Separate names with a comma.
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Feel free to sign up today.
Discussion in 'GMD Social Forum' started by Jimmy... Dead., May 13, 2007.
I've been playing alot of RTS's lately. Mainly Rise Of Nations and Rome: Total War.
fuckers sent my copy of halo wars to the wrong adress. i paid extra for release date shipping and instead of just resending it, they will only refund the money and i have to order it again.
its not hard to send it to the right adress when i type the adress in the order form.
and ofcourse, the LE was pre order only in stores here, so now i'm stuck waiting till teusday. cocktoast mother fuckers...
try it, absolutely Hard as shit, and this is on Normal difficulty, I don't even want to try it on Legendary.
Hard games, and challenging games, equal the best.
What you mean is that because it's a console game, it's unbelievably hard to work through the shitty controller to actually play the game.
actually the controls are super easy.
Then you'll love Heroes of Might and Magic V.
I recently checked out King's Bounty: The Legend, and it rules.A definite must for all fans of Heroes of Might and Magic.
I don't have a 360
ive been playing KZ2 non-stop for quite a while now, awesome game
I bought God of War 2 again yesterday. I forgot how fun that game was.
I've never actually finished it,and now finally will be able to since I obtained a second copy of the game, and it no longer glitches at the scene with Icarus.
The game still locks up occasionally at the loading screen if Kratos dies, but it's more or less manageable as it doesn't occur as frequently as before
So...yeah! Tom Clancy's H.A.W.X: High altidude warfare is absolutely fucking rape.
I've been heavily addicted to King's Bounty: The Legend. Basically, it's an RPG/fantasy adventure with turn-based strategy combat ala Heroes of Might and MAgic. Simply great. I think it's even better than Heroes 4 and 5.
I remember the old King's Bounty game. It was on Genesis and PC, so you have an idea how old it is. It is quite a bit like HoMaM. I bought my brother one of them (HoMaM IV) for Christmas and I was watching him play and it looked too busy. The old King's Bounty was simpler. With strategy series like that, it seems like the developers want to add and add and add. I still play Civ II, because the later games look too dependent on micromanagement.
Yea, of course I'm familiar with the old King's Bounty. It was the precursor to the whole HOMM franchise.
I think micromanagent is definintely the main crippling flaw of strategy games. That, and adding superfluous features just for the appearance of variety(but that's a general thing with many games).
For me, I guess, micromanagement is more detrimental in real-time strategy games where often the speed at which you can move/click the mouse is the key to defeating your opponent.This is especially true for all those RTS titles with unnecessarily large and complicated tech trees that require you to build a plethora of buildings before you can muster a competent troop.
Which is why I prefer turn-based strategy-gives you all the time to plan out each turn at your own pace.
I can see why you'd think that HOMM IV looks busy--even based on the graphics that are filled with overbloom, it's sometimes difficult to spot locations and enemies, but from a tactical standpoint, it's not really difficult to micromanage,although if you're new to the series, HOMM IV not the best place to start. The third installment is a lot less flashy, more accessible and intuitive.
The graphics of Heroes IV are horrible, which is quite a shame for such an otherwise great game. Everything in the game looks like plastic toys.
You're right, especially the animated images of the various creatures. It looks like they've been pasted into the game. But it doesn't really bother me that much.
I'd say that it's not even the over-reliance on micromanagement that hinders the potential of many strategy games, but the loss of focus on the individual role of the unit. So in a game like the latest Red Alert, for one you have many types of tanks for each side but the actual tactical benefit gained from recruiting each type is rather miniscule. You often just win by numbers and not by how well you implemented each unit.
So, your opponent has 30 tanks of type A You build a faceless squad of 50 tanks of type B and ram into him.
In Starcraft, for instance,each faction has only but a dozen unit types available, but it creates a world of tactical possibilities because of how well defined the role of each unit is.
The function of each and every unit is unique in the way it can be used in battle. They all have their weaknesses and strrengths,and the way in which one compliments the other in a mixed squad makes for some great strategy.
And unlike in many strategy games you rarely forsake the production of low-level troops, because each upgrade makes a unit more durable.
That's another reason why I prefer turn-based strategy. Because each unit/group of units gets its turn to act, so its tactical benefit/weight in the army does not get lost in the flurry of battle.
I like the idea of micromanagement, but they never let you micromanage everything, so it winds up being arbitrary - I can choose from over 200 units that are all the same but there are only three levels of taxes. Thanks, guys.
I've been replaying Quake IV and I think this could have been a really good game. The problem is that they kept trying to mix an old school run and gun shooter with a more modern stop-and-shoot shooter. The end result is that movement speeds are really fast, everything is scripted, and guns are huge and enemies run at you - elements of run and gun old school shooters - but if you try to play it like that you'll run out of ammo or get killed really quickly because it doesn't actually work like that. There are also some poor design choices. Only the machine-gun, shotgun, and hyperblaster are really fun to shoot, and the shotgun is incredibly underpowered (takes 2 direct hits to kill the weakest enemies). Only 2 varieties of enemy are fun to kill either - the basic strog and the tactical squads/stroggified marines, who are awesome. The huge ones that run at you, the doglike ones, the big ones with grenade launchers, the colossal ones with rocket launchers, the colossal ones with shields and plasma rifles - all fucking annoying, and not just because they're hard (they're not, really) but because it's boring to shoot them till they die. The fights with the tactical squads are really fun, the environments are amazing, and the parts where you're part of a squad work really well. There are a few segments that just flat out kick ass - the level where you restore power to the something or other before going to the Nexus, the first encounter with the tactical squads where you're sneaking around and rolling explosive barrels down the stairs at them, then blowing them up, the really creepy part in the Data Processing Station, and one or two more. But ultimately the game devolves into you verus absolutely absurd numbers of ridiculous monsters. That worked fine in Doom 3 because the plot is one guy versus Hell, but this is supposed to be Earth vs the Strogg, yet you're alone at least 80% of the time. Too bad, since the ally AI was actually quite good.
Also the vehicle sequences are a whole new level of gay.
What games are dudes looking forward to?
I'm looking forward to Max Payne 3. 1 & 2 were excellent games that mixed stylish action that, while repetitive and gimmicky, didn't get old (I played through both games on all difficulty levels) with great stories that were well told and really cool visual design. 3 will hopefully make fuller use of physics and maybe introduce some new mechanics but will hopefully keep true to the core gameplay of slo-mo diving around hallways while blowing away gangsters in absurd numbers.
I'm also looking forward to Deus Ex 3 (it's coming...someday). 1 was fucking amazing, one of the best games I've ever played. It was stylish and cool, but also very smart and complex and had incredible replay value. 2, compared to 1, was a train wreck, although that's not to say it was a bad game. It was at turns too shootery and too adventure gamey. The levels were designed with a limited number of multi-tools and other items required for advancement in such a way that you had to find everything to progress etc. Also, your character could for some reason throw the bodies of enemies over 20 feet straight up. Also, the power armored enemies were incredibly annoying. Basically, it actually was a bad game come to think of it.
Anyhow, three needs to be a lot like 1, only with graphics and physics, and hopefully more sandbox and less "these are the paths you can take, yes there's a bunch of them, but that's it" but without being "where the fuck do I go now?" but also not too hand-holdy.
In other words, it needs to fucking rock.
Also, I want the next Elder Scrolls game, but I want it to be more like Morrowind.