Printable View
I dont know if a stupid easy as a 1 years old kid "AI" is classified as a games best feature...
The BI has its share of faults but to call challenge and longlivety a BAD thing for a game is beyond me...
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...on/review.html
Hellinas
I suppose that depends on the audience the reviewer aims at. If it´s mainly people who give up if they didn´t get all a games´ mechanics withing five minutes, then it actually is the correct thing to say.
Easy setting?
Playing RTW first?
Playing Madden instead?
anyway...the reviewer should have states that hes a Big Rigs fan and end the review there...
Hellenes
Well, the truth is that for non-hardcore players, RTW is a rather difficult game. I think almost all reviewers have agreed on that much and for us, who are undoubtly to be classified as hardcore players, it´s a bit difficult to judge. I´d bet that more than 90% of all those who bought the game wouldn´t call it easy. The other 10% are on this board.
I for one, don´t play a game in the first place to have a challenge but to have fun. If a game is so hard that it´s frustrating even on the simplest setting, then it´s no fun and that certainly is a minus. That´s not longlivety, that´s rediculous.
That said, BI is an expansion and therefore a higher difficulty can be expected. Considered this, those who can´t even win BI on easy probably wouldn´t like the game anyway.
Well if it's the case that the game is seen as so challenging by some people that it's detrimental to the game experience as a whole, then there's no hope for us hoping the next TW game gets more strategic and complex. If the series has to cater for all these challenged people, by the time the sixth game in the Total War series arrives, it'll be nothing more than simple point and click and flashy non-inactive cutscenes. RTW is far less demanding than the previous games in the series. Often the greatest challenge has been coping with the bugs.
Ill say for your percentage figures that they have same gravity as arguments as me stating that Im the Superman, do you have figures of RTW sales? Is it correct to count one day buyers as people playing the game? I say that 99,999% of RTW purchasers are here on this board, I have NO evidence to prove it but hell I can type whatever I want.Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Saturnus
Oddly when a reviewer doesnt like a game because of his personal issues thats called bias...
Well when In a turn based game one can take 50 provinces in 29 turns that says something doesnt it?
As for being rediculus BI still doesnt have any rediculus aspects to it, if you've played RTW enough and know your way with the Programmed Opponnent (for marketing purposes called "AI") there is NO way you lose if you have a basic grasp of tactics...
Agreed with professor...
People are so nicely dumbed down in mainstream that there is no requirement for much complex coding thus cutting down the cost...
Smart buisness for stupid people... :san_grin: :san_grin:
Hellenes
Whoa, there is about 1 million people on this board? holy cow. And you're opinion seems a little extreme(and biased) but, it's a free internet i guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by hellenes
So, I guess the idea is that "poor A.I." is not a bug, but a "feature" which allows the game to be more "accessible" to idiots who will not invest 10 minutes in listening to the advisor...
C'mon....are you guys gonna say that FPS should be modified to make it easier for those with disabilities or slow reaction time?
Or, maybe we can abolish chess and replace it with checkers...you know...to reach a broader audience.
A Strategy game means you have to use your brain.
any company which loses its core and loyal customers is foolish.
p.s. What is the use of Easy, Medium, Hard, Very Hard if not to allow various levels of people play the same game?
It's challenging enough.. with all the mods that comes out. It all comes to gameplay style I guess.
The guy probably decided to play the WRE first and got overwhelmed by turn 2.
Then he gave up.
Then he wrote his review.
Now, do you really think someone playing mainly FPS or popular RTS games would find Rome (or BI, for that matter) to be easy. Face it, compared to other games Rome already is rather specialized.
A reviewer (at last a professional one) has to write his review so it´s helpful for his intended audience, so before voicing criticism try and find out what kind of players gamespot caters to. It might shed a new light on the matter.
And I strongly doubt that even the majority of RTW players are on this forum, if only for the fact that some can´t or don´t want to read and post in an English forum.
I´d wager that more than 12,574 people bought RTW. Of course you can type whatever you want, but let´s keep it attached to reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by hellenes
But hey, I agree with you! For an expansion pack, BI surely isn´t too much of a challenge. But then, that´s still the view of hardcore players (you and me).
BTW, people who are not as good as you in a PC game aren´t necessarily dumber than you. Please, do us both a favour and don´t argue with that.
P.S.
Did you do that without extermination?Quote:
Well when In a turn based game one can take 50 provinces in 29 turns that says something doesnt it?
dude, there's nothing wrong with Big Rigs, as long as you play it right. As for the reviewer, he seems too slow for the genre, as is seen by the background game footage.Quote:
Originally Posted by hellenes
What I meant was Its a matter of opinion, you call people hardcore I call people ignorant, you say its 1% of the RTW players here I say its 99,99%... It doesnt matter what our opinion Is, what matters is the provision of EVIDENCE backing our claimsQuote:
Originally Posted by A.Saturnus
Thats right the BI is an expansion pack and as thus its targeted more to people that have finished and learned Rome TW.
I didnt say people are dumper I said its all dumped down, and will be even more dumped down since the ease and "entertaiment" is promoted while challenge and strategic thought is throwned upon.
I just hope TW doesnt reach this point:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/driving/b...l?q=big%20rigs
As for the 29 turns:
Hmmm...
Do you play with your hands not tied behind your back?
With your eyes not covered?
Using your tongue and nose?
That provides a hell of challenge as far as Im concerned...
Hellenes
Lets keep things friendly gents
PMFJI, but I just love this line:
I believe there is a logic break.Quote:
I for one, don´t play a game in the first place to have a challenge but to have fun.
Challenge does not equal fun; and
Fun does not equal challenge??????
Sorry, I must live in an alternate universe.
Would someone please define "Challenge", and most importantly, also, define "Fun".
A. saturnus, what does it mean you play for "fun"? What PC game is not intended to be a challenge? A game is inherently a challenge, isn't it? The "fun" is in testing one's abilities and the pursuit of greater achievement.
Personally, I just don't find RTW to be "fun". Why? Simple, when the disparity between the things that a game does right, and the things done wrong becomes too great, its no longer fun.
Grognards unit!
---
On the subject of the review, heck its the *American* version of GAMESPOT! It's been giving crap for reviews for quite some time now. Quite some time.
The British "UK" Gamespot version was, also, the best of the *popular* review sites. A few degrees better in fact. It was my preferred site, util they started to charge a subscription fee.
Anyway, most review sites are just *pimpin* or *whoring* however you view it. I'm just surprised BI wasn't scored a 9.5!?
Oh, if you guys want a really good reviewer try this site:
http://barrys-rigs-n-reviews.com/rev...eviews2005.htm
This guy, Barry, does excellent truly **comprehensive** reviews. He reviews both software and hardware. The thing is he only reviews stuff that interests him, so you won't find a review for every game on the planet; but, if he has reviewed a game or piece of hardware you're interested in, you bank of the fact that his comments will be honest, comprehensive and USEFUL. Sorry, he's hasn't done a TW review.
What do you mean with that? We know for sure that only a small faction of the RTW customers are members of the Org. That has nothing to do with opinion. It is of course possible that the majority of customers who are not here also think that RTW is too easy. I can´t prove that that´s not the case, but I believe it isn´t. And that reviewer probably believed it too. Maybe he generalized from himself to others. That doesn´t grant him points for logical rigour but it might make his job easier.Quote:
Originally Posted by hellenes
If challenge were all I was concerned about, maybe I´d do that.Quote:
Do you play with your hands not tied behind your back?
With your eyes not covered?
Using your tongue and nose?
That provides a hell of challenge as far as Im concerned...
No, strangling a bear with my hands would certainly be a challenge, I wouldn´t call it fun though.Quote:
Originally Posted by ToranagaSama
No, you just have different preferences. Challenge is an important aspect to a game, yes, but it´s not the only one. Otherwise, more challenging games would automatically be the better. Maybe that seems like a weakness to you, but I for one like to win. I can handle a defeat but I have to have the impression that I´ve a chance. I have played shooters with god-mode on, you know. That can be fun.Quote:
Sorry, I must live in an alternate universe.
Saturnus and I are on the very same page here. I have always believed, going all the way back to Shogun, that the AI was tough enough for many players, probably most players. I make this assertion based upon success. TW is a pretty popular series. WAY less than 1% of buyers post here and the tiny fraction we represent isn’t a very good cross section of the market. Only those of us so keenly interested enough to talk to others about the game go to game forums. Casual players don’t care to yap about their games on line, preferring instead to actually play them when their limited time permits. If the AI was so miserable and unchallenging such that no one was enjoying themselves then Shogun would have failed and we wouldn’t be talking about Rome or BI.
It all comes down to this: Is the game entertaining enough (suitably challenging) for a clear majority of buyers? It looks like it is to me.
Ill quote myself:Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelson
"its all dumped down, and will be even more dumped down since the ease and "entertaiment" is promoted while challenge and strategic thought is throwned upon.
I just hope TW doesnt reach this point:
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/driving/b...l?q=big%20rigs "
Well if the challenge isnt needed in the mainstream then either the TW series become complete in the MP department or they disenegrade to the level of the Sims just for the sake of the buck...
Hellenes
PS I still cant understand how one cannot see the easy diff level and adjust it while paying credit to the effort of the AI coders for providing a truly enjoyable and challenging very hard level...
I think we could argue both sides of the argument until we were all blue in the face.
Presumably the winner in this case would be the last one with a blue face.
er... anyhow, be that as it may... and I'm not entirely sure myself why thats actually relevant to anything um....
Oh yes!...um... I think that while indeed for a lot of players the AI may be challenging, I think just about anyone that is drawn to a historical strategy sim, for casual pursuits or otherwise is going to be fairly intelligent.Quote:
Originally Posted by EVERYBODY
Intelligent enough to witness some of the mindnumbingly stupid lone general charges into the nearest unit of enemy spearmen, or the totally confusing diplomacy, or indeed the armies that run around in circles on the campaign map for no apparent reason and without any obvious intention or coordination.
And in reply to the original post: yes I too have noticed some of the gamespot reviewers' comments especially concerning strategy games that really don't make sense.
Quote:
Originally Posted by A.Saturnus
I was introduced to the TW series by RTW, and hadn`t played other strategy games than Settlers and RA.
It looked difficult when I first started playing, and I stressed a hell lot to not let the Gauls overrun me in my first campaign. However, I did barely loose a single battle and never lost a settlement.
I was also afraid what would happen when the Roman civil war broke loose, with all the fullstack Scipii and Brutii armies. The war was actually practically won after 5 or more major battles, it just wasn`t challenging at all. But it looked challenging, and that`s probably the experience of the game reviewers too.
Well, I have been playing since STW. I found that quite a challenge (this was before I "got it") and played most battles on auto-resolve.
Then came MTW and since I loved the Medieval setting I began to play it more and more and became quite good at it.
Then VI came out and I found it quite challenging, even hard (as Scotland) and even lost a campaign on "Normal"....
Then RTW came out and it was a walkover. OK, I thought, that's because I'm playing the Julii....so I try Carthage and it's still easy...."Very Hard" and it's still easy.
Having said that, the vanilla campaign I am playing now as Carthage on "Very Hard", on the campaign map it's still a challenge (although the strategic AI of this game is somewhat pathetic and I may as well completely ignore diplomacy - someone once said "It's not called Rome Total Diplomacy" but it's the same as a world where everyone is a hero like WoW - when everyone is a hero no one is a hero, well when it's always war it gets boring and repetitive) but as soon as I get to the battle map it's just flank, flank, slaughter. The armies start far too close which means no maneouvring (I miss the AI always picking hills in MTW - Do hills even make a difference in RTW? Not that there are any hills) and just point, click, and wonder whether you're playing RTW or the latest AoE clone. Modding the movement speeds to 2/3 helps tremendously, but I wish there was a way for the armies to start further apart.
I'm sure there's a point in there somewhere.
You've pretty much sumarized my opinion on R:TW. The battles are too fast and lack challenge compared to M:TW and S:TW; the campaign map is nice but the A.I. doesn't know how to handle it; the only thing I want to add is that the game is not as moddable as we were lead to believe. That said, it is a beautiful game and can be very fun despite its lack of challenge.Quote:
Originally Posted by GFX707
Incidentally, hills do make a difference, especially for phalanx units, but not as much as in M:TW.
I beat the carthaginians with my army...Without having to do anything..Just started battle and they charged and fled.
This was on VH/VH
agreed, my forces were the best in the roman world at that time. But still thats crazy, He had elephants and sacred band.