This isnt stronghold 3

[The Coal Man]

So many idiots trashing this because of stronghold 3, which was controled by another company. Most of them havent even played another stronghold game or even own 1, just repeating people or seen on youtube. This game has a wonderful record, with the only black spot being stronghold 3, which I admit, is a big spot. Theyve released 5 games, with 3 being amazing, 1 being good, and 1 being stronghold 3.

1 bad game in 5, that wasnt actually the developers fault. Stronghold 3 was probably ment to be a good game, but a third party publisher (which they arent using now) rushed them months ahead of schedule, resulting in a bad game. The last 1 was bad because a publisher, who isnt even affiliated with this 1, rushed them to release an unfinished product.

Theres a reason this series has so many diehard fans, and its because they are an amazing company. And its not even the delusional type of diehard fan, they actually admit stronghold 3 sucked.

All this being said id wait for reviews before you preorder. The last 1 had several suspicious signs if you looked for them. They had shallow trailers, something this 1 doesnt (the trailers actually pretty much matchup to the trailers for the good games), and they had no reviews from notable sources like ign. If this gets good reviews from stuff like ign, im hoping on it while its still discounted.

As a sidenote for everyone interested in this series, you can buy all their games excluding stronghold 3 for $20 in the stronghold collection. 5 games that all have amazing player and reviewer ratings for $20, its a great deal.

[The Coal Man]

You do realize I only own half their games, right? Your focusing on the fact i said ign even though it was just an example, just because its the only thing you can defend. ign was just the first site i thought of. You probably should of picked that up when i said like. Theres also metacritic, gamespot, and a bunch of others. ign isnt the only review site in existence.

And that was actually a serious question about ign on wikipedia.

[Boehm]

Just wondering, what's wrong with being a fan of a studio?
In ya's, "Fanboy"

[The Coal Man]

they can be a little blind and ignore facts, CoD being a great example. People on steam like to call people fanboys if they disagree with them though, like nuclear. Even if the title defidently doesnt fit.

[Xtorma]

Publicado originalmente por Coleron2:

keep in mind this is a large company fallen on bad times. Just because smaller companies can do it doesnt mean they can. And im assuming they abandoned stronghold 3 because everyone agreed it was a lost cause, and they dont have money to burn.

There is also a big difference in giving away a $20 game verses a $50, although its impresive if they gave away legendary heroes too. And thats a very generous thing to do, but there is no way someone should be expecting or demanding it.

The thing about preorder is that you are trading some dlcs or a cheaper price for knowing if the game is good or not. You choose to take the risk, and its a pretty big one so thats why many people dont preorder.

Strange, but in other threads they use this exact same argument for the abandonment, except they say it's because it's a small company.

I hope most people will wait and not be suckered again, because the company is too small/large to stand by thier products.

[The Coal Man]

theyve released 4 very succesful games, not a small company.

[RazingHel]

Because fanboys tend to be blinded by their love and will often defend the most asinine of development decisions.

[Boehm]

well, I may be a Fan of FireFly, but that doesn't mean that I'm not stating a good point by saying that; yeah, the messed up once... i'm pretty damn sure that they are not going to hang themselves by repeating SH3.

Other than that, we are repeating ourselves... and that's ridiculous.

[The Coal Man]

didnt bother responding to your points because they are mostly opinions or stuff there is no evidence of either way. So far ive avoided getting personal while youve done it 2-3 times, and yet you call me a fanboy and ask my age.

I can respond to the trailer 1 though. For an rts, a trailer is very important because it cant help but show a lot of gameplay. All the other stronghold games have showed plenty of gameplay, but stronghold 3 noticably showed very little. I your going to preorder, a trailer is all you have to go off of, making them very important.

The publisher is only relevant because they cut the time short, if they didnt they would not matter at all. But cutting months off of the time they get to work on it defidently changes how good of a game it is, basically a partial beta verses the full game.

The publisher they went with does bear responsibility if it didnt have a bad record, but if tehy did have a bad record then it is fireflys fault for going with them. Feel free to try and find out what their record was before stronghold 3, I have no idea

[The Coal Man]

nice attitude change btw. i did already defend all the points I could. its been a week, pretty obvious why my stance might have calmed down a bit. I already answered your questions that a could, I have no idea the opinions of the firefly devs and I doubt anyone but them does.
Answered about the trailer up above and about the publisher. I dont understand how you can say im avoid your points when im directly answering them repeatedly, unless you think you made some that you didnt or that im missing.

Also how can i be avoid the subject and discussing it at the same time? And how can i also do a 180 and be too arrogant to admit im wrong? Your calling the guy who hasnt resorted to personal insults insecure, when you yourself immedietly went to them when someone disagrees with your opinion, didnt even need to disagree with you.

[Boehm]

Publicado originalmente por GANuclearShadow:

What I brought are good points and showed that you are hypocritical on your stance of blaming the publisher for the result of the last game amongst other topics. Now, you are once again avoiding the topic and actually dicussing it and you are proving yourself to be disingenuous and possibly too arrogant to admit fault or too insecure to try to make a proper counter-claim.

Yes, I may have made some remarks that are unfavorable to you however both your words and actions thus far have lead me to believe those accusations are both genuine and fair. Now I ask you once again respond in full and if you do not than you are clearly incapable of defending your stance on this issue which you have shown to be passionate about which maked you do this 180 and become deflective and avoiding rather than confronting.

About your points NuclearShadow, If I was Coleron2, I wouldn't care too much to reply to your points. Your points was indeed an opinion and you over assumed Coleron2's post by stating... than asking.
If you want someone to reply to you, make sure you write it as if you have room for others opinion or, defense to what you have said against them or asked of them.
Also, name calling from both you and Coleron2, is probably why there is a sense of negativity between the both of you. I'm not going to only point fingers at you, but Coleron2 and many others have also been disappointingly rude to each other.
When doing this, you turn a discussion into an argument that will never end.

Now, back to your points you've made earlier, I agree that FireFly is where they are at now, cause of it's uniqueness from other RTS games with their Stronghold Series, which is a castle simulation with, in my opinion, balanced warfare. You are absolutely correct when saying that they did a good job doing it too. Which is a point that Coleron2 has been trying to make. FireFly has done a very great job on their games they've made, however, SH3 didn't go to plan. Now, Coleron2 also mentioned, which I would like to put a high attention to, is SH3 was their first game that they published with the third party publisher. They were clearly rushed.
I'm not going to claim too much knowledge of SH3, but I have watch peoples reviews on the game, and I could tell you straight away that they published it unfinished just by watching their little prologue they had in their Story. The story wasn't animated... it was simply put together quickly with their concept art of what they had originally planned to have animated.
The Concept isn't the Finish... but that's what they used and it told me that they have indeed published this too early. - Now, from the interview of Polygon with a Firefly Dev. they agreed that SH3 was published too early and they did not want to do that again. - I might mention that I have experience with Adobe and Autodesk Software's, and I practice using these for being a 3D artist. From what I learned in that career area, thats what crosses my thinking of them being rushed.

You are right, you can't put full blame on the Publisher, cause that was FireFly's choice. However, I think we know now that they've learned from their mistake, cause they are not going with that third party publisher again.

It would make perfect sense that FireFly would not repeat what have risk their whole development career for FireFly. I guarantee you that they are putting much more caution and time into SHC2 than they have ever done for any of their games. They will want their fans to have that trust in them, like they had before SH3 happened. From what I have seen from FireFly, is that they are not using the same publisher for SH3 again, they have extending the time of the final product from beginning of the year to nearly the end of the year, and to include what they have with all these beta reviews... I'm very confident that they are going to make us proud.

I agree that you can't go off of IGN. No offence to you, Coleron2. A lot of people makes this mistake in trusting rates like these. However, there is better ways that NuclearShadow could of confronted you about that topic.

Now, If anyone has any questions about my experience with FireFly, and about my opinions, please ask!
If you have a statement, great! I might reply, if I don't, I either found you to be rude or I totally agree with you.

Also, NuclearShadow... so that you don't have to ask me, I'll be 22 years old in September. So FireFly is practically sending me a gift by making this game around my birthday =D

Thanks
P.S. I kinda rushed through typing this, and apologies for the long post and typos.
*Edit, came around to fixing some of my mistakes. =D

[The Coal Man]

quick question if your still around unspokensound, what were its competitors when the first stronghold came out? Im guessing early total wars and age of empires but I honestly have no idea. I think i also remember a game called cossacks.

[Boehm]

Now, I don't have too much knowledge on that, Coleron2. However, I never pay too much attention to that.
I've read so much medieval stories, Dark age, anything that had involvement with Swords and knights... I loved it so much that when I was young, I wanted to have an experience in that those time frames to the point where I dreamed of living in those times. However, as I've gotten older, I came to realized that would be one of the last time era's I would want to live in. lol.

Suggestion, if you love this kind of stuff like I do, I suggest reading the Saxon tales written by Bernard Cornwell. They are pretty awesome.

So, for me, I was... i'm guessing 9 years old when I ran across SHC1, and I loved it to death because of the Castle similuation and battles. At that time, I was also big into Red Alert... TBH, how would there be a competition between Stronghold Crusader and Red Alert when one is based on the future, and the other based on the past?

I wasn't a big gamer cause my parents restricted me from playing games, which I'm glad they did. So I wouldn't know too much about competition SHC had with other games. I can only compare Command and Conquer and Red Alert. Which were both awesome games at that time for me.

[The Coal Man]

Id recommend reading the forgotten realms books if you like swords, unless you really like the historical aspect. Im pretty much split between liking the fantasy and the medieval parts.

And yes that was 1 of the worst periods of history but still, it wasnt boring.

[losburatinos]

Same thing, the only difference is that when I was small I was a huge fan of pirates. I was so mad I wasn't born 400 years earlier :D

Publicado originalmente por UnspokenSound:

Now, I don't have too much knowledge on that, Coleron2. However, I never pay too much attention to that.
I've read so much medieval stories, Dark age, anything that had involvement with Swords and knights... I loved it so much that when I was young, I wanted to have an experience in that those time frames to the point where I dreamed of living in those times. However, as I've gotten older, I came to realized that would be one of the last time era's I would want to live in. lol.

Suggestion, if you love this kind of stuff like I do, I suggest reading the Saxon tales written by Bernard Cornwell. They are pretty awesome.

So, for me, I was... i'm guessing 9 years old when I ran across SHC1, and I loved it to death because of the Castle similuation and battles. At that time, I was also big into Red Alert... TBH, how would there be a competition between Stronghold Crusader and Red Alert when one is based on the future, and the other based on the past?

I wasn't a big gamer cause my parents restricted me from playing games, which I'm glad they did. So I wouldn't know too much about competition SHC had with other games. I can only compare Command and Conquer and Red Alert. Which were both awesome games at that time for me.