entrerix

torchlight has no fee to play right?

diablo wasnt an offline co-op game. this is, and so was dark alliance, which is why i said DA and not diablo, but yeah its basically the same thing. i never tried hellgate london, i heard it sucked seriously though, this game is really fun if you like that type of game and you have a good friend or three to play with. oh yeah, and also: diablo was fun single player, Dark alliance wasnt, so its more like dark alliance imo

so i played this for about 4 hours yesterday with my girl via splitscreen on my xbox. we both loved it. her words "its like a mix between left 4 dead and baldurs gate dark alliance". I pretty much agree, but the left 4 dead thing she's only saying because its a splitscreen coop shooter. (she doesnt play many games - the only ones she really gets into are sidescrollers, zombie games, and games where you find tons of loot (the shinier the better) i have to say though, i think this game would kind of suck played single player, there just isnt a ton of meat to it, then again i thought dark alliance sucked single player, so if you liked that, and you like shooters, then you'd like this too. plus - the art style is a lot of fun and makes the game more fun to play

story might also include things like character and dialogue, so even though there is no main "story" the characters and dialogue make up for it to the point of a 7.4? im just guessing, i know nothing about that site i really just want the game for the splitscreen, i love splitscreen coop games that dont suck.

have you heard what people dont like about it? (warpath that is)

ditto. i thought they were going to fix the ending with broken steel. nope, still no proper ending. i can't believe they screwed that up, how hard would it have been, seriously also: i played the game once by only using vats. once my ap ran out i would not fire a single bullet till i could go vats again. it was like my own little semi-turnbased game. wierdly enough, in about 80% of the fights, this was kinda balanced. it only didnt really work against mirelurks, who just charged up and ravaged you while your points reloaded since you couldnt run backwards while shooting.

i blame interplay for the collapse of black isle, so yeah, interplay can lick my nutsack

ive always hated that dead npcs didnt get the xp. so you only learn from a fight when the killing blow is struck? that's stupid, you'd probably learn more of a lesson from getting beat down to near death/death than you would from just decapitating another orc. plus, it meant constantly reloading my saves to make sure that my party was all getting max xp. on the other hand, i think death should have enough of a penalty that you dont need a party wipeout to feel the sting of a poorly planned attack. i think a very expensive pheonix down covers that nicely, something thats not prohibitively expensive, but pricey enough that you regret deaths when they occur (but not so much you just reload every time a person dies). the price should scale with the party's level.

i love me some story, but then again, i also played diablo 2 for about 200 hours, so i can enjoy a little grind now and then so long as its fun. plus good or interesting art direction/design can be very fulfilling for me too, like bioshock or windwaker - both games played ok, but it was the aesthetics that made me fall in love with them.

empire: total war - fighting the brits when all of a sudden spain breaks our trade agreement, declares war, then drops a massive army right outside my capital, all in one turn. my win chance was only about 25%. i had to play it, but i CRUSHED them. the stupid spaniards decided to run 2 of their 4 calvary units WAY outside the bulk of their forces, so i quickly sent my 4 calv units to slaughter them, and was able to draw off the rest of their calv back to my army to be gunned down like little ninnies. then it was an even battle numbers wise, but i still had 4 calv units and they had just a bunch of grunts. grunts came my way, squared off with mine, and my calv circled around and reamed them from behind. sweet candy victory. funny though, once i won that battle france decided to finally come to their senses and accept my proposal of alliance. now spain and france are duking it out leaving the sassy brits to my devises

erm, isnt that the same time period as empire? just shorter?

ok couple questions! 1. Has anyone played the warpath expansion? is it any good? worth the money? 2. i tried finding some reviews of it online but could only find one, does anyone know where i can find some? 3. what is this "napoleon" game i'm hearing about? it looks just like empire - what's the difference?

i dont normally do this, but i just preorded the game on amazon because of that 10$ credit. i buy a lot of games on amazon, and with the 10 credit and the 3$ off anyways, the game essentially is only costing me 36.99$ that's pretty neat for a brand new bigbudget game that i was almost certainly going to get this winter anyway now that alpha protocol is delayed. cool story bro i know.

just quoting this for truth.

rejoice that one of the best hardcore rpg's has been dumbed down to the point where clickyjoe the halo player can **** around with the game for a handful of hours and "blow sum headz off those big green dudes".* * i liked fallout 3 despite my frequent complaints about it.

some of the borderlands reviews are criticizing it for relying too much on statistics and inventory management instead of just being a simple shooter, now im getting more excited...

interplay is, apparently, just throwing the most extreme argument they can come up with into the meatgrinder in hopes of ending up with a settlement slushy that doesnt leave them worse off than they were before beth sued them. it's pretty unlikely a court will render void the ENTIRE contract for the sale of the IP. it's just too extreme, all this really does is give some more ammo to their settlement negotiations, but as someone smart said earlier, they are going to drown in legal fees if they don't hammer this out soon.

dont get me wrong, im not saying it would have helped sales, im just saying that less people would hate beth right now if the name was not fallout3. as for myself, my hate of beth went out the window once they gave obsidian a shot at making the next game. also, i actually liked fallout 3. even though its not a real sequel to fallout 2

worse, at least shills are mercenary, we can understand their motives.

calling fallout 3 fallout DC would have sidestepped the entire debate about whether it was a "true sequel", and would have shut down a TON of the angry rabid fanbase. that fact alone shows the power behind a name. it doesnt change the quality of the game for certain, i'm just pointing out that it changes peoples perceptions, and controlling the perceptions of your public is very important for anyone trying to market something. it MIGHT even have gathered some NMA support : "The best offshoot of the series since tactics, we hope someday a company will make a proper sequel though etc etc"

i care, and names DO matter. names are worth billions of dollars. good will, reputation, reliability, credit, all these things are attached to names. it's wise to appreciate their power. also you can unravel the basic makeup of demons and gods by speaking their true name, so you best respect the name.

if you just play the game doing ONLY the bare minimum, (ie just the assassinations and the couple jobs needed to unlock each) there is actually a fair amount of combat, and its well balanced in between the parkour parts of the game. especially the last few assassinations, there are some brutal battles there. if you havent tried doing that, i recommend it, its much more fun than if you spend time dilly dallying with the awful side missions.

doesnt mean it cant be done of course, heck, if tower defense games and 2d fighting games can make a come-back, then turn based strategy games should have no problem, all it takes is for a talented group to make it happen. i'd have no complaints about a rt jagged alliance, as long as its not called jagged alliance 3. sequels should have the same basic gameplay style. fallout 3 should have been called Fallout: DC.

it looks absolutely nothing like fallout 3 to me (except the setting has junk in it). so one of us is retarded. i leave it to god to decide which as i can only be judged by my peers and only god is my homie

Assassin's Creed kind of did that, too bad the rest of the game sucked... i can only speak for myself, but i LOVED the swordfighting in AC. It could be challenging, but when you were in the groove it made you feel like a real badass master sworsdsman laying waste to packs of redshirts. the repetetive missions however were a joke. find all the flags..... psshh YOU find all the flags, jerk game.