It's a shame...

It's a shame... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [Science Fiction] >> Armada 2526 Series

Message

JudgeDredd -> It's a shame... (11/24/2009 10:39:45 AM)
...but I've tried several 4x games and simply don't get them. I see people rave about some, but I've just never been grabbed. GalCiv2 was meant to be "it"...customisable ships and everything, but I just found the turns boring. Maybe I missed something. I'll look at comments on this and see...have to say I was disappointed to find out that someone linked to the Total War series was in on this...especially seeing as I read the first few pages of the manual and right away thought "This sounds like Total War in space"...then I read at The Wargamer that there was indeed someone from that series involved. The reason this "worries" me is I have NEVER thought the Total War series done anything good except the battles (Diplomacy was all but useless and tech was pretty poor too)...and the only strong part (the battles) are the only things NOT in this game. Regardless of who is involved in the development, I still seem to have an "enjoyment" block when dealing with 4x space games... So I am concerned and will wait for feedback.

killroyishere -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 11:10:36 AM)
It's just life JD everybody doesn't like everything that everybody else likes. I don't like monster games like WitP. I don't like naval games. I really don't like flight sim games except WWI ones. I don't like Napoleonic games except Battles of Napoleon. I don't like Lima Beans. [:D] I do like GalCiv 2 though and Master of Orion 2 though GC2 gets most of my 4x space game attention now. I like you can make huge galaxies and games can take months to finish. The real meat of most 4x space games is in the middle and toward the end game where everything is being decided. Most of them are boring when you first start out with 1 planet and a handful of ships. I get into the diplomacy in the early game making all of them like me then buying wars and jump in and get some of the good stuff as the war is about over. There's a tactics to diplomacy in GC2 that I really enjoy. Trading with one race and selling the tech to all the others nets me huge profits. Making one race hate another getting them to goto war with each other is fun. There's a lot to be had in the strategic and tactical departments of most games it just takes discovering them and exploiting them to your advantage and that's part of the fun of them is discovery anyway.

Janster -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 12:36:07 PM)
Diplomacy?? I never liked that, always prefered to turn it off or ignore everyone and just fight it out, thats how I play most my games, hey I might not be a crowd pleaser but I like it when the odds are stacked against me :)

Anguille -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 1:08:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JudgeDredd ...but I've tried several 4x games and simply don't get them. I see people rave about some, but I've just never been grabbed. GalCiv2 was meant to be "it"...customisable ships and everything, but I just found the turns boring. Don't worry...4x games are my fav since MOO and, while i am convinced that GalCiv 2 is indeed a great game and is on my computer, i don't like it much either. There are various space strategy games around and you'll find people crazy about one and hating others. You just have to keep up looking and you'll find one that suits you [;)] Cheers

killroyishere -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 2:04:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Janster Diplomacy?? I never liked that, always prefered to turn it off or ignore everyone and just fight it out, thats how I play most my games, hey I might not be a crowd pleaser but I like it when the odds are stacked against me :) Now those are the games I get tired of quickly just battle battle battle as I like more than one method to victory than the last man standing. That's why Civilization type games are so popular I believe because they offer so many different ways to victory and so that draws in a larger crowd of different type of gamers. That's smart gaming design. Sid Meier knew it well too back in the early 90's sittin on that sack of seeds.

Anguille -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 2:19:08 PM)
Actually, i believe that the true genius was Steve Barcia. Sid Meier got all the credit for taking ideas from him and from the original board game, Civilization...imho, Sid is overrated. Master of Orion 1 beats any Civilization game (and i do like them).

Erik Rutins -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 2:25:22 PM)
Judge, This is not the Total War series, though it certainly has some similarities in some of the general design elements, but the AI is IMHO much better. It's also a very fun game. I enjoy it more than most Total War games, though as it is Sci-Fi it also doesn't have some of the historical issues to deal with that the Total War games did.

noxious -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 2:31:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Anguille Actually, i believe that the true genius was Steve Barcia. Sid Meier got all the credit for taking ideas from him and from the original board game, Civilization...imho, Sid is overrated. Master of Orion 1 beats any Civilization game (and i do like them). Having played a lot more of the original boardgame (and latter add-on/revision Advanced Civilization, out before Civ1 on PC) than the PC game, I can tell you they are very, very different games : there is no combat to speak of in the original (simple population trade off until population limit of region is reached, the player with less population starts first by taking out one pop, etc), trade is the only way to go (did I mention the game had no dice ?) using the commodity cards. Sid Meier helped define (or "invented") a new computer game genre, loosely based on the original boardgame (as they made a boardgame from the computer games in latter years, it bears being specific ;)) Sorry, a bit tired of people crediting the boardgame author for a totally different game : Sid Meier and team deserve all the credit on the design and execution of Civ 1, 2, etc. Civ1 was not really a computer version of the original game : again, totally different mechanisms and gameplay. Not much in common except the name, and theme, period. Albeit, I do appreciate people reminding others that there was a better Civilization game before the PC one ;) Cheers !

csebal -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 2:32:41 PM)
Sid might be overrated, but i still believe, that CIV4 is the best civ game as of today (including 1-3, the spinoffs and maybe even Alpha Centauri).. Not to say i havent had extreme amounts of fun with each one of those, but putting them all next to eachother, civ4 would easily be the best. Civ 4 gives you back the feeling of Civ 1 while also preserving the innovations that i liked in civ 2 and 3. Heck, would they somehow add the space and underwater aspects some of those spinoff civ games had, i would seriously not consider any other game, ever again. As for the who gets credited for what argument.. The very least we can say, that sid is great in getting great design ideas into his games. Me myself, i do not value pure factual knowledge as much as the knowledge of how to obtain knowledge when it is needed. So someone able to get the talented people together directing them in working towards a common goal is worth just as much, if not more, than any one of those people. As for the comparison with moo1. i believe thats pointless. Both may be 4X, but they are more than an AU away from eachother in terms of both style and gameplay.

Anguille -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 2:43:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: noxious Having played a lot more of the original boardgame (and latter add-on/revision Advanced Civilization, out before Civ1 on PC) than the PC game, I can tell you they are very, very different games : there is no combat to speak of in the original (simple population trade off until population limit of region is reached, the player with less population starts first by taking out one pop, etc), trade is the only way to go (did I mention the game had no dice ?) using the commodity cards. Sid Meier helped define (or "invented") a new computer game genre, loosely based on the original boardgame (as they made a boardgame from the computer games in latter years, it bears being specific ;)) Sorry, a bit tired of people crediting the boardgame author for a totally different game : Sid Meier and team deserve all the credit on the design and execution of Civ 1, 2, etc. Civ1 was not really a computer version of the original game : again, totally different mechanisms and gameplay. Not much in common except the name, and theme, period. Albeit, I do appreciate people reminding others that there was a better Civilization game before the PC one ;) Cheers ! I was indeed exagerating...still, there's still not much combat in any Civ (that's the part that really deserve to be worked on). The Original Board game Civilization is great... There are big differences, but the basic idea is the same. I just want to underline that i do own every Civilization game which i do play and enjoy. I am just tired to hear everyone say how Sid is the genius and forgetting that other game designers are at least as good but not as popular. Cheers PS: while MOO is set on different time period, the spying and diplomacy system are still the best i've seen in any game. PS2: i don't even know why we're talking about Sid has this is a forum about Armada and 4x space strategy games...

killroyishere -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 3:14:55 PM)
Because Sid is worth talking about in any thread or forum. [:'(] Don't forget he's famous for Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri as well. A space game not 4x but still a sci-fi space game so it's worth a mention as a great game too. Also this thread is more about JD's dislike of 4x games not Armada Specifically. So it's a broad topic to say the least.

Anguille -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 3:24:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: killroyishere Because Sid is worth talking about in any thread or forum. [:'(] Don't forget he's famous for Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri as well. A space game not 4x but still a sci-fi space game so it's worth a mention as a great game too. Also this thread is more about JD's dislike of 4x games not Armada Specifically. So it's a broad topic to say the least. Well...actually Sid barely worked on Alpha Centauri (Brian Reynolds was the main designer)...so it's a bad example ;) In fact...it was the same procedure with Civilization 2....and Civilization 3....and Civilization 4 [8\|] The only Civilization where he was the lead designer was the first one...

scotten_usa -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 3:39:25 PM)
Judge: I never bought GalCiv2 because I found it boring too. Watching tactical battles was not my version of exciting, either.

L�tzow -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 3:49:02 PM)
SMACX was the best game, Firaxis ever made.

Zakhal -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 3:55:50 PM)
Sword of the stars with all its addons is easily current #1 in 4x space oprah'. Havent tried this new matrix games though yet.

killroyishere -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 9:14:41 PM)
GalCiv2 is the #1 4x space oprah. [:D] I played SofS one time and put it away as it just didn't have the glitz and glamor and fun value and AI of GalCiv2.

killroyishere -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 9:17:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Anguille quote: ORIGINAL: killroyishere Because Sid is worth talking about in any thread or forum. [:'(] Don't forget he's famous for Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri as well. A space game not 4x but still a sci-fi space game so it's worth a mention as a great game too. Also this thread is more about JD's dislike of 4x games not Armada Specifically. So it's a broad topic to say the least. Well...actually Sid barely worked on Alpha Centauri (Brian Reynolds was the main designer)...so it's a bad example ;) In fact...it was the same procedure with Civilization 2....and Civilization 3....and Civilization 4 [8\|] The only Civilization where he was the lead designer was the first one... That's like saying Lucas isn't responsible for the great Star Wars games we play on the PC. Sid was a consultant on those games he no longer needed to get his hands dirty with programming or Basic design features. Afterall the Civilization series is pretty much like the first one all the way to the forth one there's just a few changes in each one. The game principle and mechanics are still the same as the first one though and he was responsible for that. [:D]

Zakhal -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 9:43:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: killroyishere GalCiv2 is the #1 4x space oprah. [:D] I played SofS one time and put it away as it just didn't have the glitz and glamor and fun value and AI of GalCiv2. What galciv2 lacks and sots has is the space battles. You need to play one full game in sots to realise how good they are.

killroyishere -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 10:38:15 PM)
Actually I don't really care for space battles. I like the hands off approach that GalCiv 2 uses as it really helps to prevent exploiting the ai in games like these. Even MOO 2 as good as it is I can exploit the ai silly as well as in SotS.

Aroddo -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 11:17:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: L�tzow SMACX was the best game, Firaxis ever made. Agreed! SMAC was awesome and SMACX was a very well done expansion. I loved the tech-quotes. "Einstein said 'God does not throw dice'. I say he does. He's even cheating."

killroyishere -> RE: It's a shame... (11/24/2009 11:19:40 PM)
Now I agree about SMAC and it's expansion Crossfire. Best of the best. Between it and Civilization and Master of Orion 2 and Master of Magic one really doesn't need anymore games. (prepares shield for the storm).[:D]

Janster -> RE: It's a shame... (11/25/2009 2:04:25 AM)
Sword of the stars AI is pretty competent, the battle part is quite fun, and not at all a walkover. Seriously, comparing Adv Civ and the CIV pc games? Only thing they got in common is the name. The Total War AI was rubbish at release, still is a pretty sad, but I just played 150 rounds of this game...and eh despite playing like a moron I had more problems keeping my planets happy than actually being threatened by the other 12 empires. Mostly they spammed me with peace and when I got tired of them and invaded I massacred a bunch of space marines, and eventually like 15 rounds later 2 of his ships showed up and got massacred by me. Maybe it was a particularly weak computer player..shrug.

Anguille -> RE: It's a shame... (11/25/2009 8:01:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: killroyishere That's like saying Lucas isn't responsible for the great Star Wars games we play on the PC. Sid was a consultant on those games he no longer needed to get his hands dirty with programming or Basic design features. Afterall the Civilization series is pretty much like the first one all the way to the forth one there's just a few changes in each one. The game principle and mechanics are still the same as the first one though and he was responsible for that. [:D] Well...we clearly don't agree...but that's fine. [;)]

killroyishere -> RE: It's a shame... (11/25/2009 8:08:48 AM)
Doesn't matter whether we agree or not the "facts" take precedence. [;)]

Anguille -> RE: It's a shame... (11/25/2009 8:25:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: killroyishere Doesn't matter whether we agree or not the "facts" take precedence. [;)] Like...Mr Caveman invented bread...now, the latest type of breads is called "Caveman's Bread 10'000"...sure

killroyishere -> RE: It's a shame... (11/25/2009 8:28:03 AM)
Apples and oranges now we aren't talking about cavemen or bread we are talking about Sid Meier's influence and direct design of the Civilization series through IV. [:'(]

Anguille -> RE: It's a shame... (11/25/2009 8:40:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: killroyishere Apples and oranges now we aren't talking about cavemen or bread we are talking about Sid Meier's influence and direct design of the Civilization series through IV. [:'(] The first idea of the game was in the board game. Sid Meier was inspired by that game. Ok, he was the first to implement this idea on a computer game...he made a fairly good/clever move by putting his name on the game (unlike most designers) and he'll get the credits for all eternity...very clever...

killroyishere -> RE: It's a shame... (11/25/2009 10:32:32 AM)
Ok what did the lead designers of II, III and IV do? Did they not copy the basic game elements that Sid designed in the very first one? Although he wasn't involved as the lead designer what he designed first was the basis for those series II, III and IV. You can see as clearly as I can the elements of the very first Civilization in all of them. In fact IV actually went back to the grass roots of the origional by adding in options so people could select things like aggressive ai and barbarians. Civ IV is nothing more than a CIV I on graphics steroids and more computer opponents to play against and religion and resources. Hardly something innovating or revolutionary from the first one. Also the only comparisons that come close to Civilization from Avalon Hill is the title itself and this was proven not a copyrightable word because of common issues and all that blah. The Avalon Hill game goes nowhere into the future and hardly even out of it's own era. It's a totally different concept and totally a different game mechanic than Sid's Civilization. Drawing influence from soemthing is one thing, using exact design ideas is another. That is what the lead designers of Civilization II, III and IV did they used Sid's exact design ideas and just either improved upon them or added a few new tweaks like religion and resources.

Anguille -> RE: It's a shame... (11/25/2009 11:48:28 AM)
Let me see... Brett Sperry was one of the first to create a RTS with Dune II....so we have Brett Sperry's Age of Empires, Brett Sperry's Warcraft, Brett Sperry's Starcraft, Brett Sperry's Empire Earth and so on (all based on the same concept - idea). Or Walter Bright for Turn-based strategy game....making Walter Bright's Civilization, Walter Bright's Total War etc... I do like Sid, he's a nice guy and a fantastic marketing guy...[;)] Again...i love all Civilization games, they are great and one of the best franchise around....still, Sid is not a god or the genius. I don't see the point to mention his name all the time. Many GREAT designers have contributed to the 4x games we enjoy so much. Cheers PS: i know fairly well the Avalon board game as i own it too. The basic concept is the same even if the computer version has been much expanded. quote: Meier admits to "borrowing" many of the technology tree ideas from a board game also called Civilization (published in the United Kingdom in 1980 by Hartland Trefoil (later by Gibson Games), and in the United States in 1981 by Avalon Hill). The early versions of the game even included a flier of information and ordering materials for the board game. There is now a board game based on the computer game version of Civilization ... The original "Civilization" computer game was one of the earliest computer games, written in 1972 on an HP2000 at Evergreen State College.

killroyishere -> RE: It's a shame... (11/25/2009 3:33:30 PM)
You didn't answer my question you went off on one of those apples and oranges tangents again. I think they call what you did a strawman exercise. You eluded the questions because you know I'm right and don't want to admit defeat. That's ok I understand there are lots of people in the world like that. Just can't stand to lose so they run away, change the subject or cower in a corner somewhere sucking their thumb. [:D] Edit: Oh btw Sperry didn't invent RTS. You better go futher back to the 1980's and find a little game called Combat Leader and Battalliion Commander. These were the first pc elements of rts long before Sperry hit the scene.

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.09375