| SUBSIM Review |
 |
Editorial June 1999 |
Great Expectations
I'm writing this piece on the eve of the most important day in our millenium-the premiere of Star Wars: "The Phantom Menace". Do I believe that? Of course not. But to thousands, nay, millions of Star Wars fanatics, a compelling case could be made. Witness the Waiters. The people who have been camping out on public sidewalks for weeks to hold their place in line for a movie. Without much encouragement, I could expound on how these fans are looking to magnify a movie into a religious experience; how they are seeking to attach their pitifully empty lives to something with greater significance, if not dubious cultural value.
But I won't, not in this column. I would like to point out that anyone who craves something as badly as these people are bound to be disappointed. How can any movie live up the level of hype we've been subjected to?
Similarly, the buzz on the long-anticipated Jane's Fleet Command has been hearty and hopeful. It's been two years since the last major naval sim release (Jane's own 688(I) Hunter/Killer) and the wetheads have been anticipating a benchmark sim. After all, it's from a collaboration of Sonalysts and Jane's, two heavy hitters in the military hardware intelligence community. How could it miss?
Fleet Command was released last week and immediately the newsgroups fairly exploded with indignation over a sim that, though graphically superior to Harpoon 97 Classic, fell short of the mark. You can't fine tune the ordnance loadouts on the Hornets and Falcons. Ships sit idly by as SSMs rain down on them. Not enough control/too much management needed. And most damning of all-the 45 page gameplay manual. From an information group that wrote the book on military hardware and strategy (literally!), this is curiously deficient.
Who are the people bent on dismantling Jane's reputation as a manufacturer of quality combat sims? Players who expected the software to live up to its advance billing, its potential, and their expectations. They have every right to. Many of them are knowledgeable military aficionados who have studied the subject thoroughly. I read one post where a player complained about the poorly modeled capabilities of a certain missile in Fleet Command. When another player challenged him, asking where he learned so much about this particular missile, the former player replied, "Jane's Defence Weekly". Scholarly sim players expect Jane's to maintain the same outstanding degree of up-to-date authenticity in their games as they do in their publications.
Players are taking matters in their own hands. Before you can say "Howdy!", several sharp cyber-skippers have already found the core of the sim's platform attributes, the Doctrines folder. Tweaking and hacking these files has brightened the outlook of a flagging performance.
Which begs the question: what audience did Electronic Arts/Jane's/Sonalysts target with Fleet Command? Is it the 800 expert players who can devote hours of time learning, planning, and executing masterful sim strategies. Expert players who also happen to be very vocal? Or could it be the 65,000 casual gamers who dislike sims that require hours of advanced training, time apart from their wives, girlfriends and families, to play to enjoyment. Casual gamers who also happen to be in the majority of buyers?
Fleet Command does not fail to deliver an exciting and reasonably authentic "real time naval strategy" package. The graphics are very good and the game is enjoyable with numerous ships and planes to control. Careful study of the box reveals that it does not promise a sim that allows the player unlimited options and platform flexibility. Sure, there are weaknesses that should be addressed and probably will be, but Fleet Command delivers what it strives to be, a strategy game. It may not have lived up to expectations-it may not be the all-time champion of naval sims-but that doesn't mean it should be burned in effigy, either.
| Neal Stevens Editor, SUBSIM Review |
|
Your thoughts on the subject?
I think . . .
Past editorials:
May 1999
February 1999
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998