http://gamingtrend.com
July 30, 2014, 06:00:56 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Battles of Prince of Persia anyone? [DS]  (Read 4215 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
TheMissingLink
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6235


TML, for short.


View Profile
« on: December 13, 2005, 07:56:24 PM »

Saw this at a local store for $40, didn't know it was out yet so I was really, really tempted to grab it.

It's a card game, ala Metal Gear Ac!d (which I sort of miss, making me wanting this thing ever greater).  There have been ZERO mainstream reviews on it, but I guess people on GameFaqs really, really dig it.  Although, that's GameFaqs, so I sorta take that with a grain of salt.

ANYONE WANT TO TAKE THE PLUNGE!?!?
Logged

TheMissingLink on PSN
farley2k
Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 3175



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 13, 2005, 08:12:52 PM »

It is out?  Wow talk about no press.  So is it a gem that that we will have a hard time finding in a few months or a POS which will be in bargin bins on Dec. 26th.
Logged

TheMissingLink
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6235


TML, for short.


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: December 13, 2005, 08:21:26 PM »

That IS the question!

And it was selling for $40 where I saw it, so man, you guys want to sell a few more copies, bring the price down, sheeeesh.
Logged

TheMissingLink on PSN
Dreamshadow
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3037


View Profile WWW
« Reply #3 on: December 13, 2005, 09:05:25 PM »

I have been wanting to get a copy to post a review on.  I've been all over card games recently (I'm playing Yu-Gi-Oh NT and prepping a review on it), and this one looked interesting.  Can't wait to get a copy....but $40?  Wow..
Logged

Tom "Dreamshadow" Tjarks
Aunt Wu: Care to hear your fortune, handsome?
Iroh: At my age there is really only one big surprise left, and I'd just as soon leave it a mystery.
farley2k
Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 3175



View Profile
« Reply #4 on: December 13, 2005, 09:24:23 PM »

Quote from: "TheMissingLink"
That IS the question!

And it was selling for $40 where I saw it, so man, you guys want to sell a few more copies, bring the price down, sheeeesh.


$40 is very, very high for a DS game.  Even most of the high profile titles seem to go for $35.
Logged

TheMissingLink
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6235


TML, for short.


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: December 13, 2005, 09:47:18 PM »

Yeah, Viewtiful Joe interests me, but I've only seen it for $40.  And a handheld game at $40 has gotta be truly special for me to pick up.

Any BoPoP impressions yet!?!?
Logged

TheMissingLink on PSN
Dreamshadow
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3037


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: December 13, 2005, 09:53:01 PM »

I'll be taking the plunge in a couple days. smile
Logged

Tom "Dreamshadow" Tjarks
Aunt Wu: Care to hear your fortune, handsome?
Iroh: At my age there is really only one big surprise left, and I'd just as soon leave it a mystery.
Cleric7
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 515


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: December 13, 2005, 09:59:14 PM »

I bought it yesterday and played through the first two missions last night.

First a caveat: I love collectible card games and I am a big fan of turn-based strategy games, so I'm probably predisposed to like this...  :?

First off: Don't buy this for the graphics. It's not flashy at all, but everything seems perfectly functional. Also, don't buy it for the story. It's supposed to be something blah, blah, blah about the Prince and his adventures between the two console games, but who cares.

I bought it for the gameplay and the alluring mix of Magic the Gathering meets Final Fantasy Tactics, and so far -- very early -- it shows promise.

The interface is surprisingly smooth with the stylus used to look around the map, select units and give orders. It really works very nicely. The top screen gives information of the terrain square or unit selected (there are tons of stats for each unit, including unit type, movement, morale, melee, missile, attack bonuses, armor, defense, and something called "Stats Down" which tells you how many HP this unit can lose before it's abilities get lowered). When you are in the "hand" screen, loooking at your cards, the top screen gives detailed information on what the card does and what situations you can use it in. I like it.

The first mission has the Prince and 5 basic units hunting down a half dozen pathetically weak enemies. It's a tutorial and it does a good job of explaining how you pick one card from your hand for each phase and then move one or more of your units.

After each successful mission in Campaign (or Multiplayer [2 carts]) you are give a "pack" of new cards, randomly selected from the game's 200 total.

In the second mission my deck contained some of the fancier cards.

Here's an example:

"Feast of Crows"
Cost -- Your ready General becomes Used (skips his turn)
Target -- Any 1 unit in Command Range (within a certain number of squares of the general) (enemy resist -30%) Any unit, friendly or enemy can be targeted. For example, a unit with Morale of 70% would get a 40% chance (70% - 30%) of resisting the effect of the card
Effect -- target loses 12 health points and becomes used (loses it's turn)
Duration -- Instant

Your General determines how many cards you have in your hand (around 5-7) and you play one card per phase, and they may have specific effects like the card above or just allow you to move and attack normally.

There is a ton more to the game: zones of control, the advantages of keeping your units near your commander (in his  command range), different ways of using the same card, the fact that powerful cards can only be played once per mission, terrain effects, weather effects, stunned units, broken units, rallying, etc.

I will post more when I have time, but first impressions are favorable! smile
Logged

"All that is necessary for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing."
TheMissingLink
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6235


TML, for short.


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: December 13, 2005, 10:31:45 PM »

Hmmm...very nice impressions, Cleric.  What would you say the game plays like?  Anything else that you've experienced?

Is it a deep, complex game (from what you can tell)?

Are the maps large?

Good music?

I'm debating grabbing this tonight...
Logged

TheMissingLink on PSN
Nth Power
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3451



View Profile
« Reply #9 on: December 13, 2005, 11:49:58 PM »

Wow, I had no idea it was like Metal Gear Ac!d.  I'm now intrigued, but I'll wait for some more impressions or the price goes down before I buy.  That's a large chunk of change for a DS game.

Great first impressies though.  Let's have some more!
Logged

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" -Voltaire
XBL gamertag: NthPowr
Cleric7
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 515


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: December 14, 2005, 02:12:24 AM »

Quote from: "TheMissingLink"
Hmmm...very nice impressions, Cleric.  What would you say the game plays like?  Anything else that you've experienced?

Is it a deep, complex game (from what you can tell)?

Are the maps large?

Good music?

I'm debating grabbing this tonight...


I just played my first skirmish match -- this time against an equal computer opponent. At first I thought I was doing pretty well, just moving my units around the map and playing the occasional special card to do some pretty effect, lol.

But then I accidentally moved one of my ranged units next to an enemy (instead of attacking from several spaces) and the computer just decimated it! I kept at it and felt like I was turning the tide of the battle (and yet I wasn't paying attention to the rock/paper/scissors unit combos) I was simply doing trial-positioning of my pieces each turn and having the computer analyze my attack probabilities in each case. (A very neat feature -- it estimates, but doesn't guarantee ...  :wink: ) You can cancel the move if the odds don't seem to your liking. At any rate I wasn't planning out a cohesive team strategy -- just picking off units here and there, if I could.

Late in the match, I had three units left (including my general). He had two left (including his general -- at better health than mine, which proved to be significant) and one broken unit, racing off the map.

I figured the match was well in hand. At the end of the next turn, though, his broken unit was able to rally and soon rejoined the battle. He also played a card that restored health to two of his units. All of the sudden I was sunk. He quickly took out my lesser unit and then chased my (soon broken) general to his death! It was actually pretty impressive how he dismantled me!  Tongue

But I learned some lessons. In answer to your question, yes, absolutely I would say that there is depth to this game. There are so many factors (including 'facing') which can effect the outcome of a battle. Understanding the best time to use each of your cards and the best way to make use of each unit's strengths, using the terrain to your advantage, positioning your general so that his influence can have the largest affect (he can rally broken troops automatically .... but only if he's close enough)

There are tons of interesting cards, too, and I think it's going to take a while to master their various uses. For instance I had a card in this last battle that allowed two of my units to greatly increase their defense -- BUT at the cost of them not being able to move until they were attacked! There was another card that allowed my units to move twice in a single phase -- at the cost of not being able to attack! Even the card I mentioned in my previous post doesn't do all that much damage to an opponent -- but if he doesn't resist it it cancels his turn which can be a very big deal! Still what if you sacrifice your general's turn to cast it and the son-of-a-gun resists the spell?? What a waste!

That's the kind of interesting tactical choices that make me think the game holds some promise. It's still extremely early going yet, but so far so good.

In answer to your other question, I've only played on the earliest maps and they weren't all that big, but I don't know about the later ones.

I don't particularly like the music, but you can go into the options and turn it down or off. You can also turn off the battle animations that play in the upper screen every time two units clash. They are kinda fun at first but I think I will be turning them off soon to speed things up.
Logged

"All that is necessary for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing."
TheMissingLink
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6235


TML, for short.


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: December 14, 2005, 03:50:55 AM »

Man, that sounds great...and I was nearly out the door to grab it...but IGN just released their review and it got a 5.5.  More than a little disheartening.  Now, I don't know what to dooooooooooo.
Logged

TheMissingLink on PSN
wonderpug
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 11265


hmm...


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: December 14, 2005, 04:06:24 AM »

The deal breaker for me is how after the campaign you can only gain new cards in multiplayer, and there's no wi-fi!

Please tell me I heard wrong about the wi-fi, this kind of game would be perfect over the internet.
Logged
Kevin Grey
Global Moderator
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 13976


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: December 14, 2005, 04:45:37 AM »

Quote from: "TheMissingLink"
Man, that sounds great...and I was nearly out the door to grab it...but IGN just released their review and it got a 5.5.  More than a little disheartening.  Now, I don't know what to dooooooooooo.


IGN also gave Metal Gear Acid something like a 6.5.  I don't trust IGN with these types of games (not that I normally trust them anyway).
Logged
TheMissingLink
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6235


TML, for short.


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: December 14, 2005, 05:18:14 AM »

Quote from: "Kevin Grey"
Quote from: "TheMissingLink"
Man, that sounds great...and I was nearly out the door to grab it...but IGN just released their review and it got a 5.5.  More than a little disheartening.  Now, I don't know what to dooooooooooo.


IGN also gave Metal Gear Acid something like a 6.5.  I don't trust IGN with these types of games (not that I normally trust them anyway).


Ooooh...hmmmm...knock it a point down from the great visuals that MGA had and you've got the same score...interesting.  Thanks for bringing that point up, Kevin.
Logged

TheMissingLink on PSN
fyedaddy
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 884

Ass


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: December 14, 2005, 04:30:15 PM »

Very curious about this title myself. While the early "professional site" reviews have been mediocre at best, the fan reviews have been fairly solid and encouraging. I've got this at the top of my Gamefly list but I'm wondering how many more positive fan reviews I can read before picking this up sight unseen.

Nice write ups, Cleric. Thanks for the details! Any updates?
Logged

XBox Live ID: fyedaddy

"I give up - Go with the DS. It's far better."
"Nintendo is King, and anyone who says otherwise is wrong."
 --Devil
Cleric7
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 515


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: December 14, 2005, 05:03:49 PM »

I just did a careful reading of the IGN review.

Let me start by saying that I have a lot of respect for professional game reviewers. They do not have an easy job and they often are assigned games that are of less than stellar quality.

Having said that, I have some issues with IGN's review of Battles of Prince of Persia.

Now, let me just start by saying that I don't yet know if this game is a 5.5 or an 8.5. My own early impressions of the game are positive, but the deciding factor for me will depend on gameplay components such as long-term playability, game balance, effective interaction of the different strategic elements, and the variety of missions and cards in the game. It will take more time to be able to give a fair assessment of those factors.

My ultimate score for this game will reflect my personal bias based on those gameplay elements, elements that I believe meet the game on it's own terms.

What I'd like to discuss is the IGN writer's bias in his review and I'd like to take a look, paragraph-by-paragraph, at what he writes.

He begins by talking about the other Prince of Persia game that has just come out for consoles and how it is a "must have" title. Then he talks about the DS game that he wishes had been made:

"When the announcement was made that a Prince of Persia title was coming to the DS as well, it took many of us back to the days of 2D platforming. However, while Prince of Persia has finally come to the DS, fans will wish they could turn back the sands of time once again and recreate what Prince of Persia should have been."

Clearly this is not the Prince of Persia game that the writer wanted to be made. He wanted "an amazing and intriguing 2D adventure". What he got instead, he describes as "forced, bulky and uninspired." Fair enough -- he's talking about the game in hand now and that's what this review should ultimately be about. The remainder of the review needs to explain in detail what he means by "forced, bulky and uninspired." It needs to analyze the game on it's own terms.

In the second paragraph, it appears that the writer is at least partially aware of his own bias when he says "It is easy to sit and complain about the choice made to go with a combination card and strategy title for DS rather than creating the original style for the franchise." Yes, it is easy! In the very next sentence he continues to criticize the game for not being the genre he wanted. "it is a valid complaint that no action will be found in the Prince's DS debut". But it's not an action game! You are not reviewing the game in hand!

The next two sentences talk about how this is a misuse of the "franchise", that attaching the Prince of Persia name to this game is (and I'm perhaps reading between the lines a bit) misleading to the fans. He says that the franchise is like "a skin" that has been placed over an "Advanced Wars" type of game and that it doesn't live up to a game like AW or Final Fantasy Tactics or Magic: the Gathering. OK, that's fine to say, but you need to tell me why it doesn't live up to those standards!!

The third paragraph begins by saying that the "execution" in this game is not strong. I really want him to elaborate on that (at some point!) He then describes the general flow of gameplay (in fairly positive terms) comparing certain features to ones in similar turn-based games.

"Once on the main map, allied troops are selected and then places ala Final Fantasy Tactics, and the fight is ready to begin. Everything from swordsmen to archers, knights and heroes are included. The hybrid card/strategy is a great idea, giving the player control of a deck which determines what can be done for each turn. Depending on what cards are chosen, a certain number of troops can be moved for that turn, and a ton of different affects can be used, much like a single turn CO power in AW."

Now comes what I feel is the crucial point in the review:

"While this is a great idea, there is just too much to deal with when trying to form strategy."

That's the crux right there. "There is just too much to deal with."
Like what?

"What cards will come up after others are used? What do all these cards do exactly? The entire system is incredibly deep..."

So he criticizes a strategy game because it is deep, has many strategic choices that need to be made and it includes card effects that you need to read and think about carefully in order to use effectively.

He then says that the game has "a cluster of stats and possibilities" (Heavens! in a strategy game??) "that will slow the action down" (it's not an action game!) "and complicate the experience".

He does begin to make a valid point that as a strategy game, this BoPoP seems to lack the "checks and balances" of the Advanced Wars series. This may be a valid point and I wish he'd gone into much greater depth about what he meant. In the matches I have played so far, there seem to be some effective checks and balances. For example, there is a rock/paper/scissors setup for the unit types. The General has special strengths that can aid his troops, but he must choose between staying near them (and conveying his bonuses) or striking into enemy territory to do some massive damage on his own.

He then praises a particular part of the battle design. "Other tactics are incorporated into the battle system as well, offering push-back if an army does exceptionally during a skirmish. This actually moves the defending army back a space, and lets the attackers take that zone. It is a great idea, and one of the main strengths that this design actually has."

In the next sentence he negates this positive by saying that it is "too clunky and slow to enjoy." I don't understand this comment at all. The push back happens quickly and for clear reasons. The flow of battle is not interrupted. The whole thing takes a couple of seconds.

He then refers (once again) to the other games in the series and how this type of game doesn't live up to them. "battles never come close to feeling as epic or intense as its inspirations." (Italics mine)

When wrapping up this section of the review, he sums up his dislike by saying that "It all boils down to the on-screen controls." (something he hasn't even mentioned to that point) "and in the end it just isn't fun to play." I would argue that the game -- any game -- is going to be less fun to play if you really wanted a different genre of game in the first place!

This reviewer clearly wanted a fast-paced, 2-D action game. He tells us this over and over!

The next paragraph discusses the presentation of the game and how it's no good because it doesn't have the flair of the "larger Prince of Persia titles."

More telling of his bias is the sentence "the battles themselves feel clunky as players run at each other and exchange blows." I have only played 3 matches of the game, but I can tell you right now that "running at each other" and exchanging blows is a bad, bad way to play this game. This is a turn-based strategy game with detailed elements such as terrain, facing, support and zones of control. If you are charging willy nilly at the opponent (as you would in an action game) then you are going to get spanked. AND you are not going to appreciate the strategic niceties of the game!

As for the action feeling "clunky" I do not get that vibe at all. The battles develop smoothly. The interface is clearly laid out. The top screen does a good job of giving you detailed information on the units on the battlefield and the cards. My early (and I stress "early") impression is that some careful thought went into the interface and how to best use the stylus to give you the information you need for your strategic decisions and to manipulate the on-screen elements smoothly.

He then complains that "The levels suffer from load times which are actually longer than some Cube games." I have not noticed load times being a problem at all!! And they are one of my personal bug-a-boos too!
I loaded up a level of the campaign just now and timed it. It took 8 seconds to load the third level of the campaign. I honestly don't know what he's talking about.

"Add in terrible navigation controls and the overall experience is painful to say the least. To move the screen the D-Pad must be held up, and then the stylus is used to move the camera. Rather than having the stylus drag the map around like a piece of paper, the camera is pushed in the direction of the stylus which feels awkward."

This may be a valid point for some people. Having to hold up on the D-Pad to move may be a problem for some (it hasn't been for me) but I can see why the designers did it. It allows you to freely examine units and terrain during battle with the stylus alone. You tap a unit and the top screen instantly gives you detailed information on it. You tap a card and the top screen instantly gives you detailed information on it. You scroll the screen by holding up button and freely scrolling the screen. (I actually prefer this way of scrolling to the "drag the map like a piece of paper" but that's just personal preference)

In the following paragraph he criticizes the games artwork -- a perfectly valid observation....up to a point! When he suggest that the graphics get in the way of analzying information within a battle,

"When the battle heats up it gets to be near impossible to tell which characters are facing which direction, and who is doing what"

he is just dead wrong! Not only can you easily access information of any unit on the battlefield (it's current HP's, any card effects currently on it, how many more HPs it can lose before it's abilities deteriorate, etc, etc) but each unit on the map has a clearly displayed white dot indicating it's facing! How long did he actually play the game? Did he even read the manual?? Units will even glow slightly if they have a current "spell" effect on them! There is so much information at your fingertips!

Next he says that he likes the sound in the game. I don't particularly, but that's fine. It doesn't matter much for a turn-based strategy game.

He also says there is potentially a lot of replay value in the different game modes, which I think is accurate.

He sums up by pointing out (again) that this is not the type of game that "fans" (read: he) wanted. "Fans deserve a true Prince of Persia adventure." Meaning a 2D platformer with lots of fast-paced action.

And that is the problem I have with this review. He does not review the game on it's own merits. He criticizes the depth and complexity of a game that belongs to a genre that values depth and complexity.

Does the game deserve a score of 5.5? I honestly don't know yet. My initial impressions are positive, but, ultimately, the value of this game will depend on how it fulfills its promise as a turn-based strategy/card game . That is how it should be judged.
Logged

"All that is necessary for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing."
TheMissingLink
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6235


TML, for short.


View Profile
« Reply #17 on: December 14, 2005, 05:53:56 PM »

Wow, Cleric, what a write-up.  Really great stuff.  That review does come off as a guy pissed off he didn't get a "proper" PoP game, doesn't it?

I am selling back my huge art history book today...sooooo...the temptation grows...(keep us posted!)
Logged

TheMissingLink on PSN
Cleric7
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 515


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: December 14, 2005, 08:01:31 PM »

Musashi Wins! did an excellent writeup on Gaming Age:

"um...this game is really fun so far. does it feel low budget? art wise, I guess so. but 3 battle maps in the strategy is quite good and I really like some of the design decisions they made.

battle rounds take place within "hours" and you are able to move your units by choosing cards that are dealt from your deck at the beginning of every hour. For instance, you could choose to move several units by playing an order card of "4" value, and move 4 of your units...or a special card that gives some sort of melee or morale bonus to 2 troops...during that turn, only two of your units would be able to move or attack. Once your unit has moved during that "hour" it's done until both sides have either exhausted their movements or passed (a very real tactical option in this game...placement is very important). At that point, the day moves forward, you can discard from your deck and it is replenished and another round begins. I'm not sure at this point if different times of day effect certain cards or strategy.

All the units have stats and weapon and armor modifiers which can be altered by time dependent cards or your general. Attacking from the rear or sides effects your success and damage. There are also excellent morale rules and units can become stunned, routed and have their stats altered by suffering a defeat. Troops can also be rallied or dispersed in later turns through time or the effect of other cards. They can also be pushed back by an effective charge/attack and if they have no room to retreat, they take additional damage. It's excellent and deep. It's also not hard to follow or too compex during the game.

Also...major props for using the touch screen excellently, along with the dpad controls. It's so easy to move around or see the field, your deck, unit info, etc. Other strategy developers MUST pay attention to this. It's more useful than in AW.

There's a small story involving the PoP universe (sort of) and plenty of Persian type music in the background. Nothing special, same goes for the simple animations which can be turned off (along with some other game options, very nice).

It feels small, but incredibly smart so far. Way too early to make a real judgement about a strategy title, but as of this moment I'm incredibly pleased. You can get cards by defeating campaign missions or engaging in multiplayer games. There is also a skirmish mode (no cards earned) and the ability to deeply edit decks, etc. Also I should mention...there is more than one way to beat maps. By attrition, achieving certain goals, etc. I'm not sure yet if card rarity (if some are really rare) is tied to your performance. There are also at least a few armies to choose from each with their own strengths and weaknesses.

If your a strategy fan I'd definitely check this out."
Logged

"All that is necessary for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing."
Nth Power
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3451



View Profile
« Reply #19 on: December 14, 2005, 08:28:40 PM »

It sounds like the IGN reviewer was miffed at it not being an action game, he wasn't able to rate it objectively.  Sad.

Thanks for the info Cleric.  It sounds great!  I'll probably pick it up if I can find it a little cheaper.
Logged

"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities" -Voltaire
XBL gamertag: NthPowr
TheMissingLink
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6235


TML, for short.


View Profile
« Reply #20 on: December 15, 2005, 03:55:13 AM »

Well, I went to the gamestore today with the intention to buy this one...

But saw Fire Emblem for the 'Cube used for $40.  Put that and BoPoP side-by-side and decided to go with FE.  BoPoP will be purchased sometime, though!  One day!
Logged

TheMissingLink on PSN
Cleric7
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 515


View Profile
« Reply #21 on: December 15, 2005, 04:33:23 AM »

Quote from: "TheMissingLink"
Well, I went to the gamestore today with the intention to buy this one...

But saw Fire Emblem for the 'Cube used for $40.  Put that and BoPoP side-by-side and decided to go with FE.  BoPoP will be purchased sometime, though!  One day!


You bought the sure thing. Good call!  Cool
Logged

"All that is necessary for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing."
Dreamshadow
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3037


View Profile WWW
« Reply #22 on: December 15, 2005, 03:25:37 PM »

Quote from: "Cleric7"
"Add in terrible navigation controls and the overall experience is painful to say the least. To move the screen the D-Pad must be held up, and then the stylus is used to move the camera. Rather than having the stylus drag the map around like a piece of paper, the camera is pushed in the direction of the stylus which feels awkward."

This may be a valid point for some people. Having to hold up on the D-Pad to move may be a problem for some (it hasn't been for me) but I can see why the designers did it. It allows you to freely examine units and terrain during battle with the stylus alone. You tap a unit and the top screen instantly gives you detailed information on it. You tap a card and the top screen instantly gives you detailed information on it. You scroll the screen by holding up button and freely scrolling the screen. (I actually prefer this way of scrolling to the "drag the map like a piece of paper" but that's just personal preference)


Yeargh...you just dropped this game from my list.  I'm left handed.  Is the stylus necessary to do this, or can you just use the d-pad and buttons?  Does the game provide  options for switching the controls to left handed?
Logged

Tom "Dreamshadow" Tjarks
Aunt Wu: Care to hear your fortune, handsome?
Iroh: At my age there is really only one big surprise left, and I'd just as soon leave it a mystery.
Cleric7
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 515


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: December 15, 2005, 04:10:17 PM »

Quote from: "Dreamshadow"
Quote from: "Cleric7"
"Add in terrible navigation controls and the overall experience is painful to say the least. To move the screen the D-Pad must be held up, and then the stylus is used to move the camera. Rather than having the stylus drag the map around like a piece of paper, the camera is pushed in the direction of the stylus which feels awkward."

This may be a valid point for some people. Having to hold up on the D-Pad to move may be a problem for some (it hasn't been for me) but I can see why the designers did it. It allows you to freely examine units and terrain during battle with the stylus alone. You tap a unit and the top screen instantly gives you detailed information on it. You tap a card and the top screen instantly gives you detailed information on it. You scroll the screen by holding up button and freely scrolling the screen. (I actually prefer this way of scrolling to the "drag the map like a piece of paper" but that's just personal preference)


Yeargh...you just dropped this game from my list.  I'm left handed.  Is the stylus necessary to do this, or can you just use the d-pad and buttons?  Does the game provide  options for switching the controls to left handed?


No fear! I just checked my copy. The X button on the righthand side doubles for up on the D-Pad so it is perfectly comfortable for lefties to use the stylus!  biggrin
Logged

"All that is necessary for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing."
Farscry
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4001



View Profile
« Reply #24 on: December 15, 2005, 07:39:51 PM »

Darnit Cleric, you're making me want to buy this!  Stop it!

Just tell me there's no multiplayer and I might yet keep some willpower.
Logged

Purge - You have unlocked an Achievement!
You are now of the rank reprobate
rabies66
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 23


View Profile
« Reply #25 on: December 15, 2005, 07:47:22 PM »

This one does sound interesting. Thanks for the impressions so far, and keep 'em coming!
Logged

Golden with barlight and beer
fyedaddy
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 884

Ass


View Profile
« Reply #26 on: December 15, 2005, 08:13:08 PM »

Quote from: "Farscry_Redux"
Darnit Cleric, you're making me want to buy this!  Stop it!

Just tell me there's no multiplayer and I might yet keep some willpower.


I'm wanting to buy this too (and YOU know this...) so I'm keeping a close eye on this one. I know there's local DS multiplayer (vs. mode?) but I don't know about WiFi.
Logged

XBox Live ID: fyedaddy

"I give up - Go with the DS. It's far better."
"Nintendo is King, and anyone who says otherwise is wrong."
 --Devil
Farscry
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4001



View Profile
« Reply #27 on: December 16, 2005, 12:03:02 AM »

Quote from: "fyedaddy"
Quote from: "Farscry_Redux"
Darnit Cleric, you're making me want to buy this!  Stop it!

Just tell me there's no multiplayer and I might yet keep some willpower.


I'm wanting to buy this too (and YOU know this...) so I'm keeping a close eye on this one. I know there's local DS multiplayer (vs. mode?) but I don't know about WiFi.


Stop it!  No!  Don't tell me that!  *covers ears*  La la la la laaaa la la laaa!!
Logged

Purge - You have unlocked an Achievement!
You are now of the rank reprobate
Dreamshadow
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3037


View Profile WWW
« Reply #28 on: December 16, 2005, 02:38:26 AM »

Quote from: "rabies66"
This one does sound interesting. Thanks for the impressions so far, and keep 'em coming!


Welcome to the boards...sweet..erm...Avatar you've got there too.  Avatar rocks!!!
Logged

Tom "Dreamshadow" Tjarks
Aunt Wu: Care to hear your fortune, handsome?
Iroh: At my age there is really only one big surprise left, and I'd just as soon leave it a mystery.
Tebunker
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3480


Ask How, Ask Now, Ask me


View Profile
« Reply #29 on: December 16, 2005, 02:45:44 AM »

Hell yeah Avatar rocks, the wife and I will watch it on Saturday mornings when they show like 5 episodes in a row...

While this game sounds awesome, it just doesn't sound $40 awesome.

I'll wait for a price drop and pick it up on the cheap.
Logged

"I hate cynicism -- it's my least favorite quality and it doesn't lead anywhere. Nobody in life gets exactly what they thought they were going to get. But if you work really hard and you're kind amazing things will happen." - Conan O'Brien
Cleric7
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 515


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: December 16, 2005, 05:20:03 AM »

For the record, this game has wireless multicard play for two (versus).
There are no Internet options.

Played the third campaign mission this morning after tinkering with my deck and enjoyed it very much.
Logged

"All that is necessary for evil to flourish is for good people to do nothing."
fyedaddy
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 884

Ass


View Profile
« Reply #31 on: December 16, 2005, 03:00:29 PM »

The two local stores I hit yesterday were out of stock. They had already sold the several copies alotted for their first shipment. I haven't checked one of the chain stores yet though (hoping to see more fan feedback on this one before taking that leap).

Great info, Cleric. Glad you're enjoying the game so far. Keep it up!  smile
Logged

XBox Live ID: fyedaddy

"I give up - Go with the DS. It's far better."
"Nintendo is King, and anyone who says otherwise is wrong."
 --Devil
rabies66
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 23


View Profile
« Reply #32 on: December 17, 2005, 01:27:28 PM »

I think I'm gonna pick this one up after the current DS glut passes. I'm waaaaay too busy now with Animal Crossing, Mario Kart, Mario & Luigi, Ouendan, Yu-Gi-Oh, etc...

I'll put this on the To Get list, with Phoenix Wright, Metroid Pinball...  Thanks again for all the previews!

Man, the DS is rocking!

Quote
Welcome to the boards...sweet..erm...Avatar you've got there too. Avatar rocks!!!


Thanks for the welcome. I've been lurking for quite a bit now.

Avatar does indeed rock! It's the one show the whole family sits down to watch in our house.
Logged

Golden with barlight and beer
fyedaddy
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 884

Ass


View Profile
« Reply #33 on: December 19, 2005, 03:42:20 PM »

Found the game this weekend but it was $40 everywhere I looked (and I still have a hard time swallowing a $40 price tag for a DS game that's not a first party title). Hopefully Gamefly gets moving and sends this to me asap.

Any more glorious updates from Sir Cleric and any potential weekend antics in this game? *anxiously awaits*
Logged

XBox Live ID: fyedaddy

"I give up - Go with the DS. It's far better."
"Nintendo is King, and anyone who says otherwise is wrong."
 --Devil
fyedaddy
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 884

Ass


View Profile
« Reply #34 on: December 20, 2005, 04:28:51 AM »

Nice review from Gamespot (or at least the nicest of the "mainstream" review sites so far):

http://www.gamespot.com/ds/strategy/battlesofprinceofpersia/review.html
Logged

XBox Live ID: fyedaddy

"I give up - Go with the DS. It's far better."
"Nintendo is King, and anyone who says otherwise is wrong."
 --Devil
TheMissingLink
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6235


TML, for short.


View Profile
« Reply #35 on: December 20, 2005, 04:53:29 AM »

Pretty good review...the second I see this one for like, $25, I'm there.  $40 is just too much, UbiSoft!
Logged

TheMissingLink on PSN
fyedaddy
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 884

Ass


View Profile
« Reply #36 on: December 22, 2005, 04:58:12 PM »

Gamefly has shipped me my rental for this so I get to play the waiting game for a few days.

Any new game details on this one, Cleric?
Logged

XBox Live ID: fyedaddy

"I give up - Go with the DS. It's far better."
"Nintendo is King, and anyone who says otherwise is wrong."
 --Devil
stiffler
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 4071


View Profile WWW
« Reply #37 on: December 30, 2005, 05:03:06 AM »

Quote from: "TheMissingLink"
Pretty good review...the second I see this one for like, $25, I'm there.  $40 is just too much, UbiSoft!


I picked up a copy at the Media Play that is going out of business for 40% off.  Total was $23.99.  TML, they had a couple more so PM me if you want me to try and pick you up a copy.

I haven't opened it up to try it yet.
Logged

Xbox Live Gamertag: cstiffler
fyedaddy
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 884

Ass


View Profile
« Reply #38 on: December 30, 2005, 09:26:48 PM »

I finally got my hands on this via Gamefly over the weekend and put some time into the title. I'm enjoying it, I truly am, but I'm not ready to go out and buy it just yet (though it's a must buy at $24, stiffler. Way to go!).

I've gotten four campaign and two skirmish matches under my belt so far. I've seen a better variation of units than first expected (including the opposing generals) and the cards too. The interface works really well and the graphics aren't nearly as bad as people have stated. Simple, yes, but not bad (they do not detract from the gameplay experience).

The other initial knock on the game from various reviewers has been the card mechanic. It has nothing to do with our traditional CCG card mechanic fare. Nothing at all! It's basically a turn based strategy game with the random strategy factor of a card each turn with a new global affect. Your units are still the deciding factor in a battle and must duke it out for the victory. The cards are just an added layer of strategy and it's handled extremely well.

There is a decent level of strategy involved too plus the CPU AI isn't a total waste... and has quickly ramped up. Looking forward to see the jump in the next few campaign missions!

The card/deck interface is nice and the game seems to provide a decent multiplayer mode (both for matches and for card trades).

My only complain so far, and it's a big one for me, would be that you get nothing for completing a skirmish match. Nothing. Not even a rating or stats to build on to compete against later. You get a "You Win" screen and then you're sent back to the title. That's going to keep me from buying this title now and will have me searching the bargain bin later on. Ideally I would have loved to be awarded with cards at the end of a skirmish match, but to not even get stats/performance reports to save? Nothing at all? That will drive me nuts and was a huge disappointment for me.

Otherwise than that I fully recommend this game so far for strategy gamers. I keep thinking of it as Advanced Wars with a card mechanic.

I don't suppose I was wrong about how you acquire new cards or track stats in this, was I?  (I hope I hope...)
Logged

XBox Live ID: fyedaddy

"I give up - Go with the DS. It's far better."
"Nintendo is King, and anyone who says otherwise is wrong."
 --Devil
TheMissingLink
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6235


TML, for short.


View Profile
« Reply #39 on: January 14, 2006, 08:19:40 PM »

WELL!!  How goes the BATTLES of PoP, fellas?

(*cough* Anyone wanting to trade it yet? *cough*)
Logged

TheMissingLink on PSN
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.25 seconds with 104 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.053s, 2q)