Railroad Tycoon II

[centrifuge]

A few months ago, I bought RRT2 platinum...from the bargain bin(ie $10). I haven't played it yet, but after reading through this thread I'm becoming more and more intrigued.

[DarkCloud]

rwprice- you had best play the game before Bill Gates makes it obsolete ... like he did to Command and Conquer!

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Standup
I revist it quite often. I miss some of the features from the original but the graphics make up for it.

Screw the graphics. Why do I need to zoom in that deep anyway? Besides, it is arguable that an overhead view similar to the original is superior to the isometric view of the sequel for railroad building games. It's a lot easier to mess up with an isometric view when you start building.

[General Ludd]

While the graphics of the originally certainly aren't very good (by todays standards you'd have a hard time even calling them graphics), I wasn't very happy with the graphics of the second, either. They donn't add anything to the game, and if anything, the 3Dness and lack of important detail really took away from it.


*disclamer* I haven't played either game for so long that they're both a bit of a blur to me now, though.

[Rasbelin]

Well, the graphics make a difference, but the most important thing is the removal of the limits of the total number of trains and stations. Also the AI is now working and much more understandable. Okay, indeed, it still builds bad lines, but those who have played RT and RTDX know that the improvement on that front is huge. I used to be a fanatic player of all titles in the Railroad Tycoon series, but as I got RT2, I stopped playing RTDX as RT2 was that much better. Admit it. The tunnels are a problem, but the current system is fine (well, not that realistic maybe, but more challenging; especially in TSC when you build from Portland to Fairbanks in Alaska or what about the Alps in RT2? It would be too easy; just get rich in north Italy and then build a tunnel (sidenote: reminds me of the "big friend" guy from Edolo )). The zooming and rotating system is just fine for me, so the isometric view would be (IMO) a step backwards.

[Rasbelin]

Originally posted by The Pioneer

why do you smell a victim?

Sorry, I can't smell anything.

Has anybody around here heard anything about a RRTIII? I've looked around and I haven't really fouond anything besides some vague comment on Gamespot!

Hey, don't ruin my The Column writing. If you wait for it, you can read it there.

[Sheep]

Finally a game of the gods. Railroad Tycoon is up with those games us nostaligic gamer miss. Others include the old Sim City and the first civilisation.

I ofthen find these games to be more playable and harder to successfully complete.

Have fun

[The Pioneer]

Ok, Ras you got me but I usually do not check the column so you may have to point it out to me!

I think the graphics, the sound FX and the soundtracks of the game serve it very well. I have no problem with the way I view the game and lest I forget ithas a very intuitive interface.

How about scenario building!? I actually don't build any myself but I played around with it, it's one of the best ones that I've seen around and the game is "old".

@DarkCloud, what do you mean by that?

So long...

[moomin]

RT1 is an all-time classic. RT2 looked nice, but gameplay is abysmal - once youy figure out how the bond/stockmarket thing works, the path to victory is always the same. I got all gold medals in the campaigns, then sat back and though - why am I doing this? - and quit. A shame, since I really, really wanted to like the game.

[Alex]

I played it only for a few hours, not because I disliked it, but because I had too many other games to play at that time. But I may give it another try.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Rasbelin
Well, the graphics make a difference, but the most important thing is the removal of the limits of the total number of trains and stations. Also the AI is now working and much more understandable. Okay, indeed, it still builds bad lines, but those who have played RT and RTDX know that the improvement on that front is huge. I used to be a fanatic player of all titles in the Railroad Tycoon series, but as I got RT2, I stopped playing RTDX as RT2 was that much better. Admit it. The tunnels are a problem, but the current system is fine (well, not that realistic maybe, but more challenging; especially in TSC when you build from Portland to Fairbanks in Alaska or what about the Alps in RT2? It would be too easy; just get rich in north Italy and then build a tunnel (sidenote: reminds me of the "big friend" guy from Edolo )). The zooming and rotating system is just fine for me, so the isometric view would be (IMO) a step backwards.

Ras, the limitation on trains and stations is meant to be a challenge, just like the way you view the inability to build tunnels in RR2. Surely it would be best if none of these limitations are there, personally I much much prefer the limitations on trains and stations.

Late in a game I was hard pressed to shuffle all the loads I had among a few large stations in big cities, I had no need for all the stations and trains. Similarly, early in a game when I was scraping the bottom, I wouldn't have the money to build those stations and trains. This is a limitation that is annoying but it is rarely encountered. On the other hand, the inability to build tunnels is always in your face. It is just too idiotic to think about.

As for AI, both games cheat heavily, and their routes are just as bad. They make lots of $ dispite of this. I don't see how that can be called an improvement. Maybe it is an improvement in playing the stock market, but I really wasn't expecting a stock and finance game intead of a railroad building game, so that's not an improvement as far as I am concerned.

[Standup]

I wasn't trying to suggest that better gfx compensate for a lack of gameplay but i found the original almost unplayable beacuse of what i've become use to over the last few years.
The AI doesn't seem to follow the same rules as the player and that makes the games almost puzzle based but then i guess thats what MP is for until we have decent AI. I remember in the orginal having to fight to save my company from being bought out by the AI and i've never seen that in RRT2.
Probably the most annoying feature i found was the inability to buy and place factories near the natural resources - something the orginal allowed. In some games i never make half the products available because the random placement makes it impossible or highly impractical.

[Rasbelin]

Originally posted by moomin

I got all gold medals in the campaigns, then sat back and though - why am I doing this?

I assume you played once through the campaign at easy level, right?

[Rasbelin]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

Ras, the limitation on trains and stations is meant to be a challenge, just like the way you view the inability to build tunnels in RR2. Surely it would be best if none of these limitations are there, personally I much much prefer the limitations on trains and stations.

I assume I'm the opposition then.

As for AI, both games cheat heavily, and their routes are just as bad. They make lots of $ dispite of this. I don't see how that can be called an improvement.

I agree about the cheating, but it's at least somewhat logical as you can see the trains of your opponents. Now we also have mergers and not just buying up a company and not gaining control of its network.

Maybe it is an improvement in playing the stock market, but I really wasn't expecting a stock and finance game intead of a railroad building game, so that's not an improvement as far as I am concerned.

IMO the integration of the financies fits in well as it's after all a game about making business with railroads.

[Urban Ranger]

Standup,

"The AI doesn't seem to follow the same rules as the player and that makes the games almost puzzle based but then i guess thats what MP is for until we have decent AI. I remember in the orginal having to fight to save my company from being bought out by the AI and i've never seen that in RRT2."

I am not sure what you meant by "puzzle-based." IIRC, the computer players in the original Railroad Tycoon behaved quite expectedly. They even vaguedly resembled the various historical tycooons, which was quite a feat in those days. If a computer player is a builder, it just builds tracks. If it is a fiancier you better be careful about your own stocks. If it is some kind of combo it could be a bit unpredictable but nevertheless they don't do things randomly. Not like the "erratic" players in Master of Orion.


Ras,

"I agree about the cheating, but it's at least somewhat logical as you can see the trains of your opponents."

Well, all right, if you insist. Not much of an improvement though, because you can never tell what the trains are carrying.

"Now we also have mergers and not just buying up a company and not gaining control of its network."

What do you mean?