StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Giantbomb video

Commence your mocking.

I'll get the ball rolling:

I can't wait to have to level up my tanks - starting with a lovely Kubelwagon, then to Pz1, Puma, PzII and so on, so that by the end of the game will be a Maus or E-100. With GIANT HAIR.

Hitler will be played out to be the good guys best friend until mid game, when suddenly BAM! You get portrayed and have to start fighting the Third Reich.

Frankly that would be an improvement over roughly 98% of all RTS games ever made, so ...

weemadando wrote: Hitler will be played out to be the good guys best friend until mid game, when suddenly BAM! You get portrayed and have to start fighting the Third Reich.

Oh wow. Pity I missed that typo during the edit window. My shame is now evident forever.

World [War 2] In Conflict.

Is it me or did the graphics in that trailer look vastly underwhelming, particularly for a PC game? It looks state of the art for 2004 or so. That'd be ok if the gameplay was stellar, but given that this is Square...

The only issue I had with the graphics was the amount of brown. But that's okay. It's not supposed to be colorful.

I don't get the mocking, though. It looked like Company of Heros minus their cover system. It's not like SquareEnix only makes Final Fantasy games.

Erik von Nein wrote:I don't get the mocking, though. It looked like Company of Heros minus their cover system. It's not like SquareEnix only makes Final Fantasy games.

On the other hand, it's not as if Squenix has very many successful franchises outside of Final Fantasy.

General Zod wrote:

Erik von Nein wrote:I don't get the mocking, though. It looked like Company of Heros minus their cover system. It's not like SquareEnix only makes Final Fantasy games.

On the other hand, it's not as if Squenix has very many successful franchises outside of Final Fantasy.

Dragon Quest and its million non-RPG spinoffs?

Losonti Tokash wrote:

General Zod wrote:

Erik von Nein wrote:I don't get the mocking, though. It looked like Company of Heros minus their cover system. It's not like SquareEnix only makes Final Fantasy games.

On the other hand, it's not as if Squenix has very many successful franchises outside of Final Fantasy.

Dragon Quest and its million non-RPG spinoffs?

Squenix only publishes Dragon Quest. They don't have anything to do with its development.

Ahem, they're only publishing this too, they aren't the developers.

EDIT:

Indeed, it's by Wargaming.net, the same people who brought us the somewhat underrated Massive Assault http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massive_Assault

A shame, I'm with the mockery version, that sounds more entertaining then YET ANOTHER CONVENTIONAL WW2 RTS

As for the graphics...meh...I'm sick and tired of needing to always upgrade my made in china graphics card with another made in china graphics card

This really doesn't look that terrible. Is the joke that Squenix is publishing it? I guess I'm not fat enough to automatically hate it on that flimsy reason.

Stark wrote:This really doesn't look that terrible. Is the joke that Squenix is publishing it? I guess I'm not fat enough to automatically hate it on that flimsy reason.

I'd venture to guess it's like this will pit one group of nerds (the ones who will kneejerk against anime and JRPG) against the their polar opposite, the ones who will excuse even the most generic and derivative crap as long as it came from Japan.


Which would be kinda ok if the game in question was something like Operation Darkness or Valkryia Chronicles...

It would really be interesting to see what the reaction would have been if we took this exact same trailer but removed references to squenix.

I'll go with "World (war 2) in conflict". It does have the look.

General Zod wrote:
Squenix only publishes Dragon Quest. They don't have anything to do with its development.

Enix had everything to do with the development of Dragon Quest. They were the ones that sent Yuji Horii over to America (as a game design competition winner) where he discovered Ultima and Wizardry and got the idea to do a roleplaying game, and they've always owned the IP to it. They subcontract out development to other companies with Horii in editorial control, but they own the product and choose how to exploit it.

Dragon Quest is still very much regarded as the company's crown jewel as well, because of it's strong domestic performance.

Vendetta wrote:

General Zod wrote:
Squenix only publishes Dragon Quest. They don't have anything to do with its development.

Enix had everything to do with the development of Dragon Quest.

EDIT: NVM

I miss the PS1 days when almost anything coming out of Square was a home run. Final Fantasy, Brave Fencer Musashi, Einhaender, Ehrgeiz, Tobal #1+2, Bushido Blade, Chrono Cross, Front Mission, Final Fantasy Tactics, Parasite Eve 1+2, Vagrant Story, Xenogears etc.

Stargate Nerd wrote:I miss the PS1 days when almost anything coming out of Square was a home run. Final Fantasy, Brave Fencer Musashi, Einhaender, Ehrgeiz, Tobal #1+2, Bushido Blade, Chrono Cross, Front Mission, Final Fantasy Tactics, Parasite Eve 1+2, Vagrant Story, Xenogears etc.

Might want to take off the rose-tinted glasses there. Most of the games you listed were average at best; a handful of those I'd consider to fall under the "Excellent" category, but. . .the gameplay in a lot of those was pretty bland or awful.

General Zod wrote: Might want to take off the rose-tinted glasses there. Most of the games you listed were average at best; a handful of those I'd consider to fall under the "Excellent" category, but. . .the gameplay in a lot of those was pretty bland or awful.

Which ones would you consider to be excellent?

Stargate Nerd wrote:

General Zod wrote: Might want to take off the rose-tinted glasses there. Most of the games you listed were average at best; a handful of those I'd consider to fall under the "Excellent" category, but. . .the gameplay in a lot of those was pretty bland or awful.

Which ones would you consider to be excellent?

I'd file Einhander and Final Fantasy Tactics under the top notch category. Mileage varies greatly on the regular FF games (8 was terrible), Ehrgeiz was an average fighter competing against the likes of Tekken and KoF at the time. Tobal was just bad (Tobal 2 never got published in the US), BF Musashi was a generic platforming game, never played Vagrant Story, PE 1&2 were okay, but very similar to RE. Xenogears had its moments but was horribly unbalanced, Chrono Cross had issues with pacing and story focus, etc.

General Zod wrote:
I'd file Einhander and Final Fantasy Tactics under the top notch category. Mileage varies greatly on the regular FF games (8 was terrible), Ehrgeiz was an average fighter competing against the likes of Tekken and KoF at the time. Tobal was just bad (Tobal 2 never got published in the US), BF Musashi was a generic platforming game, never played Vagrant Story, PE 1&2 were okay, but very similar to RE. Xenogears had its moments but was horribly unbalanced, Chrono Cross had issues with pacing and story focus, etc.

Tobal 2 should definitely fall into the excellent category, I have a Japanese copy. Why do you think Tobal was bad though?

Oh and you should play Vagrant Story if you can it's worth it.

Stargate Nerd wrote: Tobal 2 should definitely fall into the excellent category, I have a Japanese copy. Why do you think Tobal was bad though?

The characters were impossibly generic, the animations were rather mediocre compared to other games at the time and the fighting system was incredibly bland. I also don't generally count Japanese-only releases; if you did the ratio of shit to gems would be even greater.

General Zod wrote:PE 1&2 were okay, but very similar to RE.

Uh, how? Because they both used guns and were survivor/horror (ish)? I mean, Parasite Eve was actually playable, used pseudo-turn-based gameplay and, you know, didn't have an incredibly retarded story. I don't see how they could be considered very similar at all.

Erik von Nein wrote:

General Zod wrote:PE 1&2 were okay, but very similar to RE.

Uh, how? Because they both used guns and were survivor/horror (ish)? I mean, Parasite Eve was actually playable, used pseudo-turn-based gameplay and, you know, didn't have an incredibly retarded story. I don't see how they could be considered very similar at all.

In that it was an attempt at being a survival/horror-ish, basically. It was hard not to make comparisons at the time considering how much hype RE had got and those type of games were relatively new.

That doesn't really make them a lot alike, though. They play completely differently, have very different plots, and Parasite Eve's graphics were better than even Resident Evil 2's, which came out the same year. The only thing they share is the category they're put in. Wouldn't that just make every survival/horror very similar?

Erik von Nein wrote:That doesn't really make them a lot alike, though. They play completely differently, have very different plots, and Parasite Eve's graphics were better than even Resident Evil 2's, which came out the same year. The only thing they share is the category they're put in. Wouldn't that just make every survival/horror very similar?

Okay, so maybe it wasn't as much like RE as I remember. . . but I don't see how that changes my overall point.

About Parasite Eve being okay? It doesn't, since that's what your opinion of it is. I was just disputing the idea that it was like Resident Evil.