Gamers Thread
- Thread starter Jimmy... Dead.
- Start date
Blind Guardian
Member
Something I've thought about regarding Arkham City is that the flying around - while indeed fun - isn't really in line with the 'Batman' character. He usually only glides short distances down to ground level, and even then he tends to use an external flying construction.
arg
Active Member
- Jun 4, 2008
- 5,746
- 1,442
- 113
Diablo 3 looks great but there needs to be an option to turn off the happy fucking glow around everything.
like in this picture some guy made...
and we also need impaled naked bodies and topless succubi like in Diablo 1.
the graphics are dated in the video but the grim and gritty atmosphere is what needs to be recaptured in Diablo 3 and i dont think it will be. i'll still buy the game tho.
like in this picture some guy made...
and we also need impaled naked bodies and topless succubi like in Diablo 1.
the graphics are dated in the video but the grim and gritty atmosphere is what needs to be recaptured in Diablo 3 and i dont think it will be. i'll still buy the game tho.
Last edited by a moderator:
SweptbackFlame
twitch.tv/SweptbackFlame
Srontgorrth
Member
I was planning on getting BF3 when it came out but my financial situation sucks, and I wouldn't have much time to play it anyways... Maybe in a few weeks though.
SweptbackFlame
twitch.tv/SweptbackFlame
Episteme
Member
PhlegethonVeins
Autopsy Obsessed
Diablo 3 looks great but there needs to be an option to turn off the happy fucking glow around everything.
like in this picture some guy made...
and we also need impaled naked bodies and topless succubi like in Diablo 1.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CoemCmQDXI
the graphics are dated in the video but the grim and gritty atmosphere is what needs to be recaptured in Diablo 3 and i dont think it will be. i'll still buy the game tho.
One of the developers had an entry in their blog explaining why these requests are in fact silly, and it made complete sense. That said, this was months upon months ago and I don't remember his arguments.
I can certainly see where people are coming from with this, but I personally enjoy the visuals as is anyways. Yes, I thoroughly have played through the previous games.
Draehl
Lurker
It's fine so long as there's some variety. IE some dark necro looking crypts but also some brighter and more colorful areas.
I recognize that this is missing the point since it's obviously multiplayer focused, but the campaign in BF3 is terrible. They obviously put considerable work into it, but...jesus. It's just a rehash of various levels from the recent COD games.
I'm sure the multiplayer is excellent - the previous games have been - and I'm sure the overall package is great, but what bothers me is the reviews saying basically "single-player is tired dogshit but the multiplayer is great 10/10." This bothers me for 2 reasons: firstly, the single-player is presented as a significant part of the package, and thus its shittiness should be held against the game. Secondly, I'm starting to feel like games like this need 2 reviews, one for single player and one for multiplayer, since they're completely different games. That way you'd have scores that more accurately reflect the quality of the game: Singleplayer barely passable, multiplayer awesome. 5.5/10, 9/10.
On the Diablo 3 thing, those screenshots would be basically unplayable. They look beautiful but it's not immediately obvious what time of monster you're fighting, where everything is, etc. What the designer said made sense. That said, it looks like all that guy did was slap a filter on it. I suspect there'll be mods to make the game look darker out pretty quickly.
I'm sure the multiplayer is excellent - the previous games have been - and I'm sure the overall package is great, but what bothers me is the reviews saying basically "single-player is tired dogshit but the multiplayer is great 10/10." This bothers me for 2 reasons: firstly, the single-player is presented as a significant part of the package, and thus its shittiness should be held against the game. Secondly, I'm starting to feel like games like this need 2 reviews, one for single player and one for multiplayer, since they're completely different games. That way you'd have scores that more accurately reflect the quality of the game: Singleplayer barely passable, multiplayer awesome. 5.5/10, 9/10.
On the Diablo 3 thing, those screenshots would be basically unplayable. They look beautiful but it's not immediately obvious what time of monster you're fighting, where everything is, etc. What the designer said made sense. That said, it looks like all that guy did was slap a filter on it. I suspect there'll be mods to make the game look darker out pretty quickly.
SWAT
Nothing but Metal!
I hope COD, and BF3 type games slowly die away.
That type of gameplay is really getting old now, COD after MW1, has essentially been the same game.
I'm just really wanting some interesting games, with a high budget behind them, so they don't suck.
Just my opinion anyway.
That type of gameplay is really getting old now, COD after MW1, has essentially been the same game.
I'm just really wanting some interesting games, with a high budget behind them, so they don't suck.
Just my opinion anyway.
I enjoy the single-player portions of the MW games. However, they're spawning a ton of watered down clones (Homefront, Battlefield 3, Bad Company, Medal Of Honor, Sniper: Ghost Warrior) that lack the polish and adrenaline, and when you remove those aspects you basically just have a very repetitive, mindless game. There's a reason the campaigns are about 5 hours - any more and you'd want to self-harm.
That said, I feel like there are plenty of kickass big-budget games around. Recently, we've had The Witcher 2, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Starcraft 2, Arkham Asylum and the Mass Effect and Dragon Age games. In the near future we're looking at Skyrim, Arkham City (or is that out now? I know it leaked), Max Payne 3, Hitman: Absolution, and Diablo 3, as well as Mass Effect 3 and some others I'm sure I'm forgetting. The Assassin's Creed games are also decent, and Saint's Row 3 looks fucking awesome.
And not a single one of those is a 5-hour ironsights-and-chest-high-walls based Xenophobic Murder Simulator, which is my new name for this genre of gun-wanks about how the Russians/A-rabs/assorted furreners are going to DETONATE A NUKE BOOMINYOURFACESHITJUSTGOTCRAZY.
That said, I feel like there are plenty of kickass big-budget games around. Recently, we've had The Witcher 2, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Starcraft 2, Arkham Asylum and the Mass Effect and Dragon Age games. In the near future we're looking at Skyrim, Arkham City (or is that out now? I know it leaked), Max Payne 3, Hitman: Absolution, and Diablo 3, as well as Mass Effect 3 and some others I'm sure I'm forgetting. The Assassin's Creed games are also decent, and Saint's Row 3 looks fucking awesome.
And not a single one of those is a 5-hour ironsights-and-chest-high-walls based Xenophobic Murder Simulator, which is my new name for this genre of gun-wanks about how the Russians/A-rabs/assorted furreners are going to DETONATE A NUKE BOOMINYOURFACESHITJUSTGOTCRAZY.
Dak
mentat
The point of COD/Halo/etc. is the online multiplayer. I did the MW2 campaign but it was easy and over quickly. Kind of whatever.
The game studios have said that research shows most people don't have time to play campaign mode/long stories, so they aren't putting big money behind it anymore.
Pick it up, play for 30 mins, walk away is where the money is going. Which works perfectly for online matches.
The game studios have said that research shows most people don't have time to play campaign mode/long stories, so they aren't putting big money behind it anymore.
Pick it up, play for 30 mins, walk away is where the money is going. Which works perfectly for online matches.
Kind of hard to believe that someone just said "watered down" in response to BF3. What's especially surprising is the statement "lack of polish/adrenaline". Have you ever even played a damn Battlefield game? Not one single person I have ever talked to plays those games for the single player. Not one.
Judging from your third paragraph, it's seems your real problem is this "gun nut" culture you've attached to the games, plus a few other things.
Did you read what I wrote? The single-player is watered down. I haven't played the multiplayer and don't plan to but my experiences with BF2 and 1942 lead me to expect that it's awesome.
And the "no one plays it for the single-player" argument doesn't fly. Someone took the time to create a campaign. Sure, a game with awesome multiplayer and a shit campaign can still be worth buying, but that doesn't invalidate complaints about the campaign. I play games for single-player. If you're not going to have decent single-player in your game, there's no need to have it.
Furthermore, I'm not talking about a gun-nut culture. I'm talking about how a ton of the shooters coming out nowadays have plots about how either Russians or Arabs are gonna fuck with the US.
As far as lack of polish...
Animations are often problematic, especially with regards to clipping.
Switching weapons is done by holding R. This is slower than Modern Warfare's single button-tap. More importantly, the image of the gun doesn't show what attachments it has.
The quick-time events are also terribly done. Aside from being conceptually stupid, the animations lack any feeling of force. Also, the game keeps introducing new buttons, both in and out of the QTEs.
I recognize that most of this doesn't matter to people playing for multiplayer, but I don't give a shit. I play singleplayer. If a game has shitty singleplayer, I'll whine about it.
And the "no one plays it for the single-player" argument doesn't fly. Someone took the time to create a campaign. Sure, a game with awesome multiplayer and a shit campaign can still be worth buying, but that doesn't invalidate complaints about the campaign. I play games for single-player. If you're not going to have decent single-player in your game, there's no need to have it.
Furthermore, I'm not talking about a gun-nut culture. I'm talking about how a ton of the shooters coming out nowadays have plots about how either Russians or Arabs are gonna fuck with the US.
As far as lack of polish...
Animations are often problematic, especially with regards to clipping.
Switching weapons is done by holding R. This is slower than Modern Warfare's single button-tap. More importantly, the image of the gun doesn't show what attachments it has.
The quick-time events are also terribly done. Aside from being conceptually stupid, the animations lack any feeling of force. Also, the game keeps introducing new buttons, both in and out of the QTEs.
I recognize that most of this doesn't matter to people playing for multiplayer, but I don't give a shit. I play singleplayer. If a game has shitty singleplayer, I'll whine about it.
