ANCIENT PROPHECY

In conclusion I might buy this game, you might buy this game, the developers on the other hand will probably not buy this game (since they probably already have copies). The Developers anticipate having an Alpha version ready by late October, bringing the new game to us well into the new year. I must confess to being slightly worried about aspects of this game. Part of the joy of Civ was that you could play at a leisurely pace. Civ II players like me tend to be a little cack handed and prone to bouts of total insanity when in the pressure cooker of a real time strategy game. Surely there will be an option to skip controlling the battles? If there is, will having your side computer controlled be a disadvantage? If it isn't, won't it be a bit unfair to those who chose to fight every battle. I also like the familiarity of Civ II, the unobtrusiveness of all the menus, the pleasing lay out, civers prefer a functional setup to the often irritating eye candy you get in other games. Also, the whole effort of getting to learn a new game which has a 'time limit', i.e. having to do something when you really want time to think, whilst in civII you could go and get a drink before doing anything at a leisurely pace.

On the other hand Ancient Prophecy could be welcome relief. There are only so many scenarios you can play for Civ II before you finally think...its about time I changed the oil in the deep fat fryer. Maybe with the arrival of Ancient Prophecy the deep fat fryer can wait, only time will tell (or an eight ball which spells out sentences).

VISITORS COMMENTS - ADD YOURS!
Ok, I'm giving the first comment, to give the good example :) I think the most interesting feature of Ancient Prophecy is that it 3-D. I'm very looking forward to see how it is going to affect the way it will be played...
Markos Giannopoulos <markg@gamestats.com>
Thessaloniki, Greece - Thursday, October 15, 1998 at 12:19:40 (EDT)

I am not so sure about the 3D aspect, it is very difficult to get perfect, and civers are generally more strategically inclined. I would still however be interested in the real time combat aspect, especially if it is anything like Meiers Gettysburg.
Jaspers <jaspers.mail@which.net>
London, Grand Brittania - Thursday, October 15, 1998 at 15:03:50 (EDT)

AP seems highly original and looks very promising. However I'll want to more before I'm convinced. The big attraction for me is the new fantasy environment. I can see how this has a lot of potential.
Nicolas Holzapfel <j.holzapfel@virgin.net>
Nottingham, U.K. - Sunday, October 18, 1998 at 16:07:33 (EDT)

Fantasy Civ? Not a bad idea for a game - one I'd probably purchase. Real time combat though: forget it. Tried it, don't like it. As said in the review, it's nice to have that thinking time.
Quirinus <quirinus@planet.net.au>
Sydney, - Sunday, December 06, 1998 at 23:52:38 (EST)

Ap looks good but by the discription it sounds like its a lot like lords of the realm 2, I did not really like the idea of going into a battle I think it should be more like civ2 already there with your units you just have to put up with it an flank the enemy and catch them off guard. (Snicker).
Krutz Motra <KMotra@Aol.com>
Hobart, australia - Thursday, December 10, 1998 at 02:27:38 (EST)

I really, really hate how tons of people think they can add real time strategy to civilization and make a wonderfully great game. I totally agree with Jaspers when he says that part of the joy of playing Civilization II was being able to sit back and relax! Honestly, what the heck is the point of having a turn based strategy game with real time combat, TBS only works when the entire game is TBS! They are taking away from a great genre....
kshah <kshah@sidgames.com>
Warren, USA - Friday, December 25, 1998 at 15:32:11 (EST)

I think adding the real time strategy is great! Now if I lose a battle it's my own goddamn fault!
monolith94 <monolith94@hotmail.com>
- Wednesday, February 24, 1999 at 11:15:24 (EST)

after reading the review (a suppliment of a game idea I have), and reading the first couple of comments, I came up with a brill idea. get this: part of the network game could be to play as different advicers on the same team, still playing against another team and/or computer network player. just expand/change some files to give the game new game rules. simple huh :) well I thought it was, and it just adds to the ULTIMATE GAME :)
Paul Wratt <Paul@qdata.net>
Midrand, South Africa - Tuesday, March 30, 1999 at 10:27:05 (EST)

I think they should drop the whole real time combat thing and go with the Master of Magic combat system, its turn based, and you can control the whole battle.
Kevin Davies <kerek32@yahoo.com>
Courtenay, Canada - Sunday, August 29, 1999 at 04:52:10 (EDT)

Previous page: Review page 1