Tom Clancy's EndWar

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

ZOMG! Actually innovative RTS? Can it be?

http://www.gamespot.com/xbox360/action/tomclancysendwar/news.html?sid=6171351&tag=topslot;title;3&om_act=convert&om_clk=topslot


designer Michael de Plater, one of the key designers behind the popular Total War games

Do we know of this person in the TW context? What has he done for the TW series? This could be very interesting.

[Kekvit Irae]

Do we know of this person in the TW context? What has he done for the TW series? This could be very interesting.

http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,2773/

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

So, he worked on both Medieval (1) and Spartan TWr. Spotty track record. :laugh4: Thanks for the link, Kek.

I'm definitely going to keep an eye on EndWar...

[Lorenzo_H]

I really need an Xbox 360...

[Rodion Romanovich]

meh, console only? ~:(

[Bob the Insane]

meh, console only? ~:(

Bottom of the article:

"Thankfully, it's coming to the PC, Xbox 360, and PlayStation 3"

[Lorenzo_H]

Bottom of the article:

"Thankfully, it's coming to the PC, Xbox 360, and PlayStation 3"
huh? I missed that, and on IGN and gamespot I couldn't find anything to suggest it was on PC as well. Great though!

I am definitely going for this one if it does come out for the PC. Spring 2008 is a long way off though.

[Crazed Rabbit]

De Plater: Our greatest challenge was to come up with a strategy game that overcomes the perceived limitations of consoles vs. PCs that also meets the expectations of an audience that is traditionally not the core audience for this type of genre.

Therefore Tom Clancy's EndWar was designed from day one as a console specific game. We didn't optimize it or port it; we designed it from the ground up for consoles.

Meh.

CR

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

I missed that. :no:

[screwtype]

ZOMG! Actually innovative RTS? Can it be?

As it happens, I was listening to a long interview of one of the founding fathers of Atari a couple of days ago (who went on to found Activision, forget his name).

He said there is no longer innovation in the computer gaming industry because games have become so expensive to make. Once upon a time two or three guys working together could program a game in a few weeks, so you could afford to take risks. But today, dozens of programmers spend a total of several man-years to put together a game, and with such high costs, they can't afford to risk failure so they stick to tried and true formulas, sequels and so on.

My own opinion is that game companies will continue to churn out the same old garbage as long as people keep buying - so people should stop buying. Unfortunately, it's kind of hard to persuade people to do this...

[Bijo]

As it happens, I was listening to a long interview of one of the founding fathers of Atari a couple of days ago (who went on to found Activision, forget his name).

He said there is no longer innovation in the computer gaming industry because games have become so expensive to make. Once upon a time two or three guys working together could program a game in a few weeks, so you could afford to take risks. But today, dozens of programmers spend a total of several man-years to put together a game, and with such high costs, they can't afford to risk failure so they stick to tried and true formulas, sequels and so on.

My own opinion is that game companies will continue to churn out the same old garbage as long as people keep buying - so people should stop buying. Unfortunately, it's kind of hard to persuade people to do this...
Sounds logical.


-


What I read in that article vaguely, remotely, and partially describes an idea I had a couple months ago for "an improved Company of Heroes".
Hmmm, interesting article but not interesting enough to make me go "Oooooo."

[darkragnar]

As it happens, I was listening to a long interview of one of the founding fathers of Atari a couple of days ago (who went on to found Activision, forget his name).

He said there is no longer innovation in the computer gaming industry because games have become so expensive to make. Once upon a time two or three guys working together could program a game in a few weeks, so you could afford to take risks. But today, dozens of programmers spend a total of several man-years to put together a game, and with such high costs, they can't afford to risk failure so they stick to tried and true formulas, sequels and so on.

My own opinion is that game companies will continue to churn out the same old garbage as long as people keep buying - so people should stop buying. Unfortunately, it's kind of hard to persuade people to do this...

Thats just half the story, true games are getting expensive but you fail and that Atari dude (Mother****** Satans spawn all of them :P ruined plenty of good games with their crap handle on the video games industry, all the hags at atari dont know how to make good modern games, bums are living in the past) is that so has your income , before when 3 or 4 people could make a game in weeks at most they would be able to get a max of 70,000, 90,000, or even a 100,000$'s well in todays market where revinues from games like WoW exceed 5,000,000$ per month, i think you can safely say that rising cost's are just one side of the same coin, as the costs rises so does your profits.