[Ashrak]

Remember the NES? 

Gameplay trumps everything, then audio, then story, then graphics.

you obviously have a ****ty PC which can barely run FS2 (stock)

[Colonol Dekker]

Horses for courses people. Either you like it or you don't, please don't start a megargument over this. (As much joy as i would take from reading it aside) it's just not worth the bruised keyboard fingers.

[fener]

One word:

SOTS...it beats every other game like that. SOASE can't touch it. Nuff said!

I have to agree with that, the really well done part of SOASE is the RTS component, for everything else SOTS does it better.
Only complaint with both the games would be that they are a bit light in the diplomacy features.

[Polpolion]

One word:

SOTS...it beats every other game like that. SOASE can't touch it. Nuff said!

I have to agree with that, the really well done part of SOASE is the RTS component, for everything else SOTS does it better.
Only complaint with both the games would be that they are a bit light in the diplomacy features.

IMHO the only good part of SOTS was the RTS parts. Everything else was dull and stupid. Which is why I went and played HW2 PDS instead.

[BloodEagle]

[threadjack]

[...]

Gameplay trumps everything, then audio, then story, then graphics.

you obviously have a ****ty PC which can barely run FS2 (stock)

I've neither owned, nor seen a computer that was made out of manure. Thank you for the image, however. Plus, I can run the Crysis demo at medium settings with no problems.


As for my statement....

BioShock:
Poor gameplay.
Good audio.
Story that rivals the later books in the Harry Potter series (not a good thing).
Good graphics.

Ergo, mediocre.

Cave Story:
Excellent gameplay.
Excellent audio.
Excellent storyline.
Average (yet fitting) graphics.

Ergo, superb.

[/threadjack]
-------------------------------------------

As for SoaSE.... If it's anything like GalCiv: II, then I'll probably like it.

[Colonol Dekker]

Sorry to divert from topic title. But i agree with bioshock statement. After what i paid i expected a longer game with more freedom. "would ye kindly not slap a mediocre boss on the end" the endings were pants too.

[TrashMan]

IMHO the only good part of SOTS was the RTS parts. Everything else was dull and stupid. Which is why I went and played HW2 PDS instead.

HERESY!!!!! BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURRRRRRRRRRRRN!

*sets thesizzler on fire with a flamethrower*


@fenar - new expansion should improve diplomacy..and other things too.

[Mefustae]

I was sort of fence-sitting on whether to pick this game up. That is, until I saw a could of very cool mods already in development.

Namely, alien invasion Turtledove-style in Dawn of Victory. I am totally picking SOASE, now.

[starbug]

Ok i have been playing this game for afew days i am have to say i am hooked at the moment i am playing one of the random huge maps, over a 100 planets to fight over and i have been playing this same level since i got it. Yes it does have a few faults i.e ships don't move while in combat unless and the pirates are really annoying! While it doesn't have the singleplayer story driven campaign it does have a sandbox singleplayer which i like, where you can do what you want. As for the graphics i don't have a problem i have seen a lot worse. As Mefustae says there a few really good mods in production ie Dawn of Victory, BattleFleet Gothic and some people are trying to get a FS2 mod together. So Overall i like it, i think it is a good buy for £20.

[BloodEagle]

The demo is out.

[Colonol Dekker]

Saw a gameplay vid on a pcgamer dvd and it looks pretty dull. The map zoom is right out of supreme commander which is cool. But the gameplay looks slow and non frenetic to draw me. *cough bad graphics too cough* Homeworld 2 looks deep though, i just don't dig micro management that much, but if you do (generic thread reader) by all means give it a go

[BloodEagle]

The graphics are fine, but the game suffers from chronic research-itis.