Advice me up: What to get? (PS2, PS3, & XBox360-related)

Oh great and wise forum, I come to you for advice and suggestions.

Let me preface this by saying I grew up a Nintendo person (I got my start on the SNES). This means that I had little exposure to games from other systems, unfortunately. However, as I grew older, I began to have an interest in games not Nintendo, but because I was such a diehard fan, I never purchased any other system. This has recently changed.

So here are the things I'm requesting advice and suggestions on.

0) To clarify the types of games I like/dislike:

Spoiler

Show

LIKE
-JRPG
-Platformer
-Action/Adventure
-Tactical RPG
-SOME Fighting games
-SOME Party games
-Fantasy Genre games
-Games with engaging stories
DISLIKE
-Western RPGs like Oblivion, Fallout, and so on
-FPS
-Anything set in the real world
-Anything Vehicle-related (except for some racing games)
-Anything rated M

1) PS2-related.

Spoiler

Show

A couple Januaries ago I purchased a PS2. I now have a grand total of 5 games for it. I know that there were a ton of good PS2 games (and probably some great PS1 games too) but because I'm bad with my memory and never paid a ton of attention, I don't know what any of them are. I'd like to expand my collection.

I already own (and have the following assessments of):
-FFXII (:smallbiggrin:)
-Tales of Legendia (:smallbiggrin: story, :smallfrown: gameplay)
-Tales of the Abyss (:smallbiggrin:)
-Radiata Stories (:smallfrown:)
-Arc Rise Fantasia (:smallsmile: story and gameplay, :smallannoyed: voice acting)
Have played and may purchase:
-FFX (:smallbiggrin:)

2) XBox360-related.

Spoiler

Show

I hated Microsoft for entering the console market so much. They stole Rare, d*** it. However, Tales of Vesperia (:smallbiggrin:) is only on XBox360. I own the game and have been playing it on a friend's system, but I won't have that opportunity forever. So... I want to purchase a system, in all likelihood just for that one game. I would need to transfer save data from my friend's system to my hypothetical one.

So my question is this: what XBox360 should I get? What model would be best in terms of reliability? Price? Ease of transferring data? What about used versus new? What problems might arise with one system or another that I should be wary of when purchasing a used system, or should I spring for a new one? Is buying a used one some random dude is selling for 100 bucks a super bad move, or is it more reasonable than buying a used one from Gamestop or G2K for only 30-50 bucks cheaper than a new one?

Are there any other games that fit my "likes" that I might be interested in for the XBox360 that should influence my console choice?

3) PS3-related.

Spoiler

Show

Obviously, there are PS3 games which are cool. Including Tales of Graces f, which I have not played. In order to play it, I would need the system. Obviously. Anyway, my questions here are much the same as my questions for the XBox360. Also, add onto that my request for game suggestions like I have for the PS2.

Thank you for your help!

Grab a half-decent PC, buy humble indie bundles, search gog.com or steam for any other games that pique your interest.

On the one hand you've got indie types like Bastion, Braid, etc. Decent platformers with a few interesting mechanics. And the games/bundles are rather cheap to boot, meaning you can experiment with games outside your comfort zone, and if you don't take to them, you've only spent about $5 - $10 bucks then.

On the other hand you've got higher-profile games like Civ V, Torchlight II, Portal 2, etc. So any interesting, tactical games you've got for console should also appear on the PC. You've also got games like X-Com coming out, games that really only work on the PC.

If you want more help, the Steam thread's always a good place to ask about games.

Far as PS2 goes, the Ratchet and Clank series is highly recommended if you enjoy platformer/adventure type games.As well as the first 2 Jak and Daxter games. Psychonauts is also a definite must if you haven't picked it up for the PC.

All of which, I think, can also be gotten from the online store for your PS3, if you get one. In that case, I recommend both Infamous and Infamous 2, although they might be a tad violent, they are still good platform-y RPG-y fun.

As far as JRPGs, no matter if you have either a PS2 or a PS3, do yourself a big favor, and pick up Persona 3 FES. For the PS2 side of things, Kingdom Hearts, Wild Arms, Final Fantasy 7,8, and 9 (though 8 can be given a miss, kinda disappointing IMHO). That should keep you busy for the foreseeable future...

PS2:

Since you like JRPGs, I cannot recommend enough that you try Persona 3 FES and Persona 4. These two rank as my favorite games ever (tied for that title), in large part on the sheer strength of the writing. I cannot recommend them enough.

There's also Shin Megami Tensei: Nocturne, of the main series that the Persona titles spun off from. It's much less story-focused and more of a dungeon crawler, but has some interesting story concepts, and it's a damn challenging game. Great if you like turn-based combat and monster-based parties (Pokémon-esque in a very broad sense, but very different from that series).

The first two Disgaea games are available there, and are great tactical RPGs. The first has the better story I'd say, while the second improves the gameplay in several ways. Both are worth playing. Unless you're an obsessive completionist, in which case playing one of those may mean never playing another game again.

Dragon Quest 8 is another JRPG there, probably the most traditional-style one you'll find since consoles went 3D, and my personal favorite entry in that series.

The Devil May Cry and God of War series are mostly on the PS2 as well, and are both great action series. Devil May Cry 3 is probably my personal favorite action game of all. You may want to skip Devil May Cry 2 though - it's not bad per se, but the story is totally incoherent, and the gameplay actually a step backwards from the first.

360:

You've got my top recommendation, Tales of Vesperia, already. After that I'd normally point to Bioware titles (Mass Effect, Dragon Age), but if you don't like WRPGs at all, you may not want to play them. (Personally, while I don't particularly like any other company's WRPGs, I do find Bioware's to be very good.) They're all available on the PS3 at this point as well anyway though.

Some games that aren't are Blue Dragon and Lost Odyssey, two JRPGs made by Mistwalker, the company founded by the original creator of Final Fantasy. Blue Dragon is more in the style of Dragon Quest, cartoony and with a fairly straightforward fantasy plot, but has some very fun combat (although it's easy to break the game by the end due to the nature of its multi-classing system). Lost Odyssey meanwhile is basically a Final Fantasy game - you could seriously slap the name "Final Fantasy 15" on it and most people wouldn't bat an eye, except to ask why some of the spell names have changed. And honestly, I think it's better than the actual Final Fantasy games I've played (though to be fair, I don't have that high of an opinion of most of the Final Fantasy games I've played).

360 & PS3:

There's plenty of fighting games to go around, including a new one that's a sequel to my above-mentioned favorite games ever, Persona 4 Arena. That, the BlazBlue series, and Marvel vs Capcom 3 are my personal favorites, but without knowing what kinds of fighting games you like I don't know that I can really give recommendations (beyond Persona 4 Arena if you play and enjoy Persona 3 and 4).

Batman: Arkham Asylum and Arkham City are available on both consoles, and are probably the best action/adventure titles outside of the Zelda series (even if, like me, you don't like Batman). Devil May Cry 4 is also available on both, and while not as good as the third game in the series, it's still a pretty good action game in its own right.

I can't help so much on system models and whatnot, nor on PS3 exclusives (I could list those that I have an interest in, but since I haven't played them due to not having the system, I technically can't recommend them*). but there's my top game recommendations as-is. You actually have fairly similar tastes to my own, so that worked out quite nicely.

*With one exception: Tales of Graces F, which I have, and played by borrowing my brother's PS3. It's good, but not as good as most of the others of the series that I've played (Symphonia, Abyss, Vesperia). The story is disappointing for that series. Gameplay has some very good changes though, which I think makes it worth a play. And it's not like the story is bad, just not as good as its predecessors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Treayn

Grab a half-decent PC, buy humble indie bundles, search gog.com or steam for any other games that pique your interest.

On the one hand you've got indie types like Bastion, Braid, etc. Decent platformers with a few interesting mechanics. And the games/bundles are rather cheap to boot, meaning you can experiment with games outside your comfort zone, and if you don't take to them, you've only spent about $5 - $10 bucks then.

On the other hand you've got higher-profile games like Civ V, Torchlight II, Portal 2, etc. So any interesting, tactical games you've got for console should also appear on the PC. You've also got games like X-Com coming out, games that really only work on the PC.

If you want more help, the Steam thread's always a good place to ask about games.

---

Yeah, he seems like the type of gamer who likes Japanese games a fair bit, in which case a gaming PC isn't going to do him much good.

Zevox

I only own a PS2, so this will be the basis of my recommendations.

First of all, I have to third the recommendation of Persona, especially Persona 4. One of the greatest and most unique game experiences I've had on my PS2, and it will keep you entertained for many, many hours. The only problem here is that it might not satisfy your "anything set in the real world" aversion, since a lot of it is set in something very much resembling the real world.

FFX is well worth a purchase too, I personally thought it was better than FFXII. As Zevox said, you might even get some of the older PS1 FF games for your PS2, if that's an option. Even FFVIII is worth it in my opinion, though I guess I might just like it because of the nostalgia factor (first game in the series I played).

The first two Kingdom Hearts games are also very good, especially if you are a Disney-fan. I personally liked the first one best, but popular opinion seems divided on that.

I'll also second the Ratchet & Clank recommendation if you enjoy platformers. Especially platformers with a ton of crazy weapons on top. They're not too long, though, but you typically unlock a new difficulty upon completing, which lets you unlock and upgrade the final, most powerful weapons.

For the action/adventure genre, Okami is a really unique take . It's most often compared to Zelda, but it has a very unique art style. The game is also LONG, so once again will keep you entertained for hours and hours.

I'm also a fan of Shadow of the Colussus, but I think that's very much a game people either love or hate, so do some research on that one first. Basically, it's a game that consists only of exploration and 16 (fantastic) boss battles. I particularly like the very grim and desolate mood the game conveys, but your mileage may vary.

Finally, in the misc/party game category, you have We Love Katamari (Katamari Damacy is the first of the series, but I never got that one), one of the craziest games I ever played, but also one of the most entertaining ones. It may be a little rare nowadays, though.

For the PS2, Primal is an excelent but rather obscure action adventure.

Spoiler

Show

It has a simple third person combat mode that is used a lot and the puzzles are not that complex, but it really is a very story-heavy adventure game at the core. And I don't have a clue why not everybody knows that game! It's easily a 90+ game. It's just that damn good.
And has Andreas Katsulas as voice actor for one of the protagonists. :smallwink:
Gameplay Example. Not good video quality, but shows how the game plays and switches between exploration and cutscenes.

The main character is Jen, who gets attacked by a demon after leaving a night club and gets visited in the hospital by a tiny gargoyle who tells her that her body is dying and that the demon kidnapped her boyfriend, so he seperates her soul from her unconscious body and takes her with him to the Otherworld. The boss of the demon is trying to take over the whole spiritworld which threatens to destroy both worlds, so they have to journey to the four demon realms and restore the normal order. The gargoyle and Jen have different abilities and you can switch between either of them at any time, to open gates and solve other puzzles. Pretty soon Jen also gains the ability to turn into one of the four demon kinds, giving her other abilities like jumping, swiming, and super-speed. It's well written, well paced, and looks amazing on the PS2. The same graphics could be released on the PS3 and wouldn't look too bad.

Also for PS2, Shadow of the Colossus. You don't have to agree with Zero Punctuation reviews, but almost everyone should come to the same conclusion that this game is "just damn good! Damn, Damn, Good, Good, Damn, Good, Damn, Damn.
Good."
Also a kind of action adventure. It has barely any text and it's all cutscenes with subtitles. And it has no NPCs, no items, no skills, no random enemies, and it all takes place in a desert. Just 16 puzzle boss fights, your sword, and your horse. And it's incredible!

Spoiler

Show

The plot is incredibly simple. You are a young warrior and bring a dead young woman to an ancient temple in a desert that is forbidden to enter, because there is a trapped "Being" with magical powers. The spirit might be able to restore her to life, but first the "hero" would have to destroy the guardian golems whose life force power its prision. And he might have to pay a great price to get his wish.
After the intro, there is just you and your horse. And the giant empty desert. There is no way to make the gameplay sound good, but it's an incredibly use of atmosphere that never makes it get boring as you travel to find the guardians. And then you have to kill them. But they are so huge that your tiny sword and arrows can't do anything to them, and to get to their weak points, you have to climb on their bodies. Which they are not willing to let you do.

I think as an example I take just the trailer. It shows only of the guardians very well and that one is jut the first one. Which is rather on the small side. :smallbiggrin:

And just as important, get yourself a PS1 memory card and then you can play Metal Gear Solid on your PS2. Or if you have a PS3, I think the game exists for download as well.
One thing that many people dislike about the series is the massive amount of cutscenes, but if you like JRPGs that should not be a problem. The characters are mostely Americans, but it really is a throughly Japanese game in any other aspect. Then there is also Metal Gear Solid 2 and Metal Gear Solid 3. And Metal Gear Solid 4 for the PS3. I think not long ago 2 and 3 were released as a PS3 version bundled with a PS3 port of the PSP-Game Peace Walker, which is also very good from what I've heard.
All in all, the four main games alone will easy get 100 hours of what is pretty much the most pacifistic action hero there has ever been. It's at times both silly and deep. And somethimes both simultaneously. Damn, this series is incredible, it would be a crime tonot give at least the first one a try. It's just that damn good, if one is okay with the linearity and amount of cutscenes typical of JRPGs.

Spoiler

Show

It's set on Earth in the 1990s, but there is no way it could be called the Real World. That world is a very strange one. MGS may look like a cold war spy game at first, but it is anything but that. It centers on Solid Snake, a genetically engineered one-man-army/super-spy who is reluctantly fighting an incredibly complex cospiracy that ultimately is a lot about mind controlling the masses and how ****ed up the world of super-spies actually is. And most of the villains have some kinds of magical abilities in the style of X-Men. Also, it's terribly pacifistic, focusing on avoiding enemies by using stealth and spends a lot of time with the tragic villains. Almost all of them have death scenes that are 10 minutes and longer, during which they are still talking to Snake after he fatally shot them.

Since it's so cutscene heavy, I take the intro from the third game as an example for the series incredible style. :smallbiggrin:

For PS3, as a JRPG-Fan, one should get Valkyria Chronicles. It's a turn based team strategy game, but it really plays a lot like a much more complex Final Fantasy. You just have four to ten characters instead of three and you move around the map, but it's a lot of fun.
It's also a game that should be famous for being the one that does not have a single decent video on youtube.

I also dare mention Mass Effect for the Xbox 360. Technically it is a western RPG but completely different from Elder Scrolls or Fallout 3. It is rather linear and very story and dialog heavy, with huge amounts of attention paid to the characters. I also can't stand those games that have you running around in a huge world without real purpose and only banal conversations with random people you meet only once, but Mass Effect easily has as much character interaction as any Final Fantasy game. Or actually, it has a lot more! If there are games with engaging stories, Mass Effect clearly is one of the best.
The first game still plays similar to Knights of the Old Republic or Dragon Age 2 to some degree, which is one of it's weaknesses. But the second game makes it a pure third person action RPG. You do control it like a third person shoter, but compared to all the story you get, the combat parts are not actually that many. If you play it, play the female character. The male voice actor does a good enough job, but FemShep has Jennifer Hale. I loved her in Metal Gear Solid and I love here even more here.

I think this is pretty good and spoiler-free example from the second game of how most of the series plays.

PS2
JRPGs

Dark cloud 2
often over looked RPg but great system great game

Kingdom hearts
First one is the best. for anyone that grew up on FF and DIsney it is great mash up with combat that is still not dated 10 years since

Valkryrie profile 2
Great tactical combat system story is pretty good. very tactical but the skill system is tedious and confusing

Action adventure
Shadow of the colossus
there is reason people are waiting for last guardian this is why

Okami
legend of zelda meets japanese paintings and mythology

Prince of persia sands of time
Best action adventure game of the console generation. great story good action fun puzzles it has everything

Xbox360 question answer

Get an xbox with at least 4GB. depends on if you are deciding to grab downloadable games you should get more. Used is fine but you must be cautious of the White Xboxes. Those are renown for the Red Ring Of Death (RROD) which breaks people xbox and all their warrenty are now not covered. I am clue less on cost effective transfering data. the expensive option is get a memory card copy the data to that send it to yours.

PS3

any of the PS3 would work they have huge amount of GB so they are good for most your needs. used is fine no known huge issue. Older systems have one advantage being that they can play PS2 and PSone games

for all used hardware ensure it works before you buy it and check wear and tear. and of course shake test. if something rattles don't take it

JRPGS
Valkyria chronicles
It is tactical RPG using guns. with a slight anime standard plot. it ranks top in JRPG of this console generation for me

Tales of gracesf
standard tales of series. story is weaker, combats the same.

adventure
heavy rain
it is video game movie. QTE and great story and mystery. sadly it is modern settign with an M rating but damn it, it is good

XBox

last remnant
Decent squad system. standard JRPG plot.

tales of Versperia
strong character, standard tales

if you want a cheap option is to get a Wii. Xenoblade chronicles, last story and hopefully pandora's tower make it state side. LOZ is good of couse. Mario galaxy is fun and then you can pull in Tales of Symphonia from the game cube. Then there are many old virtual console Jrpgs. secret of mana, super mario rpg, chrono trigger.

I also agree with Okami and Final Fantasy X.

I'd definitely support the Persona 3 and 4 recommendations, they're both amazing games and while the setting is real world'ish, there are still demons roaming the world and weird technology far beyond what we have. Also, the characters are sufficiently eccentric for it to not quite be real. And again, you'll be killing demons spawned of the collective, human subconscious.

I'd also strongly recommend Okami, probably the HD remake on the Playstation Store for PS3, because it is cheaper and easier to get than the PS2 version and improves greatly on the visuals which are a major selling point. The game is funny with incredibly fluid Zelda'ish gameplay, great music and probably the best visual design of any video game ever. It really is that pretty.

For the PS3 I support Valkyria Chronicles, it's a great game in almost any way and the one game with gameplay engaging enough that I played on the suicidally hard difficulty you can get as DLC just for the fun of it. It is also quite pretty and has great visual design that shows what can be done when you ignore the mindless rush towards photorealism.

I also belong in the minority who loved FF XIII, so I'd recommend it. Easily the best gameplay in the series and I'd personally say the best story and writing too. Except for the ending. The ending was terrible in every way and is a major black spot on the game.

I heartily recommend Persona 3 FES and Persona 4 (my favorite game ever, incidentally) for the PS2 and Valkyria Chronicles and Disgaea 4 for the PS3. I'll also just tentatively suggest Atelier Totori and Atelier Meruru for the PS3, a couple of surprisingly addictive time-management JRPGs about alchemy and cute girls. :smalltongue:

For your 360, you'll be safe from most of the classic bugs (Red Ring of Death) as long as you buy new. Keeping that in mind, figure out of there are any other 360 games you want to play. If not, then just get whatever is cheap.

I'd recommend Lost Odyssey if you're going that way though, a JRPG made for the 360 by some of the previous Square Enix teams.

However, for your preference in gaming? You already have the perfect system. Make heavy use of your PS2 to get PS2 and PS1 games. There were so many (So many) good JRPGs during that time, it would be a shame for a fan like yourself to miss out.

Although I'd recommend starting with Dragon Quest 8 (PS2). It could take you upwards of 50 hours but it's well worth it.

edit: Final Fantasy Tactics (PS1) would do you good as well. It's a tactical RPG set in the world of Ivalice so there's a lot of fluff similarities between it and FF12.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yora

Also for PS2, Shadow of the Colossus. You don't have to agree with Zero Punctuation reviews, but almost everyone should come to the same conclusion that this game is "just damn good! Damn, Damn, Good, Good, Damn, Good, Damn, Damn.
Good."

---

Don't know what the Zero Punctuation review says of it, but I didn't come to that conclusion. Quite the contrary, I thought it felt like an incomplete idea for a game. It had a couple of good ideas for boss fights spread extremely thin over sixteen of them, a "story" that felt more like an outline since absolutely nothing was explained, and... well, basically nothing else, really. I played it because I kept hearing from its fans online that it was amazing, but I found it totally lacking. Probably the most disappointing game I've played when compared to what I heard about it beforehand, actually.

Zevox

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Terraoblivion

I also belong in the minority who loved FF XIII, so I'd recommend it. Easily the best gameplay in the series and I'd personally say the best story and writing too. Except for the ending. The ending was terrible in every way and is a major black spot on the game.

---

I think the gameplay was the greatest problem. Fighting starts to become interesting so very late in the game. It just takes forever for the game to introduce all the elements of the combat system. The primary combat mechanic isn't intrudiced until the end of the 4th level and up to that point it's always Auto-attack for every character against every enemy. If they had put the entire tutorial in the first level, it might have been a lot better.

Some very good suggestions here. Another way to get a rough idea of the game market for a given console is to check out metacritic's all-time high scores for that console. Of course there's no guarantee of quality, but just skimming through that list from the top will probably awaken some memories and provide some useful suggestions.

I often do that if I want to gift someone a console game and can't quite remember what's available and how well-received that was.

From games that weren't mentioned yet, I suggest the various Guilty Gears for the PS2 and BlazBlue for the PS3/360. They are fighting games with great 2d animations, awesome music, a cast of really eccentric characters and, most importantly, a focus on the story mode instead of just tacking it on and adding a cheesy generic storyline about a tournament or some crap. Especially BlazBlue, whose story mode is really more like a visual novel with fights from time to time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zevox

Don't know what the Zero Punctuation review says of it, but I didn't come to that conclusion. Quite the contrary, I thought it felt like an incomplete idea for a game. It had a couple of good ideas for boss fights spread extremely thin over sixteen of them, a "story" that felt more like an outline since absolutely nothing was explained, and... well, basically nothing else, really. I played it because I kept hearing from its fans online that it was amazing, but I found it totally lacking. Probably the most disappointing game I've played when compared to what I heard about it beforehand, actually.

Zevox

---

I think you're just not the kind of person who'd get captivated by that game's atmosphere. Because atmosphere is really the thing that makes SotC such a great game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yora

I think the gameplay was the greatest problem. Fighting starts to become interesting so very late in the game. It just takes forever for the game to introduce all the elements of the combat system. The primary combat mechanic isn't intrudiced until the end of the 4th level and up to that point it's always Auto-attack for every character against every enemy. If they had put the entire tutorial in the first level, it might have been a lot better.

---

Yeah, you spend the first 2-3 hours mostly auto-attacking and using potions and Blitz/Grenade from time to time... Which is pretty damn similar to how almost every other FF game out there starts. And after that you get the class system and the gameplay becomes interesting.

On a sidenote, I'd like to know what all those people who say that FF13 has a 20-hour tutorial are smoking.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tengu_temp

On a sidenote, I'd like to know what all those people who say that FF13 has a 20-hour tutorial are smoking.

---

You don't get full control over your party composition and paradigms until you get to Gran Pulse, which is about the 30 hour mark. Maybe 20 hours if you're speed-running.

It's been some time since I played and Pulse was pretty much the point where I stopped, but in my memory, that was also when I felt that the whole combat system was finally complete.

All the levels are gorgeous, but all the fighting is such a drag.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Craft (Cheese)

You don't get full control over your party composition and paradigms until you get to Gran Pulse, which is about the 30 hour mark. Maybe 20 hours if you're speed-running.

---

I comprehend this line of thought, but I also find it ridiculous - was the whole Midgard section of FF7 an extended tutorial, as well? And the whole of FF6 until you get the airship? People who this logic have a weird definition of the word "tutorial" and spread false information among those who haven't actually played FF13. As if enough misconceptions about that game weren't floating around the net already.

By the way, Gran Pulse sucked for me. So much pointless wandering and random battles, with no plot or direction. I like FF13 more when it's linear, at least it does that well.

Don't get a console right now. Next generation console are coming next year, timed for Christmas. The current generation of consoles are 5 years old, and showing it. If you absolutely can't abide getting a gaming PC together (the best option, by far, imo), then hold out on whatever gear you have currently.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tengu_temp

I think you're just not the kind of person who'd get captivated by that game's atmosphere. Because atmosphere is really the thing that makes SotC such a great game.

---

Honestly, I can't even say that I know what you mean when you talk about the game's atmosphere. I can't recall anything that I'd think of as "atmosphere" from my time with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Jackal

Don't get a console right now. Next generation console are coming next year, timed for Christmas. The current generation of consoles are 5 years old, and showing it. If you absolutely can't abide getting a gaming PC together (the best option, by far, imo), then hold out on whatever gear you have currently.

---

Um, there is no information on next-gen consoles from Sony or Microsoft at this time. The Wii U arrives this November, but that's all we've got. And Sony in particular has stated their intention to continue supporting the PS3 through 2015, if I recall correctly.

Zevox

I have to say don't spend money on a console. A lot of great games are supported on the PC, and there are even more games that are only on the PC. Plus, the Wii U marks the advent of this generation of consoles. I don't care if Sony says they'll continue supporting PS3 until 2015. That's only three years before your purchase is wasted. The next XBox is probably going to come out in a year or two.

So I say, get a custom computer built. Hunt down a guy who knows what he's doing. Get him to buy a bunch of individual parts, and put them together. With luck, you can get a desktop CPU with excellent speed, a great graphics card, and the capacity for 30+ gb RAM worth of memory chips/cards, for about six hundred bucks. Maybe less, if it doesn't come with a monitor, keyboard, and mouse. Or do the next best thing: purchase a good CPU (I recommend this), then replace certain bad parts with better parts.

For example, for the CPU I linked, here are the problems:

Spoiler

Show

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by factotum

Dell will sell you a machine with a 1Tb hard drive, 3.3GHz Intel i3 processor, and 6Gb of RAM for $499.99. Admittedly, that uses integrated Intel graphics (which are garbage) and doesn't come with a monitor, but I reckon you could fix both those issues for maybe another $250 and have a pretty decent gaming rig--not cutting edge by any means, but definitely *much* more powerful than your 2008 standard.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emmerask

Hmm, I have some problems with this product actually,
the processor is nice, 6gb ram and the hard disk all completely okay BUT

They don´t tell you what PSU is inside, a simialr product from dell had a 220 watt psu which would be way to low to support even an aged graphics card.

So I`m pretty sure you would have to buy a stronger one one on top of the graphics card.

They don´t say anything about the mainboard only that indeed it is included :smallbiggrin:
So I´m fairly certain that the mb will be garbage too heck iot might even be some asrock conversion thingy with no pcie slot ^^

I would strongly advise to ask the costumer support for additional specifications first before buying that thing :smallwink:

Most important would be the PSU and what mainboard is inside


/edit okay according to the dell website it has a 300 watt psu, which is enough for the integrated graphics card but won´t be for a new one.
Still nothing on the mainboard ^^

---

As for games themselves...

Obligatory Assassin's Creed recommendation. You can skip I, it's not so great, but II, Brotherhood, and Revelations are all good, and III seems like it'll be good.

Crusader Kings and Crusader Kings II if you like nation-building. It focuses more on the economics and diplomacy of conquest, with the only real strategy in wars being that you weigh the happiness of your vassals versus the number of troops you demand, what troops you use against who, and when and who you go to war. Here's a Let's Play of CK2 (or at least a few pages worth).

I'm going to go dig through the archives in this section, someone once mentioned that there was a company that made great strategy games...

Edit: Ah, yes! It was Paradox Interactive, the makers of Crusader Kings. I'll just leave their grand strategy games here. You can probably find them all on Steam, too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tengu_temp

I comprehend this line of thought, but I also find it ridiculous - was the whole Midgard section of FF7 an extended tutorial, as well? And the whole of FF6 until you get the airship? People who this logic have a weird definition of the word "tutorial" and spread false information among those who haven't actually played FF13. As if enough misconceptions about that game weren't floating around the net already.

---

I define the "tutorial" as the period where the basic game mechanics are being introduced to the player. Like Seyda Neen in Morrowind, or Ostagar in DAO. The end of the tutorial is where the player finally has all the tools they need to play the "real" game and are let off the leash to actually play, at least until the developers introduce something else that's minor later in the game.

I understand this definition very much hinges upon which aspects of the game are "essential" for play and which ones aren't, but I don't think anyone can deny that changing which party members you're using is essential gameplay in a Final Fantasy game. That you're restricted from it until the second half of the game starts (and not just for plot reasons) is indefensible.

Trying to define it as the point where the central conflict is revealed and the central plot takes its direction in full force (like the end of Ostagar in DAO) also looks bad in Final Fantasy's favor because the scene with Barthandelus is the first point in the game where you find out what you're actually supposed to be doing (well, more like given vague hints of what you're supposed to be doing, which the game never actually explains even at the end: FF13's strong point is most certainly not its clarity and focus). Which is the same point where you finally get to control which party members you're using, and (IIRC) the point where you can finally upgrade any paradigms you want and not just the 2-3 for each character the designers picked for you.

Quote:

---

By the way, Gran Pulse sucked for me. So much pointless wandering and random battles, with no plot or direction. I like FF13 more when it's linear, at least it does that well.

---

The linear portions of FF13 are defined by pointless wandering. Everything the characters do leads to absolutely nowhere until Sazh and Vanille get captured (which could have happened at any time due to Creepy Plot Device Kid and didn't need to wait until Nautilus except the developers spent money on the setpieces there and wanted you to look at them). The only ones trying to actually do anything are Lightning and Hope trying to take down Eden, but this gets abandoned halfway through for seemingly no reason.

Then once you're done wandering around in the fields of Gran Pulse, the party decides to go to Oerba to get rid of their l'Cie brands (exactly how going to Oerba will help accomplish this is never explained) which also leads to absolutely nothing. Oerba, the entire goal of 20 hours of gameplay, was a complete dead end. The only reason the plot doesn't just stop right there is because Barthandelus just so happens to swoop down and take them back to Cocoon when they get there.

And then... the ending. Do I even need to explain the problems with the ending?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jade Dragon

I have to say don't spend money on a console. A lot of great games are supported on the PC, and there are even more games that are only on the PC. Plus, the Wii U marks the advent of this generation of consoles. I don't care if Sony says they'll continue supporting PS3 until 2015. That's only three years before your purchase is wasted. The next XBox is probably going to come out in a year or two.

---

I very much disagree. I am not saying consoles are superior to PCs, but there are things that a console does that a PC can't. And for some people those things outweight the limitations considerably.

Not to make this a debate, but only an explaination why some people are more happy with consoles than PCs:
- My number 1: Couch! I played on my desk for over 15 years and I just can't stand it anymore. Sitting or even lying lazily on my couch is a vastly "improved gaming experience" for me.
- I am always lagging behind a year or two, always jumping only on trains that never stopped being super popular. As such I got all my consoles and almost all my games second hand. Which means it's cheap. For all my three consoles, which I admit is completely decadent, I spend about 300€. And they never need new hardware, which makes it even cheaper for me.
- Ease of use: I'm not an expert expert, but I can build a computer from scratch and install and configure linux. That's not a great feat for the real crack pros, but I think that still puts me in the top 10% of all PC users when it comes to understanding the technology. And even I spend between one half and two hours on the majority of my PC games before I got them running in way that is playable. Consoles don't need hardware upgrades and they don't need new drivers. There never are issues with new hardware not working with old games. I think for many people this is a major factor. Hell, it has become a major factor for me!
- As of now, there is none of that DRM crap that PCs are suffering. When I have the disk, I can play the game. Easy as that! No always online, no rootkits, no forced registration. There's a number of PC games I boycotted because of this, but with the console versions I now don't have a problem.
- Obviously, the games. I love Metal Gear Solid, Halo, Shadow of the Colossus, Valkyria Chronicles, and Okami. I can not play those on a PC. However for me, the number of games that I would want to play but are PC exclusives are much smaller.
And while console graphics are usually not as advanced, that often is not an issue. I have ancient PS1 games on my PS2 that I love to death and still play a lot. And unlike on my PC, my console games from the early 90s still run without trouble. I can't get Tie Fighter to work correctly no matter how much I tried.

If you want to get the latest games with great graphics, then yes. This is not a good moment to buy a console. But If you want to play older games, this is an excelent time to buy a console!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yora

[snip]And even I spend between one half and two hours on the majority of my PC games before I got them running in way that is playable.[snip]

---

I have seen this thrown around a lot, and I've got a question in regards to this.

My background: I'm an IT systems professional, so I realize I take things for granted that are absolutely incomprehensible for standard users.

That being said, what do you do for the 30 minutes to two hours? What do you have to do to get the games running?
Of all the games I have installed and played over the last, say, 6 or 7 years, I had exactly ONE that gave me a hard time - Skyrim. With pretty much every other game it was
- run installer
- choose location
- let it install
- run launcher
(- maybe let it install an update)
- click "play"

I don't have a high-end rig, but that's pretty much everything. So, unless you're counting the "Time used for installation" into your estimate, I really don't see where you'd need upwards of half an hour per game to get it running. Unless the rig in question is loaded with lots of extraneous "security" software or has hopelessly outdated drivers or something.

Nothing against you personally, but I see that thrown around a lot, and it really irks me. What do you people DO with your poor PCs? :smallfrown:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whoracle

Nothing against you personally, but I see that thrown around a lot, and it really irks me. What do you people DO with your poor PCs? :smallfrown:

---

I had to track down what felt like dozens of patches to get Thief - The Dark Project to run well on my machine. It refuses to even install on Windows NT unless you use a special console command.

Maybe that's what he meant? This is only a problem though if you're trying to play ancient/obscure stuff and you need to go through crap like manually making a DOSBox config for it yourself. Modern games are painless to install.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yora

- My number 1: Couch! I played on my desk for over 15 years and I just can't stand it anymore. Sitting or even lying lazily on my couch is a vastly "improved gaming experience" for me.

---

Also: Who says you need to play PC games at a desk? I game in bed. Besides, you can hook up your PC to a TV in the living room and use a wireless controller if you really want to play on the couch. And if you wanna play Starcraft or something else that's unplayable without a mouse+keyboard you can get a little plastic thing that sits on your lap that you can put your wireless keyboard/mouse on (this is what I use to play in bed.)

Oh god, don't get me started. I'm in IT as well and I can say from experience that it all depends on the game and the rig you've got. Many combinations work, and it's amazing when they do, but there are some which can have you tearing your hair out.

My last PC game I had trouble getting to run properly (and keep in mind I don't buy PC games too often) was Black & White 2. I had a perfectly good video card for the time, however I found out I needed updated drivers for my card to play the game without messing the bed after a couple of hours in. Of course, drivers for my particular model of card didn't exist and I had to go off recommendations from other users on what I could substitute (which is dangerous on it's own). That whole process took a whole night of swearing, research, installing and rebooting.

Mind, I've had plenty of games which have just worked without trouble as well, but I think the console is just worth it so I don't have to worry about dealing with this sort of problem anymore.

Although Skyrim definitely likes to test my patience in that regard, despite that it's a console game :/

One thing I also like about consoles is I don't have to worry about feeling like my PC set up is inadequate because I can't have respectable graphics for a higher end game. My console, while it may not be able to do the highest quality stuff that the PC can pump out, still gives me an enjoyable experience which includes all the visual features I find necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whoracle

I have seen this thrown around a lot, and I've got a question in regards to this.

My background: I'm an IT systems professional, so I realize I take things for granted that are absolutely incomprehensible for standard users.

That being said, what do you do for the 30 minutes to two hours? What do you have to do to get the games running?

---

Mostly googling for solutions that help me getting the game to run at more than 15 fps (Stalker, Skyrim), getting Rrid of "Out of Memory" error messages (Starcraft 2), enabling sound (Tie Fighter), restore missing textures (FreeSpace 2, Neverwinter Nights), reduce the massive surface glare that makes everything so bright an can't see the HUD after getting a new graphics card (Portal), solving fps jumping from 70 to 14 every couple of seconds (The Witcher), fixing broken fonts (Warcraft 3), playing a 4:3 game on a 16:10 screen withoutstretching (Warcraft 3, Baldur's Gate 2).
Stuff like that. Updating video drivers is always the first step, which means getting the correct driver for my card and installing it, which somehow often takes much longer than it should, but usually doesn't solve anything.
To stop Starcraft 2 from slowing down to a crawl after 5 minutes, I needed to download a couple of developer tools to get deep into the guts of WinXP and manually overwrite memory allocation. That one took me at least 8 hours spread over three days.
And I am done with that ****! I'm over with it and I don't care enough for PC exclusive games to put up with that anymore.

So, mostly old games on new hardware, apart from the notoriously broken ones, then?
I can get behind that,yeah, but it's hardly what mainstream PC gaming looks like.
And at least you CAN get those games running. Try that with old console games when you don't have the console in question anymore.

Same with the 4:3 / 16:9 problem. Try running PS2 games in FullHD. Won't happen.

STALKER was a bitch, yeah, and Bethesda have to my knowledge NEVER produced a game that was playable on release. I remember a bug when Oblivion came out ion the 360 where the textures didn't load and all you saw was wireframes. During the tutorial. The friend who bought it was cursing for over two hours on that one.

But (once again excluding the notoriously bad devs out there) current games on current hardware will generally work, on either PC or the consoles.

Kinda stumped on your SC2 errors there, though. Blizz is renowned for being almost bug free, last I heard, so that one surely sucks.

Part why it took so long was because it was not a very common error.

And yes, many of the problems are related to old games on new hardware, new games on old hardware, and notoriously buggy games. But that does not actually leave a lot of games that don't run into any of these three problems.
It's true that when a console is dead and you can't get a new one, there's no way to play the game. But my brother just recently got himself a second hand SNES and the oldest games I have are PS1 games, which do run on PS2s. Which are still in production.

The oldest PS1 games are as old as Tie Fighter, and as much as I tried, I can't get the game working without sound and graphics glitches.

Hardware problems on PC are an issue. How much of one and how much it influences the ability to play the games you want, is a case by case thing. If I always have the latest hardware on my computer and play games only within one year of release, this might not actually be a significant problem.
But PC is not the universally the superior alternative to consoles in all respects.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yora

The oldest PS1 games are as old as Tie Fighter, and as much as I tried, I can't get the game working without sound and graphics glitches.

---

Did you try DOSBox? Or was that what you were getting the glitches in?

As for getting old stuff running on modern PCs, that's pretty much what GoG are there for. Never had a problem running the Freespace 2 downloaded from there.