[July Discussion] Video Games: Strategy/Action

[Niniel]

It might have been on NES, but I played it on an old Mac in elementary school. You played as a black ant and you could choose to be a worker ant (gather food), army ant (attack the enemy), and uh... another ant? You'd have to go around finding food and leaving smell trails for your colony. Every once in a while kill off a Caterpillar or if you were feeling adventurous, a spider. The body would turn to food and you take it back home. The Red ants were your mortal enemy and you'd have to kill the queen. Once the queen died, you'd be able to go to a new area in the yard. The goal was to take over the entire yard and eventually house. It was amusing because the owners of the house would come out and mow the lawn or spread ant bait that would kill you and whatnot. If you went in the house the wall sockets and stoves would kill you. If you were successful enough, eventually the people would move out and the house would be condemned. It was awesome.

 

This sounds so cute.

[Locke]

1. Which do you prefer more, Strategy or Action games? Why?

Strategy. This isn't a complete blowout in my mind. I have a lot of love for both of these genres, and they both have some great games within them and make for good e-sports. However, I definitively give the nod to Strategy because it has StarCraft in its genre and because it is (more) mentally stimulating.

 

2. What do you like and not like about Strategy games? Why?

I like that strategy games make you think and are won by having superior thinking. The person who makes the better decisions generally wins with a lesser focus on execution as a factor. I also love how it is open to diversity and creativity and how thinking outside the box can net results. Additionally, I like how it crosses paths with real life (i.e. skills in rl can lead to skill at strategy games and vice versa)

 

3. What do you like and not like about Action games? Why?

I like that they're straight up fun. You get to beat up character and look awesome in the process; what more is needed? (The only thing is that they can be slightly over-addictive and end up feeling like a waste of a bit too much time)

 

4. What is your favorite and least favorite Strategy game? Why?

StarCraft II (RTS) - This game is so dynamic (think like mega version of chess). There are so many factors in beating an opponent and all of them rely on good play by you. If you win a game of Starcraft, it is all always completely your fault (which makes winning feel pretty good). Of course, the same is similarly true if you lose: The game has such a high skill cap that there is always room for improvement (game never gets old). But all along that rode of improvement, you're always playing opponents at your skill level due to Battle.net's matchmaking system (so game is always a challenge) It is great as a strategy game because not only do you need to have good strategy but you also need to adjust to situations on the fly and have good unit control. Also a nice thing is that games are relatively quick (average 10-20 minutes, some shorter, some epic game up to an hour)and can be played solo or with friends. Besides all this, it is a highly entertaining game to watch and makes for an awesome e-sport (imo the best. I personally really enjoy the pro scene (and hope to one day be good enough to come upon them in the Ladder)). Oh yeah, and it's lots of fun and has amazing graphics and UI (especially compared to original StarCraft lol)

 

I also really like:

-Age of Empires

-Civilization

-Battle for Wesnoth

-Sins of a Solar Empire

-Homeworld

-Final Fantasy Tactics

-Chess

 

I don't like: ....Can't think of any, and I can't be bothered to go dumpster diving in my brain.

 

5. What is your favorite and least favorite Action game? Why?

I like Super Smash Bros. (This is more or less the only Action game I play a lot of) It's just fun to beat people up with Nintendo characters. Super awesome game for so many reasons.

 

I would also like to note that there is a free online (and downloadable) game called Super Smash Flash 2 that I play quite a bit. It is still in development beta stage, but it is essentially like Brawl for computer except with worse graphics/engine (but not terrible) and a wider variety of characters (i.e. Goku, Black Mage, Sora, etc.). (And also, only vs. cpu available atm)

 

6. What is your favorite and least favorite Strategy Sub-Genre ? Why?

I tentatively say RTS here. I say tentatively because in my mind, I find turn-based strategy games to be hypothetically more appealing than real time ones. This is because I prefer to sit things through and think about them before acting and hate being pressed for time and having to make decisions on the fly. I also prefer just making decisions over having to execute them. Yet in spite of these things, I find myself preferring real-time over turn-based, and I'm not entirely sure why. Perhaps it just because I have found the games within the genre to be more fun. Regardless, they are both quite awesome, and I am huge fans of both.

 

Don't really have a least favourite.

 

7. What is your favorite and least favorite Action Sub-Genre? Why?

Like: Fighting

Dislike: Shooting

 

8. What games would you recomend in each category? Why?

All the games I've mentioned thus far.

 

9. What games would you advise people to stay away from? Why?

Games they don't like.

[Locke]

Civilization V (really, any of the Civilization games, but I think the newest one is the best)

 

I actually haven't had a chance to play Civ V. What did they change/add?

[Razen]

Civilization V (really, any of the Civilization games, but I think the newest one is the best)

 

I actually haven't had a chance to play Civ V. What did they change/add?

 

 

There's now city-states, which are minor civs that are placed all around the map that give you bonuses (more food for your cities, free units, more culture points per turn) of you befriend them. They play a part in the diplomatic victory (more so without the expansion).

 

They reworked the whole unit system - there's no more stacks of death. It's all one unit per tile. And the tiles are now hex shaped as opposed to being squares.

 

The leaders don't have traits like they did in Civ IV either. They instead have a unique ability that is tied to the civ that lend historical characteristics to it. England, for example, has a strong navy due to its ability because they can move more tiles in a turn than any other civ. You can't mix and match leaders and civs either - each civ has to be played with the preset leader (unless there's a mod or something out there that allows to change them).

 

Umm... oh yeah, they removed the corruption and health systems. Instead, each city you settle gives you a happiness penalty - which can hurt. If your happiness goes negative, your production and growth in all of your cities is decreased to 1/4 of its original output.

 

That's the big changes that I can think of. I'm sure there's a lot more that I probably haven't thought of off the top of my head.

 

If you're talking new civs and stuff, there aren't really a lot of NEW civs are there are recycled ones from previous games. There are a few new ones though (or at least rebranded or brought back after missing the cut in Civ IV):

Songhai

Iroquois (back from Civ III after missing the cut in Civ IV)

Siam

Denmark (DLC) - basically the Vikings, but they are called Denmark, so I go with the flow.

Polynesia (DLC)

Austria (XP)

Sweden (XP)

The Huns (XP)