Navigation

Once upon a time when you made a comment about a strategy game, people assumed naturally that you were talking about turn-based games. There was no distinction between turn-based and real-time. No one knew what an RTS was. All strategy games were turn-based, it was the nature of the beast.

The real-time strategy fad hit hard, and it was but one tool used as a way to bring tabletop gaming to the masses without the threat of losing a core business. Franchises like Battletech and Warhammer were soon made into real-time strategy games. Both made minor attempts into turn-based, but kept their efforts extremely limited for fear that computer games may draw away people from their model offerings.

Now personally I always considered this somewhat silly. I played Battletech as a tabletop game and also Warhammer 40,000. Both were extremely expensive hobbies, but it was a fun and enjoyable experience. However, I do not think people who generally play computer games would necessarily play tabletop games nor vice versa. Even then, those that would play both would probably continue to play both. I always thought that FASA and Games Workshop were limiting themselves to a small niche of a much larger market.

Well, FASA is now out of business and Games Workshop has had their seal on one middling game after another. Finally, as most tabletop franchies do, Games Workshop released a game similar to their tabletop strategy game, except in real-time, called Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War. Not only did it look great but it allowed for plenty of customization and offered nearly unlimited access to four different Warhammer 40,000 armies. The problem? Dawn of War plays pretty much like any RTS game out there. I've never been a big fan of the RTS genre, and while I love the subject matter of Dawn of War it just seems far too similar to older games that I have already experienced. The experience of building an army and fielding it against an opponent is just not their. Instead, like just about every other RTS, you establish bases and build your units. I'm surprised they didn't throw in resource gathering for good measure. I would even have been happy for a real-time version of the core gameplay where you select units based on points and managed a battle. In fact, that seems ideal since it would greatly speed up gameplay. After all, I may love turn-based but even I will admit it can be a time sink.

All that aside, it seems like in this day and age where we have the internet and a good understanding of modular programming that Games Workshop or similar businesses could have their cake and eat it to. In other words, a turn-based version of their tabletop rules on the PC. Except how do they turn it into the perpetual source of income the modelling and rulebooks have become?

It's simple...and it's not so simple. The simple part is to allow players to buy a game that basically has the rules engine and a core army. In Warhammer 40K terms the player would basically buy a Space Marine army, an Ork Army, an Eldar Army, etc. etc. They'd have access to the basic unit types and enough special units to be able to build a functional but rather plain army. Each army could be a seperate purchase or perhaps could actually be bought and installed individually without the core rules at a reduced price from the main game. Special units could be purchased, downloaded, and installed by the player. Basically they could charge for the player to use anything outside their core army. Want that special Space Marine Captain Terminator? You'll have to buy him seperately first. It works on many levels. For one, the units would not have to be terribly expensive, though I suppose you could also sell them in "bulk" at reduced prices as well. It keeps a regular revenue stream going into Games Workshop or whatever system you want to use. The players get to experience the game on the PC and it opens up a whole new audience for the company as well. Furthermore, they could offer a great deal of customization to players with an interface similar to Dawn of War's Army Painter. Players could design their own logos, symbols, and banners and have them downloaded to their opponent before a match similar to skin downloads in other games.

The system would have some challenges. For instance, how do you address multi-player? That could be a post in itself. I will just say briefly that there are many possible solutions, but each one has it's own unique challenges. The other problem would be support. Also, Games Workshop would have to commit themselves to a core set of rules. Other companies have done pretty good about this, but not all. Games Workshop, my favorite example up to this point, may find it challenging since it makes a good bit of money buy changing all of its rules and supporting materials every few years.

All the same, it's an idea whose time has come.

Trackbacks:
http://www.unfetteredblather.com/nucleus/action.php?action=plugin&name=TrackBack&tb_id=45