Last game you finished, tell us about it - Page 177 - RPGWatch Forums
|
Your donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Off-Topic » Last game you finished, tell us about it

Default Last game you finished, tell us about it

May 24th, 2021, 18:17
I had the same love/hate/love relationship with ToME that you described above, lackblogger. Maybe not exactly, yet very similar. It starts out quite fun and exciting, yet then tedium and boredom set in for me, finally realizing that it simply was no longer any fun for me. So we parted ways, and I doubt I'll be replaying it anytime soon.
Carnifex is offline

Carnifex

SasqWatch

#3521

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Holly Hill, FL.
Posts: 13,600
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 03:23
Days Gone

Easily one of the best open-world post-apocalyptic survival games. It does properly what I wished the Division would have been. Whereas that one went for the item grind and microtransaction heavy live service game, Days Gone emphasizes story and narrative, world building and strong character development.

While the story is good overall, it has a very slow burn for the first act, then starts a very strong middle, and unfortunately kind of drops the ball in the final act. It's not exactly bad, there's no cringe or anything like that, but it goes for a much too safe wrapup and ending. Actually bordering on the generic action movie tropes and ending. Which is unfortunate, as the first two halves are much more personal for the main character. And I wish it could've continued with that. Unlike other post-apocalyptic narrative games, like The Last of Us/2, this one didn't really want to risk much. Or maybe it was just rushed towards the end.

Leaving the story and narrative aside, the strongest element of the game is the "simulation" of a post-apocalyptic survival action game. The world is a great playground to explore, often shocking in the amount of detail put into everything, most of which will likely never be seen by most people. And the graphics and audio engine renders everything to such an extent that the atmosphere is almost unrivaled. Often you see vistas that just enchant and ask to be explored.

Related to graphics, another point that is often impressive, but other times not so much is the facial animation and rendering. Some of the characters have really had serious work put into them. Often the eyes are incredibly realistic, and are able to convey proper emotions.

The gameplay is strong, especially the gunplay. It's very familiar to those that have played the Division. The biking is also nicely done, and it really forces you to build a relationship with it. It ends up being your save point, your ammo cart and your absolutely vital means of transport, since the world is huge. I often had to ponder whether to go back for my bike, or just going forward to some point of interest, but risk stumbling onto a horde.

And speaking of hordes, this is easily the most recognizable element of the game. It impressively renders huge crowds of zombies, up to 500+ individuals. The hordes really are a sight to be seen. They behave very similarly to how zombies floods acted in World War Z, I believe. They really come at you like a flood, climbing over walls and buildings, trying to surround you. They really act like the main danger in the world, up until the final act when the game again drops the ball. Without going into too much detail, some happenings trivialize the phenomenon of the horde, which up until that point was treated with great reverence and fright. But up until that point, they superbly enhance the experience, and always make you be on your feet when exploring the world. Any cave you explore, you hope to god not to stumble onto some horde sleeping. But, another thing that saps at the horde element is the respawn feature of the game. Not sure if it's a bug or a feature, but often when I died to a horde, but still managed to accomplish the immediate goal, I was respawned somewhere near, with the goal still finished, but the horde gone. So it kind of made dying to the horde without consequence. Aside from the panic you engage in while trying to run away from them.

Music, is also pretty good. Some of the songs are really remarkable. Both some positive tunes, but especially the horror music when you're either attacked by the horde, or close to being discovered.

Some other negatives is the way they lock or limit you in the open world. Sections of the map are locked out until particular game events take place, but they couldn't develop a natural reason for why that area is not accessible, and just display a "Please progress the story further to be able to acces this area". The other worst thing is the, while in mission, limit to where you can actually move. It's not often, but when it happens it's annoying as hell. Seeing a "Please return to the mission area" while being chased by a horde inside a cavern system was not good at all.

So, overall a strong game, and it's amazing that Sony has allowed it to be ported to PC. I tried playing the game on a PS4, but it's unplayable for me, with the aiming levels required, without auto-aiming. It's also a great port. Runs beautifully, and very optimized most of the time. And is a real looker.

Now Sony just has to do the same treatment for Bloodborne and The Last of Us.
danutz_plusplus is online now

danutz_plusplus

danutz_plusplus's Avatar
SasqWatch

#3522

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,324
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)
+1:

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 05:41
Originally Posted by danutz_plusplus View Post
Days Gone

Easily one of the best open-world post-apocalyptic survival games. It does properly what I wished the Division would have been. Whereas that one went for the item grind and microtransaction heavy live service game, Days Gone emphasizes story and narrative, world building and strong character development.

While the story is good overall, it has a very slow burn for the first act, then starts a very strong middle, and unfortunately kind of drops the ball in the final act. It's not exactly bad, there's no cringe or anything like that, but it goes for a much too safe wrapup and ending. Actually bordering on the generic action movie tropes and ending. Which is unfortunate, as the first two halves are much more personal for the main character. And I wish it could've continued with that. Unlike other post-apocalyptic narrative games, like The Last of Us/2, this one didn't really want to risk much. Or maybe it was just rushed towards the end.

Leaving the story and narrative aside, the strongest element of the game is the "simulation" of a post-apocalyptic survival action game. The world is a great playground to explore, often shocking in the amount of detail put into everything, most of which will likely never be seen by most people. And the graphics and audio engine renders everything to such an extent that the atmosphere is almost unrivaled. Often you see vistas that just enchant and ask to be explored.

Related to graphics, another point that is often impressive, but other times not so much is the facial animation and rendering. Some of the characters have really had serious work put into them. Often the eyes are incredibly realistic, and are able to convey proper emotions.

The gameplay is strong, especially the gunplay. It's very familiar to those that have played the Division. The biking is also nicely done, and it really forces you to build a relationship with it. It ends up being your save point, your ammo cart and your absolutely vital means of transport, since the world is huge. I often had to ponder whether to go back for my bike, or just going forward to some point of interest, but risk stumbling onto a horde.

And speaking of hordes, this is easily the most recognizable element of the game. It impressively renders huge crowds of zombies, up to 500+ individuals. The hordes really are a sight to be seen. They behave very similarly to how zombies floods acted in World War Z, I believe. They really come at you like a flood, climbing over walls and buildings, trying to surround you. They really act like the main danger in the world, up until the final act when the game again drops the ball. Without going into too much detail, some happenings trivialize the phenomenon of the horde, which up until that point was treated with great reverence and fright. But up until that point, they superbly enhance the experience, and always make you be on your feet when exploring the world. Any cave you explore, you hope to god not to stumble onto some horde sleeping. But, another thing that saps at the horde element is the respawn feature of the game. Not sure if it's a bug or a feature, but often when I died to a horde, but still managed to accomplish the immediate goal, I was respawned somewhere near, with the goal still finished, but the horde gone. So it kind of made dying to the horde without consequence. Aside from the panic you engage in while trying to run away from them.

Music, is also pretty good. Some of the songs are really remarkable. Both some positive tunes, but especially the horror music when you're either attacked by the horde, or close to being discovered.

Some other negatives is the way they lock or limit you in the open world. Sections of the map are locked out until particular game events take place, but they couldn't develop a natural reason for why that area is not accessible, and just display a "Please progress the story further to be able to acces this area". The other worst thing is the, while in mission, limit to where you can actually move. It's not often, but when it happens it's annoying as hell. Seeing a "Please return to the mission area" while being chased by a horde inside a cavern system was not good at all.

So, overall a strong game, and it's amazing that Sony has allowed it to be ported to PC. I tried playing the game on a PS4, but it's unplayable for me, with the aiming levels required, without auto-aiming. It's also a great port. Runs beautifully, and very optimized most of the time. And is a real looker.

Now Sony just has to do the same treatment for Bloodborne and The Last of Us.
One of the reviews I read found the motorcycle experience somewhat annoying. Both the driving and the maintenance. His did you find it?
SveNitoR is offline

SveNitoR

SveNitoR's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#3523

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sweden
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 06:11
Originally Posted by SveNitoR View Post
One of the reviews I read found the motorcycle experience somewhat annoying. Both the driving and the maintenance. His did you find it?
I can't speak for danutz, but I've had zero issues with the motorcycle. In fact, I was surprised how well it handles with K+M.
JDR13 is offline

JDR13

JDR13's Avatar
SasqWatch
Original Sin Donor

#3524

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida, US
Posts: 31,095
Mentioned: 114 Post(s)
+1:

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 06:26
Originally Posted by JDR13 View Post
I can't speak for danutz, but I've had zero issues with the motorcycle. In fact, I was surprised how well it handles with K+M.
And is the maintenance of the mc annoying?
SveNitoR is offline

SveNitoR

SveNitoR's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#3525

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sweden
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 06:56
Originally Posted by SveNitoR View Post
And is the maintenance of the mc annoying?
I thought it was. It breaks down too easily/often. The constant need for gas is useful for generating tension. The repairs are just tedious.
JFarrell71 is offline

JFarrell71

SasqWatch

#3526

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 2,357
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
+1:

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 08:27
Originally Posted by SveNitoR View Post
And is the maintenance of the mc annoying?
Bike controlled fine for me also. Regarding the maintenance, I can’t I had too many issues with. I took it as part of the fantasy. I took very good care of the bike, and it took care of me. What I found more annoying is the random fauna that always attack me. Even on bike. Damn you wolves, bears and pumas.
danutz_plusplus is online now

danutz_plusplus

danutz_plusplus's Avatar
SasqWatch

#3527

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,324
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 08:33
Originally Posted by danutz_plusplus View Post
Bike controlled fine for me also. Regarding the maintenance, I canβ€t I had too many issues with. I took it as part of the fantasy. I took very good care of the bike, and it took care of me. What I found more annoying is the random fauna that always attack me. Even on bike. Damn you wolves, bears and pumas.
Heh, that's not very realistic. But on the other hand, neither are zombies
SveNitoR is offline

SveNitoR

SveNitoR's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#3528

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sweden
Posts: 958
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 11:56
Originally Posted by danutz_plusplus View Post
Days Gone

Easily one of the best open-world post-apocalyptic survival games. It does properly what I wished the Division would have been. Whereas that one went for the item grind and microtransaction heavy live service game, Days Gone emphasizes story and narrative, world building and strong character development.

While the story is good overall, it has a very slow burn for the first act, then starts a very strong middle, and unfortunately kind of drops the ball in the final act. It's not exactly bad, there's no cringe or anything like that, but it goes for a much too safe wrapup and ending. Actually bordering on the generic action movie tropes and ending. Which is unfortunate, as the first two halves are much more personal for the main character. And I wish it could've continued with that. Unlike other post-apocalyptic narrative games, like The Last of Us/2, this one didn't really want to risk much. Or maybe it was just rushed towards the end.

Leaving the story and narrative aside, the strongest element of the game is the "simulation" of a post-apocalyptic survival action game. The world is a great playground to explore, often shocking in the amount of detail put into everything, most of which will likely never be seen by most people. And the graphics and audio engine renders everything to such an extent that the atmosphere is almost unrivaled. Often you see vistas that just enchant and ask to be explored.

Related to graphics, another point that is often impressive, but other times not so much is the facial animation and rendering. Some of the characters have really had serious work put into them. Often the eyes are incredibly realistic, and are able to convey proper emotions.

The gameplay is strong, especially the gunplay. It's very familiar to those that have played the Division. The biking is also nicely done, and it really forces you to build a relationship with it. It ends up being your save point, your ammo cart and your absolutely vital means of transport, since the world is huge. I often had to ponder whether to go back for my bike, or just going forward to some point of interest, but risk stumbling onto a horde.

And speaking of hordes, this is easily the most recognizable element of the game. It impressively renders huge crowds of zombies, up to 500+ individuals. The hordes really are a sight to be seen. They behave very similarly to how zombies floods acted in World War Z, I believe. They really come at you like a flood, climbing over walls and buildings, trying to surround you. They really act like the main danger in the world, up until the final act when the game again drops the ball. Without going into too much detail, some happenings trivialize the phenomenon of the horde, which up until that point was treated with great reverence and fright. But up until that point, they superbly enhance the experience, and always make you be on your feet when exploring the world. Any cave you explore, you hope to god not to stumble onto some horde sleeping. But, another thing that saps at the horde element is the respawn feature of the game. Not sure if it's a bug or a feature, but often when I died to a horde, but still managed to accomplish the immediate goal, I was respawned somewhere near, with the goal still finished, but the horde gone. So it kind of made dying to the horde without consequence. Aside from the panic you engage in while trying to run away from them.

Music, is also pretty good. Some of the songs are really remarkable. Both some positive tunes, but especially the horror music when you're either attacked by the horde, or close to being discovered.

Some other negatives is the way they lock or limit you in the open world. Sections of the map are locked out until particular game events take place, but they couldn't develop a natural reason for why that area is not accessible, and just display a "Please progress the story further to be able to acces this area". The other worst thing is the, while in mission, limit to where you can actually move. It's not often, but when it happens it's annoying as hell. Seeing a "Please return to the mission area" while being chased by a horde inside a cavern system was not good at all.

So, overall a strong game, and it's amazing that Sony has allowed it to be ported to PC. I tried playing the game on a PS4, but it's unplayable for me, with the aiming levels required, without auto-aiming. It's also a great port. Runs beautifully, and very optimized most of the time. And is a real looker.

Now Sony just has to do the same treatment for Bloodborne and The Last of Us.
Glad to hear you enjoyed it so much

I'm probably a bigger fan of it, though I agree with some of your points. The ending, in particular, was a little underwhelming - though I don't think it was the entire act, more like the last couple of missions.

I also think it made a difference playing it on console, for me, because I'm sort of used to certain gameplay concessions due to the limited hardware on that platform, mostly related to slow HDD and tiny memory pools. I think those are the primary reasons they had to have so much respawning and weird stuff going on - as they just can't simulate an entire world without a lot of compromise.

If I'd played it on PC as some kind of showcase for my beefy rig, I think it would have bothered me more to have those issues.

I find it really interesting that you keep bringing up Division, as it seems you went into that one with very unusual expectations.

While Division is certainly a post-apoc "light" game - it's most definitely not meant to be - or marketed as - a survival type of singleplayer-focused experience. To me, it was very obviously a (tactical) multiplayer looter shooter first - anything else a distant second.

That said, there IS a survival mode in the game - but that's a repeatable thing that doesn't have any kind of narrative.

But I can see how the setting and tone would lead people to believe it might be more what you seem to have expected.

Just found it curious, that's all.

I'm a big fan of The Division (both of them) myself - and the urban setting is just beyond beautiful. Both games come to mind when I think of what might be the most visually impressive games of all time.

As for Days Gone - I don't remember what I rated it as in my review here. But I should think around 8.5 or 9 out of 10 - as that's how I feel about it.

The core gameplay formula is sort of what I hoped LoU2 would be - after experiencing that first free-roaming area.

Unfortunately, it quickly turned into the old LoU formula and became a linear area-to-area stealth shooter.

Which is fine, too - just not really my bag.

So, Days Gone is kind of like LoU - only with what I consider a less "desperate for attention" type of story - with a much more likable and wholesome main protagonist.

It can't quite compete with the high points of LoU2, though - but few games can.

TheDart

Guest

#3529

Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 12:02
Originally Posted by TheDart View Post
I find it really interesting that you keep bringing up Division, as it seems you went into that one with very unusual expectations.
Oh, it's not that I had these expectation out of the Division, but that this is what I'd have liked it to be. A strong singleplayer game focusing on narrative mostly, set in post-apocalyptic NY. I knew very well what it would end up as. I see it as a failed opportunity.But unfortunately Ubisoft doesn't really develop games unless they can also monetize them even more, besides the base price.
danutz_plusplus is online now

danutz_plusplus

danutz_plusplus's Avatar
SasqWatch

#3530

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,324
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 12:08
Originally Posted by danutz_plusplus View Post
Oh, it's not that I had these expectation out of the Division, but that this is what I'd have liked it to be. A strong singleplayer game focusing on narrative mostly, set in post-apocalyptic NY. I knew very well what it would end up as. I see it as a failed opportunity.But unfortunately Ubisoft doesn't really develop games unless they can also monetize them even more, besides the base price.
I'm not sure I follow your logic here, but this isn't the place for such a debate.

If you think Sony does anything gaming-related without wanting to maximise profit, let's just say I can't agree

There's a reason we're not likely to get a Days Gone sequel

TheDart

Guest

#3531

Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 12:20
Originally Posted by TheDart View Post
I'm not sure I follow your logic here, but this isn't the place for such a debate.

If you think Sony does anything gaming-related without wanting to maximise profit, let's just say I can't agree

There's a reason we're not likely to get a Days Gone sequel
Yeah, of course Sony does it with some of their games. But their game roster is huge compared to Ubisoft. And they have plenty of titles where microtransactions are either no present at all, or hidden away in some multiplayer mode, separate from the singleplayer. Ubisoft on the other hand has grind skippers in all of their games. They practically sell cheats.

Anyway, this is indeed not the place for this discussion. I generally liked Ubisoft games, but mostly until they completed sort of merging into each other with the open-world, plenty of grinding activities, unlockable towers, mechanics which seem to be present in most of their games now. But I do welcome that they switched the formula around with AC Odyseey and Origins. At least in terms of combat mechanics.
danutz_plusplus is online now

danutz_plusplus

danutz_plusplus's Avatar
SasqWatch

#3532

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,324
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 14:06
Originally Posted by danutz_plusplus View Post
Yeah, of course Sony does it with some of their games. But their game roster is huge compared to Ubisoft. And they have plenty of titles where microtransactions are either no present at all, or hidden away in some multiplayer mode, separate from the singleplayer. Ubisoft on the other hand has grind skippers in all of their games. They practically sell cheats.

Anyway, this is indeed not the place for this discussion. I generally liked Ubisoft games, but mostly until they completed sort of merging into each other with the open-world, plenty of grinding activities, unlockable towers, mechanics which seem to be present in most of their games now. But I do welcome that they switched the formula around with AC Odyseey and Origins. At least in terms of combat mechanics.
That's fair enough. I don't really distinguish between huge profit-driven publishers like that.

I tend to look at individual developers and what they do with their games. There's no denying Ubisoft seem focused on a very particular type of experience - the open world genre - and, like almost all other publishers I'm aware of - they're doing everything they can to make more profit than they did the year before.

It's a sort of societal sickness, if you ask me - and isn't really about the gaming industry as such.

I just happen to really enjoy several of the games they publish, and I think the developers keep improving upon the formulas involved. For instance, I thought Valhalla was fantastic - and a big improvement on Odyssey, which I also liked.

Both are single player games with quite elaborate and meaty narratives, by the way.

If you want something closer to Days Gone from Ubisoft - I can recommend Ghost Recon: Breakpoint. That has a lot of optional survival elements - and is definitely more of a single player experience than Division. It's really quite good overall, though not quite as focused on the narrative as Days Gone.

How they make their money isn't really a big interest for me, as long as it's not actively destructive or toxic - beyond what most capitalism is. Meaning, it's definitely both toxic and destructive - but if I want to play AAA games, I'd be hard pressed to find a publisher who didn't focus on profit.

As such, monetization is mostly irrelevant to me - as long as I don't have to engage with it. I usually find a reasonably priced key and that's about it for my expense. If they want to charge people for trivial crap that's either obtainable in-game or purely cosmetic - that's their business. If I feel like I HAVE to spend extra - or beyond what's reasonable for the content involved - then I simply don't and stop playing the game. Hasn't really happened yet in a Ubisoft game. I don't think I've ever spent a single cent on a cash-shop for any of their games, though I might be remembering that wrong.

Also, I think most publishers have figured out that if you want to exploit your audience with unreasonable monetization schemes - then the mobile market is far, far easier to focus on.

If it's a game/developer I want to support enough to overlook the publisher - I'll go for full price, but that's increasingly rare.

I'd much rather support crowd-funded stuff with my hard earned money than support the for-profit corporations with anything beyond the lowest price I can find.

TheDart

Guest

#3533

Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 15:04
Originally Posted by TheDart View Post
That's fair enough. I don't really distinguish between huge profit-driven publishers like that.

I tend to look at individual developers and what they do with their games. There's no denying Ubisoft seem focused on a very particular type of experience - the open world genre - and, like almost all other publishers I'm aware of - they're doing everything they can to make more profit than they did the year before.

It's a sort of societal sickness, if you ask me - and isn't really about the gaming industry as such.

I just happen to really enjoy several of the games they publish, and I think the developers keep improving upon the formulas involved. For instance, I thought Valhalla was fantastic - and a big improvement on Odyssey, which I also liked.

Both are single player games with quite elaborate and meaty narratives, by the way.

If you want something closer to Days Gone from Ubisoft - I can recommend Ghost Recon: Breakpoint. That has a lot of optional survival elements - and is definitely more of a single player experience than Division. It's really quite good overall, though not quite as focused on the narrative as Days Gone.

How they make their money isn't really a big interest for me, as long as it's not actively destructive or toxic - beyond what most capitalism is. Meaning, it's definitely both toxic and destructive - but if I want to play AAA games, I'd be hard pressed to find a publisher who didn't focus on profit.

As such, monetization is mostly irrelevant to me - as long as I don't have to engage with it. I usually find a reasonably priced key and that's about it for my expense. If they want to charge people for trivial crap that's either obtainable in-game or purely cosmetic - that's their business. If I feel like I HAVE to spend extra - or beyond what's reasonable for the content involved - then I simply don't and stop playing the game. Hasn't really happened yet in a Ubisoft game. I don't think I've ever spent a single cent on a cash-shop for any of their games, though I might be remembering that wrong.

Also, I think most publishers have figured out that if you want to exploit your audience with unreasonable monetization schemes - then the mobile market is far, far easier to focus on.

If it's a game/developer I want to support enough to overlook the publisher - I'll go for full price, but that's increasingly rare.

I'd much rather support crowd-funded stuff with my hard earned money than support the for-profit corporations with anything beyond the lowest price I can find.
I think Sony, and maybe Microsoft are different as publishers, compared to Ubisoft. Especially Sony. Since they own the platforms on which most console games are played on, they have a strong incentive to invest a lot of money into AAA games, like the Last of Us and God of War, without stuffing them with microtransactions. I view these games as simple system sellers. So they afford to invest huge budgets, and I don't think they have the same expectation with regards to return on investment, at least not directly through the sale of the game, as with their other games.

Ubisoft really has none of that. While I agree that their games are usually decent to good (for great, where's my Prince of Persia and Splinter Cell? ), the fact that they stuff progress skippers in there really corrupts my experience. I cannot but expect that they adjusted the progression curb to get me to use those microtransaction. Basically, the well is poisoned for me. Kinda of. I can enjoy the games, but that sort of treatment, in singleplayer games no less, really spoils my fun. And also takes me out of the experience when I see two currencies in the game, or see the item store right front and center.

Breakpoint was again a deal-breaker for me when I heard that they basically sell every item in the game, for real money. Not for me. I'm sorry.
danutz_plusplus is online now

danutz_plusplus

danutz_plusplus's Avatar
SasqWatch

#3534

Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,324
Mentioned: 25 Post(s)

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 15:46
Originally Posted by danutz_plusplus View Post
I think Sony, and maybe Microsoft are different as publishers, compared to Ubisoft. Especially Sony. Since they own the platforms on which most console games are played on, they have a strong incentive to invest a lot of money into AAA games, like the Last of Us and God of War, without stuffing them with microtransactions. I view these games as simple system sellers. So they afford to invest huge budgets, and I don't think they have the same expectation with regards to return on investment, at least not directly through the sale of the game, as with their other games.

Ubisoft really has none of that. While I agree that their games are usually decent to good (for great, where's my Prince of Persia and Splinter Cell? ), the fact that they stuff progress skippers in there really corrupts my experience. I cannot but expect that they adjusted the progression curb to get me to use those microtransaction. Basically, the well is poisoned for me. Kinda of. I can enjoy the games, but that sort of treatment, in singleplayer games no less, really spoils my fun. And also takes me out of the experience when I see two currencies in the game, or see the item store right front and center.

Breakpoint was again a deal-breaker for me when I heard that they basically sell every item in the game, for real money. Not for me. I'm sorry.
No need to be sorry - as I'm not invested in making money for Ubisoft or the developers

We can go in circles about this for a while, but there's really no need to. If you prefer Sony's way of making their money and you can't enjoy games with highly optional microtransactions - that's completely fair.

I can't present an argument that will change how many Ubisoft games have optional microtransactions. I also probably can't convince you that you don't need to engage with them in the slightest to enjoy their games to the full - including Breakpoint.

On the whole, I'm really not into trying to change minds about that sort of thing. I can remember when I had similar principles - much more heartfelt even. I strongly opposed and resisted the early DLC introduction, for instance. I argued against microtransactions long before they were introduced - because it was so obvious that they would be.

In the end, I've discovered that the forces of opportunism and capitalism are simply too great for me to do anything about them. I've also discovered that the impact on my enjoyment of games is much different than I thought, and that most games that implement additional ways of funding aren't negatively affected like I expected they would be.

Turns out both publishers and developers understand that there's a limit to what they can do to the audience - even if some need to learn that lesson a few more times than others.

Suffice to say that I think about these things differently - and I'm not sad that I can enjoy games from more sources

TheDart

Guest

#3535

Posts: n/a
Mentioned: Post(s)

Default 

May 25th, 2021, 22:15
Nancy Drew: Message in a Haunted Mansion (2000) is one of the early NC Adventure Game games, the third in the series and the first in a regular appearance of haunted mansion themed games in the series.

These games are hard but also casual, so it's impossible to know how long they'll take as each person might get stuck at a different point in the game and for different amounts of time. They also have games within games, so you can find yourself playing one of these for hours as well, completely optionally. In this game the game within the game was a maze game, which is very RPGesque, as you search round a dungeon-like map in first person.

There's lots of interesting characters to talk to and lots of interesting puzzles to solve along with many amusing ways to die. Dying is always fun in nancy drew games and ways to die should always be sort out rather than avoided.

I got stuck a couple of times, but not for very long as I'm now quite experienced with the series and I completed the game without any walkthroughs on Senior Detective difficulty in about 10-12 hours, which is about par for the course for me and these games.

In the grand scheme of Nancy Drew games I'd say it was a good average. The characters aren't as unique as some of them, the dramatic moments aren't as thrilling as some of the other ones, the mini games aren't as interesting as some of the other ones, the puzzles aren't as unique as some of the other ones, etc and etc for every facet of the game.

But it doesn't do anything wrong or blatantly absurd or annoying either, making it better than some of the more irritating moments in some of the other games. I guess if you were to look for a negative it would be that it's just a bit bland-FM, but then it's not really, only by comparison to some of the best in the series.

I had a good fist pump when I finished the game, which is always a good sign.

8/10
lackblogger is offline

lackblogger

lackblogger's Avatar
SasqWatch

#3536

Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 4,026
Mentioned: 76 Post(s)

Default 

May 29th, 2021, 15:21
Just finished Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines … again. Back to female Tremere, Camarilla ending. Worked hard to get to everything, think I did pretty well extracting all of the excellent writing.

Each time I play I feel like there is some nuance I either missed or forgot - like the relative volume of music to dialogue in The Last Round compared with other places where you have significant interactions. It is funny, I was really comfortably immersed in the world when suddenly it was time to go to the Society of Leopold and I thought 'already?' And then just slid into the end-game sequence.

Now back to Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance on Switch and Divinity Original Sin 2 on iPad
--
-- Mike
txa1265 is offline

txa1265

txa1265's Avatar
SasqWatch
Moderator

#3537

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Corning, NY USA
Posts: 14,794
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)

Default 

May 29th, 2021, 17:32
After uhm, what, three or four years I've finally completed Pathfinder: Kingmaker. I started playing this game right as it first released, as I helped kick start it and really was eager to dive in. After two to three weeks of constantly running into nasty bugs and issues that totally harshed my mellow, I benched the game.

And came back to it almost three years later. I picked up right where I left off, roughly half-way through some huge troll quest, switched to the now-included turn based option, and had my way with it! It's a great game, I adore the exploration options, the sheer amount of companions you get to choose from, there's a wide variety of opponents, and so much to do.

I'm glad I played it. I do not regret helping to sponsor the project. With that said, the fourth chapter I think it was, the whole Varnhold thing, would make me very reluctant to ever replay the game. I'd rather redo the Fade a hundred times with no reward for doing so rather than that entire Varnhold slog. I can provided details on what bothered me….it mostly consisted of having to split up my group in various dungeons, simply to click switches and such, and I found it such a total annoyance. Others may feel differently.
Carnifex is offline

Carnifex

SasqWatch

#3538

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Holly Hill, FL.
Posts: 13,600
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)

Default 

May 29th, 2021, 19:29
Glad you decided to come back to this game, @Carnifex, and even more that you liked it

The Varnhold Vanishing was fine for me, but we all have our preferences and when I think back on that puzzle part, I perfectly understand it could get irritating. Perhaps it was a bit overdone.

I was more annoyed by the magic lantern and the dual-reality switch, both in the Season of Bloom and in the House at the Edge of Time. And by these long, stretched combats in that last part, plus again in the last chapter if one doesn't take the short ending.

Have you tried to replay the last bit to see different endings? I think there are some decisions made earlier that can lead to yet other conclusions, but I didn't feel like going through all that again. I did play the few different ones near the end, it was interesting.

I don't think I could play it again either, even if I loved it.
Redglyph is offline

Redglyph

Redglyph's Avatar
SasqWatch
RPGWatch Team

#3539

Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Good old Europe
Posts: 2,806
Mentioned: 60 Post(s)

Default 

May 29th, 2021, 20:47
I can't finish the game because of the house at the edge of time.
Just lost interest then.
Pladio is online now

Pladio

Pladio's Avatar
Guardian of Nonsense
RPGWatch Donor
Original Sin Donor

#3540

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 7,461
Mentioned: 66 Post(s)

Tags
games, mini review
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Off-Topic » Last game you finished, tell us about it
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 13:50.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by DragonByte Security (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2021 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2021 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright by RPGWatch