No, I think improving the game should be their main avenue of pursuit, not creating some pointlessly linear campaign to satisfy people for 3 days. Seriously, how do you all expect them to patch a good campaign into a game? And why, when people mention campaigns, do they bring up wholly different (design wise), games like HW or C&c? Not referencing to anyone in this topic of course. Oh, and Civ 4 didn't have campaigns; random start scenarios don't count.
heflys
"My ships are bing destroyed, and I'm being beaten!!" "The game sucks!!" LOL! Anyway, I'm surprised you guys haven't uploaded the UGO review I provided. They gave you all a 95%, since that's what a score of A equals.
UGO Rating=A [link="http://www.ugo.com/ugo/html/article/?id=18231§ionId=51"]WWW Link[/link]
[quote]What the fuck? The brilliant campaigns in Starcraft was a part of the reason why the game became such a massive hit, and the expansion campaigns were loved by the gamers. There isn't much footage of Stafcraft2 yet, but they actually have released some video and information about the campagins there. I get your point, you don't like campagins, I'll write that in my book of useless information, but don't throw out your preferances as facts.[/quote] (SIGH) I should have been more sp
[quote]I don't think I used the word "devastating" onc[/quote] Did I say you did? [quote]giving a sense of identity to the races[/quote] But as he also stated, it's not really necessary. [quote]I find instruction and guidance on the game much more effective than story as I need to see things working in context before I can learn them - tutorials and the manual rarely allow me to grasp how, why and when I need to do something. But as you said, story helps to ma
[quote]A single-player campaign, when done well, can be extremely useful to new players as an introduction and walk through of all areas of the game - introducing slightly more features in each scenario and letting a new user get used to the ideas that make up the game. They can also be used to give purpose and structure to a game.[/quote] But most of the people demanding the campaign did indicate that they needed someone to explain how to the play the game. No, their main issues stem a
[quote]There's more reward and emotional investment in finishing a campaign too, rather than just finishing some skirmish mode map. The varied skirmish maps are a step in the right direction, it's just a bit of a pity that a few weren't interlinked to create campaigns to introduce us to the races (both their game mechanics and the races 'personalities').[/quote] I'm still not sure how people figure that fighting through some linear missions, being constrained to attack certain plan
[quote]Warcraft, Starcraft, Dawn of War, Command and Conquer (both series), the list goes on ALL have a single player story mode/grand campagi[/quote] And did you stop to think that none of these games are even remotely similar to SINs? Maybe I missed the open ended gameplay, and massive play environment in those aforementioned titles; not to mention a campaign attached. [quote]The ONLY series that doesnt, is the Total War series, and it does have missions in the game itself/its ba
[quote]A well done story doesn't have to be cheesy or forgettable. I am guessing they didn't put on in because the one they would have done would be cheesy and forgettable.[/quote] If someone puts a campaign in, that's fine-n-dandy, I really don't care. I just don't see the point for it in this type game. In most RTS', the campaign is merely an introductory to new units, and, with the exception of a few games, features a bland, cliched story. In the games that Paul gives examples as, most
[quote]Homeworld was another game series that resemblies this game in a small way which also included a campaign.[/quote] Homeworld is another linear game, with trial and error missions. The only titles that resemble this game are EAW and Supreme Commander (marginally). BTW, what you like to see in campaign?
[quote] Most of the better RTS did have campains.Dune 2War CarftStar CraftCommand& Conquer Fallout TacticsAlso[/quote] But most of those games take place on small maps, with maybe two or more bases. I thought Fallout Tactics was considered decent at best.
[quote Also why did they bother with the inro if a campaign wasn't in the works? [/quote] Plenty of games have intros and no campaign. [quote]Every game of Sins is a campaign.[/quote] Are we degrading you, or simply disagreeing on the point that a campaign will somehow make this game better?
Well then, looks like you guys will have to wait a bit.
[quote]I also don't believe those who can plow through 20 hard AI when you can only play with 9 at a time.[/quote] Hmmmmm...... I was being sarcastic, I hope you were too.
[quote]Yeah I am really disappointed as well. I was really under the impression this was both Single and multiplayer.. ok I know it is Single player but this Skirmish only is sorta boring and I was expecting more for a game of 2008[/quote] I didn't realize people were that concerned over some cheesy, linear experience that is quickly forgotten after completion.
Or they could simply implement something to turn off the freakin chat.
There seems to be varying accounts on the a.i., with some claiming it as being extremely difficult, and others calling it a pushover.....Meh. I rarely believe those who say they plow through 20 hard a.i.'s with the greatest of ease......but that's just me. Anyway, I'm not entirely certain how "cheating" a.i. will make the experience better. It will still conduct the same tactics, only it'll be creating ships faster. Further, it's not like you're out thinking a wily opponent, just s
It always intrigues me when people demand that a game cheats.....
[quote] For the AI its like oh no it's the player's fleet run away run away give them what they came for run away. Hehe where is the challenge in a enemy who simply run away? The AIs needs to learn how to keep separate fleet in near by systems so they can reenforce the battle quickly istead of relying on single fleet that runs even on a about equal number. Some time I think they run even if they had more ships! If the devels are too lazy to make a good AI let us mod it.[/quote]
No offense, but shouldn't you be playing multiplayer then?
Who these folks going around giving the game a bad user rating? 1up, ign, etc.
[quote] In CoH's Infantry and to a lesser extent tanks will search for cover when being shot at and try and stay in there most effective weapons range. This can lead to frustration for some pepole due to tanks ignoring orders when the AI decides to drive some were or infantry dancing between cover and there effective weapons range on occasion. [/quote] Tanks never, ever, ever looked for cover.
[quote] You will have multiple fronts to your empire most of the time even with a decent PJI. What the current (non-functioning) PJI does is make every single world in your empire a front.[/quote] Yes, and you want to change it to a few. So to prevent enemies from raiding your weaker planets. [quote]If you dislike the "lockdown" game mechanic, why would you want the PJIs made more powerful?[/quote] I thought I already explained this....I'd prefer to weaken the enem
[quote]WTF kind of issue is that? I mean would you rather have a 12 hour game? This should have been a plus not a negative mark....and losing sleep I can understand [/quote] It's alright.....
[quote]The issue is that, as it currently stands, the enemy may fly through the chokepoint and jump deeper into your empire where you do not have as many defensive structures and higher income planets even if you use phase jump inhibitors and a decent defending fleet.[/quote] Which is why I stated, several times, that I would like to see the time needed to increase the fleets jumps, as opposed to taking out raiding and circumventing major defenses as whole. I believe the current setup f