/v/ - Video Games

>>13810399

>Aurora4x is just a scaled up DWU tbh.

I am not familiar with the game you are talking about

>>13810802

fuck I totally forgot about this one

lots of mods for it, people bitch about the RNG but It never fucked me over too much

>>13810798

He probably means Distant Worlds: Universe.

>>13811070

>RTS

>on console

no, seriously, how do you make that work?

>>13810341

Ground Control.

World in Conflict ramps up the difficulty well and has some really nice gimmicks in its campaign.

Redpilled as all hell too

>>13813668

This, beating ground control 1 and 2 without cheats was very satisfying and often challenging. You can cheese with snipers in GC1, but eventually enemy deploys planes, some missions are timed and the cheese becomes shitty. Also original xcom is pretty good (play openxcom).

>>13810341

Warzone 2100 also has a singleplayer campaign with some twists and turns. There's also the Dawn of War series for some variety in gameplay (going from 1 to 2) with some oddly hilarious ham on the voice acting. Just avoid the third one.

>ai war

I never understood why nobody ever talks about it. It is such an amazing game.

>>13814127

it has no replayablility despite fucktons of content

>>13814115

If I recall correctly, remastered/HD version puts the first game in to the engine of the second one, which among some other things replaced all bullet physics and related stuff with RNG.

Also, by buying it you are giving money to gearbox.

>>13814158

How so? You have tons of game settings you can change for different experiences. Even if you play with the exact same settings every time, there's multiple end objectives to pursue that change how the game is played and the AI could simply react to you completely differently. Then there's the co-op, with every person bringing a whole new experience every time. It has one of the most replayable campaigns there is in RTS. How exactly could you even make it more replayable?

>>13814185

It also removed all fleet formations from the games.

>>13814225

99% of gameplay doesnt change across playthroughs

you still have 20 hours where shit is the same for every hour where shit isnt

The original Homeworld was fucking great.

>>13814280

That isn't what I have experienced. Every single game has been completely different for me, from small quick games to huge long drawn out ordeals, having huge head-on conflicts with the galaxy under my control to being super sneaky with only a handful of planets to my name, everything going according to keikaku to being undone at every turn. There's three different ways to end the game that completely change how you have to play so that alone gives you a ton of replayability. How the fuck do you even manage to get the same experience every single time? Do you just use the same settings and strategy repeatedly? Did you just play it once and assume that's everything? I cannot understand. Saying it has no replayability is like saying Dwarf Fortress has no replayability.

>>13814115

Visually it works but gameplay wise it's broken as swedish family unit in comparison to the first game.

>>13814460

So what you are saying is that the game has literally zero replayability because it doesn't completely swap genres every single time you play it? Of course the core gameplay will be the same because its the core gameplay. I signed up for large armies and nigh-impossible odds across a huge battlefield, not for it to suddenly be a magical girl management simulator or extreme banana racing RPG. Name one RTS where the core gameplay completely changes every single time you play it and is never ever the same thing twice. If AI War has no replayability, then no game has replayability.

>>13810341

Panzer Corps. Prepare to get your shit kicked in on every map.

>>13814601

You know, replayability does not mean addiction. You don't have to feel compelled to play something until you have experienced absolutely everything in it for it to have replayability. I have played about 10 matches and have no intention of playing any more, but I know the next time I do it will be different from what I've experienced before. It is replayable because it will provide a new experience, not because I feel I have to replay it until I die.

>>13814654

Its not replayablility if the content is not interesting

>>13814606

The only remotely good thing done by 32chan

>>13814664

So then why are you even posting if you don't find the game interesting? Why not just say "its shit" and move on instead of trying to argue anything about it?

>>13814115

>>13814185

>>13814226

>looked forward to Remastered release

>comes out

>hey look all my fleet formations don't do shit well that was a pointless waste of time

>"we're totally going to fix the mp guys just wait!"

>cancerous poster on /v/ is confused at how anyone could possibly have a bad impression of this mess

do your research

>>13815471

Epic