Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: Imperialism II and developers' folly

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default Re: Imperialism II and developers' folly

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon Appleton
    Imp2 is very much a game first and feels rather "gamey". For example, armies can teleport into surrounded provinces. As a historical simulation, this would be unacceptable but as a game it is arguably justified as it helps get a fairly good AI.
    I have to disagree with that. I think it's overall a very good simulation as well as being a good game.

    The "teleporting armies" feature is one that used to bother me too, to such a degree that at one stage I stopped playing because I felt it was too unrealistic. But when you think about it, given that each turn is a year in length it's really not so strange that armies can "teleport" anywhere from one turn to another. Also, you can only teleport armies from one continent to another so long as they start in a port, so it's not as though movement is completely unrestricted.

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon Appleton
    But the particular selling point of Imp2 IMO is how it minimises the micromanagement that plagues Civ. With Civ, you have to micromanage each city's economy and this gets onerous in the late game when you have dozens of cities. In Imp2, you have economy wide sliders for everything and need very few "agents" (builders & engineers etc) even when the empire is large so the micromanagement does not get excessive.
    Yes, that's a very good analysis of why Imp2 is more fun.

    I always enjoy the early part of Civ when you just have a handful of cities but after that it all becomes a bit of a chore. And the combat system in Civ is crap. Unfortunately it looks like they are more or less going to retain that system in Civ4, which will be a big disappointment. I was really hoping for something better in the next instalment.

  2. #2
    Lurker Member Mongoose's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,422

    Default Re: Imperialism II and developers' folly

    Looks like a good buy for 10 dollars.

    One more question: can you play a lan game without buying two copies?

    Thanks

  3. #3

    Default Re: Imperialism II and developers' folly

    Quote Originally Posted by mongoose
    can you play a lan game without buying two copies?
    The manual doesn't say whether you need more than one copy to play LAN (or over the net for that matter). So I guess the only way to find out is install the game on both machines and see how you go

  4. #4
    Senior Member Senior Member Cheetah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Hungary
    Posts
    2,085

    Default Re: Imperialism II and developers' folly

    Imperialism II homepage:

    http://www.frogcity.com/imperialism2/index.html

    not too much info but screenshots give you an idea about the game.

    strategyplanet site, highly informative, great site:

    http://www.strategyplanet.com/dailyi...imp2/index.htm


    ------------------------------------------------------------

    Bill Spieth, Lead Designer at Frog City about Imperialism III:

    "Personally, I'd like to design and help develop Imperialism 3. I see three roadblocks to overcome before this project could get underway.

    1) Frog City, so far, has been a one product at a time development house. Right now we are quite busy. This moves the potential Imp3 project into the future into a time when Frog City expands or has no other project going on.

    2) Frog City and Gathering/Take 2 do not have the rights to publish a game with the name Imperialism 3. These rights are held by the legal successors of the publisher of Imperialism 1 and 2.

    3) To obtain a financial and marketing/sales go-ahead on this kind of project there would have to be a showing that either:

    a) a traditional somewhat intellectual strategy game can appeal to a large number of people (much larger than would be indicated by sales of Imp 1 and 2) -or-

    b) That Imperialism 3 could be made very cheaply to appeal to a niche hardcore gamer audience.
    -or-

    c) Imperialism 3 is designed as a totally different sort of game. Fast-paced, 3D, and real-time are the buzz words that might gain attention.

    The final roadblock is actually the most significant. I'd strongly prefer to design a sequel that is true to its precursors. On the other hand, I don't believe a good, deep, strategy game can be made on a tiny budget. So that leaves us with the idea of proving the vialbility of a more or less traditional strategy game in the mass market. In my experience this is a hard sell.
    All this said, I'd love to work on the game and I appreciate the interest of those gamers who remain dedicated to Imp1 and Imp2.

    Bill Spieth
    Lead Game Designer
    Frog City "

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    Lional of Cornwall
    proud member of the Round Table Knights
    ___________________________________
    Death before dishonour.

    "If you wish to weaken the enemy's sword, move first, fly in and cut!" - Ueshiba Morihei O-Sensei

  5. #5

    Default Re: Imperialism II and developers' folly

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheetah
    c) Imperialism 3 is designed as a totally different sort of game. Fast-paced, 3D, and real-time are the buzz words that might gain attention.
    GAH! Shades of RTW. If they want to design a game like that, that's their business, but don't pretend it's a sequel to Imp2!

    Thanks for the links Cheetah. I might mosey over there and take a look.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO