JamesBondX

Simply a fantastic game in my opinion. I've always been a **** for these types of games. And I wouldn't mind having a few more *hint*. The world is big. And the surroundings are filled with color, life and activity. And when there isn't supposed to be that much life and activity around, there isn't! Enemies are varied throughout the game and battles are often tactical and pretty enjoyable most times. I absolutely love the fact that it's turn-based. I've always loved turn based games like the good old Heroes of Might and Magic games, the Might and Magic games (both from 3DO), Fallout 1 and 2, Wasteland 2, Civilization games, Lords of Magic, Wizardry 8 and even Etherlords games. So understandably, I liked this game a lot. There's a lot you can do, side quests and main quests and general exploring. There are some secrets too and I really like the fact that your two characters can converse with each other. It's also really fun to play with a friend, your friend controlling one character and you the other. Overall, I really recommend this game for any RPG fanatic, and if you like turn-based games, even better.

Can't recommend this highly enough! It's very much like the original XCOM: UFO Defense. They included some improvements to air combat, added more realistic weapons and updated the old graphics with new 2D sprites and nicer textures. I think it looks very good with the current graphics and I like the "cold war" style, which later then get's upgraded with high-tech equipment of course. It's a great game and I'd really want to see the developers rewarded for creating this, it's all one has ever dreamed

Re-reviewing this now that I tried it again. Setting a 10 because of the Russians that spammed negative reviews because this game handles the uncomfortable truth for them. It's definitely an enjoyable game, with many mechanics of the old CoH1. It is rather tactical and you have to know your enemy to be able to win the day. There are a few issues though and they are mostly the following: - Some units seem useless, and don't fill any function, or are too expensive to purchase when you can get a similar unit for just a tiny bit more fuel or MP and have a way, way better efficiency. - Balance is also an issue naturally, as these games can be hard to balance. Examples are Russian tanks seemingly fires their main gun and can kill up to 4 units with one shell, from any tank. While German tanks cannot. Germans (OKW) have garrisonable AT-rocket launchers and they're insane. - RNG will cause madness sometimes. - Last and biggest problem. The EXTREMELY expensive commanders that you have to pay for in-game to be able to get. Or you can play hundreds of thousands of games to find some of them. This is the major flaw in CoH2 that relic did. If not for this feature, the game would be so many times more enjoyable. It would be fine if they sold cosmetic things in the store, such as camouflage, victory strikes and all the little things for your player card. As it is now they sell commanders, and yes, those commanders have some of the unique and ICONIC units of the way. Like Sturmtruppen, KV-2, Assault Grenadiers, Partisans, Tiger Ace, Sturmtiger, Jäger Light Infantry Recon, FlammPanzer Hetzer and more. There might even be MORE units not available as I got loads of commanders for free because I was a "veteran". If you purchase the game now, I don't know how many unique units you will miss out on, but possibly very many. Now this is such a shame because behind all that pay for our chopped up game **** there's a really nice and enjoyable game. It would be a lot better if they had you progress through ranks, unlocking these commanders as you went along and then having the possibility of purchasing them if you really wanted them. Obviously this includes not making it impossible to grind through the level in a rather short time of playing 100 hours or so should be enough in my opinion. It is a really fun game to play with your friends and I would recommend it DESPITE the **** commanders crap. However, were it not for the **** commander buying, and the Russians complaining here. My real ratings would be: 8/10 As it stands now with the commanders being as they are I would rate it: 5/10

Re-reviewing now as I have gotten the fully patched version and it works well. The game is a lot better than Rome 2. The only bothersome things are a few things CA didn't think of, or purposely left out. I have a feeling they're testing a lot of new things in Attila, things that don't quite make sense. Like there's no way to not get a decrease in integrity when deciding what to do with prisoners. There are some unique units, but not enough, and older units get replaced, even though you might want the cheaper versions for a sort of "home guard" army. Optimization isn't perfect either, it seems to take a lot of resources when too many units are in one battle, but that is rather hard to fix. Another problem is the ever lasting "Agent spam" by AI factions. That and the fact that single territory AI factions, or small AI factions seem to get a lot of cheats to support armies, agents and whatnot. Diplomacy is okay, though it gets ridiculously hard to get people to agree to some thing that will be beneficial to them mostly. Oh, and there's no way to threaten factions. So if you're Attila, you can't really threaten people to give you money or trade. Some units also have issues with damage and things, armor doesn't really seem to do all that much. But the main complaint must be for slingers. They shoot rocks, and they shred most units, and are really cheap. Some DLCs seem kind of rushed and cheap, like the recent Age of Charlemagne. However it is still quite fun. Overall, Total War Attila is an enjoyable game for me now. I've racked up many hours, it's far from the best Total War game ever, but it's more on point than that of Rome 2.

Fallout 2 is simply a great game. There's lots to do and the environment is great, especially when you mod the game with sFall and killap's unofficial patch that fixes a lot of the bugs that were in the original game. I also like the fact that it's a game where everything doesn't always go your way (even though a lot does go your way :) ). There's also lots of comical dialogue, events and random encounters. Now, even for some of the game's faults, it's still a great game. The faults of the game include silly moments, quests that end abruptly and well, bugs. However, like I said a lot of this can be fixed with Killap's patch. I'm not going to complain about graphics, it's an old game, doing so would be very silly and stupid. In fact, in my opinion the graphics are charming. Sprites are a little low res and textures too, however, compared to other 2D games it's still great! The textures and such can be improved with sFall and the high res pack, if you want to use nicer graphics. Edit: Look at some of the negative reviews. Bashing this game for the single reason that they enjoy Wasteland 2 and they have heard people saying Fallout 2 is better one too many times. Now I won't name any names, but yeah... Then they went here and saw it had a better score, thus they just had to put in a "revenge review" and put 0/0. Even though the two games are really similar except for the story and setting (which is still very similar) . Quite silly, but I suppose you're not allowed to think FO2 is better. Their main argument therefor always falls to complaining about the graphics. Don't get me wrong, Wasteland 2 is great too, both games are, and there's nothing wrong from enjoying both of the games.

This game is terrible, it leeches off the name of XCOM, it could be named the bureau: aliens invade. But no, the devs wanted to make money off of XCOM and their fans. It's not particularly tactical, flanking is about as far as you get. Initially the game was buggy and the AI was literally miserable. In my opinion the setting doesn't work either.

Do not listen to the negative reviews, they are either A. Reviewing a game in BETA/ALPHA stage, or B. They totally **** at the game and just rage quitted after playing a round. Problem is people think it's simple, so they complain a lot when they die, instead of seeing the tactic that brought them down. This game is very immersive, it has some good blood effects and gore. The combat, which some lesser people claim to be luck-based, is in fact a very deep system with many tactics. The thing is, if people are too set on games being simple, they will feel it's about luck when they get killed by another better player using special tactics. You can hit people around the shield if they are not careful, and blocking is harder or easier depending on which weapon your enemy uses. The armours in this game also looks quite realistic and good. Other games always have these seriously weird armours with things sticking out everywhere or just armours that look like they weight about as much as a freight train. The ambience is very good, there are way cries and death cries echoing through the battlefield. And also a messenger shouting orders or reports to the presumed commanders further away. Animations aren't that great in some cases, but the swings are generally really good, it feels like there is weight behind them and you can't just randomly swing around, because you'll get tired. There is a good diversity in game modes as well, you can play through the "story" by going team objective, or just FFA or TDM if you would feel like it. There is also a special duel game mode where everyone gathers in one room and duel each other one by one, which is a great way to train duelling. There are also a quite interesting factor in the game, friendly fire, meaning you can accidentally kill teammates. This adds a new level of difficulty to the game, which in my opinion should be added to almost all games, it makes it more punishing to miss and hit your friend. Games like Battlefield and CoD could benefit from this in all of their gamemode, the only downside being that people are too stupid to avoid friendly fire. To counter this in Chivalry, which many people are too stupid to realize, is to simply use trusts and overhead swings whenever friendlies are nearby. The guys working on this seems like good guys, like almost no other game companies are nowadays, they release new content and patches, and they aren't trying to make extra money by releasing a DLC which you HAVE to pay for to get these new things. They recently released a content update in late January together with a patch. I am seriously looking forward to new content, unlockables and more. If I had to guess, I'd guess they will release weapons and different armours soon. Many people also claim they have lag issues, this is because they choose servers that have horrbile ping, because they have absolutely no understanding of servers what so ever. If you pick a good server and have a decent internet connection, then you will have no trouble. There might also be some unsupported routers that have created problems for some people. This is a big reason why many discard the game outright and write a bad review here, they are too lazy to fix lag issues. That is why they feel the game is unresponsive, choppy and "unfair", it is literally only because of ping, that's how ping works. There are no choppy weapons, this is because of lag only. As for people claiming M&B has a better combat system... Yeah, swinging wildly with little to no weight behind your swings and never tiring seems perfect. They are just blinded by their on fan-boyism. I've played M&B, I love it. Chivalry has a more skillful and better combat system though. Duels are amazing. The only way M&B or War of the Roses, can be better is when you have a large group (clan or guild) that works together, which doesn't happen often. WotR's problem is that it doesn't have the maps designed for large scale, group or line warfare. The only thing that Chivalry doesn't have, that WotR does have. Is customization options, in WotR you can create your own unique armours and coat of arms, which is really cool, since you basically have your own "house" you're fighting for. The problem with this is that many players tend to make goofy looking armours and such, destroying the awesome feeling of the game. WotR is also set in a later period it seems, as their armours look like they're from a later period of the middle ages. Bordering on 16th century armours, I'd say. There's far too little chain mail, which is sad, it was widely used during the middle ages, with only a surcoat over, something both games lack. Then later, it was used as further protection together with plate armour. In conclusion, I love M&B, I love Chivalry. M&B is really fun with a giant group and lots of players, but Chivalry has a more skillful and immersive combat system, where there is a lot more techniques than M&B has, and War of the Roses.

They tried to shamefully lure the DK series fans to play this THING. No one fell for it. It was very monotone, it was pretty ridiculous. A dungeon lord shouldn't ENTERTAIN heroes, there is NO valid reason for that. I know they try to explain why they need to do it, but it's just WRONG. You should mercilessly kill heroes, not entertain them THEN kill them. Creeps should be more personal, as it is, they feel like buildings rather than actual "beings" in your dungeon. I can't even see how this game would be fun from a tycoon point of view. But what bothers me most is that they basically lived on the principle that they would get the older DK fans to play this heap of ****. Definitely cannot recommend to any DK fan out there. Also, someone else mentioned this being hard while DK being "sleep, then wake up to a victory screen" NO, JUST NO. SHAME ON YOU.

I give this game 0 score. Because there are developers of the game rating the game up on the user review. Personally, this game is pretty good, but the devs are not impartial, they are russian. Therefore the game is not as great as it could be. The users that are FAKE are: RedNord Dys88 reignoftanks check the similarity between dys88 and reignoftanks. Rakashin DutchDK (probably) Pirate21110 AceGunner mrtanker ... ... The list goes on. The user reviews are not this high.. check the low reviews.