• 86 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by buft (3317 posts) -

I have no previous knowledge of the shadowrun products except the god awful Xbox game and i have to say i'm having a lot of fun with this game, bought it on an impulse while the preorder deal was on today and played around 3 hours of the default story.

I chose to go with a Decker/Rigger build which lets me jack into the matrix and also roll with combat bots, the early combat is pretty simple/tutorial like but i can see it getting a lot harder in the later levels or at the very least allowing plenty of depth when it comes to the player created campaigns.

share your thoughts and experiences, please no spoilers

#2 Posted by Ares42 (2663 posts) -

I dunno.. there's nothing wrong with the game per se and I'm having a decent time with it, but it's not blowing my mind in any way. I was pretty deep into the shadowrun universe in my youth, and while it does a decent job at capturing the magic of shadowrun I feel like the limitations of being a kickstarter product doesn't allow it to fully come to fruition. And as for almost every other aspect of the game it's very run of the mill.

With this and Larry Reloaded (go ahead and flame me all you want) being both completely adequate games but requiring a pretty apoligetic approach to not be considered something very forgettable I'm starting to think that the mark "Kickstarter game" is something I need to be more wary about.

#3 Posted by el_tajij (711 posts) -

@ares42: This is not a flame but it's funny cause I'm of the polar opposite opinion. I backed both Shadowrun Returns and Mercenary Kings on Kickstarter and the experience has been fucking amazing! Essentially getting two of my dream games in the same week has really opened my eyes to what a great thing the Kickstarter model is. I've played a few hours and it's everything I was hoping it would be. So, pretty pleased here!

#4 Edited by cassus (376 posts) -

@ares42:

Nostalgia titles on kickstarter might be a more specific thing to look out for. Especially those made by somewhat inexperienced developers, which is often the case for remakes and spiritual successors. I think it's far too early to start being critical of Kickstarter, we've only seen the very first few games, those with the shortest development time and smallest budgets/teams. Wait until Chris Avellone or Double Fine have dropped games, I think we'll all feel better about this whole thing. The alternative is for devs to run around looking for money to do games like these, cause without kickstarter we would DEFINITELY not be looking at huge adventure game releases or CRPGs inspired by games from the golden age of RPGs, full stop. Not even PC RPGs, I mean all RPGs ever, end of the 90s was where it all culminated and we've gotten easier and dumber RPGs ever since. We just couldn't expect games like that ever again if it wasn't for kickstarter. So we haven't exactly lost anything, we've got a new way to fund games=a lot more games that would never have seen the light of day, and a lot more game studios that employ passionate developers.. and THAT in itself should be worth the money, cause damn.. I've seen little passion and love put into any AAA title the past few years.

That being said.. Just bought Shadowrun.. Will be back with an edit once I've actually played it. Maybe I'll lose faith as well..

Edit: Found a bug that broke the game for me. The camera drifts to one side and just stays pinned to the edge of the map. I removed all joysticks and stuff but it still does it. Gonna have to play some Mercenary Kings instead, I guess.

#5 Edited by Ares42 (2663 posts) -

@cassus: I wouldn't say I've lost faith, it's just sorta become this thing of "it's good.... for a kickstarter game" if you know what I mean. Playing this game I just wish it had way way better presentation (which would require a bigger budget). Although I'm generally a gameplay kinda guy, this game would've been so much better with voicework, cutscenes or even just bigger animated conversation models. It's just all about selling the Shadowrun vibe, and it's hard to do with a pretty far away isometric view and lots and lots of text-boxes.

#6 Posted by NinjaPartTime (25 posts) -

I guess I am weird, but I am actually glad that it is all text instead of voiced. It leaves imagining what kind of voice each character might have to the player. I like all of the different references to the first game and the remixes of the original music are nice. The actual combat gameplay isn't all that exciting to me, but I'm not a huge fan of things like Xcom either. I don't dislike it, it's just not my favorite. I'm only a few hours into it (heard the game is somewhere between 10-14 hours) but I like it so far. The thought of playing extra content or creating my own content after finishing the actual game has me thinking I will easily get the value for my money out of it.

As far as Kickstarter goes, I didn't back this game because I didn't know about it until it was over. The only two Kickstarter games I have played, that I am aware of, are FTL and now this one. If those two games represent the quality to expect from Kickstarter games, then I'd be more than okay with that. That's unlikely, though.

Also, if it makes any difference, the original Shadowrun games are somewhere in my top 10 games if not top 5. I often go back and switch between the Genesis and SNES version every once in a while and both were great in their own way.

#7 Posted by cassus (376 posts) -

@ares42: Yeah, I know exactly what you mean, but we had this same thing with F2P games, the whole "It's good for a F2P game" thing we did a year or so ago, and then shit got real. Once the thing took off we had to shelve that sentiment. I can't say that this is definitely going to happen for Kickstarter, but seeing as it happened for F2P games, a genre of games which seems more likely to fail than kickstarters.. I think we can be modestly optimistic about the future.. Then again.. I might just be lying to myself to keep my faith in gaming alive..

#8 Edited by gike987 (1754 posts) -

@ares42 said:

@cassus: I wouldn't say I've lost faith, it's just sorta become this thing of "it's good.... for a kickstarter game" if you know what I mean. Playing this game I just wish it had way way better presentation (which would require a bigger budget). Although I'm generally a gameplay kinda guy, this game would've been so much better with voicework, cutscenes or even just bigger animated conversation models. It's just all about selling the Shadowrun vibe, and it's hard to do with a pretty far away isometric view and lots and lots of text-boxes.

Maybe old isometric RPGs are just not for you. They have always described most things through text, that what gives them their charm, it's more like reading a book instead of watching a movie. I don't think Project Eternity or Wastland 2 will have the things you ask for either, even if they had got 10 million they wouldn't be what you seem to be asking for. An isometric RPG with "lots and lots of text-boxes" is exactly what people wanted when they backed these games, if the game was full of cutscenes and had animated modern-RPG style dialogs I suspect most backers would be pretty disappointed. The only thing I could imagine being in a bigger game like Project Eternity is voice acting for important lines (like in games such as Baldur's Gate).

#9 Posted by The_Hiro_Abides (1263 posts) -

I'm about 2 hours in and playing as a Decker because why wouldn't you want to punch deck? Anyway, I like it, and it definitely makes some call backs to that SNES Shadowrun game. It's nice to actually have to consider stats instead of just abilities.

#10 Posted by CornBREDX (5279 posts) -

Its good. My only complaint is the auto save system which IS AWFUL!

#11 Posted by tgammet (93 posts) -

I've never played any of the Shadowrun games before. I'm loving the setting and look of everything. I don't like the lack of save options, but otherwise I like it.

#12 Edited by xengiantbomb (20 posts) -

This has been my experience so far, take it from a person that has been running a weekly pen & paper game of Shadowrun for the last few months.

From the lore side, everything is spot on, from the corporations to the setting and the way the interaction in the main quest is presented, characters fit really well in the world and I'm eager to see what the mission editor has to offer; I'm even thinking of adapting my campaign to the game soon.

From the technical side, I love how the game looks and feels, really old school and fitting for the game overall, though the characters are not voiced it leaves a lot of room for player generated content, which is great. On the other hand, I feel kinda sad that they made an adaptation of the original game's system, though I understand that this is done with the intention of making it more accesible.

All in all I'm loving the game, I backed it from kickstarter and I don't regret it at all. Very recommended for RPG fans and especially fans of Shadowrun.

Also my first language is not english so yeah, sorry for the weird english :P

#13 Posted by Vuud (1992 posts) -

It's pretty dope. The lack of saving was a design choice, not one I agree with, but it's like that intentionally.

My two gripes: It looks like you have infinite ammo for your guns, which I don't like. I also don't like the UI, it's too much like a phone game and not very intuitive on a PC.

Online
#14 Posted by cheddardust (12 posts) -

The game is awesome.

#15 Edited by fisk0 (4110 posts) -

My only complaint is with the checkpoint system, which is just confusing. I would've preferred a regular manual save feature, but if nothing else they should at least have a timer showing how long it's been since the last checkpoint when you exit.

Other than that, I really like the writing, setting, music and combat so far (about two hours in).

#16 Posted by Kinbote (1 posts) -

Anyone lean primarily on the Genesis version for their Shadowrun nostalgia? The sense of moderate openness that game had feels lacking in the first 90 minutes or so here; environments feel a little bit more linear and deserted than I might have hoped. Perhaps there's a little more diversity in where you can wander and who you can speak to later on, I suppose.

Or maybe the rosy glint of youth is casting the old Genesis game in rather better light than it deserves.

#17 Edited by supamon (1333 posts) -

Never had any experience with ShadowRun before but I backed it and played about an hour. It seems like XCOM with RPG and open world elements in it which is fine by me. Looking forward to the community coming up with good content that I can go through and pick up every once in awhile.

#18 Edited by Jackel2072 (2261 posts) -

i have played for 30 mins so far. just enough to give me a taste. i like the combat and the story is a typical set up for just some good old fashion Cyberpunk fun. I have 3 days off this week. im looking forward to spending my time with this game.

#19 Posted by Armoes (64 posts) -

I'm enjoying it.

I want the text / dialogue box to be a bit bigger (There's lots of reading...)

I'm a long time Shadowrun fan so it's a bit starling to begin a little bit underpowered - but that's videogames for you. Once I get more gear and combat options I think I'll like things even better.

#20 Edited by Sackmanjones (4703 posts) -

They have mutilated the series by taking it out of its fps roots. I will never buy this game that's for sure.

#21 Edited by dekkadekkadekka (733 posts) -

My only prior Shadowrun experience was dying over and over at the start of the SNES version. So far this game is awesome!

(Also I like how the main character of the SNES version shows up near the beginning in the morgue.)

#22 Posted by StarvingGamer (8237 posts) -

I dunno. I was super hyped until I hit a bug after the encounter with the Halloweeners and couldn't make any more forward progress. I didn't lose a ton of progress but it was enough to take the wind out of my sails.

#23 Posted by LiQuid3600 (146 posts) -

I couldn't be more disappointed that they took inspiration from the SNES game over the superior Genesis game. Maybe user generated content, or Shadowrun Online can give me the rebooted, open-world Shadowrun RPG I've been waiting two decades for, but so far this isn't it.

#24 Posted by Hector (3364 posts) -

Loving every bit of it. Saving hasn't bothered me a lot. I know if I want to stop playing to at least make it into the next level so it auto saves.

#25 Edited by Coafi (1488 posts) -

The auto save is terrible! I just hit a bug where a character was blocking an area, and I couldn't pass through. I had no choice to reload, and now I got set back like an hour, after I've already done two battles. Ugh! Is there a manual save? I'm not seeing that option anywhere.

#26 Edited by ArbitraryWater (11735 posts) -

As I've said in a different thread, this game feels like the campaign for the original Neverwinter Nights where it's more about showing off the creation tools and the ruleset than actually being good on its own merits. Oh, it's fine, but I'm not pretending it's anything other than an ultra-linear middling RPG-lite with the complete insanity inherent of the Shadowrun setting.

#27 Edited by bombedyermom (229 posts) -

Enjoying it, despite the odd bug and the stupid auto save/no manual save system. Also, the Matrix stuff is super cool.

#28 Posted by Huey2k2 (491 posts) -

Personally I feel like the amount of enjoyment you will get out of the game is directly related to how much you know/like the Shadowrun setting.

As someone who has played a fair amount of the pen and paper game, I love how they managed to nail the lore/story aspects of the game...that said, the gameplay itself is pretty shallow, and building a character is obviously not as in depth as it would be if you were playing a pen and paper campaign.

If you have very limited exposure to the Shadowrun universe you might feel a little lost, and it will probably hinder your enjoyment of the game a fair amount. The game does very little to explain a lot of the lingo and lore that exists in the Shadowrun universe, which is fine for someone like me, but will most likely confuse and annoy people who have had no exposure to it before.

It's not the best video game in the world, the combat is shallow, the character building isn't anywhere near in depth as it could be, it is essentially a love letter to real Shadowrun fans.

That is good enough for me, but it might not be enough for some.

#29 Edited by Itwastuesday (965 posts) -

how the eff do you overwatch?

@huey2k2: I don't know, I'm enjoying it and I have zero background with Shadowrun (though I DO have a healthy background with cyberpunk). The lingo isn't very confusing if you just assume it's a bunch of cyberpunk junk. I'm enjoying it.

#30 Edited by Xymox (2088 posts) -
@huey2k2 said:

will most likely confuse and annoy people who have had no exposure to it before.

I have no idea what Shadowrun is, but when I heard it basically described as "Elves and Dwarves in a cyberpunk setting" I got interested. When I saw that it's basically X-Com but an RPG I was like yup, I want that.

@supamon said:

Never had any experience with ShadowRun before but I backed it and played about an hour. It seems like XCOM with RPG and open world elements in it which is fine by me. Looking forward to the community coming up with good content that I can go through and pick up every once in awhile.

I hear the "open world"-ness of it is mostly just an illusion though and that it isn't like older rpgs where you can just leave an area whenever you feel like it and go do something else/do side quests. Have you had a chance to play more of it and would you say it hurts the game that it doesn't give that "old school freedom of doing whatever, whenever" to the player?

@ares42 said:

this game would've been so much better with voicework, cutscenes or even just bigger animated conversation models. It's just all about selling the Shadowrun vibe, and it's hard to do with a pretty far away isometric view and lots and lots of text-boxes.

I'm of a completely different view concerning this. This game, from what I've seen of it, lets you actually roleplay your character which seem to do a pretty good job to sell the Shadowrun universe to you from what I've seen. Like, the options you choose probably don't have a huge impact on things, but the fact that you get to actually pick things to say that's more than the standard evil/neutral/good responses goes a long way in actually making an RPG. If they had voice acting, that would a) detract from the experience if it was poor voice acting and b) not allowed them to flesh out the dialogue. The isometric view is welcome in my book, and the static camera fixes one of the biggest problems with how X-COM worked.


Its good. My only complaint is the auto save system which IS AWFUL!

I've been hearing bad stuff about this and I'm concerned. It's actually making me not want to pick the game up. I just don't see why they'd decide to use a checkpoint system. I don't want to quit the game only to come back and have to go through hours of dialogue options again. It leads to one of two things:
1. Doing the exact same thing again, which is dumb.
or 2. Picking different dialogue responses because you've already seen the outcome of the others, effectively altering your play through and going against what your character would actually say. Not to mention having to re-do battles sounds really, really tedious. Hopefully they'll patch some quick saves into this thing.

#31 Posted by bombedyermom (229 posts) -

@xymox said:
@cornbredx said:

Its good. My only complaint is the auto save system which IS AWFUL!

I've been hearing bad stuff about this and I'm concerned. It's actually making me not want to pick the game up. I just don't see why they'd decide to use a checkpoint system. I don't want to quit the game only to come back and have to go through hours of dialogue options again. It leads to one of two things:

1. Doing the exact same thing again, which is dumb.

or 2. Picking different dialogue responses because you've already seen the outcome of the others, effectively altering your play through and going against what your character would actually say. Not to mention having to re-do battles sounds really, really tedious. Hopefully they'll patch some quick saves into this thing.

It's not as bad as people suggest. Re-doing battles does suck, but you're never losing "hours of progress". Unless you play really, really slowly. The missions are short and sweet, and the long ones are broken up into multiple maps. The game saves at each map change, so I would hazard a guess that the average player would lose 20 minutes of progress if they died.

Don't get me wrong, the save system sucks. But if it's not nearly bad enough to stop me from recommending the game to someone. It's worth playing, even with the stinky save system.

#32 Edited by 2HeadedNinja (1617 posts) -

They have mutilated the series by taking it out of its fps roots. I will never buy this game that's for sure.

I'm honestly not sure if you are trolling or not.

@Topic:

Only was able to play about an hour so far, but love it. I think voice acting would have been nice, but I can handle that it's not there. The interface in parts is not awesome and no free save is a bummer, but all of that won't stop me from enjoying the game.

#33 Posted by Xymox (2088 posts) -

It's not as bad as people suggest. Re-doing battles does suck, but you're never losing "hours of progress". Unless you play really, really slowly. The missions are short and sweet, and the long ones are broken up into multiple maps. The game saves at each map change, so I would hazard a guess that the average player would lose 20 minutes of progress if they died.

Don't get me wrong, the save system sucks. But if it's not nearly bad enough to stop me from recommending the game to someone. It's worth playing, even with the stinky save system.

Okay, well that sounds more reasonable.

Is there any on-screen indication of when the game saves your progress? Like an icon or some text?

#34 Edited by MiniPato (2741 posts) -
@xymox said:
@ares42 said:

this game would've been so much better with voicework, cutscenes or even just bigger animated conversation models. It's just all about selling the Shadowrun vibe, and it's hard to do with a pretty far away isometric view and lots and lots of text-boxes.

I'm of a completely different view concerning this. This game, from what I've seen of it, lets you actually roleplay your character which seem to do a pretty good job to sell the Shadowrun universe to you from what I've seen. Like, the options you choose probably don't have a huge impact on things, but the fact that you get to actually pick things to say that's more than the standard evil/neutral/good responses goes a long way in actually making an RPG. If they had voice acting, that would a) detract from the experience if it was poor voice acting and b) not allowed them to flesh out the dialogue.

I agree. Adding voice acting just adds pressure to the writing and they aren't free to tweak/rewrite lines for fear of re-recording dialogue. Although mainly, I don't think I'd be able to bear all the sci-fi slang they toss around if there were actual voices reading those lines. I'd rather leave the voices to my imagination in that respect.

Not knowing anything about Shadowrun other than the critically panned FPS "reimagining," I am enjoying Shadowrun Returns. The world is interesting, the writing is great, and the environments are very well done. I honestly just bought it today as a kneejerk purchase. Cyberpunk X-Com? Sign me up. Then had an onset of buyer's remorse as I was overwhelmed with all these stats and abilities and had to read all this text about what everything does. But once I got into it, I managed to makes sense of all the slang and the bulky UI. And surprisingly, I found myself wanting to read all the dialogue and got immersed in the world. I've been enjoying the combat too from what I've played of it.

I do have some complaints. It's very difficult to get people into position when it's behind an object or wall. Sometimes you have to find some magic sweet spot to get the cursor to change to move your unit onto that tile if there's an environmental object obstructing your view. Certain environmental objects like walls should give cover bonuses too. And yes, the autosave can be irritating. I haven't had to redo any battles, but I did find myself having to reload because I forgot to spend my surplus karma points in charisma before triggering a conversation where I can take advantage of it. Having to get set back a few minutes for that is annoying. I don't know how robust the Shadowrun editor will be, but I would like more variety in character customization in terms of cosmetic customization. Can't say I'm a fan of any of the male character portraits they offer up, so that's why I went with a female character.

#35 Posted by 2HeadedNinja (1617 posts) -

@xymox said:

@bombedyermom said:

It's not as bad as people suggest. Re-doing battles does suck, but you're never losing "hours of progress". Unless you play really, really slowly. The missions are short and sweet, and the long ones are broken up into multiple maps. The game saves at each map change, so I would hazard a guess that the average player would lose 20 minutes of progress if they died.

Don't get me wrong, the save system sucks. But if it's not nearly bad enough to stop me from recommending the game to someone. It's worth playing, even with the stinky save system.

Okay, well that sounds more reasonable.

Is there any on-screen indication of when the game saves your progress? Like an icon or some text?

Yeah, it says when it saved ... but as @bombedyermom said: You clearly see when it changes maps (since there is a loading screen) and thats when it saves. I would bet they patch in free saving at some point. Game is still topseller on steam so I think they have some money incomming.

#36 Posted by Stete (736 posts) -

Damn, I was looking forward to this, but after hearing about the save system I was completely shocked! Why oh why would you have checkpoints and not hard saves in a game like this?

#37 Posted by Morningstar (2161 posts) -

The game is good albeit a bit disapointing in some areas. I wish it was less linear, had more exploration and a bit more complexity in the combat. The world is amazing though, and I do like the writing and the characters. All in all worth my 20 dollars, even it if isn't much of an rpg.

#38 Edited by Xymox (2088 posts) -

@minipato said:

I agree. Adding voice acting just adds pressure to the writing and they aren't free to tweak/rewrite lines for fear of re-recording dialogue. Although mainly, I don't think I'd be able to bear all the sci-fi slang they toss around if there were actual voices reading those lines. I'd rather leave the voices to my imagination in that respect.

Indeed. And it seems like this game actually has some great writing so I wouldn't be too worried about it having no voice acting. Maybe it's also that I'd be worried that all of the cyber lingo thrown into the dialogue would end up kind of awkward if spoken due to it being a kickstarter project and not exactly being able to spare incredible amounts of money on voice talent.

@2headedninja said:

Game is still topseller on steam so I think they have some money incomming.

Happy to hear it. We don't get a lot of these kind of games, so I'm glad it exists.

I wonder what the Project Eternity and Planescape developers feel about it, because I assume they're paying attention to what's happening with Shadowrun. I mean, sure, it's still kind of early to tell, but it's positive that there still seems to exist some kind of market for this kind of game and that it's possible to release a somewhat successful throwback game using the kickstarter model.

#39 Posted by Ares42 (2663 posts) -

@gike987: I'd say it's more that isometric RPGs were great 10+ years ago, and I loved them back then, but the genre has evolved since then and we've seen great ways of doing RPGs like these that make them even more awesome. I'm not saying it's bad, I just wish it was so much more. I mean wouldn't you have loved to see this same amount of effort into the Shadowrun style/setting put into a game like Mass Effect or Fallout 3 ?

#40 Posted by supamon (1333 posts) -

@xymox said:
@supamon said:

Never had any experience with ShadowRun before but I backed it and played about an hour. It seems like XCOM with RPG and open world elements in it which is fine by me. Looking forward to the community coming up with good content that I can go through and pick up every once in awhile.

I hear the "open world"-ness of it is mostly just an illusion though and that it isn't like older rpgs where you can just leave an area whenever you feel like it and go do something else/do side quests. Have you had a chance to play more of it and would you say it hurts the game that it doesn't give that "old school freedom of doing whatever, whenever" to the player?

That's what I read as well actually. In an ideal game for me it would be open world but I understand that with time and budget constraints, that's not possible. Given the scope of the game, I don't think it hurts the game and I'd rather have a well made linear experience then a broken open world so it's a good start to me. Hopefully the community will create quality stuff that surprises everyone. Kinda sounds like the situation Neverwinter nights 1 was in but I never played that.

#41 Edited by supamon (1333 posts) -

@xymox said:

@minipato said:

I agree. Adding voice acting just adds pressure to the writing and they aren't free to tweak/rewrite lines for fear of re-recording dialogue. Although mainly, I don't think I'd be able to bear all the sci-fi slang they toss around if there were actual voices reading those lines. I'd rather leave the voices to my imagination in that respect.

Indeed. And it seems like this game actually has some great writing so I wouldn't be too worried about it having no voice acting. Maybe it's also that I'd be worried that all of the cyber lingo thrown into the dialogue would end up kind of awkward if spoken due to it being a kickstarter project and not exactly being able to spare incredible amounts of money on voice talent.

Yep. VO is really costly. I'm taking it as if I'm reading a story so I can come up with my own voices and role play it a little that way.

#42 Posted by Vuud (1992 posts) -

This is a fun little RPG but Shadowrun Online actually looks a helluva lot more interesting.

Online
#43 Posted by buft (3317 posts) -

Enjoying it, despite the odd bug and the stupid auto save/no manual save system. Also, the Matrix stuff is super cool.

yeh it blew my mind when i found out what the decker did, i was completely in the dark until the first mission it became available and i was able to use it to complete the optional objective easily

#44 Edited by Xymox (2088 posts) -

@supamon said:

That's what I read as well actually. In an ideal game for me it would be open world but I understand that with time and budget constraints, that's not possible. Given the scope of the game, I don't think it hurts the game and I'd rather have a well made linear experience then a broken open world so it's a good start to me. Hopefully the community will create quality stuff that surprises everyone. Kinda sounds like the situation Neverwinter nights 1 was in but I never played that.

I think I'm ready to deal with it being a more linear/focused experience because we don't get many of these kinds of games, and hey it also doesn't hurt for the game to set itself apart.

Kind of like how Baldur's Gate 2 did it when they focused more on developing that one city so as to make it come alive, as opposed to how it was in Baldur's Gate when it was more spread out and there just weren't as many dynamic events or any feeling of things changing over time. If Shadowrun focuses on smaller areas with bitesized lore creating the illusion of a much bigger world the sum of all those small parts can become something truly interesting.

So it could work in its favor, but I still worry that it might turn into some "go into this area, click on everything, go to the next story area" thing.

#45 Posted by gsquirrelgo (48 posts) -

I'm really enjoying it. Yes it leans heavily on nostalgia, but I think they were pretty clear about that from the get go. I think it shows a lot of promise for expansions, user generated content and mods.

#46 Posted by daggon55 (114 posts) -

Gameplay is fine, feels like a combination of old Fallout and new X-COM which is a good mix. I'm not really feeling like my skill upgrades are doing much for me yet, but maybe some of the later stuff will feel more powerful.

System wise it feels like a throwback towards the 2nd edition tabletop rules where you had the skills in the tree and had to raise base skills to raise more specialized ones. But overall it does bear much resemblance to the tabletop game mechanically, which is totally fine its a video game it should be different. Mostly the old 2050 stuff, big ass cyberdecks, everything still requires a wired jackpoint, magic and cyberware still freak people out a bit.

I'm intrigued by some of the story stuff, they've been dropping several Universal Brotherhood and Chicago references into it. I hope thats an indication of where the story is going, because that stuff gets crazy.

#47 Edited by gike987 (1754 posts) -

Minor ending spoiler: http://i.imgur.com/Ho7q2x0.jpg Looks like there may be some returning characters in the Berlin DLC.

The game was pretty good, played it on Hard, but could have been better. I liked the combat, the game started of too easy but the second half had some pretty fun challenging fights. Although, it definitely wasn't a deep RPG it's better than nothing (I don't know how many years it has been since we saw a turn-based RPG similar to this on PC). I'm still looking forward to Wasteland 2 as that game looks like a more full-fledged RPG.

The story was good. I have never played or read anything about Shadowrun, I only bought the game because I like RPGs, but I ended up really liking the world by the end. Fantasy and Cyberpunk is a better mix than I thought it would be.

#48 Posted by Irvandus (2879 posts) -

With the exception of the save feature being terrible I'm really enjoying it. The only other knock I have against it is that the amount of times I actually get to use my Decking skill is disappointing.

#49 Posted by Animasta (14691 posts) -

the gameplay actually makes me wish they would remake Fallout 1 and 2 like this, because I fucking hate those gameplay systems but they made it work (by copying xcom but still).

#50 Posted by JoeyRavn (4973 posts) -

I've downloaded it, but I haven't tried it yet. So I'll just leave this here...