posted
So, has anyone bought this yet? I have, and I've been looking forward to this the way I imagine other people looked forward to Halo 3!
That said, it feels a little disorienting compared to the previous games---not because of the new rules, but because I seem to have to scroll too much to see everything.
This is what I'm talking about (the Wikipedia pages have story spoilers):
posted
I've been waiting for it, but my DS queue is so long that I'm not sure I can justify buying it yet...
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I would probably buy, except for the fact that my DS is horribly broken.
I've only played Dual Strike, but I really liked that game. I did feel it was a bit unbalanced with some of the uber units, and particularly with the insane CO powers. I also felt the whole happy, go-lucky attitude towards war was a bit creepy. Both of those are reasons why I think Days of Ruin looks even better, because it changes both of those.
Anyway, I'll admit that I'm a bit more of a Fire Emblem guy myself (a TBS RPG by the same developer). Actually, I'm a much bigger fan. Fire Emblem is probably my favorite video game series of all time.
Posts: 290 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
From what I've read, CO powers have been toned down significantly in DoR.
I liked the GBA Fire Emblem games, but I never did get around to finishing Path of Radiance on the GC. On the whole I find the FE series a bit unforgiving, and I think I've also reached the limit of how many times they can sell me essentially the same game. Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by twinky: From what I've read, CO powers have been toned down significantly in DoR.
I liked the GBA Fire Emblem games, but I never did get around to finishing Path of Radiance on the GC. On the whole I find the FE series a bit unforgiving, and I think I've also reached the limit of how many times they can sell me essentially the same game.
Fair enough. Fire Emblem games certainly aren't for everyone. And while they aren't significantly different between entry, I've always felt like they change and add enough between the games to keep them fresh. And to put it frankly, I like the formula so much that I don't mind. I've played and beaten four Fire Emblem games (multiple times for two of them) and probably put hundreds of hours into the series between them. You know how sometimes there's just a video game series that clicks with you? That's Fire Emblem for me.
Anyway, I'm sad that you didn't finish Path of Radiance. It's probably my favorite Fire Emblem. Also, if you have a Wii, consider Radiant Dawn. It's the hardest Fire Emblem to date, but it's also the least frustrating thanks to battle saves. It changes quite a bit from the standard Fire Emblem formula, making it feel really fresh. It didn't get great reviews, but I loved it (and so did tons of other people). The story is great (not "laughable", like GameSpot said), especially for those of us that played, finished, and loved Path of Radiance since it's a direct sequel to that game.
Oops. I don't mean to derail the thread with Fire Emblem. When I start talking about that series I have trouble stopping.
Posts: 290 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by aragorn64: You know how sometimes there's just a video game series that clicks with you?
Absolutely. When I bought Mass Effect I put 40 hours into it in less than two weeks. I'm already planning second and third playthroughs to create a character to carry forward into Mass Effect 2.
quote:Originally posted by aragorn64: Anyway, I'm sad that you didn't finish Path of Radiance.
I just got tired of losing characters due to not having foreknowledge of the level triggers. It wouldn't be so bad if you could afford to sacrifice units the way you can in Advance Wars, but since each character is important in FE and there are usually several event triggers in each level, I felt like after a while it started to turn into trial and error rather than strategy.
I don't have a Wii, and in any case these days I seem to have migrated back to handhelds for my TBS/SRPG fix. But thanks for the recommendation all the same. Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I never got to play the first advance wars ds game (dual strike) and now it can't be found and is sold at inflated prices due to it's unavailability. I do have it on the top of my game Q at Gamefly, so maybe I'll get it eventually.
I am planning on borrowing days of ruin next from Gamefly.
On a related note, has anyone played battalion wars II?
quote:I would probably buy, except for the fact that my DS is horribly broken.
I dropped my DS awhile ago, and it broke off the plastic connection from the bottom half to the top on the right. Luckily all communication occurs on the left half so it's still playable, although the top screen can move a lot more freely, and in more directions.
I've never liked the fog of war levels in advance wars, because it doesn't affect the computer at all.
Posts: 2489 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
I played Advance Wars for the GBA, and the next video game I'm getting will probably be Days of Ruin. Hopefully it will have enough replay value to keep me satisfied for awhile.
Posts: 1158 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
If anyone's interested in a game sometime, let me know. It'd be fun to play someone and not have to worry about a disconnect.
Posts: 291 | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by SoaPiNuReYe: I played Advance Wars for the GBA, and the next video game I'm getting will probably be Days of Ruin. Hopefully it will have enough replay value to keep me satisfied for awhile.
With Advance Wars, I wouldn't worry about replay value. They've always had just an insane amount of stuff to do and unlock. Plus, with Days of Ruin, you can play online and even create your own maps to play against each other with.
Posts: 290 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged |
I've been less than enthusiastic about wi-fi DS games, not because of the quality put out from the publisher, but because of the players on it. So many of them just drop when they're losing and there are a lot of cheaters too.
Posts: 2489 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Omega M: You can zoom in and out. Have you tried that? I usually stay zoomed in, it looks better that way, but yea you gotta scroll a bit in that view.
I love the changes they've made from the previous games, especially the new, more balanced CO system. Nothing feels quite as satisfying as loading Tabitha unto a tank and steamrolling the entire enemy army with a single unit. Or loading Waylon unto a duster, and then rushing the enemy base with bombers and fighter with CO power activated. Bombers with 460% defense boost == taking 2 damage from full health anti air units. Hahaha.
Also: Bikes, rigs, anti-tanks, gunships, new missiles and new battleships are LURV. New carrier, Md Tanks and War Tanks are complete wastes of money. Dusters are okay. Tanks, anti-air and artillery are still the most overall efficient units in game. Oh well.
[Edit: Oh yea. MEC reminded me of another great change in the game. The computer is now affected by friggin FOW. It is now possible to ambush the computer with hidden subs/units in forests. This is great, because now a bigger majority of the terrain "hides" your units. Allied and neutral citiers now hide units, as does many of the new sea terrain, making naval battles so much more interesting. No longer does the computer wreak utter havoc to your navy in FOW...
Another great change to the game is the new AI. It's extremely defensive and position-based, which is pretty awesome compared to the older "ZERGLING RUSH KEKEKEKEKE" and "OHNO P1 HAS LOADED APC KILLIT KILLIT".]
Posts: 80 | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
