SFC comparison is a good one. Despite being released with some mind-numbing bugs and features that didn't work (all of which have been fixed BTW) SFC is an excellent Sci-fi tactical wargame... one of a few titles I consider *very* high quality. Like CM, it's based on an established, thoroughly detailed tabletop wargame that wouldn't typically appeal to the typical gamer, but in the translation to the PC does.

If you're still interested the Gold Edition (includes all the fixes and freebie add-ons) has been out for awhile now and should be pretty affordable... but then SFC 2 is due later this year...

------------------

"You know our standing orders. Out of ammo become a bunker, out of commission become a pillbox, out of time... become heroes." - The Beast

[patboivin]

Originally posted by Philistine:

I think people are being a bit harsh on Squad Leader. Yes it is using the name Squad Leader, but IMHO it's not so much to "fool" people in to buying the game as it is using a name that they have in their title stable that is a good name that fits the product. "Squad Leader" actually seems more appropriate to a squad level game then it does to something the level of the board game.

--Philistine

I think the game was named "Squad Leader" because there were chits in it representing leaders with modifying factors.

It highlighted the fact that leadership plays a role in combat.

Otherwise maybe the game would have been called "Squad Combat" or something.

So although Squad Leader sounds generic enough, I think they were introducing a concept in wargaming, and that's why they named the game SL.

[IntelWeenie]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Philistine:

I think people are being a bit harsh on Squad Leader. Yes it is using the name Squad Leader, but IMHO it's not so much to "fool" people in to buying the game as it is using a name that they have in their title stable that is a good name that fits the product.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

What burns my butt about it is that there have been several other AH titles that have been computerized more or less faithfully. Wooden Ships & Iron Men, Rise and Fall Of the 3rd Reich, Diplomacy, etc (granted, not all AH games came from Hasbro). A combination of this with the "politcal correctness" (aka "revisionist history") in the game ruins it for me.

------------------

Canada: Where men were men, unless they were horses.

-Dudley Do-right

[Vomitmeister]

Hi,

I am new to this board. I remember computer Squad Leader being worked on a few years back. At the time, Avalon Hill had some other company producing it. Eventually, they dropped the project. The company developing it sold it to Microsoft, who turned around and sold it as Close Combat. By the way, I have only played a couple of games of Combat Mission, but I love it.

[FutbolHead]

I'm on the "it's only a name side". I believe they bought the rights to design and market the product however they desire. And if some of you are worried that people will flock to the stores and buy the game simply because of name association, which I really hope the masses of SL and ASL players are smarter than that, those are going to be the people who you always beat in SL or ASL because they are stupid. Anytime you buy anything, you should pay attention to more than just the name. I don't sympathize with stupid people who do stupid things.