[h1][i]“Change course, but don’t give up.”[/i]
~Roy T. Bennett[/h1]
Ground Control was... a thing. Nowadays, when pretty much every game lets you utilize elevation and gives you benefits or disadvantages according to where your units are located, it's hard to explain why exactly—but see, things were not always like that. There were times when fully 3D real-time tactical games weren't even a thing. And Ground Control? It was on the frontline of that new movement. Was it revolutionary? Can't quite say that. Things were moving that way, so it was only a matter of time until we were about to get a fully 3D tactical game with elevation. Ground Control just happened to be the one. The problem was—aside from all that—it didn't really have anything special about it. That's exactly why the first Ground Control didn't age that well. Its maps looked the same, its gameplay was repetitive, and the story was painfully boring. Since pretty much everything that came after it did a much better job, as of the moment I write this, I don't even think it's worth getting back to the first GC. It all changed when the sequel came out, though. Ladies, gentlemen, and our dear others, please welcome—Ground Control II.
To be honest, I didn't expect much. I mean, sequels rarely aim for revolution. Improve this here, polish something there, and call it a day. That's how it works. In a way, Ground Control II does that by improving the terrain. I called the original game “fully 3D,” but the thing is—its engine actually used so-called “pseudo-3D height levels.” GC II goes fully 3D with no “buts” (heck, its engine was so ahead of its time that eventually it'll serve as a foundation to what will become Tom Clancy's Division's Snowdrop engine). If you think it stops there, though? You couldn't be more wrong. The thing about GC II is that, believe it or not, it was the biggest move forward for the genre since forever. Nowadays, we all know games like Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War and Company of Heroes. But guess what? Both were directly inspired by GC II. Well, you may say that in the Dawn of War case it was more like a parallel evolution (after all, the games were released approximately 3 months apart), but Company of Heroes' famous D-Day scene, for example, was directly inspired by scenes from this game.
That's just the thing about this game. Massive (the game's developer) noticed how the first GC looked kinda boring and therefore decided to make the sequel as spectacular as possible. And it was... wow. Sure, the story isn't really that great; the storyline that started in The Dark Conspiracy (the original game's expansion) was abandoned, the characters are still nobodies, and they didn't come up with anything more interesting than pretty generic alien invaders. But the way the story was presented to us? Like I said, it introduced us to the idea that tactical games can be as spectacular as the bloody movies. Which felt even better thanks to how the game looked absolutely stunning. Even today it looks pretty competitive. Which says a lot, since more than 20 years have passed since the initial release.
But no, presentation isn't the only big difference. If anything, it's not as important as what they did to the gameplay. It's kinda funny, but Ground Control II is... heavily different from the original. The original was just that—tactical puzzles. Nothing else. Remember Force 21? That was pretty much it. Know your units and be smart. GC II? It brought POIs. And while Ground Control I purists may disagree (after all, it did change the gameplay entirely), in my opinion, it was so-o-o worth it! I mean, come on. Pretty much everything we have in POI-based tactics nowadays we owe to Ground Control II. Don't expect any base building, though. Remember the dropzones from the first GC? That's what we're fighting for. Except now we're free to customize our dropships and even make them stay on the battlefield for some time in order to provide covering fire. Careful, though, since it's easy to lose your dropship. You will get another one with time, but most likely, it'll be more than enough for your enemy to finish you. I mean, no dropship means no new units, right?
In other words, while Ground Control I was a pure RTT (real-time tactics), Ground Control II is more of a hybrid. It's still a heavily tactical thing, but it has lots of traits of a fast-paced RTS (real-time strategy). And it feels good. Like, [i]really[/i] good. I mean, let's just admit it, the first GC was a bit too slow and a bit too annoying. GC II, on the other hand, is a pure joy. It's still a bit too slow for my liking and there's still no way to change the speed, but the overall difference is on a night-and-day level. And that's just the thing about this game. It's [i]fun[/i].
Is it blameless, though? Not really. Like I said, the sequel did commit crimes against the original. Story and genre shift aside, it also changed lots of fan-favorite features. Survived units, for example, won't follow you across missions. Units also became more simple and RTS-like. It's not that simple, of course, and in the alien campaign (we're free to choose this time, but in order to learn the whole story you'll need to finish both) we'll be able to “morph” two units of the same kind into one to get a stronger fighter on the field; but still, it feels a lot like a step back. Moreover, GC II brought resources. The more enemies you kill and the more POIs you capture (and yes, capturing all landing zones means that the enemy won't be able to send any more units against you)—the more money you'll get. And it's, like, downright blasphemy for the purists. So technically, I can see those who loved the original having complaints.
But let's just admit it—all the “buts” aside—GC II is the superior game. While GC I aged poorly and may feel clunky and even unpleasant today, its sequel is still a lot of fun even with all the competition that came after. No, seriously, I just wanted to check it out to refresh my memory, but ended up re-playing the whole human campaign in one sitting. It's [i]that[/i] fun. Even if you already have some modern favorites, GC II is still one of those old gems that is worth investing some time into.
Unfortunately, the publisher screwed us all again. I mean, OK, they only ask $4.99, so it's not like I want to call out Rebellion or something (multiplayer isn't mentioned anywhere on Steam page) and the price is totally fair (it's one of those cases when paying full price is totally OK), but still, online multiplayer was, like, a key feature of the game. Not having it is, like... I dunno. It feels wrong. What I do want to blame Rebellion for is the lack of proper updates. Like the first Ground Control, the sequel has a very high chance of not working on modern rigs. It's easy to fix with dgVoodoo 2, but still, even for $4.99, one may expect a better job. You sell it—you provide the support. Still, I really don't feel like giving this release a thumbs down. Ground Control II is a milestone. And, more importantly, it's a good game that feels fun 20+ years later. What else can one ask for?
Well, maybe an expansion. Unfortunately, there's a whole other story. And yes, it's about money. The Ground Control series may be all about milestones for us players, but the thing is—those games were never best-sellers. Which actually led to Massive being purchased by Vivendi Universal Games more than a year before Ground Control II came out. It provided them with enough money to finish the sequel, but... yeah. Despite all the OMG moments, it still didn't sell enough copies to satisfy the new owners. Massive would eventually move to another project (World in Conflict) and many others will continue their legacy, but... yeah. Ground Control was dead. Let's not make it a sad ending, though. We can still buy the game, it's still playable and even the multiplayer is still a thing thanks to third-party app called GameRanger. Let's just appreciate that.
