"asymmetry/unpredictability/overpowered abilities"

This would normally make me cringe, but I think Civ definitely needs a bit more Charlie-from-Always-Sunny "wildcard, bitches!" moments, like your Jesus-based strategy that was nullified by the Greeks.

Thanks for a very entertaining mini-review. I skipped Civ V so will probably pick this up ... after the first expansion

Unity of Command: Stalingrad Campaign is on sale for $5.99 this weekend on Steam.

The first DLC, Red Turn, is also on sale for $2.99.

@Quboid: Apparently it uses a form of Starforce and has a 5-machine install limit.

IGN's review also mentions it.

Anyway, I've historically valued PC games for their mods, customization options, and strong communities (which includes private servers). Remove those things and you pretty much eliminate any benefits to playing a game on a PC. But maybe that's their plan.

Edit: LittleMe posted the stats before me

This comment was edited on Oct 21, 2009, 01:29.

Stardock should keep Impulse, but sell its games on Steam, D2D, Gamersgate, etc. as well.

Paradox, proprietors of Gamersgate, sell their brand games on Steam. While they probably make less money per copy sold on Steam, its huge user base would more than make up for this loss. Stardock could expand their customer base by offering their games on the services people want to use. Many game devs sell direct from their website/service while offering the game on the more popular channels.

Brad, though, has this zealous drive to compete with Steam at all costs. My one experience with Impulse was abysmal and I haven't opened the client since; that I never have to open the client to play SupCom is perhaps the service's most redeeming quality.

2008 called and they want their "PC GAMING IS TEH DEAD" meme back.

Besides, this week every chucklehead is talking about how Chrome OS is a Windows "killer." :/

/hates when people use "killer" or "killed" in reference to tech products and videogames

Episode 2 on the other hand was absolutely perfect and so much better than Half-Life 2.

Ep2 + Portal are great because they bring back the HL1 science research lab thing in full force. That was the best part of Ep2: dealing with a new Black Mesa and learning about Aperture Science's Borealis.

This comment was edited on Jul 5, 2009, 01:19.

Heh, I thought Karl Malden died years ago.

He's really good as Gen. Omar Bradley in Patton.

I'm more upset about this than Michael Jackson's death....

Me too, pal, me too.

AND WAIT THERE'S MORE!

The Necrons in DoW have a giant mobile pyramid that can requisition new units. The "Terran" faction in SupCom has a mobile land factory. But maybe C&C4's mobile base will be truly all-encompassing.

WiC's class-based system, coupled with 8v8 maps, make online play especially enjoyable. You could focus on your own little role without feeling overwhelmed.

Perhaps it's not that we don't want to discuss politics, it's that we don't want to discuss politics with a bunch of dumbasses. Collectively, Bluesnews is barely capable of intelligently discussing videogames; let's not even touch politics.

Anyone who would join the military based on a videogame would've done so by now. Ever heard of Call of Duty or Battlefield or any of the dozens of other games featuring U.S. forces?

I was going to solicit opinions about the gameplay before attempted to download it, but I guess very few people have managed to install it. Another botched Steamworks release...

This comment was edited on Jun 17, 2009, 18:05.

Midway and BoB are completely unique FPS experiences. I love piloting a battleship one minute and a torpedo dive-bomber the next. Midway is somewhat aimless, I'll give you that, but it's about the sandbox experience, playing with all these awesome vehicles and seeing what can happen.

Flying a German bomber in formation with 3-4 other planes, dodging flak and Spitfires, is good fun. Again, completely unique FPS experience. There are plenty of "traditional" FPS games with just a bunch of guys running around with rifles. Even BF2 feels tame in comparison to its predecessor.

DICE has said that PC gamers would be excited about their next announcement. My guess is that BF1943 and Bad Company 2 are their console-centric titles; BF3 will be a "proper" sequel with 64+ players per server.

They should completely eliminate vehicle respawns and instead allow a dedicated driver/pilot class to respawn inside a vehicle. Each player has a timer attached to his available vehicles to encourage effective use of the vehicles. PlanetSide uses a similar system, otherwise it would probably suffer from vehicle spawn camping and taxiing.

Anyway, I hope BF3 focuses on combined arms warfare and epic maps. After playing 73 Eastings, Midway, Iwo Jima, and Battle of Britain in 42/DC, the maps in BF2 seem tame and derivative in comparison. No heavy bombers, aerial respawn points, battleships, submarines, etc. I've probably had more fun in BF1942's Midway map than I've had with all of BF2 combined. Torpedo bombing the battleships ftw!

LOL@ all the butt hurt fanboys here. That's why you never, ever buy games at full price anymore, because one way or another the game will go on sale shortly after launch.

That's an excellent policy. You get more content for less money. Bugs will likely be squashed, too.

I think it's justified to wonder why TF2, which was less than $50 at release, receives more free content than L4D. Put another way: why has Valve not supported L4D like they have TF2?

Really, it comes down to what you think that game is worth. Based on the content available, and my impressions from the free weekends, L4D is worth maybe $15 and not a cent more.

I also think it's easier to get people to spend $50 on a game if they know that free content will eventually be released. If I was a fan of L4D-style gameplay, I'd be hesitant to pay full price for L4D2 given Valve's track record with L4D1. Whether or not enough people will have that mindset to really affect sales remains to be seen.

This comment was edited on Jun 1, 2009, 15:52.

Glad I didn't purchase L4D 1. YMMV, of course, but I thought L4D's DLC was incredibly weak in comparison to TF2's because L4D was a)$50 at release as opposed to $20 b)noticeably incomplete at release.

L4D had advertising? Other than the usual page ad in PC mags and online news (nothing out of the ordinary) I never saw anything on the game.

There's a huge billboard as you're leaving S.F. via the Bay Bridge. Even says you can buy it on STEAM. And last November, the MUNI subway tunnel was full of L4D posters.

This comment was edited on Jun 1, 2009, 15:32.

Also: PlanetSide's leveling system is brilliant. Battlerank doesn't make you innately more powerful. Instead, it makes you more versatile by permitting you to use a wider range of weapons and vehicles. So a BR20's assault rifle is no better than a BR11's. (Unless they've changed something.)

PlanetSide was amazingly fun prior to the introduction of BFRs. That was years ago so things could've changed by now, but I think a lot of the playerbase was lost. Last time I checked, they were merging all of the servers into one just so enough players would be online at a given time.

PlanetSide never seemed well-supported. Instead of beefing up command/control tools and teamwork functions, the devs introduced deathmatch-like weapons that didn't mesh with the game. And, let's face it, the "core" FPS mechanics in PlanetSide suck ass: movement, hit detection, cone of fire. Infantry combat always felt a bit off.

The teamwork and combined arms warfare is what made the game worth playing, but SOE never seemed to appreciate that, hence spam-tastic weapons like the Maelstrom and Flail.

In the hands of a more capable dev, PlanetSide could easily have 100,000+ subscribers today. There were plenty of good ideas there, but SOE could never take the game to the next level.

SOE spectacularly ruins their own games (PlanetSide, Infantry Online) and can't even make decent games with popular licenses (The Matrix, Star Wars). Surprised people pay much attention to them anymore.

This comment was edited on May 29, 2009, 13:18.

Saw ARMA 1 on a store shelf some years ago, remembered all the discussions about the bugs, put it back, and moved on. Apparently that game was sufficiently patched, which is respectable given the number of studios that leave games unpatched, but who knows how many players had written off the game by that point. Demigod will probably suffer the same fate. Stardock/GPG could make multiplayer flawless, but the zero-day buzz focused on the game's networking problems.

Videogaming is a buyer's market. With 1000+ PC games to purchase from digital distribution sites alone, please let me know why I should spend money on your buggy product. What I'm trying to say is that a few extra months of QA and non-idealized beta tests help in the long run. With so many choices, you can't expect the average videogamer to tolerate paid beta tests...

Combat and Classic are both fun.

And isn't Combat taking over the majority of servers a form of natural selection based on player preference? (SEE WHAT I DID THERE!?!?11~) More players want to play Combat so more servers adapt to meet this need, or something.

In any event, I never understood why the crusty NS community hated Combat with such a passion.

This comment was edited on May 28, 2009, 01:04.