Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5

Author Topic: Geo-political Simulator  (Read 22545 times)

Sordid

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #30 on: April 20, 2009, 06:31:49 pm »

Where are you even getting this? I don't see that title anywhere on the game's website. It just says "Geo-Political Simulator 2009 Edition" on the box they have pictured there.
Logged

Servant Corps

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #31 on: April 20, 2009, 06:33:56 pm »

IGN again...

Quote
Yet there's also a deeper problem, which is that the developers still try to shoehorn every governmental type into one formula. The United States' unique separation of powers, as well as the distribution of power on local, state, and Federal levels, isn't really modeled, which is a problem since the game's main scenario gives you the role of president of the United States. Sure, a European country's parliament may be able to control the salaries and exact number of teachers in the country, but in the United States those kinds of critical details are dealt with on a state and local level. Another example is when it comes to nuclear weapons: you can only build them secretly, which is weird since the US is open about the fact that it stockpiles nukes. It just doesn't make much sense in the overall scheme of things.

Also,
the name of the game according to Metacritic is
: "Commander in Chief: Geo-Political Simulator 2009".

Furthermore, on Metacritic:

Quote from: Eversim
"A new President for the USA": On January 20th, 2009, Inauguration Day, the new US president starts his 4-year mandate. He has to apply Democratic party policies and will be facing several challenges including: financial crisis, unemployment, introducing new social laws in health, education, and labor, sending home US troops that are in Irak, just to name a few tasks ...

And finally...finally...

« Last Edit: April 20, 2009, 06:39:33 pm by Servant Corps »
Logged
I have left Bay12Games to pursue a life of non-Bay12Games. If you need to talk to me, please email at me at igorhorst at gmail dot com.

PTTG??

  • Bay Watcher
  • Kringrus! Babak crulurg tingra!
    • View Profile
    • http://www.nowherepublishing.com
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #32 on: April 20, 2009, 06:38:59 pm »

Actually, re-reading the article makes me realize the real, true reason why the people protested.

Quote
January 28, 2009 - I was less than a week into the administration of my 44th president of the United States, the honorable Edward MacKenny, when suddenly the big guy was booted out of office after his popularity rating dropped faster than a meteorite crashing to Earth. And yet the only reason I can deduce for it was that that despite proposing cuts in income and property taxes, a proposed increase in vehicle registration taxes sent the electorate in a rabid frenzy. Of course, as any American who drives knows, it's the states that set their own vehicle registration taxes, not the Federal Government. That sort of sums up the relevant points about Commander in Chief: Geo-Political Simulator 2009, the follow up to last year's ambitious mess of a game, Geo-Political Simulator.

Vehicle registration taxes. If you drive a car, you're going to have to pay higher registeration fees. Yeah, that's going to lead to problems.

I think the main point I was trying to make is not about how a what-you-may-call-it tax is the worst thing on planet Earth, but how this game is not really...a good simulation at all. In general, not in this specific instance. For example, there is no such checks-and-balances in this game, in a game that is supposed to be focused on the US.

This was the only strange event I found (at least for this new updated version), as this game gets around, I'm sure reviewers will post new 'strangeness' {at least in how they preceive strange}...

True; but the game is severely inaccurate in terms of magnitude; An increase of 10% or so in real life would get people talking and senators scrambling, and may even prevent them from re-election and harm the party image, but it won't cause an impeachment.

That's annother thing; I got kicked out of office for failing to follow the republican party lines! The parties of the united states, while traditional to the point of fossilization, are not legally part of the government. Bah!
Logged
A thousand million pool balls made from precious metals, covered in beef stock.

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #33 on: April 20, 2009, 07:18:09 pm »

I think the main point I was trying to make is not about how a what-you-may-call-it tax is the worst thing on planet Earth, but how this game is not really...a good simulation at all. In general, not in this specific instance. For example, there is no such checks-and-balances in this game, in a game that is supposed to be focused on the US.

Yeah, it does look like the game has serious issues.  But I just wanted to point out that in that one instance, he was judging the game as unrealistic specifically because it was acting realistic.  It's hard enough trying to make games with any sort of depth that it irks me to see the game get blamed for a problem that's clearly located between chair and keyboard.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

Tormy

  • Bay Watcher
  • I shall not pass?
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #34 on: April 21, 2009, 07:46:29 am »

Yeah, it does look like the game has serious issues. 

Yeah it has some issues. Hopefully the devs will able to fix the bugs/polish&balance the gameplay a bit, because the game is quite good actually. It could be awesome even, if those problems would disappear.  :)
« Last Edit: April 21, 2009, 07:52:40 am by Tormy »
Logged

Bien

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #35 on: April 24, 2009, 02:01:35 pm »

Then blame it on the American school system that educated these American reviewers.
American School System, A.S.S.

"Then blame it on the ass that educated these American reviewers."
 ;D
Logged

Muz

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #36 on: April 25, 2009, 03:05:41 am »

Massive bugs are inevitable of any game of this epic scale. The only man who can pull it off is Chris Crawford :P
Logged
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.

Servant Corps

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #37 on: April 25, 2009, 10:18:39 am »

And Chris comes off slightly insane to me. :)

Yeah, the Balance of Powers series is great, altough I do dislike his reasoning for why a minor standoff over an small African country should logically result in nuclear war ("If you didn't WANT nuclear war, you shouldn't have escalated it up to a nuclear war").
Logged
I have left Bay12Games to pursue a life of non-Bay12Games. If you need to talk to me, please email at me at igorhorst at gmail dot com.

Timst

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #38 on: April 25, 2009, 11:43:38 am »

It's strange that the game is focused on a US POV, because if I remember correctly, it was made by a french company, and released during the french presidential elections (which were heavily mediatised). I also remember that the game was said to be full of bugs, probably because of its "marketized" release.

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #39 on: April 25, 2009, 03:13:17 pm »

I just played BOP 1990 for the first time yesterday, then I see it come up.  Mysteeerious!

And Chris comes off slightly insane to me. :)

Yeah, the Balance of Powers series is great, altough I do dislike his reasoning for why a minor standoff over an small African country should logically result in nuclear war ("If you didn't WANT nuclear war, you shouldn't have escalated it up to a nuclear war").

IMHO, there's two glaring problems.
1) Reality is entirely defined by the AI's expectations.  If they want something, you HAVE to give it to them.
2) There are no restrictions on superpowers beyond the threat of nukes.
3) Then there's the smaller fact of protest against actions that wouldn't be protested...

The first and second points happened to me repeatedly where the USSR would invade Iraq on the first turn and Iran on the second.  First of all, can you say "fiasco?"  Second of all, I wasn't allowed to do anything, or they would launch the nukes.  What?  You are allowed to invade and I can't do shit?

Then of course there's the fact that nuclear war starts over stupid shit because you always lose prestige for backing down over stuff, even when that's unrealistic.  Every crises is not a Cuban Missile Crises where one side has to blink.  Sometimes, one super power is completely unable to stop the other from doing stuff, because it would look freaking ridiculous even if it won.  For example, I had a game where the Soviets nuked me for saying nasty things about the Sadinistas.  Nevermind that IRL, the US actually supplied the insurgency.  There's no way the Soviets would be able to come out looking like anything but clowns for starting a crisis here.  Just imagine how this would play out:

US President mentions: we don't like the Sadinista's.
USSR on the red phone: shut up!
US on the red phone: huh?
USSR before the UN: WE THREATEN WAR!!!
US ambasador get's up and says in a puzzled voice: um, you really can't start a war over this...
USSR goes to DefCon4!
US goes before the UN: In the interest of avoiding nuclear war, the US has agree'd not to badmouth the Sadinista's.

US loses 1 prestige point for backing down from saying nasty things.  USSR looses 1000 prestige points for convincing the world they are batshit insane...

It's a cool idea and he did do a lot of stuff right, but the game boils down to whether the AI is insane enough to win or reasonable enough to let you win.  Brinksman ship has it's uses, but geopolitics has more to it then JUST brinksmanship.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

Servant Corps

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #40 on: April 25, 2009, 03:25:19 pm »

Well, Iran and Iraq is right next to the sphere of the Soviet Union. The USSR has a bonus to send in troops right into the area. Plus, the USSR has more troops than the Americans. Hm. Combined with 'Finlandization', Iraq and Iran are already leaning towards the USSR, because they don't want Soviet troops marching in?

How can the Americans stop Iran and Iraq from falling to the Soviet sphere? I'm not sure. But there are lot of minor countries out there, if you could attempt to overthrow them, the points will add up and that would be useful indeed. I recommend acting just as insane as the Soviet Union, questioning every little thing they make, so as to provoke an international crisis, and thereby gain some prestige. You'll set a bad example, but hey.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2009, 03:27:06 pm by Servant Corps »
Logged
I have left Bay12Games to pursue a life of non-Bay12Games. If you need to talk to me, please email at me at igorhorst at gmail dot com.

Servant Corps

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #41 on: April 25, 2009, 03:43:58 pm »

Wait, you gave up at DEFCON 4?

You should only, ONLY give in at DEFCON 2 and DEFCON 1, because by that time, a nuclear war would be bound to happen if you escalate any further...but as it stands, DEFCON 4? You're a laughing stock.

Escalate it up as much as you can. Get the Soviets on their toes. Eventually, the USSR will realize that you view Nicaragua as vital to America's security and that blowing the whole world up just to stop you from criticizing the Sadinistas is rather stupid. The Soviets will give in. You will get a boatload of prestige, plus you can intimidate the Soviet Union from ever assisting the Sadinistas...

Quote
Soviet Union: "I'm going to send in 1,000 military advisers over to the Sadinistas."

America: "Ahem."

Soviet Union: "Oh right. Cancel that then. I don't want a nuclear war."

...thereby providing you free rein in taking over Nicaragua.

Also, did you try calling the Soviet Union up and criticizing the Iraqi or Iranian invasions? Prehaps if you escalate it up, prehaps the USSR might reconsider the invasion?

I think maybe the only redeeming feature of "Balance of Power" is its  'multiplayer'...maybe PBEM too?
« Last Edit: April 25, 2009, 03:46:56 pm by Servant Corps »
Logged
I have left Bay12Games to pursue a life of non-Bay12Games. If you need to talk to me, please email at me at igorhorst at gmail dot com.

mainiac

  • Bay Watcher
  • Na vazeal kwah-kai
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #42 on: April 26, 2009, 01:19:17 am »

No, I didn't go to Defcon4.  I stood by my guns and the world ended.  I was saying that realistically, the US would have gone "wtf?  Just put the nukes down, dude" at Defcon4 and everyone would have said "wow, what the frak were the commies thinking?"  In game, avoiding nuclear war is somehow bad for your standing, when IRL, sanity is reassuring in an ally.
Logged
Ancient Babylonian god of RAEG
--------------
[CAN_INTERNET]
[PREFSTRING:google]
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget and I will tell you what you value"
« Last Edit: February 10, 1988, 03:27:23 pm by UR MOM »
mainiac is always a little sarcastic, at least.

Muz

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #43 on: April 28, 2009, 04:42:12 am »

Lol, Balance of Power was too difficult for me, and I have no interest in Cold War politics. BoP: 21st Century is much more fun, IMHO, even with all the bugs still in it. It does suck that you could win by a margin in BoP2k by going nuke-crazy, lol.
Logged
Disclaimer: Any sarcasm in my posts will not be mentioned as that would ruin the purpose. It is assumed that the reader is intelligent enough to tell the difference between what is sarcasm and what is not.

Servant Corps

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Geo-political Simulator
« Reply #44 on: April 28, 2009, 02:52:58 pm »

Hm, any tips for getting Pakistan to hand over Bin Laden? I finally was able to convince Afghanistan to hand over Bin Laden after working with Pakistan, passing UN sanctions against the country, and funding the Northern Alliance...only for Afghanistan to report Bin Laden fled into Pakistan.

After Pakistan refuses to budge, and after I lost two UN sanction votes, I finally decided to send military arms and actually overthrow Pakistan. My stooge however refused to actually hand over Osama Bin Laden. I 'stayed the course' in Pakistan, only for China to decide to seize some valuable strait in the middle of nowhere since I stationed all my troops in Pakistan, and Palestine decided now's a great time to fire missles. I got replaced by that Obama guy.

So, I know how to pressure Afghanistan to hand over Osama. How do I pressure Pakistan to hand Osama? It was only 'slightly' against the possiblity of handing over Osama, even after asking Pakistan. It'd also be nice if you can tell me how to gain prestige, because I've been blowing it asking everybody and their brother to help pressure Afghanistan.

EDIT: I DID IT!
Spoiler (click to show/hide)
« Last Edit: April 28, 2009, 03:13:12 pm by Servant Corps »
Logged
I have left Bay12Games to pursue a life of non-Bay12Games. If you need to talk to me, please email at me at igorhorst at gmail dot com.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5