IGN.com review, 8.2

[eastcoast2895]

http://pc.ign.com/articles/588/588399p1.html

 

haven't had a chance to read it yet, but saw the score. looks like the game is going to be pretty good.

 

Okay just read it and it seems they think the game is good, but isn't great or adding something new to the genre. Also they say the squad mechanics (point and click in certain areas) is not as good as it could have been. they wanted more control instead of having only certain options certain areas.

 

the thing that made me scared the most about the game is what they sad about multiplayer. they said the multiplayer is average. nothing special, nothing too exciting. they said that the modes are fun and all, but could have been better.

 

seems to me the game is good and worth a pickup, but won't stand out in a crowd. looks like decision time with this and project snowblind coming out.

[ZBomber]

Thanks for the link, I posted it on RC.net

[Mandalorian X]

I can't wait for the Xbox version. I played the demo and am absolutely hooked on it.

[Kurgan]

Oh man, I can only hope this reviewer is mistaken or using an early version of the game. I was really disappointed to hear about "Assault!"

 

From the review it sounds like all Assault is is REVERSE CTF (take your flag from "home" and take it into the enemy base to score)!

 

Argggh... I was hoping from the name and the association with the UT engine that this would be in the same vein.. ie: objective based multiplayer with new maps, possibly vehicles and classes, etc.

 

Such a gametype is what this game is MADE FOR!

 

The game sounds fine, but with a real lack of variety. Once the Single Player campaign is complete (sounds really short, 10 hours? I remember Elite Force was short at only 6 hours, JA was something like 15-20 hours), what will there be to keep us playing?

 

Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, CTF, and Reverse CTF?

 

; P

 

 

I'm thinking, sure, don't judge the game until you can play it, but c'mon, that sounds really boring. I've already played Quake3. What's to keep me hooked on this game besides the Star Wars Graphics? Seriously...

 

 

There's a couple of things I can hope for: 1) LucasArts will continue to support the game after release and give us more free content to keep it interesting. 2) The Mod tools provided and some ambitious and talented modders will introduce new and exciting game modes to keep it interesting, like a REAL objective based gametype and stuff. Even game modes like in UT (Domination, Onslaught, Last Man Standing, Instagib, etc).

 

In the past LucasArts hasn't been too forthcoming with #1 for the majority of their games, so that might be a long shot. For #2, that's cool, but if the game isn't a success out of box and they don't support it, it might not happen. Who wants to buy an average game to turn it into a great game? And who will be left to play such mods if they ever get finished?

 

Sounds like a great idea for a console game, but who besides console gamers will want to pay full price for such a short game with little depth?

 

Oh well, I hope this turns out to be a simple miscommunication, but as of this article my enthusiasm for this game is greatly diminished.

 

At least this will make writing a strategy guide for the game that much simpler... *sigh*

[El Sitherino]

Pfft, IGN has crap for reviews. I prefer to wait for the game as most reviewers are bought off.

 

 

The idea of a "reverse" CTF sounds fun.

Almost like the days of the conquerors, take a flag and conquer the land.

[Cavkov]

LOL worse Review EVER! he couldnt even prenounce Geonosis.. IGN is crap! Heres a nice Review!

in this review they say the singel player last as long as HALO2! i havent played halo2 but that gota be good news?

[JDKnite188]

The reviewer pointed out some important observations that I didn't think of earlier. Unfortunately, these didn't promote the game . . .

 

1. Assault.

 

So this is reverse CTF? That sounds horrible! I was under the intention that it was going to be objective-based like the awesome Return to Castle Wolfenstein/Enemy Territory. Wow, that is a let down.

 

2. Minimal squad control

 

I didn't think of this earlier, but the squad control is very simple, almost too simple. You can't do several things that might be considered practical in scenarios. As the reviewer wrote, boss can't order one trooper to stand at one specific position and use one specific weapon. Also, all the opportunities to use special formations are predefined. I can't tell the demolitions specialist to plant an explosive on any wall or surface; the game has to give me a possible location. Thus, tactics are restricted to the options given in the map environment where the devs decided you might want to use [insert strategic idea here].

 

3. Experts aren't necessarily better than the next guy.

 

As noted by the reviewer, if you assign the hacker to slice a terminal and then assign a trooper of another specialty to slice another terminal, they will both complete the job in the same time. What's the point of a specialist if anyone can do the "special" operation?

 

4. It's linear.

 

It's too linear in the maps. One never has more than one path to take.

 

EDIT: ADDITION

 

There is no convenient pop-up menu for squad control orders. Then again the orders are limited to 4, one of which never seems to work for me in the demo (I think it is called "recall"?).

[El Sitherino]

Originally posted by JDKnite188

So this is reverse CTF? That sounds horrible! I was under the intention that it was going to be objective-based like the awesome Return to Castle Wolfenstein/Enemy Territory. Wow, that is a let down.

Uhmm.. who's to say there aren't still objectives?

[TK-8252]

Originally posted by JDKnite188

Then again the orders are limited to 4, one of which never seems to work for me in the demo (I think it is called "recall"?).

 

Recall takes your troopers out of positions like sniping, turret, etc.

 

I would have liked a fall back command, since the only ways to fall back is to form up and then lead them back, or tell them to secure the area where you'd want them to fall back. It would have also been nice for a fall back command when you're incapped, so you can stop the rest of them from getting incapped too.

[El Sitherino]

Agreed, a fall back woulda been a nice command to have.

[SlicerDude]

While the limited squad tactics and overly linear nature of the game are surely valid concerns, I've noticed from playing through the PC demo several times that the game is much more dynamic and open-ended than it seems at first, partly thanks to some (usually) great AI. Ironically, there is often little use for more squad control, as your squadmates often do the right thing automatically.

[Kurgan]

Originally posted by InsaneSith

Uhmm.. who's to say there aren't still objectives?

 

True, there might be. However, CTF is pretty basic and always has been.

 

Go into the enemy's base, grab their flag. Carry it back to your base and your flag. Touch the two flags together and you score. Take away the flags and it's just a team deathmatch.

 

From the IGN review I surmise you run into your own base, and carry your flag. Then you carry it into the enemy base and tag their flag, and you score.

 

 

This really is no different than how Quake 3 Team Arena (the official Quake 3 Arena expansion) was able to stretch out CTF into so many game modes with variations (soul stealer, destructable flag, one flag CTF, etc). It used the exact same maps, there was just a little variation on what you did with the flag, like a mutator (mini mods that the Unreal series was famous for).

 

Sure, it's a little variation, but from the sound of it, it's nowhere the complexity or even the same type of game as Unreal Tournament's "Assault" or JA's "Siege."

 

I hope I'm wrong, I really do. But from the sound of it, I'm not too optimistic.

 

My only strong disappointment is the multiplayer aspects of the game. The CTF, Assault and Deathmatch games are fine enough, but the different trooper types were just crying out for some kind of class-based multiplayer action.

 

So no class based action. Bummer... That's basically all the positive reviewer had to say about MP (from here)

[TK-8252]

It's possible that a class-based gametype would be too hard to get together for how this game is. I mean, the Republic Commandos pretty much do it all. Their DC-17m is a blaster, sniper, and anti-armor (that'd be the Soldier class right there), and they have the revive tool (Medic), door breaches and dynamite (Engineer, just no pliers or in SW it'd be a fusioncutter like in SWBF). Even if there were seperate Medics and Engineers and such, what would they look like? And how could the Trandos even match the Commandos?

[Kurgan]

It wouldn't be that hard to do, as you said, just split up the gear and weapons rather than having each trooper be an "everyman."

 

As to what they'd look like, they could do lots of things. Team beacons, colors, etc. They don't have to slavishly adhere to the same conventions as Single Player.

 

And the Trandoshans could simply have their own equivalents. There are already different models and such of them in the Single Player game, and just because they might seem weak or dumb there doesn't mean they'd have to be in MP. They're just models. Or they could have made it trooper vs. troopers, or introduced other factions like the Droids, Geonosians, etc.

 

I think they probably just ran out of time, having spent it trying to refine the gameplay for the simplicity of the console.

[El Sitherino]

I don't see why anyone expected a class system.

 

I still don't see a problem with the "reverse" ctf. You gotta have a flag to claim land, it's the rules.

[Kurgan]

If you want to defend the game fine. I'm more than willing to give it a fair chance myself.

 

And I'm sure the developers tried their best. The game was delayed a few months, and this is probably all they can do within their budget. It'd be interesting to read a post-mortem on it of course, but I can't help but be disappointed already with what might have been.

 

Again, I'll give the game a fair shot, I'm just expressing my disappointment that certain features, which seem perfect for this type of game, weren't utilized.

 

And no, nobody was assuming there was going to be class based gameplay, however, the fact that there were "specialists" in SP was quite the tease, wouldn't you agree? And it's not as if the more popular FPS games don't take advantage of this feature, so naturally it would be something we'd wonder about.

 

I'm not accusing LucasArts of lying, I hope you didn't get that impression.

 

And as far as Assault goes, no, we never knew anything about it until very recently. From the get go this game was just "Deathmatch, Team Deathmatch, and CTF."

 

So we assumed right off the bat it was going to be extremely basic MP options.

 

However, "Assault" is the exact same name as a famous UT mode (same engine too), which is objective based (but not class based, at least not in the original UT).

 

Had they called it "Reverse CTF" nobody would have gotten their hopes up that this was an objective based game mode, period.

[El Sitherino]

It's not that I'm going out to defend the game, it's just that some of the arguments seem rather silly. Everyone is jumping to conclusions about things acting like they know exactly what the details are (or atleast that's how it comes off).

 

Assualt is just storming the enemies base, they probably added the flag thing to give it a bit of a unique feel.

And think about it, violating the enemies morale by planting the flag of your side, it makes ya feel squishy inside. Conquering > stealing a flag.

 

I agree saying they're specialists but when others doing the same tasks as the specialist and finishing at the same time seems a bit weird, but it's easy to overlook while you're playing the game. I don't remember anyone pointing it out after playing the demo, but now that someone said it in a review, everyones going on about it.

 

I never said you were accusing LA of lying, but not everything can be blamed on them, if anything blame the tease on the marketting departments. They're the ones that decide what gets thrown at us.

 

And I respect everyones opinion, but I get bothered by people blowing pretty much trivial things out of proportion.

So the specialist and non-specialist finish a task at the same time, doesn't matter.

 

True they could have expanded on a lot of things, but given it's Star Wars (while a huge phenomenon) it doesn't sell well in games, except to those who are big star wars fans. They have to make exceptions to most of their games because they need to hit the mainstream market, not just satisfy the game nerds.

 

Another reason I can't take the IGN review seriously is the mention of Halo2, while a good game it was far from anything amazing.

 

All I want is people to try not to blow things out of proportion. I don't mind if you're apprehensive about the game, but making judgements at this point when we have such little knowledge is kind of silly and discouraging.

 

And as a child of the NES and SNES, I still find simplicity better than extravagent features.

[eastcoast2895]

the only thing that has me thinking about this game right now is funds to purchase the game. seeing the two reviews of having at least a score of 8 looks really promising to me. I think it is getting harder and harder for fps to get a good score without bringing something completely new to the table. Especially without a strong mp component. also i'm kinda happy that the worst part of the game is the lackluster mp. alot more things could have gone wrong, which i thought would happen, with the game and it seems that they accomplished most of what they set out to do.

 

Also republic commando is another game in a short time period based on star wars that got good reviews. I hope that we are seeing the start of the resurgence of not only good, but great star wars games.

 

Although i can see where people are weary about buying this game. for 40 - 50 dollars, that is an investment that you want to make sure you get your moneys worth. right now in pc games, a strong mp component adds worth to a game while a weak mp component makes it that much harder to buy the game because the game doesn't have the replay values of games with strong mp components.

[Kurgan]

Originally posted by InsaneSith

It's not that I'm going out to defend the game, it's just that some of the arguments seem rather silly. Everyone is jumping to conclusions about things acting like they know exactly what the details are (or atleast that's how it comes off).

 

Assualt is just storming the enemies base, they probably added the flag thing to give it a bit of a unique feel.

And think about it, violating the enemies morale by planting the flag of your side, it makes ya feel squishy inside. Conquering > stealing a flag.

 

I agree, it sounds like a lot of fun. I greatly enjoyed Jedi Master, CTY and Holocron FFA in Jedi Outcast (what little I got to play of them, since they weren't very popular). However, when you get right down to it, they weren't really new game modes, more like mutators. They change one small (but important) aspect of gameplay and recycle everything else, including the maps and most of the item/weapon spawns.

 

When JA announced that it wouldn't have those modes, I was disappointed. And I could have cared less about PowerDuel (which I saw as a blatant attempt to stroke the egos of duelists and those who wanted to roleplay TPM's saber battles). However I was very excited about Siege. Finally, a completely new game mode with unique maps and such. And it was great. Obviously not perfect, but more than made up for losing those "mutators."

 

Here I was thinking that they could give us the "Siege" of this game, but instead we get the mutators. From a design standpoint they were probably hurting on time so they'd throw in another feature for some extra fun, and they simply couldn't afford to design an entire game mode with brand new maps for it.

 

The biggest "fear" about this game is that the Multiplayer will be lack luster. There's been a decided silence from LA about MP details. The reviewers spend only a handfull of words on it, generally to dismiss it as run of the mill. That has me worried.

 

Now, as to the fan community, if editing is virtually wide open like it was for the Unreal/UT series, then there is hope. We could create our own "Assault" in the vein of UT's. Of course it would take a lot of work, but it would be possible. Consider for example how many user-created Siege maps there are out there for JA, even though we did get help from the developers for editing and they did include that mode in the game.

 

Then again from what I've been told UT is easier to edit than Q3, and both games had a large editing "repository" already.

 

I agree saying they're specialists but when others doing the same tasks as the specialist and finishing at the same time seems a bit weird, but it's easy to overlook while you're playing the game. I don't remember anyone pointing it out after playing the demo, but now that someone said it in a review, everyones going on about it.

 

I remember after playing the Demo I hadn't really "gotten to know" the characters in the squad. I had to look up their names and personalities, because while I played I didn't pay attention to who was who. I just heard in the background somebody wise cracking and somebody talking like he thinks he's a killer. ; )

 

Now sure, one the first few games when we're still learning the ropes the lack of depth isn't going to be a big deal, but I'm talking about longevity for this game here. How many times are we going to play through Single Player? And after that, what's left? I'm not expecting the level of depth of the JK series (you automatically had lots more options with the Force/sabers), but still. Even the level of depth of UT would have been nice.

 

Maybe they'll do something unique with MP, but it seems kind of telling that the reviewers don't talk about it much. Were they not given access to the finished MP module? It seems to have not left much of an impression, and that's what's worrisome.

 

And yes, I'll admit I am a bit biased, because I've been looking forward to the MP portion most of all, because due to spoilers I figured that would be what I'd be playing until ROTS came out in theaters, rather than SP (which would have more spoilers built in).

 

I never said you were accusing LA of lying, but not everything can be blamed on them, if anything blame the tease on the marketting departments. They're the ones that decide what gets thrown at us.

 

If anything they can be blamed for not talking about the MP portion, and thus allowing us to speculate wildly and second guess it. It's almost as if they are too embarrassed to talk about it, other than to say "yeah, it has some multiplayer, now be happy." ; p

 

Still, LucasArts is publishing the game, developing it AND promoting it, I think some "blame" is to be shared. And it's been a long time since they've developed a high profile game themselves hasn't it? This is LUCASARTS, not valusoft, we expect a lot from them. So naturally there's going to be more scrutiny.

 

And I respect everyones opinion, but I get bothered by people blowing pretty much trivial things out of proportion.

 

Notice the great reviews for this game. Clearly the critics who've played it think it's a great game. However they all gloss over the MP portion as if it's not even there. I'm not just a single player kinda guy, and maybe in this day and age nobody cares about MP anymore, but I do. So when a game purports to be this great SP game, but the MP stinks or is barely there, well, it's like getting half a game.

 

Again, I might be wrong. MP might be so much fun that I forget that there's nothing beyond the usual game modes we've had for years in every other FPS with a star wars coat of paint. I laughed at the people who called the JK games "Quake with lightsabers" but in this case...

 

Maybe the gameplay will be so deep that the lack of game modes won't be a big factor. Who knows?

 

So the specialist and non-specialist finish a task at the same time, doesn't matter.

 

Meaning it's merely cosmetic, and therefore irrelevant. I'll be the sniper! (who has no benefits for sniping at all) etc.

 

True they could have expanded on a lot of things, but given it's Star Wars (while a huge phenomenon) it doesn't sell well in games, except to those who are big star wars fans.

 

This is the part I'm confused about. Do Star Wars games sell big? Yes, they do. Are there good Star Wars games which have sold well? Yes.

 

Or are you saying they probably thought "well it's Star Wars, it'll sell no matter what they do" and therefore they just didn't give it their all?

 

Or perhaps that Star Wars being what it is sets expectations too high and therefore no SW game can ever be good? (Because nerds are too finicky?)

 

Just saying that Star Wars games are a niche market and therefore we can assume they will bomb is nonesense. Not every game is successful out there, but many Star Wars games are among the most popular and successful or classic games of all, and I'm not saying that just as a hardcore fanatical fan. Jedi Knight series, X-Wing series, KOTOR, the Snes/NES games, the arcade games, Rogue Squadron, etc. And SWG is huge, even if it caters to the nerdish MMORPG market (all of those MMORPG games attract fanatics).

 

 

They have to make exceptions to most of their games because they need to hit the mainstream market, not just satisfy the game nerds.

 

This I agree with. The simplified controls and modes are ideal for the Xbox platform. For consoles they can save money on tech support, and charge a higher premium, plus console gamers are used to a lower standard of gameplay depth for FPS's, so it'll do better there than on the PC, just like SWBF.

 

Another reason I can't take the IGN review seriously is the mention of Halo2, while a good game it was far from anything amazing.

 

Having not played the Halo games I can only go by hearsay. My general impression is though that they're nothing really special (to a pc gamer) they are just amazing for the console, because there are few games up to that standard.

 

All I want is people to try not to blow things out of proportion. I don't mind if you're apprehensive about the game, but making judgements at this point when we have such little knowledge is kind of silly and discouraging.

 

I've tried to frequently mention that I'm NOT trying to panic or judge the game. However, the MP portion I am apprehensive about. I could just say "Yes, this game sounds awesome!" but that wouldn't be my opinion. I'm certainly not going to begrudge somebody who has a different opinion. Your's is a "wait and see" approach. But still, there's nothing wrong with discussion the possible pro's and con's of a game before it's out. That's why we have reviews.

 

And yes, the reviewers could be blowing smoke and misinformed, and this too I admitted right off the bat.

 

And as a child of the NES and SNES, I still find simplicity better than extravagent features.

 

Hey, I grew up with those systems too (I had a genesis and played my friend's NES, SNES when I could), and I played arcade games in the 1980's and 1990's. Loved 'em. But that doesn't mean I don't like complex pc games. Simply put, if you're going to spend $50 or 60 bucks on a game and only play it for 2 weeks because that's all there is to it, that's a rip.

 

That is why rental places are great, you rent a game, play it for a few nights, beat it, return it, forget about it.

 

PC games are different. You can't really rent them most of the time (I've never seen a PC game rental place, have you?), and that's that. Sure, they drop in price faster than console games, but still.

 

And I understand the game market being what it is, it takes a LOT OF WORK to make a game. Back in the good ol days of the Atari VCS and such a single programmer could write a cartridge in his basement in a week or so and sell it. Nowadays it takes teams of designers and million dollar budgets and big studios to catch up with the latest graphics and trends. As John Carmack said once, they're making the same 20 or 30 levels that they were in the old shareware days, except it's taking more time and more money because of the technology involved. The gamers expect more, but they only have so much manpower and thus diminishing returns.

 

Well, that's tough, but they've gotta be creative if they want to keep people's attention.

 

That's what I'm saying. So I guess I can agree to disagree... and wait and see (and be a poet). ; )

[El Sitherino]

What I was saying is that alot of people expect more than can be given. And everyone wants something different from the game, I think they made the choice that'll get them the most sales.

 

Look at the top-selling FPS' (aside from HL2) today, they are lacking in story, have meh layout. It's all in the eye-candy, I personally find RC to be so much more fun and interesting than Halo2 and those other meh games that get thrown around as incredible life altering event type games. But RC is far from perfect. But I think it succeeds in what it set out to do, let us play as clones and do missions in a gritty, "war is hell" fashion.

 

MP will be mostly a love it or hate it thing, I'm certain of that. (Much like JA)

 

I agree we're probably being jipped in some areas, but I think the rest of the game will make up for that.

 

originally posted by Kurgan

Hey, I grew up with those systems too (I had a genesis and played my friend's NES, SNES when I could), and I played arcade games in the 1980's and 1990's. Loved 'em. But that doesn't mean I don't like complex pc games. Simply put, if you're going to spend $50 or 60 bucks on a game and only play it for 2 weeks because that's all there is to it, that's a rip.

Yeah, but I'm saying sticking with simplicity will always bring you success with people, where as going out there and trying something new and extravagent is either hit or miss.

I agree if you're paying 50-60 for a game that lasts you 2 weeks, it's a rip.

 

The thing is there are lots of games like that, but some people find themselves playing them all the time for.... forever.

 

Me after the first few levels of halo2 I was left unmoved and very bored, others found it to be an awesome video game.

 

Myself, I find RC a pick up and play game with an actual challenge. As in you can pick up the game, learn the controls in little to no time at all, and there's still a challenge, unlike most pick up and play games.

 

In the end, I'm reserving my judgement on MP for when I play it, until then I'll just continue to question those that pounce at the MP reviews as messages of doom. [/rant]

[Kurgan]

One very good point you made (among many) that I really agree with is on the atmosphere. I did get a very deep sense of "atmosphere" playing the RC demo.

 

I could say the same thing about SWBF. While I had some serious issues with the game and haven't played it in several months due to losing interest (I may pick it up again one of these days, if for no other reason than to see if the last patch has improved it any), the game really has a strong atmosphere thing going for it. The first time I played an Instant Action game on Endor, it sent shivers down my spine. I felt like I was IN a "real" Star Wars battle, not just shooting some dumb enemies in some run of the mill liscensed game.

 

And RC has some great graphics, I love 'em. The question I have is "will this be enough" to be a game I'll want to play beyond two weeks.

 

Here you can stop reading, from this point on I begin to ramble, as is my habit...

 

I grant you, not every game can be a "classic." It's just not possible to believe that every work created can be a masterpiece. And with the huge budgets and long man hours put into each and every game, it's sad that they don't all get rewarded for their creations like some do (based on fickle public opinion sales). But, that's how it goes I guess.

 

I've seen the FPS market as being made up of two groups of developers... the "artists" who create the engines and eye candy, but which lack focus and substance, and the "editors" who take that chaotic prettiness potential and shape it into something more meaningful. In this case (on the surface) it looks like LucasArts should be the editors with a game like RC, but they are playing the part of the artists instead.

 

I could be wrong (and those terms are just ones I made up on the spot for this, and I'm tired so I probably ceased making sense several paragraphs ago, oh well).

 

We'll see in about a week...!