Dawn of War 2

Silk

Silk

Well-Known Member
Realism != fun

Still, you boys can have your silly combat sims (which btw, are nothing like real combat and never will be but please by all means carry on with that delusion).

Also.. saying proper RTS games are like sim city is asinine. I assure you I've played the latter and the gameplay is nothing like an RTS game.. so frankly I wonder if you've played sim city.

Can't wait for SC2 ;)
 
Ronin Storm

Ronin Storm

Administrator
Staff member
Hmm, but having a nod to realism can aid in the suspense of disbelief, which is part of what immersion in a game world is predicated on. So while there is no causal relationship between the two there is also no negative correlation between them either.

As for genre comparisons, I'm guessing you've not played the latter games in the Sim City series? Their method of managing disasters is much closer to RTS than you make out, with fire or police units dispatched to contain disasters, their placement being (somewhat) important in their effectiveness.

Zooggy: when we're talking strategy versus tactics I find it useful to remember that real world militaries think of war in three levels: strategy, operational and tactical. For an RTS, I find operational and below the fun parts as they focus on completing the mission rather than supporting the business of the military, which is more a strategic thing (as you say). DoW pretty much skips the whole operational level, just doing stuff at the top and the bottom. Still, games that do include that (Hearts of Iron 2, for example) can get very bogged down, for me, in needing to remember a million things from session to session to win the game (partly because it takes so long to play).
 
ShedCherrem

ShedCherrem

In Cryo Sleep
silkth said:
Realism != fun

Still, you boys can have your silly combat sims (which btw, are nothing like real combat and never will be but please by all means carry on with that delusion).

Also.. saying proper RTS games are like sim city is asinine. I assure you I've played the latter and the gameplay is nothing like an RTS game.. so frankly I wonder if you've played sim city.

Can't wait for SC2 ;)
Click to expand...

Sure they are nothing like real combat, but closer they are, more fun they are (At least in my opinion.) Same goes to battliefield and Operation Flashpoint. one is closer to sandbox, the other to the realism.

2)Who said RTS are like sim city? Read closely before implying some sillyness that havent been spoke. I said that if you like to comit to building buy yourself something like sim city.

3)SC2 = lame
 
Silk

Silk

Well-Known Member
ShedCherrem said:
Sure they are nothing like real combat, but closer they are, more fun they are (At least in my opinion.) Same goes to battliefield and Operation Flashpoint. one is closer to sandbox, the other to the realism.

2)Who said RTS are like sim city? Read closely before implying some sillyness that havent been spoke. I said that if you like to comit to building buy yourself something like sim city.

3)SC2 = lame
Click to expand...

Who said anything about commiting to building? It's just all part of the bigger picture. Build, manage, plan. Then the combat element on top of that. All makes for a run genre aka RTS.

Your third point however has left me feeling you have such poor taste in games I'm wasting my breath. I'm tempted so say.. BLASPHEMY!! But.. each to their own.
 
ShedCherrem

ShedCherrem

In Cryo Sleep
SC2 = lame thingie for people who listen to Britney :P
((I write so, cause I see you crying out already: "Leave Star Craft ALONE! Leave it ALONE!"))

And most of all returning to the main point. I have nothing against building in game, but Im strongly against building on the battlefield. In any possible ways its just stupid. And I surely dont have much of repsect to a world/universe of game where army leaders instead of corps, battalions and sqads ready for action, send workers to build them cities*palmface* Such idea is for the reasonably and logicly thinking person like a serious smack right in the head with baseball bat made of frozen stupid.

Imagine yourself a battle of Grunwald (Or as you know it: Battle of Tannenberg).
Instead of two great armies of King Vladislav Jagielo and Ulrich von Junkingen, they came on the field with couple of peasants and started building town halls...
King Jagielo says:
-Faster! Faster! Wee need to recruit more workers, send more peasants to the woods, let them gather resources!
-But my lord! - says the worker - We need places to live and food!
-Ok! Ok! Build more farmhouses! Hurry! Those nasty Teutonics wont wait!
And so town hall stands, couple of farmhouses also, now they built up barracks.
-Quickly! Recruit Knights!
-But sire! We cant! We can only recruit standard footmen! We need to upgrade our townhall to Cityhall!
-Oh! For god sake! Than do it!
Finaly they managed to have a constant flow of soldiers that after beeing produced in barracks they charge into the middle of field to fight in unorganised chaotic mass. King Jagielo stands on hill and looks on the other side, saying:
-Jesus christ! They already invented horses! We must hurry up and invent guns, or they will crush us!
-What? But, lord! Inventing a gun will take for ever.
-Nonsense! Itll take us 6 minutes, 400 pieces of wood and 500 gold coins! - King takes another glance at the enemy city. - Oh! By the love of god! They already produced two cavalery units! If they throw them in battle they will kill all of our eleven men!
-Sir! Than inventing guns will take too long anyway, cant we bring some from our last battle, I saw some guns there.
-No we cant!
-Why?
-I DONT KNOW! They just dissapeared and we got to invent them again!
-Disapeared?!
-Yes!... They were just before end of conflict, and when we won... "Poof!" all gone!
-Jesus Christ!
-Thats it!
-What?
-We can recruit priests, so they will heal our troops on the field! Quickly I want to see here a fully sized gothic style cathedral in three minutes!
-Yes, sir!... - he returns after a while - But cant we do it normal way, and bring our army?
-No we cant!
-Why, my lord?
-Because its FUN!

Sorry, but that idea is just ridiculous. It was good 5 years ago, but now... well Im not buying it its just silly, so is Starcraft. What doesnt mean I dont like Starcraft, I do, but does it mean I have to love it like a sacred icon? It has some serious drawbacks like all games, movies, books and Im not afraid to criticise them.
What Is a good idea of doing RTS with building bases, is the idea of operational base. Not many games shown this solution, but I can give an example - Earth 2150 for instance. There you had a base that you could build, process, upgraqde, make research in it and so on, build new armored units and so on... but there was no battle in your base, you just took your forces and send them to the battlefield where they fought. First they were brought by some air transport and placed safely on the ground. And thats it! thats the idea I like, There is building, BUT NOT on the battlefield.
 
Silk

Silk

Well-Known Member
Your'e arguing realism as a strong case point, but you're using it against someone who's actually very anti-realism in "games" so kinda wasted effort tbh ;)

You won't convince me that realism is a selling point because I have enough realism day-to-day thanks.. games are an escape.

And FYI you're supposed to use your imagination a little.. often RTS games mention that the "HP" of a unit is actually representing the number of units even tho graphically you only see/control one.

You say GUNS! REALISM! VIOLENCE AND WAR!
I say IMPOSSIBLE WEAPONS! MASSIVE EXPLOSIONS! IMAGINATION OVERHAUL and FUN!

We're too different to reasonably debate over this so I'd just leave it ;)
 
Nanor

Nanor

Well-Known Member
You won't convince me that realism is a selling point because I have enough realism day-to-day thanks.. games are an escape.
Click to expand...

Well Project Reality, INSMOD and ARMA make pretty strong cases for realism being fun.

You won't convince me that realism is a selling point because I have enough realism day-to-day thanks.. games are an escape.
Click to expand...

Heh, so you shoot people and drive tanks on a daily basis? I think you'll still find realistic games are about as far removed from your life as possible. ;)


I don't think people are debating that base building is unrealistic and that realism is fun. I think people are saying that base building is a waste of time when people just want to get into the fight.
 
Silk

Silk

Well-Known Member
Nanor said:
I don't think people are debating that base building is unrealistic and that realism is fun. I think people are saying that base building is a waste of time when people just want to get into the fight.
Click to expand...

But everyones different.. not everyone views that side of the game as "a waste of time". Some people like variety!

I'm all for a whole new genre of games that embrace combat only but lets leave the RTS games as they are eh? ;)
 
Nanor

Nanor

Well-Known Member
silkth said:
But everyones different.. not everyone views that side of the game as "a waste of time". Some people like variety!

I'm all for a whole new genre of games that embrace combat only but lets leave the RTS games as they are eh? ;)
Click to expand...

But we need change. We need some revolutionary ideas. If there are enough people who share the same view as you then DoW2 will probably crash and burn and that idea will be forgotten. If you really feel base building is all that then you have nothing to worry about. :)
 
BiG D

BiG D

Administrator
Staff member
You make it sound like there's never been an RTS that did away with base building. It's not exactly a new concept :p
 
Nanor

Nanor

Well-Known Member
Who does? Me?

If it's me well the no base building concept hasn't been fully explored. The only other one that comes to mind is WiC.
 
Silk

Silk

Well-Known Member
Nanor said:
Who does? Me?

If it's me well the no base building concept hasn't been fully explored. The only other one that comes to mind is WiC.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see a game with all elements.. base building.. rescoruces.. combat.. you know, the norm. But.. it'd be cool to be able to build structures on structures and experiment and build mighty death fortresses of doom!!! WITH LEGS!
 
Nanor

Nanor

Well-Known Member
silkth said:
I'd like to see a game with all elements.. base building.. rescoruces.. combat.. you know, the norm. But.. it'd be cool to be able to build structures on structures and experiment and build mighty death fortresses of doom!!! WITH LEGS!
Click to expand...

You can't please everyone. If they tried to add everything then the game would fail miserably.
 
ShedCherrem

ShedCherrem

In Cryo Sleep
silkth said:
Your'e arguing realism as a strong case point, but you're using it against someone who's actually very anti-realism in "games" so kinda wasted effort tbh ;)

You won't convince me that realism is a selling point because I have enough realism day-to-day thanks.. games are an escape.

And FYI you're supposed to use your imagination a little.. often RTS games mention that the "HP" of a unit is actually representing the number of units even tho graphically you only see/control one.

You say GUNS! REALISM! VIOLENCE AND WAR!
I say IMPOSSIBLE WEAPONS! MASSIVE EXPLOSIONS! IMAGINATION OVERHAUL and FUN!

We're too different to reasonably debate over this so I'd just leave it ;)
Click to expand...

You see realism as a copy of real world. I see realism mostly as logical reasoning. Im against building on battlefield - caus its stupid, not because in reality we have and had different patterns, but just because building on battlefield is naive.

I dont say Guns Realism Violence and war.
I just say: Logic.
You say: Kitsch

and yes games are escape from day-to-day patterns and issues, but so are movies, books, music. And just because they are escape I dont want them to be simplified poorly planed and done crap like Harry Potter. But than... I am not one who enjoys the screen flashing with colorfull lights of Soul Calibur or Final Fantasy, I do like games that allows me to get involve in story and world not just to do some button-mashing of micros.
And I agree we are waaay to different.
 
Silk

Silk

Well-Known Member
ShedCherrem said:
I am not one who enjoys the screen flashing with colorfull lights of Soul Calibur or Final Fantasy, I do like games that allows me to get involve in story and world not just to do some button-mashing of micros.
And I agree we are waaay to different.
Click to expand...

I was gonna leave it there but have to say.. how can you say on one hand you like story and on the otherhand you don't like final fantasy.. you do realise that they, and RPG's like them, have big, in depth storylines and characters? That it's pretty central to the whole genre? I'm very confused with that statement.. it's pretty much identical to saying "I Love a good story.. but yeah I hate books". And button mashing... final fantasy.. even more confused.. do you actually know anything about the games you're using as examples? Soul Calibre.. fair enough, not my cup of tea either. Never did like beat-em-ups (apart from streets of rage and golden axe, which were better because they were a little more involved than fighting one guy at a time).

For the record, logic is my day job. I have to think rationally and logically all day every day.. well, Mon-Fri. Could explain why I'd rather have the opposite in my free time.

I like base building because it's fun. There's a million games out there that are great just because they're fun. Or are we saying tetris sucked because it wasn't realistic? I mean how DO those blocks keeep appearing.. and why do they just vanish sometimes? Will Spore suck because those lifeforms I keep making just don't make ANY sense? If you try to apply rational thought to an industry that is supposed to be fun-centric then I do feel you're going a bit wrong somewhere.

Saying you like realism is one thing.. each to their own. I can see how boys like to pretend to be real army generals keeping their men alive. Same sorta lads who play football managerzz... zzz.. oh sorry, where was I? Oh yes, realism I can give you, everyone has their own taste. But logic? You want to apply logic to games? Can you imagine if the whole industry was throttled like that? We'd be reduced to sports games, flight sims and oooh.. combat sims. In fact the industry would never have taken off in the first place.

Also, do you think it's realistic to have a top down view on your little guys and to draw boxes around them and click on a map to tell them where to go? Surely that sort of game could only be truly realistic if you were in 3rd person down on the battlefield, relaying via comms to each team where you want them to go and what you want them to do? As for logic.. well it's all or nothing to me. So - if you get shot once, game over.. start the whole thing again. Sorry but it's only logical.. you get shot, you die. You can't command your guys anymore. In fact no, my mistake! You're dead and it makes no logical sense that you'd ressurect or have another chance.. so the game uninstalls itself. Likewise you can only fail a mission once.. it makes no sense for the whole battlefield to magically reset itself to try again! Just.. be careful what you wish for ok? There's a reason certain elements of realism are always and will always be excluded from games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top