|
By
Mark Baldwin
Gamasutra
CGDC Roundtable Report, April 1997
|
|
 Features
Whither
(or Wither) War Games
The purpose
of this roundtable was to discuss the direction of computer war games
in the changing world of computer games. Are they dying or evolving?
One of the first questions brought up is what defines as computer war
game. Two primary characteristics seemed to be important. The first was
that it involves the conflict of at least two active decision-makers,
either human or an artificial opponent. These separated out the war game
from the puzzle game, in which there is only one active decision-maker
and normally requires a fixed solution. The second characteristic is the
modeling of a 'war type' conflict. This distinguishes the war game from
the larger category of strategic game.
Tied to the comparison of puzzle vs war game was a discussion of the new
crop of 'real time' war games. Many felt that these games were more puzzles
than war games at least in the single player mode. One reason for this
'feeling' of puzzle in such games was ascribed to the failure of the artificial
player (or artificial intelligence). However, it was felt that the industry
was finally recognizing the need for good AI in games and resources were
being invested to solve this problem.
The types of successful war games in the market were examined. Obviously,
the simplified real time game as exemplified with Command and Conquer
and Warcraft. But the more complex and turn based games such as Steel
Pathers or Talon Soft's Battleground series shows that the market is doing
quite well.
The market and it's nature was examined with respect to war games. Currently,
there is a high demand for the 'real time' simple war game. It was felt
that this didn't represent a deterioration of the market but instead an
influx from the arcade market. The demand for any type of war game from
this market was seen as an evolution of the audience, and the more complex
and rich war games should eventually be appealing to this maturing market.
In the same way, the industry is learning to improve the war game and
therefore it too is maturing. Basic characteristics such as simplicity,
good interface, flash and a distinct relationship between cause and effect
are critical components for such games. Success based on good design is
proving valuable.
In conclusion, it was felt that both from the product point of view and
the enthusiast point of view, there are many encouraging signs for computer
war games. We can expect improvement in the quality and quantity of war
games of all types in the years to come.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
