Conflict - Middle East Political Simulator
 

Feel free to comment and discuss this game here. Also, if you have any useful tips or tricks don't hesitate to share them with the others! Thanks!

Review and Download (if available)

The only way to win is defeat all enemies, if there is an alternative, please tell me, I attempted peace, but the game did not end until I defeated the last bordering country.

I feel this game, is a political bomb. Because of all what is going on, in that area right now. And what has been going on for the last many years in that area. So I will NOT download and play that game. Not even for fun. But then again that is me in a nutshell. The reason is simple, frankly the situation down there is too real for me. And I support neither of them, but I bloody hate the killings and massacres that are going on.

it's a game :)

That doesn´t make it better.

Take into account that Abandonia is a game site, not a political one. We're fine with the fact that you don't want to play it, and a part of us probably support you, but we can't look differently or call unethically a game that just plays like any other ordinary game. What next? Ban all history games?

If I'm gonna post my opinion I think all the community is gonna lynch me.

Not 'all' ,probably far from even.

I was critical of the game as well, WolverineDK, because the game was all about blowing up Middle Eastern countries with no peace solution being allowed. Since you can only play as Israel, it seems like a very politically volatile game.

The game itself is said to be fun, though, but I dislike games forcing you down a political (or religious) path. I've turned down games for far less.

We have games in which you wage war over whole continents, for no other reason than thirst for conquest. Some are based on actual historical events such as the Napoleonic wars etcetera. We have a game about commanding German armies during the Second World War, and it's OK. If you really think that whatever you think Israel does, is worse than those examples, actually most of the staff would prefer if you discussed it elsewhere, since it's flamebait, and here we care about the games. We already discussed this internally and decided by majority there was no good reason to censor this; end of story.

Then keep playing forever and ever, just like the real world. Again you can say the same about every strategy game.

You live in Scandinavia, it's about as far as home as possible, playing a game changes nothing, heck, nothing we do changes anything, you're too serious.

I'm gonna take a look at this game from another point of view.

Where is the playability? I played this one some time ago and in all the replays following the first try, it was the same. Always attacked by either Egypt or Syria with far too few options to somehow change anything.

Where's the replayability?

2/5

Helllp.
 

Is there a way to save the game? It says in the start that its possible to load a game, but I can't see anyway to do the saving.

I don't believe it's highly controversial until I can see that citation!

I have been playing with the idea of having made real tasteless games like that, and was naive enough to not think anyone had made it.
(EDIT: How many games out there are about killing your opponents? Not slapping them or having a serious chat with them, but about slitting their throats or putting bullets in their heads? How many games are there where you put flowers in soldiers' guns? Does it become worse if there's a flag or a real, non-fictional country involved? In Silent Hunter III, the German ships all had a white empty circle on their flags. For more authentic flags, you needed a mod. I don't think the mod was made by a nazi, but by someone who just wanted to add more realism. What WW2 sim shows the Swastika on the tail fin of the German planes? None. It's deemed offensive. Fair enough but why would anyone not comfortable seeing a Swastika on a German WW2 airplane PLAY a WW2 flight sim? I don't care much for the 3rd Reich, but I did get the flag mod for SH3, I did get a bunch of old German soldiers' songs for the ingame record player. I don't want to see a Swastika in my home, but I'll be damned if I let them digital ships sail without it. Does the game change it's political character? Not for me. It's just a sub sim. I'm not praising the US Forces one bit, but I also enjoyed playing SEAL Team. I'm not a murderer, but I liked to play Hitman. I'm not finding anything funny about the situation in the Middle East, but Conflict is NOT the real world.)

As for the Game of this Topic:
Not particularly fun, and with zero replayability but as always, this is in my opinion. If anyone find it fun to play, by all means, cool! I'll just return to Ultima or something.

Yeah, the game isn't all that interesting, I feel constrained in my choices.

Well, the game did get me hooked for a few hours, and I even managed to win (but got less points then in another, lost session), but, as mentioned above, it offers only a handful of options. The final outcome of every session is based mainly on the stats you start with and very little on your actions.

Also, there's a frustrating bug - when you're getting really strong and are about to win, the game just hangs. It happened to me once when I was about to invade Egypt (the last country standing) and I read on Wiki that it's a fairly common occurrence. At this point I said **** OFF to the game and switched back to System Shock 2.

And a side note - there is a remake of this game, made for Windows, with far more options. Quite interesting, actually. But there is a downside - it has a time limit: 15 turns.

It's freeware, so it goes to AR.

Correction Mr. Obama (which I doubt you are) well your name is William, so no worries there. But I live in Denmark (Kjobenhavn = Copenhagen to the English speaking crowd and København in Danish which means the merchants harbour). And they sadly have a part in this matter, on one hand they are allies with USA, and on the other we have had our fair share of situations , such as the 12 drawings, and well Anders Fogh Rasmussen is a prime candidate for being the next big chease in NATO so well. Let us just say, it is NOT as far home as it could be. But as I said, the game can become a political firebomb. Just like I once mentioned before it became reality in my eyes. That Resident Evil 5 had racial tones in it. And about a week after hell was loose in the Resident Evil 5 camp. Because it became controversial. Stranger things has happened, these are just two off my head.

You have a point, the world is connected with each other, except for SubSaharan Africa, which is still relatively isolated. Also, is Rasmussen a common Danish last name? I remember in that one election, it was Rasmussen vs. Rasmussen, I'm not sure if any other country has had a similar occurrence.

Yes, Rasmussen is a common surname , well until very recently it was a surname you couldn´t buy. Which was okidoki with me, but some dumbarse has screwed that law, so the "sen" named are no longer protected (bollocks to me anyway, because I wouldn´t call somebody a Dane, just because of the last name had a "sen" in it). But the "sen" part is like son. Since the "sen" is something I can´t explain why, is not the actual spelling of søn (which is son in Danish) but history has done some fun hoola hoops with that. And to confuse even more, than some people use the søn part, instead of "sen". But anyway, yeah Rasmussen is a very common surname. So sen and søn means son in Danish. So the "Rasmussens" aren´t a big family. That would be a shame in my mind. But there are many people who has Jensen, Hansen etc. So the sen-name is common , or at least it used to be.

Too short?
 

How do you get well on in the game? I find that after a few turns someone nukes someone else and the game ends! How can you make the game last longer?

Conflict
 

Attack Lebanon quickly and take it over to gain the favor of war hawks. Then build up a very large military with mostly US weapons and US cash while avoiding other wars to gradually gain the favor of doves. Having an overwhelming military there is no need to attack or fight further. This "peace" goes on for quite awhile until declared winner. I won this way once having fought only the one battle.

the LAZY MANS guide to winning.

No need for war hear, build up an adequate military just in case though, if things get messy.

This is all about insurgency. Just continue non-stop funding of unrest in other countries. The importants ones, i find to do this are Egypt, Libya, Iran, Iraq and if Syria is trying to build nukes, then Syria aswell.

After anarchy takes over in the big countries you can do one of many tihngs. you could invade Lebanon and jordon with ease, Syria if you didnt use insurgency to topple over the government too. syrias the only country that would provide a challenge though.

Another thing you could do is just build nukes yourself.

And a 3rd thing you could do is just continue with insurgency and topple the last countries. OR you could do it another way.

Build good political relations with countries not building nukes, topple the regimes of the ones that are, that way you dont get as many 'violent acts' etc etc.

But Fubb! That means destroying other countries! And that's fascist, unless they're fantasy kingdoms in case of which it's okay!

For the love of Allah people. It's a game. Each day you see action players single-handedly goring hundreds if not thousands of enemies with their guns, often shooting 3D models representing ordinary soldiers with families, private lives, probably a baby and it's mother at home. They don't want to go to war. They don't wanna guard this laboratory. They just thought it'd be easy money in economic recession and then you come along and shoot them! In the head!

It's a game. It's fun, and I loved it. I didn't feel like the game forced me on a particular path, except that it required that all other countries are defeated, which is a fair requirement in the setting of Middle East, when you think about it.

If you're interested in non-fascist solutions try his game, but please, let me have my utterly ruthless simulation of Mid-east power struggle.

Just THINK of all the modding possibilities there are to make this game more contemporary!

Picture it: there could be an option to throw a Pride Parade in Jerusalem, which would endear you to the Doves yet alienate the ultra-orthodox. Tourism would get a boost (“but at what cost?!?”)

Or, to lampoon your enemies, you could commission a television program to show very awkward, painful sketch comedy. You could have the Foreign Ministry email it to everyone, then immediately apologize for how awkward and painful it is.

You could send Mossad agents on a mission to kidnap Elvis Costello and force him to play his cancelled Tel Aviv gig.

You could invite the Turkish ambassador over for a photo-op, but have him sit in a really, REALLY tiny chair.

Such unplumbed possibilities!:2thumbs:

I don't have the skill to get very far in this game, admittedly. It reminds of the stuff Molleindustria puts out, where you can be the CEO of McDonald's, except here everything is perfectly, perfectly earnest.

I love this game! It's simple to learn and play, but varied and challenging enough to provide rich replay value. Also, a single game only takes about half an hour.

It's so dated and hilariously absurd that it's easier to look past the game's inbuilt racism.

Your goal as Prime Minister of Israel is to surround yourself with a sea of anarchy so that you can "retire in glory." How does Israel benefit from the government of Egypt being overthrown by "Islamic extremists?" The last thing any country wants is for all of their neighboring states to collapse into chaos within the span of two or three years.

The basic premise for Conflict is so preposterous that it's hard to get upset at the fact that all insurgent movements in the game are Arab and/or Islamic extremists, even in Iran, which is a Muslim theocracy. Just as I want to criticize the game for unthinkingly using Arabs as all-purpose villains I stop and ask myself how it could possibly be in Israel's interest to fund these groups. Okay, so your relations with Syria are lamentable. They're not going to improve if some extremist faction pulls off a successful coup and takes over the country.

I'm not accusing the game designers of overt racism here. They're just guilty of not thinking about things too hard, which is perfectly forgivable if your goal is to make a fun game. These leaps in political logic represent the most simplistic assumptions that we in the West can make about the Middle East situation. Namely that the Arabs are the bad guys and everything would be better off if they'd just go away. Also, that conflicts between Israel and Palestinians can be easily solved forever if Israel and just one neighbor can get along for five minutes and create a separate state.

Nothing about this game makes any sense. This is good, as it frees us to stop worrying about its thoughtless political insensitivity and enjoy it both as a strategic challenge and as a cultural artifact that's so ripe for analysis it's falling of the vine.

Overt flaming in this thread will be removed. Please discuss the game and not politics in this thread, in order to prevent racist flame wars and the like. Your cooperation is greatly appreciated in this regard.

I don't understand. I was discussing the game.

What Arete meant was that this game is... shall we say, somewhat controversial?
We'd prefer to avoid any discussions on real-life ethics/politics in relation to this game.

Fair enough. I'm sure not trying to flame. I do find that part of the joy in playing this game comes from noticing how charmingly absurd and simplistic its political scenarios are when compared to the real world situation it purports to "simulate."

Even within a vacuum, the game itself is a little crazy. Surely I'm not the only one who noticed that you "win" by creating a zone of lawlessness and destruction around you. Like, as Prime Minister your objective is to mess up the entire region and then say "peace out!" I find this hilarious.

Totally agreeing with Dorkbot.

If someone were to release "Bloody Sunday: The 1st Person Simulation" (horrible idea) it would be difficult to talk about that game without real life events bleeding into the discussion, somehow.

This game has "Political Simulator" right in the title. If, in a flight simulator, biplanes handle like jet fighters, I don't think it's wrong for anybody to point that out.

I definitely do not mean to be insensitive, but I also don't believe the people who made this game were overly worried about being insensitive.:dunno:

It's good this game was posted. People should be free to play this game, but I don't think the game should be free from criticism.

In the game defense though, I always saw the game as insulting all countries in the Middle East, Israel included. If you win the game by overthrowing everybody, you can get the ranking of "Fascist". Not really something Israel would love to parade around.

An excellent point. In fact, a friend of mine suggested to me that the game is actively anti-Israel, since it casts the country as a nation of despoilers, bent on the destruction of their neighbors by any means necessary. Indeed, you even corrupt Arab forces to further your own interests.

It's an intriguing argument, but I personally feel it's a little too meta. IMO, the first-person nature of gaming--the fact that you yourself play as Israel--trumps any other bias as you naturally sympathize with yourself and your "character" nation.

Ultimately, I don't think the people who made this game had any agenda whatsoever, aside from making a fun and politically accurate game. (I would argue that they succeeded at the first goal, but ran into problems with the second.) The fact that they chose such a volatile subject and devoted so little thought to political correctness or cultural sensitivity is, to me, what makes this game so amusing. I consider it to be charmingly naive.

Right, back on track :p

Has anybody ever actually been able to defeat egypt in an actual 1 way Egypt vs Israel war before? I've only been able to do so if Egypt was at war with Libya, then i'd sneak attack them adn the war would be over quickly (assuming Libya didn't fall!)

Instead, my hard liner strategy (that is, when i just want to see my neighbours fall apart rather then actually trying to be peaceful) is to just fund rebels and all that rot in the countries, destabalie them, watch them fall apart form within until only Israel and Fubbles stand strong!

I've only beaten Egypt with Lybia's help or with nukes. Timing a war with Lybia is very tricky, since Egypt can spank them in a single turn if you don't distract them by posting enough troops. I doubt a 1-on-1 victory against Egypt is possible, except late in the game, after you've been able to expand your army by a few brigades.

I've defeated Egypt twice:
1) I used nuclear weapons after I wiped out all of Israel's neighbors. Of course, there is a random chance that you cause WW3 and lose, but if you succeed, you'll win the game even if the Americans embargo you.
2) In a Let's Play of Conflict: MEPS, I was unlucky enough to be at war with Egypt within the first two months of a game. However, the ensuring war was a stalemate that ended up hurting Egypt's economy. Eventually, the rebels I've been funding grew powerful enough for me to overthrew the Egyptian government, and therefore I won the war.

I have never beaten Egypt conventionally.

It's actually not hard to defeat Egypt about half the time on your own. Starting with relations as indifferent or even satisfactory, post a single brigade on the border. Then reduce relations, and the first month that you have to invade, do so (it should be the next month after posting the single brigade). You should find that the first month after invading, you are one tick mark away from winning the war, at which time you deploy everything you have. If you get to that point, the war will be over, and Egypt will be defeated.

I actually liked this game.

Israel is one of my favorite countries, and I was psyched that I could play as it's leader. The mechanics are good, the gameplay is addicting, and it reflects the possibilities of conflict there. Of course, the politics are outdated (it's 2010 and the political geography has changed little, if at all. I always found it funny that Lebanon just shits it's organs out by the end of the 90's when it still exists today in the real world). But it was fun bullying the weaker states and using Mossad to weaken the stronger ones.

However, I always found the rating odd. No matter what I did (lower defence spending, agree to reduce the size of the military, create the Palestinian homeland, maintaing stability all throughout the years), I was always denounced by either the Knesset or the public and labeled as "Fascistic". It was annoying when I really wanted there to be peace/I wanted to win via Mossad rather than the military and my people started complaining for absolutely no reason. To compensate for this, the game should have a public relations/economic management menu to alleviate these problems. Also, it should have allowed further invasions (if you take over a state, you should be allowed to go over to it and have it assimilated into Israel. I would have felt SO proud if Israel all of a sudden became bigger).

Overall, though, it was a good game.

Some tips to avoid Israeli protest would be appreciated!

Oh, and it IS possible to beat Egypt conventionally... You just need a really big military with a lot of different units.

It's enough to have about 3 units that you have more than Egypt, though I would focus on tanks, jets, and SAMs.

Needless to say, the war is always long and brutal, and the Israeli people don't like that.

Too old?
 

Can't get this game to run on Windows 7. Says it is not compatible. What am I doing wrong and how do I make it work?

DOSBox. http://www.abandonia.com/vbullet/showthread.php?t=14406

Brings back memories!
 

I remember picking up this game as a kid, which I played in the late 80's on my family's 286 IBM Compatible PC. At the time I thought the concept was neat. It was my gateway drug to later grand strategy type games.

Tips: Start with Lebanon. Strong Defense, usually offensive wars are best avoided. Use espionage and covert ops to institute regime changes instead. All weapons suppliers appreciate loyalty. The more you buy, the more they offer. IMO the US has the best stuff, but any of the three NATO suppliers will do. If you want to go "rogue nation", buy from the private arms dealer; however if you do you'll drop in relations with the NATO countries.