I think Hertston is talking about game play more than graphics.

So we're back to the gameplay vs graphics argument, which has been discussed a million times on pretty much every game forum in the universe.

I like both Sins and GalCiv 2. Both will hold my attention too long if I'm not careful. Graphically, the only thing they are missing are more shaders. Specular shaders and bump mapping have been standard features in games for years. Today's games will heap on dozens of shaders if they detect the card can handle it. Sorta makes these games feel like they're trying to be great graphical games, but are oddly missing something that holds them back.

In any case, from the demo it looks like I'm gonna buy Sins eventually, perhaps even before I buy the new expansion for GalCiv 2. The gameplay needs a bit of tweaking, but it's very fun! Unfortunately, I have higher priority items I want to get from Stardock, such as Object Desktop.

[joke]Stardock, you're killing me selling all of this awesome stuff .[/joke]

Yeah, I'd like to see some tweaking. Hard to say a lot from just a demo, but it looks like the planets require a lot of babysitting to make sure they build all of the stuff they need. Most 4X games have a system where you can hand over the building to the AI for less important cities/planets so you can concentrate on the more important ones.

The whole pirate system seemed rather pointless. Maybe I need to buy the game and play a full sized map, but it appears they're wiped out pretty quickly and never really have any power.

I hope the full game has more detail in the tutorials. The tutorials that came with the demo were pretty weak. Just basic gameplay, and I was kinda left clueless as to where to go with my tech tree and my planetary improvements.

In the case of TBS games (we were talking about the new Stardock fantasy TBS game, not Sins)there is no gameplay vs graphics argument. Sure, in general the prettier the game looks the better but graphics have never defined a great TBS game - gameplay design does that. The primary purpose of flashy graphics in such games is to market them, not improve them.

No, I don't wish to argue that "that the visual quality of AoW:SM & Dominions 3 is better than HM&M 5 graphics", only that the visual quality of any of them is pretty much irrelevant in determining the better game. And hence that when it comes to producing a game as good as, if not better than HoMM5 the designers of GalCiv2 are unlikely to be 'out of their depth'!

I have both, so it depends on my wants. If I want to carrier rush, I go to Sins, if I want to stuff military starbases up my opponent's wazoo (and go really fast at the same time), I go to GC2.

I suspect sometime soon that both games will be merged into Galactic Sins of a Solar Civilization II, which will really be the best of all 4xRTS games.

Actually, the planets requires little to no babysitting (especially compared to GalCiv II). The AI is pretty good at managing home defenses while you're offing invading and ships/turrets take so long to kill that you'll probably have enough time to pull back if you need to.

I agree with you on the whole pirate system, though. It kinda feels like taxes; they come around periodically and if you don't pay them, debt collectors come knocking on your door. The pirates seem there to mix things up but nothing more. I do still think SoSE is worth checking out for it's pretty graphics and impressive UI.

Oh ya, and the tutorials are ok, but the best way you're going to learn is by playing and watching the computer AI for it's initial startup. After that, the rest is pretty straightforward. Build a couple ships; take a few planets; upgrade until your economy is going; then repeat. Hence why I'd be interested in more play styles .

No doubt the AI is the major difference (assuming we are ignoring that they are two very different styles of game).

The AI in sins is lame......I realize it's complicated to make AI effective in this model but the facts don't change. Galciv AI is decent, sins AI is terrible.

I'm hoping given time and updates this will be vastly improved.

Heroes of Might and Magic 1-3... oh, the amount of hours I spent on those games when I was younger...

Age of wonders was also a lot of fun. Didn't care much for the sequel though.

If Galatic Civilizations 2 had multiplayer I'd still be playing heavily today. I kept checking back but I never saw an update for multiplayer even though I read somewhere they would probably release an update for it. All the great qualities it has is easily countered by have no multiplayer. Great if you really don't mind not being able to enjoy it with friends. Upgrading Starbases was extremely tedious, and the way ships were designed (their functions, nothing about the appearance) seemed a bit strange. Such as a ship totally offensive seemed to be the best for most situations, above going all out in any other way or even a balanced way. And back then at least the AI was the same for all races, they researched the same stuff in the same order so all your opponents were basically the same. And they could colonize all over the place in a suspiciously short amount of time. Probably do to the classic nonsense of omniscient AI design that seems to be the shortcut all designers take to "improve" their AIs. Been awhile.. I wonder if it has been updated to fix these things?

Sins of a Solar Empire is a great game, but I don't really like most of the maps and it seems to run worse than it should. The pace is a tad slow. And combat would be a little more exciting if you could hear the shots and other sounds without having to be zoomed in so close it inhibits your tactical ability. The AI is dodgy at best, but it's mostly functional.

They both have things better than the other, but I don't know if I could say one is really better than the other.

A little off topic, but..
I'd love to see Alpha Centauri redone. That game is one of the best ever. I still play it. Not many games survived the test of time for me and my friends that we played for years and years after they were release a few that have were: Doom, Alpha Centauri, WarCraft II, Fallout 2, StarCraft, Jagged Alliance 2, Quake, Command & Conquer, and Star Control 2. All of the above have the traits of being revolutionary for their genre and just had excellent game design. A game that when you played it you knew instantly that the for the designers, it was a labor of love. Something they took a lot of time refining and perfecting.

Although I still blame StarCraft for spawning more than hoards of Zerglings, a whole generation of annoying little rusher players which by making such boring gameplay popular ruin games like C&C3.

[quote]GC2's AI was much weaker when it launched, every patch improved it but yes, I agree there needs to be more victory possiblities than just military crushing.Give it time, GC2 was great when it launched and just got better every month, I'm sure the same with happen here.[/quo

So true-I wish i could get into the story and feel like the "Sins Universe" existed, but I just can't.

I found that certain elements in Gal Civ II brought out each race's uniqueness despite having the same tech tree. This was due to multiple play styles and interactions. For instance, the Dregnin would immediately start attacking while the Terrans and Altarian Republic were more likely to setup alliances. It was interesting, because in some games a strong AI would take over half the map and alliances and trade agreements would form out of the necessity of mutual survival (instead of being annoyed at a neighbor half-way across the universe). Though I think the play styles are different and I really can't fault Sins for lacking this stuff. I think if Sins were to be a better single player experience, it would have to tweak how quests are assigned and add on more interactions with the npcs.

On another note, if it wants to up multiplayer experience, it should improve on the variations between ships. In my current games, I feel like I'm just sending mobs of ships instead of applying some level of tactical strategy. Though I have to admit, they are very pretty, well scaled mobs of ships. Though, maybe I just have to up the difficulty to see those variations... *boots up SoSE

I like it better than GalCiv2 personally. While that is a great game I like the pacing of Sins better. Not to fast not to slow imo. As was stated many times above I also really wish there were more ways to win. The smash method is cool definitely because the ship battles are so nice but diplomacy, research, culture would also be fun. Diversity ftw.



You and me both buddy. I agree one of the best games. I still play as well. Still the best tech tree sounds ever.

Sorry for the off-topic. (:(