Alright Boyz, Sid Meier's Railroads First Impressions!!!

Abe Sargent · 10-17-2006, 10:05 PM

Just got my copy and I'm about to read the instruction manual over a hot bath and then play around with it some tonight. Anybody else with it? Anybody else try it out?

cartman · 10-17-2006, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anxiety

hot bath and then play around with it some tonight.

T...

M....

I....

Crapshoot · 10-17-2006, 10:07 PM

Nope- waiting to read reviews and what not, but I'm sure I'll pick it up soon anyway. Officially speaking, is it a successor of sorts to RT3 (which I loved) ?

cartman · 10-17-2006, 10:09 PM

I'll probably be picking this game up this week, along with FS:X.

Buccaneer · 10-17-2006, 10:09 PM

Cool, a virgin review. I had not read anything about the game so I'd be curious if they piratized it or learned the lesson from PopTop.

Noop · 10-17-2006, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anxiety

a hot bath and then play around with it some tonight. Anybody else with it? Anybody else try it out?

Nah I don't need a bath to play with it just a good porn site.

Craptacular · 10-17-2006, 10:24 PM

I'm guessing my P3-800 ain't enough to play Railroads.

spleen1015 · 10-17-2006, 10:50 PM

I got it today and I really like it. I didn't play any of the previous versions, so I can't speak to that.

I'm having some trouble working out my track layout, but overall I'm having a lot of fun. I'm sure my problems are due to inexperience.

I played the SW USA map twice and each time the resources were in different places. My starting location was in a different place, too.

I can see the expansion already. More resources and more maps!

cartman · 10-17-2006, 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spleen1015

I can see the expansion already. More resources and more maps!

I hope it is like Civ4, where the configuration is all in XML files, which allows 3rd party folks to customize to their heart's content.

Abe Sargent · 10-17-2006, 11:10 PM

I don;t like, from RRT3 to SMRR the change from needing to place things like Water Stations and oil, and engines needing these supplies, to no longer having these needs. Balancing track with those needs was a nice dynamic that has been removed. Ick.

Abe Sargent · 10-17-2006, 11:45 PM

Another thing RRT3 does better is finances with loans, more detailed stock, credit ratings, and so forth. In this, you own stock in lumps of 10% and you can buy or sell stock in those lumps between you and competitors. RRT3 is much more nuanced and detailed in this area.

Mizzou B-ball fan · 10-18-2006, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anxiety

Another thing RRT3 does better is finances with loans, more detailed stock, credit ratings, and so forth. In this, you own stock in lumps of 10% and you can buy or sell stock in those lumps between you and competitors. RRT3 is much more nuanced and detailed in this area.

Maybe I'm confused, but I thought this was a remake of the original Railroad Tycoon game? That's the way the stock was handled in the original game, so it certainly makes sense that it's done in that way in this game.

Ksyrup · 10-18-2006, 08:02 AM

I can't even fit in a bathtub, let alone enjoy a hot bath.

sachmo71 · 10-18-2006, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I can't even fit in a bathtub, let alone enjoy a hot bath.

have you tried letting people pee on you?

Warhammer · 10-18-2006, 08:35 AM

Was RRT3 that big of an improvement on RRT2?

Buccaneer · 10-18-2006, 08:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mizzou B-ball fan

Maybe I'm confused, but I thought this was a remake of the original Railroad Tycoon game? That's the way the stock was handled in the original game, so it certainly makes sense that it's done in that way in this game.

That was the only assumption and perception that I had - a remake of the original Sid Meier's RRT (just like SM Pirates). It shouldn't have any comparisons to the PopTop games - whether that's good or bad.

Swaggs · 10-18-2006, 08:38 AM

This sounds like a cool one. I'll have to pick it up soon.

Alan T · 10-18-2006, 08:58 AM

I picked up a copy of this last night and only tried it out for a bit before stopping for Law and Order shows on tv. So far my initial impression is that this doesn't feel like an improvement over RRT3 in any category and I'm disapointed.

Abe Sargent · 10-18-2006, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

That was the only assumption and perception that I had - a remake of the original Sid Meier's RRT (just like SM Pirates). It shouldn't have any comparisons to the PopTop games - whether that's good or bad.

It should have comparisons to me. The PopTop Games were developments of the original, with good ideas and good implementation. So far, this game is a step back. The stock market has very little detail at all - no splits, it's very unresponsive after purchases, no detail, no ability to issue more stock for quick cash, and so forth. Why have a stock market aspect of the game if it is going to be so simple - so streamlined? If this is an area that needs improvement from the original, then do so.

Now I'm not expecting it to be RRT3, but I don't see any harm in comparing it to an established standard game in the exact genre. I played through one scenario last night, and so far, I like RRT3 better. I'll play through a couple more tonight and see if that stays, but I'm betting the impression lasts.

If you can't make a game that is at least as good as a game released three years ago by a smaller company, that's a problem to me.

-Anxiety

Abe Sargent · 10-18-2006, 09:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan T

I picked up a copy of this last night and only tried it out for a bit before stopping for Law and Order shows on tv. So far my initial impression is that this doesn't feel like an improvement over RRT3 in any category and I'm disapointed.

I agree except for graphics. The graphics are better - it's a pretty game.

Alan T · 10-18-2006, 10:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anxiety

It should have comparisons to me. The PopTop Games were developments of the original, with good ideas and good implementation. So far, this game is a step back. The stock market has very little detail at all - no splits, it's very unresponsive after purchases, no detail, no ability to issue more stock for quick cash, and so forth. Why have a stock market aspect of the game if it is going to be so simple - so streamlined? If this is an area that needs improvement from the original, then do so.

Now I'm not expecting it to be RRT3, but I don't see any harm in comparing it to an established standard game in the exact genre. I played through one scenario last night, and so far, I like RRT3 better. I'll play through a couple more tonight and see if that stays, but I'm betting the impression lasts.

If you can't make a game that is at least as good as a game released three years ago by a smaller company, that's a problem to me.

-Anxiety

I didnt really buy it with the thought in mind that it was going to be built off of RRT3 or such.. I just guess I assumed since it was a new Railroad Tycoon game, it would give me some compelling reason to play it over RRT3 which has already been around a few years.

Right now, i just haven't found any reason that makes me say I would rather play it than a game already existing in the marketplace. I'm not trying to draw a direct comparison of it vs RRT3, just stating since I already have RRT3 buyin this game feels like a waste to me.

I'll probably play it some more this weekend to see if it grows on me, but so far I'm dissapointed.

Crapshoot · 10-18-2006, 10:06 AM

Ugh - if the economy model is dialed down rather than dialed up, I'm backing away from this - I liked the debt and stock modeling in RT3, and would have prefered something that expanded that, rather than curtailed it.

Abe Sargent · 10-18-2006, 10:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alan T

I didnt really buy it with the thought in mind that it was going to be built off of RRT3 or such.. I just guess I assumed since it was a new Railroad Tycoon game, it would give me some compelling reason to play it over RRT3 which has already been around a few years.

Right now, i just haven't found any reason that makes me say I would rather play it than a game already existing in the marketplace. I'm not trying to draw a direct comparison of it vs RRT3, just stating since I already have RRT3 buyin this game feels like a waste to me.

I'll probably play it some more this weekend to see if it grows on me, but so far I'm dissapointed.

I agree, I wasn't expecting an RRT3 clone, but I was expecting a game that had, at least, a similar amount of detail. It could have been detailed in different ways with different ideas - that'd be fine. It could focus more on industry, for example, with new options and ideas there - that'd be fine. It could be more focused on tech development with more of a Civ style research tree - that'd be fine. Whatever - I don't mind. But instead, it appears a weaker game after a scenario victory and two failures on a more difficult level.

AlanT, have you noticed a smaller number of goods on your maps? I remember just 10 or 15 goods (products) when I played SW US and NE US last night.

Coffee Warlord · 10-18-2006, 10:37 AM

Hell, I thought RRT3 was dumbed down by quite a bit. If this is actually MORE dumbed down, screw that.

cartman · 10-18-2006, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cartman

I hope it is like Civ4, where the configuration is all in XML files, which allows 3rd party folks to customize to their heart's content.

Can anyone who already has the game confirm this? If the possibility exists, hopefully there can be SevoMod like modifications created to enhance things.

Alan T · 10-18-2006, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anxiety

I agree, I wasn't expecting an RRT3 clone, but I was expecting a game that had, at least, a similar amount of detail. It could have been detailed in different ways with different ideas - that'd be fine. It could focus more on industry, for example, with new options and ideas there - that'd be fine. It could be more focused on tech development with more of a Civ style research tree - that'd be fine. Whatever - I don't mind. But instead, it appears a weaker game after a scenario victory and two failures on a more difficult level.

AlanT, have you noticed a smaller number of goods on your maps? I remember just 10 or 15 goods (products) when I played SW US and NE US last night.

The number of goods didnt jump out at me, but it kind of makes sense I guess. For the most part, everything seems a bit more simplified/streamlined. Its been a very long time since I played RRT3, so can't compare directly, but it felt like in almost every category there was less to work with.

Buccaneer · 10-18-2006, 05:58 PM

Sounds similar to the new Pirates. In of itself (and for a one-time play), it was a great game. When you think about replayability and would could have been (e.g., taking advantage of AI advancements/strategic elements/etc.), it is not. Sounds SM RRT falls in the same category. Thank god for the Civ franchise though.

Alan T · 10-18-2006, 08:21 PM

It informed me that my video card drivers were out of date and asked if I wanted to upgrade them. I chose to not let it upgrade my drivers for me automatically, but did it on my own from the official site.

I now can't even start the game. It crashes every time I load it up (I assume where it does the video driver check). Needless to say the game is not winning me over

About to cut my losses and win my time back on this one.

Warhammer · 10-18-2006, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Coffee Warlord

Hell, I thought RRT3 was dumbed down by quite a bit. If this is actually MORE dumbed down, screw that.

So I take it RRT2 is still the best of the bunch?

moriarty · 10-18-2006, 09:15 PM

Ugh, sounds like from the impressions here and in other threads they pretty much ignored any advancements / positive changes in RRT2 and RRT3 and just did a remake of the first one with fancy graphics (and some interface changes to simplify some things).

I was turned off by the lack of replay of Pirates, and I don't feel like getting burned again by going backwards in gameplay with this one. I think I'll be passing.

Crapshoot · 10-18-2006, 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by moriarty

Ugh, sounds like from the impressions here and in other threads they pretty much ignored any advancements / positive changes in RRT2 and RRT3 and just did a remake of the first one with fancy graphics (and some interface changes to simplify some things).

I was turned off by the lack of replay of Pirates, and I don't feel like getting burned again by going backwards in gameplay with this one. I think I'll be passing.

""""""""""". Thanks for the reviews guys - if this is "pretty" I'd rather go back to playing RRT3. Good enough graphically, and some semblance of a economic model.

Crapshoot · 10-18-2006, 10:09 PM

Fyi: First Review:

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...ds/review.html

bulletsponge · 10-18-2006, 10:33 PM

i preordered it. i never played RRT3 but did play RRT2

moriarty · 10-19-2006, 09:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Fyi: First Review:

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...ds/review.html

Here's the part that bothered me ...

"Sid Meier's Railroads! strikes a comfortable balance between a deep economic simulation and an accessible, streamlined empire-building game. People looking for the same level of micromanagement of Railroad Tycoon 3 might be disappointed with just how simplified Railroads! is, but there's still plenty of depth here to make it worth a look. This is also a good game for people who are new to tycoon-style games and just want to build a virtual model railroad without worrying about the minutiae of business management."

Maybe I'm paranoid, but I translate that as 'dumbing down' RRT3.

I. J. Reilly · 10-20-2006, 10:26 AM

All of the reviews and first impressions have me pretty excited about this game. I understand everybody’s worries, but more complicated doesn’t mean it’s a better game.

The time I have to play games has changed so much since I first started playing in-depth strategy games that I can’t really enjoy the great current games. I love Civ4 and can see that it’s a great game, but when I only have an hour or so at a time to play, and sometimes a week passes in between sessions, it doesn’t really work. It usually takes me close to an hour to figure out what my strategy was and what I was trying to do with all those armies.

So hopefully this is what I’ve been looking for, and hopefully it does well in the marketplace so that there will be other’s like it to follow.

spleen1015 · 10-20-2006, 10:40 AM

I am enjoying the game a lot. I want to play it all of the time.

Draft Dodger · 10-20-2006, 10:44 AM

sounds extremely disappointing

Crapshoot · 10-20-2006, 11:18 AM

DD, are you reviewing it for GameNikki, or is SA doing it?

Tasan · 10-20-2006, 08:56 PM

From the sounds of this, its more like the original than the two sequels, which to me is a good thing. I loved the beer 'n peanuts simplicity yet overall fun of the first one. The next two just seemed to complicate things too much.

Buccaneer · 10-20-2006, 09:14 PM

Not only that, I found RRT2 to be too linear and RRT1 more open ended. From what I've heard, RRT3 took out things that were basic to RRT2. But regarding this new release, I would like to hear about replayability.

hawk4669 · 10-20-2006, 09:45 PM

Let me preface my post by saying that I played RR Tycoon (the original), played RR Tycoon 2 (never got into it like I did the first), and completely missed the third.

That being said, I do like the simplicity of the new one. I guess I'm easy to please, but what I've seen of it so far has been fun. Been having trouble getting my trains to do what I want (my gold train bound for L.A. ended up somewhere near Yuma, AZ!)....but the more I dink with it, the more I enjoy it.

Cheers!

gstelmack · 10-21-2006, 09:53 AM

Has anyone who never played any of the others tried this one out? I'd like to know if it's a good game regardless of how it compares to the others (I've never played the others).

I'm also one that feels more complexities / options does not necessarily make for a better game. If I want to build a rail empire, why do I want a super-detailed stock market simulator?

Of course, I'm also one that got more than my money's worth out of the Pirates! remake, so...

Eaglesfan27 · 10-21-2006, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Has anyone who never played any of the others tried this one out? I'd like to know if it's a good game regardless of how it compares to the others (I've never played the others).

I'm also one that feels more complexities / options does not necessarily make for a better game. If I want to build a rail empire, why do I want a super-detailed stock market simulator?

Of course, I'm also one that got more than my money's worth out of the Pirates! remake, so...

I'm wondering the same things. I've never played any of the previous ones, but I'm intrigued by this game. Then again, there are a lot of good games that have either just come out or are coming out in the next month or so.

Warhammer · 10-21-2006, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Has anyone who never played any of the others tried this one out? I'd like to know if it's a good game regardless of how it compares to the others (I've never played the others).

I'm also one that feels more complexities / options does not necessarily make for a better game. If I want to build a rail empire, why do I want a super-detailed stock market simulator?

Of course, I'm also one that got more than my money's worth out of the Pirates! remake, so...

The reason why you wanted a stock market simulator is that many rail barons did monkey with their stocks. In RRT2, you could issue tons of stock to generate cash to build rails, but then get closed out of your company when your competition bought all the shares up.

Also, in RRT2 the whole thing was YOU were the rail baron. It was perfectly ok to trash the company but make a fortune yourself.

moriarty · 10-21-2006, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gstelmack

Has anyone who never played any of the others tried this one out? I'd like to know if it's a good game regardless of how it compares to the others (I've never played the others).

I'm also one that feels more complexities / options does not necessarily make for a better game. If I want to build a rail empire, why do I want a super-detailed stock market simulator?

Of course, I'm also one that got more than my money's worth out of the Pirates! remake, so...

I would probably wait for the demo at this point (I read somewhere it should be out shortly). Not sure if the demo will let you play enough to make a determination, but ...

Buccaneer · 10-21-2006, 12:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warhammer

The reason why you wanted a stock market simulator is that many rail barons did monkey with their stocks. In RRT2, you could issue tons of stock to generate cash to build rails, but then get closed out of your company when your competition bought all the shares up.

Also, in RRT2 the whole thing was YOU were the rail baron. It was perfectly ok to trash the company but make a fortune yourself.

But it came very formulaic. There was always one company that would do bad and one that would do good - and those would become apparent early in the game. If I recall the strategy, you short the bad one (as it was going down) and buy on margin the good one (as it was going up). Eventually you'll have control of both.

Barkeep49 · 10-21-2006, 12:41 PM

Bucc: But that argues for making a better simulator not a dumbed down one.

gstelmack · 10-21-2006, 01:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barkeep49

Bucc: But that argues for making a better simulator not a dumbed down one.

Better does not necessarily mean complex. Words like "much more nuanced and detailed" (from Anxiety) make me nervous. I want to lay tracks, watch the trains go, and build an empire, not spend all my time staring at a stock market screen. If I'm spending more than a few minutes every hour worrying about stocks, I'm not buying the game. That's my point. If most of the negativity surrounds having a less detailed stock market portion of the game, that isn't necessarily going to scare me off.

So again, is the game fun or not? I don't care how it stacks up to the others, I just want to know if it's any fun.

Civ IV has a lot of variation and things to deal with and pay attention to, but it's still very accessible and easy to play. Nothing you do in that game requires more than a few seconds of work at a time. That's what I want out of a Sid game.

Buccaneer · 10-21-2006, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Civ IV has a lot of variation and things to deal with and pay attention to, but it's still very accessible and easy to play. Nothing you do in that game requires more than a few seconds of work at a time. That's what I want out of a Sid game.

I fully agree with that. Sid's hallmark has been "simple yet deep". The keys to his games have been accessibility, replayability and "one more turn" (whether turned based or not). That's why I was surprised about the new Pirates game - where he threw replayability out the window.

You want the game to flow from beginning to end without getting bogged down in any one task. There could be a lot of tasks (like in Civ4) to work and to make decisions about but none would disrupt the flow of the game. I think the original RRT was great at doing that. Sure we would love to have a stock simulator built into the game - but at what cost?

What I would expect out of this new RRT is the open-ended gameplay (for multi-level decision making) and replayability. I would expect it to have more things to do than in the original (because of advances in technologies) but no one thing would bog the game down. Just like Civ4.

Brillig · 10-21-2006, 09:40 PM

After a couple of games, this game is fun, pretty to look at, and dumb with nothing under the surface. It's RRT Blonde!

/ducks

Seriously, the economic model isn't *too* simplified, although there are only a dozen or so goods to move, down a bit from the twenty or so I seem to recall in earlier iterations. The fact that the industries come in different sizes that grow with utilization (along with the cities) is nice. The growth also feels more responsive to player actions than they used to in RRT1/2/3.

One of the biggest changes, which takes a good deal of getting used to is that every player can access every city and resource, no more racing to objectives to lock the opposition out. This probably simplified the AI coding... There's still a big advantage in being first though, as the later companies to connect often end up using expensive and slow bridges to get in.

The patent auctions are a nice twist too, as well as the auctions for city industries. They kept the 'goal/medal' system from the last version, which is a plus, as it gives you something to shoot for other than the usual random expansion.

So, what are the bad points? First, the AI is pretty weak. I haven't had any issues crushing the first three difficulty levels yet - I expect the highest will either be easy - or impossible. It took getting to the third level before the AI even did much in the stock market.

Speaking of the stock market, it's been mentioned as a weak point - and it's a pretty glaring weakness. The '10 shares' per company isn't an impossible abstraction, but the initial setup is crazy, as any tycoon worth his salt will sell off all his stock initially in order to finance an early expansion. Maybe at Tycoon the AI will have enough capital to punish you for doing this, but otherwise, it'll only have play in a multiplayer scenario.

Scenarios are also an issue - aside from multiplayer maps, the game only has seven scenarios to start. And they're all pretty limited in scope. The game feels small. There's no 'whole US' map, just limited regions - and the scale of the models makes the game feel claustrophobic, with major cities seemingly right next to each other once you get to the middle game.

The final bone I have to pick with the game regards train routing. Now in addition to the original single and double tracking, you can even triple track. Why would you need to? Because trains don't seamlessly pass one another on double track like they used to. Instead, trains are actually on a specific piece of track, and you need to not only lay multiple lines of track but actually lay connecting pieces between them in order to allow trains to switch back and forth. Further, if you just run short 45-degree connections, you'll take a huge speed hit whenever one of your trains need to switch.

This all sounds like a realistic and interesting improvement to the game... except the AI running the trains is mongoloid at best. I've had a situation where two trains were coming into a triple tracked station... and one train took a given track, while the following train decided to use the exact same track. Since the first train was turning around at the station, I ended up with a Mexican standoff. Since there was no way around the situation, I had to delete one of the trains! Be warned, wierd shit may happen if you use the highest routing difficulty. It's possible that this might become more intuitive with experience, but for now it's a colossal pain.

So, to sum up... some good points, some bad points. The game is fun to play, within it's limitations, but I'm not sure how replayable it will be. The key will be how the highest difficulty holds up... unless they hit it just right, there won't be much left but multiplayer.

10-17-2006, 10:09 PM	#4
cartman Death Herald Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Le stelle la notte sono grandi e luminose nel cuore profondo del Texas	I'll probably be picking this game up this week, along with FS:X. __________________ Thinkin' of a master plan 'Cuz ain't nuthin' but sweat inside my hand So I dig into my pocket, all my money is spent So I dig deeper but still comin' up with lint

10-17-2006, 11:10 PM	#10
Abe Sargent Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Catonsville, MD	I don;t like, from RRT3 to SMRR the change from needing to place things like Water Stations and oil, and engines needing these supplies, to no longer having these needs. Balancing track with those needs was a nice dynamic that has been removed. Ick. __________________ Check out my two current weekly Magic columns! https://www.coolstuffinc.com/a/?action=search&page=1&author[]=Abe%20Sargent

10-17-2006, 11:45 PM	#11
Abe Sargent Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Catonsville, MD	Another thing RRT3 does better is finances with loans, more detailed stock, credit ratings, and so forth. In this, you own stock in lumps of 10% and you can buy or sell stock in those lumps between you and competitors. RRT3 is much more nuanced and detailed in this area. __________________ Check out my two current weekly Magic columns! https://www.coolstuffinc.com/a/?action=search&page=1&author[]=Abe%20Sargent

10-18-2006, 08:02 AM	#13
Ksyrup This guy has posted so much, his fingers are about to fall off. Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: In Absentia	I can't even fit in a bathtub, let alone enjoy a hot bath. __________________ M's pitcher Miguel Batista: "Now, I feel like I've had everything. I've talked pitching with Sandy Koufax, had Kenny G play for me. Maybe if I could have an interview with God, then I'd be served. I'd be complete."

10-18-2006, 08:38 AM	#17
Swaggs Coordinator Join Date: Oct 2000	This sounds like a cool one. I'll have to pick it up soon. __________________ DOWN WITH HATTRICK!!! The RWBL Are you reading In The Bleachers?

10-17-2006, 10:07 PM	#3
Crapshoot Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Dec 2003	Nope- waiting to read reviews and what not, but I'm sure I'll pick it up soon anyway. Officially speaking, is it a successor of sorts to RT3 (which I loved) ?

10-17-2006, 10:09 PM	#5
Buccaneer Head Coach Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Colorado	Cool, a virgin review. I had not read anything about the game so I'd be curious if they piratized it or learned the lesson from PopTop.

10-17-2006, 10:24 PM	#7
Craptacular College Starter Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: The Mad City, WI	I'm guessing my P3-800 ain't enough to play Railroads.

10-17-2006, 10:50 PM	#8
spleen1015 Coordinator Join Date: Sep 2003	I got it today and I really like it. I didn't play any of the previous versions, so I can't speak to that. I'm having some trouble working out my track layout, but overall I'm having a lot of fun. I'm sure my problems are due to inexperience. I played the SW USA map twice and each time the resources were in different places. My starting location was in a different place, too. I can see the expansion already. More resources and more maps!

10-18-2006, 08:35 AM	#15
Warhammer Pro Starter Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Dayton, OH	Was RRT3 that big of an improvement on RRT2?

10-18-2006, 08:58 AM	#18
Alan T Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mass.	I picked up a copy of this last night and only tried it out for a bit before stopping for Law and Order shows on tv. So far my initial impression is that this doesn't feel like an improvement over RRT3 in any category and I'm disapointed.

10-18-2006, 10:06 AM	#22
Crapshoot Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Dec 2003	Ugh - if the economy model is dialed down rather than dialed up, I'm backing away from this - I liked the debt and stock modeling in RT3, and would have prefered something that expanded that, rather than curtailed it.

10-18-2006, 10:37 AM	#24
Coffee Warlord Head Coach Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Colorado Springs	Hell, I thought RRT3 was dumbed down by quite a bit. If this is actually MORE dumbed down, screw that.

10-18-2006, 05:58 PM	#27
Buccaneer Head Coach Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Colorado	Sounds similar to the new Pirates. In of itself (and for a one-time play), it was a great game. When you think about replayability and would could have been (e.g., taking advantage of AI advancements/strategic elements/etc.), it is not. Sounds SM RRT falls in the same category. Thank god for the Civ franchise though.

10-18-2006, 08:21 PM	#28
Alan T Hall Of Famer Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mass.	It informed me that my video card drivers were out of date and asked if I wanted to upgrade them. I chose to not let it upgrade my drivers for me automatically, but did it on my own from the official site. I now can't even start the game. It crashes every time I load it up (I assume where it does the video driver check). Needless to say the game is not winning me over About to cut my losses and win my time back on this one.

10-18-2006, 09:15 PM	#30
moriarty College Starter Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: A negative place	Ugh, sounds like from the impressions here and in other threads they pretty much ignored any advancements / positive changes in RRT2 and RRT3 and just did a remake of the first one with fancy graphics (and some interface changes to simplify some things). I was turned off by the lack of replay of Pirates, and I don't feel like getting burned again by going backwards in gameplay with this one. I think I'll be passing.

10-18-2006, 10:09 PM	#32
Crapshoot Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Dec 2003	Fyi: First Review: http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/...ds/review.html

10-18-2006, 10:33 PM	#33
bulletsponge Pro Starter Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: TX	i preordered it. i never played RRT3 but did play RRT2

10-20-2006, 10:26 AM	#35
I. J. Reilly College Prospect Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: An Oregonian deep in the heart of Texas.	All of the reviews and first impressions have me pretty excited about this game. I understand everybody’s worries, but more complicated doesn’t mean it’s a better game. The time I have to play games has changed so much since I first started playing in-depth strategy games that I can’t really enjoy the great current games. I love Civ4 and can see that it’s a great game, but when I only have an hour or so at a time to play, and sometimes a week passes in between sessions, it doesn’t really work. It usually takes me close to an hour to figure out what my strategy was and what I was trying to do with all those armies. So hopefully this is what I’ve been looking for, and hopefully it does well in the marketplace so that there will be other’s like it to follow.

10-20-2006, 10:40 AM	#36
spleen1015 Coordinator Join Date: Sep 2003	I am enjoying the game a lot. I want to play it all of the time.

10-20-2006, 10:44 AM	#37
Draft Dodger Coordinator Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Keene, NH	sounds extremely disappointing __________________ Mile High Hockey

10-20-2006, 11:18 AM	#38
Crapshoot Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Dec 2003	DD, are you reviewing it for GameNikki, or is SA doing it?

10-20-2006, 08:56 PM	#39
Tasan College Starter Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Houston, or there about	From the sounds of this, its more like the original than the two sequels, which to me is a good thing. I loved the beer 'n peanuts simplicity yet overall fun of the first one. The next two just seemed to complicate things too much. __________________ 2011 Golden Scribes winner for best Interactive Dynasty

10-20-2006, 09:14 PM	#40
Buccaneer Head Coach Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Colorado	Not only that, I found RRT2 to be too linear and RRT1 more open ended. From what I've heard, RRT3 took out things that were basic to RRT2. But regarding this new release, I would like to hear about replayability.

10-20-2006, 09:45 PM	#41
hawk4669 High School JV Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Northern California	Let me preface my post by saying that I played RR Tycoon (the original), played RR Tycoon 2 (never got into it like I did the first), and completely missed the third. That being said, I do like the simplicity of the new one. I guess I'm easy to please, but what I've seen of it so far has been fun. Been having trouble getting my trains to do what I want (my gold train bound for L.A. ended up somewhere near Yuma, AZ!)....but the more I dink with it, the more I enjoy it. Cheers! __________________ Hawk4669 www.hbfire.org

10-21-2006, 09:53 AM	#42
gstelmack Pro Starter Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Cary, NC	Has anyone who never played any of the others tried this one out? I'd like to know if it's a good game regardless of how it compares to the others (I've never played the others). I'm also one that feels more complexities / options does not necessarily make for a better game. If I want to build a rail empire, why do I want a super-detailed stock market simulator? Of course, I'm also one that got more than my money's worth out of the Pirates! remake, so... __________________ -- Greg -- Author of various FOF utilities

10-21-2006, 12:41 PM	#47
Barkeep49 Coordinator Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Not too far away	Bucc: But that argues for making a better simulator not a dumbed down one.

10-21-2006, 09:40 PM	#50
Brillig College Prospect Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Mountain View, California	After a couple of games, this game is fun, pretty to look at, and dumb with nothing under the surface. It's RRT Blonde! /ducks Seriously, the economic model isn't too simplified, although there are only a dozen or so goods to move, down a bit from the twenty or so I seem to recall in earlier iterations. The fact that the industries come in different sizes that grow with utilization (along with the cities) is nice. The growth also feels more responsive to player actions than they used to in RRT1/2/3. One of the biggest changes, which takes a good deal of getting used to is that every player can access every city and resource, no more racing to objectives to lock the opposition out. This probably simplified the AI coding... There's still a big advantage in being first though, as the later companies to connect often end up using expensive and slow bridges to get in. The patent auctions are a nice twist too, as well as the auctions for city industries. They kept the 'goal/medal' system from the last version, which is a plus, as it gives you something to shoot for other than the usual random expansion. So, what are the bad points? First, the AI is pretty weak. I haven't had any issues crushing the first three difficulty levels yet - I expect the highest will either be easy - or impossible. It took getting to the third level before the AI even did much in the stock market. Speaking of the stock market, it's been mentioned as a weak point - and it's a pretty glaring weakness. The '10 shares' per company isn't an impossible abstraction, but the initial setup is crazy, as any tycoon worth his salt will sell off all his stock initially in order to finance an early expansion. Maybe at Tycoon the AI will have enough capital to punish you for doing this, but otherwise, it'll only have play in a multiplayer scenario. Scenarios are also an issue - aside from multiplayer maps, the game only has seven scenarios to start. And they're all pretty limited in scope. The game feels small. There's no 'whole US' map, just limited regions - and the scale of the models makes the game feel claustrophobic, with major cities seemingly right next to each other once you get to the middle game. The final bone I have to pick with the game regards train routing. Now in addition to the original single and double tracking, you can even triple track. Why would you need to? Because trains don't seamlessly pass one another on double track like they used to. Instead, trains are actually on a specific piece of track, and you need to not only lay multiple lines of track but actually lay connecting pieces between them in order to allow trains to switch back and forth. Further, if you just run short 45-degree connections, you'll take a huge speed hit whenever one of your trains need to switch. This all sounds like a realistic and interesting improvement to the game... except the AI running the trains is mongoloid at best. I've had a situation where two trains were coming into a triple tracked station... and one train took a given track, while the following train decided to use the exact same track. Since the first train was turning around at the station, I ended up with a Mexican standoff. Since there was no way around the situation, I had to delete one of the trains! Be warned, wierd shit may happen if you use the highest routing difficulty. It's possible that this might become more intuitive with experience, but for now it's a colossal pain. So, to sum up... some good points, some bad points. The game is fun to play, within it's limitations, but I'm not sure how replayable it will be. The key will be how the highest difficulty holds up... unless they hit it just right, there won't be much left but multiplayer.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)