Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[BishopX]

So I haven't been in a situation where I could buy or run modern (post 2007-ish) games until recently. Would anyone care to recommend some good 4x games to me? In Particular I'm interested in WHY you think a game is good.

Thanks you!

[Frumple]

Some previous threads for your perusal.

Also, search function. It lets 4x through. Strategy's another good keyword. There's a lot of 4x threads on B12.

Personally, I've been playing AI War and Eador: Genesis lately. Very different games, but... interesting. Both have pretty brutal AI once you ramp things up a bit and are fairly polished for what they are.

[Devling]

Master of Orion 1 & 2. Unless you're looking for new 4X games, then ignore me.

[Alkhemia]

Sword of the stars 1 maybe 2 when it farther along.

[Flying Dice]

Aurora. Full stop. It's the best 4X I've ever played, no question whatsoever. Link to the thread's in my sig, and it probably speaks for itself, but in summary: Deep, deep, deep. Also, the best ship design I've ever seen coupled with a strong dual focus on logistics and combat. Here are a few screenshots, some from my new campaign to give an example of the general look of the game, and some clipped from older bits of AAR.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

[fenrif]

Space Empires 3. Because you can cut yourself off from all the other star systems in the galaxy by closing the wormholes between them, then devote 10 years to buildinga fleet of cloaked robot kamikaze ships armed with system destroying sun exploder bombs, then unleash them upon the rest of civilization.

[Neonivek]

Aurora. Full stop. It's the best 4X I've ever played, no question whatsoever. Link to the thread's in my sig, and it probably speaks for itself, but in summary: Deep, deep, deep. Also, the best ship design I've ever seen coupled with a strong dual focus on logistics and combat. Here are a few screenshots, some from my new campaign to give an example of the general look of the game, and some clipped from older bits of AAR.

What isn't shown is that it has a UI made of barbed wire and the learning curve of a wall. (UI doesn't seem bad in screens because you havn't had to navigate them)

So pick Aurora up only if you have no qualms over needing to be hand held for half the entire game.

If you don't have any problems with that then you may have a lot of fun with Aurora.

Aurora is a lot like Simon the Sorcerer... It gets good reviews but I just know it is only from people who havn't actually gotten far in the game, used a guide, or struggled with it for months and forgot what a pain it was to do so. Since any review seems to glance over the underlying issues, because those issues are just so prevelent that if you disliked them even a TINY bit you would hate the game or they played it for so long they cannot even see the issues anymore because they have no issues anymore.

(and to counter the arguement I am going to get: Dwarf Fortress is a lot more intuitive, in fact I was able to play it competently the very first few times I played it was just that the goblin invasions would kill me, I read guides to play better, not just to play)

Eador: Genesis

It is fun, the issue is that it kinda gets really repetative and more so then the usual 4x affair. Still solid and you can get it for cheep so why not.

If the part you really dislike about 4x is how much you feel like you are doing the same thing over and over again. Then Eador won't please you. If you could care less then it may be a pretty solid game.

---

Thus as follows

Aurora: Use a guide and be happy
Eador: Enjoy doing the same thing over and over again and be happy.
Neonivek: mean and bitter and peaved and looking at all videogames with burning red eyes

[Flying Dice]

Aurora. Full stop. It's the best 4X I've ever played, no question whatsoever. Link to the thread's in my sig, and it probably speaks for itself, but in summary: Deep, deep, deep. Also, the best ship design I've ever seen coupled with a strong dual focus on logistics and combat. Here are a few screenshots, some from my new campaign to give an example of the general look of the game, and some clipped from older bits of AAR.

What isn't shown is that it has a UI made of barbed wire and the learning curve of a wall. (UI doesn't seem bad in screens because you havn't had to navigate them)

So pick Aurora up only if you have no qualms over needing to be hand held for half the entire game.

If you don't have any problems with that then you may have a lot of fun with Aurora.

Aurora is a lot like Simon the Sorcerer... It gets good reviews but I just know it is only from people who havn't actually gotten far in the game, used a guide, or struggled with it for months and forgot what a pain it was to do so. Since any review seems to glance over the underlying issues, because those issues are just so prevelent that if you disliked them even a TINY bit you would hate the game or they played it for so long they cannot even see the issues anymore because they have no issues anymore.

(and to counter the arguement I am going to get: Dwarf Fortress is a lot more intuitive, in fact I was able to play it competently the very first few times I played it was just that the goblin invasions would kill me, I read guides to play better, not just to play)

Actually, I've played it extensively for ~14 months, and the interface is both intuitive and simple once you've gotten used to it. I've played out around two dozen campaigns to the point where I got tired (there's no win condition). It takes a bit to get used to, but a good part of the fun is from figuring out all the neat things you can do. And in any case, my own observations show the exact opposite: the people who complain about it being overrated and the interface being shit are the ones who get frustrated and assume that because they can't get into it it is impenetrable.

Granted, the interface is a bit shit, but in that it's too detailed for a game. Which makes sense, seeing as how it was originally derived from a data management program for a tabletop wargame.


And on an entirely different note, the only available tutorials are half-complete and several versions out of date, so you're probably better off muddling through on your own and asking us questions. Which several people have done recently, with not much trouble.   

[Neonivek]

Granted, the interface is a bit shit, but in that it's too detailed for a game. Which makes sense, seeing as how it was originally derived from a data management program for a tabletop wargame.

This is probably one of the few times I've seen a backhanded compliment.

in any case, my own observations show the exact opposite: the people who complain about it being overrated and the interface being shit are the ones who get frustrated and assume that because they can't get into it it is impenetrable

Hmmm I wonder who you are referencing. Good thing I never said it was overrated but I guess I should do a full review and prove my point to finally settle this.

Though it would just be full of: "Look how long it takes to do something that should be fast and simple, this is a game that simply never bothered to do much else" or "Now it is important that you provide your own feedback, many times in this game you will make a mistake but the game will pretend that never happened" which really just boils down to "Learn the game"... which isn't really a full blown complaint is it?

Though I know a few things I could say that would be funny. Especially since unlike a lot of people playing Aurora, I've actually tried a few options that don't pan out like you would think.

Interesting there are no complete Aurora guides. Given that a lot of the games most important aspects the game doesn't even alude to.

[JWNoctis]

I'd say Aurora too. If you can get past the complexity and the complete lack of any graphical feedback, which puts a high demand on your imagination. But this is probably the best if you can put up with it. Absolutely none of the other 4x games are so detailed and, well, good for some gorgeous imagination, similar to DF.

And Distant Worlds. Fairly unique and almost hands-free if you want - which is highly unusual for a 4x title. But being a Matrix-published title...well, you know the deal. And the AI could still use a bit tweaking to stop them from ruining their own reputation with suicidal intel missions and rampart planetary bombardment - God forbid if they ever get their hand on a Worlds Destroyer, and that's a problem 'cause reputation is important in this game.

[Tellemurius]

Civ 5, im enjoying it like crazy, its radically different than the series but it works well for me.

[Endymion]

Master of Magic. Best game of the entire genre.

Well, unless you count Dominions 3 as a 4X.

[Catastrophic lolcats]

There's been a lack of really competent 4X games in the modern gaming scene. There's been some decent "space imperialism" games but that's about it. For some older games I recommend the following.

Alpha Centauri. 
Civ II in SPPPAAAACCCEEE. One of the first games to really merge gameplay and story while being extremely competent at both. Still stands as one of my favourite games of all time. The expansion was a let down however.
If you like political ideologies taken to their extreme and factions fighting over a sentient planet then this is the game for you! Great in both singleplayer and multiplayer.
http://www.gog.com/gamecard/sid_meiers_alpha_centauri

Freeciv.
Civ II but free and opensource. It doesn't quite have the single-player content as the other games but it really does shine in multiplayer. Grab a bunch of friends together, turn on some genocidal AIs and watch the mayhem and carnage. The winner gets to claim the radiated, polluted, nuclear cooled, archipelago that is all that remains of the earth.
Good for the people who thought Civ V was dumbed down and tediously boring.
http://freeciv.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page

Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic.
Civ inspired 4X in generic fantasy world 7. Choose your race, your magical alignment and then go at it. Affect the whole world on a grand scale using powerful magic, including corrupting tiles to your magic biome.
Personally I found the turn based "unit mini-battles" a bit annoying. I would have prefer the Civ style of abstraction. If you're going to play this multiplayer with friends I would enforce an "auto-resolve only" rule. The auto-resolve is rather fickle though, sadly.
http://www.gog.com/gamecard/age_of_wonders_shadow_magic

[Neonivek]

There's been a lack of really competent 4X games in the modern gaming scene

It is mostly because 4x has a lot of hold overs that wouldn't go over with a modern audiance as well as the differences in how much time animation takes over gameplay doesn't help this.

Even now some of the things I was fine with in 4x games I have grown to dislike. Such as the "One tech research".

Mind you quite a few things that you would have thought would improve over time in 4x games really havn't. The fact that modern 4x games for the most part don't have features that games 20 years earlier didn't have says something about this. With the few games that have made genuin progress in the genre being shifted far from the public mind.

[Shadowlord]

For space games: Sword of the Stars: Complete (the first SoTS, not the second), and Star Ruler.

I think Aurora has too many bugs and glitches. I try playing it, but it always winds up popping up random error messages which nonhelpfully give an error number after I get into the game a year or two, and then it keeps doing it when I try to keep playing... Not to mention you need two screens to monitors to have half the essential game windows onscreen at once, and even then it doesn't feel like enough, and you can't even keep them open, you have to keep reopening them because certain ones don't update properly. There's also no functioning multiplayer.