o'dium wrote:Yeah, the department store was full of all kinda of win. I kinda hoped for a return to that in the second, but they just teased on the one level...
The second is a lot more action than scare tbh, which is a shame. The last level is pretty much run and gun, no spookyness at all.
There will be a third though. If there isn't, it wouldnt make sense. Kinda like some twisted world where George only made episodes 3 and 4 and just stops there.
mild spoiler (no storyline info)
think the best part of the dept store for me was the random body that came falling down the escalator stairs with the note stuck to his back (can't even remember what it said - get out or something like that). don't know why, but i thought that was great stuff for some reason.
I played through the SP of COD4 about 15 times. Great weapon feel, addictive combat, and simple play mechanics. My kind of FPS.
I'm playing Diablo 2 again after about a 3 year break. Trying out some non-traditional character builds (bladefury assassin, hunter-druid) and it's still tasty wheat.
Just getting ready to start Dangerous Waters and Combat Mission II.
Half Life ep1 (already played ep2 cause I'm a moron)
9.5/10 for effect
10/10 in all honesty.
anyway I really enjoyed the entire HL2 series to be honest ...to me it's one of those games that can keep coming up with new episodes and I'll gladly pay for every single one till I run out of hardrive space.
the graphics are plenty for any moron to get in the right mood
enemies are as diverse as the weapon choice against each one...moreso than in other games I've played
and the big bang for the buck is the interactivity you get through the physics that brings the world to life... especially loved the "out of the box" thinking it required you to do in order to achieve goals...I bet alot of morons got stuck in this game
This was better than MGS 2 but a lot worse than MGS 1.
Being a MGS game, it still was enjoyable to play but I didn't like the theme of the game. The boss battles were a bit boring.
The first MGS seemed more plausible to happen in reality (even though clearly a work of sci-fi) However, this MGS seemed just absolutely rediculous and unfeasible. It spoiled it a bit for me because it didn't feel as critical to complete the game.
A plus is the ability to eat just about anything to keep your stamina up and to do surgery on yourself whenever you broke a bone/got shot.
Unfortunately it's not a game I would pick back up to do another run through.
Super Mario Galaxy - 10/10. Mario 64 IN SPACE! End. Remaking one of the greatest games of all time once again is just fabulous. And ignoring all of the failures of Mario Sunshine pretty much makes it perfect.
After Company of Heroes set a new standard for RTS games, I've had a hard time finding any that haven't left me disappointed (C&C 3 for example, what a snorefest), but I did find World in Conflict quite enjoyable, most likely because the gameplay mechanics are different enough to provide a sufficiently different gameplay experience. Less micro management, but not to the point of Supreme Commander's almost fully automated unit production and deployment, which allows for a good balance between unit tactics and battlefield strategy.
A few annoying pathfinding bugs and graphical glitches didn't take away much from what was otherwise a very enjoyable game. I also do understand why the writer did get that award - the writing and storytelling is definitely way above average, particularily when it comes to RTS games.
Got R6 Lockdown as a freebee 2 years ago but never installed so decided to give that a whirl.
Pretty awful.
Particularly the navigation skills of your squad members and to-be-rescued-hostages are lacking, which really is a dealbreaker because in about every map you have to move them to an extraction zone to complete the mission.
Many times I had to 'retrieve' (bump into and force in a direction for about a minute) them because they could not negotiate some awkward pixel and decided to spin around in circles instead.
Very unimaginative map design where every map is basically two identical mirrored sections leading to the next pair of identical mirrored sections.
Way too easy too.
You can choose the ultimate weapon/scope setup from the getgo and then snipe (without having to steady or having recoil) at leisure anything that moves with pretty much infinite ammo.
Plus there's quick save, which you don't *have* to use after every succesful kill, but if you can, you do, that's just how it works.
Less micro management, but not to the point of Supreme Commander's almost fully automated unit production and deployment, which allows for a good balance between unit tactics and battlefield strategy.
A few annoying pathfinding bugs and graphical glitches didn't take away much from what was otherwise a very enjoyable game. I also do understand why the writer did get that award - the writing and storytelling is definitely way above average, particularily when it comes to RTS games.
I thought Alec Baldwin as the narrator of the single player game was a nice touch. His voice was very well suited to the story...which was very authentic feeling. Ugh...the acting in the C&C games is beyond shit.
While I only worked on the game for a short time, the thing that hooked me was that there was no base-building: just spend your cash, get your units and get to work laying waste to enemies and control points. I don't know about other multiplayer RTSes...but the option to give your tactical aid points to a team mate can really fuck up the other team when they least expect it and can turn a game inside out...lots of laughing going on during LAN matches.
P.S. They are indeed working on better pathfinding (and better ways to make your own paths using the tactical strikes...such as napalm to burn down trees and let tanks through) for the next version...which should be out sometime around Christmas 08.
GONNAFISTYA wrote:While I only worked on the game for a short time, the thing that hooked me was that there was no base-building: just spend your cash, get your units and get to work laying waste to enemies and control points.
Yeah, that's what I liked most about it. You use your points to select your units and then just go straight into the fight, no need for base building and build queueing and shit like that. Same with artillery. It's a touch of genius the way you "earn" artillery points by killing your enemy with your ordinary units, that way you can't just hang back and avoid the fight and wait for your artillery points to count up. You need to actively go out there and earn them.
Not so much a bad game, as a game with a lot of wasted potential. The good things like the cinematic visuals, the free-running, the awesome character animations and the comparatively interesting story could have made this game into a spectacular success if it weren't for the bad things like the repetitiveness of the missions and the environments.
If they had made each of the investigations unique, and the info you got out of them actually useful, and mixed up the type of assassinations a bit more this game would have been a solid 8 or 9.
Instead we get 10 almost identical missions and stupid achievment crap tacked on (like collecting magical hovering flags and stuff) that breaks the immersion and cinematic atmosphere for no reason.
Turning off the HUD and going free-running over the rooftops or through the busy streets almost makes up for it though, and although I did actually enjoy the story "outside" the assassin setting, it's not quite enough. With everything done right, it could have been so good.
