It's a fun game provided you like the style of Total War games. Basically, an overworld map which you move your pieces around kinda like a risk board, where there's cities and areas of influence. You station armies at natural barriers to provide defensive advantage, have armies made of various types of troops, build and manage those provinces, and try to fulfill specific goals in order to achieve victory. Lots of other aspects to the turn-based system.
In addition to that, there's a realtime battle system you can go into when you're actually fighting a battle between armies, where it'll zoom into a 3d battlefield based off of the area you're fighting in, where you move units in a tactical fashion to kill your enemies. The game takes place in Europe/Northern Africa, India, and the Americas.
I'm slightly interested in Medal of Honor: Airborne for $10. I'd be even more interested at $5.
It's an above mediocre, but certainly nothing special, WW2 FPS with one good trick (the parachuting) and 'open world' levels that don't actually feel different to linear levels in any significant way.
Play the demo, if you enjoy the demo, you'll likely enjoy the whole game.
I'm slightly interested in Medal of Honor: Airborne for $10. I'd be even more interested at $5.
It's an above mediocre, but certainly nothing special, WW2 FPS with one good trick (the parachuting) and 'open world' levels that don't actually feel different to linear levels in any significant way.
Play the demo, if you enjoy the demo, you'll likely enjoy the whole game.
The demo was pretty fun when I tried it a while ago, but I just got CitiesXL.
At least it's current price isn't a sale or promotion or anything.
My brother is playing the Angle of Attack demo at the moment. Being curious, I looked up the developer: 3000AD, Inc.
I was under the impression they had died out, after the whole Battlecruiser 3000AD fiasco.
Are either Angle of Attack or All Aspect Warfare worth picking up, or should I trust my instincts and stay far, far away?
Tamin on
0
pyromaniac221this just might bean interestin YTRegistered Userregular
edited October 2009
Holy shit battlefield 2.
I never played it the first time. I'm really tempted here
My brother is playing the Angle of Attack demo at the moment. Being curious, I looked up the developer: 3000AD, Inc.
I was under the impression they had died out, after the whole Battlecruiser 3000AD fiasco.
Are either Angle of Attack or All Aspect Warfare worth picking up, or should I trust my instincts and stay far, far away?
No Derek Smart's still around, people still buy his games.
I'd say trust your instincts since the guy's absolutely freaking mental, but if you're really desperate you can try the demo. Just don't go complaining about any of the gameplay "features" on his forums because then he'll just start ranting about how you're an idiot. I am not making that up.
My brother is playing the Angle of Attack demo at the moment. Being curious, I looked up the developer: 3000AD, Inc.
I was under the impression they had died out, after the whole Battlecruiser 3000AD fiasco.
Are either Angle of Attack or All Aspect Warfare worth picking up, or should I trust my instincts and stay far, far away?
No Derek Smart's still around, people still buy his games.
I'd say trust your instincts since the guy's absolutely freaking mental, but if you're really desperate you can try the demo. Just don't go complaining about any of the gameplay "features" on his forums because then he'll just start ranting about how you're an idiot. I am not making that up.
My brother is playing the Angle of Attack demo at the moment. Being curious, I looked up the developer: 3000AD, Inc.
I was under the impression they had died out, after the whole Battlecruiser 3000AD fiasco.
Are either Angle of Attack or All Aspect Warfare worth picking up, or should I trust my instincts and stay far, far away?
No Derek Smart's still around, people still buy his games.
I'd say trust your instincts since the guy's absolutely freaking mental, but if you're really desperate you can try the demo. Just don't go complaining about any of the gameplay "features" on his forums because then he'll just start ranting about how you're an idiot. I am not making that up.
My brother is playing the Angle of Attack demo at the moment. Being curious, I looked up the developer: 3000AD, Inc.
I was under the impression they had died out, after the whole Battlecruiser 3000AD fiasco.
Are either Angle of Attack or All Aspect Warfare worth picking up, or should I trust my instincts and stay far, far away?
No Derek Smart's still around, people still buy his games.
I'd say trust your instincts since the guy's absolutely freaking mental, but if you're really desperate you can try the demo. Just don't go complaining about any of the gameplay "features" on his forums because then he'll just start ranting about how you're an idiot. I am not making that up.
He used to post on the message board of a video game review/demo/patch/walkthrough site I would frequent. I think it has gone belly up and I can't recall the name anymore. Derek Smart was hilarious. I kinda miss reading his rants and self delusions.
Oh and Steam related... Do people still play a lot of BF2 and do the expansions split the community apart?
My brother is playing the Angle of Attack demo at the moment. Being curious, I looked up the developer: 3000AD, Inc.
I was under the impression they had died out, after the whole Battlecruiser 3000AD fiasco.
Are either Angle of Attack or All Aspect Warfare worth picking up, or should I trust my instincts and stay far, far away?
No Derek Smart's still around, people still buy his games.
I'd say trust your instincts since the guy's absolutely freaking mental, but if you're really desperate you can try the demo. Just don't go complaining about any of the gameplay "features" on his forums because then he'll just start ranting about how you're an idiot. I am not making that up.
He'll also ban you if you have any problems getting the game to work. My ex-roommate couldn't figure out how to get it running online and asked how on the forums and got banned by Mr. Shitfucker himself.
He used to post on the message board of a video game review/demo/patch/walkthrough site I would frequent. I think it has gone belly up and I can't recall the name anymore. Derek Smart was hilarious. I kinda miss reading his rants and self delusions.
Oh and Steam related... Do people still play a lot of BF2 and do the expansions split the community apart?
He often posts on RPS.
He's still freaking insane. Were we to develop a means of giving it mass, his ego would envelop Jupiter.
My brother is playing the Angle of Attack demo at the moment. Being curious, I looked up the developer: 3000AD, Inc.
I was under the impression they had died out, after the whole Battlecruiser 3000AD fiasco.
Are either Angle of Attack or All Aspect Warfare worth picking up, or should I trust my instincts and stay far, far away?
No Derek Smart's still around, people still buy his games.
I'd say trust your instincts since the guy's absolutely freaking mental, but if you're really desperate you can try the demo. Just don't go complaining about any of the gameplay "features" on his forums because then he'll just start ranting about how you're an idiot. I am not making that up.
He'll also ban you if you have any problems getting the game to work. My ex-roommate couldn't figure out how to get it running online and asked how on the forums and got banned by Mr. Shitfucker himself.
RPS made a post about the demo for AAW being released. An early poster said it was crashing for him, just saying he was having problems with it, nothing antagonistic at all. Smart went on a crazy rant about how stupid he must be. CLEARLY the game wasn't faulty because they had tracked down and eliminated all the bugs in their database, it was simply impossible that anything could be an issue. Yes he literally was saying that his game released as completely perfect.
The RPS guys later modded his comment out and left a message instead telling him not to go crazy on people just for raising legitimate issues. Honestly, I have no idea why RPS love him so much, whenever anything to do with him crops up they end up having to delete half of his idiot comments along with the rest of the flamewar.
Yeah but his excuse making is just as dumb. He'll happily lambaste other companies and their games calling them crap and shallow, but when it's about his games then reviewers "just don't understand, they aren't the kind of audience who'd appreciate it". It's pathetic the way he tries to wheedle by on that when he doesn't have an issue with calling other devs and their games pointless. Like the way he constantly wheels out his "Well I'm still in business, unlike a lot of the BIG BOYS, that makes me BETTER than them" routine.
Once he's been called out on losing it for no reason, he just adopts a different kind of self-flattering idiocy.
So I just finished Dark Forces.......no mouselook and most of my 5 button mouse being useless is a painful experience. Ending was pretty meh too. Definitely shows it's age but it was fun.
Randy Pitchford, the man, trusts Valve, the company responsible for Steam. Randy Pitchford, the businessman and president of Gearbox Software, makers of Borderlands, may not. He calls the digital distribution service exploitative and a "money grab."
Why the harsh words? After all Gearbox and Valve have been tight in the past, with the former developing Half-Life expansions for the latter. Pitchford tells MaximumPC that, even though he loves Valve games, "There's so much conflict of interest there that it's horrid."
"It would be much better if Steam was its own business," he says. "It's actually really, really dangerous for the rest of the industry to allow Valve to win."
"I love Valve games, and I do business with the company," Pitchford notes. Borderlands is currently available for pre-sale through Steam. "But, I'm just saying, Steam isn't the answer. Steam helps us as customers, but it's also a money grab, and Valve is exploiting a lot of people in a way that's not totally fair."
Maybe Randy got up on the wrong side of the bed the morning of the interview. Maybe this is just one of his eyebrow raising "tall tales" of Valve. Maybe he's just got a game promote.
Pitchford's answer about who might be a better solution than Valve and Steam might surprise you. You can enjoy it at the full interview linked below.
I recently inherited a Steam account, and have been replaying through Opposing Force again. I forgot how satisfying a wrench clunking on a vortigaunt's skull can be.
My system is a little older, so I wish Steam had some way to sort games by system requirements.
Randy Pitchford, the man, trusts Valve, the company responsible for Steam. Randy Pitchford, the businessman and president of Gearbox Software, makers of Borderlands, may not. He calls the digital distribution service exploitative and a "money grab."
Why the harsh words? After all Gearbox and Valve have been tight in the past, with the former developing Half-Life expansions for the latter. Pitchford tells MaximumPC that, even though he loves Valve games, "There's so much conflict of interest there that it's horrid."
"It would be much better if Steam was its own business," he says. "It's actually really, really dangerous for the rest of the industry to allow Valve to win."
"I love Valve games, and I do business with the company," Pitchford notes. Borderlands is currently available for pre-sale through Steam. "But, I'm just saying, Steam isn't the answer. Steam helps us as customers, but it's also a money grab, and Valve is exploiting a lot of people in a way that's not totally fair."
Maybe Randy got up on the wrong side of the bed the morning of the interview. Maybe this is just one of his eyebrow raising "tall tales" of Valve. Maybe he's just got a game promote.
Pitchford's answer about who might be a better solution than Valve and Steam might surprise you. You can enjoy it at the full interview linked below.
I basically agree with him that Steam probably should be it's own entity apart from Valve. And I thought it basically was as far as the teams working on it were concerned, but even if they did spin it off it would still be owned by Valve. I think Pitchford is really just miffed that it's owned by a private company and no one can get a look at the numbers.
It's true that Valve does wield a lot of power basically being the caretaker of PC gaming at the moment, but no one else really seems to be as dedicated and able to do what Steam does. Stardock is coming close, and could give Steam a real run if they had the community features Valve has.
It probably does suck for devs that Valve products get so much exposure and play through Steam, but even retail stores have their own brands for products. Maybe not for software, but you can buy Wal-Mart brand toilet paper so his analogy to digital stores being retail stores doesn't really hold up all that well.
Randy Pitchford, the man, trusts Valve, the company responsible for Steam. Randy Pitchford, the businessman and president of Gearbox Software, makers of Borderlands, may not. He calls the digital distribution service exploitative and a "money grab."
Why the harsh words? After all Gearbox and Valve have been tight in the past, with the former developing Half-Life expansions for the latter. Pitchford tells MaximumPC that, even though he loves Valve games, "There's so much conflict of interest there that it's horrid."
"It would be much better if Steam was its own business," he says. "It's actually really, really dangerous for the rest of the industry to allow Valve to win."
"I love Valve games, and I do business with the company," Pitchford notes. Borderlands is currently available for pre-sale through Steam. "But, I'm just saying, Steam isn't the answer. Steam helps us as customers, but it's also a money grab, and Valve is exploiting a lot of people in a way that's not totally fair."
Maybe Randy got up on the wrong side of the bed the morning of the interview. Maybe this is just one of his eyebrow raising "tall tales" of Valve. Maybe he's just got a game promote.
Pitchford's answer about who might be a better solution than Valve and Steam might surprise you. You can enjoy it at the full interview linked below.
I basically agree with him that Steam probably should be it's own entity apart from Valve. And I thought it basically was as far as the teams working on it were concerned, but even if they did spin it off it would still be owned by Valve. I think Pitchford is really just miffed that it's owned by a private company and no one can get a look at the numbers.
It's true that Valve does wield a lot of power basically being the caretaker of PC gaming at the moment, but no one else really seems to be as dedicated and able to do what Steam does. Stardock is coming close, and could give Steam a real run if they had the community features Valve has.
It probably does suck for devs that Valve products get so much exposure and play through Steam, but even retail stores have their own brands for products. Maybe not for software, but you can buy Wal-Mart brand toilet paper so his analogy to digital stores being retail stores doesn't really hold up all that well.
Plus let's be completely honest here. Before Valve and Steam nobody gave a cast iron crap about DD, not in any real way. Nobody else was willing to do it, Valve shopped around trying to get anyone else to build it because they felt it was necessary, and the response was always that it wasn't a worthwhile thing to do. They're the ones that built the whole system from scratch (off the back of money made from just one game), they're the ones that went through years of teething troubles with a pretty crappy system that they evolved over time by actually listening to gamers to find out what they wanted, and listening to developers to find out they wanted the system to do.
Steam isn't the way it is through freaking luck. Publishers and devs were happy to simply ignore the importance of DD, but now that it's established comments like this just come off to me as whining that Valve made the best system whilst they refused to do anything. Of course Valve is going to own Steam. EA owns the EA store, Stardock owns Impulse. They push their own games on those systems, and if they become popular enough to stock other major titles, they'll still push their titles on there.
Steam has the market because it's the best system. D2D is starting to catch up as a marketplace, Impulse is starting to catch up in terms of community features. There are other options, but they're not there yet.
I don't honestly see how Steam can be separated from Valve. Steam isn't its separate working group, the dudes who work on Steam also work on Team Fortress, or Half Life. They swap roles around. I mean who becomes CEO of Steam? Is Valve supposed to completely stop making money from the system now that they've made it?
I don't get it. I understand the comments about lack of competition, but frankly in this case it's the fault of the competition for not doing anything when they needed to, and now competing with inferior products. When they've got decent systems of their own, then there'll be real competition. THAT will take time, but I don't believe that Valve can remain the only real market in town for much longer. It doesn't help that they try to push stupid schemes like one year download limits, but seriously, whose fault is that other than their own? They've got a good template in Steam, you can either copy the good bits and try to improve from there, or you can do what EA store does and deliberately make things worse in the hopes of getting more sales out of people, and wondering why nobody buys from you directly.
EDIT: I realise he's joking, but Microsoft, and Wal-mart? Those are the examples he gives? He talks about other people being uncomfortable with that, he can count me in with them. He says Valve is a problem monopoly but Microsoft being the gatekeepers to DD instead would be better?!
Yeah I didn't really get the comments about MS either. MS is basically a gatekeeper already, they own the software everyone needs for a PC platform to exist and have for basically ever. They just don't give a shit about it because of the Xbox.
Yeah I didn't really get the comments about MS either. MS is basically a gatekeeper already, they own the software everyone needs for a PC platform to exist and have for basically ever. They just don't give a shit about it because of the Xbox.
Pretty much. There's no reason for them to, they can't charge a subscription fee for it so there's no financial interest in developing it. Any recent developments they have made to the system have almost exclusively been about micropayments, still ignoring the most basic flaws with the system as it currently exists.
Although I suspect I know why there's no external GFWL client now. If one was constantly active (PC) you'd be constantly getting booted either from XBL or GFWL because they haven't altered the system to allow for people to be on both simultaneously. And there's no incentive to do so, so they just ignore the lack of an external client altogether
Posts
It's a fun game provided you like the style of Total War games. Basically, an overworld map which you move your pieces around kinda like a risk board, where there's cities and areas of influence. You station armies at natural barriers to provide defensive advantage, have armies made of various types of troops, build and manage those provinces, and try to fulfill specific goals in order to achieve victory. Lots of other aspects to the turn-based system.
In addition to that, there's a realtime battle system you can go into when you're actually fighting a battle between armies, where it'll zoom into a 3d battlefield based off of the area you're fighting in, where you move units in a tactical fashion to kill your enemies. The game takes place in Europe/Northern Africa, India, and the Americas.
It's huge, a lot of fun, but not for everyone.
Get it on Amazon, that way you have a nifty box and other assorted goodies, even though the box version still requires steam.
I was all ready to yell at you until I clicked your spoiler. :P
The title lies!
Too late for that.
It's an above mediocre, but certainly nothing special, WW2 FPS with one good trick (the parachuting) and 'open world' levels that don't actually feel different to linear levels in any significant way.
Play the demo, if you enjoy the demo, you'll likely enjoy the whole game.
No, they just didn't want you posting any announcements. :P
The demo was pretty fun when I tried it a while ago, but I just got CitiesXL.
At least it's current price isn't a sale or promotion or anything.
I was under the impression they had died out, after the whole Battlecruiser 3000AD fiasco.
Are either Angle of Attack or All Aspect Warfare worth picking up, or should I trust my instincts and stay far, far away?
I never played it the first time. I'm really tempted here
No Derek Smart's still around, people still buy his games.
I'd say trust your instincts since the guy's absolutely freaking mental, but if you're really desperate you can try the demo. Just don't go complaining about any of the gameplay "features" on his forums because then he'll just start ranting about how you're an idiot. I am not making that up.
Don't say his name, You might summon him :?
Who? Derek Smart?
Backlog Wars - Sonic Generations | Steam!
Viewing the forums through rose colored glasses... or Suriko's Ye Old Style and The PostCount/TimeStamp Restoral Device
Don't do that, mods don't like it.
Oh and Steam related... Do people still play a lot of BF2 and do the expansions split the community apart?
He'll also ban you if you have any problems getting the game to work. My ex-roommate couldn't figure out how to get it running online and asked how on the forums and got banned by Mr. Shitfucker himself.
He often posts on RPS.
He's still freaking insane. Were we to develop a means of giving it mass, his ego would envelop Jupiter.
RPS made a post about the demo for AAW being released. An early poster said it was crashing for him, just saying he was having problems with it, nothing antagonistic at all. Smart went on a crazy rant about how stupid he must be. CLEARLY the game wasn't faulty because they had tracked down and eliminated all the bugs in their database, it was simply impossible that anything could be an issue. Yes he literally was saying that his game released as completely perfect.
The RPS guys later modded his comment out and left a message instead telling him not to go crazy on people just for raising legitimate issues. Honestly, I have no idea why RPS love him so much, whenever anything to do with him crops up they end up having to delete half of his idiot comments along with the rest of the flamewar.
He still goes on and on, but it's usually more excuses from him and less "you suck at my game" as the comments pile up.
Once he's been called out on losing it for no reason, he just adopts a different kind of self-flattering idiocy.
Yeesh.
http://kotaku.com/5376708/gearbox-prez-lets-off-some-steam-about-valve
My system is a little older, so I wish Steam had some way to sort games by system requirements.
I basically agree with him that Steam probably should be it's own entity apart from Valve. And I thought it basically was as far as the teams working on it were concerned, but even if they did spin it off it would still be owned by Valve. I think Pitchford is really just miffed that it's owned by a private company and no one can get a look at the numbers.
It's true that Valve does wield a lot of power basically being the caretaker of PC gaming at the moment, but no one else really seems to be as dedicated and able to do what Steam does. Stardock is coming close, and could give Steam a real run if they had the community features Valve has.
It probably does suck for devs that Valve products get so much exposure and play through Steam, but even retail stores have their own brands for products. Maybe not for software, but you can buy Wal-Mart brand toilet paper so his analogy to digital stores being retail stores doesn't really hold up all that well.
Plus let's be completely honest here. Before Valve and Steam nobody gave a cast iron crap about DD, not in any real way. Nobody else was willing to do it, Valve shopped around trying to get anyone else to build it because they felt it was necessary, and the response was always that it wasn't a worthwhile thing to do. They're the ones that built the whole system from scratch (off the back of money made from just one game), they're the ones that went through years of teething troubles with a pretty crappy system that they evolved over time by actually listening to gamers to find out what they wanted, and listening to developers to find out they wanted the system to do.
Steam isn't the way it is through freaking luck. Publishers and devs were happy to simply ignore the importance of DD, but now that it's established comments like this just come off to me as whining that Valve made the best system whilst they refused to do anything. Of course Valve is going to own Steam. EA owns the EA store, Stardock owns Impulse. They push their own games on those systems, and if they become popular enough to stock other major titles, they'll still push their titles on there.
Steam has the market because it's the best system. D2D is starting to catch up as a marketplace, Impulse is starting to catch up in terms of community features. There are other options, but they're not there yet.
I don't honestly see how Steam can be separated from Valve. Steam isn't its separate working group, the dudes who work on Steam also work on Team Fortress, or Half Life. They swap roles around. I mean who becomes CEO of Steam? Is Valve supposed to completely stop making money from the system now that they've made it?
I don't get it. I understand the comments about lack of competition, but frankly in this case it's the fault of the competition for not doing anything when they needed to, and now competing with inferior products. When they've got decent systems of their own, then there'll be real competition. THAT will take time, but I don't believe that Valve can remain the only real market in town for much longer. It doesn't help that they try to push stupid schemes like one year download limits, but seriously, whose fault is that other than their own? They've got a good template in Steam, you can either copy the good bits and try to improve from there, or you can do what EA store does and deliberately make things worse in the hopes of getting more sales out of people, and wondering why nobody buys from you directly.
EDIT: I realise he's joking, but Microsoft, and Wal-mart? Those are the examples he gives? He talks about other people being uncomfortable with that, he can count me in with them. He says Valve is a problem monopoly but Microsoft being the gatekeepers to DD instead would be better?!
Pretty much. There's no reason for them to, they can't charge a subscription fee for it so there's no financial interest in developing it. Any recent developments they have made to the system have almost exclusively been about micropayments, still ignoring the most basic flaws with the system as it currently exists.
Although I suspect I know why there's no external GFWL client now. If one was constantly active (PC) you'd be constantly getting booted either from XBL or GFWL because they haven't altered the system to allow for people to be on both simultaneously. And there's no incentive to do so, so they just ignore the lack of an external client altogether
Eh, is right, but I went ahead and did so. If it came down to Gordon vs. Samus, I might have a problem, though.
edit: maybe I just have a thing for orange powered combat armor?