Anybody know where I should start Ultima?

>>11454
Underworld

>>11453
The early Rainbow Six games blow the fuck out of the new shit out there. They have a battle planner so well designed you can literally design one and let the AI pass the mission for you. You have to be a complete ADHD faggot not to like this idea.

>Ghost Recon

That series was always shit TBH, go for Operation Flashpoint 1 and its expansions, then play the ARMA games.

>Splinter Cell

All of the Splinter Cell games are good and you'd be a total faggot not to start at the first one.

>MGS3

MGS3 is the best Metal Gear in terms of gameplay to be honest, but story wise MGS1 and MGS2 are god tier and blow it out of the water. MGS3's story is pants on head fucking retarded and marks the point in which Kojima stopped giving a shit as well as his complete loss of respect for the fanbase's intelligence. With that said Metal Gear 2 for the MSX and the PS2 remakes of it play like a Zelda-esque version of MGS1 so if you end up liking MGS1 you can always try playing MG2. And honestly playing MG2 before MGS1 gives a lot of emotional impact towards a certain character who shows up in the game.

Plus MG2, MGS1, MGS2 and MGS3 all have a certain progression to them. Once you master your skills in one of them, the next one is much easier to play and it lets you have fun looking for easter eggs plus secrets.

>>11455
Operation Flashpoint 2 btw isn't as good as ARMA, however it has a much more structured campaign. With that said, everything after Operation Flashpoint 2 has been COD tier garbage for ADHD millenials.

Where should I start in Legend of Zelda series?

>>11455
>you can literally design one and let the AI pass the mission for you
I know the whole idea of playing vidya is to actually play them, but the fact that shit like that isn't blocked is pretty fucking incredible. You shouldn't have to force people to "play" the game - if there's an option to let AI do it for you, that leaves you with so much more freedom to focus on doing the shit you want. I suppose I'll start from the beginning on Rainbow Six then, I'll stop playing when I feel like it's getting shit.

>but story wise MGS1 and MGS2 are god tier
>emotional impact
That's primarily the reason why I'm playing games in order; I suppose I'll stick through the entire series in that case, especially considering Kojima apparently guides you like a retard.

>>11457
>Operation Flashpoint 2 btw isn't as good as ARMA
I'll just play both series at the same time in that case, I don't really stick with one game series at a time; I play vidya the same way I use chans.

>>11458
I'd honestly say you could start anywhere. Link to the Past and Ocarina of Time probably get the most people saying they are their favorite entries. Majora's Mask and Link's Awakening are like the hipster cred Zelda titles. Wind Waker babby's first Zelda.
Zelda 1 and 2 are the ones that are the hard ones though and Zelda 2 has a group of ardent fans but most really don't like it.
Can't say anything about the Oracle games, or the DS games, Minish Cap and Phantom Tracks?, I played a couple hours of Skyward Sword, it has motion controls and it felt weird or the Breath of the Wild.

Unless you really plan on playing the whole series and want the evolution of the series just pick a game that came out before like 2003. Really the Zelda games are very formulaic and have mostly the same game play even after the switch to 3d. The exceptions being Zelda 2 and Majora's Mask but that was more by virtue of the nature of the game itself than gameplay if that makes any sense.
There's also an Official Nintendo timeline of Zelda games that may be worth checking out but there will be immediate spoilers if you even so much as look at it.

>>11460
petty I forgot picture

>>11460
>X probably get the most people saying they are their favorite entries
I wish I could express the autism I feel when it comes to playing video games in chronological order; try to imagine it as knowing you've got spare cocaine in your drawer but you're saving it for a special occasion.

>a group of ardent fans
I feel like I'm three levels closer to normals in comparison to this point from the perspective of somebody who's never played any LoZ gaymes. Where did you start? You seem like a strong enough fan to have your word taken into account.

>Unless you really plan on playing the whole series and want the evolution of the series just pick a game that came out before like 2003
I appreciate this advice because most can be compared with most game series; I think I might just try stick through it, though unless you've got a strong recommendation of where to start instead I won't.

[spoiler]I don't pay for gaymes[\spoiler]

Also, >>11461: beautiful image.

>>11462
fuck formatting when drunk also, somebody remind me how 2 chan

>>11464
>Minish Cap

It's one of the many Zelda games that plays like more of an action game with an unlockable open world, than a non linear experience like the original. With that said the art style is cute and has some of the most awesome palettes I've seen for pixel art, which is to be expected since the art is based on the Wind Waker game.

This opinion will catch me some flack but I don't fucking care. Egoraptor (yes that casual faggot from Newgrounds) was right about the first Zelda game being a timeless classic that the sequels just don't match up to. The map design lets you sequence break as does the item acquisition. There's multiple ways to kill bosses and very few times do you need specific gimmicks to kill a boss.

Windwaker from time to time came close to recapturing that feeling for me, but it has a very linear progression which AS FAR AS I KNOW you can't sequence break without doing some glitchy fuckery.The original Zelda is a seriously excellent fucking game, in what is to me a very average series and honestly the only other modern action game with a Medieval Fantasy setting that has let me relive the wonders of cluelessly wandering about in a very open world with shitloads of bosses, obstacles, and enemies in it is the first Dark Souls.

>>11459

Yeah I don't know what caused Rainbow Six to be what it is now, a shitty gimmick tacticool shooter that tries to ape "twitch shooters" like CoD instead of what it began as, a counter terrorism manager simulator with FPS elements. Raven Shield is the pique of the series and the last entry in the game to have the battle planner in it, and it's really hard to get it running on windows 7, let alone any newer windows platforms. If you have a linux distro then you can probably try playing it on WINE.

This is just conjecture, but I think the reason why R6 moved away from the battle planner system was mostly the fault of Consoles. I remember Ubisoft really making a big fucking deal about AI companions following orders you spoke through the Xbox Live headset during E3 conferences and magazine interviews.

>>11464
>>11469
Sorry for double posting, but my memory has been jogged in regards to Four Swords and its sequel, plus the Phantom Hour Glass.

Four Swords adventure is pretty much a Co-Op only experience, additionally the multiplayer for Four Swords is abysmally fucking laggy if you try to emulate it. Now how is the game itself? Well it takes Minish Cap's combat and makes it the focus of the game along with puzzle solving. The good thing is that Minish Cap's combat is actually pretty fucking good due to the fact that Capcom at least back then, understood how 2d combat works.

So why is the combat good? The enemy attacks are well telegraphed despite the low resolution of the game due to Capcom's talented pixel artists. The hitboxes additionally also correspond nicely with most of the attack animations as well as the enemy sprites themselves. The character move set consists of the traditional 2d Zelda mechanic of blocking, slashing, and ranged combat using bows, boomerangs or bombs, however there's also a nifty little combat roll thrown into the mix. If you're familiar with Capcom's Monster Hunter, or a Souls game then you'll know how obsessed Capcom and in general Japanese devs are obsessed with I-frames.

However this is not to mean the combat is excruciatingly hard or deep, just that this risk taking maneuver was added for those who wanted to try riskier moves within the game. Interestingly enough there's multiple recurring enemies who you literally cannot beat without another player's help because there's a small puzzle involved to striking their weak spot. Moreover there's also multiple puzzles you can't solve without 2 players coordinating with each other.

However as is most couch gaming experiences, there's a pitfall to it. The pitfall being that if your coop buddy feels like a dick he can very well sabotage and compete against you in the game. How? The game has two ways in which this is possible, the first one, which is the most obvious one, is the competitive scoring system, the second one which starts innocent at first but can lead you choking your buddy's neck if he's an ass hole is the player interaction system.

What is the player interaction system? It's basically you picking up your teammate to help him up ledges, or throw him across a ravine, or hard to reach place... Yeah, your coop buddy or you, can randomly pick each other up, and once you or him is picked up said player is at the mercy of the other player. This means it's perfectly possible to have players literally throw their buddies towards powerful enemies at any point of the game.

>>11470
So the combat works, but what about the level design and overworld?

Unfortunately the game does not have a huge, or even small overworld to open up and explore, not even a hubworld. It's just a series of dungeons and levels, each with their unique sets of enemies and puzzles. Like all Zelda games since a Link to the Past it's perfectly possible to level up so badly your own character is pretty hard to kill by even the end game bosses, let alone enemies. This is even if your COOP buddy/buddies are being assholes and stealing as much unique XP as possible.

With that said the game does a very good job of making it feel you're playing a Coop experience. Both players need each other to progress the game's many puzzles and obstacles, and they're all well thought out if you only have you and a buddy, or you and 3 other friends. The coop elements don't feel latched on, there's a reason why you're playing with other people.

In all honesty though it's a Zelda game only in name. It's literally a multiplayer only dungeon crawling action game, but it's still a good game.

Next posts will be about phantom hour glass and tomorrow I'll post an actual review of Minish Cap instead of bitching and whining about the Zelda formula.

>>11471
>>11470
>>11464
The phantom hour glass is just a hot mess of a game, it's a poor attempt at trying to implement the stylus touch screen to a zelda game while completely disregarding the limitations of styluses and the hardware itself. What's the result? Movement and combat controls that are nothing more than you tapping at the world or enemies mindlessly with a stylus. Puzzles that are retardedly easy, in a series that notoriously has had easy to solve puzzles since the third entry to the series. The reason why probably boils down to the fact that these puzzles strictly involves the stylus being used.

So unlike Metroid Prime Echoes or the DS Original Moon, the stylus did not help gampeplay at all, in fact it hinders it severely.