TBS truly dead now?

[monolith94]

too bad you're wrong.

[Skanky Burns]

With regards to producing future TBS games, Civ 3 is a success as it brought in more money than it cost to produce. Compared to its predecessors though, I spent more years playing Civ 1 than I did weeks playing Civ 3.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by monolith94
too bad you're wrong.

I don't think it's good either. Jeez, attacked from all sides for some decidedly reasonable posts I am perfectly willing to back up if anyone is going to come up with arguments, instead of just posting empty rubbish.

[Jamski]

Well I would love to argue with you Spikie, because I think Civ3 is actually a better game than its predecessors. HOWEVER - I must admit that in the last two months the CD's not even come out of the box, and before then I didn't play for about 3 months. Actually I've not taked SMAC out of the CD drive for about 5 weeks, apart from a quick game of CtP2. So, what I'm saying is that Civ3 has failed to be as compelling as its predecessors - the same as Spikie.

-Jam

[DrSpike]

Fair enough WoA.

For me though the reason Civ3 is not as compelling as Civ2 is that the game was neutered, and as such I do not consider it a better game. People rave about the AI, but it's not that much better when you remove the effect dumbing down the game has.

Now I spent ages defending Civ3 in the Civ2 forums to people who would not even play a game, because in all fairness I have played many many worse TBS games than Civ3. But the longevity is not there for many gamers, because the game is inherently less versatile IMO.

And if I had to have a stab at why that is, I'd blame the growing number of Sunday gamers........but that seems to annoy people, so I wont.

[Harry Seldon]

There always seem to be TBS droughts. They'll fire up development again sometime and we'll all be there to ooh and aah and throw our money down on the latest and greatest. Even bad TBS sells a decent number of copies, if not what was expected.

[St Leo]

Re: TBS truly dead now?

Originally posted by Anun Ik Oba
With Brian Reynolds making CIVish RTS games, and the steady stream of crapware spawning from TBS developers, is it finally safe to say that Turn Based Strategy is 'nostalgia gaming'?

I think they've simply lost the art of creating the TBS game.

What are you smoking? Last year we had (the admittedly botched but very beautiful) Age of Wonders 2 and the excellent Disciples II. This year, the Disciples II expansion pack has just come out and Warlords IV will be out by Christmas.

Yes, we are a bit overdue for an original TBS.

[Urban Ranger]

Disciples II sucks worse than the original, which sucks dead donkey behinds

AoW II isn't as good as the original, either.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by DrSpike
Hey hey hey...........I said "failure of Civ3 and MOO3 to be as compelling as their predecessors" which is a long way from just "failure".

I'd say MoO 3 is a huge failure. It upsets the old timers and confuses the newcomers.

As for Civ 3, as far as I see, it made some small steps in the right direction, namely to move away from a city-centric game to a nation-centric game. But it still lags behind other efforts such as Clash of Civilizations in this area.

To me, I rate Civ 2 below that of the original. The first one was groundbreaking, the second one, merely more of the same.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Apocalypse
Studies show it isn't economically feasible as real time.

Wtf does that mean?

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

To me, I rate Civ 2 below that of the original. The first one was groundbreaking, the second one, merely more of the same.

Well it depends how much you played them I guess...............Civ2 made largely balance changes that the casual gamer may think irrelevant tweaks, but they were good balance changes.

Also I played Civ1 on my Amiga so I was more than happy to buy a prettier and better version of the game I already played.

If Civ3 was to Civ2 as Civ2 was to Civ1 I'd be happier.

[Jamski]

...and Warlords IV will be out by Christmas.

But, as a realist, it won't be as good as Warlords 2, will it? Sure it will look nice, new races, new magic... but...

Well, we'll see, but I bet it doesn't have the one more turn factor anymore.

-Jam

[lord of the mark]

everyone here seems to be thinking typical TBS - Civ, Moo, smac vs typical multiplayer oriented RTS.

I tend to be interested in thoughtful games, regardless of the technical genre. As long as there are games that seriously address interesting subhects, and i can pause them to think and strategize, and can either give enough orders while paused, or set speed slow enough so that click speed is not crucial in SP, Im happy.

I admit that due to my aged PC, I havent played many of the games Im about to enthuse about, but let me discuss some anyway.

SMG/SMA - technically an RTS(or RTT?), yet a serious thoughtful, treatment of history with almost grognard level accuracy. Engine applied to Napoleonic period.

Citybuilders - both Maxis style - latest release is Simcity4 - and Impressions style - latest is a chinese theme - allows deep play, history, interesting issues, etc, although technically in real time.

Total war series - Started with Shogun TW, a highly accurate (IIUC) RT military game, with a TB strategic wrapper. With Medieval TW the TB strategic wrapper got deeper and more important. Series to continue with Rome:TW.

Europa Univeralis : TEchnically RT, but pausible and variable speed, most historically accurate empire builders yet. Series has gone to EU2, HOI, and soon Crusader Kings and Victoria.

1602 AD - slow paced, peaceful citybuilder/RTS. 1503 now out.

Combat Mission - Simultaneus turn Grognard war game, has helped revive war game genre, several incarnations.


And now RoN - from all accounts has pushed "RTS" further towards TBS like depth than previous "RTS" endeavours - also pausible and variable speed - and TB strategic wrapper (albeit rather thin, IIUC)


So what i see is a future where while classic Civ style TBS may move in the direction of a niche genre (though still probably a much bigger niche then wargames) there continues to be plenty of interesting strategy games for those of us not into warcraft clones.

[Apocalypse]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Wtf does that mean?

Turn based games don't typically bring in as much money...

[Frogman]

I don't think its dead. AoW2 is coming out with an expansion that should fix the major problems and hopefully give a decent editor.

Dominions is getting some good chatter on its gameplay even with poor graphics and a clumsy interface. Dominions II will improve the graphics and the interface but should leave the great gameplay. Its the first game I've seen that is specially designed for pbem.

The new patch for MOO3 seems to fix the biggest problems and there will likely be one more patch. Can't say that MOO3 wasn't a collosal disappointment for everyone though. When you have to resort to paying people to take the game, thats as big a flop as you can have.