Achron

[eRe4s3r]

But you already licensed the Unity 3 Engine Think its time to do that Dungeon Keeper clone! 

Though, i won't complain about another AI War Expansion either

[x4000]

Haha, and we use as little of the Unity 3 engine as possible.  We basically use it for its graphics, sound, and so forth pieces.  We don't use any of their actual game logic code whatsoever, nor do we use their physics, etc.  To license a literal other game engine from some other company would entail wading through someone else's game logic, which is pretty high up their on my list of things I don't like to do.

[eRe4s3r]

Yeah but you could use the render-engine of Unity 3 which is, i would say, fairly decent, more decent than the engine used in Achron anyway. Now lets just ignore the 1 million $ needed for assets to make any kind of AAA looking 3d-game nowadays..

But in the end you make the games you like and thats good.. ^^ AI War does at least not look ugly (anymore - lets not remember anything pre 1.0 ,p )

Point being, if you need a 3D-Engine to make that Dungeon Keeper Clone you have one ^^

[x4000]

Hahah, yep, this is all true.

[Echo35]

But you already licensed the Unity 3 Engine Think its time to do that Dungeon Keeper clone! 

Though, i won't complain about another AI War Expansion either

More or less

[Mánagarmr]

Necromancy!

So now that this game has been out like forever...anyone actually still playing it? I got it WAY back in the alpha phase and toyed around with retail for a bit, but it never really hit home. I don't know why though.

[Draco18s]

Necromancy!

So now that this game has been out like forever...anyone actually still playing it? I got it WAY back in the alpha phase and toyed around with retail for a bit, but it never really hit home. I don't know why though.

I own the game, completed...a campaign and a half.

It still lacks some critical details like "unit differentiation."  I.e. being able to tell the difference between a guy who can build resource gatherers and a guy who can build building foundations.

Or an anti-air tank from an anti-ground tank.

Not to mention that some of the missions are really frakking difficult.  Not to the point of requiring 100% accurate timing and command, but that events will progress faster than you're ready for them to.  If you're not simultaneously building an army at T -4:40, moving units out at T -2 attacking with the army at T -0, as well as scouting at T +1...well, then you're just screwed.

[Mánagarmr]

Sounds a lot like I remember it then...

[Volatar]

I own the game. I just never have played it. It's sitting in my Steam library.

[Draco18s]

I own the game. I just never have played it. It's sitting in my Steam library.

Take a few minutes and play the opening missions in the campaign.  They're light on the time travel and get you used to the idea.

I didn't have any problems until the mission where you have to defend a research station "in 20 minutes."  That was the first mission I had to restart numerous times before I won.

[BobTheJanitor]

I have it, and I wanted to be excited about it, but yeah the terrible aesthetic kind of killed it for me. If I can't tell one unit from another at a glance, that's a big killer in an RTS. Even if the 'real time' in that acronym is kind of nebulous.

[Mánagarmr]

Yeah, the aesthetics are a bit of a downturn, not because they're ugly (well they kinda are), but because everything is hard to distinguish. I was also miffed about how "sluggish" movement felt. The game felt like it was played in slow mo. Pathfinding isn't exactly stellar either.

It's a brilliant idea, but the execution was somewhat less than perfect.