Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 47

Thread: Ground Control 2

  1. #16
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    18,631
    The only thing that's irritated me about it thus far is the Allied AI, particularly in the Beach storming level, when you recieve assistance from NSA forces. Only thing is they spend half their time runnign aroudn liek demented loons, rather than doing anything useful like siezing and consolidating objectives, it would be nice if you could requesition/control them (even if only temporarily) for support purposes etc.

    Other than that, this is probably the only RTS ive gotten much fun out of bar Myth II (see my comments elswhere about resource managment and their detrimental effect on strategy in RTS games)

    --Jakk

  2. #17
    Ultimate Member stix_kua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    My spoon is too big...
    Posts
    2,884
    It looks like a Star Wars and Halo crossover but it seems like it could be fun.
    "I'm no technical supervisor, I'm a supervising technician."
    --Homer Simpson

  3. #18
    Ultimate Member Vampiel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Dark side of the house
    Posts
    2,760
    After playing it longer and beating the NSA campaign, the storyline only get's better. BigJ, the level you are reffering to, they helped me out quite a bit. Of course it could have been better, but the AI did a good joob of taking/holding the strategic spot's I left for them to hold. If it's near their LZ then they will try to hold the strategic spot's, but dont count on it if it's far away.

    The spot's got taken, but they took them back with no help from me.

    I left them alone, the two near their LZ just to see what would happen, and they did take them back, but I took out the artillery in the middle that was pounding their LZ before all of this.
    Last edited by Vampiel; 07-11-2004 at 12:19 AM.

  4. #19
    Member holoflux's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Lamma Island, Hong Kong
    Posts
    368
    I've just started playing the game and though it's fun, I don't seem to spend much of my time admiring the close up graphics. To be able to manage your units you really need to see the bigger picture, so fo 90% of the time it looks more like C&C. Maybe I just need to get used to it and give it a bit more time, but I'm not finding the game play as intuitive as C&C either.
    Last edited by holoflux; 07-12-2004 at 03:13 AM.

  5. #20
    Ultimate Member Vampiel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Dark side of the house
    Posts
    2,760
    Give it time, I thought the same thing, you just have to get used to the control's, after that, I think it's better.

    Definentially much more challenging.

  6. #21
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    3

    Review

    Alright, here is my take on it. By the way, I'm new to the fourms, so hello everyone!

    The game is solid. I'd give it a 6 1/2 or 7 out of 10. Now, I base my numbers on 5 as an average (As it is, and I wonder why very few games get under a 7 or 8, which seems to be turning into the average). Everything I review in the game I score on its direct connection to how FUN it is to play.

    Sound: The FX are solid. However, the musical score is lacking, not because it is of poor quality, but because the soundtrack sounds like there is a fiesta going on while your fighting. It is not awe inspiring music. I does not detract from the game though, it just does not add the extra umph.

    Graphics: Absoloutly gorgous, but I agree with someone who posted earlier: The pretty graphics are wasted because you spend all your time zoomed out for good command view. You can double click on a unit (or hit its quick key twice) and it will give you a nice medium ranged view of that unit (or group), however it is not positioned as to give you a good view of what is going on in front of the tanks. A no branier for this game would have been a camera feature similar to the homeworld series, where you could zoom in to a point just behind the target unit, and a elevated. This would allow a battlefield commander to jump in to appreciate the graphics during battle, and then jump out to command again. So I think that is a no brainer that should have been included.

    Gameplay:
    I have a lot of thoughts on this. Overall, the gameplay is solid, but not as good as Command and Conquer or its predecessor Ground Control I (which I have been playing recently as they released it online for free).

    1. The difference between shooting a unit in the rear and shooting a unit in the front is not as drastically noticeable as in GCI.

    2. Units take a tremendous amount of damage in general compared to other strategy games. This makes artillary less effective, and leads to the constant use of a very, very annoying tactic: running right by. Now, I will admit this is partially personal preference, but I dislike long, drawn out battles between small numbers of units. If my tank takes two shots at a recon vehicle and hits, I believe it should be dead. Indead, recon vehicles can take 4-6 shots from a main battle tank.

    3. I am mixed on this. In GCI units (like infantry) would have a secondary RPG attack, but would be limited in the number of uses to 2. These secondary attacks were FAR more powerful than the GCII secondary attacks. Two infantry with anti-tank rounds could take out a main battle tank (from the side or rear, not from the front). Now infantry has a unlimited amount of ammo, but the attacks are far less effective. It is a trade off, however I prefer GCI style. I find it very satisfying to lay a good ambush and watch my infantry take out a few tanks in one shot, instead of 5. The outcome is the same, but the shock effect ads value.

    4. GCII camera has not improved since GCI. The camera moves up and down to match terrain, which is very annoying to any experienced strategy game commander. By match terrain, I mean if I move my camera over a valley, it falls down into the valley. Its nothing you can't deal with, but defintly feels unpolished.


    5. Overall, some of the gameplay that made GCI so great is not as noticeable. When units are moving they are less accurate, however this is much less noticeable in GCII. This also feeds into the tactic mentioned earlier: running right by frontline units to hit the more expensive units in the back.

    6. Aerodynes are done differently in GCII. I find both styles are acceptable and enjoyable. However, the fact that aerodynes may now be hit by incomming artillary fire seems a little silly.

    7. One last thing that pops to mind that is much less pronounced in GCII than in GCI, is the use of shadows in the terrain to hide troops. Man, what a great feature in GCI. I am not actually sure if that feature is still in GCII.

    8. The incorporation of buildings is great. It ads another demension to gameplay.

    9. The incorporation of aquisition points is a brillant move. By having areas that are, as defined by the game, of tactical importance, battle is much more concentrated. This is a big step up from GCI, where the multiplayer objective was to kill the enemy, but the map was so large it usually took long period of time to find the enemy will staying in a tactically sound formation (as to not leave yourself exposed unecessarily).

    I have not played multiplayer yet, but I will assume that it will be much better than the single player game (as it was in GCI).

    Final verdict: Defintly worth the money. I feel that it is a step down from its predicessor. However, GCI was a 8 in my opinion, so even a step down from 8 is a pretty solid game. Most of my complaints stem from my feeling that GCII was watered down for mass consumption. GCI was very unforgiving of stupid mistakes, GCII gives a little more leway. As a skilled gamer, I prefer games that are less forgiving and more challenging.



    P.S. I Apologize for any spelling errors, but the computer I am using at the moment does not have spell check installed (Who does that?) and it is not important enough for me to go over it myself. ==^_^==.

    I hope my review (messy as it is) helped some of you make a purchase decision.

  7. #22
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    3
    Couple things I forgot:

    Infantry are now selected individually instead of in squads. This is lame. The coolest part of GCI was that your squads WERE squads, and you could name them and then use them in subsequent missions.

    Yes, the game is worth its money, but I would suggest this is true only for casual gamers, and that strategy buffs, or GCI fans will not get as much fun out of it.

    They made the game into more of a generic strategy game, and took away a lot of what made GCI really really cool.

    So, worth the purchase if your a casual gamer. Otherwise its not worth it.

  8. #23
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    3
    Guys on the relic forums reamed GCII. Good complaints too.

    http://forums.relicnews.com/showthre...6&page=6&pp=15

  9. #24
    Hooya! Rabbitrunner51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Somewhere in time
    Posts
    6,129
    Good review...

    I just downloaded a free version of GC1 and am going to start playing it because When I originally played the demo..I gave it a 9 out of ten score. It was everything I thought it would be for a simple RTS Strategy game.Very entertaining and fun.

    The only yreason I would hold off buying this game now is there are others out there and coming up I want more..and finances are extrremely tight for me right now.

    For those who want to have the first game..it is now available from Fileplanet for free.
    Phenom 2 X4 B35 :ASRock N68C-S UCC: G Skill DDR1333 ( 4GB ): ATI Radeon HD6770 1GB : Logitech X504 5.1 SS speakers.:WD 500GB,&300GB Sata2 HD's ; Liteon Lightscribe 24X DVD/combo Drive : Antec 620C neo PSU: CTL 22"WS

  10. #25
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    29
    Originally posted by jcfinch
    Guys on the relic forums reamed GCII.
    i would ask u to qualify that satement. and u can discount anything said by ilia1986. the thread was closed by the administrator because of the high level of senseless pointless dribble being posted. if u read the post it is based on the demo and in some cases the early release promo vid. hardly a fair evauation.

    but this is a mote point since it is now released in all its splendor. open ur eyes.

  11. #26
    Ultimate Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    18,631
    Originally posted by Rabbitrunner51

    For those who want to have the first game..it is now available from Fileplanet for free.
    Goodie goodie, free games.

    I'll hang on till someone mirrors it though, yucky fileplanet.

    --Jakk

  12. #27
    Ultimate Member Vampiel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Dark side of the house
    Posts
    2,760
    I just finished this game I have to say that the storyline is very good. It's well thought out an avoid's the typical cliche's. Though toward the end, especially with the Viron's it get's sort of frusterating.

    I had to hold back for a long time in a defensive position and wait until I had sufficient force to defend my lz(s), all the while they normally have more lz's than you so they just get even bigger while you are defending.

    Then on top of that you have to mass an even bigger assault force b/c of the ridiculous defenses they had sometimes, while leaving your defensive force in position, ESPECIALLY in the 2nd to the last level it was just insane how many huge turret's they had, almost impossible to take their lz, though fortunately you dont have to take it, but you do have to fight near it in reach of there massive cannon's shooting and you and there heavy air defenses.

    Overall the game was very good, I guess you could say that my main complaint is that it was just to hard, though I dont expect the last level to be a cakewalk, but it was one of those thing's were there's no way you would be able to win on the first try. Im very good at these kind of game's and wouldnt expect alot of people to be able to beat it very quickly without cheating.

    In the NSA campaign you have another general helping you throughout most of it, but the Viron campaign you are pretty much by yourself.
    Last edited by Vampiel; 07-19-2004 at 05:22 AM.

  13. #28
    Hooya! Rabbitrunner51's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Somewhere in time
    Posts
    6,129
    Vampiel..you are just the person I am looking to talk to....

    I have been playing the first one for a couple of days( finally) and am getting a little frustrated on the third level...where the dropship lands and 4 ATV's and two groups of troops are given and you have five minutes to get through the enemies compond and destroy the generator( where is that?) ..but first you must destroy the Turrets..before they destroy your backup people...

    I get as far as maybe towards the exit..almost and just ahead of the turrets and just cannot make it...have played it a dozen or more times and can't seem to do it. Like in most games there is always some way of trick as to what ot destroy first or the best course of action.

    My skills at playing these type of games are pretty good and above average..and have to agree as it is pretty hard..and not an east task..whichever way you cut it.

    Any advice on this level??? I usually confer with some sort of walkthrough for getting stuck in games( sometimes) ..and have not looked this one up yet...not that it would help any.

    I still really like this game alot though....very much like C and C generals..don't you think??I got through all the allied parts and about 75% of the chinese in that one....and then got stuck again( I will pull this out soon and try again..as coming back later gives one a whole new perspective on things and courses of action)

    Jak.. have you got the first one yet from whomever..?? throw away your pride and download it from Fileplanet ( or Gamespy). It is well worth it and a good qame for free( better than alot of games nowadays for real money)
    Last edited by Rabbitrunner51; 07-19-2004 at 03:48 AM.
    Phenom 2 X4 B35 :ASRock N68C-S UCC: G Skill DDR1333 ( 4GB ): ATI Radeon HD6770 1GB : Logitech X504 5.1 SS speakers.:WD 500GB,&300GB Sata2 HD's ; Liteon Lightscribe 24X DVD/combo Drive : Antec 620C neo PSU: CTL 22"WS

  14. #29
    Ultimate Member Vampiel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 1999
    Location
    Dark side of the house
    Posts
    2,760
    Ive only seen the first one (when my friend was playing it). I never played it at all though so I have no idea as to any advice on the lv. you are on.

    Ive beaten the second one, that's all, no experience on the first one.

  15. #30
    Member jglaysher's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Surrey, UK
    Posts
    64
    What do you think the most acceptable PC specs would be for this game? Not the minimum specs

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •