So I got to thinking about games communities, Intellectual Property....

[Purkake]

QA should be the last thing you try to save money on. Even the bestest game in the world won't be worth anything if it doesn't work. The technical complexity thing really needs to stabilize or we need some kind of software platform that allows the developers to skip a lot of the heavy lifting.

[Purkake]

DP

Edited October 14, 2009 by Purkake

[Hurlshort]

HoMM IV wasn't a reboot, it followed a similar formula to the other games, it was just a complete mess and didn't pull anything off.

[crakkie]

I don't care if the choices that a company makes nets them more sales and makes them more money. I have certain requirements and desires that I want in a product. I will give money to a company that produces such a product. I'm a consumer not an investor or a cheerleader. It's in my interest for a company create the game that I want with an IP that I like, new or old. It's not my concern if they get a 10 to 1 return or go bankrupt.

[Morgoth]

I'm all for reboots of IP, as long as it doesn't suck. Fallout 3 was a well made reboot. Sure it pissed off NMA, Codex etc, but it was so good in it's own way it didn't matter to me.

 

I expect a reboot from X-Com as well. I know Ken Levine is working on a shooter, I just know it....

Edited October 14, 2009 by Morgoth

[Magister Lajciak]

HoMM IV wasn't a reboot, it followed a similar formula to the other games, it was just a complete mess and didn't pull anything off.

 

Ha, ha, I agree that it was just a complete mess, but I am sure the developers were thinking of it as a reboot. It was definitely the most 'innovative' of the series in terms of departing from the original formula.

[Purkake]

I don't care if the choices that a company makes nets them more sales and makes them more money. I have certain requirements and desires that I want in a product. I will give money to a company that produces such a product. I'm a consumer not an investor or a cheerleader. It's in my interest for a company create the game that I want with an IP that I like, new or old. It's not my concern if they get a 10 to 1 return or go bankrupt.

 

You assume that the company is actually dying to get your measly $50, when they could get 1000x that by making a game that appeals to a wider audience.

 

Companies don't make stuff to make you happy, they make stuff to make money.

 

In the end you're going to end up either lowering your expectations or not playing any more games.

Edited October 14, 2009 by Purkake

[Hurlshort]

It's not my concern if they get a 10 to 1 return or go bankrupt.

 

I would think the last part would be your concern, given that bankruptcy will mean you no longer get new games from them.

[Purkake]

It's not my concern if they get a 10 to 1 return or go bankrupt.

 

I would think the last part would be your concern, given that bankruptcy will mean you no longer get new games from them.

 

Reminds me of a certain Troika-related incident...

[Zoraptor]

I expect a reboot from X-Com as well. I know Ken Levine is working on a shooter, I just know it....

Jokes about XCOM Enforcer 2 aside, so far as I am aware the Levine shooter is not related to XCOM and Irrational are no longer working on their XCOM title (perhaps because their subsidiary studio keep on being pulled into doing Bioshock stuff). Last I heard the suggestions were that Firaxis had been doing some preliminary work on one but it was unlikely to proceed.

[entrerix]

WARNING: the following post is largely educated OPINION, please do not take as fact or argument of fact. merely personal, somewhat anecdotal in basis, observations-

 

 

 

if a market exists, believe in the corporations to eventually find a way to make money off of it.

 

if there are truly enough people willing and ready to buy a new turn based rpg with great and lengthy texts, then sooner or later someone will rediscover this and it will come roaring back into popularity, just with a budget to match the market. at first. then the budgets will get bigger because the first few were hits and the company will make the mistake thinking that a bigger budget will improve the game, but then they will need to have less text so the game will appeal to more people to make up for the larger budget and then we're right back where we are today.

 

look at fighting games. street fighter 2 HDRemix was a bit risky, but it made some decent $$, so street fighter 4 comes along next and makes even more $$ (those games were sort of simultaneous but bare with me for the sake of the example). now more $$ is being spent on fighting games since they're "back" and we're going to get a couple more bigger budget titles before collapse again when it becomes clear that the market doesnt care much about big budget.

 

 

rant incoming:

 

i've always compared corporations to monsters. it is a voracious, starving, mindless machine that exists to find and eat your money. if you have money it will smell it on you and then try to eat it out of your pocket. it wants ALL the money. all the money it can get from everyone it can get it from. it's crafty but stupid too. it employs marketers and research specialists to figure out where the money is, and what it has to do to eat it, then it ramps up its hunger to 11 when it thinks it has the scent. because by turning its hunger to 11 it can eat that much more money. problem happens when it does this is that now hunger is 11 and if it can only get food = 10 or worse, it starts getting fierce stabbing moneywithdrawalhungerpains. which causes it to vomit up its insides in the form of layoffs and restructuring, turning its hunger down in the process. now it starts anew on finding more delicious money to eat, deciphering how best to get it, then once again turning the hunger to 11. the monster isnt evil per se. it just wants the money, and will continue this cycle until it kills itself, or a stronger monster kicks it away from a moneymeal and digs in.

 

it's not a sophisticated economic analysis, and it ignores lots and lots of factors and realities, but the general metaphor of company being hungry monster is, i find, appropriate enough.

[Tigranes]

if a market exists, believe in the corporations to eventually find a way to make money off of it.

 

if there are truly enough people willing and ready to buy a new turn based rpg with great and lengthy texts, then sooner or later someone will rediscover this and it will come roaring back into popularity

 

A market, just like desire, needs to be cultivated; if not, it can wither and die.

[entrerix]

true dat

[crakkie]

I don't care if the choices that a company makes nets them more sales and makes them more money. I have certain requirements and desires that I want in a product. I will give money to a company that produces such a product. I'm a consumer not an investor or a cheerleader. It's in my interest for a company create the game that I want with an IP that I like, new or old. It's not my concern if they get a 10 to 1 return or go bankrupt.

 

You assume that the company is actually dying to get your measly $50, when they could get 1000x that by making a game that appeals to a wider audience.

 

Companies don't make stuff to make you happy, they make stuff to make money.

I didn't assume that. Their balance sheet and how successful they are are not my concern. I don't buy things to support companies or to make them money; I do it fulfill my needs. Should I care about Michael Bay's success from his creative interpretation of the Transformers IP even though the films didn't interest me? 'Companies exist to make money, by making products that people want' is half of capitalism, and not being a company that sells things, it isn't the part I care about. 'Consumers exist to purchase the products that they need and desire' is my half. I don't exist to support for-profit entertainment companies. I buy their products that interest me. If producing something that I do not enjoy and thus will not buy makes them a lot of money, it isn't my responsibility to begin desiring the product that they are producing. That's as absurd as thinking that they exist to make me happy.

 

In the end you're going to end up either lowering your expectations or not playing any more games.

I wasn't only referring to games, but I find enough that fit my expectations. Do you assume all consumers' needs aren't fulfilled?

[Slowtrain]

i've always compared corporations to monsters. it is a voracious, starving, mindless machine that exists to find and eat your money. if you have money it will smell it on you and then try to eat it out of your pocket. it wants ALL the money. all the money it can get from everyone it can get it from. it's crafty but stupid too. it employs marketers and research specialists to figure out where the money is, and what it has to do to eat it, then it ramps up its hunger to 11 when it thinks it has the scent. because by turning its hunger to 11 it can eat that much more money. problem happens when it does this is that now hunger is 11 and if it can only get food = 10 or worse, it starts getting fierce stabbing moneywithdrawalhungerpains. which causes it to vomit up its insides in the form of layoffs and restructuring, turning its hunger down in the process. now it starts anew on finding more delicious money to eat, deciphering how best to get it, then once again turning the hunger to 11. the monster isnt evil per se. it just wants the money, and will continue this cycle until it kills itself, or a stronger monster kicks it away from a moneymeal and digs in.

 

 

I like you.

[Slowtrain]

The thing is there is most definitely a market for a TB squad combat game like XCOM or Jag 2. Especially Jag 2. Every forum I go to has people who talk about JAg 2 from time to time. I get the occasional PM from people who see my jag 2 avvie and just say Hi, that was a great game. Bears Pit still has posters. The mods continue.,

 

 

As a market does it compare to the Halo3 market? Of course not. SO what happens? It gets ignored.

 

 

Right now game devs and pubs are so focused on honkingn big blockbuster titles that they simply igmnore any amrket that does have the potential to generate huge sales.

 

 

I really don't think that approach is going to last forever though because it's going to start showijg poor results eventually.

[Cl_Flushentityhero]

Nightshape:

 

Well, look at it this way. If an IP is rebooted into something that doesn't draw much from the original games, then what does slapping the IP's name on it even mean?

[Hurlshort]

The thing is there is most definitely a market for a TB squad combat game like XCOM or Jag 2. Especially Jag 2. Every forum I go to has people who talk about JAg 2 from time to time. I get the occasional PM from people who see my jag 2 avvie and just say Hi, that was a great game. Bears Pit still has posters. The mods continue.,

 

 

As a market does it compare to the Halo3 market? Of course not. SO what happens? It gets ignored.

 

 

Right now game devs and pubs are so focused on honkingn big blockbuster titles that they simply igmnore any amrket that does have the potential to generate huge sales.

 

 

I really don't think that approach is going to last forever though because it's going to start showijg poor results eventually.

 

Yeah, but a new Jagged Alliance style game would need a decent budget. There is voice work that needs to be done, and you would have to develop an engine, and there is a good amount of artwork to it. I'm just saying it isn't a small project if we want it done right. There are plenty of cheap JA clones coming out of Eastern Europe and they pretty much all blow.

 

Plus, the actual JA IP is in terrible hands. And there aren't many studios that even focus on TB games (except for the DS) so who is going to pick it up? I'm really bummed that Firaxis doesn't seem interested in moving forward on the Xcom property, I thought they were one of the few companies capable of doing it justice.

 

RPG's as a genre have had high and low points, but there always seems to be a few strong studios dedicated to them. TB combat games seem completely dead at this point.

[Slowtrain]

The thing is there is most definitely a market for a TB squad combat game like XCOM or Jag 2. Especially Jag 2. Every forum I go to has people who talk about JAg 2 from time to time. I get the occasional PM from people who see my jag 2 avvie and just say Hi, that was a great game. Bears Pit still has posters. The mods continue.,

 

 

As a market does it compare to the Halo3 market? Of course not. SO what happens? It gets ignored.

 

 

Right now game devs and pubs are so focused on honkingn big blockbuster titles that they simply igmnore any amrket that does have the potential to generate huge sales.

 

 

I really don't think that approach is going to last forever though because it's going to start showijg poor results eventually.

 

Yeah, but a new Jagged Alliance style game would need a decent budget. There is voice work that needs to be done, and you would have to develop an engine, and there is a good amount of artwork to it. I'm just saying it isn't a small project if we want it done right. There are plenty of cheap JA clones coming out of Eastern Europe and they pretty much all blow.

 

Plus, the actual JA IP is in terrible hands. And there aren't many studios that even focus on TB games (except for the DS) so who is going to pick it up? I'm really bummed that Firaxis doesn't seem interested in moving forward on the Xcom property, I thought they were one of the few companies capable of doing it justice.

 

RPG's as a genre have had high and low points, but there always seems to be a few strong studios dedicated to them. TB combat games seem completely dead at this point.

 

I don't disagree that a studio would need some money to develop a worthwhile title. There's only so many corners you can. But I think what is missing right now in game development is the "middle class" game studios. A lot of them died in the late 90's and there hasn't been much to replace them with.

[Nightshape]

I wonder how people would react to taking the Jagged Alliance franchise, and porting it over to consoles. Dare I say potentially ditching TB mechanics as well.

 

^ That is the sort of thing I'm on about.

[Gorth]

I wonder how people would react to taking the Jagged Alliance franchise, and porting it over to consoles. Dare I say potentially ditching TB mechanics as well.

 

^ That is the sort of thing I'm on about.

You are so gonna burn!

[Masterfade]

I wonder if there's any chance Bioware will reboot singleplayer Ultima now they have access to the IP

[Mamoulian War]

I wonder if there's any chance Bioware will reboot singleplayer Ultima now they have access to the IP

 

If they ever reboot it, it will be into Ultima Online 2

[Mamoulian War]

...Yeah, but a new Jagged Alliance style game would need a decent budget...

 

Not realy, all they need to do is not to make it on PC, Xbox 360 and PS3, and release it only for DS and PSP...

[Niten_Ryu]

I wonder how people would react to taking the Jagged Alliance franchise, and porting it over to consoles. Dare I say potentially ditching TB mechanics as well.

 

^ That is the sort of thing I'm on about.

 

Old fans would explode but Jagged Alliance could be done in "next generation" style. Let's take 2 of the most successful games of this generation and rip 'em off. Modern Warfare and Left for Dead.

 

Singleplayer campaign and 2-6 person co-op multiplayer campaign. Tons of weapons and vehicles. Players control characters from old Jagged Alliance games and each have their own speciality. You'd still get "expo", much in the same way as you do in modern multiplayer shooters. Game could use new Cryengine 3 and main location similar to old Jagged Alliance game and Crysis games (jungle, with small towns and villages). For better or worse, such game would probably sell better then turn based sequel.