PC games:

Completion level:

* played basics
** played to near completion
***basic completion
****played to death

Age of Empires *
Budoken ***
Civilization II ***
Civilization III ***
Civilization IV ***
Commandos *
Diablo II ****
Diablo II Expansion - Lord of Destruction ***
Guild Wars ***
Guild Wars Factions **
MUDD ***
Rollar Coaster Tycoon **
Sim City ***
Sim City 2000 ***
StarCraft *** 
Star Craft Brood Wars *
The Sims ** 
Total Annihilation CC/BT ***
War Craft II Tides of Darkness ***
War Craft ****
World of War Craft ****
World of Warcraft Burning Crusade ** X-Wing *

Warcraft Burning Crusade **, +++: Perhaps I would expect a little more from an expansion...however I still enjoy the scenery in the game and the working out of flight. Lvl 70 Druid, Lvl 60 mage. The druid is a fun class. This time around I am playing tank instead of healer. There weren't any new classes...and the skills are only a little different from when I last played. Nevertheless, it is still interesting to design a character assuming more talent points than before. One interesting design of the game is introduction of a large number of reputation bars. These have similarities to experience bars: take a lot of killing/questing to progress, there is some improvement to you character with each level of progression. Thus there is still stuff for "max-level" people to grind away for, without greatly increasing the complexity of game design. Of course my friend wants to get into Hyjal, but we'll see if that happens.

Maple Story *, +: A very simple, repetitive game. I like that it is a 2-d platform game mixed with RPG. Not much in the way of strategy though, and it is a grinding game. What kind of game gives quests of kill 999 of something anyways? However, it does have an interesting business model, since gaming is free and with a little bit of money you can make your character less generic or help in avoiding annoyances. But the annoyances are built into the game which is ironic. The game is also buggy and abounds with hackers. Just poor programming really, but they don't have money incentive to fix those things it seeems.

Guild Wars Nightfall ***, +++ - also enjoyed the addition of the Dervish and the Paragon...and heros. Perhaps it is nice to not rely on AI to control the rest of your group, although I am generally not able to control more than my own character.

Guild Wars Factions *** - haven't quite had a chance to try out all the aspects of the PvP Factions parts. The assassin and Ritualist appear to be interesting additions...somehow a complexity in using abilities as a tradeoff for something. The ritualist class appears to be a not well-defined class, and rather can almost anything it seems...except melee. The assassin is more expected, although somehow played as a point-blank caster with complex changes of skills. I didn't notice so much change in the other classes, but I still need to try them out.

Civilzation IV *** - Another in the series of the Sid Meier's series. This game is actually much more managable, such that the game does not slow down as armies and cities build up. The AI is much tougher...although it doesn't appear to cheat on low difficulties, it certainly starts with an advantage at deity...it was certainly adequately tough at prince difficulty. Diplomacy seems essential. Resources and territories have an interesting interaction. It is still hard to do much with cultural things though. Cultural takeover appears slow and often does not occur...but it's still interesting...probably only by disabling other easier victory conditions would a cultural 3-city victory happen. It seems a little strange that population is based on holding resources. I.e. healthiness is a major population limitation and the population can suddenly increase after gaining access to bananas or something. And if the access to those bananas is cut off then the population decreases for some reason. The music is also particularly better in the game, and the opening Baba Yetu theme particularly enjoyable.

Guild Wars **** - Another on-line game, but subscription free. The development team for Guild Wars is particularly good, taking care of all those little annoying things that other compaines neglect. They have the specific challenge of making a RP PvP game that is balanced and strategic. Keeping things fair is another issue as well. So far, they have done quite well. Interface issues disappear after noticing them for awhile, skills are varied and change with time, keeping people from getting too comfortable with any particular build. Classes have unique aspects and different play styles. Damage spike, damage over time, melee, range that considers physics, mesmer skill interrupt, energy denial, and a counter for just about every counter or skill. Energy for each class has different sources...mages have massive energy and regeneration potential, necros gain energy from death or self sacrifice, mesmers take energy from enemies, rangers are energy efficient, and well warriors don't get much being warriors. Having a variety of energy sources appears to vary strategies on how to defeat an opponent. Specialization is always good as well. Movement in the game also plays a significant factor in strategy and weakening opponents. PvE is okay in the game. I played through with a Ranger, Elementalist, Warrior, and Monk. Perhaps more when the expansion comes out. I still have yet to finish a few quests, although I did unlock almost everything. As far as guild aspects, I still prefer playing with friends since it is annoying to log in and wait one hour before I can play for potentially a short amount of time. Too bad.

World of Warcraft (WoW) **** - The next in the series of on-line games I've played. $15 US a month is the current going rate. I got a druid and a mage up to max level in the game...my friends and I played as Horde since one of them wanted to Shaman. The Players vs. Everyone (PvE) aspect of the game was enjoyable, with instances and exploring. The PvP aspect of the game...well, it's kind of on the random side. Perhaps the unique aspect of WoW is pitting people against each other...can't we all just get along? Not if controlling a region has benefits and the game does not allow us any normal way to communicate. Also there are rewards to killing each other. So, this is a good start at having intelligent enemies to fight against, unfortunately though, there is no balancing of tides. If more people are playing the human race, people playing horde are screwed in many ways. Most PvP games restrict the number of people for various things so this is often not an issue. Perhaps areas should be instanced, forcing an upper bound on how many of each faction are in any area. Well, my PvP experience involves 10 vs. 20 slaughters and such. I mostly did healing, but that only buys a little time. My mage had better luck, running through crouds with instant cast AoE. Yah, PvP at that time not so good. The expansion may be a little better, but I haven't tried. Other misc stuff: walked (half swam) a level 4 character to the shared auction house for alliance <--> horde transfers. Created a Warlock just for group summoning. Mage AoE good for killing 4-5 enemies at a time...stressful but fun pulling of groups of enemies.

Final Fantasy XI ** - Well, I can't say I actually completed the game since it takes sooooo long to actually progress in levels so that you can actually reach the story. level 52 is where I got with a Ranger/Ninja mithra...which is after about half a year...and I still can't advance the main story. Oh well. So, I can't say I did much in the game except for level up...some exploring...playing around with the auction house...camping NM's. Heh, I got myself a pair of leaping boots and an emporer's hairpin. Well, first try for both, so I might say luck was on my side. So, I did so when no one else happened to be there late at night, between US and Japan times. Auction stuff involved buying stuff with one character in city X and selling in city Y since mail was free. Paid for that ranger sub ninja, so not bad. Heh, rng/nin was expensive, which may have slowed down my first character somewhat. Yah was fun though. Well, getting up WHM and BLM for transportation also slowed me down a little. Yup so many other things to do that I never really got to finish the actual game. Alright though...very final fantasy. Well, except that the story was a little sparse compared. Character variation is ok, but not that significant. Well, give the roles available (heal, tank, nuke) and hate avoidance, there are specific numbers that are possible, but not that much more. The hate system did make the game interesting though...places a more realistic bound on what one can do...not just some arbitrary max number or something. It's ok...perhaps if I were to make a game, I would try to place a realistic bound on how much damage can be dealt...not sure what that would mean. But hate is a good way of doing it.

Diablo II Expansion - Lord of Destruction *** - More hack and slash.  More items.  Some different classes.  Well, it was still somewhat fun the second time around.  Although I think I played the regular version a bit much (i.e. beat basic difficulty with every class, and all three difficulties with a magician.).  The druid/assassin combo just ran through the game, and took out masters in no time.  Oh well, made it seem a little short.

Rollar Coaster Tycoon ** - Yah, this was pretty cool.  Just different and amusing.

Civilization III - *** Yah, this was more interesting that Civ II.  Much better controls, much smarter AI.  Although there are many features I haven't understood yet.  I beat it on king difficulty, and haven't gotten any further than that.  Too bad it isn't multi-player.

Diablo II ****- Well, kind of a MUDD type game.  This is probably more fun in the multiplayer sense.  As a single player game, it's still fun, but the simple story kind of leaves it sort of empty.  MUDD is a realtively simple game to play, but then most of the challenge is in designing a character based on the rules given.  Learning how to maximize benefits, minimize costs...efficiency.  What else is there to do?  Infinite exploration is not all that great.  Infinite surprises?  perhaps...I'm not sure yet though.  I suppose at some point there is mastery of the existing world.  The constrols are relatively simple.  Very little automation exists.  Hmmm...no food though.  The item set is relatively simple.  Weapon and armor related.  The ultima series had more interesting objects.  Perhaps one of the nice features is the relative smoothness of the program even when there are hordes of enemies.  I'm sure the enemy count forces some minimizations.  Multiplayer is pretty difficult since if you can't see what's going on, you can't do anything, and you die.  Lag is a typical problem, bottlenecking at the Server's connection.  But then my computer is not all that great, so it may just be me.  The game seems relatively simple so far, but I haven't played all that much yet.

Sid Meier's Civilization II: *** - Well, I played it on PSX before, so by comparison, it was really nice.  I don't get certain things about being done with unit movement implying end of turn...anyways, CivII is fun because it is quite challenging.  Different goals and governing styles are all valid, and its interesting to analyze the implications and tradeoffs of different approaches.  I think its sort of interesting...and I probably understand more about history - have more of an appreciation of humanity, having played it.  Can't say much for the graphics or controls.  Wow, this one has technology dependency listings, and goals to reach...way better than playing on the PSX.  Hehehe...I probably still could learn a lot about this game, but time flies by too much to play a single game.  So, I beat the space race at 1926 with low barbarians, at king mode, with 2 competitors on a large map.  Took three solid days of play to do so.  Why does it always seem like the computer picks on me?  The diplomacy is funny since their statements are just ridiculous generally.  The 2 computers formed an alliance to contain my aggression even though I was the smallest of the three, had by far the least military, and had been entirely defensive and never trespassed intentionally.  It's just funny because the computer is quite aggressive if you don't show any force or resistance back at them.  Yah, there are many other instances, but that would take a bit of time...peace with the computer implies they don't see any places to take advantages of weaknesses, or you have beaten em up or you've given them tribute very often.  Diplomacy is just hard when dealing with self-serving entities.  Well, I won the space race by only one year, edging the computer out on technology.  So, I forgot to place diplomats in all bordering cities.  I was robbed of about seven technologies...certain things about the game strategies seem like a mirror into why many things are the way they are.  Evolution of cultures and necessities...etc...So, I picked up this game a year or so later, and beat the game on deity with the maximum number of computers on the minimum amount of land...well, with the help of a friend in the multi-player version.  Pretty tough. 

Age of Empires * - Another strategy game.  This game probably has nice controls, but I just haven't learned them quite yet.  Total Annihilations unit commands still seem better...there's a graphical display of what is queued for a unit, and we can remove and append at any time...I don't get why the worker interrupts what it is doing at the moment and then does what is was last told to do.  We would have to schedule things in reverse order, which is just confusing.  Maybe it makes sense from a computer scheduling stack perspective, but as far as I know, people work in queue.  Interesting stuff?  Wall construction & gates are pretty nice.  Apparently they are a part of TA - Kingdoms, but I haven't seen that yet.  The computer AI seems more challenging and not so stupid, but that might just be because I don't know how to play/haven't played enough.  But then, they wander through my base all the time, over-focused on following something-or-other.  I would figure that AI would stop to reconsider what is going on since AI responds to a changing environment.  I'm just trying to figure what kind of algorithm would justify such behavior, just need to observe it more.  The many different architecture styles are interesting.  I think one of the nice features is the ability to play with someone else cooperatively on the same team.  Although it's a bit hard to coordinate with someone, it makes starting out the game easier, since by myself, I couldn't manage all that stuff yet.  Lots of buildings, lots of upgrades, maintenance on workers.  The idle workers feature is nice.  The statistics generated about the battle are really useful for analysis...compares strategies, and failures...well, I'm always interested in analysis, so extensive stats are nice.  More resource types...hmmm...complications are fun.  The trade market is a really nice feature.  Different goals in multiplayer (Relics/Wonder/Destroy) can make mastery of all different parts of the game useful..  Technology dependecy tree nice.  Units can't attack while moving...oh well, so what's with that?  Just makes horse and footman battle unrealistic.  TA allows it, but all attacks are range attacks, so it's not comparable.  Maintenance of farms seems a little problematic in battle, but makes things a little more realistic.  

The Sims ** - Well, I wouldn't know what completion is, but I haven't got anyone to max out their job.  I think one of the most fun things of the game is building up a house...design and layout.  Unfortunately, the AI control is really simple, and, let run on its own fails about 75% of the time.  Sims just can't seem to make it to bed or to work.  Oh well, so accordingly, this game takes quite a bit of time to get somewhere.  It's fun and a bit addictive.

Commandos * - Just started playing this one.  Seems pretty cool.  Each player on your team has unique skills, and working together as a team is required to complete missions.  Multiplayer would probably be difficult, but could be beneficial.  Realistic vision...enemy bodies must be taken into consideration when applying stealth.  Has certain realism, and accordingly a bit on the difficult side.

Star Craft Brood Wars * - Just started playing this one.  No comments yet.  I'm trying to figure out what changed.

StarCraft *** - Well, I finished the missions of the Terran, Zerg, and Protoss.  I'd say it took a little while, but not really all that long.  Comparison to Total Annihilation: TA has better control features: shift-controlled building, factory exit; unit controls, hold ground, roam, maneuver, hold fire, return fire which make mission just a lot easier; units can move and attack at the same time in TA (a bit more realism); radar features in TA are useful.  StarCraft has mobile buildings for Terran, building memory (once you have seen a building, it visually displays where it was), the races are quite different from each other, Protoss shields are a nice feature, Protoss Archon warp is interesting, carrier and reaver's storing of pre-built ammunition could be useful in TA (mine-layer)...mine layer is quite useless right now because mine-laying is so slow...mines should be able to be pre-built, dropped, and moved.  Star Craft isn't all that bad...and has some nice unit design features, in spite of the somewhat limited controls.

Total Annihilation CC/BT *** - This is complicated mastery.  Perhaps I will explain basic strategies in my own page?  TA.  Actually what makes this game really good is the controls.  Can you imagine running 200 units simultaneously - factory orders, builder orders, defense orders, attack forces...TA makes this just much more possible.  Although it is still missing some basics, it is manageable.  Playing up to 500 units gets even more so, but then a lot of the excess units are all given the same command, so the additional units aren't as taxing as the initial 200.

MUDD *** - well not to get too detailed into it, but for all the Multi-User Dungeons & Dragons games I've played, I've never reached the maximum level. I've primarily only played on Falcon and Winds of Change. Falcon no longer exists though. Both are Diku based mudds whatever that means. I am currently developing a generalized engine that is related and takes many of the neat or realistic ideas that I like. However, the complexity should be optional (not necessary for basic completion) allowing a playable atmosphere if desired. Some ideas: casting power control, use of senses (smell, vision, hearing), combo attacks (multi-fires makes it all just hotter), missions...Role playing. Thinking of adding bionet related features.

War Craft II Tides of Darkness *** - Better controls, variation on unit constructions and tradeoffs. Tradeoffs are really important in strategy games.  Meaning strength and weaknesses of course.

War Craft **** - Kind of a first generation real time strategy game. Controls are nothing like they are now. Ordering was complicated and slow. But the basic idea and strategies made it new and fun.

Sim City 2000 ***- I never did find a working solution for surviving on difficult.  Normal was not too difficult to finish (no disasters though).

X-Wing * - I beat most of the levels and had fun hacking the save game file.  

Sim City *** - 

Budoken *** - Some martial arts fighting game. Played with a PC speaker and 256 colors. A fairly good game at that time. Has concepts of stamina for fighting and some strange attack energy KI. Is pure martial arts with mostly realistic movement and moves. Taking injury slows you down. Shouldn't it always?