"javajeff" <javajeff@NOSPAMadelphia.net> wrote in message
news:T-6dnbTpQKw04YLeRVn-rQ@adelphia.com...
>I only played the first mission in the demo, and I do not know what to
>think. Any thoughts?
>
> Regards,
>
> javajeff
I'm downloading the demo as I type this. I'm very curious to see what the
single player skirmish is like compared to Age of Mythology, and if any
handicaps have been implemented in skirmish mode. On the lowest difficulty
setting, AoM was far too easy, but I never had success beating the AI on
anything higher. Thankfully, work-arounds were suggested to get the
multiplayer mode to work for single player, but the AI was still far too
strong for my liking in AoM above the lowest setting.
javajeff wrote:
> I only played the first mission in the demo, and I do not know what to
> think. Any thoughts?
I still haven't decided if I'm going to even bother downloading the
demo. I'm kind of burned on the whole concept of RTS, and I was never
all that fond of the Age of Empires series after I grew tired of the
first one. I did buy Age of Empires 2 but never really spent much time
playing it. Didn't even bother with Age of Mythology.
Besides, if I want RTS I already have several that I recently got cheap
that I haven't played yet, Warhammer 40K: Dawn of War and Battle for
Middle Earth are sitting ready to play. I actually reinstalled WC3 and
was playing through it because I never did finish the campaign for it
back when it was new. Dated graphics but it's pretty entertaining. It's
kind of cool to see all the creatures in WC3 after having experienced
World of Warcraft and noting how they translated to the MMORPG.
I found it to be different enough to make me want to play some more. The
home town sending you goods and cards that can be changed is a good thing.
Gameplay is still the same & trading posts earning xp points is cool. Any
RTS fan will enjoy it I think
NightSky 421 wrote:
> "javajeff" <javajeff@NOSPAMadelphia.net> wrote in message
> news:T-6dnbTpQKw04YLeRVn-rQ@adelphia.com...
>
>>I only played the first mission in the demo, and I do not know what to
>>think. Any thoughts?
>>
I've fiddled with it a bit and it seems pretty much the same game I've
played 100 times before.
Uzytkownik "Jamie_Manic" <yeahbutno@slag.com> napisal w wiadomosci
news:4320c06c$0$6471$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
> NightSky 421 wrote:
> > "javajeff" <javajeff@NOSPAMadelphia.net> wrote in message
> > news:T-6dnbTpQKw04YLeRVn-rQ@adelphia.com...
> >
> >>I only played the first mission in the demo, and I do not know what to
> >>think. Any thoughts?
> >>
>
> I've fiddled with it a bit and it seems pretty much the same game I've
> played 100 times before.
I was simply amazed how the EA can simply LIE about the game look: I'm now
watching AOE3 screenshots on Gamespot and comparing it to what can be seen
in this game - simply ROTFL, it looks like 100x worse in real. (all options
set to highest possible in demo)
> I was simply amazed how the EA can simply LIE about the game look: I'm now
> watching AOE3 screenshots on Gamespot and comparing it to what can be seen
> in this game - simply ROTFL, it looks like 100x worse in real. (all options
> set to highest possible in demo)
I thought the same, it looks stunning in the screens, in reality it
looks a bit average and I can run it with everything on high at 12x10,
in terms of looks not all that better than AoM.
Jamie_Manic wrote:
>
>> I was simply amazed how the EA can simply LIE about the game look: I'm
>> now
>> watching AOE3 screenshots on Gamespot and comparing it to what can be
>> seen
>> in this game - simply ROTFL, it looks like 100x worse in real. (all
>> options
>> set to highest possible in demo)
>
>
> I thought the same, it looks stunning in the screens, in reality it
> looks a bit average and I can run it with everything on high at 12x10,
> in terms of looks not all that better than AoM.
I thought it looked more like a cartoon. I feel like I am playing a
kids game. The interface is huge and takes up way too much screen. I
only played it once so far, so I may give it another try soon.
Mandella wrote:
>
>
> I was simply amazed how the EA can simply LIE about the game look: I'm now
> watching AOE3 screenshots on Gamespot and comparing it to what can be seen
> in this game - simply ROTFL, it looks like 100x worse in real. (all options
> set to highest possible in demo)
>
Don't forget that it uses video card capabilities that your current
video card may not support. You'll need the latest nVidia card or the
ATI R520 if you want it to look like the screen shots...
"Jamie_Manic" <yeahbutno@slag.com> wrote in message
news:4320c06c$0$6471$cc9e4d1f@news-text.dial.pipex.com...
> NightSky 421 wrote:
>> "javajeff" <javajeff@NOSPAMadelphia.net> wrote in message
>> news:T-6dnbTpQKw04YLeRVn-rQ@adelphia.com...
>>
>>>I only played the first mission in the demo, and I do not know what to
>>>think. Any thoughts?
>>>
>
> I've fiddled with it a bit and it seems pretty much the same game I've
> played 100 times before.
As long as you don't shell out the same cash as you've done 100 times
before, otherwise they will keep cranking out the same games you've seen a
100 times before.
I really just wanted a no frills rock paper scissors game with a new
graphic engine in a historical setting. I dont like the cards or the
home city. RPG in my basebauilding RTS game is unwelcome. I just want to
build and fight...not make decisions about bonuuses. It is a matter of
time before all the imbalances from stupid "build orders" come out with
this terrible design. Also, the interface is clunky and uncomfortable
and takes up too much screen. I play WOW for my RPG kick. Please stop
with POWERUPS, UBERWEAPONS, SPENDABLE POINTS, AND OTHER KIDDIE GAMEPLAY
GIMMICKS in an RTS game. ROCK/PAPER/SCISSORS only.
I know this is a demo, but the game design is a huge disappointment to
me more than when AOM was released. I am really looking forward to the
Rome Total War Expansion. Basebuilding RTS games are worse to me, and
the last few years has really made the genre boring. Bring back updated
games like Total Annihilation, Age of Empires 2, and Starcraft.
> I really just wanted a no frills rock paper scissors game with a
> new graphic engine in a historical setting.
And a better interface.
Some basic adjustments would be nice, like an adjustable size
minimap. I wonder why Microsoft wouldn't do that.
> I dont like the cards or the home city...I just want to build
> and fight ...Also, the interface is clunky and uncomfortable and
> takes up too much screen.
If it isn't already, it should be adjustable like things are in
Windows.
> bring back updated games like Total Annihilation
I guess that's been shelved.
The biggest improvement to real time strategy (RTS) IMO would be
to get the user interface out of the way of strategizing. I do
that now through speech recognition combined with scripting.
Usable voice scripting could be added and would serve the majority
of users since recognition would be limited to perhaps 100
commands. That number is a tiny fraction of what
speech-recognition currently handles so recognition capability
should be easy. To make speech recognition very reliable,
they could even have preassigned words just like there are
currently preassigned keystroke combinations. The words might be
generic but would provide many times more activators than
keystrokes currently provide, and probably would be much easier to
remember. That will happen probably when pigs fly, if not later.
Scripting relieves the repetitive base building without changing
anything at all. After the script is issued, the commands take just
as long to execute, but units are being produced and ready for use
almost immediately. Even if units weren't ready to use in a hurry,
you could easily spend that time contemplating the random map. The
frantic pace of RTS is impressive even with full scripting
capability. The strategy content of RTS is amazingly deep and I'm
loving it as always.
