The Rivalry Continues

[Rasbelin]

Apoc, wasn't it you who in the first place gave this thread 5 stars?

[Apocalypse]

From a thread 6 months back

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
So why doesn't EU (and EU 2) which are more civ than Moo3 or RoN not get a site on Apolyton? A travesty!

Originally posted by Apocalypse
Rise of Nations is about the rise of civilization over a long period of time and features the basic elements of civilization games. MOO does the same thing. Sim Golf is about the rise of one golf course over a few decades. EU, though good, doesn't span a long period of time and doesn't focus as much on building of infastructure.

Originally posted by DanQ
I knew from previous discussions that there was going to be some concern stemming from this announcement, but I was not expecting so many negative voices and to have them be so strong.

Apocalypse has summarized the basic points behind why RoN has been chosen, as well as why SimGolf and Europa Universalis have not. To re-iterate, the former is a golfing simulation -- albeit more than your "conventional" one, but it does not fall anywhere near under the Civilizationesque scope while the latter (again, as already stated) is too focused on a particular period of time and does give terribly much focus to building/infrastructure. Putting that to the side for the moment, the original EU is a tad old to consider adding a section to the site now. On this front, I am curious why there hasn't been any 'call to arms' over EU II coverage, as opposed to its predecessor, but again it too is not broad enough in scope.

In closing, I can see why some would ask on the heels of this announcement about why we have no EU or again EU II coverage coverage, but I hope I have adequately addressed that issue. However, I am still surprised by the calls for a SG section even when taking into account the game's parameters and a confirmation I made earlier this year that Apolyton would not be covering it for those very reasons. As for the stark criticisms about RoN itself, everyone is welcome to their opinion, including constructive criticisms, but at the same I encourage you not to condemn it so quickly and completely.

Am I just crazy? I didn't know anything changed. I just assumed Apolyton still went by these standards. X-COM just doesn't seem to fit. Can you really fault me for what I assumed? I am not and was never trying to be hostile.

[tniem]

Originally posted by The Pioneer
Huh!? So why wasn't Gettysburg and Antietam covered?

So long...

Maybe because they came out before this site opened... I think if there were enough people on this site on the Other games forum talking about MP or something they would open a new thread.

[Apocalypse]

Antietam not only came out after the site opened, but was also announced almost a year after the site opened.

[Tuberski]

I'd Guess you could put Antietam and Gettysburg in the Classic games forum.

[MarkG]

the "rules" are two
1) we cover the games that interest us and/or lots(and i mean "lots") of our visitors or potential visitors
2) we expand our coverage when we know we can cover the game well

dont like talking about other sites, but to refer to something Apoc will understand, we're not and wont become sidgames

[Apocalypse]

Alright, so something has changed. Thanks for clearing that up.

[MarkG]

i fail to see the change or be certain on what it is that has changed but anyway....

[Urban Ranger]

Just one thing: some codes for the home page is screwed up. Check for those non-breaking spaces.