CNET article: Wargames are dying

[Disaster@work]

This is my vain bid to route message traffic to the General Discussion Board which is the most appropriate forum for this kind of discussion.

Please everyone gravitate over to the General Board to talk about the CNET Gamecentre article on dying game genres in the PC market including Wargames. BTS' Combat Mission is not mentioned in the article, unfortunately. Maybe the author's opinion would change if he had known about it?

Start discussion here: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum9/HTML/000071.html

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

----

To download my scenarios: go to

http://www3.telus.net/pop_n_fresh/combatmiss/index.htm

[sniperscope]

Alot of the games coming out today are just plain junk. Or Clones that have that "been there, done that look" Thank god we have CM. Even if the whole wargame theme dies out. I firmly beleave that CM2 thru CM6 will do just fine. BTS will continue to make money and we as fans will have our cake.

sniperscope

[JediJobu]

I really hope that they continue to introduce new things and perhaps in time, redo the graphics engine. Don't get me wrong, it is superb but I would just don't want to hear later on about how the engine and graphics get dated like the Battleground series, etc.

[The Commissar]

Well, games genres that don't appeal to most people do die out.

I didn't like wargames at all until I saw CM. I thought the ugly icons on even uglier maps were boring and stupid. For a boardgame 20 years ago, it would be perfectly acceptable, but I think CM finally did the right thing by opening up the collective eyes of wargamers everywhere by showing what COULD be done with current technology. How wargames can be some of the greatest games ever if they only got some life pumped into them with good looks and sounds, and a new engine.

Since the gaming world revolves around one company copying off another, let's hope that CM will make the suits believe this genre can bring them cash. Sure, most of the clones produced in result will be hackneyed excuses for a wargame, but some are bound to be classics in their own right.

Thank you BTS for (hopefully) bringing wargames back from the dead!

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

...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..."

- Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back"

[This message has been edited by The Commissar (edited 08-18-2000).]

[vcents]

I don't see wargames dying per se, but evolving into a gruesome hybrid of history and twitch games. I can see it now...Microsquish presents Sgt Rock!! A real time, first person shooter where you get to play the roughest toughest meanist hombre this side of the Rhine! Collect weapons, power ups and gold peices while battling through waves of evil Nazis. Fight the bosses of the Nazi regime, starting with Himmler and ending Hitler and Eva in a all out battle at the Eagles Nest.

Drive nuclear powered Sherman tanks, fire 1+e02mm mortars, and Gatling flamethrowers all while receiving close air support from B-17's and B-24's!!! It's as close to real WW2 combat as you can get!!!

[Guest Michael emrys]

The rumors of the demise of the wargame are greatly exaggerated. Last year's hot button issue was the demise of the flight sim, accompanied by the cancellation of several flight-sim projects. Nevertheless, I notice quite a few new flight-sims have appeared on the market this year.

Wargaming (especially historically authentic wargaming) has always been something of a niche market. It has always appealed to a very small percentage of game players and no more than a small percentage. Still, those few avid hamsters...er...players have bought enough games to keep a small but lively industry plugging along for decades.

I think CM:BO will continue for a while to create a sensation. It will bring a lot of new players into this sub-genre of the hobby. Some of them will get bitten by the bug and remain. Most will lose interest after a while and drift off. That's the way of the world.

But among those who remain, the demand will remain as well. If it's not a large enough market to interest the big companies, that will leave room for the dedicated gamers and designers like Charles and Steve to exploit. And it's those kinds of guys that make the best games anyway. IMHO.

Michael

[Bertram]

And don't forget the RPG's that were going to die out a few years ago..

Bertram

[Guest Michael emrys]

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

I don't see wargames dying per se, but evolving into a gruesome hybrid of history and twitch games. I can see it now...Microsquish presents Sgt Rock!! A real time, first person shooter where you get to play the roughest toughest meanist hombre this side of the Rhine! Collect weapons, power ups and gold peices while battling through waves of evil Nazis. Fight the bosses of the Nazi regime, starting with Himmler and ending Hitler and Eva in a all out battle at the Eagles Nest.

Drive nuclear powered Sherman tanks, fire 1+e02mm mortars, and Gatling flamethrowers all while receiving close air support from B-17's and B-24's!!! It's as close to real WW2 combat as you can get!!!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Heh, heh. I have to agree with you.

I mean, I don't want to come on all mother superior and prescribe to people what kind of game they should buy and play. But just as a strictly *personal* expression of opinion and nothing more, I find most of the stuff I see advertised in the gaming magazines to be utter, unappealing, crap. And I feel no small amount of dismay that there is such an audience for such crap. But that's just me, I guess... [sigh]

Michael

[Philistine]

I agree with Michael Emrys [more your first post--your second appeared while I was typing this ). While it may be easy for a mainstream media reporter to look at the shelves of computer stores and notice the lack of wargames (What was the last mass-market release wargame that wasn't a sequel--thus excluding TOAW-ACOW, Rising Sun, World in Flames (Talonsoft) etc.--I honestely can't remember) that ignores the extraordinary proliferation of very good games now available from small publishers, primarily available through the internet.

Obviously CM has received the most press (and is near and dear to all of our hearts), but there's also:

Shrapnel Games: Armies of Armeggedon (perhaps not strictly a historical wargame out of the box); Brigade Combat Team; and the forthcoming Armored Task Force and Steel Beasts (also probably not technically a wargame--more a tank sim).

HPS: Panzer Campaigns I and II, Campaign 1776 (is that actually published by HPS after all was said and done? Or did John Tiller go with someone else, on his own). Plus the upcoming Point of Attack 2 (which I'm definitely looking forward to).

Matrix: With their upcoming Grigsby and Hunter games and (forgive me I know I'll get this wrong, so I'll put in both) SPWWII or SPW@W

Incredible Simulations: Medieval 2 (graphically a bit primative, but a good game, nonetheless.

It's a time of plenty, and internet distribution helps small developers/publishers actually make money making games they want to make for us.

A great time to be a wargamer!

Disaster@work--sorry, it looks like I, and verybody else, declined your invatation to go to the main board. Too much effort, I guess. Good topic, though.

--Philistine

[This message has been edited by Philistine (edited 08-18-2000).]

[Fred]

Yes, wargames are dead since 10 years now, and rpg games are dead since the demise of TSR...and suddenly Baldurs Gate sold more copies then all the hyped RTS games.

So, I guess we all are Zombies

We never were mainstream and hopefully we never will be mainstream.

This RTS hype will fade sooner or later, but quality will still hold the position.

I always smile when I read articles that claim the death of this or that...and ususally it is the writer that dies long before the announced genre

Fred

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

"I got signals, I got readings, in front and behind of us!" - PFC Hudson on LV-426 mission

[Guest Big Time Software]

Pretty shoddy editorial in many ways. I think they avoided mentioning Combat Mission for one very good reason... it doesn't fit in with the ill formed logic and "facts" presented. Either that or we were cut out by the same braindead editor that downgraded their reviewer's score of CM from a 9 to a 7 without stating any reason or even discussing it with the reviewer. My wife is a Managing Editor and if she did something like this they would stick her in a corner for a week until she appologized to all concerned. Not so with C-Net apparently.

Steve

[This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 08-18-2000).]

[Rod]

Heres my take on the Flight Sim front. I feel that they've really taken flight sims as far as they can with the current model. I've played pretty much all the new ones including Falcon 4 and Fly as well as EAW and WWII fighters. All the flight models and scenery are top notch. However, pretty soon they will be photo realistic then what. The problem I have with all flight sims is situational awareness and communicating with other planes or players in multiplayer. You are really handicapped by being confined to looking at a small screen to represent a three dimensional very dynamic environment. Many attempts have been made to ease this with various padlock modes, but to me they just come up short and take many hours of practice to master. I feel that a only a virtual reality system can advance the status of flight sims now. In fact I see no reason to buy another flight sim until something to that effect happens. I would be happy with Chuck Yeager graphics in a VR system. However I don't see any progress in this area and probably won't since most effort is aimed at more and more eyecandy.

[Mr. T]

woh. I wondered why the review seemed to be pretty positive, yet it only recieved a mediocre score. Very strange.

[The Commissar]

Wow, I just read the C-net review and apparently, Mr. Walker (the reviewer) thought the graphics which he says "aren't to par with Ground Control" and the lack of TCP/IP are to blame for the bad score.

Hmm...pretty sights over gameplay bias, maybe? He also mentioned that "since there isn't a TCP/IP option, players should be content to play against their motherboard", which means he ALSO doesn't realise there's that PBEM option included.

What can I say - C-net is and never will be a good reviewer mag (they gave bad reviews to several games for nothing other then "not top of the line graphics"). I would e-mail them to show my concern, but I've done that before and had no responce.

Guess that proves them as what they are - a bunch of fools who can't look beyond graphics. What a pity it is then that many people will listen to their review and decode CM isn't worht it for the bad grade they gave it.

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

...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..."

- Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back"

[Disaster@work]

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

Disaster@work--sorry, it looks like I, and verybody else, declined your invatation to go to the main board. Too much effort, I guess. Good topic, though.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sigh. I should have known it would be a lost cause.

[Iron Duke]

Hi everyone,

being in the game industry myself and watching this mid sized company become the 2nd largest pubisher of entertainment software in the world, (for a month anyway! We normally fluctuate between 2nd and 4th)made me realize that BTS could also penetrate the casual game market by adopting the same strategy that my company runs...that is, to have a multi-platform release strategy. I hear you all laughing out there but think of it...If BTS could port CM:BO for say the Dreamcast that has internet capability or even the Playstation (PS2 will have internet capability)imagine how many more "casual" gamers would at least pick the game up, and even if just a quarter of them, as Micheal put it "get bitten by the bug", we have (as full-on supporters of BTS/CM) successfully penetrated deep behind "enemy" lines! There are literally millions upon millions of Playstations and Dreamcasts out there just waiting to be targeted (Use main gun?). And, as you all know, not everyone can afford a PC but almost everyone can afford a game platform that costs under 300.00 bucks (under a hundred for the PS). I do not under any circumstances profess to know how easy or how hard, or even if this is possible to do, I am just throwing out an idea.

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

One shot...One Kill

[Guest *Captain Foobar*]

What an idiotic story.

They "lament" the lack of interest in this type of game, defending the genre in a way for its focus on gameplay before graphics, and then on the same website criticize Combat Mission for not having graphics that compare with QuakeIII, etc...

Journalists these days seem to either be pushing their own agenda, or just plain lazy... Wheres Edward R Murrow when you need him???

[PeterNZer]

I think the console idea is brilliant.

Wouldn't be that hard, interface wise, CM is already pretty straight forward. And there is a serious lack of decent thoughtfull games on consoles. BTS, thought about doing it?!

Or hirring/licencing someon else to? Would be interesting!

PeterNZ

[Philistine]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by *Captain Foobar*:

Wheres Edward R Murrow when you need him???<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ummm...Dead.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

I agree with your point, especially as Steve has said that the editor apparently decreased the reviewer's score (I assume without changing the text of the review) from a 9 to a 7. At least that explains why the generally favorable review had such a low score.

I also found the story itself vapid. For the most part, the "explanations" are platitutes which don't really square with reality and, as Steve also pointed out, it completely ignored Battlefront while mentioning Shrapnel & Matrix. Both are good companies and Shrapnel has some very good games [other than the SP converstion, I don't think Matrix has put one out yet] but neither has had the kind of breakout game that CM is, which is really a story in and of itself relating to wargames and internet sales.

--Philistine

[Steve Clark]

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

I think the console idea is brilliant.

Wouldn't be that hard, interface wise, CM is already pretty straight forward. And there is a serious lack of decent thoughtfull games on consoles. BTS, thought about doing it?!

Or hirring/licencing someon else to? Would be interesting!

PeterNZ<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

With all due respect, that is a very stupid idea. Unless you have a HDTV, with the poor resolution coming from console games (as opposed to a PC with a voodoo card or the like), you won't be able to see the difference between a foxhole and a dirt tile, let alone the differences between any vehicles at a distance. (I was going to say something to the effect of your a** and a hole in the ground, but that wouldn't work ). Come on, realize that consoles hooked to TVs are only good for fast graphics with poor resolutions and very litte AI. That seems to be the opposite of what CM is designed to be.