Heart of the Matter , Is RTW good value for $?

[Bhruic]

It is a very substantial game - the amount of factions you can play; the length of the Imperial campaign (how many hours to win? I'd guess 40+); the incredible variety of units and army styles (phalanx, legion, cav, horse archer, chariot, barbarian horde etc); the excellent tactical battles; the impressive strategic map; the decent building/economic game; the gorgeous graphics; the historical simulation etc etc. There's easily five times the content of most rival strategy games - in some cases, I'd say 100 times more content.

And content makes a good game? Sometimes it's the simple games that are the best - often for that very reason.

A lot of the bugs are just a consequence of the compexity of the game. Ditto the AI limitations.

Then maybe they shouldn't have made it so complex? Complexity for complexities sake is not a good idea. And excessive complexity that you can't properly account for (ie, you end up with too many bugs/flaws) is not good either.

When people damn the game, I'd like to know what contemporary strategy games they consider so superior. I'm certainly not playing any.(I'm reduced to playing shooters and replaying oldies like Jagged Alliance 2.)

And why would we be limited to contemporary games? And why should we have to name something better? Are you suggesting if your only choice for food is sour grapes, spoilt meat or stale bread, that because you happen to pick the stale bread, that makes it good? The fact that you'd choose to go back and play something like JA2 would seem to indicate you don't actually believe that, so why impose that limitation on us?

And if the say STW or MTW, I say they are just spoilt!

So if we've had a couple good games to play, that's all we are allowed? We now have a quota on them? We aren't allowed to expect a company to continue to put out the same quality games?

Bh

[Razor1952]

@ Bhruic

I have to agree with S Appleton. I give very high marks to the development team for aiming so high.

"Better to have loved and (maybe) lost than never to have loved at all" Not quite appropriate but I guess you have my drift.

[econ21]

Bhruic, I find games are rather like movies or books. No matter how good they are, you don't keep endlessly replaying them but move on to something else. It's quite legitimate to ask what's the book of the year or what new movie to watch this month. Right now, I'd rate RTW higher than any other strategy game since MTW.

For example, in a moment of weakness, I bought "Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War" - it's a great, polished RTS made with a lot of love but I played it precisely one week, stopped when RTW came out and never got the urge to fire it up again. I also bought LOTR: BFME and never got beyond the first screen (I'll return to it but am in no rush). Going a little further back, Silent Storm was technically admirable but seemed to lack soul. With Civ3, I could not get past the ancient wars which involved moving scores of warrior units one square a year in a brain numbingly dull fashion.

Typically you move on from games when you've burnt out or when you've "cracked it" (or mastered it). The complexity and variety of RTW means that point can be delayed despite the limitations. I've had hours of fun with it - I fear to estimate how much, but even a 10 year PBM reign takes up all my free time on a weekend. So I'd rate it as a good value - probably better than any strategy games which I have not already played given my tilt (I like historical war games that are accessible).

Critics of the game obviously have a different opinion, but I'm genuinely interested to know what recent strategy games they spend their time playing.

[Colovion]

Critics of the game obviously have a different opinion, but I'm genuinely interested to know what recent strategy games they spend their time playing.

Many critics of the game aren't in a monogamous relationship with their game genres.

[doc_bean]

Many critics of the game aren't in a monogamous relationship with their game genres.

They are certainly having a quite ugly divorce with Rome...

[Colovion]

They are certainly having a quite ugly divorce with Rome...

We still want to be friends, there's dependants.

[Magraev]

I believe Simon A. makes an excellent point.

All the emotions shown by true fans are a result of huge expectations and only a very good game. That doesn't change the fact that it's a very good game, but most (myself included) hoped it would be a great game.

I'm sure that the level of complexity and number of features in the game is a source of unforseen bugs, but they should still be fixed once discovered! CA can quickly loose their goodwill if they don't.

I still play the game more than any other (after a break from 1.0 to 1.2), and I think i got my moneys worth, compared with other games I've bought.

[Bhruic]

Bhruic, I find games are rather like movies or books. No matter how good they are, you don't keep endlessly replaying them but move on to something else. It's quite legitimate to ask what's the book of the year or what new movie to watch this month. Right now, I'd rate RTW higher than any other strategy game since MTW.

I agree with the first half of your statement. It's the second half that I don't. There have been very few strategy games released of late (in fact, very few games at all, at least of any quality). Would I rate RTW higher than them? Probably. Does that mean I think it's a good game? No, it just means I think the other ones are worse.

As I said before, having to choose between multiple "bads" does not make your choice "good", it makes it "least bad". To me, that's what RTW (in its current state) is. Least bad.

Bh

[Red Harvest]

@ Bhruic

I have to agree with S Appleton. I give very high marks to the development team for aiming so high.

"Better to have loved and (maybe) lost than never to have loved at all" Not quite appropriate but I guess you have my drift.

I suspect it was lust, not love. We lusted for the beautiful exterior that was Rome. Then we got to know her...a pleasant girl...but she couldn't carry on an intelligent conversation, and in the morning without her make up, foundation garments, and perfectly coifed hair...well...we lost interest all too soon.

[Colovion]

It's not that we had false expectations, it's that her father portrayed her to be something which she was not.

Or alternatively, I feel like I've been given a Leah when I was promised a Rachel. DAMN YOU LABAN!