|
As far as the game goes, I really enjoy RTS. Enough said. Other wise, make sure your computer can cook for you, brush your teeth and drive you to work before purchasing this game. My half decent computer barely played the lowest settings.Good game, recommend it not for the story, but for the elements of a RTS
The game play is phenomenal. I bought this game in the Fall of 2007. The graphics are fantastic. I started with the single player campaign and thought it was pretty fun. But, the true glory of World In Conflict is in it's multi-player mode.I've played many other games but World In Conflict is without a doubt the most addictive game I have ever played. And the real beauty of this game is that you don't have to waste your time building bases to develop certain units. You can just jump right into the game and start going to battle.It's a shame that the publisher didn't do a better job of advertising this epic game.
There is a new version of this game called "Soviet Assault-complete edition" that includes this game (World In Conflict)plus the Soviet Assault expansion pack for about twenty bucks. As I'm writing this the price for the original World In Conflict game is over $100. Save yourself the money and get the same exact game plus the extras by purchasing Soviet Assault-Complete Edition.World in Conflict: Complete EditionThe low rating was for price only.
In some ways it seems to have been short changed. I enjoyed the demo level more than many of the other levels in the game. Play the demo and you'll see what it's like for yourself. It like many other so called "strategy" games is really more about learning the interface, using hot keys, and being fast on the controls than it is about tactics or strategy. It would be fun to be able to explore more of the units somehow. I'm a solo gamer and this one does cater heavily to online multi-playing as well, so that might be another reason to buy it if you like that sort of thing.
Carpet bombing and setting the view extra close is lots of fun. The graphics and sound are great. The destructible terrains are awesome. Trees don't grow back and houses don't rebuild themselves. World in Conflict is a fun game. It could have gone a lot further in many ways. You've got these 14 missions to play (20 total with the expansion which I have yet to play) and once you've beat them, that's it.
You are limited to certain ones in situations where having certain other ones would make things a lot easier. I don't mind that and I love realism, but I do like some kind of reward once I've jumped through all the hoops. Cut scenes range from not so good to very good, though personally I could have done without them altogether. The story doesn't do much for me (I'm probably alone there). Being able to control the war would be very cool, instead of just doing missions with set objectives.
I hope that feature will become standard on all games of this type eventually. The game seemed to have a lot more potential than it fulfilled. Anyone can nitpick, but I would like to be able to explore a little more with it. It's not really epic or absorbing, but it is integral and fun nonetheless.
If you like sweating in annoyance while playing a video game like it's a chore then you'll love World In Conflict. The single player is fairly good and entertaining, but once that's over and you hit the multiplayer you'll resent the time you spend playing this game. Every click and keystroke just leads you further into a pit of competitiveness where you rarely come out satisfied. Eventually you just need to learn to quit while you're behind before you get pissed, or waste your life like a World of Warcraft gamer trying to get good; where no matter how hard you try you'll always realize how much time you wasted or how much you suck.
|
