JohnBirshire wrote on Sep 17, 2020, 13:34:
There is a big part of me that really dislikes this early access phenomenon.
Games come out as EA, are bug ridden, incomplete, lack basic functions every game should have. By the time the game is complete it's years later, old news, the novelty wore off, and nobody cares anymore. You can point to a few exceptions, but the majority of the time these EA games are ghost towns by the time they hit version 1.0.
jacobvandy wrote on Sep 11, 2020, 01:56:
Yep... I know I've come off as somewhat of a pedant here before, pointing out the difference between the two terms and when one is being used incorrectly, but the reaction to this is proof: 'remake' carries with it certain expectations of effort and quality that 'remaster' does not. All they had to do was call this the latter and the buzz would not be so negative. Asking $40 isn't doing them any favors either way, though, for something that looks on par with the canceled PoP game that would have come out almost a decade ago.
Verno wrote on Sep 9, 2020, 15:58:
Odyssey was proof that there definitely can be too much of a good thing. Too many forts, make less but more unique ones. Too many cultists/etc, make the encounters less numerable but more memorable. And so on. Everything in the game was done to death and even if you ignore the side content the game long overstays its welcome. The power curve with your character never felt right due to enemy scaling, whacking away at basic grunts gets really old. At first the gamification was welcome because we were all burnt out on trailing missions and other nonsense from the old games. But it turns out that maybe that stuff wasn't so bad, its just the usual Too Much problem at Ubisoft. Constantly designing the games with 10 different studios seems to ensure each sticks to an aspect of gameplay and makes a formula out of it. This is a Ubisoft problem in general, they stuff their games with too much cruft without considering the larger experience and arc. Weak writing also seems to follow them around - characters being introduced late into the story, constant pacing issues and incomprehensible conspiracy plot devices have been dogging them for a long time. Ubisoft desperately needs to learn that sometimes less is more. And frankly Odyssey would've been a lot more forgettable without the amazing VA performance of Melissanthi Mahut.
Anyways I can't say I'm super interested in this. It looks like the "hey we needed another one of these!" iteration. The games have totally lost track of what they set out to be and instead have become generic loot/level mashers. Ghost of Tsushima is filling the AC niche for me right now.
MoreLuckThanSkill wrote on Sep 8, 2020, 18:49:
I bought Lords of the Fallen on a pretty steep sale also... I'm starting to think those types of games, Soulish, etc. are just not for me. The only one I've kinda actually enjoyed playing so far, out of some of the Dark Souls, Lords of the Fallen, and some other junk, has been The Surge, but I'm getting to the point with that where I may just be hitting a wall. Tough combat(compared to other games) for each enemy on the map, and they respawn if you go back to the base/fire/campsite? Recipe for uninstall.
Tough combat per enemy, but they STAY DEAD, would make way more sense for these sorts of games, in my opinion. If it's a matter of farming resources/experience, then have an option to turn some/all of them back on, or a respawning area, etc. Respawning the whole map just makes me run through enemies ignoring them, or grinding them all repeatedly for crafting material, makes the game boring overall to me, after awhile. I can't even fathom how the Dark Souls series is popular, it's like the king of annoying mechanics in any game I've played outside of old school 80s arcade games.
As far as Lords of the Fallen 2, well, good luck, on the third developer? How does that even work?
jacobvandy wrote on Sep 6, 2020, 19:45:Xero wrote on Sep 6, 2020, 18:28:
Wait, so Postal 4 is still in Early Access but they've been working on another Postal? Can someone explain how that works?
Read the first sentence of the story, as many times as it takes.
Bodolza wrote on Sep 4, 2020, 20:23:
As timing would have it, I'm currently on my first run through of Witcher 3. I'm about 100 hours in at this point. Probably close to finishing the main story line, and haven't hit the expansion. Now I've got to decide if I'm going to go cold turkey until the upgrade is released.
Having just played 1 & 2 before starting 3, I'd say that while the graphics were rough in 1, I probably enjoyed it more than 2. Remembering what affect albedo had on potions vs rubedo was a lot to remember in 1, but they simplified it too much for 2. They found a decent balance in 3. The fighting in 2 was also a weird mix of the Diablo-style clickfest of 1 and the more action-oriented fighting of 3.
Witcher 1 was also a good challenge. You really needed to prepare and use potions to survive some of those fights. I don't think I've died a single time from a monster in Witcher 3, yet. Majority of my deaths are from falling.
Simon Says wrote on Sep 3, 2020, 12:23:
Doom Eternal? Not impressed.