The combat in the Shadowrun games is terrible, though. It's not XCOM.My flatmate's been enthusing about the new Shadowrun Returns expansion, set in Hong Kong. I hear that that's available on Windows, Mac and Linux too.![]()
It's turn-based.Isn't it tactical group combat, much like the classic Black Isle Infinity/Aurora Engine games?
Which makes it superior.It's turn-based.
I'd be a lot more hyped for Fallout 4 if it was being made by Obsidian.
It's just very basic, simple, easy. It's not bad, per se, but if you're looking for that kind of combat, play XCOM. You should play Shadowrun because of story and RPG, not the combat.The combat got a lot better in the Dragonfall Directors Cut. The dramatically overhauled how armor works. But, in general, I have no complaints with the mechanics (only some of the balance, a street samurai plus rifle takes things down like nobodies business), it is over slick, easy to use, and relatively intuitive.
The first two Fallout games can run on DOS, man.True, but patience. After all DLCs for FO4 are released, Bethesda will probably give Obsidian 4 hours and a broken down PC that can run only Win 98 to create Fallout: NOLA.
And everyone will love it.
I think we are saying the same thing from different angles.It's just very basic, simple, easy. It's not bad, per se, but if you're looking for that kind of combat, play XCOM. You should play Shadowrun because of story and RPG, not the combat.
I know what you mean. I only played the MMO a little, but it was definitely an inferior experience to KOTOR. Multiplayer RTS and 1st- and 3rd-person shooters seem to work pretty well. Multiplayer RPGs, meanwhile, all seem to suffer from being multiplayer. And I've tried several of them.Been playing lots of Star Wars: The Old Republic. Enjoying it, but I can't stop myself from always thinking how much better it would be if it was a single-player game.