Recent reviews by kahnwiley

It's a fun-filled afternoon or evening of ruining a country.

Those interested in current events or politics will certainly want to try this out (especially if it is on sale).

If you like Half-Life, I don't know why you wouldn't own/play/enjoy this.

I have over 1,000 hours in Stellaris, probably over 100 of that in the fantastic mod, Star Trek: New Horizons.

I was interested to see how Paradox's "official" Star Trek spin on Stellaris would compare to the existing game/mod combo.

I am a sucker for anything "Star Trek," so should be a pretty easy sell to convince me a Star Trek game is something that is worth my time/energy.

UNFORTUNATELY, as this seems to have been abandoned by the devs, I cannot recommend purchasing the game until/unless it gets a little more TLC. As it is, it is nothing more than an broken promise.

Details follow. . .

The pros:

1. It just works - really, I had not major bugs or gameplay issues and most of those issues mentioned by others seem to have been patched out quickly. Compare this to ST: New Horizons, which is still constantly playing catch-up as Paradox releases update after update for Stellaris--it is a great mod, but there are recurrent issues due to the ongoing fluctuation in mechanics and re-balancing of the base game.

2. Content seems very consistent with established ST canon - as a die-hard Trekker, I really appreciate a game that is respectful of the series that have been produced to date. This game, IMO, does an excellent job recreating the TNG-era galactic atmosphere in the Stellaris format.

Mixed bag:

1. Early progression is interesting/late progression is boring - the gameplay loop and all the various aspects of management, as with Stellaris, are engaging (if you are into the grand strategy/(micro-macro)management genre. It is demanding on your attention until you establish an advantage (technologically or otherwise), and then it is up to the pre-established gameplay mechanics to limit your runaway hegemony over the other galactic powers.

Stellaris, has established a great number of late-game mechanics (mostly available through DLC) that keep things changing and challenging you all the way to your eventual triumph or defeat. This game does not yet have this rich buffet of political, technological, espionage-oriented, etc. mechanics. It runs out of steam after a certain point.

Cons:

1. NO UPDATES SINCE DECEMBER - yeah, I think this might've gotten caught up in the whole "Embracer" thing. Ugh. That sucks, because I think this could easily have been the next "Birth of the Federation" if Paradox would have just given it a minor iota of attention.

2. The scope is quite limited - you only have the one galaxy to play in (no galaxy generation options, as there are with Stellaris). This kinda makes sense for ST: Infinite 1.0, but with further development this game would definitely benefit from--nay, require--more ability for the players to fine-tune the starting parameters for the game they are about to spend hundreds of turns playing.
It also starts in the TNG era, which to me makes less sense than a grand strategy game encompassing all of Federation (or Romulan, or Klingon, etc.) history. The extant mod already does this quite well, incorporating canonical events from all the shows.
As it is, you can only play as a few galactic powers, whereas with the mod, you can even play as a minor power like the Kazon (though why you would want to, is beyond me).
Admittedly, if the mod did not exist, the game's limitations would not seem so glaring. But in its current state, with a better alternative available, this just seems like a half-finished game which may never be completed--as a result of poor prioritization of projects, rather than irreparable problems with the game itself.

This game could be decent if it got a little support from the developer. The longstanding curse of universally mediocre Star Trek games apparently continues unabated, well into the second decade of the 21st century.

The game that started it all! I've loved the Fallout series ever since a friend of mine loaned me his Fallout game CD. You gotta be down with the old-school top-down isometric style to play this one and Fallout 2, but the experience is totally worth it. Loaded with pop culture references, jokes, and absurdity amidst all the graphic (for 1997) carnage. By default, the violence is turned up to 11, but you can turn it down for slightly fewer red pixels on the screen.
An awesome RPG with a lot of unique qualities to recommend it.

A must-play for RPG fans. Mods keep it fresh even to this day. Check it out and you might find yourself lost in the world of Skyrim for hundreds of hours, like I have.

It's sinfully addictive.

Good for a few hours of meaningless entertainment.

I know this game got a lot of bad press at launch, and rightfully so. The evolution of the product since then, however, has turned it into an entirely different game. No Man's Sky is now a pretty damn good first-person space exploration simulator. It has most of the elements I would look for in such a game, including base building, interplanetary/interstellar travel, space battles, fleet command, and alien encounters. Not to mention the bare-bones multiplayer functionality, which was finally added a couple updates after the launch.
Kudos to the developers for continuing development on this game in such a big way. . . It is fun to play on many levels. I'd say there's still a lot of room for improvement, but today's version of No Man's Sky is easily worth the price for the singular reason that it's the ONLY game on the public market doing anything like this right now in such an ambitious fashion.

It's like Fallout 3, but better. It's like Fallout: New Vegas, but bigger.
Okay, it's not exactly like the other two Bethesda-helmed (Obsidian produced, on FO:NV), first-person action RPG games. But it's close enough to be worth a shot if you liked the other two. And it is bigger. Arguably better. Might as well get it if it goes on sale, for the hours of gameplay and replayability definitely make it a perfect bargain buy for someone who hasn't played it yet. (Bonus that you can avoid the whole Fallout 76 shenanigans right now. . .)

Classic "3d" adaptation of the classic "3d" isometric RPG Fallout 1 & 2. Games of the Year, all of them, I believe.
Like its predecessors, Fallout 3 is a free-roaming kill-fests, or maybe a violence-optional, dialogue-centric, exploration game? I've seen claims for the latter but I doubt I could do a full runthrough without killing at least some Mirelurks, Feral Ghouls, etc. It's a very good sci-fi version of Morrowind or Oblivion (also made by Bethesda).
There's some great dialogue in here, and the real value lies OUTSIDE the main storyline. In fact, I think the majority of the locations on the map will not be revealed simply by following the main story quests. So it is pretty "exploration-heavy," which I happen to like. I also like the little side-quests that let me bust through a couple easy barriers to completion and get a more complete "story" for my character's interactions with the wasteland.
Most of the Elder Scrolls and Fallout games excel in the areas I've mentioned, to a greater or lesser degree, and Fallout 3 is one of the better examples, in my book. The main storyline is engaging (excuse the finale, which is halfway fixed by the Broken Steel Add-On) and everyone you meet feels like part of a bleak post-apocalyptic reality. More importantly, it feels like a continuation of the SAME reality as in Fallout 1 & 2. It's a great continuation of the series, and sets up the franchise for New Vegas, and Fallout 4 (no excuses for 76).
A must-have. The visuals aren't bad for a game from 2008 if you crank up all the graphics settings (which I did with glee--I certainly couldn't have done so on my PC in 2008).
I've played 50+ hours, which includes completion of the main quest and 2 of the DLC's. I estimate another 30+, perhaps 50 hours of gameplay, and I could probably go back and play the whole thing a different way after this run. Not bad, Bethesda. [Now go fix Fallout 76 and try not to charge your users for it. . .]