What Video Games Have You Been Playing VII: The Real Ending is Locked Behind a Paywall

[civvver]

Combat in witcher 1 sucks. I haven't played the sequels. Same like assassin's creed, just turned me off to the whole series, unfairly so since both series are supposed to massively improve with the second title.

I spent all my gaming time (which wasn't a lot) exclusively playing Master of Orion 2. Beat a bunch of games on huge and impossible difficulty finally. I had never really delved into it too fully, didn't understand what all the techs did, but I read a lot of the wiki to figure out things like megafluxors and how ship speed affects your ship defense rating plus many more. It really is quite a deep game, the only downside is also one of the beauties of the games. Everyone loves making custom races but I keep picking the same ones every time and all my games play out the same. Easiest way to win is simply go creative and either lithovore or tolerant, then quickly get 4-5 systems, turtle up and once you get like megafluxors plus auto fire mass drivers (gauss cannons later) no one can stop you. On huge galaxy you always have time. And since you have to pick repulsive to get enough points for these picks you lose diplomacy. It's unfortunate the diplo is so weak and it's always best to go repulsive. By end game I can usually destroy entire fleets of death stars and titans with just 4-5 of my own titans or maybe 10 battleships with structural analyzer, hyper capacitors and Achilles system. You can kill ships with just 1 or 2 gauss cannons or disruptors with heavy and auto fire.

Other race combos work for me but not as consistently- tried lithovore democracy but everyone stole all my techs, it was rough. One I really liked was tolerant, unified, +1 production, produce battleships in like 10 turns early game, but I kept running into psilons or humans on the other side of the galaxy who would tech like crazy and end game always stalled. It's like you are either massively successful with that build or horribly out matched with no middle ground. Vs my creative empires where I can always win it's just a matter of how long.

Anyway I'm a little moo'd out for now, probably played it 40 hours or so last month. It doesn't have the reply value of civ imo, unless you turn the difficulty down to average and try a bunch of races, even standard ones, just for fun and variety.

 

[Kozmos]

I mean combat in Witcher 1 is certainly less hand holdy than today's titles. On higher difficulties they expect you to use all the tools and techniques of your trade to successfully hunt monsters which is why I liked it a lot. The basic combat mechanics themselves are just a simple rhythm game.

 

[warpus]

Why is my character posing in such a strange way when it's time to fight though? Am I supposed to be pressing something to get him to get himself in a better pose to fight in?

Maybe I just need to watch a tutorial on how you're supposed to fight in that game..

 

[Kozmos]

I think that's just a weird design choice for one of the fighting styles IIRC. The fighting styles themselves have some modifiers based on what kind and number of opponents you are fighting. Here's the wiki for it since it's been quite a few years since I've played it: http://witcher.wikia.com/wiki/Combat_in_The_Witcher

Overall I like the character development of portion of Witcher 1 and ME 1 much more than their sequels. I feel like too much is lost in the effort to streamline RPGs.

 

[Yeekim]

I mean combat in Witcher 1 is certainly less hand holdy than today's titles. On higher difficulties they expect you to use all the tools and techniques of your trade to successfully hunt monsters which is why I liked it a lot. The basic combat mechanics themselves are just a simple rhythm game.

This. You have to pick a correct fighting style (fast or strong, depending on opponent you face) and time your clicks. I think there was some visual cue...? If I could learn it, most anyone with at least two semi-functional fingers should be able to.

 

[warpus]

Sounds like it'll help to also be sober when playing. And now that the holiday break is over that will come a lot easier. I will report back with my findings in a couple days

 

[Commodore]

By 'combat focused' do you mean 'gun focused' ?

I mean I focus all my skill points in the combat branch of the skill tree. The only non-combat skills I go for are Overload and Incinerate from the tech branch so I have a reliable means of dealing with shields and armor without have to rely on single-use ammo consumables.

This play through I'm really getting into biotic powers but it's very annoying that you can only have 3 powers. It's nice that you can respec easily but it's still very limiting.

I was really starting to get into biotic powers in Mass Effect 3, but in Andromeda they just seem so...useless. They seem to have changed the way a lot of the returning biotic powers from previous games work (i.e. nerfed them too much) and the new ones they added just don't seem to suit my play style at all. I miss my super-effective Shockwave and Charge combo my Vanguard in ME3 had. Especially since all I would have to do is equip a pistol or SMG to get that recharge bonus so I could just spam those powers endlessly.

So I just went back to being a boring old soldier that relies on gunplay to carry the day.

I think the main problems with this game is that the main story is lackluster

This. I gave up on this game primarily because the main story simply didn't inspire me to keep pressing forward like the narratives in the other Mass Effect games did.

 

[PhroX]

I found power-centric characters in ME:A, much like ME3, to be a bit lackluster (with the exception of the Vanguard in the latter). It was all about setting off the explosions and it didn't really matter what powers you were using on what target. ME2 was much more enjoyable (particularly as the Engineer) as defense stripping and crowd control were much more important. Combined with the overall pace of the game feeling faster, losing this made the combat feel less "tactical" and more about quick reflexes which was a definite downgrade for me. I'm not really a shooter player (I don't mind playing them every now and then if they have other aspects of the game I enjoy, but they're not a genre of games I generally go for) but the power based classes in the first two ME games were really fun for me as they offered plenty of different gameplay options. Powers in 3 and A feel more like playing a shooter except I don't have to aim properly (which does help, as I'm crap at aiming well, but loses much of the fun of the earlier games).

Definitely agree with the main story being rather uninteresting. I got to the point were I simply didn't care what happened and stopped playing. The more "open world" setup didn't help, as there was so much stuff distracting me from the story, interrupting it, and thus preventing it flowing properly, but even without that, it still wouldn't have been very good.


Regarding the Witcher, I'm kinda weird in that, while I didn't think the combat in the first game was particularly good, I enjoyed it a hell of a lot more that either of the sequels, to the extent that I've never managed to get more than an hour or so into TW2 or 3 as I find the fighting so utterly unfun.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

The most into powers that I have ever gotten is to play as a Vanguard, which is what my ME:A character is. This game does make it very easy to swap out powers so maybe I should try other builds just to see what it's like. However, being able to equip only 3 powers really limits power-focused players. You can't really fight without using guns for at least half of the damage you do to the enemies.

The side plots in ME:A are pretty good, especially if you are into exploring and diplomacy. I love the idea of setting up colonies and mediating local disputes and the game does a really good job of making the galaxy seem real. But the main arc is meh at best.

 

[Akka]

I also installed the Witcher and tried playing that. I like it, because I'm Slav, but the fighting mechanics seem really weird.

If you're speaking about The Witcher 1, then yeah that's pretty normal. Fighting just is very weird (and pretty crappy). It gets better in TW2 (though quite a lot harder).

According to Reddit, the Witcher series is like the epitome of gaming. Are some offerings in the series a lot better than the others or what?

Yes.
TW1 is a clunky but charming "dark & dirty fantasy" RPG, but overall just "good".
TW2 is more of a Bioware-like (read : more linear, more cinematic) action-RPG where choices actually matter.
TW3 is an absolute masterpiece of sandbox-RPG and storytelling, and is leagues above the others.

 

[EgonSpengler]

On They Are Billions: I started a new game last night, and had a sudden revelation about how important the procedurally-generated map may be to (my) success. I happened to get a dream opening, a large area around my command center with all of the resources within arm's reach and only 3 points of entry. Obviously, I can still fumble the ball and get eaten, which I probably will. Also, the discovery of the "Patrol" command was tremendous. I recommend it.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

If you're speaking about The Witcher 1, then yeah that's pretty normal. Fighting just is very weird (and pretty crappy). It gets better in TW2 (though quite a lot harder).

Yes.
TW1 is a clunky but charming "dark & dirty fantasy" RPG, but overall just "good".
TW2 is more of a Bioware-like (read : more linear, more cinematic) action-RPG where choices actually matter.
TW3 is an absolute masterpiece of sandbox-RPG and storytelling, and is leagues above the others.

Yep, pretty much this.
Witcher 1: Clunky RPG, epitome of eurojank intended for the Polish market with an initially poor translation as an afterthought. It reached a cult following like an almost genuinely good B-movie that really surprised the devs who then made an enhanced edition with better localization that made it more successful/popular.
Witcher 2: Big improvement, still a bit clunky and bugy at the start. Also got an enhanced edition.
Witcher 3: Absolute masterpiece. The best game to come out in 2015 and one of the best games in this decade so far. Still has some small things that annoy me, but they did so many things right that those don't matter. It's also the only open-world RPG that doesn't rely on irrelevant fetch quests and collecting things, has tons of side quests deserving of the name and does open world gameplay right while still having a great story.
Didn't need an enhanced edition because the release was delayed by five months but dtill got some UI improvement patches.

The great thing about WItcher 3 is that you don't really need to play the prequels to enjoy it. You'll miss some allusions, but the story relys more on the books than the previous games. You also don't need to read the books because all you need to know is explained through dialogue or the in game glossary.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Fallout 4 on VeryHard
(man those Legendaries SuperMutants are insane bullet spounges)

 

[REDY]

I also replay witcher 1 on hard.
There are three fighting styles quick, strong and group.
quick is on quick enemies. If you try strong style most of your attacks will not deliver.
strong is on heavy armored enemies...with quick its not efficient
group is against groups. With two styles above you cannot slash 2+ opponents by one slash.

Funny pose is when you use wrong style or do not continue in combo (you click too quick). You can see proper timing on your sword (or sword icon in easy/medium difficulty) - flaring.

Best sign in fight is Aard. Sometimes it even knock down opponent on ground so you can instant kill him.

The best part of game is Wyzima.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Fallout 4 on VeryHard
(man those Legendaries SuperMutants are insane bullet spounges)

I greatly preferred the combat in Survival Mode. All weapons do more damage, so the player is easier to kill, but opponents are too. I didn't crunch the numbers, but I got the feeling the type of damage weighs more heavily in Survival Mode also (e.g. ballistic vs energy), and the judicious application of high explosives seemed to have more *ahem* impact (I actually used the grenade perk, all the way up to where it shows you the arc of your throw in advance).

Other components of Survival Mode are part of the package, for better or worse, but people have made mods to deal with them individually. I used a mod that re-enabled Quick Saves, but I didn't miss Fast Travel as much as I thought I would, so I kept it disabled (there was one hiccup with the "Basement Living" mod, which uses the Fast Travel mechanism to access the interior spaces, but I don't remember now what the issue was, or whether the mod's author found a workaround for Survival Mode). I liked the increased weights of junk and ammunition, which makes weapon selection a part of the game again, and you have to think about what you need for crafting instead of just vacuuming up everything in sight (and sometimes I assigned myself a little side mission to do exactly that - setting out with a bare minimum of armor, weapons and food, in order to clear out a cluster of buildings of all their useful junk, which can be kind of fun too, if you're in the mood for stealth and exploration rather than story or combat).

Unfortunately nobody - not just Fallout - has yet figured out how to make fatigue, hunger and thirst a really satisfying component of gameplay for me. At best, having to manage those things wasn't a distraction or irritant; they never seemed to really add anything to the game, in my experience. There's a total-conversion mod for Fallout 4 called Frost, which takes place shortly after the war and is purely a survival & exploration game. The combat is brutal, and it makes the exploration really tense and thrilling, but at some point I realized that all I was doing was searching for clean food and water, a clean bed, and medications.

Anyway, I highly recommend Survival Mode, modded to taste, for the best combat experience.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Hey, speaking of Fallout 4, has anybody tried the new version of Sim Settlements? Rise of the Commonwealth. I'm not ready to start another game. Not just for that. It looks cool, though. I hope whoever does the next Fallout game hires that guy. The vanilla settlements system is pretty bogus.

 

[Arakhor]

I do use Sim Settlements, but I haven't tried out Kinggath's latest expansion yet.

 

[Commodore]

Went back to playing the old Star Wars Battlefront games. Apparently a patch just came out for the PC version of the old Battlefront 2 that reinstates multiplayer. Fun times.

 

[FriendlyFire]

I greatly preferred the combat in Survival Mode. All weapons do more damage, so the player is easier to kill, but opponents are too. I didn't crunch the numbers, but I got the feeling the type of damage weighs more heavily in Survival Mode also (e.g. ballistic vs energy), and the judicious application of high explosives seemed to have more *ahem* impact (I actually used the grenade perk, all the way up to where it shows you the arc of your throw in advance).

I like fast travel, looting and then returning back to base to do base building between each mission
What most people have said is that it is very hard at the start and use of power armour is a must (or go stealth which I dont enjoy), the problem I forsee all that traveling and waiting around to generate caps for power cores would soon become boring fast. If I could get past this then I would try out survival play though.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Went back to playing the old Star Wars Battlefront games. Apparently a patch just came out for the PC version of the old Battlefront 2 that reinstates multiplayer. Fun times.

How long before they monetize the multiplayer? i.e. add lootboxes?

I bet that's the whole reason they resurrected it