The General Videogame Thread

+
You might be more masochistic than me :p

Maybe... but there is something definitely fun with knowing your men can die at any turn unexpectedly. The new X-Com has that feeling, but it loses it eventually when your soldiers start getting a bit OP nearing the end.
If Xenonauts is like the original X-Com (as I understand it is), then that feeling never really goes away. Sure, as you get better equipment their chances improve a lot, but they continue to be fragile, and precious.

But the difference between the new and the old X-Com is the feeling of the scale of the invasion.
As in the old X-Com (as it is in Xenonauts) you have limited radar coverage, limited aircraft range due to the need of refueling, etc, you KNOW that there are things beyond your reach happening constantly. And that generates a sense of urgency that the new one lacks completely.

Don´t get me wrong, I really liked the new X-Com. But the old one was a totally different experience altogether, as Xenonauts seems to be as well. I´ll get it eventually, no doubt about it.
 
There's a lot there then!? OK, ordering now!

Yep, it has everything. One of the few bad things to say about it, is that the AI is not fantastic. In peace talks they will sometimes make the most ridiculous demands.

I really hope you get Catherine and 1/10 chance Ghandi your first game.
 
@Csàszàr @Dragonbird

Thanks you two. I've already got it installed and I'm going to try the tutorial just to get familiar with the game, before I do anything else. I take it that your leader and country are chosen at random in a single player game?
 
Each country has a set leader, I.E. Catherine the Great: Russia, Bismarck: Germany, England: Elizabeth I, etc..Each has a special ability and building/unit. Such as Rome: All Roads lead to Rome. Your legions can build roads and maintenance for roads are half cost. IIRC

You can choose which country you want or random. You can also do the same for opponents.

Another thing I won't go too much into detail about is every leader(country) has certain values. How likely they are to betray, warmongering, etc.. Some of them are really funny and it'll sometimes change depending on their chance in said value. For example Bismarck's likeness to betray is 9/10 I think.

@Dragonbird: They come to me of peace talks. Some demanding multiple cities even if you're whipping that ass. You should know this though. :p
 
 
Holy Feck! Civilization V has one complicated UI! I'm honesty confused, and the Tutorials aren't exactly the best I've seen (They're atrocious in fact). What if you don't want to recruit or build anything in your cites? It looks like you can't move to the next turn unless you do! :question:
 
Holy Feck! Civilization V has one complicated UI! I'm honesty confused, and the Tutorials aren't exactly the best I've seen (They're atrocious in fact). What if you don't want to recruit or build anything in your cites? It looks like you can't move to the next turn unless you do! :question:
It's best to always be building something no matter what. Later on you can have cities gear their production towards science and extra cash.
 
If you're stuck with working out what to do at the beginning, go with the four-city strategy:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=468487
It's a good general-purpose opener for most games, especially with the Gods & Kings version, until you start to get the feel of how it all works.

I'd also recommend that for your first playthrough, you go for domination or, if you don't want the violent approach, go for science. They're both more tolerant of planning mistakes in the early game when you're not sure what you're doing.
 
Last edited:
Ah old PC Zone, it were a good mag that usually steered you right and cut the bullshit. Started going downhill towards the end though, Rhianna Pratchett's review of NWN was a big fucking lie, and it was a lot less funny without Charlie Brooker, who raised some good points.

Edit: I remember one of the editors of the mag tried to introduce realistic scores to games i.e. an average game being a five, but was forced to stop because of publisher pressure. He soon lost editor job and all, it was a pity because he was a damn good reviewer, think he did their Div Div review when it first came out.
 
Last edited:
So, Lindsay Lohan is apparently offended because Rockstar included a character similar to her in GTA V. Hasn´t by now basically everybody made fun of her somehow?

http://www.gamespot.com/articles/li...ed-her-image-without-permission/1100-6420878/

Remember reading about that months ago. IIRC it was because of the bikini blonde doing a selfie in a loading screen, originally.

Also, "Lohan like character"? Might as well call it a Hilton like character or better yet, a Hollywood gutter skank like character.
 
Top Bottom