other games

[IG_Saint]

I found AC2 to be a much beter game than the first one. Yes, the rpg stuff was a bit redundant and the combat was too easy because of the health potions, but overal much beter. Much less tedious, much more good moments and mission variety. I also have no idea what you're talking about with the jumping sections, I never had a problem with them, my only complaint is that there weren't enough of them. Also, less is more? How does that related to the first one with its endless repetition of boring side missions that you HAVE to do.

As to the X series: I've only played x3r and tc, but it seems you have them confused with something they're not. They're space sims with a strong emphasis on empire building and strategy. Yet you complain about just those elements. It's like buying a shooter game and complaining that all you do is shoot people. It is also perfectly doable spending most of your time in a fighter. I fly around in a fighter with 12 fighter wingmen, if that isn't enough, I call in my destroyers and control them from my fighter. That's when the strategy elements really come to light.

GTA IV has the best vehicle handling from any open world game I've played. A perfect balance between arcade and sim, fun to drive with enough challenge to make it interesting. The npc date stuff sucks I agree, however there's a very easy way of dealing with it: Ignore it. You can even put your phone to silent so you don't get any calls at all. The cover system wasn't the best, so again I just ignored it, never used it once in my 2 full playthroughs. Also it has a crouch key. I also didn't have any problems with the expansions or multiplayer, because I played it on the 360.

[Zisa]

eh I will answer or not.. think Steam is offering 5 free games.. as in F2P MMO's, so I am gonna download champions and fart around with that and see if they amuse me.

[Zisa]

(click to show/hide)

I found AC2 to be a much beter game than the first one. Yes, the rpg stuff was a bit redundant and the combat was too easy because of the health potions, but overal much beter. Much less tedious, much more good moments and mission variety. I also have no idea what you're talking about with the jumping sections, I never had a problem with them, my only complaint is that there weren't enough of them. Also, less is more? How does that related to the first one with its endless repetition of boring side missions that you HAVE to do.

As to the X series: I've only played x3r and tc, but it seems you have them confused with something they're not. They're space sims with a strong emphasis on empire building and strategy. Yet you complain about just those elements. It's like buying a shooter game and complaining that all you do is shoot people. It is also perfectly doable spending most of your time in a fighter. I fly around in a fighter with 12 fighter wingmen, if that isn't enough, I call in my destroyers and control them from my fighter. That's when the strategy elements really come to light.

GTA IV has the best vehicle handling from any open world game I've played. A perfect balance between arcade and sim, fun to drive with enough challenge to make it interesting. The npc date stuff sucks I agree, however there's a very easy way of dealing with it: Ignore it. You can even put your phone to silent so you don't get any calls at all. The cover system wasn't the best, so again I just ignored it, never used it once in my 2 full playthroughs. Also it has a crouch key. I also didn't have any problems with the expansions or multiplayer, because I played it on the 360.

There are 6 tombs you HAVE to get in ass creed 2, with progressively longer and more difficult jumping sequences often involving a pointless and punitive camera change - for instance, the first 'timed' lever I pulled, I thought I would be clever and run the route before the door closed, sounds good right? So when I pull the lever, the camera view switches and is not controllable, soley to piss me off. Apparently doing similar jumping sections through the indoor of a cathedral appeals to you, and probably more like you who clamored for it. There are also 77 or so viewpoints to climb, usually with added difficulty of lateral movement, unlike in the first. Anyhow I figured after the first one the focus just might be about playing an assassin, not sonic the hedgehog with a jerky camera.

X series. Who said I wanted wingmen? I want to pilot a vehicle not command some plebes like in dune2. Tired of that genre creeping in. And jump gates, wormholes, I know, not entirely fair to this game but for an idea of what I expected in this day and age check out the free program celestia - man, that would be an awesome nav screen for a space sim.

GTAIV - you have got to be kidding me about the controls - play the first mafia with a steering wheel, that is fun, granted the vehicles are usually slow 1920's stuff, but there are certainly better handling car games then GTAIV, as mentioned, Just Cause 2 had better handling vehicles for a sandbox game. I really lament the lack of support for any controllers lately except gd gamepads, which is odd since windows can drive most devices without external software. Perhaps game companies are focusing on the console market, and refusing to even make the small effort of allowing for other controls.

[IG_Saint]

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)

There are 6 tombs you HAVE to get in ass creed 2, with progressively longer and more difficult jumping sequences often involving a pointless and punitive camera change - for instance, the first 'timed' lever I pulled, I thought I would be clever and run the route before the door closed, sounds good right? So when I pull the lever, the camera view switches and is not controllable, soley to piss me off. Apparently doing similar jumping sections through the indoor of a cathedral appeals to you, and probably more like you who clamored for it. There are also 77 or so viewpoints to climb, usually with added difficulty of lateral movement, unlike in the first. Anyhow I figured after the first one the focus just might be about playing an assassin, not sonic the hedgehog with a jerky camera.

X series. Who said I wanted wingmen? I want to pilot a vehicle not command some plebes like in dune2. Tired of that genre creeping in. And jump gates, wormholes, I know, not entirely fair to this game but for an idea of what I expected in this day and age check out the free program celestia - man, that would be an awesome nav screen for a space sim.

GTAIV - you have got to be kidding me about the controls - play the first mafia with a steering wheel, that is fun, granted the vehicles are usually slow 1920's stuff, but there are certainly better handling car games then GTAIV, as mentioned, Just Cause 2 had better handling vehicles for a sandbox game. I really lament the lack of support for any controllers lately except gd gamepads, which is odd since windows can drive most devices without external software. Perhaps game companies are focusing on the console market, and refusing to even make the small effort of allowing for other controls.

I don't get where you're coming from with the camera change, are you talking about the camera panning through the room to show you the route? I found that immensely helpfull. The only tomb I had to try more than once to complete was the last one, with the big room with the multiple levers. That one is tricky, but the rest are a piece of cake and a welcome diversion from the rest of the missions. And I loved climbing up all those towers, finding the right route to the top. Besides, didn't the first one have even more viewpoints? All the cities, plus all the country side. AC1 was just dull repetitive side missions that you have to do interspaced with just a couple good main missions. AC2 had lots of varied, interesting main missions, along with (some interesting, some not) side missions that you don't HAVE to do.

Who said you wanted wingmen? I certainly didn't. I said you didn't get what the game is about. You're complaining that a game has strategy elements, when those elements are one of the main points of the game. Just because you don't like strategy elements doesn't make it a bad game. In fact, for anyone looking for a space sim with good empire building and strategy elements, there isn't a beter choice out there. Also x3tc (the newest one) was released in 2008. Faulting old games for not having modern graphics is kinda senseless.

Are you kidding me with just cause 2? The vehicles are absolutely terrible. I might as well be playing mario kart 64 for the driving feel it gives, it's just arcadey as hell. GTA4 is absolutely beter in that department. The controls in GTA4 are tricky to master though, so I suspect it's just that. You haven't played it enough to get the feel for the controls and the cars. Once you do, you can drift through corners and pull off 360 spins that are just fantastic, because you actually have to work for them. I did play both of these games on the 360 though and it seems your complaints are mostly due to not being able to configure the controls properly. Mafia had ok driving, but really I didn't play it for the driving.

[EponiCo]

Mass Effect 2 - come on, this isn't a game, this is a lame choose a dialog and watch the script wrapped around boring cover shooting. Oh, I forgot, the dull planet mining. The 'story' was ok, the animations nice, the 'play' part of the game is a yawner.

What story? I don't know, it was kind of like you have to recruit 10 people so you run through 10 streets/tunnels/whatever and shoot people down, then you get to them and they join you, then you have to do a mission for everyone (*) so you run through 10 whatever again, then your done and are all like "yay, I've finally got through all this, I've even set it to easy to get through faster, and now I can finally unravel the mystery (**) about the horrible aliens and kick their ass" and then you get 15 minutes funny missions and then a lame giant robot which you kill and then the ending credits. WTF?!?

(*) And I think for everyone it was because of their father.

(**) Which isn't even that mysterious I guess but in hardship the devil eats flies.

[Murmillus_Prime]

Mass Effect 2, Enjoyed the story, thought the game could have been much longer.

GTAIV, Story is alright, graphics are nice the enviroment i feels alive and the missions are fun to play too. Also a half decent multiplayer, although having to use the in-game phone to connect to I thought was a bit unnecessary and irritating.

[H4rdn3ssKill3r]

What story? I don't know, it was kind of like you have to recruit 10 people so you run through 10 streets/tunnels/whatever and shoot people down, then you get to them and they join you, then you have to do a mission for everyone (*) so you run through 10 whatever again, then your done and are all like "yay, I've finally got through all this, I've even set it to easy to get through faster, and now I can finally unravel the mystery (**) about the horrible aliens and kick their ass" and then you get 15 minutes funny missions and then a lame giant robot which you kill and then the ending credits. WTF?!?

(*) And I think for everyone it was because of their father.

(**) Which isn't even that mysterious I guess but in hardship the devil eats flies.

OMAAHHGAWD... What game are you talking about, Mass effect 2 or Dragon age Origins?
They are both the same shit...
Have a jolly long 10 min chat, kill monster/aliens for 1 hour, have another jolly 10 min chat and then another one.
Rinse and repeat.

[Overdriven]

Wow...you dissed just about every great game out there.

AC2:

AC2 was 10x better than the original. Better mechanics, less repetetive and more story driven and a much better character to play with (Altair had 0 personality where as Ezio is great). If you couldn't handle the 6 tombs, even on higher difficulties, then you just fail. They were relatively easy, even if they did get progressively harder, but were very enjoyable. I honestly had no difficulty in completing them, and you're the first person I've ever heard complain of such a difficulty.

Urgency of fighting in the first? They've still got that daft counter attack system in the second as they do in the first. Fights are a simple matter in both cases. The fun of the game isn't wholey in the combat, that's always been repetitive because of the counter attack system, the fun is in the chase and in the exploration.

If you consider the second to be stale and the first to be...interesting. Then I am honestly simply bemused. The second had far more variation compared to the first. Far less of those stupid repetitive missions that you had to carry out in every assassination.

I'm also confused as Saint about the camera change comment. Honestly I found the camera perfect and never had trouble with it. I think I had more issues in the first.

The Witcher:

I can agree with you that the first is a bit bugged, and to be honest, far to drawn out. However, having played the second one, I can say it's absolutely worth playing the first simply to understand the context of the second. If you take The Witcher, strip it down to it's bare minimum and rebuild it from scratch with a new graphics engine, combat system, improved story line, voice acting, quest progression ect. Well that's what the Witcher 2 is. However, it is also far more story driven than the first. The first you felt like you were endlessly doing random quests for no apparent reason. The second actually feels like everything ties in together, even if you don't have to complete every quest in order to finish the game. The second, simple put, is one of the greatest games of the year. I can easily see it being one of the best of the decade and considering it's only 2011...that's a big claim. Hell it has 2 entirely different chapters depending on which road you take. There are something like 16 different endings. And EVERY choice you make leads to a completely different game. It's re-playability scope is enormous with about 30 hours if you play every quest, but with each quest leading to dramatically different games depending on how you play them. The only reason I haven't replayed it again is because I have exams right now. So as I said, seeing as you can pick The Witcher up incredibly cheaply atm, it's worth the buy simply to lead into the second.

Half Life 2:

I'm not even going to build an argument for that one. The game and fan base speaks for itself. One of the best games around, even now.


Fallout 3:

When this first came out it was an amazing game. Beautifully crafted (if not a little buggy for some) and it had immense re playability. Looking at it now, it has quickly become dated, but honestly, I don't think you can get bored of it that fast.

OMAAHHGAWD... What game are you talking about, Mass effect 2 or Dragon age Origins?
They are both the same shit...
Have a jolly long 10 min chat, kill monster/aliens for 1 hour, have another jolly 10 min chat and then another one.
Rinse and repeat.

Your comment on Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age Origins being the same is a little confusing. I think you mean Dragon Age 2  The second was largely based on a similar style to Mass Effect 2, the first wasn't and was a complete game in itself. The second Dragon Age was disappointing due to a whole host of reasons that could take a while to detail. But I look forward to them pulling it back with a 3rd. Origins is an amazing game.

One thing I do commend Zisa on however is the recognition of some smaller, unknown games there. Divinity 2 (played through twice, both Ego Draconis and Flames of Vengeance) and in all honesty it's a fantastic game. It's one of those game that has lots of small touches all over the place that either make you chuckle or stare in wonder. The developers thought very deeply about it. It can be buggy, and the ending to the Ego sucks, but Flames makes up for it.

Another +1 goes to you for recognising Vampire. Loved that game, even if, like you say, you do need to download stuff to actually make it work, and even then it can be temperamental. But I loved this game from the start.

[Joseph]

Yes. I dissed ass creed 2 as well.

Dead Rising 2 - slow ass character, 8 bit blood splatters.

Mass Effect 2 - come on, this isn't a game, this is a lame choose a dialog and watch the script wrapped around boring cover shooting. Oh, I forgot, the dull planet mining. The 'story' was ok, the animations nice, the 'play' part of the game is a yawner.

Half Life 2 - I said it was ok.

KOTOR - Played enough NWN to recognise this. It is not that far removed from the old SSI D&D DOS adventures, you do not 'swing'.

Fallout 3 - an odd karma system, shooting is random based on a skill percentage, and this is another advancement over the old dos games?

Everything you said has been killed by this. Right there.

[H4rdn3ssKill3r]

Nop I mean one...

you talk, you kill the same goddam thing but it has one pixel of a colour difference and then the dlcs... oh dear god no

[Zisa]

Wow...you dissed just about every great game out there.

(click to show/hide)

AC2:

AC2 was 10x better than the original. Better mechanics, less repetetive and more story driven and a much better character to play with (Altair had 0 personality where as Ezio is great). If you couldn't handle the 6 tombs, even on higher difficulties, then you just fail. They were relatively easy, even if they did get progressively harder, but were very enjoyable. I honestly had no difficulty in completing them, and you're the first person I've ever heard complain of such a difficulty.

Urgency of fighting in the first? They've still got that daft counter attack system in the second as they do in the first. Fights are a simple matter in both cases. The fun of the game isn't wholey in the combat, that's always been repetitive because of the counter attack system, the fun is in the chase and in the exploration.

If you consider the second to be stale and the first to be...interesting. Then I am honestly simply bemused. The second had far more variation compared to the first. Far less of those stupid repetitive missions that you had to carry out in every assassination.

I'm also confused as Saint about the camera change comment. Honestly I found the camera perfect and never had trouble with it. I think I had more issues in the first.

The Witcher:

I can agree with you that the first is a bit bugged, and to be honest, far to drawn out. However, having played the second one, I can say it's absolutely worth playing the first simply to understand the context of the second. If you take The Witcher, strip it down to it's bare minimum and rebuild it from scratch with a new graphics engine, combat system, improved story line, voice acting, quest progression ect. Well that's what the Witcher 2 is. However, it is also far more story driven than the first. The first you felt like you were endlessly doing random quests for no apparent reason. The second actually feels like everything ties in together, even if you don't have to complete every quest in order to finish the game. The second, simple put, is one of the greatest games of the year. I can easily see it being one of the best of the decade and considering it's only 2011...that's a big claim. Hell it has 2 entirely different chapters depending on which road you take. There are something like 16 different endings. And EVERY choice you make leads to a completely different game. It's re-playability scope is enormous with about 30 hours if you play every quest, but with each quest leading to dramatically different games depending on how you play them. The only reason I haven't replayed it again is because I have exams right now. So as I said, seeing as you can pick The Witcher up incredibly cheaply atm, it's worth the buy simply to lead into the second.

Half Life 2:

I'm not even going to build an argument for that one. The game and fan base speaks for itself. One of the best games around, even now.


Fallout 3:

When this first came out it was an amazing game. Beautifully crafted (if not a little buggy for some) and it had immense re playability. Looking at it now, it has quickly become dated, but honestly, I don't think you can get bored of it that fast.

Your comment on Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age Origins being the same is a little confusing. I think you mean Dragon Age 2  The second was largely based on a similar style to Mass Effect 2, the first wasn't and was a complete game in itself. The second Dragon Age was disappointing due to a whole host of reasons that could take a while to detail. But I look forward to them pulling it back with a 3rd. Origins is an amazing game.

One thing I do commend Zisa on however is the recognition of some smaller, unknown games there. Divinity 2 (played through twice, both Ego Draconis and Flames of Vengeance) and in all honesty it's a fantastic game. It's one of those game that has lots of small touches all over the place that either make you chuckle or stare in wonder. The developers thought very deeply about it. It can be buggy, and the ending to the Ego sucks, but Flames makes up for it.

Another +1 goes to you for recognising Vampire. Loved that game, even if, like you say, you do need to download stuff to actually make it work, and even then it can be temperamental. But I loved this game from the start.

Well you merit further reply.
Ass Creed 2
verbose

(click to show/hide)

Who said anything about having trouble handling the tombs? I could handle them, I was bored and frustrated by the camera locking. And that first timed one IS a dick move - you can run the route before pulling the lever, but as soon as you pull the lever, the camera will lock and force you to jump sideways at certain parts of the route. This was part of the more I could have done without. Should have called the character Luigi or Mario.

The fun of the first one was the regeneration system - hence the urgency - get enough plebes after you and it could be trouble, though once you get the hang of it the combat is really more of an exercise in 'oo that was a nice camera shot when I countered that guy', until of course, the dick move fight near the end.

The 2nd fighting is a matter of drink another healing potion. Also, as I said, there is so much more, as in more trees and crowded buildings - resulting in far more frequent camera shots where you can not see Ezio, even with the stting turned down to 1/4. What chase? The only reason to run from a fight is to avoid it's tedium, and the subsequent tedium of repair, restock, rip down posters. I died twice in ass creed 2 - once from a glitch that sent me 500 meters sideways before dropping, and once from jumping from a vantage point that had no straw pile, which I could not tell it being so high. Let's say I found the first's combat an intersting idea, and was dissapointed that the second offered no danger in the combat.
Throwing knives are not as fun.

In the first you HAD to do 2 of 6 admittedly boring (once you'd done a couple) information gathering quests before an assassination.
The 2nd forced the player to do 6 climbing sequences, apparently some people like that.
The 2nd, gave us a vastly improved blend system (specifically the crowd blending) that ended up being either un-needed or unavailable at times, or forced upon the player for a couple missions. Face it, it was still groups of 4, with slightly better move patterns.
Pickpocketing was made easier, but pointless. I do not recall a mission in 2 where one had to pick a pocket, I do recall trying to hurry away quietly and bumping someone for chump change, then gettting notoriety.
Beggars replaced with musicians - at least they can be got rid of with pocket change. Kind of funny, I suspect so many complained about the beggars in the first one, that they created these assholes as a joke.
Beat up missions - now in the first, you ended up locking on the target and a nice stalkery feel as you followed him to his inevitable beating. That stalkery camera in missions made the first for me.
etc.etc.

Every rooftop in the second is a peaked and tiled abomination, with more chimneys and crap to get in your way. Running along the rooftops, the camera constantly seems to recenter, likely to avoid clipping the geometry, and consequently reducing situational aawareness while running the rooftops. As stated, there are passages where the camera is locked in a sort of sideways view, which struck me as gimmicky and irritating. Hard to believe anyone found the camera perfect, as there is an ongoing whine about mouse acceleration, which certainly is tied to the camera's operation.

Speaking of rooftops, they never stay clear in the second one. You do not get to be the unseen danger from above because you would have to constantly clear the rooftops, and the guards respawn at dusk and dawn. So no more clear the area and travel the roofs at leisure.

less verbose

(click to show/hide)

To sum up, there is more in the second, some of which I liked:
 the architectural blurbs
 most of the code puzzles
 races require a near perfect run
some of which I hated:
 changing the focus of the game [super mario, healing potions]
 bigger pitas [roof running camera, unintentionally picking up weapons during a fight]
 filler [any loot chest, looting bodies, money system, estate]
 still filler - items - pointless! unless you like to stylishly use a crappier tier weapon, the item system is in effect as the first ass creed, except you get to pay for it in some sort of justification for the money system. There is not cRPG type of meaningful choices here.
 more filler - groups/factions - I think the player is forced in a couple missions to hire a group, otherwise you can beat up some ninnies guarding a codex piece, or save yourself the hassle and spend a measly 150 gold to have them distracted.. Which dissapointed me the most as I was hoping for more complex group behaviour, such as swarming/panic algorithms and a dynamic alert system.
 The behaviour of NPC's really is not so different from older stealther games - patrol waypoint, engage, lose 'sight' of player and return to patrol. Revolutionary to me would be to improve this particular model.
 To be fair, a crowd of onlockers backing off into a semi circle on occasion was cool, and was the type of thing I wish they would have concentrated on.

So, for the most part, instead of concentrating on the killing and stalking they added a lot of junior RPG elements and jumping puzzles.


The Witcher
I must be spoiled by such a primitive game as Mount & Blade that I have come to expect to be in some sort of control of my character. The Witcher's combat made me feel I was just along for the ride...

(click to show/hide)

Or the jog, as most of the time is spent running around on some NPC's schedule [store hours were mildly irritating in the old Might and Magic games]. There may be a demo for Witcher 2, in which case the combat system will have to shine for me to consider it. Yes, I am greedy, I want story etc but I want gameplay as well.

On a remotely connected note, there was a game called Dungeon Lords, good old Dreamcatcher games, which was released with bugs, and they had the audacity to release a 'platinum' or some such edition with a patch and some of the unfinished areas more completed - but the control system was almost really good.

Half Life 2. I said it was 'ok', maybe if I played it when it came out I would have gushed over it. It is still wolfenstein 3D at it's core. Like a lot of shooters, you follow a path, travelling from area to area.

Fallout 3.

(click to show/hide)

I was intially excited about a large seamless world, but that faded when I discovered it was not even a 3rd person shooter, but essentialy a turn based game. So ok, deal with that, but the inanity of the karma system sort of ruins the fun - did I mention I can pretty well rob blind a good NPC, but try and break into a villain's house and take his stuff is a loss of karma? How bout this - a mad scientist wipes out a village with his experiments - if I kill him I lose karma, if I do some chores for him I gain a super power... huh? Oh and the durability mechanic.. shudder. Not that it isn't possible to spend quite a few hours on this, but for me, by the 300th time I saw a cheesy slo mo head rolling around it became increasingly unlikely my interest would be held to the end.

------

MASS EFFECT 2: HYPE.

(click to show/hide)

MASS EFFECT 3 will not even have gameplay elements, it will be like those old endless quest books and the player just chooses dialogue after dialogue. Actually it makes me laugh that there is a gay relationship option supposedly to be included, and people are up in arms about it. Why do I care, erm, who my character sleeps with? It seems to be a selling point for the Witcher as well;  Maybe they could add some fun gameplay instead of pretend soft porn.

@IG_Saint

Where did I fault X3 for graphics? 2008 is not that old, but if you are refering to my comment about Celestia perhaps that was the confusion. However I DID fault Dead Rising 2 for it's SHITTY bloodplatters.

motorcycles: JC2 - fun. GTAIV - poo.

[[ptx]]

So, you basically diss good games, simply because you do not like their genres/subgenres?

[Zisa]

So, you basically diss good games, simply because you do not like their genres/subgenres?

Huh?

I diss 'popular' games because of elements of gameplay that are absent or lacking. When games get hyped as 'revolutionary' I have come to expect that to mean probably more eye candy, some gimmicks, but ultimately the actual play part of the game underwhelms.

Which game did I dis because of it's genre?

If you call gimmicks such as 'cover shooting' a genre I suppose you are right.

[[ptx]]

X3 for its strategy/empire building elements, Half-life 2 for its pure FPS, etc.

[Overdriven]

Huh?

I diss 'popular' games because of elements of gameplay that are absent or lacking. When games get hyped as 'revolutionary' I have come to expect that to mean probably more eye candy, some gimmicks, but ultimately the actual play part of the game underwhelms.

Which game did I dis because of it's genre?

If you call gimmicks such as 'cover shooting' a genre I suppose you are right.

Yahtzee would like you...