Recent content by Drunken Jedi

Obviously the objective of playing a game is to have fun. Personally, I have a lot more fun when I'm playing a game to the best of my ability, so I'm (almost) always playing to win. I just want to pick up on your example of rushing in rts games. Basically in an rts game there are short term...

The obvious answer is that at the beginning of time, God personally sprinkled some magic dust on every single subatomic particle.

My vote would have to go to Warcraft 3.

The thing with traditional rts games is that they revolve very much about the multiplayer. Since skill differences have a dramatic effect in these games, it's a lot about competition and players tend to play the game they've gotten good at for a long time. The result of this is that the hardcore...

It's usually a horrible idea to make RTS games realistic. Squad-based combat (meaning that there are several units that can only be controlled as a group and not individually) is the best example of this: it doesn't add any depth to the game and severely reduces the potential for micromanagement...

Company of Heroes. I really, really hate that game. It takes EVERYTHING that is interesting, challenging and fun about RTS games and throws it right out of the window. What's left is a strategy game that is about as interesting as tic-tac-toe, but with shiny graphics. And what pisses me...

I realise that many expansions just offer a few new missions and a new unit or two, but Blizzard has other standards. Just take a look at Beyond the Dark Portal, Broodwar and Frozen Throne. Each of those expansions has a single player campaign that's about as long as the one of the main game...

I really don't get what the big deal about the "3 games" is. All Blizzard is doing is announcing that they're gonna release 2 expansion packs, each with a full single-player campaign and some (yet undetermined) enhancements for the multiplayer. And if Blizzard were only interested in making...

It would be a horrible idea to get rid of all languages but one, simply because every language mirrors a particular way of thinking, and if you streamline all people into speaking one language, you are also streamlining all people to think in a similar way, which is obviously bad. And losing...

You should check out the first two Gothic games. As far as graphics go, they are of course outdated, but they are still among the best RPGs out there and should be available quite cheaply.

Just for clarification: All Blizzard is doing is basically announcing two expansion packs. Apart from that, they're only arranging the campaigns a bit differently than they did in sc1. I really don't get what all the big fuss is about. Also, if you want to keep playing the multiplayer, you...

Gothic. The first two games were completely awesome and some of the best RPGs ever created. So for the third installment, the developers somehow decided to take everything that's good about Gothic and chuck it out, like for example quests that are actually interesting or a story for which...

So you're saying it's bad that you can't sort through your inventory and drink a few potions in mid combat? Yes, the inability to hit more than one opponent with melee weapons is definitely an issue, but the game adjusts to this by having a damage calculation system that makes group of weaker...

About the controls: Yes, they're pretty unintuitive, but once you get the hang of them, they're really good, particularly in G2. About difficulty: G1 is quite challenging when you play it for the first time since it's unlike most other RPGs. In most RPGs, the monsters are arranged according...