05-03-2002 15:25									#31
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Why are you dissing RTS-genre?
Age of Empires series and Empire Earth are very cool games, in some way they reflect Civ series in real-time....
I think I've played Age of Kings more than any other game just because it had a nice counter-unit combat system and Empire Earth is even better in that way, its faster, bigger, stronger and its the best RTS ever made, and if you don't like something, you got a Scenario Editor and change it, like in Civ-series...

And yea, Blizzard games are more hype than anything, Starcraft is more like a "Quake from above"...

This game has a lot of potential, looks good and I hope it comes with a full scenario editor...

	06-03-2002 01:39									#32
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I didn't say RTS games were bad, I just pointed out its flaws; nothing is perfect.

I like RTS games too, but they get boring quickly.

	06-03-2002 04:17									#33
	Ignorance is amusing if nothing else. Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by da_jaymz And yea, Blizzard games are more hype than anything, Starcraft is more like a "Quake from above"...

	06-03-2002 05:25									#34
	Re: Ignorance is amusing if nothing else. Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc

Bah..its a matter of taste...game had nice single-player levels but multiplayer just simply sucked...rush, rush, rush and again rush with the same type of units all the time....try that "tactic" in Empire Earth or AoK you'll see what will happen...
Starcraft is overrated, there's loads of better games on the market...
Ignorance? We are talking about games man, not about achieving world peace or something...

	06-03-2002 07:56									#35
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Guess you never tried a "use map settings" game.

I have played Madness, RPG-Like, Evolution, Defense, etc. games. Blizzard added triggers to their map editor, and that has made it the hit that it is for me. Although, there still is their ability to make a game with three totally different, almost perfectly balanced races. Something no other game had attempted, and no other game that I can think of has achieved.

	06-03-2002 08:53									#36
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by MacTBone Guess you never tried a "use map settings" game. I have played Madness, RPG-Like, Evolution, Defense, etc. games. Blizzard added triggers to their map editor, and that has made it the hit that it is for me.

I have no problems with the game, its a good game but its overrated....in some games like Total Anihilation and Empire Earth you can make your own "starcraft" with scenario editor...
Best RTS?? Not even close.

quote: Although, there still is their ability to make a game with three totally different, almost perfectly balanced races. Something no other game had attempted, and no other game that I can think of has achieved

3 races but gameplay is the same, only opponent that is building different types of units is the AI....I borrowed my copy of AoK to my friend who is a huuuge Starcraft fan and he always complained on AoK that the game is forcing him to build different units because of the counter-unit system.
Is this a bad or a good thing?

	06-03-2002 09:01									#37
	Tired of ads?

Different units are a good think. It makes it more realistic. It also helps to prevent rushes, because if some set of units is destroyed in a rush, you'll have to regroup or be totally decimated.

	09-03-2002 05:08									#38
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by da_jaymz I have no problems with the game, its a good game but its overrated....in some games like Total Anihilation and Empire Earth you can make your own "starcraft" with scenario editor... Best RTS?? Not even close. 3 races but gameplay is the same, only opponent that is building different types of units is the AI....I borrowed my copy of AoK to my friend who is a huuuge Starcraft fan and he always complained on AoK that the game is forcing him to build different units because of the counter-unit system. Is this a bad or a good thing?

Sure Starcraft is less sofisticated than Aok, but is Aok more polished, balanced, fun, than Starcraft? and also Starcraft, has less economic click fest, (think Aok: boar, deer, sheep, berries, mines, trees, 120 villagers)

	09-03-2002 15:27									#39
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by thinkingamer Sure Starcraft is less sofisticated than Aok, but is Aok more polished, balanced, fun, than Starcraft? and also Starcraft, has less economic click fest, (think Aok: boar, deer, sheep, berries, mines, trees, 120 villagers)

I said its a matter of taste and it depends on your style of play...boar, deer, sheep and berries disappears in first 15 minutes of the game, those are just there to get you started, in last AoK:TC patch you can queue up to 40 farms so you're left dealing with 3 resources and you don't have to play with 200 pop and btw 40-50 villies is enough for a 200 pop game...
I'm not saying Starcraft is pure crap, its good but its not THAT good.

	10-03-2002 10:14									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by da_jaymz I said its a matter of taste and it depends on your style of play...boar, deer, sheep and berries disappears in first 15 minutes of the game, those are just there to get you started, in last AoK:TC patch you can queue up to 40 farms so you're left dealing with 3 resources and you don't have to play with 200 pop and btw 40-50 villies is enough for a 200 pop game... I'm not saying Starcraft is pure crap, its good but its not THAT good.

Yes, it is a matter of opinion, but in strategy wise, starcraft is much less required to keep track of ur resorces (which it can interrupt the "real focus strategy") such as boar killing efficiency, or even controlling bunch of unit producing buildings such as barracks, stable (even keeping track of it!) in the late game.

And by the way Starcraft takes about only 1/2 time than an Aok game (u know time is gold) and that makes this game a bit more attractive (one of the reasons civ3 failed is its looooooooong game.)

The only thing i really liked about Aok is its cool civs (and its personalty, history), but thats about it.

And Aok is not a pure crap, but it is not as good as Starcraft (just compare the # of people playing SC in battlenet with # of people playing Aok in Zone)

	14-03-2002 11:28									#41
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Civ3 failed because its a long game? I have criticized Civ3 upside, downside, and side to side and never thought of that for a second.

Of course there is the wait between turns....

I generally hate RTS and I can tell you that if a game of Rise of Nations can be completed in less than 40 hours of play I don't want to touch it.

Not with a long stick from a speeding train.

	15-03-2002 01:57									#42
	Increase Your PM Length

Many great games provide for the possibilty of short games....
Civ2, EU, Baldur's Gate, etc
It all depends on how you play.

	15-03-2002 07:02									#43
	Looks good Increase Your PM Length

I agree with Siro (and the earth shakes, hell freezes over, and Armageddon starts ) that RoN looks sufficently different from most RTS to be a great game: Now, I am a fan of various RTS games. and they are not all clones- Cossakcs, for example, is in no way a clone of AoE. it plays significantly differently, the types of units and the ways they interact, the economic model, how defense works, the differences between states- all of these thigs were significantly different in Cossacks than in AoE (which I also enjoyed) , so the notion that all RTS games are the same is false just as false as anyone who states that SMAC, MOO2, and civ3 are all clones of civ because its mostly about building large cities (or colonies) and then crancking out lots of unist to rush your opponent (and since most Civ playes seek to win by war, in a way, this is all they do).

	15-03-2002 08:14									#44
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by jimmytrick Civ3 failed because its a long game? I have criticized Civ3 upside, downside, and side to side and never thought of that for a second. Of course there is the wait between turns....

Sorry, coz i did not specify: Civ3 failed as a multiplayer game, because its long game.

But overall it is less apealling because it takes 24 hours to finish.......... (You could play 5 couter-strike/team fortress MP , 2 heroes of M&M MP, and 3 Aok MP game in 24 hours of a single player civ3 game............see my point?)

	16-03-2002 00:25									#45
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by thinkingamer Sorry, coz i did not specify: Civ3 failed as a multiplayer game, because its long game.

Civ3 fails as a multiplayer game because it doesn't ship with the possibility to be played as one unless something really signigigant happened after I uninstalled the coaster from my hard drive.

	23-03-2002 03:41									#46
	Support Apolyton

Just thinking...but isn't SimGolf just a clone of other Sim things...and of course the Tycoon whatever. They're all basically the same, different various things your building, like a golf course or a roller coaster park, but still.


Anyway, the entire way at which BHG is going at RoN is different than AoK. They're talking about actually entire nations, with cities...not just one huge old city or whatever which was the basics behind AoK.

	02-04-2002 20:59									#47
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

It's amaizing what the people can write by seeing only some SCREENS.

Was Call to Power I/II a great game?

	09-04-2002 01:02									#48
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Different units are a good think. It makes it more realistic.

Right...
In a realistic game USA would have tanks, Britain would have giant horse cabs, Germany would have AI-enhanced beer barrels, and Russia would have cyborg bears. Face it, in a realistic game, everyone would have equivalent units with slightly different stats.

	02-05-2002 00:07									#49
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: I said its a matter of taste and it depends on your style of play...boar, deer, sheep and berries disappears in first 15 minutes of the game, those are just there to get you started, in last AoK:TC patch you can queue up to 40 farms so you're left dealing with 3 resources and you don't have to play with 200 pop and btw 40-50 villies is enough for a 200 pop game... I'm not saying Starcraft is pure crap, its good but its not THAT good

sorry,but if your playing a half decent player in AoK you cannot do a 200 pop game with 50 villiagers. anything less then 100 and you lose...unless your talking about hun skirm\spear in fuedal...

	02-05-2002 07:07									#50
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

*YAWN* yet another RTS.

RTS is a genre that is very limited, and no matter how you slice it, they all end up being pretty much the same (EU is the rare exception, and the RTS part of it is actually a weakness, not an asset).

I heard everyone crowing about how AoE was so revolutionary. It was the same things as WC and C&C, just slightly expanded and with a historical context. Then everyone said EE was so much better, so in-depth, blah blah blah. No, it was just boring and added 100 jillion units and buildings. Other than that, it was mindless.

In the end, RTS will just boil down to building a big army and sending it around to decimate everything in its path until you win.

God save us from RTS games!

	02-05-2002 23:08									#51
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

strange how RTS is so much more popular than TBS if its so bad...maybe you just cant think quickly...and need 10 minutes to plan your moves

	03-05-2002 02:25									#52
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

RTS is so much more popular because of all of those kids growing up playing the arcadish console games. The new screenshots confirm that Imran was right, it looks exactly like AoE where you have to constantly engage in a click-fest to get hordes of characters engaging each other. That's not gaming, that's just superficial action-oriented eye-candy. I'm willing to take bets that the gameplay will be very similar to AoE and EE because of the limitations of combat-centric RTS designs.

	03-05-2002 09:16									#53
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Cataphract887 strange how RTS is so much more popular than TBS if its so bad...maybe you just cant think quickly...and need 10 minutes to plan your moves

Popularity is not indicative of quality, especially in this day and age. Look at what the highest grossing film of all time is.

Public sentiment is never a good guage of what is really good.

	03-05-2002 17:57									#54
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov Popularity is not indicative of quality, especially in this day and age. Look at what the highest grossing film of all time is. Public sentiment is never a good guage of what is really good.

Now we are treading the dangerous regions of "personal taste"...

I personally don't like RTS. I tried to play AoE once, and it bored me to death. Click, click, click... When I tried to stop and think about what I was doing, I had to click and click and click again...

But I think that we cannot judge RoN yet; the game will be released only next year! So far, we have some indications that it will try to do things differently; the question is: will it be different enough? We'll have to wait and see.

Sure, Brian Reynolds and his team are aiming the younger audiences (the entire scope of human History in 1 hour?!) but it seems that the game will be customizable enough to allow for different gaming styles. As I said, wait and see.