"We Do Not Sow!" (?) [Spoiler books 2 and 3]

This is the right place to share your game experience and feelings! Feel Free!

Moderators: Cyanide, Focus Team

Re: "We Do Not Sow!" (?) [Spoiler books 2 and 3]

Postby gotthammer » Wed 1 Jun 2011 05:11

Greyjoy wrote:If there is no Greyjoy:

2. then - "We Do Not Buy or Play"


Yeah...I kinda have to agree with the OP, a bit (I wouldn't have written my sentiment that way, exactly, but I do agree with it).

That and, from what little I've seen, I'm not so sure about the game as something I'd buy. I mean, I don't like comparing, but as someone who has played stuff from Paradox Interactive (EU III, HoI II & III, CK:DV, etc.) and Creative Assembly (all of them 'cept for Nap:TW & Shogun 2:TW), and some other stuff (one of my old RTT favourites, Warhammer Fantasy's 'Dark Omen'), I'm not sure what GoT:Genesis is 'bringing new to the table' (visually and gameplay-wise).
Of course, one doesn't have to 'bring in new stuff' per se, but will it be complex? Will it offer good 'scale'? (like the Total War series. Something I'm not 'feeling' with some of the screens for GoT:Genesis)

Just my two cents. :)
gotthammer
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri 13 May 2011 08:41

Re: "We Do Not Sow!" (?) [Spoiler books 2 and 3]

Postby JonSnow » Wed 1 Jun 2011 07:30

Tell you what sir, if you really like the series you'd buy the game no matter how it is built or what they include. It might not be the biggest or best RTS but hell even if it is like that I'd still play it since I love the series and want to pay my respect to this awesome studio that makes TWO, not one aSoIaF games, TWO. So I don't care if it's bad, I'd play it because GRRM is awesome.
JonSnow
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri 6 May 2011 16:06

Re: "We Do Not Sow!" (?) [Spoiler books 2 and 3]

Postby gotthammer » Wed 1 Jun 2011 12:24

JonSnow wrote:Tell you what sir, if you really like the series you'd buy the game no matter how it is built or what they include. It might not be the biggest or best RTS but hell even if it is like that I'd still play it since I love the series and want to pay my respect to this awesome studio that makes TWO, not one aSoIaF games, TWO. So I don't care if it's bad, I'd play it because GRRM is awesome.


I understand the sentiment, but I don't agree w/ the message.

A bad game (I'm not saying that's what GoT:Genesis is, or will be, mind you) is a bad game.

Case in point: I recently bought a game, from a 'triple A' developer, which was a sequel for a great game. It was disappointing, and my 'faith' in the developer 'shaken'.
Personally, I'd like to avoid further disappointments (several collector's edition boxes gathering dust in my room also come to mind lol), especially when my cash is involved. :mrgreen:

I'm not saying that GoT:Genesis will be a bad game, but, personally, from what little I've seen, I'm not liking the general direction or the looks or the way it handles 'scale'. I've played my fair share of RTSs/RTTs/TBSs, and I'd like to think I know what I'd like. :)
There are 'standards'. Games like the Total War series set the tone for TBS w/ RTT battles (IMHO, something like the Total War series best suits the ASoIaF setting).
Games like the Age of Empire ( I never really liked this series, much) series and Warcraft/Starcraft and Dawn of War/Company of Heroes (my preferred RTS style) set them for RTS games.
The Europa Universalis and Hearts of Iron series did quite well to represent Grand Strategy.

I really like GRRM's work, too (I even spent a fair amount on FFG's AGoT card game some years ago...and that one is, IMHO, a good game. The boardgame's quite 'solid', too), so any 'official' effort should aim, IMHO, not just to be 'good', but 'great'.

Otherwise, the impression that 'it's just cashing in' or 'it's another one of those tie-ins' will be prevalent...and who, in their right minds, would want that?

Again, just my two cents. :)
gotthammer
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri 13 May 2011 08:41

Re: "We Do Not Sow!" (?) [Spoiler books 2 and 3]

Postby FedericoV » Wed 1 Jun 2011 17:21

I quote Gotthammer.

Mind, I don't want to say anything bad about Genesis untill I played at least some kind of demo, and I hope that it will be great, but I do not think that they have chosen the right style for an ASoIaF strategy game. Personally, I would have loved something on the line of the TW series but with more diplomacy... while it seems... well... it seems all so small and poor. The gameplay images do not have the epic feel of the series.

Btw, the fact that the game is based upon GRRM's work is not a bonus but a responsibility.

@Gotthammer: I imagine that you are speaking of DA2 :lol: .
FedericoV
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu 14 Apr 2011 13:03

Re: "We Do Not Sow!" (?) [Spoiler books 2 and 3]

Postby JonSnow » Wed 1 Jun 2011 18:17

FedericoV wrote:@Gotthammer: I imagine that you are speaking of DA2 :lol: .

DA2 was certainly a disappointment :P
JonSnow
 
Posts: 17
Joined: Fri 6 May 2011 16:06

Re: "We Do Not Sow!" (?) [Spoiler books 2 and 3]

Postby gotthammer » Wed 1 Jun 2011 21:02

JonSnow wrote:
FedericoV wrote:@Gotthammer: I imagine that you are speaking of DA2 :lol: .

DA2 was certainly a disappointment :P


Yes, I was speaking of DA2...and yes, it was a disappointment.
Thoughts like 'wasted opportunity' and 'rushed' come to mind whenever I think about it... :cry:
I was actually glad when BioWare said that ME3 would be delayed 'til next year. :lol:

Fortunately, despite playing on an aging system, The Witcher 2 came out. That is, IMHO, the quality that a sequel should aim for. It's not perfect (not really fond of QTEs, and I kinda grew fond of the old combat system, but the new one is still quite good), but it's still 'great'. :mrgreen:
gotthammer
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri 13 May 2011 08:41

Re: "We Do Not Sow!" (?) [Spoiler books 2 and 3]

Postby FedericoV » Thu 2 Jun 2011 08:53

gotthammer wrote:
JonSnow wrote:
FedericoV wrote:
Yes, I was speaking of DA2...and yes, it was a disappointment.
Thoughts like 'wasted opportunity' and 'rushed' come to mind whenever I think about it... :cry:
I was actually glad when BioWare said that ME3 would be delayed 'til next year. :lol:

Fortunately, despite playing on an aging system, The Witcher 2 came out. That is, IMHO, the quality that a sequel should aim for. It's not perfect (not really fond of QTEs, and I kinda grew fond of the old combat system, but the new one is still quite good), but it's still 'great'. :mrgreen:


Yep, I do agree that DA2 it's more a wasted opportunity than a bad game. With another year of work, it would have been a great sequel. So', I'm happy too with ME3 delay :D. About TW2: I'm waiting till summer vacation so I will have all the time to experience it without problem. But I read everywhere that it's really a great game.
FedericoV
 
Posts: 40
Joined: Thu 14 Apr 2011 13:03

Re: "We Do Not Sow!" (?) [Spoiler books 2 and 3]

Postby Odin » Tue 7 Jun 2011 23:38

Ok first, Greyjoy are one of the 7 kingdoms and it does seem like a real let down if they aren't in the game. More importantly which no one has said, the Iornborn ruled a significant part of the mainland when Aegon came to Conquer. Harrenhall, the largest castle in Westeros was built by Harren the Black, king of the Iron Islands and the Riverlands. Harren being burned out of Harrenhall by Aegon's dragons was a major point in the invasion. If the invasion is what they are starting with and a focus of the campaign, but the greyjoys are left out, it would be kind of retarded. I want Greyjoys!

From a gameplay perspective it also balances the map adding another threat to not only the north but the whole west. If you are going to do the game do it right! Naval engagements and interactions are incredibly important to both the story and the politics.

I'm happy someone is making the game but it will be terrible if the game is not good!

-Odin

PS: Why is Caitlin listed as the Tully lord!
Odin
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue 7 Jun 2011 23:20

Re: "We Do Not Sow!" (?) [Spoiler books 2 and 3]

Postby Beric Dondarrion » Tue 7 Jun 2011 23:46

gotthammer wrote:
JonSnow wrote:Tell you what sir, if you really like the series you'd buy the game no matter how it is built or what they include. It might not be the biggest or best RTS but hell even if it is like that I'd still play it since I love the series and want to pay my respect to this awesome studio that makes TWO, not one aSoIaF games, TWO. So I don't care if it's bad, I'd play it because GRRM is awesome.


I understand the sentiment, but I don't agree w/ the message.

A bad game (I'm not saying that's what GoT:Genesis is, or will be, mind you) is a bad game.

Case in point: I recently bought a game, from a 'triple A' developer, which was a sequel for a great game. It was disappointing, and my 'faith' in the developer 'shaken'.
Personally, I'd like to avoid further disappointments (several collector's edition boxes gathering dust in my room also come to mind lol), especially when my cash is involved. :mrgreen:

I'm not saying that GoT:Genesis will be a bad game, but, personally, from what little I've seen, I'm not liking the general direction or the looks or the way it handles 'scale'. I've played my fair share of RTSs/RTTs/TBSs, and I'd like to think I know what I'd like. :)
There are 'standards'. Games like the Total War series set the tone for TBS w/ RTT battles (IMHO, something like the Total War series best suits the ASoIaF setting).
Games like the Age of Empire ( I never really liked this series, much) series and Warcraft/Starcraft and Dawn of War/Company of Heroes (my preferred RTS style) set them for RTS games.
The Europa Universalis and Hearts of Iron series did quite well to represent Grand Strategy.

I really like GRRM's work, too (I even spent a fair amount on FFG's AGoT card game some years ago...and that one is, IMHO, a good game. The boardgame's quite 'solid', too), so any 'official' effort should aim, IMHO, not just to be 'good', but 'great'.

Otherwise, the impression that 'it's just cashing in' or 'it's another one of those tie-ins' will be prevalent...and who, in their right minds, would want that?

Again, just my two cents. :)

There's a Total War mod of aSoIaF. It's very good.
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=721
Beric Dondarrion
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Tue 7 Jun 2011 22:55

Re: "We Do Not Sow!" (?) [Spoiler books 2 and 3]

Postby gotthammer » Wed 8 Jun 2011 10:39

Beric Dondarrion wrote:There's a Total War mod of aSoIaF. It's very good.
http://www.twcenter.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=721


Yup, I know. I've played it. As well as the ones for Crusader Kings: Deus Vult, and, sometime back, the one for Mount & Blade (M&B v0.903 I think...it was some time ago).

The mods also present a 'problem' (and why, I guess, some IPs are very restrictive in terms of use, especially by fans): those mods, esp. the CK:DV one, LOOK GREAT. Because they look great, there WILL BE COMPARISONS. ;)

Folks might end up saying, regardless of knowing about the 'realities of game development' (whatever that may truly be), "those guys did it better".

Unfortunately (for devs of the 'official product', anyway), 'good looking mods' aren't the end of sources of comparison: videos/screens have been coming out of E3...and, with each passing year, folks' expectations regarding what a game should be 'at the very least' (esp. in terms of graphics/visuals) get higher and higher.
The Witcher 2, IMHO, set a high bar for RPGs last month...and Skyrim is looking quite good.
Even strategy titles are looking ever prettier: Shogun 2: Total War looks very pretty (I've yet to play it, tho', as my system might give up the ghost if I even think about getting it :lol: ) and the upcoming Crusader Kings 2 looks quite good, too (I'm excited for that one, esp. in the hopes that the modder who made the Westeros mod for CK:DV will also make one for CK2).

Still, it's, hopefully, 'early'...(right?) and the game won't see release for a while (right?). So, If anything, I'm hoping stuff will improve. :D
gotthammer
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Fri 13 May 2011 08:41

PreviousNext

Return to Throne Room

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron