What WWII games really need right now...

[Jovan]

... is this. My thoughts on a very simple thing that would freshen up the subgenre of World War II video games. Warning, some caustic language.

Thoughts? Flames?

 

[Flieger]

I don't game that much and when I do it's mostly IL-2/Forgotten battles flight simulator. In this game the Luftwaffe get equal, if not more, focus. [huh]

/F

 

[Badluck Brody]

Why not!!

I have always given credit to a man willing to fight for what he believes in... Even if he is on the other side! I also couldn't imagine seeing the landing force at D-Day comming straight at you.... probably how they felt on day one when D-Shield turned to D-Storm...There's also a Russian front which could be created, and why not a Japanese... Didn't they touch on the two sides in Flags of Our Fathers???

 

[Jovan]

Indeed. I had some fun playing as Russians in the Call of Duty games, but I really would like to play as an average German, Japanese, or Italian soldier. I find it fascinating, because they were basically fighting out of being drafted or, like us, for patriotism. I really doubt they knew that Hitler was sending countless "undesirables" to their deaths.

 

[Vladimir Berkov]

I am not sure what WWII games really need right now, all I know is that they really DON'T need any more games about US paratroopers or D-Day.

 

[Jovan]

Medal of Honor: Airborne looks pretty fun, despite that. You can actually aim your landing instead of sitting through a scripted sequence.

 

[Twitch]

Ah but you see that is the essence of all video games- all but a handfull are worth playing a year later.

I used to revied combat games for combatsim.com and write historical articles for them. I've run scombat simulations since 1988 om my 286 with "Their Finest Hour" and hard on its heels Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe. All later sims and RTS games were always lacking something according the the hard core gamer. True to a great degree but companies don't produce for a small spectrum of the gaming population. They do it for a broad audience which equals $$

Most of the companies are driven by WalMart. That's right. How? Well if they did want to produce a superb, sim that hard core games would like they'd cost more. More than the $50 maximum WalMart puts on its games. Yep a retailer is dictating indirectly the quality of video combat simulation you get. Crappy huh?

The industry is such that only a few times have Part 2 or subsequently logical add-on games happened. Well over a decade ago I said there should be a completely open air combat sim that grows and encompasses old aircraft and objects along with new ones. They did it with add-on discs in Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe where a new, added plane brought with it additional missions yet integrated into the gameplay.

Along the years all producers have done is basically create objects to the degree that they took advantage of growing video quality. A sim in 4-6 months would run stunted and the visuals would look lousey on your 1 year old PC. There was a constant demand for new hardware every six months for many years!!. You never had enough hardware for the latest combat sim.

And most producers contracted to do a title and were on to something else after that contract. You'd rarely had fix it patches in the old days but as things grew more complex it was the core problem in the gaming world to have the latests patch in hopes that everything was addressed that didn't work right in the original because they hurriedly finished the junkware due to release dates coming.

The game industry is as stupid as it is greedy. They announce when a game will be released long before it is actually possible and then die to throw out some hunk of dung so the date is not passed. And most dates? Hey Nov. or Dec. each year. The remainder of the year is for sorting out the bugs of the junk they hustled during Christmas.

Producers and production teams are split up and quickly on to the next project and spend little time fixing or enhancing past titles.

The fact that a RTS-real time strategy or combat simulation looks good visually means nothing. I used to say "there's a lot more to a good sim than nice clouds."

What is paramount is immersion! The story and game premise must be plausible and workable. Sure there has to be levels of expertise difficulty. A too easy game and you're done with it in a month. One too hard and people give up and toss it aside. Sound effects, visual graphics and complexity are not substitutes for immerse-ability.

A good one challenges you and makes your think about the next encounter when you're at work or just not at your PC or X-box. And when you're involved you lose track of time and space for the sake of the experience.

A zillion folks are now judging games and sims in magazines and online with basically subjective guidelines. You see ratings like " 5 out of 5!" or "8 out of 10!" The fact is that there never has been grade-able criteria that are constant other than perhaps the quality level of sound and graphics. How do you grade the "realism" of a simulation? What ingredients must be present in every game/sim and how are these qualities uniformly recognized and graded with each title.

The type of game and simulation have different formulas that make them fun. A combat flight sim has some different features that need to be present over a submarine sim or a "through the eyes of a G.I." sim.
It has to be right or it's a dud.

As sims came along many things were longed for. Longed for for years until companies did them. Is it too much to ask that the Germans or Japanese win the war if the player can even choose to play as them? This is a long festering gripe. You can end the war with the highest score with your platoon or whatever and end up as "retired."

But when a new scenario is introduced what happens? 8 games companies produce the same thing. There might be people longing for a Korean War setting but 8 companies all produce post D-Day western France ground combat or whatnot.

One of the reasons I loved the 1989 Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe was because SWOTL let the Germans win. It had features beyond 1st person air combat where you could play to improve war industry and dispersal of same.

And truly the hallmark of a great combat game is its following through ease of modifications. If the files of a game can be modified it gives it years of extra life. Then 3rd persons can create add-ons, new missions and more.
Fansites tell the tale too. Any long-lived game/sim has a place where its followers go to talk and upload/downkoad files.

Until game companies shake the influence of retailers' limits and delve into some newr and more esoteric areas you're gonna get the same conglomerate bla-bla-bla titles.

If I can look back 20 years and truthfully say one of the best aircombat sims for immersion and multitude of features and unique add-ons happened in 1989 and since I can count on one hand those you'd consider excellent and be playing 30 days after you bought them, then something is wrong.

 

[MrBern]

If you like the Eastern Front, you could check out Red Orchestra

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Orchestra:_Combined_Arms

http://www.redorchestragame.com/

 

[jake431]

Personally, I'd like to see a good pacific strategy game. First person shooters are great, but I'd like to see some leading battle type games that take advantage of the power of today's computers and graphics. Rather than have to learn how to shoot this or fly that, I'd rather try new tactics, fight battles never fought, manage supply chains, improvise battle plans to stave off defeat and so on.

-Jake

 

[Jovan]

Agreed, Jake.

MrBern: I played the free weekend when it was on Steam, and it wasn't bad. I may wait for the price to go down a bit though. Overall, I'd say it's great for an indie game.* The graphics are competent, the controls are fairly intuitive, and they have a clear aim of what they're trying to do which isn't quite simulation (otherwise there would be dedicated tank crews and no respawning) but not quite Battlefield 1942 either.

*Note that you wouldn't say that about any indie film that got exposure... they actually tend to be better than most big budget movies.

 

[mineral]

Personally, I'd like to see a good pacific strategy game. First person shooters are great, but I'd like to see some leading battle type games that take advantage of the power of today's computers and graphics. Rather than have to learn how to shoot this or fly that, I'd rather try new tactics, fight battles never fought, manage supply chains, improvise battle plans to stave off defeat and so on.

-Jake

Jake, it's not exactly Pacific only (or for that matter, WWII only) and it definitely doesn't have good graphics, but have you ever tried The Operational Art of War? For its scope I don't think it has been rivaled, and if you want a cerebral challenge then it would be your game.

 

[ukali1066]

I agree, the WW2 US Airborne has been done to death gamewise....

How about a British SAS game that starts in the deserts of WW2 and progresses through the 20th/21st century up to today...?

 

[Twitch]

Game companies are like TV networks- when there's a hint of popularity of a certain show everyone else copies them and airs their own version. No originality. No bold lead. There were times in the past couple decades when I was involved in combat sims where 4 of the top-named companies put out air combat sims basically producing the same game- air combat 1943-45 Europe. The year before , for example, everyone had a modern-day sim with F-16s featured. And so it went.

This when there were holes in list of scenarios that never existed but the companies were seemingly afraid to exploit unless in unison. By God when the Battle of Britain concept seemed good several were relased within 3-4 months of one another.

They went years without good scenarios for- North Africa, Mediterranean, Eastern Front, WW I, Korea, and Vietnam. And this is just combat flight sims- 1st person cockpit position. It took a long time for 1st person point of view combat soldiers in a historic scenario. It was monsters and aliens for years.

RTS- Real Time Strategy came along haltingly. Most were pretty boring but a few you could call RTT- Real Time Tatics were more fun, moving faster.

There is no reason a game of any type- combat flight sim, 1st person squad level combat, armor or naval warfare could not combine the additional strategy aspects that you could play or turn off as you wish. It would expand the life of the game and stimulate 3rd person add-ons which keep
games alive for years after most average ones have died.

Part of the problem goes back to WalMart dictating the priceline of video games and the producers following because they control such a huge percentage of game sales.

It this going to be another area we lose control of to the Chinese because they could produce a more complex game for WalMart's $50 maximum?:rage:

 

[twobarbreak]

great article...

I know a Bit about this subject being the General and co-founder of one of the most popular Call of Duty Clans, 13 clan. which not only had public servers with all sorts of various settings, and game plays, but also competed in CAL league as well as Team warfare League.

The Original Call of Duty was amazing when it came out, unfortunately the makers did not share the same interest in supporting the gamers that dedicated so much time playing the game. the expansion pack United Offensive was a horrible Idea , and would of done better as a full release.

Then came COD2 , the long awaited game...only to find out it was specially made for console, and only ported over to PC practically as an after thought.

as a modder and scripter I had to seriously tweak the game, to make it play anything like the original, even then it was a dying battle to have any success as the Original Call of Duty.

over the years all sorts of mods came out, which no doubt continued the life's of all these series.

German Front Mod was pretty cool, and certainly added some fun, but it got boring quick having only their settings, and in order to use the maps made for that Mod , we had to hack their mod and take them out...which actually pissed off some of their mappers.

Merciless Mod also was an amazing addition to the game,having medics and realistic Blood etc..however the download was so big, having any other mod or custom maps really hindered the servers.

Thanks, to our British friends at Afterhourz they made Barbarossa along with all the Tanks,troop transports etc...and even a new game type call Conquest, which was an amazing shot in the arm. Nothing could have been better then playing a map with 60 plus players!

I personally scripted Planes into the game for these Huge Maps, not only to carry troops and drop them behind enemy Lines, but also to drop Bombs, however the Portals in these maps made it difficult at best.

I also released other modifications, such as the spectator music mod, which was downloaded by thousands, and honestly is what really help launch the popularity of our clan and our servers (you get all that free advertising when releasing a public mod or map).

along with a team of modders,mappers and script writers we were in the middle of a full conversion Mod called "the winter war" and we actually got very far, when out came cod3. The steam ran out, and so we just released the Maps and said forget it...

Only after all this time passed did they finally release a patch which added more memory so servers wouldnt crash, (servers that had too many custom made maps,mods etc...)

so once again, call of duty was left dead.

when BF2 came out it stole a handful of our Clan Members, simply looking for good gameplay, and not as concerned about WW2.

the dedicated WW2 players waited for something as good as the original COD.

But all failed, Red Orchestra,Brothers in Arms,New Medal of Honor, all were miserable attempts...

I've since stopped Playing and just concern my self on being the Admin, to make sure it's running, however The Clan has started Dabbling in COD4, Modern Warfare..gawd, what a disappointment it was to hear they went modern.So Now I await Jury's (my clan) decision on how great the game play really is and if we go Modern as well.

oh well....

 

[Twitch]

Twobar- your additions simply cement the fact that the entertainment software corporations couldn't find their butts with both hands.

All the things you mention are so typical and what's worse have happened years before with other titles in other genres!

Only very occassionally a company offers any tangible support or additions 3 months after release but by then the new title has usually died and people have moved on. When a truly great title comes along the company doesn't even realize it and anything they do to support it is in retrospect. They're surprised if anyone is still playing in 3 months.

Before a company probably relased a major title a year and a couple lesser ones. They supported it and released not only patches to fix things they missed but actually added features.

Now with so many mergers and generally big money flying around every 3 months a major game comes from each company and is soon forgotten. Patches are hurried out and only address the myriad problems with the initial version.

And sometimes the design teams have even sheepishly apologized to me at E3 that the game engine being used was 2-3 years old and the new title had many compromises they wish weren't there. Corporate at work again squeezing only last gasp from tired code.

We are all better to settle on a favorie few old titles and keep in contact with the fansites and those who make mods for them. For it really is a gamble to throw out money for a new title and have it suck big time.

 

[twobarbreak]

I couldnt agree more, the patches released for the original cod were horrible, when they finally fixed the anti Bunny Hop patch it jacked up remote download, by the time 1.5 came around around a year later, that had actually gone back in time causing more headaches then anything else. 1.4 for those that care was about as good as they could get it, and still is the best for multiplayer.

also releasing punkbuster months after the release is just stupid. why give cheaters those few months to give us admins the headache of banning players?

cod2 was supposed to be a new engine, but what a joke, all it was quake again however they changed the image files as well as the pk3's to formats only infinity ward had the key to. thanks to good hackers it was figured out and server admins could again change skins,game play functions etc...
Not to mention, they took away the arm model, that allows you to run around with a nade, and bash people over the head. The excuse was they wanted to reserve that model for holding another weapon, who would of around with a B.A.R and a thompson? maybe superman...

in COD2 the PPSH was the god weapon, thats all you needed to dominate those dinky maps. so i changed it, i increased the recoil like crazy and added a muzzle flash that was blinding...ah yea, realism. hehehe

and how about cod2 giving every side a pump shotgun? I Immediately removed that from the game, Infinity Ward obviously thought running and gunning was what everyone wanted, boy how wrong they were...

over and over players,modders,admins harped on the infinity ward forums, with not just complaints but also easy solutions by very reputable and knowledgeable people, only to be shrugged off.

as someone who scripts like crazy, i was blown away by horrible and messy job of cod2. Its as if they didnt care or took any pride in their writing. Parts of the game that they never finished, such as the heavy breathing and bleed out when being shot, was never finnished, however as it seems they just gave up and left all the script in the game, for some game hackers to discover and eventually fix to get it working properly..hahaha

as for cod3, i don't know,nor i or the clan ever touched it...we've been waiting for a new game to come out that comes close to the original game play of cod.

now like i said, cod4 is out and they went modern. My players enjoy it and say it's great.

nothing beats a good playing FPS,although the big multiplayer maps are crazy , when it come to competitions with your clan on teamspeak , nothing beats good players suppressing,flanking and killing!

 

[Twitch]

You really know a game is a piece of crap when it won't even install.lol I loved this RTS game called Commandos 2. When the eagerly awaited Commandos 3 came out it was done by different people and not at all playable.

The worst thing was that most people couldn't even install it! It would stick and screw up so that you couldn't retry. You had to follow explicit instructions on editting your registry to remove a bunch of enteies. As you can imagine a lot of folks aren't up to that.

Then when you finally did get it installed it was so full of bugs you needed Raid.lol

And this is an example of a major company releasing a $50 piece of crap which unfortunately is not a singular event.

 

[twobarbreak]

You really know a game is a piece of crap when it won't even install.lol I loved this RTS game called Commandos 2. When the eagerly awaited Commandos 3 came out it was done by different people and not at all playable.

The worst thing was that most people couldn't even install it! It would stick and screw up so that you couldn't retry. You had to follow explicit instructions on editting your registry to remove a bunch of enteies. As you can imagine a lot of folks aren't up to that.

Then when you finally did get it installed it was so full of bugs you needed Raid.lol

And this is an example of a major company releasing a $50 piece of crap which unfortunately is not a singular event.

They never got my money, but i feel your pain. Whats really sad, is that it's really easy to find game testers, if not a hired team, to put the beta up and have Volunteers play it, and search for glitches...

It reminds me of the whole in the Arnheim map in cod2 on it's release! players falling through an invisible hole and going under the map, only to look up and start shooting everyone...thanks infinity ward! (and thats not the only map with Holes on release!)

well, i got word last night cod4 single player mission is incredible...both in game play as well as graphics.

Great for all the FPS gamers out there....however, so sad for us into WW2.

 

[A.R. McVintage]

I would love to see a game set in Korea, a terribly overlooked war. Though, for that matter, I'd like a CoD set in the pacific during WWII.

It seems like every WWII shooter is Europe, most plane games are Europe, and rarely there comes a tactical or plane game dealing with the Pacific, but not really any shooters (or at least good ones). I can see part of the reason being that the Japanese aren't likely to program games where you go about killing them, but there are studios all over the US and Canada that could step up to the plate...though maybe they're afraid of not having a market with the Japanese not wanting to buy games where they kill themselves. (This point may only be valid bsed on how many of the CoD/Medal of Honor type games actually sell in Asia compared to the rest of the world).

I think another problem is that the CoD series has done a decent job of making you feel like part of a team going in and fighting in WWII. The Medal of Honor series starts to feel incredibly inauthentic due to the fact that there is so little play where you're part of a squad and so much where you Sergeant Rock-style blast your way through missions nearly single handedly--they play like Wolfenstein but without the bonus of nifty Nazi occult dabblings and end up somewhere in the middle. Too super-soldier to be real, but not enough Nazi supernaturalness to be pulpy.

 

[Jovan]

COD3 was a console only release.