Moonbase Commander Review

First of all, Moonbase Commander never claimed to be a Real Time Strategy game. It's most obviously turn based. So comparing it to likes of WC3 and AoE is utterly stupid.

Secondly, I sensed the reviewer was immediately turned off by the graphics. Not a good trait in a reviewer. He let the fact it was 2D cloud the real question: is it a fun game or not? I've seen countless games with stunning graphics and horrendous gameplay mechanics that make them not fun at all.

Lastly, it's a budget title. It sells for under $20. What do you really expect? A publisher isn't going to allow 18 months and $2M for a $20 title.

Yes it was evident that the reviewer barely played it at all. He didn't seem to understand what all of the weapons and buildings are used for. Likewise he obvioulsy didn't play more than the first mission of the challenge mode - he actaully said that in challenge mode you don't need to destroy your opponent! This was a very poorly done review, and demonstrates what happens when the reviewer doesn't even bother to play the game. Fortunately the "reader reviews" score is more accurate - about a 9, with around 70+ people responding to it. The gameplay is fantastic - who cares if it isn't 3D?

-Imp

This is possibly the worst review I have ever read. It is full of bad assumptions, incorrect facts, and shoddy research. Grade school children can write better articles than this.

Let's start with the introduction. "Well, another RTS game to throw on the pile". This is a turn based game. Comparing it RTS games is unfair.

Graphics: He complains about the graphics. The graphics in this game are exactly what is needed, no more. I like this fact because I finally have a game that will run on my laptop. Now I can game on the road.

Sound: This is a matter of opinion, but I think the sounds are great. I agree that the music gets old.

Gameplay: This is where this game really shines. How many pretty games suck when it comes to gameplay? This game is all about gameplay. MBC is the most balanced, addictive, and fun strategy game ever made. This guy totally misses the point.

It's obvious from his comments that he only played the first few Challenge modes. Indeed, it seems he didn't play multi-player at all. This is a great multi-player game. In fact, the challenge modes are mostly for learning how to play, to get you ready to take on a real person.

He also complains about the "weak" AI. While an AI will never be as good as a human, the AI in this game is better than most.

He seems confused about the "stream of flashing lights". He seems conused about a lot of things.

It seems to me that he expected a standard RTS, ala Warcraft, and when he got a truly original game instead, he just gave up. People like this should just stick to watching tired re-runs on TV.

[Cimlite]

Great to see that I am not alone to disagree with that review. I think that Moonbase Commander is a superb idea, executed beautifully. If you compare it to say, StarCraft, sure... then it does kind of fall on its ass. However... compare it to say, Worms and similar games, its a masterpiece.

Combining two game ideas like in MBC is something that I'd like to see more of. This game is an instant classic in my mind.

The reviewer was obviously biased before even playing the game. His expectations were set to high and he didn't do his research. Infact he even states that he didn't like the game as soon as he saw the main menu! That my friends, is a biased opinion of a narrow minded individual. He probably never bothered to play online or take on some of the later challenge mode games (like the crawler level).

True that graphically and such the game isn't great, but in the gameplay department it is superb. This reviewer shows dramatically the stupidity that is the notion that graphics make a game good...And he calls himself a strategy gamer when didn't even realize that MoonBase is not a real time strategy game but a turned based one.

Give me a break...Where do you guys find these guys?

Hi,

First of all, sorry to hear that you didn't like the review, this genuinely makes me sad, so I'm going to try and deal with you all individually.

First of all, 'GamersHellSux' :
I was turned off by the graphics slightly yes - as most games that have come out in recent times have nice graphics which add to gameplay, but I felt that in this case, they did not. That fact didn't cloud my judgement as you put it, I did not find it a fun game, and so I said so, and being a gamer of many years thought that this would turn off a lot of other gamers aswell. Well it seems I was wrong - I can admit that.

Secondly, Improvius :
I felt that I had played the game enough times to get a feel for it, and me saying that you didn't have to destroy your opponent was a statement of fact in the games that I had played. While I tried to tap into the energy pools my 'opponent' (provided no opposition for me) started creating various hubs and other buildings around the map, and when they encountered my buildings, they failed to respond and kept doing what they were doing. I'm sorry I upset you but I'm only talking from experience here.

Thirdly, geekd :
I'm going to refrain from personal insults, something you seem unable to do.
The graphics - I feel that in this day and age, graphics shouldn't look 5 years old, you may feel that it suited the game style, but I didn't. As I said to 'GamersHellSux,' this did not cloud my judgement of the game. I just did not like the whole idea of the game. The gameplay to me was slow, boring and repetitive. Again I am sorry that you disagree, but as reviews are statements of opinion, that is mine. Is the gameplay 'balanced' because everyone has the same units and buildings? Doesn't that make for a fairly short game? Surely some variety between the factions would have been a good feature.
Furthermore, I did play the multiplayer mode, and thought it was basically the same as the skirmish mode.. because it was, apart from you could have human opposition.
The AI being weak, well, I felt it was, having jumped straight in at the hardest opponent and winning very easily, it was not really up to a decent standard.

Lastly, coolman0stress :
I wasn't biased before I played the game, it was just clear that I didn't get what I expected, that's all. The part about the main menu, it was my thoughts when I saw it, I did not say 'When I saw the main menu I knew this game was rubbish.' It just gave me an indication of what I was in for, so I wrote that. I am also not narrow minded, If I thought this game was good I would have said so. If it had been good, I would have said so, but in my opinion it wasn't, so I said so. I also realise that graphics do not a good game make, and I assure you that the graphics did not sway my judgement about the gameplay. For a very good game with 2D graphics, that I play a lot, check out Soldat at www.soldat.prv.pl. Now say that I said that graphics make a game good.

Thanks for all of your time, and again, sorry you all didn't like the review.

Doug.

[hiv]

GamersHellSux, don't you think offending a team of 30 people for your own opinion is a bit dull? I'll not remove your post nor your nick but please consider education is way more important than your target.

[loki]

Avoid at all costs? what cost? I've spent more money going to a bad movie that disgusted me for an hour and a half. I'm probably going on 80+ hours of pure enjoyment with MBC! In all fairness to Doug I'll say he echoed many of the sentiments my friends say when they see me playing it. Heres what I say to them.
1: It's fun
2: Multiplayer is a hoot!
3: It's challenging
4: The map editor is easy to use, and share your custom maps, as well as replays.
5: nice opinion now get out!

I have 3 games installed right now. GTA3, Dungeon Seige, and MBC. I played and finished the other 2 games and I'll say one thing about mbc it's got loads of replayability over those other 2 big budget games and at 1/4 the cost. In a time when game developers try to dazzle players with high end graphics and force people to constantly buy expensive pc ugrades to play poorly designed, visually spectacular games that ppl rush to finish and put on thier shelves it's refreshing to see such a clean simple enjoyable game which Moonbase Commander definately is.

Graphics I'd say maybe a 6, Sound 6, Gameplay 10! after all is said and done isn't that what really matters?

The reviewer should have spent days playing it but obviously only played the training missions. you know, the ones where the enemy never really does anything BECAUSE THE USER IS TRYING TO LEARN THE GAME!

Its not an RTS.

Lets say that again: Its not an RTS. Its not realtime. Things dont move about. Its a strategy game.... like chess.

The graphics? Jesus I think they are great, the engine is sweet and the interface is simple. I'm very very glad they didnt make it FULLY 3D WITH FLOATING INTELLI-CAMS [tm].

The reviewer completely missed what the game was aiming for and so its not surprising that he felt let down.
Fair dues though for coming here and defending your review.
I think you should consider giving it a go against your mates in the office after reading the (very very) good faq here: http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/doswin/game/16971.html

We're playing it in office every night now...

Tom.

The sound is actually quite good, and serves a good purpose. You can hear what the opponent is doing. Once you are familiar with the sounds that everything makes, you can tell by listening what your opponent is throwing out, and how far it goes.

-Imp