Games: Rate and Discuss

[Shift]

Which is why its lost the very thing that made it unique, its now just another action game with few layers of stealth thrown in, boringggggg.

 

[Bad^Hat]

Is he still voiced by Michael Ironside? He did the voices in the first three Splinter Cells (and probably Double Agent, not sure though)

He sure did. Incidentally where it all started to go downhill.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqDIDMqxH1o

THANKS, MIKE.

 

[Krynn72]

Gameplay wise I am finding the more I play the game and the better accustomed I get to the intricacies of the new play style the more and more I like it.

What intricacies?

 

[stemot]

What intricacies?

Such as the movement and cover system as well as using the windows etc to my advantage. Also using the EMP device to blanket the area and take out enemies quickly and quietly with CQB. Not to mention the first time I played it I totally forgot about being able to take out lights.

 

[Sheepo]

Non so bad at all once you get the arrowhead detector though. Actually, I found looking for the giant arrowheads to be fun. Collecting the small ones at the start sucks though.

Bleh, I found them pretty impossible to find anyway, ended up looking for a map online. Being forced to collect/find things and have the game on hold while you do it is a pretty big pet peeve of mine.

 

[Sliver]

Splinter Cell Conviction Co-op campaign- ?/10

Having a hard time attaching a number to it, but it was a blast. Played through with Kryyn, and aside from some "trigger one alarm and you lose" junk it was an awesome experience. Kestrel and Archer are friends until the end.

 

[Krynn72]

Yeah, the Co-op campaign was great fun. A good length, polished, and well... co-op. Nothing in the game is more satisfying than seeing your partner being chased or pinned down by a group of enemies then sneaking around behind them and saving his ass. And vise versa.

 

[Barnz]

Metro 2033 - 7/10 or 8/10

pros:
-minor characters have interesting dialogue (there's no one-liners from stalker).
-story, characters, atmosphere/environment, level design.
-gameplay is simple, and very polished.
-ran fast with high-settings on my PC.

cons:
-combat is weak. sorry, ex-stalker devs.
-checkpoint system (it's acceptable, but hey).
-escort missions. stalker's worst missions are back for metro2033.
-ai is bit weak, but not bad in general.
-major characters are weak, and not memorable.
-no ammo (yes stemot, I had the same experience).
-mini games, some gameplay mechanics.

I got this game because it was recommended by many people on this forum. I didn't find what I expected, but I must say: Metro 2033 is a great, solid game. It's a linear Stalker game with weak combat mechanics.

next stop: cryostatis

 

[Dynasty]

Mass Effect 2 - 10/10

Havent been this engrossed in a game since Bioshock. Truly miles ahead of the competition. And omg Miranda; in...love.

Bioshock 2 - Fix Windows 7 Problems / 10

Too much crashing for the Windows 7 version. Fix. Otherwise, its Bioshock all over again but more action packed. Give it an 8 so far.

Bayonetta - 9/10

No clue WHAT is going on, bit of a button masher so far, need to learn. Its just a blur on the screen sometimes, but some AWESOME visual moments where my jaw drops like ''What the HELL just happened!?''

God of War Series - 9/10

Cant say much. Gory. Lovely fighting. Gory. BLOOD! Love the QTE kill animations, especially in GOW 3.

FF13 - 10/10

Only played about 4 hours so far.

Bad Company 2 SP - 7/10 MP - 10/10

My new favourite FPS online. Bye bye MW2. Ridiculously addicting and so much more fun.

Just Cause 2 - 9/10

Story and voice acting is some of the worst Ive ever seen, but when you're skydiving onto the back of a plane, then flying it into a fuel depot, parachuting down and blowing stuff up at the same time with your rocketlauncher, you just SERIOUSLY dont care.

And my god, so much to do. My life is over. The map is indescribably huge.

The Saboteur - 8/10

Meh. Its no GTA, but its fun, kinda. Car mechanics are quite bad though. Havent played enough yet.

 

[15357]

And omg Miranda; in...love.

You mean the "I was waiting for you to finish getting dressed. Or does Cerberus really let you whore around in that outfit?" person woman?

Still, I like the voice. And yes, awesome game.

 

[Bad^Hat]

FF13 - 10/10

Only played about 4 hours so far.

Wow, that must be the most highly rated tutorial ever.

 

[stemot]

Wow, that must be the most highly rated tutorial ever.

The ratings he's given are to games he has hardly played much of? Am I the only one who sees something wrong with that?

 

[Sheepo]

Well certain games don't end, and people often give their impression on a game at certain points within it, so I don't really see a problem. Of course, you've often indicated you think it's impossible to have an opinion on a game until you've played it, which I think is a poo poo idea.

 

[stemot]

Well certain games don't end, and people often give their impression on a game at certain points within it, so I don't really see a problem. Of course, you've often indicated you think it's impossible to have an opinion on a game until you've played it, which I think is a poo poo idea.

All the games he listed do end (with maybe the exception of JC2), and he has admitted to only playing some for a very short time. It would be like PCGamer giving a 90% score to GTA IV and only just playing the first couple of missions. I also never said it's impossible to have an opinion of a game unless you played it, just not an opinion that can be used to argue over a games quality. Shit I could watch all the videos in the world of S.T.A.L.K.E.R and I have even played a little but I know I could never objectively argue the games quality because I have not spent enough time playing it for my opinion to be worth anything.
Of course you have to play a game before your opinion on it's quality holds weight.

 

[Rizzo]

He gives one game an 8 and then calls it meh, and kinda fun. I think that pretty much sums it up. 8 is supposed to be excellent. Seriously now, it's 1-10 scale. Not 6-10.

 

[Dynasty]

Yeah its a bit weird reviewing a game in my head before Ive finished it.

But sometimes you just know what the score is minutes into it.

Look at Uncharted 2. I had a 10 in my head within the first 10 minutes. GTA4 was a 10 in my head probably before it even came out.

I rate any game I have based upon its hype, graphics, gameplay, value for money, concept, story, polish and uniqueness.

And Saboteur was given an 8 by myself, called meh but kinda fun, because, well, thats how I see it. Its not great, and I dont see an 8 in any review as being great which is why I gave it an 8, but it IS fun for me.

The concept is original in my eyes, it feels like GTA, its a huge open world, but its let down by the story, voice acting and an obvious lack of polish or talent as the studio was being pushed to finish it.

[Edit] and out of boredom I will probably rate them again once Ive finished them. IF I finish them.

And look at Mass Effect 2. I gave that a 10 and Im only just under 20 hours in now. You saying I cant give it a 'weightable' review of 10 when it so obviously is completely worthy of it? I can understand the 'argument', but at the same time, you can see why Ive given the scores to some of them. Maybe Saboteur is a bit generous though.

If I see a game with a score of 7 or 8, I will think twice about getting it over something that is a 9 or 10. So why did I get them then if they were 8s? Well, they looked different to other games, and I always knew they werent top of the line games.

 

[stemot]

GTA4 was a 10 in my head probably before it even came out.

Absolutely ridiculous.

I rate any game I have based upon its hype

You let hype factor into what score you give a game?

And Saboteur was given an 8 by myself, called meh but kinda fun, because, well, thats how I see it. Its not great, and I dont see an 8 in any review as being great which is why I gave it an 8, but it IS fun for me.

8 is a great score for any game.

 

[Yorick]

Yeah its a bit weird reviewing a game in my head before Ive finished it.

But sometimes you just know what the score is minutes into it.

Look at Uncharted 2. I had a 10 in my head within the first 10 minutes. GTA4 was a 10 in my head probably before it even came out.

I rate any game I have based upon its hype, graphics, gameplay, value for money, concept, story, polish and uniqueness.

And Saboteur was given an 8 by myself, called meh but kinda fun, because, well, thats how I see it. Its not great, and I dont see an 8 in any review as being great which is why I gave it an 8, but it IS fun for me.

The concept is original in my eyes, it feels like GTA, its a huge open world, but its let down by the story, voice acting and an obvious lack of polish or talent as the studio was being pushed to finish it.

Your post was a 10 on the Retarded scale before I even finished reading it.

If I see a game with a score of 7 or 8, I will think twice about getting it over something that is a 9 or 10. So why did I get them then if they were 8s? Well, they looked different to other games, and I always knew they werent top of the line games.

Whose score system are you going off of though? I mean, do you listen to Yahtzee? Do you listen to PCGamer? IGN? Differing reviewers have differing opinions on what makes a good game. Unless you're reading a full review from several sources, and knowing all of the pros and cons, it's completely arbitrary.

 

[Shift]

I know I could never objectively argue the games quality because I have not spent enough time playing it for my opinion to be worth anything.
Of course you have to play a game before your opinion on it's quality holds weight.

No because some games you play may be so boring or bad that it only grants a short playtime before you can't be bothered playing anymore. Any game that can't hold your attention deserves a bad review.

 

[stemot]

No because some games you play may be so boring or bad that it only grants a short playtime before you can't be bothered playing anymore. Any game that can't hold your attention deserves a bad review.

I don't agree. Sometimes a game can start of badly and recover once it gets further on. That also works the opposite way around, a game can start off great and just get worse the more you play.
If you give up on a game in the early stages how can you truly know how good the game really is?
I remember Soldier Of Fortune 2 having some really bad opening levels in Prague and a following train station level. These levels were badly designed and generic, fortunately the levels that followed, bar one shitty stealth level, made a pretty good game. By your reckoning I should have written it off on the first couple of shitty levels. Timeshift was another one that got better a little bit into the game.

 

[Bad^Hat]

The part where I draw the line is when you have to play the equivalent of an entire other game to get to the "good part." Or, as I like to call it, The Vanille Clause.

Because even after having put in like ten hours and getting nowhere SHE MADE IT SEEM EVEN LONGER.

 

[Deleted member 56031]

I don't agree. Sometimes a game can start of badly and recover once it gets further on. That also works the opposite way around, a game can start off great and just get worse the more you play.
If you give up on a game in the early stages how can you truly know how good the game really is?
I remember Soldier Of Fortune 2 having some really bad opening levels in Prague and a following train station level. These levels were badly designed and generic, fortunately the levels that followed, bar one shitty stealth level, made a pretty good game. By your reckoning I should have written it off on the first couple of shitty levels. Timeshift was another one that got better a little bit into the game.

This.

I thought infamous was **** in the first half but really picked up in the second half balancing out to a decentish game overall

 

[Shift]

Hmm yeh Vietcong Purple Haze was very weak at the start but once you got to the tunnel searching missions etc, it was absolutely fantastic. But still, some games just have to be taken back, they aren't deserved of my money.

 

[Dynasty]

No because some games you play may be so boring or bad that it only grants a short playtime before you can't be bothered playing anymore. Any game that can't hold your attention deserves a bad review.

Cha-ching.

For example, FF13 I gave a 10 in my mind even though Im still arguably doing the tutorial, which is naturally slow and quite dull, BUT I know it gets better, so Im ignoring that part for now.
Thats an exception to the rule, as Shift says, if a game doesnt hold my attention, its going. Only reason I havent gotten rid of FF13 so far is because I KNOW it gets better. Although that cant be applied if I DIDNT know it was going to get better, in which case I would be torn between either playing it through (after all, I love the FF universe and games) or getting rid of it.

If I finish a game and get a Platinum, I get rid of it unless its a MP game. Recent examples of games I traded in;

Uncharted 2
Modern Warfare 2
Assassins Creed 2 Black Edition.

I platinumed AC2 and Uncharted 2, and got rid of MW2 as, well, its crap and I hate what it represents and think less of Infinity Ward for it.

Sounds insane trading those in, but hey, everyone's entitled to an opinion. And thats what this thread is about isnt it?

Just because you dont agree with the way I have felt about the games doesnt mean Im wrong.

And if you do; oh noes *bites back of hand*...ah wait, thats right, this is where Im supposed to care isnt it?

This.

I thought infamous was **** in the first half but really picked up in the second half balancing out to a decentish game overall

Funnily enough just got Infamous again as well. Didnt complete my hero playthrough last time.

 

[stemot]

Cha-ching.

For example, FF13 I gave a 10 in my mind even though Im still arguably doing the tutorial, which is naturally slow and quite dull, BUT I know it gets better, so Im ignoring that part for now.
Only reason I havent gotten rid of FF13 so far is because I KNOW it gets better. Although that cant be applied if I DIDNT know it was going to get better, in which case I would be torn between either playing it through (after all, I love the FF universe and games) or getting rid of it.

So hang on, lemme get this straight. You have only played the tutorial so far and found it dull but you gave it a 10 because "you know it gets better"? You have yet to reach a part of the game you enjoy and you have still given it a maximum rating for what you have played so far because you seem to think rating what you've played so far includes rating what you have yet to play for the first time in the future.
There is truly something wrong with how you go about rating your games.

 

[Bad^Hat]

For example, FF13 I gave a 10 in my mind even though Im still arguably doing the tutorial, which is naturally slow and quite dull, BUT I know it gets better, so Im ignoring that part for now.

You are everything that is wrong with anything.

 

[Sheepo]

All the games he listed do end (with maybe the exception of JC2), and he has admitted to only playing some for a very short time. It would be like PCGamer giving a 90% score to GTA IV and only just playing the first couple of missions. I also never said it's impossible to have an opinion of a game unless you played it, just not an opinion that can be used to argue over a games quality. Shit I could watch all the videos in the world of S.T.A.L.K.E.R and I have even played a little but I know I could never objectively argue the games quality because I have not spent enough time playing it for my opinion to be worth anything.
Of course you have to play a game before your opinion on it's quality holds weight.

This is an interesting matter, because right now we're not distinguishing whether we're talking about a game's quality (in your opinion) and your opinion on a game. I think we can both agree that in some cases people could easily deteremine their opinion on a game with almost no experience with it. There are games I've seen screenshots of and I knew I'd love from that second on and have and vice versa.

But anyway, I think it's perfectly reasonable to say that someone's opinion on a game they haven't played can hold some weight. I think your use of Stalker as an example was good, because really, watching gameplay for it might make it seem pretty boring, but actually being in the game and absorbing that atmosphere is marvelous. And that's one of the reasons you should take all opinions with a grain of salt, because how you feel about the experience is what's really important. But really, I think Stalker is a rare exception to the rule. Watching gameplay, trailers, reading interviews, looking at screens, they all directly give you the substance of the game. I think it's only a very rare case that how a game feels is powerful enough to contradict how the substance alone seems.

 

[Barnz]

some games are not for everyone. stalker is a good example. it's not a casual game market game like metro 2033. it's trying to do something different, something gamers are not familiar with. of course, it doesn't bring something groundbreakingly new onto your dinner table, but still it's different. it's hard to find someone who can waste 500 hours in a game like jagged alliance in these days.

I'm planning to get Crysostatis. the demo version wasn't very fun, so I don't know what to do.

 

[nipples]

All the stupid in this thread makes my head hurt.

 

[Bad^Hat]

All the nipples in my head makes this thread stupid.

 

[the cow says moo]

All this SHUT THE **** UP.

 

[ríomhaire]

Command & Conquer 4 - /10
I only played the first four or so missions but my god this is bad. I could go on about the stupid-looking infantry and the resource system but I'm just going to explain the third mission:
You start off with your Support Crawler/MCV and are ordered to fly over to a base that's under attack and repair the defences. You're informed that you can now use your repair power to repair them from a distance and this will cost you points. They don't even try to explain this. Usually this sort of thing is stated as being sending in repair drones or something but no, you just click and the health of the buildings instantly jumps up and this just costs "points" that automatically regenerate.

Once you've clicked on the buildings to repair them enough times the attacks stop and then you're told you can now build a repair drone. But I just finished repairing everything so the repair drone is useless. Then I'm told I'm to help an attack on some tunnel networks. Attack with what? My repair drone? Oh they gave the the ability to call in airstrikes. I call them in on the first tunnel and they destroy it but keep circling the area because they didn't use all their bombs. But there's another tunnel just twenty feet (or in screen terms, an inch) to their left that they completely ignore. They planes are also very clearly clipping into each other. It doesn't really matter anyway because I'm able to destroy all the tunnels before my allies even get there just by calling in three airstrike. I then get thanked for my "help" and get told to move other some other place and defend it.

I call in an airstrike on the attackers and it kills them all. Then I get told I can now build orcas. That would have been useful in fighting off that attack that's now dead. There's a dead avatar husk on the ground the game points out I can capture with an engineer so I train an engineer and do that. I'm told to switch to a defence crawler because I need to build some bunkers because we're going to be attacked. I figure if we're going to be attacked I should be ready so I build three orcas and repair my avatar fully (which looks retarded by the way) repaired before I build the bunkers.

I get into position and slap down the bunkers, expecting to have to make a good defence. Then suddenly MISSION ACCOMPLISHED! What the hell? That was it? BUILD TWO BUNKERS?! Then the endmission FMV plays and Kane phones me up on my neural implants and says "Gee, I sure am impressed at how you built those two bunkers. How about you join Nod?" So then my commanding officer comes up (apparently she was listening in) and says "No, don't join Kane he's like totally evil." I pick Nod because I want stealth artillery and in the next video I'm suddenly in Kane's base (which looks like the same set as the GDI one). Apparently my CO had no problem with my walking out of her base and going over to Kane and didn't even try to stop me or have me arrested and court-martialed for ignoring orders or even mutiny! It's ****ing retarded.

And I could make an equally long rant about the next (utterly annoying) mission.

 

[Barnz]

Cryostatis - 8/10

It's like Condemned and Penumbra (and The Thing movie), but better. The combat is more fun.

pros:
-story, side stories, characters.
-atmosphere/environment.
-it ran fast on my PC.
-combat.
-sometimes scary.
-gameplay is very simple

cons:
-I wish there were more areas to use melee weapons.
-nothing. it was what I expected.

 

[Asknoone]

I think Cryostasis is probably one of the best recent games I've played.

 

[Dynasty]

Demon's Souls - 9/10

Its confusing. Hard. Unforgiving. Addictive. Fun. Scary. Beautiful.

I dont care that you can lose 10 hours of grinding souls to save for that new upgrade or level in just one swipe of a demon's mahoooooosive sword.

Initially it sucks, but you just learn all the time. There might as well just be no manual. You have to really think in some places. And be so cautious. This is a game where dying actually has consequences.

No reset button. No checkpoint saves. No quicksave. You die, you turn into a soul, go find your body to get your souls back. Die along the way to getting back to your body, and your body dissapears, and you lose all your souls, and most of your health in soul form. So fights are even harded than before, the same fights that caused you to die in the first place.

Relentless assaults. Borderline unfair. And I just keep on going.

Genious game.

 

[Matorbogl]

Borderlands - 3/10

I wanted to revisit Borderlands after a several month long hiatus just to see if I still hated it. Turns out I still do.

The Good:
The art style of the game is interesting.
Lots of shooting.
Zombie Island [DLC]

The Bad:
Billions of guns. More accurately, the same seven guns recolored and usually worthless.
Player characters have zero personality.
NPCs mind as well have been crayon scribblings on bits of cardboard.
Story? Wots dat?
Uninspired missions.
Lackluster sounds and music.

Borderlands is easily one of my biggest gaming related regrets in sometime, 45 USD for what amounted to a bad console port of an already shallow game. You also get the impression that Gearbox phoned this game in, or that they spent way too much time on the art of the game rather than any thing else. Fool me once, shame on you Gearbox, fool me twice shame on me.

 

[Dynasty]

They did do a great job of taking elements from numerous genres into one game though.

But yeah, tedius grinding and no real goal.

Its very, VERY much a MP game though. Playing it by yourself is soooooooooo boring. And often the game is designed to be so hard for SP players that they call MP for backup.

 

[Deleted member 56031]

yeah i really ****ing hated borderlands too :flame:

 

[Bad^Hat]

Alan Wake - 6/10

This is an odd one. I feel like I should have disliked it a lot more than I did, and watching Yahtzee's "review" (I know, I know) I couldn't help but agree with most of his criticisms, but there was something altogether enjoyable about the game that saves it from being the turd everyone expected it to be. I say was, as in past tense, because as with many other recent releases I hired it out and beat it in a night. Oh well, if anything I could call it mercifully short, since the last chapter really does try it's hardest to pad out it's length with pointless combat and horrid driving, the only plot point remaining at that point being "get to the end bit."

Good bits: the lighting and use of contrast is unmatched, and the way your flashlight cuts through the dark environments never gets old (those silly glow-in-the-dark messages do, though). The controls are amazingly smooth, possibly the best of any third-person game I've played. The combat, while repetitive, does offer up a decent amount of variety, if not with the weapons then with the myriad ways you introduce light to the world. That said it probably would've been a lot more interesting on a higher difficulty, because apparently "normal" now means "HERE ARE FIFTEEN ****ING FLASH GRENADES, GO NUTS." Lastly, whether or not you're into the narrative, it's hard not to get pulled into the game's twisted meta-world.

Oh, one thing that puzzled me:

Spoiler

If whats-her-name mrs. darkness incarnate was Alan's "editor," and altered the story to fit her own desires, then how on earth did he manage to write himself into it without her noticing? Did she let an intern take over that day or something? :V

 

[stemot]

Alien Breed: Episode 1 - Impact 8/10

Great "Amiga days" old school top down blasting, made richer with some quite nicely rendered unreal 3 environments.