Does this exsist?

[Gommer]

I remember a 'set' of games way back when, at the dawn of the PC age, that were going to go under the broad label: Interlocking Game System. The idea was to have a seperate game for each aspect of an over-all campaign. Something along the lines of what the Total War series does with it's turn-based campaign and real-time combat option. They'd produced a Starship type game for the fleet battles, and a "Space Marine" type game (a lot like X-COM), but they seemed to dissappear before the rest of the set was complete.

My question is: Does anyone else do something like this? From my limited game experience only Total War even approaches this system of gaming, yet I can think of a few games that just beg to be 'joined' together in similar styles.

[E]

Your interlocking game system space game was Breach 3 + Rules of Engagement.  There was also a non-science fiction one by . I don't recall the title, but only the air combat game ever came out. I also think Spectum Holobyte had originally planned on doing the same with the Falcon series.

[E]

P.S. This wasn't the "dawn" of PC gaming... the sun had been up a long time by then.  The "dawn" consisted mostly ofgames with units that were letters and/or 4 color games at a blistering 1.00mhz (although a friend talked me into souping up my 8088 to run at 1.03mhz!!  ...I went back to Apple II's at 2.8mhz @ 16 colors for years, shortly thereafter *grin*).

[DuckofTindalos]

There was of course also the abomination that was Silent Hunter II and Destroyer Command, by SSI...

They advertised that you could play it multiplayer with one player being the sub and the other the destroyer. Of course, when Destroyer Command actually shipped, they "forgot" to include the multiplayer functionality. Ooops...[8|]

[E]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

they "forgot" to include the multiplayer functionality. Ooops...[8|]

Speaking of leaving out multi-player functionality, does anyone remember the debacle that was "B-17 II?" Highly anticipated by many for a long time because of the multi-player functionality (you were supposed to be able to crew a single B-17 with players, while others could opt for fighter escort or fighter interceptors). But it was dropped as being too problematic shortly before the game's release.

[DuckofTindalos]

Yeah... The "fun" part about the Destroyer Command fiasco was that SSI "forgot" to announce they were dropping the multiplayer thing.

[Hertston]

ORIGINAL: Gommer

From my limited game experience only Total War even approaches this system of gaming, yet I can think of a few games that just beg to be 'joined' together in similar styles.

Like what, as a matter of interest?

[DuckofTindalos]

And for heaven's sake, DON'T say WitP!

[sabre1]

Breach 3 and Rules of Engagement if I recall correctly were good games, not great but good.

B17 II even without the MP was really not a bad game, but I agree it could have been great.

My favorite "In the beginning" games was Computer Ambush, and Cosmic Balance.

To this day my favorite online experience was GENIE using the offline UI called Aladdin. It was a great community.

[DuckofTindalos]

Rules of Engagement was fun on its own. Never owned Breach 3.

[ckammp]

deleted

[Jeffrey H.]

ORIGINAL: E

ORIGINAL: Terminus

they "forgot" to include the multiplayer functionality. Ooops...[8|]

Speaking of leaving out multi-player functionality, does anyone remember the debacle that was "B-17 II?" Highly anticipated by many for a long time because of the multi-player functionality (you were supposed to be able to crew a single B-17 with players, while others could opt for fighter escort or fighter interceptors). But it was dropped as being too problematic shortly before the game's release.

I have B-17, (one I suppose) on 3.5" floppies. I forget where I got it. Funny, I have never installed it on any computer. I think I got it at a garage sale with a dozen other games all in ziplocks. I bought it because I liked playing AH's 'B-17 Queen of the Skies' so much. In fact I'm still a bit curios about playing it. It should work on DOS Box.

Hrrmm.....

[Gommer]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

And for heaven's sake, DON'T say WitP!

Does thinking it really loudly count? Seriously though, I'd considered this very thing, but it's already an epic level game (ie: takes bloody forever with good players) and adding the extra time to fight out even some of the battles seperately makes me cringe. I was thinking more along the lines of the European theater land battles. It could even mirror TW in that you'd play turn-based for the strategy level and a real-time game (if you so choose) for the Tactical level.

This is one of those 'simple in concept, (perhaps) nearly impossible in practice' ideas. At the most basic it's an interpreter program. You'd take the information from an upcoming 'hex' battle in a Strategy level game, hand it to the 'translator', which would convert it to a scenario that the Tactical level game could use. The game is played out and the results used to modify the involved forces' stats in the Strategy level game.

I know at least a couple basic assumptions that would need to hold true to make two games mesh at all, namely that it couldn't be every single battle fought out a tactical level, and the two games would need a wide enough gap in respective time-frames. IE: WitP wouldn't work well unless the Tactical level game could run an entire scenario in under whatever the turns are set for (ie: a Day at minimum). Things would get even more complicated if you tried to add in the chance of reinforcements to the Tactical level.

One thing I don't worry about is the possible difficulties in having two games that didn't share the minimum level of detail needed to pull it off. This isn't any sort of problem with any number of the Strategy level games to be found under the Matrix name, where the detail level of 'corps' and 'divisions' are more than adequate for any Tactical level game. [8|]

I just like the over-all idea, and I'd hoped that if anyone had heard of such a project, or better still a working version, it would be the crowd here at Matrix.