Flash of Steel header image 1

Doomed. Again.

September 11th, 2006 by Troy Goodfellow · Industry

Gamasutra has a couple of articles today about the state of PC Gaming. The first is an interview with Dell founder Michael Dell about how Dell sees the gaming business at the moment. He is understandably bullish about the future of gaming on the PC, referring to consoles as a “locked down” PC. So why shouldn’t there be overlap or crossover? Dell is optimistic that multi-threaded chips and Blue Ray will have major positive consequences for gaming development.

The second article is three perspectives on PC gaming and why it sucks. Well, not exactly. But you would be forgiven if you read this piece and thought that the thousand bucks you just dropped on a new gaming rig was a waste of money. Michael Pachter calls PC gaming “a niche, substantial in size, but a niche nonetheless.” He sees console gaming growing exponentially, PC gaming stagnating because of piracy and a lack of a stable development platform.

Ed Barton sees PC gaming’s future in digital distribution and specialty products. The retail presence will wither and die. He has high hopes for Manifesto Games. (Hey, as much as I love Outpost Kaloki, I need my big production RTS games, too.)

David Cole begins on a positive note ([The PC] is at the cutting edge of new trends and has a very diversified consumer base.) but then goes on to note that consoles are much more profitable.

All agree that piracy is partially to blame (though Cole notes that console games are heavily pirated in Asia) and are cautious in their hopes for Vista, the new Microsoft operating system that will render my new computer obsolete in six months.

So weep, gnash your teeth, whatever. Though Battle for Middle Earth II seems to have been a successful experiment in console RTS development, the games that I love aren’t going anywhere. And compare the Sony Sims to the PC version. Or an open ended role playing romp like Oblivion to the latest JRPG. And how are the custom skins for those console RPGs anyway? Wait? There aren’t any?

For gamers, consoles have two big advantages over the PC – stable architecture makes it more likely they’ll work out of the box and you can play the games while sitting on your sofa. (Some people mention price, but since most people already own computers for email and internet, an upgrade is competitive with a new console.) The rest depends heavily on gaming tastes and developer interest. I think that the lesson of World of Warcraft is that millions of people are willing to game at their computer. WoW may be the first game in a while to make people look at their computer as primarily a game machine.

I’m optimistic, and not just because “there will always be PC games”. I think PC games will get bigger. I think they will get better. And I think they will remain a healthy industry.

Disclaimer: I am not a business analyst. Any stock you buy in Inforgrames after reading this post is entirely your own responsibility.

→ 1 CommentTags:

Developer Interview: Slitherine/Firepower

September 11th, 2006 by Troy Goodfellow · Interview, Slitherine

Commander – Europe At War will add yet another title to an already long list of World War II games. Firepower Games is doing the lead programming work with Slitherine adding their experience in development and publicity. Iain McNeil of Slitherine and John Persson from Firepower agreed to answer a few questions about the upcoming grand strategy game and the challenge of making something fresh from a familiar setting.

______________________________________________________

Commander is Slitherine’s first game not based on ancient warfare. Why the switch?

Iain: Commander was already in development by Johan Persson, at Firepower Entertainment, before we got involved. At the time it had no graphics at all, just blue/green hexes for land and sea, with icons from a mod for another game as placeholders. Even at that stage we could see the potential that the game had, and by working closely with Johan we think we’ve created something really special. So in answer to your question, this is not a switch for us, it is an additional project and the experiment is working well. Expect more collaborations like this from us in the future.

Some gamers think that the WW2 grand strategy genre has already been perfected, either by Paradox (Hearts of Iron) or Grigsy (World at War). Why make another grand strategy game?

Johan: HOI is an RTS so it plays very differently to a turn-based game. World At War has a lot of abstraction and lacks the tactical depth that hex to hex control offers. We wanted to create a game where the player had more control but ensure that micromanagement did not get in the way. We wanted terrain to have a larger impact, as it did in WW2. We also wanted to offer the chance to break through and envelop enemy positions, and cut supply lines.

You are using a hex based map instead of a province/region based one. What does the hex add to your design?

Iain: We feel the hexes offera level of strategy missing from a region based system. There are far more options where to place your troops and where to attack, and those options mean there is potential for more interesting manoeuvres.

Will the grand campaign start before the war or with the conflict already raging?

Johan: The scenario start dates range from 1939-1944, but we are planning to release a Map/Scenario editor sometime in the future which will be fully customizable. However, even in the initial release we are including scripts that control general gameplay, leaders, units, technologies and terrain. In the initial release you will not be able to change the sides, so Germany will start at war with Poland and Italy will always be Axis controlled.

How much flexibility will the player have in drawing other nations into the war on its side? Can Germany delay the inevitable by getting the Turks to sign up?

Johan: We will have a simple system to avoid the most serious exploitations, so you will be encouraged to make realistic decisions, but not prevented from declaring war on Spain if you really want to! You cannot declare war on nations that lean to your side so Axis cannot attack Italy for instance. We have seriously considered a more developed diplomacy system, but we felt there were too many factors that needed to be balanced, and it was important to get the combat engine working first. Currently the game is mostly about military decisions, with some economics and a little politics. We may adjust this balance in the future.

WW2 was won on the seas. The failure of Germany to break the trans-Atlantic supply line was decisive. But naval combat has proven difficult for gamer designers to fit into a land combat model. Have you cracked this nut?

Johan: Yes, and this is one of the most exciting and unique features of this game! Atlantic convoys contain production points which are unloaded in UK Ports. Atlantic convoys actually move around the map, they are not abstracted, and the enemy can attack them. The convoys move automatically and allied player must attempt to defend them, while the Axis player is trying to sink them. Convoys follow routes which vary slightly each time. The Allied player will be trying to cover as much of the Atlantic as possible, but also need to keep concentrations of ships around the busiest convoy routes, so it’s a balancing act for both sides. As ships take a long time to construct, it’s important to plan ahead as far as the war at sea is concerned.

What role will historic leaders play in the game?

Johan: Commanders are built in from the ground up. Commanders are not units themselves, but are assigned to units. They boost the performance of the unit they are with and those nearby in various ways. The commanders can also get injured if the unit they are with retreats or is destroyed. Naturally, some nations have better commanders than others. We’re planning to include a variety of famous names with pictures.

Commander, on the surface, reminds me of an updated Clash of Steel. Have you looked at WW2 games from the past (either board or computer) for inspiration about what or what not to do?

Johan: Iain and I played different games and we have felt there was something missing in all of them. We felt there was a gap in the market and we have taken inspiration from old games and added new twists on them to create what we think is the best WW2 grand strategy game to date.

Commander and Legion: Arena both boast cooperation with Osprey Publishing. How did this partnership come about?

Iain: For a long time Slitherine have been using Osprey books as source material when researching the background on our games. We also had direct contact with Osprey through the wargaming hobby, which some members of the Slitherine are involved in. We felt there had to be some synergy between Slitherine and Osprey and after some discussion we decided to cross promote our games and their books. We’re also looking for ways to work more closely together in the future, so watch this space!

Slitherine has said that this will be “the first in a series of high level turn based strategy games.” Any hints about future settings?

Iain: We haven’t really set our minds on anything yet. There are so many possible periods and settings that we could do this for ever and never run out! We need to find a period that interests the gamers and fits well with the systems we’ve developed. We also need to pick a period that we like and are familiar with so that we can do it justice.

→ 2 CommentsTags:

Halo RTS Shot Down

September 9th, 2006 by Troy Goodfellow · Uncategorized

The fan created Halo-based real time strategy game Halogen has been put to an end by Microsoft attorneys. In the words of the developers:

The problem with using copyrighted intellectual property as a base for a fan project is that you’re very susceptible to legal action. We always figured that since Halogen was such a different take on the Halo franchise, we might manage to make it without incident. That changed today.

Though it is amusing that someone would think that merely changing how someone else’s IP was being used makes it more likely that it would pass muster with the lawyers, I feel sorry for people who’ve put a lot of thought and work into a mod that looked like it was going to be as ambitious as this one.

The attraction of using someone else’s IP is understandable. If this was just a bunch of guys making their own independent RTS, they wouldn’t have gotten near the attention they did working on a Halo strategy game. It’s hard to publicize original ideas. Hell, it’s hard to come up with original ideas. Then to make other people care? Why not just hook yourself to a larger cultural object and have someone else do the hard stuff? If it is respectful and well done, it might get enough of a fanbase to dodge the legal avenues. And with modding so huge now, companies are more open to this sort of thing.

But this isn’t really modding, of course. It’s creating a whole new game, like if I made a Mario strategy game. Wario’s War or something. All the scenarios would be raiding the enemy base only to find that the princess is in another town center. And the idea of a Halo RTS is so obvious that Bungie would be crazy not to already be working on one. And if they weren’t, they now have your ideas to consider with no legal consequences.

So, a sad but forseeable end to what looked like a promising project. Here’s hoping that all that stuff doesn’t go to waste.

(Spotted at Destructoid.)

EDIT: I’ve just been reminded that Bungie’s early development plans for Halo included an RTS version, so they’ve not only thought of it, they’ve probably built some of it. No good idea is ever original.

Comments Off on Halo RTS Shot DownTags:

History of RTS Continued

September 8th, 2006 by Troy Goodfellow · Uncategorized

The second part of Trent Polack’s history of Real Time Strategy is up. In it he once again echoes some of my thinking on the real time tactical games that don’t have base building or resource management, classifying them as an evolution of the RTS, but along a different path. I think the break is less significant than he implies, but I would not put Sid Meier’s Gettysburg or Myth in this evolution since they are, to my mind, simply wargames with some RTS interface similarities. Both could have developed – and I think would have – completely independent of the Warcraft model. I doubt you could say the same of the Blitzkriegs of the world.

Comments Off on History of RTS ContinuedTags:

Civ Chronicles – Full Disclosure

September 7th, 2006 by Troy Goodfellow · Uncategorized

The compilation pack is an odd marketing device. Aimed squarely at completists – people who simply must have every part of a beloved series – their success can be tough to gauge.

I say this by way of the announcement of the new Civilization Chronicles Box Set. All of the Sid Meier Civs, tech trees for each version, a DVD thing with Soren Johnson and friends, a board game…lots and lots of extra stuff.

I am responsible for some of that extra stuff. I was offered a chance to contribute to a compilation pack for my favorite series of all time and couldn’t say no. With the generous assistance of Bruce Shelley, Brian Reynolds, Jeff Briggs, Soren Johnson and Sid Meier (of course) I was able to write a history of the franchise largely told through the eyes of those who made it. Most of the Johnson and Meier stuff is contained in an interview with the two. It’s really just me saying a few words and then them talking about Civ. It was a lot of fun, and I appreciate that I was convenient enough to hire.

This small part I played is why there have been – as yet – no extensive comments on Civ IV Warlords or CivCity: Rome. It is also why I won’t be professionally reviewing any 2k Games products in the near future. I want to be clear to my readers that I was – for a brief and enjoyable moment – a contract employee of 2k. For the next few months, any comment I make on either of those games (or any to follow) will have a link to this disclosure.

As for the compilation pack itself, there are already people who are complaining that this is a way to squeeze more dimes out of the Civ name. If you don’t want to buy it, you don’t have to. Me being the self-important twit that I am – I’ll buy three to pass out to family and friends. But compilation packs by their nature are targeted products.

Now, I haven’t played Johnson’s game. Nor have I seen the DVD. But this is a lot of stuff for seventy dollars considering that Civ IV itself still goes for 50.

→ 18 CommentsTags:

Writing a wrong opinion

September 7th, 2006 by Troy Goodfellow · Uncategorized

Jason Cross has a nice little piece on reviewers getting their opinions wrong.

It can happen. An ill-informed opinion is worse than no opinion at all. (Like the infamous review of single player only Max Payne that took off points because the multiplayer was unsatisfying.)

Not being a console gamer (for reasons of frugality, not snobbery) I can’t vouch for Saints Row (it doesn’t look like my kind of game) or Enchanted Arms (which also looks like someone else’s kind of game.) But Cross seems to like the former okay, and the latter was vigorously defended by the guys over at Penny Arcade.

→ 1 CommentTags: