|
Rush_shirt posted:[*]Total War games. Not so much for the battles but for the "grand strategy" aspects of building and maintaining an empire. I've been sort of intimidated by the army management. I've always found Total War to be pretty weak, as it tries to be two different kinds of game at once and isn't a good example of either. See below re: RTS games though. Rush_shirt posted:[*]Paradox games. Maps. So many maps. Again, the "grand strategy" aspect is appealing, but with the Paradox games, wrong moves seem all the more unforgiving. Plus, I get the sense that there's a lot of micromanagement and that turns can take forever with all the units you have to control. Is that true? Paradox games aren't turn-based, they're real-time with pause. I guess something like Hearts of Iron might make wrong moves more of a concern, but most of my experience is with Crusader Kings 2 (which I would absolutely recommend as a starting point) where you don't really have any specific goals except what you set for yourself and the only thing that will end your game is if every member of your dynastic line dies out. Rush_shirt posted:[*]Infinity-engine RPGs. I've tried playing the first Baldur's Gate several time and nothing really captured me. I do like the idea of managing a party and turn-based combat doesn't bother me, but I just wasn't really grabbed. Are other Infinity-engine (or similar) games more engaging for modern newcomers? Depends what you liked and didn't like about Baldur's Gate. Icewind Dale is the exact same thing, but with far less story and more of a focus on combat. Planescape: Torment is the reverse. There are a bunch of games in early access or soon to come out that harken to nostalgia for those games but honestly they aren't really all that, most people's fondness for them is because they're interactive fantasy novels and they played them as teenagers. Rush_shirt posted:[*]Roguelikes. I've tried "rogue-lites" like Rogue Legacy, but they don't seem to scratch the itch that these games do. I'd like to try something a bit closer to the "real deal," but the ones I've seen appear to be terribly either unforgiving or just plain not interesting. I like cool mechanics and unusual settings... but don't we all? "Unforgiving" is a plus mark on the roguelike design document. The only one I'd comfortably describe as a good game that also has an unusual setting is Caves of Qud, but playing roguelikes for the setting is kind of like playing Quake 3 for the deep and engaging storyline. I suggest you play ToME or DoomRL instead, as those are the two best roguelikes from a mechanical perspective that also have adjustable difficulty. Rush_shirt posted:[*]Survival/crafting games. Building shelters and defenses against monsters and the elements. It sounds fun but I have yet to come across one that has piqued my interest (I had admittedly not looked too hard). Voxels are optional. Minecraft and Terraria are the gold standard; you've probably already encountered these. 90% of the genre is going to be poorly implemented knockoffs of the same. Rush_shirt posted:[*]Slow-paced RTSes. Rapidly clicking around a map and capturing settlements before your enemy isn't really my style. I like to develop bases, upgrade things, maybe even deal with a bit of politics. Age of Empires, Stronghold, and Rise of Nations come to mind, but I've never played any. We got a word for "slow-paced RTSes," it's called "turn-based strategy."  Sins of a Solar Empire has politics (barely) and a lot of infrastructure building but it's a bit poo poo apart from being pretty. I can say with some confidence that Age of Empires isn't what you want it to be. Or maybe ignore my dismissal of Total War since that resolves individual battles in an RTS format but all the politics and realm management is handled in a turn-based format. Also, apart from any specific question, I'll echo the recommendation of Civ IV. And V too. V probably isn't as good a game but the objections people have are founded in a extensive understanding of Civ IV's mechanics, and without that background you'll probably like it just fine.
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 16:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 03:51 |
|
|
For a slower-paced RTS, I'd recommend Infested Planet. It's not really like your usual one-side-vs-another RTS, it's your handful of guys versus huge hordes, but it's fairly tactical and lets you more or less set your own pace and approach to gradually clearing the map area by area.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
Palladium posted:I really, really don't know why that "AMD is soooooo cheeeeeeap!" meme gets repeated so loving often: The AMD being cheap came from the fact that while the processor was priced similarly to the i5 where you saved your money was compatibility. I also took the phenom II route and am only now looking to replace it. What it saved me at the time was, not needing a motherboard since you could drop your AM3 into an AM2 board and it would still work. You got to keep your RAM, your motherboard, you also didn't require a format after dropping in the cpu. To jump to intel would have required a new motherboard, cpu, ram, and format. My phenom II was ~150, worked with my existing setup and did not require a format after the upgrade and the comparable intel switch would have been closer to 600 dollars, possible case gutting, and a format. To me the oddest part is that even though I chose the lame upgrade path only now half a decade later am I even considering retiring it.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 03:51
|
|
|
Rush_shirt posted:[*]Paradox games. quote:[*]Infinity-engine RPGs. quote:[*]Roguelikes. quote:[*]Slow-paced RTSes. Rapidly clicking around a map and capturing settlements before your enemy isn't really my style. I like to develop bases, upgrade things, maybe even deal with a bit of politics. Age of Empires, Stronghold, and Rise of Nations come to mind, but I've never played any.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
So my fellow PC gamers, how do you decide when it's time to upgrade? Do you wait until your rig chokes on a game, or something breaks, or there's a good deal on a part or some other reason? I upgraded mine and made the switch to Intel when my old AMD rig choked on Wolfenstein: The New Order and several other recent games.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 05:18
|
|
|
Starhawk64 posted:So my fellow PC gamers, how do you decide when it's time to upgrade? Do you wait until your rig chokes on a game, or something breaks, or there's a good deal on a part or some other reason? I upgraded mine and made the switch to Intel when my old AMD rig choked on Wolfenstein: The New Order and several other recent games. when a new Crysis comes out
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
Starhawk64 posted:So my fellow PC gamers, how do you decide when it's time to upgrade? Do you wait until your rig chokes on a game, or something breaks, or there's a good deal on a part or some other reason? I upgraded mine and made the switch to Intel when my old AMD rig choked on Wolfenstein: The New Order and several other recent games. It's usually a combination of not being able to play games on the settings I want and a new game coming out that can take advantage of a new system. In my case, it's going to probably be Witcher 3 that makes me upgrade.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 05:27
|
|
|
Thanks for the feedback, you guys. Here are some responses to your collective points: - I own two Total War games: Medieval II and Rome (no expansions). I played Rome briefly in high school, I think enough not to be too overwhelmed by it or Medieval being my "first" Total War game (i.e. the first one I play for a significant amount of time). I am tempted to give Medieval II a shot, as I think I like its setting the most, but it seems like buying Shogun 2 might prove to be a more enjoyable experience overall. I can get behind samurai. - I have heard that Baldur's Gate II is the better of the two, but I'd prefer to just revisit the entire series later on if I find I like the genre. I definitely want to play Torment at least once, but I don't think now is the time. The Icewind Dale games never appealed to me in the past, but I admit that their more direct combat-heavy approach attracts me now. Still, I'd like to try something else. Which of the Fallout games do you prefer? What about the new Shadowrun game? - Speaking of more modern CRPGs, I could never really get into Dragon Age. A little too "edgy" for my tastes. However, what about the Neverwinter Nights series? It seems like if I want to start from the present and work my way back, Divinity: Original Sin appears to be a solid choice. - Terraria is on sale right now and seems like it could work for me. Are there any mods that make it a bit more structured? I get kind of overwhelmed when I'm just thrown into a big empty map with a shovel. If Terraria doesn't work out, I might go for the more goal-oriented Don't Starve, although people I know who are much more patient than me said they couldn't get into it. - Oh man, I remember the box for Rise of Nations! It looks up my alley, but I'd like to hear about more RTSes (or strategy games in general) where combat is optional and you can win by other means (discovering wonders, controlling trade routes, etc.). I remember there was a faction in Sins of a Solar Empire that specialized in winning by cultural influence. Any other games like that? - I own Civ IV+Beyond the Sword (as well as Civ III, but I hear a lot of people hate that). I've never been driven to play it for more than an hour or so, but it does seem like the best entry into strategy games. I also have Civ IV: Colonization, but I doubt that it's a good place to start. - Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup is what my friend plays, and he swears by it. What about Dungeons of Dredmor? The UI appears to be relatively polished and accessible to novices. - After some reflecting, I think my Paradox journey should start with Crusader Kings II. I like the setting the most, plus I already own it (but it doesn't look like I have any of the substantial non-cosmetic DLC). I'll probably check out a let's play or a tutorial video first to see if it's something I could get into. - Sim City 4 never appealed to me (UI reminded me too much of The Sims, fwiw). I did not have a good time with Tropico, but maybe I can ease into Tropico 3. I was intrigued by Banished, but it seems to cater to a bit of the more hardcore set.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 05:33
|
|
|
Oh man, I completely forgot about Don't Starve. It's excellent -- much more structured than Minecraft, and not voxel-based, great sense of humor and a neat visual style.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 05:37
|
|
|
Starhawk64 posted:So my fellow PC gamers, how do you decide when it's time to upgrade? Do you wait until your rig chokes on a game, or something breaks, or there's a good deal on a part or some other reason? I upgraded mine and made the switch to Intel when my old AMD rig choked on Wolfenstein: The New Order and several other recent games. I usually have a wish list of parts in my head or on a sticky note widget. When a good deal pops up and I haven't made too many other luxury purchases in a given month I'll snap it up. I like to upgrade piece by piece rather than waiting a long time and building a new machine from (almost) scratch.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 14:06
|
|
|
I upgrade when there is an actual need for it. "Need" meaning playing some game on the framerate my TV can put out at an acceptable graphical level. I don't care too much for graphical fidelity but I just can't wait to try playing at 120fps, I'm just waiting for 120Hz TVs and/or monitors to become more common and cheaper (I think those are already cheap in the US but not in my country). Also I'm probably getting an oculus rift when the consumer version comes out and this will probably need a machine a bit better than my current 760 GTX SLI build. Having a SLI build is interesting because I can upgrade to use two 780ti and keep using all the other components, and it would be a huge upgrade, but I'm guessing I'll only upgrade when the GTX series after the next comes out, so the next one will be cheaper (the 900 series will be the next, nvidia will skip the 800 for desktops), so I'm probably getting two 980 GTX next, but only when the 1000 series is out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 14:27
|
|
|
Skilleddk posted:when a new Crysis comes out I've been the opposite, since 2007 when I get a new part I've always thrown Crysis 1 back in, hah. My game is finally over though. 7 years and umpteen upgrades later, I can finally play it at max settings 1080p 60+fps (4.5ghz 2500k and 7970 clocked above a 280x). Still need to go back and actually play it again though instead of the usual PC upgrade plan of buy part->go all  wowzerz at how I can run PS2 emulation/Metro/Crysis/etc. for 5 minutes at a time->go back to playing Peggle.  program's right, the correct time to upgrade is when something you're doing isn't fast enough. Optimal is hitting all the curves of new things coming out, your hardware being sufficiently old enough, and things being on sale. (Intel) CPUs haven't budged much in the past few years for price:performance for gaming and no one's expecting them to anytime soon. Since the 2500k, their i5 chips slay games. Video cards continue to matter on a replaceable basis with the big news right now being Nvidia announcements coming up in the next month or two for new releases, and awesome used AMD cards still being cheap from *coin miners dumping them off. On genre list stuff, check out Rogue Legacy for a super fun roguelike-ish Metroidvania-ish game!
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 15:23
|
|
|
Starhawk64 posted:So my fellow PC gamers, how do you decide when it's time to upgrade? Do you wait until your rig chokes on a game, or something breaks, or there's a good deal on a part or some other reason? I upgraded mine and made the switch to Intel when my old AMD rig choked on Wolfenstein: The New Order and several other recent games. I ride it as long as possible until one or more items craps out. My last rig finally killed itself with Skyrim (dual-core, Radeon 4770 - actually because the graphics card overheated and died). I prefer just replacing the whole thing at once, more funner that way.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
I just build a new PC every 5 years and make sure to budget about $1500 to the effort. Usually that gets me a PC that doesn't choke on anything for at least 5 years.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 15:39
|
|
|
LLJKSiLk posted:I just build a new PC every 5 years and make sure to budget about $1500 to the effort. Usually that gets me a PC that doesn't choke on anything for at least 5 years. Yeah that kinda seems like a huge waste of money compared to just upgrading your CPU and GPU when they start to falter.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 15:54
|
|
|
Depending on when you do it, upgrading your CPU could entail buying a brand new motherboard and maybe even new RAM spec. At that point you're building a new PC.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 16:15
|
|
|
Spanish Manlove posted:Yeah that kinda seems like a huge waste of money compared to just upgrading your CPU and GPU when they start to falter. On the plus side the older systems get recycled down to my kids, so it works out.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
Building a whole new PC is pretty fun. Sadly I don't have anyone who is interested in my hand me downs these days  Also the i5 2500k/580GTX I have is still pretty drat solid so no reason to upgrade despite my itch to 
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
Rush_shirt posted:- I have heard that Baldur's Gate II is the better of the two, but I'd prefer to just revisit the entire series later on if I find I like the genre. I definitely want to play Torment at least once, but I don't think now is the time. The Icewind Dale games never appealed to me in the past, but I admit that their more direct combat-heavy approach attracts me now. Still, I'd like to try something else. Which of the Fallout games do you prefer? What about the new Shadowrun game? Talking about the old Fallouts, I find the sequel better again. The games have their own, independent storylines as well, so you'll miss even less skipping the first game. And you can just play it afterwards if it turns out you like the setting enough. Just be advised that the "tutorial dungeon" for Fallout 2 is notoriously tedious, though I suppose it does a decent job at teaching the mechanics to a newcomer. Shadowrun Returns is excellent. The first official campaign, Dead Man's Switch, is completely linear though, but imo it compensates by having just excellent, entertaining writing. It's a bit like playing through a pulp cyberpunk detective novel. The DLC/sequel/whatever, Dragonfall, feels much less linear and is just as good or better in about every other aspect too. Rush_shirt posted:- Speaking of more modern CRPGs, I could never really get into Dragon Age. A little too "edgy" for my tastes. However, what about the Neverwinter Nights series? It seems like if I want to start from the present and work my way back, Divinity: Original Sin appears to be a solid choice. NWN 2 is basically more of the same in a shinier package. I guess the main difference (apart from the graphics and other more modern bells and whistles) is having more fleshed-out party members that have a more active role in the story and are directly controllable (so like in Baldur's Gate), whereas in the first NWN they're basically just henchmen that tag along. The vanilla campaign starts a bit slowly, but is quite good once it picks up speed. The first expansion Mask of the Betrayer is generally considered excellent. I should probably replay it myself, because the first time around I was already having a bit of an overdose of epic high fantasy, and MotB gets REALLY out there into rear end-busting epicness, so it kinda left me with the mental version of feeling queasy from eating too much candy. (Sidenote: as such I was completely swept off my feet by The Witcher that came out right after I finished MotB.) And yes, D:OS is great and you should get it. Nordick fucked around with this message at 16:32 on Sep 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
LLJKSiLk posted:On the plus side the older systems get recycled down to my kids, so it works out. Poor kids. About keyboards, I tried almost everything the result is I like red switches, currently I have a steel 7G, planning to change my keyboard, so looking for advices. Anyone tried gigabyte Aivia Osmium or razor widow silent one?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 16:30
|
|
|
I see Rush_shirt got some great advice in this thread, so I'll add another, similar question. I recently bought a Thrustmaster T16000M flight stick, and besides using it to fly space planes in Kerbal Space Program I thought I'd try out some airplane games. However, all of the recent flight games I can find are either full of milwank, ~simulators~, or both. I don't give a rat's rear end about the accuracy of the flight model. Flying from airport to airport seems boring. And I really don't care for milwank. I'm looking for a fun flight game with lots of maneuvering; NOE, canyon runs, flying through giant structures, that kind of stuff. It seems I'd have to dive into some older PC games for that, and I hope this thread can provide some pointers.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2014 17:29
|
|
|
pun pundit posted:I see Rush_shirt got some great advice in this thread, so I'll add another, similar question. I recently bought a Thrustmaster T16000M flight stick, and besides using it to fly space planes in Kerbal Space Program I thought I'd try out some airplane games. However, all of the recent flight games I can find are either full of milwank, ~simulators~, or both. I don't give a rat's rear end about the accuracy of the flight model. Flying from airport to airport seems boring. And I really don't care for milwank. I'm looking for a fun flight game with lots of maneuvering; NOE, canyon runs, flying through giant structures, that kind of stuff. It seems I'd have to dive into some older PC games for that, and I hope this thread can provide some pointers. The whole point of flying games is the simulation aspect. If you want "high-flying thrills and derring-do", you might have to go back to something like Crimson Skies, or just fly planes in GTA.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 01:13
|
|
|
Crimson Skies is a good point, I had forgotten about it since I didn't like playing it with kb/m. Thanks for that! I don't agree that the whole point of flying games is the simulation aspect. TIE fighter was not much of a simulation, but it was still fun. Flying planes in GTA is kind of fun but I get bored quickly with it because there isn't really anything to do while flying.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 02:59
|
|
|
TIE fighter and XWING are probably even more sim-y than most arcade flight sims. What about Freespace, did you play those games?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
Play Warthunder. On the arcade settings you can use mouse+keyboard. On the "Real Modes" or whatever you can use joystick or mouse+keyboard, it's all pretty viable. Joystick is kinda funner at maneuvering but mouse is better accuracy for the most part.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:20
|
|
|
Terminal Velocity and it's Win95 sequel Fury3. Fly a spacefighter around and blow poo poo up! Or maybe the Descent series if you wanna play Doom but with a spaceship.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 03:52
|
|
|
notZaar posted:TIE fighter and XWING are probably even more sim-y than most arcade flight sims. What about Freespace, did you play those games? And yeah, I played Freespace, and liked it. I don't feel like an open-space game, though. It's generally big and empty. darkhand posted:Play Warthunder. On the arcade settings you can use mouse+keyboard. On the "Real Modes" or whatever you can use joystick or mouse+keyboard, it's all pretty viable. Joystick is kinda funner at maneuvering but mouse is better accuracy for the most part. Starhawk64 posted:Terminal Velocity and it's Win95 sequel Fury3. Fly a spacefighter around and blow poo poo up! Or maybe the Descent series if you wanna play Doom but with a spaceship. Terminal Velocity and its sequels look interesting. I'll look into them, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
Starhawk64 posted:Terminal Velocity and it's Win95 sequel Fury3. Fly a spacefighter around and blow poo poo up! Or maybe the Descent series if you wanna play Doom but with a spaceship. Terminal Velocity and Fury3 were separate games that came out around the same time. Fury 3 did have a sequel called Hellbender (Hell something at least). TIE Fighter was the first game that I put a ungodly number of hours into as a kid, I was so proud the first time I beat the game without any cheat modes enabled.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 06:19
|
|
|
I have a Logitech G500 and like many of my Logitech devices the mouse is acting up again . For some reason both my left and right clicks register as double clicks a good amount of the time. This makes the right click context menus a nightmare to deal with. Is this mouse pretty much over with or...?
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 06:26
|
|
|
A lot of times that is a hardware issue, if it persists through multiple programs. You can use logitech's apparently wonderful support and return it. You can also get replacement micro-switches for literally a couple bucks and usually sort it out yourself with some soldering, keep in mind this voids your warranty. The switches contain a small piece of metal that acts as a spring and is usually the culprit. If you're really destitute you can open them and rebend the metal thing Also try the obvious like changing up USB slots. darkhand fucked around with this message at 06:47 on Sep 5, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 06:44
|
|
|
Yeah this has happened across multiple PC's. I find it hard to complain because Logitech has replaced my mouse twice (the first time without any proof of purchase or receipt) and they outright replaced the second G5 with a G500. I effectively haven't had to purchase a mouse in 6-7 years. Still, I was hoping the first $60 mouse I had would have lasted longer. I lack any technical hands-on ability so I think I'll buy the M500 which appears to be a replica minus the sensitivity buttons and gamer tax.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 06:58
|
|
|
It also may be static - try unplugging mouse and frantically click all problematic buttons for 10-20 minutes.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 11:16
|
|
|
I have an I2500 which has been perfectly fine for years (previously q6600). Just reading this http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/09/04/week-in-tech-intels-haswell-e-is-actually-interesting/#more-231291 made think I might look at upgrading at some point.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 11:22
|
|
|
pun pundit posted:Crimson Skies is a good point, I had forgotten about it since I didn't like playing it with kb/m. Thanks for that! you could also check out Ace Combat: Assault Horizon on steam, very arcadey, lots of explosions and typically japanese over the top story - unfortunately it's one of the weaker games in the series, but if you pick it up in a sale it should easily be worth the money.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 11:30
|
|
|
I totally forgot about HAWX. That game is so arcadey you can actually drift your jet. You did say you don't want "milwank" and I dont know what that is exactly but Tom Clancy games probably fall into that category.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 12:36
|
|
|
IL-2 Sturmovik on low realism settings is very arcadey. It's about as mil-wanky as they come, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 13:27
|
|
|
If you want arcadey flying, try SkyDrift. it's a plane racing game with really nice flying physics. Kind of a plane kart racer.
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
Bloody Hedgehog posted:The whole point of flying games is the simulation aspect. 
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2014 16:07
|
|
|
Why would you buy a $60 flight stick if you don't want to play 100% of the games that are better with it? I'd rather play Ace Combat with my 360 controller than my HOTAS setup. Sorry guy, but the joystick you just bought was kind of designed for milwank and simulators, and anything else actually doesn't really play very well with it. Well, there are some space sims that are good with flight sticks, maybe try the Freespace series (make sure you use the fantastic open source ports to modernize them)
Dr. Video Games 0031 fucked around with this message at 05:14 on Sep 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 11, 2024 03:51 |
|
|
The thing about gaming right now is that unless you want a "realistic experience", a lot of genres are now locked out for you.  edit: well, except for the odd indie lark or F2P Namco title
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2014 13:35
|
|