Questions for people new to the Homeworld games (please read and respond)

[dmille]

I'd first like to welcome all of the newcomers to these forums and the Homeworld / Relic community. HWUniverse.com has some questions we'd like you to answer, both for an upcoming article we're writing, and so the devs and other fansite administrators can read the responses.

First: If you're new to the Homeworld series of games, does the HW2 demo make you want to buy Homeworld and / or Homeworld : Cataclysm?

Second: What do you like most about the Homeworld 2 demo?

Third: What do you like least about the Homeworld 2 demo?

Finally, please respond to the poll above and respond below or suggest an additonal poll option if needed.

[protmind]

For me the improved pause function is really cool. I'm mainly a turn-ased guy, and on the previous games you could only do certain things while the game was paused. I'll miss pilot view and the time compression from HW:C

[^MeM^]

First: If you're new to the Homeworld series of games, does the HW2 demo make you want to buy Homeworld and / or Homeworld : Cataclysm?

I'd Have to say it has because I'm now wanting to know more about the HW story, and exactly what happened in the previous games.

Second: What do you like most about the Homeworld 2 demo?

Best thing I liked about the demo was the inclusion of both 2 Single player and multi Player maps, allowing me to see both sides of the game. Also the single player wasn't 2 missions halfway through the game spoiling the story-line for me.

Third: What do you like least about the Homeworld 2 demo?

The Multi player Lobby.

[dark86]

ill tell you what happened in HW and HW:C.......

...it kicked off big time!


;-)

[Leiawen]

I've only just purchased Homeworld as I want to play through the backstory before Homeworld 2 is released.

So, yes. HW2 did make me purchase HW1 I suppose...however, the major reason is that my local Blockbuster has a Sale on, and is selling Homeworld new at £1.98 a copy! Thats about $3 US.

Pretty sweet.

~Leia

[Lucky]

My main reason why I chose "yes" option, is because it showed me that the steep minimum requirements mentioned in hte readme and on the net have nothing to do with reality.

[dmille]

Those of you who picked the option saying that the demo convinced you not to buy HW2: please provide some explanation below - we'd be interested in reading it.

[GeezerGeezer]

Sadly no, I'm not going to buy it. I prefer driving or flying sims. I thought it was
a spaceflight game! That is, I thought it was a space pilot combat sim like
Wing Commander or Freespace series. Oops.

So immediately I was ready to not like it. And I don't, it's not my thing. To me
it's an RTS and I'm not a fan of *Craft's, or C&C's, or Dark Reign's, or
(blahblahblah)

That's not the point: It is probably the best demo I've ever seen.

Because of the intro, I figured I'd try the tutorial. Because of the tutorial, I tried
the first mission. And because of that, the next. It carried me through it even
though I didn't want to play it that much. That is disgusting capitalist pig
marketing at it's finest! I was compelled to try it completely, to make sure I fully
understood what the game was about. Did I mention that I didn't want to?

A lot of thought went into that demo, from defaulting to low res and gfx so all
pre- '97 machines wouldn't lock down to 2fps to that beautiful intro movie -->
live game engine crossfade that anyone running 1280 or 1600 on Full is still
looking for their lower jaw.

I don't know if Vivendi / Sierra marketing machines requested such things or if
Relic just knows how to make a damn good demo. Either way - outstanding.

What an excellent demo.

[Retroboy]

Geezer, that is one of the most rewarding posts I have seen on this forum in some time. Someone should frame it and mount it on Relic's wall of fame.

Relic dev's - take note.

-- Retro

[Athenor]

Geezer, that is an awesome post.

However, it should be pointed out that the demo really is just stripped-down Homeworld -- in fact, other than the obligatory ripping out of things that won't be in the full game, the demo for Homeworld techincally had more "specific" things to it. There was an initial demo that cut you off with an excellent cliffhanger that made you -really- want to know what happens next (unfortunately, mission 2 of HW2 doesn't do that nearly as well, IMHO), and so on and so forth. Then, there was an -extended- HW demo, that included a bastard of a 5th level that was never in the original game, and was a monster, diffuculty wise.

HW2 rocks, to be sure. But compliment Relic for making a game that can stand on its own, complete or otherwise... And not some cheap demo like some I've seen lately for FPS's and such.

And to think, the best is yet to come.

It's a shame you don't like RTS's, though. :flamer:

Athenor

[MaxxQ]

Ya know what's funny about your post Geezer? I was the same way when the original Homeworld came out. The only games I had played prior to that were Freespace: The Great War, one of the WC games, and Independence War. I knew HW was an RTS, which never really interested me. I didn't really think I could get into it, but being a Yes fan, I had bought their The Ladder cd and there was some cd-rom stuff on it, so I took a look.

Well, at that point, I figured any game that had Yes associated with it couldn't be too bad, so I gave the demo a try and that cliffhanger mentioned above caught me hook, line, and sinker - with a net for good measure.

The really funny thing is that, except for the Homeworld series, I STILL don't play RTS'. I just can't get the hang of them and their stories don't grab me by the throat and pull me in like HW did. I bought, played for a few days, uninstalled, and sold Starcraft and Earth:2150. Just couldn't get into them. My daughter's boyfriend even tried to get me interested in the Age of XXXXX games and I was just "Let me have a couple destroyers and some ICF's and I'll be okay." I even really tried the RoN demo, but even aside from the cursor problems (blinking on and off every second or so), I just didn't like it.

[RobbSLS]

I think many people who won't like HW2 will be like Geezer.

Lets face it RTS games just aren't for everyone. Not just because they are difficult to play and very complex but just because for some people they dont give them same action and immersion that RPG's/sims/ FPS games give them.

BTW. Congrats to Geezer on a mature and positive post. Even if you don't care for HW 2 please join us in the General discussion(where the topic is seldom HW2) if you like.

[rolfski]

First: If you're new to the Homeworld series of games, does the HW2 demo make you want to buy Homeworld and / or Homeworld : Cataclysm?

I'm not new but the demo certainly convinced me.

Second: What do you like most about the Homeworld 2 demo?

Kick ass multiplayer: a lot of fun, very strategic and fortunately not a clickfest

Third: What do you like least about the Homeworld 2 demo?

Too much of the time is played from the strategic overlay, also minor interface issues

[Bloodmoon]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First: If you're new to the Homeworld series of games, does the HW2 demo make you want to buy Homeworld and / or Homeworld : Cataclysm?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have Homeworld and Homeworld Cataclysm already...

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Second: What do you like most about the Homeworld 2 demo?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The graphics of course. And the way bombers and interceptors make nice attack runs. Torpedos look pretty good too.

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Third: What do you like least about the Homeworld 2 demo?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well the interface needs some getting used to, I think the buils/research/launch screens are to big (even on my 17" LCD Monitor).
Secondly the subsystems that don't explode. They magically appear and dissapear, but maybe this is different in the final version of the game.

[Demonic]

First:
I have had homeworld since about 4 months after its release (feb 2000 ish), and i got cata when it came out.

Second:
Its the sequel to homeworld.
The improved interface, which i really like.

Third:
Its the sequel to Cataclysm which i thought was a disgrace.
I miss the not being allowed to choose when to hyper at the end of missions.

[Beeblebrox]

1) already have hw( bought HW in the last 1/2 of 2000)/cata (which was crappy)
2)the graphics are awsome, some nice ideas for ships
3)the interface (i made a thread about how it sucked) and the limitation on missions/ships, although i expected a limit, as it is a demo
i would have bought HW2 regardless (i buy anything, e.g. i just saw HW and said, hey that looks like a good concept and bought it there for $20, i have bags of $$) but i hope the demo will convert many, many people
p.s. (has anyone noticed i always use a ps) didn't the HW demo let you build everthing except the HC (yes i downloaded the HW demo after lending the disk to an amigo)

[TheLegacy]

First: If you're new to the Homeworld series of games, does the HW2 demo make you want to buy Homeworld and / or Homeworld : Cataclysm?

I already own Homeworld 1 and Cataclysm. However, if I didn't, I surely would of.

Second: What do you like most about the Homeworld 2 demo?

The storyline drew me in, making me think "WHAT'S NEXT?!!", the graphics were amazing, the interface was better in some ways (though too big, and hard to use because of it. At least it doesn't take away your tactical view), and the controls are easy to use, though I had a tendency to give the wrong commands.

Third: What do you like least about the Homeworld 2 demo?

What I disliked the most about the demo (and probably the game, unless this problem is fixed before then) was that researching is not nearly as flexable as the original, and the building is too stringent (IE: Can't build frigates the same time as fighters, or can't build a carrier while building fighters. This is strange because the Mothership uses three different bays, the right side one that builds corvettes/frigates, the fighter hatch, and the left side capital ship building area). If there were three different queues instead of just one for building, it would make building much easier, because I was struggling to do everything at once, like you could in the original Homeworld. I agree with the idea of shrinking the number of queues you could have running at once, but one is way too little. However, the component idea is a good idea, but I wish asforementioned that there were visible losses of those sections. Each component should be allowed one queue (IE one fighter, one corvette, one frigate, one capital).

A minor quirk is the fact that the multiplayer level parameters are way too thin. They're not nearly as diverse as the original Homeworlds. As well, I seemed to have a tendency of sending units to places by accident. If there are ways of thinning out that problem, then by all means. Another quirk is, why do we have to research the hyperspace module in multiplayer, when the mothership hyperspace's in initially? o_O

Overall however, it was an amazing experience from one end to the other.

EDIT: Almost forgot. The fact that you can't assign formations for squads and such is a huge letdown. If this is because I don't know the commands for it, then please tell me them.

RE-EDIT: OK, maybe it does. However there aren't many options...

[Beeblebrox]

Originally posted by TheLegacy


I already own Homeworld 1 and Cataclysm. However, if I didn't, I surely would of.

you shurley would *have* you may say of, but dont type it, sorry, thats my pet peeve, grrr.

[dmille]

Beeblebrox: Please refrain from correcting the grammar of other posters. Especially when you can't spell "surely." Consider that a pet peeve of mine.

[Enterprize]

Originally posted by dmille
Beeblebrox: Please refrain from correcting the grammar of other posters. Especially when you can't spell "surely." Consider that a pet peeve of mine.

I was gonna say that but then I didnt....

[TheLegacy]

I'm curious, do these replies get noted by the Relic team, for upgrades and patches for Homeworld 2? Some of my points I would like to have a look-at.

[dmille]

The Relic team does browse these forums from time to time.

[Mr-e-Man]

I'm curious as to why people who already own Homeworld and Cataclysm are responding to a question clearly marked for "people new to Homeworld games."

[TheLegacy]

I'm not sure. I didn't notice actually.

However, we should be allowed to comment, especially since HW 2 is so drastically different, yet the same though, from the original.

[sub]

first
n/a

second
Everything.

Third
If I had to choose my fav game based on ONLY the multiplayer, I'd choose cata first and hw second as the best. The thing I liked about cata and hw was that it was such an ART. Every aspect of the game required a lot of time and patience to perfect, and the execution was in a sense a form of art, and I admired that. For those of you who play cata, some examples include: CS maneuvering, fighter battles, frigate battles, misolyte micromanagement, CQ primary-RUpatch money management, aiming siege shots and so much more. For those who played hw, swarming, 3walling, caps, etc. They were so FUN to do, no matter how complicated they may seem!

This is what disappointed me in HW2 demo. It was too simple. The ms is not as flexible as the cata CS. Fighter battles can never be as fun as they were in cata because of the strike group thingy. Ships dont spin, roll, etc. They move too quickly! You cant really swarm the way you could in hw because its not as flexible. In hw and cata the possibilites were ENDLESS. In hw2, I feel so limited with what I can do with my fighters.

I suppose this was done to make it simple for the general public, but that was one of the things I really liked about the saga...it wasnt for everyone. Only a small group of people who had the time and patience to learn the art of playing these wonderful games really would. And that is what I really felt about the consistent players of both games. They werent mindless CS players. They were mature people, smart people, people I like to hang out with. And when I signed on WON, I felt at home...as corny as it may sound. It was like one big happy family. We all knew each other, everyone was every other person's friend. I like to think that the way the WON lobby was designed had something to do with it. No offense, but gamespy just sucks. Sure its great for gaming, but its not really a welcoming cozy environment. Not a great place for a community like WON was. HW2 is more like a mainstream game, which isnt necessarily a BAD thing, in fact better for sierra, but not really one of the things that attracted me personally.

[Atreides]

Well said Farter, I agree.

The learning curve for both HW and Cata were steep, but the game was great and so I stuck with them until I became proficient in the execution of strategy and micromanagement.

I agree that HW2 was probably designed more for a broud swath of the 13-19 y/o fps crowd, as opposed to us in the community. After all, the more ppl who buy and play the game, the more money the respective companies make. A parallel might be made with music: many of the best songs by artists are never heard on the top 40 stations, as they don't have that broad based commercial mega-buck appeal. Thus they are relegated to those of us who search them out far and wide ie:many of Roger Water's solo work after he left Pink Floyd, most don't even know who he is.

I understand why they streamlined the gameplay and interface, though I am somewhat dissapointed in losing the degree of micromanagement I enjoyed in both HW and Cata. Maybe a future expansion or (modder?) might put back some of what was lost.

[kmas]

First:
No, it made me try the Cataclysm demo, but it only ran in sw-mode.

Second:
- interface
- atmosphere

Third:
- low limit of players in multiplayer mode (8/12 would be better )
- no control over friendly units like in wc3

[Skandalos]

I never played other HW games before. My true soul is first person action but by chance I went totally addicted to Battlezone 2 which is both 3D fps and rts. Now after many years playing BZ2 Im finally bored of it and looking for other new 3D strategy stuff.

Homeworld was always looking good to me so I recently d/l´ed the HW2 demo. The SP missions including the cut scenes were awesome. The story caught me instantly.

But I soon realized that 3D in HW means mainly 2D with a retarded 3rd dimension. Another big drawback was that in game I can hardly enjoy the marvellous graphics because when I effectively want to command I need a distance that leaves all objects very small.

After finishing the SP missions I went to the player vs CPU missions. On easy I had no problems to win but on hard I obviously need more info about controlling and commanding my units which the demo doesnt give me.

Last but not least there is only one voice for the many different units. In BZ2 each unit has its own voice which helps a lot in commanding and gives a much more dense atmosphere. The devs really should consider this!

So far the demo didnt convince me of HW2, mainly because of the weakness of the 3D system.

[TheLegacy]

I bought the full version of HW2...and to answer the question, yes there are multiple voices for units, and I presume that there is only one in the demo, because they want to keep the download smaller. As well, they took out quite a few units and upgrades out of the demo. Actually, about 35% of the Higarian force is missing in the demo version, including Marine Frigates, Battlecruisers, Destroyers, Shipyards, hyperspace sensors, increased buildrate, upgrades to level two, and much, much more. In fact, there are about nine modules you can add...instead of just being able to fit every single one of them on the mothership.

I should also note that the campaign is freeking hard. :o

EDIT: I should add that IMO, this game is way different from HW1, and is very hard to learn if you base the game on the original. I feel that there's something big missing from the game, yet I can't put a finger on it. Maybe because it isn't such an art. Maybe because of the lack of custom formations, and the fact that you can't add more than the preset amount of ships in a squadron. Maybe because of the buildqueues being merged (which is a very stupid thing to do in my opinion. It was a good idea, but horribly overreacted. It should be one queue/fighter, one queue/corvette, etc)...

I don't know. Anyway, it's a good game, but as said, there's something missing from the original. I sort of felt that too about Cata, but I didn't want to play the missions until I beat HW1's missions. I didn't like Cata's story in a sense.

[rpgfish]

1: I really want cataclysm and the demo of hw2 keeps screaming: 'finish hw and hw:c!'
2: The improved graphics and research/build menus.
3: The demo has very few ships and not much to show that the complete version has a variety of capitals and everything. Then everythng everyone has said so far on 3.