Stanly Manly wrote on Mar 18, 2010, 14:40:
Downloading the demo now. Looks to be a fairly generic hack 'n slash, so I'm not sure if it will provide anything over Torchlight, but I'll give it a shot.
Creston wrote on Feb 26, 2010, 00:43:
I was pretty underwhelmed by the demo. Plastic graphics, the awesome UI interface of the first game is all but gone (since, after all, you can't recreate it on a fucking Xbox controller, so why bother keeping it for the PC?), the experimentals are no longer titans of the battlefield, but rather mildly impressive units that die from a dozen normal units being thrown at them. (I sent 8 submarines after a Kraken, and the Kraken died while killing two subs...)
The maps that used to be huge and awesome are now small crappy affairs. Defensive weaponry is worthless. (I had 18 or so heavy anti-air turrets, and they still couldn't shoot down 6 enemy fighters.)
Gone are the Tech Levels, instead being replaced with a fairly extensive research tree. Sadly, that research tree is pretty much the same for Air, Land and Sea. Bonusses to health, bonusses to damage, bonusses to regeneration, less cost to purchase/build, unlock 3 other units, and a few experimentals.
Also, the research tree is unlocked by research points, which you simply gain as time goes on. (And you can speed that up by building more Research Labs.) The two missions in the demo have no time limit or any reason to hurry in them, so it's perfectly feasible to build half a dozen research labs, wait 15 or so minutes, and unlock all upgrades.
All this is not to say I didn't have any fun at all. The two missions were okay, pretty standard RTS fare. It just doesn't feel like SupCom. And I just don't get it. The original SupCom, plus FA, sold a ton of copies (somewhere in the 1.4 million range, IIRC.) So why fuck with it so badly? Why turn it into a generic, 13-in-a-dozen RTS that feels like it's from 1996?
I had high hopes for this game, it was probably my most anticipated game of the year after Mass Effect 2. Sadly, for me it doesn't deliver. YMMV.
I'll likely get this when it hits 20 or 10 bucks on Steam. It doesn't feel worth 50 bucks to me.
born2expire wrote on Jan 30, 2010, 14:49:
ummm how about making it open world instead of tiny maps, oh wait this is Bioware and all their games are the same.
Verno wrote on Jan 22, 2010, 11:46:
Helps if you actually read about the game before you post retarded one-liners.
Verno wrote on Jan 22, 2010, 11:28:
I brought it up in reference to other comments made in the thread because it was relevant in that context. Your argument seems to be that it diminishes the value of a used game but that's the flip side of increasing the value of an original copy, I don't see how this is hard to grasp. They are giving an incentive to purchase a new copy, they are not taking anything away from the game itself.
Creston wrote on Jan 22, 2010, 00:47:
I just hope it works better than that aborted travesty that came with DA.
Here's a hint, Bioware : If I eventually have to manually download the .dazip files from an FTP server in Russia somewhere, then manually install the relevant .dazip with the daupdater.exe, AFTER manually copying a missing .dll file over to the daupdater.exe's directory, since it wouldn't run without it, just to get the DLC that I FUCKING PAID FOR to properly install and run, your system is a just a giant pile of fucking shit.
Similarly, if I open a ticket to Electronic Fucking Arts's "Support" page (a misnomer if there's ever been one), explain to them that I've tried reinstalling, that my code was entered correctly, that my "entitlements page" shows that I own Warden's Keep, that Warden's Keep does NOT show up in the "to download" section, but instead shows up in the "for purchase" section (as if I don't own it), then it takes EA NINE days to give me a reply which says "Hi, please try selecting "cancel", then "download" to get it to download again." your fucking 'support' system DOESN'T WORK EITHER.
So kindly, this time, if it's not too much to ask, build a system that FUCKING WORKS. And that does not require me to register seventeen different fucking codes on a website which blatantly claims "in beta".
Think you can do that, maybe? I realise I'm a pirate and all, since I've already paid 60 dollars for your game, and really don't deserve to be treated as an actual CUSTOMER, but you know, maybe you can make things run a little more smoothly this time? Maybe? Please? Yes? I know it's a lot to ask.
Verno wrote on Jan 19, 2010, 10:25:I never actually played HGL due to the hooplah surrounding it. Does it compare reasonably to Borderlands?
No, not even close. HGL was a thoroughly boring and nearly unprofessional product, it more closely resembles an out of control mod at best. I'm not a massive fan of Borderlands myself but it's a far better game than HGL could ever claim to be.
Blue wrote on Jan 18, 2010, 13:32:BobBob wrote on Jan 18, 2010, 13:28:
God is in the details.
KilrathiAce wrote on Jan 14, 2010, 14:15:
I am awaiting review of the demo from mr. Overon
ASJD wrote on Jan 11, 2010, 18:29:
The game sucks through and through. Age of Conan, please hurry up and die already!
kxmode wrote on Dec 29, 2009, 12:50:Techie714 © wrote on Dec 29, 2009, 10:48:
Wish list for 2010
Interply just dies & goes away
We stop talking about Duke Nukem Forever
Max Payne 3 turns out quite awesome
USB 3.0 becomes widely used
Scarlett Johansson sleeps with me
I'm pretty confident all these things will come to pass although the second one is a pipe dream....
I tried the demo and it's like setting up a screensaver to run. You outfit some ships and pick a starting position for them and then it just sits there and runs by itself. You can't direct the ships or anything. Your only option during the several minute long battles is to surrender or not. The game looks great but is supremely boring. Why couldn't they at least let you point your ships? It's just awful.