I try not to let myself fall in love with the hype for a game. All it does it make the disappointment more intense when the game isn't everything you wanted (and, let's face it, no game is). Right now the fans and reviewers who were eagerly awaiting Advance Wars: Days of Ruin are grappling with some mixed reactions to the new gameplay. While Days of Ruin's current metacritic score is sitting at a stately 87%, I wonder if that'll last after more scores from smaller, angrier outlets start trickling in.
Anyway, jump behind the cut for a massive round-up of the online and critical reaction to Nintendo's latest strategy title thus far. What do you think? (I'm not playing it yet, but hey, my excuse is that somebody's paying me to play something else.)
First let's start with the first-glance impressions, something the big blogs have refined into an art form. The distinguished competition at DS Fanboy were quick to spot an early NeoGAF post by Modojo editor Justin Davis, complaining about missing features.
- No War Room
- No unlockable hard campaign
- No Battle Maps shop
- No Survival mode
- No Combat mode
- No tags/rankings outside of the medals screen
- Only 12 playable COs (compared to Dual Strike's 25+ COs)
Another post was quick to point out that some of those features are still around, just in modified form, but some of that is probably food for thought if you're a longtime Advance Wars fan.
Kotaku's impressions get right to the point, discussing the gameplay's finer points in great detail. If you're used to coasting through the game by relying on your CO powers, Days of Ruin may leave you completely boned.
By level 14, in fact, I had hit the sort of wall that required me to play the conflict over, and over, and over again, getting so annoyed at my imaginary adversary at one point that me wife asked me who I was playing. (She walked off in disgust when she realized I'd been yelling at the DS and not a real person.)
In fact, some of the single player campaign battles almost feel like tactical brainteasers. These levels are constructed so tightly that I suspect there are actually only a few ways to win.
Kotaku also graciously put up scans of some little "stat card" feelies that they sent along with Kotaku's copy of the game. These are really neat and I hope you can access the same info in-game somewhere.
Ah, but these namby-pamby impressions posts leave out the one element gamers irrationally slaver over: review scores. What's fun without numerical validation? So let's get into the critical reception.
Nintendo Power had one of the first reviews out in its February 2008 issue, taking a restrained tone and a conservative 8.5 score.
If there were anything like the gaming equivalent of comfort food, Advance Wars would be it. Now on its fourth iteration, gamers know what to expect from the franchise--a solid tactical warfare game that doesn't demand too much, but doesn't leave you unsatisfied, either. There isn't a lot of gameplay innovation in Days of Ruin--a few new vehicles and some fresh changes on the battlefield give your brain something to chew on, but most of what you'll see is comfortingly the same as before.
1up's review (by internet superstar Dan Hsu) couldn't differ more with the Nintendo Power stance of same ol', same ol'. Half the text just runs down the gameplay changes and makes some sound incredibly dramatic... though its 8.5 score is identical to Nintendo Power's.
Commanding Officers (COs) are now also more tactical in nature. These previously behind-the-scenes soldiers only offered a superpower effect when your troops got beat up enough. Now, COs take action on the field by entering an individual unit and having a local area of effect that boosts other nearby soldiers' offense and/or defense. As you deal out damage within this Command Zone, your area of effect grows, and your CO Power Gauge grows, eventually allowing you to unleash a superpower. The way COs work now takes some getting used to -- it's the biggest change the series has ever had, and veterans will probably forget to load up those COs from time to time (they're useless unless you put them on the battlefield).
IGN's coverage is enthusiastic and detailed, but opts for a barely-different 8.6 score. Much of this text focuses on the way battles play out on the field, and how available units have changed.
Previous sequels to Advance Wars kept adding more and more units to our army. Days of Ruin removes some of the vehicles from Dual Strike and adds a couple new ones, resulting in the same count of 26 ground, air, and naval units. The Neo- and Megatanks have been retired and replaced with the War Tank. An Anti-tank has been introduced, which is an indirect unit that can counter-attack (finally, right?). Two new versatile aircraft are now available: the Duster can fire on both ground and air units, and the Seaplane can attack any unit type.
Finally there's the Cheat Code Central review, which is so excited about the game that the writer seems like he might burst at any moment. While a bit of the text is vapid fanboying (with attendant 4.6/5 score), there's some really interesting commentary buried beneath the gushing.
As you can see, this new world is far more engaging than any of the previous titles. The base story is really interesting, although some of the conversations are still a bit hokey. However, I actually read every bit of dialogue before, during, and after battles. The same cannot be said for its predecessors. Even though the old games were all about great gameplay, it was a pure button mash to get through the mindless interactions. The vast improvement in storytelling has the effect of making the game and battles not only more interesting, but also much more satisfying and meaningful.
