On this page I'll try to write a few reviews of games that I've tested on my "new" computer. I'll judge all games by the same scale. That scale goes as followed:
Untested - I haven't taken the time to test the game yet... (my bad)
TestFail - I haven't been able to really test this game. Either it will not install (correctly) on my computer or it just wont run properly enough to do any worthwile testing. (Or maybe I just dislike this game too much to even give it a bad grade.)
Subpar - No, this game doesn't cut it. It's a near complete waste of time to install and or try to learn. Much more things being an issue with this game and I'd be tempted to rate it as TestFail. I recommend that you spend your money elsewhere.
Acceptable - The quality of this game is acceptable. It's lacking a little something to make it good. Either the graphics of the game is too blurry, the game has too many bugs, while being good looking and stable you will have to guess how to use the controlls in any given situation or a combination of several things that keeps it from being good. If it is really the kind of game that you like you might want to buy this, just to have the collection complete.
Good - It's in my opinion a good game. Stable engine, good graphics and nice/belivable plot. A thumb up. However, show restraint in spending your money on this game (unless you've got an unexpected $20 windfall).
Excellent - There are at most a few minor issues that I have with this game. That is details that I don't completely agree with for some reason. I'll probably have this game installed for months after completed the testing. A clearly recomended buy.
Here's a list of all games tested and about to be tested
Testresult: Good - View: Map - Focus: Action - players: single
Oki … So, this is the "Descriptive Example", not a game but a post to explain how I've written what.
First we have "Testresult: Good". This tells you that this "game" got awarded an "example" result in my testing.
Then comes "View: Map" meaning this game is played on a map. The alternatives are "1st" (first person view) and "3rd" (third person view) and "Map".
What follows is "Focus: Action" meaning that the purpose of the game is to tell an action-filled story (or just mindless action). Alternatives here are "Action", "FPS" (First Person Shooter/Sneaker), "RPG" (RolePlaying), "RTS" (Real Time Strategy), "Strategy" (turnbased strategy) and "Sim" (short for Simulation).
Lastly comes "Players: Single", which tells you how many who can play this game, from "Single" (one player only), "Multi" (allows you to play against other humans) and "MMORPG" (Massive Multiplayer Online RolePlaying Game).
For a more expansive explanation of each view, focus and players word used I've a small glossary at the bottom of this page.
Oh, and just because I've tested the game doesn't mean I own it. Just so you know.
Testresult: Acceptable - View: Map -Focus: Strategy - players: single
Ascendancy, the game of stellar conquest. Written in the far ancient time when the internet still wasn't found in every home of the western world, and DOS was the way to run programs. This is a DOS-game, and a good one at that, though playing it on a XP machine with a PCI-express 3d-graphics card makes it do weird things with the graphics. Could it be that the hardware I got is too advanced for the software? Another (slight) issue I have with the game is the tech-tree. Some of the items on it are just … weirdly placed. It's for instance easier to get the ship-cannon that have the second longest reach in the game, than to be able to build a weapon that kan fire several times a day/turn. And if you want to discover the tech needed to build Internets (one for each world), well... then you're probably in the process of automating everything in the world.
But, what is one to expect from a 70meg game written over 10 years ago?
Testresult: Good - View: Map -Focus: RPG - players: single/multi
This game have become somewhat of a classic in some circles, and I think I can see why. I have just one minor problem with it. The beginning. It's not the plot in and by itself, it's just the fact that I've stared playing it so many times that until you've rescued the friend of Minsc, there's practicly nothing I haven't done half a dozen times. I know, I know, it's after that the fun begins … but could you please run through the tedious, high-risk-to-die-because-of-one-hit, can-only-afford-crap-item-still section first for me?
Sorry … didn't mean to bitch at you. Baldurs Gate is very much like the roleplaying game it is based on (AD&D). You start at lvl 1, you got no gear worth mentioning, and just about any mob you meet might kill you with a single hit.
The one time I made the best progress I began with a Human Warrior (up to lvl 3) and then made him a Mage. That worked rather well, since he had the HP to take a few hits, could wield a weapon worth using, and were able to blast a bunch of mobs at a distance.
Testresult: Good - View: 1st -Focus: Action - players: single/multi
In this game you are an U.N.A.T.C.O-agent (United Nations AntiTerrorist COalition) given the codename J.C. Denton. It is your duty to obey the orders of your supperiors. The first order of the day is to stop the NSF-terrorists that overtook the island where UNATCO have their headquarder.
As the game progresses you'll earn experience points that you can spend on skills, such as pistols, heavy weapons, electronics and enviromental training. Different skills cost different amount of XP to increase in level (you start at lvl 1 in all, and can achive lvl 4). You will probably (you've got to go out of your way not to) find weaponupgrades of various kinds, such as accuracy, clip-size, and scopes (to mention three). You will also be able to pick up and install "bio-mods" … nanobot thingies that lets you improve your body in various ways, from mundane (higher strength) through advanced (ir-vision) to exotic (invisibility).
The best thing with this game (what makes it good) is that you can employ several different aproaches, depending on your favorite playing style. You could go for armour, rifles, heavy weapons and explosives as solution to everything, or you could spend your skillpoints/XP on stealthy techniques (such as computers, electronics and lockpicking). There is a bit of "roleplaying" (ie, multiple choices in conversations and or option to kill people) in the game, but not enough for me to lable it as a roleplaying game.
When I play I tend to spend my skillpoints to get Lockpicking, Electronics to level two, Computers to lvl three and one weapon-type (generally pistols, sometimes rifles) all the way to lvl 4. As for BioMods I tend to go for speed, stealth and recovery (in said order). This allows for a stealthy approach and still the ability take care of the random guard that's in the way to your target/extractionpoint.
Testresult: Acceptable - View: 1st -Focus: Action - players: single
Deus Ex 2, Invisible War, is a good looking game coming on a DVD. The controls are nice and easy. In many ways a good sequel to Deus Ex. A slight downside is that it seems that regardless of how much you stick to the objectives of one faction, you can do almost "everything" in the game, even if it seems contradictionary.
For example: Fairly early in the game you can get the order to kill Mr X, but dont. Go talk with him instead. He'll give you an assignment to kill some other guy (Mr Y), so sneak in and talk with Mr Y. He will -also- give you a task … one easily done. After collecting your reward, buy what stuff you think you'll find use for, and -then- kill him. Then get back to Mr X and collect your reward, followed by his head. Now go and collect that reward.
See? you've just managed to fullfill several "contradictionary" goal. However, every choice you do -does- infact have (at least some) impact. The reward for completing the objective of one group might not be handed to you right away.
All in all, I would label this as a acceptable game, despite easy controlls, good graphics and stable engine that ought to rate it higher. The reasons being: 1, Liniar Story. Even though you have great freedom to do what you want at each location you will visit them all, in a set order. 2, Too Much Loot. When I was starting the final area of the game I owned over 8000 credits, carried at least two weaponmods of each kind (there's eight) with all my six mod-able weapons modded to the max (two each), 12 biomod canisters and 7 blackmarket biomod canisters, while having level 3 biomods in all slots … and that while playing at the highest difficulty. Not to mention the fact that I left more than twice as much ammo behind as I carried with me.
Testresult: Acceptable - View: 3rd -Focus: Action - players: single/multi
Dungeon Siege is a nice game. It's sold as a rpg, and while that is not totally incorrect, I'm still listing it as Action. In the single-player game you start at point A, venture to location B and C (in said order) to reach place D. The "roleplaying" is limited to how you vanquish your foes, and thus what skills you increase. The four skills in the game are: Melee, Ranged, Combat(magic) and Nature(magic). Dealing damage increases the skill by which the damage was dealt, and that in turn increases your attributes (Strength, Dexterity and Intelligence) and subsequently HitPoints and Mana.
What was a bit innovative is the enviroment-handling/-loading. The effect is that there's no load-screen once you've got your guy to run around with, unless you decide to load a previously saved game. They achive this by dividing the enviroment into tiles (not that innovative) that carries information not only what's on them, but the ID of the surrounding tiles, and a "visibility sphere", which limits how far you/your char can see, and a somewhat larger "loading" sphere, which constantly keeps track of all enviroment-tiles you can see, and what tiles are a little bit further out (and what's on them) and loads what information the game needs in the background. That allows for smooth transition from a castle cellar to the plains outside the castle and through a forest into a natural cave.
It could be argued that the elevator-platforms and such acts as loading scenes … but you can spend that time reorganice the equipment on your party, and they will heal and replenish their mana.
The reason I don't rate it higher than Acceptable is that the game becomes rather repetitious after a while (even before the halfway-point in the singleplayer game).
Testresult: coming soon - View: map -Focus: rpg - players: single
Testresult: Good - View: 3rd/Map -Focus: RTS/RPG - players: single/multi
Spellforce. A game that originally had the undertitle "The Order of Dawn", and which the expansions were named "The Breath of Winter" and "Shadow of the Phoenix". What I've been testing is the "Platinum Edition", which is a DVD with both expansions meshed in from start. The makers of this game have attempted to create a game that blends RPG and RTS, and they've done it quite well, though it is by far more of a RTS game than a roleplaying one.
In the game you controll one Avatar (that's "you" in the game), up to five Heroes (runeservants, like yourself, that you get to pick your choice from) and up to 80 "Troops" composed of either the light (humans, elves & dwarves) or dark (orcs, trolls & darkelves) races. You will not always have access to both Heroes and Troops, though it's more common to have access to the Heroes if you have Troops than the other way around.
You get to pick yourself what kind of Avatar you want to play, though you are limited to human ones. The categories of skills you get to choose from are Heavy Combat, Light Combat, Ranged Combat, Black Magic, Elemental Magic, Mind Magic and White Magic. You can mix and match later in the game too, which gives you lots of choices. I've found that depending on what type of Avatar you have optimum style will vary. If you have an avatar with a high melee ability, you should put your Avatar at the front to bring down enemies. If you have high ranged abilities let your Avatar hang back and assist from affar. If you have managed to become a jack-of-all-trades you'll be a master of none, and should thus let your Avatar hang back while your Heroes and/or Troops do all the work.
My favourite kinds of Avatars are the Elemental(Ice)-White(Life) mage and a LightCombat(Armour&Blades)-Black(Necro) combo, though I have plans to see how a LightCombat(Armour&Piercing)-White(Life) Avatar would do.
Testresult: Acceptable - View: 1st -Focus: Sim - players: single
This is a space-fighter sim. Plain, simple, stable, goodlooking and predictable. Still, it's an ok game.
I think there were ment to be some kind of role playing element in it … but it didn't go further than "here's two quarreling factions: choose side".
What more to say? Well, what do you want me to say about this game? That it's more a matter of skill than equipment if you make it through a fight? Compare the two sides that only have slight difference in ship-preformance and available equipment?
This I would say, is the kind of game you play when you've got an urge to play something, but don't want to grow bored of your regular games.
Oh yea … once upon a time, in a fair count … um, once upon a time there were rl-servers you could have the game hook up to, and allow you to play online against other humans. I can't seem to connect to them.
Testresult: Acceptable - View: 1st/3rd -Focus: RPG - players: single
I would love to have rated Morrowind higher, but I honestly can not.
The graphics is very good, the game stable, intuitive controlls (at least once you switch jump (originally on E-key) and inventory/stat-menue (originally right mousebutton)) and a good storyline. The reason I do not rate it higher than Acceptable is the difficulty of making a balanced character, and the tediousness of getting to the midgame.
There are three categories of skills, with nine skills within each. You select five as "Major" and five as "Minor" skills, which you will be better at than the rest. These ten skills are your "leveling skills". As a test I created a character that didn't have a single skill that I would use (at least not extensively) among those ten. The downside with that seemed to be that since I didn't level up I didn't gain hitpoints or increased attributes, and thus I was a somewhat easier kill than I could have been.
Another way to make a character is an "instant leveling" character, having skills like Acrobatics (read: jumping), Athletics (skill for running and swimming), Merchantile (or haggling) and Speechcraft (the art of charming people) among the leveling skills. You then run and jump around, talking to everyone charming them and trading with every merchant you find, and ka-ching! you've leveled up … and is in no way better dealing with the tasks you're set to "win" the game.
Oh, that reminds me. Morrowind is a lot better than Daggerfall in that quests -works-. If your order is to "go talk to that person" once you go and talk to him/her, it sticks. In the main quest-thread in Daggerfall you were supposed to find and talk to a person very early on. You could find her, talk to her, and in no way know wether or not you really had completed the quest, as required for related quests. There's no such troubles in Morrowind.
One thing that, for me, subtracts a little bit from the "score" of this game is the Construction Set (TES-CS for short). It is a very powerful tool for making changes to the world of Morrowind … however it was designed by the programmers, for the programmers. There exist NO MANUAL ANYWHERE on the game-disks or printed materials from Bethesda. If you want to learn how to use it you will have to hunt a hobbyists guide of how to do something and hope they haven't missed anything. The reason the cd with TES-CS subtracts from the score is that it, imho, adds annoyance due to counter-intuitive controlls and the fact that you also pay for a cd that you didn't need nor asked for.
Testresult: Good - View: 1st -Focus: RPG/Adventure - players: single
In this, the third installment of the Thief-serie, you once again take the role of Garrett, masterthief.
Again you are to sneak around and steal stuff and (in according to prophecy) wind up messing with the balance of power of the city. This time the enemy seems to know you better than any one before. But would a Keeper really turn upon another for greed of power? Isn't that idea just … impossible? The Keepers order is old, it's members are wise and well taught in how power corrupts, so they may stay free of such corruption.
Testresult: Acceptable - View: map -Focus: strategy - players: single/multi
This game, Warlords 4, is the (at the time of writing) the latest game in the Warlords-serie. There is a single-player campaign, as well as the option to play "one off"-maps, or random ones. The "one off" and the random maps can be played in multiplayer (though I haven't tested that yet). In the singleplayer campaign your task is to conquer a number of provinces (or maps) to complete the story, which is played out as short films prior to engaging a map, and completing it.
After each combat the warlord you were playing with is assigned experience points. For each 10 xp it gains it goes up a level and then you can either improve one of the skills it got, or you can add a building to its capitol. Beware, for even though all choices makes your side better, it is possible to gimp oneself. For instance, a spellcasting Warlord is better served with fast mana-regen than quickmarching troops or tons of gold.
Testresult: Excellent - View: 1st/3rd -Focus: Action/RPG - players: mmorpg
In this online game you take the role of an adventurer of the world of Azeroth. You can pick your race from dwarf, gnome, human, nightelf, orc, tauren, troll and undead. You also get to pick a class, which actually defines your character more than the race.
When you start out on your adventures you know very little, and by completing quests and killing monsters you gain experience. When you have amassed enough experience (and money) you can turn to a trainer and learn more tricks and/or improve what you already know. The goal of the game is to bring your character from level 1 to level 60, and/or gain honour by fighting (and besting) players of the opposing side of the Horde/Alliance split.
All things concidered, it's an Exellent game, easily devouring hours and hours of time, enthralling the gamer. There are a few things that keep it from reaching the "perfect" result (the hypothetical next step up in quality), namely the monthly cost and the fact that going into the larger cities causes (sometimes severe) lag.
Testresult: FAIL - View: mapp - Focus: strategy - players: single/multi
This game installs just fine on my computer, and I have no problems launching it. However, the system locks up when I try to launch a battle, so … yea, it's a big testfail.
1st = A game that takes place in "first person", that is, what you see on the screen is what "you" in the game can see.
3rd = In a game like this you can see the ingame "yourself" moving about in the game-world with the camera following your char around. It tends to be less "personal" than the first person view ones.
Map = in these games you see a "map" of the playing-field on which you move your piece(s) around. The camera can generally be moved about independently of the pieces/chars. These kinds of games are often the least personal ones.
MMORPG = Massive Multiplayer Online RolePlaying Game. A game where you use the internet to connect to a special game-server that allows you to play this game as a RPG (se below) interacting with (many) other players.
Multi = This game allows multiple players playing at the same time, either co-operatively, or against each other. This can either be as "hotseat" (ie, people switching place infront of a computer), over lan (local area network) or through online-connection.
RPG = Role Playing Game. A game in which you controll a character that is supposed to be "you" (in some games you migth have a few "you"), and by interacting with the game world tries to improve in various ways. These games can be open-ended (like Daggerfall and Morrowind) which means that you can do "anything" (that the physics of the game allows) or they can be liniar (like Deus Ex and Spellforce) which means that there is really just one path to follow.
RTS = Real Time Strategy. A game that simulates combat on a strategic (or maybe just tactical) level with varying amound of direct controll over the units.
Strategy = Could also be called "Turn Based Strategy". Games like Chess, Risk, Go, perhaps even Monopoly, would go into this category.