Page Two

Where I think this (and Rogue Squadron for that matter) fall flat is that players cannot engineer their own levels. This single elusive quality seems to be vital in such a small game, but it is not a common one to find.

Into all this Lucasarts have attempted to inject a story line, something about the "epic" (i.e. predictable) tale of "Brenn and Dellis Tantor-who are troopers in the Imperial ground forces. As the story unfolds, we witness the brothers' struggle to remain loyal to the Galactic Empire amid Imperial atrocities against the Rebellion. Before the game is played out, Brenn and Dellis will experience missions that will test their loyalty" Oh, I wonder what is going to happen, you don't think that the Brothers Brenn and Dellis will join the rebellion do you? :-)

The one card that Force Commander has to play above Command and Conquer is that you don't have to go around mining bloody minerals, or collecting gas out of the developer's backside. Still to limit what the player can do Lucasarts have introduced the "innovative" (i.e. bog standard) "Command Point System".

The simple version is this, achieve objectives such as capturing bases, destroying units etc, you get points that you can spend on forces, you spend too much and you loose points. Pretty simple eh?

Another card that Force Commander wields is that of the "dynamic" floating camera, so that the player gets a free field of vision. You can pan, roam or stare at your own unit's backside all day. It is your choice.

Still, despite what I have said Force Commander looks like a pretty nifty game and one that I am BOUND to add to my collection. If you have any opinions I would love to hear them.

P.S. If any of my mates are reading this, I have 2 networked computers and when I get the game, I will play Imperial and win :-)