Advance Wars Doesn't Hold Up (And What That Tells Us)

It's a lot less about real war than you think.
Subscribe to Hard Drive Mag (where my new videos are)
/ @harddrivemag
My current Twitter account (whilst I'm on the run from Elon)
/ videosealman
If you feel like supporting my work:
/ nocturnalfudj
0:00 - 4:16 Intro
4:16 - 10:12 #1: Oh My God, The AI
10:12 - 13:34 #2: Time No Longer Has Any Meaning To Me
13:34 - 17:30 #3: Camera Angles & Complications
17:30 - 18:45 Intermission
18:45 - 21:59 #4: All The Small Things
21:59 - 28:04 #5: The Real Black Hole
28:04 - 30:01 Ending

[@NocturnalFudj]

Send all hate comments here twitter.com/VideoSealMan

[@goodgamer1419]

No

[@sooubic]

Congrats on 50K by the way.

[@Shibanu_]

No but i still disagree. 😊

[@timthetoolpool]

Fire Emblem is certainly the more satisfying of the two to play. Even when I legitimately win a hard match on AW, I rarely get a sense of catharsis.

[@MasterKnightDH]

So vanilla TV Tropes thinks that Re-Boot Camp is a Polished Port, even though this very video exists. Want to point and laugh at vanilla TV Tropes?

[@steamtasticvagabond474]

18:53 honestly the most realistic part of this game, military generals not seeing their troops as people, but as pawns to be deployed

[@keiyakins]

Also, wars world being fucking insane is like... the most famous thing about the series.

[@RustyRick2023]

I've played AW1 and 2 back in the day and while I do agree that the AI tends to be heavily flawed that you can exploit it, heck some of the missions like the 3 Kanbei ones in AW1 outright EXPECT you to work with it's flaws to your favor like holding one-tile chokepoints, I want to bring up that the Reboot Camp versions of fog of war missions are for the most part far less annoying because in here the AI is also stuck to the same vision limitation rules as you are whereas in GBA it essentially doesn't and can attack you with indirects and directs out of vision range even when it technically shouldn't, except for still having to move units to forests and reefs to 'reveal' you since that still conceals you. Length-wise, yeah the AW2 missions do tend to drag on quite a bit in the later half, but I think the pacing is still fairly acceptable. There is a fast-forward button now to at least aleviate having to wait for the AI to move so many units of it's own around. But I do want to ask/slightly criticize: How did the final battle mission against Sturm in AW1 take you about 5 hours? Granted yeah the meteor strikes can put an damper on your effort to push through to his base and having to regroup, but when I played it even back on GBA, it took me an hour at most. Also, what difficulty version of the Blue Moon lab mission in AW2 were you playing? I assume normal but likewise it seems odd that you were struggling that hard to beat it when for the assault on the east as Grit you can pump out artillery's and still comfortably seize the lab in a decent timeframe while just distracting the majority of enemy units to the west. I understand that you don't like Advance Wars' design, flow and unit interactions, but I don't think the gameplay itself is flawed, just that the single-player content requires you to learn it's AI flaws and run with it and it's not your cup of tea and you just threw in the towel for it. I still think AW1 isn't as good compared to AW2, except for some of the factory missions.

[@junkmail2223]

the reason the AI is bad in advance wars is that a good AI is a "5 years and a research team" problem not a "indie devs on a 1-year timeline" problem

[@insertjokeh3r3]

Theres also some non lab missions that are boring slogs like drake destroying black guns with kanbei where hawke cant really do much to stop you and the stage before the final battle on normal.

[@hayatuthunder5270]

Thanks for mentioning the 20 minute battle timer. It’s extremely underpublicised. They actually “re-introduced“ the regular timer to Scarlet and Violet by “re-introduced“ I actually mean it got silently added in some patch months after the game released, it didn’t even work for the first few days after the patch and to top it all of you can not select it during normal battles. No that would be to easy. You have to schedule a battle 24 hours or longer beforehand in a separate new mode. You will then have the ability to do your battle with the old timer and have to schedule again for the next one.

[@daserfomalhaut9809]

I find it very strange that you went into discussing the importance of highlighting nuance and mentioning how reviewers don't touch on deeper topics of games. You reference Pokemon's timer, Brawl's tripping, etc, never being talked about. But you did not touch on Advance Wars's multiplayer or competitive scene at all here. That is a longstanding component and tremendous reason for peoples attachment to the series to this day. It's to the point there is a fan made web based Advance Wars client with a large, global competitive league. Like Battle Network Legacy Collection, it's one of the reasons it's remake was so anticipated; to finally play these older entries online for the first time. The Wars series started as a multiplayer only game which should demonstrate how integral that component is to the franchise. But you entirely glossed over the totally different beast that is the multiplayer which was surprising given your usual depth and your background as to what kind of video game player we know you as. Your main, actual point is true, but you didn't exactly adhere to your own standards here, I feel like.

[@MasterKnightDH]

The multiplayer has its own problems anyway. Friends Only AND custom online map size limit of 300 tiles limit what is available whatsoever. That's grossly inadequate.

[@daserfomalhaut9809]

Missed opportunity but that sounds like a WayForward shortcoming or hinderance from Nintendo exclusive to this remake. WayForward is small and not exactly known for online infrastructure. Nintendo likely didnt give them much of a budget. But thats also just a concern of options and not gameplay itself. I'm talking about the original design of Advance Wars gameplay in a multiplayer environment which has been battle tested and enjoyed for 20 years by fans. Its a completely different experience where his complaints don't really work there but wasnt even brought up in passing.

[@SaotomeLuna]

Oh, I know this one! The reason the voiceover seems so half baked is because that's how Wayforward just likes to do things. You see it in Shantae a lot, where Shantae might say a character's name, or a single word, but never the dialogue in it's entirety. They can DEFINITELY afford to do it, it's clearly just a stylistic choice at this point, and it's one that I don't blame people for bouncing off of. In 2023, we're SPOILED for voiceovers in games, and something like this or 2020's Paradise Killer, with their limited, repetitive voiceovers, can be very jarring at first.

[@300IQPrower]

That would make sense if Wayforward had full creative control, but they presumably don't as it's Intelligent Systems and Nintendo's series, and Wayforward have made remakes in the past that bring full voice acting for main characters like Double Dragon Neon. also, yay! Paradise Killer acknowledgement!

[@TastyCarcass]

As a fast reader I like it. I usually prefer grunts to help sell emotion and text to read. VO takes me out of it if it's a text box game

[@mihaimercenarul7467]

@@TastyCarcass you are weird af

[@kev1068]

Hard Drive couldn't handle the hot take

[@BraveDuckable]

Love your work dude, your video essay style is so loose and snappy, it pairs so nice with your S tier wit. I got the good dopamine when I saw the new vid drop on your old channel, still waiting for the day your sub count x10s overnight

[@TastyCarcass]

I think you're wrong about the lander because it all comes down to fuel costs. The main weakness of air units is high fuel costs, and if they run out they die Landers refill it

[@adrianrenard1262]

Great video, I agree a lot, is nice to see i wasn't crazy as a lil kid with these feelings for the game On another note, I love your audio, something about it is so good but i cant point it out, not too loud not too faint, balanced, keep up the good stuff :)

[@NocturnalFudj]

Ahaha, thank you! I'm pleasantly surprised by this as I always worry I shout a bit too much and am a bit too loud lol

[@LukeFlavel]

I remember watching some of your world's worst review videos last year then hearing shortly after that the channel would be shutting down. I remember your videos and your personality very fondly and to find that you're still here putting in the hard yards a year later makes me feel like I've chanced upon a treasure trove buried not too far below the coriander in my grandmother's back garden. I love you Fudj, and I cant' wait to catch up on the backlog

[@PRORAGEGUY]

this video feels like game journalist's rant

[@Athesies]

I love clicking on a fudj video and bot knowing if it's going to be a giant serious analysis, a huge load of jokes and memes or a completely even mix of the 2

[@falcone5696]

5 and 3 hours for the 2 last missions, on normal difficulty, sounds like a LOT even with animations on. I'd be interested in at least skipping through those videos to see what happened, did you record them?

[@onlymyself1234]

While i agree the game has a ton of weird flaws that are most likely a product of its time, i entirely reject the game as "fundamentally flawed". None of these flaws can't be fixed. Hell, plenty of them already have obvious solutions, like the AI or the unit clutter. They're not fundamental flaws hard-baked into the very foundation of the game's design, they're very surface-level flaws that don't require you to completely rethink the game, they just need to be looked at through a more modern lens and fixed. Anyway i like long missions where i can build a big army and Fire Emblem can eat dirt

[@swordmasterarie7752]

As someone who actually reviewed this game with no prior Advance Wars experience while also not having to rush my review too much either (I finished both campaigns in around 2 weeks, and I got the game on release day) - I'm trying to figure out why I can find myself agreeing with most of what you're saying in this video despite really liking the game. I must just be bad at strategy games because yeah the AI makes really dumb moves sometimes, but not dumb enough for me to fully take advantage of? I guess? I also agree that some maps are definitely WAY too fucking long, I think if they make a new Advance Wars game they should just take out bases cause those seem to be the root of the problem lol (take out Fog of War too while you're at it). Personally though, after playing so much Fire Emblem - which is loaded with RPG elements and gameplay variables - it was fun to play a game similar to it where I didn't have to spend a billion hours in menus and didn't have to think about being overprepared or underprepared. Advance Wars is such a concentrated strategy experience by comparison, and that's what I loved about it. And yeah, your point about how day 1 reviews aren't really meant to be critical in the same way that like, a retrospective on a game a year later can be for example, is honestly extremely accurate. A review often just doesn't have the space to get into minute details and/or critiques (which would also sometimes require me to spoil aspects of a game that I wouldn't want to spoil), cause I already have to spend like half of it explaining what the game is even about. The potential audience for game reviews is simply too large I think, you have to basically take every possible customer into account somewhat (someone with no Advance Wars experience versus someone who's played every game in the series). No idea how to really solve this as you said, it just kinda is what it is at this point. Regardless, great video, and keep up the great content both here and on Hard Drive!

[@MasterKnightDH]

Unit production doesn't have to be removed. Game Boy Wars 3 has the Work Car, which allows for strengthening properties, and that actually results in gameplay being sped up once the decisive skirmish is settled, especially when the Work Car is a Lite Land unit and therefore gets mauled by the Anti-Air Tank even on properties. Gameplay in GBW3 avoids becoming stale from lack of viable interaction as a result. Fog of War needs better presentation. A guy named Melth showcases how he can decipher the opposing player's composition based on seen enemy units' Fuel values. It would have also benefited from Days of Ruin's move-by vision, but my point is that Fog of War isn't innately bad. But anyway, RBC does legitimately have issues that I called out on a post of mine on the Advance Wars Wikia. And at this point, barely a month after the game's release, add in Fudj's own review and yeah, retrospective won't be so nice to RBC when we get to the first yearly anniversary of the game's release.

[@just-mees]

Review culture is why we get bangers like "the memorable cast of characters of xenoblade like the lovable meathead rain and the stoic and inscrutable duncan"

[@deepseadoughnut44]

The best one I played was dual strike on DS, and I remember the AI being a bit less one note. There are definitely some exploits in the original AW, It's a shame they didn't update the AI with these remakes, but I hope it brings the games back. Then hopefully they can make an updated new game that can build on what came before but keep the feel of the series

[@Ace24713]

I'm surprised you didn't call out the AI's favoring of targeting APC's, I found that way more puzzling than the other behaviors you mentioned. I would agree with you that the dumb AI is the biggest flaw of the game (maybe you could pin that on GBA processing power, idk), but also I do not think improving the AI would make the game better. Generally the enemy has a significant number of advantages over you, they 100% designed the campaign to be challenging with the limitations of their AI in mind. So it just doesn't bother me, you still have to strategize if you want to win... you just don't have to strategize as deeply as you would against a human opponent... Y'know I heard someone call the AI in Wargroove "too perfect" and thus unsatisfying to play against, so I really don't think it's so simple as better ai -> better game. Remember the goal is not to make the best AI opponent, it is to craft a fun challenge, and that's possible regardless of how bad the AI is. On pacing... you do know you can turn off the battle animations... right? Cuz you didn't mention it or explain why that doesn't help... I think to me the biggest issue with pacing was closing out the mission, where you already won but had to clean up. I noticed that a few times and it was frustrating, but I felt generally the AW2 missions with their more variations on win conditions meant it usually didn't drag on too long past the point where I could autopilot. Criticizing individual units for... existing? Is a weird take... like yeah they're niche... I don't understand why that's a flaw. Cruisers will annihilate any subs, and cruisers are cheaper than subs. If a cruiser kills a sub it has reclaimed it's own value economically, it doesn't need to have a purpose at all times. I mean yeah Missiles and Naval units are overpriced for sure, but the units don't need to be balanced, they need to be fun. I personally rarely bought Missiles, but it can still be an interesting unit to try to circumvent when the AI has one protecting it's other units. Relatedly the weird damage tables I think are actually quite fun... it can lead to some very interesting strategy ideas where you block units with other units that they are ineffective against. Like protecting my Bomber from enemy Fighters by surrounding it with ground units while I roll my Anti-Air up to get rid of it. Or sometimes you can do the opposite, like in one mission I just surrounded my opponents Fighter with 4 infantry and locked it in place for the entire rest of the match. It was hilarious, I love that you can do crap like that! Also it low-key bothers me you kept pointing to that instance where the AI let you win by not attacking you. If you did the same thing I did and pelted that Medium Tank with your Silos then it was probably at 001% health, the literal minimum value because Silos can't kill. It would have done nothing to your soldier on the 3-defense Lab tile, it would've died from counter-attack damage. A soldier over 90% hp still does 10 points of capture damage, I'm pretty sure the AI was in an unwinnable situation. Now could you have constructed a situation where the AI could've won but made a bad decision and threw? Oh yeah easily... it just irks me that you kept repeatedly pointing to that same situation when I'm pretty sure it actually was unwinnable for the AI. Also you called out a different map where the AI spammed useless submarines and landers... but you know the enemy doesn't have a ground base in that map? I mean what else are they to do with their money anyways? Yeah it's dumb behavior but I really do not think it caused you to "win the map" in any way. I mean same argument, it doesn't really invalidate your point about the AI but it is an example you called out in your video as "dumb ai behavior" that I don't think is a good example. While I mostly agree with the opinions you've laid down, I do hardly think it summates to the game not holding up. I mean I liked it quite a lot, and Reboot Camp was my first AW game so I don't have nostalgia here.

[@xylon7333]

I'm curious how you will enjoy the later entries in the series, if you ever decide to give them a shot. While I don't think they have particularly improved ai or bloat, I do personally think days of ruin, the last one, addresses the bloat, while also actually containing a meaningful story. i think its pretty depressing the only reason aw1/2 were selected for this remake is for nostalgia purposes, when they may not be the best representation of the series

[@timthetoolpool]

I haven't watched the video yet, but I'm going to say you're incorrect anyway. There's no way Advance Wars will come off significantly different than it ever has.

[@ZodiacEntertainment2]

I will be honest, that anti-criticism rant at the start of this video is gonna be an unsub from me. I usually love your videos but that kind of hug boxing is not what this industry, or any others, should promote. Once you've put something out into the world people are completely free to rip into it however they want and your feelings about that as a creator are completely and utterly irrelevant. This is especially true if you're asking people to spend money on the stuff that you made. That's life, and if somebody can't handle that they should stop pretending like they deserve a seat at the grown-up table.

[@Hyperlingualism]

While the AI of the first two games is certainly atrocious, in your 'best' example at 8:24 that game was all but won on your end. Even if they bought themselves another turn (which wasn't likely, even both a 1HP MD tank and a 1HP infantry together still have high chance of doing less than one full stat of damage when that infantry gets the defense bonus from the HQ), almost all of their units were at least 3 turns away, most of them being 4 turns away from attacking since most were artillery. The closest that their reinforcements could've gotten to you were the rocket next to the bridge which you had a bomber for, or the recon or whatever they produced from their factory, which you could've blocked from crossing the bridge using your tank or even your T-Copter, costing them an extra turn. That was a sure win for you, not a sure loss, even if it had good AI.

[@MoeHasubandoAbsolver]

Honestly blowing me away how much effort you put into complaining about this game vs how little effort you put into actually playing it. Gonna list my complaints about your complaints here. First off, complaining about the visuals isn't pedantic when they've added a huge brown border to the map that never used to be there, giving the whole thing a tabletop vibe it didn't used to have. Secondly, those AI malfunctions are remake exclusive, the gba cartridge AI is dumb but nowhere near that dumb. Most of the difficulty comes from the maps themselves and how you'll use the terrain. It's basically a puzzle game. Btw that missile unit you were complaining about moves six tiles on roads, and two on grass. Try moving it the other way next time. Thirdly the mission length complaint is fair enough, but seeing as how you can save at any point during a battle, drop it and come back, I don't really see the issue here. The game isn't responsible for knowing when you need to stop, you are. The "All the small things" section is a bunch of poorly thought out pedantic nonsense. Practice battles exist man, are you complaining that they didn't add a second set of animations that show paint and retreating or what? Then you segue into some trite argument about capitalism, but your lack of knowledge throughout the rest of the video casts doubt on your political understanding. tl;dr You don't fully understand what you're complaining about and I'm unsubbing over it.

[@andymcclurg9916]

Pretty smart to write your script three weeks ago and re-use it when not enough people read it on Backloggd

[@thevorace]

Waiting for units to enter your attack range is pretty much all there is to FE as well.

[@breadbaskets2772]

Sure at face value you can say that but all the rpg mechanics and unit customization makes it feel engaging to play, you can choose how to put your units into enemy attack range. The only freedom of expression in AW is the economic decisions, choosing what to build

[@MA-go7ee]

Which is why I've always maintained that a game like Into The Breach is FAR superior to any Fire Emblem game I've played. Simply because it circumvents the AI issue bynp having enemies move first and telegraph their attacks. Your job is then to stop them from causing damage by either killing or moving them. Far more engaging strategy experience. Also, a lot more variation in weapon types, mecha, pilots, terrain, map hazards etc etc

[@sugarfreejelly5577]

@@breadbaskets2772You also have to choose your tactics, choose a wincon to go for, and you can build whole maps. FE draws out the experience a bunch because you cant afford to lose a single unit while in AW you can sacrifice any and all units to pull out a W

[@graydeotto2820]

Thank you comrade Fudj

[@TheSaxRunner05]

I love AW but I have to turn animations off. I managed to clear the AW1 final mission in 12 days as a veteran player, but even without animations on, it took an entire hour. And yes, cruisers are terrible lol

[@NevadaTanDisco]

With that example at 8:30 , i'm pretty sure because both of those units were at 1 hp, they wouldn't have dealth the damage you think they would and would have actually been simply outgunned by your infantry. Maybe thats why they were retreating to heal?

[@0huigelaar0]

Not a tank. Tanks have a huge advantage over (non-mech) footsoldiers. Not to mention, the tank would've get to deal damage before taking damage so it would have definitely chipped some health away off the infantry. Chipping away some health is all the enemy needed to do as only a full-health infantry would've captured the HQ next turn, which is also the last turn before the timer runs out.

[@NocturnalFudj]

The infantry, maybe but the tank I think definitely would have done 1 damage at least even at 1 HP, so attacking with just the tank *or* both was the correct play

[@wardoise]

calculated it in advance wars by web, the med tank would only have done 6% damage. with the potential of luck damage, it may have done 1 damage, but could have done 0, and the full health infantry counterattack could have killed the tank. definitely worth the gamble, but the AI probably is coded to execute actions that preserve unit count over objective-based actions.

[@NevadaTanDisco]

@@wardoise I thought something like this would be the case. Usually also the AI retreats units below 3 health to cities. Eitherway I guess it proves Fudjs point that they’re stupid. The submarine example on the other hand I can’t try and refute haha

[@soren1803]

@@wardoiseI’m pretty sure the Ai knows how the luck rolls will go, so that probably factored in too

[@srqaw]

Which videos have you worked on in hardrive mag? I checked the channel out but I'm not sure which ones are yours and which are someone else's lol I'm excited to see what u think of advanced wars :) these let's players (the runaway guys) just started LPing this game

[@NocturnalFudj]

Literally all of them for the past 6 months! :)

[@srqaw]

​@@NocturnalFudjcool! I'll check them out, thank u :)

[@DangitronepasVI9]

As a fire emblem fan, I can deeply appreciate the anti-fire emblem fan sentiment. Never miss a chance to dunk on fire emblem fans.

[@Sigismund697]

why? if I may ask

[@PlaystationFreak719]

​@@Sigismund697Because most of them honestly suck

[@Chase-hv2lt]

While I'm not complaining about the remaster, I do think the pixel art looks better👀

[@Tribow]

From what I remember from Advance Wars on GBA it was pretty fun to work with those long-lasting battles do to the portable-ness of it. Like at any point I could put it down and check up on it later. Never thought about the experience when played outside that pick up and play style. Don't remember if the AI in the original acted the same way, but that was ages ago. Still, something that was always appealing was the multiplayer. The experience of going against a real person is compelling. Shame the AI can't replicate it here. Makes me wonder how much the newer advanced war games addressed the flaws you mentioned (the ones rhe remake doesn't well.....remake)

[@Smoofmaster]

Good video. Love it when people make videos because they actually have something to say. I never played AW and was never a fan, but from my limited understanding, I thought the main part people liked was the pvp. PvP is an inherently endless topic, but even if you wanted to focus on the single player experience I was curious why you didn't at least address the pvp aspect, especially since you seemed concerned with preempting kneejerk responses. I know its been 3 months but im curious. To make a clumsy analogy, talking about the console release of Advance Wars and How bad the story and AI are, when a lot of the fans play it as pvp online through a 3rd party website, is kinda like posting to the SMOGON forums about how its stupid that the Pokemon Gym leaders don't have a full team of six and they always use a single type and they're so easy to beat and the story is kinda dumb and all the while everyone on SMOGON is scratching their heads cause they just play pvp on pokemonshowdown. Again a clumsy and imperfect analogy but i hope you see what im try to get at here. I know it sounds like im caping for the game and the community and im not. I believe what you said in your review and damn wow this game seems BAD. Taking the common practice of GBA games that waste your time to the extreme. I'm just curious as to why you didnt even mention the PvP aspect. Were you unaware of it?

[@user-fr9sm3it1k]

another goated fudj video

[@dreamypizza8458]

as someone who is playing reboot camp and AWBW I quite enjoy it I definitely understand it is very rough around the edges but exploiting the AI is part of the game, the insane setting about people just fighting each other for shits and giggles is absolutely part of the game fog of war is SUPPOSED to make you cautious not "fire in the dark" seeing as the AI can't see you in it, hide units in forest, scout, get the jump on the bastards don't see why you'd complain about niche units, just don't use them, theres a reason missiles don't get built often honestly I do agree with pacing as an issue, I have animations turned off and it helps a bit and oh my lord the final parts of some missions when you've already won had me screaming "GIVE UP, STOP BUILDING I'M RIGHT HERE YOU CAN'T WIN!" but like honestly I love it, just because for me the sheer satisfaction of getting into a damn good situation and going on a stomp of enemy units or grinding them down with defensive play is so fun for me

[@MadeOfMush]

Great review that I somehow missed when it was new, probably because of classes. I played these games back in the day on the GBA and remember them fondly, but I remember never finishing them because the time investment never seemed worth it. All these criticisms are on the mark, and are probably why I've never been interested in returning to the series, even if the later ones are a bit better.

[@mrshmuga9]

Time limit is a big hindrance to big review sites… but even moreso is the lack of reviewers people can trust or build a rapport with. People will wait _past_ the review embargo to hear their favourite/trusted youtuber reviewing a game. The issue isn’t people “have” to have it by the embargo because people won’t watch and it won’t make money. It’s that these sites have _chosen_ to build a business on farming out reviews than try to keep/elevate their reviewers while also building trust with the audience by being more forward-facing. On KZbin you follow someone because you find them interesting, on a review site they swap through people so often they might as well be faceless. Sites like IGN used to have a team of recurring people that would review games (mostly) on one platform. You could still keep track and understand their perspectives, but not anymore. And because of these big sites, reviewers aren’t or don’t get a chance to be interesting, so you’re not willing to wait for their opinions passed the review embargo. It’s why people trust KZbinrs more. Not just spending more time with a game, but because a KZbinr has to earn it or people won’t follow. People only glance at big review sites ratings these days as a general overview, but no one trusts them. It’s basically just feature and bug checklist. They have no reason to trust too when it’s just intern #270 where you have no idea where they’re coming from or how to keep up with them, and only there for a few months and a handful of reviews.

[@mrshmuga9]

Also, 5 mins is way too short for most reviews. It barely gives you enough time to explain it, let alone what works and doesn’t (mechanically). If sites gave reviewers a few extra days or a week, and could make them 10-15 mins long, I think it would work out much better. The trust angle wouldn’t be much/as much of an issue since each review _could/would_ be comprehensive on its own. People don’t trust most reviewers because it’s they’re general they might as well just say “thumbs up/down” and leave it there. Because they’re saying basically nothing anyway. I get t, they’re going for the casual gamer, but they aren’t checking out reviews for games they don’t care about/interested in. So limiting it to 5-7 mins doesn’t help them. If you’re desperate for a number, you can skip to the end or look up metacritic. If you’re clicking on a review, you’re interested enough in that game, and likely would watch for 10-15 mins. It’s not much more of a commitment. It’s not like they’re being asked to watch a feature-length review.

[@MasterKnightDH]

I didn't know that sexual assault of a sleeping woman at a cross-country convention like what Mangs did would have earned me 120K subs! Really, for all that the mass media reviews have problems, there's a reason why KZbin had been referred to as "Never Punished Central."

[@antant6217]

I think Reboot camp is pretty fun but it did the worst thing thing remakes almost always do: it's faithful to a fault, not fixing some of the glaring balance issues (underpowered navy/missiles) and they didn't fix the ai that much (they did fix up fog). It feels weird that they didn't backport any improvements from future games. I do think a vast majority of maps don't take nearly as much time as you're saying unless you play with animations on. While I think the ai should act faster on long maps and animations should be faster, I do think players should at least be expected to speed things up on their own. The series always had a problem where the AI cannot forfeit a game so some matches can feel like you're just cleaning up for half the match though (this isn't a problem vs humans). The poor AI is why I usually modify the base maps in the editor and create super imbalanced versions of each map so the AI can stand a chance. It doesn't feel like the AI was balanced at all for even-footing situations.

[@kipame]

I am still halfway through the video and that's exactly how I've felt when playing the original 1+2 when the remake was announced, i am very disappointed they didn't balanced or change things to make the game more interesting. though i do believe Dark Conflict for the DS fixed most of these problems, it's the only Advance Wars game i can truly say it's enjoyable and fun.

[@flamecraft7464]

I got this game for my birthday. And I have to say I love the first third of the game. (I never played AW2, here is why) I don’t have time to play a 3-5 hour battle. I don’t have time to play 2 hours. And honestly I don’t want to use most of the 2 hours to fight one or two battles. It’s just to slow. Ai is weird. Sometimes it hits like a truck and sometimes it runs away. Also I have played in both casual and classic and really can’t see a difference. It seems minor? At best. It’s kinda sad because I want to love this game but like you said when you get a map with bases or “Fog of war” it just drags more than anything. Watching paint dry is better.

[@conradbrooks1760]

I went in ready you disagree with everything, but wound up commiserating and agreeing with everything; except for the final boss, it absolutely needs to be a multi hours war of attrition, and sturms theme is so rarely heard and excellent that it makes for top tier final boss stage music.

[@conradbrooks1760]

Double bonus for using gammas theme song in sa1.

[@greenkoopa]

I've been playing advance wars 2 since 2006. It's exactly what I want it to be, so a remake was never gonna be something I bought

[@300IQPrower]

Reboot camp feels to me like Wayforward did everything they could with their usual Wayforward charm, with the issue being that there was some rule, whether due to the budget they were given or more likely some weird nintendo cult mandate, that they couldnt do anything whatsoever to improve the actual gameplay. The voice acting is a PERFECT example. It feels like the only reason for the incomplete voice acting is "because Fire Emblem uses incomplete voice acting." Everything surface level looks as good as you'd expect and then gameplay wise seems to be like if you just directly ported it. To give a government mandated Fire Emblem comparison, it'd be like releasing FE7 and not fixing the whole "most invasive tutorial in video game history" issue. Anyways i'll have you know I already went outside earlier (twice in this month alone, in fact!) so i'll thank you to not question my Grass Contact Frequency.

[@Langas_LVDC]

Fire Emblem has been using complete voice acting for a while now, what do you mean

[@300IQPrower]

@@Langas_LVDC I wouldn't call 3 of 17 mainline games "for a while now" but that's just me i guess. Either way it just furthers the point. Why would this "modernized" version of what is basically a [distant] sibling series to fire emblem only be modernizing as where that sibling was multiple entries ago? The only reason I can think of given the names involved is that the devs were hamstrung, be it by Nintendo giving them arbitrary parameters (which they have a long history of doing to any non-first-parties they work with) or flat out screwing them over with a small budget (which Wayforward has a long and sad history of getting stuck with). Personally I suspect Nintendo wanted to see if the Awakening magic could strike twice, given how FEA was also a last ditch attempt to see if there was still a market for its own series and they might have wanted to use Reboot camp as a way to "test the waters" for one of their older franchises, and as such gave an equivalent sized budget for things like voicework, but that's pure speculation on my part.

[@Langas_LVDC]

@@300IQPrower 3 of 17? Bruh, 10 of those games were impossible to be even voiced, we're talking about Nes, snes and gba, and DS having most likely not enough storage for ot. Tellius and 3DS being the real games without an excuse. Also 6 years is a considerable ammount of time tbh, Echoes released in 2017.

[@Sigismund697]

@@300IQPrower you're giving AW too much credit a new game with improved systems would have been a true Awakening attempt this is closer to them releasing the remake of FE1 and seeing if that saved the series IMO neither IS or Nintendo give that many fucks about AW and this remake was simply done on the cheap to throw a bone to the 100 or so AW fans

[@300IQPrower]

@@Sigismund697 dude i dont even like advance wars I just know that it's basic business that a company Nintendo's size is not gonna spend the resources to both hype up and release a game like this for a cult following. They're going to be fishing for a "normal" audience size. Your own example is proof of this. This is what Nintendo DID do with not FE1 but another famicom game FE3, remaking it into FE Echoes with heavily updated features, only to drop that style entirely fro 3 houses when Echoes, despite being _adored_ by those who played it, sold notably less than Awakening and Fates.

[@NCozy]

link for hard drive in the description is broken

[@NocturnalFudj]

Ty! This keeps happening for some reason lol

[@Koraroco]

Any opinions on Wargroove?

[@ericquiabazza2608]

The problem with AI selection of units is that it CANT Because of programing limitation the way the AI select the order of unit is by getting a list and moving all units base on that list. Evaluation what the "best move" to do with that "sole unit" is. Thus why you can see it atacking you with a tank, go strategy somwhere else then finish off your unite. Capturing is hardcoded to almost never be interrupted, this is to not led player find a way to stop them by baiting. And contrary to fire emblem stupid AI that will suicide 20 units against 1 of yours just to try KILL that unit and make you reset because this arent dispoabsle units, the advance AI will try to keep units alive.

[@HermenegildGaido]

You made me want to play Pokemon TCG again :

[@yearslate9349]

Undeniably, Advance Wars AI is dumb and falls well short of other strategy games. Yet, the fact it's so manipulable is exactly what I like about Advance Wars compared to all those games. It's extremely fun for me, trying to figure out exactly how the enemy will behave and take full advantage of it. To chase for high scores on the campaign and war room stages. Manipulating an enemy who completely outnumbers you is just... fun. I more often compare Advance Wars to a puzzle game than a strategy game. Into the Breach is the best game that's come out which takes cues from Advance Wars, and it does that by eschewing the massive battles that were so typical of Advance Wars 2 in favor of puzzle-box maps. But I think that to be rather telling, and so I don't fault you at all for finding the game to be far from enjoyable. Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go bother Olaf some more by making it rain...

[@insertjokeh3r3]

The ai gets better on the ds and a indy company isn’t gonna be able to do anything in a short timeframe especially when the missions are built with the sub par ai in mind. If they overhauled the ai the entire campaign would need to tested and most of aw1 rebuilt from the ground up

[@costelinha1867]

And me thinking he would never return.... What a pleasent surprise indeed.

[@tehchives]

I appreciate the video, but am I missing something about your example around 8 minutes? That game looks impossible to lose. There;s no way those units were getting the infantry below 8 hp (changing a 2 turn capture clock to 3 turns) and there are zero units that could make it to reinforce the HQ.

[@MasterKnightDH]

The turn limit was about to run out. If the Infantry had been attacked and damaged, Fudj would have lost.

[@tehchives]

@@MasterKnightDH thanks!

[@dreamypizza8458]

@@MasterKnightDHactually, assuming that the reason those units were so low health were the empty missile silos, its safe to say the med tank and infantry were actually at 0.1 HP, and would be attacking a unit on full health, with 3 terrain stars attacking the capping infantry not only wouldn't have damaged it, it would have killed the AIs units anyway honestly he was ripping the piss out of the AI for losing what is actually quite an unwinnable situation

[@t2send]

Cool epic video

[@SeveralKnapkins]

It's okay fudj, I shave my nipples too

[@foxboxtrot9436]

I was wondering if I wanted to purchase the game because I'm a fan of Battalion Wars and these games are from the same series. The points you brought up in the review were very helpful in whether or not I should buy it. Yes, I read the words at the end and liked it get your 30 minutes homie.

[@AizakkuAnalysis]

Hahaha, it's such a small thing but I like that you brought up the voice acting part. They either dub half of a sentence or even just a couple of words, it confuses me every time. Either dub the whole sentence or don't bother. What's with this in-between. 😂

[@vincentbatten4686]

Access Journalism is a problem perpetuated by the larger journalistic outlets. They should have the integrity to tell it how it is, but honestly I don't understand the point of them at all anymore. If you want to enjoy a game you should go find someone with similar tastes. It's easier that way to get an idea about a game. Respect for the hard work that journalism is, but I would never care about the opinion of someone who just played a game because they had to and also onew they would review well for fear of losing their job or access to free material. You're right that's late stage capitalism. I actually liked this game a lot and it wasn't a fully loaded remake, and I do wish I had gotten it on sale, but the online play has been fun and running through the first campaign had the same highs and lows as the originals. It would have been nice to spice up the AI. I agree that some maps were a cake walk. If you were buying this game though, it would have made much more sense to do it for the online play.

[@costelinha1867]

That second point, is the reason why I prefer Fire Emblem over any strategy game, let alone strategy rpgs. Because battles, in almost any strategy game I played other than FE... TAKE AGES TO COMPLETE! And it's infuriating.

[@YounesLayachi]

I was far too young to judge the AI but I remember multiplayer VS was very fun

[@wardoise]

cruisers are the only unit other than subs that can fire at subs that are underwater. neither one of the enemy 1hp units in your example could stop your victory btw. even if that tank attacked you, it would only do at most (and with a generous luck roll) 1 damage. your counterattack likely would have killed it, and you would have captured the HQ in one more turn. not the bestttt example for your point. so yes, the rhythm of the game is veryyyy long. pvp usually takes a lot less time for what it’s worth bc usually someone quits after a failed push. the length of the battles is actually something people like! and i’m sorry to hear that you question journalistic integrity!

[@soren1803]

The mission’s time limit runs out the next day, so it was do or die that turn. That said, the Ai knows how luck rolls will go, so it probably knew it didn’t have a chance

[@Drinkabeerandplayagameofficial]

Can confirm the quality Wayforward puts into their ports. The presentation and music that they put into River City Girls Zero are by far the best part of that package. I always wanted to play advance wars because I missed the boat as a kid and now…yeah I might save 50 hours. Great vid!

[@ayoutube5736]

I have liked your videos in the past, but your opinions on the comedy reviewer genre are very pretentious. The youtubers you showed us at the beginning of the video that supposedly "have no talent" put FAR more artistic merit into their videos than someone who has nothing better to do than make a thirty minute anti capitalism rant. If you put a product out into the wild, you have to be able to handle criticism. Us as the consumers have the right to voice our opinions on a product, whatever they may be. There can be no product without consumers. It's all about intention. If your goal is just to put other people down, that's wrong. If your goal is to provide constructive criticism, even if it's in an exaggerated comedic fashion, that's okay. And again, people who make these kinds of videos are more talented than you let on. I'm not going to attack your opinions on the game itself, like the rest of this comments section seems to want to do. It's just your opinion after all. And finally, if you ARE reading this, I don't intend to put you down with this comment. I'm moreso doing it because if I don't, my OSD will kick in and I will start to believe you are right.

[@NocturnalFudj]

I literally don't say that, I think AVGN is good, KZbin commenters comprehend nuance challenge

[@blackdragoncyrus]

The aesthetics of the units in reboot camp look like dog shit, some units are next to impossible to tell apart.

[@goodgamer1419]

The game doesn't zoom in on units because of fog of war if you could tell where the units were it would defeat the whole point

[@Nilnot]

This makes me want to play some Into the Breach

[@Renardeau]

I do not agree except about one thing , the broken AI

[@QwertyCaesar]

The AI is flawed but not even in the way he thinks.

[@tilt9808]

I'll have a lil cry too

[@titojdavis8374]

I'm an angry commenter, oops im giving engagement!

[@GamingWarlord64]

I wonder how you feel about WarGrove

[@BIayne]

The Hearthstone victory sound shocked me 😳 Like a long unused pathway in my brain was used for the first time in years lol. I played HS daily from 2013 to 2020. Thank fuck I got out.

[@superx1000]

ah fudj revealed himself as a fire emblem fan that makes his opinion invalid/s (i also like fire emblem)

[@PlaystationFreak719]

Wait I don't get it you actually like fire emblem? What the hell I thought you hated slow games and anime make it make senses

[@toffeeFairy]

Context: I played advance wars one for the first time 3 years ago. But i had played a lot of the later tittles before hand. I generally liked ur view point of a causal play trough of both the normal campaigns. however your point about games journalism stroke me a bit odd, as it seemed to me like u never looked into the advance wars community the way people like to play those games and played them. The fact that for a lot of people the pvp mode was the best part about those games, sadly online multiplayer wasn't added in a way that even competes against a 20 old website (awbw). Just a small why? didn't u turn off the animations if u found the game tedious? Your point about match length was a really good one, however i would say, the problem isn't the map length, the problem is the game never teaches u how to finishes maps quickly. So u get punished for playing badly with long af matches. another thing is the way u talk about the difficulty settings, yes hard mode isn't available from the beginning, but it's a thing as soon as u beat the first camping, (also makes ur point about not looking into a game enough feel weird). the ai is stupid yes, and yes on normal maps are fairly easy if u are somewhat ok at strategy games, however the whole hard mode is balanced around u having to abuse it, especially in the first one. Also the AI in the second game works a lot better/no longer has certain obvious flaws, like always attacking transport units. one thing i really dislike about the remake is how it takes longer to play, while yes u have the forward feature, it generally feels worse to play, especially with the pro controller and ofc load times are longer, which just feels awful when switching back and forth to compare both games.

[@8BitFun]

Thank you for revealing why I bounced right off this game. The GBA one, many years ago. You are an inspiration to us all Fudj

[@junker154]

I fully agree with your take on this. Personally, it was nice to relieve some of that nostalgia because I played AW so much on the GBA. However, the gameplay is a massive slog at some point, battles take so long and you need to keep trucking on with units all the time. The story and general tone is really irritating. Not sure if it is just the atmosphere that we live in but the way that characters talk about war is really childish and rubbed me the wrong way. It's absolutely bonkers how it was all jolly fun for everyone despite seeing units getting blown apart. I thought that this childish tone gave the game a bad aftertaste. I think devs could have adapted the story a bit but the plotline is outright incomprehensible to me, at least in the campaign of AW1. I respect you for putting this video out.

[@DamitTucker]

So the problem with this review is that this is a person who doesnt play wargames. Advance wars is a lite wargame. Comparing Fire Emblem and Advance wars is only correct if you say they are both turn based. This is a game that can prepare you for a more complex title like Panzer General, Panzer Corp 1+2, Unity of Command, and Order of Battle. Saying that we've progressed to RTS games fails to even understand the differences between the 2. All your nonsense on Capitalism is also bunk.

[@fireblast133]

really you don't keep a copter in a cruiser for long. The main thing a cruiser can do in that case is act as a supply for the copters.

[@matthewlynn6108]

Unrated tactics gem is Digimon Survive. It’s a slow burn of a story which is why it got mostly mid and harsh reviews. That’s my two cents to the internet S T R A N G E R S

[@Sigismund697]

the gameplay of survive is awful tho, incredibly simple and just undercooked the story however and the atmosphere is the closest to the first anime I've seen really wish they just made a VN rather than stick bad gameplay

[@matthewlynn6108]

@@Sigismund697 I didn’t think the tactics elements for Digimon Survive were that bad. I mean, Fire Emblem is the “gold standard” of tactics games, and there isn’t much more to it than MOVE -> ATTACK -> SELECT NEXT UNIT The wild encounters in Survive for sure were nothing special, but I felt most of the story oriented fights were great 🤷🏻‍♂️

[@Sigismund697]

@matthewlynn6108 well yeah you can boil down any game to press button, thing happens, move on if you leave every other aspect that FE involves like squad composition, weapon advantages, follow-up possibility and counterattacking plus what happens to a unit during the enemy phase and how good at surviving it they are plus their individual growths for future fights and how each one interacts with one another (via supports for example or passive abilities) and that's the thing, survive feels like it wants to do something with positioning, height and elemental damage plus the evolving mechanic but when you realize that there's no reason you shouldn't evolve all of your mons to their highest level or just send Agumon forward and he will likely crush almost everything once he reaches his second evolution you realize these elements don't really affect your strategy at all it's a shame because I played Triangle Strategy, one of the best SRPGs I've played in recent years shortly before Survive and when I noticed the field and mechanics resembled TS I tried to play it the way I played TS but no, all units play the same, there's little to no punishment or reward for facing and the early game is a slog and their individual stats or quirks don't really affect the individual battles much of anything, as I said, it's undercooked much worse when Survive's own convictions system is wasted on most choices since you don't really affect the flow of the story you just get asked what you think and the characters move on only really mattering at the very end of the game Sorry for the rant but DS is a game that could have been so much better but I get the devs never intended for it to be much more than a VN (which I would have been perfectly fine with) but then, as it tends to happen to a lot of AA-likes, why bother with shitty/surface level gameplay if the focus is on the story, just make a pure VN and save both of us time

[@dopewizrd]

yay fudj video

[@curtisdebord8863]

🎉

[@TheJebus26]

FUDJ IS BACK BABY

[@TheJebus26]

but real ones know he never left 😈

[@keiyakins]

Are you really complaining that it doesn't reveal where indirects are on fog maps? *really*? also I fail to see how you can win against human opponents by abusing the AI. The campaign is fun, but Advance Wars has multiplayer for a reason. Also Wars World is fucking insane. We all know this. It's honestly part of the charm? It's one of the things that it's famous for?

[@giratina6665]

I think every video game review should end with the victory of Communism

[@Reach_W]

Not gonna lie, seeing this title as I booted up the game gave me the gut reaction of a Zelda fan seeing a review score lower than a 12/10. Like them, I haven't even consumed the content yet. Unlike them I'mma hear you out and respect the shit out of your inputs because I don't believe my opinions are objective truth.

[@auraguardianred4771]

I love you but please turn off your phone or give me a dall. I cannot support hate. Please stop this.

[@exxon101]

I came in expecting to disagree but, well, I couldn't. Every complaint you had was perfectly valid. The AI is universally bad. The missions drag for ages. The unit balance is kinda screwy. Good on you for saying what was on your mind.

[@MasterKnightDH]

A shame the Advance Wars communities will bashed on Fudj for doing that, no doubt telling him to shut the (EFF) up. They already did that sort of thing before back in the day.

[@exxon101]

@@MasterKnightDH It's okay, you can swear on the internet.

[@atmatey]

Funny thing is that a lot of the things he said the AI did doesn't happen in the GBA games. In the original AW1 and AW2, the AI doesn't take engagements that are unfavorable to it (like attacking attack copters with regular tanks) and it will always prioritize attacking infantry that is about to capture a property. In the campaign mission with Sonja that he talked about, I have played that mission multiple times on GBA and I have never seen the AI build multiple submarines like that. I'm not saying that the AI in the original games is amazing (it's definitely not), but the missions were often balanced around the player understanding how the AI works. It's funny that the Switch's CPU is insanely more powerful than on the GBA, but the AI seems to be worse in many ways.

[@oof5992]

It's over AWBros

[@faidou9954]

No one gave a shit about Valkyria Chronicles and this is the punishment society is met with.

[@jamjars1971]

The example you used of the Ai at 5 minutes in is so weird! I've played the the second game so many times and never seen them attack a helicopter with a tank. Not even one at low HP. Even in DS the Ai mostly uses infantry to attack weakened vehicles. Good video though. Even as a fan of these games your points are all reasonable.

[@turtleanton6539]

Is true😊😊😊

[@goodgamer1419]

Yea advance wars generaly is more pvp based

[@Big_Dai]

Okay... I'll give you this one. I loved AW back in the day and I don't remember the AI being so dumb! Which is even worse if it happens after a couple-hours-match, deflating the whole experience.. But I also remember playing a LOT with high-school friends at the time. Sadly, "Journalism" does suck.. and it's even more evident with the 10/10s "Masterpiece" TotK has received. And I stopped paying attention, even if I never took their "reviews" to heart. I've grown to enjoy critiques and content like this even more, because it generates discussion, not fanboy-sim. And it makes me look at the things I love(d) differently. Things can always be better! And in the case of Advance Wars.. it should have been! Specially since they keep beating these dead horses for profit, when its easier than generating anything new and creatively inviting.

[@YounesLayachi]

19:10 that sounds like a translation error to me

[@YounesLayachi]

24:29 no ! BLJ was a gamebreaking bug, and it was fixed back in 1997 or whenever the shindou SM64 version was released. It bears no similarity to brawl's tripping, which was intentional and never fixed.

[@costelinha1867]

Look I get that this can feel like a hot take, specially for people who love this game. But why take this so personally dudes? seriously, a person criticising your favorite game is not a fucking personal attack on you. Just go take a deep breath, relax, maybe go play Advance Wars if you love it so much, I dunno. Because seriously the ammount of anger I saw in some comments over a guy merely having an opinion is just insane. (Oh wait, I forgot, this is the internet. Having an opinion on the internet is a war crime.)

[@purebaldness]

Going by the tone within your numerous comments here, you seem more heated than the 2-3 people who didn't like some of the criticisms. Seems like you're far more invested in this genre than the people you're mocking lol.

[@costelinha1867]

@@purebaldness I'm more invested? My guy, you were all throwing temper tantrums over Fudj criticising the AI, and accused him of not understanding the game despite literally showing gameplay footage of the AI being dumb. I'm just poking fun at your weird obsession you guys seem to have for defending this game from any criticism whatsoever regardless of how valid or how much evidence is provided to back said criticism up.

[@purebaldness]

@@costelinha1867 lol... I haven't made any such comments. The comment above is the only one I've made. You've pretty much proved my point here. For what it's worth, I played through the first two GBA games in the late 2000's. I really enjoyed them. However, the AI is atrocious and whilst I didn't consider _some_ of Fudj's points at the time, I'm inclined to agree. Simple case of them not aging super well as single player experiences. I may or may not buy this remaster regardless. But nah, keep being heated over these almost nonexistent comments you're crusading against.

[@sugarfreejelly5577]

Bro who you talking about? Did he get a death threat or somethn?

[@izzi_sins]

s k i l l i s s u e

[@MasterKnightDH]

So clearly, I suck beacause I am not able to edit in any Forests, Mountains, or Reefs for an infamous Fog of War called Rivals AC. Am I getting that right?

[@timthetoolpool]

Okay, I assume they made the AI more dumb. It didn't used to be THAT stupid.

[@QwertyCaesar]

The AI is actually better than it used to be. The AI didn't do what Fudj said it should have in that one example because it wouldn't have worked and both units would've been destroyed in retaliation. The AI has a better understanding of damage values than Fudj does

[@rafresendenrafresenden.1644]

oh your jokes video are back nice

[@Sigismund697]

I played AW1 some years ago and I beat the tutorial + some 1-2 missions and gave up I didn't find the gameplay particularly entertaining and even that early I could tell it was blurring the line between an RTS and a true SRPG meaning it was bound to start getting too complex for its own good and slow to a crawl Good for its fans that it got the remake but at the end of the day there's a reason IS gave it to a western Dev and the game didn't even release in Japan

[@MasterKnightDH]

Thank you for deconstructing RBC. Whether or not AW1 or AW2 ages well is a case of YMMV, but I will say that WayForward should be held to account for diligence issues. I made a post on the Advance Wars Wikia that calls out the issues I could already see from the evidence that I had seen for myself, between the Flanderization of Andy that was based on an already repetitively used line, the lifelessness in the voice acting, the gameplay being affected by the graphics, lack of good level design improvements, and the online being VERY lackluster. By the way, somebody tried linking to said post, as well as my prior post effectively banning Mangs content from the Advance Wars Wikia, on the YMMV page of Nintendo Wars (the unofficial but widely accepted name of the franchise) on vanilla TV Tropes. I have to disagree with WayForward being undeserving of criticism. Around when the first delay happened, some people actually leaked the game, one of them to Mangs, who had been held to point on sexual assault with overwhelming evidence. WayForward provided NOTHING about that, not even a public statement. They showed a similar lack of diligence about designing the game itself, which is a contrast from Pac-Man World Re-Pac being a solid remaster that went as far as to improve level design. I can tell that WayForward is representative of the problems that plague California in general: a failure to handle due diligence out of arrogance leading to these God awful messes, creating Unfortunate Implications of only incompetent people at best caring about the mission statements of House Democrat. In that regard, I can at least sympathize with your complaints about the journalism mess being stuck in a rat race, though I would think more people would care about integrity in the first place. I especially call out WayForward when I would want to see a Battalion Wars remaster, but I wouldn't want it to be subject to the same disgraces that have befallen Advance Wars. Also worth talking about your take on complexity. I think the system just needs to be intuitive. Game Boy Wars 3 for example uses the Unit Family system, where more exposed units such as foot soldiers and cars won't be as protected from MG fire or rockets, while armored units such as tanks and APCs have added vulnerability to higher-end explosive rounds. It's able to get away with 51 unit types in the game because of reasons like that, as well as less confining rules on how range fire and transporting is handled. I made a balance patch for it called the PALBal patch too, so as to address GBW3's own misfires, even if it's still limited in that, but even without that, you can at least enjoy the Anti-Air Missile Launcher being better in GBW3. Please let me know what you think, okay?

[@AlphaladZXA]

Wonder how much better this could've turned out if Nightdive studios made it instead. Also question, what are you saying with the house democrat part?

[@j03T3XAz]

bro please breathe