Posted May 13, 2017
BreOl72: I understand your mockery regarding the fact, that the Vietnam war was the only one, the US have ever lost.
I also see the possibility, that this historic fact may have an impact on the decisions of US devs/pubs, whether to make such games or not.
One genuine question, however:
what has
1) the US losing a war,
respectively
2) US developers aren't willing to use the scenario
to do with the fact, that there are no more games in the Vietnam setting?
The devs/pubs of "Vietcong" were Czechs.
Well, to be honest, Vietnam setting had some love from devs: SEAL Team, Gunboat simulator, various simulators had missions and campaigns of this period (like Jane's USAF), NAM, Vietcongs 1/2, and missions from Call of Duty Black Ops. I also see the possibility, that this historic fact may have an impact on the decisions of US devs/pubs, whether to make such games or not.
One genuine question, however:
what has
1) the US losing a war,
respectively
2) US developers aren't willing to use the scenario
to do with the fact, that there are no more games in the Vietnam setting?
The devs/pubs of "Vietcong" were Czechs.
On the other hand we have war in Korea (almost no games at all except simulators and strategy), Grenada and Panama (only one missions in CoD), recent Afghanistan (except MoH2010 and Warfighter which i liked very much!), Somalia (Delta Force Black Hawk Down) and many other periods.
The main problem with MP games, that your comrades try to ruin atmosphere with trolling, metagame knowledge and many other things. Finding a team who interested in ROLE-playing game, not just winning, is almost impossible. MP games started to remind me of such guys as munchkins - not caring for game, only about winning at any cost.
This is why i prefer SP games - i want characters, story and emotions.
Post edited May 13, 2017 by Andrey82