While computer games are a good value -- they aren't quite as good a value when you consider all of the additional hardware one purchases for games. I'm thinking about getting an entirely new system because my current PC while completely capable of handling my non-entertainment computing needs, is sluggish when running games.

Of course, even when you factor that in -- computer games are quite a value -- almost as good a value as watching television (:

Frank

TV? What is that? Digital cable =~ $62/month here. I have been trying to convince my wife that we should go back to
analog. There is very little on TV, even digital cable, worth that much.

Cheers,
Jack

I was thinking about over-the-air television say 25" screen that costs $250 plus about 300 Watts comes to almost but not quite free.

Personally, I'm paying ~$40/month for DirecTV with a $650 DirecTiVo (including the cost of lifetime membership and hard drive upgrade to 149 hour recording capacity) on a $380 flat-screen 27" television -- Plus the cost of electricity -- still quite a bargain -- just a bit more than all those hours on a $3000 486 PC with OS/2 and GalCiv Gold.

Frank

Yeah, but what is there that is even worth watching? But then, perhaps at my age one gets to the
point of thinking one has "seen it all".

Cheers,
Jack

The main thing I have found in playing strategy games(since the mid 80s) is that the more modern strategy games are so much the same in terms of the dynamics of AI, warfare, economics, science, and so forth that the same basic strategy can be used against almost any strategy game out there. I don't even have to read the manual, and I can beat most in 3 days(about 20 hours).
The same sort of manipulation of resources/brute force approach is used across the board in these games. It amounts to nothing more than using the arrogant stupidity of the AI against itself. The AI will always break its treaties, swipe undefended planets(or cities), take cheap easy advantages when offered, and all those sorts of obvious shallow level AI concepts. All you have to do is use a 'posioned pawn' defence of sorts and eventually they bite and you beat them.
The beauty of a developed AI is the nasty shocks they can give you when they pigeonhole your strategy and give you that sense that they have 'read your book' so to speak. All of a sudden you realize that though the interface and elements look somewhat the same, THIS game is going to force you to completely rethink how you approach this game.

The problem with game reviewers is that game reviewing is their job. Most games aren't worth playing, but they HAVE to play them...and after 20 or so truly terrible games, they start to get "tunnel vision" about games. Myst is a good game, but almost all of the Myst clones were horrid.........after a while the reviewers had 'tunnel vision' about Myst games and they couldn't get a decent rating.....even if they were good. There hasn't been a good AI in a long time..........as a result, most reviewers have no sense of what it brings to a game........they have gotten 'tunnel vision' and focused more on graphics instead.

If you can bring those "nasty shocks", I think the reviewers will come on board. Perhaps you could have pre-set scenarios, like Warlords II, or Simcity 2000, where they can jump into situations and try to solve them? Give them an upfront opportunity to test themselves against the computer AI in situations where the AI shines...........that would really wake them up.

I like the idea of premade scenarios!

Perhaps when the game is closer to release the beta testers can submit saved games to be added as scenarios. A saved game, with a description and a few comments on why it is a good scenario would be great. I have certainly player a few games when a few hundred turns into it I think 'save this now as it'll make a great start point for future games'.

Paul.

If you could create a map builder, where people could actually place the planets and give them certain values, be able to place the other elements......set up the enemies to have certain starting advantages and weaknesses. I always liked the way Warlords II deluxe added an extra panel for a brief description of the History of the city, and you could place signs all over the place that would read a message usually describing the area when you right clicked on it.
The 'saved' game would be a groundwork for setting up the scenario.....but unlike the saved game......everybody would start with only 1 or 2 units at every planet(like galaxy, an old pc program of a friend of mine). Then everybody would jockey their units around all at the same time to create fleets from all these little ships while not leaving their planets too defenseless. Each player would have starting advantages/disadvantages in tech and social issues as well as starting economic/social power in the United Planets.
Even if you didn't have the time to do it now, It would make a great add-on pack if the game really began to take off. Throw a map builder, 100 or so custom maps of various sizes, add some extra graphical elements(extra planet icons, nebulae, asteroid fields, black holes, 20-30 extra cosmetic elements for various menus), bring some upgrades to the game and you have a add on pack that can be sold for $25 or so. The added plus is that the custom maps that players make can become a part of the site like wincustomize.com or something.
They probably already have something like this in mind.....

They probably do -- except that it will come as part of the Drengin.net subscription rather than as a $25 add on pack.

Frank