Homeworld: Deserts of Kharak

[Gusington]

Thanks for posting

[SirAndrewD]

This isn't what I expected when Gearbox acquired the Homeworld IP.

Reminds me of how Aliens Colonial Marines wasn't what I expected when Gearbox acquired the Aliens IP. 

Passing.

[Jarhead0331]

This isn't what I expected when Gearbox acquired the Homeworld IP.

Reminds me of how Aliens Colonial Marines wasn't what I expected when Gearbox acquired the Aliens IP. 

Passing.

You would be mistaken if you think this release is anything along similar lines to Aliens Colonial Marines. You're not spiting anyone other than yourself by writing this one off.

[SirAndrewD]

You would be mistaken if you think this release is anything along similar lines to Aliens Colonial Marines. You're not spiting anyone other than yourself by writing this one off.

I'll give it a look.  I just lost more than a little trust in Gearbox with A:CM and I felt pretty strongly that Homeworld should stay Homeworld (ie Space). 

I won't refuse a good game if it's actually good.  I'm just a bit skeptical.

[Jarhead0331]

You would be mistaken if you think this release is anything along similar lines to Aliens Colonial Marines. You're not spiting anyone other than yourself by writing this one off.

I'll give it a look.  I just lost more than a little trust in Gearbox with A:CM and I felt pretty strongly that Homeworld should stay Homeworld (ie Space). 

I won't refuse a good game if it's actually good.  I'm just a bit skeptical.

I get that. But they shouldn't be criticized for trying something new, especially since it works. Yes, its not in space...its in a desert, but it is still VERY much Homeworld.

[SirAndrewD]

You would be mistaken if you think this release is anything along similar lines to Aliens Colonial Marines. You're not spiting anyone other than yourself by writing this one off.

I'll give it a look.  I just lost more than a little trust in Gearbox with A:CM and I felt pretty strongly that Homeworld should stay Homeworld (ie Space). 

I won't refuse a good game if it's actually good.  I'm just a bit skeptical.

I get that. But they shouldn't be criticized for trying something new, especially since it works. Yes, its not in space...its in a desert, but it is still VERY much Homeworld.

No one will claim I didn't give it a fair shake.  Even if that means I put a bullet in it in the end. 

I will admit, I love the adherence to the lore.   They took a few blurbs from the Homeworld 1 manual and made a game.  I'll give it a chance at least on that I guess. 

I just feel that this is SO safe.  Especially compared to expanding on the 3D concept of the old Homeworld Engine. 

[JasonPratt]

Ditto. They aren't trying something new; it feels a lot like a regression. It might be a very nicely made regression, but it still feels like a regression.

[Jarhead0331]

Ditto. They aren't trying something new; it feels a lot like a regression. It might be a very nicely made regression, but it still feels like a regression.

Have you played it? Its a "regression" why exactly? Because it takes place on a planet and not in space. So yeah, there is no "z" axis. Instead, you have terrain features that matter. Its ground combat instead of space combat. You may not like it, but that is not a reason to knock it as a step backward. There are things I don't like and feel can be improved, but its still a great addition to the series.

[TacticalWargames]

For me I found it to fast and to much of a hectic click fest from the get go. I just don't get RTS games, esp with base or unit buildings aspects.

[mikeck]

I just picked this game up. Is there a manual I'm missing? I see an "expedition guide" sold as a DLC...but normally steam games have a downloadable manual

[Jarhead0331]

Did you do the tutorial? There really is not that much more to it.

[mikeck]

Not yet. I will. Just curious if I was missing it. I remember the homeworld Manual with details on the ships and such

[GDS_Starfury]

the Homeworld manual was one of the last great manuals for a game.   :-\

[JasonPratt]

Ditto. They aren't trying something new; it feels a lot like a regression. It might be a very nicely made regression, but it still feels like a regression.

Have you played it? Its a "regression" why exactly?

Because it takes place on a planet and not in space, so there is no "z" axis.

Because it takes place on a planet and not in space. So yeah, there is no "z" axis.

That's why it's a regression, exactly. ;)

Suppose someone started with this game (since it's an immediate prequel to Homeworld), and then went from this into Homeworld. Wouldn't that be a progression? An obviously obvious progression? An amazing progression, for which all of us who played Homeworld were so impressed (having played standard RTS games for years before then)?

So going from Homeworld back to this is... not a regression exactly, how?

Instead, you have terrain features that matter.

As in many RTSes from Total Annihilation onwards, including some notable ones (e.g. TAnni) made years before Homeworld.

I'm not saying that makes it a bad game, or even a bad RTS. I haven't played it, and I heard good things from people who have. But neither am I rushing to pick it up. Whereas, I am thinking about playing Homeworld again. (And H2 which I never got around to.)

Its ground combat instead of space combat. You may not like it, but that is not a reason to knock it as a step backward.

Except that it is a step backward, which is really all I was saying: of course they shouldn't be criticized for trying something new, but they AREN'T trying something new.

Now, you could argue instead that they shouldn't be criticized for NOT trying something new, and playing it safe instead. Especially since it might be rather hard to try something as new as Homeworld was. I might even agree with that. But I'm not going to give them a pass for "trying something new" when they pretty obviously didn't. They took a page of plot from the Homeworld manual and made a competent and beautiful but standard RTS from it.

Of course, if they had made a perfectly designed and implemented standard RTS, then...

There are things I don't like and feel can be improved...

...uh, I guess that would have been fine, too.  >:D

...but its still a great addition to the series.

Eh, okay, everyone else who has played it so far thinks so, too. I'll probably get it someday. But not for it's own sake. Only as a standard RTS prequel campaign before starting Homeworld.

[Jarhead0331]

Whatever, Jason. You want to argue about not liking a game you don't have, be my guest. I'm 4 hours in and loving the hell out of it, so go ahead. Cut off your nose to spite your face. You're the one missing out. I'm not going to waste my time arguing about it.

The game is a key part of the Homeworld lore. It tells the story about where the entire Homeworld series comes from. Its an important release for Homeworld fans. What you call a "regression" I simply call trying something new. You do always seem to be a glass half empty type of guy, anyway.