Top 7


  • sargonvi - October 24, 2011 7:36 p.m.

    Too Human was meant to be a trilogy, I like to think that is why the story was wonky. In all I loved the game and would like to see the next two in the series completed.
  • Jedipimp0712 - October 24, 2011 8:36 p.m.

    i also loved the concept, i got 8 of my friends to buy it on day one because of the hype i gave it. needless to say only one of my friends still has it and we play every once in a while. i would really like to see the team known as Silicon Knights NOT make this game though. i do not think they, as a studio have enough experience nor the leadership and skill to make a stellar AAA game. its unfortunate too, because i think Too Human was such a brilliant idea, along with the advertising known as "The Goblin Man of Norway" watch them, you will probably agree.
  • Fiirestorm21 - October 24, 2011 7:28 p.m.

    To be honest, I loved Alpha Protocol, warts and all. I think out of all of Obsidian's games it has the most potential in a story. As long as they pull their heads out of their asses and stop making the same mistakes they keep making with every damned game they make, it could be absolutely brilliant. And I could tell other gamers I love it without them looking at me funny. Homefront on the other hand represents probably the greatest case of disappointment in a single game that I've ever personally experienced. It had so much potential! But the developers knew it, and that was the problem. As South Park would say, they were high off the smell of their own farts; so caught up in how much potential their game had they forgot they still had to put in the work to meet the potential halfway. I never even got to finish the game. That wasn't a conscious choice of rebellion against its quality or anything. The game was so buggy that I couldn't progress any further; even starting a new game didn't fix it, I'd just get to the same point and the same bug would strike.
  • DaveGoose - October 24, 2011 7:26 p.m.

    Cool Top 7, I liked the Too Human entry. Thought the game was ok, a sequel would be interesting.
  • g4m3rk1dd - October 24, 2011 7:17 p.m.

    Brink would be much better too if they gave some kind of tutorial on how to play...i spent a whole day just figuring out the controls. also there was no parkour in that game...just free running...not alot of that either unless you play as security on the hardest mode and you know how to think missions were unnaturally harder than the anarchy missions...
  • archnite - October 24, 2011 7:16 p.m.

  • BlackElement17 - October 24, 2011 7:15 p.m.

    I would like to see H. Jon Benjamin make an appearance in and alpha protocol game
  • mbrown3 - October 24, 2011 7:06 p.m.

    Agree with all of these, though I'm not 100% with you on Homefront. I still play that one and think it's pretty fun (not the MP, the SP). It's just too darn short. It's like they ran out of money...or time...or both. Glad they've got another one coming though. I also think Brutal Legend was a pretty good game. The one I MOST agree with you about is Alpha Protocol. Never have I been so excited about a game, and so disappointed. Seriously. I've NEVER been so excited for a game as I was for Alpha Protocol. A spy shooter/action game with a large amount of RPG elements? RIGHT UP MY ALLEY. But then they dropped that horrible turd and I still haven't forgiven them. Still, if they made a sequel and did ANYthing decent with it, I'd buy it.
  • keith-saunders - October 24, 2011 7:04 p.m.

    Darkest Days, amazing concept but terrible execution, should be given new life.
  • kyle94 - October 24, 2011 7:37 p.m.

    I had forgotten about that game, but I agree with you absolutely.
  • RedHarlow - October 24, 2011 10:43 p.m.

    Darkest of Days? Really cool concept. The game isn't terrible, it's just good for some mindless shooting. I enjoy it in it's own way. If it were put into the hands of a more competent developer (or one with more money) it could be fantastic.
  • kyle94 - October 25, 2011 12:53 p.m.

    I think one of the more disappointing things with that game was that they advertised the game as being set in several time periods, but the game was only set in the Civil War and WW1, with the Pompeii section as the final mission. I would've found the game more interesting if it jumped around more. Throw a Wild West small battle, throw in a Revolutionary War battle, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, etc. and it would've been more interesting. At least, that's my opinion.
  • lilspooky - October 24, 2011 6:53 p.m.

    Alpha Protocol had the worst hacking mini game EVER! It was broken on PC. Rest of the game was alright. I would love a new Brutal Legend. One of the most interesting game intros i ever seen.
  • Brutalicus - October 24, 2011 6:52 p.m.

    If they could somehow put a little Bayonetta or God of War (or Ninja Gaiden, or Castlevania Lords of Shadow, the list goes on) into TFU, it would have been a great game. That was my biggest gaming letdown since my FFIX disc 1 broke. It says a lot that there can be a level *inside* a Sarlacc Pit and another level *inside* the Death Star cannon and they both make you want to turn to arson. So that one definitely tops my list.
  • kyle94 - October 24, 2011 6:34 p.m.

    I agree absolutely with Alpha Protocol. I'm one of the few who absolutely loved that game. Sure, the gameplay wasn't that good, and neither was the AI. But I still stand by my belief that it had some of the best choices games present. First off, you only have a limited amount of time to decide, so you can't think it over. You have to go with your gut choices. Secondly, and for some reason I just love this, a lot of the choices are meaningless. No matter what, the bad guys get their way. Either the president of Taiwan is killed, and the Chinese blamed. Or a riot starts, hurting and killing people, and the Chinese are blamed. I think that it removes which one is the good and bad choices at times. It's basically asking you whether the life of a president is worth the lives of several people. There's no "right answer", and I love that. There's no "good or evil". There's not really anything like "Donate all your money to an orphanage or burn it down" in the game. I don't know, whenever that game is brought up, I start to ramble about it. I do think that Obsidian is a very good developer, at least when it comes to stories.
  • Sinosaur - October 24, 2011 8:16 p.m.

    Alpha Protocol was pretty fun, and I totally agree about the conversation system being pretty good, although like all of those things I occasionally found myself going, "WAIT, WHAT?! I didn't mean to say something like that!" when I actually heard what my one word style choice got me... and I didn't like the reactions those got. But, overall, Alpha Protocol was fun to play once, partially because I went into it long after it had come out and didn't go in with high expectations or a full price tag paid. A second one could be a lot of fun if Obsidian learns how to finish a game before releasing it.
  • kyle94 - October 25, 2011 12:46 p.m.

    Yep, that is absolutely Obsidian's problem. Look at KOTOR 2. It's unfinished, but it had a lot of brilliant ideas behind it. It also delved into morally gray areas, and it was well written. I still remember one conversation choice being an example of that. The main character wasn't an amnesiac, and the conversations reflected that. When a general is mentioned, you don't have a choice saying "Who was that?" and getting an exposition dump. Instead, one of the choices you get was something along the lines of "I remember him, I fought alongside him at *something*. He was a good man and a brave soldier". The dialogue choice from the protagonist tells the player what they need to know. Shame about the ending, though. But I digress.
  • minimaxi - October 24, 2011 8:23 p.m.

    if I had more time to play games, I would regret passing that $2 steam deal after reading your comment. I absolutely loved Witcher 2 for the exact same reason; most if not all choices are morally grey, making you choose the lesser evil
  • kyle94 - October 25, 2011 12:50 p.m.

    I think Witcher 2 did a better job at that than Alpha Protocol did, but both did morally gray choices better than most games. Though, some of the choices in Alpha Protocol weren't that morally gray. In one case, it was pretty much "Do you save this woman you slept with, or do you stop the bombs and save dozens if not hundreds of innocents?" At least for me, that one was a rather simple decision between serving yourself and serving others. However, some choices in the game didn't even seem like choices, or I actually regretted. One example of that is (and this is going into spoiler territory so don't read it if you have any hope of playing the game spoiler-free) one of the characters in the organization the protagonist was betrayed by was that woman's father. So, if the woman dies, you can basically tell him "Hey, you know your long lost daughter? Yea, your boss killed her." He tried to stab the guy in the back, and wounds him, but gets shot himself. In game terms, all he did was weaken the boss so he had a smaller healthbar when you fight him, or something like that. However, I felt so bad about him getting killed that I loaded an old save and didn't tell him about his daughter, just because I would rather fight a full-strength boss than see him get killed.
  • shawksta - October 24, 2011 6:29 p.m.

    If were lucky, these games can get the same treatment Red Steel did to be a better sequel. I loved Brutal Legend, its fun and the main character was Jack Black, I hope they make a sequel to make this game much better.

Showing 41-60 of 76 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000


Connect with Facebook

Log in using Facebook to share comments, games, status update and other activity easily with your Facebook feed.