|
|
 |
| [March 27, 2008, 08:37 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
Tiscali Games has
some details on World in Conflict: Soviet Assault, the upcoming console edition
of World in Conflict that includes new content for Massive
Entertainment's RTS game, including the ability to play as the Soviet side. This
additional content will be released separately as an add-on for the PC edition,
and Tiscali also points out the Xbox 360 edition is available for preorder on
Play.com carrying an October release date that may offer an indication of
when to expect the new single-player and multiplayer content for the PC edition.
19 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Prev [ 1 ] Next >
| 19. |
Re: No subject |
Mar 29, 2008, 17:28 |
CreamyBlood |
|
|
Nexus is a must, I loved that game, I 'd buy a sequel in a second, even an expansion pack. I have both WiC and SoaSE demos installed but still haven't tried them.
|
| 18. |
Re: No subject |
Mar 28, 2008, 04:15 |
drt |
|
|
no one in their right mind would pre-order this game for the 360. it gets pushed out by several months, every time the previous ship date nears.
loved WIC on the PC, but the lack of depth led me to lose interest quickly.
hope this expansion adds quite a bit of stuff - if it does, i'll pick it up and come back to playing.
|
| 17. |
Re: No subject |
Mar 27, 2008, 22:00 |
Prez |
|
|
Man Nexus is one of those great games nobody played. It is super cheap on Steam, if anyone is interested |
| 16. |
Re: No subject |
Mar 27, 2008, 20:43 |
Kedyn |
|
|
Nexus was great. So was World in Conflict.
Hopefully Mithis can do a sequel to Nexus someday. I kind of doubt it, so I hope they do a good job on the next Battlestations game.
|
| 15. |
Re: No subject |
Mar 27, 2008, 18:11 |
Karl_L |
|
|
I loved WIC, But it was too short and had no skirmish mode or single player level editor. .
Nutshell42.
Nexus Fucking Rocked.
And they need to make a sequel 
|
| 14. |
Re: No subject |
Mar 27, 2008, 16:35 |
nutshell42 |
|
|
Now for something (almost) completely different: since you liked Nexus, have you tried Sins of a Solar Empire yet?
Not enough time atm, unfortunately, but it's on my to-do list.
But I don't think the two are all that similar apart from both having spaceships. 
In Nexus you just controlled a few ships and it was more a ship simulator than a strategy game. Also the gameplay in Nexus sucked big time. But I loved the graphics, the feel and the storyline
|
| 13. |
Re: No subject |
Mar 27, 2008, 15:58 |
Wolfox |
|
|
Your reply was not harsh, and as far as I'm concerned, has not offended anyone. I understand both your points; just wanted to clarify.
Now for something (almost) completely different: since you liked Nexus, have you tried Sins of a Solar Empire yet?
|
| 12. |
Free addon for PC? |
Mar 27, 2008, 14:56 |
Ant |
|
|
"This additional content will be released separately as an add-on for the PC edition,..." Is this going to be free? |
| 11. |
Re: No subject |
Mar 27, 2008, 14:34 |
nutshell42 |
|
|
Sorry, if that reply was overly harsh. I didn't mean it that way. It's just that thinking of that whole incident makes me wanna shoot some marketing reps.
Of course you're opinion on whether you're controlling enough units in WiC is as valid as mine, it's just my main gripe with WiC and the reason I didn't buy it.
Nevertheless I don't hate or even dislike the game. I just wanted to like it and it does nothing for me.
Which is Massive's loss. I alternately loved and hated Nexus:The Jupiter Incident with a passion and they got my money 
|
| 10. |
Re: No subject |
Mar 27, 2008, 14:29 |
nutshell42 |
|
|
I may have misunderstood your comment, but World in Conflict is not Vista-only. I should know, I play it in XP.
Yes, and you'd think someone working at marketing for the fscking publisher of that game should be aware of that, don't you?
and the small number of units, along with no base building/management, are the main reasons why I like it so much. To each his/her own, I guess.
I like the no base building and small numbers of units but WiC's numbers aren't small, they're tiny. Unless there's lots of infantry you'll see less units in WiC battles than in some squad based fps...
|
| 9. |
Re: No subject |
Mar 27, 2008, 14:06 |
Wolfox |
|
|
I may have misunderstood your comment, but World in Conflict is not Vista-only. I should know, I play it in XP.
As for the game itself, it's one of the best RTS games I've ever played - and the small number of units, along with no base building/management, are the main reasons why I like it so much. To each his/her own, I guess.
|
| 8. |
No subject |
Mar 27, 2008, 13:58 |
nutshell42 |
|
|
Sierra's and Microsofts marketing departments should be shot.
A friend of mine always gets free games from someone who works at Sierra marketing. So he asked that guy for World in Conflict and was told that it was Vista only and he should try another game instead.
How incompetent are those Sierra guys? I by now accept that MS wants the PC to die as a gaming platform. So if MS is just stupid instead of malicious they just got away with it.
But I can't think of a reason why Sierra'd want that game to fail so there's no excuse for them.
About the game itself. Well, I loved Ground Control more than any other game and Ground Control II was a bitter disappointement so I was hopeful when they said WiC would be more like GCI.
Unfortunately, I played both the multiplayer beta and the demo and you just got not enough units. It feels more like Diablo than like an RTS. Your average army in GCI was about 12 tanks (in 4 units. There where fixed units) and equal numbers of artillery and a bunch of infantry with air defense and perhaps air units thrown in for good measure.
In WiC, at least in the multiplayer games I played, a major army consists of 4 tanks and 2 support vehicles.
Even worse, in multiplayer teamwork is so important that it trumps *everything* else. It hardly matters if you attack the opponents tanks with your tanks from the front or the back and in which formation. Your tanks need an eternity to wipe out the enemy. All the while helicopters kill tanks instantly.
Similar problem for the other roles. The paper rock scissors between the roles is just so strong that anything besides staying with the right guy on your team doesn't matter. Perhaps it's different for competitive play at the highest level where both sides are equally good at teamwork. But it ruins casual games.
|
| 7. |
maniac half |
Mar 27, 2008, 11:15 |
Cheese |
|
|
yes i agree with you i own the game and while i thought I would like it alot, i miss the buildup phase and also i just cant get into the game as much as the graphics are nice and multiplay is great i just dont like this title too much.
Im more into Universe at War.
This message was edited at Mar 27, 11:16. |
| 6. |
No subject |
Mar 27, 2008, 10:11 |
loomy |
|
|
wic fucking owns, and that is all I have to say about that
|
| 4. |
At last! |
Mar 27, 2008, 09:45 |
Wade |
|
|
I can now crush the imperialist yellow dog capitalist swine Americans under the might of my brave noble glorious socialist Soviet tank treads!
|
| 3. |
Re: No subject |
Mar 27, 2008, 09:25 |
manic half |
|
|
I have determined that I do not like base building and resource gathering rts. I do like world in conflict because it has no base building and resource gathering. maybe thats whats stopping me? i enjoy base building and what not.
|
| 2. |
No subject |
Mar 27, 2008, 09:23 |
manic half |
|
|
i still dont own this game. but i played the beta way back and had lots of fun with it.
i have no idea what is stopping me from purchasing it, i just havnt had the urge
|
| 1. |
No subject |
Mar 27, 2008, 09:23 |
Overon |
|
|
I have determined that I do not like base building and resource gathering rts. I do like world in conflict because it has no base building and resource gathering. It's more of a RTT (real time tactical) game than it is a traditional RTS.
|
19 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Prev [ 1 ] Next >
|
News script copyright © 1999-2008 James "furn" Furness & Blue's News.
