Thinking about larger battles.........

[Marc Bellizzi]

I'm still mulling that last post over as to whether or not it's a trolling or legit.

It almost sounds like the First Person Shooter format would be better suited to capture what you are looking for. The most recent models can have 32vs32, which is essentially platoons.

I believe firmly that what you jotted down in wistful fashion with 'let it be done' like Hitler wishing armies into existence, is a bit more graphic & intelligent AI intensive than that. <edited due to miss-spelled existence>

Cutting edge FPS games have individuals on different levels, and to compensate the designers have to chop the battle area down to something akin to a few city blocks for people to play. The recently released Red Orchestra 2:Stalingrad and CodeMaster's Battlefield series are two good examples of where Squad and Platoon tactics can be employed. Unfortunately the Battlefield series didn't sell because players found the leadership aspect too cumbersome - me, I revelled in it because I was leading men, not busy 'racking up kills' like these little punks that also played only seemed to only care about. There is not enough demand for tactical games above squad size that are hyper-realistic.

Maybe I just don't understand what you wrote.

< If more realism or something else is to be added to these games to make them better, get serious about it and look for ways to make them happen rather than excuses for them to not happen. Otherwise, this is as good as these games will get, but they could be so much better. It doesn't all have to happen overnight, just take it one step at a time. >

It is happening, one step at a time; I remember my first 'digital game' was Pong. Now I look at where things are and I am amazed. When I was a young butter bar Lieutenant in the Army it took a processor the size of a bus to run the 'cutting edge' simulator, which still was hokey as hell and had graphics in 2D since 3D was too intensive (slowed the game down to eventually crash).

Sure, it isn't moving as fast as people 'would like', because humans are greedy and selfish and want things now. I blame Pandora for that and bad parenting. But when I put it in perspective, i.e. 'Pong' & that Army program that I was in awe with at the time but would laugh at now, I'm not too put-off by the pace of things - especially because if I really wanted it done that badly, I'd try and learn coding. But I'm not that smart, so I realize this drive forward moves at the pace of others. That and demand.

It's all based on that, unfortunately. The problem is that the technology is there - all one need do is check out the first person shooters I spoke of - Red Orchestra 2: Stalingrad - to see where things are for graphics and content - but there is no demand for the aspect/level/concept we play at. In other words, seeing where technology is at, if there were a worthwhile demand, the games would be there. There's just not the demand, it would seem.
[/quote]