Matrix Games Forums

Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!Piercing Fortress Europa Gets UpdatedBattle Academy Mega Pack is now availableClose Combat: Gateway to Caen Teaser TrailerDeal of the Week Alea Jacta Est
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/3/2013 6:44:28 PM   
Rtwfreak

 

Posts: 382
Joined: 12/11/2011
Status: offline
If they would develop something besides repeats of old games and the same old games it might not be an issue. But, people get tired of the same old things....Why do you think 50% of all marriages end in divorce?

Now they want to move to handhelds and tablets because once again they can make the "same old things" and reap profits off of old content again and even put in less content because of what the handhelds and tablets can handle.

It's never been about the gamer or the love of creating a game it's always been about the $$. They will follow the stream not their convictions or what gamers want.

So you either follow the tug boat or you're left adrift in the ocean of despair waiting on that wargame you've always wanted that will never be made. Cue Combat Leader and some others Matrixgames has Abandoned.

But, even you and I as gamers ask for these troubles. Look how many of you want an Age of Rifles remake or a SPWAW remake? You want a graphics facelift really of old games you enjoyed but how much more could they do to make the games any better than they are in DOS mode other than the graphics? Well of course we can always say AI improvements but we've been saying that for 20 years and it never happens. You know no publisher or developer ever really says how the AI was improved only that it was improved. I highly question improvements to an AI of any game in the past 10 years. All I've seen is them getting worse.

But, things will change and publishers and developers will always run where the money is. Look at these independents begging you to approve them on STEAM greenlite program. Everybody wants on Steam and I wouldn't give you a plug nickel for Steam games if they weren't $5 or less.

When you want to get right down though to the blame game just look in the mirror, we cause this (the gamers) because we put up with released broken games, paid full price for them, we put up with them using Steam and intrusive gaming clients, we ran into their arms because they taunted us with games we just had to have no matter what the consequences. Welp the consequences are growing near and now you've made your bed it's almost time to lie in it.

(in reply to Matti Kuokkanen)
Post #: 31
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/3/2013 7:22:05 PM   
wodin


Posts: 7696
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DigIn

I'm with you pzgndr. I really don't have TIME to play all the greats I played in the 60's-90's. I looked at the PC Afrika Korps but haven't finished the main campaign yet. Sometimes lots of units just isn't the answer. I'm pretty sure this is why the squad level stuff is getting so popular and has so many games out at that scale. An operational game with 100+ divisions on each side with 32 actions per turn per unit is NOT what I really want.

My favorite current "wargame" (not actually even close) is Settlers of Catan with all it's expansions on my PC. Turn based in case of a phone call, few units per turn (too few but hey), and unlimited strategies. It has that...if I win I'm smart and good. If I lose it was the dice appeal. LOL





Hmm..funny that as I'm still waiting a a decent squad level game that improves upon Steel panthers that isn't 3D or realtime. The is a bigger gap for a great squad level monster game than Operational or Grand Strat as they really are well covered.

Paradox certainly took off compared to Slitherine Group. However they've even shied away from squad scale game even though they own the PC rights to Squad Leader.

Another wargame thats terribly overlooked is a tactical air warfare game. Lest one was Flight Commander 2 and I reckon thats an area that can really be expanded on by adding Squadron management, operational mechanics and rpg aspects.

< Message edited by wodin -- 3/3/2013 7:23:28 PM >


_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to DigIn)
Post #: 32
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/3/2013 8:16:32 PM   
Matti Kuokkanen

 

Posts: 1748
Joined: 4/2/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rtwfreak

It's never been about the gamer or the love of creating a game it's always been about the $$. They will follow the stream not their convictions or what gamers want.

Do you mean to say: "It's not what gamers want but what gamers buy"? What is difference?

_____________________________

You know what they say, don't you? About how us MechWarriors are the modern knights, how warfare has become civilized now that we have to abide by conventions and rules of war. Don't believe it.

MekWars

(in reply to Rtwfreak)
Post #: 33
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/3/2013 8:24:10 PM   
Mobius


Posts: 8841
Joined: 6/30/2006
From: California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: junk2drive
RE:war games

It costs too much to pay a programmer, artist and content providers for games that only sell a few copies. Ad to that the bargain bin pricing mentallity that kills the hope of recovering the costs.

As I have said for a while now, the future will be hobbist making open source freeware games.

Even bleaker. The tools to make the open source must be cheap, quick and easy to use or that won't even happen.

(in reply to junk2drive)
Post #: 34
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/3/2013 8:33:37 PM   
Matti Kuokkanen

 

Posts: 1748
Joined: 4/2/2004
Status: offline
I don't know about cheap, quick and easy, but it happen

_____________________________

You know what they say, don't you? About how us MechWarriors are the modern knights, how warfare has become civilized now that we have to abide by conventions and rules of war. Don't believe it.

MekWars

(in reply to Mobius)
Post #: 35
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/3/2013 9:56:16 PM   
parusski


Posts: 4591
Joined: 5/8/2000
From: Wyoming, Even Liberals Welcome
Status: offline
quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rtwfreak

It's never been about the gamer or the love of creating a game it's always been about the $$. They will follow the stream not their convictions or what gamers want.


Well, that is what any business SHOULD do. Without those $$'s they would not be able to publish any games.

_____________________________

"I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are. If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast."- W.T. Sherman

(in reply to Matti Kuokkanen)
Post #: 36
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/4/2013 12:03:23 AM   
ezz

 

Posts: 594
Joined: 7/4/2004
Status: offline
Om the comment about variable turn lengths for WIF being a modern day turnoff .. the new Battle of the Bulge for ipad/tablet uses variable turn lengths.


(in reply to parusski)
Post #: 37
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/4/2013 1:36:43 AM   
Joe D.


Posts: 3448
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: junk2drive

Posted at wargamer discussions by me

RE: consoles
My forecast is that app games will outpace PC and console games. Smartphones and tablets will have docks that attach to a TV screen or PC screen (or those 2 will become the same thing) for those wanting a larger view. Casual gamers will play browser games on google devices like the Chromebook.

PCs and consoles will become nostalgia items ...


I can remember when PC software filled a wall of shelves, but now they occupy a small niche in most retail stores.

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to junk2drive)
Post #: 38
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/4/2013 2:05:15 AM   
flashburn


Posts: 79
Joined: 6/19/2012
From: WASHINGTON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Status: offline
A game that looks like a board game and plays like board game....... Maybe you should get some friends over, get drunk and play the board game?

AS to computer games dying blabla bla. RIght now the trend may be leaning to tablet games and the like as those are popular devices. AT somepoint the WOW factor will deminish. Although certainly a segment that will stay. Every year there are more older gamers. Now they have LIVES of course, but a certain number will want games that use BRAINS. I can only see this increasing. But current crop of most war games do not interet me. That is not to say they are bad or anything. Just seem to old school. No longer a fan of most turn based games. For me that has passed. On the flip side...........these total fanatasay games coming out of from big players. UGH yuck! No thanks you. Wheres the middle ground damnit! Or design more scalabilty into the silly thing.

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 39
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/4/2013 2:23:28 AM   
Jamm


Posts: 374
Joined: 10/2/2009
Status: offline
I think there will always be computer wargames as the computer can just do so much more.
There will always be a segment of society that gets into history, even if its only by watching the History channel, or seeing movies like "Saving Private Ryan"
Or there are those who are into fantasy or science fiction.
There are a multitude of games for all of these tastes.
And some of these people will get into the games like we did.

I think a lot of the games could use a major graphic update to reach wider audiences and make marketing them easier.
And I'm not talking here about making everything 3d, as I think it is a wasted effort on the part of devs.
Nice maps and unit counters, good sound and a few battle effects are all I want.
As long as the substance of the game remained.

One game I think would benefit in this case would be the Steel Panther series.
If done well, I'm sure it would sell across the board.
Even some of the kids playing the Battleground series could try it out tactically, if it looked right.
And this series handled all the complexity under the hood.



_____________________________

When the going gets weird,... the weird turn pro

Hunter S Thompson

(in reply to DigIn)
Post #: 40
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/4/2013 6:15:59 AM   
Rtwfreak

 

Posts: 382
Joined: 12/11/2011
Status: offline
If any game series needs a graphics update it's The Command OPS series. Those nato counter chits are rather boring. Now if that game had better 2D graphics or graphics like a Panzer General or Panzer Corp that would be great and I'd buy more of the series. But, after playing BftB (as great of a game as it is) the graphics just turned me right off to it.

(in reply to Jamm)
Post #: 41
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/4/2013 8:28:03 AM   
wodin


Posts: 7696
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rtwfreak

If any game series needs a graphics update it's The Command OPS series. Those nato counter chits are rather boring. Now if that game had better 2D graphics or graphics like a Panzer General or Panzer Corp that would be great and I'd buy more of the series. But, after playing BftB (as great of a game as it is) the graphics just turned me right off to it.



No thanks. The counters are very important as they give out much needed info. Infact I wish the counters where a little bigger so there was more space for the info. CO is not an RTS game as such. It's a wargame thats continuous time. Start using 3D units (which make no sense for a game this scale) or anything else other than counters you'll lose alot more customers than you'll gain.
You really can't compare PC to CO. Using those sorts of graphics wouldn't work at all. It strikes me you've never played a Panther game as if you have you'd realise you couldn't use icons like PC has. Also to me it looks silly..one tank representing a company of tanks...The only thing that could improve the game is a 3D map but still use counters. It doesn't surprise me you are a Total War fan. Total War is as grog as Sonic the hedgechog, it's a fun game that looks OK and has mass appeal, something CO would never have even if it looked like a Total War game (which wouldn't work). There is a reason counters are used in wargames that have more complexity than Panzer Corps..it's all about giving out info in a quick and easy to read way. Worrying about graphics in CO sort of shows the game went over your head, a tank moving over the map would look silly and also show you nothing at all about what unit it is who it belongs to it's combat power, it's facing, ammo levels, moral level etc etc all the things you can quickly access from the counter. I can't understand why people want one tank or a soldier graphic that would represent a coy or division or whatever scale it is..the only scale that works at really is squad or 1:1. I do think graphics can be improved in wargames but they need the counter as the Icon.

It's not graphics so much that need to be improved in wargames but gameplay and mechanics.

Sorry mate but I strongly disagree with you here..probably have a stronger conviction for the current look that you have because it looks abit boring. Why not use your imagination?

< Message edited by wodin -- 3/4/2013 8:37:30 AM >


_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to Rtwfreak)
Post #: 42
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/4/2013 2:41:15 PM   
Joe D.


Posts: 3448
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

quote:

ORIGINAL: junk2drive

Posted at wargamer discussions by me

RE: consoles
My forecast is that app games will outpace PC and console games. Smartphones and tablets will have docks that attach to a TV screen or PC screen (or those 2 will become the same thing) for those wanting a larger view. Casual gamers will play browser games on google devices like the Chromebook.

PCs and consoles will become nostalgia items ...


I can remember when PC software filled a wall of shelves, but now they occupy a small niche in most retail stores.


I just remembered how I got into war gaming -- my first computer games were UV and the original HttR that I saw on a shelf at Electroinics Boutique, but it's been a very long time since I've seen a Matrix title at a retail store.

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 43
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/4/2013 5:58:06 PM   
meskary

 

Posts: 95
Joined: 12/20/2006
From: Colchester CT
Status: offline
Joe-

I agree...my first "war games" were V for Victory series, I don't count wastelands or pool of radiance on a Commodore 64 war games. Then I saw Close Combat at a retail store (can't remember which one) and when I got home and played with my brother and you know 10 seconds into the game our tanks are destroyed and burning and we are going crazy...well we were hooked, but you are right when is the last time we went into a store looking for computer games?

(in reply to Joe D.)
Post #: 44
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/4/2013 7:06:27 PM   
Perturabo


Posts: 2202
Joined: 11/17/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rtwfreak

If any game series needs a graphics update it's The Command OPS series. Those nato counter chits are rather boring. Now if that game had better 2D graphics or graphics like a Panzer General or Panzer Corp that would be great and I'd buy more of the series. But, after playing BftB (as great of a game as it is) the graphics just turned me right off to it.

Command Ops don't use Nato counters by default. They use silhouettes for marking unit types. Also, I liked graphics in Command Ops, they have very nice colours.

As for the idea itself, I think that it would be very difficult to make animated RTS-style graphics work for a game where multiple unit icons may be in the same place at the same time and where units themselves are usually scattered over a large surface.
Not to mention that it hiring animators to make good looking RTS-style graphics would probably be too costly.

< Message edited by Perturabo -- 3/4/2013 7:08:52 PM >


_____________________________

Without social solidarity manifested in the form of welfare state, people inhabiting one territory are a non-nation of mortal enemies engaged in competition for survival.

(in reply to Rtwfreak)
Post #: 45
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/4/2013 8:26:03 PM   
Matti Kuokkanen

 

Posts: 1748
Joined: 4/2/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wodin

It's not graphics so much that need to be improved in wargames but gameplay and mechanics.

I've got an idea regarding this matter. Wargame, where casual player sees only few different counters on the map (but could be many of each), and moves them around as simply as in Battle Isle series with only most important handful of data (speed, weapon ranges, general offensive values, general defensive values, general supply values, experience, morale, and that's it) at the glance. He isn't interested about what machine guns and what tanks are in that force, just that it is either infantry, tank, or artillery regiment (or division or whatever the scale) and general understanding of its capabilities. And game would be playable and winnable as such, at least on easy difficulty level. Out of that same game grognard can dig out very detailed information down to # of different rifles and pistols, models of each and every vehicle, ammo supply for every weapon, full TO&E of the force with options to change things around (veteran tank crews to newest Panther, rookies to PzKpfw IV Ausf F2, old PzKpfw III refitted to Marder III etc.) within limits of available resources. Actually there could be such games already: I played demo of The Operational Art of War as described rookie player and ogled stupidly at text mass of all the detailed information.

What do you think?

< Message edited by Matti Kuokkanen -- 3/4/2013 8:40:03 PM >


_____________________________

You know what they say, don't you? About how us MechWarriors are the modern knights, how warfare has become civilized now that we have to abide by conventions and rules of war. Don't believe it.

MekWars

(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 46
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/4/2013 8:52:08 PM   
Perturabo


Posts: 2202
Joined: 11/17/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Matti Kuokkanen

quote:

ORIGINAL: wodin

It's not graphics so much that need to be improved in wargames but gameplay and mechanics.

I've got an idea regarding this matter. Wargame, where casual player sees only few different counters on the map (but could be many of each), and moves them around as simply as in Battle Isle series with only most important handful of data (speed, weapon ranges, general offensive values, general defensive values, general supply values, experience, morale, and that's it) at the glance. He isn't interested about what machine guns and what tanks are in that force, just that it is either infantry, tank, or artillery regiment (or division or whatever the scale) and general understanding of its capabilities. And game would be playable and winnable as such, at least on easy difficulty level. Out of that same game grognard can dig out very detailed information down to # of different rifles and pistols, models of each and every vehicle, ammo supply for every weapon, full TO&E of the force with options to change things around (veteran tank crews to newest Panther, rookies to PzKpfw IV Ausf F2, old PzKpfw III refitted to Marder III etc.) within limits of available resources. Actually there could be such games already: I played demo of The Operational Art of War as described rookie player and ogled stupidly at text mass of all the detailed information.

What do you think?

One of my dream games would be a RTS that would have the complexity of games like WITE hidden under the hood. All of it with subordinate AIs that would handle micro-management for the player.

_____________________________

Without social solidarity manifested in the form of welfare state, people inhabiting one territory are a non-nation of mortal enemies engaged in competition for survival.

(in reply to Matti Kuokkanen)
Post #: 47
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/5/2013 10:06:20 AM   
Saint Ruth

 

Posts: 47
Joined: 12/16/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Perturabo
One of my dream games would be a RTS that would have the complexity of games like WITE hidden under the hood. All of it with subordinate AIs that would handle micro-management for the player.

Like the mythical Road To Moscow game?

As someone said, I think I'd prefer a Russian Campaign game with 100 units a side rather than having to worry about
how the number of Latrines and kitchens in 1st Company of 2 Battalion, 1 Regiment, 13rd Division, 3rd Corp, 4th Army!

(in reply to Perturabo)
Post #: 48
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/5/2013 11:02:59 AM   
Perturabo


Posts: 2202
Joined: 11/17/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Saint Ruth


quote:

ORIGINAL: Perturabo
One of my dream games would be a RTS that would have the complexity of games like WITE hidden under the hood. All of it with subordinate AIs that would handle micro-management for the player.

Like the mythical Road To Moscow game?

As someone said, I think I'd prefer a Russian Campaign game with 100 units a side rather than having to worry about
how the number of Latrines and kitchens in 1st Company of 2 Battalion, 1 Regiment, 13rd Division, 3rd Corp, 4th Army!

Would ever a single person directly command 100 units in real life?

_____________________________

Without social solidarity manifested in the form of welfare state, people inhabiting one territory are a non-nation of mortal enemies engaged in competition for survival.

(in reply to Saint Ruth)
Post #: 49
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/5/2013 11:06:10 PM   
SLAAKMAN


Posts: 2808
Joined: 7/24/2002
Status: offline

quote:

As someone said, I think I'd prefer a Russian Campaign game with 100 units a side rather than having to worry about
how the number of Latrines and kitchens in 1st Company of 2 Battalion, 1 Regiment, 13rd Division, 3rd Corp, 4th Army!

So when do you wanna play?
http://www.vassalengine.org/wiki/Module:The_Russian_Campaign
http://russiancampaign.com/


_____________________________

Germany's unforgivable crime before the Second World War was her attempt to extricate her economy from the world's trading system and to create her own exchange mechanism which would deny world finance its opportunity to profit.
— Winston Churchill

(in reply to Perturabo)
Post #: 50
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/6/2013 12:20:32 AM   
rogo727


Posts: 1334
Joined: 7/12/2011
From: Iowa
Status: offline
And geez only after seven years of development ..... Wonder how the programmers are taking this into account .. (See my previous post about the year 2031). Makes me wonder if matrix shouldn't hand this over to slitherine. Call me crazy but I do see slitherine outlasting matrix in the future...they seem to be open to more ideas and willing to implement them. I do not see ONE matrix game being planned for tablets or mobile gaming. Almost reminds me of a grandfather/grandson who are business partners.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel

HoI 3 has much more than just generals. More of a tactical nature it seems and maybe too much micromanagement, but there is a lot of depth to the game. The scale is both smaller and larger at the same time than WiF. I have to admit that while I own HoI3 and its DLC's, I haven't actually played it that often.

But back to your VASSAL point. I think you may be correct. It might be the only hope for uber complexity as many old games have been made available through VASSAL.

An unnamed member contacted me by PM to discuss WiF. This person is an avid gamer and one very familiar with WiF. He stated that it might not be as good as many think it is. When I asked why, his response was this: (I hope he doesn't mind and of course he will stay anonymous)

My gripes with it are at both high and low levels. I'll start high and work down. Also, bear in mind that the last version I played was 5th Edition, and it's been in the last millenium. I'm sure they have improved a few things.

1. Physical Size of Game: It's too big to play unless you have a very large playing area. The main ET and PT maps are each 44 x 34 inches. Supplements add even more real estate.

2. Unnecessary Complexity: It seems to me as if the designers set about making their game as big as they could, and then designed the combat systems. Each type of combat (land, air, naval, sub, anti-sub, anti-air, etc.) requires a different resolution mechanic. IMO, the designers could have developed more realistic and smoother rules. Had they done so, it would be more playable.

3. It's a monster game. Takes forever to play. The expansions (ships in flames, planes in flames, jeeps in flames, etc.) only make it that much more complex and unwieldy. Now, if you can set up 2 or 3 44 x 34 inch maps for a year while you play one turn a night once a week (avg. wargame group), and you like monster games, it's probably okay.

4. For all of its complexity, it's not particularly realistic.

5. For at least five editions, the rules were just plain broken at several levels (can't remember details, only remember the frustrations of contradictory rules and in some cases, missing rules). I presume that the Internet has allowed them to address this problem to an extent.

Moving to a more tactical level:

1. Ground combat is very odd for the scale. They have an impulse system that governs all their game impulses, but it makes the entire game very unstable. If a particular turn goes long, one side can use it to trounce the other.

2. I intensely dislike the naval system. The game encourages players to just move their massive fleets out of port and park them in a blockade of enemy ports in perpetuity. This never happened, and is extremely unrealistic. (Gets back to my point about how complicated it is vs. how realistic it is.)

3. Many of the rules are out of proportion to the level of simulation. The result is something that calls to mind the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

Summary of WiF Peeves:

A. More complicated than it needs to be owning to lazy system and unit design that never evolved through several editions.

B. In most practical gaming situations, it's unplayable because of its physical size.

C. It takes way too long to play it (especially since the usual Axis tactic is that if they don't win by the end of 1942, they give up and want to reset and play again, having just taken 2-3 months of game nights to get to that point—probably happens in other games as well, but it plagues this one as the Axis, if their wheels come off, cannot sustain a prolonged war of attrition because of the impulse system, which makes it impossible for the Axis to replace their losses to the level needed to compete in a long game).

For the record, when I complain about the complexity, I'm also an ASL player, so I'm not just whining—it's way more complicated than it needs to be to simulate what they're trying to simulate.

The root of the problems with the mechanics, I think, is the same as for Third Reich: Their 1st edition had a beer-and-pretzel countermix and mechanical system wrapped with a set of complicated rules the creates unrealistic situations because its the only way they could make the game work. Instead of slapping more and more expansions onto it while increasing the counter density and rules bloat, I think they would have been better served to review their individual subsystems and polish them.


Your response?



< Message edited by rogo727 -- 3/6/2013 1:15:26 AM >


_____________________________

"I thank God that I was warring on the gridirons of the midwest and not the battlefields of Europe"
Nile Kinnick 1918-1943

(in reply to Missouri_Rebel)
Post #: 51
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/6/2013 1:38:38 AM   
SeaMonkey

 

Posts: 745
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline
There is a mechanism for accomplishing a rather complex wargame, but I believe it has to be eased into. The developer starts with a simplified version, building a command, control, supply infrastructure as the foundation, something that allows expansion of the features. The code language would need to be carefully selected as to contribute to the feature creep as the game progresses in sophistication. The developers need only introduce the basics that wargamers are attracted to and allow for a community of modders to help with the progression that will occur over years. It will take committment, perseverance and a viable economic return for the invested developer to continue to grace the community with his work of art and most of all he will have to be interactive with his community through the forum.

As the years, months roll on, as the patrons continue to support the artist and learn the intracacies of the design and manipulation of the features, the game eventually evolves into what this thread has addressed.

(in reply to rogo727)
Post #: 52
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/6/2013 5:25:39 AM   
Punk Reaper


Posts: 1082
Joined: 8/23/2006
From: England
Status: offline
With MTV generation with their short attention spans I believe the future is bleak and will be on the iPad /tablet with the complexity of Battle of the Bulge or Battle Academy...... Sad but probably true.

(in reply to SeaMonkey)
Post #: 53
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/6/2013 6:42:46 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 16006
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: rogo727

And geez only after seven years of development .....
warspite1

This is the board game being talked about - not the computer version...

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to rogo727)
Post #: 54
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/6/2013 7:31:43 AM   
wodin


Posts: 7696
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
You do realise Matrix and SLitherine are the same company now? Slitherine Group is their real name. Matrix was bought out same as Ageod. Thye just kept their own names but really their all Slitherine.
quote:

ORIGINAL: rogo727

And geez only after seven years of development ..... Wonder how the programmers are taking this into account .. (See my previous post about the year 2031). Makes me wonder if matrix shouldn't hand this over to slitherine. Call me crazy but I do see slitherine outlasting matrix in the future...they seem to be open to more ideas and willing to implement them. I do not see ONE matrix game being planned for tablets or mobile gaming. Almost reminds me of a grandfather/grandson who are business partners.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel

HoI 3 has much more than just generals. More of a tactical nature it seems and maybe too much micromanagement, but there is a lot of depth to the game. The scale is both smaller and larger at the same time than WiF. I have to admit that while I own HoI3 and its DLC's, I haven't actually played it that often.

But back to your VASSAL point. I think you may be correct. It might be the only hope for uber complexity as many old games have been made available through VASSAL.

An unnamed member contacted me by PM to discuss WiF. This person is an avid gamer and one very familiar with WiF. He stated that it might not be as good as many think it is. When I asked why, his response was this: (I hope he doesn't mind and of course he will stay anonymous)

My gripes with it are at both high and low levels. I'll start high and work down. Also, bear in mind that the last version I played was 5th Edition, and it's been in the last millenium. I'm sure they have improved a few things.

1. Physical Size of Game: It's too big to play unless you have a very large playing area. The main ET and PT maps are each 44 x 34 inches. Supplements add even more real estate.

2. Unnecessary Complexity: It seems to me as if the designers set about making their game as big as they could, and then designed the combat systems. Each type of combat (land, air, naval, sub, anti-sub, anti-air, etc.) requires a different resolution mechanic. IMO, the designers could have developed more realistic and smoother rules. Had they done so, it would be more playable.

3. It's a monster game. Takes forever to play. The expansions (ships in flames, planes in flames, jeeps in flames, etc.) only make it that much more complex and unwieldy. Now, if you can set up 2 or 3 44 x 34 inch maps for a year while you play one turn a night once a week (avg. wargame group), and you like monster games, it's probably okay.

4. For all of its complexity, it's not particularly realistic.

5. For at least five editions, the rules were just plain broken at several levels (can't remember details, only remember the frustrations of contradictory rules and in some cases, missing rules). I presume that the Internet has allowed them to address this problem to an extent.

Moving to a more tactical level:

1. Ground combat is very odd for the scale. They have an impulse system that governs all their game impulses, but it makes the entire game very unstable. If a particular turn goes long, one side can use it to trounce the other.

2. I intensely dislike the naval system. The game encourages players to just move their massive fleets out of port and park them in a blockade of enemy ports in perpetuity. This never happened, and is extremely unrealistic. (Gets back to my point about how complicated it is vs. how realistic it is.)

3. Many of the rules are out of proportion to the level of simulation. The result is something that calls to mind the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

Summary of WiF Peeves:

A. More complicated than it needs to be owning to lazy system and unit design that never evolved through several editions.

B. In most practical gaming situations, it's unplayable because of its physical size.

C. It takes way too long to play it (especially since the usual Axis tactic is that if they don't win by the end of 1942, they give up and want to reset and play again, having just taken 2-3 months of game nights to get to that point—probably happens in other games as well, but it plagues this one as the Axis, if their wheels come off, cannot sustain a prolonged war of attrition because of the impulse system, which makes it impossible for the Axis to replace their losses to the level needed to compete in a long game).

For the record, when I complain about the complexity, I'm also an ASL player, so I'm not just whining—it's way more complicated than it needs to be to simulate what they're trying to simulate.

The root of the problems with the mechanics, I think, is the same as for Third Reich: Their 1st edition had a beer-and-pretzel countermix and mechanical system wrapped with a set of complicated rules the creates unrealistic situations because its the only way they could make the game work. Instead of slapping more and more expansions onto it while increasing the counter density and rules bloat, I think they would have been better served to review their individual subsystems and polish them.


Your response?





_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to rogo727)
Post #: 55
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/6/2013 9:49:21 AM   
Iain McNeil


Posts: 1878
Joined: 10/26/2004
From: London
Status: offline
There is no reason why complex games cant run on tablets. The processor is way more powerful than desktop PC's from a few years ago let alone the classics from the past.

Which complex wargame series that we used to produce have you seen us stop supporting that gives rise to this concern? World in Flames is almost complete and to release this year and War in the West is going well.

If you mean you see less of these releases than the lighter wargames then.... yes of course! These complex games take so much longer to make that you will by definition see less of them.

I think the change we are seeing is that there is an uptake of lighter wargames from the tablet audiences rather than a decline in complex games. It may feel like that as the news for these games covers more sites and there are more releases but I don't see any evidence to back it up. Light wargames are growing and as a result complex games are a smaller % of the total.

_____________________________

Iain McNeil
Director
Slitherine Software
Website http://www.slitherine.com

(in reply to DigIn)
Post #: 56
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/6/2013 1:54:59 PM   
ComradeP

 

Posts: 7166
Joined: 9/17/2009
Status: offline
There is one thing to keep in mind about the so called short attention span generation (which presumably I also belong to as I'm 25): even if people don't spend a lot of time playing a game during a single session, overall they might spend most of their spare time on a game. It's a guess, but I'm willing to bet that most people playing CoD spend more time on that than most wargamers spend on their PC wargames.

It's one of the reasons why less complex games sell well nowadays: they require less time to play during a single session, whilst you still get something done. You could say it's apples and oranges, but the younger generation certainly doesn't spend less recreational time at their PC or console than most wargamers, the opposite is more likely, if only because younger people generally have more spare time than middle aged people with fulltime jobs.

That doesn't automatically mean complex wargames don't have a market they can aim for. Rather, it could be seen as an incentive to "compartmentalize" complex wargames in such a way that during each session a player can do something that they feel is meaningful (say, attack with a corps or army from an army group instead of being more or less required to attack with the entire army group at once). I enjoy monster wargames as much as a grognard, but sometimes you can play for hours without anything meaningful happening. That limits its appeal, even to many wargamers.

That also brings me to what I still view as one of the main shortcomings of PC wargames and the area where a number of developers have somewhat failed to make the move from tabletop to PC: using the PC as something else than a glorified calculator. For starters: the AI in most wargames I've played is less than stellar. You could counter that is due to the inherent complexity of some monstergames, but even the AI for many less complex games isn't exactly great. That means solitaire play becomes boring after a while. The UI is also often quite primitive and sometimes even looks like it's build up around all the functions described in the manual, instead of the developer trying to see if hotkeys could be made available or if a function could be abstracted due to the benefits given by the PC.

Many wargames also don't have a modern multiplayer component in the sense that you can play them directly against another player. Rather, they rely on PBEM. This is also an area where many wargames are technologically not at the tip of the spear. Opening a game and immediately noticing if opponents are available requires much less effort than trying to find opponents through forums, keeping in mind that we here are a vocal minority and that there are many people both on numerous other forums or not represented on forums at all. Finding opponents through forums is a slower process than finding one simply by opening a multiplayer lobby in-game.

Regardless of the above, the main reason why I stop playing some wargames is that they have a (number of), to me, critical flaw(s) that just really start to bug me after a week/month/year (or two). WitE, for example, is detailed in a number of ways but also quite simplistic in some others. Similarly, I didn't like the way artillery and air strikes worked in Decisive Campaigns. To me, it is just a shame if a developer spends so much time on polishing certain aspects, that others are clearly less functional (or even less balanced).

There's also the tendency of wargames featuring events that, to Americans, belong to their national history because they feature a well known battle Americans participated in, which are presumably attractive from a commercial perspective. To Europeans and other non-Americans, this might not be the case, which has an impact on sales. It's often Overlord of Battle of the Bulge. North Africa and the PTO don't get a lot of love. I don't find battle of the Bulge games particularly interesting, particularly because if they're done well (like Command Ops), the Germans don't have much of a chance at all. Whilst Overlord is covered well, I'm still waiting for a good "Overlord to the Westwall" game, which also includes Dragoon.

Most summer 1944 wargames tend to focus just on Normandy and don't offer a long-term campaign even though the most spectacular part of the entire operation from a military perspective was crushing the German forces in the west (a collapse which in many cases is around the corner but not quite there in June-July 1944 wargames). Playing the same Eastern Front operations over and over is also not all that interesting after a while.

It would be refreshing to play operational wargames covering the less well known operations. Before anyone points me to TOAW: I don't like TOAW's artillery and air system either, nor the way units reconstitute.

Obviously, all of this is just my 2 cents.

< Message edited by ComradeP -- 3/6/2013 2:00:28 PM >


_____________________________

SSG tester
WitE Alpha tester
Panzer Corps Beta tester
Unity of Command scenario designer

(in reply to Iain McNeil)
Post #: 57
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/6/2013 2:36:13 PM   
sterckxe


Posts: 4600
Joined: 3/30/2004
From: Flanders
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Saint Ruth
quote:

ORIGINAL: Perturabo
One of my dream games would be a RTS that would have the complexity of games like WITE hidden under the hood. All of it with subordinate AIs that would handle micro-management for the player.

Like the mythical Road To Moscow game?


It's not mythical at all - I've played the beta - my review is up here :

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=891383&mpage=1&key=&#

quote:

ORIGINAL: Saint Ruth
As someone said, I think I'd prefer a Russian Campaign game with 100 units a side rather than having to worry about
how the number of Latrines and kitchens in 1st Company of 2 Battalion, 1 Regiment, 13rd Division, 3rd Corp, 4th Army!


Amen !

Greetz,

Eddy Sterckx

(in reply to Saint Ruth)
Post #: 58
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/6/2013 4:06:52 PM   
wodin


Posts: 7696
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
Iain..why aren't wargames then taking all that PC power and doing something with it. Yes tablets can do this and that but they are still no where nears as powerful as a PC.

Surely something innovative could come along and reshape how we see grog like wargames by using the power of the modern day PC. I'm not talking 3D RTS style or anything here but may really beautiful 3D maps or 3D Overlays..I'm not sure what can be done to be honest to use the power..but surely something can be..surely we haven't gone as far as we can do when it comes to the more Grog like wargames?




quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

There is no reason why complex games cant run on tablets. The processor is way more powerful than desktop PC's from a few years ago let alone the classics from the past.

Which complex wargame series that we used to produce have you seen us stop supporting that gives rise to this concern? World in Flames is almost complete and to release this year and War in the West is going well.

If you mean you see less of these releases than the lighter wargames then.... yes of course! These complex games take so much longer to make that you will by definition see less of them.

I think the change we are seeing is that there is an uptake of lighter wargames from the tablet audiences rather than a decline in complex games. It may feel like that as the news for these games covers more sites and there are more releases but I don't see any evidence to back it up. Light wargames are growing and as a result complex games are a smaller % of the total.


_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to Iain McNeil)
Post #: 59
RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak - 3/6/2013 4:17:06 PM   
PipFromSlitherine

 

Posts: 489
Joined: 6/23/2010
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: wodin

Iain..why aren't wargames then taking all that PC power and doing something with it. Yes tablets can do this and that but they are still no where nears as powerful as a PC.

Surely something innovative could come along and reshape how we see grog like wargames by using the power of the modern day PC. I'm not talking 3D RTS style or anything here but may really beautiful 3D maps or 3D Overlays..I'm not sure what can be done to be honest to use the power..but surely something can be..surely we haven't gone as far as we can do when it comes to the more Grog like wargames?




quote:

ORIGINAL: Iain McNeil

There is no reason why complex games cant run on tablets. The processor is way more powerful than desktop PC's from a few years ago let alone the classics from the past.

Which complex wargame series that we used to produce have you seen us stop supporting that gives rise to this concern? World in Flames is almost complete and to release this year and War in the West is going well.

If you mean you see less of these releases than the lighter wargames then.... yes of course! These complex games take so much longer to make that you will by definition see less of them.

I think the change we are seeing is that there is an uptake of lighter wargames from the tablet audiences rather than a decline in complex games. It may feel like that as the news for these games covers more sites and there are more releases but I don't see any evidence to back it up. Light wargames are growing and as a result complex games are a smaller % of the total.


Super-high-quality graphics are very expensive to produce, and yet generally will not give you a huge boost to the sales of a hardcore wargame (there does, in fact, appear to be a % of hardcore gamers that consider good visuals to be a sign that the game can't be very good... ).

Cheers

Pip


(in reply to wodin)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> RE: The Future Of Complex Wargames Looks Bleak Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





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
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.125