Why wargamers are slowly killing computer wargames?

[Spharv2]

I wonder what the effect on sales would be for AGEod to quickly convert some of their latest titles to work on the new I-Pad?

I'm thinking if they got in real early before others did that maybe there might be a virgin market to take advantage of.

Considering the near complete absence of real wargames, and the general level of gaming on the IPad and IPhone, I would think there's probably a decent market for it. There are a few decent games out there, but for the most part, they're pretty bad.

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Franciscus]

I do not have an ipad but I do have an iphone. Multitasking is impossible in both, and probably will remain so, because in fact it is one of the fundamental principles of Apple's philosophy - avoid anything that might disturb the seamless functioning of the devices. So, no multi-tasking (to avoid conflicts and/or overload the CPU/Ram), no flash apps, only legit way to get apps via Apple's own appstore after Apple tested them and validated them, etc.
I very much doubt this approach will change.

Iphone just works and it's great. I guess ipad is the same. I very much doubt that, unless one buys an ipad thinking they are buying a cute laptop, most of the people that buy an iphone and/or ipad care a bit about multitasking as long as it works great in what it's supposed to do (and that probably is not playing complex wargames )

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[Franciscus]

Considering the popularity of gaming APs for cellphones, that's rather short sighted of Apple/Jobs, IMO. Of course, to Apple/Jobs, it might not matter as long as unit sales are huge, but I'm sure competitors will take advantage of the disadvantage when they release their own competing devices, eventually taking sales away from Apple/Jobs.

Do not underestimate Apple and Jobs. They are in fact, according to some, creating a different paradigm, that includes a not so "free" internet, more controlled applications, etc. It remains to be seen if it will be Apple that will be forced to change or rather the rest of the world.
I would not place my bets just yet...

[Dunhill_BKK]

Just a couple of points:

Charles S Roberts didn't turn over Avalon Hill to his creditors because he was becoming rich making wargames in his garage. Creating wargames is a passion and if you can get paid to do it, good on ya.

Wargamers, particulalry the grognard class, are a specific subclass of humanity prone to grumpiness and arguing about very minor things, such as rules. Don't be surprised if they also complain about other things, such as parting with a few extra silver pieces.

I don't mind paying a bit extra or buying games I might not play much from a favoured developer.

[gchristie]

Wargamers, particulalry the grognard class, are a specific subclass of humanity

That's Mr. Subset of Humanity to you, buster

Wouldst that I could be paid to play these games...in my garage or wherever

Regards.

[Chris Stavros]

I have to say the thread title is ironic.

Don Greenwood once said to me at a wargaming con back in the 80s that computers were killing wargaming (Greenwood was the main designer developer at Avalon Hill at the time).

Now some say we have come full circle.

[alexander seil]

Yeah this is a VERY frustrating reality. It points toward what the purpose of video games as a whole SHOULD BE. I like to learn from them, to interact with history (or historical fiction) and learn more about the period I'm playing.

I think many true strategy wargames also teach you about proper administration and decision making in tough situations that require a lot of thought. Most people today, especially young people (the main target of the video game industry) just aren't interested. It's very sad.

For instance, I've learned how some of the decisions I make running a country in EUIII can translate to real life understanding of how to properly run, maintain and expand a business. Balancing a budget, steady growth and consolidation of gains to achieve long term prosperity. The only thing missing (most times) is human competition.

Video games these days are seen as a "quick fix". And you're seeing more of it in the "wargames" that so many of the younger generation know about. The tride and true "C&C" RTS's out there like StarCraft...an incredibly popular successful game...but hardly a true game of strategy.

No, friends....it's all about the adrenaline rush; getting that fast twitch fix for an hour or so. It not only makes me weep for the strategy genre and the industry as a whole, but weep for we as a people. Learning, whether it be through books or through wargames...should always be embraced and attract interest. The fact that it doesn't....is very sad.

This whining, if I recollect (my memory is getting dodgy, unlike all these twitch-gaming youngsters, I'm of a ripe old age of 23! ), has been ongoing for a good 15 years now, yet there were more decent wargames released in the last 5 years than between 2005 and the invention of the computer, provided that you exclude TOAW.

Of course, people who whine like this wouldn't be able to deal with wargames being a success. It would take away their elitist pedestal, that they can stand on and spit on the StarCraft-playing plebs

It's also ironic that EUIII is being brought in as an example of something rare here, considering Paradox's explosive growth and positive mainstream coverage over the past decade.

My advice - instead of bemoaning the fall of wargames on Internet forums, go play some wargames!

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[alexander seil]

With all your vast wargaming experience acquired during your 23 years of existence, do you have any more words of enlightenment, Mr. Wargamer, Sir?

Yes. Next time, before you click "Submit Reply," give a thought to whether your post has any actual content

[Gray_Lensman]

deleted

[RELee]

Yes. Next time, before you click "Submit Reply," give a thought to whether your post has any actual content

What the ...

I've been cruising on these wargaming forums for 7 years now and I can proudly state that I've not added one iota of actual content to any internet conversation or argument.

I know most of you think you have contributed. But really, nothing said here or at PI has greatly influenced my life. It's all about the games.

[vonRocko]

edit

[Pat "Stonewall" Cleburne]

Wargaming isn't dieing, it's just a finite market. I have absolutely no data in front of me, but I'm willing to bet that in terms of sheer number of fans that it's bigger than ever. People have touched on some of the reasons why it's a hard financial environment for developers but that doesn't mean it's dieing.

If AGEOD is looking for new customers, I'd recommend some advertising. I would have never found AACW or AGEOD if I hadn't typed "American Civil War" into the Pirate Bay and downloaded the first thing that showed up. (Don't worry, I've since bought it legally) I'm no grognard though so I'm not really sure where a good place to advertise would be.

[Farseer]

<------ Mr Forum Necromancy General (I can't help I just joined the forums and find I missed all these interesting discussions when they were happening)

I have had this discussion with many of my wargaming friends over the years, but discussing paper version wargames, not computer wargames. I think much of the truth lies in the fact that people who grew up in the 60's to mid 80's lived in an entirely different world than people who grew up in the 90's and beyond. Wargames that took days to play and years to learn well were the norm, albeit not as commonplace as Monopoly or Scraps. Today, as has been mentioned above, people expect instant gratification which makes psychological sense. It's how we're wired. We just didn't have the tools 'back then' as we do today so we adopted the patience we needed to learn to appreciate the much greater, but slower, gratification of these kind of games.

Some people today still learn that patience for different reasons, but most don't. So we remain a rather limited part of the general populace. However, since gaming in general has increased ten fold (or hundred fold perhaps) since the computer and Internet revolution a few years ago, and still increasing mind you, of course also the wargaming community ride on that success in gaming. But relatively speaking we are still a small group and will, for as long as human psychology remains what it is, remain small.

It is, however, large enough for producers of these games to have a solid, and usually very loyal, market of buyers of their products. At least for a few good producers of wargames such as the ones mentioned repeatedly in previous posts in this thread.

No... if they don't make much money I think it is because of two major factors:
1: The genre work against itself. What I mean is, these games last so long, that we who buy them don't need to buy new games very often. Buy one and it may serve you for years. Buy an action game and three weeks later you're looking for a new game. Also, the kind of people who enjoy these games are the patient ones. Patient people don't play a game for a few hours and then need a new one. ADHD isn't well represented in our ranks.

2: Piracy. Most games find their ways to the piracy market. There are groups who systematically crack every game that's released. This hurt any genre, but perhaps even more small companies producing games for a more limited playerbase.

I don't think wargaming is dying, but if it is its not because of lack of wargamers, but because of the nature of the games and gamers itself and the money leak that piracy creates, making it too unprofitable to make the games itself.

Hopefully us patient wargamers are also wiser and more loyal than the average action game player and hence pay for our games. I know I do.

[Anguille]

The genre work against itself. What I mean is, these games last so long, that we who buy them don't need to buy new games very often. Buy one and it may serve you for years. Buy an action game and three weeks later you're looking for a new game. Also, the kind of people who enjoy these games are the patient ones. Patient people don't play a game for a few hours and then need a new one. ADHD isn't well represented in our ranks.

You have a very valid point. I've gotten myself to that point...i have so many games that i have still barely played that i don't really look forward to any new games now. I still play games released 17 years ago....

I will most likely limit my purchase in 2011 to Armada 2526's expansion and Pride of Nations (with more than 1'000 turns, that's a game for a lifetime).

[Christophe.Barot]

About you point 2: Releasing games about obscure periods is risky, of course. Many of us (me included) are not number-crunchers or history professors. Many are a bit romantic, and like to relive famous passages of world history and maybe try to rewrite them. That's one of the reasons why, for instance AACW will always be more sucessful that RoP, even in Europe.

that may be, but is a matter of taste and center of interests

i am personally passionated by some "obscure" subjects like 7th year war and franco prussian war, and conversely have a comparatively lower (way lower) interst for ACW - not that i'm telling it's not an interesting subject - it definitely is (and i could prove it is) just it is less my cup of tea, less references, less appeal i don't have the feeling of the terrain (couldn't situate chickamauga or gettysburgb precisely on a map without looking my atlas or wikipedia, know only great lines, don't intuitively feel the tactics - conversely, give me a map of central europe, will immediately locate froeschwiller, konigraetz, breslau or riga, almost with eyes closed

another example is I'm way more informed and interested about middle ages than antiquity - sure I heard of cannes and double envelopment, but teutonic knights agaibnst lithuanians at tannenberg or bouvines has definitely more appeal to me (of course, I LOVE barbarian invasions, but you know, you're already entering early lmiddle ages)

so i'll buy nearly any wargame on my favourite rare subjects, and be very picky about other themes - but I'm subject driven - and a rare bird about subjects preferred (i still like wwii and napoleon, of course, but louis XIV, peter the great or bismarck have as much appeal for me)

I suspect most people are subject driven - still, i'll probably will be more likely to give a try to a subject outside of my usual preferences scope if produced by a good known firm like ageod (or if i know the designer , here too) than if unknown quantity - still, wandering out of my intersts is rare for me - I have little time, so ptrefer to concentrate on what has real STRONG appeal for me

but it's just me

[Carrington]

I'd mention the stability of the Ageod (and, for that matter, the SSG) engine as a very positive development -- these kind of modular systems allow gamers and developers to explore a range of interesting historical scenarios without having to reinvent the wheel.

[TheDoctorKing]

<------ Mr Forum Necromancy General (I can't help I just joined the forums and find I missed all these interesting discussions when they were happening)

No problem. There's almost always more to say about any subject

2: Piracy. Most games find their ways to the piracy market. There are groups who systematically crack every game that's released. This hurt any genre, but perhaps even more small companies producing games for a more limited playerbase.

Well the Phils would know better than I but I get the impression that these sorts of games don't get cracked as much as the shooters. Those of us with this particular sort of interest aren't going to be a good market for hackers. We actually want to support the developers because we know that without them there is no feeding our addiction!