Matrix Games Forums

I visited a gaming forum of an N-1 game the other day. It is interesting, because there are some certain standard patterns which seem to emerge.

First, let me explain what I mean by an N-1 game. It's the game which the developer has recently released a new and improved successor. (No, I am not going to mention names here.)

Two interesting things that commonly occur and I find amusing are:

(1) Often there are a group of players, who will reaffirm their allegiance to N-1 for various reasons and decide not to move on to buying/playing N. Their reasons range from failure to meet N's steep hardware requirements to not liking new features introduced in N to asserting that N-1 is stable and mature while N has been rushed out the door and is as of yet not playable.

(2) Often N-1/N beta testers appear in discussions with N-1 advocates to assert why it is time to move on to N. Generally, the same beta testers who until only a months ago found N-1 to be world's greatest game engine/system, now find it trivially easy to identify and expound on major flaws in the N-1 engine.

As I said, I find all of the above amusing, since I experience it from the outside looking in.

I've beta tested RDOA/HTTR/COTA for about five years now. I went back to play some HTTR after we got COTA done. I even went back to play some RDOA after COTA was complete. Although COTA did make major improvements in the system, I still find HTTR to be a perfectly enjoyable game. Yes, I would love to see HTTR with the new supply and movement system, but even without it, there was much to learn about operational warfare from the game ... stuff I certainly didn't know five years ago. I also have no doubt that if PG had called it quits after RDOA that I would still be playing RDOA and regarding it as a classic that was just too far ahead of its time.

So, I watch the N-1/N game discussions and chuckle, because I don't really understand it myself. I think I will get a new PC this year and I will surely install HTTR, COTA, and BFTB. (not sure if I will have time for them all) The RDOA CD/manual I will keep in a safe place, but since HTTR had most of the RDOA scenarios, I don't think I will install it.

ORIGINAL: MarkShot
First, let me explain what I mean by an N-1 game. It's the game which the developer has recently released a new and improved successor. (No, I am not going to mention names here.)

As hardcore wargamer from last 20 years:

I see this N and N-1 issue pretty valid sometimes I own only COTA so I cant say anything about this particular game but I also own Grown of Glory and Forge of Freedom that is supposed to be sequel of GoG.

I was big fan GoG but I’m little disappointed to FoF yes there is many new features in FoF but I dont see game system as enjoyable to play as in GoG. I see FoF game system little immature there is issues with balance and game stability it looks that there is memory leaks that slowly consume all memory of your computer so I do understand those who dont see N sometime as good as N-1.

If you buy N-1 game system is most of time more mature with less of bugs actually this is same also in Uncommon Valour and War in the pacific I found UV more enjoyable and mature to play than WITP that is sequel. Yes there is new features covered in WITP and it covers whole war still I found UV more interesting, maturer and more balanced for PBEM than WITP. If somebody is interested Pacific war and don’t own neither of games I would almost more recommend getting UV than WITP for more matured game playing.