Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - GuJiaXian

Pages: 1 [2] 3
16
Role-Playing Games / Re: Hackmaster
« on: August 30, 2002, 03:16:33 AM »
Saint Ehlers is pretty interested in Hackmaster as well.  I flipped through one or two of his books, and the whole thing seems like a massive joke.  It's so needlessly complex, and he indicated that all 9 (nine!) core books are really required to play.  Sheesh!

17
Video Games / Re: Warcraft III
« on: August 29, 2002, 07:44:44 PM »
Okay, having posted a fair amount concerning this game, I have to disagree with the review posted on the TWG site.  The game is NOTHING NEW.  New graphics, yes, but the gameplay is the same as all the older Warcraft titles.

Heroes do keep their levels from level to level, but all heores become inconsequential once the current campaign is done.  For example: once the Human campaign is over, Arthus (the paladin dude) ceases to exist.  He becomes a deathknight or something in the Undead campaign, but he starts at level 1 again (even if he was a level 10 paladin).  Blah.

As for the graphics themselves, the cut scenes are incredible.  Despite anything else bad I say about the game, I loved the cutscenes.  Blizzard always does a great job with those.  The in-game graphics are nothing special...a bit dated and angular.  They work for the scope of this game, but they're nothing special.

Like I've said a million times, the tech tree/unit advancement is nothing new.  Build a lumber mill to be able to upgrade your town hall to build the next building...blah.  By your little ranking system, it's Red Alert style (20 minutes or less and you've got everything).

I was VERY disappointed by the final level.  You have to hold off this "huge" invasion force for 45 minutes (real time).  I had destroyed the enemy base within the first 15 minutes, and then literally had to sit and idle for 30 minutes before I could beat the game and see the final cutscene.

Nothing special.  Bad game?  No.  Great game?  No.

18
CCGs / Re: Rumors
« on: August 28, 2002, 05:52:01 PM »
Exactly.  I guess it tightens up rules clarifications and the length of text on the cards.  I'm glad they're bringing back some of the older mechanics...I'd personally like to see a new resurgance of Banding, myself.

19
CCGs / Re: Rumors
« on: August 28, 2002, 03:34:52 PM »
Cycling was a fun, if somewhat boring, ability.  The tribal ability sounds interesting: a million other cards already have the ability; sounds like they've just finally given it a name.

20
Everything Else / Re: Cool stuff found on the Internet (Take 2)
« on: August 27, 2002, 11:18:26 PM »
True that.

21
Movies and TV / Re: T... t two towers....
« on: August 26, 2002, 07:41:14 PM »
I agree: anyone expecting a scene-for-scene translation of the novels has already been disappointed by the first film.  They'd be boring, anyway.

22
Movies and TV / Re: T... t two towers....
« on: August 26, 2002, 05:53:54 PM »
I agree.  It'll be a good movie.

23
Everything Else / Re: Music Industry Wows
« on: August 22, 2002, 02:10:34 PM »
Touchy subject...careful.

24
Video Games / Re: Warcraft III
« on: August 21, 2002, 06:46:18 PM »
Yuck, see, I don't enjoy that at all.  Real jobs are hard enough, with scraping together cash to pay for bills.  I don't need to emulate it in my entertainment!  That's why I stopped playing the Sims: why should I spend my free time teaching a computer sprite to use the toilet (and not the kitchen floor) when I have to urinate in real life?  Yay, fun.  "Cool!  My dude in the Sims finally used the microwave without starting a fire!"

25
Video Games / Re: Warcraft III
« on: August 21, 2002, 04:07:28 AM »
And sold them for a paltry 1/25th gp, I'll bet.  Low levels in MMORPGs are just dumb. I spent most of my time in Ultima Online slaughtering sheep and carding their wool to sell.  Yay.  *yawn*

26
Video Games / Re: Warcraft III
« on: August 20, 2002, 09:05:02 PM »
I dunno, Fellfrosch...I really enjoyed killing 6 THOUSAND skeletons to level up to second level in Everquest.  What about picking up all of those spider eyelashes and bat guano bits to sell for 1/25 gp?  I mean, you can't beat tried-and-true gameplay like that.

27
Video Games / Re: Warcraft III
« on: August 20, 2002, 03:14:36 PM »
I still probably won't get it.  I've never been big on online role-playing.  Or online games much at all, for that matter.

28
Video Games / Re: Warcraft III
« on: August 20, 2002, 02:55:19 PM »
Oh, I know what the $10 goes toward.  Still, I played a month or two of Everquest and hated the surcharge.  Then again, I hated Everquest, too...at Software Etc. we called it Evercrack, because every time a new expansion came out, all the junkies were in dishing out money to get their next hit.

As for innovation, I expected something new in the gameplay.  Other than a graphical facelift and the heroes (and their "rpg"-ish qualities), I just didn't see enough to really catch my eye.  Oh, well.

And yes, I am *much* more into rpgs than rts titles.

29
Video Games / Re: Warcraft III
« on: August 20, 2002, 02:12:56 PM »
Fellfroch: an expansion is assumed with Blizzard titles.  The plot also leaves huge threads open for an expansion.

30
Video Games / Re: Warcraft III
« on: August 20, 2002, 02:12:00 PM »
Buy the expansion?  Probably not.  The plot was typical, and while WC3 is NOT a bad game, nor even just a mediocre one, it just didn't really catch my attention (yes, despite the fact that I played through the whole game).  An expansion seems like it would just end up re-hashing the same thing over and over.

Diablo II was radically different than Diablo.  I was working at a Software Etc. when Diablo II came out, and so got an excellent view of how the public recieved it.  It was recieved VERY badly, initially (despite incredible sales figures).  The fact that you couldn't save and the unfamiliar gameplay caught many people unawares.  They wanted Diablo verbatim with a graphic facelift.  That's all Warcraft III is: Warcraft II with a facelift.  There's no new innovation.

World of Warcraft?  I'd be lying if I said that it didn't intrigue me--I'd love to play an ogre mage and cast Bloodlust on myself to make that funny growling noise.  I've thought all along that WC3 was nothing but an "event" to prep people for playing WoW.  Look at it this way: the world introduced in WC1 and WC2 had two races: very boring for a MMORPG (Everquest has 8 or so races).  WC3 got everyone pumped with the Warcraft world and concept (after about a 6 year hiatus).  It also introduced two new "races": the Undead and the Night Elves.  can you see how Blizzard is using WC3 as a medium to make WoW work?

In addition to all this, I have a bone to pick with MMORPGs.  Why should I pay $50 to get a game and then an additional $10 or so every month for the "privilege" of continuing to play the game?  I'm not big on online gaming at all.  In fact, i was one of the beta testers for Warcraft 3.  The beta was online only, and I was sick and tired of lag and pimply 12-year-olds grunt rushing me.

Pages: 1 [2] 3