Can Imperialism II be far behind?
Wow!! Good news indeed!!
Quote from: tgb on November 20, 2012, 08:58:25 AM
Can Imperialism II be far behind?
I live in hope...
My favorite games of all time.
Perfect candidates for iPad resurrection.
Quote from: Martok on November 20, 2012, 10:13:39 AM
Quote from: tgb on November 20, 2012, 08:58:25 AM
Can Imperialism II be far behind?
I live in hope...
I expect someone here will notify us when that happens?
I'd also expect that to be the case.. if it was also published & owned by Ubisoft (as was this one).
I never played
either Imperialism game for some odd reason. Probably because I never saw it for sale at the brick & mortars back then and didn't hear much about it until a long time later.
This thread caught my eye and forced me to dig out my old Imperialism II CD just to see if it'd load/play on Windows 7 (Pro, 64-bit, SP1)...and it does! :) ...or at least seems to so far, haven't messed with it more than loading and firing up a game, but no crashes. Something to mess with over the long weekend...
Quote from: Queeg on November 20, 2012, 10:14:45 AM
My favorite games of all time.
Perfect candidates for iPad resurrection.
Totally true!
Quote from: Nefaro on November 20, 2012, 10:23:15 AM
I never played either Imperialism game for some odd reason. Probably because I never saw it for sale at the brick & mortars back then and didn't hear much about it until a long time later.
Highly recommend Imperialism I at GOG for $6. Graphics are dated of course, but the game really shines. Kind of like a lite version of Vicky II with some elements of transportation tycoon mixed in, but turn based. The manual is about 100 pages...so there is quite a bit of depth. You develop your empire through conquest or development. Pick your takeover targets based on their natural resources. Establish trading relations. Send in developers to buy up the resources. Bribe them. Then, if they still don't want to be "civilized" send in your armies.
Quote from: steve58 on November 20, 2012, 10:27:35 AM
This thread caught my eye and forced me to dig out my old Imperialism II CD just to see if it'd load/play on Windows 7 (Pro, 64-bit, SP1)...and it does! :) ...or at least seems to so far, haven't messed with it more than loading and firing up a game, but no crashes. Something to mess with over the long weekend...
While confined to my laptop during the hurricane, I revisited Imperialism II for a couple of days. What a great game!
Every time I play it, I wish we could pass legislation requiring all game designers to study it.
1. The interface is clean and everything is interconnected.
2. You research something, you get to build it. You build it, it produces tangible product. If you build a lumber mill, it's so much more satisfying to get wood instead of a 0.000375% increase in some hidden production value. (I wish the Paradox guys had been awake during Imperialism class.)
2. The game elements are simple but challenging: six or so commodities, two of this makes one of that, and Worker A needs this food and Work B that food. Simple. But really hard to fulfill over the course of game - just when you're ready to take off, some critical shortage always creeps up on you. (Compare to Paradox games. In EUIII, for example, is there a single commodity that you really NEED? Apart from tiny, largely invisible increases in income, why trade at all?)
3. Same with the transport system. Developed a nice gold mine overseas? Great, now all you have to do is transport the gold back home. But, wait, you need those same ships for trade. Or that grand invasion you've been planning. You suddenly need more ships, which means you suddenly need more cloth, which means you suddenly need more cotton....which is also overseas, which means you need more ships.... (Again, I'm talking to you, Paradox. A game mechanic, if well conceived, can be very simple and still very challenging.)
4. I even like the combat (though I may be in the minority on this). Each unit plays a specific role. Tactics actually matter. And I get to do it myself. (Instead of just watching sprites stand on the map stabbing each other (for weeks!). Another Paradox staple.)
5. Finally, turned-based beats RTS for strategy games. (RTS, with its emphasis on speed over thought, is too often just camouflage for a weak AI.)
My own view is that Paradox has taken us about as far as we can go in the spreadsheet as game genre. Here's hoping we can press the reset button a bit and revisit the elements that made games great in the beginning, before mega-computers spawned game bloat, when game designers had to search for elegant abstractions. That may be the best impact of the mobile platform. (I actually think CK2 is an improvement on the typical Paradox model, though they seem intent on adding yet more layers of questionable complexity with each DLC.)
Thanks. I needed to say this. I feel better now. ;)
Quote from: ArizonaTank on November 20, 2012, 11:58:01 AM
Quote from: Nefaro on November 20, 2012, 10:23:15 AM
I never played either Imperialism game for some odd reason. Probably because I never saw it for sale at the brick & mortars back then and didn't hear much about it until a long time later.
Highly recommend Imperialism I at GOG for $6. Graphics are dated of course, but the game really shines. Kind of like a lite version of Vicky II with some elements of transportation tycoon mixed in, but turn based. The manual is about 100 pages...so there is quite a bit of depth. You develop your empire through conquest or development. Pick your takeover targets based on their natural resources. Establish trading relations. Send in developers to buy up the resources. Bribe them. Then, if they still don't want to be "civilized" send in your armies.
I'll definitely check it out sometime. :)
That's an awesome game. About 10 years ago, I played on an Ultimate Frisbee team with 2 of the 3 lead folks from Frog City (who designed both I and II). The guy who helped plot out the game system (w/his brother, whom I didn't know) had a great head for gaming, and his wife was a kick-ass project manager. They eventually sold out to a larger company, but they had a good run for a while.
And Imperialism II was certainly their crown jewel. If only there had been a way to get the AI to be more responsible with money, it would've been perfect!!
I was always put off by the fact that the game used a randomly generated fictional world instead of a simulation of the real one.
Quote from: Queeg on November 20, 2012, 12:56:50 PM
Quote from: steve58 on November 20, 2012, 10:27:35 AM
This thread caught my eye and forced me to dig out my old Imperialism II CD just to see if it'd load/play on Windows 7 (Pro, 64-bit, SP1)...and it does! :) ...or at least seems to so far, haven't messed with it more than loading and firing up a game, but no crashes. Something to mess with over the long weekend...
While confined to my laptop during the hurricane, I revisited Imperialism II for a couple of days. What a great game!
Every time I play it, I wish we could pass legislation requiring all game designers to study it.
1. The interface is clean and everything is interconnected.
2. You research something, you get to build it. You build it, it produces tangible product. If you build a lumber mill, it's so much more satisfying to get wood instead of a 0.000375% increase in some hidden production value. (I wish the Paradox guys had been awake during Imperialism class.)
2. The game elements are simple but challenging: six or so commodities, two of this makes one of that, and Worker A needs this food and Work B that food. Simple. But really hard to fulfill over the course of game - just when you're ready to take off, some critical shortage always creeps up on you. (Compare to Paradox games. In EUIII, for example, is there a single commodity that you really NEED? Apart from tiny, largely invisible increases in income, why trade at all?)
3. Same with the transport system. Developed a nice gold mine overseas? Great, now all you have to do is transport the gold back home. But, wait, you need those same ships for trade. Or that grand invasion you've been planning. You suddenly need more ships, which means you suddenly need more cloth, which means you suddenly need more cotton....which is also overseas, which means you need more ships.... (Again, I'm talking to you, Paradox. A game mechanic, if well conceived, can be very simple and still very challenging.)
4. I even like the combat (though I may be in the minority on this). Each unit plays a specific role. Tactics actually matter. And I get to do it myself. (Instead of just watching sprites stand on the map stabbing each other (for weeks!). Another Paradox staple.)
5. Finally, turned-based beats RTS for strategy games. (RTS, with its emphasis on speed over thought, is too often just camouflage for a weak AI.)
My own view is that Paradox has taken us about as far as we can go in the spreadsheet as game genre. Here's hoping we can press the reset button a bit and revisit the elements that made games great in the beginning, before mega-computers spawned game bloat, when game designers had to search for elegant abstractions. That may be the best impact of the mobile platform. (I actually think CK2 is an improvement on the typical Paradox model, though they seem intent on adding yet more layers of questionable complexity with each DLC.)
Thanks. I needed to say this. I feel better now. ;)
Have you ever actually played Victoria? Diffently have to balance resources, goods and needs in that game.
Quote from: OJsDad on November 20, 2012, 04:40:07 PM
Quote from: Queeg on November 20, 2012, 12:56:50 PM
Quote from: steve58 on November 20, 2012, 10:27:35 AM
This thread caught my eye and forced me to dig out my old Imperialism II CD just to see if it'd load/play on Windows 7 (Pro, 64-bit, SP1)...and it does! :) ...or at least seems to so far, haven't messed with it more than loading and firing up a game, but no crashes. Something to mess with over the long weekend...
While confined to my laptop during the hurricane, I revisited Imperialism II for a couple of days. What a great game!
Every time I play it, I wish we could pass legislation requiring all game designers to study it.
1. The interface is clean and everything is interconnected.
2. You research something, you get to build it. You build it, it produces tangible product. If you build a lumber mill, it's so much more satisfying to get wood instead of a 0.000375% increase in some hidden production value. (I wish the Paradox guys had been awake during Imperialism class.)
2. The game elements are simple but challenging: six or so commodities, two of this makes one of that, and Worker A needs this food and Work B that food. Simple. But really hard to fulfill over the course of game - just when you're ready to take off, some critical shortage always creeps up on you. (Compare to Paradox games. In EUIII, for example, is there a single commodity that you really NEED? Apart from tiny, largely invisible increases in income, why trade at all?)
3. Same with the transport system. Developed a nice gold mine overseas? Great, now all you have to do is transport the gold back home. But, wait, you need those same ships for trade. Or that grand invasion you've been planning. You suddenly need more ships, which means you suddenly need more cloth, which means you suddenly need more cotton....which is also overseas, which means you need more ships.... (Again, I'm talking to you, Paradox. A game mechanic, if well conceived, can be very simple and still very challenging.)
4. I even like the combat (though I may be in the minority on this). Each unit plays a specific role. Tactics actually matter. And I get to do it myself. (Instead of just watching sprites stand on the map stabbing each other (for weeks!). Another Paradox staple.)
5. Finally, turned-based beats RTS for strategy games. (RTS, with its emphasis on speed over thought, is too often just camouflage for a weak AI.)
My own view is that Paradox has taken us about as far as we can go in the spreadsheet as game genre. Here's hoping we can press the reset button a bit and revisit the elements that made games great in the beginning, before mega-computers spawned game bloat, when game designers had to search for elegant abstractions. That may be the best impact of the mobile platform. (I actually think CK2 is an improvement on the typical Paradox model, though they seem intent on adding yet more layers of questionable complexity with each DLC.)
Thanks. I needed to say this. I feel better now. ;)
Have you ever actually played Victoria? Diffently have to balance resources, goods and needs in that game.
@OJsDad :)
Just got the impression - and I apologise if I'm wrong- that you think Imperialism II is Industrial Age - it's not. It covers approx 1492 to about 1800ish. If you want the Victorian/Industrial Age you need Imperialism I. If you get the CD you will need to set the compatibility settings on the setup file, otherwise you might have problems, as I did, when trying to get it to run in Win7. Both are good games, but have a different flavour. Graphics are hugely dated, but the game is fun.
Great news indeed! I love both Imperialism and Imperialism II (as you can tell from my avatar!). I wish someone would make a good Imperialism III.
If anyone would like more color in Imperialism I have a mod (http://www.aarcentral.com/phpbb3/viewtopic.php?f=16&t=5&sid=0afda71a722176d45b9adcef74129d08) that brightens things up a bit. There are two options but I think the second post is the better one.
Quote from: OJsDad on November 20, 2012, 04:40:07 PM
Have you ever actually played Victoria? Diffently have to balance resources, goods and needs in that game.
My comments mostly were about Imp 2, but most of them apply equally to Imp.
Yes, I've played Victoria 1 and 2. I liked the the first one; the second one not so much. Lots of reasons for that, but there's one in particular that I think illustrates the comparison to Imperialism very well. In Imperialism, you have to constantly tweak your production and trade, but it's very easy to do as a matter of game mechanics - you can do the whole thing from two inter-connected screens. In Victoria 2, you do production province by province - and trade is so complicated that 99% of people simply automate it.
I play Imperialism. I typically watch Victoria 2 play itself.
There's still a website dedicated to Imperialism: The Daily Imperialist (http://thedailyimperialist.net/)
^Nice find! Thanks for sharing :D
Quote from: Queeg on November 20, 2012, 06:42:14 PM
I play Imperialism. I typically watch Victoria 2 play itself.
Sad...but true for me as well....
So.. is Imperialism II owned by the same entity right now?
If so, I'd expect they're just milking some sales for the first one before releasing the second, amiright? Because it sounds like #2 was a notable improvement the way everyone asks about it when the first one is mentioned.
Not sure why this topic got locked, but I'm unlocking it.
Sorry for any inconvenience.
I liked playing Imperialism back in the day. The only problem I had with the game was instantly resolving the battles. I remember having a massive army and attacking with it. I didn't want to play through the battle manually so I let the AI resolve it. I lost. EVERY TIME! I suspect the AI was putting my artillery in front and blocking off my other forces from even taking part in the battle. I played it out manually and won easily.
You have been warned.
Quote from: LongBlade on November 21, 2012, 08:06:07 PM
Not sure why this topic got locked, but I'm unlocking it.
Sorry for any inconvenience.
I was wondering myself...
Seems like i will have to get this game too... :o
Funny fact..
The feature list on the back of the Imperialism II box is rather identical to the sales pitch text we showed their publisher back when we tried to get a publisher for eu1.
Quote from: Johan on November 22, 2012, 07:46:53 AM
Funny fact..
The feature list on the back of the Imperialism II box is rather identical to the sales pitch text we showed their publisher back when we tried to get a publisher for eu1.
Sorry Johan, but i couldn't care less at least now after so many years :o
Quote from: Greybriar on November 21, 2012, 11:20:49 PM
I liked playing Imperialism back in the day. The only problem I had with the game was instantly resolving the battles. I remember having a massive army and attacking with it. I didn't want to play through the battle manually so I let the AI resolve it. I lost. EVERY TIME! I suspect the AI was putting my artillery in front and blocking off my other forces from even taking part in the battle. I played it out manually and won easily.
You have been warned.
I played a lot of Imperialism myself and had the same thing happen to me. Autoresolve = autolose. Good game otherwise, just be prepared for some battles to drag on once you have a decent military in play.