Red ConquestWhen John Kooistra, the developer of Blue Defense and Blue Attack, announced his upcoming real time strategy game, Red Conquest [App Store], fans went crazy. Kooistra has developed quite a following over time, and expectations were high for this prequel/sequel to the Blue games.

One of the big talking points for Red Conquest is the fact that it ties together the story of Blue Defense, Blue Attack, and this game into one comprehensive whole. Aside from pre/post-battle text dialogue, the story is largely told through the use of cutscenes with zero talking. Quite frankly, the cutscenes, while cool in concept, fall flat due to the arguably weak art direction that was taken as well as the fact that the story itself is pretty difficult to make heads or tail of.

redconquest4Red Conquest does not feature a ton of different unit types, but it covers all of the necessary bases. Harvesters collect resources from floating rock formations, Cruisers and Battleships serve as combat units, and Carriers serve primarily as support units. All units are initially created from the Base unit, but can also be created from the Foundry unit, which is created by the Base. You'll be playing as the Red team throughout most of the game, but it is possible to play as the Blue team in multiplayer (the differences being that Blue units cost less resources to create, take more time to create, and do not heal automatically).

The core gameplay of Red Conquest can be extremely complex for first time players, with multi-touch menu navigation being required for such simple actions as moving a small group of units. While I really believe that they're some of the most well thought-out RTS controls on the iPhone, the learning curve at the beginning of the game is just too intense.

960702_4The tutorial can be blamed for a majority of the problems that players are likely to experience, as it's one of the most confusing tutorials that I've ever seen. In it, players are thrown into a level containing three "elders," all of whom offer differing kinds of advice on how to play the game. This is all fine and well, but instead of letting players know when they've done something correctly, the elders just randomly blurb out instructions, ignoring all player interaction. This was extremely confusing for me, as I didn't know if I was supposed to do what the elders were telling me until they told me I could stop, and I had no idea why I would use any of the controls that they were pointing me towards.

Shortly after this tutorial, players are tossed into a level that, while easy for experienced players, can be incredibly difficult to the uninitiated due to the almost instantaneous bumrushing of the A.I. opponents on the player's base. Only after reading up on the Red Conquest Strategy thread in our forums and watching the below video did I manage to get a full grasp of what the correct strategy should be on that particular level. I say all of this as a guy who is intimately familiar with the concepts behind RTS games; I can kick nearly anyone's tail in Age of Empires II, and I've always been a big Starcraft fan. If Red Conquest was this difficult for me, I suspect newcomers to the genre don't stand a chance.

I began to really like Red Conquest after I spent some extended time with it, and I see a lot of potential for the game as more content is released for it over time. The ability to play with bots in multiplayer or up to 8 human players is a real feat, and something that I think really enriches the game and gives it some long-term viability, but the current lack of online play is a real bummer. The campaign is fairly short, but the inclusion of the 16 challenge levels and the promise of more content to come likely makes up for that.

Those who are not fans of RTS games are not likely to enjoy Red Conquest, as it's really packing a complete RTS into a small, complicated control method that only genre veterans are likely to figure out. For those who stick with it and master the controls, one of the most complete, well-made RTS experiences on the iPhone await, but some real patience will be required.

App Store Link: Red Conquest, $3.99

TouchArcade Rating

StarStarStarStarNone
  • Peri

    I'm confused by the title of your review. Did you mean to imply that a *complete* RTS is not ordinarily *complex*? If so, I'm not sure why you would think that is the case, nor do I see that explained in your review. Why would *completeness* generally preclude *complexity*? That don't seem categories that we would normally think of as contrasting. Now, if that's not what you intended, then I think the title is misleading and you might consider rewording it.

    • Ryan Rigney

      Complete - having all parts or elements; lacking nothing; whole; entire; full

      Complex - so complicated or intricate as to be hard to understand or deal with: a complex problem.

      I think that I effectively explain that the game is both a full RTS experience and a complex, difficult one in my review, so I'm happy with the title as is :)

      • Peri

        Not squabbling over whether you successfully show that the game is *both* complete and complex. You are probably right about that. However, you use *but* in the title, which is a *contrasting* coordinating conjunction (as opposed to *and* which is a non-contrasting coordinating conjunction). Hence, you imply that there is some sort of inherent contrast between something being complete and it being complex. I don't think such a contrast makes much sense generally speaking, and in any event isn't delineated in the piece. So, I think a better conjunction would be something like *and*, which doesn't imply a contrast between the concepts.

        Not trying to be a jerk, but simply trying to increase the clarity of your article.

      • Windburn

        In all fairness to Ryan (and sticking my own neck out a bit), I think what he is saying is appropriately conveyed by the title. 'But' is not only a contrasting conjunction, but also an excepting one. And that exception here comes in the form of a falling short of the inherent expectation that a game that is complete is also always accessible.

        For most readers, this game's completeness appears to come at the cost of its complexity, thus the usage is warranted.

      • Adams Immersive

        Yep--like saying a game has "great graphics but poor sound." The two ate contrasted simply because one will appeal to players while the other may not.

      • abugida

        A complex problem is a problem with lots of parts. A children's puzzle or LEGO set is complex, but it's not hard to figure out, you just need some time. Therefore, if you call a strategy game "complex", I would think "Great, it provides lots of playing time!". The word you were looking for really is "complicated", not "complex".

      • Ryan Rigney
      • Peri

        If you are using *but* as an exceptive coordinating conjunction, then you are using at as an *only* ("I would go *only* it's too far"). When *only* is used as an exceptive conjunction, it means "were it not that." I don't think the author meant for the title to convey that the game is "complete were it not that it is complex." That implies that the game's complexity somehow detracts from its completeness, which I don't think is in fact the case, nor is it what the author objectively describes in the article.

        *Complex* (and, though to a lesser extent, *complicated*) primarily denotes that something is composed of two or more parts (i.e., it is neutral, not implying fault or failure), and only derivatively suggests lending to confusion. Related words that connote something more appropriate to the intended meaning, since they add a shading of confusion and fault: complicated, intricate, involved, knotty, and perplexing.

        Still, whether or not one of this substitutions are used by the author in place of *complex*, due to the above considerations, I think it remains that *and* rather than *but* is the appropriate conjunction.

      • http://www.twitter.com/thewindburn Windburn

        Welcome to the joys of the English language, Peri :) Such a convoluted and often perplexing language, unavoidably will give rise to situations where two opposing views on syntax exists. Fact is, there's no cut and dry here, so you're going to have to just agree to disagree and let it drop.

        Evidently by the other responses here, Ryan's intended meaning has been conveyed, so we're going to have to just rely on that as proof in the proverbial pudding. Pushing the point further is just stooping to nitpicking.

      • Dave

        I hate to say it guys but, English is highly idiomatic. And all languages are as they are spoken, not as they are "purely preserved by anal retentive academics." Anyone passingly familiar with linguistics should realize that the highly idiomatic-alness combined with common usage makes English a very NON-logical language. And this phrase is commonly used and understood, putting it under the language-is-as-language-is-spoken category. It is valid, and it conveys a very clear message. In fact, all your arguments about pure syntax are much more confusing than the title itself.

        In short, get your heads out of your buts (ha ha, a pun!) because everything you've said about 'and' or 'but' is irrelevant.

    • Andrem720

      @Peri... I mean this in the nicest way possible, but shut up. You spent several posts talking about nothing important. And even if you had made a point, the way you said it was rude.

      • Peri

        I don't think I was rude. It certainly wasn't intended. I thought I was making a legitimate point about a central feature of the article. The author, as well as several other folks, responded, so I gather they thought it was a worthwhile point (even if they disagreed with me).

  • Peri

    I'm confused by the title of your review. Did you mean to imply that a *complete* RTS is not ordinarily *complex*? If so, I'm not sure why you would think that is the case, nor do I see that explained in your review. Why would *completeness* generally preclude *complexity*? That don't seem categories that we would normally think of as contrasting. Now, if that's not what you intended, then I think the title is misleading and you might consider rewording it.

    • Ryan Rigney

      Complete - having all parts or elements; lacking nothing; whole; entire; full

      Complex - so complicated or intricate as to be hard to understand or deal with: a complex problem.

      I think that I effectively explain that the game is both a full RTS experience and a complex, difficult one in my review, so I'm happy with the title as is :)

      • Peri

        Not squabbling over whether you successfully show that the game is *both* complete and complex. You are probably right about that. However, you use *but* in the title, which is a *contrasting* coordinating conjunction (as opposed to *and* which is a non-contrasting coordinating conjunction). Hence, you imply that there is some sort of inherent contrast between something being complete and it being complex. I don't think such a contrast makes much sense generally speaking, and in any event isn't delineated in the piece. So, I think a better conjunction would be something like *and*, which doesn't imply a contrast between the concepts.

        Not trying to be a jerk, but simply trying to increase the clarity of your article.

      • Windburn

        In all fairness to Ryan (and sticking my own neck out a bit), I think what he is saying is appropriately conveyed by the title. 'But' is not only a contrasting conjunction, but also an excepting one. And that exception here comes in the form of a falling short of the inherent expectation that a game that is complete is also always accessible.

        For most readers, this game's completeness appears to come at the cost of its complexity, thus the usage is warranted.

      • Adams Immersive

        Yep--like saying a game has "great graphics but poor sound." The two ate contrasted simply because one will appeal to players while the other may not.

      • abugida

        A complex problem is a problem with lots of parts. A children's puzzle or LEGO set is complex, but it's not hard to figure out, you just need some time. Therefore, if you call a strategy game "complex", I would think "Great, it provides lots of playing time!". The word you were looking for really is "complicated", not "complex".

      • Ryan Rigney
      • Peri

        If you are using *but* as an exceptive coordinating conjunction, then you are using at as an *only* ("I would go *only* it's too far"). When *only* is used as an exceptive conjunction, it means "were it not that." I don't think the author meant for the title to convey that the game is "complete were it not that it is complex." That implies that the game's complexity somehow detracts from its completeness, which I don't think is in fact the case, nor is it what the author objectively describes in the article.

        *Complex* (and, though to a lesser extent, *complicated*) primarily denotes that something is composed of two or more parts (i.e., it is neutral, not implying fault or failure), and only derivatively suggests lending to confusion. Related words that connote something more appropriate to the intended meaning, since they add a shading of confusion and fault: complicated, intricate, involved, knotty, and perplexing.

        Still, whether or not one of this substitutions are used by the author in place of *complex*, due to the above considerations, I think it remains that *and* rather than *but* is the appropriate conjunction.

      • http://www.twitter.com/thewindburn Windburn

        Welcome to the joys of the English language, Peri :) Such a convoluted and often perplexing language, unavoidably will give rise to situations where two opposing views on syntax exists. Fact is, there's no cut and dry here, so you're going to have to just agree to disagree and let it drop.

        Evidently by the other responses here, Ryan's intended meaning has been conveyed, so we're going to have to just rely on that as proof in the proverbial pudding. Pushing the point further is just stooping to nitpicking.

      • Dave

        I hate to say it guys but, English is highly idiomatic. And all languages are as they are spoken, not as they are "purely preserved by anal retentive academics." Anyone passingly familiar with linguistics should realize that the highly idiomatic-alness combined with common usage makes English a very NON-logical language. And this phrase is commonly used and understood, putting it under the language-is-as-language-is-spoken category. It is valid, and it conveys a very clear message. In fact, all your arguments about pure syntax are much more confusing than the title itself.

        In short, get your heads out of your buts (ha ha, a pun!) because everything you've said about 'and' or 'but' is irrelevant.

    • Andrem720

      @Peri... I mean this in the nicest way possible, but shut up. You spent several posts talking about nothing important. And even if you had made a point, the way you said it was rude.

      • Peri

        I don't think I was rude. It certainly wasn't intended. I thought I was making a legitimate point about a central feature of the article. The author, as well as several other folks, responded, so I gather they thought it was a worthwhile point (even if they disagreed with me).

  • Peri

    Second to last sentence should have read: "They don't seem like categories that we would normally think of as contrasting."

  • Peri

    Second to last sentence should have read: "They don't seem like categories that we would normally think of as contrasting."

  • Klaus

    I've have probelems to get really into the game, seems to difficult for me. Is there a "handbook" somewhere?
    Hope Jon will bring us a game like the blue ones again, they were pretty easy to get into!

    • Ryan Rigney

      The difficulty is definitely the worst part about the game, but the video that I included in the review should help. Also, try turning your game speed down to about 33%; it'll give you a lot more time to strategically plan out your movements and should help with that brutal difficulty curve.

  • Klaus

    I've have probelems to get really into the game, seems to difficult for me. Is there a "handbook" somewhere?
    Hope Jon will bring us a game like the blue ones again, they were pretty easy to get into!

    • Ryan Rigney

      The difficulty is definitely the worst part about the game, but the video that I included in the review should help. Also, try turning your game speed down to about 33%; it'll give you a lot more time to strategically plan out your movements and should help with that brutal difficulty curve.

  • Q.

    Nice and totally argreed by me review.

    I think the biggest surprise for me is the lack of direct move action, i mean why should i press 2-4 times the screen for simply moving a unit?

    Really, a quick touch-n-drag move had to be implemented.

    • Hmar9333

      There is a "Touch 'n' Drag" move.

      When in the 'top' tier of menus, press the button on the far bottom right. now touch and drag to move. Press the tick in the corner to return to the other menu. I'd upload a video, but that isn't so easy for me...

      Maybe I will tomorrow.

  • Q.

    Nice and totally argreed by me review.

    I think the biggest surprise for me is the lack of direct move action, i mean why should i press 2-4 times the screen for simply moving a unit?

    Really, a quick touch-n-drag move had to be implemented.

    • Hmar9333

      There is a "Touch 'n' Drag" move.

      When in the 'top' tier of menus, press the button on the far bottom right. now touch and drag to move. Press the tick in the corner to return to the other menu. I'd upload a video, but that isn't so easy for me...

      Maybe I will tomorrow.

  • http://www.twitter.com/nielskob Niels K.

    Totally agree with the review but I did not yet have the endurance to have a deeper look into the game. The controls are kinda complex and for me it's still a problem to recognize the units in spite of the helpful filters.
    The tutorial is just to short and it's the first iPhone-game where I wished that I had a written instruction manual either in PDF or in print.

    • Hmar9333

      If you check the release thread sometime tomorrow, (AEDST) Then I'll probably have uploaded a video.

  • http://www.twitter.com/nielskob Niels K.

    Totally agree with the review but I did not yet have the endurance to have a deeper look into the game. The controls are kinda complex and for me it's still a problem to recognize the units in spite of the helpful filters.
    The tutorial is just to short and it's the first iPhone-game where I wished that I had a written instruction manual either in PDF or in print.

    • Hmar9333

      If you check the release thread sometime tomorrow, (AEDST) Then I'll probably have uploaded a video.

  • habolt

    personally i found the game easy to get into. some features took a little thought and experimentation, but that's half the fun, no?

    i was able to complete the first three levels with no problem, and got the fourth level after a few tries...

    i love this game. and i think that the cut scene art is totally fine considering the overall level of detail in the game. it creates a satisfying and consistent whole, and is more than strong enough aesthetically.

    this is a very well thought out project. and great fun.. i am fascinated by the story and look forward to completing levels to hear the next part.

    death to the blue faction ~ aiiiiiiii!

  • habolt

    personally i found the game easy to get into. some features took a little thought and experimentation, but that's half the fun, no?

    i was able to complete the first three levels with no problem, and got the fourth level after a few tries...

    i love this game. and i think that the cut scene art is totally fine considering the overall level of detail in the game. it creates a satisfying and consistent whole, and is more than strong enough aesthetically.

    this is a very well thought out project. and great fun.. i am fascinated by the story and look forward to completing levels to hear the next part.

    death to the blue faction ~ aiiiiiiii!

  • majormauser

    If the game was a little clearer on forcing you to do the Advance tutorial when you start the game.... things would have been much better. I think the developer really tried to come up with a way to improve RTS controls on the iphone. Most others have a selection box. RC just does not have the traditional RTS controls .... and for the most part its good thing. Spend some time with the Advance tutorial and all will become clear.

  • majormauser

    If the game was a little clearer on forcing you to do the Advance tutorial when you start the game.... things would have been much better. I think the developer really tried to come up with a way to improve RTS controls on the iphone. Most others have a selection box. RC just does not have the traditional RTS controls .... and for the most part its good thing. Spend some time with the Advance tutorial and all will become clear.

  • Shumby

    I think the core game engine is sound enough that an improved tutorial will entirely change the perception of those who dislike it right now.

  • Shumby

    I think the core game engine is sound enough that an improved tutorial will entirely change the perception of those who dislike it right now.

  • Poedonk

    There is a learning curve but the controls do seem to be very intuitive. Lost a level or two but picked it up pretty quick. Being that all controls come with an explanation if held it seems to flow pretty well.

    Some things like the zoom function in the upper right are just so well thought out.

  • Poedonk

    There is a learning curve but the controls do seem to be very intuitive. Lost a level or two but picked it up pretty quick. Being that all controls come with an explanation if held it seems to flow pretty well.

    Some things like the zoom function in the upper right are just so well thought out.

  • Brian

    They have tutorials for a reason. I learnt how to play this game in 20 mins. It's definitely not too hard.

  • Brian

    They have tutorials for a reason. I learnt how to play this game in 20 mins. It's definitely not too hard.

  • Peter M

    I have never played an RTS game before, but I liked the other 2 games from this developer. Should I buy it or not. I would like to support him. Any suggestions for a RTS novice?

    • shumby

      as long as you're a good study and don't get frustrated easily I say go for it!

      the UI is revolutionary, John is a genius
      the grafx are great at any zoom level
      the campaign is short but there's a ton of content aside from that
      promised large episodic updates to come

      if you need help the forums are buzzing right now, we'll get you on your feet.

  • Peter M

    I have never played an RTS game before, but I liked the other 2 games from this developer. Should I buy it or not. I would like to support him. Any suggestions for a RTS novice?

    • shumby

      as long as you're a good study and don't get frustrated easily I say go for it!

      the UI is revolutionary, John is a genius
      the grafx are great at any zoom level
      the campaign is short but there's a ton of content aside from that
      promised large episodic updates to come

      if you need help the forums are buzzing right now, we'll get you on your feet.

  • Frood

    The tutorial is the weakest point of the game. Uniwar had an amazing training period and we all loved that game. This game is just too difficult as it currently is but after the next update maybe the controls will make more sense. Or if John could post everything online so we can read how the controls work better than blindly tapping the screen.

  • Frood

    The tutorial is the weakest point of the game. Uniwar had an amazing training period and we all loved that game. This game is just too difficult as it currently is but after the next update maybe the controls will make more sense. Or if John could post everything online so we can read how the controls work better than blindly tapping the screen.

  • RacingGun

    Interesting comments about the difficulty curve and controls. While I also found the controls a tad frustrating when I first picked it up, I found this was mostly due to my preconceptions of what RTS controls should be like, because I am such an RTS fan on the PC. BUT, after I spent a few games just getting used to the controls (with perhaps quickly selecting and moving units being the most important thing to do), I found myself intuitively moving individual units and squads of units around very quickly and with a minimal number of "button presses". As already mentioned, perhaps the biggest change from a PC-type RTS is the lack of drag-to-move on the default screen. This is important though, with the lack of screen real estate on an iTouch device. Pressing the bottom-left (not bottom right as was mentioned by someone else) button makes the interface behave as one would expect when desiring to move individual units.

    Anyways, I know I am a fan of more complex and difficult games, but I LOVE Red Conquest just because it doesn't feel like someone tried to dumb-down a PC game and cram it into the iPod/phone, but instead took the interface provided and made something that works wonderfully with it. I'll agree on the fact that I would LOVE to have a paper manual with this game, but its no where near a deal breaker for me... definitely 5/5 stars for Red Conquest!!!

  • RacingGun

    Interesting comments about the difficulty curve and controls. While I also found the controls a tad frustrating when I first picked it up, I found this was mostly due to my preconceptions of what RTS controls should be like, because I am such an RTS fan on the PC. BUT, after I spent a few games just getting used to the controls (with perhaps quickly selecting and moving units being the most important thing to do), I found myself intuitively moving individual units and squads of units around very quickly and with a minimal number of "button presses". As already mentioned, perhaps the biggest change from a PC-type RTS is the lack of drag-to-move on the default screen. This is important though, with the lack of screen real estate on an iTouch device. Pressing the bottom-left (not bottom right as was mentioned by someone else) button makes the interface behave as one would expect when desiring to move individual units.

    Anyways, I know I am a fan of more complex and difficult games, but I LOVE Red Conquest just because it doesn't feel like someone tried to dumb-down a PC game and cram it into the iPod/phone, but instead took the interface provided and made something that works wonderfully with it. I'll agree on the fact that I would LOVE to have a paper manual with this game, but its no where near a deal breaker for me... definitely 5/5 stars for Red Conquest!!!

  • Minotaar

    I have ever played a red/blue game from this author before, and having played through the campaign so far, and I feel that the game is too easy. Each level required only one or two attempts to pass it, and 2-3 further attempts to get an A. I found that the issues I had in getting higher grades was largely related to the need for me to get more familiar with the interface, which I find irritating.

    I find that the point and select interface for moving units is the most effective, and that the circle interface is nearly unusable. The lack of certain aspects of unit AI (e.g. automatic pursuit for example) is irritating in the extreme. Also, the game is insufficiently sensitive to "pinch" gestures.

    I will say more after playing more, but I find that making a few harvesters and foundries then spamming the "Crab" ships that do lots of damage almost always wins the game hands down. Blue production is not high enough to match red production, especially when the units do as much damage as the crabs.

    The game needs more sophistication regarding armor types and damage types, so that there is a more complex interaction between unit counters. Right now the game plays very much like a war of attrition because there isnt a huge difference between units. Units with individual abilities would be nice also.

  • Minotaar

    I have ever played a red/blue game from this author before, and having played through the campaign so far, and I feel that the game is too easy. Each level required only one or two attempts to pass it, and 2-3 further attempts to get an A. I found that the issues I had in getting higher grades was largely related to the need for me to get more familiar with the interface, which I find irritating.

    I find that the point and select interface for moving units is the most effective, and that the circle interface is nearly unusable. The lack of certain aspects of unit AI (e.g. automatic pursuit for example) is irritating in the extreme. Also, the game is insufficiently sensitive to "pinch" gestures.

    I will say more after playing more, but I find that making a few harvesters and foundries then spamming the "Crab" ships that do lots of damage almost always wins the game hands down. Blue production is not high enough to match red production, especially when the units do as much damage as the crabs.

    The game needs more sophistication regarding armor types and damage types, so that there is a more complex interaction between unit counters. Right now the game plays very much like a war of attrition because there isnt a huge difference between units. Units with individual abilities would be nice also.

  • iamBone

    I agree with RacingGun, I only found the controls hard at first because I was so used to computer RTS controls and kept wishing for something similar but once you play it for a bit you quickly adapt to the touch screen perfect controls.

    So maybe RTS-newbies won't find this game hard to pick up (as the review said) because they don't have a predefined meaning of RTS controls (eg. the computer ones).

    I have seen many posts about people who don't normally play, or haven't really gotten into RTS' and how they're unsure of whether or not they will like this game, but I haven't heard from them after they've bought the game and how they've found the controls.

  • iamBone

    I agree with RacingGun, I only found the controls hard at first because I was so used to computer RTS controls and kept wishing for something similar but once you play it for a bit you quickly adapt to the touch screen perfect controls.

    So maybe RTS-newbies won't find this game hard to pick up (as the review said) because they don't have a predefined meaning of RTS controls (eg. the computer ones).

    I have seen many posts about people who don't normally play, or haven't really gotten into RTS' and how they're unsure of whether or not they will like this game, but I haven't heard from them after they've bought the game and how they've found the controls.

  • http://www.joshuazimmerman.com Joshua Zimmerman

    I really enjoyed this game. Its a very solid RTS with great graphics and fun play.

    My problems with the game are thus:

    1) Cut scenes seem out of place style wise. Almost wished there was an option to turn them off. Maybe hire an art student to redo the cut scenes.

    2) Have some more complex options. Such as 'Researching' to upgrade ships or abilities. Maybe even add a couple of extra ships, especially to red. (Maybe increase the number of ships you can have as well.)

    3) Internet Multiplayer. It would be nice.

    4) Hurry up with the next episodes already! The game has been out for like at least two days, hurry up already. Lazy bum!

    Overall I love the game. But there are areas to be improved. I look forward to seeing what happens next!

  • http://www.joshuazimmerman.com Joshua Zimmerman

    I really enjoyed this game. Its a very solid RTS with great graphics and fun play.

    My problems with the game are thus:

    1) Cut scenes seem out of place style wise. Almost wished there was an option to turn them off. Maybe hire an art student to redo the cut scenes.

    2) Have some more complex options. Such as 'Researching' to upgrade ships or abilities. Maybe even add a couple of extra ships, especially to red. (Maybe increase the number of ships you can have as well.)

    3) Internet Multiplayer. It would be nice.

    4) Hurry up with the next episodes already! The game has been out for like at least two days, hurry up already. Lazy bum!

    Overall I love the game. But there are areas to be improved. I look forward to seeing what happens next!

  • anthonyafterwit

    This game is awesome. If it had online play it might be my favorite game.

    • ggg

      Uhm. It does have online...

  • anthonyafterwit

    This game is awesome. If it had online play it might be my favorite game.

    • ggg

      Uhm. It does have online...

  • Izzy1985

    Wow.. you people whine so much. You also try to use all these big words and sentances to try and look smart. No one really cares.. stop nit-picking on the use of "BUT" geez....you don't look smart... its just annoying

  • Izzy1985

    Wow.. you people whine so much. You also try to use all these big words and sentances to try and look smart. No one really cares.. stop nit-picking on the use of "BUT" geez....you don't look smart... its just annoying

  • alv746

    how come it wont let me go on to episode 2? ive beaten episode 1 but after the cutscene it goes back to the menu with episode 1?

  • http://whatwebsite? alv746

    how come it wont let me go on to episode 2? ive beaten episode 1 but after the cutscene it goes back to the menu with episode 1?

  • http://www.google.com alv746

    how come when i beat episode 1, it shows a cutscene for episode 2, then goes back to the episode 1 menu? how do i get to episode 2?

  • http://www.google.com alv746

    how come when i beat episode 1, it shows a cutscene for episode 2, then goes back to the episode 1 menu? how do i get to episode 2?

  • Justin

    I am in no way a "veteran" of the RTS series (quite the opposite really. "Conquest!" was my first RTS), but I found the game very intriguing and easy to figure out if played for about thirty minutes to an hour. Sure there are many menus to play around with and figure out, but the video walkthrough of one of the levels that John put out demonstrated them very well. I hope I'm not coming off as rude in this next sentence (I'm trying to be the exact opposite =P), but if you don't understand the controls then you must not be trying hard enough, as there are enough resources out there to aid in your gameplay experience. Not to mention the great, customizable(able to change your colour) graphics. I think this game will be great once John puts out the updates.

  • Justin

    I am in no way a "veteran" of the RTS series (quite the opposite really. "Conquest!" was my first RTS), but I found the game very intriguing and easy to figure out if played for about thirty minutes to an hour. Sure there are many menus to play around with and figure out, but the video walkthrough of one of the levels that John put out demonstrated them very well. I hope I'm not coming off as rude in this next sentence (I'm trying to be the exact opposite =P), but if you don't understand the controls then you must not be trying hard enough, as there are enough resources out there to aid in your gameplay experience. Not to mention the great, customizable(able to change your colour) graphics. I think this game will be great once John puts out the updates.

  • http://koowie.com Koowie

    Totally agree with your review.

  • C. Stubb

    THEY'RE BACK!