RE: Considering the game..

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Considering the game..

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Carriers At War >> RE: Considering the game..

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/25/2007 11:04:44 PM

Blond_Knight

Posts: 1031
Joined: 5/15/2004
Status: offline

Well if thats the case....

<wine> I want a patch and I want it now!</wine>

(in reply to Scott_WAR)

Post #: 31

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/26/2007 2:13:45 AM

JSS

Posts: 781
Joined: 10/15/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHellPatrol

Oh, come on! A bunch of whining made you guys rush ahead of yourselves? Sheesh, that is a lame answer...you'd have been better off saying nothing IMHO.

Again I have no info on release decisions; the point I'm making here is that the scenarios shipped were listed in advance and the fact that the editor would be included was also known.... Very little comment was made along the lines of the CCAW point above... lots of comments were directed at where's the game. Nothing about rushing known nor implied!

< Message edited by JSS -- 7/26/2007 5:16:55 AM >

(in reply to TheHellPatrol)

Post #: 32

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/26/2007 5:01:00 PM

Erik2

Posts: 786
Joined: 11/2/2000
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline

What I really would like is an answer from SSG wether they plan to released a Battlepack with the 'missing' scenarios themselves.
No point in us players with access to CCAW starting to convert scenarios if they're already in the works.

Here's the list (including those already in CAW:
Arctic Convoy Dec 28th 1942 - Jan 5th 1943
Altantic 15-25th Oct 1943
Action off Calabria 6-13th Jul 1940
Convoy Raiders 17-21st Apr 1942
Coral Sea 3-12th May 1942
Coral Sea variant 6-13th Apr 1946
Port Darwin 18-20th Feb 1942
Eastern Solomons 22-27 Aug 1942
Guadalcanal 6-12 Aug 1942
Invasion Hawaii 30th Aug - 3rd Sep 1942
Leyte Gulf 22-26th Oct 1944
Operation Ironclad 3-6th May 1942
Java Sea 26th Feb - 1 Mar 1942
Cape Matapan 27-30th Mar 1941
Midway 3-8th Jun 1942
North Cape 26-29 Dec 1943
Norway 8-17th Apr 1940
Okinawa 5-9th April 1945
Operation Olympic 4-8th Mar 1946
Plan Orange 20-24th Aug 1936
Pearl Harbor 6-8th Dec 1941
Operation Pedestal 9-14th Aug 1942
Philippine Sea 16-21st Jun 1944
Convoy PQ.17 1-10th Jul 1942
Rabaul 1-10th Nov 1943
Rainbow 5 2-9th Feb 1942
Santa Cruz 24-29th Oct 1942
Cape Spartivento 24-29th Nov 1940
Tarawa 19-26th Nov 1943
Task Force Z 7-10th Dec 1941
Trincomalee 3-8th Apr
Wake Island 20-24th Dec 1941

And from old Run5 magazines:
Relief of Wake Island 19-25th Dec 1941
Japan Sweeps South 9a 7-11th Dec 1941
JSS 9b 20-24th Jan 1942
JSS 9c 27th Feb - 4th Mar 1942
Gilbert's Strike 19-26th Nov 1943

_____________________________

(in reply to JSS)

Post #: 33

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/26/2007 6:29:32 PM

Toby42

Posts: 1626
Joined: 8/10/2003
From: Central Florida
Status: offline

I don't feel that for 50 Dollars, we should have to build a game that we should have received!!!

_____________________________

Tony

(in reply to Erik2)

Post #: 34

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/26/2007 6:54:33 PM

Scott_WAR

Posts: 1020
Joined: 2/24/2005
Status: offline

Exactly. For $50 we should have recieved the original game plus all scenarios released for it up to date. We should not have had to pay full price for what is technically a two decade old game. and NO, a new interface does not make it worth the price of a premium full price game. Considering that CCAW can be bought for MUCH less and comes with MUCH more, I wouyld have to say, yeah,... SSG screwed us pretty good.

(in reply to Toby42)

Post #: 35

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/26/2007 8:26:21 PM

Toby42

Posts: 1626
Joined: 8/10/2003
From: Central Florida
Status: offline

Buying games is just like life. You pay your money and take your chances!!!

_____________________________

Tony

(in reply to Scott_WAR)

Post #: 36

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/26/2007 9:09:17 PM

Scott_WAR

Posts: 1020
Joined: 2/24/2005
Status: offline

Matrix is usually better than that. Before the last few games, I have never regretted a Matrix purchase. My last 3 purchases from Matrix have been Maximum football, UFO, and CAW. 0 for 3. This needs to stop now before Matrix starts getting a bad rep.

(in reply to Toby42)

Post #: 37

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/26/2007 9:30:32 PM

LarryP

Posts: 3783
Joined: 5/15/2005
From: Carson City, NV
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scott_WAR

Matrix is usually better than that. Before the last few games, I have never regretted a Matrix purchase. My last 3 purchases from Matrix have been Maximum football, UFO, and CAW. 0 for 3. This needs to stop now before Matrix starts getting a bad rep.

I bought all the above except Maximum Football. What do you consider your BEST Matrix purchase? Out of the over 22 games I bought from Matrix, I am not sure which I consider the best...

Have to think on that one.

(in reply to Scott_WAR)

Post #: 38

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/26/2007 10:03:36 PM

Venator

Posts: 96
Joined: 1/22/2007
Status: offline

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...

I got For Liberty from Battlefront but counting it as a Matrix game it'd be a close second.

I actually quite like Tin Soldiers: Julius Caesar too but mainly for its old fashioned table minatures approach. Strangely pleasing. Must be the nostalgia.

The other one I really felt was worth the money was Chariots of War. But mainly because it was cheap and the rather odd combat system actually seemed quite in keeping with the setting.

I'll refrain from mentioning the worst but I've bought about eight or nine Matrix titles and have been disappointed in some way with half (disappointed to the extent of having mild regrets about purchase). I don't consider any of them to have been rubbish but I do feel that the disappointing ones (including CAW, sadly) have failed to deliver long term appeal in the way that the others have. still an approximately 50% success rate's not too bad.

(in reply to LarryP)

Post #: 39

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/27/2007 12:34:02 AM

LarryP

Posts: 3783
Joined: 5/15/2005
From: Carson City, NV
Status: offline

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...

I got For Liberty from Battlefront but counting it as a Matrix game it'd be a close second.

I actually quite like Tin Soldiers: Julius Caesar too but mainly for its old fashioned table minatures approach. Strangely pleasing. Must be the nostalgia.

The other one I really felt was worth the money was Chariots of War. But mainly because it was cheap and the rather odd combat system actually seemed quite in keeping with the setting.

I'll refrain from mentioning the worst but I've bought about eight or nine Matrix titles and have been disappointed in some way with half (disappointed to the extent of having mild regrets about purchase). I don't consider any of them to have been rubbish but I do feel that the disappointing ones (including CAW, sadly) have failed to deliver long term appeal in the way that the others have. still an approximately 50% success rate's not too bad.

I also have HTTR and I like that better than COTA. I played COTA again a few days ago and it is a good game with a ton of docs that come with it. A lot of work went into that title.

I don't have Chariots Of War. I have one that's similar to it called Gates Of Troy. No comment.

I also bought For Liberty from Battlefront in June of 2006.

I played the demo of Tin Soldiers and I almost bought it, but I wondered how long it would capture my interest. I liked the demo though.

I still don't know what my favorite would be. I'm still thinking on that...

(in reply to Venator)

Post #: 40

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/27/2007 2:37:45 AM

Scott_WAR

Posts: 1020
Joined: 2/24/2005
Status: offline

Hmm, I would have to say Gary Grigsby's World at War just based on the amount of time I spent playing it.

I have been considering buying UV for what seems like forever, but I just cant convince myself I will have the time to invest in a game of its depth.

(in reply to LarryP)

Post #: 41

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/27/2007 2:55:14 AM

willycube

Posts: 95
Joined: 1/24/2005
Status: offline

I am a little suprised at the comments on this particular post, most of you are very knowledgeable about game designs, most of you understand war games inside and out and I am in awe of your knowledge of WW2 planes, carriers, battlewagons etc. Why not let Matrix work this out, hopefully they will add scenerios and improve the AI, I doubt they will make a campaign add on. I have been playing war games since my first Atari computer. I loved the panzer general series. Now Matrix is promoting World in Flames as one of the greatest board games "ever" being converted to the PC. I have long given up looking for the great computer war game wheather played as solo or multiplayer from any company. They can if they want to, make outstanding graphics and beautiful physical models of WW2 equipment. What they cant do is program a very good AI, no way no how. Talon Soft promised it in the conversion of Avalon Hills Third Reich from the board game to the PC, a terrible disaster. Strategic Command 2 promised it and was only half succesful. Most of my game time is with COD2 multiplayer which I truly enjoy, but it was in trouble until the modders pulled it out of the fire with great mods. Hopefully Matrix will do the same or the modders will. CAW is up there in price I agree but hoagies dont cost $1.50 anymore [giving away my age] all games are expensive anymore, and like some of you have said I will pay good money for a good game, but give me that good game please. Hopefully Matrix has listened to you in the forums and will do something soon. Your feelings are what make these some of the best forums in gaming or anywhere.

Willy

(in reply to LarryP)

Post #: 42

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/27/2007 4:10:08 AM

Prince of Eckm�hl

Posts: 2459
Joined: 6/25/2006
From: Texas
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: willycube

Why not let Matrix work this out

Matrix isn't the developer.

PoE (aka ivanmoe)

_____________________________

Government is the opiate of the masses.

(in reply to willycube)

Post #: 43

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/27/2007 4:18:21 AM

BlitzDude

Posts: 7
Joined: 7/13/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LarryP

I bought all the above except Maximum Football. What do you consider your BEST Matrix purchase? Out of the over 22 games I bought from Matrix, I am not sure which I consider the best... Have to think on that one.

That's an easy one for me...Operational Art of War III is an outstanding value. You can play it forever and the scenario editor has done what it's supposed to do - CREATE A DEDICATED COMMUNITY OF HOMEBREWED SCENARIOS. Many of which are most excellent and Matrix usually includes the better ones in their patches (new one due out soon!) I imagine the rehash of John Tiller's Campaign Series is decent stuff but I am still playing the "gold version" releases from Talonsoft. I'm sure you would get a lot of value out of that one as well.

CAW is a mystery. I've never been a naval ops gamer though I have played several boardgames that have been fun and enlightening - especially the Second World War at Sea Series by Avalanche Press (excellent treatment of the Pacific War there). The original CCAW seems to have gotten great support and reviews. So far, unfortunately, it seems SSG hasn't been able to translate that into a decent PC game for Matrix. As I have mentioned, I'm a non-buyer until I hear better things on this board. BUT, when I search online for various alternatives there doesn't seem to be ANY. So...I'm waiting til you CCAW pros tell me the patch is great or start saying something more positive. I really want to add something about the carrier war in the Pacific to my PC game collection but so far I'm stuck rolling tons of dice in the Avalanche Press system which, though abstracted in many ways, remains satisfying it is details...just takes a lot of time to play. Now if someone could translate that to a PC game you'd really have something IMO. Still rooting for CAW...or waiting for something else to show up in the PC realm. I sense I am not alone. Maybe I should buy CCAW for $27 or whatever it's selling for??

< Message edited by BlitzDude -- 7/27/2007 4:20:57 AM >

(in reply to LarryP)

Post #: 44

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/27/2007 5:13:36 AM

LarryP

Posts: 3783
Joined: 5/15/2005
From: Carson City, NV
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scott_WAR

Hmm, I would have to say Gary Grigsby's World at War just based on the amount of time I spent playing it.

I have been considering buying UV for what seems like forever, but I just cant convince myself I will have the time to invest in a game of its depth.

I play both of those. UV is great, a shorter version of WitP without the scenario bugs. I was thinking between UV and Flashpoint Germany as my favorites. I just started playing Grigsby's World Divided since a couple gamers here have coaxed me into it. I have enjoyed it immensely playing as the Soviets. It is a tough game to understand but after sticking to it, I am satisfied. Still not sure though about number one...

(in reply to Scott_WAR)

Post #: 45

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/27/2007 5:15:49 AM

LarryP

Posts: 3783
Joined: 5/15/2005
From: Carson City, NV
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlitzDude

That's an easy one for me...Operational Art of War III is an outstanding value. You can play it forever and the scenario editor has done what it's supposed to do - CREATE A DEDICATED COMMUNITY OF HOMEBREWED SCENARIOS. Many of which are most excellent and Matrix usually includes the better ones in their patches (new one due out soon!) I imagine the rehash of John Tiller's Campaign Series is decent stuff but I am still playing the "gold version" releases from Talonsoft. I'm sure you would get a lot of value out of that one as well.

TOAW3 is a deep game. I still have the original first two also. I have never used the scenario editor though. Maybe I should try that next?

(in reply to BlitzDude)

Post #: 46

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/27/2007 5:40:44 AM

MarkShot

Posts: 7089
Joined: 3/29/2003
Status: offline

I completed the second scenario out of twenty of CAP2 tonight.

I still have yet to formulate an opinion on the game. Is it an exciting struggle with worthy AI opponents or is it simply a simulator for pre-MBA types trying to understand the basic relationships and timings of key business concepts. I guess I still need to play more in order to reach a conclusion.

_____________________________

(於 11/13/21 台北，台灣，中國退休)

(in reply to LarryP)

Post #: 47

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/27/2007 11:12:51 AM

RayWolfe

Posts: 1553
Joined: 2/5/2003
From: Kent in the UK
Status: offline

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

(in reply to Venator)

Post #: 48

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/27/2007 1:30:50 PM

Erik2

Posts: 786
Joined: 11/2/2000
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LarryP

quote:

ORIGINAL: BlitzDude

That's an easy one for me...Operational Art of War III is an outstanding value. You can play it forever and the scenario editor has done what it's supposed to do - CREATE A DEDICATED COMMUNITY OF HOMEBREWED SCENARIOS. Many of which are most excellent and Matrix usually includes the better ones in their patches (new one due out soon!) I imagine the rehash of John Tiller's Campaign Series is decent stuff but I am still playing the "gold version" releases from Talonsoft. I'm sure you would get a lot of value out of that one as well.

TOAW3 is a deep game. I still have the original first two also. I have never used the scenario editor though. Maybe I should try that next?

The TOAW3 editor is very powerful, but it is also quirky. Best to start out creating a small scenario with not too many events. The event editor allow you to add lots of intersting options to a scenario, but the learning curve for this is steep.
I've done 6-7 complex scenarios and the reward when you finish one at it works to your expectations is great.

_____________________________

(in reply to LarryP)

Post #: 49

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/27/2007 8:28:56 PM

GoodGuy

Posts: 1506
Joined: 5/17/2006
From: Cologne, Germany
Status: offline

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

.

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.

< Message edited by GoodGuy -- 7/28/2007 1:36:55 AM >

_____________________________

"Aw Nuts"
General Anthony McAuliffe
December 22nd, 1944
Bastogne
---
"I've always felt that the AA (Alied Assault engine) had the potential to be [....] big."
Tim Stone
8th of August, 2006

(in reply to Scott_WAR)

Post #: 50

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/28/2007 3:56:57 PM

Scott_WAR

Posts: 1020
Joined: 2/24/2005
Status: offline

I've been thinking. With all things considered, SSG would have been better off, and the customers certainly would have been better off, if SSG just re-released CCAW with no improvements aside from ensuring it would run on XP and Vista. It would probably been profitable to sell it at $19.99, then SSG woud have made money, the customers wouldnt feel ripped off, and the game would have had more than 1 weeks worth of replay value.

Sadly, halfway doing a remake has made nobody happy, has brought into question whether an ancient software company has what it takes to survive in todays market, and has showed Matrix customers both old and new that Matrix NEEDS to do a better job of ensuring that their developers are putting out quality work.

(in reply to GoodGuy)

Post #: 51

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/28/2007 4:27:50 PM

Venator

Posts: 96
Joined: 1/22/2007
Status: offline

[q]I guess that's what Venator had in mind there.[/q]

Yes. I just didn't phrase it very well. I'll buy CotA in due course I think but as I say, I really feel I made a mistake in choosing CAW over it. It's not so much that I mind it being a quick and simple game - sometimes simple is good. It's just that I have the feeling that the game lacks replayability. And that (superficially) that could be corrected easily by having more scenarios and allowing task force customisation (before the scenario begins) as you said above. Thinks like tweaking arming/fuelling times to be more realistic and making the search procedure a bit more nerve wracking would be nice extras too.

I don't by any means regard my money as having been wasted, I've had some decent entertainment from the game. Sadly though I'll only be buying from Matrix in the future after I've seen a few weeks worth of forum feedback on whichever title catches my eye.

(in reply to Scott_WAR)

Post #: 52

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/28/2007 7:32:21 PM

Gregor_SSG

Posts: 681
Joined: 3/6/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Scott_WAR

I've been thinking. With all things considered, SSG would have been better off, and the customers certainly would have been better off, if SSG just re-released CCAW with no improvements aside from ensuring it would run on XP and Vista. It would probably been profitable to sell it at $19.99, then SSG woud have made money, the customers wouldnt feel ripped off, and the game would have had more than 1 weeks worth of replay value.

Sadly, halfway doing a remake has made nobody happy, has brought into question whether an ancient software company has what it takes to survive in todays market, and has showed Matrix customers both old and new that Matrix NEEDS to do a better job of ensuring that their developers are putting out quality work.

Well, some of us might be older than we once were, although Alex Shaw, the CAW programmer is shockingly young, but none of us thought for a moment that a band-aided re-release of CCAW, apart from being a technical nightmare, was going to make the grade. I can just imagine the posts now complaining about the interface, fixed resolution etc etc, so it just wasn't going to happen.

More later,

Gregor

_____________________________

Vice President, Strategic Studies Group
See http://www.ssg.com.au and http://www.ssg.com.au/forums/
for info and free scenarios.

(in reply to Scott_WAR)

Post #: 53

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/28/2007 8:09:21 PM

Hertston

Posts: 3564
Joined: 8/17/2002
From: Cornwall, UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LarryP

What do you consider your BEST Matrix purchase?

It's a hard question, really. I think WitP might be 'worth' the cost of the whole lot put together if I could ever find time to do it justice - which I can't. I think, despite their age, both the Campaign Series and TOAW3 both provide superb value for money, as does CoI to a slightly lesser extent, but I can't really consider any of those my 'best' purchase as I already owned all of them in previous incarnations. The Tin Soldiers games are favourites, too.. I still boot up Caesar now and again. A really class act (terrific MP AND challenging AI) that never got the credit or sales they deserved, and I'd recommend them wholeheartedly.

But... the winner would be HttR. CotA is probably the better game, but I'm less interested in the scenario so HttR has got played a lot more.

(in reply to LarryP)

Post #: 54

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/28/2007 9:31:30 PM

Joe D.

Posts: 4004
Joined: 8/31/2005
From: Stratford, Connecticut
Status: offline

Maybe I have to rethink this game: I played CaW the other day, the same scenario about 5X, and it never played the same each time; that should count for something.

I also went thru the music tracks; they are really quite good, I just never paid much attention to them as the games go so quickly, as compared to UV et al.

I think one patch w/some needed tweaking and some new scenarios will put CaW up where it belongs; a simple game that delivers good carrier tactics, but not much more.

At least for now.

_____________________________

Stratford, Connecticut, U.S.A.

"The Angel of Okinawa"

Home of the Chance-Vought Corsair, F4U
The best fighter-bomber of World War II

(in reply to Gregor_SSG)

Post #: 55

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/28/2007 10:15:22 PM

Scott_WAR

Posts: 1020
Joined: 2/24/2005
Status: offline

I can live with the bugs, and I am positive SSG will probably fix them. But what I HAVENT heard is when and if we are getting more scenarios,............ the ones that were in CCAW. The ones that should have been in this game considering the price we were charged.

(in reply to Joe D.)

Post #: 56

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/28/2007 11:59:36 PM

TheHellPatrol

Posts: 1588
Joined: 7/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe D.

Maybe I have to rethink this game: I played CaW the other day, the same scenario about 5X, and it never played the same each time; that should count for something.

I think one patch w/some needed tweaking and some new scenarios will put CaW up where it belongs; a simple game that delivers good carrier tactics, but not much more.

At least for now.

I agree 100%, it's nail-biting at times and doesn't play out the same. I think the game is a real beauty and i would not be satisfied with a CCAW remake, the game/interface is top notch. But after Battlefront i can't help but feel we are being shortchanged again when it comes to content. I don't mind blowing $50 for CAW as it is, but not everyone has money to burn on games and less customers means less games in general for all of us.
A patch with some beef and we'll all stop complaining...right?

< Message edited by TheHellPatrol -- 7/29/2007 12:22:26 AM >

_____________________________

A man is rich in proportion to the number of things he can afford to let alone.
Henry David Thoreau

(in reply to Joe D.)

Post #: 57

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/29/2007 12:07:54 AM

LarryP

Posts: 3783
Joined: 5/15/2005
From: Carson City, NV
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHellPatrol
I agree 100%, it's nail-biting at times and doesn't play out the same. I think the game is a real beauty and i would not be satisfied with a CCAW remake, the game/interface is top notch. But after Battlefront i can't help but feel we are being shortchanged when it comes to content. I don't mind blowing $50 for CAW as it is, but not everyone has money to burn on games and less customers means less games in general for all of us.
A patch with some beef and we'll all stop complaining...right?

After Battlefront? I thought players complained about that having a lack of scenarios and graphics? I must be confused here. You mean we can't complain once we get some beefy patch?!

(in reply to TheHellPatrol)

Post #: 58

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/29/2007 12:22:05 AM

TheHellPatrol

Posts: 1588
Joined: 7/3/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LarryP

After Battlefront? I thought players complained about that having a lack of scenarios and graphics? I must be confused here. You mean we can't complain once we get some beefy patch?!

<ahem> I meant shortchanged again

.

_____________________________

A man is rich in proportion to the number of things he can afford to let alone.
Henry David Thoreau

(in reply to LarryP)

Post #: 59

RE: Considering the game.. - 7/29/2007 12:26:00 AM

LarryP

Posts: 3783
Joined: 5/15/2005
From: Carson City, NV
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHellPatrol

quote:

ORIGINAL: LarryP

After Battlefront? I thought players complained about that having a lack of scenarios and graphics? I must be confused here. You mean we can't complain once we get some beefy patch?!

<ahem> I meant shortchanged again.