Brood wrote:Saying that the tactical FPS community is dying is a horrible analysis of what is actually happening. All we are seeing is a trend, as more people become learned "casual gamers" we will see developers once again making more intricate and engaging titles in an effort to keep fresh. The tactical FPS community will see a revival and everyone will rejoice.
I dind't say the tactical fps community is dying... what I said was:
[quote=""eggman"]
Consoles are dominating the gaming industry and I think good multiplayer tactical gaming is going to suffer, especially in the coming years of ruthless cost savings by studios. I am of the view that the only way a really, really good large scale multiplayer tactical game is going to get made is if it IS free from commercial requirements.
[/quote]
And I probably should have said "good,
large scale multiplayer tactical gaming is going to suffer..."
The tactical gaming community will always be a thriving niche. Unfortunately more and more people think that the Rainbox Six series as it is today represents everything tactical gaming needs to be. For me the "virtual battlefield" and large scale multiplayer combined arms aspects of tactical gaming are the most interesting.
And, in my own selfish way of seeing the world hehe.... I see fewer gaming companies really making commitments to that space. I see that largely being driven by economics.. PC gaming is as expensive as Console gaming to produce. And the PC market is shrinking relative to the console market. (please don't try and argue that unless you have sales figures that somehow I don't have access to).
So my take on it is that I don't think leaving it to AAA studios and commercial, share holder driven organizations is going to see the "virtual battlefield" realized. I think a bunch of fanatical whack jobs are going to get that done
Case in point.... look at the Office software space. Nobody was able to "topple" MS Office. Lots of companies went bankrupt trying. But the open source movement with Open Office has made a huge impact on MS Office. You can say the same (to a much larger extent) about the operating systems marketplace.
[quote="Brood""]
This is probably something that is 2-3 years away, but it is definitely happening.
[/quote]
What facts do you have to support that? The facts I have (sales figures, games in development, gaming industry newsletters) don't indicate this is happening at all.
Brood wrote:
In the end it all comes down to how you market something, eve is a terribly complicated game but somehow manages to keep it's server population at 30,000+ with 500,000 subscribers. It has great PR and marketing, constantly adds fresh content and is something different and adventagous in a sea of mediocrity.
While eve may be complicated... it's that last bit you said that makes it a success... it an incredibly well designed game in a sea of mediocre WoW clones trying to cash in. On top of it they have been very smart about their marketing.
Brood wrote:
Project Reality doesn't do too bad for itself either ... The last mod I can remember doing this was Desert Combat for BF1942.
I once recall saying to the mod team that PR should have a goal of being the "DC of BF2" but not at any expense of making a mod we wouldn't ourselves enjoy playing.
But take a look at that history relating to BF42, DC, EA & DICE:
- After working with them since February 2004, in September 2004 DICE acquires Trauma Studios (makers of DC)
- DICE uses Trauma to prototype BF2 elements that DICE then incorporates into BF2; DICE commits to growing the 9 Trauma Studios employees to 20 in the coming months/years
- In November 2004 EA aquires DICE
- In early June 2005 EA disbands Trauma Studios, laying off all employees (including wiggling out of a $200,000 payment they owed)
- In late June 2005 EA releases BF2
So there's an example of how large corporate interests foster and reward innovation. I am sorta glad those dimensions on being "the DC of BF2" never materialized.
egg