Oooh, vidya hot takes. How can I not? Ahem:
- Call of Duty singleplayer is Good, Actually more often than not, at least up through WW2 (the game, not the war, to be clear).
- Far Cry peaked with the first one and Crysis was the real sequel to it. Crysis 2 and 3 can be likened to the Matrix sequels, with all that implies.
- No One Lives Forever deserves a proper re-release more than most franchises deserve to exist.
- Wasteland 3 handles complex moral dilemmas with no clear right or wrong answer better than most RPGs to date.
Lukewarm take to cool things down for a minute:
- It's perfectly fine to enjoy stuff that's mediocre, trashy, or even outright bad if it does it for you. The mind has funny idiosyncrasies and sometimes craves comfort/junk food, it's not the end of the world. Just don't be a damn weirdo about it and be willing to accept criticism of the thing without feeling like it reflects on you, enjoyer of the thing.
And last, but most importantly:
- Rebecca Chambers > Tall Vampire Lady and it's not even close, fuck outta here with this flavor-of-the-month monster waifu nonsense.
Final Fantasy 7 ruined the series.
Bastian's gameplay was dull (the music and VO was amazing).
The Metal Gear Solid series has too many cutscenes and the storylines are a mess.
100% agreed on FF7. Final Fantasy peaked with 6, but I think 7 fell into a weird cultural niche where the Playstation was the first console to successfully market itself as "for everyone" and it was the exact kind of bad story and characters that 13 year olds ate for breakfast in the late 90's. It gave it a permanent place in popular culture while better installments both before and after languish in comparative obscurity.
Still, I'll take anything that's come of Final Fantasy over Chrono Cross.
Oooh, vidya hot takes. How can I not? Ahem:
- Call of Duty singleplayer is Good, Actually more often than not, at least up through WW2 (the game, not the war, to be clear).
- Far Cry peaked with the first one and Crysis was the real sequel to it. Crysis 2 and 3 can be likened to the Matrix sequels, with all that implies.
- No One Lives Forever deserves a proper re-release more than most franchises deserve to exist.
- Wasteland 3 handles complex moral dilemmas with no clear right or wrong answer better than most RPGs to date.
Lukewarm take to cool things down for a minute:
- It's perfectly fine to enjoy stuff that's mediocre, trashy, or even outright bad if it does it for you. The mind has funny idiosyncrasies and sometimes craves comfort/junk food, it's not the end of the world. Just don't be a damn weirdo about it and be willing to accept criticism of the thing without feeling like it reflects on you, enjoyer of the thing.
And last, but most importantly:
- Rebecca Chambers > Tall Vampire Lady and it's not even close, fuck outta here with this flavor-of-the-month monster waifu nonsense.
Crysis 2 is so much better than 1. The change in level design means so much less time spent wandering through the woods until you get shot, and at the same time they actually managed to pack much more meaningful decision making into the smaller spaces. The weapon sandbox is broader, the enemies are more varied, and they dig deeper into the sci-fi concepts inherent to Crysis in a way I really enjoyed.
- Call of Duty singleplayer is Good, Actually more often than not, at least up through WW2 (the game, not the war, to be clear)..
I bought MW1-3 for the campaigns and I don't regret any of them. They might be short but they were well done with memorable set pieces and just pure off the walls dry-humping-the-Pentagon gunwank schlock the likes of which would make Michael Bay weep.
+3
Options
KalnaurI See Rain . . .Centralia, WARegistered Userregular
Fallout: New Vegas is a dull and uninteresting brown/grey world with little in the way of interesting gameplay innovations and faux depth in no-win moral scenarios. The radio music is the best part of all of it.
NV never set to do anything new with gameplay. It really couldn't given that it was Obsidian trying to work with Bethesda's engine for the first time under time constraints. It's catnip for fans of the original Fallout games seeing as how it's really a sequel to 2 with a number of callbacks to that game. But it was never going to be able to be much beyond Fallout 3 with Black Isle Studio style writing. Which I guess is Oblivion with guns with Black Isle Studio writing.
That said, the best part of NV was not in the base game. It was Old World Blues with its freedom to be less grounded
I can't remember which add-on it was, but I remember being told of one that would force you to stay until you were done, and not come back, and I'd swear it was for this game.
Regardless, The fact that it was meant as a thing for old Fallout fans probably means it was never meant for me anyways; I tried Fallout original and played it for all of 5 minutes before giving up in utter frustration. There was absolutely no direction, I kept dying right out of the gate, and the combat was fiddly as fuck. It made me rage and then quit in that order. So anything that was meant to call back to a potential experience like that would be doomed to disappoint me eventually.
I make art things! deviantART:Kalnaur ::: Origin: Kalnaur ::: UPlay: Kalnaur
And last, but most importantly:
- Rebecca Chambers > Tall Vampire Lady and it's not even close, fuck outta here with this flavor-of-the-month monster waifu nonsense.
Oooh, vidya hot takes. How can I not? Ahem:
- Call of Duty singleplayer is Good, Actually more often than not, at least up through WW2 (the game, not the war, to be clear).
- Far Cry peaked with the first one and Crysis was the real sequel to it. Crysis 2 and 3 can be likened to the Matrix sequels, with all that implies.
- No One Lives Forever deserves a proper re-release more than most franchises deserve to exist.
- Wasteland 3 handles complex moral dilemmas with no clear right or wrong answer better than most RPGs to date.
Lukewarm take to cool things down for a minute:
- It's perfectly fine to enjoy stuff that's mediocre, trashy, or even outright bad if it does it for you. The mind has funny idiosyncrasies and sometimes craves comfort/junk food, it's not the end of the world. Just don't be a damn weirdo about it and be willing to accept criticism of the thing without feeling like it reflects on you, enjoyer of the thing.
And last, but most importantly:
- Rebecca Chambers > Tall Vampire Lady and it's not even close, fuck outta here with this flavor-of-the-month monster waifu nonsense.
Really ? Rebecca ? Nowhere near the level of Jill/Claire/Ada in my humble but unarguably definitive opinion.
bad hot takes? alright everyone sit down because not only do I think GSC is the worst gen with the worst starters, I think it's a bad game in general terms
Oooh, vidya hot takes. How can I not? Ahem:
- Call of Duty singleplayer is Good, Actually more often than not, at least up through WW2 (the game, not the war, to be clear).
- Far Cry peaked with the first one and Crysis was the real sequel to it. Crysis 2 and 3 can be likened to the Matrix sequels, with all that implies.
- No One Lives Forever deserves a proper re-release more than most franchises deserve to exist.
- Wasteland 3 handles complex moral dilemmas with no clear right or wrong answer better than most RPGs to date.
Lukewarm take to cool things down for a minute:
- It's perfectly fine to enjoy stuff that's mediocre, trashy, or even outright bad if it does it for you. The mind has funny idiosyncrasies and sometimes craves comfort/junk food, it's not the end of the world. Just don't be a damn weirdo about it and be willing to accept criticism of the thing without feeling like it reflects on you, enjoyer of the thing.
And last, but most importantly:
- Rebecca Chambers > Tall Vampire Lady and it's not even close, fuck outta here with this flavor-of-the-month monster waifu nonsense.
Crysis 2 is so much better than 1. The change in level design means so much less time spent wandering through the woods until you get shot, and at the same time they actually managed to pack much more meaningful decision making into the smaller spaces. The weapon sandbox is broader, the enemies are more varied, and they dig deeper into the sci-fi concepts inherent to Crysis in a way I really enjoyed.
I'm one of those that really liked the first half of Crysis 1 and not so much the second half. Found Crysis 2 to be somewhat OK, and kinda liked 3's semi-open world design, but I'll admit that I never finished it.
Ooh are we doing hot takes? In honor of Mass Effect remastered coming out soon:
- ME3 was a good capstone to the arcs that came before it, except for the ending ofc. But the stories for each of the planets tied a bow on most of the plotlines pretty well.
- If any game needed a final cut where you reject both the blue and red options, it was DA2, not ME3
- ME2 should have just been a side story, because you wouldn't lose anything from skipping it. Except for the chance to kowtow to space nazis.
- Some parts of the fan base totally actually are a fan of the space nazis just because of the Voice Actor (see also: Alan Rickman, Tom Felton)
- ME1's inventory system wasn't that bad (on PC)
+7
Options
KalnaurI See Rain . . .Centralia, WARegistered Userregular
Claire is best RE waifu, but no matter who you choose, they're better than that awful vampire giant thing.
For me, the worst part of all this is the knowledge that if I tell a person on team Dimitrescu that she's just going to turn into a horrific fleshy mass of teeth and tentacles that will want to devour their main character, it only makes them happier. :sad:
I make art things! deviantART:Kalnaur ::: Origin: Kalnaur ::: UPlay: Kalnaur
Oooh, vidya hot takes. How can I not? Ahem:
- Call of Duty singleplayer is Good, Actually more often than not, at least up through WW2 (the game, not the war, to be clear).
- Far Cry peaked with the first one and Crysis was the real sequel to it. Crysis 2 and 3 can be likened to the Matrix sequels, with all that implies.
- No One Lives Forever deserves a proper re-release more than most franchises deserve to exist.
- Wasteland 3 handles complex moral dilemmas with no clear right or wrong answer better than most RPGs to date.
Lukewarm take to cool things down for a minute:
- It's perfectly fine to enjoy stuff that's mediocre, trashy, or even outright bad if it does it for you. The mind has funny idiosyncrasies and sometimes craves comfort/junk food, it's not the end of the world. Just don't be a damn weirdo about it and be willing to accept criticism of the thing without feeling like it reflects on you, enjoyer of the thing.
And last, but most importantly:
- Rebecca Chambers > Tall Vampire Lady and it's not even close, fuck outta here with this flavor-of-the-month monster waifu nonsense.
Crysis 2 is so much better than 1. The change in level design means so much less time spent wandering through the woods until you get shot, and at the same time they actually managed to pack much more meaningful decision making into the smaller spaces. The weapon sandbox is broader, the enemies are more varied, and they dig deeper into the sci-fi concepts inherent to Crysis in a way I really enjoyed.
That's fair, and there are things I do like about Crysis 2; the Matrix comparison is a bit tongue-in-cheek since I think the third is where things truly go awry. Mostly I thought the engine was a better fit for open environments and environmental destruction, letting one approach an objective from several directions and punching through walls and barriers in ways that are more difficult to do in an urban setting. I remember one sequence where you use a mounted gun to destroy a door, and being disappointed that it couldn't destroy a small tree almost in front of the door. I wasn't really crazy about where the story was going either, although it didn't fully go off the rails until the third game.
But yeah, Crysis 2 definitely has its positives, and I did enjoy it at the time.
And last, but most importantly:
- Rebecca Chambers > Tall Vampire Lady and it's not even close, fuck outta here with this flavor-of-the-month monster waifu nonsense.
ONE THOUSAND TIMES THIS
I'm just saying, one saved Chris twice on the same day she had her own insane mansion adventure, on what was probably her first mission, and the other is going to give you an annoying stealth sequence in a game that doesn't clearly communicate whether you're hidden or not.
I loved RE7 but you know that's exactly what's going to happen at some point.
Inventory Tetris is actually awful and boring and not fun at all.
Weight restrictions are boring.
So is the "can only hold two firearms" of seemingly a host of modern shooters.
Durability is Bad, Actually™ and while it's usually meant to give some sense of struggle all it really does is give a player more busywork to do.
I mostly agree with this, but I kind of enjoyed inventory tetris in RE4 and it even surprised me. Figuring out how to fit the most fish in my inventory was a good time.
Steam: offday
+1
Options
KalnaurI See Rain . . .Centralia, WARegistered Userregular
Inventory Tetris is actually awful and boring and not fun at all.
Weight restrictions are boring.
So is the "can only hold two firearms" of seemingly a host of modern shooters.
Durability is Bad, Actually™ and while it's usually meant to give some sense of struggle all it really does is give a player more busywork to do.
I mostly agree with this, but I kind of enjoyed inventory tetris in RE4 and it even surprised me. Figuring out how to fit the most fish in my inventory was a good time.
I mean, I'm a hoarder in basically every game I play (and especially in Bethesda games that give me a home and a container to stuff shit into) or I at least want to haul every scrap out to a store to sell, so a limited amount of space and weight and the need to fit everything just right inside it is just there to irritate me.
I make art things! deviantART:Kalnaur ::: Origin: Kalnaur ::: UPlay: Kalnaur
I love inventory tetris! Provided it's done the right way, e.g. Deus Ex & RE4, and not the imitation way, e.g. Stalker. I love the decision points between space vs. value (the GEP gun is the fist of god, but huge and limited ammo, whereas the crossbow is small and useful but can't take out big nasties; slapping a stock on the Red 9 makes it take up more space but also more effective), between limited upgrade resources (upgrade the inventory case or an actual ability), and between hoarding for a tough situation/spending because you know you can't take everything anyway.
So long as a mechanic is providing a series of interesting decisions, it's valuable. Only when the value balance is off-kilter, rendering the decisions thoughtless and reflexive, does it become a tedious chore instead of another layer, imo.
+2
Options
KalnaurI See Rain . . .Centralia, WARegistered Userregular
I love inventory tetris! Provided it's done the right way, e.g. Deus Ex & RE4, and not the imitation way, e.g. Stalker. I love the decision points between space vs. value (the GEP gun is the fist of god, but huge and limited ammo, whereas the crossbow is small and useful but can't take out big nasties; slapping a stock on the Red 9 makes it take up more space but also more effective), between limited upgrade resources (upgrade the inventory case or an actual ability), and between hoarding for a tough situation/spending because you know you can't take everything anyway.
So long as a mechanic is providing a series of interesting decisions, it's valuable. Only when the value balance is off-kilter, rendering the decisions thoughtless and reflexive, does it become a tedious chore instead of another layer, imo.
See, I don't want any of those decisions. I want the big gun, the crossbow, the rifle, all of it. Give me all the hotkeys and all the space to use it.
I want. To take. It.All.
Which means that even fairly fun games like Deus Ex: Human Revolution and Prey anger me when they're trying to make me choose. I don't want to choose. It's why by the end of the game I'll have every ability if I possibly can, by in game mechanics or by cheats.
I make art things! deviantART:Kalnaur ::: Origin: Kalnaur ::: UPlay: Kalnaur
I found Horizon Zero Dawn's gameplay to be disappointing and can't remember any of its cast of characters outside of Aloy and Sylens.
Horizon Zero Dawn is like the alpha of Assassin's Creed: <Newer Ones> with clunkier movement.
Story will probably be better, though.
My gameplay issues mostly stemmed around 3 things:
1) I really had grown tired of the parkour mechanic where you can only climb on specified handholds and have to figure out where the map designer wanted you to go. More so since sometimes you had to climb in a low visibility snow storm. To be fair, I played HZD after Breath of the Wild and really missed the freedom I generally had in that but HZD obviously had been in development way before BotW rewrote climbing mechanics in open world games. But to also be fair, Dying Light had made better and freeform parkour years before that and without the resources of a major studio.
2) You deal with a lot of annoying, low level enemies. Everyone remembers the handful of fights against the roborexes and storm birds. But you spend so much more time dealing with the weakest robots and weak, super annoying flyers than you do fighting anything interesting.
3) HZD's approach to weapon variety was "here's a standard bow, a slow bow, and a faster bow." Non-bow weapons were either very ammo limited like the bomb slinger or very weak like the Rattler. This one's a bit personal as bows are usually my least favorite weapons to use in any game but that's still a lot of bows to the exclusion of other options.
I loved the story of the setting but even that has a caveat as I didn't find anything going on in the world that interesting and post-apocalyptic fiction really should be more about the survivors. You can only milk the mysterious end of civilization once in the series.
3b)Triple nock sonic arrows are so much stronger than anything else it's ridiculous.
I found Horizon Zero Dawn's gameplay to be disappointing and can't remember any of its cast of characters outside of Aloy and Sylens.
Horizon Zero Dawn is like the alpha of Assassin's Creed: <Newer Ones> with clunkier movement.
Story will probably be better, though.
My gameplay issues mostly stemmed around 3 things:
1) I really had grown tired of the parkour mechanic where you can only climb on specified handholds and have to figure out where the map designer wanted you to go. More so since sometimes you had to climb in a low visibility snow storm. To be fair, I played HZD after Breath of the Wild and really missed the freedom I generally had in that but HZD obviously had been in development way before BotW rewrote climbing mechanics in open world games. But to also be fair, Dying Light had made better and freeform parkour years before that and without the resources of a major studio.
2) You deal with a lot of annoying, low level enemies. Everyone remembers the handful of fights against the roborexes and storm birds. But you spend so much more time dealing with the weakest robots and weak, super annoying flyers than you do fighting anything interesting.
3) HZD's approach to weapon variety was "here's a standard bow, a slow bow, and a faster bow." Non-bow weapons were either very ammo limited like the bomb slinger or very weak like the Rattler. This one's a bit personal as bows are usually my least favorite weapons to use in any game but that's still a lot of bows to the exclusion of other options.
I loved the story of the setting but even that has a caveat as I didn't find anything going on in the world that interesting and post-apocalyptic fiction really should be more about the survivors. You can only milk the mysterious end of civilization once in the series.
3b)Triple nock sonic arrows are so much stronger than anything else it's ridiculous.
My favorites were: Sonic Arrows for tear and knockback damage, Precision for damage, Tripwires (explosive) for a big boost in damage, and the sticky bombs for damage and the flinching it caused. There were other techniques (such as the grapple thing that nailed down the really big bastards), but those were the main ones I'd travel with.
I make art things! deviantART:Kalnaur ::: Origin: Kalnaur ::: UPlay: Kalnaur
I just played it on easy, so it didn't matter what I used. I had fun with various bows, slings, ropecasters, bombs, traps, whatever. I was in it for the story and there it delivered. It delivered so. damn. well.
I am still haunted by the story behind the vantage points.
Fallout: New Vegas is a dull and uninteresting brown/grey world with little in the way of interesting gameplay innovations and faux depth in no-win moral scenarios. The radio music is the best part of all of it.
NV never set to do anything new with gameplay. It really couldn't given that it was Obsidian trying to work with Bethesda's engine for the first time under time constraints. It's catnip for fans of the original Fallout games seeing as how it's really a sequel to 2 with a number of callbacks to that game. But it was never going to be able to be much beyond Fallout 3 with Black Isle Studio style writing. Which I guess is Oblivion with guns with Black Isle Studio writing.
That said, the best part of NV was not in the base game. It was Old World Blues with its freedom to be less grounded
I can't remember which add-on it was, but I remember being told of one that would force you to stay until you were done, and not come back, and I'd swear it was for this game.
Regardless, The fact that it was meant as a thing for old Fallout fans probably means it was never meant for me anyways; I tried Fallout original and played it for all of 5 minutes before giving up in utter frustration. There was absolutely no direction, I kept dying right out of the gate, and the combat was fiddly as fuck. It made me rage and then quit in that order. So anything that was meant to call back to a potential experience like that would be doomed to disappoint me eventually.
I'm not sure, but I think all the dlc may require you to finish them before going back to the main world. But yes, agreed with Steel Angel, that the gunplay was hampered by the engine, which was the same engine from Fallout 3. That being said, I found the story amazing. Old World Blues was hilarious and made me laugh. Honest Hearts actually made me tear up. Dead Money was frustrating, but i may have to tackle that again someday with a different build. I'm sad that you didn't like it, but to each his own.
0
Options
KalnaurI See Rain . . .Centralia, WARegistered Userregular
Fallout: New Vegas is a dull and uninteresting brown/grey world with little in the way of interesting gameplay innovations and faux depth in no-win moral scenarios. The radio music is the best part of all of it.
NV never set to do anything new with gameplay. It really couldn't given that it was Obsidian trying to work with Bethesda's engine for the first time under time constraints. It's catnip for fans of the original Fallout games seeing as how it's really a sequel to 2 with a number of callbacks to that game. But it was never going to be able to be much beyond Fallout 3 with Black Isle Studio style writing. Which I guess is Oblivion with guns with Black Isle Studio writing.
That said, the best part of NV was not in the base game. It was Old World Blues with its freedom to be less grounded
I can't remember which add-on it was, but I remember being told of one that would force you to stay until you were done, and not come back, and I'd swear it was for this game.
Regardless, The fact that it was meant as a thing for old Fallout fans probably means it was never meant for me anyways; I tried Fallout original and played it for all of 5 minutes before giving up in utter frustration. There was absolutely no direction, I kept dying right out of the gate, and the combat was fiddly as fuck. It made me rage and then quit in that order. So anything that was meant to call back to a potential experience like that would be doomed to disappoint me eventually.
I'm not sure, but I think all the dlc may require you to finish them before going back to the main world. But yes, agreed with Steel Angel, that the gunplay was hampered by the engine, which was the same engine from Fallout 3. That being said, I found the story amazing. Old World Blues was hilarious and made me laugh. Honest Hearts actually made me tear up. Dead Money was frustrating, but i may have to tackle that again someday with a different build. I'm sad that you didn't like it, but to each his own.
If a game's gameplay isn't at least engaging enough to drive me forward, it will honestly not matter how good the story is. Unlike others I'm not willing to play through a mediocre game for a good story. On the other hand, I'm willing to play through a good or better game even if the story doesn't exactly blow me away. I mean, neither should be crap, but I've played some games longer than intended just because the gameplay loop feedback made me happy to play the game.
So, when a game is basically all about the story (which seems to be the case with New Vegas, the game just being a vessel for the story they wanted to tell), I'm not going to be engaged. This is also why Visual Novels are boring as hell for me, and why I'm not so big on Point N Click adventure games (or their modern ilk).
I make art things! deviantART:Kalnaur ::: Origin: Kalnaur ::: UPlay: Kalnaur
Fallout: New Vegas is a dull and uninteresting brown/grey world with little in the way of interesting gameplay innovations and faux depth in no-win moral scenarios. The radio music is the best part of all of it.
NV never set to do anything new with gameplay. It really couldn't given that it was Obsidian trying to work with Bethesda's engine for the first time under time constraints. It's catnip for fans of the original Fallout games seeing as how it's really a sequel to 2 with a number of callbacks to that game. But it was never going to be able to be much beyond Fallout 3 with Black Isle Studio style writing. Which I guess is Oblivion with guns with Black Isle Studio writing.
That said, the best part of NV was not in the base game. It was Old World Blues with its freedom to be less grounded
I can't remember which add-on it was, but I remember being told of one that would force you to stay until you were done, and not come back, and I'd swear it was for this game.
Regardless, The fact that it was meant as a thing for old Fallout fans probably means it was never meant for me anyways; I tried Fallout original and played it for all of 5 minutes before giving up in utter frustration. There was absolutely no direction, I kept dying right out of the gate, and the combat was fiddly as fuck. It made me rage and then quit in that order. So anything that was meant to call back to a potential experience like that would be doomed to disappoint me eventually.
I'm not sure, but I think all the dlc may require you to finish them before going back to the main world. But yes, agreed with Steel Angel, that the gunplay was hampered by the engine, which was the same engine from Fallout 3. That being said, I found the story amazing. Old World Blues was hilarious and made me laugh. Honest Hearts actually made me tear up. Dead Money was frustrating, but i may have to tackle that again someday with a different build. I'm sad that you didn't like it, but to each his own.
If a game's gameplay isn't at least engaging enough to drive me forward, it will honestly not matter how good the story is. Unlike others I'm not willing to play through a mediocre game for a good story. On the other hand, I'm willing to play through a good or better game even if the story doesn't exactly blow me away. I mean, neither should be crap, but I've played some games longer than intended just because the gameplay loop feedback made me happy to play the game.
So, when a game is basically all about the story (which seems to be the case with New Vegas, the game just being a vessel for the story they wanted to tell), I'm not going to be engaged. This is also why Visual Novels are boring as hell for me, and why I'm not so big on Point N Click adventure games (or their modern ilk).
I mean, it has some incremental improvements like ammo types and weapon mods, but the basic gameplay is like 95% the same as FO3. I.E. absolutely terrible, even by bethesda standards. (though at least it isn't FO4)
At some point, I do need to play the PC version of Crysis 1. I think maximum strength and maximum speed are supposed to work slightly differently on PC than on console. While I don't expect that to improve the game for me, I won't know for sure unless I try it. Plus you can't quicksave on console, and that game's checkpoint system definitely makes more sense if it's meant to be supplemented by quicksaves. Personally I'd prefer if the checkpoint system was just good, but at least quicksaves might cut down on the situations that were just frustrating.
cB557 on
0
Options
KalnaurI See Rain . . .Centralia, WARegistered Userregular
I mean, it has some incremental improvements like ammo types and weapon mods, but the basic gameplay is like 95% the same as FO3. I.E. absolutely terrible, even by bethesda standards. (though at least it isn't FO4)
I mean, I actually like the Fallout 3 gameplay as far as it was in that game, there was just nothing in it to drive me forward in New Vegas because it was just more of the same.
The gunplay is terrible in both games, but I always do the thing where you've got insane amount of AP so you can VATS everything, and that's fun (to me) but it gets stale after a while and New Vegas was like more but worse Fallout 3 with fiddly new systems (crafting was fun until you realized it was nearly useless), and a map with no interesting features. I'm still in the middle of Fallout 4, and what of the map I've explored I like, and I enjoy making new settlements and fortifying them, but I also enjoy base-building, so . . . that's a thing.
I make art things! deviantART:Kalnaur ::: Origin: Kalnaur ::: UPlay: Kalnaur
Confession time: I've never actually played an adventure game as it was "meant to", figuring out the puzzles myself. Always walkthroughs.
If YouTube had somehow existed in the 80s and 90s, I would have consumed (i.e., watched) every single classic Sierra and LucasArts adventure as passive media experiences.
Posts
- Call of Duty singleplayer is Good, Actually more often than not, at least up through WW2 (the game, not the war, to be clear).
- Far Cry peaked with the first one and Crysis was the real sequel to it. Crysis 2 and 3 can be likened to the Matrix sequels, with all that implies.
- No One Lives Forever deserves a proper re-release more than most franchises deserve to exist.
- Wasteland 3 handles complex moral dilemmas with no clear right or wrong answer better than most RPGs to date.
Lukewarm take to cool things down for a minute:
- It's perfectly fine to enjoy stuff that's mediocre, trashy, or even outright bad if it does it for you. The mind has funny idiosyncrasies and sometimes craves comfort/junk food, it's not the end of the world. Just don't be a damn weirdo about it and be willing to accept criticism of the thing without feeling like it reflects on you, enjoyer of the thing.
And last, but most importantly:
- Rebecca Chambers > Tall Vampire Lady and it's not even close, fuck outta here with this flavor-of-the-month monster waifu nonsense.
Now playing: Teardown and Baldur's Gate 3 (co-op)
Sunday Spotlight: Horror Tales: The Wine
100% agreed on FF7. Final Fantasy peaked with 6, but I think 7 fell into a weird cultural niche where the Playstation was the first console to successfully market itself as "for everyone" and it was the exact kind of bad story and characters that 13 year olds ate for breakfast in the late 90's. It gave it a permanent place in popular culture while better installments both before and after languish in comparative obscurity.
Still, I'll take anything that's come of Final Fantasy over Chrono Cross.
I bought MW1-3 for the campaigns and I don't regret any of them. They might be short but they were well done with memorable set pieces and just pure off the walls dry-humping-the-Pentagon gunwank schlock the likes of which would make Michael Bay weep.
I can't remember which add-on it was, but I remember being told of one that would force you to stay until you were done, and not come back, and I'd swear it was for this game.
Regardless, The fact that it was meant as a thing for old Fallout fans probably means it was never meant for me anyways; I tried Fallout original and played it for all of 5 minutes before giving up in utter frustration. There was absolutely no direction, I kept dying right out of the gate, and the combat was fiddly as fuck. It made me rage and then quit in that order. So anything that was meant to call back to a potential experience like that would be doomed to disappoint me eventually.
ONE THOUSAND TIMES THIS
Really ? Rebecca ? Nowhere near the level of Jill/Claire/Ada in my humble but unarguably definitive opinion.
I'm one of those that really liked the first half of Crysis 1 and not so much the second half. Found Crysis 2 to be somewhat OK, and kinda liked 3's semi-open world design, but I'll admit that I never finished it.
- ME3 was a good capstone to the arcs that came before it, except for the ending ofc. But the stories for each of the planets tied a bow on most of the plotlines pretty well.
- If any game needed a final cut where you reject both the blue and red options, it was DA2, not ME3
- ME2 should have just been a side story, because you wouldn't lose anything from skipping it. Except for the chance to kowtow to space nazis.
- Some parts of the fan base totally actually are a fan of the space nazis just because of the Voice Actor (see also: Alan Rickman, Tom Felton)
- ME1's inventory system wasn't that bad (on PC)
For me, the worst part of all this is the knowledge that if I tell a person on team Dimitrescu that she's just going to turn into a horrific fleshy mass of teeth and tentacles that will want to devour their main character, it only makes them happier. :sad:
I am the most basic of gamers
That's fair, and there are things I do like about Crysis 2; the Matrix comparison is a bit tongue-in-cheek since I think the third is where things truly go awry. Mostly I thought the engine was a better fit for open environments and environmental destruction, letting one approach an objective from several directions and punching through walls and barriers in ways that are more difficult to do in an urban setting. I remember one sequence where you use a mounted gun to destroy a door, and being disappointed that it couldn't destroy a small tree almost in front of the door. I wasn't really crazy about where the story was going either, although it didn't fully go off the rails until the third game.
But yeah, Crysis 2 definitely has its positives, and I did enjoy it at the time.
I'm just saying, one saved Chris twice on the same day she had her own insane mansion adventure, on what was probably her first mission, and the other is going to give you an annoying stealth sequence in a game that doesn't clearly communicate whether you're hidden or not.
I loved RE7 but you know that's exactly what's going to happen at some point.
Now playing: Teardown and Baldur's Gate 3 (co-op)
Sunday Spotlight: Horror Tales: The Wine
Weight restrictions are boring.
So is the "can only hold two firearms" of seemingly a host of modern shooters.
Durability is Bad, Actually™ and while it's usually meant to give some sense of struggle all it really does is give a player more busywork to do.
These are all just really good takes, actually.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
These all came from someone talking about STALKER and how all these systems are "just the best" so apparently they're not entirely popular takes.
I mostly agree with this, but I kind of enjoyed inventory tetris in RE4 and it even surprised me. Figuring out how to fit the most fish in my inventory was a good time.
I mean, I'm a hoarder in basically every game I play (and especially in Bethesda games that give me a home and a container to stuff shit into) or I at least want to haul every scrap out to a store to sell, so a limited amount of space and weight and the need to fit everything just right inside it is just there to irritate me.
So long as a mechanic is providing a series of interesting decisions, it's valuable. Only when the value balance is off-kilter, rendering the decisions thoughtless and reflexive, does it become a tedious chore instead of another layer, imo.
See, I don't want any of those decisions. I want the big gun, the crossbow, the rifle, all of it. Give me all the hotkeys and all the space to use it.
I want. To take. It. All.
Which means that even fairly fun games like Deus Ex: Human Revolution and Prey anger me when they're trying to make me choose. I don't want to choose. It's why by the end of the game I'll have every ability if I possibly can, by in game mechanics or by cheats.
3b)Triple nock sonic arrows are so much stronger than anything else it's ridiculous.
3DS: 0473-8507-2652
Switch: SW-5185-4991-5118
PSN: AbEntropy
My favorites were: Sonic Arrows for tear and knockback damage, Precision for damage, Tripwires (explosive) for a big boost in damage, and the sticky bombs for damage and the flinching it caused. There were other techniques (such as the grapple thing that nailed down the really big bastards), but those were the main ones I'd travel with.
I am still haunted by the story behind the vantage points.
Honestly I can't think of a single female RE character that I wouldn't bang. You've got a lot of great options in that franchise.
edit: Holy shit I forgot about Sherry Birkin. So that's one I can think of.
There is a joke about how three stereotypes tithe to god by throwing money in the air.
BioWare's success is the result of throwing things in the air and the good stuff ended up in circle.
That reminds me, I need to check and see if short circuit is available in 4K.
I'm not sure, but I think all the dlc may require you to finish them before going back to the main world. But yes, agreed with Steel Angel, that the gunplay was hampered by the engine, which was the same engine from Fallout 3. That being said, I found the story amazing. Old World Blues was hilarious and made me laugh. Honest Hearts actually made me tear up. Dead Money was frustrating, but i may have to tackle that again someday with a different build. I'm sad that you didn't like it, but to each his own.
If a game's gameplay isn't at least engaging enough to drive me forward, it will honestly not matter how good the story is. Unlike others I'm not willing to play through a mediocre game for a good story. On the other hand, I'm willing to play through a good or better game even if the story doesn't exactly blow me away. I mean, neither should be crap, but I've played some games longer than intended just because the gameplay loop feedback made me happy to play the game.
So, when a game is basically all about the story (which seems to be the case with New Vegas, the game just being a vessel for the story they wanted to tell), I'm not going to be engaged. This is also why Visual Novels are boring as hell for me, and why I'm not so big on Point N Click adventure games (or their modern ilk).
I mean, it has some incremental improvements like ammo types and weapon mods, but the basic gameplay is like 95% the same as FO3. I.E. absolutely terrible, even by bethesda standards. (though at least it isn't FO4)
I mean, I actually like the Fallout 3 gameplay as far as it was in that game, there was just nothing in it to drive me forward in New Vegas because it was just more of the same.
The gunplay is terrible in both games, but I always do the thing where you've got insane amount of AP so you can VATS everything, and that's fun (to me) but it gets stale after a while and New Vegas was like more but worse Fallout 3 with fiddly new systems (crafting was fun until you realized it was nearly useless), and a map with no interesting features. I'm still in the middle of Fallout 4, and what of the map I've explored I like, and I enjoy making new settlements and fortifying them, but I also enjoy base-building, so . . . that's a thing.
Loading...?
If YouTube had somehow existed in the 80s and 90s, I would have consumed (i.e., watched) every single classic Sierra and LucasArts adventure as passive media experiences.