Terrapin Posted December 22, 2002 Share Posted December 22, 2002 But loses to... Medieval: Total War. If it's anything like the Oscars, it's enough to just be nominated! http://gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/bestof2002/pc27.htmlp Hey, BTS can be comforted that Gamespot, like the Oscars, makes weird final decisions from the nominees. Witness Morrowind being beaten out by Neverwinter Nights for RPG GOTY. It's like Star Wars Episode II beating out LOTR: The Two Towers for best fantasy action pic. Anyways, there's a reader vote available, so if you want to vote for CMBB, vote here: http://gamespot.com/gamespot/features/all/bestof2002/readers.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firefly Posted December 22, 2002 Share Posted December 22, 2002 Wong forum for the argument, I know, but I'd say NWN was better than Morrowind . You're right though, like the Oscars, being nominated for these awards is an achievement in itself, it means that people who may not be aware of the games may take a look at the demo at least. Congrats to BFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotreDame89 Posted December 22, 2002 Share Posted December 22, 2002 Well, CMBB still has another shot for strategy game of the year at GameSpy: http://www.gamespy.com/goty2002/ Results are being announced on Dec 24th. It certainly received my vote! Ben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Posted December 22, 2002 Share Posted December 22, 2002 You mean Medieval: Total Bore? Nice enough concept when STW came out, still a good game I suppose, but they seem to have changed so little that I had I known that there was so little difference over STW I wouldn't have bought it. Or, more likely, had I known MTW was coming out I'd have waited a couple of years and got that instead of STW. [ December 22, 2002, 12:26 PM: Message edited by: Apache ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stacheldraht Posted December 22, 2002 Share Posted December 22, 2002 Thanks for the heads-up, Terrapin. Went and put in my votes for CMBB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ichadwick Posted December 22, 2002 Share Posted December 22, 2002 Okay, sorry in advance, this might veer off topic a hair... MTW: an excellent RT wargame but really best as a multi-player online battle game. Simply too easy to beat the AI after a few sessions, and the strategic level game was full of oddities and holes (why can't a king snatch an enemy's diplomat or priest and skin them alive?). But very challenging to defeat a real person... catapults and mangonels can be a lot of fun! However, not really much about strategy: more about opportunity and tactics. Morrowind: good game but confused and easy to befuddle. I went around doing all the things in the wrong order and beat the Big Guy... but the game couldn't recognize that I had won because I didn't follow the programmed sequence of events. So it got locked in limbo and I quit. A little too much of the "go-there-get-this-come-back" missions required to get to the next level. Nice idea, though. Ghost Recon: simply one of the best FPS games around for solo and multiplayer. A game that demands thinking and planning, not just shooting. But plenty of that, too! Unfortunately it lacked a proper or complete vehicle component. CMBB isn't really in this league. It's better - but also completely different. It can't be stacked up against FPS or RTS games because they have vastly different goals and results. The sheer volume of data CMBB manipulates makes it stand alone. The historical accuracy makes it a rarity. I could go on, but I'm preaching to the converted. Just my $0.02 worth (in Canadian funds, I might add!). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spook Posted December 22, 2002 Share Posted December 22, 2002 It's rather odd as that Medieval: Total War would take the "strategy game" category over "Warcraft III," when the latter rated overall better (9.3) in the GS rankings than MTW (8.7). A bit more odd is that Warcraft III then is declared by GS as the "clear winner above all others" for its bigger "Game of The Year" category. Hmmmm. I suppose it COULD be argued as that MTW rated better, according to GS, strictly in the "strategy" category and what all goes to define that rating class. Still, it's not althogether what I would expect. As to CMBB, GS should now recognize as that wargaming (or historical wargaming as to placate the grogs) has experienced a recent rebound with a good number of solid titles just this last year: CMBB, AA, Uncommon Valor, new PzC sequels, to name but a few. It thus seems appropriate that a "Wargame" category should apply for the next awards session. [ December 22, 2002, 01:32 PM: Message edited by: Spook ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murpes Posted December 22, 2002 Share Posted December 22, 2002 Originally posted by Firefly: Wong forum for the argument, I know, but I'd say NWN was better than Morrowind . And neither of them are as good a Arx Fatalis! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ichadwick Posted December 24, 2002 Share Posted December 24, 2002 Gamespy just did the same: MTW got the nod, CMBB got the runner up as strategy game of the year (although they were complimentary in their comments, sort of like Bill C saying Monica also took good notes). Wonder if it has anything to do with who's a bigger advertiser? Nah, that would be too cynical... wouldn't it? Maybe if CMBB came with flaming car crashes, bloody graphics and women in bikinis, it would have inched up (note subtle attempt at humour) the ladder to first place instead. Hey, BTS: consider this in your next game, eh? Forget the panzers: Give them babes! Sorry. Had to let it out. I'll take my medication now, nurse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts