Is Sarcrifice good? I tend to like old strategy games like Age of Empires or Disciples and I'm not sure on the third person view Sarcrifice has compared to the top down view that Age of Empire has.

Take the Company of Heroes

I thought the Witcher 1 was a very good, very original game, but I wouldn't call it an RPG per se. More like Adventure/Story. There was only like, what... one armor you could buy in the whole game? But it was a pretty damn good title.

The Witcher 2, however, I feel had traded gameplay for cutscenes. I didn't like their decision to move from promiscuity into "more serious relationships", even though they didn't really do that. Also, the so-called choices that effect the game cut the game as a whole into half of what it could have been. Instead of playing a long game, you can play the same short game twice on either side of the field. They took it in the wrong direction. The Acts/Towns are very, very small, and even though there is a great deal more items to purchase than in the first Witcher, that still isn't much. I also felt that it was pretty straight forward and consisted of more linear zones than the first. The cities in W2 make Skyrim's look like real cities, which is sad. I'm also not one for dwarves and mountains and harpies, or QTE subgames or QTE boss fights or the less dynamic combat system.

That being said, Witcher 1 is amazing, Witcher 2 is great graphics and cool story bro.

I liked Sacrifice quite a bit, but I haven't played it in a long time. I would call it an action-RTS with some RPG-like features.

Sounds interesting, I heard the voice acting was quite good but are the gods in the game interesting at all? Since it seems to revolve mostly around them and their squabbles between each other.

Witcher series yes, 1st one is already patched fully and Enhanced edition free on install of patches.
2nd is getting the free Enhanced ed makeover april I've heard.

1st Witcher good, funny, tactical.. highly story and setting based, brilliant game, 2nd one played so little to say, but heard no complaints on it's story.

Rage: Liking it, pretty fun shooter with a great look. Sadly it felt to me though that it was an attempt to make a Fallout shooter. One with a lot of things that would make traditional FO fans twitchy... Though the unique raider gang work and various accents and traits would suit FO.

Dead Island is fantastic a nice themed horror survival online rpg.
Good connection for me, though it has some serious zombies as you level up.. but certain characters have great perks, and really open to team work but yet to try that tbh.

So, I rented Dead Island a few months back and managed to just barely finish the resort area. I have to say I really loved what I played of it... the open (or so I remember it as such), gorgeous, tropical paradise serving as a backdrop for a bloody horror story was just great. I really like tropical settings and the twist of the isolation and peril thrown onto it was really cool. I liked the combat... fighting zombies truly was a blast and I'm not typically one who takes that much of a liking to doing nothing but bashing the skulls of hostile NPCs in, but this game just made fighting too fun. The weapon degradation and customization/reparation was also well-implemented. I want to get the game to keep playing, but the problem is that I'm hearing that open-world style going on in the resort ends after the resort and I'm afraid the combat alone isn't going to be a good enough reason to keep up with what may be very stale gameplay only exacerbated by the possibility of future linearity. I feel like I had my honeymoon period with the game and although I may have still been in it as I was just messing around in the resort area one last time before moving on, I'm worried I won't like what I find when I finally get to whatever the next level (The city?) is. What do you think about my concern?

Sorry I can't speak to the next setting, my experience is just about reaching the end of the resort.
A friend I play with has said she found the next stage really difficult but enjoyable. I can't say if this was because of the combat ( insane creatures. ) or story.
If I could help I would, I got it on the steam Christmas sale so though in love with it. Not sure if it moves from open world story, to linear story.

Keep an eye out Seti, if on offer and cheap the Resort has lots of side quests that still pop up for me when exploring.
It could be worth it.

I've watched some Lets Plays and it does seem to get more linear after the first level. There's not a whole lot of room to explore in the city, and the quests force you to go through some fairly linear sewer levels a couple of times.

I have no idea if it opens up again later though.

The Witcher 1+2 are both very good though different in their way of handling combat. They're role players, in that you're playing a character as opposed to a spreadsheet, you can make your choices based on what you want to do. Great storyline though not one for people who want to be the big shot cliche hero. Nice alchemy system and a good variety of beasties to fight and characters and personalities to meet. Pacing is a little off in the first one but great in the second one.

Civ IV is good, really good. But Alpha Centauri is even better.

I loved the Battle for Middle Earth games and I'm thinking about getting BFME2 for the 360 but how does it measure up to the PC version? Are there any game modes or features removed? Are it's controls as cumbersome as most console RTS?

I don't know how it compares to the PC version but I thoroughly enjoyed the game. I personally had no difficulties with the controls but then again I also found Halo Wars' to be fine as well.

So, does Space Marine find ways to keep it interesting throughout the game?

Not really. The game is really more about the multiplayer which is, admittedly, a lot of fun.

Ah. May pick it up for gaming club, then. Does it have split-screen or is it strictly on line?

From what I've heard, Divinity 2 is MUCH better on PC. The original game, a more isometric (think Diablo but much deeper) was PC only.


Make sure you know what the games are like. They're very lonely, isolated games. SotC only has 16 enemies (massive bosses, no regular enemies)), and you have to travel to them across vast landscapes, with your horse as your only companion. Amazing atmosphere, and even on the PS2 the graphics hold up. I have to be in the right mood, though.

No, it's online only. It should have been co-op given that 99.9% of the time you have at least one other marine with you anyways. But, you know, EVERYONE MUST BUY THEIR OWN COPY.

There doesn't seem to be many playing on PC version :/

I have DKS for the PC. Its really fun. It has a certain challenge to it, but its not OMGHOLYSH!T hard. Its got a really good story and the gameplay is fun.

_______

Does Red Dead Redemption get significantly better?
I've been playing it for three hours and its doesn't seem fun yet.
The movement controls are infuriating and herding cattle is damn near impossible. The story is interesting, but the controls just doesn't justify me finishing it.

P.S. How does the horseshoe game work? I've been trying to get it in the middle fo the gauge, but that doesn't work. Tried getting to the top, doesn't work. Its confusing me. Even when I get in the same spot its a different outcome.

I am dissapoint. Was looking forward to crushing my friends under the mighty and undeniable weight of Chaos manifest in some two player goodness.

I really enjoyed Red Dead Redemption, but to me the beginning is very tedious. It gets better. Try going on a few rampages.

As for the horseshoe game, I am not quite sure, sorry.

What do you mean does it get better? Your enjoying the story ,which is excellent form beginning to end, but you don't enjoy the controls which I thought where also excellent once you got use to them.

Was not a big fan of Red Dead Redemption, myself. Yes, the story was great. Didn't find the gameplay all that great though. Really didn't care for much of the side content either. Still thinking of picking up the game of the year edition though. Interested in trying out Undead Nightmare, as well as the multiplayer, being that I didn't have online when I originally owned the game.

I'm looking for a good open-world RPG and I've heard Witcher 2 is good and that it's non-linear. How is it as far as the open-world and side-content aspect?

It's non-linear in the sense that you have choices in your quests and how they play out. The chapter areas are of a decent size though, but of course nothing close to Fallout or the TES series. Never-the-less, it's a phenomenal game with a good story, plenty of action, plenty of choices, and amazing visuals. If by side-content you mean side quests, there are plenty of those.