Star Wars: Empire At War Demo

Oh the disappointment.

Kludgy UI. Poor resource management. Space battles in 2D.

I think SW: Rebellion was a better RTS then this one.



All it is, is basically C&C with SW units. Truly disgusted, and I was so looking forward to this game. At least GW still delivers...
 
Kidan said:
Oh the disappointment.

Kludgy UI. Poor resource management. Space battles in 2D.

I think SW: Rebellion was a better RTS then this one.



All it is, is basically C&C with SW units. Truly disgusted, and I was so looking forward to this game. At least GW still delivers...
Click to expand...
D'oh, that's a shame. I kept my eye on this one.
 
what the...

This demo is amazing, how can u say that space is 2d when its clearly not. have u seen the cinimatic view point? it looks like the movie for goodness sakes, whats a matter with you? i give this game demo a 10/10 its got great graphics, amazing game play, awesome storyline of course. so what if its like C&C, the game is pretty good as far as i know. would you rather have EA make this game? UHG! AND it runs fast on my computer which is a rare thing. your opinion is for you, but hey, the rest of the world likes it, so eat it.
 
Last edited:
Armandus said:
This demo is amazing, how can u say that space is 2d when its clearly not. have u seen the cinimatic view point? it looks like the movie for goodness sakes, whats a matter with you? i give this game demo a 10/10 its got great graphics, amazing game play, awesome storyline of course. AND it runs fast on my computer which is a rare thing. your opinion is for you, but hey, the rest of the world likes it, so eat it.
Click to expand...

o.0 grumpy.....;)


As for the space battles, yes the cinematic view point is pretty, but the problem is that it is cinematic, not gameplay. Ultimately, the cinematic viewpoint is a rather pointless thing, it's there to allow you to watch the battle unfold. I don't want to watch. I want to be Admiral Ackbar and think up tactics to use. I want more control over what the ships do, then just selecting a target, and telling my group to attack it.

When I refer to them as 2D that's because the tactis are just that. two-dimensional. I can go left, right, forward or backwards (X, Y axis). But this is space, where's my up an down (Z axis). Oh sure the models do it during flight animation, but I should be able to send my forces on an arch that goes beneath the plane that my enemies are on.

I know this can be done for this type of game, cause it's been done in Homeworld, Pax Imperium 2, Master of Orion 3, Imperium Galatica 2 (which beats this demo in all manner of gameplay arenas).

And no matter, how you look at it, the controls are clunky. I would expect to be able to click an unit, and then rotate my camera around that unit. With that said, I was never able to figure out how to rotate my camera. Zoom in an out, sure, but not rotate. There was no context menu on selection of units (which I would expect).

So while, sure, it has novelty value in the cinematic view (but not much, as HomeWorld 1 is based entierly in this cinematic view, and you do all your resource management within that view), and the other graphics are ultimately nice (I reallly liked how the ship models actually took damage during battle), but one cannot forget that the graphics are just icing on the cake. Gameplay and game mechanics is where games when or lose, and all my complaints on this are gameplay mechanics, not visuals or sounds.

Consider Imperium Galactica 2. This is the bar that this game should have set up to overcome.
IG2 had the following capabilities:
  • Sim City style building choices and placement. On my planets I could decide where to put which buildings (and likewise which buildings to build) or I could allow my governor to do so.
  • Intuitive interface for constructing space and ground units for each world on galactic overview
  • Ability to micromanage land engagements and tactics ( I could direct tanks to go to specific places, and attack specific units)
  • Ability to micormanage space battles. I could set up initial tactics (say group 1 go above and behind, while group 2 goes in straight) and then let the battle progress.
  • Then, I didn't have to do any of that, I could always just direct things on a high-level and let my governors and admirals run the low-level stuff for me.
When you compare it to games such as Dune2000 or the original C&C it is fine, and a logical progression from those games. Unfortunately, I happen to be comparing it to RTS's that are actually based on the concept of space colonization/conquering, rather than a single planet colonization conquering. In that arena it falls flat, even behind the original Rebellion (which supported 3d tactical abilities).

Their ad campaign promises the concept of YOU in control. Yet when you boil it down, the AI is totally in control. You decide the target, and it plays a pretty animation for you while it decides damages.

I had high hopes for this game, and really wanted it to like it. Unfortunately, they did not make a game I would enjoy playing.
 
I agree with Kidan. The demo was enjoyable, but actually seemed pretty basic when it came to actual ground battles. And the space battles were boring. No cover, nowhere to hide. Point and shoot. The meat of this game looks to be in the empire management arena, overseeing the conquering of various planets and such. But as a RTS, it didn't really grip me.

For the record, I'm currently playing the BFME II beta and when compared to its graphics, new tough AI and strategy/building elements, Empire at War just isn't quite where I expected it to be... even if it is a Star Wars game.
 
Why is it when you assault Tatoonie with Rebel Forces, your ground units have to have a "line of sight", if you will, to assign a target for Y-Wings on bombing runs. Shouldn't the Y-Wing squadron be able to identify the enemy position (Especially oh...say, a gigantic turret) and attack regardless of the location of the ground forces? This is the Empire here, subterfuge isn't exactly the hallmark of their battle strategy.
 
They are implying that you do not know that there is a huge turret. realistically, in war, there general will not be looking through the clouds and directing attacks in that point of view.
 
inkelis said:
They are implying that you do not know that there is a huge turret. realistically, in war, there general will not be looking through the clouds and directing attacks in that point of view.
Click to expand...

Right, but surely your pilots could alert you to the targets just ahead, at which point you could order them to strike.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top