Maniacal
the green Napoleon
It would have been great if he included a review with that summary too.
Where WE review our games
- Thread starter Rub'Rum
- Start date
schlaufuchs
Break My Heart
^
You should've added these pics to that post:
Spoilered because it's huge!
Spoiler :
And the map with daggerfall
Spoiler :
So people can see just how big it is.
And I would consider Nightfall to be the middle of the three maps you get in GW, with Prophecies being the larger (I don't know for sure, I just remember it feeling a helluva lot larger, and it had a good, what, 30 more areas?), especially when you include the additions from EotN. I'd be interested in seeing just how large all three maps put together are compared to the above maps.
Also, sure Daggerfall is huge. But it's procedurally generated, and the terrain gets really dull after awhile. I'd much rather have the unique and interesting 16 m² of Skyrim than the dull and samey 62000 m² of daggerfall. Although I don't suppose that's entirely fair considering Skyrim had near 15 extra years of technology and a helluva lot more manpower and money than Daggerfall had.
Polycrates
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2006
- Messages
- 1,288
SpaceChem
There was some interested feedback about the game when I posted some screenies in the screenshot thread a while ago, so I thought this game deserved a proper review.
This is one of the best games I've played in a while, but it does such an incredibly good job of hiding it that it's only because of Steam sales and word-of-mouth that I ended up even playing it.
At its essence it's a puzzle game about designing an assembly line, with the chemistry being an almost arbitrary subject matter (it's pretty fake chemistry that would have your professor having a fit). Certain atoms/molecules are given as inputs and they have to be sent to the appropriate output(s) after being constructed/deconstructed into other target atoms/molecules. Early on you might just be taking hydrogen atoms and oxygen atoms and bonding them together to make water, but later on the molecular rejigging required can become obscenely complicated.
To achieve this, there are two assembly lines (called "waldos" for some reason) whose path you trace around the game area, and then add instructions for them to carry out when they reach any given point on their path. These instructions being things like grabbing an atom/molecule, adding or removing a bond, rotating or asking for an atom to be fed into the input zone or fed from the output zone. It's all a bit hard to explain, so here's an introductory video.
What really makes this interesting is that you can have two of these waldos running simultaneously within the same space, which allows for vastly more complicated problems to be solved and vastly more clever solutions involving the interaction of the two.
As the game progresses, you then proceed to also face levels with an "overland" map of game areas (represented as "reactors") which you join by pipes to create machines of even greater complexity and variety.
In particular, the reason this game really shines is that the puzzle solutions are so open-ended. With two waldos and an array of potential commands, there really is no "correct solution" to any but the very simplest of puzzles. You're given a problem, some space and some tools and left to your own devices. There's a huge amount of room for experimentation, and there's a pretty good chance it will lead to an alternate solution rather than a dead end. I've solved puzzles then looked at other peoples' solutions on youtube, and it's hard to believe that they're solving the same problem; they have almost nothing in common and sometimes used tricks that I never discovered throughout the entire game. Compared to a puzzle game like Portal 2, where there's really only ever the one "right" solution, and the difference is like night and day (no slight against Portal 2). And because your solution is so individual (and probably involved a whole lot of time and mental toil), it's hard not to feel proud of your final machine, even if it's ramshackle as hell and a miracle that it actually works, because it's YOURS.
Adding to the sense of satisfaction is that the spartan graphics and precise, ordered animation of the machinery in motion really gives your creation the feel of an orderly, efficient assembly line - when you've solved a puzzle it's hard not to sit there for a few minutes watching the molecules go through their paces again and again with a sense of smug satisfaction.
But while "open-ended puzzles" usually means "easy", SpaceChem is HARD. Like brutally, brain-meltingly hard. There might be ten thousand solutions to a problem, but once you're past the initial tutorial levels, each of those solutions has to be meticulously designed and planned and tested and then rejigged when it inevitably fails the first fifty times and then thrown out and started again. You end up just working on getting small bits of the machine working at a time because the machine as a whole is so overwhelming. Your brain will hurt and you'll spend hours on a single level. If you're anything like me, you'll also spend most of your waking hours thinking about it, and it's easily the equal of any civ game for keeping you up all night. But the difficulty also makes the payoff so sweet, and you can't help but feel smart as hell when you finally get there.
On the other hand, in the starting levels, the difficulty is mostly in figuring out the nuances of the game's mechanics, which have a pretty steep learning curve - but soon the difficulty of the levels themselves ratchets up significantly. Everyone will probably be different, but personally I was still getting my head fully around the mechanics when the levels themselves got a whole bunch more complicated - so there was a big difficulty spike before it all finally "clicked". I think most people will probably hit a bit of a wall somewhere in the first few planets, and I think plenty will bounce off it before they get to the meat of the game. And while I appreciate that the creator wanted to encourage figuring things out for yourself rather than being led by the nose, I think a bit more guidance in the early levels wouldn't have gone astray.
He does do a very good job of keeping things interesting and fresh, though. Each "planet" introduces an interesting new concept to add to your toolbox, gives a couple of relatively straightforward levels for mastering it and then some bigger, more open levels with multiple reactors to really stretch the concept. And then a boss battle. Yes. The only thing more satisfying than building an elaborate machine for fabricating complicated chemicals is building an elaborate machine for fabricating complicated chemicals for powering lasers to fire at space monsters. I was amazed how well the boss battles worked in a puzzle game about chemistry, they were possibly the game's highlight for me. There's also a bit of a story built up in text between levels - it's decent and adds a nice touch but it's fairly disconnected from the game proper.
Also it has fantastic music.
There are a few criticisms I could level at the game though.
The first is that it only really supports a resolution of 1024x768 - those with higher-res monitors can either run it windowed or stretched. There are times when I feel that the density of information/interface presented in a single screen would really benefit from more pixel real estate. In particular, this is a problem for the "overland" screen, which can get really cluttered and messy and doesn't have the greatest interface in the world.
Perhaps my biggest problem is the lack of any sort of diagnostic tool for when things go wrong. In the harder levels, it's very easy for a problem to surface only after twenty or thirty iterations, and it can be very difficult to pinpoint what actually caused it (especially when you've got multiple reactors). The game just pauses and dumps you with a screen-obscuring generic error message, then dumps you back to the design mode. While there are multiple speeds for the simulation mode, it would benefit massively from a rewind option to allow easier diagnosis of what went wrong.
So yeah, overall probably the best and certainly the smartest puzzle game I've ever played. There's a ton of puzzles (and a bunch more on their ResearchNet) so it's ludicrously good value for the price, and it's just satisfying as hell. But I think it's a bit of a love-it-or-hate-it game that is definitely not for everyone, so if you're on the fence I'd probably suggest trying the demo first. Steam classifies it as "casual" but that is a filthy lie because just about the only game less casual is probably Dwarf Fortress (check out these utterly insane examples from the sandbox mode to see just how non-casual it's capable of being). Anyway it's a fantastic game that I think would appeal to a lot of the people here, so I highly recommend trying to get past its terrible first impressions and giving it a shot. 8/10
There was some interested feedback about the game when I posted some screenies in the screenshot thread a while ago, so I thought this game deserved a proper review.
This is one of the best games I've played in a while, but it does such an incredibly good job of hiding it that it's only because of Steam sales and word-of-mouth that I ended up even playing it.
At its essence it's a puzzle game about designing an assembly line, with the chemistry being an almost arbitrary subject matter (it's pretty fake chemistry that would have your professor having a fit). Certain atoms/molecules are given as inputs and they have to be sent to the appropriate output(s) after being constructed/deconstructed into other target atoms/molecules. Early on you might just be taking hydrogen atoms and oxygen atoms and bonding them together to make water, but later on the molecular rejigging required can become obscenely complicated.
To achieve this, there are two assembly lines (called "waldos" for some reason) whose path you trace around the game area, and then add instructions for them to carry out when they reach any given point on their path. These instructions being things like grabbing an atom/molecule, adding or removing a bond, rotating or asking for an atom to be fed into the input zone or fed from the output zone. It's all a bit hard to explain, so here's an introductory video.
What really makes this interesting is that you can have two of these waldos running simultaneously within the same space, which allows for vastly more complicated problems to be solved and vastly more clever solutions involving the interaction of the two.
As the game progresses, you then proceed to also face levels with an "overland" map of game areas (represented as "reactors") which you join by pipes to create machines of even greater complexity and variety.
In particular, the reason this game really shines is that the puzzle solutions are so open-ended. With two waldos and an array of potential commands, there really is no "correct solution" to any but the very simplest of puzzles. You're given a problem, some space and some tools and left to your own devices. There's a huge amount of room for experimentation, and there's a pretty good chance it will lead to an alternate solution rather than a dead end. I've solved puzzles then looked at other peoples' solutions on youtube, and it's hard to believe that they're solving the same problem; they have almost nothing in common and sometimes used tricks that I never discovered throughout the entire game. Compared to a puzzle game like Portal 2, where there's really only ever the one "right" solution, and the difference is like night and day (no slight against Portal 2). And because your solution is so individual (and probably involved a whole lot of time and mental toil), it's hard not to feel proud of your final machine, even if it's ramshackle as hell and a miracle that it actually works, because it's YOURS.
Adding to the sense of satisfaction is that the spartan graphics and precise, ordered animation of the machinery in motion really gives your creation the feel of an orderly, efficient assembly line - when you've solved a puzzle it's hard not to sit there for a few minutes watching the molecules go through their paces again and again with a sense of smug satisfaction.
But while "open-ended puzzles" usually means "easy", SpaceChem is HARD. Like brutally, brain-meltingly hard. There might be ten thousand solutions to a problem, but once you're past the initial tutorial levels, each of those solutions has to be meticulously designed and planned and tested and then rejigged when it inevitably fails the first fifty times and then thrown out and started again. You end up just working on getting small bits of the machine working at a time because the machine as a whole is so overwhelming. Your brain will hurt and you'll spend hours on a single level. If you're anything like me, you'll also spend most of your waking hours thinking about it, and it's easily the equal of any civ game for keeping you up all night. But the difficulty also makes the payoff so sweet, and you can't help but feel smart as hell when you finally get there.
On the other hand, in the starting levels, the difficulty is mostly in figuring out the nuances of the game's mechanics, which have a pretty steep learning curve - but soon the difficulty of the levels themselves ratchets up significantly. Everyone will probably be different, but personally I was still getting my head fully around the mechanics when the levels themselves got a whole bunch more complicated - so there was a big difficulty spike before it all finally "clicked". I think most people will probably hit a bit of a wall somewhere in the first few planets, and I think plenty will bounce off it before they get to the meat of the game. And while I appreciate that the creator wanted to encourage figuring things out for yourself rather than being led by the nose, I think a bit more guidance in the early levels wouldn't have gone astray.
He does do a very good job of keeping things interesting and fresh, though. Each "planet" introduces an interesting new concept to add to your toolbox, gives a couple of relatively straightforward levels for mastering it and then some bigger, more open levels with multiple reactors to really stretch the concept. And then a boss battle. Yes. The only thing more satisfying than building an elaborate machine for fabricating complicated chemicals is building an elaborate machine for fabricating complicated chemicals for powering lasers to fire at space monsters. I was amazed how well the boss battles worked in a puzzle game about chemistry, they were possibly the game's highlight for me. There's also a bit of a story built up in text between levels - it's decent and adds a nice touch but it's fairly disconnected from the game proper.
Also it has fantastic music.
There are a few criticisms I could level at the game though.
The first is that it only really supports a resolution of 1024x768 - those with higher-res monitors can either run it windowed or stretched. There are times when I feel that the density of information/interface presented in a single screen would really benefit from more pixel real estate. In particular, this is a problem for the "overland" screen, which can get really cluttered and messy and doesn't have the greatest interface in the world.
Perhaps my biggest problem is the lack of any sort of diagnostic tool for when things go wrong. In the harder levels, it's very easy for a problem to surface only after twenty or thirty iterations, and it can be very difficult to pinpoint what actually caused it (especially when you've got multiple reactors). The game just pauses and dumps you with a screen-obscuring generic error message, then dumps you back to the design mode. While there are multiple speeds for the simulation mode, it would benefit massively from a rewind option to allow easier diagnosis of what went wrong.
So yeah, overall probably the best and certainly the smartest puzzle game I've ever played. There's a ton of puzzles (and a bunch more on their ResearchNet) so it's ludicrously good value for the price, and it's just satisfying as hell. But I think it's a bit of a love-it-or-hate-it game that is definitely not for everyone, so if you're on the fence I'd probably suggest trying the demo first. Steam classifies it as "casual" but that is a filthy lie because just about the only game less casual is probably Dwarf Fortress (check out these utterly insane examples from the sandbox mode to see just how non-casual it's capable of being). Anyway it's a fantastic game that I think would appeal to a lot of the people here, so I highly recommend trying to get past its terrible first impressions and giving it a shot. 8/10
Disgustipated
Deity
Diablo 3: final score is below, but I'll put it here for the ADD people. Overall score: B (85)
I'm a little underwhelmed from this game considering how long we've waited for it. But it's not like they've been working on it this entire time. They had other projects. It wouldn't have felt like Diablo if they made it too different from the other games. So in that regard, I like this game a whole lot. Compared to a real rpg with a stronger story and more fleshed out world, it's kind of weak. But for an action rpg it's pretty strong. Keep in mind I've only played through normal with my Witch Doctor and most of Act 1 with my barbarian. I'm not reviewing nightmare, hell, or inferno. And don't tell me that's when the game really starts. I play a game to have fun, not brag how good I am. I will play nightmare, but doubtful I'll play hell or inferno. Dying over and over isn't why I play a game. I like some challenge, but I stop playing when a game becomes more work than fun.
My main complaint is the internet requirement. But Diablo 2 also had that. Yeah you could play the closed world games in D2, but that would mean you couldn't find random groups for multiplayer. It helped reduce cheating too. It helps to join random groups for the bosses. Although usually I prefer to do it solo so I can explore everything. This game still isn't optimized for internet, but that may be due to high volume of playing right now. And then the bugs...
Graphics: I give this one a B. The graphics are pretty slick. They didn't go too cartoonish (like wow) thankfully. I really liked the oasis in chapter 2. The movie graphics are top notch. I never seen movies/cutscenes with this much sharpness and clarity. Top notch production values on the movies/cutscenes. It's not graphics you'd find in a first person game, but we weren't asking for that. If they made the game first person they'd ruin it. My main complaint is the inability to zoom with the mouse wheel. They give us the ability to dye our outfits, but I can't tell what color they are anyways on my witch hunter. Even when I hit the Z key my character is too small to see in detail. I'd like more zoom. So I can't give the graphics an A.
Sound: Sound is excellent. I'll give sound an A-. My main complaint is the bash sound on barbarians. It gets annoying hearing that sound all the time.
. It sounds like he's hitting a metal trash can or other metallic object. Why does it sound like that when he's hitting flesh? I'd give the sound an A except for a few minor annoyances such as that.
music: I'll give it a B-. My main complaint is I can't hear it even at 100%. The sound effects (especially bash- see above) are loud and overpowering the music. I always loved Diablo's guitar work on their music. They used a lot of different instruments for the D2 soundtrack. I was disappointed they didn't use Matt Uelman again. But I just looked it up, and he left Blizzard. He also did Burning Crusade music (which I also enjoy a whole lot). The new guy doesn't really do anything that stands out. Although looking it up, the new guy (he's not really new) also did Burning Crusade music too. So I'm not sure how much was his, and how much was Matt's. I do enjoy music in games, and really liked Diablo 2 music. But I can't tell you much about D3 music. I don't hear enough of it. But what little I did hear, I liked.
Bugs. I'm giving this one a D+. No major gamebreaking bugs. But I do have a bug where the screen blacks out for a few seconds, and I'm unable to interact with the world. The problem seems worse with my barbarian. It's either some kind of graphical lag bug or internet lag. From what I read online, it's not people's systems. They've tried different drivers and setups to no avail. The problem is with the game itself I think. I also give low marks because of the internet requirement. The game was unplayable when I first installed it because the server was down for maintenance. I'm off on Tuesday mornings, and they choose that day to do maintenance a lot. This isn't a MMO, there is no reason to have the server down every week, and for over 8 hours too!. This makes the game unplayable at certain times. I also encounter internet lag which shouldn't be an issue in a single player game. The Auction house is down a lot too, so I consider that a bug. Also when I go to pick up gold, it picks up nearby objects (yes I do realize I have equipment that allows me to pick up gold within a certain number of yards, but it shouldn't pick up equipment). I end up picking up lots of normal level equipment which is useless and must be dropped periodically to make room in my bags. I consider this a bug. Also sometimes the followers will speak to you when the audio from a book on the ground is playing which will block out what they are saying. I also have also seen a few other overlapping audio issues. But they should make it so other people don't speak when you have speaking already going on.
Gameplay: score A-. My main complaint is lack of skills you can use at one time. But I don't knock it down too far for that. I'm glad they didn't make it like a MMO like WOW. They kept the diablo theme somewhat. I do have 6 I can use (keys 1-4 and right and left mouse button). And 6 isn't bad. Kind of annoying waiting for cooldowns before you can switch them out however. Gameplay is killing, more killing, and even more killing. What's not to like. Bodies exploding everywhere. Who doesn't like that? Gameplay is very satisfying. I only wish you could have more people in world like you could in Diablo 2.
Story/plot: score B+. I didn't give it a lower score because I am judging this on basis that it is an action rpg, and not a real rpg. I'm mainly comparing it to other games of it's type. Namely the other diablos since I don't normally play action rpg's. I've only played a few others. I still feel like there could have been some improvement. And yes it does feel incomplete due to them leaving room for an expansion. It just feels too rushed. I'd like to see more content. The game doesn't seem as long as it could be. The plot in Act 3 and 4 goes by too fast, and could be more fleshed out.
NPC's. B+ I usually like to grade this category, although I will score it as an action rpg. I don't expect fully fleshed out NPC's with backstories. But I am glad they at least tried to do some back stories with your recruitable NPC's. And they went into Leah's past a little which I liked, along with Cain. It gave you a little bit to go on so you cared a little about Leah during the events at the end of Act 3. I still feel there is room for improvement, even in an action NPC. I still feel they can do more with your followers.
Interface: grade is A. I know I shouldn't have to give props to a game that is actually designed for a PC instead of a console. But these days it's a refreshing change to see a game with a halfway decent PC interface. As much as I like Fallout New Vegas (it's my favorite game of all time), games like that suffer because it was designed for a console. Diablo 3 was not designed with the console in mind, and for that I thank them. The interface is very good, and I don't find myself hitting the wrong keys in the heat of battle. Granted, the game is pretty easy and doesn't have many keys to hit anyways.
Mutiplayer: C+ I know it's early, but I'm not impressed with the matchmaking system yet. It's supposed to work similar to lfg system in WOW. When I go to join public games, I can't choose which games I join (like in D2). I'd rather join parties with 3 people in them, not just 1. Yesterday I was trying to find a party for the act 3 end boss. First game was a player called xxkd or something like that. He didn't help at all. No one else joined, so I left. I tried a couple other games with only one player who didn't want to do anything or speak. I finally found one guy who actually wanted to play and kill things. My main complaint is they don't find 2 more people for our party to make it a full party of 4. 4 is much more fun than 2. Why is the matchmaker system not putting people in the party until it's full? When I was playing with my brother (and his friend from China), it was more enjoyable. As with any game, multiplayer is more enjoyable when you play with people you know. It's easy to join in games of people on your friends list, so I give good marks for that. My low score is mainly because you can't choose what games to join (as I said, I prefer more people in my parties), and the system doesn't add people until the party is full.
Final score: B, or a score of 85. It's a damn fun game, but there is some room for improvement. Subsequent patches and improvements to the matchmaker system will improve the game for sure. Even after finishing normal, I do want to continue playing, so I consider that a good thing. In D2, I often got bored of my character then, and got tired of grinding through Nightmare. I'm not sure if this game will be like that. My only other complaint is the character class selection. I miss paladins. Barbarians just don't cut it. And I'd prefer the amazon instead of the demon hunter. And the monk doesn't interest me either. The only 2 characters that really interest me are the wizard and the witch doctor. I hope they bring back druids in an expansion. And one last observation is I wish the game could be a little longer. It's a little shorter with smaller maps than D2. But the maps are more interesting than D2 so it's a tradeoff. As for difficulty, I found normal to be a little bit easier than D2, but not being able to chain chug potions balances that out a little.
I'm a little underwhelmed from this game considering how long we've waited for it. But it's not like they've been working on it this entire time. They had other projects. It wouldn't have felt like Diablo if they made it too different from the other games. So in that regard, I like this game a whole lot. Compared to a real rpg with a stronger story and more fleshed out world, it's kind of weak. But for an action rpg it's pretty strong. Keep in mind I've only played through normal with my Witch Doctor and most of Act 1 with my barbarian. I'm not reviewing nightmare, hell, or inferno. And don't tell me that's when the game really starts. I play a game to have fun, not brag how good I am. I will play nightmare, but doubtful I'll play hell or inferno. Dying over and over isn't why I play a game. I like some challenge, but I stop playing when a game becomes more work than fun.
My main complaint is the internet requirement. But Diablo 2 also had that. Yeah you could play the closed world games in D2, but that would mean you couldn't find random groups for multiplayer. It helped reduce cheating too. It helps to join random groups for the bosses. Although usually I prefer to do it solo so I can explore everything. This game still isn't optimized for internet, but that may be due to high volume of playing right now. And then the bugs...
Graphics: I give this one a B. The graphics are pretty slick. They didn't go too cartoonish (like wow) thankfully. I really liked the oasis in chapter 2. The movie graphics are top notch. I never seen movies/cutscenes with this much sharpness and clarity. Top notch production values on the movies/cutscenes. It's not graphics you'd find in a first person game, but we weren't asking for that. If they made the game first person they'd ruin it. My main complaint is the inability to zoom with the mouse wheel. They give us the ability to dye our outfits, but I can't tell what color they are anyways on my witch hunter. Even when I hit the Z key my character is too small to see in detail. I'd like more zoom. So I can't give the graphics an A.
Sound: Sound is excellent. I'll give sound an A-. My main complaint is the bash sound on barbarians. It gets annoying hearing that sound all the time.
. It sounds like he's hitting a metal trash can or other metallic object. Why does it sound like that when he's hitting flesh? I'd give the sound an A except for a few minor annoyances such as that. music: I'll give it a B-. My main complaint is I can't hear it even at 100%. The sound effects (especially bash- see above) are loud and overpowering the music. I always loved Diablo's guitar work on their music. They used a lot of different instruments for the D2 soundtrack. I was disappointed they didn't use Matt Uelman again. But I just looked it up, and he left Blizzard. He also did Burning Crusade music (which I also enjoy a whole lot). The new guy doesn't really do anything that stands out. Although looking it up, the new guy (he's not really new) also did Burning Crusade music too. So I'm not sure how much was his, and how much was Matt's. I do enjoy music in games, and really liked Diablo 2 music. But I can't tell you much about D3 music. I don't hear enough of it. But what little I did hear, I liked.
Bugs. I'm giving this one a D+. No major gamebreaking bugs. But I do have a bug where the screen blacks out for a few seconds, and I'm unable to interact with the world. The problem seems worse with my barbarian. It's either some kind of graphical lag bug or internet lag. From what I read online, it's not people's systems. They've tried different drivers and setups to no avail. The problem is with the game itself I think. I also give low marks because of the internet requirement. The game was unplayable when I first installed it because the server was down for maintenance. I'm off on Tuesday mornings, and they choose that day to do maintenance a lot. This isn't a MMO, there is no reason to have the server down every week, and for over 8 hours too!. This makes the game unplayable at certain times. I also encounter internet lag which shouldn't be an issue in a single player game. The Auction house is down a lot too, so I consider that a bug. Also when I go to pick up gold, it picks up nearby objects (yes I do realize I have equipment that allows me to pick up gold within a certain number of yards, but it shouldn't pick up equipment). I end up picking up lots of normal level equipment which is useless and must be dropped periodically to make room in my bags. I consider this a bug. Also sometimes the followers will speak to you when the audio from a book on the ground is playing which will block out what they are saying. I also have also seen a few other overlapping audio issues. But they should make it so other people don't speak when you have speaking already going on.
Gameplay: score A-. My main complaint is lack of skills you can use at one time. But I don't knock it down too far for that. I'm glad they didn't make it like a MMO like WOW. They kept the diablo theme somewhat. I do have 6 I can use (keys 1-4 and right and left mouse button). And 6 isn't bad. Kind of annoying waiting for cooldowns before you can switch them out however. Gameplay is killing, more killing, and even more killing. What's not to like. Bodies exploding everywhere. Who doesn't like that? Gameplay is very satisfying. I only wish you could have more people in world like you could in Diablo 2.
Story/plot: score B+. I didn't give it a lower score because I am judging this on basis that it is an action rpg, and not a real rpg. I'm mainly comparing it to other games of it's type. Namely the other diablos since I don't normally play action rpg's. I've only played a few others. I still feel like there could have been some improvement. And yes it does feel incomplete due to them leaving room for an expansion. It just feels too rushed. I'd like to see more content. The game doesn't seem as long as it could be. The plot in Act 3 and 4 goes by too fast, and could be more fleshed out.
NPC's. B+ I usually like to grade this category, although I will score it as an action rpg. I don't expect fully fleshed out NPC's with backstories. But I am glad they at least tried to do some back stories with your recruitable NPC's. And they went into Leah's past a little which I liked, along with Cain. It gave you a little bit to go on so you cared a little about Leah during the events at the end of Act 3. I still feel there is room for improvement, even in an action NPC. I still feel they can do more with your followers.
Interface: grade is A. I know I shouldn't have to give props to a game that is actually designed for a PC instead of a console. But these days it's a refreshing change to see a game with a halfway decent PC interface. As much as I like Fallout New Vegas (it's my favorite game of all time), games like that suffer because it was designed for a console. Diablo 3 was not designed with the console in mind, and for that I thank them. The interface is very good, and I don't find myself hitting the wrong keys in the heat of battle. Granted, the game is pretty easy and doesn't have many keys to hit anyways.
Mutiplayer: C+ I know it's early, but I'm not impressed with the matchmaking system yet. It's supposed to work similar to lfg system in WOW. When I go to join public games, I can't choose which games I join (like in D2). I'd rather join parties with 3 people in them, not just 1. Yesterday I was trying to find a party for the act 3 end boss. First game was a player called xxkd or something like that. He didn't help at all. No one else joined, so I left. I tried a couple other games with only one player who didn't want to do anything or speak. I finally found one guy who actually wanted to play and kill things. My main complaint is they don't find 2 more people for our party to make it a full party of 4. 4 is much more fun than 2. Why is the matchmaker system not putting people in the party until it's full? When I was playing with my brother (and his friend from China), it was more enjoyable. As with any game, multiplayer is more enjoyable when you play with people you know. It's easy to join in games of people on your friends list, so I give good marks for that. My low score is mainly because you can't choose what games to join (as I said, I prefer more people in my parties), and the system doesn't add people until the party is full.
Final score: B, or a score of 85. It's a damn fun game, but there is some room for improvement. Subsequent patches and improvements to the matchmaker system will improve the game for sure. Even after finishing normal, I do want to continue playing, so I consider that a good thing. In D2, I often got bored of my character then, and got tired of grinding through Nightmare. I'm not sure if this game will be like that. My only other complaint is the character class selection. I miss paladins. Barbarians just don't cut it. And I'd prefer the amazon instead of the demon hunter. And the monk doesn't interest me either. The only 2 characters that really interest me are the wizard and the witch doctor. I hope they bring back druids in an expansion. And one last observation is I wish the game could be a little longer. It's a little shorter with smaller maps than D2. But the maps are more interesting than D2 so it's a tradeoff. As for difficulty, I found normal to be a little bit easier than D2, but not being able to chain chug potions balances that out a little.
GoodGame
Red, White, & Blue, baby!
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
- Messages
- 13,725
Magicka and some DLC
What it is: An action RPG about magic-users, school wizards, Imperial War Wizards, in primary color robes running around killing typical fantasy trope creatures within a linear story about saving the world from evil mages. Although I classify it as an action RPG, there's no branching skill system whatsoever, nor experience point grinding; the only real RPG system is in looting equipments and learning spells from books you find. There's a bit of a "live" RPG system and in the player's developing grasp of the magick creation system, although I'd tend to think of the "live" magick system as a real-time tactical puzzle challenge.
The core of the game-play is the "live" magick system in which you conjure up spell effects on the fly without using pre-canned spells. The pre-canned spells are "special" spells that you learn from books found. Everything else are chain effects by stringing together up to 5 elements that can mutate each other in combinations. The elements are fire, cold, water, life, arcane (un-life), electricity, earth, and there are combo elements---steam and ice. There's also poison (anti-life) that you have no control on but is present. The combinations have to be entered in real-time, which is like a "teaches typing" test, though there's only about 12 keys to enter in all effects. The on-the-fly spell effects give a variety of projectile, beams, shields, auras, arcane landmines, chain lighting, and barriers. The combos are fairly unique in that subsituting one will make a significant effect.
The challenge is further improved by a system of counters and nullifying rules that effect your spells, and appropriate spells. For example, if you become wet, hen you can't use the electrical element until you dry off (and you may take extra damage if wet standing in electricity). Or you can freeze opponents standing in water, or freeze lava to earth temporarily, etc.... etc... The fun is in devising appropriate effects for specific enemies and tactical terrain, and also unlearning/tweaking your favorite combos as the tactical situations change.
There's a bit of customization in starting robe and equipment selection, which is improved in by DLC.
There's also versus and coop modes, and challenge modes. I never found an open versus or coop mode, and they looked pretty lightly populated. The challenge modes can be played single player and are basically battle arenas of you versus continual AI waves and loot drops to score as high as possible. Other challenge modes are semi-story based, but basically an assault battle arena like an arcade side-scroller (though isometric).
NPCs/Story: Mostly forgettable, and intentionally so since the game sets itself up to be a light parody of fantasy tropes and popular fantasy. Most dialogue is meant to be at least weakly humorous, but thankfully you can skip it with a <space bar>. The story is palatable enough to be mildly interesting, but a lot of it is just there to take you from goblin area to town area to goblin mine area to undead area to demon area etc... etc...
Graphics/Sound: The graphics are decently animated HD isometrics. The spell effects are particularly visually impressive and make each spell combination visually distinct down to +-1 magick elements. The sounds are well done, and contribute to the parody (e.g. some enemies shout DOTA DOTA DOTA in a nerdy voice, over and over, and many townies speak a Swedish version of Simlish). The musical scores are ok, with only one or two remarkable; the rest are filler that succeed in not being annoying.
Overall I give this one an B-plus/A-minus (89.5 raised to a 90 for extra credit) with the understanding that it's a brilliant, small developer released by a major publisher (Paradox) and not meant to be a AAA title. It has the feel of both an isometric action RPG (e.g. diablo)and a real-time puzzle games, without any equipment/experience point grinding, which makes for a fun time. For ~ $15 in base game and DLC, it's a good bargain and easily passes the 50 cents per hour of fun, threshold of quality.
****
I have to agree that map size is misleading. Some of those games are pure sandbox, but some (including the sandbox games) have maps that are basically bent spaghetti railroad where you can't do simple things like climb a hill. And what about Sim City 4? You could practically play a whole state. Or what about Eve Online?
What it is: An action RPG about magic-users, school wizards, Imperial War Wizards, in primary color robes running around killing typical fantasy trope creatures within a linear story about saving the world from evil mages. Although I classify it as an action RPG, there's no branching skill system whatsoever, nor experience point grinding; the only real RPG system is in looting equipments and learning spells from books you find. There's a bit of a "live" RPG system and in the player's developing grasp of the magick creation system, although I'd tend to think of the "live" magick system as a real-time tactical puzzle challenge.
The core of the game-play is the "live" magick system in which you conjure up spell effects on the fly without using pre-canned spells. The pre-canned spells are "special" spells that you learn from books found. Everything else are chain effects by stringing together up to 5 elements that can mutate each other in combinations. The elements are fire, cold, water, life, arcane (un-life), electricity, earth, and there are combo elements---steam and ice. There's also poison (anti-life) that you have no control on but is present. The combinations have to be entered in real-time, which is like a "teaches typing" test, though there's only about 12 keys to enter in all effects. The on-the-fly spell effects give a variety of projectile, beams, shields, auras, arcane landmines, chain lighting, and barriers. The combos are fairly unique in that subsituting one will make a significant effect.
The challenge is further improved by a system of counters and nullifying rules that effect your spells, and appropriate spells. For example, if you become wet, hen you can't use the electrical element until you dry off (and you may take extra damage if wet standing in electricity). Or you can freeze opponents standing in water, or freeze lava to earth temporarily, etc.... etc... The fun is in devising appropriate effects for specific enemies and tactical terrain, and also unlearning/tweaking your favorite combos as the tactical situations change.
There's a bit of customization in starting robe and equipment selection, which is improved in by DLC.
There's also versus and coop modes, and challenge modes. I never found an open versus or coop mode, and they looked pretty lightly populated. The challenge modes can be played single player and are basically battle arenas of you versus continual AI waves and loot drops to score as high as possible. Other challenge modes are semi-story based, but basically an assault battle arena like an arcade side-scroller (though isometric).
NPCs/Story: Mostly forgettable, and intentionally so since the game sets itself up to be a light parody of fantasy tropes and popular fantasy. Most dialogue is meant to be at least weakly humorous, but thankfully you can skip it with a <space bar>. The story is palatable enough to be mildly interesting, but a lot of it is just there to take you from goblin area to town area to goblin mine area to undead area to demon area etc... etc...
Graphics/Sound: The graphics are decently animated HD isometrics. The spell effects are particularly visually impressive and make each spell combination visually distinct down to +-1 magick elements. The sounds are well done, and contribute to the parody (e.g. some enemies shout DOTA DOTA DOTA in a nerdy voice, over and over, and many townies speak a Swedish version of Simlish). The musical scores are ok, with only one or two remarkable; the rest are filler that succeed in not being annoying.
Overall I give this one an B-plus/A-minus (89.5 raised to a 90 for extra credit) with the understanding that it's a brilliant, small developer released by a major publisher (Paradox) and not meant to be a AAA title. It has the feel of both an isometric action RPG (e.g. diablo)and a real-time puzzle games, without any equipment/experience point grinding, which makes for a fun time. For ~ $15 in base game and DLC, it's a good bargain and easily passes the 50 cents per hour of fun, threshold of quality.
****
I have to agree that map size is misleading. Some of those games are pure sandbox, but some (including the sandbox games) have maps that are basically bent spaghetti railroad where you can't do simple things like climb a hill. And what about Sim City 4? You could practically play a whole state. Or what about Eve Online?
CivCube
Spicy.
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2003
- Messages
- 5,824
Mirror's Edge - 2009 saw the release of parkour games by two big publishers: Assassin's Creed II by Ubisoft and this one by EA/DICE, of all people. Evidently the Battlefield developers wanted to see what it was like to make something not focused on hooh rah brah militarism.
They are partially successful. In place of explosions and guns a-blazin', you're a "runner" who avoids said explosions and guns a-blazin' (although you get to do some shooty-shoot every now and then). As a courier, your job is to climb and amble around on brightly colored buildings, jump across impossibly high gaps, dodge the best efforts of the most professional assassins. Because see, your parents were Occupy types, and you'd rather disarm instead of kill (except for that one cutscene).
It's actually a refreshing change from DICE's usual faux grit. Like a pop song, it's a game that's mostly about setting your mood soaring along with your avatar. The plot's bubblegum taste is easily forgotten and ignored as you climb through the game's mostly well designed environments (Project Icarus! Traitors! Who cares!). Despite complaints about the controls, I found the PC port to be well done in its ease of use. Even as I fell off the side of a building for the umpteenth time, I found I wanted to try again and didn't feel the need to beat my face against a walkthrough. A button that points you in the correct direction is a simple fix over the console version that works splendidly. DICE is also smart enough to end the game just as it becomes repetitive. Just before that happens, I feel that there was a good variety of environments for Faith to jump around in.
Should there be a sequel? I don't know; I guess I wouldn't mind. I think I know enough about this world that I would be content with simply playing again. Its linear design is refreshing compared to Assassin's Creed's open world but doesn't become the slog that AC sometimes is. If you get this game on sale, it's well worth it. 75%
They are partially successful. In place of explosions and guns a-blazin', you're a "runner" who avoids said explosions and guns a-blazin' (although you get to do some shooty-shoot every now and then). As a courier, your job is to climb and amble around on brightly colored buildings, jump across impossibly high gaps, dodge the best efforts of the most professional assassins. Because see, your parents were Occupy types, and you'd rather disarm instead of kill (except for that one cutscene).
It's actually a refreshing change from DICE's usual faux grit. Like a pop song, it's a game that's mostly about setting your mood soaring along with your avatar. The plot's bubblegum taste is easily forgotten and ignored as you climb through the game's mostly well designed environments (Project Icarus! Traitors! Who cares!). Despite complaints about the controls, I found the PC port to be well done in its ease of use. Even as I fell off the side of a building for the umpteenth time, I found I wanted to try again and didn't feel the need to beat my face against a walkthrough. A button that points you in the correct direction is a simple fix over the console version that works splendidly. DICE is also smart enough to end the game just as it becomes repetitive. Just before that happens, I feel that there was a good variety of environments for Faith to jump around in.
Should there be a sequel? I don't know; I guess I wouldn't mind. I think I know enough about this world that I would be content with simply playing again. Its linear design is refreshing compared to Assassin's Creed's open world but doesn't become the slog that AC sometimes is. If you get this game on sale, it's well worth it. 75%
Polycrates
Emperor
- Joined
- Dec 15, 2006
- Messages
- 1,288
Dear Esther
This is an odd one. I feel like this game was made just for me; I loved it, but there is an equally good chance that you will hate it.
For starters, its not a game. Its first person but theres no interactivity AT ALL. Theres no challenge, theres no action, and your only controls are wasd and mouselook. You can walk, and thats it - and you walk slooooowly. Its also around 90 minutes long, and youre unlikely to go through it more than once. And as you might guess from all that (and the name), its also a bit wanky and pretentious in a way that it probably wants you to call it a digital art installation piece or something.
And yet its an utterly fantastic experience. What it is, is a 90 minute wander through the most incredibly detailed and visually stunning digital landscape Ive ever seen, with a slow-burn story that builds up to tie it all together. It's very much a sensory experience (and yes, I know how that sounds), and if youre thinking of playing this, you MUST set aside a couple of uninterrupted hours and play it in the dark with earphones, or else youre wasting your time and money.
Its possibly the most beautiful looking game Ive ever come across, and the best argument that the ever-increasing graphics race hasnt been a complete waste of time. Technically, its nothing particularly special (its apparently the Source engine). But there is a meticulous attention to detail the environment is crammed with detail, and everything down to the thousands and thousands of small rocks has been very clearly hand-placed with a lot of care and lord-knows how much effort. And all that is in service to a remarkable aesthetic sense for building utterly majestic and hauntingly beautiful landscapes. There are so many points where I just stopped and thought oh wow. WOW. Its a world where I found myself more than happy to just wander around and soak it all in and see whats there. And the caves. Oh my.
The price of all this is that its very linear you cant just freely roam the island, and theres very much a path to follow. It mostly does a good job of making sure the invisible walls arent in your face (though that does mean it can be slightly jarring when you run into them accidentally). But this linearity really does make sense in the context of the story its a journey with a purpose so it doesnt really make sense to stray.
The story! Its told in snippets of narration by the player character at various junctures throughout the journey, ostensibly to dear Esther. A lot of it is very unclear and rambling, and often very flowery and pretentious, and it will be a little while before it starts to make sense. At first I found it an unwelcome distraction from rambling through the countryside and I thought oh god this is Braid all over again. But then it grabbed me. And the interaction between these cryptic snippets and the clues throughout the environment really worked well for me, and added an extra layer to the already fantastic landscapes. It does certainly play a slightly secondary role, and you might find yourself disappointed by its sparseness if you go in just to be told a story, but I found it really quite compelling and it really builds towards the finale.
Oh and I should also mention the music which is great and is a spot-on fit. Between the visuals, the sound and the story, it really does build into a hauntingly beautiful whole with real emotional involvement.
So is it worth it? Certainly not for everyone, and Im sure that plenty of people will hate it. If it doesnt sound like your cup of tea from what Ive written, I would definitely advise avoiding it. If youre like me and you found that the main draw of games like Morrowind and Skyrim was just wandering around, soaking in the lonely world and exploring to see whats out there, then you would probably enjoy this (as long as you can handle the linearity). It's a left-field comparison, but if you liked Bastion for more than just the fighting, you might like this.
If you look at it from a perspective of hours-of-gameplay-per-dollar, then its absolutely dreadful value (though no worse than a movie or plenty of other forms of entertainment) Id suggest that kind of misses the point, but certainly if youre on a tight gaming budget then this might not be the best way to spend it.
Anyway Im not sure its really possible to give it a rating so I won't, but I found it to be a magnificent experience worth every penny. Its on special on Steam at the moment ($5), so if youre on the fence now would be the time to try it.
This is an odd one. I feel like this game was made just for me; I loved it, but there is an equally good chance that you will hate it.
For starters, its not a game. Its first person but theres no interactivity AT ALL. Theres no challenge, theres no action, and your only controls are wasd and mouselook. You can walk, and thats it - and you walk slooooowly. Its also around 90 minutes long, and youre unlikely to go through it more than once. And as you might guess from all that (and the name), its also a bit wanky and pretentious in a way that it probably wants you to call it a digital art installation piece or something.
And yet its an utterly fantastic experience. What it is, is a 90 minute wander through the most incredibly detailed and visually stunning digital landscape Ive ever seen, with a slow-burn story that builds up to tie it all together. It's very much a sensory experience (and yes, I know how that sounds), and if youre thinking of playing this, you MUST set aside a couple of uninterrupted hours and play it in the dark with earphones, or else youre wasting your time and money.
Its possibly the most beautiful looking game Ive ever come across, and the best argument that the ever-increasing graphics race hasnt been a complete waste of time. Technically, its nothing particularly special (its apparently the Source engine). But there is a meticulous attention to detail the environment is crammed with detail, and everything down to the thousands and thousands of small rocks has been very clearly hand-placed with a lot of care and lord-knows how much effort. And all that is in service to a remarkable aesthetic sense for building utterly majestic and hauntingly beautiful landscapes. There are so many points where I just stopped and thought oh wow. WOW. Its a world where I found myself more than happy to just wander around and soak it all in and see whats there. And the caves. Oh my.
The price of all this is that its very linear you cant just freely roam the island, and theres very much a path to follow. It mostly does a good job of making sure the invisible walls arent in your face (though that does mean it can be slightly jarring when you run into them accidentally). But this linearity really does make sense in the context of the story its a journey with a purpose so it doesnt really make sense to stray.
The story! Its told in snippets of narration by the player character at various junctures throughout the journey, ostensibly to dear Esther. A lot of it is very unclear and rambling, and often very flowery and pretentious, and it will be a little while before it starts to make sense. At first I found it an unwelcome distraction from rambling through the countryside and I thought oh god this is Braid all over again. But then it grabbed me. And the interaction between these cryptic snippets and the clues throughout the environment really worked well for me, and added an extra layer to the already fantastic landscapes. It does certainly play a slightly secondary role, and you might find yourself disappointed by its sparseness if you go in just to be told a story, but I found it really quite compelling and it really builds towards the finale.
Oh and I should also mention the music which is great and is a spot-on fit. Between the visuals, the sound and the story, it really does build into a hauntingly beautiful whole with real emotional involvement.
So is it worth it? Certainly not for everyone, and Im sure that plenty of people will hate it. If it doesnt sound like your cup of tea from what Ive written, I would definitely advise avoiding it. If youre like me and you found that the main draw of games like Morrowind and Skyrim was just wandering around, soaking in the lonely world and exploring to see whats out there, then you would probably enjoy this (as long as you can handle the linearity). It's a left-field comparison, but if you liked Bastion for more than just the fighting, you might like this.
If you look at it from a perspective of hours-of-gameplay-per-dollar, then its absolutely dreadful value (though no worse than a movie or plenty of other forms of entertainment) Id suggest that kind of misses the point, but certainly if youre on a tight gaming budget then this might not be the best way to spend it.
Anyway Im not sure its really possible to give it a rating so I won't, but I found it to be a magnificent experience worth every penny. Its on special on Steam at the moment ($5), so if youre on the fence now would be the time to try it.
I bought it for 2.50$ the other day on flash sale. It's worth that price at least. Just for the jaw dropping musical score. Apparently when you play it again, you might get different bits of stories (they are supposedly randomly selected as you walk through the game world). It was like an above average movie.
GoodGame
Red, White, & Blue, baby!
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
- Messages
- 13,725
Borderlands (one) Free Weekend:
Moderately pretty to look at (cell-shaded graphics, day/night cycles, well-drawn enemies, enemies are original art) and the combination of ideas in it are interesting if fairly unoriginal (random guns, semi-sandbox exploration, random enemy spawns, kill/collect X quests). COOP is available (with character customization), but the online servers are very laggy (Gamespy servers---not sure why they didn't switch to Steam servers).
The AI mechanics are fairly shallow;enemies just rush at you in a zig-zag line, or they stand-off and shoot at maximum ineffective distance without using a basic infantry tactics. The gun variations are interesting, but ultimately it's just variable stats like an RPG without any real FPS effects; best described as a COOP rogue-like of a console FPS.
No real campaign story, just a few quests (kill/collect) at a time.
Overall: C+ / B-
The Fallout 3 series could learn a few things from this game, but overall Fallout 3s do it better in single-player.
I only recommend this if you don't have a better multi-player FPS to play, and Left-4-Dead 2 is definitely a better multi-player FPS than this. For $5 it's alright, and for $2.50 more you get a ton of DLC that is unlocked in game (haven't tried the DLC). OTOH, $5 can be better spent on other games.
Hopefully Borderlands 2 will be much improved.
Moderately pretty to look at (cell-shaded graphics, day/night cycles, well-drawn enemies, enemies are original art) and the combination of ideas in it are interesting if fairly unoriginal (random guns, semi-sandbox exploration, random enemy spawns, kill/collect X quests). COOP is available (with character customization), but the online servers are very laggy (Gamespy servers---not sure why they didn't switch to Steam servers).
The AI mechanics are fairly shallow;enemies just rush at you in a zig-zag line, or they stand-off and shoot at maximum ineffective distance without using a basic infantry tactics. The gun variations are interesting, but ultimately it's just variable stats like an RPG without any real FPS effects; best described as a COOP rogue-like of a console FPS.
No real campaign story, just a few quests (kill/collect) at a time.
Overall: C+ / B-
The Fallout 3 series could learn a few things from this game, but overall Fallout 3s do it better in single-player.
I only recommend this if you don't have a better multi-player FPS to play, and Left-4-Dead 2 is definitely a better multi-player FPS than this. For $5 it's alright, and for $2.50 more you get a ton of DLC that is unlocked in game (haven't tried the DLC). OTOH, $5 can be better spent on other games.
Hopefully Borderlands 2 will be much improved.
CivCube
Spicy.
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2003
- Messages
- 5,824
The Secret World (Launch content)
I'm really enjoying this so far. If you haven't heard of this yet, it's Ragnar Tornquist's new modern-world conspiracy/supernatural horror MMO. I heard of this back in 2007 when they were doing an ARG involving Amundsen discovering the hollow earth in Antarctica. The player feedback has been very positive, which gave me the impulse to subscribe.
I am not disappointed. This is a well-written story that frequently breaks into Joss Whedon-style humor. Every NPC is memorable and gives you a reason to care about them. Every little nook and cranny has at least one story-related detail to keep things interesting. Sometimes (okay, often) there's a nerd reference thrown in for good measure ("Bubastis Cat Food"). It can be somewhat derivative at times: you'll recognize certain elements stolen wholesale from Stephen King and H.P. Lovecraft. The devs do a great job of tying these elements into a distinctive, unique whole, however, which makes this MMO's setting very interesting and different from your standard WoW clone.
So is it a WoW clone? Yes and no. While much of the gameplay remains very similar, the way in which it happens is not. For one, there's the very strong writing that makes this game much, much smarter than Blizzard's. For two, the level-less design immediately changes things up. No more do you have to create an alt or two just to help your dungeon group; you can switch things up on the fly and switch to a different ability set with the same character. This is because The Secret World has no levels; you instead progress through an Ability Wheel and pick whatever new abilities you want when you accumulate enough Ability Points. Many of these abilities (and there are over 500 of them) have synergies with each other, making it a priority to progress through weapon trees you wouldn't normally use. For example, Pistols often create Penetration damage; you can capitalize on them by going through the Sword and Blood Magic trees to unlock further modifiers and counters. It's quite possible to create a hybrid of the usual classes you would see in other games and do just fine in a group. Right now my character is mostly DPS but could easily switch to tanking by switching out a couple abilities and talismans.
So maybe you enjoy this kind of setting and you're intrigued by GURPS-style character progression. Is it worth it? I'd say so but your mileage may vary. Funcom is planning to have monthly content updates to keep players interested but the game has only been out for a month. If you're still shy about plunking down $50 and a sub, I'd wait a few months for the content to become more extensive. For now, I'm very satisfied and enthused about what's already a very good game.
Graphics: A-. The artwork on display here is just great. Fantastic immersion.
Sound and Music: B. The music could use more variety but the environmental sound is worthy of good speakers. Again, very immersive.
Gameplay: A-B. Again, your mileage may vary. If you enjoy darker stuff, this game may be for you. PvP could still use some work but that doesn't take away from the awesome PvE.
Dev Support: B+ to A-. This is the least buggy game I've seen on launch, let alone an MMO. GMs are very quick to respond to any issues.
Overall: 90% (A) for now. Even if you're not playing, keep an eye on this one as it will evolve with more zones and missions in the next few months.
I'm really enjoying this so far. If you haven't heard of this yet, it's Ragnar Tornquist's new modern-world conspiracy/supernatural horror MMO. I heard of this back in 2007 when they were doing an ARG involving Amundsen discovering the hollow earth in Antarctica. The player feedback has been very positive, which gave me the impulse to subscribe.
I am not disappointed. This is a well-written story that frequently breaks into Joss Whedon-style humor. Every NPC is memorable and gives you a reason to care about them. Every little nook and cranny has at least one story-related detail to keep things interesting. Sometimes (okay, often) there's a nerd reference thrown in for good measure ("Bubastis Cat Food"). It can be somewhat derivative at times: you'll recognize certain elements stolen wholesale from Stephen King and H.P. Lovecraft. The devs do a great job of tying these elements into a distinctive, unique whole, however, which makes this MMO's setting very interesting and different from your standard WoW clone.
So is it a WoW clone? Yes and no. While much of the gameplay remains very similar, the way in which it happens is not. For one, there's the very strong writing that makes this game much, much smarter than Blizzard's. For two, the level-less design immediately changes things up. No more do you have to create an alt or two just to help your dungeon group; you can switch things up on the fly and switch to a different ability set with the same character. This is because The Secret World has no levels; you instead progress through an Ability Wheel and pick whatever new abilities you want when you accumulate enough Ability Points. Many of these abilities (and there are over 500 of them) have synergies with each other, making it a priority to progress through weapon trees you wouldn't normally use. For example, Pistols often create Penetration damage; you can capitalize on them by going through the Sword and Blood Magic trees to unlock further modifiers and counters. It's quite possible to create a hybrid of the usual classes you would see in other games and do just fine in a group. Right now my character is mostly DPS but could easily switch to tanking by switching out a couple abilities and talismans.
So maybe you enjoy this kind of setting and you're intrigued by GURPS-style character progression. Is it worth it? I'd say so but your mileage may vary. Funcom is planning to have monthly content updates to keep players interested but the game has only been out for a month. If you're still shy about plunking down $50 and a sub, I'd wait a few months for the content to become more extensive. For now, I'm very satisfied and enthused about what's already a very good game.
Graphics: A-. The artwork on display here is just great. Fantastic immersion.
Sound and Music: B. The music could use more variety but the environmental sound is worthy of good speakers. Again, very immersive.
Gameplay: A-B. Again, your mileage may vary. If you enjoy darker stuff, this game may be for you. PvP could still use some work but that doesn't take away from the awesome PvE.
Dev Support: B+ to A-. This is the least buggy game I've seen on launch, let alone an MMO. GMs are very quick to respond to any issues.
Overall: 90% (A) for now. Even if you're not playing, keep an eye on this one as it will evolve with more zones and missions in the next few months.
GoodGame
Red, White, & Blue, baby!
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
- Messages
- 13,725
Actually it seems to be modern to collect subscription fees for a year, or two, and then suddenly reveal a hidden free2play micro-transaction model within the game.
You would see it in the OP if anybody had.
Maniacal
the green Napoleon
My LoL review:
Not my type of game, I didn't really enjoy it and just got bored. It doesn't help that the community is as often as not extremely immature and generally poor.
6/10, wouldn't lol again.
Not my type of game, I didn't really enjoy it and just got bored. It doesn't help that the community is as often as not extremely immature and generally poor.
6/10, wouldn't lol again.
GoodGame
Red, White, & Blue, baby!
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
- Messages
- 13,725
LOL.
DOTA2's community is a mixed bag, having some mic spam rage-queens, and some mute incoherent, noobs, but it's a pretty good community so far. I've made a few buddies in it in a few weeks.
Maniacal
the green Napoleon
Basically in LoL if you don't EXACTLY what you are doing and how to play the game completely and properly you are doing nothing but harming your team and slowing them down/causing them to lose. Of course your team can still be idiots who yell at you for not doing things their way of "properly", but yeah its not a friendly community, especially since matches can take a while even if you are losing.
I just don't find anything appealing about that.
I just don't find anything appealing about that.
Heathcliff
Tactician
Well nothing beats the gaming experience if you play dota/hon/lol with 4 friends.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
