Rise on Nations: Boring and a waste of time

Discussion in 'Games' started by pgc6000, Jan 6, 2005.

  1. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    #1
    Well after all the hype I heard about Rise of Nations, I decided to spend my money on it.Wow, was I dissapointed. It is basicly AoE II all over again, except worse, and boring! Even the campaigns are boring. It's a nicely well done game, but if it were only fun. It's fun once I get to the Modern Age +, but that's were C & C Generals comes in, doesn't it? Any back to Age of Mythology for strategy gaming. I should of spent my $50 on something good, like Ghost Recon 2 for my Xbox. Take this as a warning: Rise of Nations is a waste of both time AND money.
     
  2. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    #2
    Everyone's opinion of fun could be different but maybe you were expecting something else when you bought it. I got it when it came out on the PC (and the expansion pack too) and think its one of the best RTS's ever made. Its not the best one to look at, maybe not the most action, but it has by far the most strategy out of any RTS out there. The resource model rocks, I prefer unlimited resources personally (just like TA). You don't have to micro manage your peasants so you can focus on the real fun, the strategy of setting up the battles. The Economic system IMO is brilliant because you can alter it by researching technologies, building more cities, or setting up on rare resources. The cultures may seem similar at first look, but actually playing them can wield very different results. The one thing about this game, and it could by why you didnt like it, is that in order to really get into it you have to understand the entire depth of it. If you liked Civilization because of its Depth, you will like RoN. If you couldn't stand Civilization because it was too complicated you probably won't like RoN. I would really like a port of Warhammer 40k: Dawn of War, thats an action RTS that is really accessible to anyone, like starcraft was, but still is a whole lot of fun.
     
  3. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    #3
    I dunno...granted that I haven't actually played it yet, but from what I've seen and read, this sounds rather like complaining that "UT2K is like Quake 3 all over again", or something. Sorry, but I'm still going to buy it. Lots of people who like strategy games think it's great. Also I don't trust people who write "should of" when they mean "should have" or "should've." (OK, cheap shot, but what can I say, I like literacy.)

    --Eric
     
  4. macrumors 601

    BornAgainMac

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2004
    Location:
    Florida Resident
    #4
    Yes, I agree. The worst hyped game for the Mac. I bought it and within an hour I was back to playing C&C. When I first played my first game, I almost got a stomach ache for laughing when I saw some people chopping wood. I didn't want to do that again like from Age of Empires. The later World War missions were boring also.

    I increased C&C to the hardest level and I am playing it all the time now. It is my favorite RTS game. I love attacking those insurrgents with my army and airforce. I usually play this game after watching the evening news because it puts me in the mood to kick some ass. The music soundtrack and effects goes well with the game.

    Next month is Doom III. From now on, I'll only buy good games and preview demos before I buy.
     
  5. macrumors 6502a

    comictimes

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2004
    Location:
    Berkeley, California
    #5
    I haven't played it, but I would definitely say James Bond: Nightfire is right up there for overhyped, really bad games...
     
  6. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    #6
    Yeah I am planning on picking C & C up. I have played both Generals and Zero hour and they are both amazing. Not like RoN...The only good thing about RoN is the unlimited rescources and massive armys. But that's not good enough for me to pay $50 for.
     
  7. macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    #7
    RoN a bad game? It seemed good to me and ive heard its good...
    Well, any game where I can play as America and conqure the world is a good game for me...and the expansion pack seems nice with the cold war and all...also its my money and Ill waste it any way I want :D
     
  8. macrumors 65816

    iKwick7

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2004
    Location:
    The Wood of Spots, NJ
    #8
    It all comes down to your preference in game type. I LOVED Age of Empires, one of my all time favorites. I quite enjoyed Rise of Nations, and I am not interested in any C & C game at all. And I quite enjoy chopping wood in AoE. :)
     
  9. macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2004
    Location:
    Washington D.C.
    #9
    I loved Civilization 3 but Rise of Nations, after my short stint with it, didn't appeal to me too much. I dunno, i was able to deal with (and also appreciated) the complexity of CivIII most likely because it was turn-based so I had the time to learn all the intricacies and details whereas in RoN i'm just thrown into the battle and i have no clue where to start. Too me, it just seemed like RoN had too steep a learning curve for me which, over time I could probably get used to and enjoy but I'm not willing to put in that time right now.

    I love the Blizzard RTS games mainly because they are complex enough that a decent amount of actual strategy is involved in playing while not being too daunting on the player. I haven't played C&C yet, so I'll probably try that next.

    but in the mean time I think I'll stick with finishing off the traitorous Greeks with my Stealth Bomber in Civilization 3 for all my world-domination needs.
     
  10. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    #10
    RoN has it's moment's, true, but I just got bored with it. I tried it 3 times. I tried to keep an open mind about it but it just didn't work out.
     
  11. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2003
    #11
    I think it just came out at a wrong time for the Mac. I tried playing the trial version at my friend's house, and it was pretty boring. But, I blame the games that are out now. RoN is a few years old on the PC, isn't it.
     
  12. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    #12
    Er...a year?

    One of the problems is it needs a background soundtrack.
     
  13. macrumors 68000

    pimentoLoaf

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2001
    Location:
    The SimCity Deli
    #13
    Each new successive Civ, from the first to the worst of Alpha Centauri, had me realizing the genre was dead, at least from the people who created it. Age of Empires, from the first to the current RoN-Civ hybrid, has always been full of vim and vigor, something which Civ alone has never been able to accomplish.

    Two caveats about RoN:

    1 - all scenarios come up in "normal" game speed, which is waaaaaaay too fast, as the game then becomes nothing but an eye-hand coordination of excessively fast clicking to achieve any result.

    2 - gameplay is too fast anyway even at the slowest speed; if slowest could have smooth character movement and gameplay be half as slow at this speed, then I think the game would be manageable.

    Otherwise, it certainly MUCHO BETTER than ordinary Civ, which it is closer at being.
     
  14. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2003
    #14
    Well GameFAQs does say 5/20/03 was the release date.

    Then what was it people saw in RoN that we don't? :confused:

    I may end up buying RoN sometime because there aren't too many games I can play on Mac these days.
     
  15. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    #15
    I'm trying to find out what they saw. Every once and a while I play it just to give it a chance, but everytime I end up quiting 15 min. later. Obviously people like it. It's already becoming popular on GameRanger. So I just don't know...
     
  16. macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #16
    i actually like it as well ....still have the cd somewhere around (for pc)

    normally i don't play much with ww1 stuff etc. so the mediveal stuff was quite enough for me


    found it to be much more enyoing than age of empire where i have to organize those resources all the time ...i'm not interested in that anymore
     
  17. macrumors 68000

    pimentoLoaf

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2001
    Location:
    The SimCity Deli
    #17
    Gotta correct my earlier post: one can alter settings globally off one of the main menus, including speed and the program can be played solo via the Quick Combat menu selection ala Civ and have it play relatively slow enough to get somewhere.

    Personally, I'd like a Caesar 2 / 3, Pharaoh/Cleopatra style city building version of Civ that allows big cities that take time and can be played more or less for a long time, or open-ended like SimCity.
     
  18. macrumors 6502a

    JeDiBoYTJ

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Location:
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    #18
    I love Rise of Nations. Essentially, it is just like all the other RTS games, but still fun none-the-less. when I first played it, I was hooked on it for 3hours straight (just 1 game though), but after I played it, I had no incentive to play again until tomorrow... I dunno, it seems like if you play 1 Quick Game, advance through all the ages, then end the game with a few nuclear bombs, it feels like you have done it all and im basically satisfied at the end and have no incentive to go play again until the next day.

    Also 1 gripe I have about RoN is the very VERY VERY VERY slow moving campaign mode, god I was so bored by the end of capturing 1 country, I dont even want to go back and finish.

    Dont get me wrong, I still think it is a great game, it just has some shortcomings.... personally im looking forward to AOEIII.... too bad it will probably be Spring-Summer '06 before that game even sees the light of day on a Mac... :(
     
  19. macrumors 6502a

    mattmack

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2002
    Location:
    San Francisco Area
    #19
    And maybe they will fix the crossplatform compatability problems that have plagued this series from the get go
    :(
     
  20. macrumors 6502a

    JeDiBoYTJ

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Location:
    Ft. Lauderdale, FL
    #20
    YES!! now THATS a major piss-off. I spent almost 2 hours trying to diagnose why I couldnt connect RoR to my friend.... then I read that the games arnt cross-platform compatible. :mad:
     
  21. macrumors 6502a

    mattmack

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2002
    Location:
    San Francisco Area
    #21
    I have heard it is because the AoE series uses DirectPlay as its game networking protocol as opposed to just TCP/IP and as everyone knows there is no mac equivalent of any of the Direct "products" hence no cross platform gaming which would open up a whole bunch more online games in this series. I enjoy playing against someone in a RTS rather than a campaign.

    PS I will still probably buy this game though :rolleyes:
     
  22. thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2004
    #22
    AoE II was a major hit on the mac. Think of CoD. It was so popular on the mac that the expansion pack (United Offensive) came to the mac only about 3 months after it was out for the PC. Also BF1942. We saw it come out middle 2004, I think. It's expansion, Secret Weapons, came out in October. Of course these are both Asdpyr published games. Mac Soft will most likely be publishing AoE III mac version and they may take longer...
     
  23. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 26, 2004
    Location:
    Dekalb IL
    #23
    I have to agree with pgc6000, I personally think it kinda blows. Just my opinion though, when compared to Warcraft or Comand and Conquer I give it one of these :eek: If you're going to spend $50 on something... make it a downpayment on your new G5 instead... now that is money well spent :)
     

Share This Page