3030 Deathwar Review

3030 Deathwar, developed and published by Bird In Sky.

The Good: Large “alive” universe, neat graphical design, simplified controls

The Not So Good: Painfully slow travel times, difficult with slow tedious progress, limited jobs, unintuitive interface, limited tutorial and no multiplayer

What say you? A sluggish, boring pace and high initial difficulty hurt this space adventure: 5/8



MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

I think most trading adventure games take place in space because it’s an interesting setting, as opposed to, say, Delaware. There have been quite a number of space adventure games released in recent times: Space Trader, Parkan II, SpaceForce, DarkStar One. Now we get to experience the full fury of 3030 Deathwar, a top-down game from an independent developer. Now, it obviously won’t have the graphical splendor of the big budget titles, but it can make up for that with innovative and entertaining gameplay. Will 3030 Deathwar push the genre forward, or just suffer a death war of its own?



GRAPHICS AND SOUND

For a top-down 2-D game, 3030 Deathwar actually looks pretty good. I really like the overall presentation of the game: there are number of nice effects with the various maps and icons, zooming in and out and such. This attention to detail makes up for the lack of spectacular 3-D vistas. While the game is played at a fixed low resolution, the maps are nice and the universe of 3030 Deathwar looks nice when you are around stations. In open space, the game is very drab with hardly any background images to look at: realistic to be sure, but not very stimulating. The background does light up as you approach a star, so that’s kind of cool. The game shows the interior of each station from the side, but the game layout is used for the every station, making them all run together and losing a distinctive feel. Still, for an independent developer, the graphics of 3030 Deathwar are about as good as you can expect for a 2-D game. The sound is pretty generic: none of the dialogue is voiced, but 3030 Deathwar comes with a good assortment of effects and pleasing background music that fits the genre. While neither the graphics nor the sound are impressive, they do their job and give 3030 Deathwar a characteristic feel.



ET AL.

3030 Deathwar is a single-player only game where you follow the misadventures of John Falcon. The story is generic for the genre: lone wolf gets mixed up in galactic conspiracy. The game has the potential to incorporate a massively multiplayer aspect to it, but honestly the single player mode works just fine and you’d probably never run into anyone else anyway (since the universe is so large). The game comes with a tutorial when you start a new game, but it doesn’t explain a lot of the icons in the game (and neither does the manual); more explicit clarifications would be appreciated. 3030 Deathwar also lacks an editor, but the game is expansive enough to not really need one. The overhead view from which the game is played lends itself to simple keyboard controls. However, the Newtonian physics (with a strict application of inertia) makes it difficult to control the ships in the game, actually more so than in most space games where piloting is fairly intuitive. It takes some getting used to the controls in 3030 Deathwar, and the less-than-comprehensive tutorial and manual don’t help matters. You are given an auto-fly mode (if you purchase it) that will maintain the highest speed possible to make life easier, and the split-drive makes traveling large distances easier (but, as you’ll see, not nearly easy enough). The game limits you to saving while in a station and not in an active mission. While this might make for smaller save game files, it is a frustrating limitation (more on why later).



The HUD is confusing at first, as icons representing stations, planets, asteroid fields, ships, and systems are displayed around your ship. The HUD shows heading well but not distance, as everything over a screen’s width away overlaps. The map makes finding objects easy as it is organized well. Flying to a distant station is a matter of choosing it on the sector map and then flying towards the heading. The docking procedure is neat: you must maintain a slow speed and follow the lights into the station, which will tick off as you get closer to your destination. The stations themselves offer a trade screen (for trade) and a job screen (for jobs), plus a load of NPCs that are usually there for mission purposes. On the trade screen you can purchase goods for trade, new ships, upgrades, or repair and refuel your vessel. You will need to purchase fuel on a regular basis as you will go through your supply very quickly. Upgrades are very, very expensive which slows down your progress through the game dramatically. While this gives you a longer experience, it is annoying that you must complete a ton of missions just to afford a slight improved gun. Jobs usually consist of bringing someone (or something) to another station; there isn’t much variety here. Still, 3030 Deathwar offers the most believable space world since Independence War II (still my favorite game of the genre): the stations are buzzing with activity and it’s much more believable than most of the other space games that only have one or two other ships flying around. Unfortunately, travel times in 3030 Deathwar are a little too realistic. Even with the split drives, it will take upwards of ten minutes to reach a destination in another star system. I don't mind waiting in a game like Microsoft Flight Simulator (that's part of the game), but watching your ship just fly in 3030 Deathwar is unnecessary and annoying, especially when there is nothing to look at and absolutely nothing to do. You just sit there, as your engines are on maximum and your heading is already set. You won’t run into any enemies or discover any cargo: you just sit and wait for time to pass. This is exacerbated the fact that your split-drive is actually slowed down if you are anywhere near a star. If you are somewhere on a star’s map (ot near a station, star, or planet, mind you) you are limited in your speed. Why would the split-drive speed be lowered when there is nothing to do and no reason for it? Eventually the game speeds you up to make trips a bit faster, but you've still wasted time staring at a blank screen. Sure, it's realistic, but that doesn't mean it’s fun. And speeding up interstellar travel won’t change the game, because during this time you are just waiting anyway. It’s really annoying and genuinely frustrating because there is absolutely no reason why you can’t just instantly zap to a new system.



There are a handful of things to do in the 3030 Deathwar universe: trading, bounty hunting pirates, exploring derelict ships, mining asteroid fields, and taking missions. The mission pay is very weird and seemingly arbitrary: you can actually get less pay for longer or tougher missions. You will have to engage in combat (usually against pirates), and you are given access to missiles and other weapons, assuming of course you can afford them (which you can’t for a while). You even need to purchase an upgrade to target enemy ships. I guess money is the driving force of the future. 3030 Deathwar features frustratingly difficult gameplay, especially at the beginning of the game. Let me tell you a story. I wasted 30 minutes flying (yes, I spent thirty minutes just flying between two stations in the game...sigh) a mission only to be destroyed by a friendly station that was shooting at a pirate ship. Awesome. I couldn't save the mission halfway through because the game wouldn't let me, so now I have to waste another half an hour and hope I don't die again. Having to attempt the third mission in the game FIVE TIMES (after being blown up by a pirate ship, a friendly space station, another pirate ship, and another friendly space station) before surviving is not what I call an entertaining experience. What are pirates doing in the first few systems anyway? Why not ease the player in? You certainly can’t afford high-priced weapons, ships, or shields to defend yourself. The combination of long travel times, expensive ship upgrades, and no concessions for beginners makes 3030 Deathwar exasperating when it shouldn’t be.



IN CLOSING

3030 Deathwar has the potential to be a very entertaining game, but a couple of oddball decisions ruin the overall experience. I haven't been this frustrated in a game in a long time, because I can see how good it can be, but the various areas of disappointment suck all of the fun out of the game. The basic design is good, with a good implementation of a 2-D universe with simple controls and some nice graphical effects. But, the insane travel times and overly difficult pirates (with friendly stations that just happen to shoot you) make playing 3030 Deathwar a very trying experience. If you enjoy staring at a mostly blank screen while not doing anything, then 3030 Deathwar is the game for you! Luckily, I think most of the problems with the game can be easily eliminated by allowing for faster split-drive speeds, especially when you aren’t near anything (which is the case almost all of the time). It doesn’t have to be instantaneous, but a thirty-second trip between two systems is a request that I think is reasonable. Ten to fifteen minutes for a one-way trip is ludicrous, especially since there is nothing to do while you are traveling other than to wait. Speed up the game and 3030 Deathwar would become a much more appetizing title, but the slow speed makes the game too boring to enjoy.

BioShock Review

BioShock, developed by Irrational Games and published by 2K Games.

The Good: Extremely varied and customizable weaponry, fantastic setting, outstanding graphics and sound, not terribly difficult with no penalty for dying and frequent respawn points

The Not So Good: No multiplayer, ridiculous and redundant copy protection

What say you? A tremendously well-developed shooter: 7/8



Note: This is a spoiler-filled review. Kevin Spacey is Keyser Söze



MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

As a smallish review site, I normally get to pick and choose which games I annoy publishers about getting. This is why you’ll see an inordinate amount of strategy games (my favorite genre) reviewed here and hardly any role-playing games (meh). I’m not the biggest fan of single player first person shooters (I do, however, enjoy online shooters), so when you see one on the site, you know I think it’s potentially pretty good. That brings us to BioShock, developed by what used to be Irrational Games (now called 2K Has Deep Pockets), authors of several games I enjoy (SWAT 4, Tribes Vengeance). Will those countless e-mails sent to 2K’s press relations company be worth it?



GRAPHICS AND SOUND

BioShock uses the new-ish Unreal engine and the results are impressive. The game looks technically good, with all sorts of shiny surface, light tricks, and all of that stuff that most high-end games include these days. The water has gotten special attention in the game (since the game takes place under water) and it looks nice, although it’s not as overwhelmingly spectacular as others have stated. The special effects like fire work well, and the weapons come with high detail as well. The thing that really works for BioShock is the setting: the developers have created a semi-plausible environment with a consistent theme and finely detailed characters and buildings. It really puts you in the game and BioShock is very immersive (Mircosoft Word says that’s not a word, but I think it is). Any game can have bump-mapping and reflective surfaces, but it doesn’t mean much if the total package doesn’t come together in an impressive fashion, and it does in BioShock thanks to the unique scenery. A bonus is that the game performs smoothly, even with all of the snazzy features cranked up. Accompanying the quality graphics is equally fine sound. BioShock features great, heartfelt voice acting that almost makes you feel bad for killing little girls (almost). The music in the game works well, and the sound effects are also well done. Overall, BioShock looks and sound very impressive and the high production values produce a very believable environment in which to shoot things.



ET AL.

The first thing you’ll notice when you play BioShock is that you have to register your CD key online. I have no problem with that: most of the games I review are downloaded and registered online. However, you must also have the disk in the drive every time you play and you are limited in the number of reinstalls you can do (in case you get a new computer or need to reinstall Windows, although Windows is so stable why would you ever need to do that?). This is overkill to the extreme. If everyone has to authenticate their game with a key before they play, then why is the disk required to be in the drive? I thought the point of online authentication was to eliminate the need for a CD, not to exacerbate the copy protection problem. It’s enough to take the overall score down a point…so take that!



BioShock is a single-player only first person shooter where you explore the underwater world of Rapture and shoot stuff. There is no multiplayer, which would have been an interesting addition considering some of the exotic weapons and spells that are present in the game. The game takes place during the early 1960s, and BioShock takes place in a futuristic environment for the time period. The world of Rapture is very well designed and it’s a captivating place in which to destroy things. The story is fairly interesting and you can listen to optional audio tapes that shed some light on the strife present in Rapture. The weapons you are given are the standard fare: a wrench, pistol, machine gun, shotgun, crossbow, and grenade and chemical launchers. However, each weapon (with a couple of exceptions) can hold three different kinds of ammo: they can include armor piercing, explosive, electrical, napalm, or incendiary rounds. Each of these alternative ammunitions are appropriate for different enemies in different settings, which makes the strategic elements of the game much more interesting than generic weapons that are present in most shooters. Taking a cue from role-playing games, your character in BioShock can become equipped with a number of spells (the game calls them “plasmids”) that grant special powers as a secondary (or primary, depending on how powerful it is) weapon. You can freeze things, set fire to them, electrocute them, use a swarm of insects, command a tornado, hypnotize enemies, and move objects with your mind. These are much more interesting than the standard spells in most RPGs that simply cause damage. Together with the weapons, the plasmids open up a large variety of attacks and all of the weapons (even the lonely wrench) and plasmids have their use for the entire game. For example, electrocuting enemies and then knocking them out with the wrench remains a viable attack for the whole campaign. That’s something that can’t be said in most shooters, as the most powerful weapons you get near the end are the best. You are also limited to carrying two plasmids at once (you an unlock additional slots, though), so having a good combo is important.



Plasmids are powered using Eve, which is collected around the map or “borrowed” from fallen enemies. Ammunition and health are gathered in the same fashion. New plasmids, however, require gathering Adam, and this can only be taken from Little Sisters. Unfortunately for you, these defenseless Little Sisters are always accompanied by Big Daddies, large hulking robots with very powerful weapons that require extreme firepower (or good planning) to defeat. These Big Daddies are by far the most difficult part of the game (the normal enemies aren’t that challenging until late in the game). Thankfully, they won’t attack unless provoked, so you can lay mines and set up turrets before making your initial strike. Once you destroy a Big Daddy (which is kind of sad in a way, with the Little Sister weeping, “Bubbles! Noooo!”), you can choose to “free” the Little Sister for a small amount of Adam (but you feel better about yourself) or “harvest” the Little Sister for maximum Adam, killing her in the process. You are given rewards over time for the less violent approach. In addition to the plasmids, you can also gain tonics that provide permanent physical, weapon, or other upgrades (like faster hacking). With all of the weapons, ammo, plasmids, and tonics, you can really tailor your character to your play style in BioShock.



Other than the ammo, first aid kits, and Eve needles scattered around each level, there are a number of machines to serve your needs. Different machines allow you to reconfigure your plasmids and tonics, purchase new plasmids, purchase ammunition or kits with money “borrowed” from corpses, shut down security camera, increase your health, upgrade weapons, or even make new items. You can also get a camera for research purposes, which will improve your attacks against the enemy you researched. BioShock includes a hacking mini-game for gaining access to turrets and machines: you need to connect pipes. It’s a good challenge and a decent puzzle game on its own.



One of the reasons I dislike single-player shooters is that I get stuck. A lot. So I’m happy to report that I only got lost a couple of times in BioShock, as there are normally hints on what to do next and an arrow pointing the way to the objective. Another annoyance with single player games is death, which usually requires you to reload a saved game. In BioShock, there is no penalty for dying: you will just respawn at the last checkpoint (of which there are plenty) with all of your weapons and money intact. The enemies you were fighting will also keep their damage (otherwise defeating Big Daddies would be almost impossible in the early game). You can get stuck in a loop as you run out of ammo and money, but it’s still a better system than the alternative. The AI opponents are smart: they will run for water if they are on fire and use health stations if needed. While they won’t necessarily use cover, they do provide a good enough amount of challenge without being overly difficult, especially for veteran players. I had fun playing the game, with the occasional hiccup for getting stuck or having to respawn a lot for a Big Daddy battle. But overall, I had a grand time vacationing in Rapture.



IN CLOSING

If you like single player first person shooters, then BioShock is a good one to play. BioShock makes the shooter experience deeper than the typical game, due to the successful blend of varied weapons, ammunition, spells, and power-ups. The setting is very memorable and distinctive, unlike all of those World War II games. While experienced players might fund BioShock to be too easy, the difficulty level makes the game appeal to a much larger audience. The various strategies you can employ, coupled with the Big Daddy battles, elevate BioShock above the rest of the pack. Unfortunately, the game doesn’t come with multiplayer and the copy protection scheme is extremely annoying and restrictive. Still, most fans of first person shooters or simply games in general will find a unique and fun experience.

Europa Universalis III: Napoleon's Ambition Review

Europa Universalis III: Napoleon's Ambition, developed and published by Paradox Interactive on Gamer’s Gate.

The Good: Automated merchants, more rules options, longer timeline with additional events and national ideas, several interface improvements, Austria is finally colored white

The Not So Good: Can't join multiplayer games in progress, no short scenarios

What say you? A sufficient expansion for fans of the original game: 6/8



MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

The expansion pack has inundated the PC gaming market. Adding a few additional features for a reduced price, expansion packs have run the gamut from comprehensive and worthwhile to oversaturated and meaningless. One of my favorite games is Europa Universalis III, and a digital-only expansion has been released called Napoleon's Ambition. Not surprisingly, the game centers on an expanded timeline to cover the exploits of one Napoleon Bonaparte and his attempts to try to take over the world, among some smaller user-requested features.



GRAPHICS AND SOUND

While the graphics remain the same as the original game, there have been some interface improvements made to make navigating through the game easier. There is a right-click province menu for one-stop military shopping, a colonization view with all of the pertinent information in one place, an improved ledger view of provincial improvements to make building easier, and others that I will talk about a bit later. All of these additions are nice, but things that could (and some have) been included in a free patch. Still, anything that makes navigating through the game easier is fine with me, and the interface improvements are worthwhile things that you will actually use. The game performance has also been improved, as loading the game and playing at the highest speed both happen noticeably faster, so that’s nice.



ET AL.

The most obvious improvement made in Napoleon's Ambition is the expanded timeline to December 1820. You can now start the game any day between 1453 and 1820 and the world’s provinces are historically accurate. With the date expansion comes more events, additional national ideas for high technology levels, the ability to dismantle the Holy Roman Empire (by occupying all of the capitals of the member nations), and enhanced revolutions. Now, nations that are revolting gain bonuses against monarchies, and vice versa. I think it’s just a matter of time before the game expands even further into the present; the game engine could probably handle all the way up to the present day using the current rules, and it’s just a matter of investing the time and energy in doing so. The potential for the game engine is exciting, and I hope the developers make additional expansions to Europa Universalis III instead of making separate games with slightly different rules like they have done in the past (the rules and level of complexity in Europa Universalis III is the best out of all of the Paradox titles).



To satisfy those patrons of Europa Universalis II who enjoy less randomness and more historical accuracy in their gameplay, Napoleon's Ambition includes additional game options that influence the appearance of historical leaders. Before, leaders, advisors, and rulers had a window in which they could appear, but now you can set “historical” rules and they will appear on their actual birthday and die on the appropriate day as well. This has some really interesting impacts on gameplay, especially if you have historical military leaders on. Basically, you are getting leaders for free (great for cash-strapped countries) with really good ratings without using tradition. You can also eliminate the costs associated with merchants, colonists, missionaries, and spies, adding another layer of intriguing ramifications on gameplay. The spread of land discoveries and colonist size can also be tweaked to alter the composition of the New World. More options are always better, so it’s nice that Napoleon's Ambition adds more user-defined settings to tailor your gameplay experience further.



An area that received improvements was trade, and most notable is the addition of automated merchants. Finally you don’t have to keep clicking every couple of months to constantly send merchants. It was so tedious and by far the least enjoyable part of the game. Now, you can assign each center of trade a priority (high, medium, low, or zero) and the game will automatically send merchants to the best center of trade if you have enough money. The game won’t send merchants if it will bring your balance below zero before year’s end, and it will take value and competition into consideration when choosing where to go next. Now, instead of trade being an annoying part of the game, it can be left alone and your focus put on more important areas. The trade map has been enhanced with icons representing the good it produced; while it is helpful for colonization and manufactories, you have to know which goods are “good” and which are not. Napoleon's Ambition adds the ability to create (and destroy) new centers of trade if the current center of trade in the region is pulling in a lot of cash. The AI seems to do a good job with managing new centers of trade, and it’s a nice addition to allow for nations to develop another source of income.



Provinces can now have a recruitment queue for military units, taking some of the repetitive nature out of creating an army. While this is a useful feature, it’s faster to build one unit in five provinces than five units in one province, unless you have some sort of bonus from a manufactory. Smaller nations have been given a boost through discipline, which is tied to the quality vs. quantity slider. Now, high quality nations will get double benefits, through increased morale and discipline, to make the use of that slider more practical. This evens the playing field a bit more, although the largest nations will always have an advantage in war. You can consolidate regiments in Napoleon's Ambition: instead of having two half-strength infantry units, you can combine them. I don’t really see the usefulness of this feature, since it’s the same number of troops and you are preventing reinforcement during and after the war. Spies have been given a couple of new tricks: counterfeiting currency to increase inflation, reducing stability, fabricate core province claims, inciting natives, and bribing defenders. I’m not a big spy player, but, again, more things to do is always welcome.



The last area of improvement deals with war. First, if you click on the war alert flag at the top of the screen, the diplomatic panel for the country you are at war with will open. This is very useful in those weird wars where you are battling some far-off ally of an adjacent country (for me, Funj allied with Austria). Napoleon's Ambition comes with more end-of-battle information, with the total troops engaged, casualty information, and the values of each leader, replacing a simple “you lost” message. There is also a war screen that displays the data the AI uses to calculate how a war is going. The armies and navies, stability, and economy are converted into a war capacity value that shows how much more a country can invest into a prolonged battle. This takes some of the guesswork out of an AI refusing a peace proposal even though you hold several of their provinces (they may still be able to raise more troops). I think the war capacity was always in the game and it’s just now being shown to the player; some users think that the AI has been altered somewhat but it seems to behave the same as before for me.



There are some other odds and ends included with Napoleon's Ambition as well. You must hold the capital of a nation in order to make it as vassal. An annexed nation loses all cores on colonial provinces. And you can move your capital to a new province. I’m not sure what the reason for this is and the AI seems to be a little too happy in doing this (Spain’s capital in modern Peru? Whatever). I suppose if you are losing your home provinces you could “relocate” to your colonies, but wouldn’t that really be considered a new country? But I guess one weird feature in a sea of good features is OK.



IN CLOSING

I like what Napoleon's Ambition has added to Europa Universalis III. I wouldn’t call it a must-have to owners of the original game, but it offers enough substance to warrant its purchase. The expanded timeline is nice and it gives you more time to develop your country, but it is thankfully not the only additional feature. The automated merchants is my favorite feature (something I mentioned in my review of the original game), and the additional rules options allow users to customize their game even more. Most of the smaller improvements I like (the movement of capitals and unit consolidation are questionable), and overall they make playing the game that much easier. Oh, and Austria is now it’s appropriate while color instead of that blasphemous red. Some (most?) of this stuff could have been included in a free patch, but since the basic game was so cheap (and yet so good), I don’t mind paying $20 to support the efforts of the developers. At $50 total for the original game and the expansion, it’s a very typical price and still less than all of those useless console games. The game still doesn’t allow for joining multiplayer games in progress (something I wish they will add in the future) and small scenarios are still missing to ease people into the game. Still, if you play Europa Universalis III enough, it’s worth $20 to get Napoleon's Ambition as it enhances the game and adds meaningful features to an already impressive game.

Galactic Assault: Prisoner of Power Review

Galactic Assault: Prisoner of Power, developed by Wargaming.net and published by Paradox Interactive.

The Good: Enjoyable strategy gameplay, challenging campaign, neat morale model, streamlined base management, emphasis on resupply rather than massing units, one unit per hex stresses realistic front lines, time of day drastically affects strategy

The Not So Good: No level editor, some missions are exceedingly difficult

What say you? This turn-based strategy game has a lot of good ideas, but casual users will dislike the tedious pace and high difficulty: 6/8



MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

The Massive Assault series has been around since 2003, providing strategy fans with a decent series of games: the original Massive Assault, Massive Assault Network 2, Domination, Massive Assault: The Next Generation, and Massive Assault: Deep Space Nine. The Assault has now expanded from Massive to Galactic levels in Galactic Assault: Prisoner of Power. This new title uses the same conventions as the Massive Assault series but a more conventional RTS approach (though the game is still played in turn-based modes) with base-building, unit recruitment, and faster-paced straight-up action. It was time for a change, since the basic game has been around since 2003 and each iteration really felt more like an expansion pack than a full-fledged game. Will Galactic Assault: Prisoner of Power open to doors to a wide audience and provide a distinct gameplay experience?



GRAPHICS AND SOUND

The graphics of Galactic Assault: Prisoner of Power are largely the same as in Massive Assault Network 2, albeit with more varied locations and new units. The game is rendered in 3-D and a lot of the same effects and attention to detail present in previous games carries over. The units move in a realistic method, utilizing roads and automatically moving to a column formation while moving. The unit animations are also well done, from the infantry lining up and taking their shots to the more powerful weapons in the game. The game uses a movie-style camera that zooms in on the action during large explosions: it is dumb, not necessary, but easily skipped. Overall, Galactic Assault looks good for a wargame, but lags behind the higher production values present in mega-budget real time strategy games. And that’s just fine with me, as the minimal interface has come to a very streamlined place and navigating through the game is very useful. Galactic Assault displays both morale (as a circular indicator) and health (as a bar) above each unit at all times, making assessing the battlefield situation easy. Galactic Assault is easy to get in to thanks to its mostly intuitive interface. The quality of the sound presentation is similar to what it was before: sporadic and not up to the graphics. The uninspired voice acting heard when passages from the book the game is based on are being read while loading a new campaign level doesn’t get you excited for the next mission. The sound effects, while decent, are sporadic (typical for a turn-based game) and don’t bring the full force of war to your gaming experience. The background music is good and doesn’t repeat itself much. Overall, Galactic Assault maintains the higher-than-average quality graphics for a wargame.



ET AL.

Like Massive Assault, Galactic Assault is a turn-based strategy game where you move units around to conquer enemy bases. The game comes with four campaigns (one for each of the races) totaling seventeen missions in all. The first set act as a sort of tutorial to the game, although if you haven’t played Massive Assault you will be almost completely lost: the in-game tutorials do not explain the user interface (and neither does the manual) and other nuances of the game very well if at all (though tool-tips are some help). A single mission can take up to an hour to complete (thanks to the slow turn-based nature of the gameplay), so Galactic Assault has a lot of content. The campaign missions are generally well done (though difficult) and strike a good balance between offensive and defensive operations with some stealth mixed in for good measure. There are also eleven objective-based scenarios and twelve deathmatch maps with identical goals for each side (capture the other base). You can also engage in hot multiplayer action over a LAN or using the in-game matchmaking. You can only play deathmatch, as the territory-based mode from Massive Assault is mysteriously absent. This is a good amount of content and it should keep you busy for a while, even without a map editor to incorporate third-party content.



Gameplay in Galactic Assault takes place over two phases: the combat phase where you can order troops and the reinforcement phase where you can purchase new troops and upgrade your bases. The game features a good number of real-world features that impact the gameplay, such as time of day (which drastically affects fog of war) and cover provided by terrain. Galactic Assault puts a lot of emphasis on good movement planning, forcing you to evaluate the terrain’s features well and note which kinds of troops can traverse the varied landscapes in the game. Units can be instructed to use camouflage (which makes them invisible to units beyond the adjacent hex) or entrench for improved defense. Engineers can also build pontoon bridges on shallow water and construct forward air bases. Unlike a lot of RTS games, new bases are not built; rather, they can be moved when resources run out (there is a finite level of resources at each location). This cuts down a lot on base management, as you’ll only have one or two places to worry about instead of many outposts scattered about the map. Bases can be captured by simply moving a unit into the center, so troops must be kept back on defense. Depots can be built surrounding a base to construct units, much like in Rise of Legends. Again, this makes finding unit-producing buildings very easy since you know they must be adjacent to your base. Each depot type can construct one type of unit, from barracks for infantry to ports for ships. Depots can be upgraded to unlock more powerful units. Each depot is limited to producing one unit per turn, since only one unit can occupy a single hex at a time (and each depot sits on one hex). Galactic Assault features conventional units: infantry, vehicles, tanks, transports, air, and naval. Each of these has their strengths and weaknesses, from attack ratings to speed to weapon range. Damaged units can be repaired for a much lower cost than making a new unit at their depot, if you want to take the time moving them back to home base. I like how Galactic Assault incorporates RTS conventions into its formula, and the result is an easy-to-handle game because of the streamlined base construction.



During the combat phase, units can move and shoot in the same turn. Since there is no stacking in Galactic Assault (each hex can only contain one unit), there is a lot of planning involved when you start to move troops around. The game displays the attack range of each of your units when you select them, helping out the process. Most of the units for each of the races are the same (although they look different), so you can plan your movement and orders accordingly. . Luckily, you can queue your commands up in succession, so you don’t have to wait for the last unit to finish moving before issuing orders to the next unit: this speeds up the gameplay somewhat. You will need to maintain a front line of units to prevent fast units from moving past your units and engaging fragile artillery or capturing your base. Units can return fire on defense and support artillery can protect nearby units automatically by engaging three enemy units during the opposing turn. Galactic Assault comes with end-turn prompts that remind of you unmoved units or those that haven’t fired yet, helpful for making sure all of your firepower has been used. Galactic Assault has a good morale system: units that suffer incoming fire and the death associated with said fire will experience lower morale. Lower morale will result in decreased firepower, and units with the lowest morale won’t fire at all. The morale model is well done because you don't have to annihilate every unit on the map to make them ineffective. Of course, they can still act as road blocks, so some enemy units will need to be completely destroyed in order to advance across the map. Specialized units like hypno-transmitters can increase morale, but the best way of keeping morale up is not to die. Units can earn combat experience, which increases damage and morale values. The one unit per hex restriction makes Galactic Assault easier to handle than a lot of wargames, and the morale system is very straightforward. So, with all of these good things said about the game mechanics, why doesn’t Galactic Assault completely succeed?



Galactic Assault is too hard. The AI is good enough to engage a human opponent head-on (although it isn’t quite as aggressive as a human in deathmatches), but the developers seem to be hard-set on making each campaign and standalone scenario unbalanced with too many enemy units. This was a problem in Massive Assault and the trend continues in Galactic Assault. Easy is challenging enough, and anything higher than that is very hard and meant for strong veteran players. I’m no slouch at strategy games (I review plenty of them), but I had a terribly time winning even the introductory scenarios on medium settings. It took a while for me to “get over the hump” and start enjoying Galactic Assault. The game does require you to be almost perfect in order to win with any regularity above “easy” difficulty (and even that level is no walk in the park). You will need to carefully scout ahead to eliminate enemy surprises (of which there are many in the imbalanced campaign), carefully maneuver your troops to prevent enemy units from breaking through your lines, are carefully direct your fire to take advantage of counters (like anti-tank units), positioning, and morale. Galactic Assault requires you to be perfect, and that’s a very hard thing to do in a game with multiple variables. The deathmatches and multiplayer modes are more evenly matched, but the campaigns and stand-alone scenarios border on frustrating difficulty. While Galactic Assault has a faster pace than Massive Assault, the tedious gameplay will annoy some users. Units (especially infantry and artillery) move very slowly when not on transport units, making reinforcements a long time coming. It also usually takes a turn or two to destroy a single unit, so the combat pace is also slow. This deliberate pace allows for some thinking and more involved gameplay, but the does get annoying after a while at how long a single match takes and how little each unit can do in a single turn. The pace is in line with other turn-based strategy games, but Galactic Assault seems to drag along more for some reason. This game is certainly more approachable than Massive Assault, as the units are more conventional and the base building elements add familiarity. I do like how this aspect of the game works, providing funds over a limited time and requiring users to expand to new territories. I think the developers tried to expand the audience with a more conventional structure and they were successful on some levels, but the deliberate pace and requirement of perfection will dissuade some players.



IN CLOSING

Veteran wargamers will have a grand time with Galactic Assault, but beginning players who aren't accustomed to the gameplay mechanics of Massive Assault will feel lost and overwhelmed by the high difficulty and level of planning required in order to be successful. There are a lot of things in Galactic Assault that I like: the units, the base building, the amount of content, the morale model, the non-stackable units, and the general gameplay are all fine and dandy. But the game is really difficult and slow, two things that won’t appeal to a large audience. I much prefer Galactic Assault to Massive Assault and it does a lot of things well and more often than not I am having fun playing the game, but then I encounter an unfair or overly difficult scenario that causes me to quite playing. There is nothing wrong with a challenging game, but it should be challenging on “hard” settings, not on all settings. Ultimately, Galactic Assault is a high-quality wargame that will appeal to wargamers, but not many other people.

Concentration Review

Concentration, developed by Freeze Tag and published by Mumbo Jumbo.

The Good: A reasonable assortment of puzzles, accurate gameplay, challenging puzzles, reasonable AI

The Not So Good: No online play, repetitive sound, no custom puzzles

What say you? A faithful recreation of the classic game show: 6/8



MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

One of the many game shows I followed in my youth was Concentration. While it wasn’t my favorite (that high honor goes to Press Your Luck), it was still good entertainment that required some skill in order to win, unlike a lot of the contemporary game shows. Most, if not all, game shows translate well to the computer gaming realm, so it’s not surprising to see a new version of Concentration coming around the corner. The classic game show required you to remember where prizes were hidden on a game board and then figure out a puzzle using pictures and letters to convey a common phrase. Will Concentration feature all of the heart-pounding excitement of Concentration?



GRAPHICS AND SOUND

While Concentration is not rendered in 3-D, the game does get the style of the game board and puzzles correct. You won’t see the host or avatars representing your player, but Concentration does use the old color scheme (along with some new ones) for the game board and the puzzles are just as flamboyant as during the TV show. The various prizes have good icons for each of them, so overall the game board holds true and looks good. Concentration does feature the classic sound effects for matches and choosing squares on the board, but it seems like they couldn’t afford licensing the theme song and had to resort to some hokey selections. The host also becomes terribly repetitive, even during the first round of the first game you will play. It doesn’t seem like much attention was paid to the sound outside of the accurate effects, but the audio doesn’t ruin the overall experience. The graphics and sound for Concentration are exactly what you would expect for a $20 game: straight and to the point, accurate but not making any improvements.



ET AL.

The game of Concentration exactly mirrors the game of Concentration (or is it vice versa?). Concentration (the game, not the game) can be played by one player against the computer or two human players on the same computer. There is no online play, something that would have been greatly welcomed (and caused a higher overall score). If you are unfamiliar with the conventions of the game show (if so, what is wrong with you?), here is how play progresses. A puzzle is covered up by twenty-five squares, each containing a prize. If the player matches two squares with the same prize, he or she earns that prize and the two squares are removed from the board, revealing a portion of the puzzle. The puzzles combine pictures, numbers, and letters to form a well-known phrase, although there is some abstraction involved to make the puzzles more difficult (for example, a picture of a dove represents the word “of”). Whoever correctly solves two puzzles first wins and moves on to the bonus round. The bonus round is similar, although there are pictures of cars hidden behind fifteen squares and you must match all of them within a thirty-second time limit.



Concentration stays true to the original game show. The puzzles have the same design as the originals and there are enough of them so that it takes a while to find repeats. There is no puzzle editor, though, which would have been a neat addition. The prizes are more contemporary in nature and the colorful backgrounds aid in identification. You will occasionally find wild cars that will automatically find the match of the other card you chose, and take cards will allow you to take (surprise) a prize from your opponent. The game tracks high scores and cumulative stats for a single player name, and even assigns a champion title to the current undefeated player. This is a game where the AI could really cheat a lot, but it seems like the AI has been programmed fairly: it plausibly finds matches, makes some mistakes, and waits until near the end to solve the puzzle. Overall, the AI is a fair competitor that makes playing the game enjoyable. While I would have liked to have online play in the game, Concentration does offer everything you would expect a game based on the show to have, so fans of the game show will find an enjoyable replica here.



IN CLOSING

Concentration translates very well to a computer game, and Concentration is an entertaining computer game. While the game lacks online play and the host is repetitive, the remainder of the game is a very accurate replica of the game, delivering all of the hot memorization action of the game show. The AI provides a good competitor, but playing against another human placed within smacking range (for when they steal a prize you just found) is good fun. The puzzles are numerous enough and challenging enough to round out this quality title. While it’s a little odd to see a computer game version of a show this old, Concentration is still an enjoyable game and a good fit into the library of any fan of the show or computer games in general.

It’s The Big Game, Charlie Brown! Review

It’s The Big Game, Charlie Brown!, developed by THE WEB PRODUCTION and published by Viva Media.

The Good: Appropriate for a variety of ages due to numerous difficulty settings, diverse mini-games, can skip recruiting process, simple mouse-driven controls, recognizable 2-D graphics

The Not So Good: Fielding is very hard, slow pace, some arbitrary story advancement requirements

What say you? Part adventure game and part sports simulation, it is enjoyable for a large age range: 6/8



MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

One of the most esteemed comic strips is Peanuts. Charlie Brown and his gang of cohorts have been doing their antics for quite a long time, and have appeared in numerous television specials like A Charlie Brown Christmas (????) and It’s Columbus Day, Charlie Brown! Sports have been infused with the comic strip, from Lucy’s Tony Romo-like football holding skills to baseball. Using this connection is It’s The Big Game, Charlie Brown!, and adventure-sports game where you must recruit members to your team and then play your way to victory in a point-and-click baseball game. It seems like a good concept that doesn’t just use the license to sell games (since baseball was a predominant part of the comic). Will It’s The Big Game, Charlie Brown! be good, or grief?



GRAPHICS AND SOUND

It’s The Big Game, Charlie Brown! uses 2-D graphics that mirrors those found in the comic strip. I’m glad the game uses this method to look more like the cartoon instead of an inferior 3-D game with giant bulbous children. While the level of quality isn’t up to the cartoons, the game still looks good and it’s unmistakably Peanuts. The game looks like a color version of the comic strip, and that’s all you really need in a Peanuts-based game. The game doesn’t lose anything by eliminating that third dimension (although the baseball games are more challenging, which you could argue is actually a good thing), so residing in a well-represented 2-D world is fine with me. It appears that all of the current voice actors are in the game, or at least people strongly reminiscent of those voices. It’s reassuring when Charlie Brown sounds like Charlie Brown. Completing the package is entertaining background music that fits the atmosphere of the game well. Honestly, the graphics and the sound could not have been better for a Peanuts-licensed game, and keeping true to the original comic is what fans would prefer.



ET AL.

It’s The Big Game, Charlie Brown! is a single-player only game where you must recruit players onto your team and then taste sweet, sweet victory in The Big Game. The recruiting phase is a lot like an adventure game, where you go talk to characters and “unlock” them by completing mini-games. You can skip the story mode and go straight to a game if you would like, though the story mode is good enough to play through once. In the story mode, you must activate each of five Peanuts characters and then beat their mini-game. Typically, activating a character involves bringing along another character to interrupt their current activity and start the mini-game (distracting Lucy away from Schroeder, making Sally annoy Linus, et cetera). Most of these interactions make sense from a character standpoint if you follow the cartoon, though if I didn’t have the walkthrough, it would have taken me a while to figure out how to unlock each of the mini-games. The characters also have side dialogue that doesn’t repeat as much as you would think; if you backtrack past the same area, the resulting conversation might even reference previous passes by. After each successfully completed mini-game, you are taught one aspect of the baseball game to prepare you for The Big Game (like hitting, pitching, or fielding). Each mini-game has three difficulty settings to choose from and they are very different, making It’s The Big Game, Charlie Brown! appropriate for all ages. The hard difficulty level is actually very hard, even for a seasoned gaming veteran such as myself (I almost felt bad playing most of the mini-games on medium…almost). The mini-games also have a good variety and most of them relate to the specific character: Schroder has a Simon-like music game, Lucy gives a Peanuts-related trivia game (in the form of a psychological test), and Linus makes you catch objects with his blanket, to name a few. It’s nice that the developers actually put some thought into the mini-games: instead of just throwing them in, they do relate pretty well to each character. There isn’t any replay value in the story mode and it only takes about two hours to complete, but it is something to try out once and it is well-designed and appropriate for the Peanuts world.



The baseball game is a mouse-driven affair, as everything is done with clicking on the field. This makes the game much easier to control than any of those console baseball games, since this game is geared towards a younger audience. You can choose a six or nine inning contest and the difficulty level (which, again, makes it very easy or quite challenging). When pitching, you will pick the pitch type (fastball, slider, curve, or change-up), location, and speed. It’s pretty difficult to strike out opposing batters if you don’t mix up your pitches, which adds an air of strategy and realism to the game. Fielding is probably the most difficult portion of the entire game: you have to click on the ground where you expect the ball to land, and the closest player will automatically go there. Since It’s The Big Game, Charlie Brown! is in 2-D and the fielding mode is played from an overhead perspective, it can be difficult to judge where the ball is going to land based off the ball size and shadow. It definitely takes some practice, and the first losses you will experience are a direct result of poor fielding on your part. To bat, you simply move the batter in the box and click at the correct time. Once you figure out when to swing (right before the ball crosses from the grass to the dirt), battling becomes trivially easy. The opposition tends to throw a lot of strikes (especially at the lower difficulty levels) so it’s just a matter of getting timing down. The game could have made you guess where in the strike zone the ball was going to go, but maybe that level of complexity is beyond the scope of It’s The Big Game, Charlie Brown!. Running is done from the same overhead perspective as fielding, and you just need to click on the base to move. Runners will automatically advance to first base, but other runners will automatically hold up, requiring some micromanagement. It does get frustrating when players are out because they didn’t (or did) automatically run when they should (or shouldn’t) have, but in the end that’s poor playing on your part. Overall, the baseball aspect of It’s The Big Game, Charlie Brown! is well-designed and very appropriate for a wide range of ages. While the constant cut-scenes interrupt the flow of the game (though they can be skipped once you see them once), the simple mouse controls means anyone can learn the conventions of the game quickly, and you almost have the same level of control as in more “sophisticated” simulations. I actually had fun playing the baseball part of the game, at least until I figured out how to hit the ball with disturbing regularity. Still, I imagine kids will have a ball (get it? ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!) with the game, as the adventure mode and baseball mode come together to produce a completely entertaining package.



IN CLOSING

It’s The Big Game, Charlie Brown! doesn’t simply use the Peanuts name to sell games: it is thought out and executed very well and appropriate for a large age range. The adventure mode is fun the first time through, recreating a believable Peanuts universe thanks to the spot-on graphics and sound. The mini-games are also plausible activities that link to the characters in the game. The baseball game uses simple controls but still manages to be a bit challenging, at least until you start connecting on hit after hit. It’s The Big Game, Charlie Brown! shows how a license is supposed to be used: to create a compelling and plausible game within the universe of that particular license. Those interested in a Peanuts-related game, or even just an adventure or baseball title, will find a lot to like in It’s The Big Game, Charlie Brown!.

The Bojo Game – Home Edition Review

The Bojo Game – Home Edition, developed by Black Knight Productions and BBM Multimedia and published by G3S.

The Good: Simple game mechanics, large simulated online environment

The Not So Good: AI bettors need work, no real online play

What say you? A good foundation for a betting game, but the dumb AI makes it feel much less realistic: 5/8



Note: Version 1.5 of the game fixes the AI issues I discuss in this review. This patch was released after I posted this review but before retail release, so potential buyers won't experience the issues with the AI I mention below. While I didn't feel like re-writing an entire review (cutting out the rant about the AI would have made it extremely short), you can go ahead and bump up the overall score to a 6/8.



MY POORLY WRITTEN INTRODUCTION

Gambling has become so popular that it’s almost bordering on “sport” status; the World Series of Poker gets many showings on ESPN, complete with the action-packed excitement of watching cards turn over. Obviously, most gambling-type games would translate well to the computer games. I’ve been known to enjoy some poker, and a new card-based gambling game has come in the form of The Bojo Game – Home Edition (Ty Pennington not included). This is a combination of poker and craps (you know, what you get after eating too much Taco Bell), incorporating side bets for each card drawn and a main bet for the result in a simulated online environment. Will The Bojo Game – Home Edition prove to be an engrossing gambling game worthy of your virtual dollars?



GRAPHICS AND SOUND

The Bojo Game – Home Edition features some utilitarian 2-D graphics, similar to the consoles you’d find in an Applebee’s. The background is supposed to look like a casino, with flaming flames that don’t seem to ignite the playing cards for some reason. There aren’t many special effects in the game, other than the countdown timer and the flames in the background. The cards appear on the game table and you use the mouse to select your bets each turn, and that’s pretty much it. The game does have a bunch of stats that are accessible from the main screen and you’ll never have to navigate away from it, so that’s nice. This is about the best the game could have looked without making the leap to 3-D (which, honestly, is unnecessary) and the interface promotes speedy and unhindered gameplay. The sound in the game is underwhelming, though: a lot more could have been done to promote the casino atmosphere. Overall, The Bojo Game – Home Edition has a fairly standard presentation that lacks the loud noises and shiny things that accompany most gambling ventures, but it still looks decent for a straightforward gambling game.



ET AL.

The Bojo Game – Home Edition is a betting game surrounding five card stud poker (and I, for one, should know about stud poker…because I’m a STUD). You bet on each individual card’s color, suit, and rank, as well as the overall hand (one pair, straight, flush, et cetera). Being a Home Edition, you don’t actually play online, rather against simulated AI players numbering between 200 and 100,000. While the lack of online features should be noted, the game would progress exactly the same if you were competing against real people, so it’s not really missed. You can change some of the settings in the game, from the number of AI players to the amount each bet costs (you always start with $200). You can also adjust the amount the casino charges for betting for a more realistic monetary experience. You are playing against the other players and not the house, so the strategy is to bet in the categories that others are not to maximize your profits. The game displays how many competitors have bet in each category, but I would like to see a bar graph for easier identification of underutilized bets: staring at numbers is a bit strenuous.



The basic premise of The Bojo Game – Home Edition is well executed, for the most part. There is the potential for a very entertaining game: while the side bets are mostly luck, you can adjust your betting to take advantage of the least used categories. There is also some intrigue associated with the poker bets: will the next card produce a straight or a pair? You must play a poker bet before the first card is thrown and you can only increase your poker bet (meaning you can change your bet from one pair to two pairs but not back again). The thing that ruins The Bojo Game – Home Edition is the elementary AI. The first sign of trouble is that each of the poker bets gets an evenly distributed amount of bettors at the start of each round. You mean to tell me the AI thinks getting a royal flush is just as likely as one pair? This goes for the numerical bets as well: every card gets essentially an equal number of bets, no matter which cards have been played. This results in inflated winnings if you guess correctly on the side bets. The AI is even worse with the poker bets: no matter which cards have been played, the “royal flush” category always gets the most bets at the end of each round. This is caused by the even distribution and the fact that you can only increase your bets: evenly distributed increases cause a massive amount of “royal flush” bets. This could be partially solved by allowing movement up and down the poker tree and awarding more money for staying on a single poker bet longer. As it stands, you get the same amount of money if you chose two pair on the last turn than if you kept it all along, which doesn’t seem fair. What really needs to be done to solve the The Bojo Game – Home Edition puzzle is to improve the AI. The computer players need to avoid poker bets that are impossible according to the current cards played. If an eight is the first card, there should be nobody betting royal flush (other than those who played it from the beginning, which actually shouldn’t be anyone since you can move up to royal flush from one pair anyway). If you have a king of clubs and a three of diamonds, why are the AI bettors throwing their money on a straight or flush? It doesn’t make any sense and it’s quite sad since good AI would make this game much more enjoyable. The AI should also be programmed to look at the played cards when doing single-card bets. Although single bets work well enough since they are more suited to evenly distributed bets, more variety would result in more exciting gameplay. Although the basic game is fun enough, the lack of thoughtful competition will turn a lot of people away from The Bojo Game – Home Edition.



IN CLOSING

The Bojo Game – Home Edition is a good card betting game destroyed by incapable AI. I like the premise and it opens the window for some interesting betting, as you try to out-maneuver your AI opponents. While there is only one mode of play using the default rules and betting structure, the combination of short-term and long-term bets makes for an entertaining gambling game. However, the shoddy AI makes winning in the game all too easy. When 23 people bet on one pair (usually the winning hand) while 7,000 bet on royal flush, there is a problem. The AI completely ignores the cards that have been played, so straights, flushes, full houses, and three of a kinds will continue to be bet on even if they are impossible to get. Hopefully the AI can be easily improved and The Bojo Game – Home Edition will be a better game in the future. I do like the overall design, and The Bojo Game – Home Edition is an AI fix away from being a notable gambling title. But as it stands now, the AI is too unintelligent to enjoy as a competitor.

Delicious 2 Deluxe

As the sequel to the popular Delicious Deluxe, the newly-released Delicious 2 Deluxe delivers even more fast-paced restaurant management fun. Featuring two game modes, all-new customers, and hours of family fun, Delicious 2 Deluxe is just the thing to satisfy your craving!

Ricochet Infinity

The Richochet series of breakout-style arcade games from Reflexive Entertainment have become classics of the genre, featuring graphics and game play that quickly made the series a favorite in offices and homes across the world. The games in this series have included Ricochet Xtreme, Ricochet Lost Worlds, and Ricochet Lost Worlds: Recharged. Now there a [...]

Gemsweeper

Indie developer Lobstersoft has released a Windows version of the hit Nintendo DS game Picross, called Gemsweeper. Gemsweeper features unique gameplay, easy to learn rules, brilliant graphics and sound, two different game modes and 225 fun levels. It does not require fast reflexes and is even easy for kids to learn, but requires enough strategy [...]

The Rise of Atlantis

In this interesting and well-done match-three style puzzle game you set out on an adventurous quest around the ancient lands of the Mediterranean to find a way to bring the legendary continent of Atlantis back to the surface and restore it to its might and glory. In every country you visit (including Greece, Troy, Phoenicia, [...]

Help Protect Animal Habitats With Venture Africa

Pocketwatch Games has donated 4% of the income generated in 2006 by Wildlife Tycoon: Venture Africa to The WILD Foundation, a Boulder, CO based non-profit dedicated to protecting animal habitats in Africa. Pocketwatch Games will also motivate others to support The WILD Foundation by providing a link to the WILD website in their upcoming game, Venture [...]

Little Shop of Treasures

Little Shop of Treasures, from Gamehouse, is the latest game in the very popular “hidden objects” genre, where the player attempts to locate objects cleverly concealed in plain sight. The game is set in a charming little town called Huntington, and you are new to town but dream of opening your own Little Shop of Treasures [...]

Monarch: The Butterfly King

The latest game from Reflexive Entertainment, Monarch: The Butterfly King, has just been released. In the new game, you’ll find yourself immersed in a story of magic and adventure as you attempt to stop an evil wizard intent on destroying the butterfly kingdom. You’ll journey across majestic Celtic ruins, creating potions and harnessing magic in this [...]

Virtual Villagers 2: The Lost Children

The first game (Virtual Villagers: A New Home) was quite successful, winning both a huge number of fans, as well as game industry awards such as the “Zeeby” for Best Strategy/Sim of 2006, and the “Best Sim of 2006″ award from GameTunnel. The follow-up game in the series is now available, and we expect big things [...]