Are newer game releases dumbed down? Is it now all about graphics and no gameplay

[juan_gigante]

SWAT 3 was pretty awesome. If only it had ANY REPLAY VALUE WHATSOEVER :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: .

[Mace]

Originally posted by juan_gigante:

I notice that lots of people are OFP fans here. That game never really did it for me in the same way that, say, Ghost Recon did.

You could argue that OFP was better suited for bigger battles fought over a larger area than Ghost Recon, I thought Ghost Recon was the better developed and more enjoyable of the two.

[WineCape]

IMHO,

Great games are scattered thinly in the PC world, and I guess other platforms too. I’ve played quite a lot over the years. Games I’ve enjoyed, though some still have the irritating wash, rinse, repeat formula are:

Fallout Tactics: Brotherhood of Steel

Silent Hunter III

Links 2000 - since Access sold out to Microsoft it lost its touch

X-Com Apocalypse

Railroad Tycoon III

Civ II

Silent Storm - awaiting reviews on the follow-up Hammer & Sickle

Rome: Total War – especially the historical RTR mods

F.E.A.R. – I’m not a fan of FPS, but an impressive cinematic shooter, if you have a top rig that is. Suffers a bit from repetetiveness, though saved by the really outstanding shooting physics a-la Max Payne style slo-mo, good pace as well as atmosphere: what’s-that-I-see-in-corner-of-my-eye/screen?

Also enjoyed EuroFighter 2000 (can't remember the add-on name, Total War or somefink from DID).

Bought Baldurs Gate II after reading rave reviews. Not to my liking, even though I have a passing interest in AD&D (pen/paper).

Truly great games are Combat Mission Trilogy, especially the last 2 incarnations. The Trilogy spoiled me for the better: I want no health bars/hit points on units. No more. Never.

Sincerely,

Charl Theron

[ November 18, 2005, 02:31 AM: Message edited by: WineCape ]

[Vedric]

WARNING: This is how you redefine a thread. Read On.

OFP and SWAT 3/4 are without a doubt the best shooters ever to come out on a PC. Rogue Spear/UO was the best multi-player shooter ever.

Actually it depends on how you define a shooter. If you look for the best competition available worldwide then OFP or RS simply were not the best shooters. The best players in the world were playing Quake3 or CS. Players which many of you probably have never played against. Insanely good and often mistaken for cheaters or bots. These players don't really care about built in tactical depth or raw numbers of vehicles. They become the depth, team vs. team. They look for few of the traditional features most of us would look for. They require weapon balance with a development team that listens to the best players and makes needed adjustments. They also require a fluidity and refinement to the gameplay that allows their aim to shine. No herky jerky movement here. It simply won't sell to this community. Accuracy is most important. They require the ability to define all their hotkeys and define the sensitivy of every axis they move within. Graphics are great but considering the lifespan of the finest shooters it clearly is not the most important criteria.

RTS games have also nearly reached this stage. Nearly Identical to shooters in every respect. RTS games will require a bit more predefined balance and depth due to the nature of the game but in every other respect the best players in the world will find their way to a single title. The reason for this is simply playability and balance. Not graphics, not bump mapping or anti-aliasing. It's simple playability and the capacity of the development team to stay in touch with the bleeding edge of whatever genre they are invloved with. This in its most basic form means support through patches and a careful ear to the community.

I see no reason why tactical wargaming cannot reach this level of popularity. It takes vision and an open ear. I don't know if we have these requirements yet but BFC "seems" to understand this to "some" degree. I'm not fully confident tactical wargaming can reach the mainstream without the best of tactical wargaming devlopment teams reaching out to the mainstream "RTS/Tactical RTS" community with genuinely playable titles that maintain the depth we all love but package it in such a way that a veteran RTS (or even FPS) types can appreciate.

You all may think genuine mainstream tactical wargaming is a pipe dream but I would remind you of the success Panzer General had in it's day. Not exactly a perfect "grog" game, it however did redefine many grog concepts and had mainstream success. Developers at the time watered down many of the concepts and failed to build on what made PG a success. This is a failure of the core industry not the publishers. These people will publish whatever sells.

Some of you reading this may recognize this rant. I would simply say I'm here to help. Just a smidgen of credit for pounding this hope is all i ask.

Think about what it is these FPS and RTS people are doing for endless hours online. They are going over tactics, defining a "skill base" and seperating into clans, practicing new strategy for the next confrontation, developing their tactical and twitch skills within the game system they use. Beyond that they are doing it with friends and having a damn good time. You tell me how tactical wargaming cannot fit within this industry and I will show you a defeatist that lacks the.. well you get the idea.

Yes you can move this thread to its own if you wish. I've exhausted my myself here.

Vedric

[Dinger]

These players don't really care about built in tactical depth or raw numbers of vehicles. They become the depth, team vs. team. They look for few of the traditional features most of us would look for. They require weapon balance with a development team that listens to the best players and makes needed adjustments. They also require a fluidity and refinement to the gameplay that allows their aim to shine. No herky jerky movement here. It simply won't sell to this community. Accuracy is most important. They require the ability to define all their hotkeys and define the sensitivy of every axis they move within. Graphics are great but considering the lifespan of the finest shooters it clearly is not the most important criteria.

Outside of the hotkey/axis sensitivity issue (Which practically every game outside of CMx1 has), the features you describe are what you get from designing to the hardware's strengths. It's not simply a development team that listens. Quake and CS were and are built to spec on the hardware. And, while you might "consider the lifespan" of the shooters, the hardware used by the athletes of the computer world is always top-notch.

Moreover, if you look at these players, many of their key abilities are athletic: the ability to issue thousands of separate instructions a minute; precision in movement; fast reflexes. They also cultivate an intuitive knowledge of every inch of their tiny online arenas. yeah, they can play in teams, but what they play -- Counterstrike, RTS, Quake, is about as close to simulated combat as an NBA game.

Indulge me for a minute here -- I tried not to talk about OFP, but sooner or later I fail. OFP is an ugly game, and sure, de gustibus, it's not for everybody.

Online, most games are either some variation on the MP competitive styles made popular by Quake/CS/BF and the others -- some with vehicles, some without. The rest are these interminable FPS RTS games.

But at times, I'd get the posse together, someone would write a mission and post a briefing. We'd then go in and try it -- often unfamiliar terrain (not quite as unfamiliar as a quick battle).

For example:

6 of us form a LRRP squad on a vietnam map -- we are to investigate some activity in a wooded area 7 km NE of our camp. For support, we had a FB with some 155s roughly 6km NE of the target area; I get to be the FO. We board the Huey and ride to a LZ 3 km East of the target area. Staggered column through woods, pausing every couple hundred meters to listen and look for activity (as well as to figure out where the heck we are). We come to a small hill, and I carefully look around and fix our position on the map: Hill 31. Proceeding West, we're on our guard, until someone screws up. Bullets crack over our heads as a couple VC squads are coming right at us. Behind them, the woods are alive with activity. We duck back behind a small rise in the terrain -- it can't be more than a couple feet high, but it gives us some cover. The squad pops up, and returns fire -- the air is really thick with lead now, while I get my back to a tree stump and get the FB on the horn. I need the rounds to hit 200 meters away, and I hope to hell I got my location right -- well, not like anyone will yell at me if I got it wrong. Meanwhile, the enemy has sent a squad to flank us south, and the others are shifting their fire that way. Finally, about 2 minutes later, the first shells start ripping overhead and exploding in the trees, right on target. As we see bodies flying over the rise, we break contact with the enemy and regroup at the reverse slope of Hill 31. Back at the hill, I call up the FB and have them prep a 500mx500m box to the North and West of where we made contact. When the shells finish landing, we advance -- more cautiously this time -- and investigate. We find the ruins of what was a company-strength camp, but all the enemy is either dead, injured or run off. We head back south to the exfil LZ, and secure it, and call in the Huey to take us home. Elapsed time: ~4 hours.

In that time, yes, we had a firefight, and yes we got videogame-class kills; but the pacing and the experience was completely unlike CS or Quake.

You could probably write similar accounts of outstanding SH3 games, GR matches, WW2OL sorties, Target:Whatever battles or IL2 Missions. But this combination of open-ended play, narrative richness and coping with the unexpected -- that keyholed AT gun on the approach to Paislinis -- is I believe, what engages people in this sort of simulation. And, to be honest, the game that in my experience most consistently delivers this sort of engaging play is CMx1. Almost every battle is epic.

(EDIT - I use paragraph breaks, but UBB doesn't indent. Anyway, it's not like you're supposed to read this)

[ November 18, 2005, 02:29 PM: Message edited by: Dinger ]

[Sixxkiller]

Man you need to use paragraph breaks.

-Ray

[Sixxkiller]

Originally posted by Vedric:

[QB] WARNING: This is how you redefine a thread. Read On.

Well first off the best players play lots of games. I have played with most of these "best players in the world" you describe since at one time I was among them (pats myself on back). My saying that OFP and Swat 3 were the best shooters is purely an opinion. When you become elite in any game it tends to let you floss over the tactical depth.

I dont play CS anylonger and have never played Quake3. Anyone can become good at CS, all it takes is lots of sleepless nights, the right people to play with, repetition, a great computer, a fast connection, and obsessive qualities.

-Ray

[Vedric]

Sixxkiller, the best players in the world "as I call them" are those that compete professionally. Depending on when we are talking about these national and world level pro tournaments were Q2 Q3 or CS.

However my post was not really about OFP or any FPS game but an attempt to facilitate discussion about bringing in new people to real tactical wargaming by pointing out common ground in the motivations of current mainstream gamers and what tactical wargames do and do not offer. Your quote about OFP simply lead me into a thought which lead into another thought. I should have pointed this out in the post. Sorry if I offended you.

There is simply so much more depth to a wargame and depending on how this depth is presented will overwhelm many players. Steve has mentioned the use of mouseovers and this will be welcomed. Without knowing how extensively mouseovers will be in CMSF I would suggest using them for detailed unit statistics along with cover and concealment. The text could display in an invisible window to the lower left or right of screen just above the GUI. Having this much information appear over the mouse pointer would be ugly.

In the tradition of Civilization and other games that have done this, I would like to see a CMopedia complete with extensive hyperlinks.

The UI and how important information is presented I believe are crucial to introducing a broader range of gamers to real tactical wargames. It's all about immersion. Getting past information deficits and UI clutter is a large part of being immersed.

Vedric

[markl]

Can someone point me to a site with a current forum for OFP.

I was at Electroni Boutique this weekend and I saw the GOTY edition with Cold War Crisis, Red Hammr and Resistnce. I only had straight Cold War crisis before. When I installed this version it installed two shortcuts. One for "GOTY Edition" and one for "Classic Flashpoint". I had quick look on the web and there could be updates for both versions but I am not sure.

In the past when I have tried to update my last version with a patch or mod I trashed the setup completely. I would like to avoid that this time.

Electronic Boutique even had a box with the first 3 Medal of Honor games and the often cursed Hidden & Dangerous II. I may neve play them, but for the price they were asking I could not leave them there. They even had CMAK for $10.00, so a few people will get that for Christmas a well.

It looks like Christmas will be the season for gaming this year.

Cheers MarkL

[juan_gigante]

I bet you could get all the MoHs for $10 - 15, which is a deal. You can also get CoD for $15 - 20, which is, IMHO, a must buy. Don't know about H&D II.

[Lee_DiSantis]

anyone ever play 'x-wing' for pc back in the day?

[stoat]

How about "Comet Busters?" I played that game for many an hour in my early youth.

[Michael Emrys]

Originally posted by stoat:

How about "Comet Busters?" I played that game for many an hour in my early youth.

Which was—what?—a month and a half ago?

Michael

[stoat]

For 90 minutes.

[juan_gigante]

I had "X-Wing". It was a fun time, I guess, but "TIE Fighter" so much better. I had all the old Star Wars games. Rebel Assault, Dark Forces, even Yoda Stories.

[SgtMuhammed]

I had all the Star Wars flight sims. I also had the entire Wing Commander series. It was the game that would make me upgrade my computer with every release. I used to call it my $2000 game.

[juan_gigante]

Wing Commander 3? Oh yeah, baby. I remember there was that mission about 12 in, wherein if you had lost any mission before that one and you lost that one, it was impossible to win the story. The one where you get to fly the fancy fighter for the first time. I got by okay, but I had two friends who had to restart their entire game so it was possible to win the game.

[TheNathan]

I see someone mentioned Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, but don't forget Morrowind either.

[Kellysheroes]

Yep, most all games today are crap, too graphic artists motivated and very little gameplay or openendedness. They need to fire about 1/2 the graphic artists of these games and hire another 1/2 for AI programming and scenario building. HPS's Gettysburg Campaigns comes with over 300 scenarios, now that's a game.

I was a big fan of Battlefront, and can't wait for CMC version. But, I'm nowhere near as excited or will ever care about their first new release of the CMX2 engine. I hate modern warfare and I will not spend 1 dime on anything to do with it. Futuristic I can handle or pre korean war. Other than that it's all crap.

But, on a brighter note CIV IV and "The Movies" has been pretty good entertainment for the money. Of course Sid Meier always makes great games and surprisingly The Movies is something new and innovating, though it's not very openended.

Schwerpunkts AGW is out and it's actually pretty good. Reminds me a lot of the old Avalon Hill early games of the 60's. Simple mechanics, but, still takes time to master and PBEM games are still going to be the best for it. But, if you enjoyed AH's "Battle of the Bulge", "Africa Korps", "Blitzkrieg", "France 1940" and "D-Day", you'll enjoy Schwerpunkts AGW. Amazingly you don't have to wrack your brain to understand the interface and play a game out in one setting of a few hours.

[Salkin]

Originally posted by Dinger:

This is THE way OFP SHOULD be played. I don't play it anymore but my friends and I used to download co-op missions like these and do commando raids on bases and navigating alot of enemy infested terrain.

Intense, suspensefull, tactical and action-packed.

In a word:

Beautiful !

//Salkin

[Sixxkiller]

How can you come on this board and say that all modern era wargames suck, that you were a fan of battlefront, and then say that you think "The Movies" is a game that even rates in the same sentence as any BFC game? Talk about fluff games...

And if you dont care about the first release of the new engine, why are you posting on this board? They have a newsletter here for you to subscribe to that will let you know when they have a game release that you dont think sucks.

-Ray

Originally posted by Kellysheroes:

Yep, most all games today are crap, too graphic artists motivated and very little gameplay or openendedness. They need to fire about 1/2 the graphic artists of these games and hire another 1/2 for AI programming and scenario building. HPS's Gettysburg Campaigns comes with over 300 scenarios, now that's a game.

I was a big fan of Battlefront, and can't wait for CMC version. But, I'm nowhere near as excited or will ever care about their first new release of the CMX2 engine. I hate modern warfare and I will not spend 1 dime on anything to do with it. Futuristic I can handle or pre korean war. Other than that it's all crap.

But, on a brighter note CIV IV and "The Movies" has been pretty good entertainment for the money. Of course Sid Meier always makes great games and surprisingly The Movies is something new and innovating, though it's not very openended.

Schwerpunkts AGW is out and it's actually pretty good. Reminds me a lot of the old Avalon Hill early games of the 60's. Simple mechanics, but, still takes time to master and PBEM games are still going to be the best for it. But, if you enjoyed AH's "Battle of the Bulge", "Africa Korps", "Blitzkrieg", "France 1940" and "D-Day", you'll enjoy Schwerpunkts AGW. Amazingly you don't have to wrack your brain to understand the interface and play a game out in one setting of a few hours.

[Kellysheroes]

Because I have a right to my opinion just like you do bucko. So I'm voicing it, if you don't like it...tough. There's nothing you can do about it. So there Puff boy.

[Sixxkiller]

Puff boy and bucko in the same post. Thank god you are a mental giant. But I am glad you have a place here to spew forth your wisdom for all to see.

And btw I said FLUFF not Puff as he was a magic dragon that lived by the sea, that frolicked in the autumn mist in a land called BFC.

-Ray

[Kellysheroes]

I know you said FLUFF and I SAID PUFF, so now you expect me to post as you do also? You been eating braindead food too long and from your byline you probably need to spend more time with your girlfriend.

[mrpwase]

I can never tell if these kind of posts are serious. >_>

I've found myself playing CM more recently, but this is more because my computer has degraded to the point where it can't play good games (whereas when I bought it, not too long ago, it could play them all perfectly). I played The Sims 2 since its release (don't laugh ), and found it more enjoyable than most other games I've played, mostly due to the freeform elements. It's the same with Grand Theft Auto (again, don't laugh) - I'd happily sit playing GTAIII and GTAIII only for about a month's worth of gaming time.

The most recent release I've played is Half-Life 2, which I enjoyed to a certain extent, but it didn't captivate me in the same way as games like CM or TS2. I still enjoy playing CS with my friends on a LAN, but I am beginning to become bored with straight FPSs. Call of Duty 2 looks good simply because the AI is actually vaguely intelligent (although based on the demo, it is still unbelievably easy).

I've successfully managed to completely ignore console gaming for a quite a while now, and I'm beginning to do the same to certain genres of PC games. There are still good games being released, however, that have both good graphics and good/innovative gameplay - although I do agree that my favourite games tend to have worst graphics.