Most folks will tell you that it's a bad game and I'm one of the few that actually liked it. Very linear, to the point where there is no exploration or freedom for the first 25 hours or so. After that point it opens up to some degree, though even then your options are limited compared to past Final Fantasy games. The story and characters themselves aren't bad, but are presented in a fashion that was slightly confusing at times. Combat is somewhat shallow, but at the same time I had a lot of fun with it.

I'd say it's worth checking out. It's probably hit bargain bins by now, and I enjoyed it for the $60 I paid at release. It's just not your traditional Final Fantasy game.

Baldur's Gate 2 is one of the best western RPGs of all time, IMHO, and definitely one of my favorite games. Continuity wise the very early parts of the game do rely on events of the first--but the plot of the first game is also very well explained to you in the opening cutscene. I think it stands pretty well on its own. (Grain of salt time: I've played the complete series, in order, so I'm probably not the best judge of how the game stands on its own.)

Arcanum--I really need to get back to that game (I started it, but then got distracted by shiny objects and haven't finished it yet. I'm easily distracted, see.). I remember it being very much "Baldur's Gate: now with steampunk"; the setting and how the game handles magic vs. technology in gameplay is unique. Though being a Troika game it is a bit buggy, but there are fan-made patches to fix that, IIRC.

If you're thinking about buying those from GoG, I say go for it, especially with their holiday sale currently ongoing.

is Bayonetta any good.

my friend said it was great, but i dont know.

Have no experience with FFXIII, and likely never will. It just doesn't look interesting. Demon's Souls, however...I can't sing enough praises for it. It's simply a superb game, easily my favorite in the PS3 library, and one of 2009's best titles. Excellent combat, terrific challenge, awesome boss fights, nifty online features, gorgeous graphics and art direction, and absolutely atmospheric. If you don't mind a difficult game (difficult, but FAIR let me assure you) get it. Now.


svcks to be you. I wouldn't spend that much on it.

Dragon Age: Origins

How long is it? Is it a good RPG? If no to the last question, then is it at least a good game? Might I need it to understand what's going on in DA2?

Thinking about buying it but not sure if I should just skip it and just wait for DA2.

Great Game,if you love Bioware then you will certainly like this.Playthrough time if you rush 20 hours, if you enjoy yourself and fart around a bit 35+.With mutiple origins there is plenty of replay value to it as well.

Will you need to play it to understand the going ons in DA2, not sure yet but it seems like it won't be absolutely necessary.

$50 for the Ultimate Edition. I'll probably end up getting it, sounds pretty good as well.

I clocked in around 60 hours, doing just about every sidequest I came across. I have no clue if that's normal or if I just took my sweet time, but I was playing through on the easiest setting and I never really got held up at any point.

Really good game. Story was pretty standard fantasy, but the characters were great and gameplay addicting. I did play on PC though, zoomed out to an isometric view. I couldn't stand playing it zoomed in as far as consoles got, but that doesn't seem to be a problem for most folks.

Can't comment on DA2 though, haven't been following it at all.

Untrue. I love BioWare but I think they screwed up with Dragon Age.

So, what beat-em-up is the one to get for PS3? Tekken/Soul Calibur/Street Fighter/other?

Also, my sister wants something Super Mario-ish for the PS3 for christmas. All I can think of it Ratchet and Clank to be semi-similar. Any other tips?

And how do you clock so low times on DA? I ended at 86 hours on my first playthrough, with quests missed. Could be that I'm a perfectionist freak and paused like mad though...

Magnificent.

Fairly simple plot, great combat and controls, awesome atmosphere (looking at you, world 3 and 5) and the online aspect deserves a mentioning for being somewhat different from the standard. Seeing what other players are doing in the area you're currently is both entertaining and can give you a hint of what to do to proceed if needed. The bloodspots showing how someone died in that place are particularly interesting. Oh, and the messages left by other players. Can't forget those.

This is harsh. Evaluate me.

How so ?

:unsure:
I consider myself a perfectionist who wants to do as much as possible of everything on the first playthrough (though not going as far as reloading a dozen times to see every possible outcome of a conversation, I'll replay it a second time for fresh options) and I cannot possible have clocked more than 40 hours.

Super Street Fighter IV is where it's at.

Do you guys think if I could not get into STALKER SHadows of Chernobyl that buying Call of Prypiat would be worth $10? Keeping in mind I am onl very limited funds at the moment and not much time to game.

What's Different about call of Pripyat:

1.Three different areas to explore, all are large non-linear areas unlike SHOC, which was more linear in design.
2. Anomalies are mostly confined to specific anomalous areas. All artifact spawning happens in these areas.
3. Perks are granted for achieving certain goals in-game.
4. In-game blow outs, they happen once a day. Basically, the sky turns red and at the apex of this event, you'll be killed unless your in a properly fortified area, like an underground tunnel, safe house, or some buildings.
5. Snorks, bloodsvckers, and pseudodogs are common enemies. Once defeated in quests, controllers, pseudogiants, Chimeras, and even psydogs (as in psychic dogs) will eventually populate the game world, with the stronger enemy types being most prevalent in Yanov and Pripyat.
6. Stashes no longer stored in chests, but are just a grouping of items tucked away in some hidey-hole.
7. Armor and weapons now upgradeable.

If you didn't like Stalker Shadow of Chernobyl for it's core gameplay (especially the lethality of bullets and gun mechanics), you won't like CoP. Simple as that.

I was wondering about Civ V.

I own Civ IV, however I never really took the time to get into it. It seems like people are always raving on about the Civ games, I just never took the time to try to get into them.

Would people suggest getting Civ V if it goes on sale? Or should I stay with Civ IV and try to get into it?

I've never really played an TBS game, but it seems like a great game. People just say it takes a long time to get into.

So basically, for somebody that has never played the TBS genre, should I stick with Civ IV and try to get into it, or grab Civ V when it's on sale? Which game is superior, and why?

Egriz, there's a Civ V demo on Steam unless you've tried it already.

Yeah I did try it a bit. I'll load it up again.

I wish they gave you access to the tutorial though.

How much access does the demo give you?

Well the game still gives you advice through out all the turns it gives you. (Which is a max of 100 in the demo)

Both are great games, so they are both worth playing. Civ V would be the more accessable of the two, although Civ IV isn't too bad in that respect either. You'll have an easier time picking up Civ V as a beginner. Personally, I think Civ V is an improvement over Civ IV, particularly the more tactical combat. I haven't seen it yet myself, but apparently the diplomacy was improved a lot in a patch recently for Civ V too.

I just saw that Bully Scholarship Edition is 3.75 on Steam. Would anyone here recommend this game?

Is AC2 a good PC game?

I've tried it on the ps3 at my friends house, but is it a bad port? Is the DRM horribly annoying? It's on 50% sale today on steam.

I bought it used for PS3 just because of that DRM :hehe: I haven't played it myself, but i watched my sister play trough it, and she loved it. Much more varied than AC1. If the PC port is equal quality to AC1 it is pretty good, but for me that DRM is enough to be a deal breaker.

Yeah I think I'm going to grab Civ V. I played the demo for almost 2 hours. It seems great.




I'd recommend it. The controls are a bit weird, and it's quite obvious it was a straight port. However I quickly got used to the controls so now it doesn't bother me. I haven't run into any issues with the DRM so far.

AC2 is loads better than the first. There are a lot more weapons, mission types, and there is actual strategy and thinking involved. "What is the best way to do this mission without getting caught?"

I'd pick it up. $17.50 for the deluxe edition is a good deal. I paid full price only a week before this sale -_-. It was worth every penny though.