Hmmm this might fly or the thread might burn bright, but I can deal with it.
Much has been said of the merits of "helping the hobby". But some of the methods are at best wishful thinking, while others are at best just inefficient thinking.
I think of recruiting as passive, active, or aggressive styles.
Passive assumes you are just hoping it works.
Active assumes you are going to expend effort, but it might not matter much.
Aggressive assumes nothing, you have every intent of getting new wargamers come hell or high water.
A good example of Passive would be the MMP web page. It's a top notch web page, but I can't see anyone going there unless they were already intent on buying (which means you are already a wargamer). They have no interest in a forum (I know I have inquired).
Active might be developing cross over game products. But that is imperfect. You might only create an interest in cross over game products, and end up with no interest in wargaming all the same.
I know of a lot of persons that will play First Person Shooters of all sorts, but ask them to play something serious like Steel Panthers or Uncommon Valour or Combat Mission, and you get a complete lack of interest. They don't want to play a wargame.
Aggressive would be going out there and telling yourself, I am going to hunt down someone and make them a wargamer intentionally.
You pick a game that is basically introductory grade, and you convince a person to try it.
My current favourite introductory wargame is called Victory the Blocks of War from Columbia Games (a board game that uses blocks for the counters). You don't take no for an answer, you go out and search and search till you get someone willing to try it.
Some people make great wargamers, some people don't. But generally speaking, you will find that very few people will have the slightest interest in becoming a wargamer.
The trick to ending up having a wargamer at your disposal, is determining how long you are going to wait for one to fall in your lap.
I live in a town of 20+ thousand. Half will be female. Nothing wrong with female wargamers, but you won't find one near as fast as a male gamer. Might as well concentrate on a male target audience. You can ignore children and people over 30 if you want the search to be faster.
Then you want to list any location that has a chance in hell of having a decent supply of targets.
We have a college here in town, plus two highschools. No gaming stores, one lousy library, no museums. We have an army cadet corps unit though (if you are lucky **** lucky you might even score a female wargamer here).
Think guys think. The town might have a dozen good wargamers out there. They won't know they are wargamers yet either in most cases.
You can use Passive, and assume they might find this forum by accident somehow. Or they might actually notice the one only lousy copy of the latest attempt at computer wargaming in the current computer retail outlet. But don't hold your breathe.
You can use active as your means of hoping, but I don't think there is reason to be excited by the chances. So asking the local stores to stock the latest software, just so it can linger on the shelves like some bad idea of bait ain't going to cut it.
And writing a nice piece about wargaming in the local paper is also just not going to produce definitive results.
Nope the only route to take is get out there and do it yourself. Get a good game, and check out the local highschool. Try to get a club going. Hey you don't have to be a student eh. You just have to remember it is a public institution crammed with students, and if 5 can be convinced to play a wargame afer school, who cares if you graduated from there 20 years ago. A college might be a good option, but the student body might be to prone to leaving after 2 years only to leave you high and dry all over again.
Check out the chance of a group like army cadets. Hey they are obviously into the military eh. They will likely love to find a person willing to make a cool opportunity like have access to a good wargame collection become possible. It is even possible you could volunteer in some way, become part of the unit. No small number of us are ex military, the forum here is crawling with experiences.
I started this thread, because the idea of making a spiffier looking wargame, is not going to make wargamers in any way worthy or mention. It is inefficient, it is random, it is just not tangibly reliable enough.
A flashier looking box is not going to cut it. They buy the game, realise it wasn't what they thought it was, and move on. Flashier looking games are not the right way either.
Wargamers wargame for specific reasons. Its the same reason people pick certain lines of work and eat certain types of food. The best way to get more wargamers, is to just go out and find them directly.
In a weeks time I can likely get more people wanting to play wargames by just asking, than will happen by mere chance.
I can get a person to play Advanced Squad Leader cold (I know I have done it several times already).
But it would be a great expenditure of effort, trying to hope for wargamers to fall out of thin air, by asking wargame companies to make games more likable. And then sit waiting for something to happen.
This is primarily why I don't have much to say in favour of making games more and more fancy looking. Because it is to indefinite in response.
A fractional increase in wargamer population as a whole within my province, as a result of Company X releasing a new way of playing a wargame online through a computer, is not really going to get me very excited.
Tomorrow though, through my own choice and initiative, I could be meeting with several young potential wargamers at the local armoures, in a small room requested for regular use on an evening when it was available.
I could likely get them to play my dullest most basic most graphically plain wargame in my collection. Why? because I went and intentionally located people that are specifically interested in being wargamers in the first place.
I would not mind having a person that had finally gotten bored of Everquest, want to finally check out why I am always busy playing Steel Panthers. But I would be unwilling to get to excited over the prospects of that person becoming a wargamer, just because the game looked neat.
I don't think it is possible to make a wargame neat enough, to make a non wargamer suddenly into one. The wargamer had to be inside that person in the first place.
Recruiting methods
Moderator: maddog986
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
Recruiting methods
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
-
Raindog101
- Posts: 202
- Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2002 6:10 pm
- Location: Hole-in-the-Wall
First you need to define “wargame”. As near as I can tell your idea of a wargame is:
Must have gameplay exactly like ASL.
Turn-based with no AI.
Flat, drab, 2-D colorless maps that look as if a child drew them.
Absolutely no special effects or sound of any kind, lest a “grognard” label the game “flashy fluff”.
A PBEM option, no other multiplayer needed.
Must be packaged in a medium gray box with no “flashy” pictures, and preferably just the title “New Wargame” printed on the box.
Lastly, 3 ½ “ floppies are desired, but not mandatory.
Looks like a tough sell to me.
Must have gameplay exactly like ASL.
Turn-based with no AI.
Flat, drab, 2-D colorless maps that look as if a child drew them.
Absolutely no special effects or sound of any kind, lest a “grognard” label the game “flashy fluff”.
A PBEM option, no other multiplayer needed.
Must be packaged in a medium gray box with no “flashy” pictures, and preferably just the title “New Wargame” printed on the box.
Lastly, 3 ½ “ floppies are desired, but not mandatory.
Looks like a tough sell to me.
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
Possibly, possibly not.
But given a choice, I can say if it interests me, and interests another. And through my actions that person interests a few others, I have accomplished what I set out to do.
After being here at Matrix now for more than 2 years, I have not benefited in any way, from any other methods.
That said, I see no reason to support other methods eh.
But given a choice, I can say if it interests me, and interests another. And through my actions that person interests a few others, I have accomplished what I set out to do.
After being here at Matrix now for more than 2 years, I have not benefited in any way, from any other methods.
That said, I see no reason to support other methods eh.
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Originally posted by Old Eagle101
First you need to define “wargame”. As near as I can tell your idea of a wargame is:
Must have gameplay exactly like ASL.
Turn-based with no AI.
Flat, drab, 2-D colorless maps that look as if a child drew them.
Absolutely no special effects or sound of any kind, lest a “grognard” label the game “flashy fluff”.
A PBEM option, no other multiplayer needed.
Must be packaged in a medium gray box with no “flashy” pictures, and preferably just the title “New Wargame” printed on the box.
Lastly, 3 ½ “ floppies are desired, but not mandatory.
Looks like a tough sell to me.
LoL...
I think that about sums it up nicely....
Curmudgeon!
Reiryc
-
rockymtndoc
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Sun Oct 27, 2002 9:59 am
Active would be my choice. I efine active as someone who comments, reviews, participates and, in many cases, cranks out a mod or two.
Why look for anybody? Let them find you? Because the science of social anthropology clearly demonstrates that that which does not maintain growth dies. This is true of towns, cities and groups, as well as forums.
Except for Hilary Clinton and bad jokes, nothing lasts forever.
Why look for anybody? Let them find you? Because the science of social anthropology clearly demonstrates that that which does not maintain growth dies. This is true of towns, cities and groups, as well as forums.
Except for Hilary Clinton and bad jokes, nothing lasts forever.
rockymtndoc
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
Well Eagle's and Reiryc's comments were expected.
But to let "them" find "us" is basically how it is normally done. Which explains why we have whiners crying we need to make games prettier so we can attract new wargamers.
They have the perception that the hobby is in decline, a myth in my opinion. It isn't in decline, it just isn't growing at the same rate as the rest of the computer gaming industry.
Differing priorities.
I say that if 1000 gamers, went into 1000 highschools, and each of those 1000 gamers convinced 5 persons to play a game or to on a table, a genuine beginners wargame. And if they ended up with 3 guys willing to play a wargame once a week after school.
Well the result would be suddenly there would be a lot more wargamers.
But wargamers are not inclined to do this sort of thing. We have our computers now, and we don't need those 5 highschool students. We have a wargame hobby that is firmly where we put it.
You can dress up computer wargames till you are blue in the face, but they will still be wargames. And those 5 students won't have any more interest in them now or later.
Get those 3 that remain, and odds are most will become avid computer gamers. Most will likely venture away from dull boring board games. Doesn't bother me a bit. But it will have been a dull boring board game that turned them into wargamers. Not a flashy looking computer game that they had no real initial interest in.
And board games are an easy tool to employ in recruiting. or would you rather lug around several computer wargames on several pcs? I can set up a board game in any room that has a decent sized table. I just need to have the chance to show the potential gamers, it can be an interesting hobby.
Fast efficient, and high return on effort (not to mention it won't cost me a cent).
But I am not going to wait for those 1000 gamers. Because wargamers as an individual are just not entirely that breed of person.
You only get the hobby you go out of your way to create.
But to let "them" find "us" is basically how it is normally done. Which explains why we have whiners crying we need to make games prettier so we can attract new wargamers.
They have the perception that the hobby is in decline, a myth in my opinion. It isn't in decline, it just isn't growing at the same rate as the rest of the computer gaming industry.
Differing priorities.
I say that if 1000 gamers, went into 1000 highschools, and each of those 1000 gamers convinced 5 persons to play a game or to on a table, a genuine beginners wargame. And if they ended up with 3 guys willing to play a wargame once a week after school.
Well the result would be suddenly there would be a lot more wargamers.
But wargamers are not inclined to do this sort of thing. We have our computers now, and we don't need those 5 highschool students. We have a wargame hobby that is firmly where we put it.
You can dress up computer wargames till you are blue in the face, but they will still be wargames. And those 5 students won't have any more interest in them now or later.
Get those 3 that remain, and odds are most will become avid computer gamers. Most will likely venture away from dull boring board games. Doesn't bother me a bit. But it will have been a dull boring board game that turned them into wargamers. Not a flashy looking computer game that they had no real initial interest in.
And board games are an easy tool to employ in recruiting. or would you rather lug around several computer wargames on several pcs? I can set up a board game in any room that has a decent sized table. I just need to have the chance to show the potential gamers, it can be an interesting hobby.
Fast efficient, and high return on effort (not to mention it won't cost me a cent).
But I am not going to wait for those 1000 gamers. Because wargamers as an individual are just not entirely that breed of person.
You only get the hobby you go out of your way to create.
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
-
Fallschirmjager
- Posts: 3555
- Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2002 12:46 am
- Location: Chattanooga, Tennessee
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
Don't dispair Fallschirmjager.
There will always be wargaming, not sure about computer wargaming, but the board game industry is still out there and still selling as it always did. Small numbers to be sure, but they are still selling.
Of course it always pays to have a real job to rely on.
Take MMP for instance. ASL is as good as a wargame can aspire to, but Curt Shilling isn't about to quit baseball to market wargames heheh.
Actually, I can find more board game wargame titles on sale than I can for computer.
Which only tells me, that board games never lose their appeal. They ain't any easier to find, not any harder to find. Ain't any easier to play, ain't any harder to play.
If you buy a good board game wargame, short of wearing out the materials enjoying the hell out of it, you will never have to fear that some new technology will leave it behind hard to enjoy.
My board games are every bit as good as they ever were.
There will always be wargaming, not sure about computer wargaming, but the board game industry is still out there and still selling as it always did. Small numbers to be sure, but they are still selling.
Of course it always pays to have a real job to rely on.
Take MMP for instance. ASL is as good as a wargame can aspire to, but Curt Shilling isn't about to quit baseball to market wargames heheh.
Actually, I can find more board game wargame titles on sale than I can for computer.
Which only tells me, that board games never lose their appeal. They ain't any easier to find, not any harder to find. Ain't any easier to play, ain't any harder to play.
If you buy a good board game wargame, short of wearing out the materials enjoying the hell out of it, you will never have to fear that some new technology will leave it behind hard to enjoy.
My board games are every bit as good as they ever were.
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why Ignore People Over 30?
Many state intelligence and maturity as two qualities that wargamers have (something I would probably debate) but either way why exclude those over 30? Personally, and I surely don't know for sure, but I always thought the die-hard wargamers were all WW2 veterans or of the baby-boomer generation right-after.. And while most gamers play a variety of games (a few shooters, a few RTS, a Fantasy RPG, a MMPG, etc..) seems that all "wargamers" are so closed-minded as to only play "wargames".. Good games naturally find more players, just like good movies generally find more viewers. People talk about them at work, with friends, online, etc... And one sale leads to 2 or 3 more to friends, and a dozen more and so on... Now I figured one reason "wargamers" must be older is an unfamiliarity with computers that makes it difficult to find "typical" things interesting.. and lack of dexterity that makes other games simply not fun. Not to mention older people tend to be very set in their ways and unwilling to try new things.. Kids these days get so adept at computers and the "dexterous" side of things that combining those elements into a game are nearly essential to them..(Not suggesting that be done, but I do see value in "spicing" up wargames) Where to older people it seems needlessly childish and ignorant.. You state people should "Finally get bored with Everquest" but yet you play the same wargames years later... How is still playing Everquest any different? The first step for wargamers to gain additional wargamers is abandoning the "arrogance" that goes with being a wargamer...
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
Veldor I would never say avoid over 30s as if they had no merit, not what I meant was that you will find rich opportunities in places where you generally won't find guys my age in useful sums.
Most guys my age that want to be wargamers already are wargamers heheh.
With Everquest, some will play it endlessly and never tire. But some will play it and play it and play it. Eventually they might want something new. An Everquest gamer though is definitely a fast moving target hehe.
As for arrogance, well there is nothing special about being a wargamer in my opinion. My games are **** hard to master, but so is golf.
I can run circles around my buddies in a wargame, but then I don't know squat about games like Everquest.
I am just a different type of gamer.
It requires that we recognise "why" a person plays a wargame, before we can know how to make people that have not realised they like wargames, to want to become one.
It is a waste of time trying to make some of the public into wargamers. The trick is admitting, that some people can't be made into wargamers with clever tricks.
You for instance will never get me to play golf. So there is no point trying to make the game look cool.
Most guys my age that want to be wargamers already are wargamers heheh.
With Everquest, some will play it endlessly and never tire. But some will play it and play it and play it. Eventually they might want something new. An Everquest gamer though is definitely a fast moving target hehe.
As for arrogance, well there is nothing special about being a wargamer in my opinion. My games are **** hard to master, but so is golf.
I can run circles around my buddies in a wargame, but then I don't know squat about games like Everquest.
I am just a different type of gamer.
It requires that we recognise "why" a person plays a wargame, before we can know how to make people that have not realised they like wargames, to want to become one.
It is a waste of time trying to make some of the public into wargamers. The trick is admitting, that some people can't be made into wargamers with clever tricks.
You for instance will never get me to play golf. So there is no point trying to make the game look cool.
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Golfing
I think Golf is not the best example because its only a single game, whereas "wargames" cover potentially thousands.. The way I see it RTS games are "Introductory" wargames on a very very basic level.. In that some of the basic concepts are there.. And I think anyone who just wants to blow #%@$ up will play a first person shooter or strickly playstation games. Civilization is another awsome example.. Not a wargame persay but in the right direction... And if someone can like those...and Civilization is no short game or minor commitment.. Then its not much of a leap to an actual wargame... And if you look at the reasons someone plays Civ and likes it.. I'm thinking they aren't much different. Civilization to me...always had an easy interface and was pretty easy to learn...yet it had a depth unparralleled and the ability to micromanage... So as you learned the game you grew with it learning more, WANTING to learn more..
That's why boardgames will die after this generation.. There is simply no way around reading the manual before you play.. And even if you have a basic rules set.. then your missing half or more of the game.. With a PC, and a good tutorial/interface (one or both ideally) you can start playing before you read a thing... Learn as you go... And by then you WANT to read the manual.. Or at the very least your looking up various sections and reading in pieces.. Either way you've learned the game with very little effort compared to the average board game...
Just that games like Uncommon Valor do a TERRIBLE job at teaching the game... The tutorial is awful.. I have to think people who buy it and move on do so because its too much effort to get good at/learn etc... I know it was almost that way for me...
That's why boardgames will die after this generation.. There is simply no way around reading the manual before you play.. And even if you have a basic rules set.. then your missing half or more of the game.. With a PC, and a good tutorial/interface (one or both ideally) you can start playing before you read a thing... Learn as you go... And by then you WANT to read the manual.. Or at the very least your looking up various sections and reading in pieces.. Either way you've learned the game with very little effort compared to the average board game...
Just that games like Uncommon Valor do a TERRIBLE job at teaching the game... The tutorial is awful.. I have to think people who buy it and move on do so because its too much effort to get good at/learn etc... I know it was almost that way for me...
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
Veldor, just as I have been charged with being arrogant, you don't want to immediately discount your fellow gamers so rapidly.
There isn't an RTS game out there, that is easier than a game of Victory the Blocks of War from Columbia Games.
http://www.columbiagames.com/index2.html
The game has about 8 pages of mindnumbingly basic rules. The beauty is in playing the game, not in the materials it is made out of. it is easy to learn, but a good player will still slag you with more well thought out moves.
I have Sudden Strike II. The interface is not overly obvious. I had a buddy that plays RTS games all the time. He was stymied by trying to figure out how to crew an anti tank gun. I managed it in time just farting around with the game.
The lack of a manual (or need of it) does not make a game easy. And the presence of a manual does not make a game automatically hard.
Give me an hour and I can have virtually anyone playing ASL.
This generation might have a patience thresshold problem they have to master, but I possess zero fear of the hobby continuing on.
Look at the web, there are lots of sites out there marketing board games as we speak. There are more board games being sold than computer games it seems.
There isn't an RTS game out there, that is easier than a game of Victory the Blocks of War from Columbia Games.
http://www.columbiagames.com/index2.html
The game has about 8 pages of mindnumbingly basic rules. The beauty is in playing the game, not in the materials it is made out of. it is easy to learn, but a good player will still slag you with more well thought out moves.
I have Sudden Strike II. The interface is not overly obvious. I had a buddy that plays RTS games all the time. He was stymied by trying to figure out how to crew an anti tank gun. I managed it in time just farting around with the game.
The lack of a manual (or need of it) does not make a game easy. And the presence of a manual does not make a game automatically hard.
Give me an hour and I can have virtually anyone playing ASL.
This generation might have a patience thresshold problem they have to master, but I possess zero fear of the hobby continuing on.
Look at the web, there are lots of sites out there marketing board games as we speak. There are more board games being sold than computer games it seems.
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Im not disagreeing with you. But, in my observance, if I had to answer the question.. What kind of games do people like? I think I have an answer that isnt what most people would think. People like games they are GOOD at. Period. If a player feels they aren't good at a game, or aren't going to be good.. then they won't have interest to play it. If there was a point I was trying to make, that was it. So ASL... I really really think.. thats its not an issue with "patience" just options.. Years ago there was no other option for a decent game... You had to dedicate the time and have patience.. But when OTHER games exist where you can load them up right away, learn the basics of what you need, and feel like you might actually be good at the game... Its hard to turn off the computer, pull out a 10pound rulebook, and get going. Why not spend that extra time even if you had it playing a game rather than learning one? Computer games can be much more complex, because you dont have to worry about calculating a million modifiers yourself, drawing LOS, and an endless list of other things.. And with that complexity comes a new challenge.. Which is still to make it easy to learn/play but without sacrificing the depth of play... There will always be "Simple" boardgames(And wargames).. If for no other reason than the social one... But the days of having monster boardgames with huge rulebooks are over.. There are simply better, more time economical "computerised" options out there.. And they are only getting better and better whereas boardgames stay the same..
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
Actually Veldor, I "like" all those calculations hehe.
Part of the fun is the calculations, They often tell a story. You miss a lot when the computer robs you of some of the detail.
Sure it is hard to play The Longest Day all 5.5" by 5' of mapboard. the thousands of counters, the incredible detail. The studying of the terrain.
But when I set the game up, I can "see" Normandy, I AM there.
A computer would make the game run faster, there would be less work, but it would just be this monitor to look at.
And I would end up robbed of all that immensity of detail.
That is precisely why fretting over this hobby is pointless. I am 40, I know 60 year old gamers 30 year old gamers and when computers plateau, there will be a realization that board games are still out there too. And there will be 20 year old gamers and teens too.
But computers are still new.
There will always be those that want the detail, and those that don't.
I have gone into model stores. Some want a model for 5 bucks regardless of how crummy. They have 5 bucks and they want a model. Some will go straight for the industry leaders and dump 100 bucks down for the latest state of the art kit. Then hand over 50 bucks for super detailing parts.
Some people will only buy books in hard cover. They cost 4 times as much, but the feel of a good hardcover is hard to replace eh.
I am concerned for the future of computer wargames, but yet again I state, I am not worried about the future of baord game wargaming.
Part of the fun is the calculations, They often tell a story. You miss a lot when the computer robs you of some of the detail.
Sure it is hard to play The Longest Day all 5.5" by 5' of mapboard. the thousands of counters, the incredible detail. The studying of the terrain.
But when I set the game up, I can "see" Normandy, I AM there.
A computer would make the game run faster, there would be less work, but it would just be this monitor to look at.
And I would end up robbed of all that immensity of detail.
That is precisely why fretting over this hobby is pointless. I am 40, I know 60 year old gamers 30 year old gamers and when computers plateau, there will be a realization that board games are still out there too. And there will be 20 year old gamers and teens too.
But computers are still new.
There will always be those that want the detail, and those that don't.
I have gone into model stores. Some want a model for 5 bucks regardless of how crummy. They have 5 bucks and they want a model. Some will go straight for the industry leaders and dump 100 bucks down for the latest state of the art kit. Then hand over 50 bucks for super detailing parts.
Some people will only buy books in hard cover. They cost 4 times as much, but the feel of a good hardcover is hard to replace eh.
I am concerned for the future of computer wargames, but yet again I state, I am not worried about the future of baord game wargaming.
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
I think what you need is a bigger monitor, say 25".. Then you can still see all of normandy. Alot of what your refering too sounds to me like "nastalgia"... The good 'ole days when you had to add everything up yourself.. when you could choose one target over the next because it was +1+2-1+3 instead of the other which was +1+1-2+4. I don't see much realizm in that other than that was the way it use to be. I would love it if a computer wargame let me delve down into that level, if I wanted too.. But thats the key.. I wouldnt have to ALWAYS do it. Most dont care, which is why they dont do it.
As for detail.. As computers get better.. everything will be picture quality.. It doesnt get anymore detailed than that. There is already live chatting (Vocal) during some online game and live video is next.. Screen sizes will continue to grow, as will interface methods (For instance the virtual reality glove for black and white that lets you cast spells by moving your hand around, and bases the strength of the spell on the accuracy of your movements)
http://www.essentialreality.com/p5_glove.asp
And to quote Joe Balkoski in regards to one of my favorites:
"Overall, the Fleet series was resoundingly successful in terms of sales. For me, it sort of marked the passing of an era. When I first started working on the series it was possible to actually make a living designing the games and living off the royalties. By the time the last game was published, board game sales had dropped so dramatically that it was impossible even to contemplate the type of commitment I had made in the past to game design. If I, in 1997, put in the kind of work on a board game that I had put into the Fleet series in the mid-1980's, my hourly rate of pay after royalties were added up would be much less than minimum wage."
That statement was made years ago, and its only gotten worse. Computers will ALWAYS be new.... Technology continues to advance. Imagine when things like the P5 glove work not just for RTS and FPS's but for wargames as well? And what about the enhancements beyond those? This is only the beginning, computer wargames are the future, everything else will just be steamrolled over...
Mark your calendar.. In 30 years lets see who was right. Let's say $20 and I'll give you 5 to 1 odds?
Seriously though, it a definitive reality..and I think clinging to the past only hinders advancement into the future... Perhaps that's the real problem with wargaming? Too many cardboard-punchers clinging to the past?
As for detail.. As computers get better.. everything will be picture quality.. It doesnt get anymore detailed than that. There is already live chatting (Vocal) during some online game and live video is next.. Screen sizes will continue to grow, as will interface methods (For instance the virtual reality glove for black and white that lets you cast spells by moving your hand around, and bases the strength of the spell on the accuracy of your movements)
http://www.essentialreality.com/p5_glove.asp
And to quote Joe Balkoski in regards to one of my favorites:
"Overall, the Fleet series was resoundingly successful in terms of sales. For me, it sort of marked the passing of an era. When I first started working on the series it was possible to actually make a living designing the games and living off the royalties. By the time the last game was published, board game sales had dropped so dramatically that it was impossible even to contemplate the type of commitment I had made in the past to game design. If I, in 1997, put in the kind of work on a board game that I had put into the Fleet series in the mid-1980's, my hourly rate of pay after royalties were added up would be much less than minimum wage."
That statement was made years ago, and its only gotten worse. Computers will ALWAYS be new.... Technology continues to advance. Imagine when things like the P5 glove work not just for RTS and FPS's but for wargames as well? And what about the enhancements beyond those? This is only the beginning, computer wargames are the future, everything else will just be steamrolled over...
Mark your calendar.. In 30 years lets see who was right. Let's say $20 and I'll give you 5 to 1 odds?
Seriously though, it a definitive reality..and I think clinging to the past only hinders advancement into the future... Perhaps that's the real problem with wargaming? Too many cardboard-punchers clinging to the past?
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
Being "good" does help.
Being taught well helps as well.
Two examples.
One, a friend of mine will NOT play wargames. Why, because his brother always made a point of crushing him and then making him miserable in the process.
So he was burned on the hobby.
Two, I have a friend that just didn't get it when I played him a game of ASL. He was sure he was understanding, and I showed him every last thing I was doing and why.
I showed him his most obvious options, but in the end, he thought, if I can do it, then he can do it. He was to used to playing dummied down games where the wargame had been to thoroughly distilled out of the process.
It was scenario 2 of the old SL converted to ASL. The Russians can do wave attacks and make mad dashes and absorb casualties. My guys were getting trashed a lot, but then I had a lot of them. And I was taking ground. He went and just swarmed at me with his valuable German engineers and I cut them down and that was that. The game was in the toilet after that turn.
He had applied generic tactics that a lot of player find fine in RTS games. You don't think, you just do. That doesn't cut it in a wargame if it's any good.
To lessons, in the first, the person was taught to hate the hobby.
In the second, if you are going to play a wargame, be prepared to think. If you don't want to think, don't expect anything to happen.
I have been playing Steel Panthers now for some time. I have played good games, and bad games. And the bad games were because I wasn't thinking, I was just doing.
I have yet to ever play any game now that I think of it, where just doing, was any fun at all in the end.
Being taught well helps as well.
Two examples.
One, a friend of mine will NOT play wargames. Why, because his brother always made a point of crushing him and then making him miserable in the process.
So he was burned on the hobby.
Two, I have a friend that just didn't get it when I played him a game of ASL. He was sure he was understanding, and I showed him every last thing I was doing and why.
I showed him his most obvious options, but in the end, he thought, if I can do it, then he can do it. He was to used to playing dummied down games where the wargame had been to thoroughly distilled out of the process.
It was scenario 2 of the old SL converted to ASL. The Russians can do wave attacks and make mad dashes and absorb casualties. My guys were getting trashed a lot, but then I had a lot of them. And I was taking ground. He went and just swarmed at me with his valuable German engineers and I cut them down and that was that. The game was in the toilet after that turn.
He had applied generic tactics that a lot of player find fine in RTS games. You don't think, you just do. That doesn't cut it in a wargame if it's any good.
To lessons, in the first, the person was taught to hate the hobby.
In the second, if you are going to play a wargame, be prepared to think. If you don't want to think, don't expect anything to happen.
I have been playing Steel Panthers now for some time. I have played good games, and bad games. And the bad games were because I wasn't thinking, I was just doing.
I have yet to ever play any game now that I think of it, where just doing, was any fun at all in the end.
I LIKE that my life bothers them,
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
Why should I be the only one bothered by it eh.
-
Les_the_Sarge_9_1
- Posts: 3943
- Joined: Fri Dec 29, 2000 10:00 am
Les the dinosaur has returned
Les, If you want to use 1970s technology for your fun that’s OK by me.
This forum is a computer wargaming forum. We want to use 21st century technology for our fun. Your comments give the wrong impression to wargame developers.
“by asking wargame companies to make games more likable” No, not at all. Instead, make them more intuitive. The soldier under fire will go to ground. He does not need to be ordered to go to ground.
“I don't have much to say in favour of making games more and more fancy looking”
So a large tank can be represented by a large block and a small tank by a small block?
Any given tank had a number of variants and quite often the turret was different. To me accurate artwork adds to the game. And how about accurate paint colours on the tank? Or do you want green for allies and grey for Germans and brown for the Japanese?
“After being here at Matrix now for more than 2 years, I have not benefited in any way, from any other methods”. That’s because you have not tried any 21st century games – Uncommon Valour comes to mind.
“That said, I see no reason to support other methods”. But there is no need to denigrate other methods.
“Active would be my choice”. And so to a recent post I made. As I said there, my brother and I played Third Reich. My brother would love to play wargames but he wants to take advantage of computers – saving games – the set up – and many other features. He will no longer play Third Reich the way it is now. If there were a computer version and less tedium he would be an avid player.
He loved Close Combat – best described as Steel Panthers in continuos time.
“In case you havn’t noticed wargames arn’t good sellers...no matter how small time you are you need decent sales to keep alive” and so we need a game that can appeal to both the hard core and the occasional player – a game where the hard core can count every bullet or the occasional player can give orders at battalion level and never go to a lower level.
Everybody is coming to the same conclusion except Les.
“ASL is as good as a wargame can aspire to. Errr Les, when you bowl a dice you have a maximum of 6 results – ie 6 variables. In a computer game you can have many thousands of variables – this is the basic fault of your argument.
“Actually, I can find more board game wargame titles on sale than I can for computer.
Which only tells me, that board games never lose their appeal” Wrong. It just means they cannot afford to make a computer version. Explain again why ASL was never made into a computer version? Maybe a lack of potential sales?
Sudden Strike? Les, we are discussing wargames here. Why do you mention Sudden Strike? If you have gone off topic why did you leave out virtual Barbie? That’s not a wargame either!
Les, If you want to use 1970s technology for your fun that’s OK by me.
This forum is a computer wargaming forum. We want to use 21st century technology for our fun. Your comments give the wrong impression to wargame developers.
“by asking wargame companies to make games more likable” No, not at all. Instead, make them more intuitive. The soldier under fire will go to ground. He does not need to be ordered to go to ground.
“I don't have much to say in favour of making games more and more fancy looking”
So a large tank can be represented by a large block and a small tank by a small block?
Any given tank had a number of variants and quite often the turret was different. To me accurate artwork adds to the game. And how about accurate paint colours on the tank? Or do you want green for allies and grey for Germans and brown for the Japanese?
“After being here at Matrix now for more than 2 years, I have not benefited in any way, from any other methods”. That’s because you have not tried any 21st century games – Uncommon Valour comes to mind.
“That said, I see no reason to support other methods”. But there is no need to denigrate other methods.
“Active would be my choice”. And so to a recent post I made. As I said there, my brother and I played Third Reich. My brother would love to play wargames but he wants to take advantage of computers – saving games – the set up – and many other features. He will no longer play Third Reich the way it is now. If there were a computer version and less tedium he would be an avid player.
He loved Close Combat – best described as Steel Panthers in continuos time.
“In case you havn’t noticed wargames arn’t good sellers...no matter how small time you are you need decent sales to keep alive” and so we need a game that can appeal to both the hard core and the occasional player – a game where the hard core can count every bullet or the occasional player can give orders at battalion level and never go to a lower level.
Everybody is coming to the same conclusion except Les.
“ASL is as good as a wargame can aspire to. Errr Les, when you bowl a dice you have a maximum of 6 results – ie 6 variables. In a computer game you can have many thousands of variables – this is the basic fault of your argument.
“Actually, I can find more board game wargame titles on sale than I can for computer.
Which only tells me, that board games never lose their appeal” Wrong. It just means they cannot afford to make a computer version. Explain again why ASL was never made into a computer version? Maybe a lack of potential sales?
Sudden Strike? Les, we are discussing wargames here. Why do you mention Sudden Strike? If you have gone off topic why did you leave out virtual Barbie? That’s not a wargame either!