Title: Strat/Sim Titles and the Genre Bender By: Len 'Viking1' Hjalmarson Date: 1998-07-06 1528 Flashback:Orig. Multipage Version Hard Copy:Printer Friendly
This year brings us closer to the integrated electronic battlefield
than we have ever been, and that elusive goal is being hotly pursued by
at least five organizations: DiD, Janes, Microprose, Mindscape/SSI and
Novalogic. But equally as exciting, we are witnessing the birth of a
new genre through the marriage of two well established genres: military
strategy games and military simulations.
The increasing sophistication of military gaming has me pumped. Recently I hosted a forum on Dynamic Campaigns,
focussing on this particular feature of the latest and greatest air
combat simulations. Last fall we took several stabs at defining the
"Holy Grail" in the military flight sim genre (See Dan Crenshaw's Quest for the Grail, Mark Doran's Manifesto and my own Seven Sons of Sim).
This year we will see the release of at least three simulations
whose hub is a dynamic and real-time campaign system, and each
integrates a tactical dimension, a component that has only surfaced
substantially for the PC gaming environment in the last twelve months
(although we saw hints of the broader direction years ago with the
Strat-Falc add-ons, and even in Microprose Task Force: 1942).
This year we will see three new simulations that will integrate real
time dynamic campaign intelligence as well as tactical control at the
theatre level: Falcon 4.0, Flanker 2.0 and Total Air War.
Each has its own level of sophistication, and the first two will also
be the first components in electronic battlefields, with later releases
inter-operable in a real-time multiplayer environment (both F4 and
Flanker2 will add other player mounted platforms early in 1999).
Its a great time to be a military sim nut. We are seeing
advances in every area of game play: virtual pilot intelligence, flight
modeling, systems modeling, physics and ballistics, graphics and
environment, sound and voice interaction.
But these new simulations hint that something much bigger is happening
to expand the depth of gameplay. At the same time as military games are
becoming far more immersive we are seeing the blurring of genres and
the integration of third person perspective and strategic control with
first person simulation control in a real-time multiplayer environment.
Lets take a closer look at the names and games on the horizon
in alphabetical order: DiD (Total Air War), Janes Combat Simulations
(Fleet Command), Microprose (F4 and M1TP2), and Mindscape/SSI, who are
aiming at two sets of interoperable sims (Silent Hunter 2 and Destroyer
Command, Flanker 2 and Harpoon 4). We'll focus particularly on Fleet
Command and Harpoon 4, since these titles take us toward a full
marriage of the genres in the multiplayer environment.
Digital Image Design
DiD is a good place to start for reasons other than the letter
"D." Their conception of the Electronic Battlefield of Tomorrow (EBT)
was first discussed with the development of "Tank," whose first screen
shots we saw last fall. "Tank" has evolved into something a bit more
esoteric titled "Wargasm", a memorable if odd title for a military
simulation (Curiously, the Playstation title "Front Mission
Alternative" also uses the term "wargasm" in their preview clips).
But whatever you think of the title, "Wargasm" isn't a bad
example of the blurring of boundaries between strategy and simulation.
Lets talk a bit about those boundaries so we have a reference point for
all that follows.
First, military strategy games originated as board games with
a top down, third person perspective of some kind of military
engagement. Originally turn based, more recent releases have been
incorporating real-time gameplay, often in a multiplayer internet or
LAN environment, thus the acronyn RTS: real time strategy.
Military simulations, on the other hand, are by
definition first person perspective, with actual control of the
military platform given to the player. But in simulations like F22:
ADF, this distinction began to blur in the AWACS interface by offering
the player real time control of other assets, including a real time
view of these assets in operation.
An exciting addition to game play, real time tactical control of
allied air assets adds the challenge of actually participating in the
larger battle. The real time 3d third person perspective offered by the
Smartview system increases the sense of participation in the bigger
picture as well as the feeling of immersion. Now lets consider DiDs own
strat/sim games soon to be incarnated in "Wargasm" and Total Air War.
DiD's Wargasm takes this evolution another step by
giving the player both tactical control of all allied assets in the
battlefield as well as the ability to control individual assets from
the first person perspective. In short, a player can select any asset,
whether a trooper or a chopper, from a real-time strategic map and
either choose the tactic and objectives for the object or objects or
jump in and attempt to accomplish the mission personally.
Wargasm is not a serious simulation like Total Air War;
it has a surrealistic air about it by intention of the designers.
Wargasm is more about the experience of the battlefield, and primarily
about the ground battle. With the goal of an online multiplayer
environment, it should attract quite a following.
Click for 800x600 -260K.
Total Air War, on the other hand, takes the AWACS module
introduced with F22: ADF and integrates it into the real-time dynamic
campaign system. The War Room interface combined with the AWACS
interface in this system gives an entirely new feel to the experience,
offering the player tactical control while strategic control remains
largely in the hands of the WARGEN AI system. Nevertheless, the player
has the strategic perspective via the various Intelligence reporting
screens as well as via the real-time maps.
While Total Air War is a step toward the integration of RTS and
simulation, its still fairly low on the evolutionary rung. It offers
tactical control but not strategic control, and only of air assets.
Furthermore,
multiplayer involvement is limited to a single platform. The real genre
blenders will offer strategic control also, not only of air assets but
also of naval assets, and many players will control different platforms
in one theatre. Now we'll look at Janes Combat Simulations to see where
the next leap will take us.
Janes Combat Simulations
With 688(I) Hunter/Killer,
Janes took a step toward third person/first person strat/sim
integration, offering a window on the world through which the player
could observe any object in the battlefield environment, from whales to
missiles to ships. And 688(I) was designed from the start to connect
with another simulation, which was originally conceived as AEGIS.
Unfortunately for those who were hoping to see AEGIS this
summer, Janes and Sonalysts took a step back to see what was possible,
and the coming "Fleet Command"
is the result. "Fleet Command" will be Janes first entry into this new
genre, firmly cementing the integration of strategy and simulation on a
grand scale. How will this work?
If you've ever played a third person strategy title, you know that
it's relatively easy to actually control objects using your mouse to
select and drag. In order to vector an intercept in ADF or Total Air
War you simply click on the allied flight and then drag to the enemy
flight. This kind of control could be broadly extended by offering a
drop down menu system.
Imagine it like this: you drag your flight to command an intercept, but
once the red diamond pops up and the flight acknowledges the command, a
menu pops up that allows you a finer degree of control. Now you can
select INTERCEPT TYPE : -cutoff or stern conversion, and PRIORITY :-
all possible speed - all possible stealth - blow through and stealth
(this latter so that friendlies bypass intervening targets).
I don't know how much command depth Fleet Command will offer,
but the player will be able to select individual ships or task forces,
or individual aircraft or flights. We will also be able to call up new
flights and command undersea assets. (Remember Microprose "Task Force:
1942?" Imagine this in the modern setting, with high resolution and a
far more detailed command and map interface, integrated with first
person play for the aircraft also).
Fleet Command will initially give us first-person control over
sea assets only, but this initial release will be shortly followed by
an inter-operable simulation of the F/A 18, and if we're lucky, the F14
Tomcat! Who knows, after that we may be able to fly some choppers, and
an additional allied submarine is likely too.
The 3d perspective will be much like the Smartview perspective
pioneered by DiD in EF2000 Tactcom and later in F22:ADF and TAW. The
camera will offer real time views with all the trimmings: you'll see
all the action, all the weather, and all the damage! Its incredibly
immersive just watching the dogfights in the TAW beta! However, Fleet
Command will likely add support for multiple monitors, which should
allow us the gods' eye view on one screen while issuing orders on the
other!
Jane's plan to model over 1000 different units, all with their
actual capabilities. The real time dynamic campaign system will extend
to cover 16 different navies including Russia, China, Taiwan and India.
Multiplayer support will allow up to eight players via LAN, modem or
serial connection.
Microprose
Microprose has been moving in the direction of tactical integration since the Strat-Falc days, but Falcon 4.0 and M1 Tank Platoon II will extend their efforts to a new level.
The Tactical Engagement module in Falcon 4.0 goes beyond anything
yet seen in allowing the player to determine the nature of the war. I
quote from Dan Crenshaw's introductory piece:
The TACTICAL ENGAGEMENT module allows players to set up a mission, with
full direction of the ground forces, orders, routes etc. It allows the
players to set up the opposition’s forces similarly. Once the mission
begins, the AI takes over and the war begins. Anything you are not
flying will get run by the AI. Even if you set up successive missions
and don't get home in time to fly the next one, it will take off and
fly the mission.
Of course you can always hop out of your current
flight, and into the new one whenever you like (except during egress or
landing, in all sections of the game you can not jump into a flight in
egress or landing. You can leave these flights if you wish and the AI
will take them over).
Now
you and your AI or human cooperative multi-player pilots must perform
your tasks to help insure victory. If you are very bold, you can fly
low and watch what the forces are doing and even witness a land battle.
And, as is becoming an industry standard, you will be able to make your
mission and send it to your friends to see how well they do.
Once you watch a campaign and start to play with the Tactical
Engagement section, you will quickly realize you can create a war of
the same magnitude as the campaign if you were so inclined. You can use
TE to set up competitions with Win Conditions. You can use it to train,
or just learn or test tactics (both air and ground). You can make the
missions as easy or as difficult as you like, as cut and dried or
complex as you want. Solo or multi-player, cooperative or H2H, the
possibilities are virtually endless.
This system is only a short step away from becoming a true strat/sim
blend. Who knows, perhaps Microprose will later allow manipulation of
these same forces in real time DURING the campaign, or perhaps Gunship III,
the interoperable sim designed to connect to M1 Tank Platoon II, will
become Microprose' first entry into this new genre. (Note: Gunship III
will now connect to M1 Tank Platoon III sometime in early 2000.)
Mindscape/SSI
Mindscape/SSI have made some VERY good simulations, though their
reputation probably isn't as large as they deserve. Still, for those
who got their feet wet in Silent Hunter, they are known to be SERIOUS
simulation designers. 1998 and 1999 may finally place them up in the
league with the big boys: Janes and Microprose.
Arleigh Burke Class.
First, Silent Hunter II
will be released, taking us back to the deep in a simulation of the war
in the Altantic, this time from the German side. Unlike its namesake,
this one will have a multiplayer component allowing for wolf pack
tactics. But the better news is that an interoperable sim will arrive
later on, currently titled "Destroyer Command."
The modern component of SSI's Digital Combat Series may
ultimately shine more brightly still, competing head to head with Janes
Fleet Command for best of the genre benders. Harpoon IV
is destined to allow strategic control of assets at the grand level
while allowing players to get into the action in the first person in
vehicles like the Soviet Flanker, at least the carrier version!
But of course, it won't stop there. Since Harpoon is
classically a naval battle game, we will likely see command of certain
Allied and Russia naval assets, and perhaps even submarines. An Allied
naval fighter is another likely bet, probably the F-18 and if we're
really lucky, maybe the Tomcat or Sea Harrier also.
As
with Fleet Command, we can look for click and drag control over assets,
and since this is a mid to late 1999 scenario, we would probably also
have multiple monitor support. Personally, I can envision my office
running this game across three monitors: a real time Theatre Command
view where I order a strike of a ground based position, a real time
view of the cat launches happening on my carrier, and another view
showing me the battle scene (the gods eye cheat view).
It doesn't take much imagination to suppose that LAN meets would take
on a whole new dimension in this kind of game! Getting six or eight
guys together might mean you only need two or three system units, but
six or eight monitors. And I can also imagine some unique multiplayer
scenarios.
The following is mostly conjecture, but suppose that Fleet
Command or Harpoon 4 or 4.5 allowed eight players, with two players
(one on each side) acting as Theatre Commander, actually ordering the
intercepts and CAPs and Strike missions, and controlling the movement
and engagement of naval assets also.
Then picture the Theatre Commander of Soviet forces with his system
box and two monitors. He monitors the strategic Theatre command view
from his 21" monitor, with the ability to bring up a zoom window on a
particular area. He checks the battle scene as his strike force arrives
and he zooms in to get a closer view.
Meanwhile his second monitor has a real time view of the Flight
Leader , but the Flight Leader in the Su27 is NOT an AI machine, but
one of his LAN buddies flying in the same room in real time (Is that
Su27 PINK??)
Meanwhile, somewhere in Denver Colorado "Sleepdoc" and "Snacko" and
a few of their buddies are playing for the Allies. Eric "Snacko" Marlow
is Theatre Commander, directing traffic while Glen "Sleepdoc" is flying
LEAD in an F18 force that is scrambling to deal with the hostile
incursion. Of course, we can't leave out Crash and Rhino of the 209th.
These guys are both flying F16s as CAP and are already racing to engage
the incoming force = )
"Snacko" and "Sleepdoc," however, are not satisfied with a 21" hi
res display, they have the Theatre map on a 60" projection system,
making their War Room look like something out of the movies! "Snacko"
kicks back in an easy chair with his IR mouse, vectoring aircraft and
sending orders to the naval commanders.
Just when he thinks things are under control, someone else is in the
Soviet LAN group is getting a good fix on an American carrier, and that
isn't a Flanker he's flying! In fact, the only thing vaguely resembling
wings on that vehicle are the diving planes! As soon as he lets go with
his three fish, another LAN player at Allied HQ commanding a destroyer
is getting ready to loose some serious hardware on top of that
ambitious tin can!
In the real time air engagement, the 209th in F16s is doing fairly
well against the Pink Flamingos in their Su27s, and all the while the
respective Theatre Commanders are monitoring the entire operation in
real time while other players are engaging on the ocean. If the Soviet
Commander loses his carrier, where are Papadoc and crew doing to land
their returning strike force?
Well, you get the picture. If these interoperable titles can handle
eight players, perhaps they will allow two Theatre Commanders and three
other real time first person players on each side. Then we can begin to
have the kind of involvement we've been waiting for, beyond merely
flying the airplane or commanding the ship, actually directing the war
too!
1999 will likely show us the future in a way we have not yet seen,
combining this kind of genre bender real time strategy/simulation with
solid multiplayer support and allowing real wars to be waged in real
time at a level of complexity and involvement barely dreamt of to date.
Maybe we will even see the arrival of some awesome new peripherals in
the form of virtual reality headsets to allow we pilots a degree of SA
that we have longed for.
In the meantime, we have simulations arriving on the
scene that allow player control of assets beyond anything yet seen.
With Falcon 4.0, Total Air War, and Flanker 2.0 we will be practicing
for the strategy/sim titles of 1999 and beyond! Let the games
begin!