Simulations a dying breed... No says Paradox Interactive

Wolfehunter · 08-29-09, 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arclight

Thats the whole point. Gaming shouldn't be popular, popular things are turned to crap.

Agreed. Certain interest groups want PC games removed. I find the best games today are those who aren't controlled by big name publishers. Sure big named games have all the nice graphics and sounds but they're content sucks monkey balls.

I was happy when Console focused on console games and PC was for PC games.

stabiz · 08-29-09, 10:54 AM

I agree ... somewhat. The best games recent years have been from small outfits (rFactor, Men of War, Arma 1+2, etc, etc), but the big guys have published games like SH4 and Empire: Total War. Those are exceptions of course, 99% of big titles do - as you say - suck donkey balls.

Task Force · 08-29-09, 10:57 AM

yea, cause the big companys like to make the storylines sell...

Ea comes to mind.

stabiz · 08-29-09, 11:57 AM

EA made F1 Challenge 99-01 (or something like that), and thats the last time they made something I liked. Almost ten years ago!

Task Force · 08-29-09, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stabiz

EA made F1 Challenge 99-01 (or something like that), and thats the last time they made something I liked. Almost ten years ago!

lol, yea, I think Ive only liked maby one or to of Eletronic A**holes games...

Arclight · 08-29-09, 11:59 AM

Imho it's not so much about being developed by a big company, it's really about popularity;

Casual gamers outnumber core gamers by a fair margin, so for a game to be popular (ie. liked by the majority of gamers) it needs to appeal to casual gamers.

When devs listen to their fans, the majority is most likely to get what they want (of course there are exceptions: some teams want to stick to their vision instead of expanding the user base, but it's rare since money is always a concern), meaning a popular game is dumbed down or simplified because the majority wants instant gratification with minimal effort.

Both ETW and SH are scalable, making them fairly popular. Casual gamers are interested in ETW as a strategy game (imho it's a tactical game, because the battles are the focus), simply auto-resolving battles. Imho the strategy element is very simplified, but that's exactly what they are looking for. Same with SH: with auto-aim on and realism options off, it's a very simple lock-and-shoot experience, though you need to find a target first (the one "hard" thing in the game, which I think accounts for a part of the popularity gap between SH and TW games).

It's both a blessing and a curse: the simplification comes at a cost for core gamers, but without it the games would not be popular enough to keep producing new ones.

*(forgive me for the broad terms like casual- and coregamer, it's not ment to offend.)

08-29-09, 10:54 AM	#2
stabiz Silent Hunter Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Norway Posts: 4,224 Downloads: 14 Uploads: 0	I agree ... somewhat. The best games recent years have been from small outfits (rFactor, Men of War, Arma 1+2, etc, etc), but the big guys have published games like SH4 and Empire: Total War. Those are exceptions of course, 99% of big titles do - as you say - suck donkey balls. __________________

08-29-09, 10:57 AM	#3
Task Force Rear Admiral Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: SPACE!!!! Posts: 10,142 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	yea, cause the big companys like to make the storylines sell... Ea comes to mind. __________________ Task Force industries "Taking control of the world, one mind at a time"

08-29-09, 11:57 AM	#4
stabiz Silent Hunter Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Norway Posts: 4,224 Downloads: 14 Uploads: 0	EA made F1 Challenge 99-01 (or something like that), and thats the last time they made something I liked. Almost ten years ago! __________________

08-29-09, 11:59 AM	#6
Arclight Navy Seal Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Land of windmills, tulips, wooden shoes and cheese. Lots of cheese. Posts: 8,467 Downloads: 53 Uploads: 10	Imho it's not so much about being developed by a big company, it's really about popularity; Casual gamers outnumber core gamers by a fair margin, so for a game to be popular (ie. liked by the majority of gamers) it needs to appeal to casual gamers. When devs listen to their fans, the majority is most likely to get what they want (of course there are exceptions: some teams want to stick to their vision instead of expanding the user base, but it's rare since money is always a concern), meaning a popular game is dumbed down or simplified because the majority wants instant gratification with minimal effort. Both ETW and SH are scalable, making them fairly popular. Casual gamers are interested in ETW as a strategy game (imho it's a tactical game, because the battles are the focus), simply auto-resolving battles. Imho the strategy element is very simplified, but that's exactly what they are looking for. Same with SH: with auto-aim on and realism options off, it's a very simple lock-and-shoot experience, though you need to find a target first (the one "hard" thing in the game, which I think accounts for a part of the popularity gap between SH and TW games). It's both a blessing and a curse: the simplification comes at a cost for core gamers, but without it the games would not be popular enough to keep producing new ones. (forgive me for the broad terms like casual- and coregamer, it's not ment to offend.) __________________ Contritium praecedit superbia.*