Welcome to the last gaming podcast of 2008! This week we’re flashing back to Nobunaga’s Ambition, a classic turn based Japanese strategy game. We’ll take a look back at the history of FASA and hit up some gaming news, including:
This weeks soap box segement, we ask if the video game release cycle is too fast or too slow.
Because you asked for it, the podcast features four guys, including Jonah Falcon, Paul S. Nowak, Jordan Lund, and Dan Quick. This is the no frills edition, however, as due to travel to PAX East, there’s no Gaming Flashback, and only a few news items.
They include:
We also include Reader Feedback. We’ll have a Question of the Week next week, we promise.
Lode Runner, a game many of us logged hundreds of hours upon. Lode Runner has a great deal of replay value thanks to its great map editor. The game was first published by Broderbund in 1983, but was first prototyped by Douglas Smith, an architecture student at the University of Washington.
The Lode Runner prototype was called Kong and was originally written for a Prime Computer 550 minicomputer on campus, but shortly after it was ported to the VAX minicomputer. Originally programmed in FORTRAN and utilized only ASCII character graphics (the most basic of characters).
In September of 1982 Smith was able to port it to the Apple II+ (in assembly language) and renamed it to Miner. In October of that same year he submitted a rough copy to Broderbund and he’s said to have received a one-line rejection letter, “Sorry, your game doesn’t fit into our product line; please feel free to submit future products.”
The original title had no joystick support and was developed in full black and white…not exactly exciting. So, Smith then borrowed money to purchase a color monitor and joystick and continued to improve the game. Around Christmas of 1982, he submitted the game, now renamed Lode Runner, to four publishers and quickly received offers from all four: Sierra, Sirius, Synergistic, and Brøderbund.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Paul is not in the podcast, and will be out for the next couple of weeks as he recovers from major surgery. In the meantime, the podcast chugs on with three podcasters, as Jordan relays what he thought of the Sony Gamescom 2012 press conference.
In the meantime, the news items include:
All that plus Reader Feedback wishing Paul well (sorry, Kizer, we didn’t moderate your message til after recording), as well as this week’s Question of the Week, “When is the right time to cut the price of a console?”
Derrick, that’s Shogun: Total War (it was the first Total War game in its series so the graphics aren’t that good compared to the recent Total War games). I liked that game too.
If you liked Nobunaga’s Ambition you might like Genghis Khan 2, also made by KOEI (http://www.abandonia.com/en/games/505/Genghis+Khan+II+-+Clan+of+the+Gray+Wolf.html)
What’s your take in Valve’s concept of episodic releases? They explained that with that kind of structure they can easily take advantage of new technologies as they come up, and not have to hold back using new technologies until the next reiteration of their game.
The problems with long release cycles, taking it to the extreme, with Duke Nukem Forever (I think) the reason why it was so delayed was by the time they reached mid-development, their game, the graphics, the engine look so obsolete, so they bought a new engine, and by the time they reached back to mid-development, the then new engine they bought gets outdated, and the cycle repeats.
Something like this happened with Blizzard with their Warcraft Adventures (it was never released).
I think episodic structures work well for some games (Sam and Max), and long development cycles for others. So long as I get a game I can enjoy I don’t really care that much
Here’s what *I* think about it, underdog: They take way too friggin’ long. They keep changing the engine, when all you need to do is create levels.
Look at Telltale Games – now they do episodic content right.
@jonahfalcon: yeah I know, the wait is killing me for episode 3.
but from a developer’s viewpoint, improving the engine continually will do good in the long run since it’ll not only help with that game their making at the moment, but they can use it for their future games as well.
keeping the engine up-to-date with new technologies is always good. I’ve worked with commercial engines that, while popular, they start showing their age in that we couldn’t incorporate features we had in mind because of its limitations that could have been fixed with newer libraries