I was lied to; this game isn't unique at all!

[One_Dead_Villy]

Originally posted by Action


Oh its quite possible that it plays slightly differently from other RTS games. But it plays 90% the same as any other RTS game. It plays nothing like a Turn Based Strategy game.

Kohan can claim that it plays like an TBS, but RoN sure as hell can't. So as I said, its just another RTS with a few interesting tweaks, not some special hybrid of RTS and TBS.

have u tried the conquer the world campaign?
its like total war...its not in the demo though

[albiedamned]

I agree with others that the game mechanics are very similar to other RTS games, and to classify this as a new genre is probably a stretch. And I also agree with all the posters pointing out all the new features of RoN that separate it from the other RTS games. But what I think distinguishes RoN the most is not the new features themselves, but the new strategies they allow.

For example, going after a territory victory with a defensive strategy is entirely possible. Build forts and towers and a large enough standing army to deal with an invasion, but focus on cities, temples, and techs which push your borders. Don't know if it will work in multiplayer, but it certainly works against the AI.

Another example is the diplomatic game. You don't have to start at war with everyone if you use this option. You can try to appease (or even becomes allies with) one neighbor while fighting another. This is very TBS-like. In Civ, there is an early trade off between rapid expansion and getting your military going. You can afford to have very little military early on because you start at peace with everyone. In the RoN diplomacy game, the same is true and thus you have the same strategic trade off decision to make.

[Alex]

I've tried the demo, and I have to say that RoN is a very polished RTS game, which really shines in some aspects when compared with other RTSs (idle villagers that look for something to do is wonderful), and have one of the most stunningly wide range of configurable options that I've ever seen... but, in the end, it is still a RTS.

If someone approaches RON with an idea that it could be Civilization in real-time, then he/she will be prone to a sore disappointment.

But what RON does it does extremely well. I like the graphics, the battles are incredibly large and exciting, borders are a nice feature, it has interesting research and economic systems, so... all in all, I'm pretty sure that most of RTS games in the future will follow RON's recipe to some extent, and we could say that it is a big evolution for the RTS genre. Notice I said "RTS". That's what RON is, and I can say that for the first time I'm satisfied with an RTS game.

[Bridger]

Originally posted by Action


Oh its quite possible that it plays slightly differently from other RTS games. But it plays 90% the same as any other RTS game. It plays nothing like a Turn Based Strategy game.

Kohan can claim that it plays like an TBS, but RoN sure as hell can't. So as I said, its just another RTS with a few interesting tweaks, not some special hybrid of RTS and TBS.

Who the hell said it plays like a TBS? If anything it "apeals" more to the TBS audience that wants to try their hand at an RTS, but it sure as hell isnt' a TBS.

[jendragon]

I agree with the original poster....

this is so close to EE its amazing ..

and technically RTS's end up boiling down to the same mix pile of units, and seem as artificall with respect to thier cities as an abstract regiment or division.

Like the guy said no carry over from the strategy part.. ie i just won a defense of this territory and have to start over completly is rediclous..... so it seems tedious and not as entertaining as it should be.....

This is not CIV IV no mistake about that ... so to compare the two is crazy... but it is likewise crazy to try to get the TBS crowd to try it you will like it .. that they are trying to do with the marketing campaign.. make no mistake about that either.

And for someone to remind people of that fact .... is the major intent of the original poster... IMO. And in that respect he should be commended.....

NOW ... to say how good or bad RTS game this is ..is purly taste... there are so many to pick from that are great.

Hell i liked one of the Warhammer 40,000 ones from SSI along time ago where you could dig in your infantry and they would be in little foxholes with their defense upped... so my tase is not a baramoter to go by ~

His points make a valid reminder to TBS that this is a RTS and you may not like it.

[DarthVeda]

reynolds is definately my favorite game developer, he has talent and it shows.

[Bridger]

Originally posted by jendragon

This is not CIV IV no mistake about that ... so to compare the two is crazy... but it is likewise crazy to try to get the TBS crowd to try it you will like it .. that they are trying to do with the marketing campaign.. make no mistake about that either.

Glad you speak for the entire TBS croud, i'm sure BHG will imediatly stop trying to market the game to them based on your suggestions.

[jendragon]

Bridger cant read as well...


I said thier marketing unmistakingly targets the TBS crowd.... I did not say if the TBS crowd would like it or not. That would be up to the individual players.... IF you would like to dispute if their marketing targets TBS players .. that would be a point for disussion.

[Alex]

Do you think that their marketing efforts are directed towards the TBS crowd? I don't think so. But since we are in a site dedicated to TBS games and their fans, it is natural that the discussion here is more oriented towards TBS elements in RoN and if those elements add anything that could be appealing enough to us.

But I can't see a concerted BHG/Microsoft effort to publicize RoN as a game that would appeal the TBS crowd.