SMAC re-released yet again?

[Kaboth]

I was just skipping through the pages of this month's PC Powerplay; a popular Australian PC gaming magazine when I noticed a budget section containing none other that Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri supposably re-released for $9.99 AUS by a company called Red Ant (I think?). I can't verify this as I havn't seen it on shelves but chances are if its released in Australia it may well be rereleased in other countries also.

Who knows it might even be the Planetary pack, seems strange just to release SMAC when Planetary Pack was released last on 1 disc. I quickly closed the pages in disgust after reading the reviewer give SMAC 6/10 whilst they gave CivIII 9/10 on the preceding page. Phhh Never trust a critic

[livid imp]

Re: SMAC re-released yet again?

Originally posted by Kaboth
I quickly closed the pages in disgust after reading the reviewer give SMAC 6/10 whilst they gave CivIII 9/10 on the preceding page.

Keep that mag near the toilet, it may yet server a useful purpose.

Originally posted by Kaboth
Phhh Never trust a critic

You have it wrong, it's "Everyone's a critic". Which means even inbred mouth-breathers that makes glossy bum wipe for a living have the opportunity to give SMAC a 6/10.

You can trust a critic, it is morons you don't trust.

[Dis]

you have to expect most reviewers to give it a pass now days. The graphics do look a bit dated.

Even though in 1999 the graphics weren't all that great, people still gave it a pass, because most strategy games at the time had terrible graphics.

[livid imp]

Originally posted by Dissident
you have to expect most reviewers to give it a pass now days. The graphics do look a bit dated.

Even though in 1999 the graphics weren't all that great, people still gave it a pass, because most strategy games at the time had terrible graphics.

If you get that hung up on graphics, then you shouldn't be doing a video game review. Any reviewer worth his salt will know that gameplay > than all. I don't mind seeing them mark off for graphics, but -40% for graphics?? I don't buy it.

[Darsnan]

Originally posted by livid imp


If you get that hung up on graphics, then you shouldn't be doing a video game review. Any reviewer worth his salt will know that gameplay > than all. I don't mind seeing them mark off for graphics, but -40% for graphics?? I don't buy it.

I'll completely agree with that statement: I don't play chess for the graphics, either, and I'd still give it a higher game rating than 6/10....

D

[livid imp]

SMAC in the conceptual stage deserves a 8/10

[Dis]

the sound is bad too.

but the gameplay makes up for all of that. at least imho.

the fact is most newbie reviewers probably haven't played a tbs game. And don't know how it's supposed to play.

[Mart]

Re: Re: SMAC re-released yet again?

Originally posted by livid imp


Keep that mag near the toilet, it may yet server a useful purpose.

Yup, I agree
-----------
And a note about graphics. In 1999 when I purchased the SMAC I was more like stunned by its graphics. This new idea of tiles being tilted according to their elevation. The climate of the game was perfectly matched with the graphics. During all these years from 1999, when I think of it, there is little what I would consider for change actually.
I dislike though much of the 3D graphics nowadays. Still good 2D perspective is better than 3D with possibility to change the angle. And many of my friends share this oppinion with me.

[Kuciwalker]

The graphics actually inhibit gameplay - I found it difficult to play with the color scheme.

[Mart]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
The graphics actually inhibit gameplay - I found it difficult to play with the color scheme.

In patches, there is gamma correction, I think. You can adjust that, if it is too dark for example. Have you tried that?

[Sikander]

I like all of the graphics except the caviars. They truly stink, especially the infantry. But the screen graphics etc. are great, I still like them.

[Dis]

I thought all the graphics are caviars. I'm not really sure what a caviar is.

I actually turn up the brightness, but it can only do so much.

I just wish it had the color scheme of that one SP movie. I can't remember which one it is. It's one of the "green" ones with Deirdre talking. Xenoempathy Dome maybe. The fungus there is brighter, and the greens are brighter. The planet looks much more inviting in that movie.

[SynthetGod8]

Originally posted by Dissident
the sound is bad too.

but the gameplay makes up for all of that. at least imho.

the fact is most newbie reviewers probably haven't played a tbs game. And don't know how it's supposed to play.

I play with the sound off anyway. I should probably try my hand at replacing some of the sounds. Does anyone know of such an endevour? But yeah, sounds off, my own playlist is on.

But I still call PC Gamer the greatest computer game mag off all time, not only because they gave SMAC 98%, but because they have never lead me to buy a bad game... except Civ 3. And I bought MoO3 without reading the PCG review... so that was my fault.

It's a shame that I've played SMAX to death and don't play it much any more. That's how I killed Starcraft too.

[Sikander]

The Caviars are the 3D models which are used for units in the game.

[Zoetrope]

Soon after SMAC was published, Brian Reynolds was very active on sites like Apolyton, so i asked him why his team chose Caviar 3D. He replied that the choice was a mistake.