Band of Brothers

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

I'm really surprised there's no talk about Band of Brothers here. I saw
it in the stores and haven't seen any talk about it, good or bad. Has
anyone tried it yet? If so, how is it?

Thanks!

Nathan

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

what a moron I am. It was Brothers in Arms: Road to Hill 30. No wonder
I haven't seen anything on it.

 

[Andrew]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On 26 Aug 2005 08:05:09 -0700, "nathantw" <nathantwong@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>I'm really surprised there's no talk about Band of Brothers here. I saw
>it in the stores and haven't seen any talk about it, good or bad. Has
>anyone tried it yet? If so, how is it?

Assuming you mean Brothers In Arms (BIA), that came out and was
discussed months ago.
--
Andrew, contact via interpleb.blogspot.com
Help make Usenet a better place: English is read downwards,
please don't top post. Trim replies to quote only relevant text.
Check groups.google.com before asking an obvious question.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

I think the general consensus was:

meh ....

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Oh. Just so-so? I guess I won't be purchasing it anytime soon.

"One Punch Mickey" <fantantiddlyspan@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Q%GPe.4536$R5.855@news.indigo.ie...
>I think the general consensus was:
>
> meh ....
>
>

 

[Nonymous]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

> "One Punch Mickey" <fantantiddlyspan@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Q%GPe.4536$R5.855@news.indigo.ie...
>>I think the general consensus was:
>>
>> meh ....
>>


"nathantw" <me@nospamsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:8SLPe.77$m56.28@newssvr24.news.prodigy.net...
> Oh. Just so-so? I guess I won't be purchasing it anytime soon.

I actually enjoyed it.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Re: Brothers in Arms: Road to Hill 30. (I talking Re; PC versions here)...

I tryed this and thought it horrid ...I have and enjoy & highly recommed
Call of Duty....I've tried quite a lot of Medal of Honor 1 & 2 ...and didnt
like it (far, far to scripted) but I can see why a lot of peeps rate it
high..
Orthough Bro. in Arms is much more recent than these other 2 it doesn't look
any better ...the kids cartoon style (I thought) graphics seemed years old
and the way you have to go along VERY rigid paths was v.bad....this is allso
true of Call Of Duty...but the way that game hurries you along and the
quality and detail of everything going on means I was involved and
completely forget how scripted it is ..

Brothers in Arms has a 'control a squad' format...but it just means u
control 1 or another 1 character (badly drawn ,...and lacking 'character')
at a time....the targeting system is silly/annoying..
But it does have its fans..

There are lots of BoA reviews here;
http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/brothersinarms

There is a demo (PC) around ..maybe allso consider "Full Spectrum Warrior"

Of cause if your NOT! an United States type person (yes there r other places
in the world)...u might hate them all for 'forgeting' all the (very many)
other countries in WWII..

Luv mouse (the 1 oo caint spel)
@@@@@

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"nathantw" <me@nospamsbcglobal.net> once tried to test me with:

> Oh. Just so-so? I guess I won't be purchasing it anytime soon.

I have only played a little bit of it, like the first 4 or 5 missions, but
I do not like it as much as Medal of Honor or Call of Duty. They added some
"strategic" aspects to the game that IMHO gets in the way of immersion and
story. YMMV. I actually regret buying BIA because I spent nearly full price
for the DVD version simply because it WAS the DVD version. And then it
dropped in price by like $10 the next week.

--

Knight37 - http://knightgames.blogspot.com

Once a Gamer, Always a Gamer.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"nathantw" <me@nospamsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:8SLPe.77$m56.28@newssvr24.news.prodigy.net...
> Oh. Just so-so? I guess I won't be purchasing it anytime soon.
>
> "One Punch Mickey" <fantantiddlyspan@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:Q%GPe.4536$R5.855@news.indigo.ie...
> >I think the general consensus was:
> >
> > meh ....
> >


The squad control was (IMO) very good (a great blend of control without
burden); however, after the first 5-7 missions, it becomes way too
repetitive.
A real advance in control, but the storyline lapsed into drudgery.
Too bad, I really enjoyed the start. CoD still blows it away as far as
re-play value.
I suppose I will dust if off and give it another run sometime.

--
------
Dr. Dickie
"Let be be finale of seem.
The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream."
-- Wallace Stevens

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Dr. Dickie" <Dr_Dickie@chembench.com> wrote in message
news:1125314090.0f9a9427d15bbc71b9d2348a2363a753@teranews...
>
> "nathantw" <me@nospamsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:8SLPe.77$m56.28@newssvr24.news.prodigy.net...
>> Oh. Just so-so? I guess I won't be purchasing it anytime soon.
>>
>> "One Punch Mickey" <fantantiddlyspan@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:Q%GPe.4536$R5.855@news.indigo.ie...
>> >I think the general consensus was:
>> >
>> > meh ....
>> >
>
>
> The squad control was (IMO) very good (a great blend of control without
> burden); however, after the first 5-7 missions, it becomes way too
> repetitive.
> A real advance in control, but the storyline lapsed into drudgery.
> Too bad, I really enjoyed the start. CoD still blows it away as far as
> re-play value.
> I suppose I will dust if off and give it another run sometime.
>

I got about 1/5th of the way thru the game, and stopped to do other stuff.
I've meant to go back to it, but the game wasn't all that exciting for me.
And that was over a month ago. This game and Medal of Honor Pacific
were a step back after having played Medal of Honor and Call of Duty.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"OldDog" <OldDog@citypound.dogs> wrote in message
news:EAPQe.202364$0f.40719@tornado.texas.rr.com...
>
> "Dr. Dickie" <Dr_Dickie@chembench.com> wrote in message
> news:1125314090.0f9a9427d15bbc71b9d2348a2363a753@teranews...
> >
> > "nathantw" <me@nospamsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> > news:8SLPe.77$m56.28@newssvr24.news.prodigy.net...
> >> Oh. Just so-so? I guess I won't be purchasing it anytime soon.
> >>
> >> "One Punch Mickey" <fantantiddlyspan@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> news:Q%GPe.4536$R5.855@news.indigo.ie...
> >> >I think the general consensus was:
> >> >
> >> > meh ....
> >> >
> >
> >
> > The squad control was (IMO) very good (a great blend of control without
> > burden); however, after the first 5-7 missions, it becomes way too
> > repetitive.
> > A real advance in control, but the storyline lapsed into drudgery.
> > Too bad, I really enjoyed the start. CoD still blows it away as far as
> > re-play value.
> > I suppose I will dust if off and give it another run sometime.
> >
>
> I got about 1/5th of the way thru the game, and stopped to do other stuff.
> I've meant to go back to it, but the game wasn't all that exciting for me.
> And that was over a month ago. This game and Medal of Honor Pacific
> were a step back after having played Medal of Honor and Call of Duty.
>
>

I kinda enjoyed MoH Pacific, although the damn "dense" jungle to keep you on
ridiculously tight rails did get bothersome. At least it offered some
variety in what you had to do.
There is no doubt that CoD got a very good mix of immersion and FPS. Only
problem is, I see no way for them to take it to the next level...but I sure
as hell hope they do, and I wish they would hurry (although BF2 is a nice
diversion ;-)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

My goodness a thread where I agree basically with everyone. I too got the 5
to 7 mission blues, found some of it sort of interesting but hardly
inspirational. I also agree with Trimble. For some reason Full Spectrum
Warrior really was enjoyable to me which I know was not the case for many
others. Went all the way through it and couldn't get enough. I really
used the squad part and they didn't seem to get in the way of me or each
other most of the time. It was not real complex but I thought it fun and
the interface for me anyway worked on my warped brain.


"Trimble Bracegirdle" <NOspam@spam.not> wrote in message
news:430f917e$1_2@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
> Re: Brothers in Arms: Road to Hill 30. (I talking Re; PC versions here)...
>
> I tryed this and thought it horrid ...I have and enjoy & highly recommed
> Call of Duty....I've tried quite a lot of Medal of Honor 1 & 2 ...and
> didnt like it (far, far to scripted) but I can see why a lot of peeps rate
> it high..
> Orthough Bro. in Arms is much more recent than these other 2 it doesn't
> look any better ...the kids cartoon style (I thought) graphics seemed
> years old and the way you have to go along VERY rigid paths was
> v.bad....this is allso true of Call Of Duty...but the way that game
> hurries you along and the quality and detail of everything going on means
> I was involved and completely forget how scripted it is ..
>
> Brothers in Arms has a 'control a squad' format...but it just means u
> control 1 or another 1 character (badly drawn ,...and lacking 'character')
> at a time....the targeting system is silly/annoying..
> But it does have its fans..
>
> There are lots of BoA reviews here;
> http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/pc/brothersinarms
>
> There is a demo (PC) around ..maybe allso consider "Full Spectrum Warrior"
>
> Of cause if your NOT! an United States type person (yes there r other
> places in the world)...u might hate them all for 'forgeting' all the (very
> many) other countries in WWII..
>
> Luv mouse (the 1 oo caint spel)
> @@@@@
>
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 08:50:43 -0700, "bunboy" <bunboy@cox.net> wrote:

>My goodness a thread where I agree basically with everyone. I too got the 5
>to 7 mission blues, found some of it sort of interesting but hardly
>inspirational. I also agree with Trimble. For some reason Full Spectrum
>Warrior really was enjoyable to me which I know was not the case for many
>others. Went all the way through it and couldn't get enough. I really
>used the squad part and they didn't seem to get in the way of me or each
>other most of the time. It was not real complex but I thought it fun and
>the interface for me anyway worked on my warped brain.


One of the smart things the developers did in FSW is that they didn't
make it a first person shooter; e.g., *you* don't get to aim'n'shoot
personally. All you get to do is direct the soldiers where you think
they should place their fire. Because of this, you could focus
entirely on the strategy aspect. In fact, because you have no DIRECT
control you have to think that way.

In comparison, many of the FSW-wannabes (Brothers in Arms, Close
Combat First to Fight, even Republic Commando), any "strategic"
aspects (I guess technically it would be tactical, right?) are sort of
bolted on to an FPS. You therefore have to perform dual duties of not
only keeping yourself alive, but also nursemaiding the AI characters.
Furthermore, because of the deficiencies in party control, AI and even
because the first-person viewpoint almost demands it, it is very
tempting to "go it alone". This makes the rest of the party and,
indeed, any strategy almost superfluous. The games end up being, for
the most part, straight first-person shooters of the sort we've seen a
thousand times before that just happen to have a bunch of tag-alongs.

FSW got it right.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

Yes spalls that states it much better than I could have. Different type
game but also the reason I enjoyed the Majesty games in the RPG arena. Any
folks have any others games to recommend that fall in this type of gameplay.


"Spalls Hurgenson" <yoinks@ebalu.com> wrote in message
news:an4ah1hnmmk9nlpu33o40pi683ma9i0lag@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 08:50:43 -0700, "bunboy" <bunboy@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>My goodness a thread where I agree basically with everyone. I too got the
>>5
>>to 7 mission blues, found some of it sort of interesting but hardly
>>inspirational. I also agree with Trimble. For some reason Full Spectrum
>>Warrior really was enjoyable to me which I know was not the case for many
>>others. Went all the way through it and couldn't get enough. I really
>>used the squad part and they didn't seem to get in the way of me or each
>>other most of the time. It was not real complex but I thought it fun and
>>the interface for me anyway worked on my warped brain.
>
>
> One of the smart things the developers did in FSW is that they didn't
> make it a first person shooter; e.g., *you* don't get to aim'n'shoot
> personally. All you get to do is direct the soldiers where you think
> they should place their fire. Because of this, you could focus
> entirely on the strategy aspect. In fact, because you have no DIRECT
> control you have to think that way.
>
> In comparison, many of the FSW-wannabes (Brothers in Arms, Close
> Combat First to Fight, even Republic Commando), any "strategic"
> aspects (I guess technically it would be tactical, right?) are sort of
> bolted on to an FPS. You therefore have to perform dual duties of not
> only keeping yourself alive, but also nursemaiding the AI characters.
> Furthermore, because of the deficiencies in party control, AI and even
> because the first-person viewpoint almost demands it, it is very
> tempting to "go it alone". This makes the rest of the party and,
> indeed, any strategy almost superfluous. The games end up being, for
> the most part, straight first-person shooters of the sort we've seen a
> thousand times before that just happen to have a bunch of tag-alongs.
>
> FSW got it right.
>
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action (More info?)

"Dr. Dickie" <Dr_Dickie@chembench.com> wrote in message
news:1125402829.51fd44d36848f064aa9326c07cd38053@teranews...
<snip>

>>
>> I got about 1/5th of the way thru the game, and stopped to do other
>> stuff.
>> I've meant to go back to it, but the game wasn't all that exciting for
>> me.
>> And that was over a month ago. This game and Medal of Honor
>> Pacific
>> were a step back after having played Medal of Honor and Call of Duty.
>>
>>
>
> I kinda enjoyed MoH Pacific, although the damn "dense" jungle to keep you
> on
> ridiculously tight rails did get bothersome. At least it offered some
> variety in what you had to do.
> There is no doubt that CoD got a very good mix of immersion and FPS. Only
> problem is, I see no way for them to take it to the next level...but I
> sure
> as hell hope they do, and I wish they would hurry (although BF2 is a nice
> diversion ;-)
>
>

I should have expanded upon my comment about MoH Pacific. There were
elements in that I enjoyed. I thought the dialog and cut scenes were well
done. And sometimes I enjoyed the gun battles.

But there were times where I got annoyed with hitting the enemy A/I 4x in
the chest only to see him get up again and charge me. And some of the
jungle levels seemed like they were the same as the last 2 levels that I
just finished.

Plus, I had to do a lot of "Quick Saves" in ever level. Cause it seemed
like I was going to die at least 37x a level.