Quote:
"They (The Confederacy) are unique in their ability to use their animal nurseries to build predators, each with a specialized function. The nexu are effective against workers, the reek are effective against buildings (they're basically fast, cheap units), and the acklay are the equivalent of strike mechs, effective against enemy troopers. However, unlike the neutral predators in Galactic Battlegrounds, the Confederacy's predators are instantly identified by other civilizations as enemy units and attacked accordingly. There's no opportunity to use them as stealth units. Instead, they serve only as relatively cheap mid- to late-game units."-Gamespot
How do you expect to be stealthy with a 2-ton, lumbering, obviously carnivorous beast walking around in enemy territory? :D I mean really! If a huge thing like that came walking into your city, would you just ignore it? NO! You would shoot the hell out of it!
:fett:
Lets all go and post all 10 reviews so it counter balances the horribly biased review
IMHO That review was...kind
I think they were just as frustrated as us. The last paragraph was about the attack-move option that like they said would really sproose up the game a bit. I'm not talking about attack while moving it's attack- move option that is so prevelant in games like SC.
I think they are still working on it for the next patch though. We sahll see.
Well, I haven't played the X-Pack yet (5 days to go:( ) so I can't judge for myself.
Originally posted by Ten-Forward
IMHO That review was...kind
I have to admit that I feel slightly short changed from this expansion pack. Like the review says, there isn't enough notable improvements in the gameplay. Small bonuses to civs just aren't enough. I do like the addition of the air cruiser and mobile power units, but that doesn't constitute a decent upgrade from the original game. I wouldn't have minded if they added some more civs, but the two they have added annoy me. The Republic pretty much make the Rebels a pointless civ to play, whilst the Confederacy come across like a poor mans Galactic Empire.
My main criticism is that Lucasarts seem to have gone for Star Wars style over substance, crappy units like the a-wing, Genosian Warrior, predators and Jedi Starfighter are all a waste of anyones time, unless you have a burning ambition to command the units from the films.
I had started to get bored of the game a little while after the xp was announced, but knowing an xp was just around the corner kept my motivation for playing going. With this dissapointing addtion I can't see myself giving the game too much more of my time. :(
I'm actually starting to re-invest in GB because of it.
The review is fair though, when you compare it to xpacks like that of Age Of Kings: The Conquerors.
It was probablly written by some biased guy who doesn't even like Starwars or RTS games. He probablly writes articles for many other different Genres without truely having an appreciation for RTS games, even good RTS games. This review is coming from a guy who thinks an acklay is the equivalent of a Strike mech! He really lost his credibility when he started suggesting that these controllable preditors should be stealth! The author doesn't know his rear end from a pile of Bantha crap. He probablly judged the unit / technology changes off the campaigns alone. The campaign computer AI doesn't play half as hard as it does in a RM game. The campaigns are set up to challenge you but not totally try to wipe you out of the game. It's setup to give you a chance.
"Like the review says, there isn't enough notable improvements in the gameplay."
If you spend enough time in RM against the comp you will notice a lot of different improvements. For example: Play a (1v1, hard, 250 pop) with a Naboo AI for example. In regular GB Naboo was just a pushover. Well now it has beat me 3 times in a row. I noticed that Naboo can totally shut down Wookies, Gungans, and Rebels. Naboo doesn't suck now. They can manage to kick your butt in a hurry especially with all the nova and holocrom bonuses. Don't bother with "hardest" mode, because I think the comp still cheats and gets extra resouces and a few upgrades. "Hard" mode doesn't get any advantage other then how it plays.
I liked this x-pack. I don't know what all the complaining is about. Most of the complaining about the AI is about changes that the engine will not allow without making an entirely different game. It isn't like GB burnt a hole in my pocket anyways. Computer and game prices are lower then ever before. I remember forking over 60-80 bucks for Super Nintendo games. Heck the PS2 set me back over 300 bucks. What did GB: CC cost? 32 bucks with tax. Pretty cheap to me, or maybe its just me.
On that note, I will be skiping the expansion.. Not enough players out there :o.
Originally posted by Paragon_Leon
I'm actually starting to re-invest in GB because of it.
The review is fair though, when you compare it to xpacks like that of Age Of Kings: The Conquerors.
Spot on. The Conquerors xp is what I'm using as the benchmark, and the Clone Campaigns falls well short of it.
Polaris, try to understand that not everyone shares your opinion.
just go to that link and rieview this game!
make it a 10 and do this every day and the score wil go up!