Thompson reacts to Take Two lawsuit

[Don Maddox]

http://gamepolitics.com/2007/03/17/thompson-reacts-to-take-two-lawsuit/

In the wake of a recent legal threat by Miami attorney Jack Thompson (left), game publisher Take Two Interactive has launched a pre-emptive strike.

With Thompson threatening to file suit to block the release of Grand Theft Auto 4 and Manhunt 2, Take Two has petitioned the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida for relief.

[freightshaker]

Isn't Thompson's 15 minutes up yet?

[Aries]

I missed a detail while out getting a sandwich, what is Thompson's original issue with Take 2?

[John Powderly]

The software publisher seeks to block Thompson from trying to have the games declared a public nuisance under Florida law. Thompson filed a similar action against Take Two’s Bully last October, but a Florida judge rejected Thompson’s contention, allowing Bully to be sold by retailers.

http://gamepolitics.com/2007/03/16/breaking-take-two-sues-jack-thompson/

[Aries]

So my take on this, is company X, wishes to market game Y, which focuses on "undesirable activity". And super doofus layer A has declared a personal crusade against company X as a result of his own personal dislike of game Y.

So company X on behalf of themselves, has decided to strike back against super doofus lawyer A in the process.

Have I got that all correct?

Seems like a lot of grief just to be able to market a dumb game, that has already been done to death as game version 1,2 and 3.

Either way, I suppose super doofus lawyer A would have a problem if someone was to post his address on the internet somehow hehe. Then all the miscreant fans of game Y could express there displeasure with super doofus lawyer A :)

[Mantis]

While your contention that this has been done to death might be true (to us 'outsiders', anyways), I'm sure to the fans of the series, this is a hugely anticipated release. And quite frankly, with the dollars involved in the GTA series, I don't blame T2 for a preemptive strike. (Must be a holdover from when they released wargames... :halo: )

[Karri]

Have I got that all correct?

Seems like a lot of grief just to be able to market a dumb game, that has already been done to death as game version 1,2 and 3.


Well...isn't there like 5 'versions' of the game already?

[Don Maddox]

Well...isn't there like 5 'versions' of the game already?

How many versions of TOAW and Panzer Campaigns are there, about 25? 50?

GTA is easily one of the hottest selling game series ever produced, and I would fully expect to see Take2 continue to crank out sequels until gamers decide they don't want them any longer.

The decision of which games the public can buy should be up to consumers, not some lawyer. My 2 cents.

[JAMiAM]

How many versions of TOAW and Panzer Campaigns are there, about 25? 50?

Hey! Don't lump TOAW into Panzer Campaigns, add us up together and use their number of sequels to impugn on TOAW's release history.:mad:

I don't know how many "versions" there are of Panzer Campaigns, but even counting all of Talonsoft's questionably marketed versions of TOAW, in the period from 1998 to 2000, there have only been half a dozen.

Now, as to sequels, I don't see too much of a problem here, as long as consumers are getting what they want, companies are remaining viable (especially the smaller niche companies producing wargames) and that innovation continues to thrive within the series and its genre.

[Karri]

How many versions of TOAW and Panzer Campaigns are there, about 25? 50?

GTA is easily one of the hottest selling game series ever produced, and I would fully expect to see Take2 continue to crank out sequels until gamers decide they don't want them any longer.

The decision of which games the public can buy should be up to consumers, not some lawyer. My 2 cents.


But TOAW is the greatest game ever...it's like comparing Sun and a drop of water.

[Aries]

GTA 1,2,3,4,5 whatever next number is not identical to purpose made scenarios.

Poor comparison Don.

While there is quite a few versions of TOAW since the day 1 launch of the first game of that name, they are hardly the same thing as yet another GTA.

The same would apply to PzC which are uniquely identifiable battles.

But while your point is well taken, most video games are more about an evolved game engine and the same basic game, rather than an entirely new game setting, but essentially the same game engine.

Aside from PzCs being patched, the first game looks mostly the same as the latest release.

I am sure GTA 1 is graphically way less advanced from GTA latest number.

The purpose of several PzC titles, is to give the player new battles. But these battles take a great deal of research to design.

Whereas I think the latest GTA is just slightly prettier graphics, and a desire to sell you the same game over again, but slightly prettier.

I'd rather have 10 PzC titles all using the same game engine, than 10 progressively prettier GTA titles if I had to choose.

[Don Maddox]

But TOAW is the greatest game ever...it's like comparing Sun and a drop of water.

No, that would be like comparing the sales figures of GTA and TOAW. :ciao:

[JAMiAM]

No, that would be like comparing the sales figures of GTW and TOAW.
What's GTW?

[Don Maddox]

What's GTW?

GTA. Sorry, typo.

[JAMiAM]

GTA. Sorry, typo.
Oh...:devious:

No, that would be like comparing the sales figures of GTA and TOAW. :ciao:
In that case...a guy can dream, can't he?

[Don Maddox]

In that case...a guy can dream, can't he?

Sure. I'm the first one to celebrate when a war or strategy game puts up really big numbers.

But most of this "problem" is self-inflicted by the wargame companies themselves. I really hate to say that, but it's true.

Getting back on topic.

My personal belief is that it is not the job of the courts, politicians, or lawyers to tell me which games I can or can't buy. They aren't allowed to tell me what books to read, what movies I can see, or what music I can listen to. Why in the world would I allow some knucklehead in Washington D.C. to dictate to me what games I am permitted to create or buy?

I'm all for the ESRB and responsibility when it comes to parents deciding which games are appropriate for younger gamers. But I don't need ANYONE telling me which games I can play!

Mr. Thompson can go chase ambulances to amuse himself for all I care.

[JAMiAM]

But most of this "problem" is self-inflicted by the wargame companies themselves. I really hate to say that, but it is true.

That's a rather ambiguous, yet loaded, statement. Care to elaborate on it a bit? I, for one, would be interested in seeing where you were headed with it.

[Aries]

Don can you elaborate more on this...

"But most of this "problem" is self-inflicted by the wargame companies themselves. I really hate to say that, but it's true."

You could be implying many things, but I'd rather not need to guess.

[Don Maddox]

I was responding to your earlier post:

In that case...a guy can dream, can't he?

I will ask you to explain that comment first. Why is selling a lot of copies of a war game a "dream?"

[JAMiAM]

I was responding to your earlier post:



I will ask you to explain that comment first. Why is selling a lot of copies of a war game a "dream?"
Selling "a lot" of copies is rather a subjective number. Selling enough to directly compare to a mass-market title like GTA, which is the comparison that you were drawing, is a dream for the "serious" wargame developer/publisher.

Now, care to follow up on your statement that the reason that this is a problem (the inability of a serious wargaming title to sell comparably to GTA) due to the part of developers/publishers?

Obviously, if I've read more into your statement than you intended, feel free to qualify more clearly what you meant, than I have assumed above.

[Don Maddox]

Selling "a lot" of copies is rather a subjective number. Selling enough to directly compare to a mass-market title like GTA, which is the comparison that you were drawing, is a dream for the "serious" wargame developer/publisher.

James, you didn't answer the question, you simply repeated what you said earlier. Why is this a dream? Your statement is what I was originally responding to.

Mainstream games (or "mass-market" if you prefer) come from many different genres, and they come in all flavors and difficulty levels and are crafted by developers from all over the world. RPGs, shooters, third-person action games, puzzle games, simulations, RTS games, and strategy games can all be found among the top hits for any given month. So I ask again, what makes war games different? Why is having a mainstream hit with a war game a "dream?"

Your posts clearly indicate you feel there is some fundamental difference between war games and all other genres that prohibits them from being a big hit. What is that difference?

[JAMiAM]

James, you didn't answer the question, you simply repeated what you said earlier. Why is this a dream? Your statement is what I was originally responding to.
Yeah...I realized that, as soon as I posted it last night, but didn't bother to elaborate. Sorry about that.

Mainstream games (or "mass-market" if you prefer) come from many different genres, and they come in all flavors and difficulty levels and are crafted by developers from all over the world. RPGs, shooters, third-person action games, puzzle games, simulations, RTS games, and strategy games can all be found among the top hits for any given month. So I ask again, what makes war games different? Why is having a mainstream hit with a war game a "dream?"

Your posts clearly indicate you feel there is some fundamental difference between war games and all other genres that prohibits them from being a big hit. What is that difference?
I'm going to go out on a limb here, but I would say that most "serious" wargames tend to rely on the players being more contemplative than most "mainstream" players want to be. In other words, they are more geared towards those who find enjoyment in relatively slow, deliberative play, rather than fast, reactive play. Much the same as the difference between the mindset of reading a book, and turning on the television to watch the same story.

Now, I know that this might be a fairly sweeping generalization, and I am making no direct social judgement on those who enjoy "lighter" entertainment. I often feel like firing up something less mentally stimulating, just to blow off some steam. However, it is a fact that the level of detail that needs to be absorbed, the rules that need to be learned, the game functions that need to be understood, in a serious wargame far exceed most mainstream hit titles.

Obviously, there are some notable exceptions in the mainstream - the Civ series, for example - where you have a fairly comparable level of detail. However, I'd say that the "rules sets" for most mainstream games are of an order of magnitude, or two, smaller than for a wargaming title.

To answer your question as to why I think it will remain a dream for wargames to sell comparably to GTA, and other Mass-Market, or mainstream games is simply due to the general entertainment desires of the buying public. Those who tend to want to "intellectualize" in their free time, constitute a smaller portion of the game buying public than those who are more inclined to seek a more viscerally stimulating, yet generally less thoughtful form of entertainment. Ask yourself how much TV air time is dedicated toward big league sports competition, versus more contemplative activities, such as fly-fishing, hiking, chess, and poker? The same way a producer of a show featuring one of those activities could dream about "Monday Night Chess Matches" I can dream about mainstream success for the TOAW series.

[JAMiAM]

Your turn...;)

[Aries]

I will interject with these names here guys.

Age of Empires Age of kings, Steel Horizon, Panzer Tactics.

The first two are DS titles, the third is a soon to be released DS title.

Age of Empires is turn based and fricking fun. It is indeed a wargame, and is definitely a nice challenge. Steel Horizon is a naval warfare wargame, turn based and I am also quite amused with it. Panzer Tactics, I can hardly wait, wish it would hurry up.

The Nintendo DS is as you know, NOT an obscure doodad :)
I don't know how many units of each game have been made, but I doubt Nintendo will even touch your game if the numbers are not awesome.

That by the way Don, might be in the process of trashing your assertion that wargaming will never be mainstream. They are wargames, and they are mainstream. Not exactly a lot of titles, but I think more are possible.

So, where does that leave wargaming?

Hmm well if HPS and SSG and Panther Games, and all the other guys we know and love that make computer wargames NEVER break out of the current PC mode, then I suppose they will also remain companies that think large sums of their titles is not possible.

I personally think many wargames can go the route the above DS titles have gone. It remains to be seen if they can figure out how.

Can TOAW become a DS title? Sure, but I think it is illogical to assume it would have massive sums of battles, and I doubt Europa Aflame is doable.
But I don't see why some battles of more limited size can't be done.

I think Squad Battles could be made into a DS title, if HPS felt it was important enough. Their games use fairly basic graphics eh.

There are dreamers, and there are doers. Doers become people like Bill Gates, dreamers are usually left to whine about what might have been :)

[Don Maddox]

James, allow me to respond by posing another question or two. Indulge me.

How do you explain the success of flight simulations? Anyone who has ever spent any significant time at Avsim.com or the other major flight sim websites knows this is a genre that is taken very seriously by its fans. In fact, flight sim enthusiasts are probably the one group of gamers even more dedicated to their chosen genre than the average war gamer. Yet, this genre is massively popular. So popular, in fact, that Microsoft appears to consider it "their" genre. Sales for Microsoft Flight Simulator over the last 15 years have been steady and quite impressive.

How do you explain the mod communities that thrive around some of the first-person shooter and strategy games? Many of these mods boast a level of quality not even seen in yesteryear's full game releases! That doesn't seem to fit with your characterization of mainstream gamers as less thoughtful, less dedicated, and generally just after some quick entertainment.

And what about the various RPGs, both electronic and tabletop. Ever look at the entire D&D d20 system? The sheer volume of rules and add-on modules makes even ASL pale by comparison. Yet I would venture to guess that D&D sells more in a month or two than ASL has sold in its entire history. By any reckoning, the modern incarnation of D&D is hardcore and complicated, yet the system remains phenomenally popular around the world. Again, this doesn't appear to square with your characterization of mainstream gamers as less thoughtful and just after a cheap thrill.

[TacCovert4]

I tend to go along with Aries line of thinking. If you want a 'serious wargame' to be a mass market hit, you are going to need some wargames that are console based. Gateway wargames as it were, showing people who thrive on squad strategy games that there is more out there for them to challenge themselves.

The other thing is advertising. FPSs advertise like mad, both in mainstream mags, on mainstream sites, and on television. Wargaming publishers tend to be more frugal (mostly due to them being smaller and less profitable generally) and don't do much mainstream advertising. They stick to arenas where their current purchase demographic (wargaming buffs, history grognards, and the like) lurk.

To mainstream a 'serious wargame' you'd need to do the following:

Boost the graphics up a couple of notches without skimping on the engine. Graphics get mainstreamers to look at the game (many won't even take a second glance at a game with poor or dated graphical content), but serious mainstream gamers want an engine that is not a redux of the last game.

Advertise to a 'mainstreamer' demographic. Serious wargamers already know where your titles can be found. Advertise to the people that might, but don't buy your products. Show your strongpoints, such as realism, a strong engine, and a helpful online community.

Provide related titles in several areas. Mainstreamers don't want a game that is such a change that they have to relearn everything, but they do want changes of pace. The Total War series has been so popular because the interface is the same even when the game era, units or tactics has changed. Don't make 10 reruns of the same era with minor changes, but make expansion packs, new eras, and the other things highly successful mainstream games do.

[Aries]

To remark to Don's last post, D&D sales are a hard target. Some of the people in the hobby both seller and player have seen that the products are both nicely done, but also have glutted the market.

When the d20 license was opened up to anyone, virtually everyone assumed they too could do a respectable product. They weren't all correct though, and there IS some incredible crap mixed in with everrything else out there.

And the store owners are having a hard time moving some of the sludge.

To remark to TacCovert4's comments, sometimes simple is good, sometimes complex is good. Simple works on a DS. Complex works on a PC.
Logically, the smart company makes a good simple game for the DS, makes oodles and oodles of DS cartridges, and then slips a bit of cash to the dudes that make the complex game, and the niche in a niche crowd gets their complex sure ain't mainstream and ain't going to selll ANYthing like a DS title's copies worth.

War in the Pacific, excellent example of a game that simply will never sell enough numbers to make ANYone outside of wargaming give a damn. You compare WitP with the newest Zelda, and the Zelda game is of course just Zelda. But, would you prefer the cash income of Zelda, or the cash income of WitP? Don't answer that, only an idiot is going to pick WitP.
I own WitP, and I would rather play that extremely complex time killing micromanaged all year long marathon experience than Zelda. I just don't like Zelda.

But if the creator of Zelda decided, hmm I think I will make a naval game, set it in the Pacific, but keep it managable so it can be played on the DS, guess what, their sales will so utterly outdo WitP. And the Zelda guys can afford to make their game.

Wargame companies need to accept that they will never be mainstream if they have no interest in leaving the shallow end of the pool. The deep end is where the money is. They either learn to swim in deep water, or they can sit in the shallow end and keep on dreaming.

Yeah even a mediocre hand held DS game costs REAL money. But they also sell big numbers too.

I bet Steel Horizon, a decent enough WW2 naval game, makes WitP eat their dust.
And if Panzer Tactics even does average, it likely will sell enough copies to equal almost every wargame of the current style released in 2006. That's just a guess, but one I can believe.

What's really both shocking, and yet even insulting, is this. Wargames are so utterly niche, you can hardly even find them on the download scene. Yep, they are so niche they are barely even registering on the download scene.
That says something. It says wargames barely interest ANYone.

It's pretty sad, when even those that don't play consoles know the company names. but, ask someone if they know Matrix Games, HPS, SSG, Panther Games, Battlefront, and usually you get "nope never heard of them".

[Don Maddox]

I think you guys pretty much said what I was going to say. So, there it is. :smoke: