• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About s8g

  • Rank
  1. What a great episode! As I'm a huge fan of Civ (over 600 hours into Civ5), I really enjoyed the discussion between the two designers and Rob. I found the information sourrounding Civ3 especially interesting. But at the time, I somehow played Call to Power and not Civ... What I really missed was a ciritical perspective on the last two games. Beyond Earth has been left out, although it's clearly a Civ-game, though not a very good one. And Civ5? It's funny, when the two designers picture the community as very conservative and feature-oriented, but nobody mentions that Civ5 before the first expansion wasn't a very good game. It was not only missing features (which can be debated of course), but its AI was not capable to play 1UpT. And then there were the horrible DLCs which showed that 2K/Firaxis regarded the game for some time as a platform to sell new civs and scenarios. Although Civ5 is a great game and design by now and Jon's innovation plays a great role in that, I think it became a truly great game only after two expansions and the correction of some of the mistakes made.
  2. Episode 250: More Than a Box

    I'm listining since the 60s-something episodes. And I'm really glad you've made it this far. I'm hoping for antohher 250 episodes.And you seem to have some more German fans. One user on a gaming website weekly news for 3MA-episodes: http://www.gamersglobal.de/news/82215/three-moves-ahead-jubilaeumsfolge-mit-pandora-alpha-centauri
  3. Episode 213: On Campaign

    I thought I had to post here, but actually 'bdmarvel' pretty much posted what I had to say: While I love turn-based strategy and tactics, as well as the Paradox-style of real-time but pausable, I don't care that much for RTS games. Perhaps there is still something to add. I have thought about, why I like RTS campaigns even thought they don't exemplify what's typical for the genre in the eyes of many more hardcore players. I've reached the conclusion that my experience depends on two factors: There is the narration and the gameplay systems. In turn-based and 'slower' games, these two come together, so I can enjoy both the great intellectual challenge of learning and mastering a system (let's say that of Crusader Kings 2), while creating a story (in that case that may be the rise to power of my small dynasty from Cornwall). Regarding the system, the RTS falls short to that - the strategic mechanism that I like are hidden behind a wall of skill - meaning the ability to react quickly and to conscious about what's happing in every corner of the map. Also there are problems with the narrative side: when a match usually lasts an hour on the maximum, there is not much persistence in the story. In addition to that the RTS genre has problems with "interesting decisions" - most times there seems to be an optimal path to victory. Why do I play RTS campaigns nonetheless? Because they create a narration with gameplay in between, that is okay (but not great) for me. As I don't like action-adventures or shooters that much, the gameplay in the typical RTS campaign seems okay to me. And Blizzard already tries to bring people over to skirmishes and MP - but for me, that hasn't worked. Because of the problems stated above and because I certainly don't look for competitive gameplay.
  4. Episode 177: Pokemon Conquest

    Thanks for a podcast with that topic! I'm actually waiting for my copy of the game to arrive from the UK. I hope it will be longer fun than Pokemon Black which I started playing a month ago and I'm nowhere near finished. But the 20 hours I spent with the game were a goodf time. Also full of childhood memories. I haven't played any title of the Nobunaga's Ambition Series. Is there any game (available to the western audience) that one should've played?