Jocund
Novice
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2011
- Messages
- 39
I have a strategy/tactical itch that needs scratching, and I've been away from these types of games for a good while (Civ3 I believe is the last game I played).
There are games considered to be classic in the genre that I've never played. I'm wondering, in choosing a game to play, if there's anything modern that's come out that's widely considered a must-play that I should dive into, or if I'm better off visiting a classic for the first time.
I know it's a wide genre, with differing opinions, so I'll try to give some examples of games I've really enjoyed, and what I've enjoyed about them, to give you an idea of my tastes.
1) Final Fantasy Tactics - I know it's more of a (J) RPG, but the combat system was very enjoyable to me, with the mix and match skill and class system and turn-based combat. If I had to say a dislike, is that it sometimes felt a bit too small scale (5 party on map max), and I sometimes wish there were a more grand campaign that required using multiple parties or more units.
2) X-Com: UFO Defense - The combat, again, obviously. The base management aspect was okay, but definitely underwhelming compared to the combat. I liked how (if you managed to keep them alive) soldiers would improve and rank up, and the threat of permanent death (although sometimes the deaths can be frustrating if they feel unpreventable). Biggest dislike would be the clunkiness of some aspects of the game (where can I throw my flare? I'll just click a bunch until it works), and the interface. Also, I swear they give you new recruits with terrible stats on purpose.
3) Heroes of Might and Magic 2/3/4 - The map exploration with heroes/parties is great, as well as fighting neutral monsters and being able to capture resources / level up and equip your hero / learn spells with your hero based on buildings. I know 4 isn't the most popular of the series, but I really enjoyed having the hero be a controllable, movable unit on the battlefield. Dislikes - the maps for combat were a little overly simplistic/small, which is really both a like/dislike, because the combat can be quick. Despite being able to have multiple parties, the unit recruitment limit always made me tend to have one good/big party, and parties of mostly heroes running around collecting stuff and scouting, rather than multiple fully equipped/capable parties.
4) Civilization 3 - More of an overarching strategy that didn't always involve combat (founding cities, managing income/corruption, trading). Dislikes - No tactical combat, the combat in general was "stack of death" moving across the map, the other options for winning the game that didn't involve combat could kind of feel underwhelming.
Without wanting to create a massively long text, I'll just cut it short there. I like fun combat mostly, preferably turn-based, and having a more overarching grand campaign/sense of progression/strategy level is great.
Some classics I've never played, but have thought about: Master of Magic, Jagged Alliance 2, Age of Wonders (any of them), X-Com: Terror from the deep. The only thing I'm worried about playing these games is battling the potentially outdated/clunky interfaces and mechanics.
I haven't kept up with new releases really at all, so I couldn't say I've been thinking about any of them, but I'm hoping maybe there's something that has become a new or modern classic.
So, any thoughts on whether I should go classic or modern?
There are games considered to be classic in the genre that I've never played. I'm wondering, in choosing a game to play, if there's anything modern that's come out that's widely considered a must-play that I should dive into, or if I'm better off visiting a classic for the first time.
I know it's a wide genre, with differing opinions, so I'll try to give some examples of games I've really enjoyed, and what I've enjoyed about them, to give you an idea of my tastes.
1) Final Fantasy Tactics - I know it's more of a (J) RPG, but the combat system was very enjoyable to me, with the mix and match skill and class system and turn-based combat. If I had to say a dislike, is that it sometimes felt a bit too small scale (5 party on map max), and I sometimes wish there were a more grand campaign that required using multiple parties or more units.
2) X-Com: UFO Defense - The combat, again, obviously. The base management aspect was okay, but definitely underwhelming compared to the combat. I liked how (if you managed to keep them alive) soldiers would improve and rank up, and the threat of permanent death (although sometimes the deaths can be frustrating if they feel unpreventable). Biggest dislike would be the clunkiness of some aspects of the game (where can I throw my flare? I'll just click a bunch until it works), and the interface. Also, I swear they give you new recruits with terrible stats on purpose.
3) Heroes of Might and Magic 2/3/4 - The map exploration with heroes/parties is great, as well as fighting neutral monsters and being able to capture resources / level up and equip your hero / learn spells with your hero based on buildings. I know 4 isn't the most popular of the series, but I really enjoyed having the hero be a controllable, movable unit on the battlefield. Dislikes - the maps for combat were a little overly simplistic/small, which is really both a like/dislike, because the combat can be quick. Despite being able to have multiple parties, the unit recruitment limit always made me tend to have one good/big party, and parties of mostly heroes running around collecting stuff and scouting, rather than multiple fully equipped/capable parties.
4) Civilization 3 - More of an overarching strategy that didn't always involve combat (founding cities, managing income/corruption, trading). Dislikes - No tactical combat, the combat in general was "stack of death" moving across the map, the other options for winning the game that didn't involve combat could kind of feel underwhelming.
Without wanting to create a massively long text, I'll just cut it short there. I like fun combat mostly, preferably turn-based, and having a more overarching grand campaign/sense of progression/strategy level is great.
Some classics I've never played, but have thought about: Master of Magic, Jagged Alliance 2, Age of Wonders (any of them), X-Com: Terror from the deep. The only thing I'm worried about playing these games is battling the potentially outdated/clunky interfaces and mechanics.
I haven't kept up with new releases really at all, so I couldn't say I've been thinking about any of them, but I'm hoping maybe there's something that has become a new or modern classic.
So, any thoughts on whether I should go classic or modern?