🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1719@nunki.usc.edu> jjung@nunki.usc.edu (John Jung) writes:
>In article <6726@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU> seitz@cory.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (Matthew Eric Seitz) writes:
>>>
>>	I don't think Risk is available.  However, you might take a look at
>>Electronic Arts' _Lords_of_Conquest_, which was designed as a deluxe Risk.
>
>  Are you insane? I tried Lords of Conquest in the store, and I think it
>stinks. I had seen the ads, and I knew the graphics weren't going to be much,
>but when I actually saw it, the graphics looked like *bad* Atari 8-bit
>graphics. The game interfaced wasn't too bad, but I didn't like it. The sound
>(which I prefered off) was bad and annoying.
>
>  I would not reccommend this game to anybody who likes/loves Risk. I am a
>devotee of Risk, and I didn't like Lords of Conquest one _single_ bit.
>
	I wasn't trying to review or reccommend the game.  Just wanted to 
mention it as a possibility, since it is the closest thing to Risk on the ST.
However, I don't think the game is as bad as you make out.  Yes, the graphics
are crude and the sound is poor.  So what?  The appeal of board games like
Risk, Chess, or Go isn't the slick visual and sound effects, it's in the 
strategy and subtleties of the game itself.  Lots of bells and whistles are
a nice extra, but a solid game design, clear rules, good user interface and a
challenging opponent are the most important things.  I'm just as happy playing
PD Krabat as Chessmaster 2000, even without the 3-D board, full color, and
digitized voice.

					Hoping to be found sane,
					Matt Seitz
					seitz@cory.berkeley.edu
>						John