|
GoodGuy -> RE: Considering the game.. (7/27/2007 8:28:56 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Scott_WAR
Matrix is usually better than that. Before the last few games, I have never regretted a Matrix purchase. ..............[]This needs to stop now before Matrix starts getting a bad rep.
You are right. Matrix still has a good reputation, but they have to focus on the quality assurance. Employing 1 or 2 guys rating/tracking content and quality should do the job, so I'm not talking about a fully fledged QA-division here.
Other publishers who started out as rather small underdogs (like THQ or Take5, IIRC), ages ago, still managed to apply their own QA rules, although they weren't developers back then.
quote:
ORIGINAL: RayWolfe
quote:
ORIGINAL: Venator
Best Matrix game I've bought was Highway to the Reich. to be honest i wish I'd bought its sequel, Conquest of the Agean rather than CAW now. Ironically it was the lack of scenarios that put me off CotA...
WHAT?
Have you actually counted the number of scenarios that come with that game?
Ray
You're right Ray, COTA has 29 stock scenarios including 2 (short) tactical exercises, tutorial missions (2) not counted.
But each historical scenario has either 1 or even 2 variants (what-if versions). So, there are around 17-19 stock maps, where some are excerpts of bigger maps or where some cover overlapping areas, resulting in having around 14-16 unique maps. I guess that's what Venator had in mind there.
I, for one wasn't disappointed by an imaginary low amount of maps/lack of content, but i was somewhat disappointed by the scenario design, where only 2 maps put up a real challenge for me. The scenario design in HTTR was excellent, and I'd consider this to be the best Matrix game unto now, especially since the replayability is being boosted by this engine's brilliant AI, which acts differently each time. Each time you load a savegame, chances are high that the AI will come up with a different approach.
To be honest, I'd pay 70 bucks for such a game. I kinda squeezed HTTR but there was always room to deploy new strategies and different approaches, and I finally adjusted scenario settings/units to get an even stronger AI. I played HTTR for more than 2 yrs, every once a while. THAT's replay-value at its best.
I can be an excessive gamer who plays a game until it's "squeezed out". Most products in the game sector would not last longer than 2-4 days, I finish/beat them within that time frame. These games are like junk food, some with amusing gameplay but most provide rather short entertainment.
I didn't touch CAW anymore after playing it for several days, I've played all the scenarios on both sides ..... then I replayed it a week later, just to double check if there was some hidden game depth...... there wasn't [:D].
There have been so many types of games, and, as a developer, it's hard to come up with fresh ideas without being accused of copying others or even themselfs.
As someone pointed out before, carrying a full-price tag, CAW should have been released with all CCAW missions in order to score in the content department and to deliver value on a "Matrix level", or it should have had a randomization-function (scenarios and force pool) along with customizable TGs.
CAW isn't complete junk food, but the game still has to grow up, it's a youngster trying to evolve from a kid to an adult. Disturbing detail here, it's the customer who has to cope with a situation where this process did not finish before the product hit the shelf.
I've tested various games in open beta and closed beta, and now, while I'm thinking about the discussion in this thread, I can't help thinking that many of these Betas had more scenarios/content than the retail version of CAW, and everyone knows that a given game's Beta content usually isn't meant (nor able) to satisfy the testers' thirst for fresh and massive game content.
My 2cents.
|
|
|
|
