Video (Gamer) Romeo (Not)
Jun. 8th, 2004 01:53 amWhy do they not make video games for the demographic that includes me?
Probably because there are only six people in it. :(
Blizzard still hasn't released a patch for the weird error between Warcraft III and OS X. Apparently it only happens on some machines, but ours is definitely one of them. Periodically, the screen freezes, although the sound continues. It doesn't do it in the same place each time, either (originally, I thought it did it right before cut scenes, and it does seem more likely to do it then, but it's happened in other places, too). This is making me grumpy.
So, since I couldn't play Warcraft III, I've been trying to finish StarCraft. This is an exercise in frustration as much as fun, though. I like (and am good at) resource management and general strategy, but I suck at real-time combat and single-unit tactics. And the last Zerg level is really nothing but combat. *sigh*
At least there's a backstory. The vast majority of the games out there seems to be variations on Random First-Person Shooter XIV, with little to no worldbuilding or backstory. I wouldn't mind trying to run a roleplaying game in the StarCraft universe. The only shooter I can think of for which I'd even consider the idea is Halo, and, well, that's Bungie.
I really enjoyed Master of Orion II. I want more games like that. Unfortunately, it appears that Masters of Orion III isn't. I wouldn't mind having another shot at StarCon II, but that was never released for Mac, and I'd need a college student to play through the combat for me for the first third of the game, until my tech level gets high enough for me to manage combat without getting myself killed.)
*sigh* I find that I'm playing through individual levels of Majesty without getting much out of them. (It's a swords-and-sorcery sim game, for those who have never heard of it.) That has the resource management, but not the strategy. If I could cross Majesty and Warcraft II, I'd have something pretty close to my perfect game. But no one's going to write that.
Back to working on my GURPS stuff . . .
Probably because there are only six people in it. :(
Blizzard still hasn't released a patch for the weird error between Warcraft III and OS X. Apparently it only happens on some machines, but ours is definitely one of them. Periodically, the screen freezes, although the sound continues. It doesn't do it in the same place each time, either (originally, I thought it did it right before cut scenes, and it does seem more likely to do it then, but it's happened in other places, too). This is making me grumpy.
So, since I couldn't play Warcraft III, I've been trying to finish StarCraft. This is an exercise in frustration as much as fun, though. I like (and am good at) resource management and general strategy, but I suck at real-time combat and single-unit tactics. And the last Zerg level is really nothing but combat. *sigh*
At least there's a backstory. The vast majority of the games out there seems to be variations on Random First-Person Shooter XIV, with little to no worldbuilding or backstory. I wouldn't mind trying to run a roleplaying game in the StarCraft universe. The only shooter I can think of for which I'd even consider the idea is Halo, and, well, that's Bungie.
I really enjoyed Master of Orion II. I want more games like that. Unfortunately, it appears that Masters of Orion III isn't. I wouldn't mind having another shot at StarCon II, but that was never released for Mac, and I'd need a college student to play through the combat for me for the first third of the game, until my tech level gets high enough for me to manage combat without getting myself killed.)
*sigh* I find that I'm playing through individual levels of Majesty without getting much out of them. (It's a swords-and-sorcery sim game, for those who have never heard of it.) That has the resource management, but not the strategy. If I could cross Majesty and Warcraft II, I'd have something pretty close to my perfect game. But no one's going to write that.
Back to working on my GURPS stuff . . .
no subject
Date: 2004-06-08 03:39 am (UTC)Very very very bad.
Majesty was all right, not bad at all.
Let me guess--you are looking for a strategy game that isn't all about combat, perhaps with a story, yes?
no subject
Date: 2004-06-08 04:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-08 04:00 am (UTC)I suggest downloading a console emulator(SNES9x, say) and trying out some old(er) school gaming. I still think you would like console RPGs, but if that doesn't work there's plenty of other stuff out there.
no subject
Date: 2004-06-08 04:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-08 05:08 pm (UTC)eBay is your friend for PS1 games. You can get most of them for about $10. If you want something right this second, Best Buy has cheap games too. The only limiting factor is how much time you're willing to put in, and that will steadily increase as time goes on.
This is only a list of the best games; there are a lot more out there that are worth playing.
RPGs:
Final Fantasy IX makes a good starter RPG.
Final Fantasy VII is generally considered to be the best RPG on the PlayStation.
Xenogears is what I consider to be the best RPG on the PlayStation. :)
Parasite Eve is something of a quasi-action RPG thingy. It's pretty good.
There aren't many strategy games(the aforementioned RPGS probably come closest), but the one that stands out is Final Fantasy Tactics, a turn based strategy game with a plot to go with it.
There's an interesting little genre called Survival Horror. It's not everyone's thing, but if you see a copy of Resident Evil 2 lying around you might give it a try. They're sort of like third person action games with puzzle solving, except the emphasis is more on running(survival) than fighting. Not a lot of reflexes are required. A scarier version is Silent Hill. Survival Horror really came of age on the PS2, but that doesn't concern us right now.
The one side scrolling action game you absolutely must play is Castlevania: Symphony of the Night.
I don't know much about other genres besides those. I've always mostly bought RPGs, because they have the best money/game ratio.
Hope that helps!
no subject
Date: 2004-06-09 01:16 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2004-06-09 11:30 am (UTC)I generally enjoy survival horror games, although often they are just too hard for me. Not being a console gamer, I frequently find I have to get someone else to do a lot of the fighting for me as games are made for people who have played these games for years. Of course, survival horror as a genre did not start on the PS1; it started with Alone in the Dark (still a great game). That said, Silent Hill is worth checking out, although I found combat too hard for me... Pretty much the same for Castlevania: Symphony of the Night . If you had a Gamecube, I'd recommend Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem . Great game!
Of course, I am not sure we like the same things in computer games at all, so YMMV with all of this.
no subject
Date: 2004-06-09 11:40 am (UTC)Survival horror is generally too hard for me, too, so I usually turn to walkthroughs for help. www.gamefaqs.com is our friend, although I'm depressingly weak-willed when it comes to resisting the urge to run for help. I figured the puzzle solving aspect of survival horror might do something for
Gamer geekage....
Date: 2004-06-08 06:05 am (UTC)FPS games with actual plot and immersion are few, but Half-life is generally considered the benchmark for a FPS that actually has a story arc to follow.
Played MOO III for a about a month. Some interesting and even good ideas... but poor and spotty implementation. I in theory liked the idea of Macro instead of micro managing. MOOII late games could bog down to a crawl with telling each and every planet what to do this turn. But MOO III kinda set your decisions at a more abstract high level, and then wasn't very transparent about how the planet AIs were trying to carry out your general orders. Also some bad and annoying bugs to start out with like PD weapons not firing and AI buidling *way* too many troop transports.
Have you looked at any of the more recent turn based fantasy stratagey games? I will confess to being ignorant if Mac versions exist, so feel free to flamethrower me if I'm recommending games that you can't play anyways. But can recommend the Age of Wonders II and Disciples II games. Age of Wonder actually play very much like the old classic master of magic. Disciples II is sorta half RPGish in that your unit stacks are a hero with a very small number (max of 5) of other units and the hero and other units all upgrade and gain levels. Disciples II also has great art in my opinion. I will confess to not playing turn based games as much as I used to cause of the slower pace of play and less time on my hands.
Re: Gamer geekage....
Date: 2004-06-08 07:18 am (UTC)Re: Gamer geekage....
Date: 2004-06-09 01:32 am (UTC)Re: Gamer geekage....
Date: 2004-06-09 03:53 am (UTC)Re: Gamer geekage....
Date: 2004-06-09 01:30 am (UTC)I haven't finished the original StarCraft, and I was under the impression that there wasn't any point to playing Brood Wars until I'd finished the original game . . . or that, at the very least, it would spoiler the end of the original game. If that's not true, I'll see if I can order it.
Re: Gamer geekage....
Date: 2004-06-09 11:32 am (UTC)I still like nethack
Date: 2004-06-08 07:47 am (UTC)for rpg with resource planning, I'm surprisingly found of the browser based, online, multiple player Faith by Dragon Claw Studios. I'm bored with the games of clicking, and I don't like FPS at all
are there Mac versions of Civilization or Pharoah?
no subject
Date: 2004-06-09 01:36 am (UTC)