I've only played through DMS twice, but I've run through DF at least 4 times (if I include both "original" and "director's cut"), played through HK twice.

I didn't think either DF or HK limited my character choice, but as MikeMaximus says it will likely change who you choose to run with you.

I very rarely play as an adept, but one of the runs through DF was as an adept dwarf.

I've even tried freaky things like decker/mage and cyber-mage - all doable in DF, and I suspect easier in HK due to the extra cyber and the cyber-affinity stat.

Not sure what would be so hard about the boss in HK if I were not a magician - my first run through was as a straight street sam, yet that mission was only slightly more challenging than the rest of HK (which isn't saying much since the rest of HK was pretty easy). This was on hard of course. Plus I had to kill the boss totally in that one since something had stuffed up (this was prior to any patches) so I didn't have the "trickery" option.

Actually doesn't HK offer the most adept-friendly action of the series so far? You definitely get some cool swords with special powers this time around - plus more adept skills...

I thought so, some Adept skills in HK were a little buggy at launch but that's the only problem I encountered.

The sword selection made me sad after I had decided on Unarmed before seeing them. :D They defenitely look awesome.

Yes, you have some cool swords, this is certain, but for the adept, you not only need to invest in Willpower and Chi use, you also need Strength and Melee, and since you not are attacking being cover, you also need Quickness and Dodge, this left you with few karma points to invest in Charisma, that's is needed for the low profile run.

Huh - would have thought you'd be able to counter that somewhat with cyber, which is now viable for adepts due to the cyber-affinity stat - though then that would be another stat you'd have to raise...

To be honest despite the fact I had no problems completing either DF or HK, I DID think that the total amount of karma points was a bit too low - it would have been better to increase karma by about 2 points per mission at least.

In HK this is much more noticeable since your team-mates seem to gain skills at this phenomenal rate - so how many karma points are they getting per mission!? Seems like much more than the player gets...

You don't have to raise every stat that you could use in order to have a successful character. That goes for all archetypes including PAs.

I still think Dragonfall is where it's at. The story seemed better to me, even if the way it was told made the pacing suffer a bit, it was great to see it unfold. The characters were fewer, but fantastic. I especially loved Glory, still undisputed as the best Shadowrun character for me... though I loved Gaichu and was quite fond of Racter and Gobbet.

Hong Kong as a setting felt fitting and was pretty cool... but maybe more cliche in cyberpunk terms (though all that Corporations that do feng shui thing was pretty cool), whereas I didn't feel as drawn in by the premise of Berlin and was totally suckered in.

Also, I think Dragonfall was pretty challenging whereas I didn't find anything challenging about Hong Kong. Hope they go back to Dragonfall's dificulty for Shadowrun Tenochtitlán (come on! It has to happen).

Now, character advancement and cyberware were very much improved in Hong Kong.

How did Dragonfall "push you toward Decker"? I've completed DF with a number of different characters, including chromed out Street Sam, Mage, Street sam/minor shaman, rigger, etc.

Both games have one good Decker you can always bring with you (except about half a mission or so in DF).

yeah I know . But I didn't care for him . So I always like to take my favorite character with me on missions . So that mean , I gotta fill the slot that is missing . Which is decker .


Like I said . I think they are all awesome . But there is always that one game you like a tiny bit better then the others for a reason or another lol .

haha see for me , in Dragonfall my favorite was Eiger . I loved Glory and man she was so awesomely written . But Eiger lol can't help it but love her .

In Hong Kong , it was Gaichu (he was so interesting) , ISobel and Gobbet . I tolerated Duncan , just wish he was less grrr about it though .

No love for Racter? I'd say he was very well-written.

I did like Gaichu - especially in certain missions where people freak out over him. Gobbet cracked me up on occasion - she definitely had the best comments if you bring her on missions.

I agree with you about the characters in DF - Blitz was probably my least favourite character, although his "personal" mission was one of the best missions in the game. Actually that mission and the one the doctor gives you are probably my favourite missions in the series.

I guess that's the main thing for me - for some reason, most missions in HK weren't as memorable as those in DF. They were still good missions, and there were some interesting developments in some of them, just not quite the same level.

Gaishu and that part ''He is an actor wearing a costume'' Totally priceless ! XD

True . Hong Kong didn't have those side quest that had your companions seem to be invested in them . But you still had alot of more npc to talk and friend . The family in the Bar . The 3 elders who are playing a game of chess ? . even each vendors has a side story . So to me that balance it a bit in comparaison to Dragonfall .

Add the story and stuff that happen effect every npc you meet . There was an urgency there that I loved .

If I had to choose, I would go with Dragonfall. The sidequests feel more connected with the story and they can play a small role in getting you that piece of equipment you need.

Also, that part with Green Winters' DVD where he sends his final message to you saying that they are looking for you now, THAT was just freaky and unexpected.

For me it's:

1 Dragonfall
2 Dead Man's Switch
3 Hong Kong

Dragonfall had the best story, best companions, overall feel of missions was better, most memorable music of the three. Dead Man's Switch was ok, and etiquettes seemed to be more useful. Hong Kong comfortably sits last. Didn't quite like the story (though the setting had promise), didn't care much for the NPCs (and absolutely despised 'my brother'), thought that the matrix revamp was a disaster (even though it could've used a revamp, this made it worse), UI changes were meh. In fact, Hong Kong wouldn't even cut it as a good game for me, if it weren't for three factors: 1) the expansion adds to the game for the better, specially in the fights department, even if they drag on sometimes; 2) Is0bel's quest mission is easily in the top 3 missions of the trilogy, if not the overall best one; 3) The Hong Kong BBS is freaking hilarious, its quality tramples all over the previous two, and I'd call it the game's finest moment by far, which seems sad, being just a side content at best.

I beat Dragonfall and so far I've played about 20 hours of Hong Kong.

I vehemently hate the Matrix system in Hong Kong game. Every part of it is inherently aggravating & asinine, and it has nothing to do with skill either. They turned what should have been a tactical turn-based game into a real-time lightning-reflexes twitch game, even though the interface/play control is too clunky to accommodate the ultra-fast twitchy responses that the Hong Kong game demands.

The "Matrix matching mini-games" in the Hong Kong game are equally vile.

Moreover, the Hong Kong game's Matrix system makes the enemies vastly OP vs. the player, in a multitude of different ways. Just to have a fair shake, the player pretty much must keep saving every few seconds, and reloading any time the game unfairly dings him/her with an error.

In short, the Hong Kong Matrix system is some of the worst game design I've seen in a long time. It shouldn't have got past beta testing, much less been published in the final version. If the fanboys of the previous games are what caused that to happen, then it's a great lesson of why devs shouldn't listen to fanboys.

I'm assuming their intention wasn't to make the player dread playing the game, but dread is exactly what I feel every time a Matrix sequence comes up in the Hong Kong game.

The Matrix system in Dragonfall was infinitely better. They never should have changed it, especially not radically so. Like the saying goes, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

Completely agree with you there. I tolerated the matrix sections only because the rest of HK wasn't too bad (excessive boring hub conversations notwithstanding).

What is really baffling is that in the very same game, they created a turn-based stealth system for meatspace! Sure it was pretty half-assed, but it was there and at least it wasn't frustrating or annoying. More importantly, being turn-based it fit with the rest of the game. And yet, in the same game, they decided to make the stealth portions of the matrix real-time?!

It just makes no sense. Apart from the other reason it doesn't make sense, namely that all other skill/combat parts of the game are effectively turn-based.

I suspect that if they used the same mechanics as the "stealth" portion of meatspace, that it would be too easy - at least without completely revamping how many movement points entities get in the matrix. Which is just plain lazy IMO.

And then, since having a real-time crappy "stealth" portion in the matrix wasn't retarded enough, they then added that stupid simon-says/memory segment to the "hacking" portions of it. The only good thing about that is that your skill is compared to the level of the "hacking game", so it makes a difference - but seriously, what were they thinking?

If they really wanted a "puzzle" for the hacking parts, they could have easily created something turn-based - e.g. using the conversation mechanism. They could have had riddles, quizzes, mathematical equations, etc., and the higher your skill then the easier they would be to solve. Or, present some options and have skill checks required to pass them (even if they randomised the skill checks it would still be preferable to what they came up with).

I would hope that true old-school Shadowrun fanboys wouldn't have supported that - it would seem like something that players newly introduced to the Shadowrun Universe (possibly coming from other genres) would come up with - but I have no idea. It does seem like a case of listening to the wrong people (who are often the most vocal) - whether internally or externally.

Personally I had no issue with the matrix from Dragonfall. Some of those segments were actually quite challenging too.