Homeworld: Cataclysm (Emergence) Rerelease

[malletmann]

I hadn't seen this posted here, and I figured a lot of folks would want to know. I just found out recently that Homeworld: Cataclysm has been rereleased on gog.com as Homeworld: Emergence. Apparently the rename's due to copyright reasons. Now, the game can have trouble running on modern systems, but I managed to get it to work by looking it up; that being said, I'm not exactly sure what I did to get it to work, so don't ask me.

[Siber]

Apparently the rename's due to copyright reasons.

Trademark reasons, strictly speaking(A distinction that matters more than you might think). Activision/Blizzard owns the name Cataclysm for video games currently.

[orion1836]

As much as I loved the original, Cataclysm put in a lot of anti-frustration features that the made the gameplay far more enjoyable and approachable. Wish 2 hadn't sunk the series.

[icekatze]

hi hi

I tried multiple times to play Homeworld 2, and never made it past the third level. Curse that stupid shipyard. Maybe I'll have to give Cataclysm a try, cause I enjoyed Homeworld 1.

[RedDwarfIV]

hi hi

I tried multiple times to play Homeworld 2, and never made it past the third level. Curse that stupid shipyard. Maybe I'll have to give Cataclysm a try, cause I enjoyed Homeworld 1.

As someone who has played Homeworld 1 and Homeworld Cataclysm, I preferred the latter. The story felt more interesting, the enemy more dangerous. I actually gave up on Homeworld 1 just after the ghost ship level, whereas I actually completed Cataclysm and later played it again.

Also, Kuun-Lan best mothership

[Arioch]

I didn't much care for Cataclysm overall. Good story idea, lots of potential with the modular mothership, but I thought it was really mediocre on the execution. The gameplay (for me) was very much the typical "bandbox your units, throw them at the enemy, watch them die, build more, repeat" RTS gameplay that has since made me stop playing RTS's, and the brilliant art direction of the first game just isn't there.

There are lots of folks who didn't like Homeworld 2, and I understand why, but I enjoyed it a lot more than Cataclysm.

[orion1836]

My take was this:

The original was a masterpiece, but you needed a very particular fleet build to do well on certain levels. If you didn't get enough resources, or you lost too many ships two levels previous to your current one, you had to go all the way back and re-play it (better) to have a shot.

Cataclysm was very well balanced and offered multiple ways to attack a particular problem in the early game. However, if you carried over your lessons from Homeworld 1 and mined every last resource you could, you were entirely too overpowered towards the end of the game, and it ended up becoming too easy.

Homeworld 2 made the AI difficult by cheating. Instead of having a given scenario, the Vagyr's starting fleet in each level was adjusted to perfectly oppose your play style (e.g. if you were fighter heavy, they'd be corvette heavy), causing you to either take a massive beating, completely change your fleet each level, or game the system by balancing out your ships/go to hyperspace with a different fleet composition and then changing it back at the start of the next level.

Suffice to say, I hate that type of game design.

[SVlad]

For me Homeworld 2 was much more a typical "bandbox your units, throw them at the enemy, watch them die, build more, repeat" RTS, than Homeworld 1 and Cataclysm, where tactic, flank maneuvers and formations had significant impact on gameplay. Also Homeworld 2 missions was heavy scripted to flood player with constant flow of enemies, but if player trying to be creative, scripts broke.

AI cheating (as giving computer opponent forces based on your current fleet) was in all Homeworlds. But in H2 it can be easily abused by taking only capital ships on next mission and building everything other in place.