StarDestroyer.Net BBS

This Friday I'll be married for five years and I'll be treating myself with a game since I haven't gotten one for quite a while. I've been looking at a list of games priced at $20 and below and I'm having trouble picking out which one I'll buy. Here's what I've currently narrowed it down to.

Spore
Fallout:New Vegas
Empire:Total War
Tropico 3
Flatout 2
Sins of a Solar Empire: Trinity (I have the vanilla but not the extras)
Sword of the Stars:Complete Collection (I have the vanilla but not the extras)
Hearts of Iron 3
Command and Conquer 4
C&C: Red Alert 3
Red Faction: Guerrilla

Which one should I go for?

Fallout New Vegas if you want the best one on that list and the one that's easily going to last you twenty plus hours, an extra four hours or so per DLC you grab as well.

What do you feel like playing?

Aimless sandboxing?
Racing?
Massive strategy?

Yeah, an RPG is going to get you the most time for your money. Plus, Fallout is awesome for the atmosphere.

If not F:NV, I'd say Napoleon: Total War (not E:TW). The patching process is pretty much completed, and the game is better mechanically than E:TW.

It might help to know what you're looking for... but most of those games are dogshit anyway.

Understanding Bean's English is hard enough at times, but if he's suggesting you'll get less than 20 hours out of any of those strategy games, he's probably wrong.

The only game on there I've played that wasn't a pile of cuntal discharge dogshit was Sins.

F:NV would be my choice especially with 3 DLC's and one more along the way, easily 100+ hours

weemadando wrote:What do you feel like playing?

Aimless sandboxing?
Racing?
Massive strategy?

All. I'd like one that'll give the best bang for the buck, has good re-playability and the quality doesn't suck.

I've played the first two Red Faction games. Loved the first game, didn't care for the sequel and was quite disappointed with the limitation of the destructibility of the environment. Would the third game be an improvement? Is their Geo-Mod still limited as the other two games? If so, then forget it?

I listed Tropico 3 since I have the first game and found it entertaining. Yet somehow I found it lacking. Is T3 a vast improvement?

Loved Flatout and I have it but I'm intrigued with the sequel. The only thing I'm nervous about is that when I saw the game trailer, it just looked like a polished version of the first game. They've even have the same characters, no new ones.

SoaSE: Trinity. My recollection of the game isn't good since I haven't played it for a while and right now my memories of it is meshed with SotS. Lol. But what I do remember of those two isn't too bad. Would the add-ons for the two games improve it or make it worse?

Hearts of Iron 3. Enjoyed the first game. Frustrated with the second as the game would slow to a crawl within a couple of months game time. HoI3 an improvement?

C&C4. Played 1 through 3 (didn't do the alien missions though). Enjoyed each and every one of them. Would 4 last as long as 3 or is it shorter? Longer?

C&C:RE3. Played the first two and enjoyed them very much. Number 3 any better?

I have the two Medieval: TW games plus Rome. Would Empire be better (after patch)? I'm trying to find what era it covers but all I know it starts from 1700 and lasts until?

Fallout:NV. I love the whole series from the beginning until F3. Haven't bought the DLC for the time being so meh. F:NV a greater improvement over F3? Without the DLCs, would I spend the same amount of time with NV as F3? Or is the game longer or shorter?

I like a game with a very good amount of entertainment value, be able to play it again and again, doesn't look like shit and isn't short. I don't want to finish the game in one setting.

Lord Relvenous wrote:Yeah, an RPG is going to get you the most time for your money. Plus, Fallout is awesome for the atmosphere.

If not F:NV, I'd say Napoleon: Total War (not E:TW). The patching process is pretty much completed, and the game is better mechanically than E:TW.

I plan to buy a game at a brick and mortar store and not online and so far I haven't found N:TW priced at $20 or lower. The price I've seen is $30.

Well, look, if you already have vanilla Sins, Entrenchment basically just added starbases which the AI has no idea how to deal with, and one person in my group tried Diplomacy and found (1) the Diplomacy options really didn't change the game that much and (2) that he got raped by the pirates, which apparently leveled up as time went on and eventually ended up as something to stay the fuck away from.

Now, starbases are sweet, but if you're looking for $20 worth of gaming, for frak's sake get something new to you, not minor enhancements to Sins. It won't feel much different with the expansions.

Mods, yes, that's different -- my group switched wholeheartedly to the Real Capital Ships mod and loved every minute of the Kol Battlecruiser becoming an unstoppable beast and leveling up from there. You could throw that thing in a fight alone and just expect it to win.

You can get Flatout Ultimate Carnage (or whatever the newest one is called) on Steam for like five bucks. Go nuts buddy.

How much of HoI3 would you be getting? If just the base game, I wouldn't bother, but if you're getting the full package of Semper Fi and For the Motherland, it might be more worthwhile.

I have the two Medieval: TW games plus Rome. Would Empire be better (after patch)? I'm trying to find what era it covers but all I know it starts from 1700 and lasts until?

1799. It is pure 18th century.

weemadando wrote:You can get Flatout Ultimate Carnage (or whatever the newest one is called) on Steam for like five bucks. Go nuts buddy.

I'd love to but for convoluted, head smashing reasons, I'm sticking to brick and mortar stores. BTW, I'm already nuts.

Brother-Captain Gaius wrote:How much of HoI3 would you be getting? If just the base game, I wouldn't bother, but if you're getting the full package of Semper Fi and For the Motherland, it might be more worthwhile.

How much difference is vanilla HoI3 compared to vanilla HoI2? Better graphics(hah! like that matters in the HoI\EU\Victoria series)? Gameplay? Stability?

I never played HoI2, only the original, so I don't know. HoI3 is comparable in almost every way with EU3, if you're familiar with that.

Getting into it is a bit steep. I noticed that HoI3 was much harder to break into and learn than EU3, which was comparatively accessible, but if you're familiar with prior HoIs you'll probably have less trouble than I did. It's hard to comment on the graphics, since I got all the sprite packs and I don't know how they compare with the original game's, and I'm also running a couple of cosmetic mods (prettier unit counters in place of the ugly ass NATO symbols, and fancy art in place of the mismatched black and white unit photos).

It's quite stable. I think it's only crashed on me once, and that was probably due to my abusive alt-tabbing to cross reference the wiki. Gameplay is pretty solid. It caters well to my "historical fiction" style of playing these games (as opposed to hardcore grognard shit wherein one meticulously recreates history). YMMV.

Also, if you're buying the full package, you can probably skip Dies Irae Gotterdammerung unless you really, really, really want a third party Germany-only mod (which is quite literally what DIG is, even though it costs money...).

I haven't played any of the others but New Vegas is good. I'm practically addicted. And then you get to the mods. Stuff like New Vegas Bounties I & II, Tales From the Burning Sands, TSC Vegas. Those stack even more hours into my playing time. The vanilla game on its own is wonderful, though. The only thing I'm sad about is the dearth of quests for the Legion.

Pretty much reduced the list to either F:NV or RTS\TBS games like E:TW, HoI3 or C&C4.

Enigma wrote: Fallout:NV. I love the whole series from the beginning until F3. Haven't bought the DLC for the time being so meh. F:NV a greater improvement over F3? Without the DLCs, would I spend the same amount of time with NV as F3? Or is the game longer or shorter?

I like a game with a very good amount of entertainment value, be able to play it again and again, doesn't look like shit and isn't short. I don't want to finish the game in one setting.

New Vegas has the same basic gameplay as Fallout 3 (I have seen it described as an elaborate mod). The only real change in gameplay is 'Hardcore Mode' - where ammo weighs, you get thirsty and hungry, and healing items don't heal you immediately; but that does make the game significantly different, mostly because you can't carry two miniguns, a rocket launcher, fifty rockets and three suits of power armour - unless you don't mind starving to death.

Story-wise, it's much more faithful to the feel of the first two games than 3 was: the supermutants are rare and are not psychotic cannibals; there aren't millions of feral ghouls everywhere. Unlike in 3 (where the Enclave were just pathetic) the main villains are skin-crawlingly evil; and the good guys aren't squeaky-clean either, so there's a hint of ambiguity. As to whether you would spend the same amount of time ... well, there are slightly less side-quests, but I'd say the quality of them is better. Also, each companion has a related questline - so there's replayability in doing the game with different companions.


The only other game on this list I have played is Red Faction Guerilla. It has pretty good hotseat multiplayer, where you take turns demolishing buildings, and the geomod works pretty well; but the single-player campaign is distilled bullshit.

I can't recommend Fallout New Vegas highly enough. I just finished the game last week and even though I spend over 80 hours playing it I'm pretty sure that I missed a lot of the side quests. The NV is slicker than Fallout 3 in my opinion and the main quest more compelling. The weapons are excellent and I loved the casino mini games. I really got my money's worth from new vegas as too many single players games these days are over in an eye blink.

I would vote for sword of the stars (as a matter of fact I did). However it highly depends on your gaming mood right now. You put a some games from different genres there, but most of them are strategy, that's why I recommend you sword of the stars. In the other hand you could wait a few weeks and get Sword of the Stars II, which will be a "hundredfold times" better yet!

New Vegas is pretty fun, as long as you remember to keep a billion saves because it will fuck up, bug out, corrupt saves, and generally troll you. The DLCs are pretty good too (especially Old World Blues). If you're going to play it though, play Hardcore, just for the stimpacks healing over time bit. Probably the most significant of the changes, really. The thirst/hunger business is ehhh, it turns out is really easy to manage it as long as you don't hugely load yourself down with bullets (which you probably won't need to anyway if you play a sensible build).

I hear the PC version will be getting a mahoosive patch fairly soon which will make it not fail as much.

I've had problems running Fallout 3 in Windows 7. As in, I can't run it at all. Does New Vegas have these problems or have they been resolved?

I bought F:NV at a local Gamestop. But I also got Hearts of Iron 3 for $4 at Half-Price Bookstore. I couldn't pass it up.

Ryan Thunder wrote:I've had problems running Fallout 3 in Windows 7. As in, I can't run it at all. Does New Vegas have these problems or have they been resolved?

New Vegas runs in Windows 7 but crashes fairly frequently; the DLC seems to be even worse than the regular game, for me, but others may have different experience.

Jaevric wrote:

Ryan Thunder wrote:I've had problems running Fallout 3 in Windows 7. As in, I can't run it at all. Does New Vegas have these problems or have they been resolved?

New Vegas runs in Windows 7 but crashes fairly frequently; the DLC seems to be even worse than the regular game, for me, but others may have different experience.

In one of my games, I kept crashing when I tried to fast travel in Big Mountain. I also have a fuckload of mods running and have a computer that's running off a single core processor. I'm pretty sure that causes a lot of problems. Still recommended, though. As for Fallout 3 crashing, almost never happens to me. If it does, it's almost always because I screwed up while dicking around in the GECK.