Last game you finished, tell us about it

Silent Hill: Origins
I have played all the games in the Silent Hill series, including "The Orphan" on my mobile phone. I like the series, but the first two were really the best. The third had a bit too much action. The fourth was a great game in it's own, even if it broke off from the formula. Anyway, since Silent Hill really started to become popular, there have been alot of discussion about "is there any rational explanation for all of this?". Different endings offer different theories as explanations of all the weird stuff going on, but adding it all together it's probably best to reach the conclusion that not even the makers have a clue. Still, the SH series consists of great storylines, strong with symbolism and often with a gruesome twist.

Silent Hill: Origins were developed for PSP and was later released for PS2. Personally I have played the PSP version. Just like so many other series, Origins is a prequel, supposed to take place before the first game and explaining some things about what kind of city Silent Hill actually is. The game do not only tie back to the games before it, but also to the movie.

Having ended it though, I have to say that the game fails to deliver. The greatest problem is that it fails to surprise. There's really nothing new or exciting about it. There are connections to previous games yes, but they are rather weak, and contains nothing that explains or improves those games. The story in Origins is almost a prelude rather than a prequel to Silent Hill 1. The main character, Travis, is the most boring and uninteresting character yet in a SH game as far as I concern. There are no new areas worth mentioning, several of them are reused from older games. In fact, the whole game is like that, recycling the previous games.

Even the gameplay have problems. SH:O have more weapons than ever before, but you will only use a few. Since I ran past most opponents I had a truckload of melee weapons at the end.

All things considered, SH:O is the worst game of the series.

Oh, I finished Gemcraft about 10 days ago. That was one addictive tower defense variant.

JemyM said:

Silent Hill: Origins

All things considered, SH:O is the worst game of the series.

Click to expand...

Definitely agree ... but that is almost always the case with PSP action games ...

Finished the Witcher yesterday. It's the best RPG I've played since Gothic II... After the patches got rid of the loading times I find it safe to say that the game is a masterpiece story- and consequence-wise. My only beefs are relatively minor technical issues (not being able to get to seemingly accessible areas due to the 2.5D perspective, mainly in chapter 5, and the minor inconvenience of a limited inventory). Not a game for those who want to experiment with different character builds though...

Interesting to see someone mention the Silent Hill games here. Coincidently I just finished getting the entire collection. After having owned Silent Hill 2, 3, and 4 for some time, I purchased SH: Origins a few weeks ago, and I just won a copy of the original Silent Hill on Ebay.

I've never actually finished any of them except for SH 1, and that was nearly 10 years ago. I'm looking forward to playing through the whole series in order.

Jaz said:

Oh, I finished Gemcraft about 10 days ago. That was one addictive tower defense variant.

Click to expand...

Warcraft, Starcraft, Gemcraft ?

JDR13 said:

Interesting to see someone mention the Silent Hill games here. Coincidently I just finished getting the entire collection. After having owned Silent Hill 2, 3, and 4 for some time, I purchased SH: Origins a few weeks ago, and I just won a copy of the original Silent Hill on Ebay.
I've never actually finished any of them except for SH 1, and that was nearly 10 years ago. I'm looking forward to playing through the whole series in order.

Click to expand...

Three of the games have a continuing storyline (Origins, 1 and 3) that tells the tale about how the city Silent Hill came to be the evil place it is. They also have reoccuring characters (even if the main character is different for each game). The movie is tied to the story from those games.

#2 is standalone, but for most fans it was the first game they played (first game available on PC) and made the series popular. #2 is not "booh" kind of scary, but it's creepiness, strong atmosphere and an unforgiving storyline leaves a strong psychological impact that last for days. Even if it's stand alone, it is the game to pick if one is to play only one game out of the series. If you havn't played #2 yet, you are in for a good ride.

#4 was not supposed to be a Silent Hill game at all. It was only later tied to the series. As a result, it's very different from the other games in how the game is designed and how it relates to the city Silent Hill.

Except for Origins, I have played all the games on PC. The first game works absolutely great in a playstation emulator such as ePSXe.

Even if I played #1 after #2, I found #1 to be the best in the series even if #2 is a great and memorable game. #3 was a bit of a letdown. #4 is so different from the others that it's difficult to recognize as a silent hill game, even if it have a great story. Origins was a dissappointment as you can read above.

JemyM said:

Except for Origins, I have played all the games on PC. The first game works absolutely great in a playstation emulator such as ePSXe.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately you played the inferior versions of all those games with the exeption of SH1. The PS2 editions were definitely higher quality than the PC versions, and scored substantially higher reviews.

JDR13 said:

Unfortunately you played the inferior versions of all those games with the exeption of SH1. The PS2 editions were definitely higher quality than the PC versions, and scored substantially higher reviews.

Click to expand...

Nah, it's just that the PC versions are compared with other PC games while they have PS2 graphics. The advantage the PC versions have is higher resolution and mousecontrol, beyond that it's the same game.

JemyM said:

Nah, it's just that the PC versions are compared with other PC games while they have PS2 graphics. The advantage the PC versions have is higher resolution and mousecontrol, beyond that it's the same game.

Click to expand...

No, they're not. Mouse control is not an advantage for a game that wasn't designed to use it in the first place, and pc gamepads just don't seem to work very well with certain console ports. The higher resolution is also no real bonus because they used the exact same textures from the console versions.

JDR13 said:

No, they're not. Mouse control is not an advantage for a game that wasn't designed to use it in the first place, and pc gamepads just don't seem to work very well with certain console ports. The higher resolution is also no real bonus because they used the exact same textures from the console versions.

Click to expand...

I disagree. Maybe you should actually play the games first.

JemyM said:

I disagree. Maybe you should actually play the games first.

Click to expand...

Huh? I have played them. What would make you think otherwise? In fact I've tried both versions of a couple of them (2 & 4), and it's easy to understand the review scores, and accompanying criticisms that go along with them.

I find your statement particularly ironic since it applies more to you than it does to me. How do you disagree when you haven't even played both versions?

JDR13 said:

Huh? I have played them. What would make you think otherwise? In fact I've tried both versions of a couple of them (2 & 4), and it's easy to understand the review scores, and accompanying criticisms that go along with them. I find your statement particularly ironic since it applies more to you than it does to me. How do you disagree when you haven't even played both versions?

Click to expand...

First up; you are simply incredible. I wonder if you actually try to create arguments whenever you can. Second, I have read the reviews. The major reason the PC versions are lower than the PS2 version is due to it's aging graphics compared to other PC games available at the same time. The advantage with playing it on the PC version is higher resolution but that's pretty much the only major difference between them.

well it's been a few weeks, but I just finished playing the Baldur's Gate series. Obviously it doesn't need a detailed review, but I will say a few things:

1) Stay awway from The Darkest Day and Shadows over Soubor mods. TDD was every bit as bad as I heard and SoS just never kicked off.
2) The game has really aged well. It may not be 3-D or even have as stunning graphics as some of the newer 3-D iso fare, but it's still easy to slip into, unlike some older titles like Ultima VII (still trying to get back into it, but it's been hard with some of the graphics issues). I had a few annoyances with the game after playing NWN2, but in general, I feel like I could start it right back up and play again. For anyone that has never played it, it's well worth the $19.99 or whatever for the whole package these days.

(Ohh an most importantly, it got that really, really bad taste out of my mouth after playing through Ultima IX!)

JemyM said:

First up; you are simply incredible. I wonder if you actually try to create arguments whenever you can. Second, I have read the reviews. The major reason the PC versions are lower than the PS2 version is due to it's aging graphics compared to other PC games available at the same time. The advantage with playing it on the PC version is higher resolution but that's pretty much the only major difference between them.

Click to expand...

I must admit that I'm a little confused by your hostile response. I'm simply pointing out a fact, I'm sorry if it offended you. Almost every major review on those games has pointed out the differences, would you like me to provide quotes? I find it odd that you would refuse to accept that not all PC ports are of superior quality compared to their console originals.

Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem
It began with a slow start and I found the controls to be a nuisance, but I have to confess that the game grew on me later on as the story improved. It's not at all as good as the reviews I read claimed it to be, but at least it was entertaining enough for me to complete.

JDR13 said:

I must admit that I'm a little confused by your hostile response. I'm simply pointing out a fact, I'm sorry if it offended you. Almost every major review on those games has pointed out the differences, would you like me to provide quotes? I find it odd that you would refuse to accept that not all PC ports are of superior quality compared to their console originals.

Click to expand...

You can try. And sorry if I sound a bit irritated. I felt a bit shoved off for trying to be nice and reveal what I thought about the games, just to hear "well, you played the inferior versions", like the differences between the PS2 and the PC versions would change how I felt about those games. I rated them exclusively on story and that wasn't changed in the PC version. No cut content. No added content.

What I do know is that the PC versions got the common console-port complaints. This means that since the games were developed for ancient PS2 hardware, the game looked very old when it was released on PC. That means low-resolution textures and lack of pixel-shaders etc. The only advantage of the PC version was the capability to play the game in higher resolution.

I also assume that there were complains about the controls since ports are rarely perfect in that department.

It's no big deal. I didn't mean to start a debate about it, and I wasn't trying to bring down your experience with those games. I similarly enjoyed the PC port of Resident Evil 4, and that also is commonly thought to be slightly inferior to it's console version. The important thing is that you enjoyed the games regardless.

Just finished Dark Messiah of Might and Magic last night. I must say I found it rather enjoyable. I bought it when it came out but never got very far the first time around. Perhaps it was due to the exceptions for a game more like Arx Fatalis that it just didn't ride the first time around.
The game itself it pretty much a FPS but with swords and magic. It's pretty linear so it's great for people who just want to advance the story instead of exploration. The kicking feature just never gets old IMHO even though a lot of spikes are conspicuously placed all over the place.

JDR13 said:

It's no big deal. I didn't mean to start a debate about it, and I wasn't trying to bring down your experience with those games. I similarly enjoyed the PC port of Resident Evil 4, and that also is commonly thought to be slightly inferior to it's console version. The important thing is that you enjoyed the games regardless.

Click to expand...

Ironically, when it comes to RE4 I had huge problems with it.

When RE4 was released and before the patch, it lacked darkness. I am sure there are plenty of great analogies I could make on what it is like to play a horror game that lacks one of it's most vital components... or even release a game without such content, but at least they fixed that with a patch.

The second problem with RE4 was that there were two versions of the game; the one for GameCube and the one for Playstation 2. The GameCube version had better graphics, but the Playstation 2 version had added content in which you could play as Ada. Seeing it as an "either or" option, I prefer the PS2 version since the Ada addon was a good addition. However, a version with both advantages was later released for Wii, so they could have made a superior version for PC if they took it seriously.

Then ofcourse, the greatest and most glaring problem still in the game was the lack of mousecontrol. Playing a game which really relies on a FPS-style aiming system on a PC without mouse control... well, I am sure I could make plenty of analogies there too but I am sure you know the problem. The only way I can rationalize the decision not to have mouse control is that they didn't take the PC version seriously at all, they just wanted to squeeze easy money out of it.

I personally rate RE4 as the worst port ever made. I also count it as the game which killed the Survival Horror genré and changed the RE series in ways that might have permanently wounded my attachment to it. Survival Horror games to me is all about immersion, and the gold-rush gameplay mechanics in RE4 (which seems to be reused in RE5) breaks the immersion for me so badly that the game is nothing more than a run-of-the-mill actiongame for me now.

I mean... classic Zombie-style games and movies are about surviving with decreasing resources, where gas, food and ammo is more valuable than money. When much of the gameplay is focused on collecting goldbars, shiny clocks, and smashing barrels for piles of money, then the survival horror simply isn't there anymore.