MarkShot wrote:Well, there are enough games out there now for this question to be asked and discussed (or more accurately a series of questions). I will limit this just to games based on the AGE engine (thus, GI and WWI are excluded). So, we are talking about: BOA, AACW, NCP, and WIA.
I know many people here are historians and are particularly attached to certain epoques. However, for my question if you will, can we focus on the game mechanics, scope, and play.
(1) Which of AGEOD's games has greatest replay value? Why?
(2) Which of AGEOD's games has the most satisfying game play? Why?
(3) Which of AGEOD's games is the most intuitive to learn? Why?
(4) Which of AGEOD's game broke the most new ground? Why?
(5) Seeing the evolution from BOA through WIA, are you happy with the direction which has been taken in evolving the AGE game engine? Why?
(6) It is part of AGEOD's business strategy that each new game not only refines existing features, but essentially adds new modules (completely expanded scope) to the engine's capabilities. Putting aside periods and theaters, how would you like to see AGE evolve in the future?
(7) AGE was initially born as primarily a grand scale warfare engine. The evolution has been to go beyond warfare into many other realms. Where do your interests primarily lie? Is it with warfare? Is it with the challenges of national growth, leadership, and the international stage (with warfare as just a singe option)? Or is there something else?
(8) For those who have followed AGEOD's growth over the last few years and purchased the full spectrum of games is there anything else which you would like tell us about where we are going that you think we should know?
Feel free to answer any or all of the above. Please simply be clear as to what your response pertains to.
Thank you very much for your business, reflection, and time.
Let me add also my thoughts to this very intersting thread.
Regarding the qustions of Mark:
1. AACW. The grand campaign the AI and the several improvements since the begining make this a high replayable game
2. AACW. To me at least... . But let me say that this answer is very biased. I am definitely not a wargamer, my interests in PC gaming revolve around grand strategy and RPG games. But I am also a ACW nut , so AACW had and has a particular appeal in my heart What I like most about AACW? The Grand campaign. The very satisfying AI. The map and overall artists work. The way we can recognize real generals in the ones we have in the game. The way, at least to me, that the game plays intuitively: meaning, although it pays to know the rules, I allways felt, since day one, that if I play with common sense and using history lessons, I could very much forget about the rules and concentrate in the fun. And this is a great, great quality in AACW. What could be better: naval AI; even better UI. And battle reports and unit history.
3. Having started with AACW, the rest is easy (and sadly a bit unsatifying - see point 5). And I truely believe AACW is VERY intuitive
4. AACW, definitely
5. Not really. AACW shines. BOA was OC inovative, and is an easy game to play, but is too much of a wargame to my taste. NCP was probably a sad failure, and I still do not understand exactly why. The lack of a grand campaign, political and economic option are surely a reason. The relative lack of support for this game was also definitely a factor. Unfortunate problems with the community also played a role. WIA ?. Sorry, Lodilefty et al, but I feel that it is really BOA2, with more bells and whistles (again, IMHO). I just bought it to support AGEOD. Forgive me and do not flame me, but I still do fail to grasp the wisdom to have invested time and effort in that game. American war of independence et al is not, I think, a big topic of interest for wargamers and strategy gamers in general. Was AGEOD banking on the USA market ? Or just catering to a small but very vocal fanbase of BOA ??. So, the evolution from AACW, with 2 games with good quality but without nothing truley innovative, and without grand campaigns, REAL political and economical options, etc, was not very fortunate, IMHO.
6. Mixed feelings about this question. Definitely there was an evolution in some/many aspects of the engine, many of which were even incorporated in AACW, for which I am definitely grateful . But I am expecting the real evolution in VGN.
7. Definitely more grand strategy elements. BUT I would also very much like an introduction of a tactical aspect to the battles, as I have stated countless times, in these last 2 years
8. Mixed feelings. I hope the best for AGEOD. I guess the interest base in the period of VGN is great. To me, besides some focus of interest - ACW, Franco-prussian war, WW1, the victorian period never appealled much to me. Where I would like AGEOD to thread in the future ? Definitely in NCP2, with a real grand campaign, etc. I believe the sales potential of the Napoleonic saga is huge. Next ? AACW2 . Next ? Medieval ages (specially the fall of Byzantium :coeurs , Ancient (Greek, Rome), and why not Fantasy grand strategy ??