Quote:
Originally Posted by nearmiss
All the developer has to do is provide a star wars, or newbie clickon for those types of users.
There are features built in that do that, but it is easy to forget the newbs and people that are into that genre are gamer mentality.
All developers know what they are up against. I appreciate all the efforts on our behalf as dedicated air combat sim enthusiats, but if number of boxes sold is important they have to find a way to capture that business.
You can't do it with a bunch of click ons,complex configuration, setups and advance quality hardware items.
They have to think of ways to get people involved with a few simple clickons and minimum hardware requirements to get started. Then have the ability for interested users to move to more advance levels.
There are several cheap joysticks AV8R, etc., that will fill the bill for cheap entry hardware. The graphics enhancement need a progressive way to access better and better graphics, but there must be lower graphic requirements for newbs. Getting people involved with the COD is the secret to more users.
I have given away numerous copies of the IL2 sturmovik 1946, and I don't think there is a single one of those people that even have it on their HDD at this time. Why is that I ask myself?
There have been plenty of air combat games released and people do buy them, because they keep coming to market.
Facts are facts, and the COD with C.E.M. and other complexities aren't a best start for anyone. There are just too many things competing for people's free or leisure time. W.O.W - Everquest have captured huge market. Anyone planning a game of any kind should carefully strategize with those game in mind. IMO, they remind me of Pachinko. Redundant hacking or beating on enemies is boring in about 3 minutes.
There is something to say about rewards system that is sure, which is pretty low priority with IL2 and COD. Hitler believed in awards and accolades for sure, and had a zillion medals for anyone did well.
I've often though no one should enter the game except at lowest levels, and advance in rank and medals. There was quite abit of this with early release of IL2, but the way to acquire the advancement was hampered by the AI that were terrible and the stupid mission and campaign scenarios. It was better to just become a flight leaders to start with high rank, because following the AI probably meant you would never get anywhere.
So rewards system has to be carefully planned for maintaining user interest.
|
A reward system is not only necessary but only a piece of a fix.
First all we have to learn that there a ditance between the general public and the simulation games, then we can realize that the problem of this games is the own cornering in his complexity, may be due a fear to lose that simulation status scribed on some stone, some where ...
But not all simulation games are cornered in his self, there succesful simulation models out there, I will give a example, is not the best example but easy to understand to all
Gran Turismo :
This cars game have complex physics, tire degrading, dampers tweaking, engine tweaking, body tweaking ... we have to obtain licenses to play races, tweak the cars to win races, win events to access to more events ... and the list goes and goes ...
The complexity of this game can frustrate any player, forget it and go to play any Need For Speed version that are out now.
But it does not, there millions of players playing it, why ??
The key is :
Simulation + entertainment
Gran Turismo is not only a strict cars simulation game, it is a strict simulation game but also is pure entertainment.
It takes any inexperienced player and brings it between cottons, trough nice music and menus, to the most demanding simulation, the player progress his self without lose motivation trough the incentivation and stimulation .
Back to PC Simulation :
If we make a raw simulator it will be bearable for experienced players only, making only niches audience, because if we throw a usual player to raw simulation without the knowledge and motivation then he will burn and crash without known how and why, and without motivation to try it again.
We should not forget that after all we have a game in our hands.
This basic words are ignored for simulation titles and at same time, in his stubborn, are not able to understand why they have a niche audience.
It is not enough with make a simulation, because betwen the player and the simulation you should make a properly interface too.
A entertaining interface that through amusing brings to the player the knowledge and show the excelence of your simulation.
Some PC simulation games are aware of this problem and they started to work seriously on interface designs, you can see a example of this in PC simulation with Project C.A.R.S (Community Assisted Racing Simulation) :
You can see a really worked and pretty 3D interface, easy and clean, guess that with nice music ...
But back to WWII here a example of interface, although the game is an arcade Wings of Prey have a amusing menus interface with video background and outstanding music :
All this showroom is pure entertainment and stimulates the player to navigate through the menus, missions, setups and briefings.
Back to CLOD :
CLOD was lauched in a rush so the user interface is not complete but even if is working is nothing but a disordered´s lack of interactive stimulation.
A good interface for CLOD could be a mix of video background for main menus and 3D where see our plane for setups and briefings, also properly mission intro and properly end mission options as replay and camera options, all with nice music
We should understand that this is very important for the succes of a simulation game, the level of complexity of a game should be supported by interface.
else = fail
Sry for the text wall, greets.