Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Grand Strategy game?

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> Grand Strategy game? Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Grand Strategy game? - 7/28/2004 2:08:16 PM   
Error in 0


Posts: 248
Joined: 7/19/2004
Status: offline 		I have played Hearts of Iron, and found it enjoyable. But mostly frustrating . Is it possible that Matrix games have a similar or is about to make a similar game? That is, a game that involves strategic fighting in a grand (even world) theater, and also some degree of empire building? Even though I love the Korsun Pocket game, I miss the ability to build your own army like in SPWAW. And naturally, if one include empire building, I would have even more control.

Oh, I have played UV which is a strategic game, but maybe it is because I dont fancy naval battles, or what, but I never understood that game...

< Message edited by JallaTryne -- 7/28/2004 12:09:37 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 7/28/2004 2:09:12 PM   
andytimtim


Posts: 150
Joined: 7/15/2004
From: Livingston, Scotland
Status: offline 		yes sir there is! world at war i think its called!

but to be honest i perfer hearts of iron!!

(in reply to Error in 0)
Post #: 2
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 7/28/2004 2:14:40 PM   
Error in 0


Posts: 248
Joined: 7/19/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: andytimtim

yes sir there is! world at war i think its called!

but to be honest i perfer hearts of iron!!


I think WaW looks very interesting. But how can you prefer HoI when WaW is still under production? But since you do, can you explain what WaW lacks to become superior to HoI?

(in reply to andytimtim)
Post #: 3
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 7/28/2004 4:11:07 PM   
andytimtim


Posts: 150
Joined: 7/15/2004
From: Livingston, Scotland
Status: offline 		well if you look at WAW it just doesn't look to exciting, theres only five provinces between berlin and moscow!!!!

after playing HoI, i think its a great game,


obviously i wont be able to tell which game is better, but ill stick to HoI!

(in reply to Error in 0)
Post #: 4
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 7/28/2004 8:52:12 PM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline 		They might as well call it "World in Candyland" because anything that simulates the world in any kind of a realistic way may involve scrutiny of certain 'political' figures. Which I suppose is alright if they're DEAD( I don't know.Ronald Reagan's dead.I wouldn't want to be caught criticizing him on this website! Oops!). Matrix games has made it clear to me that any discussion involving the world since 1945 aside from the great war against the communists( that never happened,that was won by republicans spending billions on SDI,B1s,B2s,MX missiles -all which have proven to be useless or redundant, and arming every allah-loving moslem with the most sophisticated weapons imaginable-"Don't worry it'll all come back to us." Yeah. That's what I'm afraid of.) is strictly off limits!

-As long as I'm in good company. Hell, 'Risk' would even work. Pehaps we could refer to HOI as a "gateway" strategec-level sim.

< Message edited by macgregor -- 7/30/2004 6:41:11 PM >

(in reply to andytimtim)
Post #: 5
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 7/29/2004 4:47:35 AM   
ravinhood


Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline 		Never miss a chance at my favorite game to bash! HOI is a rediculous pile of garbage, when a minor country like Brazil can defeat the Italians and the Germans it definitely has problems. And that combat system??? The most abstract hands off do nothing combat system I've ever seen, very unrealistic, hardly worth any mention at all. And lets talk about the Allied/Japan invasions, those amphibious ones that hardly take place and when they do, so easily crushed, hardly any competion or challenge or enjoyment out of that game at all. And then we can get into it taking Paradox a year and a half to even make the game a "meager" challenge with patch 1.06, but, still flaws in much of the system and still the AI is too easy to over-run, destroy with any country.

I believe they made a mistake using the EU engine on HOI and Victoria and now CK, it's a tired engine and while it worked "just ok" with EUII, it's certainly not the engine for an operational level wargame of WWII. So, I'm very much looking forward to World at War by Matrix development, Matrix makes the very best "wargames", but, then again they have the very best wargame designers, now if you could just get Sid Meier to join your merry little crew, lord knows what kind of grand strategy operational tactical game all those brains you have combined could fulfill. ;)

(in reply to macgregor)
Post #: 6
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 7/30/2004 12:42:37 AM   
Koper


Posts: 34
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Never miss a chance at my favorite game to bash!


Never miss the chance to bash your bashing...

quote:


HOI is a rediculous pile of garbage, when a minor country like Brazil can defeat the Italians and the Germans it definitely has problems.


And in WaW those simply not exist as playable countries... Hooray for realism!

quote:


And that combat system??? The most abstract hands off do nothing combat system I've ever seen, very unrealistic, hardly worth any mention at all.


Again, hooray for super detailed and realistic WaW!


Seriously? WaW can be really fun game - I'm definetly going to try it. But I suspect it will be 2-3 weeks of fun at the most, as game seems like not very replayable in single player mode (yes, yes - it probably rocks in PBEM).

HoI on the other hand got huge replayability potential - playing all the mayors, some minors or testing one of the mods is really fun - and it guarantees long hours of game (or, in your case, frustration ).

No sense in comparing HoI and WaW. HoI is somewhere between WiTP and SC, WaW is even simplier then SC.

< Message edited by Koper -- 7/29/2004 11:23:45 PM >

(in reply to ravinhood)
Post #: 7
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 7/30/2004 2:04:35 AM   
dinsdale


Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood
it's certainly not the engine for an operational level wargame of WWII.

Then it's a good job that HOI is a strategic level game isn't it.

quote:

So, I'm very much looking forward to World at War by Matrix development, Matrix makes the very best "wargames", but, then again they have the very best wargame designers, now if you could just get Sid Meier to join your merry little crew, lord knows what kind of grand strategy operational tactical game all those brains you have combined could fulfill. ;)

Funny, I've been looking through the WiTP forum and reading the same sorry excuses about the AI that I thought Paradox fora had copyrighted. Plenty of bugs, including some who could not even start the game (sound familiar yet?)

However, I don't see you railing against Grigsby+co at all, in fact you're claiming their game is worth looking forward to

Oh well, I'll be waiting for World In Flames to be finished, Risk++ (sorry World At War) is just too abstract for my taste.

(in reply to ravinhood)
Post #: 8
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 7/30/2004 2:08:49 AM   
ravinhood


Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline 		Well, I liked SC, you really think WaW will be easier than that?

Oh well matters not, in all fairness after patch 1.06 HOI wasn't that bad, but, after waiting a year and a half for that patch, it left me with sour apples for Paradox games. I like my games to work out of the box or at least within a few weeks to a month, no more.

Now it would have been different if they had fixed all the bugs and flaws in patch 1.01 or 1.02, but, they didn't, and adding "new features" to later patches wouldn't have been a problem. But, many things in patch 1.05 and 1.06 should have been in the origional game and not a patch.

Sooooooooooooo, I will stick with Matrix, Hps, and Shrapnel and Creative Assembly games from now on and may take a stab at one outside game called "Take Command 1861", looks like Civil War:TW to me and very detailed graphics of the battles.

Now, if Matrix would just release something I have been waiting to play for way too long now, Cross of Iron, Battles in Normandy, that Napolean Empires game, and some Africa Korps game, I think that would tide me over until next year about this time. When I'll be looking for World at War and World in Flames. World in Flames is really the one I think will surpass HOI in replay value, MP value and accuracy value.

I was looking at the new Axis and Allies remake game, but, it's patterned after Rise of Nations, and I was hoping it would be patterned after the Total War engine. I really hate real time micromanagment games.

(in reply to Koper)
Post #: 9
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 7/30/2004 2:13:44 AM   
ravinhood


Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline
quote:

However, I don't see you railing against Grigsby+co at all, in fact you're claiming their game is worth looking forward to


Nope, cause I didn't buy WitP, so I didn't get burnt by WitP, so I have no complaints against Grigsby or Matrix and company until I feel burned by them.

I been playing Steel Panthers for years and you don't find many companies that support a game for so long for FREE, let alone give you FREE downloads of War in the Pacific origiona game or War in Russia origional game. FREE FREE FREE. ;)

Now if Paradox wants to give me some FREE games, I might have a different outlook on them, would show me they care enough about keeping me as a customer that they'll give me something FREE to ease the pain of their sorry out of the box games. ;)

(in reply to dinsdale)
Post #: 10
RE: Grand Strategy game? You bet! - 7/30/2004 2:35:05 AM   
2Stepper


Posts: 948
Joined: 1/19/2003
From: North Burbs of Omaha
Status: offline 		Well, at the risk of getting roasted alive in a "flame", I'll jump in this and say something...

I bit on both HOI, AND WiTP. I love them both for very different reasons! I haven't had an ounce of trouble with WiTP so far for the type of wargame that its out to simulate. Its turn based and frankly designed for weeks and weeks of play just to complete one single game. Something I remember very fondly from the old boardgame days... So in its own right, its everything right about board games with the "instant" gratification of a computer game. Something I totally appreciate. I mean while a great game in its own right, Victory Games "Pacific War" from 1986 took HOURS to just setup.

Now as for HOI, granted, it took a patch or two just to get going off the shelf. It had a pernicoius habit of crashing without a warning only a year or two into the game. That said, the "community" around the game is very dedicated to the potential of the game, added the fact that they're mod'ing the daylights out of it in lieu of HOI 2 which is supposed to be out late this year, early next... I love its replayability too for the very reason that I can play any country at any level and just go. A game takes me a week or so in single mode and maybe a month give or take in multiplayer with a dedicated friend...

I.e, in MHO, both games have their merits. You bet they have problems, but both companies (Matrix and Paradox) are dedicated to making them work. I for one look forward to several months if not YEARS of playing both of them.

_____________________________


"Send in the Infantry. Tanks cost money... the dead cost nothing..." :)

(in reply to ravinhood)
Post #: 11
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 7/30/2004 3:43:06 AM   
dinsdale


Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Well, I liked SC, you really think WaW will be easier than that?

I can't say, it just looks very....limited. They're also marketing it as a lightweight, it's just not my taste.

quote:

World in Flames is really the one I think will surpass HOI in replay value, MP value and accuracy value.

If they ever get it finished it should be the WW2 strategic game we've been waiting for. I'll never understand why designers continue to make up their own game, then try and develop it in a short space of time. Board games have tried and tested rules, yet very little inspiration is taken from games such as 3R A3R and WiF.

quote:


I been playing Steel Panthers for years and you don't find many companies that support a game for so long for FREE, let alone give you FREE downloads of War in the Pacific origiona game or War in Russia origional game. FREE FREE FREE. ;)

Now if Paradox wants to give me some FREE games, I might have a different outlook on them, would show me they care enough about keeping me as a customer that they'll give me something FREE to ease the pain of their sorry out of the box games. ;)

Well when they're almost a decade old and a fan group wishes to take on the code we'll see :)

(in reply to ravinhood)
Post #: 12
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 7/31/2004 8:10:33 AM   
ravinhood


Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline 		Yeah, like SQUAD LEADER hexed based game by Avalon Hill, why can't they just make that game instead of EYSA, Combat Mission, Steel Panthers, Close Combat, etc. etc.

While those above games are fun, they just aren't SQUAD LEADER to me. I need my Les the Sarge counter. hehe

Oh and btw what is AIDE DE CAMP? Is this a program to play board games with a computer opponent or just an aid for playing another human player using a computer to keep all the data?

(in reply to dinsdale)
Post #: 13
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 7/31/2004 10:18:36 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline 		You guys are so wrong about WAW (well, some of you are )

I invite you to come over to WAW board and read an AAR or two. This game is going to be hit, and deservedly so. It's cool for wargaming newbies, but IMO grogs will make a huge mistake if they miss on this one. I have and enjoy monster like WITP, and plan to have several PBEMs going, but I also enjoy WAW immensely, though on a totally different level.

WAW is VERY realistic, historic, and challenging, all the while being deceitfuly "simple". Come over to WAW boards and read an AAR or two

Oleg

_____________________________


(in reply to ravinhood)
Post #: 14
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 2:28:38 AM   
SeaMonkey

 

Posts: 804
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline
quote:

You guys are so wrong about WAW (well, some of you are )


This is exactly what happens with the SC experience. People play it and decide they have it mastered and its so simple and move on without really examining the intracacies of the engine, especially against humans. What's the ole saying..."Never judge a book by its cover". I'm not at all surprised by the negative overturns of preview opinions of WaW, ....after all in this world everything is wanted NOW!!!, Fast... I can't wait..all shortsightedness, jump to conclusions and no long term wisdom....That's our world "instant gratification"...case in point, look at the success of FPS.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 15
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 2:39:57 AM   
dinsdale


Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey
This is exactly what happens with the SC experience. People play it and decide they have it mastered and its so simple and move on without really examining the intracacies of the engine, especially against humans. What's the ole saying..."Never judge a book by its cover". I'm not at all surprised by the negative overturns of preview opinions of WaW, ....after all in this world everything is wanted NOW!!!, Fast... I can't wait..all shortsightedness, jump to conclusions and no long term wisdom....That's our world "instant gratification"...case in point, look at the success of FPS.


So not being interested in a game is due to the ills of all society is it? Chess and Checkers are both games which are fairly easily mastered but many ignore the intracacies of those engines too if they want a detailed and complex WW2 game.

Sorry, neither SC nor WaW look to be the games I want to play. Wish I could change my taste just to keep you happy, but that's not possible. Simplified grand strategic games are too similar to the Risk and Attack! style of play which just does not interest me. That's why I'll wait for WiF and hope that somebody else tries to create another game system in the future.

Have fun feeling superior over those who enjoy FPS games, obviously you know what the real gems are, so I'd suggest you start some publication to educate the millions of wayward souls who, surprisingly enough, don't see everything the same way you do.

(in reply to SeaMonkey)
Post #: 16
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 3:03:24 AM   
SeaMonkey

 

Posts: 804
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline
quote:

so I'd suggest you start some publication to educate the millions of wayward souls who, surprisingly enough, don't see everything the same way you do.


Not a chance...its their loss , not mine.

(in reply to dinsdale)
Post #: 17
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 3:21:00 AM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey

quote:

You guys are so wrong about WAW (well, some of you are )


This is exactly what happens with the SC experience. People play it and decide they have it mastered and its so simple and move on without really examining the intracacies of the engine, especially against humans. What's the ole saying..."Never judge a book by its cover". I'm not at all surprised by the negative overturns of preview opinions of WaW, ....after all in this world everything is wanted NOW!!!, Fast... I can't wait..all shortsightedness, jump to conclusions and no long term wisdom....That's our world "instant gratification"...case in point, look at the success of FPS.


Well I wouldn't go that far

I can see where are people coming from when they say they have reservations towards WAW, but all I can say to them is they're *wrong*! Without having played WAW myself I could be thinking along the similar lines ("too simple", bah, etc.), as I do come from hardcore grog camp as well, so I don't entirely blame them for being so prejudicial.

All I can say is to repeat that WAW is historical, it has depth, it is challenging and has tremendous replayability. It is also one of the most PBEM-friendly games I ever saw. To dismiss this game because it seems "simplistic" is just plain wrong IMO.

But if someone still thinks this "simplistic view of WW2 grand strategy" is not his cup of tea I have no problems with that, nor do I think he comes from "instant gratification" FPS crowd Different people - different tastes. Just don't jump to conclusions too soon.

(BTW there are good FPS games out there ).

Oleg

_____________________________


(in reply to SeaMonkey)
Post #: 18
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 3:46:50 AM   
SeaMonkey

 

Posts: 804
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline 		Geez...Alright, already, I confess .. i still play "Halo" with my son and his pods... Not to mention a good "Doom" sequel from time to time. Oh hell what does it matter, I used to really be into "Asteroids", "Missile Command", etc. etc. The grog came out in me again when TOAW arrived, as I started with AH D-Day in 66. So yeah, I see y'all's points...but I'm old and cranky...set in my ways...narrowminded..conservative and there's nothing more satisfying than having about six games of PBEM SC going at one time....simple...yet chaotic...multi-tasking...self deceiving.....exactly the ways of the world.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 19
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 4:31:24 AM   
ravinhood


Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline 		Don't worry SeaMonkey I agree with you also. ;)

So Dinsdale you gonna buy HOI 2? ;) I'm not hehe

We all have our preferences, I don't like monster games and actually like Risk and Axis and Allies type games. I still prefer those games you can play in an evening 4 to 6 hours.

WitP looks superb, totally monster game, but, even if I bought it, which I probably will eventually, I'll never play it.

I had D-Day the Longest Day and never really played it, setup the pieces a bunch of times though, heh. I also have Pacific Theater of Operations by SPI (unpunched) woohoo, but, I'll never play it. Now The ALAMO by Decision/Spi, now I've played that game a bunch of times. ;)

I think what bugs me in monster games is I have to deal with too many situations, way to many units, I loaded up Battleground Waterloo today and quit by the 3rd turn, just too much to mess with. So, I'll definitely get WaW and most likely love it. But, I'll get WIF also and not sure if I will play it much. But, I do enjoy SC.

That new Gettysburg game coming out by HPS looks like my cup of tea also, bunch of scenarios 310 I believe, and most likely many that can be played out in 4 to 6 hours.

(in reply to SeaMonkey)
Post #: 20
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 4:50:19 AM   
dinsdale


Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: ravinhood

Don't worry SeaMonkey I agree with you also. ;)

So Dinsdale you gonna buy HOI 2? ;) I'm not hehe

Lol, it might be a good game, I'll keep an open mind, but I won't buy it until the final patch is released, or if it hits the bargain bin. CK was the final nail in the coffin for me.

quote:


We all have our preferences, I don't like monster games and actually like Risk and Axis and Allies type games. I still prefer those games you can play in an evening 4 to 6 hours.

There's another A&A game in development, but I believe it's an RTS.


quote:


That new Gettysburg game coming out by HPS looks like my cup of tea also, bunch of scenarios 310 I believe, and most likely many that can be played out in 4 to 6 hours.

But wasn't Tiller the same man who designed and wrote the Battlefield series. There are a couple of shorter Waterloo scenarios. Also, there's a primitive command/control in Battleground where you can order larger groups of units. I never really liked it that much, but YMMV.

One other game you might like; Highway To The Reich. I would say it was the best game of last year, and most of the scenarios are a couple of hours at most.

(in reply to ravinhood)
Post #: 21
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 6:34:29 AM   
ravinhood


Posts: 3891
Joined: 10/23/2003
Status: offline 		Yeah I saw that other Axis and Allies game, plays like Rise of Nations, woulda been great if it had been more Total Warish and not rts micro-management for each battle.

This RTS trend, will be so happy when it dies out and everyone gets back to making turn based games again. ;) LOL fat chance eh?

Oh well Disco dancing died out, so I expect RTS will die out someday haha

(in reply to dinsdale)
Post #: 22
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 2:13:51 PM   
Error in 0


Posts: 248
Joined: 7/19/2004
Status: offline 		RTS is ok. As long as you have a pause button . When I play HoI I use it everytime I need something done :) Defies the purpose of RTS, doesn't it :)

(in reply to ravinhood)
Post #: 23
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 6:08:29 PM   
SeaMonkey

 

Posts: 804
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline 		Dinsdale,

Your right, HttR is one of the finest games out...a superb engine...it and SC are presently the only games residing on my HD. If all RTS was like HttR we would be in Hog-Heaven, but alas they are not. Now something special that may are may not pan out is Supreme Ruler 2010. It is both RTS and turn mode, you can play either way. To be brought to us soon by the boys at Battlegoat...a real bunch of Grogs...their first game... it is precedent setting.

Allright back to Eindhoven... them dastardly Boch are trying to slip a reinforced battalion into the 101rst's landing zone and with painfully realistic order delays my forces are scattered and in disarray after just arriving...where the hell is that Irish Guards when you need them? Wait...is that them back down Hell's Highway, what the hell....they're going to have tea? Sorry Irish......no!! Its the Coldstreams....hope the gunpowder fumes don't spoil their cake.

(in reply to Error in 0)
Post #: 24
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 6:15:47 PM   
macgregor


Posts: 990
Joined: 2/10/2004
Status: offline 		I'm assuming HOI isn't a matrix game so then all games are up for discussion. TOAW aCoW has some interesting strategic-level scenarios. Of course, you can't conduct strategic warfare with aCoW. It seems like a great idea was started, yet never finished. Anything involving naval units is pathetically under-represented and the HQs cannot set up beachheads. All supply sources must be pre-programmed. I guess that makes it sound pretty lame(which in some ways it is) but in some ways it's fascinatingly detailed. It seems to be destined for the scrap heap of good ideas left unfinished.

(in reply to Error in 0)
Post #: 25
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 7:48:31 PM   
dinsdale


Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey
Now something special that may are may not pan out is Supreme Ruler 2010. It is both RTS and turn mode, you can play either way. To be brought to us soon by the boys at Battlegoat...a real bunch of Grogs...their first game... it is precedent setting.


I've been following it for a while. It's going to be about a year late when it comes out, hopefully it will surface despite Strategy First's financial problems. Looks like an excellent game and BG seem to have spent a long time polishing it since the beta started.

(in reply to SeaMonkey)
Post #: 26
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 8:00:58 PM   
Oleg Mastruko


Posts: 4921
Joined: 10/21/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dinsdale

quote:

ORIGINAL: SeaMonkey
Now something special that may are may not pan out is Supreme Ruler 2010. It is both RTS and turn mode, you can play either way. To be brought to us soon by the boys at Battlegoat...a real bunch of Grogs...their first game... it is precedent setting.


I've been following it for a while. It's going to be about a year late when it comes out, hopefully it will surface despite Strategy First's financial problems. Looks like an excellent game and BG seem to have spent a long time polishing it since the beta started.


Ugh! Now THAT is a game I am prejudicial about Seems awfully (over)ambitious, and it's their as you said first game.

Does anyone remember Super Power, another very ambitious game that was abysmal failure a year or two ago, by some Canadian company? I wish well to developers of Supreme Ruler and will most probably buy and support their game, but frankly, based on available info these guys bit FAR more than they can chew (IMO) and will get burned.

It's not a WW2 nor history game anyway (though I don't mind )

Oleg

_____________________________


(in reply to dinsdale)
Post #: 27
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 8:33:26 PM   
Koper


Posts: 34
Joined: 6/22/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko

Does anyone remember Super Power, another very ambitious game that was abysmal failure a year or two ago, by some Canadian company?(...)


Yes, actually - they are in preparing a sequel...
Maybe this time it will be something playable?

Experience certainly pays off in this genre - "Spartan" mentioned by Ravinhood on the other thread is actually 3rd title of Slitherine Soft. that covers ancient times grand strategy and is visbly better then their previous titles.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 28
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 9:07:34 PM   
dinsdale


Posts: 384
Joined: 5/1/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Oleg Mastruko
Ugh! Now THAT is a game I am prejudicial about Seems awfully (over)ambitious, and it's their as you said first game.

Does anyone remember Super Power, another very ambitious game that was abysmal failure a year or two ago, by some Canadian company? I wish well to developers of Supreme Ruler and will most probably buy and support their game, but frankly, based on available info these guys bit FAR more than they can chew (IMO) and will get burned.


Superpower was crap yes, but first time developers have also been able to create works such as Baldurs Gate, while established devs have created such disasters as MOO3 and GI Combat.

The good thing about battlegoat is that they've spent the extra time and have done an extensive public beta, hopefully that will leave a polished and absorbing game.

(in reply to Oleg Mastruko)
Post #: 29
RE: Grand Strategy game? - 8/1/2004 9:19:42 PM   
SeaMonkey

 

Posts: 804
Joined: 2/15/2004
Status: offline 		Now don't go guoting me on this, but when SR2010 was first hitting the web I had a few emails going back and forth with the developers. They said that if this game gets decent support they will port the engine into a WW2 game...for SR2.

(in reply to dinsdale)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion >> Grand Strategy game? Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.813