should i keep ac II and fallout new vegas?

chrislisting

chrislisting

Banned
for christmas, i got fallout new vegas and assassins creed ii... should i keep them or should i trade them? im not a big rpg fan, though i here new vvegas is a bit different with realtime fighting. acii i played the first one so i know what to expect, but what do yo uthink? games worth keeping or shhould i get rid of them?
 
AC2 is a LOT better than the first, and not worth a whole lot so play it! (Was my favorite game that year)

New Vegas, is good, but you could trade it now and pick it up later down the line when it is cheap (or when the inevitable game of the year edition with all the dlc they release for it comes out).
 
[quote name='Kaoz']AC2 is a LOT better than the first, and not worth a whole lot so play it! (Was my favorite game that year)

New Vegas, is good, but you could trade it now and pick it up later down the line when it is cheap (or when the inevitable game of the year edition with all the dlc they release for it comes out).[/QUOTE]

This is actually the perfect suggestion. AC2 doesn't trade for much right now, but NV is pretty new so you should be bale to get some good money out of it. Since it's a singple player only game there's no rush to play it (i.e. being left behind other players or empty lobbies) so you can pick it up later for cheaper than you traded it
 
[quote name='erequena']This is actually the perfect suggestion. AC2 doesn't trade for much right now, but NV is pretty new so you should be bale to get some good money out of it. Since it's a singple player only game there's no rush to play it (i.e. being left behind other players or empty lobbies) so you can pick it up later for cheaper than you traded it[/QUOTE]
As a player of mostly single player games I find this trend towards considering games without some stupid multiplayer modes to be useless and only worth the bare minimum insulting.

From what I've experienced since I started playing online mp with some games I'd rather go back to where I had no internet at home and couldn't get online to play, snice there's far too many assholes compared to decent players out there.

Between the people who yell racial epithets and think they're cool by doing so, to the people who scream into their headsets, to the people who team kill and grief just for fun I'd rather stay playing mostly single player games or PRIVATE online matches where it's just those few friends who I know won't do any of the above.

As for FO: NV it's a decent game and I like it compared to Fallout 3. I even got used to using that formerly annoying VATS targeting system.
 
[quote name='IAmTheCheapestGamer']As a player of mostly single player games I find this trend towards considering games without some stupid multiplayer modes to be useless and only worth the bare minimum insulting.

From what I've experienced since I started playing online mp with some games I'd rather go back to where I had no internet at home and couldn't get online to play, snice there's far too many assholes compared to decent players out there.

Between the people who yell racial epithets and think they're cool by doing so, to the people who scream into their headsets, to the people who team kill and grief just for fun I'd rather stay playing mostly single player games or PRIVATE online matches where it's just those few friends who I know won't do any of the above.

As for FO: NV it's a decent game and I like it compared to Fallout 3. I even got used to using that formerly annoying VATS targeting system.[/QUOTE]

Woah! I think you totally misinterpreted my post. I'm NOT in love of MP games (and definitely I don't think that SP games are worthless, quite the opposite), but, sadly, they are the ones that are better purchased close to release date because there are more players available, everyone is on even ground, etc. On a SP game you can take the luxury to wait until the game drops to 20 or less and your experience will be the same as if you've purchased on day one. This is pure cheapass gamer logic dude.

The OP can sell or trade his NV copy now and get maybe $25 to $30 and purchase it again for $10-$15 in a year without having his experience altered in any way. And if he's like any other CAG around he probably has a sizable backlog so it makes it even more pointless to hold on to it if he's not going to play it for another 6 months or so, no matter how good a game it is.

Being smart with our money doesn't alter the appreciation of the games. For example I'd certainly prefer to play Majin than Black Ops, but if I got both as a present I'd probably sell or trade Majin for near full price and play through BO first to be able to enjoy the MP before the kiddies get too tough and then down the road purchase Majin for half of the original price or less. And I think Majin is a much better game! But not the smartest economic choice under the circumstances.
 
+1 on trading in New Vegas now and waiting for the inevitable GotY. By the time they get around to putting out the GotY, they have generally smoothed out a lot of the bugs and glitches, which is an added benefit.

I did the same thing when I got Fallout 3 the first time and was able to pick up the GotY just after it came out for only $30.
 
Poor AC2... always being shunned because of AC1.

I hated AC1, it was a bad game in so many ways. AC2 and AC:B are strong enough for me to say that AC is my favorite series this generation.
 
[quote name='nbballard']Poor AC2... always being shunned because of AC1.

I hated AC1, it was a bad game in so many ways. AC2 and AC:B are strong enough for me to say that AC is my favorite series this generation.[/QUOTE]
AC1 wasn't bad, just slow and boring. AC2 was far more fun so I agree with you there. New Vegas has too many bugs so I would trade it in as well now too.
 
[quote name='wrencrest']AC1 wasn't bad, just slow and boring. AC2 was far more fun so I agree with you there. New Vegas has too many bugs so I would trade it in as well now too.[/QUOTE]
Well- the basic graphic, combat and traversal was retained from 1 to 2, so obviously something was done right. The mission objectives, the game layout (and how it was all announced at the beginning), and the sell of assassinating people (when 90% of your time is spent watching people from benches) was kind of a bummer.
 
I have both just keep them, Assassins Creed 2 is better than the first game. Haven't played enough of New Vegas though but from what I played its like an expansion to Fallout 3.
 
Definitely play AC2 first. My GOTY of 2009. Trade in NV while the value is high and get Fallout 3 for dirt cheap. If you like the game enough to finish the game, you probably spent so many hours on it that NV would have gone down in price tremendously. Than buy that.
 
well after reading all that, much opinionated i might add

i kept both

fallout is an interesting rpg, never quite played one like it before

AC2 turned out to be brotherhood, so since they are both brand new games, i decided to keep them as gifts

thanks for all the input, knowing ac ii and brotherhood are good made a difference, and everyone likes fallout so im happy with keeping them, especially since theres nothing out right now to get (and they came to 70 bucks together at best buy so my g/f was happy about that lol)
 
You made the right choice. They were given as gifts, so if you had an interest in them at all, sticking with them is the best choice to make.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top