Support NeoGAF

[explodet]

Once I realized this is a Wars game in NAME ONLY, I lightened up and considered the possibility that it could be a fun little title.

I'll have enough Intelligent Systems love this year with two Fire Emblem games and Advance Wars DS (assuming they all make it this year).

 

[ChrisReid]

This game was just not fun at E3 last year. I'm a huge Advance Wars fan, and I have no interest in buying the title that was shown at E3 last year. It seemed like a crappy Army Men title.

 

[Jonnyboy117]

I liked what I played of it at E3 okay. It was really unpolished but you could see where they were going with it and that it could be good after it was fixed up more.

That being said it's got pretty much nothing to do with Advanced Wars as we know and love it. This game would have a lot less ill will towards it if they just called it something else.

Correct on all fronts. I like the idea of mixing strategy and action (remember Pandemic's remake of Battlezone?), but the controls and missions and units have to be very well designed. I would agree that using the Wars license is causing this game more grief than it would see otherwise, but from what was shown at E3 last year, the game just doesn't live up to the reputation of the series. I hope that has either been fixed, or that the game has been canceled.

 

[GSG Flash]

This is one game that looks like it would be better if it had online.

 

[Pellham]

He says the game has come a long quite well from what has been shown before.

That's what everyone says on a game that gets bad press ahead of time then later disappears for a while. 9 times out of 10 those games still end up sucking though.

Anyway, i'll just reiterate what I said and give the game the benefit of the doubt for now. If reviews pan it, then you know they failed.

 

[Li Mu Bai]

Tactical turn-based strategy has worked quite well with a traditional rpg. interface, where the players are accustomed to waiting their turn for action. (ala FE:GC) In a massive war-based type scenario however, the switch to real-time strategy was needed imo. (as a platform based game) You're running sorties etc, the player needs to feel connected & in control of the outcome, as opposed to merely issuing orders & planning it out. This game holds potential, I saw that it was indeed in need of some re-tooling at last year's E3. But I liked some of the ideas they had implemented already. I hear it's looking, & thankfully playing better as well.

 

[Cragstar]

just to let you know

UK magazine CUBE is in the studio this month playing the game, and will give us UK guys and gals an update in the new Mag which is out on the 7th May.

So hopefull in a weekes time we can see where this game is at, as its a UK mag and this is an American site, i'll get some scans up when mine drops through the door

 

[Ristamar]

I also thought the trailers looked decent. If the controls can be tweaked and polished, I think it could be pretty fun.

 

[Ash Housewares]

just be glad new games are coming out for GC at all

 

[john tv]

We can cross our fingers and hope it is!

fixed

 

[EternalDarko]

That's what everyone says on a game that gets bad press ahead of time then later disappears for a while. 9 times out of 10 those games still end up sucking though.

Anyway, i'll just reiterate what I said and give the game the benefit of the doubt for now. If reviews pan it, then you know they failed.

very true.

but as someone else said, just be glad games are still being made for the cube; it's an unfortunate situation for cube lovers. Under fire seems to be a fun title and if the controls are better than they were last time it was shown, it could be very fun to play.

 

[Rahul]

From what I read in EDGE's April issue, it seems like Kuju has thusfar missed the whole point of why Advance Wars is what it is and is essentially just making an average game that has little to nothing to do with the franchise's original value or style. Too bad? Who knows.