Defcon Review

By Kieron Gillen Published 2 October, 2006

Do you want to play a game?

Version tested: PC

Want a long shot? Now that the media firestorm engulfing Bully is beginning to rival weekly scandals about what Dennis the Menace is up to for absurdity, how about Defcon as most controversial game of the year? It's a game that features the annihilation of every city on earth every time you play. All it takes is a dirty nuke going off somewhere (and that's bound to happen sooner or later, yeah?), a screenshot of the city disappearing beneath an ultra-white nuclear bloom and the small legend "7.2 million dead" and suddenly Introversion is public enemy number one.

While a large corporation tends to reel away from controversy, there's a nagging suspicion that Intro-"We didn't want a publisher f***ing up our game"-version would revel in it. Hell, with their love of a well-planned publicity stunt, you half expect them to use a hastily constructed nuke to level Birmingham, if only to build up a little more hype. (Why Birmingham? Why not.)

Defcon - if this string of cheerily tasteless jokes about Armageddon hasn't made it clear - is a game about nuclear war. Essentially, it's that famous scene in Wargames turned into a videogame. Except this time, there's none of that wimpy "Shall we play a game of tic-tac-toe" nonsense. Some nation's going home in an ambulance. Possibly literally, since everyone will be tiny radioactive dust.

Defcon is simultaneously very Introversion and completely unlike anything they've done previously. It's partially inspired by the popular cinema of their childhoods (just as Uplink was by Wargames, and Darwinia Tron). It's a strategy game, but with a heavy influx of action elements - even the animation-free Uplink was a game where quick actions were essential and time was the most relentless of foes. It's got their minimalist yet professional graphics style, all cool computer graphics. It's got their equally minimalist stark audio. And it's extremely good, which probably doesn't really fit a "style", but is certainly something they've managed to do so far.

'Defcon' Screenshot 1

Asia is the strong but slow continent. America is the fast but weak. Africa is somewhere in-between.

That said, in many ways, it's the least ambitious of Introversion's games in terms of design (I dare say, wrestling with online multiplayer for the first time, technically it could be the hardest). It's also the one which you suspect may be their most commercially successful. "Nuclear War" is immediately understandable and an attractive subject for a game. It's their first multiplayer game, so leading the possibility of a more active community. And more than any of their other games, it's the one which is closest to the mainstream of a commercial genre: it's recognisably a real-time strategy game.

Not that it's anything at all like Command & Conquer. In the basic game, you're given control of one of the six sides, one mapped to each continent (Asia is split into a north and south components). You're then given access to all the equipment you'll ever have in the game. Position each on the landmass, working out how they'll interact with one another, and then sit back and have a nice little war. There's no construction here, only destruction.

The mainstay of your forces are your nuclear silos, which switch between a defence mode where they shoot down incoming missiles, and an intercontinental attack mode where they can fire off their ten. There's a considerable delay switching between the two, and they're completely undefended when they're launching. That said, they're relatively hardy and can resist a chunk of hits before disappearing and leaving a nasty hole in your defences. Which is more than can be said for the radar stations, which are totally essential for locating incoming attacks and tend to shatter easily. Airbases can switch between bombers, which fly to their destination and then launch nukes, and fighters, which can take out bombers in transit and attack ships. Navies comprise three sorts of unit - battleships, submarines and carriers. The latter alternate between launching planes, hunting submarines and (er) being shot as they've no defences. Submarines, underwater, are almost impossible to find, but have to surface before they can launch their own nukes. And battleships just exist to stomp anything else on the surface of the sea.

The game, much like a nuclear war, is one of escalation. Units are placed in Defcon 5 and 4. On 3 and 2 conventional attacks can kick off, with ships attacking each other or infiltrating. And on 1 - where the majority of the game takes place - the birds can take to the air and make the human race as nothing.

'Defcon' Screenshot 2

Remind me to cancel my holiday to Prague.

The heart of the game lies in the matters of placement and timing. Your decisions in the initial set-up will come back to haunt you, as you try and work out how best to manage the many facets of the situation your actions have shaped. Each of your cities has a differing population, and deciding which direction an attack will probably come from is paramount. While taking out a silo is tricky, placing radar so they're over-vulnerable can lead to holes in your coverage and nukes sliding through. In actual play though, it's timing over placement. Managing to strike when a silo is in its launch mode, and thus unable to shoot down incoming fire, is where the megadeaths start adding up. The simple horror of a submarine fleet surfacing when you've left - say - the west coast of Africa without protection is a sublime horror.

Well... that's one of the game's hearts anyway. The other heart of the game is the simple joy of seeing a nation disappear under a mass of slowly expanding white orbs, or watching the long arcing trajectory of a swarm of intercontinental ballistic missiles converge to avenge the strike. It's all blisteringly atmospheric.

Despite there only being one map in the game, Defcon manages considerable tactical variation depending on the game mode. In normal mode, you gain points for killing opposition populations and lose points for the death of your own. Logical enough. However, you can also play in genocide or survival modes, where you only gain for the death or others, or only for the survival of your own. In any mode where you gain points for killing others, expect a tall-poppy syndrome to kick swiftly in, as your initial success marks you out as a target for everyone else come the endgame. Conversely, survival games see people risking fewer attacks because it leaves them open to a counter.

The more extreme modes especially will see the most extreme variety of play. The much-discussed office mode, where a game is played in real-world real time of six hours or so isn't quite as unusual as you'd expect, but Speed Defcon - where it's at maximum speed constantly, and the Earth burns up in fifteen minutes - is like a hyper-tactical missile command. The specific diplomacy game, which begins with every player in a single alliance sharing radar information - in other words, a game where everyone knows where best to strike right from the off - leads to some of the most intense considerations of where and when to stab. Stab too early, and you're an easy target. For everyone. Stab too late, and you're going to be the one who is stabbed.

'Defcon' Screenshot 3

Tic-tac-DIE.

Defcon is as pure and direct a game as its inspiration, and its limitations are ones of the game's basic scope. There's a single world-map, of the real locations, which, while it offers more strategic variability than you may expect at first, is still a hard limitation. You can expect the modding community to step in here. In terms of its actual dynamics, there's a splash too much open unfairness in play - mass ganging-up on a player is enormously tricky to defend against, but could lead to some very determined politicking and manipulation on the player's behalf. For example, I'm starting to experiment with deliberately suffering some early losses to make me a less attractive target. Perhaps my main reservation, though, is that in the basic game modes the game plays at the slowest selected speed at any point, meaning that a tedious player who insists on slowing things down can grind a game to a tedious sludge. Of course, that's only on default, and you can easily change its settings.

But its failings of scope are easily forgiven at the impressively well-judged price Introversion has chosen (£10 direct download, with an extra fiver if you want them to send you the box. Alternatively, purchase over Valve's Steam). It's some manner of end-of-the-world sale. In fact, this almost pushed Defcon into the nine. Some argue that price shouldn't affect marks, but those people are predominantly either the enormously rich or pirates. Marks are only a buyer's guide, so have to include whether you have to throw down. I've decided against it, but this is a solid eight, as unshakable as my four-silo defence of the Warsaw Pact nations.

Nuclear War has no winners. Except Introversion. And gamers.

8 / 10

Defcon is out now, and you can purchase it at Introversion's excellently named website. www.everybody-dies.com (let's hope so).

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy
Picture of Kieron.

About Kieron Gillen

Kieron is one of the founders of the lovely Rock, Paper, Shotgun and nowadays writes comics for Marvel starring characters that even his mum has heard of.

Read more articles from Kieron by visiting the Kieron Gillen archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (82) Latest comment 5 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Jesus: Action Figure #1 5 years ago

    Finally!

    Good score - now to read the review =P

  • patlike #2 5 years ago

    First!

    *w0oit!1*

    Edit: Second, you *bastard*.

    Edit 2: Anyway, I've played this a fair amount and the score's about as correct as a score can be, IMO.
    Edited by 2 at 02/10/06 @ 11:22

  • Carlo #3 5 years ago

    Damn this game is good. Anyone unwilling to spend a tenner on this and plays on a PC needs their head examined!

    Well, unless you hate this kind of game of course!

  • Xerx3s #4 5 years ago

    Lol, I think that their demo servers are overloaded. ;p 1 hour to down a 60 mb file (while it should take less than a minit)

  • patlike #5 5 years ago

    Agree, Carlo. For £10 it's a complete bargain. It's genius in multiplayer. Had some proper knife-edge last second shocker moments: it's all good.

  • Dizzy #6 5 years ago

    I just messed around in "single player". Will try the multiplayer game soon after I finish last mission in DOW: WA ;)

  • OnlyMe #7 5 years ago

    Didn't I already play this on the Amiga?

  • UncleLou #8 5 years ago

    Not only has its substance, it's worth it for the style alone. Beautiful game, beautiful subdues music and soundeffects with muffled voices, coughs etc. Well atmospheric and scary. :)

  • phAge #9 5 years ago

    "Tic-tac-DIE".

    Contestant for 'Best Caption 2006'?

  • OnlyMe #10 5 years ago

    disc wrote: No that was Nuclear War and not at all the same.

    They seem kinda similar, but of course, I'd expect this "new version" to be slightly more fleshed out.

    That said, I've not tried Defcon.
    Edited by 1 at 02/10/06 @ 11:34

  • asphaltcowboy #11 5 years ago

    Great game!

  • patlike #12 5 years ago

    Lou - It definitely is frightening. Especially in the slower modes. The sound of a large scale launch really does cause unease.

  • AcidSnake #13 5 years ago

    There's not going to be a boxed version then?

  • TwistidChimp #14 5 years ago

    There is a boxed version, you can order it from Introversion themselves.

  • AcidSnake #15 5 years ago

    Damn...I actually live in Italy...
    Don't know if they ship here...
    And my pc has a nifty 56k connection...great hunh?

    I'll find some way of getting the game...

  • Stickman #16 5 years ago

    I defy anyone to find a reason to not spend £10 on this!

  • space_ace #17 5 years ago

    interesting. what was that old game - nuke war or something?

  • Xerx3s #18 5 years ago

    So, can you let the computer play tictacto until it realises that it is all futile?

  • kangarootoo #19 5 years ago

    Was it Introversion that did that hacking game a few years ago? That was very good also, I forget the name.

  • Azazel #20 5 years ago

    Uplink. It is 'The Shit'.

  • asphaltcowboy #21 5 years ago

    AcidSnake: The download is 59mb. Even on 56k, it's not that bad.

  • Mechstra #22 5 years ago

    Aye, I wouldn't hesitate to download it over 56k. Playing it over 56k, now... not sure about that. Multiplayer's where it shines.

    Spot-on review, too.

  • Laserbream #23 5 years ago

    Thank you, that was a nice review. I now intend to buy it instead of writing it off as a dull Risk clone.

  • sunjumper #24 5 years ago

    Acid Snake:

    Introversion ships their games (in a box) world wide, so you have no need to worry.

  • Kostabi #25 5 years ago

    Easily the best value new game I've bought in years.

    The sessions I've had with the Eurogamer forum peeps have been some of the most entertaining online games ever, mostly thanks to the treasonfests of Diplomacy mode.

  • TwistidChimp #26 5 years ago

    hehe, Diplomacy is definatley the best, waiting to see who's going to break off / get kicked out of the alliance first. Watching the whole thing collapse at defcon 1 is most amusing :)

  • brooza664 #27 5 years ago

    How much is this in the shops?

  • TwistidChimp #28 5 years ago

    Not sure if its being sold at retail. If they do i'd imagine 15 quid or there abouts.

  • brooza664 #29 5 years ago

    Aye, just finished reading the review

    £15 boxed

  • Xerx3s #30 5 years ago

    Hmmm, just played it a bit. It is addictive, but I get the feeling that it might grow boring soon. :\

  • TripSkyway #31 5 years ago

    Sounds cool, might give it a shot.

  • AcidSnake #32 5 years ago

    Thanks for everyone who has replied...
    I'll figure something out...

    I only hope they won't dub the game in italian...

    Defcon Uno?

  • Darkedge #33 5 years ago

    oh wow.. this game does rock

    Must play more :D

  • gamingdave #34 5 years ago

    Had some great games of this last night with some other EGers. Excellent fun. Apart from when we played diplomacy, and I was kicked out of the alliance, and before I knew it there was a fulll load of nukes completely anhialating me. Few bugs or glitchs to iron out, but otherwise a fantastic game.

    At £10 its a bargain. Download the demo, and if you like it then simply pay, get an authentication code instantly, enter it, and the demo becomes the full game.

    Looking forward to tonight for some more action.

  • Willum #35 5 years ago

    Been playing the demo the past couple of days, it's pretty fun. Strategy games aren't usually my thing though, so I'm gonna keep on playing it the demo for a while before I decide if I wanna buy it.

  • smelly #36 5 years ago

    Im not convinced. Get feeling it might become too dull too quickly.

    Shame really. Im all for indie games.. but even for 10 quid...

  • Errol #37 5 years ago

    Just purchased it off STEAM.

  • MaxiSleep #38 5 years ago

    Smelly wrote "Im not convinced. Get feeling it might become too dull too quickly.

    Shame really. Im all for indie games.. but even for 10 quid... "

    This is, I think, your stupidist comment ever

  • pollster #39 5 years ago

    Anyone here remember those "protect and survive" leaflets that the government put though our letter boxes in the early eighties? What a complete farce they were! A bit of white wash on the windows and take the kitchen door off its hinges lean it against the side of the stairs. A 40 megaton blast would have no effect!

  • MikeP #40 5 years ago

    Does anyone know if this would work on an Intel Mac using Bootcamp?

  • TwistidChimp #41 5 years ago

    hehe, I saw an american one once, it had this family having a picnic, then this Mr Chumley Warner voice says "Timmy's seen the flash ! He knows what to do !" at which point the kid puts a gingham picnic blanket over his head.

    Welldone Timmy. Presuming you can still see after having seen the flash, that luxurious weave is sure to protect you from a hundred megaton blast.

  • [maven] #42 5 years ago

    MikeP: Yes, it does. There's also a native Mac version in the works, but it has just entered beta and it's not ready yet.

  • UncleLou #43 5 years ago

    hehe, I saw an american one once, it had this family having a picnic, then this Mr Chumley Warner voice says "Timmy's seen the flash ! He knows what to do !" at which point the kid puts a gingham picnic blanket over his head.

    Welldone Timmy. Presuming you can still see after having seen the flash, that luxurious weave is sure to protect you from a hundred megaton blast.


    Heh, "Duck and cover", you've probably seen it in the fantastic documentary "The Atomic Café".

  • souljah #44 5 years ago

    Really is a fantastic game, especially when playing with a group from EG.

    Diplomacy is especially fun when you decide to scare your "allies" by flying a few squadrons of bombers over their borders at Defcon 1 :)

  • UncleLou #45 5 years ago

    Yeah, but those propaganda movies suggest that everything is ok if only you duck and cover. I don't think it was quite as harmless. ;)

    Youtube link

    Longer clips available if you search for "duck and cover".

  • UncleLou #46 5 years ago

    I can only recommend watching "The Atomic Cafe", if you haven't. The Duck and Cover clips are comparatively harmless, but there's some incredibly nasty (and also ridiculous) propaganda stuff from that era, and the D&C stuff is just the icing on the cake in their attempts to distort reality.

  • Stickman #47 5 years ago

    Duck & Cover is pretty similar to adopting the brace position in a crashing airliner! Soon to become the 'scattered over a wide area' position.

  • Carlo #48 5 years ago

    "Does anyone know if this would work on an Intel Mac using Bootcamp?"


    works great :)

    (I also hear they're making a OSX version, but I wouldn't wait!)

  • Subquest #49 5 years ago

    Reminds me of end-game Civilisation, where everyone is primed with nukes.

    There's so much back-stabbing going on - it's fantastic. In my very first online game, the 5 other players all sided against me - but I was in private conversation with two of them. Alliegances change all the time - don't trust anybody who asks you to move your units...

  • kangarootoo #50 5 years ago

    "stockpile enough essentials to sit out the worst radiation"

    How long is that exactly? :) In the case of an H bomb the resulting radiation is comparatively low, but in the case of other nuclear devices you could be waiting a very long time.


    "when most nuclear war scenarios were eminently survivable"

    Not by the people within the blast radius they aren't. The truth is that survival of a nuclear weapon attack depends almost entirely on your proximity to the target. The actions of the individual are negligible to say the least.

    I think the main purpose of duck and cover, as many have already said, was to reassure the public that something could be done to save them. The second was to make them feel involved and to suggest they had some control over their own lives.


    If the public at large were essentially told "if an H-bomb is dropped, you will be killed and there is nothing on earth you can do" they would probably ask rather more questions than the governments in their bunkers might care to answer.

    "Proud nuclear survivalist!"

    You will note the the definition of a survivalist is someone who makes preperations. There is no mention in my dictionary of actually surviving, or indeed influencing the outcome of an attack by making said preparations.


    Bit of info about the H bomb.

    [link url=h ttp://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0824719.html
    ]http://ww w.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0...[/link]
    [link url=http://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_bomb
    ]http://en. wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydrogen_bomb
    [/link]


    And on duck and cover.

    [link url=http://en .wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_and_cover
    ]http://en .wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_and_co...[/link]

    They give mention to it perhaps being relevant if you were in a situation where stuff might fall on your head (assuming you were covering your head with your hands).

    Interesting that the linked movie mentions that you should D&C if you "see the flash". I think that summarises the attitude behind giving the advice. Because the experts forumating the advice would have known full well that if you actually saw the flash, that was probably the end of your day.

  • AOFanboi #51 5 years ago

    <em>Duck & Cover is pretty similar to adopting the brace position in a crashing airliner!</em>

    Ah, the "protect teeth to simplify identification based on dental records" position.

    The Atomic Cafe has some nice cross-cutting, like from a "duck and cover" film with a boy ducking under a table, cut to a house (pretend the boy is inside) getting blown to smithereens by a nuke.

    Perhaps they instead should take the advice from the beginning of that Bond movie with the stolen nukes and hold around your loved ones as you vaporize in the blast. Current-day nukes are much, much more potent than the bombs dropped in WW2. Especially the "small Sun in a warhead" hydrogen bombs which IIRC use a fission bomb as the fricking trigger!

  • MikeP #52 5 years ago

    Surely all you need to do is wait until stuff stops glowing and then start breaking open crates with red crosses on them.

    Or is that only in games?

  • Hypocee #53 5 years ago

    Kangarootoo, you're obviously fairly informed and linking to decent info etc. It seems like you may be overlooking the past tense - "were eminently survivable", with '60s tech and strategy. I don't think anyone's claimed that a modern all-out exchange would leave anyone alive for any significant time.

  • ekko #54 5 years ago

    The game is great, apart from its networking code, which is a pain.

  • Azazel #55 5 years ago

    Scream and Vaporise

    lol!

    Also: I recently read a book 'Eisteins Monsters' by Martin Amis, nice bit of railing against the whole nuclear issue.

  • RedPanda #56 5 years ago

    Post deleted at 14:31:59 28-01-2012

  • InfiniteFury #57 5 years ago

    Pay £15 and get a nice boxed version in the post as well

    They're worth it :-)

  • pantherboy #58 5 years ago

    At first glance I thought this was a update the classic amiga game 'Balance of Powers' so was dissapointed when read the review.

  • Errol #59 5 years ago

    Easily one of the best games I've played this year. Really excellent.

    The price makes this a no-brainer.

  • TheRealBadabing #60 5 years ago

    Superb game, had lots of fun this weekend.

    Regarding DnC, all this talk of whether it might have been effective or not is irrelevant. The entire purpose of those campaigns was to keep the population on edge about nuclear war. The more frightened people were, the easier it was to run witch-hunts about commies. The more the threat seemed real, the more governments could get away with spending on weapons.

    There are frightening parallels which can be drawn with all the crap that the US and UK governments have produced in recent years but of course our generation could never be manipulated as easily as 1950s America; we are much more enlightened and mature.

  • dcangel #61 5 years ago

    I really hate to break up the party, but after playing through the demo tutorial and having a quick game against the AI, it's doing nothing for me at all. And please don't say "well, you haven't really played it unless you've played against other humans", because it's not relevant. It's the same game regardless. Maybe I'll come back when I'm less tired.

    Nevertheless, fair play to Introversion for having the balls to tackle this subject.

  • newt #62 5 years ago

    The more the threat seemed real, the more governments could get away with spending on weapons.

    The threat was pretty real, hun. Look up Cuban crisis or Stanislav Petrov ( http://en .wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_P... ), whose story happened few weeks after Soviets shot down KAL 007..

    I won't deny tons of propaganda were involved in the nuclear scare but saying we couldn't end up like Defcon accurately depicts is, well, ridiculous.
    Edited by 1 at 03/10/06 @ 06:55

  • pollster #63 5 years ago

    "more the threat seemed real, the more governments could get away with spending on weapons.

    The threat was pretty real, hun. Look up Cuban crisis or Stanislav Petrov ( http://en .wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanislav_P... ), whose story happened few weeks after Soviets shot down KAL 007..

    I won't deny tons of propaganda were involved in the nuclear scare but saying we couldn't end up like Defcon accurately depicts is, well, ridiculous."




    Absolutely!

    I was 12 in 1983 and remember it being a pretty scary time. The threat of nuclear war was always on the minds of the public around this time. Its hard to relay how this felt to people who were too young or not born back then. Remember folks, Frankie goes to hollywood had a no 1 hit with "two tribes". That song pretty much sumed up the nations conscience at that time. Btw, cracking song and video!


    Also, try and get hold of a film called "When the wind blows" made in 1986.
    Edited by 1 at 03/10/06 @ 08:30

  • Redeye #64 5 years ago

    Or better yet, try to obtain a copy of 'Threads' - one of the most terrifying pieces of nuclear war docu-drama ever conceived.

    *goes off to try the demo*

  • kangarootoo #65 5 years ago

    @dobbie

    "This would probably have been a far more 'propagandistic' statement than pushing DnC in the 50-ies, and 60-ies."

    Quite true. My comment was admittedly exagerrated, if only for comic license and to help me make my point.

    As you and Hypocee have mentioned, I am overlooking the 50's-60's situation somewhat. Things were a little different back then in terms of total coverage I agree (though I would still suggest it to be academic if you happen to be hiding under your kitchen table when a cranky old 60's H bomb lands in your garden) :)

    @TheRealBadabing

    I have to agree with the comments saying the threat was real (don't mean to gang up on your, I guess I just like the sound of my own voice). I know it is more reassuring to imagine that it was all just about crazy people selling guns, but in fact sometimes the crazy people very actually put others in colossal danger AND sell guns at the same time.

    I wonder if anyone in history has been stood by "the button" and NOT been safe in a bunker at the same time. I suspect not.

    I was going to say something like "anyway, we've got off topic", but in fact I think we probably haven't :)
    Edited by 1 at 03/10/06 @ 09:36

  • bauhaus #66 5 years ago

    Threads is a bit of a pisser really

  • InfiniteFury #67 5 years ago

    [link url=http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=FIWbFT25vdE
    ]http://www .youtube.com/watch?v=FIWbFT25vdE
    [/link]

    8min clip of Threads on Youtube. Potentially NSFW depending on where you work

  • TheRealBadabing #68 5 years ago

    That even today people believe we were minutes away from nuclear war just shows the power of the propoganda.

    There were many crisis during the cold war, lots of sabre rattling and macho politics for all. The fact that none of them ended with even a small tactical nuclear strike shows that neither side was prepared to risk real conflict. Does that show that the deterrent worked or that the will for war was never there in the first place?

    I remember watching "Threads" first time round too. Pretty frightening and I was totally convinced that the world would end in a very messy way. Now we have more accounts and evidence since the collapse of the USSR, we should acknowledge that the threat was never as real as we were led to believe.

    Why the dangers were so skillfully exaggerated is a matter for historians but they certainly were exaggerated.

    Anyway, still loving the game so if anyone wants to debate the merits of cold war sabre rattling, let's take it to the forum.

  • Hypocee #69 5 years ago

    Badabing, find the most reasonable person you know who lived through the Cuban Missile Crisis as an adult, and try telling them that. I suggest you stay out of arm's reach.

    Trivialising the apocalyptic threat which existed during the Cold War, and still exists in a different form today, is an extremely irresponsible thing to do - though it does appear to be a very comfortable fantasy, I must admit.

  • asphaltcowboy #70 5 years ago

    Actually, in the 80s we were VERY close to nuclear war...

  • kangarootoo #71 5 years ago

    Just read this moments ago.

    [link url=http: //news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5402342.stm
    ]http://ne ws.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/5402...[/link]

    So maybe in some bizarre alternative logical progression, D&C is actually really effective? :)

  • dcangel #72 5 years ago

    After another couple of games, I can safely say that I hate this game utterly. Guess strategy really isn't my thing.
    Edited by 1 at 03/10/06 @ 20:04

  • NthSimulachum #73 5 years ago

    This game rocks, in a rather morbid way. "Shit,3 are radars gone, my subs have been spotted, and their ICBMs are flying...but they haven't got my bombers...WOO! I won by .1million dead! In your face Chong Qing!"

    My only critique is the closed nature of the Bering Strait. If you're East Asia against the Soviets, nuclear attacks from subs are a bit of a problem, unless you wish to send them all the fucking way around the Cape of Good Hope and to the Arctic Ocean.

    In a patch maybe?

    As for Nuclear War, didn't we have a bit of a close call when Norway launched a sattelite? In 1995?

  • oneshotgame #74 5 years ago

    well well, after the tutorial missions and a couple of online matches i am not certain whether i got the point of the game. seems to me as if you don't have that many strategic options, seems pretty flat and kind of boring. when it comes down to strategy, hearts of iron 2 is my cup of tea, when it comes down to multiplayer online strategy, then warcraft 3, but what the heck is this? it doesnt have the amount of action as WC3 (in fact it has no action at all) and it lacks the depth of a real strategy game as HOI (in fact, it has no tactical depth at all), so can anybody answer me this little question:

    what's the point? why are you all so excited?



    let me have a guess: it's the nukes.

  • Hypocee #75 5 years ago

    If you're a HOI2 fan, aren't you going to find just about anything shallow? It's not for everyone and you may not be the target market.

    That said, as stated in the review the heart of the game is tension - trying to maximise your defenses during the construction phase as the early moves happen, then desperately trying to figure out, await and arrange the optimal strike. It's timing, timing, timing.

  • urban #76 5 years ago

    i think its the best £9 i've spent on a game ever, its going to make my brain expand and goo will come out my nose.

  • T4RG4 #77 5 years ago

    Played the tutorial last night (which I found very annoying in window mode - having to move blasted text boxes out of the way so you can click buttons gah!)

    Playing against the AI... hmm, seems very shallow and will bore me very quickly. Going to try a match against brother tonight (he's human) in the hope we might like it enough but to be honest, even at 10quid, it seems to play like something I could play on a website for free :-/

    I love the concept, like introversion, but heck, I'm not blind :)

    Here's hoping tonight uncovers its soul.

  • T4RG4 #78 5 years ago

    Look harder? I'm reserving final feeling until play time is complete this evening...

    Later that night...

    Great idea - Poor execution (no pun intended). Maybe they shouldnt have launched so early (no pun intended). Maybe they should have handed over development to some big-guns (no pun intended).

    Played tutorial, played AI, played human (1v1) and became very bored very quickly. Nukes are throwaway, when perhaps they should be 'precious' at least to start with. Even at a tenner I wouldnt/wont buy it and it pains me to say that - I so wanted it to be good :(
    Edited by 1 at 04/10/06 @ 21:16

  • GodlessXVIII #79 5 years ago

    For some reason Canadians and Aussies seem to have transcended away before nuclear war breaks out...

    Political statement of the day ? :)

    Anyway, great game.

  • Errol #80 5 years ago

    This game has almost infinite depth.

    I've played loads of games (all multiplayer) so far and every one has been different with a unique story to tell.

    Easily the best £10 I've spent this year. I would give a 9/10 score.

  • ThwartedEfforts #81 5 years ago

    Really stylish, old fashioned fun, I'd say this is probably worth the $11.69 I paid for it. But it's nowhere near as amazing as some people are making out.

  • Radiant_Caligula #82 5 years ago

    O----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------O

    Want to play rated Defcon rounds or create your own league?

    Community and good players to be found at:

    ......................................
    [link url=http://www.defconmatch.co m
    ]http://www.defconmatch.co m
    [/link]
    ......................................

    All free! Come sign up, open to all!

    We love this game and if you share our passion for nuking and everyday
    Armageddon, join us in this game of Megadeaths and strategical splendour...


    Greetings from The Nuclear Colosseum

    Emperor Radiant Caligula ;-)

    O----------------------------------------------------------- ----------------O