/v/ - Video Games

I played this a long time ago, but I'm sorry to say I've never played the sequel. I was also way too timid in this game with just slowly advancing while allowing my artillery to chip away at the enemy. Stuff like bombers, and such seemed too vulnerable, and expensive.

>>15975293

I also used that style of play too. Much more so when forced to take enemy bases without a weakpoint power site to take down for shutting off enemy turrets. I think the game basically employs it as the go to tactic since in those missions, you're also given artillery units. It gets pretty messy in the later part of the second half of the game where enemy artillery emplacements AND mobile enemy artillery starts getting in your way.

I played the demo for the second game a long time ago, as I remember it was better than the first

>>15975130

Ground Control was a real treat to play – I wish some of its mechanics like directional armor, elevation, shadows etc. made it into other strategy games.

GC2 felt nothing like the first game, I couldn't get into it after finishing GC1.

The sequel did away with the squad-based gameplay and unit customization and played like a cookie-cutter RTS for the most part.

You get to play none of the old factions and you gotta mod the game just to play the enemy faction with walkers and hoverdynes.

I've yet to finish GC1's expansion. The expansion's campaign is good enough for the first few Crayven missions, but the overall quality plummets afterwards.

The story gets really convoluted and the pacing is just horrible – the expansion feels like none of the original devs and writers had any hand in making it.

The missions are heavily scripted to the point where the enemy may airdrop its entire army on top of you if you step out of line slightly.

Not to mention the overuse of certain enemy types (like artillery turrets/units and attack aerodynes).

The only real upside to the expansion is the unit additions for Crayven and the Order.

It's nice having the Phoenix mercs as a third faction, but they're weirdly imbalanced.

Phoenix vehicles accelerate really slow, making light vehicles a bad investment and heavy vehicles more unwieldy than their counterparts.

Somehow, the Phoenix snipers can one-shot aerodynes and wreck artillery and drone carriers in a few shots.

>>15975293

I'd argue that bombers are fine for the damage they can cause, as long as they're covered by point-defense and other aerodynes.

I always bring scout aerodynes to pinpoint enemy AA, artillery and aerodynes; the deployable radar that basic infantry have is also useful in central areas or near an enemy base.

>>15975130

The sequel isn't as good and is a more traditonal RTS. Really loved the first one though.

remember playing both back in the day, imo story in 2 was better (from what I remember, don't think it was that much worse than 1).

world in conflict is the spiritual sequel if wanna give that a try.

Dont play it. You will be sad about how the golden age of videogames is dead and Western vidya is soulless.

It has one of the best menu themes ever, but that's about it. It's quite literally nothing like the original.

Then there's of course the expansion to the original, Dark Conspiracy, but I don't think that was as high quality either. At least it's still in the same engine and has the same spirit.

I'd say try the expansion, but pass on the sequel.

>>15976559

That's a shame to hear both Dark Conspiracy and GC2 didn't surpass or, at the very least, hold up as much as the original in certain aspects. Still, I'll give the expansion a go and probably GC2 too at a later point. I had to take significantly longer periods of time completing missions just for eliminating hidden artillery emplacements one by one.

There was one fun, cheesy tactic I used in a mission as the Crayven Corporation where I'd send my scout terradynes to bait out the artillery units since it seemed they just auto attacked anything that came in range first and they wouldn't stop firing on that very same unit of scouts even if you sent in your other units until those scouts went out of range. There wasn't any variation or sort of pattern in AI artillery fire either so I could just bait enemy artillery with scouts then bring in my own artillery to counterattack them easily.

>>15976850

I actually have World in Conflict installed somewhere. I'll go look around for that too.

>>15977282

you mad cuz your shit aint kawaii?

>>15979125

I apologize for posting again right after another, but your post slipped under my nose.

That being said, GC1's main menu theme holds up pretty well too. The techno in the middle part feels like biting into the jelly part of a pastry.

>>15975130

Good one. I remember thinking RT tactics was on its way to becoming a strong alternative to RTS back when this came out. Homeworld was still blowing everyone's minds, Myth got a great sequel and all Warhammer PC games up to that point were hard as fuck formation based RTT. Exciting times, but it all fizzled out just as the golden age was around the corner.

>>15977282

I don't get RPG fans. There are definitely stand out RPGs that are great fun, but RPG fans have really low standards and will play any garbage RPG game and think it's a masterpiece. Maybe they're just addicted to grinding and bad mechanics.

>>15979359

Most RPG fans are escapists who'll put up with any bullshit so far as the game is long enough and doesn't introduce lines of thought that bring them out of their bubble bath. Bloated lore, meandering stories and obtuse stat systems are actually desirable to those people, since when you layer enough of these things there's nothing real left to occupy their minds. You see the same shit in fantasy with all those faggots obsessing over Game of Thrones trivia.

>>15979185

I prefer the first track