calvin.bruner@canremote.uucp (CALVIN BRUNER) (09/07/89)
Well, I for one will be extremely disappointed if the new versions don't come out for the Atari ST, although I certainly can sympathize with the economics of the situation. Perhaps they are just going about it the wrong way. For instance, Interstell upgraded my 2.0 version of Empire to 2.5, and didn't charge me ANYTHING! I was quite surprised, and would certainly have paid for the upgrade. I suspect that he could easily justify the upgrade (I can't believe it would be a port from the IBM, give that the base program already exists for the ST) if he were to offer it to all registered users for a discounted price of say $25 US for a major upgrade. I for one would buy it....and I have faith that the company will be around for a while an supporting their product as they have in the past. Between users already registered who would buy...with no retail markup t o reduce their profits, and new sales through the retail network I think they can do quite well on an ST product. I also think Mark and Interstel should look at the potentially enlarged market of Atari ST users (assuming that Atari can get their act together and deliver the campaign and some goodies like the STE) P.S. Yes I use my Atari for games, and am proud of it! --- * Via ProDoor 3.01R
gilmore@vms.macc.wisc.edu (Neil Gilmore) (09/09/89)
In article <89090717595044@masnet.uucp>, calvin.bruner@canremote.uucp (CALVIN BRUNER) writes... >Well, I for one will be extremely disappointed if the new versions don't >come out for the Atari ST, although I certainly can sympathize with the >economics of the situation. Perhaps they are just going about it the >wrong way. For instance, Interstell upgraded my 2.0 version of Empire >to 2.5, and didn't charge me ANYTHING! I was quite surprised, and would (other stuff deleted) What are the differences between 2.0 and 2.5? My landlord/friend bought 2.0 when it first came out and played it once. He decided that it was strategically insignificant. So I played once at the preset levels, and found it boring. So I turned up the computer opponent nearly all the way, and found it more boring because it took longer to win. I played it a few more times to be sure, because all the reviews raved about it. I was still bored. Eventually, he traded it for an assembler, which he and his wife gave to me for Christmas. Recently, another friend of mine mentioned Empire, and I recounted my experiences. He inquired the capabilities of the game and pronounced it 'a brain-dead version'. Seems he playes on mainframes... We are all hard-core wargamers so our perceptions may be warped. On not the same subject, does anybody have strong feelings about the Universal Military Simulator? I didn't like that one either. Units 'retreating' TOWARD the enemy? JUst so you don't get the wrong idea, there have been games I liked a lot. It seems to be the wargames that are weak. >--- > * Via ProDoor 3.01R +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Kitakaze Tatsu Raito Neil Gilmore internet:gilmore@macc.wisc.edu | | Jararvellir, MACC, UW-Madison bitnet: gilmore@wiscmac3 | | Middle Kingdom Madison, Wi | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
calvin.bruner@canremote.uucp (CALVIN BRUNER) (09/11/89)
Well, some of the diffences between Empire 2.0 and 2.5 that I can recall, are a coastline that looks half decent (you don't immediately knkow which way the land is going) some minor bug fixes with save and when units can be used, and most importantly of all, the game was speeded up somewhat! Yes, I have to tweak up the computer's stats somewhat, and give it a 60% for production and combat for a real challenging game. And then again, when I "really" want to loose, I have both computer opponents at that level. I can't say whether you'd like it any more now, but I sure like it a lot more than UMS. But your right, we need some real strategic simulations...very few around! --- * Via ProDoor 3.01R
ins_bac@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Ajay Choudhri) (09/11/89)
In article <89091023103940@masnet.uucp> calvin.bruner@canremote.uucp (CALVIN BRUNER) writes: >I can't say whether you'd like >it any more now, but I sure like it a lot more than UMS. But your >right, we need some real strategic simulations...very few around! Well, after read Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising, I was looking for a well done WWIII conventional warfare simulation. I found one that was recently released, by SSI called Red Lightning. Excellent game, not too many varieties but My roommate and I have fought against each other and have had a great deal of enjoyment. It has standard book protection but I would definitely suggest this one. It even has the "Frisbee" bombers!! -Ajay ins_bac@jhunix.UUCP ins_bac@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU .. !uunet!mimsy!aplcen!jhunix!ins_bac