Honestly I have no clue why so many people are up in arms about this. Bohemia hasn't been praised for a campaign since Cold War Crisis/Resistance. Harvest Red was ambitious but still breaks even after tons of patches. Operation Arrowhead was literally just a collection of unconnected missions that easily could have been supplied by mission makers. The same can be said for the first Arma's campaign and don't even get me started on Queen's Gambit. I doubt Arma 3's campaign will be anything special and after it comes out people will go through the first few missions, see it isn't very compelling and go back to multiplayer or user missions/the editor.

Performance issues are too much for me right now. I wouldn't mind playing at 30 fps if it was consistent 30 fps like I got in Arma 2. Right now even at the lowest settings playing on Altis I somehow go from 60 fps to single digits sporadically even on an empty map. Stratis is better but the dips go from 60 all the way down to 20 sometimes. I'm used to low fps but the changes are so dramatic and jarring for me it makes things just really aggravating. Besides while I wait for better optimizations modders will be at work and hopefully get the Arma 2 content properly ported over.

Yay me! Thanks Spoonoop! Maybe I'll share the magic and give away some of my Guns of Icarus Online keys that have been sitting around.

I shall do this.

Planetside 2 by a slim margin. I wouldn't say it's pay to win, I've dropped over a hundred dollars on it and was at one point subbed for a while and it really doesn't make a difference at all. It is a game where you need to be in an outfit to have the most fun, though the good outfits have pickup and play platoons going almost 24/7. Battlefield 3 is fun but it really is just Call of Duty with larger maps and vehicles at this point. There's no depth to it. The last time I played I was so impressed with the visuals and the chaos of the battle but I realized nothing is really happening. Hardly anybody communicates, the gameplay moves way too fast for a cohesive strategy to develop. Project Reality for BF2 showed how you could turn Battlefield into a deep shooter. DICE will add in Commander mode for BF4 but if they don't address the other issues of the game it won't really make a difference.

I played all three back to back a while ago and Human Revolution definitely isn't as good as the first game but it's still leagues better than Invisible War. I wouldn't bother with the Typhoon, it's a waste of points, just acquire the revolver and get the explosive ammo upgrade. Boss fights are a joke with it. My main gripe is the awful story that feels isolated from the rest of the series beyond some distant connections. I never really felt like anything that was going on in the game was important. The plot twists are obvious, there's never any real choice, some of the powers seem impressive like punching holes in walls but realistically you'll probably only do that five times at most in the game. Also you can skip the DLC, it's bad, adds nothing to the game either in terms of gameplay or plot, and is completely isolated anyway. It happens toward the end of the game, you have to load a seperate client to play it, you bring in none of your old skills or weapons, the game just has you choose them again, and then when you finish nothing carries back over to the main game. It's a levelpack and a bad one.

Shogun 2 is good yea, alltho its not really an rts but it combines some elements of that aswell.

Crusader King? Thats not even an rts as far as I know, theres no battles ur fighting its more of a managment map based game.

SupCom is sci fi, robots, lazers ..

FiRe1987

the very fact that there is grass everywhere, and clouds, leads me to say "no, this is nothing like Dune".

Also, I recommend reading the book.  Great science fiction. Arguably to Scifi what LOTR is to fantasy.

mrbojangles25

Lol at the "they should be paying me to test their game" comments.

You're not testing the game. You're getting it in an early stage of development. There's no obligation for you to actually report feedback and thus no guarantee they will receive it. Whether or not you give feedback is entirely up to you and is no different than giving feedback at any other stage of the development process. People who are actually paid to test videogames find that the novelty wears off rather quickly when they're expected to repeat the same level ad nauseum and try to break the game rather than enjoy it. I would guess the percentage of people who actually report bugs in these kind of releases is in the single digits.

Hi all. Haven't played an MMORPG in some time and would like to try some of the free offerings on Steam or elsewhere. Now that all of these titles have seen numerous content additions and bug fixes, which do you think are the best to play now? Age of Conan DC Universe Online Lord of the Rings Online Star Trek Online Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic (yes, the only non-steam title I'm looking at) Planetside 2 Everquest 2 Champions Online Dungeons & Dragons OnlineMidnightBossman

Planetside 2 - Get in an outfit (guild). A good one. You can play the game as a pubbie but it gets stale pretty quick just following the zerg around. Things get significantly more enjoyable when you're in a coordinated outfit that applies metagame and actual tactics to win fights.