Johannes
Arcane
Kinda want to 
...
But no point really, I'll wait for a while first. Maybe.
...
But no point really, I'll wait for a while first. Maybe.
-
Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.
"This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.
Grey Goo - Now wobbling on your Hard Drive
- Thread starter Wirdschowerdn
- Start date
if only it had a demo 
I'll let you guinea pigs the Kodex Konsensus decide for me.
I be one of them guinea pigs!
80s Stallone
Arcane
$49.99
Awesome!
Awesome!
$49.99
Awesome!
Where do you get this from?
Steam page still isn't showing up a price, and retail at Amazon costs less. http://www.amazon.de/Grey-Goo-Limit...=UTF8&qid=1421479978&sr=8-1&keywords=grey+goo
it is a bit strange that the retail costs more than the limited ed steel box.
http://waywardstrategist.com/2015/01/14/my-thoughts-about-grey-goo/
Comprehensive preview of someone who actually knows something about Real-time strategy games...
Sounds like a 75%er.
Better wait for AoA for dat real C&C revival....or not.
Comprehensive preview of someone who actually knows something about Real-time strategy games...
Sounds like a 75%er.
Better wait for AoA for dat real C&C revival....or not.
Does not sound bad.
Universe At War was also by no means perfect (in fact, it had design issues a 10 year old could have avoided....*), but it was fun.
If the same is true for Grey Goo (minus the glaring design issues), I'll get my money's worth.
* Just to name some...
Universe At War was also by no means perfect (in fact, it had design issues a 10 year old could have avoided....*), but it was fun.
If the same is true for Grey Goo (minus the glaring design issues), I'll get my money's worth.
* Just to name some...
- Tutorial was played with a faction (humans) that were not even a playable faction. WTF?
- Descriptions of units, weapons, etc. were written in in-game lore, but had no easily decipherable information about what something is good/bad against. Utterly confusing.
- The cut-scenes looked worse than the actual game. Not really game design but... Lol.
- The interface was rather "meh". As in this game, the three factions were radically different, but only one had a really working UI (the one with the classic base building). I really hope this time, all factions have a functional UI.
Last edited:
CthuluIsSpy
Arcane
I actually liked that the tutorial was with a non-playable faction. A tutorial should just teach the basic mechanics; leave the more interesting stuff to the actual campaigns.
fizzelopeguss
Arcane
Australian.
http://www.actofaggression-game.com/
eugen system is 200% less likely to revive C&C than the people that actually did C&C, so you have to read that sentence as the usual morgothian bullshit.
Sorry raw dude, but Petroglyph has never grown out of mediocracy. Grey Goo looks more like Avatar: The RTS, and with only 5 missions per faction (of whom the Goo are totally uninteresting) they'll have a hard time selling this to me.
Empire at War was way above mediocre. Its space battles are some of the best RTS gameplay I've seen, and they blow stuff like Homeworld completely out of the water. Just a shame that the land battles are so terrible.
Dayyālu
Arcane
Coff *Heresy* coff
Empire at War was a good game. Good , not great or anything. Empire at War, however, had not "Space Battles", they had reskinned stock RTS battles in space (You cannot say that Starcraft has true "Space Battles" even if you get a bunch of Battlecruisers in a Space Tileset). That said, without degenerating in trolling, why they are better? Homeworld has a variety of strategies and tactics (Capital-Ship centric, Fighter-class centric) Z-axis, excellent campaign, great designs. Empire at War has.... nice factions? Star Destroyers spamming Tie-Fighters? Ahh, yes, it had subsystems!
They are pretty nice, but they have nothing on Homeworld. There is a sad reason why Empire at War is mostly forgotten. Plus the baseline campaign was kind of terrible. And Land Battles are.... well, spam TIE tanks and run over infantry, rush and rush and rush or get rushed by neverending Indie infantry. *tactics*
About Universe at War, well, I must say that the only good thing was the soundtrack. It was not *bad* per se, only it felt somewhat derivative despite some very good ideas in some fields. Plus Games for Windows Live pretty much killed it. Yet, it gave me remakes of some classical C&C themes...
Grey Goo is interesting, but I still have this never ending impression that they are still trying to sell the same game again and again. They can place all the soul and design they want, but why I should play this instead of OpenRA or good old RA 2?
Last edited:
80s Stallone
Arcane
Act of Aggresion looks boring, setting-wise.
The difference is that Empire at War had different units for space and different units for land, as opposed to Starcraft where you could bombard zealots with battlecruisers. Plus, the dynamics and shit of space combat were completely different than land - auxiliary reinforcements limited by space station level (as opposed to land battles' constant spamming out of units from buildings), star destroyers with limited fighter payloads, much more robust rock-paper-scissors mechanics and priority-setting for blowing up hotspots on big ships.
EaW has all of them and then some more.
Which isn't used for anything major except looking cool.
YMMV. I personally found it to be mind-numbingly boring in how easy and repetitive it was.
Nice factions that are also very diverse and asymmetrical, and which genuinely play differently. And as previously mentioned, it has p. much all the good parts of Homeworld's gameplay, along with some insanely cool missions in the singleplayer campaigns, some neat global management (which is particularly perceptible in the rebel campaign where you have to scrounge up every penny at the start), intense space battles that you can win even against overwhelming odds if you are a tactical genius, and more. And then there's the Forces of Corruption expansion which is a very good extension of the OC that also adds a new faction, some new mechanics and even fixes the land battles by not making generic skirmishes so prevalent, and instead giving you more actual missions.
All star destroyers have a limited amount of tie bombers and tie fighters that they can churn out, and you might find yourself in a p. bad situation if you let all of them get blown up. It's another layer of management that can sometimes be tuff, particularly during the early game when you only have acclamators (that carry like 2 squadrons of fighters and 1 squadron of bummers, iirc) or when you eat an unlucky salvo of a rocket corvette that can wipe out your entire fighter base outright.
Wasn't Act Of Aggression released years ago and failed miserably with its C&C style cutscenes?
Edit:
No wait, that was Act Of War, but by the same developer.
Edit:
No wait, that was Act Of War, but by the same developer.
Dayyālu
Arcane
Given. Yet, still nothing but a reskin of a 2d terrain based RTS if we are talking about mechanics. As I said, the only peculiar thing that cames to mind is the subsystem mechanics, that HW2 tried also to introduce. But we do not speak of HW2.
"He is intelligent, but not experienced. His pattern indicates two-dimensional thinking." Z-axis gives a great amount of possible routes, and in comparison Empire at War's space maps are...very small. Limited thinking is not the game's own fault, even if I admit that the campaign can be beaten by playing traditionally.
As you said, YMMV. EaT campaigns had...problems, that made them not much fun. Mostly in land maps and mechanics (unggghhhh neutral infantry). HW campaigns, even if you disregard the "storyfag" side - far superior to the poor mangled SW lore. *ignoring HW2 out of mercy*
"And as previously mentioned"? There are, for example, formations in EaW? You are comparing a stock 2d with 3d graphics RTS (an adequate one, I'll admit) with a full 3d RTS focused on space combat. Apples and oranges. About "insanely cool missions", I give that to the expansion (one of the best that I've ever played. Cataclysm is still better though!), but you'll have to admit that the baseline campaign was nothing short of atrocious rush spamming in cramped maps, bar some nice setpiece battles. Like the Masari campaign of UaW, they dropped the ball on that one. Sadly.
Yep, I do remember. Still simplicistic compared to fuel/ repairs and carrier tactics in HW. Again, I don't even understand why you are comparing the two of them: they are completely different, as Empire at War, even in space battles is nothing bar a 2d RTS, lacking logistics, formations and proper resource management. As a C&C style game, it is nice, and it would be probably a good way to approach a new title (the "remaking the same game" problem mentioned above). After thinking it about a while, they are simply not comparable in any way. But I would buy a new game that built on the space battles of EaW with some cool lore and soundtrack.
80s Stallone
Arcane
Not related to this game but let me ask this question here:
Is there a fix for Emperor: Battle For Dune which modifies the controls in the way that when I click on the mini-map with units selected they do not automatically march to this point but the main screen jumps to the area (like it is when no unit selected)?
Is there a fix for Emperor: Battle For Dune which modifies the controls in the way that when I click on the mini-map with units selected they do not automatically march to this point but the main screen jumps to the area (like it is when no unit selected)?
Someone is still playing Battle For Dune? 
80s Stallone
Arcane
Only today and only until friday!
Perhaps. But considering Eugen's track record, a C&C successor by them is even more unlikely.
The HP-as-resource has not been done before to my knowledge. The G is actually very interesting from a game play perspective and what I am looking forward to the most.
Me, too.
Just really hoping that the interface is not as bad as it was for the invaders in UaW. That walker+unit management was horrible.
Then again, I am a dirty turtle, so I guess it is humans for me
Just really hoping that the interface is not as bad as it was for the invaders in UaW. That walker+unit management was horrible.
Then again, I am a dirty turtle, so I guess it is humans for me
As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.