New Rpg To Play

[Verran]

I went through Bioshock rather quickly. i couldn't stop playing..it was like crack. Same thing with Crysis. Assassins creed is a really good game but its not holding my attention like Bioshock The witcher or Crysis did. I have a feeling Mass Effect will keep me engrossed for a while.

I tore through BioShock like crazy! That was even after I slowed way down on my gaming, but I just couldn't put it down. Fantastic game.

[InCrYsIs]

I tore through BioShock like crazy! That was even after I slowed way down on my gaming, but I just couldn't put it down. Fantastic game.

 

 

COD4 was too short. I finished that in 2 days. Multiplayer got annoying after a while but that is a good game too. As far as FPS goes I'm on the countdown for Far Cry 2 and left 4 dead.

[jack_of_java]

I just started playing Hellgate: London. So far I'm loving it!

[ClayMeow]

I just started playing Hellgate: London. So far I'm loving it!

I play that too. lol. Will get back into it when they release Abyss Chronicles.

[Verran]

HGL was cool for a while but just turned into such a grind. It sort of just felt like an MMO with a severely limited social aspect. The graphics are cool and the gameplay is nice because it's somewhere in between the stop-and-go of an MMO and the ultra-twitch of an FPS, but the storyline didn't hold my attention and ultimately I just got kinda bored of it. Now it just feels like a long series of errands that I'm not really interested in running.

[ClayMeow]

HGL was cool for a while but just turned into such a grind. It sort of just felt like an MMO with a severely limited social aspect. The graphics are cool and the gameplay is nice because it's somewhere in between the stop-and-go of an MMO and the ultra-twitch of an FPS, but the storyline didn't hold my attention and ultimately I just got kinda bored of it. Now it just feels like a long series of errands that I'm not really interested in running.

The problem is it has the storyline of an Action-RPG, but the grind of an MMO. So you get "done" with the story well before your character is complete, and then it just feels a bit repetitive. That's kinda why I've took a break until Abyss is released.

[InCrYsIs]

I overlooked Hellgate. The reviews weren't that good. I take Gamespot, IGN and PC Gamer as sources. They all pretty much had the same thing to say. Out of 10 what would someone rate Hellgate? Maybe I'll try it out if its a bargain price.

Edited May 29, 2008 by InCrYsIs

[ClayMeow]

I overlooked Hellgate. The reviews weren't that good. I take Gamespot, IGN and PC Gamer as sources. They all pretty much had the same thing to say. Out of 10 what would someone rate Hellgate?

PC Gamer gave it an 89/100 ... and that was before they fixed a lot of annoyances and added new features like shared stash. Other reviewers, you really have to read the reviews and not just look at the scores because a lot of them knocked HGL for their subscription program, which is completely optional. One review I read (I think it was PC Gamer UK) was so obviously written by a WoW fanboy and Diablo2 hater, that it shouldn't even be considered in anyone's research on the game.

 

Anywho...I've put almost 170 hours into HGL, so I've obviously enjoyed it. Also, I'm a "Founder", meaning I paid for a lifetime subscription, which I wouldn't have done if I didn't see longterm potential.

 

I'd say the game is definitely worth the initial box cost of $50. I definitely wouldn't pay for a subscription until you're done with the main story and get a better feel of whether you'd like to play the subscriber-only areas (Stonehenge and soon-to-be Abyss).

[InCrYsIs]

PC Gamer gave it an 89/100 ... and that was before they fixed a lot of annoyances and added new features like shared stash. Other reviewers, you really have to read the reviews and not just look at the scores because a lot of them knocked HGL for their subscription program, which is completely optional. One review I read (I think it was PC Gamer UK) was so obviously written by a WoW fanboy and Diablo2 hater, that it shouldn't even be considered in anyone's research on the game.

 

Anywho...I've put almost 170 hours into HGL, so I've obviously enjoyed it. Also, I'm a "Founder", meaning I paid for a lifetime subscription, which I wouldn't have done if I didn't see longterm potential.

 

I'd say the game is definitely worth the initial box cost of $50. I definitely wouldn't pay for a subscription until you're done with the main story and get a better feel of whether you'd like to play the subscriber-only areas (Stonehenge and soon-to-be Abyss).

 

So as a single player game it can hold up? Most say play online or don't play.

[ClayMeow]

So as a single player game it can hold up? Most say play online or don't play.

And I 100% agree with those people. You can play online for free (it's like Diablo2). Subscribing is simply for added benefits and definitely not necessary to enjoy the game.

[InCrYsIs]

And I 100% agree with those people. You can play online for free (it's like Diablo2). Subscribing is simply for added benefits and definitely not necessary to enjoy the game.

 

What does the single player lack that makes it better online? Is it a bad single player game all together?

[ClayMeow]

What does the single player lack that makes it better online? Is it a bad single player game all together?

No no no. Most of my playtime in HGL has been solo. I recommend playing online because you can make it as much SP or MP as you want. You can play online solo so it's the exact same experience as SP, but then you always have the option of trading/auctioning items, or grouping later on. If you play SP, then you can't bring that character to MP, so you'd have to create a new one.