XPlay (G4TV) Video Review of Dangerous Waters

[Jamie]

Anyone who has cable (or satellite) television in the U.S. has probably surfed by G4TV in their remote control travels. It's somewhat mindless, occasionally funny, and always has young and attractive women as co-hosts... Sounds like a good formula for success given the average age of the common game player, actually (and I'm guilty of watching it from time to time).

Their viewers are certainly not our core audience and so their review of DW is slanted as such. However, the video review is sort of funny in a crass, adolescent sense and that sort of humor can be fun to partake in on occasion.

http://www.g4tv.com/xplay/reviews/42...us_Waters.html

Sometimes you just need to be able to laugh at yourself. We are certainly capable of that.

[Syxx_Killer]

Hmmm... Dangerous Metal Tubes. That could be the next installment!

[XabbaRus]

LOL very funny.

[madDdog67]

Hey, where's Morgan Webb when you need her??

I agree with the part about the tutorials...some narration would really be helpful, imho.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by madDdog67

Hey, where's Morgan Webb when you need her??

She was in the video review... you gotta click on the "Watch Video" to see her.

[Dr.Sid]

Oh yeah ! Everybody who read the review, found it funny, but did not watch the video, JUMP BACK AND WATCH IT. Because THAT is what I call funny.

[SeaQueen]

Oooo man... they really slammed you guys.

I dunno... do you guys think that maybe you're marketing a game that isn't for everyone as a game that's for everyone and getting punished for the fact?

Back in the day... before every game was a first-person shooter, there was a lot more diversity between games. You could usually get a pretty good idea what a game was like by looking at it. Now a days, the emphasis in marketing games seems to be so heavily on cool screen shots and what not, that the substance of a game is largely obscurred. It's like every game is trying to steal market share from first person shooters by looking like a first person shooter, even when they're nothing like one.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki II]

Wonder what they'd do if they ever reviewed Harpoon.

[SeaQueen]

Originally Posted by Kazuaki Shimazaki II

Wonder what they'd do if they ever reviewed Harpoon.

They won't, and if they did it'd be clear that they didn't get it.

When computers didn't generally have the horsepower to handle advanced graphics engines, companies would hype a simulation's realism. The whole selling point of the SIMULATION was that YOU COULD LEARN SOMETHING.

Take Microprose's Red Storm Rising, for example. To this day, I still think it's one of the coolest naval simulations out there. Graphics were minimal. The whole point of playing the game was that you were curious about what WWIII might be like.

I wonder if it would be possible to build a naval simulation around one specific theatre again, say some hypothetical future Taiwan Strait crisis, and just really bore down into that. Don't worry about scenario editors, don't worry about being able to do anything anywhere in the world. No fancy scripting. Just lay down the forces, and some kind of campaign script or even a dynamic one. I would like to see a post-Cold War Red Storm Rising.

[Molon Labe]

What was all that **** they're giving you guys about no printed manual?

That's what I call "libel."

[Smaragdadler]

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

What was all that **** they're giving you guys about no printed manual?

It's understandable in a way. They have to learn DW not just for fun like we, but for their job... and it makes their job harder and les fun to have no printed manual.

[Molon Labe]

Originally Posted by Smaragdadler

It's understandable in a way. They have to learn DW not just for fun like we, but for their job... and it makes their job harder and les fun to have no printed manual.

But there IS A MOTHER ****ING PRINTED MANUAL!

[sonar732]

Originally Posted by Molon Labe

What was all that **** they're giving you guys about no printed manual?

That's what I call "libel."

They did mention the printed manual...complaining that it cost $45.

[Molon Labe]

Originally Posted by sonar732

They did mention the printed manual...complaining that it cost $45.

they said it would cost that much to print the .pdf themselves.

[goldorak]

Originally Posted by SeaQueen

I wonder if it would be possible to build a naval simulation around one specific theatre again, say some hypothetical future Taiwan Strait crisis, and just really bore down into that. Don't worry about scenario editors, don't worry about being able to do anything anywhere in the world. No fancy scripting. Just lay down the forces, and some kind of campaign script or even a dynamic one. I would like to see a post-Cold War Red Storm Rising.

[mode daydreamer on]

Of course its possible.
Microprose did it for Falcon 4, why would it be different for naval simulations. ?
I agree with you seaqueen, concentrate on one single theater and apply a dynamic campaign engine.
Let the ai carry on with a global crisis, generating different kinds of missions (infiltration in enemy territorial waters with subs, reconaissance with p-3, naval strikes with frigates, etc...) and you choose the mission to carry out.
Of course you will need to have a logbook with all the scores and promotions

[mode daydreamer off]

If we are to have a succesor to DW, divert all resources to a dynamic campaign.
Ignore graphic deficiencies, scenario editor features, etc....
Just give us the holy grail of military simulations.
Back to reality, we know that DW will never have a dynamic campaign *sigh*.