Annihilation. Not Planetary. Better.

Not at all. You can buy the final version of the game for $40.

Oh. That's a good relief indeed. Still too much for my pocket (CIS prices are usually 15-20$ for new title) but its not 100$ like it were at start of sales.

You mean like 30?

70 is only for like the beta/alpha.

Edit: ahh it was £40.

Odd, I'm seeing it as $40 (US obviously) here.

I disagree. Hence my response.

This topic isn't about Planetary Annihilation. *handballs thread*

It's $40, or just over £25.

If i had the option of getting with 6 bad looking girls for free or 1 great looking lady for a few dollars, I know what I would be doing.

....smartass much?
does this looks bad to you?

That goes both ways.

This looks like the equivalent of OpenArena. Nuff said.

Just saying, you shouldn't expect people to not be "pissy" with such a baited title.

not for me

http://www.esreality.com/post/1718725/re-open-arena/#pid1715395

Just my two cents.... I found out about Spring ages ago.

When I first tried a game on it I was meh.... but then I got into it.
It is absolutely awesome.

But it is true, you need to keep at it for 15-20 hours before you really get into it.
BA (Balanced Annihilation) is really the only one I played, its strategic depth is really good and it is truly the kind of game I want from an RTS. I have had the best games ever in terms of strategy and so forth playing BA online.

I hope Uber really spends some time looking at Spring games... there is really a lot of nice features there.

In fact I dare say, PA is going to be really good... but I have my doubts the strategic gameplay will be as good as my experience with Spring. Of course I hope for the best.

It is 20-15$ you nitwit, at least for those who were smart enought to be on the kickstarter. You're being a steam goon all over again. 60-70-90$ are prices for an early acess of the game in development. What nobody understood is that "the game cost 90$" is a wrong statement because there is no "game".

Not yet, not untill release. untill then it's just a test program in alpha and beta phases.


The game costs 40$. bottom line. 20 if you were smart. 15 if you were real smart.

It is not. Springrts is a core engine - it has dozens of games on it. Everyone can fork any game and put up a server for it which will appear in general lobby and use internal Rapid download to put up a link for it and people will join and play it.

Actually, yeah. It does.

Pretty darn bad at that.

I played a couple Spring games back when it was called TA Spring, and didn't care for it because it just felt unfinished. (Same reason I don't really play the PA Alpha, except for testing it on Linux.)

But after PA was announced, I tried out Zero-K, and quite enjoyed it. It certainly isn't as polished as it could be, but once I got used to the AI, it felt great to play. I know that there are several features in it (and other Spring games) that Uber are looking into adding to the PA UI, which is testament to some of the advances that were made by the Spring developers. GoogleFrog, one of the ZK devs, was pretty active on the PA forums early on, and gave some excellent input from his own experiences.

Also, for people complaining about the UI/art/etc for Spring, and open source games in general, do realize that it's hard get people experienced in those areas to contribute. Programmers are often passionate about open-source, hence their contributions, but it can be challenging to find artists and UI designers willing to work for free in these areas, especially since they are so high in demand.
It also takes time for open source games to mature in these areas. Battle for Wesnoth has some great artwork and a very consistent style, but it took a good 7 years or so before it even started looking the way it does now. (Just google some of the original screenshots and cringe.) Warsow was originally released in 2004, and it took until around 2011 for them to finally standardize the art style. (And get rid of some of the eye-cancer inducing Tron textures.) Spring games like Zero-K are only starting to reach that point, and I'm sure that watching PA's development will have a positive influence on them as time goes on.

So when people scoff at the look and feel of open source games, they really need to consider that it's not that the developers don't find these things important. They just don't have the capability to improve on it. So instead, they concentrate on making a powerful engine and good gameplay, with hopes of improving the rest when the talent becomes available. Compare that to the plethora of indie games by the artistically inclined that use non-open engines, such as Multimedia Fusion, Gamemaker, UDK, Unity, etc. More often than not, their games look pretty, but lack the solid feel and gameplay of some of their open-source counterparts.

...are you mad? or just insane? for opensource game that looks pretty solid. no wuzz or fuzz like bloom/blur - just raw coloring.

He is mad or insane because his has a differing opinion? Okay.