Hubert Cater Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Just caught this preview and thought it might interest some of you http://www.monkeyreview.com/news/index.php?action=full&ID=101&page=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Very nice writeup. Now, if ENVY was not one of the seven deadly sins, then another comment might be appropriate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloid Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Overall, a good write-up! I guess the full version is a little overwhelming? Hmmm... wouldn't know about that, would I? Aloid [ July 10, 2002, 12:51 PM: Message edited by: Aloid ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barticus Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Very nice review, looks good for Hubert. I do have a question, though, the reviewer refers to "Great work from the guys at Fury Software", I thought Hubert WAS Fury Software, or am I wrong? Secondly, he didn't once refer to the technology research aspects of the game which, for me, is a very important part of the game. In any case, eagerly awaiting release date with plastic in hand. B Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck_para Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 I thought the write up was OK, but not a rousing endorsement. If I had not played the Demo I might have shyed away. At least he admitted it is not his usual type of game. I think people who like turn based strategy games will understand what he is talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rediroc Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 The very fact that the reviewer states that this is a "overly complicated game" shows that he is not a strategy buff. Apparently the updated demo/game is finished, so where is that announcement we were promised? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWinterbottom Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 "I was instantly engulfed by the many different enemy vehicles, troops, and aircraft" Errhmmmm.... heh... oh my. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted July 10, 2002 Author Share Posted July 10, 2002 I thought Hubert WAS Fury Software, or am I wrong? Officially yes, but I think it's safe to think that this also includes the great work from the Beta Boys Hubert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Straha Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Though the review is very positive, as a review it is not good at all. On two pages, the reviewer virtually does not explain *anything*, and even rather tends to get things wrong (e.g."diplomacy"). Straha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Barticus Posted July 10, 2002 Share Posted July 10, 2002 Originally posted by Hubert Cater: Officially yes, but I think it's safe to think that this also includes the great work from the Beta Boys HubertAhh yes, once again I post before thinking a bit. My apologies to all the Beta Boys (lucky B*st*rds) Bart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Allen Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 Hey Guys, Sorry to hear some of you guys didn't like my preview, this is a new aspect of gaming for me and in fact was a genre that generally bored me. I will keep all your comments in mind when doing the final review and will be something we will attempt to put more effort into. This was not a game we were expecting and is in fact the first preview we have done. We love the feedback though and hope it has pleased some. Chris Allen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperTed Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 Okay, who let in the reviewer?! I thought Straha was on security duty. Sheesh! Chris, if you'd like to do PBEM, just let me know. It really makes a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Rock Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 I thought it was a fair review. The final sentence, "This game will interest anyone who enjoys strategies and doesn’t require instant Great work from the guys at Fury Software" seems to sum it up rather well. Comments such as "complicated" are relative - to anyone who grew up on board games such as DNO it's positively trivial. To someone who's usual gaming tastes run to Unreal or Warcraft the learning curve might be pretty steep. Things old hand WWII players take for granted aren't obvious to people who haven't played lots of WWII games, read up on the war, or both. I absolutely agree about the replayability. The first game I played France was still in the war in November - not my best-ever bit of virtual generalship. I fiddled a bit in Africa before Yougoslavia declared war on me and so I had to go in and pacify that - by which time the game ended. Second game I knocked the French out in four weeks. I had massive air driving the Brits back, I took Yugoslavia out in a two weeks, sank the British Med fleet, and was ready to go in Russia when I quit - all went swimmingly, except I never could take Egypt! Now if I could start from '39 I figure I could do some really wild things. (Hmmm... didn't plan for this to turn into an impromptu AAR.) As for it being on the "boring side", if you're into eye candy and fast paced action it isn't exciting. Wargamers may not like it, but the TOAWs and SCs don't have the same visual coolness and energy of a Freedom Force or Morrowind. Nature of the beast(s) - but then they don't have the same kind of analytical challenges wargames provide. So - given the reviewer's background I thought it was a good write-up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agua Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 Originally posted by Brian Rock: So - given the reviewer's background I thought it was a good write-up.Yes. I think it comes off as a very impressed reviewer given his lack of familiarity with such games. Congrats Hubert. With the Gamespot review of AA:RDoA and this one, BFC is racking up the props. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 This should put all future game reviews into a proper perspective. Chris, thanks for your writeup and checking in. So, like, if you're maybe done with your copy of the game for now, could you, you know, let us borrow it for a while? We can all pass it around in a plain brown envelope like a chain letter or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
von Murrin Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 ROTFL!!! Bill, you just made my morning! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 Did Chris get a different demo/Beta than the rest of us? The review states he played the Poland campaign. But all the screen shots are of France. BTW Chris, judging by the screenshots, you might have enjoyed it more if you weren't getting your head handed to you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
watchdog Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 Originally posted by Bill Macon: This should put all future game reviews into a proper perspective. This says alot about society as a whole these days. Maybe they'll get it right in Chess "2"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canuck_para Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 Originally posted by Bill Macon: This should put all future game reviews into a proper perspective. Chris, thanks for your writeup and checking in. So, like, if you're maybe done with your copy of the game for now, could you, you know, let us borrow it for a while? We can all pass it around in a plain brown envelope like a chain letter or something. Good one Bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Straha Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 Originally posted by Chris Allen: Hey Guys, Sorry to hear some of you guys didn't like my preview, this is a new aspect of gaming for me and in fact was a genre that generally bored me. I will keep all your comments in mind when doing the final review and will be something we will attempt to put more effort into. This was not a game we were expecting and is in fact the first preview we have done. We love the feedback though and hope it has pleased some. Chris AllenChris, in your preview you chose the approach of describing the situation how you got the game, and how it "felt" playing it. This is a good and tried way to begin a review, and it also has the effect that people will think "me too, me too!". It should not "span" the whole article, though. After some introduction, you should come around to provide info on how the game actually works so that both newbies and grognards get a better clue on whether the game might be to their liking. I'm glad to hear that there is a final review. I think that, there, you should mention things like - that there are two kinds of maps - what kind of ground/naval/air units there are (and on what level, e.g. there are no single "vehicles", but corps etc) - that the units all have different values for hard/soft/air/naval attack and defense (like in Panzer General) and that they can gain experience. - that there are Headquarters with historical generals (Rommel etc.) influencing the combat effectiveness of their troops - that supply is important (and taken into account) - that production capability depends on mpps provided by cities, ports, oil, mines and plundering - that there is strategic warfare (subs and strat bombers deducting production points). - that there is research allowing you to get e.g. jetfighters, and that the icons of the units change with higher techlevels - that there is a "historical", "neutral" and "random" option for diplomacy, and how the "random" option works. - that there is a fog of war option - that there is an "intelligence" screen giving you info about losses, production capabilities etc. - the needed system specs (which are amazingly low!) Of course, the actual level of detail in a review has to be adjusted to how much place you have at your disposal, but the main features should always be mentioned. Straha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valadictum Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 Hmmmm! New thread on Chess 2 required? :cool: I'd suggest a cross shaped board for a 4 player game in which you can attack the player opposite and to your right, but not the player to your left. It would be a world where no-one could trust no-one where you run from people you can't hit and they hunt you down, while you attack the others! Any other ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Valadictum Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 I can't believe I just posted that! Pleeese give us a clue on release date?? :confused: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Sterrett Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 Valadictum: It's been done. In fact, there are a number of variants of chess floating about, which vary from the sublime to the riduculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 As originally posted by Valadictum: I'd suggest a cross shaped board for a 4 player game in which you can attack the player opposite and to your right, but not the player to your left. There is a great board-game called Feudal that was brought out by Avalon Hill in 1967. It has those 4-way elements that you are looking for. The "chess-pieces" are emblematic of knights and bowmen, etc, though, no merry maids stranded in an ivy-overgrown tower. If you stumble across it in a garage sale or elsewhere I would grab it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted July 11, 2002 Share Posted July 11, 2002 As originally posted by Straha: - that there are two kinds of maps - what kind of ground/naval/air units there are (and on what level, e.g. there are no single "vehicles", but corps etc) - that the units all have different values for hard/soft/air/naval attack and defense (like in Panzer General) and that they can gain experience. - that there are Headquarters with historical generals (Rommel etc.) influencing the combat effectiveness of their troops - that supply is important (and taken into account) - that production capability depends on mpps provided by cities, ports, oil, mines and plundering - that there is strategic warfare (subs and strat bombers deducting production points). - that there is research allowing you to get e.g. jetfighters, and that the icons of the units change with higher techlevels - that there is a "historical", "neutral" and "random" option for diplomacy, and how the "random" option works. - that there is a fog of war option - that there is an "intelligence" screen giving you info about losses, production capabilities etc. - the needed system specs (which are amazingly low!) Great job Straha! That sounds like one helluva game, where and when can I get it! [ July 11, 2002, 02:37 PM: Message edited by: Immer Etwas ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts