There's a lot to be excited about right now.

jTVME61.png

Well Bethesda just had to add something from their latest shitty Fallout game into NuDoom for shits and giggles.


Bruh, like chill, its cute.

Anyways;

Since I've got no life I decided to be bored with Doom, and since I also have bad habits, I picked up Uncharted 4.

+Dialogue is good

+action is interesting.

-Gun-work is a bit wooden.

+looks nice

-solid 29 fps, thanks ps4

+genuine characters, with genuine motives

-only on playstation

Honestly, it's quite the opposite of Doom. In Uncharted they value story over gameplay. Quite interesting, actually.
 
Bruh, like chill, its cute.

Anyways;

Since I've got no life I decided to be bored with Doom, and since I also have bad habits, I picked up Uncharted 4.

+Dialogue is good

+action is interesting.

-Gun-work is a bit wooden.

+looks nice

-solid 29 fps, thanks ps4

+genuine characters, with genuine motives

-only on playstation

Honestly, it's quite the opposite of Doom. In Uncharted they value story over gameplay. Quite interesting, actually.
It seems this brainless shooter will become a better RPG than a certain game supposed to be a RPG.
And you really should buy it on PC.
 
Bruh, like chill, its cute.

Anyways;

Since I've got no life I decided to be bored with Doom, and since I also have bad habits, I picked up Uncharted 4.

+Dialogue is good

+action is interesting.

-Gun-work is a bit wooden.

+looks nice

-solid 29 fps, thanks ps4

+genuine characters, with genuine motives

-only on playstation

Honestly, it's quite the opposite of Doom. In Uncharted they value story over gameplay. Quite interesting, actually.
The human eye can't see more than 30 frames per second, gotta go for that nice cinematic experience.
 
I am just voicing criticism, that's all. Simply the way how I see it. I have grown up with games that saw a lot of:

1. Free content, that you have now to pay for. As in form of free maps, textures and items.
2. A lot of user created content and support for modders by the developers. See the total conversion mods for HL and UT.
3. No intrusive DRM bullshit masked as "support". Let us be honest, a lot of games could do well without always-online and accounts.

What I have noticed over the years, is that game developers and publishers have become extremly commercialized, focused on clean marketing campaigns, demographics and casualisation of their products. That's why you don't see games and companies like Westwood, Maxis, Bullfrog, anymore. Why so many of the old franchises got bastardized and butchered because of their brand value, instead of creating new frachises. Hell, Blizzard today, has zero in common with the Blizzard from 15 years ago.
Those games, Diablo 3, Doom 4, Fallout 4, Elder Scrolls 6 and many more. They ALL have names of established game franchises. How again is it not fair to compare the new games, the development and anything around it with the old titles? That's in my opinion a kind of luxury, that they simply can't make use of. We are not talking about new franchises here.

And it is exactly this kind of thinking "(...)And Diablo were never meant to be modded, especially not Diablo 3 that is meant to be played semi-competatively online." why we can't have nice things anymore. The fuck do I care, what they intended with D3 or not. It might be a fun game, just for it self, but it is a shell of what Diablo 1 and 2 have been. And in my opinion, Bliz really disqualified itself with the way how they got the auction house in the game. And I don't even believe for a min. that they removed it for the community - it is interesting how the removing of the auction house was timed nicely with certain ... circumstances.



*Edit
I am not saying that you can NOT enjoy new games. Infact you can! They are made as games, and as such they give you, obviously, a lot of fun. But, in my opinion, there can be no doubt that the focus by publishers/developers like Bliz, Bethesda, EA etc. has shifted. And if you're one of the people that enjoyed their old games, the overall experiece, has become worse. It's not just about making a high quality products anymore. It's about, how much you can monetize it.


Your rage is blinding you. I generally agree with your stance on the gaming industry. I was only questioning your comments on modding. I didn't say it's not fair to compare old games with new in a broad sense - I pointed out that there's an obvious difference between games from another era and modern games when it comes to mod availability.

As for prices and monetizing, I wholeheartedly agree. But even game developement is a business and this is what businesses look like in a free capitalism. At least there are steam sales, and if you're patient you can pick up loads of games for way less than you could a few years ago.
 
At least there are steam sales, and if you're patient you can pick up loads of games for way less than you could a few years ago.

That's what i do, at a winter or summer sale you can pick up a bunch of games for 60 euro. So for a price of one game, you can get a bunch of titles that will keep you busy for months ahead (or until the next sale)...
 
It seems like 2016 is going to be a very strong year for video-games.

I'll shoot through this with my youthful, accepting, forgiving mind and see what happens.

DOOM - Never had much interest in the Doom series, heard bad things about MP, heard good things about SP. Will probably grab it on sale, it looks like a decent shooter. In singleplayer games, I usually need plot and context to get invested in the game, and Doom has never been about that, but a shooter with medkits and movement-based shooting as opposed to regen-health and cover-based shooting sounds like a nice change of pace.

No Man's Sky
- Much like all the games that came with the trend Minecraft and DayZ started, it sounds great on paper but it gets dreary pretty quickly when you actually play it. Maaaaybe on sale, but I doubt it.

Homefront: The Revolution - Looks okay, but I'll just hold out for now. I've already got Far Cry 3 if I want an open-world, outpost-based, optional-stealth guerilla shooter, thanks. It's kind of funny how this series just keeps attempting to jump on a bandwagon too late. First, it was trying to compete with CoD by being CoD in every sense except with somehow even clunkier gunplay and worse writing, and now I guess it's going to be Far Cry in every sense except with somehow even clunkier stealth and worse writing.

Mafia III - It looked interesting at first, what with the setting and the characters plus the turn away from the old crime story we've all seen many times. But then I saw that they turned the story-focused linear game into a repetitive open-world where you takedown outposts one by one with stealth or gunplay like every single game as of late, so no thanks. That plus the driving, half the fun in Mafia 2 was trying to enact chases with a somewhat realistic driving mechanic, seems like that's gone now too in favour of grabbing more GTA fans.

Battleborn - Tried the free beta, no interest. I don't like the art style, the visuals, the gameplay is trying to combine Borderlands with Team Fortress and MOBA games and feels okay but not my kind of thing. Should stop being compared to Overwatch, though, they're completely different games mechanically even if similar visually.

Anything from the FF series - I have never been a fan of JRPGs, thanks.

Battlefield 1 - What am I supposed to review, the completely cinematic laughably "in-engine" cutscene that EA called a trailer? I say Battlefield 4 again, with less full-auto weapons. Which isn't too much of an insult - Battlefield 4's MP was okay, and the support for new maps and weapons after release was incredibly good after about a year. Will need to see more before I make an opinion, but for now it's a no.

Overwatch - Genuinely intrigued, I really enjoyed the open beta, and looking forward to seeing what comes next, though it's MP only and it's a Blizzard game, so I'm not going to be very optimistic about the game's future. It's Team Fortress 2 meets the Disney art style, if anyone needs an idea of what kind of game it is. I doubt it will hold much interest to the majority here so I won't go further into it.

Mirror's Edge: Catalyst
- I enjoyed the first one, but yet again they're turning it into one of those tedious collect-everything open-worlds where you have to take-down outposts between missions. It used to be that the phrase "open-world" actually excited me, now it's just weary and overdone. Especially with the repetitive kind as opposed to the exploration kind. Sceptical, will wait and see. But the gameplay looks nice.

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided
and Dishonored 2 - Stealth games with sprawling levels and skill sets where you can affect the ending through a fairly simple consequence system. My favourite kind of game, but the actions of both game's publishers have left me feeling pessimistic about both games. Will have to wait and see that they haven't cocked them up.

Horizon: Zero Dawn
- It's a PS4 exclusive. I'll stay on the side for now.

Dawn of War III - I have never been a fan of the Warhammer 40K series, thanks.

So, my final verdict is that all the good series are getting a hyped-up sequel, and that the AAA industry is getting more unique with its new ideas. Not a bad start, but I wager only about half of them will turn out as good as expected. Still, it was better than 2014, and for all the damage the new console generation did to game standards, this is actual progress. Looking forward to the future as much as I can without getting excited for anything.

So, yeah. Basically I don't give a shit about the hypetrain of 2016. Only game I want is Overwatch and only games I'm willing to give a chance is Battlefield 1 and Deus Ex. The rest just seem like triple-a garbage to me or I simply don't care about them. I remember way back when I was younger and I actually looked forward to triple-a games and there were so many I wanted to get and I was so amazed by them time after time. And now look at me. I feel like a bitter old hag who's yelling at kids about how nowadays sucks. Whatever. Triple-a games can exist for those who enjoy them. I'm fine with that, I got my indie titles anyway so it doesn't bother me. Still, I never thought that this is how I would end up.

Don't fret, people actually make money off being bitter and cynical about all hype and critical about every game. Seems like the ideal job for everyone here. :ok:
 
Your rage is blinding you. I generally agree with your stance on the gaming industry. I was only questioning your comments on modding. I didn't say it's not fair to compare old games with new in a broad sense - I pointed out that there's an obvious difference between games from another era and modern games when it comes to mod availability.
And that is what I am criticing, because it was better in the past, when you look at popular games today, like Doom 4, Fallout 4, Deus Ex HR, Diablo 3 and many more. But if I am blinded, fine. Than I am gladly keeping my eyes shut here ...
 
And that is what I am criticing, because it was better in the past, when you look at popular games today, like Doom 4, Fallout 4, Deus Ex HR, Diablo 3 and many more. But if I am blinded, fine. Than I am gladly keeping my eyes shut here ...

Kids these days, amiright guys???
 
When it comes to how smoth a shooter plays, FPS isn't the only facator though. If I remember correctly 30 FPS on a TV screen is not exactly the same as 30 FPS on a PC monitor. Locking the FPS here, is utterly stupid.
 
Not sure if this has been mentioned, but deep sliver is supposed to announce something big at e3, and the 4A guys have confirmed they will be there, so another metro game may be announced. Not only that, the lead of 4A said a while ago that they would be/like to work on an open world metro, like STALKER. So we may see an open world, post-apocalyptic, FPS that's actually good!
 
Not sure if this has been mentioned, but deep sliver is supposed to announce something big at e3, and the 4A guys have confirmed they will be there, so another metro game may be announced. Not only that, the lead of 4A said a while ago that they would be/like to work on an open world metro, like STALKER. So we may see an open world, post-apocalyptic, FPS that's actually good!

I hope so, they have really been taking their time so far.
 
NOt sure what to think about the we-want-to-make-an-open-world-game, as right now it seems like everyone, their grandmother and their dog want to make Open World Games. It is simply the toughtest kid on the block now ... but if it is used to often, it becomes simply boring. One of the refreshing things about Metro, in my opinion, was the fact that the game had a tight, but decent narrative. I would not mind a bit more open gameplay, here and there. But a whole like Skyrim or Stalker? I feel it might end up like a clone of Far Cry, where you grind out bases, to gain small victories and such.
 
It really shows how dedicated they are.
If only LL wasn't so cliched about evil communists, that tomboy chick and boring philosoph-main protagonist and one-dimensional characters. They are sure in different dimension but still. And the ending, oh that ending. More angst of angst god and fuck the common sense. :facepalm:
But it's not the devs' fault truly. The keyword is gluhovski, tbh.
 
If only LL wasn't so cliched about evil communists, that tomboy chick and boring philosoph-main protagonist and one-dimensional characters. They are sure in different dimension but still. And the ending, oh that ending. More angst of angst god and fuck the common sense. :facepalm:
But it's not the devs' fault truly. The keyword is gluhovski, tbh.
I actually really liked the story in LL, and thought the ending(s) were very well done. Each to their own I guess :shrug:
 
NOt sure what to think about the we-want-to-make-an-open-world-game, as right now it seems like everyone, their grandmother and their dog want to make Open World Games. It is simply the toughtest kid on the block now ... but if it is used to often, it becomes simply boring. One of the refreshing things about Metro, in my opinion, was the fact that the game had a tight, but decent narrative. I would not mind a bit more open gameplay, here and there. But a whole like Skyrim or Stalker? I feel it might end up like a clone of Far Cry, where you grind out bases, to gain small victories and such.
Well, with how lethal the world of Metro is above-ground I think that they'd prevent players from just running around all over the map by slapping them to Narnia with monstrosities and grotesques.
 
Well, with how lethal the world of Metro is above-ground I think that they'd prevent players from just running around all over the map by slapping them to Narnia with monstrosities and grotesques.
mutant doesnt pose problem, the main nasty thing cames from what Khan describe as " a dangerous phenomena in a new world"

ghost of people shade, the freaking great door in tunnel and river of fate supernatural shit. that alone were enough to deterr people
 
Back
Top