Sure it have issues [maybe ‘parts’ of the issues I know of], but I thought that ‘NO’ games [excluding consoles, I think - as I can’t imagine if they were… never have a console before] are particularly effective when they just first launched. Unless the developers were starting to give up, there are always hopes for bits of pieces of perfection somewhere along the line. Just give them the time they need, surely they will come back for a big, great news as they have always.
Take an example of ‘X’-series games. Back in the day, they require of sort-of 6 - 9 months before actual updates were out. Both this and that games have completely different roles, but both have similar problems like this one: formations for space ships. But most people [at least, most people I know of] were capable to bring those issue, into a completely different gameplay: If you can’t do ‘this’, how about ‘that’-sort of things.
Still, despite of what I read on this thread from the beginning, I’m having great difficulty when reading the word ‘Multiplayer’…
I thought that most Homeworld games aren’t designed, nor built for such [unless you want to play interlocal LAN, instead of playing world-wide]. I myself was simply playing in Skirmish for more 10 years trying to justify my own strategies [which I could never cope over] against multiple CPUs. But since the inroduction of editing tools, things have gone haywire to the points were I completely lost the game before I can even begin the directions I want to play it.
So, what’s different with the multiplayer?
Is it because that some people only play multiplayer games that are perfect, right from the get-go?
Un-officially, I do understand a little bit - officially… I don’t get it at all.
In my opinion [alone, maybe], if I can’t do what I did back in the day of the Classics, I begin ‘what if I do that’ play, therefor change my strategy in its entirety. Aside from what people begin with ‘frigates are weak, and destroyers are slightly more than stronger [I didn’t write it, I just quote it]’, I think the GB-dev teams to even ‘thought’ to relive this game is more than just ‘epic’.
I mean, the entirety of Homeworld is ‘basically’ an epic singleplayer missions, each with a leveled-up challenges and stakes that require players to think ahead the plans that players will use on the late game. Pretty much that, and some want to test tactics’ effectiveness when used on Skirmish with multiple, banded-together CPUs against players alone, like what I’ve been doing for the late 15 years myself, even now. In my country [Indonesia, by the way] there were already some challenging events on how you play the HW-1R singleplayer missions using only all variants of fighters and corvettes, maximum 6 support frigates and 4 carriers, while all frigates and destroyers must be captured from enemy players. The winner takes a car worth of approx. 200-millions of Rupiah!
Not to mention that they themselves are old-way Homeworld players, and they didn’t have any particular inconveniences [that I know of… well, except for the way much higher processing power for a lifetime-guaranteed visual display based on a remastered Homeworld 1].
Oh I know… licensing issues are so frustrating >.< Lawyers are why we can’t have nice things…
those are more a simulator type of game than an FPS. However, never played them myself since they came out before my time ^^, but I play Mechwarrior Online (MWO) and it is nothing like a regular shooter