Инсталирайте Steam
вход
|
език
Опростен китайски (简体中文)
Традиционен китайски (繁體中文)
Японски (日本語)
Корейски (한국어)
Тайландски (ไทย)
Чешки (Čeština)
Датски (Dansk)
Немски (Deutsch)
Английски (English)
Испански — Испания (Español — España)
Испански — Латинска Америка (Español — Latinoamérica)
Гръцки (Ελληνικά)
Френски (Français)
Италиански (Italiano)
Индонезийски (Bahasa Indonesia)
Унгарски (Magyar)
Холандски (Nederlands)
Норвежки (Norsk)
Полски (Polski)
Португалски (Português)
Бразилски португалски (Português — Brasil)
Румънски (Română)
Руски (Русский)
Финландски (Suomi)
Шведски (Svenska)
Турски (Türkçe)
Виетнамски (Tiếng Việt)
Украински (Українська)
Докладване на проблем с превода
Правила и насоки за дискусии
Докладване на публикацията
Wtf?? You ask him after a million of posts here, are you blind or you just dont want to see what people write
He was asking about Peeveli reasons, because this was his first post here and it had no info about why he feels that way. What's illogical in that?
of spamming, apparently
After that people did explain what is the problem, this is ignoring the elefant in the room
Exact !!!
The problem with the devs/publisher of the most games: They all jump on the "mainstream-train" !
All must be easy so that every stupid mainstreeam-child can handle this game and feel like a hero when their very poor "fast-click-rusher-tactics" work.
Not only strategic/tactic-games,first person shooter too.All must be very easy for the mainstream-kiddies and they are very hapyy when such games have idiotic unlocks,ranks,stats too....the perfect mainstream-mess.
Look at raven shield and now on all the ubi-mess with not real browser,unlocks,stats and laughable gameplay,but kiddies call it tactical.
Look at the very(old) great americas army 2 and now at the very idiotic counterstrike-clone proving grounds.
I can give you a lot of example from good (older) games they switched to mainstream-mess (oh i forget the worse blitzkrieg 3 too).
Or arma3 community. The great ofp/arma community BEFORE brainless dayz was so great,full with serious gameplay. And now look at the serverbrowser from arma3...you will find most server with stupid mainstream-mess.
And the biggest idiots ever are all the brainless children they cry for "Zombies" in every game.
That is the new player-base: Only stupid children they prefer simple gameplay and cry for zombies in every game (will never understand the zombie-idiotic-player).
But you will not find many players they prefer R E A L serioud/tactical gameplay.And the devs know very well they can earn better money with mainsteam-mess of games because you fin much more player they prefer simple "mainstream-unlock-stats-rank"-games then real tactical games where it is more important to use your brain then a fast click-finger and stupid rusher-gameplay.
I dont think ST4 will be a good tactical game like all the great older games like the REAL first Sudden Strike or the first Blitzkrieg.
The best will be a Combat Mission game with a good multiplayer (and more then only 1vs1) or a Theatre of War.
And you know the company Kalypso??? You can read a lot of the "Quality" from this company.
Very often they release refreshed older games and stop very soon the support. (My first experiernce with this company was the german version of Theatre of war 1...they never will fixed it.,ut promised a lot...typical Kalypso.).
Or look at Grand Ages: Medieval. There you read : Kalypso heared of the community (steam-forum). Looool and you see there the typical Kalypso result too.
You find many players they write "will never buy anything from Kalypso". And after i read the publisher is Kalypso i must olny think this game will not be very great.
And when not believe you will see. In another forum the call me troll because i warn other player about firefly (stronghold). And what happens.....yes stronghold crusader 2 is only mess.
They promise 8 player multiplayer (you can read it in the manual too,lol) but only 2vs 2 works....with many crashes,dsync,worse performance. So only 1vs1 is really possible.
You see sometimes it helps tro know about something some publisher. I will never buy any game of firefly,ubi,EA.....such games will be only mainstreammess.
And who thin Rainbow six Siege is a real tactical game....lol such player have no play what a tactical game is.
So two things i look for : - Which publisher (many publisher release only mainstreammess or/and have a very worse support)
- too much mainstream and only the name is the same (Blitzkrieg,think Sudden Strike too).
Perhaps they will fix ST4 to a bettere game and Kalypso will be a better company in future (but i dont think so).
Search some forums about kalypso and you will see.
Normally I would agree with that, but in this context I must throw some words of protest.
Some features of SS4 are completely against this trend. The inability to repair tanks health in field is one of them. I'm not saying whether its a good or bad design decision, but it's certainly not something you would find in a game for casuals.
Logistics are also non-casual. Ammunition runs out faster than e.g. in Blitzkrieg 2, and in B2 you didn't have to take fuel into account, if I remember correctly.
In SS1 you could destroy a Konigstiger with few Stuarts, attacking it from the front. If SS4 was so arcade, similar things would be possible in it, while they're not.
When you play a very very long time PC-games you know the different companies/publisher very well.
For example the disaster with stronghold 3 and all the promise of the devs for their next game....i dont believe them and it was the true for their next horrible game. Only 1 example.....
And Kalypso have made many negative things,when not believe you can read it in different forums.
Sometimes it is so funny with some fanboys. Lol one more example: Age of Mythology Extended was never fixed,multiplayer near unplayable. Then i warn to buy their next addon and some players insult me and mean all will be great. And again....Addon very worse quality,worse multiplayer again,absolute unbalnced and many players are crying. That what i mean with "know companies".
And i talk not about 100% realistic in SD4 or not. I talk about the publisher and the quality of the games.
And i talk about to use only the same name,but the game is absolute different and feel more arcade.
Do you know the Real operation Flashpoint and then the Red River-Operation Flashpoint from Codemasters? The same,different publisher/devs and only the nasmer is the same,but game absolute different.
SS1 was not a war-simulation but good enough.But SS4 feels like too much arcade.When you play a game it called Sudden Strike the gameplay must be as a Sudden Strike and not like a mainstream-arcade-rts. The typical "devs jump on the mainstream-train".
Hope in future of real good rts like the good old time (the settlers 1,Blitzkrieg 1 and a lot of more).
Perhaps Northgard will be good,gameplay look like the settlers 3,but dont know.
But i hate all the boring mainsteam-mess you can buy.
But the mistake was to use the name of a title of which has many good memories for the veterans (people between 25-40 years)
And there is where they ♥♥♥♥, ,thought it would be a good idea to use an unknown name for the people of the new generation and take the opportunity to sell the product to some nostalgic, but they did not think that we were so many that we say that is ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ game.
Exactly, they wouldnt have gotten this much negative attention had they used an original title.
But to sell a simple mainstreamgame for all the kiddies but usethe title from a great old game for serious players is so poor from the devs....but very typical for many modern games.
Same with first perdon shooter. Most newer games will only make for a playerbase full with kiddies they prefer simple gameplay,but games for older or/and serious player you will not find very often (or only very boring "spreadsheet-games" like hearts of iron).
A tip: When you (as an older guy) played and liked the settlers buy "Northgard",a very great game. It is like finished,only the campaing will released later and some smaller bugs.It feels like the good old "the settlers".
But i can only say again: Typical Kalypso !!!! Sudden strike 4 is N O T a Sudden Strike,only the name is the same.But with such "tricks" (use names from good old game-series") works a lot of companies.
Same with Blitzkrieg 3,use a name from a great old game but Blitzkrieg 3 is again a horrible simple mainstream-mess.
Ammunition and fuel management - I bet kids love dealing with boring logistics.
Armor / positioning / penetration matters - but no, it's a simple "action-rusher-gameplay".
You can't repair vehicles HP - a characteristic feature of a casual game, I'm sure of it.
We can sneak infantry behind enemy lines using environment elelemnts as cover, capture enemy equipment after killing it's crew - still, simple game for stupid kids, no strategies possible except brainless rush.
Combined arms matters, without infantry to spot, the tanks get r3kt - still, simple action game.
Screw logic.
Other players write the same....ST4 is NOT like Sudden Strike,only the name is the same.
Too much crash and booom.
This few "realistic-settings" of ST4 is not enough for a game that called Sudden Strike. ST4 is more arcade and such realistic-settings cant build an arcade-rts to a good tactical game.
By the way , don't you remember several months ago old people are concern there will be too much micro control ? So what is the point to against rush click ??
Also , we are looking for the title of Sudden Strike is because we want to play something not so serious , don't you ?
Like the game Combat Mission , Graviteam Tactics etc I had talk about before , I don't like them because they are no fun for me , but it doesn't mean I can't handle this kind of game . But for some of the people who talking about realism whole day , they really can't handle this kind of game . Some of us is talking about how good Steel Division is (it is better than SS4 of cause) and go to play it , then you see they are back and complain this game is too much hardcore for them . Oh , come on guys .
So over all , you hate SS4 is because it don't have a large scale battle field and also there is no too much units , or maybe the producer Kalypso . Nothing about realistic this or realistic that , alright ?
After playing the missions of the beta I really dont understand the complaints of a lot of people. The graphics are really beautiful, the missions design is interesting and you can feel that they have put a lot of passion into this game.
I played some Sudden Strike 2 yesterday (it was one of my favorite games back in the time) and in my opinion, the series has always been a little bit of arcade. If you are looking for super realistic games, maybe Eugen is your publisher.
There is still a lot of space in order to get a really good game but it is on a good way, have some trust.
And for people who believe that it is a simple tank rush game, well I played the Stalingrad mission and I did not lost even one of my tanks. I used my infantery to scout, withdrawed when they got attack, sent my attillery and than my tanks.
And I used the infantry to capture all 4 AT Guns and 2 Artillery Guns in the center (after the minefield) and also sneaked to the river to disable Katyusha before if could fire.
The game is good and allows for a lot of appproaches.