In Tanner's world, quanity = quality.
I guess in this throw-away society Tanner buys into the quanity aurgument. Who cares if the game won't be played at all in year's time when the yearly 60 dollar sequel comes out.
With a few exceptions, most of those games on his list won't be played by the majority of the gamers that buy them after a year or so.
IL2 on the other hand is still being played after nearly a decade. Sure the game lacks "whoring itself out" to mass market appeal, but it is clear the game is for people who want a deep, realistic, and detailed flight sim experience.
The reason IL2 isn't more mainstream is most gamers lack the patience to deal with the steep learning curve the game presents. They want to fly, shoot bullets, and get instant success as their online opponent blows up in a hollywood style fireball while screaming "pwned!" through their microphone. What really happens is they fire up the game, go online, and have their asses handed to them by virtual pilots using realistic air to air combats tactics and skills. What follows is, "this game sucks, (insert game) is so much better than this crap!" Then they leave.
Tanner, I'm sorry you had your ass handed to you in air-to-air combat. There is nothing wrong with sticking to games with less depth and skill requirement - just like kids have tricycles and training wheels when they aren't ready to ride a bike, there are a bunch of games to suit the weak attention span and skill set of average gamers. They are quite popular I hear.
|
12-22-2009, 04:16 PM
Hybrid Mode
