Demo Feedback - Okay, but not *great*

[Guest JediIgor]

The first thing I noticed is that it took me less to beat the demo then it did to download the demo. Not a good sign. Then there was the bug in tutorial 2 which made me restart the game.. but I digress. Should I start with the galactic or battle mode? Let's start with the galactic mode..

 

Galactic mode - I bet someone thought he/she was pretty smart thinking up of this. I mean, can you imagine it, a "persistent" way of storing troops! It's not like every other 4X game and even recent RTSes such as Rise of Nations have done it.. But at least in Rise of Nations you didn't lose the building once a battle had begun, and in other 4Xes you had much, much more choices.

 

They took some features from Rebellion, like having build slots per planet, or minor characters (which feel worthless because they get used up right away). The key thing here is the crazy-ass build speed. You know the Nebulon-B frigate which takes months or weeks to build in the EU? Builds within a couple of hours. I could understand if this was Kuat here (and even then, you'd have to have crew standing by), but on some random planet like Ryloth? I don't think so. Build speed is way too fast. People will just be able to spam units and send their entire fleet at the enemy..

 

Oh, did I say spam units? Why that's because the super-duper-fast hyperspace speed helps things too! Remember Episode 3 where it seemed like everyone could travel around the galaxy within a few minutes? That's the gist of it! With seconds, your fleet is at the bordering planet, and since time pauses during battles you could conquer a whole sector in 1 day if you really wanted to. Maybe if the build time wasn't so rapid, this would be acceptable, but it's just not Star Wars to me.

 

Then there are all the options.. you can build a few ground units, a few space units, a few buildings, and that's about it. No special forces, covert ops, diplomacy, popularity, etc. Where's the replayability in that? Turtling on one planet and then taking over the galaxy within 3 days doesn't seem very fun after you do it for 50 times in a row. Multiplayer will be different, if both players decide not to turtle you will get unit spam all the time with planets constantly switching sides because of the short travel time and galactic mode pausing.. oh, and auto resolve? Guess that didn't make the cut.

 

I mean why would you need auto-resolve? If there's 50 planets and the enemy can conquer 10 of your planets within a day (he has a fleet, you do too.. but 11 planets away).. that means that's 10 planets you have to sit on wasting your time defending them to a far superior force.

 

Which brings me to the next point, Space battles - Auto-generating TIE fighters is ridiculous. If they aren't buildable in galactic mode like X-Wings, they should at least respawn *between* battles, not *during* battles. The Empire's capital ships are already superior to the Rebellion's, and now they get to have more unit spam too? Superb!

 

I will be honest though, since there is only one real space battle, it's hard to judge the space battle much, though not having control over things like tractor beams, or being able to tweak the generators in favor of engines/shields/weapons may bite in the long run. Formations didn't seem to make the cut either (heck, even RTSes have those nowadays.. not just Total War style games).

 

More importantly are the ground battles. My first question is.. if the regular shield generators allow solid objects to pass through them, why can't a bomber fly in under the shield and blow it up? Didn't think of that one, did you? Hmm .

 

Let me go on, the battles are very reminiscent of an RTS. No morale, no troop experience, overly fast paced, etc. The first thing I noticed is that unlike in the movies, all the soldiers and vehicles stand still while firing at each other. A regular soldier can take up to 50 blaster bolts from another soldier, and maybe 5-10 shots from a bigger vehicle. I guess the movies were wrong when Han/Luke/Leia shot a stormie down in just 1-2 shots. With vehicles taking a lot of shots is at least understandable because of shields/armor, but it still makes no sense that things like speeder bikes would stand still while shooting. I would've preferred a "Hold Ground" command which when deactivated would make vehicles do drive-bys. Heck, even if someone played Battlefront, they would know that vehicles try to dodge each others shots .

 

What makes everything worse is the possibly pointless "capture the flag" system. While landing your troops via shuttle is a very good idea, you start off with several troops deployed right away and you can't deploy more until you control more flags. Why these flags are so important, I can't understand. If there is *space* on the map, the player should be able to land down his units.. but no. Can you land your units anywhere? No. I would understand much more if some places were off-limit because of anti-air emplacements there, but instead there are arbitrary restrictions on the landing zones. This may or may not make for fun skirmishes, but reasonable and Star Wars it is not.

 

You can't build units, only call for reinforcements, but of course it's nicely designed to limit the # of units you can call at any one time.. this smells like an elaborate ploy to artifically limit the # of units under the player's control because the game cannot handle well many units deployed on the field. In fact, the whole "squad" system falls apart when you have over 20+ vehicles deployed because it's just like any other RTS in this regard.

 

So what do we really have? An RTS with a map mode, without building, but with Star Wars. This demo tries to be more Rebellion and less like Command and Conquer but doesn't really succeed at doing either. It's stuck somewhere in-between, bearing Star Wars graphics (yet not the feeling the trailers portrayed), and whilst it may be fun for the first few weeks I don't see myself playing it for a very long time with such a repetitive gameplay.

 

But it's not all bad... the super-low graphics option lets me run it on my 64 MB integrated video card [on my tablet]! Good job on that, too bad the graphics look pretty sad on a *real* PC, like any desktop with a 128+ MB video card.

 

If you've read this far, congratulations. I bet you're ready to flame me now if you're a diehard 14-year old, or maybe you will realize that I am only trying to offer constructive criticism. This game *is* fun at first, and I am simply pointing out that with a simplistic system it will be hard to stay to installed on a regular person's PC for very long. Not that it matters of course, it's Star Wars, it will sell like crazy,  :.

 

p.s. meaningless flames will be deleted on the spot, if you are going to argue with me, do so in a rational fashion. thanks. I might still buy this game but only after I play the real game for a few days.

Edited January 20, 2006 by JediIgor

[felixforever]

The key thing here is the crazy-ass build speed. You know the Nebulon-B frigate which takes months or weeks to build in the EU? Builds within a couple of hours. I could understand if this was Kuat here (and even then, you'd have to have crew standing by), but on some random planet like Ryloth? I don't think so. Build speed is way too fast. People will just be able to spam units and send their entire fleet at the enemy..

 

Oh, did I say spam units? Why that's because the super-duper-fast hyperspace speed helps things too! Remember Episode 3 where it seemed like everyone could travel around the galaxy within a few minutes? That's the gist of it! With seconds, your fleet is at the bordering planet, and since time pauses during battles you could conquer a whole sector in 1 day if you really wanted to. Maybe if the build time wasn't so rapid, this would be acceptable, but it's just not Star Wars to me.

 

if you read in one of the demo comment topic's delphi stated that build times were speed'd up for the demo i think the hyperspace speeds were upped too but thats not confirmed

heres the link for youhttp://pff.swrebellion.com/index.php?topic=1912.0

[Delphi-PG]

An RTS with a map mode, without building, but with Star Wars.

 

 

You, built units didn't ya?  You built structures didn't ya? Building is there, it is just in another layer most RTS gamers are not familar with.  We did this on purpose to try something new. It takes time to get used, but now I rather perfer it. We could have went with the age old generic mechanic of tactical production, but what is the fun in that. 

 

diplomacy, popularity,

 

Shudders at the thought... 

[The Saint]

I notice you complain about the speed of things built however its been stated already on other forums as well as this one that the build time was increased. We will not know for sure just how long it'll take for a Nebulon B frigate to be built, we dont know how long it'll take for hyperspace travel to occur. Frankly we dont know how the modding community will be able to fix any of our so called dislikes of the game. Sure Petroglyph will put out EaW and it'll be a fantastic game, however there will undoubt be a slew of modders behind them, and we already see it, with the demo alone that will be able to correct what is wrong.

 

We got an extremely limited taste of the game, and while the graphics may not be intensive remember this isnt supposed to be some hyper realistic game. Its more of a beer and pretzels RTS. The graphics are more than adequete to draw us into the game and make us enjoy it. I think we've all been spoiled by the recent crops of games that were released before the holiday season each one seeming to be a bigger penis waving venture in terms of who could make it look more real than the last. Great graphics dont make a great game. We will need to hold our breaths. However I do agree on a few points..if the demo is any indication of how the full game is(and I seem to remember them saying that the demo was made before they began to make changes) then this game will be boring and I'll buy it and shelve it until modders fix it..but I dont think it'll be that bad.

[Guest JediIgor]

if you read in one of the demo comment topic's delphi stated that build times were speed'd up for the demo i think the hyperspace speeds were upped too but thats not confirmed

heres the link for youhttp://pff.swrebellion.com/index.php?topic=1912.0

 

I completely forgot about this..

 

The game seriously needs more than 1 button to speed-up/slow-down gameplay. At the very least a second 3x mode, preferrably a speed slider. How something so simple could be omitted, I have no idea. I imagine even if the game was slowed down, the lack of depth in its non-military options woud be severely limiting.

 

You, built units didn't ya?  You built structures didn't ya? Building is there, it is just in another layer most RTS gamers are not familar with.  We did this on purpose to try something new.

I'm sorry Delphi but what you describe is not really an RTS. I realize you guys are trying to redefine the genre, but in a regular RTS you build units and structures in the same "mode" as the rest of the fighting is going on like in Galactic Battlegrounds. While you may try to pass it off as "new," pretty much every 4X game has been doing building on the galactic level, and fighting planet-by-planet (though most games only have space battles, no ground battles). You moved the building to a different layer, but you forgot to add other things to the new layer as games of this type usually do.

[Delphi-PG]

but in a regular RTS you build units and structures in the same "mode" as the rest of the fighting is going on like in Galactic Battlegrounds.

 

Really, where is the rule book on that?    In my entire 10+ years of working on RTS games, no one ever told me we couldn't change the way this works. ;D

 

How do you ever expect things to change, if it is always just regular. How you build in a RTS is up to the developer, the fact that none have tried to improve upon the mechanic and keep feeding RTS fans the same old stuff is the problem.

[lucienskywalker]

I think hes right about xwings respawn , i dint know about this .

[WhiteSkull]

LOL you go delphi you owned him on that one.

 

Last time i checked a RTS=real time strategy, not real time build base build units strategy.

 

RTW MTW and STW are RTS strategy with a TBS system and you dont build units in battle or base's, EAW is the same BUT with real time space map rather then TBS.

 

EAW rocks and with the speed for travel and build times (posted before) being slower in retail this game is soooo gona rock.

[Delphi-PG]

I realize you guys are trying to redefine the genre...

 

By no means are we trying to revolutionize the genre, we only wanted to try something new. Can't really fault us for that.    Our goal at the end of the day was to just simply make a fun game with new ways to play.

 

We're trying and we will keep trying and improving upon what we have done. 

 

Like I said though, feedback is appreciated in all forms so don't think I'm coming down on ya.  Your review was well written and well taken.  ;D

[Guest JediIgor]

but in a regular RTS you build units and structures in the same "mode" as the rest of the fighting is going on like in Galactic Battlegrounds.

 

Really, where is the rule book on that?    In my entire 10+ years of working on RTS games, no one ever told me we couldn't change the way this works. ;D

 

How do you ever expect things to change, if it is always just regular. How you build in a RTS is up to the developer, the fact that none have tried to improve upon the mechanic and keep feeding RTS fans the same old stuff is the problem.

 

It's not a rule, it's just that when you start to change the subgenre, it's no longer quite the same subgenre. It's like taking a regular car and making it run with electricity.. it's a hybrid now! I'm glad that you guys are experimenting with new features, but I can't say for sure they are all great. It's like many features of regular RTSes that you say make them tedious are removed, but the features that are supposed to be there to reinforce the removal are missing. What are ground battles after all? They remind me of Age of Empires deathmatch except without the building. While other games would add something in there like making the stats more realistic, adding extra gauges like experience [which even your previous CnC games had], aside from the flags I am at a loss as to what's so new.

 

Last time i checked a RTS=real time strategy, not real time build base build units strategy.

 

RTW MTW and STW are RTS strategy with a TBS system and you dont build units in battle or base's, EAW is the same BUT with real time space map rather then TBS.

 

If Total War is the same type of RTS that CNC is, then an F-22 must be filling the same role as a B-2.

[lucienskywalker]

LOL you go delphi you owned him on that one.

 

Last time i checked a RTS=real time strategy, not real time build base build units strategy.

 

RTW MTW and STW are RTS strategy with a TBS system and you dont build units in battle or base's, EAW is the same BUT with real time space map rather then TBS.

 

EAW rocks and with the speed for travel and build times (posted before) being slower in retail this game is soooo gona rock.

 

rtw is a tactical real time base game with turnbase strategie .

not a rts .

[Delphi-PG]

It's like many features of regular RTSes that you say make them tedious are removed, but the features that are supposed to be there to reinforce the removal are missing.

 

Change is very difficult, so I understand your reaction. It was mine when I initially started playing EAW many months ago. Now, I hope more future RTS games incorporate EAW like features.

[The Saint]

RTS was always such a broad term though. There are plenty of things which can define a game as RTS. When it comes to strategy games the categories arent defined. They're constantly evolving and changing as developers attempt to carve out their own niche in the market. A market that is growing smaller by the way according to the decline in PC game sale last year as opposed to 2004, of course this is a periodical thing that occurs as a fresh crop of MMORPGs came out..(the same kind of drop could be seen when UO and Evercrack first came out). Of course this is all schemantics really and only the true diehard fans of either class will complain about changes to genre and say "this has been done before elsewhere." Well..there are very few original ideas for categories, only original ways to execute said ideas.

[Delphi-PG]

Well..there are very few original ideas for categories, only original ways to execute said ideas.

 

 

Indeed... 

[lucienskywalker]

RTS was always such a broad term though. There are plenty of things which can define a game as RTS. When it comes to strategy games the categories arent defined. They're constantly evolving and changing as developers attempt to carve out their own niche in the market. A market that is growing smaller by the way according to the decline in PC game sale last year as opposed to 2004, of course this is a periodical thing that occurs as a fresh crop of MMORPGs came out..(the same kind of drop could be seen when UO and Evercrack first came out). Of course this is all schemantics really and only the true diehard fans of either class will complain about changes to genre and say "this has been done before elsewhere." Well..there are very few original ideas for categories, only original ways to execute said ideas.

 

Its not hard to understand .

 

Strategy = ressource managing  and army moving

Tactical  = army fight

 

Even EAW is a tactical wargame .

With a rts too .

 

 

EAW is not just a RTS , its also a real time tactical game , or should i say a tactical wargame kinda .

 

 

The problem is , nobody got a clue about what is a tactical wargame , so many tactical wargame are called RTS . But game like RTW is not a rts at all .

[Guest JediIgor]

It's like many features of regular RTSes that you say make them tedious are removed, but the features that are supposed to be there to reinforce the removal are missing.

 

Change is very difficult, so I understand your reaction. It was mine when I initially started playing EAW many months ago. Now, I hope more future RTS games incorporate EAW like features.

 

Change is very difficult? I am confused as to why that would be a response to my quote (especially because I like changes, just as long as they're generally positive). I said it's missing reinforcing features. I wish you could tell me what these reinforcing features were. Because I can tell you what reinforcing features you *could* have had:

 

Anything else from Rebellion - special forces, covert ops, sabotages, uprisings, maintenance, and persistent non-movie characters that aren't extendable. I didn't mention popularity and diplomacy because you think they are absurd for some reason (I won't argue that).

 

Anything from Total War - battle morale, experience, train enhancements, more realistic stats, more units on the field, bigger maps, more emphasis on unit tactics.

 

Those are just 2 games. I could go on with 4X games (research tree?), other RTS games (simultaneous ground+space+galactic modes), but I just don't feel the need to.

[lucienskywalker]

 

 

Anything from Total War - battle morale, experience, train enhancements, more realistic stats, more units on the field, bigger maps, more emphasis on unit tactics.

 

 

 

I think EAW is more a easy-friendly game .

What you asking for is almost a simulator like in RTW .

 

I would love your idear , but the game wouldnt be for the same customer .

Developer try to avoid complicated stuff because most players will find it too hard to play .

Im sure the Demo is near from too hard for many ppl , when there is too many stuff in a game , a lot of players will quit soon .

[Guest JediIgor]

RTS was always such a broad term though. There are plenty of things which can define a game as RTS. When it comes to strategy games the categories arent defined. They're constantly evolving and changing as developers attempt to carve out their own niche in the market. A market that is growing smaller by the way according to the decline in PC game sale last year as opposed to 2004, of course this is a periodical thing that occurs as a fresh crop of MMORPGs came out..(the same kind of drop could be seen when UO and Evercrack first came out). Of course this is all schemantics really and only the true diehard fans of either class will complain about changes to genre and say "this has been done before elsewhere." Well..there are very few original ideas for categories, only original ways to execute said ideas.

 

I have a hard time talking to you. Have you looked at NPD numbers? Strategy game sales have been up. MMO profits aren't counted in PC game revenue (among other things), so you can be sure with a game like World of Warcraft that developers are making *more* money on PC games, not *less*.

 

Nor are there as few original ideas that are actually implemented as you might think. When is the last time you have seen a game that lets you command a galaxy whilst in a space battle whilst in a ground battle? Or how about possessing one of the AT-ATs during a battle?

 

I think EAW is more a easy-friendly game .

What you asking for is almost a simulator like in RTW .

 

I'm hardly asking for a simulator. I am saying the battle depth has been reduced negatively. If you turn on arcade mode RTW, that is very similar to what we are getting now (except of course, since units are grouped in 20-40-60, and you have AI allies, it's still easy to control them) in EaW.

[Nevets]

Anything else from Rebellion - special forces, covert ops, sabotages, uprisings, maintenance, and persistent non-movie characters that aren't extendable. I didn't mention popularity and diplomacy because you think they are absurd for some reason (I won't argue that).

 

Mark me down for all the above  lol

[The Saint]

Change is very difficult? I am confused as to why that would be a response to my quote (especially because I like changes, just as long as they're generally positive). I said it's missing reinforcing features. I wish you could tell me what these reinforcing features were. Because I can tell you what reinforcing features you *could* have had:

 

Anything else from Rebellion - special forces, covert ops, sabotages, uprisings, maintenance, and persistent non-movie characters that aren't extendable. I didn't mention popularity and diplomacy because you think they are absurd for some reason (I won't argue that).

 

Anything from Total War - battle morale, experience, train enhancements, more realistic stats, more units on the field, bigger maps, more emphasis on unit tactics.

 

Those are just 2 games. I could go on with 4X games (research tree?), other RTS games (simultaneous ground+space+galactic modes), but I just don't feel the need to.

 

Total War was based on at least somewhat based on historical accuracy. Star Wars, this is more or less based on the rebels fighting for their very lives and thus willing to go to any length vs the imperials who are willing to go to any length to dominate the galaxy. Now honestly, if the Death Star showed up do you think the rebels would have been high in morale, or willing to try and destroy it? Even with the plans. Now there are enhancements for the troops and for the accuracy again we dont know everything about the full game to know anything about the maps..their might be bigger maps. As for unit tactics, honestly Tatootine gives us a perfect example..unless you want to be cheap and use the whole bombing just outside the shield generator bit..

 

As with 4x games and the research tree, I believe in the tutorial it is said the rebels steal their research, the empire must actually work on it. This game does have special forces and covert ops, we see them carried out in the tutorial, granted it might not be on the same level of rebellion yet we dont really know that yet do we? Right now this is all speculation.

[Guest JediIgor]

Total War was based on at least somewhat based on historical accuracy. Star Wars, this is more or less based on the rebels fighting for their very lives and thus willing to go to any length vs the imperials who are willing to go to any length to dominate the galaxy. Now honestly, if the Death Star showed up do you think the rebels would have been high in morale, or willing to try and destroy it? Even with the plans. Now there are enhancements for the troops and for the accuracy again we dont know everything about the full game to know anything about the maps..their might be bigger maps. As for unit tactics, honestly Tatootine gives us a perfect example..unless you want to be cheap and use the whole bombing just outside the shield generator bit..

 

As with 4x games and the research tree, I believe in the tutorial it is said the rebels steal their research, the empire must actually work on it. This game does have special forces and covert ops, we see them carried out in the tutorial, granted it might not be on the same level of rebellion yet we dont really know that yet do we? Right now this is all speculation.

 

Think back to Episode 3 where we saw thousands of soldiers on-screen and dozens if not hundreds of vehicles duking it out, all with officers and generals. It would be representing Star Wars in its true self. I am not even talking about the EU, which consistently talks about large-scale battles over the *whole* planet.

 

As for shield generators, there is no reason why it couldn't be covering the entire planet. Bombardment via turbolaser would thus be ineffective, and bombardment via atmospheric bombers would be a bad idea because of ground-based anti-air emplacements.

[WhiteSkull]

Its not hard to understand .

 

Strategy = ressource managing  and army moving

Tactical  = army fight

 

Even EAW is a tactical wargame .

With a rts too .

 

 

EAW is not just a RTS , its also a real time tactical game , or should i say a tactical wargame kinda .

 

 

The problem is , nobody got a clue about what is a tactical wargame , so many tactical wargame are called RTS . But game like RTW is not a rts at all .

 

 

 

 

I disagree tactics to me is deciding what to build what counter to use where to send your fleets and what planets to invade, while strategy happens durning the battle it is, do i do a fient then flank, do i send a small force around to draw troops then hit etc..

 

Why you do think before a war they do tactical planing? they dont hold strategy planing its called tactical

 

jediigor you ask for more realistic stats, but how do you get real stats when the whole starwars world is FAKE its fantsy made up, its impossable to make anything REAL when none of its real to start.

[The Saint]

I have a hard time talking to you. Have you looked at NPD numbers? Strategy game sales have been up. MMO profits aren't counted in PC game revenue (among other things), so you can be sure with a game like World of Warcraft that developers are making *more* money on PC games, not *less*.

 

Nor are there as few original ideas that are actually implemented as you might think. When is the last time you have seen a game that lets you command a galaxy whilst in a space battle whilst in a ground battle? Or how about possessing one of the AT-ATs during a battle?

 

Wasnt talking about overall profits, I'm talking about the sales themselves. Comparitively speaking sales have been down for PC games some 14% and this has been attributed to more people deciding to play games like Guild Wars and WoW, and the other numerous MMORPGs which have sprung up. So while more profit has been made by developers of the MMORPG that doesnt mean the hard numbers of games sold is higher. Two different aspects.

 

Plenty of strategy games let you do one factor at a time, but not all at once(Rebellion let you control space but ground combat was abstract. Force Commander let you control ground but space wasnt even a factor). Something like that might just be out of the limitations of the current crop of AIs. Or maybe its just developers dont want to frustrate gamers by allowing the galactic map to continue on while battles are taking place simply because that would place undo pressure and detract from the games overall fun. Granted plenty of people on this board wouldnt mind it, I myself wouldnt mind it, it would make the game truely RTS, but the average gamer would more than likely hate that feature.

[Guest JediIgor]

jediigor you ask for more realistic stats, but how do you get real stats when the whole starwars world is FAKE its fantsy made up, its impossable to make anything REAL when none of its real to start

RPG D20 stats to start.

 

Wasnt talking about overall profits, I'm talking about the sales themselves. Comparitively speaking sales have been down for PC games some 14% and this has been attributed to more people deciding to play games like Guild Wars and WoW, and the other numerous MMORPGs which have sprung up. So while more profit has been made by developers of the MMORPG that doesnt mean the hard numbers of games sold is higher. Two different aspects.

 

Then you must be missing the entire point because the fact is the PC market is *more* profitable, not less.

 

Good night all, I see no relevant arguments are being made anymore.

[The Saint]

Think back to Episode 3 where we saw thousands of soldiers on-screen and dozens if not hundreds of vehicles duking it out, all with officers and generals. It would be representing Star Wars in its true self. I am not even talking about the EU, which consistently talks about large-scale battles over the *whole* planet.

 

As for shield generators, there is no reason why it couldn't be covering the entire planet. Bombardment via turbolaser would thus be ineffective, and bombardment via atmospheric bombers would be a bad idea because of ground-based anti-air emplacements.

 

You want to bring in Ep 3? Fine, that was two galactic powers duking it out across multiple worlds to the point where even Coruscant was indanger in the openning scenes of the movie. This was the Republic at war with a group of established industrialized worlds that were attempting to break away. You do not have that with Ep 4-6. Remember, the Rebel Alliance is a much smaller group. You wont get massed battles with thousands of troops because the rebel alliance doesnt, and wouldnt have that kind of numbers until after RotJ when the war becomes more traditional and even then on the ground the New Republic had smaller numbers.

 

Then with shields few planets in the SW universe could afford a shield network to cover the entire planet. Thats where rebellion falters. It just assumed that one shield generator instantly granted protection to the entire planet.