Rise of Nations: Good or Bad?

[Archer 007]

Its a pretty good game.

 

[shinoui]

I received RoN in May, I must admit that I was surprized in the good sense of the word. I'm very far to be a RTS player, it requires a too big stamina and adrenalin expense. Nevertheless I tried and in solo mode using the features of the game I found out it is possible to have fun and thinking in the same time, with an excellent sound track, a beautiful screen and this is a real pleasure, to complete a game in a short time.
The Sybex Strategy Guide is good and compared to the poor one issued by Prima for Civ 3 I can say it's an excellent book.
No way to compare RoN and Civ. I believe the both should be present in any gamotheque shelf and used as frequently as possible : week ends, got time, practice Civ(PTW) solo or multi whatever. Week time, not so much free long periods rush into a RoN fast solo game "Quick Battle" or try to complete one Age of Conquer the World (campaign mode)

 

[Alone]

I don't know, maybe I'm not valid person to judge this thing, but I try to play RoN and didn't like it. Looks to me like Empire Earth (with the same opinion) just modernized. But the same happened with me and MoO III. It's look that I have a problem: After start to play CivIII every other game look bad to me. Simply Civ III is just the game for my taste, and thats all.

 

[shinoui]

OK I do agree after Civ (whatever the number)it's quite difficult to appreciate other games maily the RTS type. I tried in his time AoE and was not convinced. I don't know Empire Earth but I was not attracted(RTS Yecch!). I made an exception for RoN just because I thought Brian Reynolds could bring something with a taste of Civ and I am not disappointed. Nevertheless, I'll stay for ever a Civ addict.