yeah, the wide open expanse of grey sludge, tree stumps, flooded craters and corpses? Lot's of scope for level design there ;-P
Seriously though, I dunno. It's a good point. WW2 has always held more romantic appeal in popular culture I think and I'm not sure why. Perhaps because it was more obviously 'good V evil' in its nature. 'Saving Private Ryan' and 'Band Of Brothers' brought it to the forefront of peoples imagination again. I don't recall seeing too many epic WW1 movies, although 'Gallipoli' was pretty good If I recall correctly.
Well yeah probably, and trench warfare seems so goddam ineffective. Suicidal even. Charging over the top to whistles blowing and shouting, bayonets fixed, only to get caught up in barbed wire and mowed down by a Gatling gun?! Doesn't sound like fun in videogame form. Unless you're manning the Gatling gun of course! Could be pretty damn atmospheric though.
maybe if you were the guy who ordered all the people in the trenches to go rush out into the barbed wire and gatling gun fire? You know, the guy who didnt go rush out and die.
Good points from Daz here. Being involved in design, I've often had long discussions about how to work out a WWI game. Overall, we concluded it was too vile and disgusting a war to make a good gaming experience. It was more tragic than romantic, and left unresolved (hence WWII). I recently watch a film on WWI, and it showed no war scenes. It just showed the male/father character go off to war, and then the papers came in that he died. Possibly another genre than FPS, or a game which the user assumes the role of different soldiers in different settings. Either way, it's similar to a Civil War fps in that a lot of things stand in the way of it being a more entertaining gameplay experience. Nevertheless, if anyone ever wanted to chat up some concepts, I'd be happy to give some input.
The problem with WW1, is that it had very ineffective leadership at the top. The trench warfare was a lack of any sort of creativity or initiative on the part of the Generals, most of whom had little combat experience, as the last European war had been in the 1870's, 40 years previously. Colonial Officers who had more recent combat experience, socially were on the fringes, but because of their fresher experience, and less accountability to the continental command structure had more "interesting" or "gameworthy" campaigns. Examples like "LAwrence of Arabia", "The Australian Light Horsemen" (Prince of Wales 7th Light Horse), The German campaigns in Africa, and the Sea Raids and Pursuits in the south Pacific and south Atlantic.
Trench warfare, is futile and boring, seemed to achieve little and is the opposite of empowering. You didn't move, you were kept in the dark, and fed bullshit from the superiors. No wonder British Helmets looked like Mushroom caps :-) In comparison, WW2 was about Mobility, More autonomy to lower ranks in terms of decisions and creative flexibility. (Even, yes, the Germans, especially the Germans), but you also have the goal or romance of liberating the continent from the greatest Tyrranny in living memory, against a foe, that was as competant and clever. It was a contest with high stakes. Even the Generals, all vets of WW1, didn't want to repeat that mistake, so you get Rommel and Guderian's creativity to invent the Blitzkrieg. Waivell's boldness against the Italians in Africa, Zhukov's Drive and thorough examination of the enemy in Russia, and from that spirit flowed down to some GI, named Cullen, in the rear on the Normandy peninsula, figuring out how to use the German Hedgehogs in the beach to turn them into Hedge clippers for tanks to remove the concealment advantage the Germans had in the hedgerows.
For a game background to work. you need to present a problem that the player is empowered to solve, and many ways to solve it with the tools they are presented with. It's why games with Boss levels where you need a specific spell to defeat, otherwise you can't get past, are bad design.Just like Trench Warfare looks like a bad design.
Theres also a BF mod called 1918, or something like that. That one seems like a little more fun though because you at least get to fly in some planes, and since they would be slower it'd make dogfighting a little more fun, i'd imagine.
The closest thing to a WW1 game I played was the original Crimson Skies. It was a fantasy take on that era, but flying in souped up biplane and shooting at airships was pretty fun.
I'd think it be awesome to walk though a map that is littered with corpses. Every war game I played has been nice picturesque European towns or bunkers. Seeing the true horror of war- Instead of a NPC just ragdolling after being shot. He could convulse and make nasty gurgling sounds or screams that just wont stop. Death is not pretty.
In FPSs you are ether brezerking or sneaking I'd like to see a map where it would be like the final scene in Full Metal Jacket- 'where is he? where can I go to stay out of harms way?' more problem solving than skills, think your way out of a jam rather than use brute force.
I think a WW1 game could be done well. Instead of having every weapon under the sun at you disposal you would have to make due with the poorly designed rifle with 18 odd bullets. The game would be more about survival rather than being an unstoppable juggernaut killing everything.
Spot on, KMan. If you look at the popular literature and what held the popular interest after "The Great War", it was all about planes, pilots and Aerial derring do. Where the popular imagination goes, is where the games go. The only common WW1 games that were out there were flight sims and flight arcade games. Pilots went up to do battle with their counterparts in a "contest" where the stakes were life and death, but each pilot thought they were incontrol and had the skill to make the other pilot the 2nd place finisher. For a game to be "fun" it needs a contest. Trench Warfare, with all the realistic death that Sett wants would be a niche product , because while he might think it's important to show the horrors of trench warfare, and the muddy destruction wrought 5 miles on either side of a pair of trenches a few yard apart from the english Channel to the Swiss border, most people would react to this, the same way the average gamer reacts to any "educational title". "Yuck... where's the fun?"
[ QUOTE ]
english Channel to the Swiss border, most people would react to this, the same way the average gamer reacts to any "educational title". "Yuck... where's the fun?"
[/ QUOTE ]
Well personally, I think thats one of the things killing this industry from being more accepted at this time. The idea that interactive entertainment has to be "fun" versus engaging. IE you keep playing because you want to find out what happens next, not that your smiling because you shot some punk ass nazi in the head.
I guess I would be another niche Scott. I think though there is alot more out there then you think. Maybe some currently dont play because of your same arguement. Its solely fun versus saying anything about the human spirit. So when is a niche not a niche ehh?
Scott, I know that you really know what you're talking about, and everything you've said in this thread has been spot on, but I also believe it would be possible to make a successful WWI FPS. It would just have to be very well thought-out and carefully executed, but it could make a great setting for a game.
I remember a couple years ago a popular WWII FPS included a great D-Day level (I think it was one of the MOH games, but with the market being as over-saturated with WWII games as it is, it's hard to remember). The game did a great job at conveying the heavy casualties and immense amount of destruction, while at the same time presenting the player with an achievable goal. I think that's how a WWI game would have to be executed.
Lets stop trying to turn our history into a game and start making some alternate reality histories into a game. I would rather see a little imagination instead of XYZ war conflict turned into another video game where the selling point is how realistic (read: not fun) it is.
I'm a big fan of the FPS shooters based on war, WW2, some kind of modern war ect. Just about every one of them I have played. I guess I am getting tired of the same thing. I want to see something along the lines of the Advance Wars story line (what little there is of it). Toss in more than two sides, make certain sides the enemy and you must defeat and then rebuild and use them to push forward. Good VS evil, Axis VS Allies, America VS Terrorist, is fun but lets toss in some other sides and use alittle imagination to spice things up. Come up with some different weapons the world has never seen before.
It's always easy to be new and creative in space or the future but lets see some creative history?
i'm surprised any war of the 20th century could be considered "romantic" (any at all to be exact). but WW1 as a scenario for me would be more interesting than WW2 because of the interesting stylemix that goes into everything from uniforms (think pickelhaube!), weapons and equipment to the status of a soldier within society (very special in germany/prussia). it's all still very victorian era-esque to me, sometimes even with slight medieval influences (cavalry, officers with rapiers, honor on the battlefield).
WW1 surely was not all about trenches.
I think for a World War 1 game to work successfully, it'd have to be closer to an RPG than a standard FPS. Because theres so little to do between skirmishes, you'd have to keep your soldier fit, healthy, sane and ready to head up and get himself shot to bits. A mechanic something akin to the Sims or Fahrenheit/Indigo Prophecy would probably work well.
We looked into doing an Australian light horse game a while back using a system like this, along with a whole lot more for looking after the mount, keeping it fed, healthy and calm, tending wounds etc. In theory it could be an amazing game, but realistically its not too likely to have much commercial appeal.
i'd think of any war more as a setting, a stylistical choice, less one of game mechanics or level design. in my book WW2 is not only overdone, the gear also has a certain dull look to it that's too close to what we see today.
personally i'd like to see games exploring a broader variant of historical periods - not following strictly events that took place. these are games, after all.
i found gods of war and it's setting in ancient greek refreshing. i'd like to see more of those "unusual" settings.
Replies
Seriously though, I dunno. It's a good point. WW2 has always held more romantic appeal in popular culture I think and I'm not sure why. Perhaps because it was more obviously 'good V evil' in its nature. 'Saving Private Ryan' and 'Band Of Brothers' brought it to the forefront of peoples imagination again. I don't recall seeing too many epic WW1 movies, although 'Gallipoli' was pretty good If I recall correctly.
Another might be the confusion that would occur from from playing a game where Germans are bad, yet not Nazis
Trench warfare, is futile and boring, seemed to achieve little and is the opposite of empowering. You didn't move, you were kept in the dark, and fed bullshit from the superiors. No wonder British Helmets looked like Mushroom caps :-) In comparison, WW2 was about Mobility, More autonomy to lower ranks in terms of decisions and creative flexibility. (Even, yes, the Germans, especially the Germans), but you also have the goal or romance of liberating the continent from the greatest Tyrranny in living memory, against a foe, that was as competant and clever. It was a contest with high stakes. Even the Generals, all vets of WW1, didn't want to repeat that mistake, so you get Rommel and Guderian's creativity to invent the Blitzkrieg. Waivell's boldness against the Italians in Africa, Zhukov's Drive and thorough examination of the enemy in Russia, and from that spirit flowed down to some GI, named Cullen, in the rear on the Normandy peninsula, figuring out how to use the German Hedgehogs in the beach to turn them into Hedge clippers for tanks to remove the concealment advantage the Germans had in the hedgerows.
For a game background to work. you need to present a problem that the player is empowered to solve, and many ways to solve it with the tools they are presented with. It's why games with Boss levels where you need a specific spell to defeat, otherwise you can't get past, are bad design.Just like Trench Warfare looks like a bad design.
Scott
The closest thing to a WW1 game I played was the original Crimson Skies. It was a fantasy take on that era, but flying in souped up biplane and shooting at airships was pretty fun.
In FPSs you are ether brezerking or sneaking I'd like to see a map where it would be like the final scene in Full Metal Jacket- 'where is he? where can I go to stay out of harms way?' more problem solving than skills, think your way out of a jam rather than use brute force.
I think a WW1 game could be done well. Instead of having every weapon under the sun at you disposal you would have to make due with the poorly designed rifle with 18 odd bullets. The game would be more about survival rather than being an unstoppable juggernaut killing everything.
Scott
english Channel to the Swiss border, most people would react to this, the same way the average gamer reacts to any "educational title". "Yuck... where's the fun?"
[/ QUOTE ]
Well personally, I think thats one of the things killing this industry from being more accepted at this time. The idea that interactive entertainment has to be "fun" versus engaging. IE you keep playing because you want to find out what happens next, not that your smiling because you shot some punk ass nazi in the head.
I guess I would be another niche Scott. I think though there is alot more out there then you think. Maybe some currently dont play because of your same arguement. Its solely fun versus saying anything about the human spirit. So when is a niche not a niche ehh?
I remember a couple years ago a popular WWII FPS included a great D-Day level (I think it was one of the MOH games, but with the market being as over-saturated with WWII games as it is, it's hard to remember). The game did a great job at conveying the heavy casualties and immense amount of destruction, while at the same time presenting the player with an achievable goal. I think that's how a WWI game would have to be executed.
I'm a big fan of the FPS shooters based on war, WW2, some kind of modern war ect. Just about every one of them I have played. I guess I am getting tired of the same thing. I want to see something along the lines of the Advance Wars story line (what little there is of it). Toss in more than two sides, make certain sides the enemy and you must defeat and then rebuild and use them to push forward. Good VS evil, Axis VS Allies, America VS Terrorist, is fun but lets toss in some other sides and use alittle imagination to spice things up. Come up with some different weapons the world has never seen before.
It's always easy to be new and creative in space or the future but lets see some creative history?
Ramble ramble, ramble, crazy talk...
WW1 surely was not all about trenches.
We looked into doing an Australian light horse game a while back using a system like this, along with a whole lot more for looking after the mount, keeping it fed, healthy and calm, tending wounds etc. In theory it could be an amazing game, but realistically its not too likely to have much commercial appeal.
personally i'd like to see games exploring a broader variant of historical periods - not following strictly events that took place. these are games, after all.
i found gods of war and it's setting in ancient greek refreshing. i'd like to see more of those "unusual" settings.