Realism or Balance?

[Guest]

These factors could make or break any game. Do you want realism where most of the rebel's ships are scrapped together pieces of junk and have inferior weapons and training? Or do you want a nice balancing feature that completely ruins the fun but gives the other side a fighting chance?

 

(Realism pertaining to the SW universe)

[Wiking_pff]

I'm always for 100% realism in any game I play, even if that means clicking through 1000 options before even starting to play.

[Dorkthehunter]

Beowulf, this is a very good poll/discussion topic! Good work!

 

Realism all the way! Balance is for cookies!

[Garbageben]

I said realism. As a Star Wars fan having seen the movies, read the books, and played many games I'd say that I enjoyed the games most where it was realistic and not cookie-cutter balanced.

[Foshjedi2004]

Ya. Borg vs the Federation in BOTF was great!!

[Guest]

hmmm... when I posted this same question on lucasarts a while back, I was flamed for favoring realism

[RogueCommander]

I voted balance because I hate when a game is unbalanced and everyone just sticks to the better side. Although I do hate lazy balancing(i.e. Empire has AT-AT so a dev makes a similiar vehicle for rebels)

[Dorkthehunter]

hmmm... when I posted this same question on lucasarts a while back, I was flamed for favoring realism

 

Don't take it personally! Those guys are mean.

[Guest]

actually they're more stupid than mean, but mostly because I had built up a reputation on that site under a certain screen name....

[Dorkthehunter]

actually they're more stupid than mean, but mostly because I had built up a reputation on that site under a certain screen name....

 

Please tell me it's not cheesinator, please tell me it's not......

If you tell me, then someone from LEC will find you and kill you, so don't tell.

I posted there for a while, then I found this one, and I have been here ever since!

[Guest]

whoah! no, no, no, not him

 

I was the Jedi Chef

[Sigma]

Realism here, love the fact that the Reb ships are junk myself, makes the game that much more fun.

[Avaris]

Realism is great! But you'll never win over the Quake4 players or the 12 year olds with it......and somehow those bastards have all the money.

[Teradyn_pff]

All of their parents have the money. And the stupidity is hereditary or learned... either way, you know where it comes from.

[Phantom_pff]

Realism here, love the fact that the Reb ships are junk myself, makes the game that much more fun.

 

not all the ships were junk, just look at the Mon Cal ships, and the Corellian ships are not junk, not to mention the A-wings and X-wings.

 

anyways im for realism.

[SirNuke]

I am always for balance first. Realism never directly equals fun. For eample, play anything Maxis made that ran on Windows 3.1 (other than the SimCity games). In particular, I have a copy of SimEarth back home. Even by today's standards, it is both cool and realistic, but it is the raw antithesis of fun. For me, the 10 second good feeling of "Hey, they have both one and two seater Y-wings! That's exactly the same as in the Star Wars universe!" doesn't begin to outweigh my fustration over any, even minor, balance issues. And lets face it, if the Star Wars universe was real I seriously doubt that the Rebels would have lasted through ANH.

 

With that being said, realism can add a ton to a game, and it should not be 'swept aside'.

[deriko]

I voted for balance, becuase while realism is great, the game would stink if one side was always better. There would be about no point to the game if you could always win on one side becuase of realism. As much realism as possible is great, but balance should come first. I'm not saying that both sides should be the exact same or anything, but I think that each side need to have their own advantages and disadvantages to make each side have a fighting chance. I would hate this game if it was all on realism.

[Avaris]

"Realism never directly equals fun"

 

This whole concept of realism vs balance makes no sense to me at all. Is everybody here saying that if they were to make it REAL then the rebels would always win? They won in the story. As we all know, the sides "ships" weren't balanced. The empire had much stronger ships. But the rebs had great heros, a little bit of luck, and some great intelligence and strategy. The empires stronger ships couldn't make up for it, and therefore they lost. But it was "very close". So, it seems to me that REAL is BALANCED. How can being "real" to starwars then in anyway "unbalance" the game?

[Guest]

the only reason the rebels won is because George Lucas Felt like it

[Havok9120]

Not gonna touch that one.

[Ghostly_Substance]

Not gonna touch that one.

 

Since I already did long time ago.

[Havok9120]

I dont remember...was it a fun experiance?

[Ghostly_Substance]

well dont know what happened to the thread or where it went. Alll I know is people continued to make fun of Lucas and how good guys always win

 

edit: I chose balance since to much realism would turn this game into a Star Wars sim But I dont want to much balance with cookie cutters since that would just make things boring. Balance as in factions with its special powers but with a trade off in another area.

[Havok9120]

Hehe...Im sorry I missed that thread lol.

 

Realism and balance have their places. While I think most of the ppl on this forum would love a "realistic" game where the rebs had to use every means except open combat to win...the average gamer would hate such a game.

 

It'd be cool, in fact, someone should mod it...but a game needs to be decently balanced to sell, and get good reviews. I'd be happy with the C&C balance I suppose, although, it had a few of the "Army of Doom" scenarios where the only way to win was to spam the build buttons on light infantry and heavy tanks lol.

 

I'd really like to avoid that. Most of C&Cs missions didnt require an Army of Doom, but some did. I want none of these to need it. Anyway, Ive wandered off topic and, although I voted for realism, I can see why the retail version will be balanced. Modding can (hopefully despite LEC intervention) change this to a degree.

[Phantom_pff]

Hehe...Im sorry I missed that thread lol.

 

Realism and balance have their places. While I think most of the ppl on this forum would love a "realistic" game where the rebs had to use every means except open combat to win...the average gamer would hate such a game.

 

It'd be cool, in fact, someone should mod it...but a game needs to be decently balanced to sell, and get good reviews. I'd be happy with the C&C balance I suppose, although, it had a few of the "Army of Doom" scenarios where the only way to win was to spam the build buttons on light infantry and heavy tanks lol.

 

True, and since the game is supposed to be directed at both people who play RTSs for a little fun and those hardcore RTSers it would probably flop if it dose not have enough balance to it. because if they did go by realism only those who are tactical wanders would be able to play and win (as the rebels at least)