John D. Giorgis wrote:
> At 11:08 AM 1/17/02 -0800 Jeffrey Miller wrote:
>
>>No comparison for me. I really didn't like AC terribly much; I
>>appreciated the games theory improvement made in the game, and liked the
>>storyline attatched to game play idea, but I found, in the end, that
>>since I have no space of reference to their made up future technical
>>advances that I had a hard time deciding if building a creche or a
>>holodeck was better, or whether I should be researching Nanotubes or
>>Cryolasers. Also, I disliked the entire "munchkin your own army" idea
>>contained within the Design-A-Unit section - not only did I get left in
>>the dust in higher difficulty levels if I didn't optimize every last bit
>>of my military units, but it was buggy and crashe prone.
>>
>
> I'm in the same boat, and had the same problem with Master of Orion. All
> those future technologies just don't inspire me in the same way as the real
> thing, and watching the vast scope of history unfold before me.
I'm surprised to find to people on a science fiction oriented list
that aren't inspired by future technologies in a game. 8^(
--
Doug
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.zo.com/~brighto
"Labor is prior to, and independent of, capital. Capital is only the
fruit of labor, and could never have existed if labor had not first
existed. Labor is the superior of capital, and deserves much the
higher consideration." A. Lincoln's First Annual Message to
Congress, December 3, 1861.
