-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
Not a bad list: X-Com1 is an amazing game, still holds up today. What is doublyamazing is that no one has improved on it or at least successfully cloned it.
I think it's mainly because they ran the franchise into the ground. Apocalypse was ... less than favorably received. The flight-sim-ish one was utterly horrid. There's been some offshoots like UFO Aftermath (which is 'protected' by Starforce, ugh), and a newer one, I forget the name, but for the most part I think those are the main reasons behind it.
Quote:
BG1 and FO still set the standard for CRPGs. I agree with the comment about FO2 being better - it seems twice as big (and therefore twice as good).
Fixed the first bit for ya. :grin: In terms of FO2, if you're simply refering to the size in terms of plot, then yeah I'm with you. In terms of being better, unfortunately I just ran into every single script bug that was possible, and it ended up leaving a real bad taste in my mouth. With the fan patch, it finally made it playable and enjoyable for me, and now it's right up there with FO1 on my personal list of favorites.
As an aside, if anyone wants, I made my own "mod" for it based on that fan patch that I'd be happy to share. The only thing it does on top of the fan patch (which fixes bugs only) is your NPCs will change appearance based on the armor they wear, and you can now loot armor from many encounters. Always hated it when I blew away an Enclave patrol and I couldn't peel that shiny Adv. Pwr. Armor off of their crispy corpses. :grin: PM me if interested, be happy to share.
:balloon2:
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whacker
BG1 and FO still set the standard for CRPGs
I do not quite share the view that BG1 would deserve the top-spot over BG2.
While BG1 was a game that certainly revitalized CRPGs and was heaps of fun - BG2 took the necessary steps that turned it into a classic that I still would love to replay with various main characters/parties (if I only had the time to do so).
While actualy gameplay changes in BG2 were only incremental they made the game much smoother and (at least IMHO) more fun to play. Add to that the story of epic scale and even better NPCs than in BG1 and the result was a game that benefited from all the experience the developer gained from BG1 and turned the concept into perfection.
In the end these top lists are of course all purely subjective and nobody can claim to be the holder of truth - nevertheless it is just plain fun to discuss such lists and remeber the fun you had with some of the old games ~:)
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ser Clegane
I do not quite share the view that BG1 would deserve the top-spot over BG2.
While BG1 was a game that certainly revitalized CRPGs and was heaps of fun - BG2 took the necessary steps that turned it into a classic that I still would love to replay with various main characters/parties (if I only had the time to do so).
While actualy gameplay changes in BG2 were only incremental they made the game much smoother and (at least IMHO) more fun to play. Add to that the story of epic scale and even better NPCs than in BG1 and the result was a game that benefited from all the experience the developer gained from BG1 and turned the concept into perfection.
In the end these top lists are of course all purely subjective and nobody can claim to be the holder of truth - nevertheless it is just plain fun to discuss such lists and remeber the fun you had with some of the old games ~:)
Indeed it is fun to discuss these. The reason I hold BG1 in a bit "higher" regard was, as you stated, it was the "first of it's kind" so to speak that really put the D20 rules to work, and in a manner that was readily accessible to the non-hardcore fantasy types as well as the hardcore pen-and-paper guys. BG2 definitely made great strides forward, as did NWN too. In fact that's one thing that I give Bioware credit for, is that they've consistently done a good job improving their game engines and products. I've heard a lot of bad press about NWN2, but I haven't played it yet so I reserve my opinion on that until I do so.
:balloon2:
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit
Caravel, your post reads like the entrance to an Orson Scott Card novel...
I had to google that, his works look sufficiently cheesy, I'll take that as a compliment!
:2thumbsup:
I disagree as regards BG1 and BG2. I do think that the best Bioware games were Icewind Dale, Planescape Torment and BG1. BG2 was far too scripted and inflexible, it also utilised far too many very badly acted voice overs and was very, very cheesy in places. I hated the whole Irenicus plot as well. I had expected something very complex but it was quite shallow to find that the arch enemy was simply an exiled elf wizard trying to harness the power of the Bhaal spawn. The slayer change thing irritated me immensely also. BG1 had a lot more class, Baldur's Gate City was better layed out and much more interesting than any of the areas in BG2. BG1s drawback was that it was a little slow to get started. The real gems among them, and this is a personal thing for me, were Torment and IWD, I've replayed though many more times than the others. IWD I preferred because you could create your own party and did not have the annoyance of others joining and "chatting" when they felt like it. It had some superb areas to esplore excellent enemy types and was far more immersive than BG1 and 2.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
BG2 marked the beginning of Bioware's trend to make CRPGs "cinematic", with impressive cut scenes and sparkling dialogue. That reaches it apotheosis with Kotr, although Jade Empire is also in that mold. BG1 is more "old school" - potter around, read a lot of text and chop things up. With BG1, you have to work hard to empathise with Imoen ("You're a queer fellow, aren't you?" or whatever else she keeps wittering at me); in BG2, I had to work hard not to fall for my sister. I loved all the dream sequences and Irenicus with his experiments; for me, the game starts to run out steam when you rescue Imoen. The Underdark is excellent, but my party feels rather emotionless by that stage; plus Minsc's ravings have turned from endearing to aggravating.
BG2 also has better balanced combat. In BG1 (and 2ed DnD generally) composite bows gun down almost all opposition. In BG2, melee is better balanced and I really admired the "mage duels" with protections and their counters.
I do, however, like the openness of BG1. It handles the balance between non-linearity and a central story arc much better. Essentially its in the Fallout vein - create a vast world that you can move quite freely in, but which the plot naturally leads you along into harder areas. In BG2, the "hub" structure with many sidequests is annoying. You are placed in the invidious position of wasting time on sidequests when you should be rescuing your sister or waiting, then wasting time on sidequests when you should be saving the world.
I guess the essential difference for me is that wandering round the BG1 world is rather relaxing; wandering through the BG2 one is intense.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
In the interest of fairness, one thing I will offer to BG1's detriment is that it does contain quite possibly one of the most annoying NPCs ever.
Noober.
I couldn't stop myself from killing him, even when trying to play as a hardcore lawful good. :no:
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob the Insane
In the spirit of Frogbeast's post above, i would love to what about Deus Ex turned you off so much?
I can understand OFP as it was an acquired taste and being ex-military the infantry experience authenticity really got me into it...
The characters were flat and off putting. And the story was a Matrix rip-off.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
I have to say.... Civ II is so much better than Civ IV. I understand that from a modern perspective, Civ IV is more attractive, but come on Civ II was much more innovative and brought alot more to the gaming world than Civ IV which seemed to lack any major innovation since Civ III. RTW, is a joke too, I can't see how it is better than Half Life, either one, or Starcraft which is just awesome. A few more things missing from whole list: Doom, Diablo I or II, and the old C&C
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lars573
The characters were flat and off putting. And the story was a Matrix rip-off.
Ok, I'm dying to know. How is DX a Matrix rip-off?
As for the list, eh. Good rule of thumb is that any top 10 list, let alone top 25, will be updated at a whim and all you ever get is a flash-photo. Meaningless.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
BG2 marked the beginning of Bioware's trend to make CRPGs "cinematic", with impressive cut scenes and sparkling dialogue. That reaches it apotheosis with Kotr, although Jade Empire is also in that mold. BG1 is more "old school" - potter around, read a lot of text and chop things up. With BG1, you have to work hard to empathise with Imoen ("You're a queer fellow, aren't you?" or whatever else she keeps wittering at me); in BG2, I had to work hard not to fall for my sister. I loved all the dream sequences and Irenicus with his experiments; for me, the game starts to run out steam when you rescue Imoen. The Underdark is excellent, but my party feels rather emotionless by that stage; plus Minsc's ravings have turned from endearing to aggravating.
Well I found her even more irritating than in the first one, and I had thought that impossible. For me also it began to feel stale after the Underdark. The area I hated the most in fact was the wood that led to the entrance to the Elven city. Walking along logs was bad enough, but the city itself was horrible and platformy. The two times I replayed BG2 I got to this point and gave up. I haven't played it again since.
Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
BG2 also has better balanced combat. In BG1 (and 2ed DnD generally) composite bows gun down almost all opposition. In BG2, melee is better balanced and I really admired the "mage duels" with protections and their counters.
That is very true, the game engine is vastly superior in fact, without a doubt. The spells are better, though that has a lot to do with the level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
I do, however, like the openness of BG1. It handles the balance between non-linearity and a central story arc much better. Essentially its in the Fallout vein - create a vast world that you can move quite freely in, but which the plot naturally leads you along into harder areas. In BG2, the "hub" structure with many sidequests is annoying. You are placed in the invidious position of wasting time on sidequests when you should be rescuing your sister or waiting, then wasting time on sidequests when you should be saving the world.
I also hated the side quests and hub structure, as well as the fact that you couldn't just do everything. I must admit that I hated the npcs with a vengance, and just couldn't get on with them at all. If BG2 had been structured more similarly to BG1 it would have easily have been the better game.
Quote:
Originally Posted by econ21
I guess the essential difference for me is that wandering round the BG1 world is rather relaxing; wandering through the BG2 one is intense.
True also. The first stages of BG1 can be very dull. It's kind of: explore woods, get killed by wolf/ogre/bear, reload, try again, get killed try again etc etc. Getting constantly harassed by wild animals on your travels got annoying. The cities also had so few people in them. I was also disturbed by the amount of burglary involved, and tedious exploration of featureless open spaces. This is why of all the games, IWD did it for me. Plenty to explore, many large and interesting areas, enemies and treasure galore. :2thumbsup:
Have you tried running BG1 under the BG2 game engine?
:bow:
-Edit: wasn't Noober the one that followed you around asking questions like "what's that for?", "do you think I'm annoying?", "are you going to throw stones at me?" etc etc etc.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Phatose is quite right seeing as how The Matrix was released in 1999 and the Deus Ex was released in 2000. Should Deus Ex had been copied from the Matrix, the game would have to be created in just a year which is quite impossible for a game of that quality
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
wasn't Noober the one that followed you around asking questions like "what's that for?", "do you think I'm annoying?", "are you going to throw stones at me?" etc etc etc.
Yep, that's the one. The fact that you can't clearly remember is evidence that your mind is trying to cleanse itself of the horrid memories of that part of the game. My apologies for dragging it back up. :shame:
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Quote:
It did not ruin the Total War community. Maybe it ruined YOUR Total War community, but overall it was double, triple times more popular than STW and MTW.
Yes from those of us who liked a realistic historicly accurate game to eye candy and who cares about realism or mp game play. I suppose the sp game maybe fine but when it comes to mp RTW sux.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Thief? Civ4 instead of EU3? Oh well.
Fairly nice list though. It depends what genres you like best though, so top 25 doesn't really work.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caravel
I had to google that, his works look sufficiently cheesy, I'll take that as a compliment!
:2thumbsup:
His Ender's Game series was good, but that's the best of his work...not much else worth searching for of his, though I recommend reading that series.
In particular, I'm thinking of his book Earthborn ( :no: ), which includes a chapter on the naming conventions; naifari, elemenki, etc.
I'm going to have to get BG2 someday - I remember going to the store long ago and trying to decide between Dungeon Siege and BG2 - I made the wrong choice. But I was young and impressionable! Forgive me! When I get a new comp I'm going to get Vampires Bloodlines and BG2.
Quote:
Yep, that's the one. The fact that you can't clearly remember is evidence that your mind is trying to cleanse itself of the horrid memories of that part of the game. My apologies for dragging it back up.
Killing him was one of my fondest memories - especially since no one in the town seemed to mind.
I am glad they put Age of Empries 2 on the list - that game rocked, and rocked hard.
CR
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
There should surely be at least some of the classic Lucasarts adventure games in the list? Day of the Tenctacle and Return to Monkey Island spring to mind. Grim Fandango was brilliant, but those former games are two of the best written and cleverest ever made, and I still have some extremely fond memories of them.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Regarding BG1 versus BG2, I think they both had their merits, but BG2 tops it. I think BG1 starts very poorly. It is fairly linear and the opening plot and sequences seems a bit contrived, and although you can wander around elsewhere, the fact that you start with about as many hitpoints as the average chicken, means you die almost instantly. It's not until chapter 3 or after the mines that the game opens up and you finally have earned your 'freedom' to explore and go off and seek your own challenges. That's because you have a few extra levels of experience to play with and those ridiculously overpowered archers won't instantly kill you (unless they score a critical). By the time you reach chapter 4, the story becomes immense and it is so very well written that you want to keep on playing, uncovering all there is to see. I find it a game of two halves - the opening one a little lackluster, the other brilliant.
With BG2, you already have the story line and the history from the beginning. Unless you didn't start with BG1, you already have some idea of what the game is about. I actually played Fallout 2 before the BG games and initially found the fantasy setting a bit, well silly in comparison to the bleak post-apocalyptic setting of FO. But by the time BG2 came around, I was settled into the world and ready for the adventure. And what an adventure. Alright it's still tightly scripted and full of set pieces, but it was still a large and rewarding game. You could go off and solve numerous quests in the many locations and the combat seemed a bit more fun now you were fairly powerful to begin with. I did, however, dislike the horribly linear part of the game that makes up about a third of the entire experience where you were but a passenger to the events before you. That's when you go off to Spellhold or whatever that place is called. Once back, you have your freedom again. The spiced up graphics and spell effects etc were an improvement also, but the romances and extra conversations between NPCs added a bit more to the experience too.
Then factor in the add-on, and the final piece of the BG saga, and BG2 soon feels very epic. You become more and more powerful and caught up in the experience. I think the fact you know you're coming to the end of the story adds another layer to the adventure. Maybe it's because I delayed completing the game over a period of a few years, but by the time I finally finished the saga, I felt like I'd been on a massive journey, when all along I'd been stuck in my seat.
I can see how people can prefer one over the other, as they both are great games. BG1 has an incredible unfolding story that gradually gets better, whereas BG2 seems to throw you in the deep end from the beginning and the pace never really lets up. BG2 is much bigger, but at times far more linear. I just feel with the expansion, the sequel is the better package.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
I'm just glad to see Fallout is still getting props all of these years later. That's the game that sucked me into PC gaming. Shogun: Total War was discovered in the bargain bin only after I had realized there were no more Fallout games to be had ...
And of course we're going to disagree with large swaths of the list. It's three guys putting titles on paper over coffee, fer goodness' sake.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
WORST LIST EVER! CAPS LOCKS FIRE!
RTW was probably the one thing that made me go ~:rolleyes:. Props for Tie Fighter at #3 though, at least there was one space sim there.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xdeathfire
I have to say.... Civ II is so much better than Civ IV. I understand that from a modern perspective, Civ IV is more attractive, but come on Civ II was much more innovative and brought alot more to the gaming world than Civ IV which seemed to lack any major innovation since Civ III. RTW, is a joke too, I can't see how it is better than Half Life, either one, or Starcraft which is just awesome. A few more things missing from whole list: Doom, Diablo I or II, and the old C&C
Civ IV is essentially the same game, except prettier.
There is a "Top 100" games of all time, and I think C&C and Diablo are there.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Another of these stupid lists, I really hate these as all they do is incite anger and disgust, mainly from myself. :laugh4:
The Sims - I suppose maybe at 25, but many games are better than it.
Deus Ex - Definitely, began emergent gameplay
Warcraft 2, CoD, BF 1942 and AoE II - :yes:
World of Warcraft - I HATE THIS GAME.
Company of Heroes - No way, almost choked when I saw this. DoW is so much better and it's the same engine.
Half-Life 2 - Rubbish compared to the original (Civ II is better than IV also, but meh really).
Baldur's Gate II: Shadows of Amn - Ohhh yeah.
I'm really disappointed that C&C and Total Annihilation aren't on there.
Now we get to Rome: Total War, so I will quote some of the article:
[I have STW, MTW, VI, EB, BI, Alex, just for reference.]
Quote:
deepest, most polished, and addictive strategic gameplay out there.
They must be joking, I never finished this game without adding EB. And I in all seriousness said I would ignore what people said about it and give it a fair go but the patronising nature of the gameplay, the rubbish AI, the ahistorical nature and the fact it obviously was targeted to attracted children all made me quite bored and sick.
Quote:
Fusing a 4X style overworld map with riveting real-time battles
Sure, I agree to some extent, but the "Risk" style map without the tedium of movement points for agents really was much more enjoyable and meant I actually used agents, not to mention how the AI refuses to accept any proposals (and yes I've read the guides, and none of aforementioned things work for me). Now when I play EB (I no longer call it RTW as EB is a game, RTW was an attempt) I always send my agents on a one way boat trip to remove their disgusting presence from my gaming experience.
Quote:
there was a near overwhelming amount of expertly designed content to chew through. The A.I. always put up a challenging fight, making aggressive overworld map moves and employing effective tactics on the battlefield.
Ok, I praise CA on their new ideas, some I really like (such as ancillaries and seasons not years). What I don't like is how they turned their backs on the older players and aimed for the money of ignorant people (mostly children), a phenomenon I blame on Activision. I think the reviewers are rather, how should I say this politely, ineffective in their strategic and tactical approaches. Before I installed EB I barely ever lost a battle, even in the most stupid of circumstances. Maybe my Shogun and Medieval days made me experienced in warfare, but mostly it was the bugs (most of which are now fixed, not entirely but mostly :2thumbsup:) and lack of innovation in the AI's battleplans. VH/VH tactics: attack, start a flanking move, enemy routs before they even move a couple paces to actually flank. And one of the major issues with the strategic map was that the AI was far too aggressive, and failed to apply effective diplomacy.
Quote:
Rome offered even more complex siege battles, cities whose appearance reflected the structures placed therein,
Definitely, siege battles were much better than MTW, but then again the AI wasn't very effective at fighting them anyway so it sort of defeats the purpose in my eyes. Why make it more complex if the AI won't be able to handle it anyway?
Quote:
a wide range of highly detailed units,
True, not really historical units but yes a wide range.
Quote:
and unprecedented sound design.
I found the music in particular rather tedious.
However, what I really like is the huge possibilities when it comes to modding and the huge community we have here to complete such mods as EB, RTR, Hegmonia City States [sp?] and Ran No Jidi [sp?].
Ok I'll be quiet now.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
That is a thorough critism Rythmic, and I respect your ideas.
However, the Hardcore Gamer is not who RTW was trying to appeal to. I personally never touched a single mod, and enjoyed RTW more than any other game, with maybe one exception. I am not a hardcore gamer. And I am kind of surprised at how pedantic (for want of a less mordant word) your critism was, for it would seem to me that nothing could satisfy your thirst for things such as realism, difficulty and AI. None of these were outright Rubbish so that someone like me could notice it, and I think the statement
Quote:
deepest, most polished, and addictive strategic gameplay out there.
describes it very accurately. It was very fun if you took it at face value, not comparing it with STW or MTW (I never played either) and none of the inaccuracies could not be lived with.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Utmost respect to you diablodelmar. I think that my overall reception to RTW was slighted because I had experienced STW and MTW-VI first so I expected more and similar. Whereas you had not so there was no expectations due to the previous games.
Quote:
the Hardcore Gamer is not who RTW was trying to appeal to.
Yes, I mentioned that, but I don't like the fact that it there was no mix between more serious and the more casual. If they had made an effective compromise I would kneel at their feet.
Quote:
nothing could satisfy your thirst for things such as realism, difficulty and AI.
MTW and STW are both not entirely accurate, but what I love about them is STW had great balance and atmosphere. And MTW had an effective compromise between realism and gameplay.
Sorry to derail the thread.
C&C should be on that list!
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatose
Ok, I'm dying to know. How is DX a Matrix rip-off?
So I take it you've never 1. Seen the Matrix, or 2.Played Deus Ex. In short every Cyber-punk motif (and thye both use about 4 of the exact same ones) that Deus Ex did the Matrix did bigger and better.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
At leat some of the games are good....
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
The thing to remember here is that RTW is no less realistic than MTW or STW. RTW has it's flaming pigs, druids and screeching women, Shogun had it's Kensai, Geishas and Battlefield Ninja, MTW had it's Hashishin, Lancers and others, which are all obvious fantasy units to most. What a lot of people miss though are the other fantasy units that populated these games, those that are less noticeable, ahoristorical city locations, incorrect naming of units, the list is endless and this is across the board for all TW games.
The main issues with vanilla RTW that I have are as follows:
Battles:
1) Movements Speeds, cavalry too fast, infantry too fast. This leads to using pause more often. You simply do not have the time to click everything in real time as you did with MTW. Ruins the feel of the game, and reduces the use of good tactics.
2) Units tire much more slowly than they did in MTW. I've seen men that have run across the map and back again (at their ridiculously high speed) still stated as "fresh".
3) Missiles are quite simply unrealistic
4) Battlefield AI is generally worse than it was in STW/MTW.
5) Routing of units is far too exaggerated and unrecoverable. Whichever side routs first is the loser. There is no rallying, and coming back for another go as there was in MTW, this only seems to occur occasionally with very high valour units, in my experience.
6) Overpowered cavalry: Charge, pull back, charge pull back - rinse and repeat. Routing galore.
7) Poor unit response. Sometimes I find myself clicking like a loon, and still units don't go where I want them to go or attack the unit I want them to attack.
8) Great sieges, poor AI and pathfinding in cities. I also find it difficult to order my units to attack a unit in the plaza. They will walk up to it and past it, stop in fron of it, cavalry will charge past it. The small plaza in a barbarian settlement is worse for this problem. I've had to order my units to march through them several times in oder to kill the last few defenders. Siege towers that don't open their ramps are another problem, as well as men getting stuck on the walls still as statues and mousing over them reveals that they're "fighting to the death". The AI also assaults in a completely ridiculous fashion if it also brings ballistas as well as rams, siege towers and ladders to the assault. It will use the ballistas to shoot at the gatehouse, not the gate itself, then advance right up to your walls and then begin firing the ballistas again at a tower. It will only begin to assault properly once there are no more towers shooting at it's units.
Campaign:
1) Movement points system. It works, but it doesn't work as well as it should. The problem again is the AI not coordinating it's stacks and merging them together correctly. The AI often sends individual units in a continuous stream against a settlement. It is also fairly easy to challenge these units, force them to retreat apart from each other and pick them off one at a time. It also is completely wrong for ships and agents. Naval battles are massive tedium of fight, win, port - retrain, fight, win etc etc. The ships lack any kind of useful range and it's a case of micromanaging a fleet turn by turn out to a certain point to see it sunk by an enemy. The AI fleets are also rather predictable in that they will always retreat along a certain route when defeated, this allows you to pingball them to their dooms with your own fleets. Unlike in MTW fleets don't control an area of sea, so in this respect they're quite impotent. Agents are another problem. In earlier TW games agents could simply hop from one port to another. Nowadays they go travelling along the same routes as your armies which is just silly. Large armies would travel alot slower than a lone agent, they would have to stick to certain tracks, an agent wouldn't have this restriction. It would be far better if agents could simply port or province hop as they could in earlier games.
2) Unit roster. I find this rather limited, and generic. I do like the tech tree itself and I won't criticise that here as I don't see it as any worse than the STW tech tree and I would say that it is almost on par with the MTW one. The biggest issue for me is the lack of any specialised units and predominance of militias and very generic units that are recruitable by a certain culture. The Gauls for example have the Warbands, Swordsmen, Chosen Swordsmen. All of these are pretty much the same unit with progressively better stats. The first appear to be spearmen but are not. Dependancies for unit training are very simplified with units only depending on a single building. This is good in some ways. MTW had some ridiculously overpriced and underpowered units that took a lot of teching up and required three dependancy buildings. That is simply too much, though multiple dependancies could have been retained. The reason it isn't, IMHO, is because there isn't enough unit variety to justify it. Mercenaries are better handled in RTW than they are in MTW, though the costs should be adjusted with mercenaries costing much more, giving the player an incentive to disband them.
3) Farming, population growth, squalor... in short loads of CivII stuff added to a TW game. This is one of my major gripes micromanaging settlements. Yes you can automanage, but I don't trust the AI to do it, nor do I feel as if I'm playing the game, or in control if I do this. The squalor factor is way over the top as is the population explosion, and that is without building any of the famring upgrades, which can have even more disastrous results. Training peasants and moving them from city to city to transfer the populace can be a big chore. What happened to good old fashioned farms that give a steady income and don't have the side effect of a baby boom?
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Not a single paradox instalment? I would have assumed that EU2 was on it.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lars573
So I take it you've never 1. Seen the Matrix, or 2.Played Deus Ex. In short every Cyber-punk motif (and thye both use about 4 of the exact same ones) that Deus Ex did the Matrix did bigger and better.
I've played Deus Ex, and seen the matrix. I just don't see the similarities, any more then I would between say Half Life 2 and Doom.
Artificial world? Matrix: Check. Deus Ex: No check
Illuminati/MJ12: Deus Ex: Check Matrix: No check
Nano augmentation: DX: Check Matrix: No Check
Sorry, I ain't seeing it.
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
lars, I repeat, Deus Ex came out one year after the Matrix did which would make it pretty hard for the developers to completely change parts of their story line to copy the Matrix. In the last year, most of the game is already done with only some final things to finish up and maybe game testing
-
Re: Top 25 PC games of all time.
Matrix or no Matrix (I don't see it as a knockoff either), it's still one of my favorite PC games of all time.
If you decide to replay it again soon, use the opengl renderer here (the D3D one sucks): http://cwdohnal.home.mindspring.com/utglr/
This will hopefully make it even more fun to replay down the road: http://www.offtopicproductions.com/hdtp/