EDBIS preview of Lionheart

[Saint_Proverbius]

<strong>[ -> Preview]</strong>

I just spotted this <a href="http://www.edbis.com/Articles/DeepInsig ... preview</a> for <a href="http://lionheart.blackisle.com/">Lionheart</a> that was posted by <A href="http://edbis.com/">EDBIS</a>. It's really short, poorly written, and they even bothered to give the game a <b>rating</b>! That's right kiddies, without ever actually having played the game, they gave it a <b>Four Lightning Bolt rating</b>. Wow!Here's some of the lubbin':<blockquote>All in all I'm pretty anxious and excited to get my hands on Lionheart and see whether it is as good as the Infinity Engine games. And everyone who at least is a bit interested in those should try it out too as I'm sure that the story part and the game play are pretty cool. The only disadvantage maybe the graphics that don't look too stunning but they make up for that lack of spectacularity with low system requirements so that all players can have a play, not only those with the high- end systems.</blockquote>You have to love some of these previews.This was spotted at <A href="http://rpgdot.com/">RPGDot</a>.

[Dan]

All in all I'm pretty anxious and excited to get my hands on Lionheart and see whether it is as good as the Infinity Engine games.

That pretty much says it all...


Comparing the game to an IE game and saying it just might not be as great as those games just killed any hope I had left for it.

[Saint_Proverbius]

Well, keep in mind, the moron who wrote the preview have never played the game. I wouldn't be surprised if this wasn't written based on reading a few other previews and a few interviews.

Until a press preview version of the game is sent out, you really can't trust previews.

[James]

I just looked at their site. I went to game profiles where, under F, they list FOT but not FO or FO2.

This is from a site which proclaims itself "Your RPG site".

Blargh!

[Strap]

::Caugh::

sorry, but this is getting to look more and more like Diablo2...
im done with that game

[Saint_Proverbius]

Diablo won't let you sneak/talk your way through the game. The current design for Lionheart currently does allow this.

[Constipated BladeRunner]

Yeah.
Iam just curious if they can pull it off the rt though. Dont care how the rest of the game is.
This could be the 2 instance in gaming history where a classic tb system is used really, really well in an rt game.

[Saint_Proverbius]

Starfleet Command being the first?

[VasikkA]

Most of the previews are basically the same thing. Exactly same info, just in different order. The only previews I'm really looking for are RPG Dot's and RPG Vault's, at least they offer some new info.

[Constipated BladeRunner]

I was thinking BG, to be honest Saint.

[Gimp Mask]

[Saint_Proverbius]

I was thinking BG, to be honest Saint.

BG has a lot of flaws in it's TB. Of course, IWD2 will take the cake in terms of fucking up the rules due to it's real time nature because there are some 3e rules that don't translate well in to real time at all. Combat Reflexes and Attacks of Opportunity being two of the big boys there. IWD2 won't have either.

3e was designed to be more tactical in nature, and that's just something you can't do in real time.

[Gimp Mask]

[James]

I thought Fallout Tactics had the perfect RT TB? It's even called Continuous Turn Based... I mean, how flawed can that be?

Indeed, it must be uber l33t!


RT TB = an oxymoron.

Therefore CTB = an oxymoron.

[Doyle]

CTB was just an attempt to appeal to both real-time cattle and FO fans. In my opinion, it failed.

[Gimp Mask]

[Dan]

CTB was just an attempt to appeal to both real-time cattle and FO fans. In my opinion, it failed.

I dont think this game failed because of it's combat system (I'm talking about the FO TB fans, of course), but because it wasn't fallout (this has been discussed a lot of times and you know what I mean).

The FOT TB system was OK but the game wasn't.

The CTB system wasn't ok but I dont think that a full RT system could be better (as I hate both).