No announcement yet.

So, what game(s) are worth of Yin's praise?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16

    i think some of the criticisms you leveled at SE4 are unfair

    first thing SE4 has had 7 patches total, not 40+, samething when the civ3 patch comes out next week it will be version number 1.14 but that doesn't mean that it has had 14 patches

    second thing is that SE4 was playable out of the box and while having numerous bugs there wasn't any showstoppers that i encountered with v.99, since they don't have a QA department at all, it probably got less official testing than Civ3 did, so the investment time on playing a game isn't as great as what you make it seem

    i have two other smaller points

    MM gives their game some of the best support of ANY gaming company out there, even though there is maybe five of them (i think it is more like three programmers and one artist but i'm not sure) these guys deserve a medal for going above and beyond the call of duty! if a year after civ3 is out it still gets any support i will be pleasantly surprised

    one last thing

    the goal of civ3 was to be the best civilization experiance to date

    the goal of SE4 (as taken from their website) was to have industry competitive graphics, a simplified user-interface, and simultaneous play capabilities

    one of these games achieved its goal, wanna guess which one?

    having said that, for me Civ3 is the better game but i still think that SE4 is a good game and i would buy it if it was in the 20-25 dollar range, and i think that it is amazing that guys who have a day job could create such a good game without any publisher support during the development process, and i look forward to a more ambitious SE5


    • #17

      I feel some of your criticisms leveled towards Civ 3 are biased. For example, on research, EU is quite screwed up with regards to "technology." Some of the areas where a player can spend money on are, eh, unconventional.

      As for moving hundreds of units, there's not a whole lot can be done. Implementing stacks will minimise the number of combat units that needed to be moved, but there are still those explorers, settlers, and workers. In fact why did you create so many units in the first place?
      (\__/) 07/07/1937 - Never forget
      (='.'=) "Claims demand evidence; extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence." -- Carl Sagan
      (")_(") "Starting the fire from within."


      • #18
        Originally posted by Urban Ranger
        In fact why did you create so many units in the first place?
        In my current game I have 22 own workers (Trying to get rid of them by joining cities as fast as possible) and 50+ captured workers improving my territorium and rebuilding after each turn. (AI just loves to bomb Railroads&roads - when fighters don't protect outside your city.)

        So why not have alarger worker-army improving my land faster??