Honestly not too happy with this video, but I've been writing and re-writing the script so much I just decided that it'd be best if I uploaded a video to kick off the channel again. This video will probably get a redux later on that's more inline with the other videos in the Advance Wars retrospective series. Tell me what you think though! Any constructive criticism is appreciated!
I still have and play this game on my nintendo DSi XL I agree the sound design in this game are great. plus the story is great,i like the flower disease in the game too.
Most people in the advance wars community pronounce the powers as C O Powers not CO powers (I know its kinda spelled like that but people usually refer to them as if they are Commanding Officers and not Commanders) sorry for such a nit pick but I do think it would help to improve the video when you remake it. Great content ;)
I like the story as well and I really like how Ed does not instantly become the leader or that it goes completely smoothly. He becomes the leader because he's the best man for the job and there are some doubts. I do wish though that Catleia had a few battles of her own in the storyline since she is a playable CO. (Sorry. I grew up with the PAL version and so those are the names I remember.)
The storytelling done piece-by-piece as I went through each mission was really fun to see unfold. One of the challenges I had going back to previous games like Dual Strike was that happy-go-lucky color-scheme you mentioned. It felt like eye-candy, which made it tougher for me to really feel like I was commanding an army and that there was gravity to the moves I made during gameplay. Days of Ruin gave me a reason to want to win each campaign mission (to see more of the story and to kick the crap out of people like Admiral Greyfield); it gave me reason to conserve units too, since whether you won or lost, there'd undoubtedly be blood on my hands. I won't spoil much even though the game's quite old, but even though I had a laugh at some of the shallower character development, stuff like Brenner's attitude towards helping others eventually grew on me, which made it twice as painful midway through the game. Days of Ruin is great at taking simple ideas like "Hope never dies" and hammering home the point that even though they're not perfect mottos, they may be our best bet at overcoming the cruelty and selfishness of human nature. The custom map maker was damn well legendary too. I had a ton of fun with that!
Days of Ruin is my favorite game in the franchise and my favorite DS game in the entire library. I love Dual Strike as well due to just how busted that game was. But the gritty nature and darker story of Days of Ruin just puts it ahead for me. I was playing Company of Heroes on my PC during that same time frame and it’s eerie how similar the games’ presentations were. Days of Ruin felt like a real war story to an extent. Whereas previous titles like Dual Strike felt more like a comedic story set during a war, sort of like the old TV show MASH or the movie Good Morning Vietnam. I’m currently playing the 1+2 Reboot Camp remake of the first two games. I hope this game sells well (I’ve done my part) so that perhaps we can get a new installment. I’d love to see them try the grittier route again.
My favourite Advance Wars, mainly for the superior AI than the previouse AW games. Sadly it just lacks a hard mode and more unlockables, as I really wanted to play the Beast character (we never hear the latter part of his theme in the campaign).
I would have preferred the setting and art the series was known for BUT man the balance of the game and the brutality of the AI is actually really good in this game. That promotion system really encourages you to be strategic with your actions and unit rebalance like the introduction of the anti-tank really changes the game. Makes me wish for a game with this gameplay but the old art.
Fun fact, the dialong differences between days of ruin and dark conflict change the tone a little, in dark conflict there are moments that are abit darker than in days of ruin, for example in the later stage of the game theres the mission with the hope village where everyone worships a bug, in dark conflict the mad worshiper demands a sacrifice of 999 souls to cure them of the desiease and will and the crew try to stop this, in days of ruin the bug becomes a worm and the reason the fighting starts is because the mad worshiper orders the people to attach will and his crew to please the worm
I wish they had a full apocalyptic trilogy to give these characters and era a chance before pulling the plug on the series(plus I do wonder how'd the series would look on both the 3ds and switch)
I like the cartoony aesthetic more than the aesthetic in this game, but I don't give a damn what aesthetic the game has if they release a game on the Switch. I just so badly want to see a new game in this phenomenal franchise. Advance Wars is my favorite strategy series ever and one of my top 3 or 4 Nintendo franchises ever right along side the likes of Mario, Zelda, and Metroid. If Fire Emblem can become a multimillion selling blockbuster franchise, then I see no reason why Advance Wars can't at least become profitable enough for Nintendo to keep making new games.
@@williamkoscielniak820 well yeah, in one form or another, it'd be great if this series can come back(hell, they could even market it as a more advanced form of fire emblem or something for the hardcore fans since nintendo do like to try to attract everyone)
Some fans of previous games feel the new story was too dark. I felt it still had enough levity to avoid getting too depressing, and it ends on a hopeful note saying with our heroes defeating the evil that rose up after the apocalypse. This wasn't some edgy nonsense like The Last of Us where after the end of civilization it presents 99% of humanity as bloodthirsty psychopaths.
Too be fair to the Last of Us a significant portion of humanity (not 99% but the majority) would be bloodthirsty psychopaths in a complete societal collapse. What TLOU gets wrong is that they are presented as psychopaths with no higher goals in mind. In reality there would be method to the madness. There would be all out localized wars between settlements for resource control. Clean water spring? Some folks are going to die over it. A huge stash of medical supplies? Some folks are gonna get maimed and killed over it. Just the nature of humanity when the chips are down and every single person/group is desperate to ensure long time survival.
Thanks for the video. As somebody that clocked well over 150 hours playing the campaign and custom maps, it felt really nice to hear you give this retrospective!
While it's good... the battle animation is very lacking... it's basically just a still sprite added some particle effect and gorgeous sound effect. Unlike previous iterations which really has animations in it.
Really great review, I was on the fence if I should get this game because I remember it got some negative reviews back in the day. I’m a big Advanced Wars fan so I’m glad that you made comparisons to the previous titles. Definitely will check out Days Of Ruin.
Im starting a new Channel and this game is my bread and butter im hoping lol. To play this game and talk history and politics in the background would be so cool.
I like both style TBH I would have certain preferred an inbetween. The gameplay is king The animation was underwelming in days of ruin, but that can be fixed with a remaster
I might find a copy somewhere and try it out, my brother said it’s not that great compared to the previous games, and he was an advanced wars junkie. But I’ll give it a try sometime. I suppose my greatest concern is that I’ll get bored during missions, like I do when I play Wargroove occasionally. You see, I’ve only played Dual Strike, but one thing I can say is that whenever I used a power, super power or did a tag, I got a surge of excitement (perhaps I’m an adrenaline junkie idk). It was an odd but satisfying feeling. Building up this attack for so long and finally releasing it on my enemy is a good feeling, and then does a complete 180 when the enemy does it to me, but it makes that power/super power/tag I’ve been saving up all that worth it in the end. Now going back to Days of Ruin, I’m afraid that missions will last too long for my liking, and also lack that same adrenaline rush as it was to me in Dual Strike. Not to mention how tedious it might feel, which there were points in Dual Strike and Wargroove where I was pulling my hair thinking of what to do. So idk, those are my only concerns about picking up this game. But I suppose I’ll only know my true opinion when I eventually pick up and play the game. Some of the changes sound interesting and make me want to play it. I’m not worried about it being a waste of money, because it’s the same thing with Wargroove for me. I don’t think it’s a bad game or anything like that, but I just prefer Dual Strike over Wargroove. Mainly for the different Co mechanics. I don’t think Days of Ruin is going to make me want to burn the cartridge but I just hope that It can be that sweet spot between Dual Strike and Wargroove.
Aside for the units on combat(not in the map). I like the artstyle. And really it's a good change in terms of gameplay and history. Simply with dual strike reach the point we're you can't anything more without feel overcharged, instead they remove unit, add the ranks and change own the Powers work to give more importantance to the units. The game was a intend to reboot the franchise, maybe if they sell it as stand alone spin-off this could have a better reception.
I have been playing Advanced Wars for years but could never get into Fire Emblem. Fire Emblem's RNG takes the piss out of skillful game play and reduces strategy to spamming beatstick units. In Advanced Wars you can have the biggest baddest units and still loose easily to a couple infantry without planning and logistics.
A big difference though is that usually in Fire Emblem you're way stronger in quality but way outclassed in quantity. So it's more about protecting your own units and making sure they don't get swarmed.
I put this game off for a long time in part because of its different aesthetic and in part because I was an idiot who thought there were no battle animations because I didn't check to see that there was an option for battle animations. I started giving this game another shot like 5 days ago or so and it is every bit as incredible as any other game in the series and better than Dual Strike because DS gives CO's WAY too much power imo. I'm so grateful that I put this game off for so long out of ignorance, because it's the only Advance Wars game I have left that I haven't played to death. I am cherishing every battle in this game because when I'm done with it there will be nothing left in the series for me to play that I haven't already played. The only issue I have with this game is a very minor one, and that is how much damned dialogue there is. I know some people really care about stories in their games, but for me I play strategy games for the strategy. I tried to go ahead and read the dialogue for the first 7 missions or so and then I just gave up and completely stopped caring, in part because I just want to play the damned game and in part because the story was just so damned cookie cutter to me that I had no more reason to waste my time following it. It's like, I get it. The villains are super duper evil and we are super duper noble. But again, the story is damned near irrelevant so that's a very minor complaint.
With the remake of the advance era Advance Wars games coming out, there may yet be for this game to see a re-release, or a new Advance Wars game that takes the best lessons from this one (at the very least the unit balance and AI) and brings it to a new title. Really, that's my only concern with the remake. The simpler and less balanced mechanics may be seen as "good enough", with nostalgia and hype blinding people to what the series can actually be! Which would be a terrible shame because Intelligent Systems did push themselves with this one, with design decisions I wish had continued in some form. Whereas the first two Advance Wars had a computer that barely played better than what you'd expect from an NES game, and balance that was completely nuts at times (especially the first game), even if there was still plenty to like in them. (As an aside, if you ever wanted to return to revisit this game or the series, this this probably the time to do it!)
@@AlexaRobin21 I didn't say they were developing the remake. I said Intelligent Systems pushed themselves with Days of Ruin, and that I don't want the likely simpler AI and mechanics/balance in the remake to set a standard for any potential future Advance Wars games. Though admittedly my post has some sloppy writing in it.
The story was really cheesy/tropey, and the cast isn't as fleshed out as aw/ds, but the visuals, music, and major set pieces were great. Like EVERY theme in this game sticks out, even all the "villain" themes..
The music is fantastic, but I don't like the visuals as much as the earlier games. I mean the actual animations are great and all, but the aesthetic is unnecessarily dark for me. The drab color palette can be a bit of an eyesore after a while, and as you said the story is cheesy and cookie cutter. I love the lighthearted, cartoonish aesthetic of the earlier games because they were just flat out nicer to look at on the one hand, and the tone sent the message that this a Nintendo game and it's all about having fun on the other hand. DoR takes itself too seriously. The villains are ridiculously villainy which works in the cartoonish setting but comes off as ultra corny in the more "realistic" setting of DoR, because even the most sadistic psychopaths in existence don't speak and behave in the exaggerated way the villains in this game do. But at the end of the day those are really minor complaints. The gameplay is fantastic just as every AW's game is, but I think the balance among the units and the reduced CO powers puts it over the edge as having the best gameplay in the entire series.
@@williamkoscielniak820 I think "best" is subjective..best balance and pvp? Probably, but for me at least when I revisit the series, playing the ones where COs have huge variance lead to more play styles and fun. I do agree the color was badin dor, especially the unit sprites on the map and the map itself... I liked the combat art a lot, including the punchier sounds though. For the villains I thought waylon was good, greyfield was bad and caulder was boring. Beast gets a pass for serving an ok foil for will. All tropey, latter three being soo one dimensional and plain. The doctor is the worst character by far though lol...
Disagree on the first point. I think the original AW trilogy has more cheesy dialogues but that's to be expected due to the more light-hearted and fun nature of the games themselves. I think the dialogue on Days of Ruins is more realistic, but yes some of the dialog is still cheesy. Agree with 2nd point. With only 26 campaign missions and unremarkable villains, the character development leaves a lot to be desired, but for a standalone game it still holds up pretty well. For me the story itself was a fresh air of change from the original trilogy.
I personally didnt like this one just for the cause of units not having the slightest animation to them, they are all just static stickers so they dont feel as live as prior games.
4:10 Sped up gameplay? It does the opposite. It slows the gameplay down as you need time to construct them. Days of ruin is a much slower paced game than it's predecessors. Many of the units that allowed for fast and sustained offense like Aircraft carriers, black boats, neo-tanks, helicopters and mega-tanks were either greatly nerfed or removed completely. While helicopters and aircraft carriers are in the game they are far more vulnerable than before. Mega-tanks in days of ruin are much more like greatly slowed down neo-tanks than the borderline unstoppable monsters they were before. Defensive units were either introduced or buffed substantially with the biggest example being the anti-tank gun which can put the brakes on any talk assault and is very hard to just push through. Fighters are also pretty defensive units as they can't really do damage to vehicles but can greatly interfere with rushing infantry in helicopters and their supporting helicopters. Missile boats are also almost entirely defensive because they only have 1 attack meaning they need to constantly go back to their base. The mechanic of having units gain experience again makes it more defensive. As having units in safe areas means they will be stronger and can ward of assaults of new units.
it kinda depends on the style that you play. you can play more in a cautious, defensive way or build up for a fast, agressive way, both way works for the majority of the campaign missions, and most new units i find it better to use as roadblocks, like the missle boats or bikes/small tanks, they are cheap and can mostly survive an attack or two sometimes so i get a wall of them to slow down the enemy and then i start building a big counter attack, and with carrier that can deploy it's own units its even better and easier.
The balance changes weren't amazing though. You were still rewarded for spamming units, which once again slows down games. You can thank division defense for that crap.
Really? To me it felt like it was far less. Stronger units can ward off assaults much better. In many of the earlier games a large wall of infantry will do much more work defensively than any mega tank ever could. The big thing though about Days of Ruin is that the gameplay as a whole is much more defensive. You just don't have the units that allow for explosive offenses anymore. Almost all the offensive units like the neo tank, black boat, helicopter, stealth figher and mega tank were either nerfed or removed completely. While defensive units like the Submarine, artillery and cruiser were all buffed. Also new very defensive units were introduced such as the Duster which is hell to any kind of infantry sneak attack, the anti-tank which can put the brakes on even the strongest offensive push and the missile boat which can be a real nuance to all naval ships. The leveling system also makes things slower since it means long lasting units on defensive will be stronger than throwaway units on offense. Your CO mounting also makes it very worthwhile to be cautious and not just barrel through the enemy. I do like it though as it makes days of ruin very different. It is a lot slower paced. Usually what ends up happening though is that you kind of get into a stalemate with strong units on both sides. Then both sides build up their forces while making slight movement until one uses their ability and tries to push through and gain the advantage. However once you have secured victory it's much easier to steamroll the opponent. One thing about Advance Wars that I've never liked was that you often have a post-game. Where you have already secured victory and are just finishing off your opponent. That is often very long and it's not uncommon where the post-game section is pretty much as long as the rest of the battle. I do wish they would impliment some sort of system like that if another advance wars comes out. Something like Empire at War or AoE III had where you can have an auto conclusion to the battle once you have an overwhelming advantage.
I like DoR... I like the music, the new units... But... The other games in the series had more fun, charm and character. So yeah, gimmie the first three any day over this one,
I liked those as well, but I also didn't mind a change after 3 games with the exact same visuals. I think I WOULD have minded if the series went on after this in the same style. I had a similar reaction to FE Awakening. I didn't necessarily like that game's visuals, but I thought it was a fine enough style after having played the three GBA games. But now that we've had a ton of FE games in the same boring art style, I can't fucking stand it.
I actually really like the gameplay mechanics. Choosing which unit to assign your CO, buffing units with your CO zone, leveling up units to vet status. I liked how every tile that's viewed from a unit is permanently revealed for that turn. You shouldn't let something as shallow as art style keep you from enjoying good gameplay.
Advance wars wasnt a war sim it was a fun game that made light of a horrible aspect of the human condition in a goofy way. The more “Realistic” themes of this game made me feel like shit playing it and I couldn’t get invested in the campaign.
I don't entirely agree with you but I see where you're coming from. My requirements are a little different. If you want to present a lighthearted and unrealistic take on war, make it a very goofy game with colorful characters. I also very much love serious war games, but then I want them to take the subject matter very seriously as well. There are many games that fail to do this. For example: I absolutely LOATHE the story in Valkyria Chronicles 4, because it features a real and semi realistic war, but portrays it as an opportunity for a bunch of Anime characters to become best friends and make it a nice school trip, instead of the absolutely horrible and inhuman situation it is. Or most Call of Duty games, which are mostly just gun porn games with dehumanized enemies. Stuff like that.
Honestly not too happy with this video, but I've been writing and re-writing the script so much I just decided that it'd be best if I uploaded a video to kick off the channel again. This video will probably get a redux later on that's more inline with the other videos in the Advance Wars retrospective series. Tell me what you think though! Any constructive criticism is appreciated!
I still have and play this game on my nintendo DSi XL
I agree the sound design in this game are great.
plus the story is great,i like the flower disease in the game too.
Most people in the advance wars community pronounce the powers as C O Powers not CO powers (I know its kinda spelled like that but people usually refer to them as if they are Commanding Officers and not Commanders) sorry for such a nit pick but I do think it would help to improve the video when you remake it. Great content ;)
@@PortCityBalrog that's because in real life people will actually say "see oh" when referring to their commanding officer
I like the story as well and I really like how Ed does not instantly become the leader or that it goes completely smoothly. He becomes the leader because he's the best man for the job and there are some doubts. I do wish though that Catleia had a few battles of her own in the storyline since she is a playable CO.
(Sorry. I grew up with the PAL version and so those are the names I remember.)
Same bro I prefer the English version to american
The storytelling done piece-by-piece as I went through each mission was really fun to see unfold. One of the challenges I had going back to previous games like Dual Strike was that happy-go-lucky color-scheme you mentioned. It felt like eye-candy, which made it tougher for me to really feel like I was commanding an army and that there was gravity to the moves I made during gameplay. Days of Ruin gave me a reason to want to win each campaign mission (to see more of the story and to kick the crap out of people like Admiral Greyfield); it gave me reason to conserve units too, since whether you won or lost, there'd undoubtedly be blood on my hands.
I won't spoil much even though the game's quite old, but even though I had a laugh at some of the shallower character development, stuff like Brenner's attitude towards helping others eventually grew on me, which made it twice as painful midway through the game. Days of Ruin is great at taking simple ideas like "Hope never dies" and hammering home the point that even though they're not perfect mottos, they may be our best bet at overcoming the cruelty and selfishness of human nature.
The custom map maker was damn well legendary too. I had a ton of fun with that!
It's the only map maker that has a square as a default and you can even change the size of it. It's really good.
Days of Ruin is my favorite game in the franchise and my favorite DS game in the entire library.
I love Dual Strike as well due to just how busted that game was. But the gritty nature and darker story of Days of Ruin just puts it ahead for me. I was playing Company of Heroes on my PC during that same time frame and it’s eerie how similar the games’ presentations were.
Days of Ruin felt like a real war story to an extent. Whereas previous titles like Dual Strike felt more like a comedic story set during a war, sort of like the old TV show MASH or the movie Good Morning Vietnam.
I’m currently playing the 1+2 Reboot Camp remake of the first two games. I hope this game sells well (I’ve done my part) so that perhaps we can get a new installment. I’d love to see them try the grittier route again.
Sooo....
this is my favorite advance wars. i bought one for myself, and bought one for each of my friends D=
Let's play online
My favourite Advance Wars, mainly for the superior AI than the previouse AW games. Sadly it just lacks a hard mode and more unlockables, as I really wanted to play the Beast character (we never hear the latter part of his theme in the campaign).
true on mine own opinion i say it deserve an remake or port for switch
an spiritual sequel would be pretty nice too
I would have preferred the setting and art the series was known for BUT man the balance of the game and the brutality of the AI is actually really good in this game. That promotion system really encourages you to be strategic with your actions and unit rebalance like the introduction of the anti-tank really changes the game. Makes me wish for a game with this gameplay but the old art.
Nah, this style and art is awesome and you know it.
Fun fact, the dialong differences between days of ruin and dark conflict change the tone a little, in dark conflict there are moments that are abit darker than in days of ruin, for example in the later stage of the game theres the mission with the hope village where everyone worships a bug, in dark conflict the mad worshiper demands a sacrifice of 999 souls to cure them of the desiease and will and the crew try to stop this, in days of ruin the bug becomes a worm and the reason the fighting starts is because the mad worshiper orders the people to attach will and his crew to please the worm
I wish they had a full apocalyptic trilogy to give these characters and era a chance before pulling the plug on the series(plus I do wonder how'd the series would look on both the 3ds and switch)
I like the cartoony aesthetic more than the aesthetic in this game, but I don't give a damn what aesthetic the game has if they release a game on the Switch. I just so badly want to see a new game in this phenomenal franchise. Advance Wars is my favorite strategy series ever and one of my top 3 or 4 Nintendo franchises ever right along side the likes of Mario, Zelda, and Metroid. If Fire Emblem can become a multimillion selling blockbuster franchise, then I see no reason why Advance Wars can't at least become profitable enough for Nintendo to keep making new games.
@@williamkoscielniak820 well yeah, in one form or another, it'd be great if this series can come back(hell, they could even market it as a more advanced form of fire emblem or something for the hardcore fans since nintendo do like to try to attract everyone)
@@williamkoscielniak820 This aesthetic is more fitting for war, critically speaking.
Some fans of previous games feel the new story was too dark. I felt it still had enough levity to avoid getting too depressing, and it ends on a hopeful note saying with our heroes defeating the evil that rose up after the apocalypse. This wasn't some edgy nonsense like The Last of Us where after the end of civilization it presents 99% of humanity as bloodthirsty psychopaths.
Too be fair to the Last of Us a significant portion of humanity (not 99% but the majority) would be bloodthirsty psychopaths in a complete societal collapse.
What TLOU gets wrong is that they are presented as psychopaths with no higher goals in mind. In reality there would be method to the madness. There would be all out localized wars between settlements for resource control. Clean water spring? Some folks are going to die over it. A huge stash of medical supplies? Some folks are gonna get maimed and killed over it.
Just the nature of humanity when the chips are down and every single person/group is desperate to ensure long time survival.
Thanks for the video. As somebody that clocked well over 150 hours playing the campaign and custom maps, it felt really nice to hear you give this retrospective!
same
While it's good... the battle animation is very lacking... it's basically just a still sprite added some particle effect and gorgeous sound effect. Unlike previous iterations which really has animations in it.
Really great review, I was on the fence if I should get this game because I remember it got some negative reviews back in the day. I’m a big Advanced Wars fan so I’m glad that you made comparisons to the previous titles. Definitely will check out Days Of Ruin.
Im starting a new Channel and this game is my bread and butter im hoping lol. To play this game and talk history and politics in the background would be so cool.
I just decided to replay this game because the president of my country is very similar to Greyfield and there's also a virus pandemic in the story
Lmao
It’s CO power like “seee ohhh” it’s short for commanding officer. Pet peeve to hear you say it wrong being in the military lol
My favourite too. Just installing on retroarch ^^
I love this game so much I still play it lol
So do I! I always have my DS Lite on me on overseas flights. Playing it for hours ^^
I'm playing it right now on my nintendo dsi XL i like the story and gameplay
I started playing tiny metal as a sub but it’s not the same but I hope they remake this game just like the advance wars 1 and 2 for the switch
I like both style TBH
I would have certain preferred an inbetween.
The gameplay is king
The animation was underwelming in days of ruin, but that can be fixed with a remaster
The music in this game was top notch, Will's theme playing on that last level was amazing
It bothers me how you say CO (coh) instead of C.O. (cee-oh). C.O. Stands for commanding officer.
What’s a co?
c o c k
I might find a copy somewhere and try it out, my brother said it’s not that great compared to the previous games, and he was an advanced wars junkie. But I’ll give it a try sometime. I suppose my greatest concern is that I’ll get bored during missions, like I do when I play Wargroove occasionally. You see, I’ve only played Dual Strike, but one thing I can say is that whenever I used a power, super power or did a tag, I got a surge of excitement (perhaps I’m an adrenaline junkie idk). It was an odd but satisfying feeling. Building up this attack for so long and finally releasing it on my enemy is a good feeling, and then does a complete 180 when the enemy does it to me, but it makes that power/super power/tag I’ve been saving up all that worth it in the end. Now going back to Days of Ruin, I’m afraid that missions will last too long for my liking, and also lack that same adrenaline rush as it was to me in Dual Strike. Not to mention how tedious it might feel, which there were points in Dual Strike and Wargroove where I was pulling my hair thinking of what to do. So idk, those are my only concerns about picking up this game. But I suppose I’ll only know my true opinion when I eventually pick up and play the game. Some of the changes sound interesting and make me want to play it. I’m not worried about it being a waste of money, because it’s the same thing with Wargroove for me. I don’t think it’s a bad game or anything like that, but I just prefer Dual Strike over Wargroove. Mainly for the different Co mechanics. I don’t think Days of Ruin is going to make me want to burn the cartridge but I just hope that It can be that sweet spot between Dual Strike and Wargroove.
The thrum of those diesel engines :3
Aside for the units on combat(not in the map). I like the artstyle. And really it's a good change in terms of gameplay and history. Simply with dual strike reach the point we're you can't anything more without feel overcharged, instead they remove unit, add the ranks and change own the Powers work to give more importantance to the units. The game was a intend to reboot the franchise, maybe if they sell it as stand alone spin-off this could have a better reception.
A bit of a silly remark, but it's not "Co", it's "SEE-OH". Commanding Officer.
4:20 Reduced range not move, it's move is 5 like in the older AWs but it's range was lowered from 2-6 to 3-5.
Favorite game on nds!
I wanna get this game again. One of 4 games I played on my nintendo. Also I stopped playing the game for a few months when I couldn't beat Foryster.
I have been playing Advanced Wars for years but could never get into Fire Emblem. Fire Emblem's RNG takes the piss out of skillful game play and reduces strategy to spamming beatstick units. In Advanced Wars you can have the biggest baddest units and still loose easily to a couple infantry without planning and logistics.
A big difference though is that usually in Fire Emblem you're way stronger in quality but way outclassed in quantity. So it's more about protecting your own units and making sure they don't get swarmed.
Not if you're The Beast RAAAAGH!!! The badder the better, har har har!
I put this game off for a long time in part because of its different aesthetic and in part because I was an idiot who thought there were no battle animations because I didn't check to see that there was an option for battle animations. I started giving this game another shot like 5 days ago or so and it is every bit as incredible as any other game in the series and better than Dual Strike because DS gives CO's WAY too much power imo.
I'm so grateful that I put this game off for so long out of ignorance, because it's the only Advance Wars game I have left that I haven't played to death. I am cherishing every battle in this game because when I'm done with it there will be nothing left in the series for me to play that I haven't already played.
The only issue I have with this game is a very minor one, and that is how much damned dialogue there is. I know some people really care about stories in their games, but for me I play strategy games for the strategy. I tried to go ahead and read the dialogue for the first 7 missions or so and then I just gave up and completely stopped caring, in part because I just want to play the damned game and in part because the story was just so damned cookie cutter to me that I had no more reason to waste my time following it. It's like, I get it. The villains are super duper evil and we are super duper noble. But again, the story is damned near irrelevant so that's a very minor complaint.
You did a very good job, reviews aren’t easy. Content is very engaging keep it up!
With the remake of the advance era Advance Wars games coming out, there may yet be for this game to see a re-release, or a new Advance Wars game that takes the best lessons from this one (at the very least the unit balance and AI) and brings it to a new title.
Really, that's my only concern with the remake. The simpler and less balanced mechanics may be seen as "good enough", with nostalgia and hype blinding people to what the series can actually be! Which would be a terrible shame because Intelligent Systems did push themselves with this one, with design decisions I wish had continued in some form. Whereas the first two Advance Wars had a computer that barely played better than what you'd expect from an NES game, and balance that was completely nuts at times (especially the first game), even if there was still plenty to like in them.
(As an aside, if you ever wanted to return to revisit this game or the series, this this probably the time to do it!)
Intelligent System isn't involved in the remake
@@AlexaRobin21 I didn't say they were developing the remake. I said Intelligent Systems pushed themselves with Days of Ruin, and that I don't want the likely simpler AI and mechanics/balance in the remake to set a standard for any potential future Advance Wars games.
Though admittedly my post has some sloppy writing in it.
The story was really cheesy/tropey, and the cast isn't as fleshed out as aw/ds, but the visuals, music, and major set pieces were great. Like EVERY theme in this game sticks out, even all the "villain" themes..
The music is fantastic, but I don't like the visuals as much as the earlier games. I mean the actual animations are great and all, but the aesthetic is unnecessarily dark for me. The drab color palette can be a bit of an eyesore after a while, and as you said the story is cheesy and cookie cutter. I love the lighthearted, cartoonish aesthetic of the earlier games because they were just flat out nicer to look at on the one hand, and the tone sent the message that this a Nintendo game and it's all about having fun on the other hand. DoR takes itself too seriously. The villains are ridiculously villainy which works in the cartoonish setting but comes off as ultra corny in the more "realistic" setting of DoR, because even the most sadistic psychopaths in existence don't speak and behave in the exaggerated way the villains in this game do.
But at the end of the day those are really minor complaints. The gameplay is fantastic just as every AW's game is, but I think the balance among the units and the reduced CO powers puts it over the edge as having the best gameplay in the entire series.
@@williamkoscielniak820 I think "best" is subjective..best balance and pvp? Probably, but for me at least when I revisit the series, playing the ones where COs have huge variance lead to more play styles and fun. I do agree the color was badin dor, especially the unit sprites on the map and the map itself... I liked the combat art a lot, including the punchier sounds though. For the villains I thought waylon was good, greyfield was bad and caulder was boring. Beast gets a pass for serving an ok foil for will. All tropey, latter three being soo one dimensional and plain. The doctor is the worst character by far though lol...
Disagree on the first point. I think the original AW trilogy has more cheesy dialogues but that's to be expected due to the more light-hearted and fun nature of the games themselves. I think the dialogue on Days of Ruins is more realistic, but yes some of the dialog is still cheesy.
Agree with 2nd point. With only 26 campaign missions and unremarkable villains, the character development leaves a lot to be desired, but for a standalone game it still holds up pretty well. For me the story itself was a fresh air of change from the original trilogy.
The first three games were super cheesy as well, I think most of us didn't mind it at all because the game had an overall very lighthearted tone.
This is the best Advance Wars by far.
Should of remade this game instead of the 1 and 2 games
Ikr, this one only lacked animation , like actual moving units
very good video,
Best AW game.
7:36 I liked that joke hahahahah! 🤣
I personally didnt like this one just for the cause of units not having the slightest animation to them, they are all just static stickers so they dont feel as live as prior games.
Well, it better fits with the dark tone.
4:10
Sped up gameplay?
It does the opposite. It slows the gameplay down as you need time to construct them. Days of ruin is a much slower paced game than it's predecessors. Many of the units that allowed for fast and sustained offense like Aircraft carriers, black boats, neo-tanks, helicopters and mega-tanks were either greatly nerfed or removed completely. While helicopters and aircraft carriers are in the game they are far more vulnerable than before. Mega-tanks in days of ruin are much more like greatly slowed down neo-tanks than the borderline unstoppable monsters they were before.
Defensive units were either introduced or buffed substantially with the biggest example being the anti-tank gun which can put the brakes on any talk assault and is very hard to just push through. Fighters are also pretty defensive units as they can't really do damage to vehicles but can greatly interfere with rushing infantry in helicopters and their supporting helicopters. Missile boats are also almost entirely defensive because they only have 1 attack meaning they need to constantly go back to their base.
The mechanic of having units gain experience again makes it more defensive. As having units in safe areas means they will be stronger and can ward of assaults of new units.
it kinda depends on the style that you play. you can play more in a cautious, defensive way or build up for a fast, agressive way, both way works for the majority of the campaign missions, and most new units i find it better to use as roadblocks, like the missle boats or bikes/small tanks, they are cheap and can mostly survive an attack or two sometimes so i get a wall of them to slow down the enemy and then i start building a big counter attack, and with carrier that can deploy it's own units its even better and easier.
DoR was pretty kino
The balance changes weren't amazing though. You were still rewarded for spamming units, which once again slows down games. You can thank division defense for that crap.
Really? To me it felt like it was far less. Stronger units can ward off assaults much better. In many of the earlier games a large wall of infantry will do much more work defensively than any mega tank ever could.
The big thing though about Days of Ruin is that the gameplay as a whole is much more defensive. You just don't have the units that allow for explosive offenses anymore. Almost all the offensive units like the neo tank, black boat, helicopter, stealth figher and mega tank were either nerfed or removed completely. While defensive units like the Submarine, artillery and cruiser were all buffed. Also new very defensive units were introduced such as the Duster which is hell to any kind of infantry sneak attack, the anti-tank which can put the brakes on even the strongest offensive push and the missile boat which can be a real nuance to all naval ships.
The leveling system also makes things slower since it means long lasting units on defensive will be stronger than throwaway units on offense. Your CO mounting also makes it very worthwhile to be cautious and not just barrel through the enemy.
I do like it though as it makes days of ruin very different. It is a lot slower paced.
Usually what ends up happening though is that you kind of get into a stalemate with strong units on both sides. Then both sides build up their forces while making slight movement until one uses their ability and tries to push through and gain the advantage. However once you have secured victory it's much easier to steamroll the opponent.
One thing about Advance Wars that I've never liked was that you often have a post-game. Where you have already secured victory and are just finishing off your opponent. That is often very long and it's not uncommon where the post-game section is pretty much as long as the rest of the battle.
I do wish they would impliment some sort of system like that if another advance wars comes out. Something like Empire at War or AoE III had where you can have an auto conclusion to the battle once you have an overwhelming advantage.
I like DoR... I like the music, the new units... But...
The other games in the series had more fun, charm and character. So yeah, gimmie the first three any day over this one,
Nah, this one also has charm and actually treats war seriously. It’s better and more fitting compared to past games and you know it.
@@raphaelsorel6907 Each to their own. I prefer AW-Classic is all.
And I can't wait for Re-Boot Camp!
@@kazekamiha Though, it at least has a better tone and setting, critically speaking.
I absolutely loved the colorful sprites and characters of the past 3 advance wars. I'm not playing this nonsense
I liked those as well, but I also didn't mind a change after 3 games with the exact same visuals. I think I WOULD have minded if the series went on after this in the same style. I had a similar reaction to FE Awakening. I didn't necessarily like that game's visuals, but I thought it was a fine enough style after having played the three GBA games. But now that we've had a ton of FE games in the same boring art style, I can't fucking stand it.
Lolz the storyline of the 3 original games treated war like a fun routine weekend activity but this is the game that’s ‘nonsense’. Alright man XD
@@atrholiday2889 well you play a game to have fun no?
I actually really like the gameplay mechanics. Choosing which unit to assign your CO, buffing units with your CO zone, leveling up units to vet status. I liked how every tile that's viewed from a unit is permanently revealed for that turn. You shouldn't let something as shallow as art style keep you from enjoying good gameplay.
Advance wars wasnt a war sim it was a fun game that made light of a horrible aspect of the human condition in a goofy way. The more “Realistic” themes of this game made me feel like shit playing it and I couldn’t get invested in the campaign.
You are a sad and delusional weirdo.
I don't entirely agree with you but I see where you're coming from. My requirements are a little different. If you want to present a lighthearted and unrealistic take on war, make it a very goofy game with colorful characters. I also very much love serious war games, but then I want them to take the subject matter very seriously as well. There are many games that fail to do this. For example: I absolutely LOATHE the story in Valkyria Chronicles 4, because it features a real and semi realistic war, but portrays it as an opportunity for a bunch of Anime characters to become best friends and make it a nice school trip, instead of the absolutely horrible and inhuman situation it is. Or most Call of Duty games, which are mostly just gun porn games with dehumanized enemies. Stuff like that.