Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Pc's Most Anticipated Games For 2008


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 bestof

bestof

  • Banned
  • 96 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:59 PM

Posted 01 June 2008 - 08:26 PM

Read an article about PC's Most Anticipated Games for 2008

http://www.freshbite.info/fnews_1210745147_10038.htm

So what's your most anticipated games on pc for 2008?

Edited by bestof, 01 June 2008 - 08:34 PM.


BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


m

#2 SmileyXX

SmileyXX

  • Members
  • 14 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Iowa
  • Local time:05:59 PM

Posted 01 June 2008 - 10:18 PM

The most anticipated pc game for 2008 for me would have to be StarCraft II. I've had StarCraft since it game out like what 10 years ago or so and still play it to this day. In my opinion it is one of the best RTS games ever made. I just hope Blizzard can actually get the game done and released yet this year but more than likely it will be pushed back and not released till sometime in 2009.

#3 nigglesnush85

nigglesnush85

  • Members
  • 4,371 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK
  • Local time:10:59 PM

Posted 02 June 2008 - 04:36 AM

I'm looking forward to Starcraft 2 and fallout.
Regards,

Alan.

#4 Sterling14

Sterling14

  • Members
  • 1,842 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York
  • Local time:05:59 PM

Posted 02 June 2008 - 04:03 PM

FarCry 2 looks amazing, but even though I just ordered an ATI HD 3870 graphics card, my computer probably won't be able to handle it very well.
"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." - Thomas Watson, Chairman of IBM, 1943

#5 vagg

vagg

  • Members
  • 2 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:03:59 PM

Posted 03 June 2008 - 02:59 PM

http://www.spore.com/

#6 locally pwned

locally pwned

  • Members
  • 489 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon
  • Local time:02:59 PM

Posted 03 June 2008 - 05:24 PM

I have been curious about Spore since I heard about it a year or two ago.

Sins...haven't picked it up yet but I plan to.

I am not too worried about many new games until I get around to building a new computer; my current one is barely up to the task. I am big fan of Supreme Commander; my P4 is not! Single-core machines are going the way of CRT's and Dodo birds...

Speaking of SupCom there is a new expansion coming out: Experimentals. There is not much info on it yet. I bet it adds more...experimentals? Heh heh, sorry, couldn't help it.

I am looking forward to the summer for more gaming time. I'd like to start playing SupCom and/or Forged Alliance on the ladders. I would also like focus on Company of Heroes a bit more...I still haven't got a handle on that one. Then as I mentioned theres' Sins...wow, the line up is growing...

I also hear there will be an expansion for Portal. That ought to be fun...

Besides the prospect of more Portal-action, there's been nothing in FPS Land that has peaked my interest lately...

---

Though I am a big RTS'er, I have zero interest in StarCraft II. I thought the original was mediocre at best; the new one looks exactly...the...same. I am having a hard time...containing my...enthusiasm.




Oh sorry, we were talking about StarCraft, I got distracted by some paint drying on a wall...

:thumbsup:
"The whole of science is nothing more than a refinement of everyday thinking." - Albert Einstein

"The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine

"If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands." - Douglas Adams

#7 Gratious

Gratious

  • Members
  • 12 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:59 PM

Posted 06 June 2008 - 10:11 AM

The most anticipated pc game for 2008 for me would have to be StarCraft II. I've had StarCraft since it game out like what 10 years ago or so and still play it to this day. In my opinion it is one of the best RTS games ever made. I just hope Blizzard can actually get the game done and released yet this year but more than likely it will be pushed back and not released till sometime in 2009.

I agree that starcraft is the #1 RTS games ever made, apparently it is being realesed in november. part of me is and is not looking forward to it. I only say this cause recently the graphics have been butchering game play, causing more lag or unstabability. I prefer the straight above look over units of 2D. 3D just works the computer harder so by the time you finally get the game running smoothly a new game has came out and caught your attention.

#8 locally pwned

locally pwned

  • Members
  • 489 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon
  • Local time:02:59 PM

Posted 07 June 2008 - 03:02 PM

I only say this cause recently the graphics have been butchering game play, causing more lag or unstabability. I prefer the straight above look over units of 2D.


I can see what you are getting at here. I think there are two sides to the coin.

For a long time RTS games were far behind FPS games in terms of graphics. In the last few years, it's as if RTS game developers are trying to catch up quickly.

On one side, 3D graphics can be a hindrance if the interface isn't up to the challenge. Clunky, unresponsive, or obstructing interface makes controlling units difficult and ultimately un-fun, regardless of how "pretty" the game looks. An example good interface is Company of Heroes; a couple examples of games with badly executed interface are Earth 2160 and Rise of Legends. Legends is decent game with bad camera control; (Rise of Nations had a simpler interface and benefited from the fact) while 2160 is a bad game across the board.

Indeed, CoH is a great example of balance between graphics, gameplay, and interface. My only complaint is that after playing Supreme Commander, I find myself working the scroll button to zoom out further!

One other thought: often in games like Homeworld 2 or Supreme Commander, you make many of the 'big decisions' with the view zoomed out very far...much too far to witness the high-end graphics. Does that make such graphics mute? Heck no; zooming in for the fireworks is part of the enjoyment. But this is something to consider when choosing your video settings!

Supreme Commander is the premier RTS at the moment, in my opinion. This brings us to the other argument: there are a large number of strategic and tactical elements that can be added with a third dimension. Some examples: T2 flak can't reach the high altitude of T3 spy planes, only T3 SAMs can; the long, high arch of certain artillery guns can reach targets that low-level firing weapons cannot.

Terrain plays an important role as well in 3D; faced with moving an army through rough mountainous terrain, you'll have to weigh your options carefully when deciding on an overall strategy for that map.

The interface for SupCom was an example of true innovation; the point-and-zoom feature is so smooth and functional I don't scroll anymore.

I guess I am a bit hard on StarCraft...there are just a lot of things I don't like about it and I never understood how it got its wide appeal. I just never got into it, I was too busy playing Total Annihilation back then. It strikes me as especially odd that so many people want so little to change about the new one. If it is going to be exactly the same, why make a new one?!? I realize that changes to a wining formula can be risky (aka, Homeworld -> Homeworld 2). But changes and improvements offer the change to make a great game even better. Example: Total Annihilation -> Supreme Commander.

Edited by locally pwned, 07 June 2008 - 03:30 PM.

"The whole of science is nothing more than a refinement of everyday thinking." - Albert Einstein

"The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine

"If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands." - Douglas Adams

#9 protozero

protozero

  • Members
  • 447 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Quebec, Canada,
  • Local time:06:59 PM

Posted 07 June 2008 - 04:34 PM

I only say this cause recently the graphics have been butchering game play, causing more lag or unstabability. I prefer the straight above look over units of 2D.


I can see what you are getting at here. I think there are two sides to the coin.

For a long time RTS games were far behind FPS games in terms of graphics. In the last few years, it's as if RTS game developers are trying to catch up quickly.

On one side, 3D graphics can be a hindrance if the interface isn't up to the challenge. Clunky, unresponsive, or obstructing interface makes controlling units difficult and ultimately un-fun, regardless of how "pretty" the game looks. An example good interface is Company of Heroes; a couple examples of games with badly executed interface are Earth 2160 and Rise of Legends. Legends is decent game with bad camera control; (Rise of Nations had a simpler interface and benefited from the fact) while 2160 is a bad game across the board.

Indeed, CoH is a great example of balance between graphics, gameplay, and interface. My only complaint is that after playing Supreme Commander, I find myself working the scroll button to zoom out further!

One other thought: often in games like Homeworld 2 or Supreme Commander, you make many of the 'big decisions' with the view zoomed out very far...much too far to witness the high-end graphics. Does that make such graphics mute? Heck no; zooming in for the fireworks is part of the enjoyment. But this is something to consider when choosing your video settings!

Supreme Commander is the premier RTS at the moment, in my opinion. This brings us to the other argument: there are a large number of strategic and tactical elements that can be added with a third dimension. Some examples: T2 flak can't reach the high altitude of T3 spy planes, only T3 SAMs can; the long, high arch of certain artillery guns can reach targets that low-level firing weapons cannot.

Terrain plays an important role as well in 3D; faced with moving an army through rough mountainous terrain, you'll have to weigh your options carefully when deciding on an overall strategy for that map.

The interface for SupCom was an example of true innovation; the point-and-zoom feature is so smooth and functional I don't scroll anymore.

I guess I am a bit hard on StarCraft...there are just a lot of things I don't like about it and I never understood how it got its wide appeal. I just never got into it, I was too busy playing Total Annihilation back then. It strikes me as especially odd that so many people want so little to change about the new one. If it is going to be exactly the same, why make a new one?!? I realize that changes to a wining formula can be risky (aka, Homeworld -> Homeworld 2). But changes and improvements offer the change to make a great game even better. Example: Total Annihilation -> Supreme Commander.


I liked Supreme commander as well execpt for one damn aspect that really ruined it for me. I like most RTS's and I'm a bigger fan of FPS's but taking 12 minutes to build ONE damn plane is pretty annoying. That's the #1 reason that ruined Supreme Commander was the damn build time. That's why I prefer Age of Empires 3 with good build times, graphics and gameplay.
Programming today is a race between software engineers striving to build bigger and better idiot-proof programs, and the Universe trying to produce bigger and better idiots. So far, the Universe is winning.

#10 locally pwned

locally pwned

  • Members
  • 489 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon
  • Local time:02:59 PM

Posted 08 June 2008 - 04:10 AM

I liked Supreme commander as well execpt for one damn aspect that really ruined it for me. I like most RTS's and I'm a bigger fan of FPS's but taking 12 minutes to build ONE damn plane is pretty annoying. That's the #1 reason that ruined Supreme Commander was the damn build time. That's why I prefer Age of Empires 3 with good build times, graphics and gameplay.


Economics in SupCom is about continuous production and allocation. If you want to build a strategy based heavily on T3 strategic bombers, for example, and your economy is cookin,' you can use as many engineers as you want to assist the factories building them; as many as you can afford, anyway. In other words, you can dump what ever percentage of your economic production into what ever project you want.

T3 engineers are a good option for this, they don't cost a lot to build. However if you have a strong economy and want a real boost in construction speed, use upgraded support commanders. You have to have a strong economy; these guys build fast.

Your ACU can be upgraded as well, I'm sure you know. If you upgrade its resource allocation and tech ability, it will build faster and have a relatively small impact on your economy compared to the increase in build capacity it provides.

You'll want to make use of assistance when you are building any major project; T3 arty installations, T3 naval units, experimentals, and of course your land factories if you want to build up an army quickly.

---

I hate it when RTS games control how I can spend my resources, such as games that require the full amount of resources before construction can start or how much of your economy is directed to a given project. I want to have that subtle control over the behavior of my overall production. I think games with more freedom engender a greater level of strategic depth.
"The whole of science is nothing more than a refinement of everyday thinking." - Albert Einstein

"The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine

"If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands." - Douglas Adams

#11 Gratious

Gratious

  • Members
  • 12 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:59 PM

Posted 09 June 2008 - 02:06 PM

This time I find no need to quote, I've played age of empires 3 and Supcom, I am hecne the over estatic RTS fan, I played the original total annihalation, found it hard then when the expansion came out found the AI had died, kinda made me sad but in total annihalation it was a conflict for me I liked having the unlimited resources but same time pissed me off, just took out one strong point of strategy, Supcom part of me wishes they didn;t allow the 1K unit pop, cause even with a good processor and graphics card unless you have a quad core, after 3 ufos fly into your base filled with planes your computer learns fast to nearly crash if you are zoomed in at the time, stilla good game non the less, wish some units weren't so big or soem units not so small. I do like how for teams you can share resources, this has saved my butt and my friends butt many of times. age of empires 3. a game that big wish they had more resources lol though it really does force you to figure a strategy and figure it fast or you wont have the resources to do so with. all have their good and bad points.

all in all heres my thought Starcraft as is>>200 pop>>minerals=strategical point and can run out
Starcraft to come>> graphics that can make finding units more difficult from seeing top and side view of your aircrafts>>definate grouping will be required
Total annihalation>>solar panels for the win, well until later in the game lol. also very hilarious to play when you decided 9 kbot labs all building peewees......
Subcom>> a short game can still take quite some time>> high chance of recoverign from a lose situation in other words you can tech with out the tech buildings, as long as you've been upgrading your commander (just abit hard)
Age of empires>>I wont go to far into this one as in I play it less then the rest cause I couldn't get into as others may have.

By the way there is no Dis to the other games because I still do play them just not as much as others.

I still do prefer when they were just top views especialy with starcraft wanna piss someone off in starcraft build tons and tons of overlords send them over their buildign then send your units in they can't see anything and makes them hard to build new units to replace old ones cause unless they have their buildings grouped they can't select them.

and a question to follow, has anyone found away to lan the original total annihalation, now that the supporting sites have died off and dial up internet has seemingly vanished from the face of the world.

Edited by Gratious, 09 June 2008 - 02:47 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users