Curse

Rushing Wind · Apr 13, 2005, 05:22 PM // 17:22

Just before I got caught up in the GW hype I noticed a game in the works... Dragonshard. I've sort of been keeping tabs on it from time to time and looks like an interesting type of game.

A cross between Warcraft (any of 'em) and Command and Conquer. I say this because 1) you have much more exploration than either of these two games ever conceived, 2) You build an army and a base somewhat like Warcraft, 3) It involves top notch strategy throughout the game and just in the building of your HQ alone.

I'm sure there are other reasons but it looks ingenious! Don't get me wrong... GW tops it by a landslide but I'd like to know what other people think about it or if anyone else has even looked into it.

LordFu · Apr 13, 2005, 06:01 PM // 18:01

I like the idea of combining traditional RPG elements into a RTS. I plan on giving it a try when it comes out. I'm more excited about Tactica Online and Stronghold 2 personally.

Tactica Online will be similar to GW, being an on-line only game that makes strong use of instancing, but it will be very different in terms of gameplay. Combat will be turn based, and you will have a group under your control instead of one character. It's release is pretty far off, but I think it will be the first on-line game to follow GW's business model, i.e. lack of monthly fee, regular expansion packs. I'm an old school X-Com/Jagged Alliance/Fall-Out fan, so turn based combat will be my biggest draw.

Stronghold 2 comes out this month, and it's an awesome RTS with tons of management aspects. I loved the first two in the series. It's hard to beat a game where you get to build your own castle and crush your enemies beneath the might of your medievil army. I'm definitly picking this one up.

Volume II · Apr 13, 2005, 06:48 PM // 18:48

Unless your able to mow down your enemies in a hail of bullets a la Imperial Glory. Definately looks cool, what with the imperial setting and everything. Although the demo keeps crashing on me. It's fun when I cana play it, though.

Manderlock · Apr 13, 2005, 07:07 PM // 19:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by LordFu

I like the idea of combining traditional RPG elements into a RTS. I plan on giving it a try when it comes out. I'm more excited about Tactica Online and Stronghold 2 personally.

Tactica Online will be similar to GW, being an on-line only game that makes strong use of instancing, but it will be very different in terms of gameplay. Combat will be turn based, and you will have a group under your control instead of one character. It's release is pretty far off, but I think it will be the first on-line game to follow GW's business model, i.e. lack of monthly fee, regular expansion packs. I'm an old school X-Com/Jagged Alliance/Fall-Out fan, so turn based combat will be my biggest draw.

Stronghold 2 comes out this month, and it's an awesome RTS with tons of management aspects. I loved the first two in the series. It's hard to beat a game where you get to build your own castle and crush your enemies beneath the might of your medievil army. I'm definitly picking this one up.

if you want a good RTS/RPG you might want to try the Warlords Battlecry games

LordFu · Apr 13, 2005, 07:45 PM // 19:45

I'll look into it. Thanks for the suggestion! It's a shame how many great computer games go unnoticed, while the worst console game gets tons of press.

Devil's Dictionary · Apr 13, 2005, 08:23 PM // 20:23

The 'cool' idea behind Dragonshard is not the done-one-million-times RPG/RTS. Dragonshard is an RTS on the surface and a Dungeons & Dragons 3.5 RPG underground that infact influences the combat on top.

DarkWasp · Apr 13, 2005, 08:32 PM // 20:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by LordFu

while the worst console game gets tons of press.

Well take doom 3 for example, the other two dooms gave it a good backround, but they screwed up.

A lot of popular games have a well known company or series.

IndyCC · Sep 29, 2005, 03:48 PM // 15:48

For the person that mentioned Battlecry, yes I concure they are good games. But, just get three because they really are all the same before that with less races.

So I picked up Dragonshard yesterday and invited a friend over to give it a grueling test run through. I have to say I am very impressed. I haven't yet tried the campaign (I plan on playing that tonight). I did, however, try the skirmish and multiplayer and I am quite impressed. It reminds me of a cross between Kohan and Warcraft. Now I have to say I did not enjoy the Warcraft games, but I loved Kohan. I like RTS games that don't have 30 different types of resources, this effectively only has two (dragonshards and gold, XP is supposed to be a resource but it is just used for upgrading). I like haveing and overworld and an underworld (it reminds me of Age of Wonders, another great but extremely long game). The concept of settling new bases exists in some RTS game, but not so much in this one. Effectively you have one base that you really have to plan out ahead of time if you want any kind of decent units end game. So I like that it makes you think about building placement rather than throwing down buildings randomly like some RTS games. There is a lot of strategy in this game because taking out a player (eliminating their base) really takes some doing. Overall I am really digging this game, which is good because I am at the point of putting GW to rest for a couple months before picking it up again.

So I am wondering what other people think of this game. I'm already lost in it.

midnyte13 · Sep 29, 2005, 05:35 PM // 17:35

i'm in.

Aracos79 · Sep 29, 2005, 06:07 PM // 18:07

I've been playing the Battlecry series for years. They used the semi-RPG playstyle WAY before Dragonshard or Warcraft 3's hero system. I don't know why never get any credit for it. The Battlecry series really are good games. Although the AI does leave something to be desired... it's either stupidly easy, or insanely hard. :P