The farther these guys have deviated from the old Poptop classic, the worse the games have gotten.

I think Kalypso just doesn't know how to make strategy games with interesting choices, and filling the gap with ever more preposterous megastructures doesn't translate into compelling gameplay.

I never got into Long War 1, but I found Long War 2 to be a lot of fun and not too difficult.

CJ_Parker wrote on Jan 31, 2016, 10:17:
Also, we were promised 50 missions WITHOUT the expansion alone. So they first need to deliver a 50 mission campaign (it is very unlikely that the first two episodes will include that many missions) and then a reasonably sized expansion after that and ONLY THEN are they even allowed to BEGIN considering the milkage of their backers who pledged early enough to get Squadron 42 *and* the expansion for free.

Designing single player missions for space sims doesn't take very long if you have the right tools. I used to code missions for X-Wing and Tie Fighter that were much more complex than anything the games shipped with (and way beyond what Freespace and Wing Commander ever contained). I probably cranked out and tested 50 missions in the course of 6 months, and that was on top of school and homework every day.

If the tech is done, 50 missions in 11 months is a cakewalk for a real games studio.

jdreyer wrote on Sep 24, 2015, 13:47:
He's obviously a guy who likes building the environment engine, and is less interested in other stuff like AI and ships and UI. However, he's stated he won't bring anyone else in.

If you take a look at the dev diaries, back when he was doing them, he was very interested in all these things.

harlock wrote on Sep 6, 2015, 17:36:
its an interesting way to do business - no need to worry if the allocated budget is too much, now you can determine demand BEFORE supply!

Is this supposed to be sarcasm? Determining demand before supply so you don't sink money into a game no one wants seems like a win-win to me. The problem isn't some unfair market advantage. The problem is when they don't deliver a product worth what they asked for it.

walrus1 wrote on Aug 28, 2015, 19:02:
Yeah it looks impressive at night but I'm kinda worried that this is the main feature of this expansion. If so I don't think it's worth very much.

Isn't the day night cycle in the free patch? I think the expansion provides the entertainment buildings.

Kxmode wrote on Aug 21, 2015, 16:23:
So using basic math we can conclude about a 4:1 ratio or 4 times more. Using the same converter I plugged in 67 million Zolty and the US Dollar spit back $18,025,555. Based on a 4:1 ratio I then multiplied 18,025,555 by 4 to come up with 72,102,220.

You just divided by 4 then multiplied by 4...

If you wanted to know how much W3 cost in dollars, you already had the answer. 67 million.

MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Aug 14, 2015, 18:59:
Well, I'm still looking forward to patch 2.3 for some of the changes, but Blizzard has gone completely insane about these sets. Regular legendaries are just becoming more and more worthless over time.

Way, way too much emphasis on sets, and in particular 6 piece set bonuses. There simply isn't enough room left for customization.

Of course that's been the widespread complaint for about a year or so.

Totally agree. My buddy and I dabble each season, and the set bonuses are both very fun, and very necessary for high end play. There are some very fun legendary abilities, but all that really matters to your clear speed is you 2-4-6 piece bonuses.

killer_roach wrote on Jul 12, 2015, 21:02:
Wilson, FDR, LBJ, JFK was a far more aggressive military presence than you're claiming (not to mention, as per my prior statement, the creator of the Peace Corps), Carter was interested in reinstating the draft...

Claiming McGovern was a blip is inaccurate. While (white) southern democrats remained relatively hawkish, the rest of the party has been much more skeptical of military force since the Vietnam war.

Citing presidents before the last realignment may be an interesting history lesson, but it's as useful as using Abraham Lincoln to draw conclusions on the Republican party's approach to race relations.

Task wrote on Jul 12, 2015, 15:45:
That is until you look into Sanders track record. Sanders may say things about the Oligarchy study or is on record giving Greenspan the one two punch, but he has to answer for his spotty foreign policy first, which mirrors corrupt Dems and Pubs. A bunch of stuff that makes me wary, since I actually look into what it is candidates are voting on or what they supported:

- He supported the illegal Kosovo War under Bill Clinton
- Supported the invasion of the Afghanistan War
- Voted against the Iraq War, but laughably voted FOR more funding for the War Effort
- Voted for Bill Clinton's Anti-Terrorism Act (the precursor to patriot act)
- Supported Israel's illegal genocide and bombing of Gaza
- Supported giving aid to Kiev's illegal coup government which taxpayers have to pay for (fuck that)

Personally, I think Jill Stein is the best choice since she tells it like it is. I don't like lesser evil choices unless Sanders starts answering for his past decisions on his current rallies and fixes his shit foreign policy which mirrors other crony Leaders. War and Imperialism is bringing America to its knees in debt which is the root of the issue. Then again I don't like all-out-insanity like Hillary or Jeb.

Illegal Kosovo war? Illegal Kiev coup? Are you one of the professional Russian trolls I read about? If so welcome to Blues.

After one trainwreck of a sequel and two decades of bland imposters, I'm convinced that game developers are just not smart enough to understand what made MOO (1 and 2) so compelling. (Hint: technologies and racial traits that are both diverse and ridiculously overpowered).

I'd bet 70/30 that the "balance pass" will strip out everything fun about the original.

eRe4s3r wrote on Jun 2, 2015, 10:28:
Define media

If it's anything readable, on a screen, on tv, on radio

Then yes, we do. Unless you work in a cave with no power

I think "consume" is the term to focus on. If you're using that screen to create or edit something, that's clearly not consumption. They probably also wouldn't count reading for the direct purpose of writing a report or reviewing a contract, but I don't know what their definition is.

I'm pretty sure the correct response is "agree to disagree." If you can't accept a good argument from a person because you happen to disagree with them about some unrelated issue, then you're going to miss out on a lot of good ideas.

Paranoid Jack wrote on May 27, 2015, 21:50:
it sounds dead on from what I know of the country. They pirate and reverse engineer everything. They have more rip off products than any other country yet we still do most of our business with them?

Welcome to how new powers rise. I live half a mile from the first powered textile mill in America. Know how we got it? A guy went over to Britain, visited theirs, memorized what he saw, and made a copy when he got home.

We basically stole the whole industrial revolution from Britain. We shouldn't be shocked that the tables turned once we got on top.

ItBurn wrote on May 19, 2015, 14:53:

Task wrote on May 19, 2015, 14:31:
I read the whole thing just to check. The score given was the "Essential" award.

At one point at the end of the article, the author seemed to copy Polygon's take by using the buzzword "misogynistic." "set in a feudal world that is sometimes gruesomely misogynistic" - even though that's how Medieval life was (unfair and often brutal), Geralt is one person unable to change Human cruelty in society, and is depicted as such in the novels - similar vein to Game of Thrones.

There's nothing wrong with having misogynistic media or offensive media in general. There's nothing wrong in wanting to save a helpless princess. I don't want to live in a world where everything needs to be politically correct, not offend anyone and contain a person of every race and sex... There's all kinds of media and that's awesome.

The odd thing is that reason that we're told that depictions of misogyny are unacceptable is that they validate or even encourage misogyny in the real world. And yet every reader and writer at Polygon finds the idea that violence in videogames begets real violence laughable. Keep in mind that many videogames not only contain violence, but encourage and reward the player for committing it.

So in short, this new "depictions of mysogyny are wrong" is every bit as bullshit as "depictions of violence are wrong." I'm going to keep on enjoying games that contain both, while being peaceful and nonjudgmental (to the best of my ability) where it actually counts: the real world.

dj LiTh wrote on Apr 10, 2015, 21:38:
So you think Rome2 is a worthy successor of Rome1? Or a step forward for the series from Medieval2 or Shogun2? Do tell...

Some people seem to really like Rome2 now. Shallow campaign mechanics can be outweighed by a much prettier and still quite competent battle engine. Rome 1 had a lot of weird campaign ticks too. Total war games have rarely been good strategy games, but they're great battle simulators.

eRe4s3r wrote on Apr 7, 2015, 14:27:
And as a German I frankly don't care the what and hows. NSA / GCHQ spies on me, that means the USA and UK are enemies and not allies.

It's a good thing that no serious decision-maker subscribes to this world view. Germany spies on/in allied countries too.

Did they ever fix the PC tactical UI? At launch, it looked like they were trying to emulate controller sticks on the keyboard instead of, you know, clicking where you wanted someone to go.

Burrito of Peace wrote on Feb 4, 2015, 20:46:
Who owns the rights to Master of Orion now?

MOO3 was published by (the new) Atari. I assume if anyone bought it from them, we'd be seeing the results.

harlock wrote on Dec 16, 2014, 10:22:

Desalus wrote on Dec 16, 2014, 10:06:
More paid content...just what this game needs. I believe this is the 9th expansion, along with the 36+ minor DLC!

yeh i havent played this in years, mainly because they keep releasing significant additions all the time

probly gonna wait for a few more years and then buy the "super ultimate mega bundle" that has everything included... shit will probably be 100GB by then too

The thing is, this isn't just new maps or unit packs like most strategy games get. Paradox adds big new mechanics with each expansion. I think they have a fanbase who are happy to pay essentially a subscription to keep development going, and see how good a game they can squeeze out of this engine. Their subreddit has people with hundreds or thousands of hours played. $100 is a pretty good deal for that amount of playtime. I have a lot more sympathy for DLC-driven development when its handled this way.