Welcome to the Home of Game Strategies and Stories
14 Jan 05
I said I'd go over some thoughts on the nominees for Talk Strategy Game of the Year. I can't say that I've played all of them, but I have read up on them all. The goal here is to narrow the list down to 12 so we can get with the voting. Any feedback you provide via comments, forum posts or emails will be appreciated and used to cull the list. Off we go then:
Chris Sawyer's Locomotion -- Gamerankings 60% -- Chris Sawyer makes games his own way. He makes them largely by himself. He doesn't need no fancy 3D interface. Reviewers seemed to take issue with that stance. Gameplay was generally regarded as fun, but buggy and cumbersome.
Massive Assault Network -- Gamerankings 82% -- Massive Assault was released in 2003, but this improved online version came out in 2004. The chess like turn based gameplay remains top notch, but the focus on human competition helps this game shine.
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War -- Gamerankings 86% -- Relic's latest effort is an inspired take on the Warhammer 40k universe. You have four disparate factions that clash in wild multiplayer. The single player campaign only showcases one and has some problems.
Rome: Total War -- Gamerankings 91% -- Epic. I like that word to describe Rome. The scope and scale make you feel part of a world spanning empire. The political model is fun as well. There are some AI weaknesses, but they can be overlooked when you admire the eye candy.
Port Royale 2 -- Gamerankings 74% -- A Caribbean trading game set in the days of colonies and pirates. You have the freedom to play as you want to build your empire. Besides an odd design decision to only let you control one ship in your group at a time during naval engagements, it's a solid, fun game.
RoN: Thrones and Patriots -- Gamerankings 87% -- Only an expansion, un huh. It got people addicted again to one of the best games of 2003. It added new factions and governments models. Perhaps the biggest difference was the inclusion of actual campaigns.
Kohan 2 -- Gamerankings 81% -- Another entry in the "we'll do it our way" crowd. Its fantasy world has players focused on unit balance and maneuver instead of gold and peon management. It forces players to expand to win, but rarely do tides suddenly turn and a loss transformed into a victory. With the slower pace, that can hurt.
The Sims 2 -- Gamerankings 91% -- What can you say? It's more of the sims in a better looking game with more freedom. Everything here has been improved and streamlined.
Zoo Empire -- Gamerankings 64% -- It's a Zoo management sim. Actually, it's a zookeeper career management sim. You have to balance the needs of your animals with the needs of your guests, but gameplay isn't overly hard.
Silent Storm -- Gamerankings 82% -- It's a team oriented, turn based tactical combat game set in WWII. With fun weapons and completely destructible environments, it achieves some of the addictiveness of Xcom. It also throws in character development to keep you on your toes.
Crusader Kings -- Gamerankings 76% -- It's government management in medieval times. You can start as early as 1066 and try to lead your family and country to success. It's deep strategy, and some players will be turned off by the layers of interlocking decisions and consequences as well as the lack of eye candy.
Sid Meier's Pirates! -- Gamerankings 88% -- This is remake of the classic game simulating life in the Caribbean in colonial times. While some have complained about particular mini games, it's a fun sandbox to play in whether you want ship battles, ground battles, sword fights or wooing Governor's daughters.
Pikmin 2 (GCN) -- Gamerankings 90% -- This is the sequel to the quirky plant based RTS from Nintendo. You and your partner lead an army of mobile plants to clear enemies, solve puzzles and collect the treasure. It's not a traditional RTS, but that's not necessarily a drawback.
Full Spectrum Warrior (Xbox & PC) -- Gamerankings 83% -- This is a tactical action game based on a simulator designed for the US Army. You lead two fire teams into combat in a fictional middle eastern country. Tactically correct use of fire, cover and special abilities are the path to success in this game.
LotR: Battle for Middle Earth -- Gamerankings 82% -- It's a licensed RTS designed to bring the epic battles of the Lord of the Rings movies to life in a dynamic middle earth. The impressive visual style is somewhat offset by the relative ease toward the end of the campaign.
Kingdom Under Fire: The Crusaders (Xbox) -- Gamerankings 82% -- Another console RTS that seems more traditional until you personally lead your troops into battle slashing your way through enemies to take out the squad leader. It features deep gameplay, unit advancement, special skills and visceral action. It's dragged down by the lackluster voice acting.
Ground Control 2 -- Gamerankings 81% -- The original was one of the first true 3D RTS games, and it provided a refreshing focus on tactics. The sequel expands on that providing great eye candy, deeper options and a control point system that encourages conquest and expansion. Negatives include only two playable factions and some tough puzzly scenarios.
Phantom Brave (PS2) -- Gamerankings 83% -- This is the latest strategy RPG from Nippon Ichi, makers of Disgaea and La Pucelle. Instead of leading a small army into battle you take your hero who can summon phantoms to fight at her side. Phantoms have to be tied to a physical object and only last so long. Since the properties of the object affect the stats of the phantom, many tactical considerations go into each battle.
Tribes: Vengeance -- Gamerankings 82% -- The high speed, high flying tactical game is back. The graphics are better, the multiplayer is more stable and the vehicles are fun. The only downside is the still insular community.
Star Wars: Battlefront (PC, PS2, Xbox)-- Gamerankings 80% -- Note that I used the Xbox score since it was in the middle. It's a Battlefield 1942 game set in the Star Wars universe. You can play either time period and control your favorite vehicles. It has some AI and balance issues, but those are easily overlooked by fans of the movies.
Joint Operations -- Gamerankings 82% -- Huge battles with up to 150 players engaged in all out war. Set in modern times in a tropical environment with vehicles, Joint Ops still manages to not bog down. Unfortunately, the main complaint against the game is that dying all the time isn't fun.
Battlefield: Vietnam -- Gamerankings 83% -- It's still Battlefield. It's set in the jungles of Vietnam with appropriate weaponry for the time period. I guess the big question is why didn't everyone make the switch?
I was thinking about adding Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow for its innovative multiplayer mode, but the rest of the game really doesn't fit. This took longer than I thought. I hope someone reads it and responds. We'll get the voting started sometime next week.
Jason
Comments?
13 Jan 05
Nintendo sent out a press release today pointing out that Resident Evil 4 for the Gamecube is not only the best game in the series, but one of the best of this generation. Not too shabby. I might have to check it out.
For the Game of the Year voting, here's where the nominees stand with some of my additions:
Chris Sawyer's Locomotion
Massive Assault Network
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Rome: Total War
Port Royale 2
RoN: Thrones and Patriots
Kohan 2
The Sims 2
Zoo Empire
Silent Storm
Crusader Kings
Sid Meier's Pirates!
Pikmin 2 (GCN)
Full Spectrum Warrior (Xbox & PC)
LotR: Battle for Middle Earth
Kingdom Under Fire: The Crusaders (Xbox)
Ground Control 2
Phantom Brave (PS2)
Tribes: Vengeance
Star Wars: Battlefront
Joint Operations
Battlefield: Vietnam
Ok, we have to narrow that down to a dozen. Then we can start voting. I'll put some thoughts up about some of the nominees tomorrow. Please add comments to this story to give your top 12 or at least the ones you think have to be there. Or, you can drop me an email.
Jason
Comments?
12 Jan 05
For those that thought the days of corporate raiding ended in the eighties, this news should change your mind. In a move surprising no one paying attention, G4 Tech TV announced they're dropping the Tech TV from their name. So basically they swooped in, bought Tech TV, grabbed the distribution deals, some of the talent and all the copyrights and are now swooping out with only memories of Tech TV swirling in the dust.
It's too bad really. I used to watch both networks, but now I hardly watch any of the combined network. Oh well, it's not like I have much time for TV now anyway.
Speaking of dying institutions, it looks like Adrenaline Vault is fading away. I spent some quality time there (though not in the forums). After watching Gone Gold go, it's hard to see another one falling. There are rumors of the "curse of Derek Smart" but I think it just that the times are a changing.
Time for me to catch up on my sleep so this place doesn't disappear.
Jason
Comments?
11 Jan 05
I wanted to talk briefly about intellectual property (IP). It was in the news again lately thanks to an interview with Bill Gates before CES. It's on News.com Here.
Most of the press in the gaming community focused on the contrast Gates used between protecting IP and communism. Some interpreted that to say he was calling pirates, abandonware advocates and open software supporters communists. I think his actual point was more interesting. He said that people who don't think musicians, moviemakers and software makers deserve the incentives they get for their creations (the money) are sort of modern day communists. In other words, you'd get paid to produce something (a film, game, book, etc.) but it wouldn't matter if it was a hit or flop. You'd get your salary either way. I can see where that would equate to communism, but that's dodging the crux of the argument.
I guess I see three groups in the real argument. There is a group that doesn't respect IP and the associated laws. They crack games, distribute music and movies. But I don't think Gates is right to call them communists. They're not doing it for ideological purposes. They don't hate the rich musicians in general. Basically, they're just greedy. They want as much as possible for themselves. When they group together to share everything, they end up paying very little for a lot. They really don't care one way or another about who is being short changed. These are the people usually arguing that they wouldn't have bought it anyway, or that they pick up legitimate copies of the stuff they like. They will argue against any stringent IP enforcement or enhancement simply because they don't want to get caught and punished.
The other extreme is represented by the digital rights management police. They believe the control of IP extends to altering the user's environment to eliminate any unauthorized use. These are the people firmly behind starforce copy protection. They believe it's ok to alter the functionality of a user's computer or other hardware to ensure that only authorized (and paid for) use happens. They also like legislating hardware solutions like DVD burners that won't burn any IP material if it can't confirm the legality of the digital data. This is also the group that believes in hacking into user's systems to check for illegal IP. Most, but not all, do require probable cause before doing that.
In the middle you have everyone else. I like to think this is the common sense position. You pay for the IP you use. You don't mess with a user's hardware before a crime has been committed. There's still a lot of leeway in this group. From the free (fair) use crowd who believe that once you buy the IP you can do with it what you wish for your own personal use (not making money). To the IP publishers who want use limited to the original format, but don't believe in altering systems that don't belong to them.
As you can guess from the descriptions, I fall into the common sense crowd. I believe both the extremes are ultimately destructive. Within the middle, I lean toward the fair use side of the discussion. If I buy a CD, I'm paying for the IP and the right to use it. It shouldn't matter if I play it on my computer, my MP3 player, in my car or even rip it to my Xbox to play in my games. On the other hand, I'd like publishers to offer easy lan play for home networks (either free or cheap) from one purchased copy, but if they don't, it clearly doesn't fall under fair use. So yes, I think there should be reasonable restrictions on both sides. I'm interested in what everyone else thinks.
Jason
Comments?
10 Jan 05
Don't forget to put your nominations for the Game of the Year 2004 in the Forum. Right Here.
Amazon is taking donations for the Tsunami relief effort for the Red Cross. I've put a link at the bottom of the page for those interested.
Last time for those reminders. If we don't get any more nominations, I'll fill out the rest of the list and we'll start voting. The donations banner will remain, but I'll stop beating you all over the head with it.
I may disagree with EA's strategy on exclusive licenses, but I certainly admire their execution of that strategy. In case you didn't see, EA has just inked a four year exclusive deal with the Arena Football league. I guess that only leave the Canadian league since NFL Europe is included in the NFL license. I guess we can expect a CFL announcement in about 2-3 weeks.
That leaves competition basically making either a generic (or themed) football game, or they can focus on college since there's no exclusive license to be had there. Maybe the BCS will create one to become Bill Harris' true embodiment of evil. Perhaps he'll take up his whip and perform a symphony of the night on them.
Moving on, Take 2 announced that a PSP version of Grand Theft Auto (set in Liberty City, scene of GTA 3) along with a PSP version of Midnight Club 3: DUB edition will be available near the PSP's launch. There's just a little more pressure on Nintendo for those big "shocking" announcements they have planned to dull the PSP launch furor.
This week's game is an old school wargame. The surprising thing is that it's coming on the Xbox. It's Dai Senryaku VII: Modern Military Tactics (official site) from Kool Kizz Amusement Works. It's a hex based wargame set on the modern battlefield. This turn based game even allows you to create your own maps or use one of the 160 packaged maps. There's also a 26 level campaign to play through. Start you conquests in February.
Jason
Comments?
© Talk Strategy 2005