Ground Control

DEVELOPER : Massive 
PUBLISHER : Sierra Studios

 

System Requirements Pentium 233, 64 RAM

Recommended Pentium II 350MHz, 128+ MB RAM,  TNT or better 3D card

Ratings
Code Issues Graphics: 9 - Certainly the marquee feature of Ground Control. The one thing keeping this from being a 10 is the uninspired unit design. Audio: 7 - Nothing to memorable here, either pro or con. The voice acting for the briefings and in-game cinematics are above average. Interface: 7 - The combination of a solid camera control system and unique unit management interface make this a marginal success. To be honest, I'm not sure there is a 3D RTS out there that does it better. Nevertheless, when compared to the simplicity of 2D RTS interfaces, there is still much progress to be made.	Play Issues Solo gameplay: 6 - Standard scripted missions. The tactical elements introduced by armor distribution and low-light bolster what is ultimately revealed to be a very plain 'deathmatch' game. Replayability: 7 -The scripted missions certainly don't offer much to discover on subsequent playthroughs, though the multiplayer implementation is competent enough to ensure some post-campaign entertainment. Multiplay: 7 - It's still deathmatch, but at least you can join at will. Learning Curve: 5 - While the tutorials do a fine job of explaining basic RTS mechanics, it tends to understate the importance of the new game elements. That, in conjunction with the freedom inherent in a free roaming camera, creates some moments of confusion throughout the early hours of gameplay.
Other/Notes Documentation 8 – The game manual is well laid out and informative. The unit encyclopedia is especially appreciated. Pros: Beautiful Engine, interesting stabs at 3D RTS interface design, dynamic joining in multiplayer, interesting AI tweaks for friendly units. Cons: Uneven documentation, potentially a pay service to play on Microsoft's Internet Gaming Zone (though player support games are free). Overall: 7.0 Ground Control's greatest flaw is that it reminds you of other games, sometimes because Ground Control exceeds their feature set and sometimes because it falls short. It's engine is a triumph, but I desperately wish it was debuted on a game other than a vanilla RTS port to 3D. But to be honest, the one game Ground Control makes me think about the most is Massive Entertainment's next title. Hopefully, for us at least, they won't play it safe and will give us a game as fun as it is pretty.

Ground Control is part two of Sierra's attempt to corner the RTS market from a fumbling Westwood Studios and an indifferent Blizzard. Their freshman attempt, Homeworld, was a critical hit but was plagued with just average sales. Nevertheless, Homeworld broke many boundaries when it came to interface and presentation, and the genre's boundaries grew as a result. It took advantage of graphics hardware that for the most part the strategy genre had ignored. Massive Entertainment's Ground Control (MEGC) feels like a confident sophomore effort, but upon continued exposure eventually collapses because of its hit to miss ratio in the innovation arena. It also loses some luster from the somewhat unavoidable similarities to other 3D strategy games that currently clutter the market. I often couldn't help making unfavorable comparisons to classics like Dark Omen, Myth and more recent titles like Dark Reign 2.

An easy and immediate comparison can be made to Bungie's Myth franchise. Eschewing the RTS staples of resource gathering and base building (and the subsequent infrastructure of 'harvesters' and unit production), the game attempts to focus solely on tactical engagement. To this end, you are primarily commanding squads of between 4 and 10 vehicles or soldiers, rather than single units. This contributes to a certain manageability that other RTS games often lack, since many missions will have you only controlling a half-dozen or so regiments. MEGC however offers a number of new game elements to manage in order to fill in the void that base nurturing leaves.

One such element is an appreciated nod to realistic armor tactics. MEGC's units typically have strong armor to their front, with weaker armor protecting their sides and rear. This allows maneuvers like flanking to carry substantial weight and to be an integral tactic when facing superior forces or numbers. Another is the use of the engines considerable lighting effects to create shadowed areas. Stealth becomes a viable tact for most unit types when occulted in darkness, which when combined with the above mentioned armor configuration leads to some delicate but satisfying operations.

The graphics engine stands out as the primary draw for this title. It's capable of drawing breathtaking vistas of rolling hills, shadowy ravines, and some of the most realistic looking grass ever implemented in a 3D title. The units themselves sport an admirable amount of texture detail, though regrettably the only way to truly enjoy this is to zoom in so close that effective unit management becomes impossible. Another detail worth noting is the trails and dust that units leave in their wake. While not infinitely persistent, they add some much needed 'weight' to your forces endeavors. Coupled with above average weapon special effects and moody lighting, this game can easily be enjoyed from a visual standpoint.

But as detail oriented as the graphics engine is, it's baffling to note how generic the units are. Not only do they sport such vanilla names as Light Terradyne, the amount of detail hinted at in the comprehensive unit encyclopedia found in the manual, seems completely irrelevant in-game. One almost gets the impression that the developers came to the same conclusion, since each unit has the ability to sport various special equipment. Ranging from various types of ammunition to healing kits to anti-armor weaponry, these limited use modifications go a long way in adding some personality to the otherwise sterile units. Regrettably, these are assigned per mission, rather than permanent modifications. Many missions ended in failure for me because I became too reliant on these sporadically available tools.

One feature that falls clearly in the realism over Gameplay category is friendly fire. Much like Myth, your intervention is required for your units to avoid obliterating each other, let alone the enemy. One way Myth addressed this nod to the chaos of battle was to offer almost a dozen formations. This allowed the player to strictly guide the encounter; the degeneration from order to disorder became one of my favorite spectacles in those Bungie titles. While MEGC offers a paltry 3 formation types (Box, Line, Column), it makes significant amends by allowing the player to tailor the AI of said units. For instance, setting a squad to Offensive movement mode makes certain that your units will reach their destination, but at the same time engage enemy units where possible. This is in stark contrast to the Defensive movement mode where movement orders are secondary to eliminating any enemy forces encountered. Other rules of engagement can be set as well, namely when a squad will attack an enemy (returning fire only or initiating combat). While being able to mix and match these settings allows for some reduction in micro management, it doesn't completely eliminate the frustration of friendly causalities. I imagine this was intentional, just in not much fun.

Ground Control attempts to correct many of the problems that ports of RTS mechanics to 3D make, such as Earth 2140 and Warzone 2100. First at bat is the camera control interface, which seems to actually take some lessons from 1st person games. While using arrow keys to control forward and reverse motion, your primary control is the mouse, which will pan and yaw your perspective in the direction you move the pointer. The requisite mini-map does a good job of marking the range and the field of view of your camera. One 'hit' in the innovation column in the ability to view a mid-range map of the playfield, between the abstract minimap and detailed game map where you're controlling units. This screen comes in handy for precise camera repositioning, as well as getting details on where the player currently stands with regard to the laundry list of objectives most missions require completed.

Selecting units maintains the RTS genre's convention of 'drag-select', setting quick-groups, and double-clicking to reposition the camera over the unit. One neat feature is the hovering interface of squad buttons. This was a smart decision on the developer's part, since it capitalizes on the relatively small number of squads. They contain an icon illustrating the unit type, their health and function as a thermometer for when squads start taking casualties. They also allow you to at a glance digest the AI's behavior settings or select a unit that is beyond the camera's field of view. Since all these squad icons are available at once, maintaining an overview is surprisingly easy. Air unit controls however don't quite hang together. The biggest problem is the fact they tend to fly in large, arcing patterns, dispelling any sort of unit coherence. Air combat certainly looks good, capturing dogfights better than games like Starcraft, but feels 'soggy'.

Multiplayer is corralled via WON.net, so if you've played Half-Life, you'll be familiar with the basic lobby architecture. One nice innovation is the inclusion of dynamic joining for internet games. This most likely will lead to Ground Control offering new users a very positive first multiplayer experience (a rarity), since you can quickly find a game and get into it. One of my greatest frustrations with other lobby RTS games like Starcraft and AOE II, is fumbling through a few dozen lobbies looking for a good match. Since getting everybody on the same page can require ten minutes or so, if you end up not enjoying that game, you've wasted a considerable amount of time. With MEGC, the feedback loop is significantly shorter.

In conclusion, Ground Control offers any number of innovations and direct hits when it comes to the RTS genre. The problem, and the reason I had to labor to finish the game, is that they combine into a rather bland final experience. It's like a mediocre chef with the world's finest ingredients. Massive Entertainment followed the recipe for a 3D RTS, included some fresh elements in calculated portions, and even broke some genre rules with finesse. Regrettably, the final product just fails to live up to 'picture in the cookbook'. Ground Control undeniably demonstrates a certain flare, especially in the graphics department, but ultimately draws comparisons to better, and often many years older, products.

If you like to comment on this review, please post a message at the forum.
Reviewed by Jeff Morris