I could never get into Sim City 4, instead still being a big fan of Sim City 3000, which was pretty much a directly updated version of 2000. I just preferred the graphical style of the game as it was much easier to navigate and manage the game. In Sim City 4 I found the new control system and closer game view tended to just slow everything down and make it harder. Still good, but for me SC3000 is currently the best version.

When I originally bought Sim City 2000 on the Amiga I also bought a really good strategy guide book for it that went into great detail on city planning and running. It really helped as it showed you exactly the consequences for everything you did in the city.

Sim City games definitely make you appreciate how hard it must be to run a real city, and does make you take a step back and think being moaning about something in your actual local community.
[Reply]

On the teletext gaming news today they mentioned that the rights to the Homeworld games has been bought up by the publisher who now owns the original Homeworld development team. Could this mean a new Homeworld is in the planning? Now that would be cool.

They also mentioned that Bethesda have registered the domain name elderscrollsonline.com and that they are also currently working on an MMO. So we might be seeing the first online Elder Scrolls game. Oblivion online? Now that would be cool.
[Reply]

Do you think they will focus on Cyrodiil or another area in such a game? Maybe we will see a return to Morrowind? Could it be that the action will be put to Skyrim, or maybe the whole world will be available for adventuring? It sounds interesting with an Elder Scrools Online game. If such a game ever gets released, I'm sure I'll get addicted if I buy it.
[Reply]

Hello,

I also read about the Homeworld franchise being sold to THQ, but remembering how pis poor the story of Homeworld 2 was compared to Homeworld 1 I am not as intrigued any more in the game universe.

I couldn't stand all that crap about magical hyperdrive and I think the writers were trying to mimic Star Wars in order to create some 'mythical' background.
If I connect a man to a nuclear reactor I am pretty sure he will not end up becoming immortal.


From what I hear some of you have the same problem as I have with larger strategy games, well Sim City 4 at least.
While the concept of running a city is fun, running a city properly without cheating is quite an assignment, learning all the mechanics and ins and outs of the gameplay.

I am not so attracted to Sim City Societies of whatever it is called, for some reason it doesn't really work for me.


As for Bethesda, after the butchering they have done on Fallout I hope some asteroid is on a direct collision course with their offices.
The idea of Pete Hines and Todd Howard being vaporised by a piece of cosmic debris somehow makes me smile.

* * * *

These days a lot of magazines and sites seem to be the mouths of the publishers which makes me wonder how objective the reviews are.
If every game gets praised as "you have to get this as soon as you have your monthly income" it becomes a bit difficult to tell which games truly are gems and which are just hype sold by a publisher bent on making some bucks for a lesser quality game.

Hey Harrison, in what way could a pre-release code be fixed?
[Reply]

Well, they can alter the game structure so the reviewers only get to see the parts of the game that actually work correctly.

This happens in all industries. In design, if a client wants to see their project you dedicate a couple of people to "fixing" the product so that parts of it look finished and polished, but others that haven't had much work done to them are hidden or inaccessible. It happens all the time and I can't imagine it's any different with pre-release game code.

I think I'm sensing a slight dislike for Bethesda from you I think!

The problem with any gaming series or franchise is that as technology and what is possible moves forward it is very hard for any developer to stick to the original formula and designs that made the very first game a hit. If you stay very close to the original gaming look and feel it can end up feeling very dated. Equally the same is true with gameplay mechanics. You have to move forward or nothing evolves. Die hard fans of the original will hate change, as in your case, whereas others who just liked the series will probably still enjoy the sequels, and others that haven't encountered the series before will love the new releases and then go back to explore the older titles for retro enjoyment. Sadly you can never please everyone all of the time.
[Reply]

Hello Harrison,

I heard this one from quite some people, and I do NOT agree.

First of all turn based RPGs or simply turn based is not something of the past, despite what people like Todd Howard wants you to think, the whole Real Time with Pauze has always been a compromise between Turn Based and Real Time and sometimes its a rather half assed one because the mechanics haven't been thought out well.

Improving the original Fallout would mean that developers would continue to refine the existing gameplay, work out the last kinks to optimise game enjoyment, not toss it out of the window because you don't know what it is and replace it with something you do.

Despite what people might say, gameplay is a part of what makes Fallout Fallout, and not just the said atmosphere which Bethesda couldn't even get right, going for EXTREME wasteland rather than trying to honour the weird twisted retro post apocalyptic future.

Bethesda didn't need to purchase Fallout, it could have peacefully waited for the time that some developer, preferably Obsidian decided that they had the budget to try a title that didn't fit the standard mold of today.
But Bethesda did buy it, and with that they also got a load of fans who actually kept the flame alive and kept asking for a sequel, not the Xbox 360 and PS3 crowd who couldn't give a damn less about some obscure game from ten years ago.

What Bethesda, or to be exact Todd and the gang have been doing is pretty much ripping out most of what made Fallout, leaving something like post apocalypse setting filled with mutants and left over technology.
That is not that far from developing your very own franchise with your own backgrounds and ideas.

Something that now feels almost similar is the rather disastreous Fallout Brotherhood of Steel for the PS2 and Xbox360 which also failed to appeal to most of the console gamers despite also being EXTREME wasteland, doing away with such boring things like solving quests through ways other than shooting things.

In the end to me this is just another Fallout disaster, yes the game will appeal to the GoW and Halo fanboys as that is Bethesda's target fan group, but not the fans of old.
I hope this will be the last step on Fallout's road to disaster so that the franchise can finally rest in peace, far away from the Tod Howards who really have no clue what makes classics tick.

Now lets have that asteroid.
[Reply]

There is one thing though that you failed to mention. Return of investment. Today's games cost a lot more than they used to to develop and produce. Sadly you have to cater for the current gaming demographic to guarantee the game will sell. If they had left the game using the same gameplay and style as the original games it would have pleased the original fan base, but that would not have been a big enough number of sales to make a decent return from the investment spent. They have to develop games that they are more certain a wide range of gamers will buy.

Think of it much like an artist or designer. They all want to paint or produce a design for themselves, using their own ideas and imagination, but those won't have much commercial value or interest due to the work being individual and personal. They instead need to produce work for others that cater for their needs and ideas, even if the artist or designer doesn't personally like it. It's how money is made.
[Reply]

Hello Harrison,

I know that these days there are more restrictions on game developers than ever and that the primary purpose on game development is to make money.
And yes, I do realise that offering gameplay that didn't exactly swept the complete gaming community the first time is not automatically successful.

But Bethesda did not need to buy the Fallout franchise, there was no public outcry for a sequel, only of a handful of fans.
Most of the people were more looking forwards to a sequel to the Elder Scrolls, not some sequel to an obscure game series they had neverheard of before.

They could have made their very own new futuristic franchise with their own rules and background, but instead they choose an existing series they have no actual development experience with other than perhaps playing it and hearing rave reviews about it.

Well they got the franchise anyway, and as a part of that they also got the community, which might not have an actual say in the development but does make a judgement of the game in the end.
And on the moment as a fan I am deeply disappointed in what Bethesda is making, I have no problem with telling as much people as possible not to buy this game, giving them information why this isn't a sequel and more of a spin off.
[Reply]

As with anything, I never pass judgement until the final product is out and available to test and use for myself. And from the official Fallout 3 site, and from the many magazine previews I've seen, I'm looking forward to Fallout 3.

OK, it might not be the same as the previous games, but I don't personally think that is necessarily a bad thing. Yes, the existing games are great, and they are still some of the best games in their genre, but technology and game development moves on and allows developers and fans to experience something far greater than was possible 10 years ago, but you have to remember that for this to be realised, the way a game is played and functions has to change.

I know the key reason for your concerns isn't really the mechanics of the game (shifting from an isometric game to one more like a first person shooter), but instead is the game's universe and the story's narrative. But we haven't actually been shown a great deal relating to this yet so I'm keeping an open mind until I get to play the finished game.
[Reply]

Perhaps its best we let it rest for now Harrison.

I wouldn't want any negative contact between us just because we differ on opinion regarding this game.
[Reply]