Out of Eight PC Game Reviews

Airport Mania: First Flight Review

2008-05-20T15:48:00.000-04:00

Airport Mania: First Flight, developed by South Winds Games and published by Reflexive Entertainment.
The Good: Nicely balanced chaos, can queue multiple actions, customizable airport upgrades that impact gameplay
The Not So Good: Gets repetitive, can’t skip levels
What say you? The click management genre takes to the skies with good results: 6/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION
Click management games, where you use the mouse to direct a character to perform specific tasks, are fairly popular. Most of the titles in the genre revolve around food service or a similar small business. Airport Mania: First Flight takes the click management game into the world of aviation, a place historically dominated by flight simulators or realistic air traffic control reproductions. Will this new setting spice up the gameplay?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND
The animated feel of Airport Mania: First Flight shines through in the presentation. Though the graphics are relatively simplistic, as the game is rendered in 2-D and it looks like it could have been put together over a long weekend using Paint. But you don’t have to worry about any 3-D artifacts, camera angles, or confusing overlays, or high system requirements. The planes are nicely modeled: Airport Mania: First Flight is the only game that features both male and female aircraft. The various buildings around your airport are easily identifiable and large icons are displayed to show each plane’s next appropriate destination. So even though I would not call the graphics “impressive” or “groundbreaking,” they won’t destroy your computer and they don’t get in the way of the gameplay. The sound is cute: each airport has its own jaunty instrumental theme and the plane reactions are satisfyingly adorable. As far as click management games go, you could do worse than the graphics and sound of Airport Mania: First Flight.

ET AL.
Airport Mania: First Flight puts you in the role of airport manager, an abstraction of an air traffic controller, where you direct planes to land, unload and load passengers, fuel up, and get repairs. There are a lot of levels in the game, and each stage has you continually improving a single airfield. The levels unlock in a set order, so you unfortunately can’t skip ahead to the more difficult scenarios if you get bored early on. Also, the amount of new elements introduced in the game is very low: almost every structure you will need is given to you in the first stage. This means you won’t want to see what unlocks next since you’ve seen everything by the first handful of levels. There are a number of rewards to earn along the way that can be earned by keeping planes happy or using runways in quick succession. The rewards aren’t enough motivation to keep you playing, but they are a thoughtful feature.

So here’s what you do: each plane needs to land, go to a gate, and then take off. Some planes will also need repairs and fuel before loading new passengers. Orders are given by simply clicking on the plane and then the object (runway, gate, parking spot) you want it to use. This relative simplicity makes Airport Mania: First Flight easy to comprehend for all skill levels and makes the game approachable as a whole. You can queue half of the actions up in advance (before or after passenger unloading), which makes running a functional airport easier. The game will even send planes directly to a gate if it opens after you have given a landing pad order. Airport Mania: First Flight will not show the queue for planes that are not directly selected, however, so you can lose track of how many orders you have given to existing planes when the action gets hectic. Airport Mania: First Flight offers up just the right amount of controlled chaos: the first levels aren’t terribly difficult and ease you into the game, which the closing stages require a lot of managing skills. Each plane is rated according to the income you’ll receive, the number of passengers, loading and unloading speed, and their patience. Your job is to make sure all of their required tasks are completed before they get mad and fly away. You can earn score bonuses for having the same colored airplane use the same gate in a row, in addition to landing or taking-off planes on the same runway in quick succession. You will have to make key decisions on which color bonuses to sacrifice in the interest of getting all of the planes unloaded and flying again. Each individual level passes by quickly enough that Airport Mania: First Flight doesn’t drag.

The feature that keeps Airport Mania: First Flight from being just another run-of-the-mill click management game is the upgrades you can purchase. Unlike a lot of games in the genre, Airport Mania: First Flight does not predetermine which upgrades become available, so you can tailor your improvements to your gameplay style. Keep a lot of planes in the air? Get in-flight movies to keep passengers happy. Like to earn a lot of color bonuses? Purchase new gates. The most useful upgrade is the radar, which tells you the next four colors that will appear; this is great for deciding which gate color bonuses to keep and which to switch to a new color. You can also get more efficient gates, additional parking spaces, and new planes that can bring in more cash. I like to have freedom in my strategic decisions, so allowing the user to determine which upgrades to get next is a wonderful feature.

IN CLOSING
If you like click management games, then you can’t go wrong with Airport Mania: First Flight. The controls are straightforward, the actions are intuitive, and the game balance is well done. I do wish there were more objects available later in the game as the levels tend to become repetitive after a while, but the pace is quick enough where you won’t notice too much. Airport Mania: First Flight might not have the best graphics, but it does have an inviting theme. I really like the upgrades that can be added in any order: they not only impact the gameplay, but letting the user choose which ones to get makes the entire experience better. Being able to queue actions is great, and the fact that the game is smart enough to remove unnecessary queue orders when a gate opens up is fantastic. Airport Mania: First Flight will not win over anyone who doesn’t like this type of game, but it is surely good at what it does.

Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor Review

2008-05-16T18:34:00.003-04:00

Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor, developed and published by Stardock Entertainment.
The Good: Unique technology trees and buildings for each race, four game editors, automated custom ship design, more detailed graphics with better performance, insanely large galaxies, new campaign, improved AI, new music, a bunch of smaller stuff
The Not So Good: AI hates people going for an ascension victory too much
What say you? The swan song for Galactic Civilizations II is an excellent, feature-filled expansion that delivers more than most full-priced sequels: 8/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION
Turn-based strategy games have a small, dedicated, rabid following on the PC. This goes for a number of other genres (racing and flight simulators, to name a few) as well, so while they might not have the sales figures that the carbon-copied, rehashed console games designed for 10-year-olds do, they are still popular if you ask the right people. A good example of a company that caters to this crowd is Stardock Entertainment. Their recently-released real-time strategy game Sins of a Solar Empire has overshadowed their strategy series that was first, Galactic Civilizations. The second and final expansion has been released for the sequel, titled Twilight of the Arnor, and it hopes to further enhance an excellent turn-based 4X experience. Does Twilight of the Arnor prove to be a fine twilight for Galactic Civilizations II?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND
Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor makes some slight improvements to the overall presentation. First, the default ship designs have been overhauled and include more detailed textures and animated parts for a more immersive feel. The game actually performs slightly better as the developers have altered the way textures are stored so the game uses less memory than before, so it has that going for it. Battles also have better weapon effects for more space-based destruction. I play from the zoomed-out icon view for the most part so I didn’t notice the enhancements for the most part, but people who like their strategy up close and person will be pleased with the upgrades made here. The sound has also been enhanced with some new songs that fit the game well; more variety is always better. You can’t ask for much more improvement in the graphics and sound of an expansion pack than what Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor delivers.

ET AL.
Since Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor is an expansion pack, this review will focus on the improvements made since the last time. First off, we get a new campaign. Now, I’m not the biggest fan of campaigns (the fact that Sins of a Solar Empire lacked one didn’t phase me) and the one contained in Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor is similar to the ones in past versions of the game: a series of skirmish levels with non-random galaxies and some text story to tie the mission together. It’s not the most intriguing campaign seen in a strategy game, but the additional content is nice. I like the fact that the campaign starts out relatively easy as the game does not assume you have completed the previous two campaigns. New to the series is the suite of editors that allow you to change pretty much everything in the game. Although some level of customization was present before (in the form of custom races), Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor lets you make your own maps, scenarios, technology trees, and planetary improvements. You can imagine that it won’t be long before mods that mirror notable science fiction series start to appear. Letting the user completely customize their gaming experience is great for longevity and the editors are a find addition. You can also use the new extremely large galaxy size “immense” (possible because of the performance increases) and play others in tournaments through the metaverse (the online scoreboard).

The biggest addition made in Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor is the unique technology trees. Before, the various civilizations were different only in morality (good versus evil) and color: everybody had the same ships, buildings, and research paths. While this made it easy to new players to transition from one race to another, the game tended to get repetitive after a while as the same strategy would work for all races. Now, every race (all twelve of them) has a drastically different technology tree that mirrors their overall theme. For example, the evil Drengin have an emphasis on weapons while the Thalan has a drastically reduced tech tree because they came from the future and thus know a lot already. Each race does share a lot of the basic techs, but you will find plenty of unique technologies for every civilization to take advantage of. This helps the game immensely as each side has a unique strategy. Included with these technology trees is unique buildings for each race, from the basic structures that are available when you start to more powerful versions further down the line. This addition is very awesome and well-done, providing twelve different ways of approaching the same game.

In addition to the standard array of victory conditions (research, alliance, influence) from previous games, Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor adds ascension. Here, you need to place starbases (using constructors) on several ascension crystals scattered around the map. Once you place one starbase, you are 1,000 turns away from victory and each additional ascension crystal cuts the time remaining in half. This is the worst aspect of Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor. You will probably reach one of the other victory conditions first (I almost always get an alliance victory first…I guess I am friendly) and all the ascension victory does is get everyone mad at you. Even if you are 800 turns away from victory, all of the AI players will hate you and relationships will deteriorate quickly. The AI puts way too much importance on an ascension victory, to the point where capturing two crystals is suicide. I don’t mind the other players ganging up on someone when 100 turns are left before the end, but the instant you have the most crystals (no matter how many turns are left), you had better be ready to take on everyone else as an enemy.

The ship designer is a big part of Galactic Civilizations II, as you need to incorporate newly-researched items into your designs to make your fleet as effective as possible. But wouldn’t it be nice if the computer did it for you automatically? Twilight of the Arnor does! Computer-designed ships are automatically created using the best weapons available, and they do a pretty good job incorporated the latest developments, even using incremental upgrades along the way. The computer designs don’t serve up the best variety (I’d like an all-offense, all-defense, and average design) and basic ships (freighters, colony ships, constructors) are never improved, but they are a good starting point for beginners. Speaking of ships, Twilight of the Arnor also includes the “terror star,” a slow-moving spherical monstrosity capable of destroying an entire system (I wonder where they got that idea from). Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor has smarter AI (yeah, like the computer opponents needed to become even more difficult) that will make you weep. Also, the budgetary requirements for colony improvements and ship maintenance have been drastically increased, making it much more difficult for smaller empires to afford a large military and lots of buildings. If you are preparing for a fight, you had better have a robust economy that can afford the increased ship count. Since you can very easily out-produce your income with ships, I’ve had to be much more careful with my money in Twilight of the Arnor than with previous versions, where balancing the budget or earning a hefty monthly profit was relatively easy. This means that small empires won’t get completely steamrolled and spies (they disable buildings) are even more important.

IN CLOSING
Simply put, if you have any version of Galactic Civilizations II (and even if you don’t), you need Twilight of the Arnor. The additions made here are far beyond what we see in most expansion packs, and the amount of content is more like a sequel. The unique technology trees alone would justify purchasing this game, as they add varied strategies for each race and increase replay value dramatically. But there is even more new content in Twilight of the Arnor: more detailed graphics and additional music, even better AI, and new game editors, just to name a few. There is really only one thing I hate (the ascension victory condition) and that’s because the AI overreacts to the side closest to victory, even if they are hundreds of turns away. But since you can turn ascension victory off, this is really a non-issue. The turn-based nature of Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor lets you experience the game at your own pace and the experience never drags since you can quickly skip through the boring parts, something that can’t be said for the first half-hour of Sins of a Solar Empire. As a whole, I like Galactic Civilizations II more, and it’s the best 4X strategy game available. If you have the original Dread Lords or the first expansion Dark Avatar, then Twilight of the Arnor is definitely worth it. If you are new to the franchise and enjoy 4X games like the aforementioned Sins of a Solar Empire but want more varied options, then getting the entire collection for $60 is a bargain considering the amount of replay value and content contained herein. Galactic Civilizations II: Twilight of the Arnor puts all of those repetitive sports franchises to shame with the amount of new, meaningful improvements it has. More than just a handful of new maps and a couple of new units, this is how expansion packs should be.

Turok Review

2008-05-14T15:26:00.001-04:00

Turok, developed by Propaganda Games and Aspyr Studios and published by Touchstone.
The Good: Action-packed, interesting two-weapon system, strategic deathmatch rules, cooperative multiplayer, decent production values, dinosaurs
The Not So Good: Impossibly difficult bosses, repetitive objectives, linear level design, dumb AI, no multiplayer server browser makes finding games difficult, long load times, can’t load previous checkpoints and saved games, technical issues
What say you? The series returns with some innovative elements and shows that killing dinosaurs can still be fun…some of the time: 5/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION
Even though they went extinct 65 million years ago, dinosaurs are still very popular. They have been depicted in movies like Jurassic Park and TV shows like Larry King Live. What’s even better than simply watching dinosaurs roam the Earth is shooting them in the face, and that’s the premise of Turok, a remake of a classic first person shooter. Although the game is obviously not completely original, the addition of big, scary dinosaurs to the enemies list is intriguing, and we haven’t seen a Turok game in six years. Will the gameplay prove to be compelling after all these years?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND
The graphics of Turok is a mixed bag. The characters (both human and animal) have good textures and detailed models, though there are some animation problems and models tend to “float” over the terrain. The environments have a jungle feel, which tends to get repetitive after a while and becomes obstructive (probably on purpose) on occasion, preventing a clear view of your enemies. The environments are not quite as detailed as you would like, especially the outdoor areas, with very blocky terrain and clearly linear paths. It’s a bit odd to see detailed characters walking through blocky and rather bland terrain. The environments are also very static, with hardly any movement that isn’t directly tied to character interaction; I guess it’s not so windy in dinosaur world. The blur effect that occurs when you are stunned gets annoying, but disposing of dinosaurs using melee combat techniques is pleasingly violent. Performance is not what I would like to see: stuttering at seemingly random intervals is common. The sound fares much better: decent voice acting (and every line of dialogue is voiced) and appropriate weapon effects accompany the generic background music. It should also be noted that Turok takes up a whopping 15 GB of hard drive space, and load times are especially long. While there are a couple of highlights in the presentation, overall the graphics and sound of Turok come up a bit short.

ET AL.
You can play Turok in two modes: the single player story campaign and online. The campaign is fairly lengthy and, while it starts out pretty good, the story tends to get forgettable near the end. But I don’t really pay much attention to the story: I just want to shoot stuff. The console roots of the game crop up in that you can only have one saved game and the game can automatically do it for you. Unfortunately, if you are badly injured and the game saves your progress, then you are screwed and caught in an infinite loop of death. I think that if a game takes of 15 GB of hard drive space, we can have an unlimited number of saved games. Over time, the objectives of Turok become quite repetitive: the game lacks many alternative missions other than shooting things. While having almost constant action may be a good thing on occasion, it does get monotonous after a while as you’ll be constantly swarmed with various enemies. I should also mention a bug I have experienced: having my analogue gamepad plugged in makes my view constantly rotate, even though the gamepad is calibrated and works fine with all my other games. I e-mailed tech support and they said there is no way of disabling it from within the game, so I have to unplug my gamepad every time I want to play Turok. Annoying.

The multiplayer of Turok can be interesting, but it’s too bad it’s so difficult to find a game. In a disturbing trend of recently released console ports, Turok does not list every available game on one screen. Instead, you have to pick a game type (small free-for-all, large free-for-all, small team-based, large team-based, co-op) and then search. The quick join option will just place you in a random game type that you might not have wanted to join. The Club also suffered from this problem. Listen up, developers: just put every game on one page and let me pick. Is that too much to ask? I don’t want to spend minutes searching through every category looking for others to play against. Once you actually join a game, you’ll find the deathmatch games come with a kill limit (usually 15) but also a death limit (usually 10). This makes deathmatch more interesting, as you can’t simply run around, guns blazing and still win as you’ll rack up too many deaths. I thought this was a pretty cool standard option. The team-based games consist of capture the flag, assault capture the flag, and war games, although I have no idea how these play because I never found anyone playing the team-based game modes. I did have a chance to check out cooperative multiplayer, and it was pretty fun. There are only three specially designed levels for co-op (there are seven for the other modes), but they are fun and require some teamwork (there might be two consoles that must be hacked simultaneously). Your team is limited in the number of respawns you can have, so a well-coordinated team will be successful. I do like some of the aspects of Turok’s multiplayer, but it’s not reason enough to get the game.

Another thing I enjoy about Turok is the weapons. Turok is equipped is fairly standard weapons: a knife, bow, handgun, sub-machine gun, shotgun, mini-gun, rocket propelled grenade, pulse rifle, sniper rifle, grenade launcher, and flame thrower. But you can wield small two weapons at one time, which is very satisfying. Firing a sub-machine gun and a shotgun simultaneously is a joy not found in many other first person shooters. You can only carry two weapons at a time (other than the knife and bow), so making appropriate choices is important. This goes for multiplayer as well, so Turok rewards players with better weapon strategy more than players who have stuck around more and collected all of the weapons. The heads-up display is also minimal: the ammunition counter is located on the gun as a blinking light when you need to reload. That’s a nice touch. The bow is also extremely deadly at far distances and getting headshots is good fun. You can also use stealth attacks with the knife: sneak up behind any enemy (human or dinosaur) and the game will indicate you can use your knife. Then, a pre-canned violent animation will play and Turok can move on to his next victim. While this is a nice change of pace, it does get dull after a while.

Alas, the core gameplay of Turok falls short of being completely entertaining. The game comes with rag-doll physics, which results in some unintended comedic effects like kicking around deceased dinosaurs when you walk near them. Speaking of the dinosaurs, the AI is not very good. I realize that dinosaurs are (supposedly) dumb animals, but the creatures are heavily scripted and will attack you or your partner first if the game was programmed that way. The humans are not much better: they will stop and shoot without seeking cover (unless the developers put them there) and seem a bit too accurate for the weapons they are carrying, hitting Turok more often than not. This is partially due to the fact that everyone in the game can take an extremely large amount of damage before dying, for better or for worse, so they better hit you every time. The potentially interesting dynamic of turning the dinosaurs on your enemies is only used in very specific (and very obvious) circumstances, which is too bad. A lot of the multiplayer maps are completely devoid of dinosaurs (or place them in obscure locations), which makes Turok play more like a conventional first person shooter rather than taking advantage of its unique setting. Turok as a whole is very linear and the developers want you to play the game their way. Defeating bosses can be very frustrating as you try to figure out the arbitrarily specific method of taking them down. The game drops very subtle hints (or sometimes no hints at all) along the way; it’s a good thing they sent me a walkthrough with the game or else I’d be stuck several times over. You will also need to use archaic button-mashing counters when dinosaurs attack you; I though this gameplay mechanic was extinct but it, like the dinosaurs, has returned. Turok takes what could have been a compelling theme and doesn’t take full advantage of it, resulting in a run-of-the-mill first person shooter.

IN CLOSING
Shooting dinosaurs: what could go wrong? Well, the PC version of Turok is a couple of key points short of being a notable title. There are definitely some things to like: the dual-wielding weapons, using dinosaurs against your enemy, tweaked deathmatch rules, and some of the visuals and sound effects. Sadly, Turok is also accompanied by extremely linear level design, very difficult bosses, controller issues, one saved game per user, generally stupid AI, and long load times. Turok also lacks a multiplayer browser, which makes experiencing the decent cooperative and deathmatch online modes more difficult than it should be. It’s a bit disappointing that Turok isn’t more polished because the premise is very intriguing. Unless you really want to kill some dinosaurs, Turok doesn’t offer enough of a complete experience to warrant its purchase.

Trials 2 Second Edition Review

2008-05-11T14:21:00.000-04:00

Trials 2 Second Edition, developed and published by RedLynx.
The Good: Believable physics, simple controls, numerous challenging puzzles that can be completed in any order, frequent checkpoints, nice graphics, online high scores
The Not So Good: No map editor, difficulty increases very quickly, can’t customize controls
What say you? A fun but exceedingly tough physics-based motorcycle racing puzzle game: 6/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION
Part of the reason why extreme sports are popular is because there is a distinct chance of someone getting seriously injured. Oh, and they are skilled athletes. One of the more insane rungs on the extreme sports ladder is motorcycle stunts, where riders go far too fast and jump far too high. If there was only a computer game that captured the raw fury of people breaking a majority of their bones! Lucky for us we have the generically-named Trials 2 Second Edition, a motorcycle stunt puzzle game derived from a flash game. Like Trackmania, Trials 2 Second Edition involves doing slightly over-the-top stunts over courses and trying to reach the finish in the shortest amount of time. Will Trials 2 Second Edition earn perfect “10”s, or crash head-first into a pile of dirt?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND
Trials 2 Second Edition features some very nice 3-D graphics. Though the environments are bland and repetitive (with the same industrial theme throughout), the level of detail and special effects present in the game are outstanding. The bike and rider are well-animated and the in-game objects are realistic-looking. There are also some pleasing shadow and lighting effects, from the motorcycle headlights to fire. Turning the graphics to “ultra-high” brings even more detail to the table and the game runs smoothly. The sound is a bit more understated, with crowd reactions and the sound of pain. The bike engine effects are done well and the music, while generic, is somewhat catchy. Overall, Trials 2 Second Edition has a very slick presentation that certainly does not look like a budget game.

ET AL.
Trials 2 Second Edition features numerous puzzles to test your gaming mettle. The normal game mode (coincidentally called “normal”) requires you to reach the goal in the shortest amount of time. Dynamic mode adds moving objects, flip mode wants you to flip the bike, and wheelie mode wants you to pull some sick wheelies. There is a good amount of variety here that should keep you busy for a while, especially since you can continually improve your time and execute new ways of attacking each obstacle. The game starts with the first tutorial level selected each time you play instead of where you left off, which is very strange. You can, however, choose any level at any time, so there isn’t any artificial restriction on progression through the game. The tutorial levels teach you various key presses to get past specific obstacles, although a lot of the combinations are very precise. Trials 2 Second Edition could use more introductory levels, as I found the easy levels to still be quite difficult. Something that would remedy this situation is a level editor, and the lack of a level editor is a crime against humanity. Since all of the puzzles in Trials 2 Second Edition take place along a linear path, it would seem that allowing users to create their own content would be pretty straightforward, but for some reason Trials 2 Second Edition does not support adding levels to the game. This is very odd on a platform that typically supports user-made content.

Trials 2 Second Edition features full stats on your progress through the game. Each session records your overall time, faults (resarts), flips, wheelie distance, air time, bones broken, and experience gained. The game will also record your time and automatically upload it to the central server for comparison against the world. This progress happens almost instantaneously and it’s great to see how you stack up against other players. As an extension of this method of online competition, Trials 2 Second Edition also includes a chat room, teams you can join, and an achievement system to give you more incentive to keep playing other than simply getting a good score.

Controlling your bike is straightforward: accelerate, brake, and lean forward or back. You can’t customize the controls at all, but Trials 2 Second Edition will automatically detect any gamepads you might have plugged in. Trials 2 Second Edition doesn’t really lend itself to keyboard controls since accelerating too quickly will result in many tumbles (especially on inclined surfaces that populate the maps). This increases the difficulty since you have to be very, very careful in driving your bike. It does take a while to get used to how the bike handles, since it always wants to pull a wheelie (since all power is directed towards the back wheel). It also took me a while to realize lean was not a toggle (you can pick varying degrees of leaning); this might be the cause for a lot of my failures (in the game, not in life).

The physics engine at the core of Trials 2 Second Edition delivers some plausible results, which makes controlling the bike more predictable. In your journeys, you will encounter objects such as ladders, planks, drums, logs, and ramps standing in your way. How you attack each obstacle in both strategy (which to jump over) and execution (how much lean or gas to use) determines how successful you will be. Luckily, Trials 2 Second Edition features pretty frequent checkpoints where you can start from if (when) you crash. Some of the checkpoints are located in questionable areas where it is difficult (if not impossible) to start from, but these are in the minority. I must say that I really stink at this game. I’m not sure if it’s the hardcore level design, the touchy controls, or just my poor playing skills, but I found Trials 2 Second Edition to be one of the most challenging games of any kind I have encountered. While this would be fine for higher-level puzzles, the game starts getting hard right out of the box. This will probably frustrate a lot of new players (as it did to me) and you really need to practice a lot to get somewhat decent. Trials 2 Second Edition would certainly benefit from more puzzles for beginners to ease them into the game.

IN CLOSING
Trials 2 Second Edition is a polished, well-executed game that could benefit from a couple of enhanced or additional features. The controls are simple, the puzzles are numerous, the graphics are generally spectacular, and the online scorekeeping features are robust. Trials 2 Second Edition plays like a more deliberate version of Trackmania: a much slower pace but a higher level of precision. This makes Trials 2 Second Edition pretty darn difficult, and I think the learning curve new players will have to encounter will turn a lot of them away. Practice makes perfect, but Trials 2 Second Edition should come with more introductory levels to make the game appeal to a larger audience. Add a track editor and I’d bump the score up a point. Add more levels easier than “easy” and I’d bump it up another. So, really, Trials 2 Second Edition is two features away from being, well, perfect. The game is best in small doses, and if you like the genre then you will have a good time improving your times and coming up with new strategies.

X-Plane 9 Review

2008-05-07T17:11:00.000-04:00

X-Plane 9, developed and published by Laminar Research.
The Good: Outstanding flight model, wide variety of aircraft, detailed topography, imports real-time weather, editing programs for custom content, lots of exported data, comprehensive system failures, multiplayer, orbital and Mars flight, flexible system requirements, available for Windows, Mac, and Linux
The Not So Good: No directed tutorials, lacks recognizable structural landmarks for full realism, scenario list could be expanded, computerized ATC voices, no flight planning
What say you? The most authentic flight simulation available is getting very close to being a full-featured game for all experience levels: 7/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION
To fly! The dream of man and flightless bird alike! But since most of us are not licensed pilots, we like to simulate our dreams of flight without potentially injuring hundreds of people. Everyone is probably familiar with Microsoft’s Flight Simulator series. Since 1982, it’s stood for high-end graphics and user-friendly features. But not as many people are familiar with X-Plane, now in its ninth iteration. This simulation takes a different approach: instead of drawing in users with flashy eye candy, X-Plane strives for a realistic flight model. The series has continually been closing the gap in terms of auxiliary features, and X-Plane 9 is now here with greatly enhanced scenery and a bunch of small features designed for its fanatical followers. The last version I reviewed was X-Plane 6, though I played X-Plane 8 (bought from a retail store before I resumed by reviewing duties). In any event, it's time for a new version! Will we finally have no reason to give Microsoft our hard-earned money?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND
The area of improvement that most people will notice in X-Plane 9 is with the scenery, and it’s quite a dramatic upgrade. There’s a reason X-Plane 9 comes on six DVDs and can take up to 80 GB of hard drive space: the amount of detail is great. I do all of my flying in the U.S., and it appears every single road in the U.S. is present in the game. Every. Single. One. This makes VFR a possibility and increases the realism of the simulation dramatically, especially for people obsessed with roads like I am. Add to that accurate terrain, auto-generated buildings, water reflections, pixel shaders, volumetric fog, and birds, and you have a very convincing environment in which to fly. X-Plane 9 does lack distinctive world landmarks, so the cities aren’t exactly like their real-life counterparts, but the geography is still very impressive. Quite honestly, actually seeing the Gateway Arch or Washington Monument is low on my scale of important features, and third-party mods add these features in anyway. I would much rather see an accurate portrayal of less-traveled areas than every single building in New York City. The plane models are generally the same as in previous versions, and you can view the action from pretty much any angle, and even zoom out (rather quickly) to a distant perspective: X-Plane 9 allows you to zoom from your airplane all the way out to a picture of the entire Earth in a smooth transition; the daylight representations are even accurate from the orbital view. X-Plane 9 also supports any screen resolution from 1024x768 to 9999x9999: pretty snazzy. It should be noted that most (if not all) of the instrument panels are designed for 1024x768, so picking anything other than a 4:3 ratio resolution will result in some stretching. While you will need a good system to crank up the settings, X-Plane 9 supports older systems by providing lower quality options. Of course, then X-Plane 9 would look more like X-Plane 8, so you really need a more modern system to enjoy the enhancements of the newer version. The sound is less impressive: although we do have accurate engine sounds and background radio chatter, the air traffic controllers still use computerized voices instead of having real people. This makes for a less believable flight, but it’s a small complaint in what otherwise is a much improved presentation.

ET AL.
X-Plane 9 comes on six DVD disks and contains accurate scenery (in terms of elevation, lakes, rivers, forests, cities, and roads) for the entire world. You can install everything for a cost of 80 GB, or choose your own area for flight. Installing just the continental U.S. brought the size down to about 18 GB; any areas that are not installed will be represented by ocean (I guess Al Gore was right!). X-Plane 9 is available for Windows, Macintosh, and Linux (all on the same set of DVDs), so all PC users can get their fix. Not only does X-Plane 9 include the main flight simulator, but a suite of editors are also available: the plane maker (which makes planes), the airfoil maker (which makes the body of the planes), and the world editor (which edits the world). The result of these fairly easy-to-use tools is that there is a whole bunch of planes and add-on scenery available on the Internet. While the game comes with a fair number of planes (35), I was able to easily download hundreds of others from X-Plane.Org and the X-Plane Freeware Project, since planes designed for X-Plane 8 seem to work just fine if you load them and then save them in Plane Maker first. The combination of the editors and the non-scripted physics model makes X-Plane 9 a modders dream come true.

X-Plane 9 can be used for instructional purposes (and a version of it is even approved by the FAA), so the game allows you to export all of the raw data associated with simulating flight. One hundred and thirty (!) different values can be displayed on the screen, saved on a text file, or even sent over the Internet. From frame rate to fuel pressure to angular acceleration, you can know exactly what your plane is doing at all times. This is great for people who are making a custom design (or a replica of a real one) and want to see what is causing all of those crashes. Speaking of the Internet, X-Plane 9 allows you to team up with twenty others and fly around. Though there is no matchmaking from within the game (you have to manually type in IP addresses), this is still pretty cool. You can even export the instrument panel or scenery views to another computer. Seeing up a controller is fairly straightforward, though you need to know what the various settings (yaw, pitch, roll) mean to get it right. You can pilot with the mouse or keyboard, but it’s not recommended: X-Plane 9 is best enjoyed with a joystick or one of those fancy (meaning “expensive”) hardware sets with pedals and stuff.

The one feature that X-Plane 9 really lacks in an in-game instructional tutorial. There is a lengthy manual that gives directions on how to fly, but you really need to know at least a little bit what you are doing beforehand or you will become frustrated by X-Plane 9. The in-game instructions (accessed from the “about” menu) are almost laughable with their vague and deficient directions. Even though this game has been around for nine full versions, there still isn’t a comprehensive tutorial for new pilots, and that’s a very important feature to have in order to lure in novice players. One thing X-Plane 9 does have is a number of scenarios: you can take off from a aircraft carrier, fly in formation, refuel in the air, land on an oil rig, put out forest fires, and even take the helm of the space shuttle during re-entry. While the 20 scenarios are nice, we always want more and a more diverse selection would be even better.

As I mentioned earlier, X-Plane 9 includes around 35 aircraft (though plenty more are available for free) that covers all of the bases: military fighters (the F-4 Phantom), general aviation (the Cessna 172SP), gliders, commercial jets (Boeing 747), helicopters (Bell 206), large planes (the B-2 bomber and SR-71 Blackbird), radio controlled planes, sea planes, vertical take-off and landing craft, x-planes (no surprise), and the Space Shuttle. X-Plane 9 also includes the Cirrus Jet, which used X-Plane to test prototypes during development. You can customize your plane from within the game: adding additional weight in the form of fuel or payload and adjusting equipment failures (from not working to always working, including variable rates for random excitement). With all of these customizable features, you can see why X-Plane 9 is a good choice for teaching any type of situation a pilot might experience.

As I also mentioned earlier, X-Plane 9 includes Earth: all of the airports, navigational aids, mountains, rivers, roads, and cities you will find in real life. Picking a starting point is as easy as typing in an airport code or name and choosing a runway or ramp. X-Plane 9 does not include flight planning software, so you can’t choose starting and ending airports and have the game generate a realistic path for you, so getting to your destination is up to you. There is, however, third-party software designed to do this (for $30), although by this point something should be included in the simulation. X-Plane 9 also has Mars, so you can take the two planes designed for less atmosphere for a spin on the red planet (say “hi” to Arnold while you are there). You can customize your location by adding time-of-day and weather. You can track your system time or define any specific hour. The weather options are plentiful: clouds, visibility, precipitation, temperature, and wind speeds can all be customized. Or, you can have the game download the real weather. Neat.

Actually flying is where X-Plane 9 makes up for lacking certain features. The blade element theory X-Plane 9 delivers a convincing experience and allows for a large variety of aircraft to pilot. There’s no punching in values for lift and drag: your design will determine how it flies. You can see how it flies, since X-Plane 9 will visually show the flight model to you. Loading a plane in X-Plane 9 mirrors its real-life counterpart in terms of instrumentation, and since X-Plane 9 lacks tutorials, learning each of the controls can take some time. There are tool-tips if you hover your mouse above each dial and knob, but novice pilots will probably not understand how to do some of the things in the plane, such as using autopilot or ILS landings. However, flying in X-Plane 9 is a convincing experience. Taking to the skies in adverse weather conditions is an adventure: piloting a small plane in high winds results in some nausea-inducing wind shear. Interacting with air traffic controls is straightforward using the mouse to select options, and although it lacks human voices it gets the job done. Overall, I would say that X-Plane 9 is designed for slightly experienced (or above) virtual pilots who have a basic understanding of airplane operation going in, though dedicated new users can gain knowledge by reading the manual. More instruction in-game would greatly benefit X-Plane 9 as a whole and drastically reduce the learning curve associated with piloting an airplane.

IN CLOSING
X-Plane 9 takes the franchise one step close to toppling the behemoth that is Flight Simulator X. The most obvious improvement made in the 9th version of the simulation is the scenery, and the inclusion of all the roads and hills is great. If you go to the website and read most of the additions in each patch, the remainder of improvements are minimal (like an “auto-cowl-flap option”) and won’t be noticed by most people, but they are important to experienced pilots and designers. The large diversity of included aircraft can be attributed to the accommodating flight model, and the editing programs makes custom content a popular feature. X-Plane 9 doesn’t hide anything, as every single variable and value can be exported or displayed. Add in flight in space and on Mars, real weather, and support for Windows, Macintosh, and Linux, and X-Plane 9 is getting quite impressive. I recommend X-Plane 9 over Microsoft’s Flight Simulator X to almost everyone. X-Plane 9 is less friendly to novice pilots since it doesn’t have a tutorial and lacks a couple of features (flight planning, ATC voices, additional scenarios) that probably should be included in the 9th version, but the flexibility of the flight physics and the much improved scenery offsets these shortcomings for those more concerned about accurate flight than seeing real casinos while flying over Las Vegas. If you want a precise and flexible flight simulation, look no further than X-Plane 9.

Paradoxion Review

2008-05-04T19:10:00.000-04:00

Paradoxion, developed by VSB Games and published by Slave Circus Entertainment.
The Good: Very challenging, fairly unique gameplay with numerous puzzle elements, lots of levels and a level editor, online solutions and in-game help
The Not So Good: Too challenging since most puzzle have only one very specific solution
What say you? Want a really, really tough puzzle game? Here you go: 6/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION
Puzzle games run the gamut from action-packed and fast-paced to drawn-out and thought-provoking (and some in the middle). The different types appeal to different crowds who want a different experience at different times (where’s my thesaurus when I need it?). Paradoxion is one of those slower-paced games where success does not depend on reflexes but rather on planning, strategy, and smarts (that last requirement will put a lot of us in deep trouble). How will this take on the logic-based puzzle turn out?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND
The presentation of Paradoxion can be described as “basic.” The game is in 2-D, with the game being played on a flat board. There is a handful of effects when orbs are destroyed or special elements are activated, but mostly Paradoxion is pretty static and not too exciting visually. The backgrounds are nice, though, but most of the time you’ll be ignoring them. The sound is along the same lines: generic effects that accompany each of the in-game actions and spacey background music. Frankly, there’s not much to say about the graphics and the sound because there isn’t much to say about the graphics and the sound. Go figure.

ET AL.
The goal of Paradoxion is to place objects in your inventory in such a manner as to cause other objects to explode and move to cause more objects to explode and move, eventually removing every object from the game board because they all exploded. The game comes with 90 levels and a level editor, so you won’t be hurting for content. The fairly unique gameplay of Paradoxion is still intuitive and you should get the hang of it quickly. There are a number of objects you will have to eliminate on the game board: orbs that are removed in rows of three, gems that are removed in two-by-two squares, blastoids that provide a blast, paradoxes that can appear when an object is blasted simultaneously from two sies, paradoxions that remove paradoxes, as well as disintegrators, teleports, and shifters that move or remove objects. Explosions either push things out (in the two-by-two case) or to the side (in the row case), although orb explosions push objects away from the last orb you placed which is very confusing at first.

Paradoxion is very difficult because there is usually only one solution and each puzzle requires perfection: getting every single step correct in the order the developer intended. Difficulty ramps up very quickly, as I started to have trouble in the tutorial. Later on, you can have puzzles with more than twenty steps; good luck getting them all right. Luckily, there are online solutions that will give step-by-step instructions for each of the 90 puzzles, but cheaters never win. I’ve played plenty of puzzle games, and I can honestly say that Paradoxion is the hardest one I’ve ever encountered. If you are looking for a puzzle game that just might make your brain melt, then look no further than Paradoxion. However, most everyone will find the game too difficult to be enjoyable.

IN CLOSING
Paradoxion is really freakin’ hard. The game is easy to understand and the overall design doesn’t impede your progress, but the perfection required by the game to pass each of the 90 levels is too much to ask. Paradoxion will exercise parts of your brain you didn’t know existed, at least before you quit in frustration. You really have to like challenging puzzle games to last past the first handful of boards, so the overall appeal of Paradoxion is limited. I will applaud the developers for creating a lot of very meticulously designed levels, so it’s clear a whole lot of though went in to Paradoxion. There is nothing inherently wrong with the design of Paradoxion, but it’s way too difficult for mass acceptance.

Panzer Command: Kharkov Review

2008-05-01T16:25:00.001-04:00

Panzer Command: Kharkov, developed by Koios Works and published by Matrix Games.
The Good: Random mission and campaign generators add plenty of replay value, user-friendly editors, lots of small realism enhancements, improved AI
The Not So Good: Slow pace with frequent pauses won't appeal to everyone, interface could combine unit icons better, PBEM-only multiplayer
What say you? Meaningful content additions and generally improved gameplay makes for a better follow-up: 7/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION
Sequels (and expansion packs, for that matter) sure are popular in computer gaming, especially with large publishers. Just add a couple of features, package it together, and sell it for full price a year later. Brilliant! Once you have an existing game model down, there’s no need to actually attempt to make a groundbreaking game, right? Just rehash what’s been done before! That cynical introduction somewhat leads us to Panzer Command: Kharkov, a sequel to an almost two-year-old game called Panzer Command: Operation Winter Storm (coincidence? I think not). So, what have the developers been up to in the mean time?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND
The graphics have been slightly improved since two years ago. Some of the vehicle models are more detailed, animations have been improved, and there are some addition lighting effects. Really, though, Panzer Command: Kharkov looks almost identical to Panzer Command: Operation Winter Storm, and most everybody won’t notice any differences. Now, the game wasn’t exactly a graphical juggernaut two years ago, which means it certainly is not now, as Panzer Command: Kharkov is starting to look quite dated. It’s good that the game is in 3-D, but overall the title looks like a slightly more polished version of the older Combat Mission games and that’s not saying much. In addition, the game performance is too slow for my tastes, when compared against other tactical strategy games. The sound is even worse off: very repetitive weapon sounds and battle cries litter the landscape. This does not immerse the player in a war-torn world. Overall, Panzer Command: Kharkov looks like it was published, well, at least two years ago.

ET AL.
As is my policy (Article XI, Section III, Paragraph IV), I’m going to talk primarily about the improvements made in Panzer Command: Kharkov, so make sure you are somewhat familiar with the original first. Done? OK. The biggest problem I had with Panzer Command: Operation Winter Storm, lack of content, has certainly been solved in Panzer Command: Kharkov. In addition to a couple of new scenarios and individual missions in those scenarios that you would expect to find in a sequel, Panzer Command: Kharkov comes with a random battle generator, a random campaign generator, and non-random map generators for battles and campaigns. This is great, as it extends the life of the product essentially to infinity (and that’s far away). You can completely randomize the settings in the random generators, or customize the number of points available for each side, availability of reinforcements, minefields, starting positions (envelope, pincer, wedge), experience, strength, and individual unit type distribution. The game even picks out an unused date for naming purposes. There are a number of maps to choose from, and while the map itself isn’t randomly generated (similar to the quick battles in Combat Mission: Shock Force), there is enough of a variety to keep it interesting. You can even connect random battles into a random campaign using forces that carry over. For those who like more scripted combat, two editors have been included to make new maps and battles and campaigns as well. As you can see, the twelve battles present in Panzer Command: Operation Winter Storm have been significantly expanded upon. In other features news, Panzer Command: Kharkov does lack real-time multiplayer, as the game only supports play-by-e-mail; there isn’t anything wrong with PBEM, but more options are all welcome. In addition, the unit point limit is usually superfluous as a lot of scenarios let you deploy every available unit anyway. So while there are still some minor issues to content with, the increased content is much appreciated.

The interface is largely unchanged in Panzer Command: Kharkov: the game still lists every unit in the bottom center of the screen for easy access, though now it’s a scrollable (I think that’s a word) list. However, the unit list could have been streamlined by combining units with the same commander instead of listing them individually. For instance, units could be placed in a circular arrangement with the commander in the middle. Or, a large commander unit icon could be followed by small square icons for subordinate units. This way, all of your units would be displayed on one screen instead of having to scroll through the list in the heat of battle.

But wait, there’s more! There’s a “whole bunch” (that’s a technical term) of improvements made to the gameplay, some of which are surprising they weren’t in the original game. Infantry units can now hide in trenches and foxholes and create smoke screens, and minefields can be laid for defensive purposes. Infantry units can also be suppressed by weapons and suffer variable injury levels; before, a unit was either “dead” or “alive,” but in Panzer Command: Kharkov there are variable degrees of “deadness”. Panzer Command: Kharkov also includes a lot of new units: most of these are to incorporate the new scenarios and casual players probably won’t notice any difference. These new units can be introduced a reinforcements, as opposed to giving each side all of the units at the beginning of the match. This seems to offset the large point amounts generally granted to each side and makes for more varied strategies.

AI has been improved as well. Units will now defend by default if not given an order, which cuts down on micromanagement considerably (especially with large battles). Units will also automatically switch targets if their current target is destroyed during a turn. The enemy AI provides even better competition this time around, taking advantage of cover and using some semi-advanced maneuvers. The lack of robust multiplayer options (other than PBEM) means most players will spend a lot of time with the AI, so it’s a good sign that the AI in Panzer Command: Kharkov is pretty good.

Panzer Command: Kharkov is still a niche game, as the slow pace and frequent pauses will turn off a lot of gamers used to real-time combat. Each turn consists of two phases: an 80-second orders phase and a 40-second reaction phase with limited commands. You issue all orders while the game is paused and then the action plays out. Even though you can accelerate the resolution, the game still seems to drag somewhat. Having such frequent input also makes each game last a whole lot longer; with better AI, why can’t each turn last two or three minutes between orders? Or at least give the user the option to customize the real-time length of each turn. It’s because of this approach that I think Panzer Command: Kharkov, like its predecessor, will ultimately appeal to a smaller audience. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. While most of the changes are minor rules enhancements not directly noticed by the user, they add up to be fairly significant in the end.

IN CLOSING
On the surface, it doesn’t look like much as changed in Panzer Command: Kharkov, other than the new random generators. But under the surface lurks a host of changes which improve the gameplay enough to make Panzer Command: Kharkov better than its predecessor. I do like the random generators, as they introduce a lot of new content into the game, a serious deficiency in the previous version. All of the rules changes result in a more polished and realistic game, although I suspect a lot of players won’t really notice them without being told specifically what they are. In the end, Panzer Command: Kharkov is better than its predecessor and the improvements cover all of the major problems I found with Panzer Command: Operation Winter Storm, so it’s getting a higher score. While it won’t appeal to everyone, Panzer Command: Kharkov brings up a lot of memories of Combat Mission (in a good way) and the turn-based strategy gameplay is enjoyable and definitely improved.

Master Kick Review

2008-04-28T16:25:00.001-04:00

Master Kick, developed and published by Industry Entertainment.
The Good: Fast pace, custom formations, league play, fair computer opponents, very low system requirements, available for multiple platforms (Windows, Linux, Mac, Palm, Windows Mobile)
The Not So Good: Poor controls makes playing very frustrating, low resolution graphics makes it hard to see the action, no multiplayer
What say you? A foosball game hampered by an odd control system and the lack of PC features: 4/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION
Did you know that foosball has been around for over 100 years? Me neither. This bar and rumpus room favorite has been causing injuries (both physical and mental) for years. But what if you don’t have another person to potentially injure with a fast-moving rock-hard ball? That’s where Master Kick comes in, a foosball game originally developed for the mobile platforms but now available for your desktop operating system of choice (Windows, Linux, or Mac). Does this game capture the excitement of its real-world counterpart?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND
Master Kick was originally designed for mobile platforms, and the game certainly hasn’t been enhanced for desktop operating systems with much larger screens. The game is set at a fixed resolution of 480 by 320, and boy does it look small. It’s so small that the game is nearly unplayable if you have a high native desktop resolution. The graphics are decent, considering the resolution the game is played at, with animated players and some special effects like snow. Still, this is clearly a title made for slow machines and overall Master Kick appears very archaic. While it’s nice the developers have ported the game over to the major desktop operating systems, they could have at least bumped the resolution up to make the game easier to see. Master Kick also features pretty generic sound effects: the ball bouncing and the crowd cheering. Of course, these frugal features means the game is small (2.88 MB) and it runs on pretty much any machine. Overall, though, the transition from mobile to desktop formats did not come with any enhancements in Master Kick.

ET AL.
Master Kick is a foosball game (I think I’ve made that pretty clear so far). The game lets you play a quick match against the AI or engage in a round-robin league, which is pretty cool. For a game, you need to pick a team to lead; all of them are exactly the same except in uniform color. One cool feature is the ability to choose a formation, as you can pick from a real soccer arrangement (4-4-2, 3-6-2, et cetera). This puts some strategy into the game: do you want to play aggressively, defensively, or somewhere in the middle. This is a great feature for the leagues, as you can be more offensive-minded for must-win games or protect the net for can’t-lose games. You will also need to set the CPU difficulty level, field type (grass, snow, et cetera), and match type (timed or first to five goals). The CPU is a very challenging opponent, even on the easiest difficulty levels, and should prove to be quite an obstacle for any skill level. There isn’t any multiplayer for Master Kick, even on the same computer. While online play is a feature I assumed was going be missing, not allowing multiplayer on the same computer when one person can use the mouse and another can use the keyboard is puzzling.

And that brings us to the game’s downfall: the controls. They are simple enough: use the mouse or the keyboard to move the players up and down (just like you would do in real life) and press, hold, then release the mouse button or arrow keys to shoot. The game only spins one set of players at a time, so most of the game you’ll be constantly clicking in order to keep everyone in motion. But here is the fundamental problem with Master Kick: in real foosball, when you start to spin the players, the players start to spin. In Master Kick, when you start to spin the player, you have to wait before you power up and then release the button before the players start to spin. In addition, it takes a fraction of a second too long from when you release the button to when they begin to spin. These lag times add up, and you need to be about three or four seconds ahead of the action to be successful. This means that Master Kick is more about luck than skill, and that’s quite disappointing. Master Kick is also really difficult, as it’s almost impossible to get the timing down correctly. Playing foosball in real life is far easier than playing foosball in Master Kick.

IN CLOSING
A simple game such as this needs almost flawless controls, and Master Kick lacks that critical feature. I like a number of the features in the game, namely league play, formations, and support for multiple operating systems. But the controls are too delayed and cumbersome to be enjoyable or even usable. It’s frustrating when you see the ball coming but it takes 2-3 seconds for your players to respond, the time required to press the shoot key, power up, and release. It’s just a whole lot easier to play foosball in real life. The graphics need to be easier to see on the PC and the addition of same-computer multiplayer would be cool. Master Kick is also a bit pricey at $20; I feel the game would be more suited for the $10 level considering the amount of casual fun it delivers. While Master Kick might be fun on a mobile platform, the poor controls and lack of PC-specific enhancements make it a less than stellar title for computers.

ARCA Sim Racing Review

2008-04-23T15:22:00.001-04:00

ARCA Sim Racing, developed and published by The Sim Factory.
The Good: Very convincing physics, entertaining lag-free multiplayer that's great for leagues, online stat tracking, comprehensive garage options, default setups work well enough, robust replay system
The Not So Good: Won't appeal to casual drivers, spotty AI, no tutorials, some minor bugs and missing features, more expensive than competing sims
What say you? Racing fans rejoice: your authentic stock car simulation is here: 7/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION
Ever since Electronic Arts bought (stole) the NASCAR license away from Papyrus, racing fans have been looking for the next great stock car simulation. EA's NASCAR SimRacing was disappointing at best, and all the quality sims out there (RACE 07, rFactor, or Live for Speed) have another focus. So along comes ARCA Sim Racing: a heavily modified version of rFactor that uses a bunch of real-world data and input from real ARCA drivers (including one stunt driver). The developers are obviously serious about the venture, since they bought part ownership in an ARCA team and sponsor the pole award (without a large income stream like larger software developers). Does ARCA Sim Racing fulfill all of our hardcore simulation needs?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND
Overall, I am pleased with the graphics in ARCA Sim Racing. The tracks are detailed, from the textures to the infield. Since you have to drive from the garage onto pit road, the developers have put in all of the fencing and other objects for you to see along the way. Some tracks look better than others, but I think this mirrors real life. Also realistic is the crowds you'll see at each track, far more appropriate than seeing completely filled stands at an ARCA race. The cars seem realistic; apparently the models were laser-scanned from the real cars. There are also nice day to night transitions and the scoreboards are actually correct. The effects are OK, with translucent smoke billowing from a spin, but damage is quite disappointing. A sophisticated damage model is not on the top of my list of features, but watching parts fly through the air is still entertaining and ARCA Sim Racing lacks anything beyond simple body dents. The performance is also good: I've been able to run with high settings at 1280x1024 with fluid results; this is comparable to RACE 07. The sound is pretty typical: throaty engines that sound a whole lot more realistic than the rFactor stock car mods and other racing effects. Ignition sounds like someone is unsheathing a knife (maybe I have violent tendendcies...or cooking tendencies). The spotter could use some work: he tends to forget about cars sometimes and interrupts his messages with a constant barrage of lap times. A number of users have had problems with sound cutting out before a race begins, but I have not experienced this issue personally. ARCA Sim Racing delivers the presentation I would expect for a serious racing simulation.

ET AL.
ARCA Sim Racing simulates ARCA racing (didn’t see that one, did you?). Unlike all of the other simulation racing titles, you have to order a DVD in the mail instead of having a digital download; I got mine pretty quickly (next day it shipped and arrived three days later) so the wait wasn’t totally excruciating. ARCA Sim Racing also requires you to have the DVD in the drive, promoting an antiquated form of copy protection. The game features the usual level of support for control devices; I use an analogue gamepad (stop laughing) and it works just fine. You will need something with variable input levels, so keyboard or joystick driving is out of the question. ARCA Sim Racing lacks driving tutorials of any kind, so good luck learning the game if you haven't played a hardcore simulation before. The game’s difficulty can be changed by adding driving aids and toning down the AI strength. All online servers have all helps turned off (except for auto-clutch) so be prepared before venturing online. Dialing in the correct AI level to be competitive takes trial and error; having an automatically adjusting AI based on performance (a feature of NASCAR Racing 2003 Season I really liked) would remove a lot of the manual labor. ARCA Sim Racing features test sessions (private and public) and race weekends to compete against the AI. There are no season or career modes; odd, then, that the manual describes the ARCA point system. You can adjust (deep breath) flag rules, fuel usage, tire wear, mechanical failure, race type (timed or laps), race length, starting time (for night races), time scale (for the speed at which dusk appears), number of AI drivers, starting position (fixed, random, or through qualifying), and weather, so creating your ideal conditions is simple enough. ARCA Sim Racing ships with ten tracks which offer good variety: superspeedways, 1.5 mile ovals, short tracks, and even a dirt track. The developers plan to add most (if not all) of the other tracks the series runs on during the year. ARCA Sim Racing also includes a lot of the special rules of the series, which mirrors ones found in NASCAR: the lucky dog, only lead lap cars can pit, et cetera. Caution flags are thrown appropriately; last-lap accidents will not necessarily bring out the yellow if they are behind the main pack, and green-white-checkered finishes are a possibility. ARCA Sim Racing also includes a good number of real ARCA cars (including one non-ARCA car), but also has placeholders to round out the field. During each race, the game also records video you can replay and export into AVI format, although the exporting process takes so long (a two minute clip took three hours to render at a decent resolution) that it’s almost useless. While ARCA Sim Racing lacks a couple of small features, it generally delivers a good amount of content.

ARCA Sim Racing features a “whole lot” (that’s a technical term) of options in the garage, far beyond any other stock car simulation. In order to make my review even longer, I’ll go ahead and list them for you: gear ration, brake bias, brake pressure, brake duct size, front and rear rotors, “pad” compound (I think that means tire), fender flare, air pressure, springs, slow compression, slow rebound, fast compression, fast rebound, camber, caster, ride height, spring rubber, track bar, steering lock, grill tape, front toe, sway bar, weight bias, wedge, spoiler, and rear toe. The car’s characteristics noticeably (and realistically, or so it seems) change when one setting is altered, so they are not there as eye candy. Now, all of these options are probably pretty daunting to beginning drivers, so thankfully ARCA Sim Racing includes good default setups for each track that only require a small bit of tweaking to make you very competitive. Also, there are a host of user-made setups also available. Since different tracks have different grip levels (culled from real world data), tracks similar in shape might behave quite differently. Without actually ever driving a stock car, ARCA Sim Racing seems to feature a very realistic physics model. I certainly feel less on-edge than in NASCAR Racing 2003 Season, the setups are much less twitchy, and I can brake and turn at the same time. It actually took some un-learning to start driving “correctly” and take advantage of the car’s attributes. You also need to crank the wheel over (most setups use a low steering lock setting) just like the do on TV. I found the touchy nature of other games made driving the cars difficult, and the seemingly more realistic driving of ARCA Sim Racing is actually easier to control. There is also noticeable “aero loose” when another car is on your back corner and non-artificial drafting. The cockpit vibrations are also not distractingly over-the-top like they are in rFactor. I’m not an absolute authority on realism when it comes to racing (since I’ve never actually done it in real life), but ARCA Sim Racing looks good to me and I like how the cars handle.

You’ll either be doing this racing against the AI or online, and I’ll talk about the AI first: it’s OK. The AI is good while racing: they will mix it up, pass when given the opportunity, give you room, run different lines, and generally provide a good practice tool. However, it’s when something else is going on that the AI becomes quite annoying. The computer drivers to weird things during practice, such as ignoring the user car on the way out of the garage, riding up against the wall, and drastically changing speed for no apparent reason. The AI also slows down dramatically once they cross the start finish line under caution. Skipping the formation lap also results in questionable results, with cars magically slamming into each other on occasion (and consistently at tracks such as Pocono). Still, you can race side-by-side against the AI and not wreck, even if you “accidently” run into them a little bit. It’s this dichotomy that makes single player in ARCA Sim Racing frustrating: the racing AI is good, but the auxiliary AI does some really bone-headed moves.

ARCA Sim Racing is really designed as a multiplayer title, and it performs smoothly and relatively bug-free. The in-game browser shows all of the available games, but it does not have any filters and does not display the current session unless you click on the server name. It’s easier to go to the online listing and join from there; even though that list lacks pings (I guess we can’t have all the information in one place), most of the servers are based in the U.S. and having a ping somewhere under 200 will result in smooth racing. I have experienced very little warping, stuttering, or other online artifacts while playing online, even with up to 40 other cars. This is pretty impressive, since racing simulations require about the same (or better) connection quality as first person shooters that generally have far fewer participants. This means cars can run side-by-side without worrying about lag causing wrecks. The game also comes with a lot of admin options that are great for running leagues, including fixed setups to level the playing field. Online competition in ARCA Sim Racing is very enjoyable, even on the public servers: you can find a server that’s close racing quickly and the events take under a half-hour to complete. The other competitors seem to be well-behaved as well: there was usually only one or two “idiots” in each race and they quickly wrecked out anyway. Speaking of wrecking out, players who leave the server during the race have their finishing position saved; this is really neat, as I always found it annoying that racing games displayed by finishing position against who was left at the end instead of who started (it’s more impressive to finish 8th compared against the 30 drivers who started the race instead of the 15 who finished it). I have experienced (once) a strange bug where the engine sounds disappear and your brake control setting is reset as you join a race; this is mentioned on the message boards as happening to many others as well, and hopefully a fix will come in a patch. ARCA Sim Racing features online stat tracking that supposedly records you results from every race. However, if you have a space or underscore in your name it never saves your results, so that stinks. So much for using your real name.

IN CLOSING
ARCA Sim Racing is far superior to any of the stock car mods for rFactor or any other stock car mods from other recent racing games. The car handling is outstanding, the setup options are robust, the online play is smooth, and the overall experience is great. I haven’t had this much fund in a stock car since, well, NASCAR Racing 2003 Season, and I actually think this title is more approachable thanks to cars that are easier to drive and default setups that make you competitive. ARCA Sim Racing really lets you drive the car without worrying about constantly spinning out. All of the real world data seems to have worked, as the experience in ARCA Sim Racing is convincing. Still, there are a number of things that can be improved: the non-racing AI, the online stat tracking, the lack of in-game tutorials, and the rest of the tracks and drivers. With all of the realism, ARCA Sim Racing is certainly not geared towards the casual racing fan, so all those twelve-year-olds who like driving as Dale Jr. on their console need not apply. ARCA Sim Racing is also pricey at $50 compared to RACE 07 ($30) and rFactor ($40), but that’s what you get for fully licensed software. I can say that I certainly got $50 worth of fun out of this game, and I expect to be playing this quality stock car simulation far into the future.

Night of a Million Billion Zombies Review

2008-04-18T16:43:00.000-04:00

Night of a Million Billion Zombies, developed and published by PowerUp Studios.
The Good: Hectic gameplay, multiple characters to control with varied weapons and abilities, each zombie enemy requires a different tactic, great background music
The Not So Good: Starts out very slowly, repetitive, sometimes ridiculously challenging and no difficulty setting, enemies routinely get stuck on objects, models could be more detailed, unlimited ammunition removes some strategy
What say you? Some chaotic fun, but repetitive and a bit rough around the edges: 5/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION
The most classic theme in horror movies is the zombie: brain-dead humans hungry for flesh. Our intrepid hero must fight them against all odds to save his beautiful female companion and wise-cracking male cohort. This, obviously, makes for some good computer gaming, and several franchises have been established to take advantage of hot zombie-killing action. Most of these games have been on the dreaded consoles, so it may be up to independent developers to take up the cause. That (sort of) brings us to Night of a Million Billion Zombies, a game full of hyperbole and zombie killing. Will this title fill our ferocious need for undead blood? Does anyone have a ferocious need for undead blood?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND
Being an independent title, the expectations for Night of a Million Billion Zombies in terms of graphics and sound are not very high, and the game certainly fulfills those expectations. The graphics are in 3-D but they are only passable at best: the textures are not detailed, the models are blocky and poorly animated, and the environments are repetitive. Night of a Million Billion Zombies does not compare well with other contemporary third-person action games, which is a shame because the horror genre can exhibit some graphical feats. While the sound effects are average, the background music is well done and the highlight of the game’s presentation. The theme clearly invokes some memories of Beetlejuice (in a good way) and fits the slightly comedic tone of the game well. So while the graphics and sound of Night of a Million Billion Zombies is not extravagant, I wasn’t anticipating them to be and neither should you.

ET AL.
Night of a Million Billion Zombies features twenty-five levels of zombie-killing action. Each of the levels has a generally linear design, restricting your movement to city streets and providing typically one or two paths to the objective. You start out with one intrepid hero, but unlock new characters every five levels that will accompany your party. Most of the levels involve simply getting to the end and standing on the target for a harrowing ten seconds, but there is the occasional defend mission to undertake. There isn’t much replay value in Night of a Million Billion Zombies, thanks to the linear level design and objectives. The only incentive it to accumulate more kills; you need to essentially decapitate a zombie to register a kill, as simply knocking them over will only stun them long enough for you to sneak by. Night of a Million Billion Zombies lacks difficulty settings of any kind. This is pretty disappointing, as a simple health increase (or enemy damage decrease) would make the game more approachable; as it stands, Night of a Million Billion Zombies gets crazy hard starting with level four.

Controls are straightforward: WASD to move and the mouse to turn and shoot. You can’t tilt the camera, so you are fixed at an isometric perspective that’s not low enough for my tastes. You can directly control any of the characters in your party, and switching is a simple mouse wheel flick away. Each character has a primary weapon (usually medium to long range) and a secondary weapon (usually melee). These weapons have reload times but unlimited ammunition, making conserving ammo not a concern. Melee weapons (and the larger primary weapons like flame throwers and bombs) and hit more than one enemy at once, which makes dealing with large crowds possible. Finding the exit to each level is easy with the minimap and large directional arrow, but enemies do not show up on the map.

Obviously, the objective is to reach the end of each level alive. Night of a Million Billion Zombies relies on large numbers of dumb AI for difficulty, and it certainly succeeds in being a challenging game. You can run past enemies without engaging them, but they will follow and they generally move the same speed as you do, so when you stop to kill other zombies they will catch up. Because of this, it’s always a good idea to kill everything. Enemies do tend to spawn behind you; whether this is fair or not is a personal decision, but it can be annoying and disorienting. The enemy AI of Night of a Million Billion Zombies is downright horrible, as zombies will routinely get stuck on objects (light poles, cars) as they run straight for you. I realize that they are zombies, but the AI should be able to walk around a fire hydrant. Friendly AI is better, as your cohorts will engage enemy units on their own without you having to directly control them. It’s more fun to take command of the characters with the bigger guns, and switching between your roster is easy and fun. Night of a Million Billion Zombies is really good when it is frenzied but fairly balanced: fighting off hordes of beasts with a motley crew is good fun. However, for much of the game there are either too many enemies or too few allies. You don’t get your first partner until level five, and, quite frankly, the game is pretty boring until then, as all you’re doing is fighting enemies by yourself. The lack of difficulty settings doesn’t help matters, as the game seems to be geared towards experienced players. The repetitive nature of the game is a problem that could have been alleviated by getting new characters earlier and more often: once you get a new character, the game plays the same for the next five levels until you get somebody new.

IN CLOSING
Night of a Million Billion Zombies is good when it’s good, but there are several things holding the game back. The hysterical action works well when you have several characters to use and the enemies are coming at a balanced pace. This, however, happens too infrequently. Also, the enemy AI is garbage: coming straight towards you is fine (they are zombies, after all), but getting stuck on objects is not and that happens a lot. I like the inclusion of different controllable characters, the simple controls (especially switching people), the music, and the gameplay on occasion. But Night of a Million Billion Zombies is too unfair or too repetitive more often than not, and this makes for a less than satisfying experience.

StoneLoops Review

2008-04-15T15:40:00.000-04:00

StoneLoops, developed and published by Codeminion.
The Good: Simple controls, helpful interface, bonus levels add some variety, polished presentation, several powerups
The Not So Good: Mostly repetitive, home upgrades do not impact gameplay, unoriginal as a whole
What say you? Solidly executed, but there are already a bunch of games just like it: 5/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION
Making a unique puzzle game these days is a tough job. Most of the good ideas have already been taken, so new developers need to either successfully enhance existing ideas or come up with truly original creations. We do see some great new ideas, but a majority of the games in the genre do tend to fall into one of several categories. StoneLoops is not alone, squarely falling into the “shoot balls to make matches” subcategory. Will it introduce new features to make a unique title?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND
Overall, the presentation of StoneLoops is quite good for a 2-D puzzle game. The graphics are detailed enough and represent their environment well. The best part of the graphics is the user interface, highlighted by the aiming cursor that displays the color you are currently aimed towards: this makes gameplay painless and easy for beginners. The effects are also pleasing, providing plenty of chaotic visuals when numerous matches are happening. StoneLoops certainly looks more polished than a lot of the puzzle games I receive. The sound in the game is along the same lines: appropriately powerful sound effects for matches and bonuses and fitting background music. I was pleased with both the graphics and the sound found in StoneLoops.

ET AL.
StoneLoops is very similar to another game I reviewed, Dragon, except that instead of shooting colored balls to make matches, you collect them first and then shoot them. That’s really the problem with it: the overall unoriginality of StoneLoops means you probably already have played a game similar to it, assuming you frequent the puzzle genre. The game comes with 75 levels scattered over five environments; there isn’t anything terribly different from setting to setting other than increasing difficulty. StoneLoops comes with three modes of play: classic where the snake (or whatever you want to call it) moves on its own, strategy where the snake only moves when you click (which actually tends to make the game easier), and survival that throws a whole bunch of stuff at you.

As the snake(s) make(s) their way down the path, you collect colored balls from them and then shoot them at other locations in order to make matches of three or more. You must clear an entire snake before it reaches the end of the level, and you advance once you meet a specified score quota. There is also a suite of power-ups to assist your ball destroying needs: most of these are powerful weapons intent on pure destruction or color-altering spells.

The dynamic of collection actually makes StoneLoops easier than previous games in the genre. Since removing balls can make matches as well, you can effectively make double the chains in the same amount of time. In fact, clearing snakes is pretty easy since you can just collect the remaining balls and then shoot them at another snake further up the path. This makes StoneLoops pretty easy to beat, at least until the difficult ramps up when the snake movement speed increases. Difficulty can also result from convoluted paths, making accessing desired parts of the snakes impossible. You cannot, however, ricochet shots to make additional bonuses, and more points are not rewarded for more difficult shots. There is some minor incentive to keep playing, as you earn more upgrades towards your “home,” but these upgrades don’t impact the gameplay at all so their inclusion is essentially superfluous. While bonus levels serve to vary the gameplay somewhat (the involve aiming for specific points on the game board), in general you will be doing the same thing over and over again, and those not inclined towards repetitive puzzle gameplay will tire of StoneLoops quickly.

IN CLOSING
It’s not that StoneLoops is necessarily bad (because it’s not), it’s just that there is a plethora of other games available that do essentially the same thing. In order to make a stand-out puzzle game, you need to have a unique hook and StoneLoops lacks this crucial feature. The presentation and controls are well-done, creating what most people would consider to be a fine puzzle game. The bonuses also keep things interesting and difficulty does ramp up at an adequate rate. Still, you can’t fight the feeling that you’ve done this before, and the somewhat unique “collect and shoot” game mechanic present in StoneLoops isn’t enough on its own to make the title stand out. If you’ve never played this kind of game and think you’d like it, then StoneLoops is not a bad place to start. However, most of those who have already played this type of game in several other iterations will find that StoneLoops doesn’t offer anything truly unique and it’s too little too late.

Europa Universalis: Rome Review

2008-04-12T10:43:00.001-04:00

Europa Universalis: Rome, developed and published by Paradox Interactive.
The Good: Simplified gameplay should appeal to a wider audience, improved graphics and performance, interesting dynasty dynamics
The Not So Good: No objectives, very Rome-centric, non-interactive non-voiced tutorial, reduced scope makes for less variety
What say you? With meaningful gameplay alterations, a smaller scale works just fine for this grand strategy series: 8/8

MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION
Vēnī, vīdī, vīcī: I came, I saw, I kicked its ass. This famous Roman phrase is pretty much sums up the dominance of the Empire during the days of Caesar. In the continuing effort to expand beyond World War II (the Civil War and Napoleon have been popular choices), Europa Universalis: Rome takes us to the historical setting of...wait...let me see..ah yes...Rome. I was a big fan of the latest game in the venerable series, and now the grand strategy game takes a more focused look at one of the powerful empires of history. Will this change preserve the awesomeness present in previous versions?

GRAPHICS AND SOUND
One advantage of having a smaller geographic focus is that more work can be put into the map graphics. Europa Universalis III was the first iteration of Paradox’s new 3-D engine and the results were mixed: while the game looked fine from a wargame perspective, general audiences would not have been impressed. Luckily, Europa Universalis: Rome features a much better looking map with great textures and more topographic detail. While it doesn’t quite look photo-realistic, the map in Europa Universalis: Rome is a far cry from previous games: majestic mountains, thick forests, beautiful coastlines, sprawling plains. Plus, the view can be rotated from birds-eye view all the way down to essentially ground-level, producing a variety of visuals along the way. So all those people who complained about the bland map in Europa Universalis III will hopefully be satisfied now. The rest of the graphics remain largely the same, although the 3-D units obviously have Roman flair now. The sound design also remains the same: great period-specific background music and sound effects. However, some of the indicator sounds could be a lot louder: I routinely miss diplomatic events even with the volume cranked up. Overall, Europa Universalis: Rome is simply more polished than the previous game.

ET AL.
Europa Universalis: Rome lets you take control of any Mediterranean (European-Middle Eastern-North African) country starting on any date from 474 AUC to 727 AUC, whatever the heck that means. Not surprisingly, considering the title, the focus of this game is on Rome. Controlling any of the other nations, especially the very minor tribes scattered around Europe, is not as exciting. In order to get the most out of the game, you really need to focus on one of the big five nations: Rome, Carthage, Egypt, Macedonia, and the Seleucid Empire. You can choose any nation you’d like, but the smaller European tribal nations are basically wastes of time. The situation is less disappointing in the Middle East, but players used to being able to choose from a “whole bunch” of semi-interesting nations located around the world will feel quite limited in Europa Universalis: Rome. It depends on whether you enjoy controlling “mid-major” nations like I do; the game is still interesting as a minor player, but there is certainly less to choose from. Being able to play a game in Europe, Asia, Africa, or the Americas while the rest of the world develops is a limitation players of Europa Universalis: Rome will just have to accept. Another thing this game lacks, just like its predecessor, is short- or long-term goals. Europa Universalis: Rome is purely a sandbox game; in fact, the prestige ranking has been removed so there is now no scoring method. While you are free to make up your own goals (make an alliance, create a trading empire, don’t die), it would be nice for the game to give little objectives with small bonuses. The game comes with a tutorial, though it is not voiced and doesn’t involve any direct interaction with the game (it’s more of a movie), so you’ll have to read along. Europa Universalis: Rome also comes with the same multiplayer features as before; I didn’t test it out because I received the game before release (I am cool like that), but if it’s anything like it was in Europa Universalis III, then it should work well. Most people will probably play single player games with the AI, which holds its own and behaves realistically enough.

The game interface puts most information right at your fingertips. Because of the removal of merchants/colonists/diplomats/missionaries/spies, there is room to put icons to access all of the displays on the main screen, making almost all of the information about your country one click away. All of the wonderful aspects of the Europa Universalis III interface (the outliner, alerts, diplomatic messages, descriptive tool-tips) are carried over to Europa Universalis: Rome, and a lot of aspects are even streamlined or overhauled to appear more appealing. National ideas are still here, although you are limited to three and each of the three should (or suffer a penalty) be in one of four categories (military, economic, civil, religious). The national ideas are more powerful (since you have less of them) and having nations “specialize” in certain areas is pretty cool. Just like before, the building blocks of your empire is the province. Each province will be run by a governor (an actual person you appoint…more on characters later) and have a number of attributes (culture, revolt risk, fortification level) in addition to improvements and a population divided into three categories (citizens, freemen, slaves) that determine research and income levels. A lot of the provinces in the game are unowned, instead settled by evil barbarians. In order to colonize them, you need to own an adjacent province with a militaristic governor and routinely patrol said province. This is a much more intuitive and realistic way of doing expansion, as colonization in Europa Universalis III was haphazard at best. Now, you expand out instead of randomly, and watching the red blob of Rome slowly creep its way across Europe is intimidating.

One area of the game that’s really gotten simplified is the economy. Before, you spent a lot of time tweaking your budget, setting sliders in a bunch of research areas while still bringing in money to purchase troops and buildings. Well, all of that is gone as the economy is automated. The only thing you can directly influence is military maintenance levels (which I recommend leaving at maximum due to barbarian attacks unless you are seriously strapped for cash); you will get income from taxation, trade, and tributes from peace treaties, while losing money from the aforementioned military maintenance and tributes. And that’s it. This is really great for new players as it removes the slider adjustments completely, letting you concentrate on more important matters. Trading is also a lot easier: you can set up trade routes within your countries or to foreign lands, if the provinces are connected by roads. These provide a permanent income: no need to constantly send merchants every two months (or auto-send them). Trading may also grant new unit types or other bonuses (population growth, for example). Sometimes you can't maximize your trade routes because you haven't researched roads yet (which happens late enough into the game), but you can still pull in a lot of money through trade alone. The income you get each month now can be used for new units or buildings without worrying about whether you should invest it in research or stability. Europa Universalis: Rome also removes yearly income that, quite honestly, should have just been incorporated into monthly income to begin with. I like the changes Europa Universalis: Rome makes to the economy: everything is much more intuitive.

The diplomatic options have been greatly streamlined. Now everything is easily accessible from a single place (it helps that there are far fewer countries this time around) and clicking on a country in a sortable list (alphabetical, relationship level, or diplomatic ties) bring up a menu of options: peace treaty, alliance, military access, tribute, trade access, supporting rebels, desecrate holy site, seduce governor, trade route, or assassinate (even a rival your own country). Most of these options are familiar, though it should be noted that allies aren’t automatically involved in wars as you must call them to arms. The diplomatic menu also has icons that show agreements (or disagreements) at a quick glance. Before Jesus took over Europe (by force), there were a number of religions in the area, all of them vying for pious dominance. Religion is used for three purposes: causes for war, sacrifices to increase stability, and invoking omens for short-term bonuses. This time around, stability is a simple monetary investment, as killing a pig seems to make everyone happy. Omens have a percentage chance of success (based on the dominance of the religious group) and they can provide year-long increases in trade, morale, population growth, research, popularity, and more. If omens are not successful, then you get a negative bonus in that particular area, so there is always a risk that prevents spamming omens. The manual says there is an alert when you can invoke an omen and there is a good chance of success, but I've had a 90% success rate and no reminders; with everything else that's going on in the game, a more reliable indicator would be much appreciated.

Military units and combat is essentially the same as before, though the units are more generic as there aren't nation-specific units that have small bonuses. Combat is still automated (no problem with that) and good leaders will make their troops fight more effectively. The most different aspect of Europa Universalis: Rome is the dynasty/character system, similar to the one employed in Crusader Kings (for those familiar with that Paradox game). There are characters with family trees (complete with parents, siblings, spouses, children, friends, and rivals) that will be employed by you in several positions. Each character is rated in three major areas: martial (military), charisma (diplomacy), and finesse (government and research). You will choose five characters that are highly rated in finesse to head your research in land, naval, civic, construction, and religious areas. Research is not a budgetary item anymore, as the speed of technological discoveries is dependent on the skill of your characters and the contributions of your population. You will also appoint governors to each of your provinces; they will alter the tax income rate and have other effects on their domain. One character will also be chosen for diplomatic missions. Each characters is also rated in popularity, loyalty, and corruptness, in addition to having a host of traits that are automatically applied to their overall ratings. The character system in Europa Universalis: Rome is very interesting and a neat little side-game that makes the game feel more personable. You will occasionally get head-strong rivals that you will need to deal with (sometimes they will lead a Civil War against you), replace dead or assassinated characters (the listing is automatically sorted according to which position you are looking at), and resorting everyone to maximize your empire. I would like a notice when a new person of high attributes becomes available, but people die often enough where you're not unaware of someone for too long. I'm glad that the economic aspects of Europa Universalis: Rome have been streamlined since the focus has been put on individuals. Everything else (events, culture, war exhaustion, combat, sieges, core provinces, revolts, casus belli, morale, attrition, the ledger, et cetera) is almost identical to Europa Universalis III, so I won’t bother repeating myself (though a cut-and-paste does seem tempting).

IN CLOSING
So, how is it? Well, I like the changes the developers have made to the Europa Universalis III formula. This game retains the overall feel of the previous entry in the series while introducing new or tweaked items to make the gameplay feel fresh. The economic aspects of the game have been greatly simplified without being trivial, removing the tedious nature of adjusting budget sliders. The inclusion of characters brings another neat aspect to the gameplay, and watching children develop, rivals become more dangerous, and corrupt governors steal your money is rewarding. Overall, the game is a lot more straightforward, but there is still enough to pass the time (especially with the larger nations). I'm glad that Europa Universalis: Rome isn't just a carbon copy of Europa Universalis III set in a different time period. All of the issues I have with Europa Universalis: Rome (objectives, the tutorial, less nations) are minor, so I certainly can't rate it worse than its predecessor. Europa Universalis: Rome is the same but different, keeping the best aspects of Europa Universalis III and adding new, interesting features that will appeal to new players and veterans alike.