[quote who="Rand Johnson" reply="7" id="3529826"] I spoke to Paul this morning and personally told him I Stardock has nothing to fear from Sid Meirer's Starships game. [/quote] [e classic]:-|[/e] Well I'm glad you settled that for them. Anyway, my understanding was that Starships was supposed to play more like XCOM than it was supposed to play like Civilization, even though it's borrowing from the Civ
Never cared for SoaSE myself. I'm just happy when smart people make quality games so that other people can obsess over them. If I allowed myself to like everything I'd never get anything done anyway :)
RTS = PASS For me. But I hope the game turns out well anyway, always like to see innovative new games even if they are not my cuppa tea.
[quote who="ElanaAhova" reply="28" id="3521550"] I enjoyed the X com, enemy within, long war mod. Worth a spin.... [/quote] It's true that the longwar mod definitely improves upon the game. It adds more depth and a greater tactical challenge.
2T over TU isn't a flaw, it's a massive improvement! TU was bogged down by micromanaging and ridiculous turn plotting due to the advantage of one square creep. Lack of bases is a personal thing, neither is obviously superior to the other in my opinion, it's down to personal choice. And I'm not sure what version of Xcom you played where high level characters were never heroes, not sure if it was better or worse in which versio
Many Xcom fans think that Apocalypse was the best of the original 3 (I am inclined to agree, but it was different enough that if you felt it went to far astray that's fine). The mess that came after that wasn't xcom anyway and no one thinks that they were. the UFO series has some fans, and it's not bad, but it's not xcom either... if you just liked the game play mechanically you were probably happy (I really enjoyed UFO:ET, the rest I didn
[quote who="Alstein" reply="12" id="3517313"] The boardgame approach is fine, they just don't execute it well. I suspect that Firaxis's change in ownership is what is causing the game quality issues over there- they might still have autonomy, but I'm sure they have certain guidelines they have to follow. [/quote] Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but by what metric did they not execute the board game approach well?&nb
So then you meant to write... Stealing is stealing? Period? :)
[quote who="DARCA1213" reply="14" id="3503180"] This is starting to feel like a serial killer confession. Lol Can you be my steam friend, I think EA sucks too!?!? [e digicons]:P[/e] ID is right though, there isn't a need to pirate games anymore with Wikipedia, let's plays, reviews, game facts, and the internet at large. ;- ) [/quote] +1 I used to feel differently about piracy th
There's a lot of things I want to DL as well. And I know exactly where I could go to get them. Yet I don't do it. Not because I'm superior to anyone else, but simply because I've grown up over time and have decided that most games simply aren't worth playing in the 1st place, so 'checking them out' isn't worth my time or effort ;) But seriously, there's so much content on youtube and twitch that it&#
Sad but true. Thanks for the reminder to everyone to not be a dickwad pirate.
Buggy? I've been in since they opened the alpha and I don't even know that it was particularly buggy back then. What exactly is making you call it buggy? As to the design flaws... That's probably more a matter of personal taste than actual flaws, but either way, it's flawed as far as you are concerned.
[quote who="Heavenfall" reply="75" id="3496003"] I agree that the combat is weak, it doesn't quite feel like I can control my own units. The rest of the game is really well executed. [/quote] Initial designs were 'worse' you were never supposed to actually control the units, you were to give simple commands (attack, hold, defend) and then the battle would play out. Enough people whined about that (though I thought it was working well enough)
I dunno, I don't have any issues playing EL for hours, on the other hand when I tried to play AoW3 I couldn't take more than about 30m of it before I got bored and frustrated by it. To me there's plenty of exploring to do in EL, finding ruins, or scouting out another region for resources/villages. The military side has unit design, so even though you don't have a lot of chassis to build, you can customize your infantry/ranged/support/... with the different items
New expansion coming out sometime next month! Check out the game if you like CCGs, it's better than Hearthstone if you prefer a bit more complexity.
Interesting, but I always hated the halflings in the 1st game, doesn't seem like this is going to change my mind on this game.
I've been playing a fair bit of this Might and Magic themed CCG for a while now, and I have to say it is truly excellent. If you are interested in these kinds of games give it a look see. I've provided a link below, which of course benefits me to a degree. However, the real benefit from joining from another players link is that you start automatically with all 6 starter decks. There is no reason not to join as a friend, and if you join and never play, I don't get anyt
[quote who="sareth01" reply="55" id="3475315"] @Uberlicker Okay time for a reading lesson. Lets break it down in steps. [random drivel snipped] [/quote] What you broke down was completely pointless. You do realize this don't you? Think about it. If you have to go to such lengths to explain what you meant then you are failing at communicating your point. But what is your point now? You say things
[quote who="sareth01" reply="45" id="3475028"] If you read critically, you will notice that the core of my statements have NOTHING to do with how fun RTS games are(mainly because that is subjective and therefore a moot point) and everything to do with how little RTS is represented in the marketplace. You and I can and will enjoy turn based games, yet I will always think turn based games are inferior creations to RTS games because they require so much less talented engineerin
I'm going to assume that sareth is simply trolling and cease responding to the idiocy he is perpetuating. On the odd chance that you're serious though, well, I think you need to do better homework before you make the claims you have been making. Because I'm quite sure that the Civ series and XCOM and even HoMM were all commercial failures that only would have sold well had they been RTS.
[quote who="sareth01" reply="32" id="3474324"] If logic is applied, within the scope of life, turn based games are themselves real time strategy. They feel different from other games, no argument there. They are easier to play, especially after a long day of work. Yet, they are a dime a dozen because they are so easy to develop. As far as the market is concerned, Turn based games are over represented, real time strategy games are the minority and therefore need t
[quote who="sareth01" reply="30" id="3474314"] Quoting uberlicker, reply 29 It might be what you want, but I honestly wouldn't touch that. RTS, no matter the implementation, just leaves me cold Then you should buy a sweater, life is an RTS.[/quote] Which is why when I play a game I want something different than what I do all day.
[quote who="Space Voyager" reply="10" id="3474256"] And Fort Zombie was fun, albeit glitchy. Definitely a superb idea, I hope they do a FZ2 some day. But yes, SotS2 is the bane of Kerberos. They aimed too high and weren't able to finish the game and nobody seems to be able to forget that. And it also seems to be the only thing everybody remembers about Kerberos, as if SotS1 never happened.[/quote] I think it's more because SotS
Yep, between good and not bad. Sadly I only have time to spend on great to excellent :( Pandora just doesn't make the cut.