OT where have all the good games gone?

[RogerJNeilson]

Another year notched up, my games here are of a very slow pace but realistically I don't think I can commit to new ones to keep me busy (one game averages 1 move per week, the other one move perhaps every two weeks). So I sit down and think, what else is there out there I can play as well?

Well there are a whole slew of games by another publisher that are strategic but use the same game engine for all of them - they run from the 30 years war through to ACW. However I just cannot get interested in them.

There are a whole load of Matrix/Slitherine games which I have played but which seem to have stopped any form of development or support.

The new games that are produced seem to have become dumbed down to play on tablets and have comic figures and little men to represent armies. And chance cards - detest chance cards!

There seem to be a number of what might have been promising games that are very poorly supported with people developing them so they are going nowhere fast.....

I cannot get my head round stuff that is not historical, but would love to find something that was a serious treatment of conflict and not heading for the 'beer and pretzels' level.

Age of Rifles 2?
A decent tactical ACW game? Developing from the Forge of Freedom battle engine?
A development of Flashpoint to encompass WW2

It looks like the economics of game development is no longer providing the opportunities for these sort of games, so am I doomed to view anything new in the same way as I view a great deal of 'modern life'?

Have we had our 'golden age'?

Roger

[adarbrauner]

I'm still dreamin of an evolution of WITPAE (smaller hexes, added land warfare details, maybe more detailed animations, and more);

the more detailed, and historic, is a game, the better for me; the "accessibilty" hoax which is strangling Hearts of Iron and actually putting an end to that series , at least by Paradox, as an example of a tread by producers, doesn't appeal to me at all;

I don't cherish so much War in the East and West, which I've not purchased, probably for lack or nerfing of naval aspects and of a bigger context; also, it seems to me that the land combat model isn't detailed enough (too big hexes?);

[patrickl]

Agree with TS. Just AE is not enuff to occupy us. I have just bought Hearts of Iron 3 from Amazon to play. We can only hope Matrix can quickly come up with another superb game like AE.

[Leandros]

I've never really liked turn-based games, that I became hooked on WitP was simply because I hoped it could be a
useful tool in my "Saving MacArthur" book project. So it proved and now I like to play it in its own right.

Going back some years my favourite was Sid Meyers Gettysburg. Before that I can hardly remember what I played,
but there was some TOAW, mainly because no other games contained scenarios of Sealion or the early Philippines
campaign. It was quite interesting to modify the pre-requisites of the Philippine defense to what it was supposed
to have been in the spring of '42. Or, for that matter, a more aggressive stance against the first feeble Japanese
landings.

One game I can recommend is the Silent Hunter series. The IV has taken a step backwards regarding "serious"
playability, but has improved in looks. The portrayed aircraft are quite unsatisfactory but the games have
a large following with an active member mass, plenty of development going on.

Fred

[chemkid]

.

[Oberst_Klink]

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3
...

Age of Rifles 2?
A decent tactical ACW game? Developing from the Forge of Freedom battle engine?
A development of Flashpoint to encompass WW2

It looks like the economics of game development is no longer providing the opportunities for these sort of games, so am I doomed to view anything new in the same way as I view a great deal of 'modern life'?

Have we had our 'golden age'?

Roger

Ys, Roger, we had our golden age... I recall, back in the mid-90s, it was possible to contact and get info from game devolopers themselves... in particular Norm Koger, when one asked some specific questions! And yes, AoR was a great game and being further developed would be still an outstanding one today!

Klink, Oberst

[RogerJNeilson]

ORIGINAL: chemkid

i'd say, this age still is 'golden' - just a different 'golden', though... [;)]

my recommendation: Command: Modern Air / Naval Operations ...now on sale (65% off) [8D]

historical - ON (if history starts yesterday!)
a serious treatment of conflict - ON (cannot be anything else!)
the 'beer and pretzels' level - OFF (definitely!)
short+sweet or long+hard - ON [:D]

I have had a look at some screenshots of that and it just looks massively confusing to me - I'm also not that attracted to the present day stuff....

However I do notice lots of stuff on sale that I could be tempted to add to my long list of Matrix purchases (and an almost as long list of non played games after an initial interest in them) Anyone spot anything that they would really recommend?

Roger

[Canoerebel]

A few months back, I looked very hard for a new game while my current AE game was in sabbatical. I looked high and low. I looked mainly for WWII or American Civil War operational or strategic. I especially gave Matrix a hard look, since I was somewhat familiar with WitE and WitW (and less so, but still a bit with the Civil War titles). I ended up concluding that there just isn't anything out there of interest right now.

Since then, the new Strategic Command game has become available. I'm watching it a bit to see how people react. I know that Warspite, Grotius, and Numdyar (three names I recognize from the AE forum) are playing. If it gets stellar reviews, I might be interested. But every game gets stellar reviews at first. Most of them then quickly fall by the wayside. The shelf-lives of WitW and World in Flames, in particular, was not encouraging (the latter not due to the quality of the underlying game, but the warts in how it was assembled for the Matrix iteration of the game).

[RogerJNeilson]

I had Field of Glory for ages sat on my hard drive and recently it was updated to a new version. I updated and there was the usual hiatus of bugs and issues that seem to have been sorted. So I thought, ok lets have a go. It has been released without the editor being ready - a big deal but ok I can live with that. But it has also been released without the Help section. So actually you play it (unless you are familiar with the previous iteration) with no help or rules at all.... The suggestion is to have a look at the AArs - which are just a set of screenshots!

I posted on the forum, no replies in 4 days - how good is this forum folks!!!

I posted to support and got a reply today to dig deep into the file structure and find an html index file which would then open the help in a web page. I did that and found it was in Italian......

I bought Tigers on the Prowl when it was released, its one guy developing it, it wasn't ready and as far as I am concerned its unplayable.

Some people really need to have a long think about the relationship and trust of their customers.

And don't get me started on Brother against Brother.....

Or the trend of bringing out a base game then running out loads of DLC that pushed the price upwards and upwards.

Roger

[Jorge_Stanbury]

long time passing?

I think the biggest problem is the complete lack of creativity/ talent. Very few new developers are now coming with new ideas, instead they just recycle old concepts in better interface or "eye candy" graphics.

There are of course some exceptions, but few

[RogerJNeilson]

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

long time passing?

I think the biggest problem is the complete lack of creativity/ talent. Very few new developers are now coming with new ideas, instead they just recycle old concepts in better interface or "eye candy" graphics.

There are of course some exceptions, but few

A very good example can be found within the Matrix stable itself where an 'engine' is recycled over and over again rather than any new approach explored. I had great hopes for the Thirty Years War. Note I said HAD.

I do think the mechanics of Flashpoint are superb and the concept of getting within the opponents orders phase is very good thinking. I would hope that this could be adopted for other periods and certainly I feel that it would work as far back as ACW and probably Napoleonics - essentially where the armies multiply in size and the ability to control them is a major feature of their success. However the development is all centred on the actual Cold War period at present.

Roger

[btd64]

TOAW keeps me busy, plus the Distant Would 4x game is, to me, Strategy in space. When I want the space fix with AE's size, I go for Distant Worlds....GP

[Lecivius]

DW, Total War (lots of those out there), Harpoon, AE. And when those run dry I have @ a hundred other games loaded. My problem isn't games, it's the time to play them [:(]

[bazjak]

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3








Some people really need to have a long think about the relationship and trust of their customers.

And don't get me started on Brother against Brother.....

Or the trend of bringing out a base game then running out loads of DLC that pushed the price upwards and upwards.

Roger

Brother against Brother i have been on that forum moaning about a decent tutorial and the developers are not lisening to me or the others who say the same thing
All i get back are they are a small team
So what
There not going to get any bigger if they dont respond to us
This could be a good game but i cant understand how to play it
Baz

[pontiouspilot]

You may as well face reality....you are addicted to the crack coke of the war gaming world!...WITPAE. Why fight it? Get yourself set-up into another PBEM game to get your fix. I have 3 x PBEM on the go. 1 game on sabbatical with chap I have had 3 with; 1 game a slow mover; and a recent addition with former opponent. When all running it is a little hairy but generally I get my daily fix.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

long time passing?

I think the biggest problem is the complete lack of creativity/ talent. Very few new developers are now coming with new ideas, instead they just recycle old concepts in better interface or "eye candy" graphics.

There are of course some exceptions, but few

warspite1

I suspect its not a lack of talent - its a lack of money/reward i.e. good old fashioned economics.

A few comments I have seen on forums here in recent weeks pretty much confirms what most have suspected for a long time. The hobby is niche and the returns are probably just not there for spending time/resource on experimenting with new games/concepts and different subjects (that may or may not sell).

Look at World In Flames. It's not like someone had to invent a game. An award winning, brilliant, beautiful game was there and ready. It just needed someone to bring it to the computer in a way that was economically feasible.....[:(] Well that's where the problems began.

Look at DC: Barbarossa. Decision cards may not be for everyone (and fair enough) but here was something a little different, a little exciting - perhaps the start of something. But the economic reality is that is unlikely to be the case.

There is a period of WWII that screams out to be war gamed. A game that is genuinely winnable by both sides without having to insert faux balancing items, a game that could appeal to the naval war gamer, the air man and the land war devotee in equal measure. One problem. The War in the Mediterranean is not the Battle of the Bulge, The Soviet / German war or any of the other 'staples' that cost conscious developers need to concentrate on. As was pointed out the other day in the DC:B forum, if it doesn't sell in the US then forget it, the returns are just not there.

No, I suspect there is a world of talent and creativity out there. But this is the wrong area of the gaming world to get their attention.

[anarchyintheuk]

There are a couple of check marks in your don't like categories of 'chance card' and 'inactive forum', but I've thoroughly enjoyed playing Hannibal: Something, something Carthage and Rome. Elegant design, just a gem of a game.

Being so conditioned by AE, somehow it felt like I was playing it wrong because I finished it in under two hours.

It has good replay value, although you can't play as Rome.

[btd64]

This thread got me thinking, Thinking of a song. The Kinks, "Where have all the good times gone".....GP

[crsutton]

I very much like Battlefront's Combat Mission series but that is a tactical game. Otherwise, I am just not seeing much that sets me on fire..

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

Since then, the new Strategic Command game has become available. I'm watching it a bit to see how people react. I know that Warspite, Grotius, and Numdyar (three names I recognize from the AE forum) are playing. If it gets stellar reviews, I might be interested. But every game gets stellar reviews at first.

warspite1

Its very early days but the game is fun and seemingly has more depth to it (I am just diving in at this stage pending the arrival of the manual).

Coming from WITP-AE if its historical accuracy you need then probably best to give a wide berth. There is hopefully just enough of an historical feel to keep my interest - although some design decisions seem a little strange.

Unlike World In Flames which beautifully interweaves the Strategic with the tactical, this game seems, at first glance, to be more strategic - which is fine.

A few bugs are in evidence, but that is to be expected I guess and hopefully a few patches will sort those. Too early to say how long term this game is but is something to play (I still play World In Flames but I despair of it ever being sorted properly).