will there ever be a game like WITP

[madmickey]

good news I hope support will continue with good sales.

[Ron Saueracker]

ORIGINAL: denisonh

I have to say that WitP is the finest military simulation of the War in the Pacific to date. Period.

But......

I have to echo Pasternakski's sentiments on the piece about "pandering" to people whining about the combat system.

The fact is that we have the invulnerable IJN "Deathy Star" wandering around with absolute impunity.

Somebody please point to the historical precedence for this.

This applies to both Allies and IJN in the early war.

The CV was a new weapon system. Managing CAP, organization of air wings, doctrine, formations, etc.. were all in development. The fact that the first CV on CV naval engagement did not happen to May of 1942 (Coral Sea) indicates that the CV was not the reliable "tried and tested" weapon system it gets credit for in the game.

Combat is choatic. Particularly so with a new weapon system where you are still learning how best to employ it.

But the way the KB can park off the coast of Java, India, or Austrlaia in early 42 is so unreal it defies reality. There is such certainty with early war CAP effectiveness, NONE of the reticence displayed by the IJN or USN naval staffs in planning early war CV ops is considered. Why I ask?

It is kind of like saying that since nobody died last year on US Highways from "playing touch football", that is is ok to play touch football in the middle of the freeway. We reason away historically significant concerns with such comments as "I have twenty Zeros on CAP, no single unescorted bomber SHOULD be able to penetrate my CAP". The fact that it could happen in reality scared real planners, but is is so unlikely in WitP that it can be dismissed as not an issue.

The uncertainty of the CV as the "premier" platform existed in reality and fact until later 42, when enough lessons had been learned to codify it as the such.

Air combat is too bloody and early war CAP too effective because of this pandering. It should be far more "chancy" than it is now to better represent the uncertainty that in fact existed at the outset of the war.

Most of the "pandering" or whatever was aimed at toning down combat, not upping it. The fact that it remains too bloody has much to do with the way they approached the design of CAP. Unfortunately CAP does not subscribe to the notion of the sixty mile hex like say naval combat, where ships in a formation 500-1000 yards apart are regularly non participants in combat because of the somewhat extreme assumption that they travel as a formation until combat, then break off and do whatever "because it's a sixty mile hex".

This is not the case for CAP. Fighter elements, just being a mile or so out of position resulted in bombers getting through without full, partial or anyCAP participation because CAP flew in elements or sections, not in a big swarm like bees. CAP should be TF specific, not hex specific, because seperate TFs were many miles apart and cover a large area. Further, uncoordinated attacks should be no different than coordinated attacks when encountering CAP initially...this stream of uncoordinated bomber packets having to run the gauntlet of CAP is brutal. The uncoordinated strike should suffer a combat penalty, but should not have to come in seperately and get drilled. These CAP fighters seem to have unlimited ammo and the ability to be in numerous places at one time because of this.

In the game, we all know that efforts were made to illustrate degrading CAP effectiveness with each successive wave but I still think the CAP gets too much credit to be everywhere at once.

[Toast]

A few random thoughts about out this subject that seems to be coming up a lot lately.

Everytime I read threads like this it reminds me of the running gags on the open source forums about "Netcraft confirms BSD is dying." It also reminds me of all the Angst in the wargame industry in the late 80's bemoaning the slow death of the industry.

I was a hard core wargamer in the 60's delving into ASL, the Victory series but life intervened and I coudln't devote as much time to it (normal story) and I sort of lost track of the industry as all the familar names went under and it transformed into computer wargames. I found WITP quite by accident and have been excited about wargames for the first time in years. And the biggest reason I have gotten excited is because of this forum and reading the discussions and feeling the community unlike anything I experienced in my board gaming years. We were so isolated then and now with this forum and others it is just much more of a communty with a lot more members and support than I would have thought existed.

The economics of wargaming is always going to be tough, that's just a fact of life. But I think that we as hobbyists who obviously love the hobby and spend so much time with it are the ones who are going to keep it alive or let it die. Indevidual games will come and go and have their supports and detractors and no game is going to be perfect. But WE have to keep games like this alive. How?

Not just by buying and playing the games but by getting the word out and trying to build the hobby community. Talk about the game to other hsitry buffs or other people who we knew are or were into wargames but may not know about this. But also supporting the "beer and preztel" or "entry level" games like GGWaW and the ACW game. These may not be the types of games we love and crave, but they just might be fun games to play and maybe, maybe we can get freinds and nephews or sons or history buffs to try them and share with them our passion and have another member of the hobby. If just 1 in 10 who try the game goes on to games like WITP then that will make the economics that much more appealing to the game companies.

The other way is DIY. Write the games you want to see. I've read enough of these posts to know there are some coders who love theses games and we can all help in research, documentation, playtesting, just ideas. Maybe after a game that we are passionate about like WITP ceases to be a money making propostion for Matrix and 2By3, they might be willing to donate the source code to the community. Or maybe we just start from scratch if the commercial companies aren't writing the games we want to play. We all spend such a huge amount of time with this hobby that writing a game we would like to play does not seem too far fetched.

These are just some random thoughts. I just believe this hobby is in our hands and we should do with it what we want. We can make it live or let it die.

Well, I have a week off to get to get projects done around the house and to play WITP and get comfortable enough to start a PBEM game. Guess how much I will get actually done around my house!

[Embark]

The economics of wargaming is always going to be tough, that's just a fact of life. But I think that we as hobbyists who obviously love the hobby and spend so much time with it are the ones who are going to keep it alive or let it die. Indevidual games will come and go and have their supports and detractors and no game is going to be perfect. But WE have to keep games like this alive. How?

Not just by buying and playing the games but by getting the word out and trying to build the hobby community. Talk about the game to other hsitry buffs or other people who we knew are or were into wargames but may not know about this. But also supporting the "beer and preztel" or "entry level" games like GGWaW and the ACW game. These may not be the types of games we love and crave, but they just might be fun games to play and maybe, maybe we can get freinds and nephews or sons or history buffs to try them and share with them our passion and have another member of the hobby. If just 1 in 10 who try the game goes on to games like WITP then that will make the economics that much more appealing to the game companies.

I agree with what you have to say. I think that a lot of wargamers know that this is necessary in order to help keep the genre thriving. I myself am a history buff recently turned wargamer. I went from the Combat Mission games to Highway to the Reich and then to War in the Pacific. I definitely don't think I would have been able to jump right in with something as complex as WITP had there not been some precursors to it.

[Stavka_lite]

I have wargaming since '74 and this hobby has always been a niche market. Looking back at my history of gaming and casually researching the industry I think that the industry and hobby is not in too bad of shape. While in the USN I gamed with 2 other people and after I got out in 78 I gamed spottily, at best, with one or two other people eventually fading out. On a quirk in the late 90s I was doing a search trying to see if SPI's War in Europe/East/west was even on the market vis a vis ebay. Much to my surprise I found a computerized version, albiet pricy, at Decision Games (www.decisiongames.com)and I also found what I considered to be a healthy community too. I played PBEM for a couple of years until I started on my MBA. After I finished that tribulation I was tipped off to Combat Mission by a co-worker and that community as well and it was and still is healthy and thriving. I got caught up in that fiasco called Hearts of Iron for a while as well but found Matrix games by accident(hasn't everyone[:D]) but more importantly I found the community.

I have made mention of community a couple of times now and that is the gist of this post. I have also mentioned four online wargaming companies, there are more but I digress. One company, Decison Games has a poor non-involved community and as such appears to be struggling. The producers of HOI enjoy a healthy community even though I think the games are buggy and unplayable but they seem to remain fiscally viable. The last two companies, Matrix games and Battlefront produce quality games and have a great community. While this is significant the producers of HOI ( can't think of their name for the life of me) are more intersting as they do not produce quality games like BF or MG but they do have a online community, or at least they did last time I looked. While this may be a statement of the obvious[X(] wargaming companies need to nuture their communities and make an effort to start one if they don't have on i.e. DG. Their health does not appear to have the strong anecdotal correlation to the quality of their games as one would expect but instead to the community that they have. Of course I have no empirical data to back up these hypotheses and they are purely anecdotal but I think an interesting observation none-the-less.

You can't attrribute the healthy communities to marketing as all of the companies do a very poor job of that but imagine what the industry and their attendant communities would do if these companies would build into their budget a little money for a decent marketing program. While expensive and a pipe dream what do you think would happen with one or two good commercials aired on the History Channel???

Ok, flame away...

[BlackVoid]

As long as there is demand there will be supply.
Dont freak out. PC games were thought to be dead. More titles are released now than ever before, the industry has more money in it than ever, and this will continue to be like this as long as there is economic growth.

Yes, the majority of games are crap, but this is not limited to the game industry. The same happens to films, books, television even food.... More crap than ever on all levels.

The number of families with computers continue to grow all over the planet (maybe not so much in the US anymore). As more and more people play games, the percentage for niche/quality games (call it as you wish) is shrinking. But overall, the market is growing, I believe on a global level more people play wargames now than ever. I also see that an increasing number of the mass-market buyers get disappointed with the mass-market games. As they get older, many of these people will stop playing games (bored of it), but some will play on and go for a deeper experience. Which can mean wargames, online games, simulators - games that are worth playing beyond a few days/weeks.

[madmickey]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

WitP sales have been fine (higher in October than in September, always a good sign). It's more a case that the effort required to put out a Med War game that we would be happy with turns out to be much greater than what we had originally thought, and we are all too burned out by working on this monolith to want to put that much work into the Med War game. This is especially true given the known sales limitations of a Med game. WitP was a product that at every turn took a ton of effort, and we didn't want to put out a Med War game that we wouldn't be proud of. It was really only after we put out WitP and could step back and figure out what we needed to do to put out Med War that we came to this understanding of the effort required.

As for another WitP? I don't think there will be anything quite like it again covering the War in the Pacific. That's not to say that sometime in the future someone might not do another kind of War in the Pacific game that is even better. I just don't think it will be as grand-tactical in nature, and won't likely have both the detail and the player control over so much (if not all) of the operations.

we will be facing less complex game, the people who makes them are telling you.

[U2]

I think there is hope for these kind of games as long as Gary is around. I mean he is making a new East Front monster so I guess there is hope out there. Steel Panthers IV appeals to me too because I don't really enjoy the CM games and a new fresh SP IV will therefore give me what I need from tactical games. GGWAW looks like a fun game and I don't get some of the negative remarks. I love hardcore wargames just like you but it's fun to wind down with "easy" games just for the fun of it. WAW looks superb and entertaining. The Civil War game is not really my favorite subject but I like wargames period so the subject is not important.

When it comes to the Med game that was cancelled. Well lets look at it from the bright side, it was cancelled with UV engine, who knows if they will make it with another engine in the future.

After SP IV, East Front, WAW and Civil War game PLEASE do a remake of Carrier Strike, please? [:D]

[Nikademus]

ORIGINAL: denisonh

I have to say that WitP is the finest military simulation of the War in the Pacific to date. Period.

Wanted to add this because its a statement that is appreciated by testers and developers alike. [;)]

But......

I have to echo Pasternakski's sentiments on the piece about "pandering" to people whining about the combat system.

As with everything else, there are pros and cons to any system or organization. I have always supported Matrix's open ended forum where players have to ability to provide input. Yes this can lead to some cons to match that pro, but overall i think you and Pats are underestimating the devs and their ability to stand by their own opinions or that of their on-staff researchers.

Combat is choatic. Particularly so with a new weapon system where you are still learning how best to employ it.

But the way the KB can park off the coast of Java, India, or Austrlaia in early 42 is so unreal it defies reality. There is such certainty with early war CAP effectiveness, NONE of the reticence displayed by the IJN or USN naval staffs in planning early war CV ops is considered. Why I ask?

Mainly because players have a degree of control and knowledge not available to the historical players and more importantly, because in the end, none of us players are responsible for lives nor are we answerable to a higher authority if we screw up. The only way to "simulate" this is to impose hard coded (or optional) command/control rules that limit a player's freedom of action. This road tends to be an unpopular one for many wargamers who love to micromanage and control everything. If i were asked to define a signature aspect of a Gary Grigsby designed wargame, two facets would immediately come up, 1st....a degree of detail in the tactical frame that belies either the operational or strategic scope of the game if it encompases such (examples: War in Russia....Pacific War) 2ndly, a degree of control provided to the player that matches the detail level of 1st signature aspect. (example: WitP is a grand strategic/operational level wargame, but one that encompases so much detail and control that often it "feels" like a tactical simm.) All in all its a great approach and i think Gary's reputation and the popularity of his wargames vindicates that opinion. However as with any system, there are cons as well as pros. One of the cons is the ability of players to micromanage and produce accelerated or overagressive strategies.

Air combat is too bloody and early war CAP too effective because of this pandering. It should be far more "chancy" than it is now to better represent the uncertainty that in fact existed at the outset of the war.

I dont agree this is due to "pandering" but rather, due to the limitations imposed by trying to design a game engine that revolves around 1 day turns and two phase air operations. Let me remind all that this same issue was present in Pacific War, a game that did not, in it's day have an Internet to provide a means for "pandering" Nor was it only favorable to one side.

This issue is also fixible.

[Hartley]

Unless you erase all historical knowledge from a WITP player, and hook him up to an electrical shocker that works every time he loses a capital ship -
most of the complaints here are bogus.

[ZOOMIE1980]

ORIGINAL: Ron Saueracker

ORIGINAL: Embark

I think as long there is a market for this type of game that people will try to satisfy that niche. I don't think 2by3 or Matrix got rich off of WITP even charging 70 bucks a pop. They said they anticipated selling between 5,000 and 15,000 copies of it. Those numbers arent very large compared to mainstream titles.

No, but is good money as it is not their only project. Not much difference between financially comfortable and stinking rich unless you are a complete freak.[:)]

Split the middle, 10,000. $700,000 gross. Matrix gets a chunk, DR gets a chunk. Government gets a chunk, but what's left between 3 guys? And it's not like they developed WitP in a vacuum. They had UV income coming in, and also working on their other title(s). WIN32 Computers aren't the only things that can multitask!

This isn't an ActiVision game that needs 200,000 sales to support a 50 man shop. There will be more like this some day.

[pad152]

This isn't an ActiVision game that needs 200,000 sales to support a 50 man shop. There will be more like this some day.

I don't think so, only GG ever made games like this, and if 2by3 games and matrix can't make a go of it or don't want to, there is little hope[:(]. No other game requires this amount research before any type of coding is ever done.

[ladner]

I was thinking of what you posted, and I relized they have already accomplished the hard part the research. The research is done, in terms of a Pacific Theater OoB. I interpreted the statement put out by 2by3 Games, meaning they have a new engine, i.e. tool for doing there job.

Think of how much easier it is to write a paper on a word processor compared to a typewritter, I interpret the statement to mean the WiTP engine is like the typewriter, GGWaW engine is the word processor. As long as they make games that have individual ships and planes, large scale land formations but with the detail of individual squads, tanks and guns I will be happy.

And to Joel, Gary and company, if you read this thread THANK YOU! [&o] Have been a big fan ever since I was kid and bought Kampfgruppe for the C-64, the joys of the 5 1/4" floppy days.

[madmickey]

ORIGINAL: Joel Billings

WitP sales have been fine (higher in October than in September, always a good sign). It's more a case that the effort required to put out a Med War game that we would be happy with turns out to be much greater than what we had originally thought, and we are all too burned out by working on this monolith to want to put that much work into the Med War game. This is especially true given the known sales limitations of a Med game. WitP was a product that at every turn took a ton of effort, and we didn't want to put out a Med War game that we wouldn't be proud of. It was really only after we put out WitP and could step back and figure out what we needed to do to put out Med War that we came to this understanding of the effort required.

As for another WitP? I don't think there will be anything quite like it again covering the War in the Pacific. That's not to say that sometime in the future someone might not do another kind of War in the Pacific game that is even better. I just don't think it will be as grand-tactical in nature, and won't likely have both the detail and the player control over so much (if not all) of the operations.
Joel Billings
Moderator




Posts: 2764
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: Encinitas, CA
Status: offline RE: will there ever be a game like ... (in reply to Banquet)

ladner & pad152
this is from a true authority

[Jmsimer]

I think the reason there will be few, if any, games like WiTP is TIME. The advancement of hardware and software technology will enable more advanced and complicated wargames, yes, but WiTP is probably at the very limit of how long it can take to play a game, and still have enough people be interested in it to make it economically viable. i can definitely say that it is at MY limit. I bought it within a couple weeks of its release and am still playing my first game against the AI to get the hang of things.

[dday]

And to Joel, Gary and company, if you read this thread THANK YOU! Have been a big fan ever since I was kid and bought Kampfgruppe for the C-64, the joys of the 5 1/4" floppy days.

Gosh, I wish I could plays that again. More so, we gotta get this Holodeck to work!!! [:D]