Say what?Towelly wrote:
Oh no you don't{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank wrote:
Just so you know Kr@cker, to play WOW you have to pay like $15 USD a month for subscription fee
yeah, its lame, this is why I never bought the game.
Last edited by dubbs (2006-12-06 14:03:22)
those trailers are hilarious, i love the narrator in the firstdubbs wrote:
Hero online is very nice. It is about a marial arts. http://www.hero.netgame.com/
How is this?Towelly wrote:
Oh no you don't{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank wrote:
Just so you know Kr@cker, to play WOW you have to pay like $15 USD a month for subscription fee
yeah, its lame, this is why I never bought the game.
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-12-06 14:46:46)
Last edited by Goven (2006-12-06 14:51:58)
Let me know what servers you run around on, I'd like a decent commander that actually coordinates with the squads. I'm usually running around as SL with the only squad that's working together, hence my win/loss ratio is terrible.kr@cker wrote:
i get bored real easy, that's why i always try to command in the battlefield series, i like studying tactics and all, most people can't handle me as i can be a bit of a hardass, in fact i've been booted for "abusing team mates" (this usually happens when admins don't follow my orders for some odd reason). that and my squads don't last long, i flame them like hell for lone wolfing and leaving me to defend a flag against 2 walkers alone. i've run the civilization and total war games into the ground, and figured one of these might have some fps kinda action (ok with swords not guns) mixed with some strategic elements when it comes to weapons/armor loadouts and such. dunno if i can handle the nerd trooping though, i hate team speaking stuff.
Last edited by TheEternalPessimist (2006-12-07 07:27:18)
Last edited by FriiginChomper (2006-12-07 07:27:30)
Older game, but I loved Diablo 2. Lots of depth.FriiginChomper wrote:
WoW has a free 10 day trial, you could play that and see if you like it enough to pay per month.
i think its a really good game myself.
and if not that, you could play Diablo II: Lord of Destruction.
Unless much has changed since when I used to play (shoot me I know), you used to be able to "pay" for a month play a session (although I once had it working for up to a day) and then as soon as you're done cancel it. Just repeat each time.{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank wrote:
How is this?Towelly wrote:
Oh no you don't{BMF}*Frank_The_Tank wrote:
Just so you know Kr@cker, to play WOW you have to pay like $15 USD a month for subscription fee
yeah, its lame, this is why I never bought the game.
honestly Civ III was a superior product, but I haven't tried the newer civ 4 expansions, they're supposed to be more war oriented. I wish I had all my civ 3 stuff, i'd mail it to you. I've had all of them from civ 1 to 4 vanilla, in fact my bro is playing civ 1 on playstation right now.Stingray24 wrote:
Let me know what servers you run around on, I'd like a decent commander that actually coordinates with the squads. I'm usually running around as SL with the only squad that's working together, hence my win/loss ratio is terrible.kr@cker wrote:
i get bored real easy, that's why i always try to command in the battlefield series, i like studying tactics and all, most people can't handle me as i can be a bit of a hardass, in fact i've been booted for "abusing team mates" (this usually happens when admins don't follow my orders for some odd reason). that and my squads don't last long, i flame them like hell for lone wolfing and leaving me to defend a flag against 2 walkers alone. i've run the civilization and total war games into the ground, and figured one of these might have some fps kinda action (ok with swords not guns) mixed with some strategic elements when it comes to weapons/armor loadouts and such. dunno if i can handle the nerd trooping though, i hate team speaking stuff.
Like you, I wanted a WoW type game, but refuse to pay monthly to play a game I already paid for. Also, I would have to almost completely ignore my wife and kids to play WoW. I need something that I don't have to invest huge blocks of time to in order to get anywhere. Then a friend of mine had just purchased Guild Wars and the Factions expansion, so I played at his place and loved the game. It would work perfectly, too, because I can log in, kill stuff for awhile and jump out. If I have a block of time, then I can run around on quests with others. I almost exclusively play FPS and racing games, so it's saying a lot that Guild Wars hooked me. It's on my Christmas list since I don't have the money to drop on both games right now.
I just DLed the demo for Civ4 and played it last night - most fun I've ever had with a turn-based RTS game. Trying to expand my gaming horizon and Civ4 looks like a great way to get into RTS gaming. Company of Heroes is tempting, too, though.
Last edited by kr@cker (2006-12-07 09:02:08)
I have heard exactly that from other fans of the Civ series. In what way was III better? I went through the tutorial in the IV demo which limits to 1024 and it still looked good. Maybe the rest of the demo will let me tweak things to take advantage of my vid card.kr@cker wrote:
honestly Civ III was a superior product, but I haven't tried the newer civ 4 expansions, they're supposed to be more war oriented. I wish I had all my civ 3 stuff, i'd mail it to you. I've had all of them from civ 1 to 4 vanilla, in fact my bro is playing civ 1 on playstation right now.
hehehe You are evil. See ya later suckers! *boooooooooom*kr@cker wrote:
tactically and diplomatically the AI was much more logical in 3, in 4 the battles are just too easy, and diplomacy is just thrown straigh out the window, no matter how much you trade, what kind of alliances you have, even your closest allies refuse to help you out, then as if on cue, they all attack you at once. i usually manage to come out on top, and most of my games end in me launching my space colony and nuking the planet into a nuclear winter.
nice link!Big McLargehuge wrote:
FilePlanet.com has MMO trials. http://www.fileplanet.com/features/MMORPG/