Some think I hate Interplay for making it, or whatever, but look at some reasoning:
Final Fantasy:
Originally was an Adventure/RPG
Went hybrid to "Interactive movie with combat scenes".
End result: Staunchest supporters are starting to loose faith, as they cut through the hype and realise the only part of number 8 worth playing is the card sub-game. Most of those who have played the entire series only play 1-6, as they don't find the later ones to have the same enjoyment factor.
Ultima:
Originally an Adventure/RPG game.
Tried first to hybrid into a platform game, then tried to cross-genre to a Tomb Raider clone.
End result: Members of the largest fan group of Ultima (UDIC)openly bash the latest two installments.
Might and Magic:
Originally an RPG.
Eventually went into a real-time combat-intensive game.
End result: Many fans of the original stopped playing the series, as each installment tried to put in new things. Puzzles used to be plentiful in the early games, but now the only puzzles that exist in the later ones are the monolith ones.
HOM&M 1-3 haven't helped the quality of the series, as the M&M series has gone downhill completely. In fact, many prefer to play the cross-genre rather than the original series. Talk has been flying around of just turning it fully into a strategy game.
X-Com:
Originally a strategy game.
Cross-genre'd to a flight sim and a FPS. According to several, X-Com: Intercepter tries to copy Wing Commander and fails miserably. Could be wrong, but I know many are pissed that another good strat like Apocalypse was not made. X-Com the ORIGINAL CONCEPT was a good series. But when it went cross-genre, it started to slide rapidly in favor of other game series.
Now, in light of all this and many more instances of failed cross-genre and hybrid-genre failures, I have seen perhaps one or two that have succeeded. Unfortunately, I can't think of them off the top of my head.
My biggest fear, is that by Fallout going cross-genre, the same thing would happen to it. X-Com and JA2 are not linear. According to various people, BOS is going to be linear. Kind of hard to imagine a linear, by-stage strat game. Would be like doing repetitive recovery and terror missions right after one-another in X-Com.
I would be more than pleased if Interplay/14 Degrees East/(ummm...other studio...forgot name...sorry....) proved me wrong. I really do want them to prove my fears on this wrong. Despite all my nay-saying and venting of my fears, etc. I would have bought BOS, just to see if it was good. My reactions on it afterwards are merely speculative at this point, but if it's good, then I probably wouldn't have any problem with it and probably would enjoy it immensely.
(As for the point of someone saying that strategy games are only for the intelligent, the same was said for RPG games, and they apparently haven't met some of the AOF....)
Final Fantasy:
Originally was an Adventure/RPG
Went hybrid to "Interactive movie with combat scenes".
End result: Staunchest supporters are starting to loose faith, as they cut through the hype and realise the only part of number 8 worth playing is the card sub-game. Most of those who have played the entire series only play 1-6, as they don't find the later ones to have the same enjoyment factor.
Ultima:
Originally an Adventure/RPG game.
Tried first to hybrid into a platform game, then tried to cross-genre to a Tomb Raider clone.
End result: Members of the largest fan group of Ultima (UDIC)openly bash the latest two installments.
Might and Magic:
Originally an RPG.
Eventually went into a real-time combat-intensive game.
End result: Many fans of the original stopped playing the series, as each installment tried to put in new things. Puzzles used to be plentiful in the early games, but now the only puzzles that exist in the later ones are the monolith ones.
HOM&M 1-3 haven't helped the quality of the series, as the M&M series has gone downhill completely. In fact, many prefer to play the cross-genre rather than the original series. Talk has been flying around of just turning it fully into a strategy game.
X-Com:
Originally a strategy game.
Cross-genre'd to a flight sim and a FPS. According to several, X-Com: Intercepter tries to copy Wing Commander and fails miserably. Could be wrong, but I know many are pissed that another good strat like Apocalypse was not made. X-Com the ORIGINAL CONCEPT was a good series. But when it went cross-genre, it started to slide rapidly in favor of other game series.
Now, in light of all this and many more instances of failed cross-genre and hybrid-genre failures, I have seen perhaps one or two that have succeeded. Unfortunately, I can't think of them off the top of my head.
My biggest fear, is that by Fallout going cross-genre, the same thing would happen to it. X-Com and JA2 are not linear. According to various people, BOS is going to be linear. Kind of hard to imagine a linear, by-stage strat game. Would be like doing repetitive recovery and terror missions right after one-another in X-Com.
I would be more than pleased if Interplay/14 Degrees East/(ummm...other studio...forgot name...sorry....) proved me wrong. I really do want them to prove my fears on this wrong. Despite all my nay-saying and venting of my fears, etc. I would have bought BOS, just to see if it was good. My reactions on it afterwards are merely speculative at this point, but if it's good, then I probably wouldn't have any problem with it and probably would enjoy it immensely.
(As for the point of someone saying that strategy games are only for the intelligent, the same was said for RPG games, and they apparently haven't met some of the AOF....)
,then what is the problem people???? its still multiplayer fallout!!!! greetingz to you all.
