Why warzone dont get so succeful?

Other talk that doesn't fit elsewhere.
This is for General Discussion, not General chat.

Why warzone dont get so succeful?

Postby Cpablo » 08 May 2017, 00:28

I know warzone 20 years ago in psx. And it games rocks. It has his limit, and a basic sistem, but the idea to have a core army and a constant base, brings a lot a real campaing experience. It is a shame for me what the game dont be a succes or it dont was take as concept ot another game development so mass like agenof empire was...a true shame. Only panzer heneral take some of it i believe and too was abandoned. Both games are now being developed by the community.


So...why the market never takes open design complex strategy games? That is the question. 😕. Sorry by horrible english grammar.

You get the idea? Age of empire get a lot.od sequels and immitator, (empire earth, rise of nations...), why they forget complety games as warzone? What about the sequel? The campaigns ending clearly shows what dr reed survives...
It is a shame. It is better than command and conquer or age of empire...a true shame
Cpablo
Greenhorn
 
Posts: 9
Joined: 05 May 2017, 19:11

Re: Why warzone dont get so succeful?

Postby William » 09 May 2017, 01:15

Cpablo wrote:I know warzone 20 years ago in psx. And it games rocks. It has his limit, and a basic sistem, but the idea to have a core army and a constant base, brings a lot a real campaing experience. It is a shame for me what the game dont be a succes or it dont was take as concept ot another game development so mass like agenof empire was...a true shame. Only panzer heneral take some of it i believe and too was abandoned. Both games are now being developed by the community.


So...why the market never takes open design complex strategy games? That is the question. 😕. Sorry by horrible english grammar.

You get the idea? Age of empire get a lot.od sequels and immitator, (empire earth, rise of nations...), why they forget complety games as warzone? What about the sequel? The campaigns ending clearly shows what dr reed survives...
It is a shame. It is better than command and conquer or age of empire...a true shame

Because pumpkin studios was closed in 1999 and then pumpkin-2 took support in 2001-2003
then the warzone 2100 project takes over in 2005-2017
back in the day they still had directx and direct3d included with opengl too bad directx and direct3d were removed by warzone 2100 project
maybe because the game would be very slow in those renderers i wish i can modify the game and add directx and direct3d support
by using my copy of warzone 2100 1.0
William
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 150
Joined: 02 Sep 2015, 22:39

Re: Why warzone dont get so succeful?

Postby Cpablo » 09 May 2017, 04:35

Beyond that, ths game have a lot of cool concepts what a re very awesome for a rts. I never see many rts after it allowing design or campaign continuty in that level
Cpablo
Greenhorn
 
Posts: 9
Joined: 05 May 2017, 19:11

Re: Why warzone dont get so succeful?

Postby vexed » 13 May 2017, 21:33

William has no clue what he is talking about. Feel free to ignore any of his posts. :annoyed:

For the record, Pumpkin's version of Warzone 2100 used DX 5/6.
Once the source was released, in order to make it crossplatform (Windows / linux / mac/ whatever) openGL was used instead of the proprietary tech (DX 5/6), which was later removed for obvious reasons.

As for Warzone 2100 not being "successful" that depends on what you mean.
We still get a ton of downloads, and the vast majority of those downloads are in it ONLY for the Campaign game, and skirmish.

The MP "community" isn't very friendly to so called "noobs" with people getting kicked out of games for being "noobs". So, it ends up being the same clique of players play against each other, instead of helping "noobs" become better...then they get bored, and disappear, and the community keeps shrinking.
That isn't to say that everyone does this, since there are some players that try to train these "noobs", but, there are just not enough of these kind of people to change things. :(
/facepalm ...Grinch stole Warzone🙈🙉🙊 contra principia negantem non est disputandum
Super busy, don't expect a timely reply back.
User avatar
vexed
Inactive
Inactive
 
Posts: 2385
Joined: 27 Jul 2010, 02:07

Re: Why warzone dont get so succeful?

Postby Lord_Kane » 14 May 2017, 05:39

Cpablo wrote:Beyond that, ths game have a lot of cool concepts what a re very awesome for a rts. I never see many rts after it allowing design or campaign continuty in that level


There is the Earth 2150 Trilogy, but the game play is different and it does have similar continuity (except for Lost Souls)
Ironically when I discovered WZ last year I was looking for games that were like Earth 2150

Also William is a bit excitiable but I would follow Vexed's advice and not listen to william about anything. :P
Lord_Kane
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 33
Joined: 24 Nov 2016, 21:51

Re: Why warzone dont get so succeful?

Postby themac » 20 May 2017, 19:57

Warzone don't get so successful because most players prefer to play it like Dullzone by removing important parts of the game and the gameplay itself.

@ Lord Kane: Similar games were Thandor, Earth 2150 and Machines by Acclaim.
themac
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 334
Joined: 17 Jul 2009, 19:14
Location: Germany

Re: Why warzone dont get so succeful?

Postby Lord_Kane » 21 May 2017, 03:37

themac wrote:Warzone don't get so successful because most players prefer to play it like Dullzone by removing important parts of the game and the gameplay itself.

@ Lord Kane: Similar games were Thandor, Earth 2150 and Machines by Acclaim.


Thandor I never heard of,
Machines I used to own but lost my CD's when I moved.
Lord_Kane
Trained
Trained
 
Posts: 33
Joined: 24 Nov 2016, 21:51


Return to Other Talk

cron