It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
Community
General discussionRelease: Field of Glory: Empires(20 posts)(20 posts)
(20 posts)
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Posted July 11, 2019
Field of Glory: Empires is now available DRM-free.

Field of Glory: Empires is a grand strategy game in which you will have to move in an intricate and living tapestry of nations and tribes, each one with their distinctive culture.

Expand your dominion through wars of conquest and make your culture a beacon of light, but be careful though. The risk of Decadence is not trivial. Many civilizations have collapsed for not having seen in time the signs of impending crisis. The older your empire, the more challenges will lurk in the shadows. Just expanding your borders without carefully shaping your form of government and culture won’t be the wisest of strategies.
Posted July 12, 2019
avatar
Crosmando: Wow, this releasing so soon after Imperator almost feels exploitative, like they're saying "hey you know that Iron Age grand strat Pdox just released which sucked, we'll here's ours which doesn't suck!"
I don't know how good or bad the Paradox game is, but his game being turn based already has the upper hand as far as I am concerned.

I already said about the marketing surrounding it that I don't like, but otherwise it looks like an interesting game.
Posted July 12, 2019
avatar
Crosmando: Wow, this releasing so soon after Imperator almost feels exploitative, like they're saying "hey you know that Iron Age grand strat Pdox just released which sucked, we'll here's ours which doesn't suck!"
It's the reverse, that's Paradox who urge release their game before Slitherine, because Paradox know Ageod would release a good game,
and so Slitherine had to release their game before the Paradox one being made at last good after its patches and DLCs.
Post edited July 12, 2019 by ERISS
Posted July 12, 2019
avatar
OldOldGamer: I wonder why such thing?
At least they could integrate the games to work seamlessly.

Poor marketing (or even deceiving...) and poor engineering.

Shame.
Unfortunately it's not something new. In the old days (late 80's/early 90's) some strategy games would require that you had to buy 2 different games from the same publisher in order to manage your battles.

It was the case of the first "Caesar" game, where you needed to have "Cohort 2" installed in order to be able to manually control your battles.

IMO this is a step back in gaming design :(
Posted July 12, 2019
avatar
OldOldGamer: By publishing Empires, I already have expecations of a blend of the two.
But, instead, I got a complerely different game.
avatar
Chiteki: Problem of personal expectations, got it. Understandable, but I do not agree. Empires is a spin-off, it went in completely different direction - direction of old Slitherine Grand Strategy titles from decades ago: Legion Gold, Chariots of War and Spartan: Gates of Troy (every single one of them had automated visualised battles). And I personally waited for this kind of game from them for ages. Those are my expectations, and FoG2 integration is just a welcome bonus.

Still, I will not argue that just having those battles in the game would be better, that's a given. Nevertheless, they had their limitations during development, studios under Slitherine are not that big. So I don't see anything malicious or negative in all this, maybe a missed opportunity at most.
I fully understand your point. And I understand slitherine low budget.

Moreso, publish a new game line, advertising the ability to export battles, as plus!
This way they are incurring in alienated customers.
And since it is happening...

Sorry, this is not personal expectations, this is lack of marketing skills.
But anyway, if the game is cool, and cheaper than 30£, I will consider.
Post edited July 12, 2019 by OldOldGamer
Posted July 13, 2019
high rated
avatar
Chiteki: Problem of personal expectations, got it. Understandable, but I do not agree. Empires is a spin-off, it went in completely different direction - direction of old Slitherine Grand Strategy titles from decades ago: Legion Gold, Chariots of War and Spartan: Gates of Troy (every single one of them had automated visualised battles). And I personally waited for this kind of game from them for ages. Those are my expectations, and FoG2 integration is just a welcome bonus.

Still, I will not argue that just having those battles in the game would be better, that's a given. Nevertheless, they had their limitations during development, studios under Slitherine are not that big. So I don't see anything malicious or negative in all this, maybe a missed opportunity at most.
avatar
OldOldGamer: I fully understand your point. And I understand slitherine low budget.

Moreso, publish a new game line, advertising the ability to export battles, as plus!
This way they are incurring in alienated customers.
And since it is happening...

Sorry, this is not personal expectations, this is lack of marketing skills.
But anyway, if the game is cool, and cheaper than 30£, I will consider.
I don't follow the logic. 2019's Field of Glory Empires simply says they support import/export of 2017's Field of Glory II save games; there's nothing bad about that, and I fail to see anything whatsoever like "bad marketing" in them mentioning that new *feature*.

Nor is *that* new feature reason to criticize them for not remaking the two-year-old Field of Glory II, even if it were the same developer, but as mentioned above, the two games are by different game studios.

As far as I can see, this thread has a negative tone towards FoG:E simply because the first post made an unwarranted criticism that set that negative tone (Jedi mind trick?)

But perhaps I'm misunderstanding something; I just think criticism should be fair, that's all.
Pages:
1
2
This is my favourite topic
Community
General discussionRelease: Field of Glory: Empires(20 posts)(20 posts)
(20 posts)