|
hm, boring sale, only bought serious sam. But i laughed at rage being down 50%.
I only liked the start of the Witcher, the end was just too crazy and overboard for me, i dont think you really need it. But then again i found Mask of the Betrayer to be annoying too, so you may want a 2nd opinion.
|
I was mainly wondering if I needed to see the story of the first one to understand the second one, since the first one is only $2.50 US anyway. If you don't really need it then I think I'd skip it, since both games are pretty long and I got other games to finish.
|
Hm, I'm thinking about getting Civ V, but then again I just today was in it's thread here on TL and read that the multiplayer is very unstable, so dunno...
|
well i quickly bought limbo now :D braid is also on 50%, for braid i can vouch myself, get that if you are into thinking and don't mind reading a bit. limbo i'll see, but critics suggest it's pretty good, so you might want to get that too.
|
On November 27 2011 03:13 chocopaw wrote: Hm, I'm thinking about getting Civ V, but then again I just today was in it's thread here on TL and read that the multiplayer is very unstable, so dunno... I think it's not as good as 4 in some ways but definitely kept me playing for around 50-60 hours of tooling around on singleplayer alone so I think it's well worth it.
|
On November 27 2011 03:13 chocopaw wrote: Hm, I'm thinking about getting Civ V, but then again I just today was in it's thread here on TL and read that the multiplayer is very unstable, so dunno...
I am around 110 hours on that, it's definitely the game that I have played the most in my Steam library. Pick it up, especially at that price it's a bargain, it's a really addictive and fun game, I guarantee you won't be disappointed if you like turn-based strategy games where you plan everything and the game unfolds slowly and slowly each turn.
Graphics are great aswell, they are very nice to look at on the highest details, especially the leader introductions.
|
Also as a heads-up, for US people at least, the Witcher 2 digital version is on sale for 16 dollars on amazon as opposed to 24, so you save 8 more dollars if you buy from there.
|
Oh don't worry, I already played lots of Civ V, lol. I would just buy it to play multiplayer.
|
Going to plug my favorite game in a third thread too, fuck yeah.
EU3: Chronicles is only $11 on Steam down from $30.
|
I've heard a few good things about Rage, cant anyone recommend it? I like games like Borderlands but dislike fallout and such. So is it slow like fallout or fast like Borderlands?
I always end up buying the wrong kinds of games because of how good their reviews are. Skyrim, Fallout, Civ 6 and so on. I get so carried away with sales and just end up buying 5 games that i will never play 
Also, i'll probably get every game at less than $5, just too cheap to say no to.
|
On November 27 2011 03:35 Deadlyfish wrote: I've heard a few good things about Rage, cant anyone reccomend it? I like games like Borderlands but dislike fallout and such. Is it slow like fallout or fast like Borderlands?
Also, i'll probably get every game at less than $5, just too cheap to say no to.
Well, it's clearly a console port. You can't turn off V-sync and almost any graphics settings. It has the most anti-climactic ending ever of all times, as well. However, if you can get it less than $15 I suppose it's worth it if you really like the Borderlands formula. I would wait for Christmas, though, since it's guaranteed to be much less than it is now then.
|
On November 27 2011 03:02 DystopiaX wrote: So if I get the Witcher 2 now that it's on sale, would you guys recommend I pick up the first one as well and finish that first/is it necessary to understand and enjoy the second one?
All other sales are pretty meh for me; I'd recommend Deus Ex but I have it already.
I thought about that in summer too and went with playing the Witcher first. Can't say I was disappointed, it is a very cool RPG, feels much more lengthy and full of content to me than Witcher 2 tbh (Witcher 2 was an awesome game, but they trimmed many of the first game's features). Witcher 2 is a much more faster paced RPG, not just necessarily the combat but the way the game flows. Travelling, reading books, drinking, alchemy etc were much more different in Witcher. The zones were much bigger in Witcher, the swamp in Act 2 made me cry with the travelling around, so can't say I miss that. And honestly when I look back, I think the second game fixed those issues for me.
In short, if you aren't too annoyed by how the game handles certain features compared to the Witcher 2, I say go pick it up, because the story and dialogue-writing is very good at that game.
|
On November 27 2011 03:36 Bleak wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2011 03:02 DystopiaX wrote: So if I get the Witcher 2 now that it's on sale, would you guys recommend I pick up the first one as well and finish that first/is it necessary to understand and enjoy the second one?
All other sales are pretty meh for me; I'd recommend Deus Ex but I have it already. I thought about that in summer too and went with playing the Witcher first. Can't say I was disappointed, it is a very cool RPG, feels much more lengthy and full of content to me than Witcher 2 tbh (Witcher 2 was an awesome game, but they trimmed many of the first game's features). Witcher 2 is a much more faster paced RPG, not just necessarily the combat but the way the game flows. Travelling, reading books, drinking, alchemy etc were much more different in Witcher. The zones were much bigger in Witcher, the swamp in Act 2 made me cry with the travelling around, so can't say I miss that. And honestly when I look back, I think the second game fixed those issues for me. In short, if you aren't too annoyed by how the game handles certain features compared to the Witcher 2, I say go pick it up, because the story and dialogue-writing is very good at that game. I guess I should rephrase my question- is it essential that I play the witcher 1 to understand what happens in 2, or can I just pick 2 up and play it without any knowledge of the story in the first one, the universe, etc.?
|
United States47024 Posts
On November 27 2011 03:40 DystopiaX wrote: I guess I should rephrase my question- is it essential that I play the witcher 1 to understand what happens in 2, or can I just pick 2 up and play it without any knowledge of the story in the first one, the universe, etc.? You could play Witcher 2 without having played the first game, but its questionable whether you'd want to, since, depending on what things you're judging by, Witcher 1 is an equally good or possibly even better game, and is much cheaper.
|
It's not essential but you'd be more familiar with the overall world and characters. Story wise it's really not dependent on the first. Witcher 1 has TONS of faults, but it's one of my favorite games of all time. I'd recommend it only if you really like RPGs though cause it could definitely test your patience a lot. Witcher 2 is alot more snappy and shiny - a bit too much compared to the original IMO, but still very good.
|
On November 27 2011 03:35 Deadlyfish wrote:I've heard a few good things about Rage, cant anyone recommend it? I like games like Borderlands but dislike fallout and such. So is it slow like fallout or fast like Borderlands? I always end up buying the wrong kinds of games because of how good their reviews are. Skyrim, Fallout, Civ 6 and so on. I get so carried away with sales and just end up buying 5 games that i will never play  Also, i'll probably get every game at less than $5, just too cheap to say no to.
the combat is fairly fast, the movement not so much i'd say. There is a lot of car racing involved, which you might not expect from a rpg/shooter. Check out the first view videos in this let's play series, gives you a good impression i think: http://www.youtube.com/user/OMFGcata#grid/user/250845BC24F9807B
|
On November 27 2011 03:40 DystopiaX wrote:Show nested quote +On November 27 2011 03:36 Bleak wrote:On November 27 2011 03:02 DystopiaX wrote: So if I get the Witcher 2 now that it's on sale, would you guys recommend I pick up the first one as well and finish that first/is it necessary to understand and enjoy the second one?
All other sales are pretty meh for me; I'd recommend Deus Ex but I have it already. I thought about that in summer too and went with playing the Witcher first. Can't say I was disappointed, it is a very cool RPG, feels much more lengthy and full of content to me than Witcher 2 tbh (Witcher 2 was an awesome game, but they trimmed many of the first game's features). Witcher 2 is a much more faster paced RPG, not just necessarily the combat but the way the game flows. Travelling, reading books, drinking, alchemy etc were much more different in Witcher. The zones were much bigger in Witcher, the swamp in Act 2 made me cry with the travelling around, so can't say I miss that. And honestly when I look back, I think the second game fixed those issues for me. In short, if you aren't too annoyed by how the game handles certain features compared to the Witcher 2, I say go pick it up, because the story and dialogue-writing is very good at that game. I guess I should rephrase my question- is it essential that I play the witcher 1 to understand what happens in 2, or can I just pick 2 up and play it without any knowledge of the story in the first one, the universe, etc.?
No, it is not essential to play Witcher 1 first, though it adds a lot to the immersion and atmosphere, as you already know how it feels to be a witcher. You will also be able to occasionally notice the subtle references to the first game, but no, you don't have to play the first game to enjoy Witcher 2. I still recommend it though.
|
bought Limbo, its been pretty cool, very unique game. Ive enjoyed the difficulty and gameplay so far, however it seems ive played through about 30% of the game in only 30 minutes :-(
|
what's the difference between "buy Civilization V -> $10.19" and "Buy Sid Meyer's Civilization V: Game of the Year -> $16" ??
edit - nevermind i'm stupid, it's an edition with more content
|
Both the Witcher I and II are amazing, get them.
|
|
|
|