I apologize for the lack of pictures in this review, I'll endevour to edit a few into it once i get some screenies from my game.
Its been a LONG day and my computer decided that it would implode on itself this afternoon so i've only got access to my laptop for a little while.
Anyway, enough excuses:
Having been an avid lover of SOTS 1 (and all of its 20,001 addons) i was very much looking forward to getting my greasy mits all over a nice clean digital copy of SOTS 2. This, driven by a curiosity into the new much larger size of ship (seriously... they're 3x bigger... THREE!) as well as the Oh so shiny mars graphics engine that Kerberos have been bragging about forever.
Well, it finally happened and the long awaited day came when i could purchase, for 30 of my hard earned pounds, a copy of SOTS2.
I purchased the game on Steam (a practice a really hate but i'm far too lazy to go to the shop anymore...) and went to get a cup of tea while the game downloaded. About 40 mins passed and finally i was ready to play!
I was surprised to see no cinematic when i turned the game on, simply a static Kerberos logo and then it punched straight into the start menu. Or well i 'Say' the start menu but it's hardly a menu when half of the options are blacked out!
Thats right... Kerberos managed to get the Options menu wrong on release... I guess they were hoping you wouldn't notice after being made to use a flimsy set of checkboxes before you launch the program proper.
So, i clicked on 'Create game' and was greeted with a semi-similar 4X startup screen. All of the basic needs were met:
A selection of map styles, limited... but varied.
Sliders for economic and research efficiency as well as some for random encounters etc...
Different races to be allowed and disallowed
etc etc etc...
This all seems fine, but i can't help but compare this to the game setup menu from the first SOTS... Its missing a few features.
For example there's no way to change the number of stars, or the spacing between them.
It turns out that the planets are procedurally generated in each gameplay but the stars and spacing are fixed. This seems like a step backwards... i enjoyed those random map generators as it allowed me to make a nice close game with few stars for a fast paced guns blazing game to vent my anger out on some poor bugs.
Or to make a very large spaced out game to play over a few weeks blissfully ignoring 99% of my social life.
Not to mention that they've continued the button teasing trick by giving you a scenario button without any scenarios.
So basically... the game is a selection of approximately 10 maps with which you can face some NPCs or multiplayer.
Yay... My dreams have come true...
However, lets stop complaining... I'm sure the game will really shine once i get to build those HUGE ships and enjoy watching my mass drivers rip perfectly spherical holes through alien ships in glorious HD astro porn.
So, the game starts and i begin to get to grips with the new features.
The method of play has changed somewhat and actually there are some good points to be said about these changes.
The first change you're likely to notice is that the way you manage ships has been completely overhauled. Gone are the days of simply building a ship and sending it somewhere (noo... Thats too easy) Now you need to build a command ship, and give that to the control of your favourate admiral. This then becomes a fleet to which you can add ships to (up to a command limit).
These fleets can then be given specific missions, i.e. to survay a system, or to colonize a planet in said system. Once the job has been completed the fleet will return to its home system and await further orders.
This method of gameplay is actually quite good once you get used to it, and it allows a decent amount of fore-planning with your fleets. I did, however, find it quite hard to keep track of all my fleets, and i've not yet found out how to make a fleet STAY at the mission location without returning home (which is of great use concidering i would like to use colony fleets to scout and then colonize, rather than having to scout it, and then send the colony fleet out after... wasting about 4-5 turns in the process)
But these are small personal preferences, and overall the system has great merit, even the personification of specific admirals with specific skills is a nice little touch, and when my first battle-fleet got their asses handed to them by a monitor base, i actually felt sad about the death of my admiral.
Finally, I've got an 'Admiral Kirk' in charge of my 1st survey fleet... Enough said.
Another roughly positive thing is the research 'tree'. It's actually broken up into several different areas (10 if memory serves) and it carries on the tradition of being randomly selected each time you play a new game. Thus players cannot learn and routinely research an 'optimum path' through the tree.
A nice new touch to the tree is that rather than simply not showing technologies that were not avaliable (like in SOTS1) this game requires you to spend a few turns preforming a feasibility test on new technology. Your scientists will then return to you with a % success rate and it's up to you if you wish to persue this technology or choose a new route.
I found this to be a realistic and an engaging way to research technology. It balanced the time needed to preform these feasibility studies with the time taken to actually reasearch stuff well and maintained a random feel.
The only downside i have to report so far is that these studies often come out as either 0% or 99% for most technologies... So you're still effectively getting the digital 'Yes' or 'no' approach...
For me, a much better approach would be to have most techs hovering around the 40% or 60% marks. choosing you to spend more time on a technology you may really want or researching more tech that you may not need in a much shorter time...
But again, just nit-picking, the research works fine, has good choice, and i like it.
This is all well and good, but the fleet management and research tree is a small island of hope amist a sea of depression, frustration and regret...
The user interface in general is a joke, There are many buttons that do not do Anything (especially in combat) and there are many more which are labled and do not do what they're labeled to do! Is this some sort of joke from Kerberos?
I'm having images of the production team watching my efforts to fight off an agressive liir attack and enjoying the sadistic pleasure of seeing my very expensive fleet being torn to bits because when told to 'Fiyah zee lazor' they decide to 'do a barrel roll'...
The user interface is non-intuitive and non-explained in other areas of the game as well, for example in the ship design screen you get faced with many many different modules for ship design as well as multiple graphs and charts for each weapon but without any relavent information explaining anything!
It's like playing EvE online all over again, except this time i can't even type 'What the hell!?" into chat to bail myself out.
Not to mention some of the ship components are not explained AT ALL, and you're just expected to either 1) expensively trial and error them or 2) guess by the name at what they do.
Now i can see the pleasure in discovering a game's features by yourself, and i can also see the gratification in knowing that you personally found the best setup by spending 3 hours doing calculus and linear algebra on efficiency graphs.
But seriously Kerberos... Can you please just give us a little hint as to what all these spreadsheets mean?
I mean... you did it very well in the first game? Why are you suddenly deciding that the only players to want to continue your franchise are the super-hard core ones who spend most of their time exploring caves in minecraft without any torches. (Like REAL men)
Moving on from the UI... The graphics in the game, Run by the afore-mentioned 'Mars' system, are actually pretty stunning. The level of detail and complexity on the ship models is top notch and i really enjoyed the 'weapons test' section of the ship design where i could sit and drool over the weapons i've just plopped onto my shiny new dreadnought.
This said, the mars system is equally dodgy as it is beautiful... It eats through my computer's 6 gig of RAM as if it was Crysis running on a commodore 64. I'm not entirely sure if this is an intentional use of memory of if it's a byproduct of seriously un-optimised coding.
But i really can't stay mad at the mars graphics engine, the shading is brilliant... I love the way that objects in the distance go all fuzzy as if they're out of focus and i really really love the detail on all of the many varied ship designs.
If Kerberos did anything right in this sequal, it's deffo the visuals.
So, we've established that the game:
1) Is unfinished and feels much like a beta
2) Is full of bugs, both predictable and non
3) feels unoptimised and runs slowly even on a high grade system
4) Has a bad UI and lacks any sort of coherent tutorial system
5) Decent research tree with randomisation
6) Looks AWESOME.
I think this only leaves out the future for this game.
Well, Kerberos have so far given out several heartfelt apologies regarding the game's release and have actually been offering not only refunds but free copies of SOTS1 to gamers who feel they have been cheated out of their cash.
http://www.kerberos-productions.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=22033
They do promise to continue releasing patches at a rate of '2-4' per month (depending which forum post you read) and they say that they will not stop patching until the game reaches the stage it should have been at launch.
This is all great to hear but it doesn't address the real underlying problem here...
More and more these days, as the PC gaming community becomes more and more digital, I'm seeing games released that are under-developed, under-tested and generally under-polished in terms of features and design.
All of these games are placed onto digital sites such as Steam and then gamers are charged full price to, effectively, be beta testers of a game they've been waiting to enjoy for years.
It happens far too often and it's not something we should stand for... We as a consumer deserve to recieve quality for our money. Not a half finished idea with promises that it will one day become the product that we paid good money for.
The fact that companies such as kerberos can simply patch their games over a period of several months after release is NO excuse for releasing a game that clearly is NOT finished.
Now i don't mean to beat down on just Kerberos here... they're actually a very good group and i have no doubt that they will make SOTS2 an epic in 4X history... but how long before i can wake up and download the patch that actually makes this game playable.
How long before i can write on my calender "Actual release date of SOTS2"
To round off I'm going to say that SOTS2 has potential to be a great game, but don't open your wallets just yet.
Wait until the forums light up with 'Finally, a patch that works' before purchasing it.
If you're a sorry sucker like me that's already purchased it...
HAHA!!! oh... wait... DAMN!
Its been a LONG day and my computer decided that it would implode on itself this afternoon so i've only got access to my laptop for a little while.
Anyway, enough excuses:
Having been an avid lover of SOTS 1 (and all of its 20,001 addons) i was very much looking forward to getting my greasy mits all over a nice clean digital copy of SOTS 2. This, driven by a curiosity into the new much larger size of ship (seriously... they're 3x bigger... THREE!) as well as the Oh so shiny mars graphics engine that Kerberos have been bragging about forever.
Well, it finally happened and the long awaited day came when i could purchase, for 30 of my hard earned pounds, a copy of SOTS2.
I purchased the game on Steam (a practice a really hate but i'm far too lazy to go to the shop anymore...) and went to get a cup of tea while the game downloaded. About 40 mins passed and finally i was ready to play!
I was surprised to see no cinematic when i turned the game on, simply a static Kerberos logo and then it punched straight into the start menu. Or well i 'Say' the start menu but it's hardly a menu when half of the options are blacked out!
Thats right... Kerberos managed to get the Options menu wrong on release... I guess they were hoping you wouldn't notice after being made to use a flimsy set of checkboxes before you launch the program proper.
So, i clicked on 'Create game' and was greeted with a semi-similar 4X startup screen. All of the basic needs were met:
A selection of map styles, limited... but varied.
Sliders for economic and research efficiency as well as some for random encounters etc...
Different races to be allowed and disallowed
etc etc etc...
This all seems fine, but i can't help but compare this to the game setup menu from the first SOTS... Its missing a few features.
For example there's no way to change the number of stars, or the spacing between them.
It turns out that the planets are procedurally generated in each gameplay but the stars and spacing are fixed. This seems like a step backwards... i enjoyed those random map generators as it allowed me to make a nice close game with few stars for a fast paced guns blazing game to vent my anger out on some poor bugs.
Or to make a very large spaced out game to play over a few weeks blissfully ignoring 99% of my social life.
Not to mention that they've continued the button teasing trick by giving you a scenario button without any scenarios.
So basically... the game is a selection of approximately 10 maps with which you can face some NPCs or multiplayer.
Yay... My dreams have come true...
However, lets stop complaining... I'm sure the game will really shine once i get to build those HUGE ships and enjoy watching my mass drivers rip perfectly spherical holes through alien ships in glorious HD astro porn.
So, the game starts and i begin to get to grips with the new features.
The method of play has changed somewhat and actually there are some good points to be said about these changes.
The first change you're likely to notice is that the way you manage ships has been completely overhauled. Gone are the days of simply building a ship and sending it somewhere (noo... Thats too easy) Now you need to build a command ship, and give that to the control of your favourate admiral. This then becomes a fleet to which you can add ships to (up to a command limit).
These fleets can then be given specific missions, i.e. to survay a system, or to colonize a planet in said system. Once the job has been completed the fleet will return to its home system and await further orders.
This method of gameplay is actually quite good once you get used to it, and it allows a decent amount of fore-planning with your fleets. I did, however, find it quite hard to keep track of all my fleets, and i've not yet found out how to make a fleet STAY at the mission location without returning home (which is of great use concidering i would like to use colony fleets to scout and then colonize, rather than having to scout it, and then send the colony fleet out after... wasting about 4-5 turns in the process)
But these are small personal preferences, and overall the system has great merit, even the personification of specific admirals with specific skills is a nice little touch, and when my first battle-fleet got their asses handed to them by a monitor base, i actually felt sad about the death of my admiral.
Finally, I've got an 'Admiral Kirk' in charge of my 1st survey fleet... Enough said.
Another roughly positive thing is the research 'tree'. It's actually broken up into several different areas (10 if memory serves) and it carries on the tradition of being randomly selected each time you play a new game. Thus players cannot learn and routinely research an 'optimum path' through the tree.
A nice new touch to the tree is that rather than simply not showing technologies that were not avaliable (like in SOTS1) this game requires you to spend a few turns preforming a feasibility test on new technology. Your scientists will then return to you with a % success rate and it's up to you if you wish to persue this technology or choose a new route.
I found this to be a realistic and an engaging way to research technology. It balanced the time needed to preform these feasibility studies with the time taken to actually reasearch stuff well and maintained a random feel.
The only downside i have to report so far is that these studies often come out as either 0% or 99% for most technologies... So you're still effectively getting the digital 'Yes' or 'no' approach...
For me, a much better approach would be to have most techs hovering around the 40% or 60% marks. choosing you to spend more time on a technology you may really want or researching more tech that you may not need in a much shorter time...
But again, just nit-picking, the research works fine, has good choice, and i like it.
This is all well and good, but the fleet management and research tree is a small island of hope amist a sea of depression, frustration and regret...
The user interface in general is a joke, There are many buttons that do not do Anything (especially in combat) and there are many more which are labled and do not do what they're labeled to do! Is this some sort of joke from Kerberos?
I'm having images of the production team watching my efforts to fight off an agressive liir attack and enjoying the sadistic pleasure of seeing my very expensive fleet being torn to bits because when told to 'Fiyah zee lazor' they decide to 'do a barrel roll'...
The user interface is non-intuitive and non-explained in other areas of the game as well, for example in the ship design screen you get faced with many many different modules for ship design as well as multiple graphs and charts for each weapon but without any relavent information explaining anything!
It's like playing EvE online all over again, except this time i can't even type 'What the hell!?" into chat to bail myself out.
Not to mention some of the ship components are not explained AT ALL, and you're just expected to either 1) expensively trial and error them or 2) guess by the name at what they do.
Now i can see the pleasure in discovering a game's features by yourself, and i can also see the gratification in knowing that you personally found the best setup by spending 3 hours doing calculus and linear algebra on efficiency graphs.
But seriously Kerberos... Can you please just give us a little hint as to what all these spreadsheets mean?
I mean... you did it very well in the first game? Why are you suddenly deciding that the only players to want to continue your franchise are the super-hard core ones who spend most of their time exploring caves in minecraft without any torches. (Like REAL men)
Moving on from the UI... The graphics in the game, Run by the afore-mentioned 'Mars' system, are actually pretty stunning. The level of detail and complexity on the ship models is top notch and i really enjoyed the 'weapons test' section of the ship design where i could sit and drool over the weapons i've just plopped onto my shiny new dreadnought.
This said, the mars system is equally dodgy as it is beautiful... It eats through my computer's 6 gig of RAM as if it was Crysis running on a commodore 64. I'm not entirely sure if this is an intentional use of memory of if it's a byproduct of seriously un-optimised coding.
But i really can't stay mad at the mars graphics engine, the shading is brilliant... I love the way that objects in the distance go all fuzzy as if they're out of focus and i really really love the detail on all of the many varied ship designs.
If Kerberos did anything right in this sequal, it's deffo the visuals.
So, we've established that the game:
1) Is unfinished and feels much like a beta
2) Is full of bugs, both predictable and non
3) feels unoptimised and runs slowly even on a high grade system
4) Has a bad UI and lacks any sort of coherent tutorial system
5) Decent research tree with randomisation
6) Looks AWESOME.
I think this only leaves out the future for this game.
Well, Kerberos have so far given out several heartfelt apologies regarding the game's release and have actually been offering not only refunds but free copies of SOTS1 to gamers who feel they have been cheated out of their cash.
http://www.kerberos-productions.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=22033
They do promise to continue releasing patches at a rate of '2-4' per month (depending which forum post you read) and they say that they will not stop patching until the game reaches the stage it should have been at launch.
This is all great to hear but it doesn't address the real underlying problem here...
More and more these days, as the PC gaming community becomes more and more digital, I'm seeing games released that are under-developed, under-tested and generally under-polished in terms of features and design.
All of these games are placed onto digital sites such as Steam and then gamers are charged full price to, effectively, be beta testers of a game they've been waiting to enjoy for years.
It happens far too often and it's not something we should stand for... We as a consumer deserve to recieve quality for our money. Not a half finished idea with promises that it will one day become the product that we paid good money for.
The fact that companies such as kerberos can simply patch their games over a period of several months after release is NO excuse for releasing a game that clearly is NOT finished.
Now i don't mean to beat down on just Kerberos here... they're actually a very good group and i have no doubt that they will make SOTS2 an epic in 4X history... but how long before i can wake up and download the patch that actually makes this game playable.
How long before i can write on my calender "Actual release date of SOTS2"
To round off I'm going to say that SOTS2 has potential to be a great game, but don't open your wallets just yet.
Wait until the forums light up with 'Finally, a patch that works' before purchasing it.
If you're a sorry sucker like me that's already purchased it...
HAHA!!! oh... wait... DAMN!
