Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Which of these games would you get?

Which of these games would you get?

  • Fallout 3 - $90

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Dead Space - $50

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Mass Effect - $50

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Command and Conquer 3 - $50

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Red Alert 3 - $80

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0

A user named cat

Guest
Imbecile said:
Yep, I'm not really an RTS fan (apart from Total war) so haven't played it, but I know my mate has, and liked it a lot.
The Total War games aren't RTSes, but yeah I too enjoy them. Well rather, the first couple games. The flat gameboard style was so much better than the current "prettied" up map style.

xuerebx, I just looked through every PC game they have (there isn't that many). I think these three games will give you the best bang for your $90, considering most games they have are next-gen junk and nothing really outstanding.

Company of Heroes - $20

Hitman: Blood Money - $20

GTR 2 Racing - $50

So you get a great RTS title, very fun stealth/action game and a fantastic racing sim.
 

1eyedking

Erudite
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
3,591
Location
Argentina
Edward_R_Murrow said:
Daggerfall was better though. By the fact that they were procedurally generated, you had no idea what would pop up next. You could be fighting orcs and fire daedra, and then have an ancient lich jump you in the next room. Couple this with the fact that Daggerfall dungeons were large and offered tons of ways to traverse them such as swimming, climbing, jumping, and levitating and it made things a little more interesting. They still were kind of boring at times, but at least they complemented Daggerfall's diverse character system pretty well, making the way a character delves into them different from others, compared to other Bethesda games where you constantly get the "same shit" feeling all the time, with every character.
Why the hell would a fire daedra, an orc, and a lich be in the same dungeon? Reminds me of those clusterfuck Final Fantasy encounters where random shit was thrown at you together: "Holy crap, it's a Thndr Bird, a Fire Drgn, a Master Pug, and a Bracosaur!"

Phantasmal said:
Company of Heroes - $20
So you get a great RTS title
Great as in 'stupidly unbalanced with the lamest game-breaking patches in history'?

Company of Heroes must have been the most disappointing experience I've ever had online: 'strategy' is all about abusive exploits, uphill mechanics, campy maps (bridges are fun!!1!), and overpowered units and abilities.
 

mondblut

Arcane
Joined
Aug 10, 2005
Messages
22,250
Location
Ingrija
xuerebx said:
Just out of curiosity, what do you think about Daggerfall? The dungeons I mean.

The most important feature of Daggerfall's dungeons was that they were SKIPPABLE.

"- An imp run away from our lab and is hiding in Shiteaterwithspoon Dungeon. We need you to find and kill it, mister Mages Guild aspirant!
- No way in fucking hell you faggot, I am not going in any fucking dungeon of yours!
- Ok, fine. Our guild needs guarding against 3 thugs this night at 3 o'clock.
- Now, that's ok with me. Will they wear daedric?"

The "fuck off, give me ANOTHER quest instead of this shit" option was the most important feature of Daggerfall ever ever ever. Removing it sealed the doom of Bethesda as producers of supremely stinking crap.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2008
Messages
3,001
Location
Treading water, but at least it's warm
Holy shit get Company of Heroes. Much better in terms of SP than DoW.

On the list I voted Dead Space, since it's by far the most competent game (of the year even, though that's not saying much, I know).

Also, I prefer Mass Effect over Fallout 3 any day; at least the shooting mechanics aren't an epic failure.

RA3 is quite lulzy, but shallow in terms of gameplay, and missing a degree of that mystical substance that made RA2 so much fun. C&C3 is basically a snorefest in my opinion.

UT3 isn't worth two shits. Get UT2004 or Quake 3 or uh Counter-Strike Source (or TF2 or DoD:S if those are more your cup of tea I suppose) instead. Don't bother with shitty multiplayer-only games when there are many others that, if older, are significantly better and more popular so you'll actually have the chance of finding someone interesting to play with/against.
 

Zhuangzi

Scholar
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
307
Very useful post, Occasionally Fatal, thanks. Basically I wanted someone to say that CoH was more fun in single player than DoW. And I have heard that UT2004 is better than the more recent one. I've been playing the original 2000 version with about ten teenagers (high school students - I'm their teacher) and it's tons of fun.

Sounds like RA3 might not be worth full price either. RA2 was great though (and RA1). In fact Red Alert has been far superior to vanilla C&C basically since Tiberian Dawn.

EDIT: looking at the poll, it's seems there's some love for Dead Space on rpgcodex. Who'da thunk it? It sounds okay to me, but I'm worried that if the campaign is only 10-12 hours, there won't be any replayability. Will there?
 

A user named cat

Guest
Get the 3 games I suggested, they're all better than everything on your list and will last you much longer.
 

Zhuangzi

Scholar
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
307
Okay, I picked up Company of Heroes for $20. I'll see how I go with that one first. I'm fickle enough with finishing games as it is, so it's not a good idea for me to get more than one game at a time. But cheers for your suggestions Phantasmal. Those other two will be next on the agenda.

Cheers all for steering me away from the mostly garbage games I listed in this poll. :cool:
 

Elric

Novice
Joined
Dec 25, 2008
Messages
62
Zhuangzi said:
Sounds like RA3 might not be worth full price either. RA2 was great though (and RA1). In fact Red Alert has been far superior to vanilla C&C basically since Tiberian Dawn.
RA3 is ok if you liked the cheeky humor of the previous games, and how absurd they were (it takes the absurdity of RA2 to a whole new level). Its got very little competitive multiplayer value, but then again, this is coming from someone who views Starcraft and Warcraft III as the only viable competitive RTS games out there right now.

I found Company of Heroes to be strictly meh. If I want a deeply strategic singleplayer experience, I'll play a turn-based strategy game. The multiplayer isn't engaging, deep, or balanced enough to be considered anything amazing.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2008
Messages
3,001
Location
Treading water, but at least it's warm
Very useful post, Occasionally Fatal, thanks.

You're welcome. I figured you wanted it more for the SP than MP (personally I suck at RTS games online. :cry:) Like you, I found Dawn of War's SP fairly lacking, and I just couldn't maintain any interest, which is a shame because its WH40K, so you would think that would be a non-issue. Anyways, CoH is a game for me, that was able to breath life into the WWII setting once again, something that I haven't been able to stand since, oh, Medal of Honor and RtCW, I guess. The story is interesting, and gives a nice Band of Brothers vibe, while the units and their abilities are quite fun, and the overall presentation of the game (audio, graphics, interface) is top notch. The only thing is you can't play as the Germans, but I guess the stand-alone expansion lets you do that, but I haven't played it yet, since I'm on winter break with just my laptop. Maybe someone else has an opinion on it.

And I have heard that UT2004 is better than the more recent one. I've been playing the original 2000 version with about ten teenagers (high school students - I'm their teacher) and it's tons of fun.

That's awesome. At my school we did Quake 3 though :)rivalry:), because it has a great demo that can be quickly installed and runs great on just about anything.

Sounds like RA3 might not be worth full price either. RA2 was great though (and RA1). In fact Red Alert has been far superior to vanilla C&C basically since Tiberian Dawn.

Sadly, this is true (RIP Westwood?). I rather enjoyed Tiberian Sun though (definitely better than RA3 or C&C3.

EDIT: looking at the poll, it's seems there's some love for Dead Space on rpgcodex. Who'da thunk it? It sounds okay to me, but I'm worried that if the campaign is only 10-12 hours, there won't be any replayability. Will there?

Um, this really depends on your personal taste. I replayed it twice (and I have an impossible mode game stalled about 1/4 of the way through), because I really enjoyed shooting the limbs of off stuff and wanted to see what all the weapons did (you can do a +game where you carry over all your stuff from your savegame once you've beaten it, so you can get everything and trash all the monsters), but others have lambasted it pretty good. I guess it depends if you liked RE4 alot, since the basic mechanics are pretty similar. Also, I should mention that it isn't very scary apart from a few sections where you're not properly armed, though the setting is creepy and unsettling, and the story is alright, but nothing special EXCEPT THAT IT HAS AN AMAZING ENDING BECAUSE IT'S NOT AN OBVIOUS AND LAMEASS CLIFFHANGER SO STORY GETS 10/10 IN THIS GODFORSAKEN AGE OF GAMES.

/rant
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
7,953
Location
Cuntington Manor
Empire Total war is out in March...

I hope for the best but expect the worst, unfortunately. The thought of a great Napleonic Total war game is exciting to say the least. Whether it will be a shallow, unfinished experience like MTW2 was, we shall have to wait and see.
 

hiver

Guest
i think advantage of dead Space is that it doesnt come with any expectations like f3 or mass fart so it may pleasently surprise you few times.

i didnt play it to the end because i thought it wont be worth the trouble and i got stuck when i needed to set a bomb on that asteroid -which i coudnt do because i didnt upgrade slowing down time skill enough-
thought of going back and doing couple of levels all over again was so horrible i just deinstalled it.

but im glad to see f3 didnt come out as a winner of the poll.
that would have been awfull.

What i found really interesting in dead Space was how some mechanics were integrated into the game itself.

Your health bar is directly on the power armor you wear and saving is done by interfacing with some machinery in the game areas.

i thought that was pretty cool in execution and refreshing from usual crap.
 

vrok

Liturgist
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
738
hiver said:
i didnt play it to the end because i thought it wont be worth the trouble and i got stuck when i needed to set a bomb on that asteroid -which i coudnt do because i didnt upgrade slowing down time skill enough-
You don't need to upgrade stasis at all to do it, you don't even have to use it period. All you need is a brain and some minor problem solving skills.
 

Heresiarch

Prophet
Joined
Mar 8, 2008
Messages
1,451
Buy UT3 because everyone in the Codex hate Bioware, Bethsoft, and EA.

Personally, Dead Space gave me the most fun.

The 75 hours I spent on Fallout 3 is like being raped straight for 75 hours. I f3lt s0 HI!!!!! Only after the cum I realized I was being humilated throughly.

Mass Effect is a hollywood movie. Don't expect deep gameplay in it and the middle part (especially the shit sidequests) are boring like hell. The final part is ok.

EA raped Westwood RTS are all shit.
 

hiver

Guest
vrok said:
You don't need to upgrade stasis at all to do it, you don't even have to use it period. All you need is a brain and some minor problem solving skills.
ha, i thought it might turn out this way but at that point my brain just didnt care anymore.

ah fuck now im curious at what sort of stupid switch wa sit. have to check walkthrough....

bah... its a mindboggling trick of shooting something.

they pulled one over me there for sure.
 

xuerebx

Erudite
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Messages
1,004
Edward_R_Murrow said:
xuerebx said:
Just out of curiosity, what do you think about Daggerfall? The dungeons I mean.

They're nothing really special. The fact that they are leagues better than anything in Morrowind, Oblivion, or Fallout 3 as far as fun "dungeons" to explore speaks volumes about Bethesda's design ability and how it's declined.

Most Bethesda game dungeons (read: post Daggerfall) are so terrible because they are formulaic, boring, predictable, and not very interactive. As soon as you walk into one an fight one encounter, you pretty much know what the rest of the dungeon will be like. If it's a bandit, then the rest of the dungeon will be bandits. If it's undead, you're going to be knee deep in the dead. If it's mutants, then have fun killing more muties. Not to mention,encounters in Bethesda dungeons are 1-3 monsters in a room, then 1-3 monsters in another room, then 1-3 monsters ad nauseum. It's just not interesting. Making things worse is that dungeons have the interactivity of a bad corridor shooter. You can kill and loot, and that's it.

Daggerfall was better though. By the fact that they were procedurally generated, you had no idea what would pop up next. You could be fighting orcs and fire daedra, and then have an ancient lich jump you in the next room. Couple this with the fact that Daggerfall dungeons were large and offered tons of ways to traverse them such as swimming, climbing, jumping, and levitating and it made things a little more interesting. They still were kind of boring at times, but at least they complemented Daggerfall's diverse character system pretty well, making the way a character delves into them different from others, compared to other Bethesda games where you constantly get the "same shit" feeling all the time, with every character.

They still have nothing on well designed dungeons with nicely designed encounters, nifty scripting, and unique experiences...but they beat the utter crap of Bethesda's other games.

Hmm, I can't agree with everything on Daggerfall. I love that game so I suppose I overlook some things.
 

Black

Arcane
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
1,872,660
Good job Zho. Making a list with no good options to vote on. It's like president election again!
 

Wyrmlord

Arcane
Joined
Feb 3, 2008
Messages
28,886
1eyedking said:
Company of Heroes must have been the most disappointing experience I've ever had online: 'strategy' is all about abusive exploits, uphill mechanics, campy maps (bridges are fun!!1!), and overpowered units and abilities.
DoW was better.
 

GMonkey

Scholar
Joined
Dec 2, 2008
Messages
167
Isn't Mass Effect, like, 12 quid from online retailers, these days.
 

Forest Dweller

Smoking Dicks
Joined
Oct 29, 2008
Messages
12,210
Blackadder said:
Empire Total war is out in March...

I hope for the best but expect the worst, unfortunately. The thought of a great Napleonic Total war game is exciting to say the least. Whether it will be a shallow, unfinished experience like MTW2 was, we shall have to wait and see.

How was MTW2 shallow and unfinished?
 

Zhuangzi

Scholar
Joined
Sep 11, 2008
Messages
307
Black said:
Good job Zho. Making a list with no good options to vote on. It's like president election again!

Ron Paul? You could try Stardock's The Political Machine. :P
 
Joined
Nov 1, 2008
Messages
7,953
Location
Cuntington Manor
Dicksmoker said:
Blackadder said:
Empire Total war is out in March...

I hope for the best but expect the worst, unfortunately. The thought of a great Napleonic Total war game is exciting to say the least. Whether it will be a shallow, unfinished experience like MTW2 was, we shall have to wait and see.

How was MTW2 shallow and unfinished?

Bugs, bugs, bugs and more bugs. Have they even fixed the Axe bug, shield bug and passive AI bug yet? Also, the stutter bug where if the AI came against the walls with ladders, suddenly it would turn into 1 frame a minute. Misc bugs that blend in....

Having to virtually force CA to release patches for bugs, having to threaten never to buy CA products again en masse. Before forum goers did this CA did not plan to release further patches past 1.01.

Strat map AI horrid, with small little armies waltzing around. Is it fixed? I have no idea, but it was horrible when released. Battle map idiocy besides the Passive AI bug above, the enemy is totally moronic compared to the AI in the original MTW. Far too easy to defeat.

Voices: Full voices for English, French, Germans and Spanish (all Italians, Greeks, etc use the Spanish voices). One Russian voiceset for Russians, Hungarians, Polish, Scandanavians and generic one liners. One generic voiceset for Muslim nations, and none for the Turks. Started but never finished basically.

It might be a better game now. I wouldn't know since I sold my copy in disgust not long after the "CA is not planning to release another patch" crap started. This same battle was fought during MTW1 and Rome. MTW2 the battle was harder and the game was not really fully patched as far as I know. I just got sick of fighting to have a finished game.

I hope Empire won't be yet another shite fest though I am prepared for it this time. I won't be buying it straight away under any circumstances, though the fact it wasn't thrown out before Christmas is a somewhat good sign, unless it is still far from being finished. Heres to hoping.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom