firehawk12
Subete no aware
Yeah, for 12 bucks... can't complain. This totally slipped under my radar anyway.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
STEAM - announcements, updates and WIN
- Thread starter Tony Rocky Horror
- Start date
- Status
speculawyer
Member
I already have too many strategy games that I'll never get around to playing.
But I have completed my collection of Valve developed games by picking up a retail Counter-Strike Anthology in order to get CS:Zero & the deleted scenes.
Of course I still need Garry's Mod for all the Valve published games.
Put the Rainbow Six stuff on sale please Ubi. Or old Call of Duty, Acti.
But I have completed my collection of Valve developed games by picking up a retail Counter-Strike Anthology in order to get CS:Zero & the deleted scenes.
Of course I still need Garry's Mod for all the Valve published games.
Put the Rainbow Six stuff on sale please Ubi. Or old Call of Duty, Acti.
Zaraki_Kenpachi
Member
Is supreme commander 2 as good as the first one? I enjoyed the first one but haven't tried the second one at all.
Morbid Angel
Member
Javaman said:
They streamlined the gameplay (economy etc) in the sequel. It's not what people were expecting from a sequel to Supreme Commander but it's still a pretty decent RTS.
Grimm Fandango
Member
+1 for Supreme Commander 2
Psy-Phi
Member
The original is still amazing, not for the single player though, but just the sheer scope of the game is untouched, and SupCom 2 change so many things, and none for the better if you enjoyed the first one for what made it unique.Schmattakopf said:
Far less units and structures. Which in turn means simpler strategies, more Rock Paper Scissors that's easier to figure out than the first.
Smaller maps to play on.
Adjacent bonuses are gone.
There's now no way to queue up things (troops/buildings) beyond your Mass income.
Converting energy into Mass is now a manual process. (and the currency is now more of a classic RTS style, instead of a constant rate based on energy plants)
Drones/Engineers can no longer assist build or repair.
Army formations have been removed in favor of an auto-form 'feature'.
You can't create build order macro's for pre-set structure layouts (though with less buildings it doesn't really matter).
You have to research tech now, and can't have access to everything, instead of just building a building to grant you the ability to build higher tech. (before energy/income was the only limitation stopping you from building anything)
I bought it at launch from Gamestop for $40 + $10 credit, played it for about a week and haven't touched it since. At $11 I wouldn't say stay away though, it is entertaining, it's just a shadow of it's former self. If Supreme Commander was too daunting to you, then this game may be right up your alley.
Schmattakopf
Member
Thanks for the input. I had a feeling from the reviews. The economy and scale of the first one is what drew me in from beginning to end.Psy-Phi said:
Phife Dawg
Member
Wow, it's 17 here :lol .LovingSteam said:
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Fuck that noise. They condensed it. Tactics heavy RTS games are far from dumb. And unlike SupCom, SupCom 2 runs great on modest hardware.Vandiger said:
The core issue is that SupCom fans were expecting more of the same from SupCom2 and felt blindsided when they got something different. I personally enjoy both games but for vastly different reasons.
Did anyone pick up Magic: The Gathering? I played the XBLA one at a friend's house and it seemed okay, but I'd like other opinions as I didn't see a whole lot of it.
I used to be pretty big on the card game as a kid, so it always holds a place in my heart. I'm still a bit skeptical about a trading card game in virtual form.
I used to be pretty big on the card game as a kid, so it always holds a place in my heart. I'm still a bit skeptical about a trading card game in virtual form.
I too pre-ordered MtG. I was into the game in my early teens, but stopped playing because there weren't any other players (of the same age, at least) in my area. The only times I played it was with a family friend who lived like 800km from my town. I wanna see if I still remember how to play it.
Schmattakopf
Member
I will be getting Shattered Horizon, too. I should have gotten it when it was $5, but I didn't, and then someone gave me a three day pass and it was amazing.
MisterAnderson
Member
Shattered Horizon is amazing. I will probably get back into it when the SC2 beta ends. And wow at Supreme Commander 2. I can't see myself ever playing it though since SC2 though...probably won't get it.
Minsc
Gold Member
AcridMeat said:
I picked it up, but it's not out yet, just pre-release.
I played the game pretty nerdily back in school, and the 1997 Microprose version of the game is incredible, 2nd only to MTGO, but MTGO is the real deal, you need to actually buy boosters and starters, while MTG from 1997 gives you all the cards for free (not all at once, you find/buy them throughout the adventure mode), but there's no micro-payments.
Highly recommended, if you want to revisit deck building and not actually pay 100s of $s for rare cards, like with MTGO (which I suppose is basically as good as it gets, given the cards have a real value you can sell).
Back to this recent title, it's supposed to be a great game, just very limited. The decks are pre-built and there's no building your own, so there's a very limited amount of strategy and cards compared to the 1997 title where you can build hundreds of different themed decks without thinking.
But this would quench a small yearning for the game, no doubt. It looks like a perfect simulation of the real thing, if anything a little too flashy! The 1997 one is very simple, but has all the high res art, just simple magic games.
That one was limited to 1 on 1 though, and this new one looks like there is some 3 way free for all, and perhaps even 2 vs 2?
AcridMeat said:
If this is a port of the XBLA version then I can offer some input on it.
It's basically M:TG lite. You'll start with a number of pre-constructed, 60-card decks. Winning with a given deck will unlock new cards for that deck at a rate of 1 card for each time you. Deck customization is extremely limited - you can only add or remove the cards that you unlock; in other words you can't mess with the original, pre-construct deck. There are usually about, I don't know, 12(?) cards you can unlock with each deck.
If the game is a port then you can participate in 1-on-1 or 2-headed giant duels. I never got into custom matches so I'm not sure what kind of house rules are available.
There are also a number of puzzles for you solve like the old Mark Rosewater puzzles you used to get in the Duelist.
Pretty fun game, though you'll definitely be aching for more. I'm pretty sure that's what the creators were shooting for.
Yeah, it's pretty much 'lern 2 magic' for the ultra-noobs, myself among them.
It seems that many of those who don't like the game are those who have played 'real' magic and, as such, know how much fun it can be to build your own decks.
I haven't personally and have had a blast with this while learning the core mechanics. But if I ever did move onto MTG:O or similar I'd probably never be able to come back to Planeswalkers as a result.
It seems that many of those who don't like the game are those who have played 'real' magic and, as such, know how much fun it can be to build your own decks.
I haven't personally and have had a blast with this while learning the core mechanics. But if I ever did move onto MTG:O or similar I'd probably never be able to come back to Planeswalkers as a result.
PedroLumpy
Member
Lyphen said:
Yep, can't tweak your land either. Yer stuck using every card from the base deck
In the XBLA version at least, you can't edit the 'core' part of the deck at all. Only choose which of the bonus cards you want to add to it.
Basically, the deck building isn't there at all, your only tactical option is in which deck you actually take into the fight.
EDIT
For memory, buying real versions of the cards lets you use them in MTG:O as well.
Basically, the deck building isn't there at all, your only tactical option is in which deck you actually take into the fight.
EDIT
hamchan said:
For memory, buying real versions of the cards lets you use them in MTG:O as well.
Annihilator
Member
I still play actual mtg so the pc/xbla version with the limitations it has is not for me. Hopefully they keep making more games though and include more cards and maybe some kind of adventure mode. I would be onboard for a full price release if they completely updated the old micropose game with all the new cards and abilities that have been introduced since that game came out in 1997 or so.
Nickiepoo said:
No, you can't: http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75846/24868249/Real_Cards_tpo_Online_cards
You can only trade a full digital set for a physical one.
Minsc
Gold Member
Annihilator said:
I think part of the reason they never made another game like the 1997 one is because it's not nearly as profitable as doing MTGO.
There's really nothing wrong with the Microprose one, other than it doesn't have the newest cards, but it really doesn't need them. I agree with you, a sequel exactly like that one, would be perfect.
Nickiepoo said:
It could be useful if he wanted to leave MTGO and start playing the real game (you lose your digital set in the process), but even in this case he'd still have to buy some more cards, as a full set means 1 copy of each card and this isn't enough to build a typical deck (unless you are playing highlander format). There's no point in starting MTGO if you want to play the physical game.
Minsc
Gold Member
danmaku said:
I guess you could get 4 complete sets digitally, then get 4 complete sets mailed to you in physical form. God knows how much that'd cost, probably close to $1,000? If not more I'd guess, especially for the huge whatever generation of standard cards they're up to.
I was playing a little bit after Beta, up through about 4th generation, fell out of the game when it transitioned to 5th.
I think that coincidentally was also when the cards cost the most money too, single cards going for over $100 was not unusual because you could still play with most Beta cards back then in tournaments.
Hmm I might buy Shattered Horizons, but how is the community outside of the free weekends? Are there enough players?
SC is amazing, but obviously it's really user unfriendly. SC2 is just an average RTS with nothing that makes it stick out, and so it's better to just get a different (superior) RTS e.g. Starcraft II.
It was dumbed down like hell. They focused on consoles too much.SapientWolf said:
SC is amazing, but obviously it's really user unfriendly. SC2 is just an average RTS with nothing that makes it stick out, and so it's better to just get a different (superior) RTS e.g. Starcraft II.
Minsc
Gold Member
John said:
Doesn't MTGO have drafting? What's the difference? I'm quite rusty when it comes to the intricacies of this game.
Minsc
Gold Member
John said:
Yea, there's something nice about the Draft. I'm remembering my brief experience with MTGO (lasted less than a year), and I did a few of the drafts.
It's the perfect leveling tool while still keeping things random. You don't know what color decks your opponents are making, what backup decks they're making, hell you don't even know what cards they have. And since it's all random it's as fair as fair can be.
It's just a bit expensive, since the Draft requires you to have something like 3 or 5 boosters, and 2 event tickets (cost $1 each).
I think winning makes you break even though, you definitely get some nice prize for winning. I also think it was timed, so you had to make your deck in a certain time, and play through the Draft in a set time too, so you don't want to start one if you have other plans. Since you can do them basically 24/7, finding a good spot to play one usually isn't hard.
Make sure to read this first if you do throw your productive life way! If nothing else, it should drill the point across that the worst way to spend money on MTGO is through their website (even if you are buying unopened boosters for the draft or tickets), because everything is obtainable for significantly cheaper via the communities built in trading.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
I'd really like to see you justify that statement. I'm primarily a tactical RTS player so I take offense at the idea that less units on smaller maps means "a dumber game for the consoles." If that's the case then AI War and Sins of a Solar Empire are the only RTS games that don't have to wear a dunce cap.Ultimatum said:
Some people may enjoy Starcraft more, but that's subjective. In any case, SupCom 2 still has the better interface.
SapientWolf said:
Actually, it's interesting you say that, because I loved all the games involved in this post but, purely impressions from the Supcom2 demo, would be inclined to say that much of what made SupCom interesting was removed from the sequel.
It's not that a smaller number of units on a smaller map is less interesting since I also love DoW2, which takes small scale tractical RTS quite a long way, it's just that from my impressions Supcom2 isn't actually trying to be a small scale tactical RTS, but rather, a large scale strategic RTS that's also console friendly which simply results in less strategy.
But again, these are simply demo impressions, if you think otherwise then I'd like to hear because honestly, I want to be able to like the game.
- Status