Re: OT: The Future of Computer Strategy Games
 

To quote, 'You don't stop playing games when you grow old, you grow old when you stop playing games'.

Fuzzy Wuzzy Wazza Bear,
Fuzzy Wuzzy Hadno Hair.
Fuzzy Wuzzy Wasn't Very Fuzzy,
Wuzzy?

Re: OT: The Future of Computer Strategy Games
 

But isn't that the case with all media? There are very clever websites with amateur web design whose conent is brilliant, and commercial websites with excellent design and graphics but very banal material. Hollywood puts out big budget FX movies where the story or subject matter isn't as intriguing to many people as some low budget indie flicks. Smaller newspapers have better, more attentive local coverage than big ones.

On the other hand, from time to time you have projects that marry the two. The LotR trilogy in movies is probably a good example of this, where you had state of the art CGI and blockbuster movie production values, but it remained faithful to the story and were just great to watch. The only complaints I've heard about these movies are from people who reject sword-and-sorcery stories because they don't like the genre.

Despite our apparent differences in video game tastes, I think we can all agree that Master of Orion or its sequel(s), MOO2:BAA (and MoM), were great games that offered up many (probably countless) hours of fun and replayability. They also had high production values for their given eras. I don't know how many of you played Fallout, but that game stands out as one of the greatest RPGs of all time, and it was a quality game in all respects from a major publisher. Star Control 2, which has been mentioned as a good game by many here (and I'll definitely agree with) had great music, great presentation, great graphics (for its time) and probably the best storyline I've ever seen in a computer game. Starcraft (and all of Blizzard's games) while they may not be your preferred fare, offer up excellent production values, albeit traditionally aimed at lower-end specs for their time to be available to as many people as possible. They make up for low system requirements with great artwork, voice acting, presentation, and game/interface design. They're a mainstream company that makes very fun games.

I don't think games necessarily lose their quality when you add good graphics or major studio-level production values. It's just that there's so much crap out there in general, finding the few games that offer both great presentation and great content can be difficult. The overabundance of mediocre games with multi-million dollar development pricetags can make it seem like only crap games get the flash, but that's not always the case.

Off the top of my head for semi-recent offerings: Supreme Commander, Company of Heroes (and its younger cousin Dawn of War), anything Valve's released (or soon will release) on the Source engine, and Will Wright's upcoming Spore (provided it does what they claim it will do).

Re: OT: The Future of Computer Strategy Games
 

The overabundance of mediocre games with multi-million dollar development pricetags can make it seem like only crap games get the flash, but that's not always the case.

The really big pricetag games come from big faceless corporations... but unfortunately Flash & Fluff is more quantifiable for beancounters than Fun.

Re: OT: The Future of Computer Strategy Games
 

Actually its not. Any one remember system shock II? This game is a lot like that made by the same guys who made System Shock II. The game bucks the trend of low brow story lines in favor of a more in depth story with environmental appeal much like a good horror movie.

Far Cry was the last great fun to play, good FPS in my opinion and I hope Crisis will be just as fun. Its story kicked the crap out of HL2 and its open ended maps made the scripted corridor feel of HL2 feel very old and claustrophobic.

Re: OT: The Future of Computer Strategy Games
 

I'm really looking forward to Crysis, and also picking up Bioshock when I next make it into a gaming store. FPS's can be quite enjoyable, though usually just when I want to relax and not think for a while! http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...ies/tongue.gif

Re: OT: The Future of Computer Strategy Games
 

Scott had a blog entry recently about how formulaic FPS games are.

Re: OT: The Future of Computer Strategy Games
 

Bioshock *is* another Oblivion, in my opinion. Yeah sure, it's better than most games out there right now, but that's because of the lousy quality of today's games in general, not because Bioshock is anything special. It's a shoot-em-up with some more variation than usual in how you can kill things.

Personally I don't think it gets anywhere near System Shock 2, the 'spriritual' predecessor. And as with just about all sequels now a days, it's been very much dumbed down and <made for consoles>. Away is the neat skill system of SS2, away is the Inventory system, away is the chemicals-needed-for-research( now you just spam the fire button while holding a camera ), say hello to another magical quest compass, etc.

Fun for a few hours, but nowhere near the classic that is System Shock 2, and the changes very much show that it's made first and foremost for consoles. Another Oblivion.

Re: OT: The Future of Computer Strategy Games
 

I just saw a commercial for the Wii and I think it was Metroid, looked like a point and shoot type of deal. So does this Wii thing vibrate too to simulate recoil? That would pretty cool it did.

Anyways back game interface development and the future. I think if this Wii thing takes off I would like to see the ability to have kits one could purchase or a shell that they could place around their Wii type controler to simulate an actual pistol, SMG, assault rifle sized weapons and weights. Machine gun sized weapons too, no more Rambo games of players running around with M60s toting them like SMG's could be a good thing.

Also a recoil system to simulate an accurate recoil for those that love realism and a weight kit to replicate that actual weight of a specific weapon to add how quickly fatigue can set in after lugging around an assault rifle at the aiming position for 10 or 15 minutes. To reload, one would actually have to take out the magazine and put it back in and charge the weapon. For those that realy want to immerse in realism, highly realistic shells or kits could be purchased of their favorite weapon.

I think for $50 -80 for each size, $100 - $200 for highly accurate replicas, I would buy one in each size or ($150-for a pistol, SMG, and assualt rifle), just for the realism approach. That might even be high considering that they are just plasic shells with a recoil motor, a weight kit to simulate the appropriate weight, and replaceable magazine and charging mechanism.

How does one move around one might ask. Those little running pads of course. No more critism of the video game generation having weight problems. You can get in shape and shoot your buddies all at once.

Re: OT: The Future of Computer Strategy Games
 

Heh imagine the controversy that'd cause. You think critics who claim video games cause violent crime now are bad...wait till you can accurately simulate holding a weapon, reloading, etc. Then you'll *really* see moronic politicians trying to ban video games http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/frown.gif

Re: OT: The Future of Computer Strategy Games
 

I suppose they could have those little red caps at the end of the barrel so a police officer doesn't mistake someone pointing a rifle at a t.v. as a threat.

Wow, times really are different, I remember as a kid running around the neighborhood with water guns that looked real and even made real sounds.

I won't describe the neighborhood pellet gun wars we used to have as kids for fear of being grounded by my father twenty years too late.
http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/images/smilies/eek.gif Heck maybe video games are safer than days of past http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/image...es/Injured.gif