Crave Online
USER     PASSWORD  
 Forgot username or password? Click here.
ActionTrip
Back to home
Back to home
LATEST NEWS News

LATEST BABE
Latest babe9.0 out of
941 votes


LATEST COMIC
Latest comic"Not The Payne He Used To Be"
Jun. 29, 2009


LATEST CHEATS
LATEST VIDEOS
LATEST DOWNLOADS
ACTIONTRIP POLL
During these hot summer days, I'll be playing:
» view results
» view poll archives


FEATURED LINKS
FUNNY VIDEOS
By CRAVEONLINE.COM
CONTACT US Contact us
NEWSLETTER
Subscribe to our free
weekly newsletter:



USER SCORE
/
YOUR SCORE
RATE IT 0.0
ACTIONTRIP SCORE
8.3
Very Good

HIGHS
Excellently conceived, engrossing fantasy world. Variety of units, gods, and structures; great voice acting. Multiplayer is going to rock!

LOWS
The AI could've been better. The designers didn't get the difficulty build-up right. Myth units are just too overpowering when amassed in great numbers.

RATINGS GUIDE


TOP STORIES
Line

TOP COMICS Disable thumbnails
Line
"The Future of Gaming... It's Awesome"
06/14/2009
17268 views
"E3, No Entry"
06/08/2009
16035 views
"Dragon Age: Getting Bloodier by the Minute"
06/22/2009
14226 views
"Safe Trip Mr. Terminator"
05/25/2009
13844 views
"The Entirely Dark Void"
06/01/2009
13487 views

BABES Disable thumbnails
Yesterday
9.5 avg score
1096 people voted
Two days ago
8.9 avg score
1386 people voted
Three days ago
8.7 avg score
892 people voted
Four days ago
9.5 avg score
1492 people voted
Five days ago
9.2 avg score
1194 people voted

TOP VIDEOS Disable thumbnails
Line
Wolfenstein 'Assassin' Trailer
0:58
Saw E3 2009 Trailer
1:14
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen Gameplay Trailer
1:35
Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen Launch Trailer
1:40
Blood Bowl Launch Trailer
1:15

TOP CHEATS


ActionTrip's unique gaming MySpace layouts! Click here to grab them!
PLATFORM   PC

Age of Mythology Review

GAME INFO
publisher: Microsoft
developer: Ensemble studios
genre: Strategy

MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS
PII-450 128MB RAM, 16MB Video Card, 500MB HD
ESRB rating: T
homepage:
www.microsoft.com/games/ageofmythology

release date: Oct 29, 02 (released)
» All About Age of Mythology on ActionTrip


October 29, 2002
Uros "2Lions" Jojic

Advertising in PC games is becoming more mainstream. These days, many popular PC titles have been getting airtime in order to promote their upcoming releases. Of course, no one does advertising and marketing like Microsoft. Case in point: A week or so ago, Microsoft Game Studios, in partnership with Loews Cineplex Entertainment, announced a movie-style promotional campaign for the launch of Age of Mythology. From October 18 through January 10, Loews will promote Age of Mythology with exclusive in-theatre promotions and signage on over 1500 screens nationwide. In addition, a cinematic trailer for the game will appear before many of the season's hottest films, including Red Dragon, Lord of the Rings: Two Towers and 007's Die Another Day.

When a company spends so much money on promoting a game title, it's got to be labeled as a AAA project, no matter what. From the makers of the critically acclaimed Age of Kings, Ensemble Studios, comes this latest foray into the 'Age' universe - a unique blend of familiar AoK-like strategy concepts and the vast and unexploited potential of world's most famous mythological pantheons, like the Ancient Greeks, Egyptians and Norse gods. Most of today's fantasy worlds in video games are loosely based on works like Tolkien's epic trilogy, The Lord of the Rings, so it is refreshing to see that someone has decided to leave the Elves, Dwarfs and Halflings be and to replace them with Cyclops, Minotaurs, Scarabs and a host of deities from the rich fantasy worlds of the stories of the Greeks, Egyptians and Vikings. Modern adaptations of ancient Greek myths are not an uncommon occurrence in Hollywood, so it's a bit surprising that no one thought of making an elaborate and expensive strategy based on it before. And building on the highly successful Age of Empires and Age of Kings titles, it's no small wonder then that the task was appointed to the talented folks at Ensemble Studios, once the final decision to develop the game was made by Microsoft.

Many of today's games have a problem with creating consistent and unique game worlds. Whether it was because of the talented writers, or the abundance of research material, Ensemble Studios had no such problems. Age of Mythology is as rich, inspiring and epic as strategy games get, and (save for Blizzard's Warcraft III) it's possibly the most immersive strategy game we have seen in quite some time. The world of myths and great deeds is full of life and charm. The voice acting is very good, and it helps to submerge the player in the story. The characters each have personality, and best of all, so do the gods (they plot and scheme just like today's politicians - an unfortunate reference, I know)! The single-player portion of the game is divided into three different mythical chapters with 36 missions in all. Each of these campaigns (Atlantis, Egyptian, and Norse) is intertwined with the others, making the single-player campaign appear seamless, and of epic proportions.

Having three different mythical worlds in a game naturally equates to each side having more heroes and units than you can shake a dead cat at, and this diversity is where AoM's true strength lies - in its wide variety! The huge number of very different units, heroes, abilities, tech trees, spells and godly powers is just staggering! I can't even begin to explain how much I enjoyed going through different campaigns and unlocking all kinds of imaginative units and tech advances! But that's not all! Each civilization has a different set of structures and different ways of gathering resources to boot! Meaning, there's a snowball's chance in hell you'll get bored with this game and give up on the single-player. If the multitude of units, structures and tech-trees doesn't get to you, the epic story certainly will! As I said, this is probably the game's biggest strength, apart from the obvious implications of such an original unit design to the multiplayer matches and the number of possible battle tactics. Mark my words: Age of Mythology is going to be a huge multiplayer success!

The graphical and audio segments of AoM are in line with the general idea of introducing so much verisimilitude to the gameplay. The map design and particularly the unit and structure design clearly differ from one campaign to the next, each possessing a unique visual style and artistic approach. Players will get to travel to Mediterranean, and then hop on over to the picturesque sand dunes of Egypt and snowy mountains of Scandinavia. The unit sounds are authentic for each of the civilizations, or at least they sound like it, which is another big boost for the in-game atmosphere.

If you're into rich fantasy worlds and you're looking for a game that might take you on a pleasant mythical journey, look no further than Age of Mythology. It is captivating enough to hold the attention of any true strategy gamer.

Those of you who enjoyed Age of Kings will be quite familiar with the gameplay mechanics of Age of Mythology. Unit movement, resource gathering, and even the AI seem pretty much the same, which brings me to one of the game's biggest downsides - the lackluster AI routines. Age of Kings' AI code was decent for its time, but I think there's no place for it in today's day in age. Sadly, Age of Mythology units act much the same as the ones in AoK. Pathfinding is not the issue here; it's the rather silly and senseless rushing at the stronger enemy. When selected, units will setup a proper formation - heroes and melee units first, and ranged units at the back. However, in the thick of battle they will tend to break formations and rush carelessly at a vastly superior opponent, consequently causing your army to split and give you all sorts of headaches and micromanagement problems. Sure, you can set the units' behavior to defensive rather than aggressive, but you'd think they'd be smart enough to know when to rush recklessly and when not to, even with an aggressive behavior on. Furthermore, you can easily deal with enemy squads by luring them with a single unit and then ambushing them with your main army. The oldest trick in the book - and I can't believe it still works in AoM! The developers have obviously spent a lot of time on the story and in-game atmosphere, neglecting to bring any substantial advances in the field of AI.

The developers were obviously so busy creating tons of units and great narrative that they forgot to properly test the gameplay balance as well! Mythical units are far superior to regular troops, which means you'll almost always want to produce as many mythical and hero units as you can. And once you've amassed your huge army of mythical creatures, it'll be very hard to stop you unless you're playing on the Titan level of difficulty. Simply put, this game becomes all too easy once your main army is produced and ready to march. I've expected a far more vigilant resistance from the enemy. Instead, with just a touch of common sense and some strategy know-how you'll have no problems breezing through the single-player experience. Ensemble Studios simply didn't get the difficulty build-up right - in terms of increasing the difficulty as the final mission of the chapter draws near. Personally, I feel that this just kills any sense of accomplishment the player might have, and it lessens the excellent atmosphere created by the artists, actors and writers.

Getting the gameplay balance right often is the key to success when designing a game. That doesn't seem to be the case with AoM however, and yet the game is very entertaining and fun to play. The sheer number of units and their special abilities ... heroes and structures in combination with some fantastic cinematic sequences, and the narrative should prove sufficient to entangle you in AoM. Add to that the incredible potential of the game's multiplayer, and the decision whether or not you should own this game becomes a matter of having enough dineros to churn out for it. I wholeheartedly recommend this title to anyone who likes a bit of flare in his or her strategy games. It could've been fantastic, but as it is it's "only" very good. Ensemble got a portion of it right, but the other portion will just have to be made right with small bug fixes and gameplay tweaks.

PAGE 1




76 post(s)
Reader Comments
Marc [mail] Oct 30 2002, 06:55 am EDT
I really like this game. But, im still trying to save up for Splinter Cell.
  hiryu: I played the beta and throughout the 13 missions, I was tras...
Brodie@144.137.100.78: Play on the internet hiryu or play against a high difficulty...
Smapdey [mail] Oct 30 2002, 11:12 am EDT
Eah, I think I'll pass on this one.
ReDeeMeR [mail] Oct 30 2002, 11:29 am EDT
I really liked it, I think its the next best thing after warcraftIII and it just feels same as wc3, polished and balanced, I think you're wrong in your review, mythical units should be even more powerfull then they are in AOM, but I do think they could have been a bit more expensive so you wouldnt be seeing 13 chimeras in your army lol, but overall its a great game and I didnt liked AOE 2, but sure love this one.
ReDeeMeR [mail] Oct 30 2002, 12:06 pm EDT
Also lovin the graphical detail,
acid911 [mail] Oct 30 2002, 02:47 pm EDT
Yeah '2lions' this game deserves much more ... I mean somewhere between 93-96. It's the NEXT best thing in RTS ... Stronghold: Crusader was given 85 ... This review is a bit unfair ...
Smapdey [mail] Oct 30 2002, 04:28 pm EDT
They never give anything a 90 anymore. Never ever ever.

What the fuck was up with that VIP review from a long time ago? It had nothing to do with the game but the game got like a 99 or something.
  2lions: I was actually being sarcastic when I gave it 99...
Smapdey: The link to the review doesn't even work anymore.
Smapdey: Yeah I went out and got it and it sucked and I planned to ki...
ReDeeMeR: LOL do you actualy buy games based on reviews you read onlin...
Smapdey: I'm joking dude.
nasiraskar: As a reviewer 2Lions it is your duty to honestly review a ga...
2lions [STAFF] [mail] Oct 30 2002, 04:58 pm EDT
I've finished this game, and it DOESN'T deserve a 90+ mark. It is my job as a reviewer to look beyond the hype. It's your "job" as gamers to tell me that I'm lame, and to simply worship some highly marketed titles.
2lions [STAFF] [mail] Oct 30 2002, 05:05 pm EDT
Oh and regarding ratings... Unfortunately, every reviewer has his/her specific system of scoring, and some (unfortunately) may disregard the fact that they are scoring a game from 1-100. This game is very good, and if the multiplayer takes off as it should this may well become a 90+ game, but from where I stand, this is not an excellent strategy game, but it's very, very good nonetheless...

The easiest (and the least painful) thing is to succumb to the pressure and just say that the game rocks. Some fols will disagree, but they usually won't be as vocal as those folks who feel that the game has been underappreciated by the reviewer. Still, it's my job to call it as I see it, and that's what I'll continue to do whether our readers like it or not.
  Jimmy@12.241.65.23: Dude, you gave Daikatana an 80!!!! I rest my case...
Brodie@144.137.100.78: 2lions, your reviews are becoming very inconsistent. You gav...
God man@217.42.108.65: Your review started off nicely, then you said about how the ...
Smapdey [mail] Oct 30 2002, 05:16 pm EDT
Reviews, all reviews, are pretty much worthless if you don't know the writer personally. My friend mason hates isometric RPGs but loves things like EQ and DAoC. I can simply ask if he liked the game or not and get a good idea if I'll like it. I tend to be much more accepting of games than he is so if he thought it was O.K. I'll love it and if he thought it was great, I'll come in my pants.

I believe that the song "The Next Big Thing" by Electric Funstuff captures the story of certain games very well.
Pretender [mail] Oct 30 2002, 11:44 pm EDT
Sorry no offense, but I think this game is better then warcraft 3. I mean, EVERYTHING is great about this game. The graphics, story, music (fantastic), animations, units. That you gave the game a 83, only because of the myth units is just plain stupid. Please, I'm asking you to change your rating. Make it at least a 90, because this score makes my stumach hurd.
Sleepy_Foot_Rulz [mail] Oct 31 2002, 01:20 am EDT
AOM is certainly imressive but Warcrat III still tips the scale 4 me when it comes 2RTS. now here's something if i tell u guys u'll think i'm looney. Me still like C&C, n not just Renegade, RA2 n TS were the real geniouses!
BIG G [mail] Oct 31 2002, 04:25 am EDT
Man o Man. 83 just aint enough. Emperor, Battle for Dune plays like everything else Westwood have come up with. Amass the troops, send them over, direct them to destroy, level won. That gameplay might roll with sub-junior teenagers, but us seasoned RTS lovers want more. Microsoft and Ensemble through AOE and AOK took it to the next level with advanced gameplay programming matched with solid unit diversity. Its important to offer a critique, that I can dig, but sheesh, this one you got wrong.
BIG G [mail] Oct 31 2002, 04:29 am EDT
2 LIONS. You are right. Apologies to you my, friend. I respect your go up there and you do call it like you see it which is why we all return. Keep up the good work. Maybe its a case of a few of us wanting a bit too much from this one. The hype runs deep.
BIG G [mail] Oct 31 2002, 04:31 am EDT
Oh, fuck it. I love this game. To hell with it, I just cant help myself.
Murchad [mail] Oct 31 2002, 01:00 pm EDT
You scored this way too low, at least 90 would have been more accurate. Warcraft III is much worse than AoM. There are so many new concepts in the game. It is very ballanced. Heroes counter myth units very well.
kamrantu [mail] Oct 31 2002, 04:29 pm EDT
Regarding the Cons

The AI can ALWAYS be better. Age of Mythology's AI is much better then Age of Kings's AI. It's the best AI for any RTS that I have ever played.

Difficulty levels are adjustable and very challenging at higher levels. Campaigns are not supposed to be too difficult. Ensemble Studios game designers know to reward the players, not frustrate them. The difficulty levels are there to satisfy all levels of players, not just expert players. If Hard is too easy for you, try taking on two hard computers in a random map game. Oh you didnt' even play the Random Map did you? A big part of the game and you still gave it a review?

Age of Mythology has 3 core components and your review is based on just 1: The Single Player Campaign. Did you want to be the first to release a review? Next time be more thorough. Nobody respects an uncredible review.

Try massing a ton of Myth units against the computer at very hard level. Or in multiplayer against human opponents. How about considering the multiplayer aspect of the game before releasing your lazy review?

The reviewer did not play this game Multiplayer.
Quote: "Multiplayer is GOING to rock"

The reviewer is knocking the difficulty level and AI of the game. So obviously has not tried the random map option against the computer thoroughly.

Disregard this review and wait for more thorough reviews to make your purchasing decision. (Or better yet just get the demo and try it out for yourself)
Largo [mail] Oct 31 2002, 06:24 pm EDT
We love it 2 Lions. No denying the pressure you're under, you can flip that review around and work it a hundred ways, but we will still love it. Here's the thing, you race ahead to review the game so that by release date, you and other major crews can claim to be the first to 'get it out there to us'. This we dig, we value your quick responses, but it does affect the overall review strategy, does it not? Take your time my friend. Work with it a bit more, get that good old ActionTrip comprehensive analysis thing happening.
John [mail] Oct 31 2002, 08:19 pm EDT
I'm guessing everyone here has a warez copy of this game? Because it's not even in stores around here yet. Unless of course you're going to the mall at midnight to buy it.
Smapdey [mail] Oct 31 2002, 08:57 pm EDT
All of you, ALL OF YOU, are fucking morons. Really. This is the biggest fucking waste of time ever. Do you realize how stupid you sound? You're bitching about a review you disagree with. WTF do you care? Half of you haven't made any convincing argument, you've just spouted off opinions.

Hey, all of you cockjocky's out there that think that this review was rushed, Game site's, like actiontrip, get review copies. Blow it out your ass.

There are no new features here. Myth units? That's not a new feature. There is nothing new or innovative here.

HE MENTIONED THE FUCKING MULTIPLAY AND NOT BEING ABLE TO TALK ABOUT IT. READ THE FUCKING REVIEW BEFORE YOU BITCH.

And about the A.I., It's not the most advanced A.I. ever. You ever play Black and White?

If you like the fucking game so much, why are you here bitching about one review instead of actually playing it?

[ This comment was edited by Smapdey on Nov 01 2002, 02:01 GMT ]

  Largo: Good points raised, Smappers. Your fiery rhetoric is spot o...
John [mail] Oct 31 2002, 09:50 pm EDT
Yea this pouting and yelling is fucking useless. The score is the score, leave it be. If you don't like the number you see, go away and play the game because you like it so much.
Largo [mail] Oct 31 2002, 10:21 pm EDT
Smaps and John are right here. I was one of those gunslingers firing salvos off in every direction about the nature of the review. But, let it be remembered that this is a comments-post area. I dont think we can go around slamming those who post opinions. The more the merrier. I am sure AT does not mind considering it creates more interest in the site, and thus new memberships etc.
fatBastard(); [mail] Nov 01 2002, 08:42 am EDT
I haven't seen the final layout of the box of this game yet but I seriously doubt it have a label saying: "Suitable for Multiplayer Only", don't you?

Since the game is NOT just a multiplayer game any reviewer worth 2cc will have to include the singleplayer experience in the reivew. Some of you have flung postulations like:

"The age serries has always shined with multiplayer"

"If you are able to mass up 13 chimeras then the person you are playing is crap and they deserve what they are about to get"

"The most important point for RTS games to be balanced in is competitive multiplayer gaming"

etc. etc. etc.

As some of you have already stated, the game contains several play modes but judging by the arguments from most of the critics YOU only play 1 play mode: multiplayer or skrimish (i.e. multiplayer against the computer).

Considering the fact that singleplayer campaigns contain stories, spoken dialog, cut scenes, specially designed levels and a lot more scripted events than the multiplayer counterpart, it is not just relevant but also important to weigh the singleplayer experience heavily in a review, since singleplayer (and skirmish of course) is the only play mode available to ALL players (some people doesn't have an internet connection or have an insufficient connection to play online).

For me it took just a few play sessions of StarCraft with a friend to discover that having to maintain a log and write down how the first 45 min. of a multiplayer RTS game was to unfold down to every little detail, is a complete bore and I haven't bothered with multiplayer RTS games since then. You may all have different oppiniones (I surely hope you do :o) and that's just fine but the fact remains that if developers chooses to include a singplayer part, it had better be good or the reviews are going to reflect this in their score (at least they should even though it was not the case with NWN) and it is a lot easier, due to the above mentioned reasons, to forgive a shoddy multiplayer element if the singleplayer is good than the other way around (this depends on the genre of course as I imagine this would not be the case with an MMORPG).

In conlusion I will have to say that my first thought when the AoM hype really started to ignite was: "Cool, Empire Earth with fantasy elements" and where singleplayer only games should only be judged by the singleplayer element and multiplayer only games should only be judged by the multiplayer part, a game containing both parts should be judged by THE WEIGHT OF EACH PART (i.e. if the developers spend more time and energy on SP rather than MP, which appears to be the case in most RTS games, then SP is more relevant in the review than MP).

Oh and by the way, I am looking forward to this game and I do intend to buy this game when I can get my hands on it, so please don't write off my comments as someone who doesn't like RTS games.
  ReDeeMeR: EE sucked.
fatBastard();: It is completely beside the point whether you think Empire E...
ReDeeMeR: lol, they dont look alike, EE graphics sucked at the time of...
fatBastard();: Well, at least this time you presented some reasons why you ...
ReDeeMeR: Yea, it's not like ''OMG end of the wrold AOM got less then ...
acid911: SP dies after some time. Those who've played through the cam...
amix [mail] Nov 01 2002, 09:33 am EDT
2lions: you suck.. you are a true lamer.. get a life. You cannot test the game in a few hours... LAMER!!
  fatBastard();: Well ... no, never mind. I'm not even going to try to explai...
John: I think we know who is lame here.
Pretender [mail] Nov 01 2002, 12:28 pm EDT
Ok guys, enough of this bull. I also can't stand low ratings, but I know something that helps, go to a site which rates the game above a 9 and then we are all happy yeehaa!!

http://www.gamezone.com/gzreviews/r18525.htm

97% for this game is more like it. Maybe a bit to low ;)
  fatBastard();: So basically what you're looking for is not another person's...
John [mail] Nov 01 2002, 02:01 pm EDT
This is so gay. Everyone's real life problems infest themselves within this forum.
Neo-Masamune [mail] Nov 01 2002, 05:21 pm EDT
Heh, although I'm not going to say anything like that guy who hit the front page, saying "They are the masters". This was a fun game when I was playing the demo. AI was a little bit weak, and I do agree the myth units can be overpowering but hey, thats what EVERYONE is probably going to be mass producing. I think Warcraft 3 is better, just cause I like the series a lot, but this is definately something I'll have to buy. I love the fact that your not building stuff on a grid, its all open.
Smapdey [mail] Nov 01 2002, 05:58 pm EDT
Ok you absolute arguments for postnatal abortian, Game sites get REVIEW COPIES of the game. No say it with me. REVIEW COPIES.

This game will sell just fine and they are not going to stop making strategy games because of one shitty review. Get your fucking head out of your fucking ass. No wait, leave it in there and maybe you'll do us all a favor and choke to death.
  SixShooter: Smaps is absolutely correct. As a matter of fact, I am hold...
Smapdey [mail] Nov 01 2002, 06:00 pm EDT
This isn't actually A.I. and there is no real strategy involved in this game. You can't really flank somebody and no one builds bases for the purpose of not being able to be flanked.

I don't even think that this is A.I. I think that these are just simple sprites with pathfinding abilities.
John [mail] Nov 01 2002, 06:21 pm EDT
Yea, when you guys speak of A.I. in a game or even a developer it is a term used very loosely. REAL A.I. isn't even developed yet. A.I. is true when the subjects can actually learn for themselves and reason from the ability to determine what needs to be done from what has happened.
acid911 [mail] Nov 01 2002, 06:36 pm EDT
"2Lions" should'nt have reviewed this game in the first place. Why? Because a review of a game should be done by someone who's specialized in playing games of that specific genre ... You can't expect a UT2003 player do a AoM review, or someone who plays NOLF2 do a review of FIFA 2003. It just doesn't help ...

After reading the review for the 6th time, all I can say is that it just doesn't make any sense, like the reviewer just gave a hint of the god powers. AoM is based solely upon Gods (Major and Minor), that are responsible for giving your civilization extra bonus and god-powers. A single god-power can turn the tables of a game, if used correctly ...

Also for those who say that the AI is weak as compared to other titles ... give this game a try by playing a Random map with a couple of oponents on Titan difficulty level and you'll get your ass handed over to you in a matter of time. It's just the developers wanted to make the single-player campaign easy and enjoyable for beginners, not frustrate them like Blizzard did in WC3 ...

Get a life ... or something like it!
John [mail] Nov 01 2002, 06:55 pm EDT
You get a life! You're the one fucking with yourself on these forums because you don't have a life! We've heard it over and over, 2lions this 2lions that...leave if you don't like it. Of course the same reviewer can play all games. He likes games in general. That is why there is a set criteria for every game, just like in any magazine or other gaming website.

By using blitzkreig techniques I was able to overcome the enemy A.I. on Titan within 10 minutes. They got their asses handed to them.

The fact is this game is the same thing as Age of Kings with an enhanced engine, god powers, some new units, and a different title.

You people are treating the game like it is some EPIC achievement in gaming and its the game of all games. No it is not.
Smapdey [mail] Nov 02 2002, 12:26 am EDT
There is no real strategy here. Go read a book about any of the really great generals in the punic wars and you will see some real strategy.
BIG G [mail] Nov 02 2002, 01:02 am EDT
Smaps and John have spoken well here on this one. Strategy games rely on advanced commands (both offensive and defensive orientated) to be truly successful. AOK did this relatively well with patrol, guard, offensive, defensive etc. This is the next step for RTS game developers, to beef up the pathing options associated with the above so that the human input becomes rewarding above the build an army, send it over, conquer and destroy routine. At least, I hope this is where it all goes. Its all good and well to have the eye candy, but playability wins hands down for me, I'm sure that a few of you would agree.
comlink [mail] Nov 02 2002, 02:13 am EDT
I think this game sucks! It's 3D AoE! You can have more units in CHESS! If this is the future of RTS gaming, then I don't want to play future RTSes.
ReDeeMeR [mail] Nov 02 2002, 07:03 am EDT
Um imo the best 'strategy' was/is in Cossacks: European wars and the expansions, there was the 'REAL' strategy where you could/can defeat a stronger army simply by using 'STRATEGY' so yeah after playing AOM deeply there's seems to be lack of 'strategy' it's more like who's faster at 'clicking' and spotting resources is gonna win.

btw computer AI half-good, but your own unity AI SUCKS-ASS hell yeah, they just stand there while their buddies are being slaughtered a few meters away.

You cant even set war commands(click attack on the ground so units could attack everything on sight while moving f/w).
nasiraskar [mail] Nov 02 2002, 07:17 am EDT
Uros "2Lions" Jojic I think is rusty. Needs to be replaced. AOM is an improvement over its predecessors and it is visually more stunning. Giving it a 83 rating is unjust. I think it deserves a 90+.
  John: That's your opinion now go away.
Smapdey [mail] Nov 02 2002, 10:42 am EDT
Look assholes, It's a numeric rating system. 83 is still a relatively high score. That's a B. Actiontrip rarely if ever gives anything above 90. He might like the game but it's a mathmatical system. Get the fuck over and go play your fucking game.

If you memorize hotkeys you win in multiplayer. That's not a real strategy.
SixShooter [mail] Nov 02 2002, 11:51 am EDT
Can we please put this argument to rest? Here's the deal. Uros and I (and the other reviewers of ActionTrip) love games. We love them to pieces. We love them so much that we would like to consider ourselves knowledgeable of what makes games good v. what makes games great.

I happen to concur with my colleague 2Lions here. Age of Mythology is a very good game. Truly. There is little about this game that comes up lacking, but those little somethings add up to the fact that this game gets an 83% from us rather than a 90+. The scale of the game is grand, the musical score is sweeping and triumphant, and the use of actual mythological units from our ancient past is impressive and imaginative. But when the game plays like every other RTS out there, with no real innovation other than God Powers (which were present in Empire Earth) it can't register with us as a great game.

Does this make us harsh? Maybe. Does this make us critical? Definetly. Does this mean we don't like this game?

Absolutely not.

I hope I speak for the editorial and review staff of AT when I say that we hold every game we review to an extremely high standard (except VIP - that was a pure comedy review) that we know every hardcore, dyed-in-the-wool gamer out there expects us to. We are honest (brutally so), hard-working, and plain speaking. We are not fanboys, company shills, or sell-outs. We earn our paychecks through the same blood, sweat and tears that the rest of you out there do, and we want to make sure that when you spend your hard-earned dollars on the next overly-hyped ones and zeroes that you know what to expect.

You may not agree with us - we don't care. We're not changing our minds, we're not backing down. This is a very good game. But a great one? 2Lions doesn't think so, and I stand by his opinion.
  fatBastard();: Hear, Hear. Well spoken as usual :o)
Smapdey [mail] Nov 02 2002, 11:59 am EDT
Amen.
John [mail] Nov 02 2002, 03:47 pm EDT
Yea. You forgot to mention it though that it cost nothing for these guys to get the games because obviously they got the warez copy because they were talking about it before the game was in stores. Even here (in VA) the game won't be in stores until tomorrow.

THAT IS THE LAST WORD.
AMEN!
HOLY SAINTS!
Smapdey [mail] Nov 02 2002, 05:50 pm EDT
Yes, Actiontrip.com isn't supporting the makers of this game by giving it a bad review yet all of those with Warez are because they're playing it.
John [mail] Nov 02 2002, 06:41 pm EDT
Well said.
Smapdey [mail] Nov 02 2002, 07:54 pm EDT
Yeah. Thank god it's just us posting now. Show's over denizens! Go back to your lives!
John [mail] Nov 02 2002, 08:34 pm EDT
Heh
Let's try to break 100 comments Smapdey. :-)
acid911 [mail] Nov 02 2002, 09:01 pm EDT
Hey ... The show must go on ... we're only on 72

[ This comment was edited by acid911 on Nov 03 2002, 02:08 GMT ]

John [mail] Nov 02 2002, 09:30 pm EDT
Now we're at 73.
Smapdey [mail] Nov 02 2002, 09:46 pm EDT
Break 100?
Smapdey [mail] Nov 02 2002, 09:46 pm EDT
That sounds tough, Has it ever been done before?

Sorry about the double post.
Smapdey [mail] Nov 02 2002, 09:47 pm EDT
One more thing, I only have four more posts to go after this one to hit 600.
John [mail] Nov 02 2002, 09:59 pm EDT
Wow, I have many to go. I would actually have about 100 or so more posts, but somehow my account was deleted before and I had to re-register. Oh well, random selection huh?

  COMMENTS PAGE 1 NEXT »


POST A COMMENT
Username:Password:



SEND THIS PAGE TO A FRIEND
Easily fill in your friends' emails to send them this page.
 
 
BACK TO TOP
 
Partner Sites:    CraveOnline.com    PSP3D.com
ActionTrip.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline, LLC. © 2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Terms of Use - Privacy Policy - Site Map