
Download: - 3.17 GB
Part 01 Part 02 Part 03 Part 04 Part 05 Part 06
Part 07 Part 08 Part 09Part 10 Part 11 Part 12
Part 13 Part 14 Part 15 Part 16 Part 17
Files Password: www.itemxp.net

Publisher: EA Sports
Publisher: EA Sports
Developer: EA Sports
Genre: Soccer Sim
Release Date: Oct 29, 2001
ESRB: EVERYONE
Publisher: VU Games
Developer: KCET
Genre: Soccer Sim
Release Date: Apr 9, 2004
ESRB: EVERYONE
Publisher: 2K Sports
Developer: Aspyr
Genre: Tennis
Release Date: Mar 16, 2007
ESRB: EVERYONE
Publisher: Eidos Interactive
Developer: Beautiful Game
Genre: Soccer Management
Release Date: Oct 13, 2006 (EU)
Number of Players: 1 Player
DirectX Version: v9.0c
Championship Manager is a name that has become synonymous in the UK for over a decade with the concept of a great, in-depth football management game. Originally developed by Sports Interactive, the game has been the responsibility of Beautiful Game Studios (BGS) since 2004. Unfortunately their initial attempts frankly weren't up to scratch but with the benefit of time and stability under the new SCi-Eidos regime, the team has succeeded in building those early efforts into something far more worthy of the CM brand.
This year's iteration is undoubtedly the most convincing edition yet and gives you the task of choosing any team from a total of 63 league tiers in 26 countries with which to find glory. What that glory might be will depend on your choice of team. Chelsea, for example, would no doubt demand an excellent showing in the English Premier League, as well as a more-than-respectable level of advancement in the Champions' League. But if you decide to opt for the likes of Farnborough Town, which would probably just settle for avoiding relegation from the English Conference South, a different kind of challenge would await you.
But your first choice, once you've set up your own manager's profile, is to work out which leagues you want to run and how much detail you'd like the game to go into. If you've got an older machine, it'll help to keep the number of active leagues relatively low and simulate the rest, although you can only take jobs from active leagues as determined at the start of the game. It's common to choose the country you want to start in, as well as a few others, and it's possible to limit the number of leagues playable within a given country.
Once that's done, and you've decided on a team, you'll be responsible for pretty much every decision you can think of that a football manager in real life would make. First of all, you'll need to think carefully about the players at your disposal and whether you want to mould a team around a certain formation, or vice versa. It's important, especially at lower-level clubs, to spend some time looking at the players' statistics--of which there are many--to see who might perform well in any given position.
Of course, there's far more to take into account than bare stats alone--the age, morale, and general happiness of a player can contribute to whether or not he'll perform. And until you've played a number of matches, it's hard to get a feel for a team that you don't know very well.
Fortunately, that's exactly what preseason is for, with a raft of friendly matches that will have been arranged for you. These games are designed to give your players the chance to gain match practice before the proper season begins, but also to give you the opportunity to experiment with formations and tactical settings. However, it's worth bearing in mind that the opposition is likely to be doing the same, so just how much valuable information you gather during this time is always open for debate.
The hub of the game focuses around match day itself. When your team is due to play, you'll see a list of fixtures onscreen, before being taken to the dressing room for the team talk. In CM 2007, you have the opportunity to utter some words of inspiration--or condemnation--before a match, during halftime, and after the final whistle. You can also talk individually to players, as well as give an overall address or keep quiet if you'd prefer. Different team members will respond better to different messages, depending on their personalities. A feedback area at the bottom of the screen will give you some idea about how certain players have reacted to your comments. As you progress in this way, you'll get an idea of how to motivate the various characters on your team to get the best from them.
After that, it's on to the real action, and you can choose to digest the match in a number of different ways. The game is played out automatically, without any intervention from you unless you decide to make a tactical change. As in real life, once the whistle blows, it's up to the players. You can view as much or as little of the on-pitch action as you like, but you'll usually want to stick to the highlights--near misses, red cards, injuries, and of course, goals.
When one of these highlights occurs, you can watch the match in a kind of 3D that's an approximation of what you might see on TV. Should you so desire, you can also change the viewing angle. Although players aren't represented realistically, as you might expect from something like FIFA 07, you get a good idea of the movement and the ball and players.
On the plus side, being able to see a game play out in this way gives you much more of a visual clue as to where your team is doing well, or not so well, and it's certainly easier on the eye than CM's text commentary roots. However, the drawback is that most people buying this game will be used to watching real teams play on TV, and unfortunately, BGS still has some work to do on sharpening up some of the player intelligence. There has definitely been an improvement made to the match engine since CM 2006, but watching just a handful of games will present a myriad of odd decisions.
For example, on a number of occasions, we witnessed situations where a challenge would occur on the edge of the area, which resulted in the ball trickling toward the goal and just past the post as the goalkeeper and nearest defenders stood by and watched. This usually resulted in a corner to the opposition--despite the fact that there was ample time and opportunity for one of our team's players to rescue the ball.
On another occasion, we managed to score from a free kick that was taken midway in the opposition's half. Curiously, most of the players on the pitch were huddled about 15 yards from where the kick was being taken, while a lone pairing of striker and defender stood on the penalty spot. The ball came in and was nodded home by our striker--the oddest-looking attack-free kick we've ever seen.
Minimum System Requirements
System: Pentium III 1GHz or Athlon XP or equivalent
RAM: 256 MB
Hard Drive Space: 400 MB
Recommended System Requirements
System: Pentium 4 2GHz or Athlon XP or equivalent
RAM: 512 MB
Hard Drive Space: 400 MB
Screen Shots
Download
part1,part2,part3,part4,part5

Game Details:
publisher : Atari
developer : Housemarque
genre : Sports
ESRB rating : E
homepage : http://www.supreme-snowboarding.com/
Release date : Jan 2000 (released)
Snowboarding seems almost out of season in April but Supreme Snowboarding comes on the heels of a series of snowboarding titles released for next generation consoles. PlaynGo transfers the formula found in those games to the Pocket PC. While some snowboarding titles emphasize tricks, railing and jumps, Supreme Snowboarding is more interested in races and times. As such, the game is broken into free race and championship modes. A good two-thirds of Supreme Snowboarding's initial runs are locked and you have to unlock them through the championship mode. Championships involve a variety of time-based challenges issued to you on a particular run. After you complete a challenge, another run will open up and you can practice the newly opened run in the free race mode until the next one.
Like many snowboarding games in this genre, Supreme Snowboarding keeps track of a plethora of personal achievements. Best times are kept for each specific run. Moreover, you can save and load different championship runs so you don't mix up the progress of your individual snowboarders, or it prevents someone else from muddling yours. One of the problems I cited with the Xbox snowboarding title Amped is the fact that the runs themselves were geographically wide and lateral. Supreme Snowboarding, probably owing to the PDA's portrait configuration, still demands lateral movement but its courses are more elongated. They privileged length over width. This gives the game more of a race feeling and since performance is really based on time, it is aptly fitting. Jumping is still pretty useful in the game though. Performing certain jumps will earn you extra time bonuses. Some jumps are also timed so you can shave off a few seconds by going over obstacles, and on certain runs you can even jump over a snowed-in car.
Visually though, Supreme Snowboarding is a 2D top down title. Its animation is smooth and there is a slight trace of particle effects when you navigate through the snow. Particularly noteworthy is the attention to the star of the game itself, the snowboarder. The persona may be small but it reacts naturally to the varying degrees of turns applied. Unfortunately, the snow looks fairly bland and artificial. It effectively is one sheet of white pixels and the lack of anything organic about it almost makes it unbelievable. It could easily have been a blue background and turned into a Transworld Surf title. The visuals are saved by the sound effects but even those are far and few in between. I often wished Supreme Snowboarding would take a more aggressive, in-your-face type attitude that is often evoked by the sport itself. Perhaps a little music and commentary would make it more in line with the sport.
With experience, I found that one of the most crucial things about snowboarding games is the controls themselves. If they're too tough, you'll find yourself battling the control schema as much as you are the actual runs themselves. If they're too easy, a fast run might consist of nothing more than a few timely nudges. Thus, the actual connection between the snowboard itself and the player is absolutely crucial. Supreme Snowboarding gives you the choice of controlling via the stylus and the PDA's keypad. Both avenues don't provide absolute control. Those thinking you can simply draw a line from the start of the run to the bottom of the run will be in for a surprise. Supreme Snowboarding is about controlling the snowboard itself. And the physics of momentum mean you can't stop or turn on a dime. As you can probably guess by now, it takes quite some time to accelerate in Supreme Snowboarding, but it's helped (whereas Amped was not helped) by the fact that the runs are fairly lengthy in nature so you have ample real estate to gather speed. There's a slider in the main menu to control how sensitive you want the turning to be. On higher sensitivities, you don't feel as much friction but again, it's never as easy as merely connecting the dots with your stylus on the PDA screen. PlaynGo's idea of snowboarding, just as in real life, takes some getting used to.
In total, there are sixteen tracks altogether, of which you'll spend the majority of your time overcoming challenges to open up the latter ones. The runs increase in difficulty but unfortunately, there's no briefing screen or option to see the run before it happens. Because of the somewhat stiff controls, you really have to plan ahead of time to get the minimum times to complete challenges. This will undoubtedly lead players to take a scenic tour of a particular run to get to know the lay of the land, and then practice until they can clear the entire track in record time. These types of design create redundancy but I'm guessing it's a device by developers to extend the longevity of their game. A live automap during snowboarding or a quick glance at a map before the start of the run would have helped ease the frustration.
The small size of Supreme Snowboarding is something to cheer up about in light of the lack of extras. There's no multiplayer, support for ghost racers or additional tracks, which any single one alone would have added immensely to the game. So it all boils down to improving times and going over the few jumps that exist in the game. I always came to snowboarding games thinking the emphasis on merely performing tricks was too much. On the other hand, Supreme Snowboarding is all about getting to the base of the hill in a timely fashion. On its own, it also seems to err too much to the other side of the pendulum. If it were to include some of the trick-oriented play of the console snowboarding titles, PlaynGo would easily have a winner here. Throw in some good, maybe even customizable soundtracks, as well as multiplayer or some way to tie in the net as a platform for competition, and they'd hit more than solid gold.
Minimum Requirements:
Windows 95/98/ME/XP Home
Pentium 233 mhz
4x CD Rom
64MB Ram
8MB Graphics Card
Category: Sports
Ratings:
[08/10] Addictiveness
[17/20] Gameplay
[12/15] Graphics
[08/10] Interface/controls
[09/10] Program Size
[03/05] Sound
[04/05] Discreetness
[11/15] Learning Curve
Download
part1,part2,part3,part4,part5


Download
1.http://www.filefactory.com/file/b5985e
2.http://www.filefactory.com/file/c8eafb
3.http://www.filefactory.com/file/723789
4.http://www.filefactory.com/file/fdb4b4
5.http://www.filefactory.com/file/77323c
6.http://www.filefactory.com/file/e0198b
7.http://www.filefactory.com/file/72efdd
8.http://www.filefactory.com/file/054ea4
9.http://www.filefactory.com/file/6de6c4
10.http://www.filefactory.com/file/05a36f
11.http://www.filefactory.com/file/62a458
Publisher: Microsoft Game Studios
Developer: Big Huge Games
Genre: Historic Real-Time Strategy
Release Date: Oct 23, 2007 (more)
ESRB: TEEN
ESRB Descriptors: Blood, Violence
Publisher: cdv Software
Developer: Fireglow
Genre: Historic Real-Time Strategy
Release Date: Nov 9, 2004
ESRB: TEEN
ESRB Descriptors: Violence, Animated Blood
Connectivity: Local Area Network
Offline Modes: Competitive
Online Modes: Competitive
Number of Players: 1-4
Publisher: Strategy First
Developer: Object
Genre: Historic Real-Time Strategy
Release Date: Mar 26, 2002
ESRB: TEEN
ESRB Descriptors: Blood, Violence
Number of Players: 1-8
Object Software's Dragon Throne: Battle of Red Cliffs is the sequel to Fate of the Dragon. Both are real-time strategy games that take place during the legendary Three Kingdoms era in ancient China. Like Fate of the Dragon before it, Dragon Throne is a strategy game that uses somewhat simple 2D graphics and has full speech in Chinese. And like Fate of the Dragon, Dragon Throne is a decent enough game, but there are better real-time strategy games that you can spend your time and money on.
As you might have already guessed, Dragon Throne also sounds pretty much the same as Fate of the Dragon. The original Fate of the Dragon had two language options for audio speech: English and Chinese. Dragon Throne has only Chinese speech, though you can choose English subtitles. The game's voice acting is quite good, but unless you're fluent in Chinese (or attempting to learn the language), you'll probably end up ignoring it entirely. As with Fate of the Dragon, Dragon Throne's synth-instrumental soundtracks combine traditional Chinese folk music with more upbeat rhythms. The music is well suited to the game, though it isn't particularly memorable.
Does Dragon Throne also play the same as Fate of the Dragon? Yes, it does. In both games, as with most other real-time strategy games, you must recruit peasants to build a base of operations, then create an army to crush your enemies. And Dragon Throne more or less has the same base building and combat as the previous game. You recruit peasants to build houses to increase your population limit, farms to grow food, barracks to create soldiers, and mechanical workshops to build siege engines--it's all quite similar to other real-time strategy games you may have played. As in Fate of the Dragon, your infantry comes from training peasants at a barracks. The one interesting new feature that the sequel has is that soldiers can revert back to peasants in times of peace. In other words, instead of having soldiers standing about idly in times of peace, you can assign them peasant work. This occasionally comes in handy during longer campaigns, in which your armies have to travel long distances to fight and will gradually run low on strength (provided by food and wine, which your peasants can produce or carry in slow-moving supply wagons). So, the new feature simply allows you to build a new base of operations so you don't have to walk all the way back home to replenish your strength.
Minimum System Requirements
System: PII 266 or equivalent
RAM: 64 MB
Video Memory: 8 MB
Hard Drive Space: 240 MB
Recommended System Requirements
System: PIII 800 or equivalent
RAM: 128 MB
Video Memory: 32 MB
Hard Drive Space: 300 MB
Screen Shots
Download
part1,part2,part3,part4,part5
part6,part7,part8,part9,part10
Publisher: Paradox Interactive
Developer: Stormregion
Genre: Historic Real-Time Strategy
Release Date: Jun 12, 2006
ESRB: TEEN
ESRB Descriptors: Blood, Violence
Publisher: Microsoft Game Studios
Developer: Ensemble Studios
Genre: Historic Real-Time Strategy
Release Date: Oct 26, 1997
ESRB Descriptors: Animated Violence, Animated Blood
Number of Players: 1-8
When you first play Age of Empires, a warm feeling develops in your gut. Warcraft meets Civilization! Real-time empire-building! And does it ever look sharp and feel right.
But an uneasy feeling builds as you get deeper into it, a sense that all is not quite right. This is not quite the game you hoped for. Even worse, it has some definite problems. The pitfall when you review a game as anticipated and debated as this one is to make sure you criticize it for what it is, not for what you wish it was. I wish that Age of Empires was what it claimed to be - Civilization with a Warcraft twist. Instead, it is Warcraft with a hint of Civilization. That's all well and good, but it places it firmly in the action-oriented real-time combat camp, rather than in the high-minded empire-building of Civilization. The result is Warcraft in togas, with slightly more depth but a familiar feel.
Age of Empires places you on a map in an unexplored world, provides a few starting units, and lets you begin building an empire. Each game unfolds the same way. You begin with a town center and some villagers. The villagers are the basic laborers, and the town center enables you to build more of them and expand your settlement. The villagers are central to AOE: they gather resources, build structures, and repair units and buildings. Resources come in four forms: wood, food, stone, and gold. A certain amount of each is consumed to build various units and buildings, research new technology, and advance a civ to the next age.
There is no complex resource management or intricate economic model at work here. What you have is the same old real-time resource-gathering in period garb, with four resources instead of one or two. As your civ advances, you develop greater needs for these resources, but the way in which they are gathered and used becomes only marginally more complex (certain research can cause faster harvesting or more production). It appears on the surface to be a complex evocation of the way early civs gathered and used materials, but beneath the hood is the same old "mine tiberium, buy more stuff than the other guys" model. It is the first hint that AOE is a simple combat game rather than a glorious empire-builder.
There's no denying the thrill the first time a villager chucks a spear at an antelope and spends several minutes hacking meat from its flank with a stone tool. This is the level of detail that brings an empire-building game to life. If only those villagers would grow and develop over the course of the game, it would make it so much more interesting. If only they would trade in their loincloths for some britches and maybe some orange camouflage, and switch from spears to arrows and rifles. Yes, that's another game, but it could easily have been done in AOE, and why it wasn't is a mystery.
The overall impression of AOE dips further with the prickly issue of unit control and AI. As you expand your city with new and improved buildings, you develop the ability to produce new and better military units. These fall into several categories: Infantry (Clubman, Axeman, Short Swordsman, Broad Swordsman, Long Swordsman, Legion, Hoplite, Phalanx, and Centurion), Archers (Bowman, Improved Bowman, Composite Bowman, Chariot Archer, Elephant Archer, Horse Archer, and Heavy Horse Archer), Cavalry (Scout, Chariot, Cavalry, Heavy Cavalry, Cataphract, and War Elephant), and Siege Weapons (Stone Thrower, Catapult, Heavy Catapult, Ballista, and Helepolis). With the completion of a temple, a priest becomes available that can heal friendly units and convert enemy units. Naval units come in the form of fishing, trade, transport, and war.
The problem is that while enemy AI is savvy and aggressive (it can afford to be since it appears to cheat with resources), your units are bone-stupid. Path-finding is appallingly botched, with units easily getting lost or stuck. There is a waypoint system, but that hardly makes up for the fact that your units have trouble moving from point A to point B if you don't utilize it. Military units will stand idly by while someone a millimeter away is hacked to pieces. They respond not at all to enemy incursion in a village and wander aimlessly in the midst of battle. Was this deliberate so that the gamer needed to spend more time in unit management? If so, it was a poor idea, since there is simply too much going on midgame to worry about whether your military is allowing itself to be butchered in one corner of the map while you are aggressively tending to a battle in another portion. There is no excusing this flaw, and it seriously diminishes AOE's enjoyability. Finally, there is the fifty unit limit that is irritating many players, but in light of the game's already troublesome play balance, it was a solid decision to force users to build units more selectively.
AOE obviously is sticking close to an early-empire motif, and there's nothing at all wrong with that. Stone, Tool, Bronze, and Iron are the four ages, and with each come new structures and military units. You don't earn these advanced ages - you buy them with resources. Advancement is a simple matter of hoarding and spending food and gold. The overall welfare of your state is irrelevant as long as it survives: happiness is not measured, trade is barely modeled, and the state exists merely to produce a military machine to crush everyone else on the map. Naval power has a woefully unbalancing effect upon gameplay, with a strong navy able to shred the competition at the expense of reality.
Micromanagement is the name of the game in AOE. There is no unit queue, and to build five villagers, you need to build one, wait, build another, and so on. With units acting so stupidly, you should be able to set their level of aggression and the manner in which they attack (a la Dark Reign), but that is also not an option. Diplomacy is relegated to tribute and nothing more, and alliances are hard to form. You can be allied, neutral, or at war with other civs, but if the radio button is still set to "allied" when an opponent starts firing on your units, your units will not fire back, defend themselves, or even flee. They will just be destroyed. Cues as to exactly what's happening on the map are obscure; the duty has been relegated to unrelated sound effects. Does that bugle call mean my building is finished being built, or my units are under attack? How about some help, people? Victory conditions can also be irritating. There are several campaigns that require that specific goals be met, and these quickly grow tiresome. Thankfully, there is an excellent custom generator that lets you set map size, starting tech, resources, and other features. This is the saving grace of AOE, and what kept me coming back again and again. The main reason is that it let me change some of the insane default victory requirements, such as when the victor is the first to build a "wonder" (through another massive consumption of resources) that stands for 2000 years. These 2000 years can pass in about twenty minutes of game time. That means that as soon as an opponent builds a wonder, you create a whacking huge navy to go over and blow it up. Not a very subtle way to maintain an empire. In fact, there is no strategic nuance: It is merely a brawny muscle contest. For all its historical trappings and pretensions to recreate the early progress of civilization, in the final analysis it does not even have the depth of a pure combat game like Dark Reign or Total Annihilation.
If all these judgments seem harsh, it is only because Age of Empires looked, and pretends, to be so very much more. It still has tons of potential and a fundamental gameplay that remains entertaining enough to overcome the flaws and merit a fair rating. The system can go very far with some fine-tuning, but as it stands it seems downright schizo. Is it a simplified Civilization or a modestly beefed up Warcraft? It's almost as if the designers started out to create one game and ended up with another. With such beautiful production and the fundamentals of a vastly entertaining game, it's sad that it fell short of the mark. The disappointment is not merely with what AOE is, but with what it failed to be.
By T. Liam McDonald, GameSpot
Minimum System Requirements
System: Pentium-90 or equivalent
RAM: 16 MB
Video Memory: 1 MB
Hard Drive Space: 130 MB
Screen Shots
Download
Copyright 2009. Mahi-The Creator .