Charles22
Posts: 912
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline
|
Tombstone: You have described SS as 'awesome', while I have called it 'rubbish' and 'stinks to the heavens'. What we have at least in the case with me, and probably you, is an overemphasis of it's good or bad qualities.
While I agree with another poster that it's arcadic and somewhat FPS or RTS for wargaming, those are very negative qualities for me. For the game falling into those categories I would be more inclined to call it 'fair', but the whole point is that I was having wargaming glasses on and I'm fairly disappointed at the lack of depth in RTS, and even more so in FPS, so that when I somewhat expected at the bare minimum a 'lift' beyond the least detestable of the two (RTS), it surely didn't do that. I have the AOE series representing RTS, and since I threw away any Doom/Doom II I once had, I'm unlikely to buy any more FPS; they're just not worth my time, time I could be using in using my brain a bit more for the likes of SPWAW etc.
For FPS/RTS fans, my critique must seem a bit harsh, but I'm sure some of the really super-fans of both categories are severly disappointed as well, though they are putting on their respective different glasses. I don't think many FPS fans expected it to add to their interest in the genre, but that it favors FPS is largely just my observation, I sure didn't expect that going in.
Now if I liked the game as you have, I might well have resorted to calling the game 'awesome', but context is quite important, we are in a turn-based environment after all. I wasn't attempting to sway you, indeed, I've had enough years to realise that when someone describes anything as awesome, particularly if they don't parrot that word every chance they get, and it would appear as though you don't, that there's no chance to sway them as only the game can get them down to something more resembling reality.
My attempt is to dissuade others from wasting their money, money which in large part would seem to key towards turn or phase-based play. I also take into account that most people don't buy every game that comes out, so that, like I, they're discriminating. If they feel that having more than one visual feast like AOE is not too much icing on the cake, so be it, but at least RTS does have some strategy. I would have to have a hole in my head to be on an FPS forum, and to a lesser degree an RTS one, but if I were I would take that viewpoint in perspective when describing the game, in which case I would likely call it 'fair', but I'm not in those forums. I say if you just "have to" have 'one' RTS WWII game, that "maybe" Empire Earth could be the one (though one may spend almost no time in the WWII era - I'm not sure). That's easy enough for me to say, because Empire Earth from the distance, looks to be so much like AOE, and indeed it's unlikely to actually be considerably worse in RTS aspects, than what the market has been putting out for the last year or two.
What the real shame of the game is that I think it's very unlikely to be a crossover game for RTS people, but only make the idea of wargaming in it's current and recent past, more abhorent to them. Unfortunately even Empire Earth, for as good for RTS as it might be, is unlikely to do crossover on RTS fans to WWII wargaming as well, simply because WWII isn't the primary era.
So, in the foreseeable future, perhaps the most attractive aspect of RTS, that being upgrading and the strategy involved in that, in WWII form, will be, strangely enough, SPWAW (I now take off my campaigner WWII glasses).
[This message has been edited by Charles22 (edited January 01, 2001).]
_____________________________
|
Printable Version
- 
- 
If you are looking for a comparable game, I would suggest that you have found probably the best in its genre here for SPW@W.
I wouldn't really place Combat Mission in the same area as SPW@W. It's focus is different from SPW@W, it sports the latest in AI and 3D Graphics suitable for mainstream computers. It looks great and plays fantastically. Its campaign system isn't quite as lengthy and connected as a Steel Panthers type scenario. It is more remaniscent of an improved Age of Rifles campaign. The length of the campaign, or operation, is restricted to just one segment of a battle (ie. the Battle for Arnheim bridge). You keep your 'core' or surviving starting troops througout the game, and sometimes gain reinforcements. I would recommend downloading the Demo. It is't quite as good as the current patched version of the released product, but, it gives a good impression on how gameplay goes.
It does take a while to get used 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