The I wanna talk about AoW II threadiii (Suomi)

[Pythagoras]

Re: Well, I've gotten a chance to play it now....

Originally posted by Osweld
Good game

It basically improves upon the first in every way, and none of the changes are a step backward in my opinion (atleast, not that I have seen so far)

The magic and research part of the game, town managment, andas the combat engine have all been greatly improved, and the races/units have been cleaned up a bit, but no drastic changes. (Although, I haven't gotten a chance to play them all yet)

My only complaints are that it still takes ages for the computer to take their turns on classical mode, and it goes a bit sluggish for me on the larger maps. The new graphics are nice... but I don't think it was enough of an improvement to warrant the higher system requirements.

Sounds like no improved replayability though, its main flaw.
Ill probably wait till it gets down to 20 bucks, which it will soon since it wont catch on like civ3 which has tons of replayability.

[General Ludd]

Re: Re: Well, I've gotten a chance to play it now....

Originally posted by Pythagoras


Sounds like no improved replayability though, its main flaw.
Ill probably wait till it gets down to 20 bucks, which it will soon since it wont catch on like civ3 which has tons of replayability.

I have yet to see a random map generator that can make maps worth playing on - especially when they are as detailed as in AoW.


I don't have any problem playing on premade maps, and they don't neccisarily have to mean poor replayability. Take EU2 for instance - the map is always the same, but to me, it is still the most replayable game that I've ever seen.

[da_jaymz]

Re: Re: Well, I've gotten a chance to play it now....

Originally posted by Pythagoras


Sounds like no improved replayability though, its main flaw.
Ill probably wait till it gets down to 20 bucks, which it will soon since it wont catch on like civ3 which has tons of replayability.

Check the demo out, click on the links I posted above.
Game features multiplayer also so try that out too.

[Pythagoras]

Re: Re: Re: Well, I've gotten a chance to play it now....

Originally posted by Osweld


I have yet to see a random map generator that can make maps worth playing on - especially when they are as detailed as in AoW.


I don't have any problem playing on premade maps, and they don't neccisarily have to mean poor replayability. Take EU2 for instance - the map is always the same, but to me, it is still the most replayable game that I've ever seen.

I agree that the random map generator would be hard to do in AoW. However, I would like to see the ability to make campaigns, and even better multiplayer campaigns. That would be an awesome game.

[SnowFire]

As far as I'm concerned, the problem with AOW's replayability was simply that the map editor wasn't complex enough, limiting the style of downloadable maps. Heroes games have always allowed you to do crazy story maps and other fun things, not to mention more fun with difficulty levels. (and by the way, AOW1's original maps were actually not that detailed. It still doesn't mean that a random map generator wouldn't suck, because for a game like that, a map generator fundamentally does not know how a map will play. It certainly won't create good maps.)

From what I've seen so far, AOW2 improves on that. And just in terms of sheer messages, I'm really impressed at the first scenario- the actual amount of map you need to conquer is fairly small, but there's massive massive side areas to explore if you want, all with neat little messages and signs filling you in. I'm talking massive- it feels like this area existed first, and there happened to be a war fought on it later, and it just happened to be balanced for it.

[Pythagoras]

I think what I would like is the ability to craft (and play) my own story line. Imagine a Lord of Rings campaign, or a Wheel of Time campaign. The posibilities would be endless. Throw in the ability to play these story lines multiplayer, and wow I couldnt stop playing.

[kring]

I say it advertised recently, and was wondering about it myself. I will have to check it out when I get a free minute.

[Pythagoras]

Gamespot's review. Im very interested. I wish I had money though

http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/reviews/0,10867,2871030,00.html

[kring]

I don't trust any gaming magazine review. There is too much incentive for them to be pro game, esp. if you see the game in question company has bought much advertising. It is too biased, can be pro or negative; but rarely objective. I have seen too many comment about how a game review encouraged them to buy the game, only to find out the article was misleading at best.

I go with word of mouth and filter out the obviously biased ones. You can usually get a better review this way; esp. if you know the people talking about it. I have found this to be a much better way to learn about a game, and have purchased some good games (the kind I would like to play, and managed to steer away from some that wouldn't interest me, even though the gaming mag made it sound like it would.

[Pythagoras]

Well I tend to agree with the critics. Some are better than others, and gamespot is up there for me.

[Urban Ranger]

Nothing on Games Domain yet, that's the site with which I agree with most.

[Sarxis]

I have been playing AoW2 for two days straight now.

Its fun, but then again, I only have Lords of Magic SE to compare it with since I am not a big fan of these style games.

I can't wait for the patch though, as it seems a few tweaks are in order.

[Cookie Monster]

Well since my fellow 'Polytoners are not really raving about AoW2 or shooting it down I've decided to wait for bargain bin prices before giving this one a try.

[SnowFire]

Hey, don't get the wrong idea from my complaints. AOW2 really is a fantastic game, it's just not quite perfect.

If you're concerned about economy, grab your time-machine and pre-order it. I got it for 30 bucks that way.

[Urban Ranger]

Games Domain's hot off the press review

It got a silver star, which means it's quite good