|
by fabio 12/26/2015, 12:07pm PST |
|
|
|
|
|
I had only fiddled with the campaign a little in 2005's Act of War, but I went back to play it on GoG and realized it was exactly the same game as Act of Aggression: same factions, same units, same buildings, same upgrades.
Except all those things I said would make AoA good? Only one resource, no hidden resources, less units, smaller maps, units bigger in scale, no roads? That's all in AoW! AoW is the better, improved, 10 year earlier version!
It still has the problem of units dying before you even get a chance to react because every weapon is high damage, slow reload. The whole POW system still stinks but at least you can easily turn it off. Doesn't have the humor of Generals, which is still overall the better game.
If you're itching for some kind of Generals fix, Act of War is definitely worth getting off of GoG. Every single thing about it is better than the $45 Act of Aggression (except only AoA has supported multiplayer but who cares when the game is so shitty?). The gold edition includes the expansion High Treason, which I wouldn't recommend touching since there's barely anything new and what is new blows the balance to hell (Task Force Talon heavy weapon team is ungodly broken). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|