Review ic-games hates H&S' guts

[Balor]

Btw, one small question:
Why do you think that this game is mediocre?
I've stated a few good points. Care to come up with some bad one?
Difficulty and music aside?

 

[Gwendo]

It's part, but not the whole part. Not even the most important one.

Yes, you can't please everyone. It seems H&S didn't please many people.

About opinions and respect, aparently you don't know what they mean, so no further debate is needed. Just go back to your hole and show us how hard you can take them, champ!

Edit: Didn't see your second post. As you said, you don't respect my opinion, so why should I care to answer you? I'm not trying to convince anyone, unlike you.

 

[Dhruin]

The wealth of options (I did play a rather intelligent character, though) in dialogue (well, having in mind that it's a mix of tactics and RPG, not pure RPG), very high nonlinearity - it's all very good points.

Like this? First map - absolutely no tactics or strategy other than running across the map. Fine. Map 2 throws me into combat with a bunch of enemies before I've had the chance to even investigate the interface - no problem. I pick up their weapons. Guy across the raod says they'd love to help against the upcoming onslaught but they have no weapons.

What about all these!!! I yell. Sorry, no dialogue options. Zippo.

Shoddy design, I'm sorry. Being difficult - or even offering some options - doesn't make it good in the face of other obtuse design. With another year's development it might be a great game but as it stands, it's rushed and often non-sensical.

 

[Naked_Lunch]

The point of the first mission is to get you acquainted with the interface and whatnot, so it's excusable that it lacks the depth of later missions. The gun thing is rather weird, but you can just drop all the guns and talk to him again and he'll pick them up. Whoop de doo, two little mistakes that don't even matter that much in the long run, which more than makes up for these oh so horrible errors.

Pray tell, did you play past the first 15 minutes of the game?

 

[Dhruin]

Yes, but not for more than a few hours. Everything I saw pointed to the same shortcomings throughout and I have better things to do. I understand if you think some elements are good enough to sustain the entire game - fine. But not liking doesn't make someone an RPG-hating pansy or whatever Balor thinks.

 

[Naked_Lunch]

Fair enough. You didn't like the game, I happened to love it. I'm not going to go all russian on you about it.

What were some of the "shortcomings" for you, though? Lack of direction? Inchoherent storyline (admittedly, it is for the first couple of missions or so)?

 

[Crichton]

Silent Storm is my favorite pseduo-modern skirmish tactical game ever and I still couldn't even stomach the demo of H&S (for all I know, the next half hour would have blown my mind). I didn't have a whole lot of hope going in since silent storm had an excellent combat engine, but the writing, setting, storyline and presentation were all pants. So having the same personel try their hands at something less combat-focused sounded like a very, very bad idea.

My comments on the demo are in the old H&S demo thread, I'll look it up,

http://www.rpgcodex.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=10341

The thing that should be driving the game is the environment, but the game is about as much of a "cold war RPG" as GI Joe is a recreation of the american invasion of granada. So it winds up being silent storm with the combat compromised (fewer manuvre units, less interesting situations, generally crummy level design) in exchange for more of the immersion-breaking garbage dialog from the last game. Ugh.