Well, I’m not in the Fallout club yet, nor will I likely be until Christmas, but Dead Space is owning my life at this point. I have to make an update recommendation of the game, though, if you’re not into horror games at all, don’t even bother playing a demo of it.
I am, though, pleasantly surprised by the difficulty.
[quote]SSC wrote:
Well, I’m not in the Fallout club yet, nor will I likely be until Christmas, but Dead Space is owning my life at this point. I have to make an update recommendation of the game, though, if you’re not into horror games at all, don’t even bother playing a demo of it.
I am, though, pleasantly surprised by the difficulty.[/quote]
I’ll be getting Dead Space soon. Can’t wait.
For fans of Overlord, it looks like Overlord 2 is scheduled to come out next summer.
Also, on November 16th, Adult Swim is showing the new “Robot Chicken: Star Wars Episode II”. If you enjoyed the first one, I’m sure the second one will be just as funny.
[quote]AngryVader wrote:
Also, on November 16th, Adult Swim is showing the new “Robot Chicken: Star Wars Episode II”. If you enjoyed the first one, I’m sure the second one will be just as funny.
Adult Swim Announces Robot Chicken: Star Wars Episode II ! [/quote]
Sweet!!!
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I think games get a bad rap when people play them for all of 5 min and then come to the conclusion that they suck. I could see if it was a game like Viking that was literally shit from the start, but some of the complaints I had in even the previous post (like the wall climbing thing) are off base now seeing as how I get more skills the more I play.
I can run up walls now, not climb. Being able to toss cars at enemies was a great upgrade.
Yeah, I would say give it a chance.[/quote]
It doesn’t help that the game review websites are in competition with one another to turn out their reviews as fast as possible. I always question the legitimacy of a review posted the same day a game goes on sale, even though I know many reviewers recieve advanced copies. Second, no game review site has any form of retractions for poor or just flat out bad reviews. I don’t mean poor scores for a game, but just flat out low quality review decisions.
“Army of Two” got dumped on because of the political ideals of the reviewer (gameinformer, i think). “Too Human” got a 5.0 or a 5.5 at Gamespot because the reviewer couldn’t adapt to the right analog stick combat controls. The review I read of Spiderman: WoS spent more time critiquing the tutorial than the game play.
Its good to hear your reviews of the game as you play it. I may give it a shot at a later date, still got a little credit at GameStop.
For those of you that have 360s and PS3s (ok, most of you, minus myself) and are concerned about the console generating heat within a closed cabinet:
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/howtos/keep_your_pcxboxps3appletv_from_overheating_a_closed_cabinet
Check that out if you’re feeling adventurous. Although, it’s not that hardcore of a project if you ask me.
Oh, and as for building a PC gaming rig. After seeing the following badass case, I might just do it instead of ordering a PC and spending a couple hundred for someone else to do it:
http://www.coolermaster-usa.com/product.php?category_id=18&product_id=2810
Now, to determine whether I want water cooling:
http://www.coolermaster-usa.com/product.php?category_id=1624&product_id=2742
Or something more traditional yet still badass:
http://www.coolermaster-usa.com/product.php?category_id=1623&product_id=2869
[quote]Shire wrote:
Did anyone ever play that Ghost in the Shell game on the old Playstation. That game was cool. Using a robot insect machine thing: you could climb walls/walk ceilings, fight giant spider tank machine things.
[/quote]
Tachicomas?
It looked like a cool game nad definately a great idea for a game, but I never had a playstation.
[quote]Bujo wrote:
It doesn’t help that the game review websites are in competition with one another to turn out their reviews as fast as possible. I always question the legitimacy of a review posted the same day a game goes on sale, even though I know many reviewers recieve advanced copies. Second, no game review site has any form of retractions for poor or just flat out bad reviews. I don’t mean poor scores for a game, but just flat out low quality review decisions. “Army of Two” got dumped on because of the political ideals of the reviewer (gameinformer, i think). “Too Human” got a 5.0 or a 5.5 at Gamespot because the reviewer couldn’t adapt to the right analog stick combat controls. The review I read of Spiderman: WoS spent more time critiquing the tutorial than the game play.
Its good to hear your reviews of the game as you play it. I may give it a shot at a later date, still got a little credit at GameStop. [/quote]
That’s a great point and one I have made before (not on here). It does bug me.
I do know my buddy at worthplaying.com gets games WAY in advance and he, his wife and the few friends who write for the site are true gamers. The reviews are extremely thorough and they aren’t exactly the best known gaming site, yet they provide little bullshit and instead post relevant news, trailers and screenshots as often as possible. The site’s being redone and it’ll take a while but because there’s so much content and the reviews are fair, I prefer going there first.
Shameless plug, I know, but I wouldn’t if I didn’t believe in it myself.
[quote]AngryVader wrote:
For fans of Overlord, it looks like Overlord 2 is scheduled to come out next summer.
[/quote]
An Imp/Wolf cavalry will be awesome. And did someone in the article mention Dragons? I read a similar article at GameInformer.
I never played Overlord. Good game? For 360 only or PC as well?
Looks wicked.
[quote]AngryVader wrote:
For fans of Overlord, it looks like Overlord 2 is scheduled to come out next summer.
[/quote]
To club or not to club the baby seal? That is the question.
[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
I never played Overlord. Good game? For 360 only or PC as well?
Looks wicked.[/quote]
I wrote a short review of it on the 360 Fan thread. It’s a fun, snarky game to kick back with. The game is set in a Lor-Of-The-Ringsesque fantasy world where you play as the Ovelord. You’re goal is to raise a minion army and then go about committing evil deeds. Thrashing Hobbits, eradicating elves, slaying unicorns, stealing away beautiful maidens to add to your harem. Its your choice to be evil or really evil.
[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
Bujo wrote:
It doesn’t help that the game review websites are in competition with one another to turn out their reviews as fast as possible. I always question the legitimacy of a review posted the same day a game goes on sale, even though I know many reviewers recieve advanced copies. Second, no game review site has any form of retractions for poor or just flat out bad reviews. I don’t mean poor scores for a game, but just flat out low quality review decisions. “Army of Two” got dumped on because of the political ideals of the reviewer (gameinformer, i think). “Too Human” got a 5.0 or a 5.5 at Gamespot because the reviewer couldn’t adapt to the right analog stick combat controls. The review I read of Spiderman: WoS spent more time critiquing the tutorial than the game play.
Its good to hear your reviews of the game as you play it. I may give it a shot at a later date, still got a little credit at GameStop.
That’s a great point and one I have made before (not on here). It does bug me.
I do know my buddy at worthplaying.com gets games WAY in advance and he, his wife and the few friends who write for the site are true gamers. The reviews are extremely thorough and they aren’t exactly the best known gaming site, yet they provide little bullshit and instead post relevant news, trailers and screenshots as often as possible. The site’s being redone and it’ll take a while but because there’s so much content and the reviews are fair, I prefer going there first.
Shameless plug, I know, but I wouldn’t if I didn’t believe in it myself.[/quote]
Yeah, I was going to say the same thing. I know most (major) game-reviewing media take their shit pretty serious, and play the game fairly thoroughly prior to reviewing it. I’m sure that if a reviewer is playing Dragon Quest MXXVIII they’re not going to take time to hit up all the side-quests, but still get a grasp for the entire game and how it plays.
And for Overlord - It’s basically just Pikmin with a little less ghey.
[quote]PonceDeLeon wrote:
For those of you that have 360s and PS3s (ok, most of you, minus myself) and are concerned about the console generating heat within a closed cabinet:
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/howtos/keep_your_pcxboxps3appletv_from_overheating_a_closed_cabinet
Check that out if you’re feeling adventurous. Although, it’s not that hardcore of a project if you ask me.
Oh, and as for building a PC gaming rig. After seeing the following badass case, I might just do it instead of ordering a PC and spending a couple hundred for someone else to do it:
http://www.coolermaster-usa.com/product.php?category_id=18&product_id=2810
Now, to determine whether I want water cooling:
http://www.coolermaster-usa.com/product.php?category_id=1624&product_id=2742
Or something more traditional yet still badass:
http://www.coolermaster-usa.com/product.php?category_id=1623&product_id=2869
[/quote]
If you are interested in building a new machine Thermaltake also has some very nice products.
http://www.thermaltakeusa.com/
From the Nvidia home page you can navagate to the SLI Zone and watch videos on building new dual SLI computers for various prices for different levels of performance.
There is also Tom’s Hardware, a mecca of PC and gaming info. Tons of PC builder info, even a build it yourself section in the forums. They usually to a build and test series of articles 2 or 3 times a year. They will build 4 or so cpmoputers at different budget limits. $500. $1000. $1500. $2000. Budget Buster $4000+. Then test and rate the machines against 4 different games. All specs for the machines are given as well as performance vs. price comparison.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
red04 wrote:
Fallout 3 is fantastic, I had 27 hours of play to finish doing mostly just the main storyline and conveniently placed side quests. I can’t really say about the difficulty, it seems like it can be so easily swayed by your playstyle, so how “hard” it was for me may not be an accurate barometer.
You will not be disappointed with length though, I can tell just by looking at my map that I left tons of side quests undone(I reached the point of no return on final mission unexpectedly, who knew).
Right now I’m torn between loading a game before that point and doing side quests on this data, or starting over with a different skillset and knocking them out while I enjoy the replayability.
I’ll look it up, but what kind of game is it, first person shooter?
[/quote]
I would say the first 2 are turn-based strategy/adventure games. The new one is more designed as a first person game though, not necessarily an FPS.
If you can handle the dated graphics, I would HIGHLY recommend playing both fallout 1 and fallout 2. Without a doubt 2 of the best, if not the best games I have ever played(and there’s alot). Be prepared to lose track of time though if you do. They really are one of a kind imo.
27 hours is pretty decent I guess. I was actually hoping for about 50, but then again they need to cater for a big audience. I don’t play these sort of games in any rush though, so I probably could get 50 out of it from the sounds of things.
Glad to hear the game lives up to the expectations, especially since Interplay decided not to follow through with it.
Unfortunately mine has been delayed and I have about 2 weeks before I see it yet. 
Overlord = greatness.
Upcoming Warhammer 40k tactical:
http://gamevideos.1up.com/video/id/15131
Space Marine:
[quote]HangerBaby wrote:
I beat Fallout 3 in about 6 hours… 27 hours? thats slow but also I would have liked it to last about that long.[/quote]
I have never understood guys who play games like its a race. If a game is good enough, actually reaching the end isn’t even my primary concern. I still haven’t actually beat the entire San Andreas game. I spent more time on side missions and just screwing around.
I’m not saying your way is wrong, but damn, enjoy the game a little.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
HangerBaby wrote:
I beat Fallout 3 in about 6 hours… 27 hours? thats slow but also I would have liked it to last about that long.
I have never understood guys who play games like its a race. If a game is good enough, actually reaching the end isn’t even my primary concern. I still haven’t actually beat the entire San Andreas game. I spent more time on side missions and just screwing around.
I’m not saying your way is wrong, but damn, enjoy the game a little.[/quote]
Agree with this.
I tend to take my time with games too - often doing side missions before the main storyline or alongside it.
Knowing myself, I’ll spend well over 50 hours on Fallout 3 - the little bugger is in my bag waiting to be played tonight. Same goes for Fable 2 - I’m doing the whole game now with side missions and exploration as a good guy, and will redo it one day as a bad guy.
[quote]RSGZ wrote:
Professor X wrote:
HangerBaby wrote:
I beat Fallout 3 in about 6 hours… 27 hours? thats slow but also I would have liked it to last about that long.
I have never understood guys who play games like its a race. If a game is good enough, actually reaching the end isn’t even my primary concern. I still haven’t actually beat the entire San Andreas game. I spent more time on side missions and just screwing around.
I’m not saying your way is wrong, but damn, enjoy the game a little.
Agree with this.
I tend to take my time with games too - often doing side missions before the main storyline or alongside it.
Knowing myself, I’ll spend well over 50 hours on Fallout 3 - the little bugger is in my bag waiting to be played tonight. Same goes for Fable 2 - I’m doing the whole game now with side missions and exploration as a good guy, and will redo it one day as a bad guy.[/quote]
X3
I’ve put about 20 hours into it so far, and I know I am not even close to finding everything there is out there.
The one thing about this game that sticks out it my mind is that there is a ton of map space that lies outside of the main quest points.