|
2house2fly posted:I'm not a big fan of the Batmobile in Arkham Knight and I'm hoping it's optional for most of the game. Who the hell thought gliding and zip-grappling around the city was insufficiently exciting? Arkham city is my platonic ideal Zelda game and easily in my top 3 games of all time, but WBs marketing department ruined Arkham knight for me I think. Going back it was the hook marketing demanded for the sequel, so it is in your face the entire game like a stripper you just gave a hundred dollars to during her song on a Tuesday morning. Like you'll be ignoring it by just trying to fly around the needlessly enlarged map that has lost all its tiny personal touches, and all the thug banter is like "I wonder why batman just flew by, I hear his batmobile is powered by quantum bats so it's definitely not out of gas! It's probably sneaking up behind us in a contextual manner!" Late game spoilers I'm not tagging cause gently caress this game but there is a horrible car boss later in the game, and when you beat it's tediousness stupidity your loving horrible car explodes with more gravitas than the dark knight trilogy manages for Rachel Dawes death. I cheered, and then Alfred dropped down a brand new one before you even get control of batman properly again. I drove it into the ocean and posted it on eBay in the same motion. Edit: Also one of the car achievements is called "You Are Wasting Your Life" Double edit: and if you are a story or lore dork at all you can go 150 miles a hour with your actual Jet Engine Afterburners as only The Batmobile can, and then sideswipe crush an entire division of unarmed dudes against a wall and then peel out on their dead mangled ragdolling corpses (that are labelled "unconscious" but that dude just did two cycles in my wheel well and got ejected through my jet outtake so if he only made it to unconscious that was a tough son of a bitch.), which makes story batmans obsession with and refusal to kill joker across the entire trilogy suddenly very.... Weird. Olaf The Stout has a new favorite as of 00:28 on Mar 22, 2016 |
#
?
Mar 21, 2016 23:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 02:15 |
|
|
Action Tortoise posted:Riddler bullshit are the worst parts of every Arkham game. I really liked the parts in Asylum and City where a riddle question pops up and you have to take a picture with detective vision solve it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
10 Beers posted:I really liked the parts in Asylum and City where a riddle question pops up and you have to take a picture with detective vision solve it. Yeah, weirdly enough when the Riddler is having you solve riddles it's pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
Action Tortoise posted:Riddler bullshit are the worst parts of every Arkham game. I would like the Riddler stuff if there was, like, 10% as much of it. As is I always just look at "12/293" complete and say gently caress it. Agreed that the actual riddles were pretty neat. Nonlethally running dudes over with my electrified tank was a bit odd. The Moon Monster has a new favorite as of 01:26 on Mar 22, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 01:23
|
|
|
Byzantine posted:Yeah, weirdly enough when the Riddler is having you solve riddles it's pretty cool. Yeah, I was pretty aggravated that all the riddles were care races.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 01:28
|
|
|
Olaf The Stout posted:Double edit: and if you are a story or lore dork at all you can go 150 miles a hour with your actual Jet Engine Afterburners as only The Batmobile can, and then sideswipe crush an entire division of unarmed dudes against a wall and then peel out on their dead mangled ragdolling corpses (that are labelled "unconscious" but that dude just did two cycles in my wheel well and got ejected through my jet outtake so if he only made it to unconscious that was a tough son of a bitch.), which makes story batmans obsession with and refusal to kill joker across the entire trilogy suddenly very.... Weird. I like the theory that Batman is pretty much killing people, but Alfred just tampered with his detective mode to mark people he'd killed as "unconscious" so as to keep Bruce from killing himself in shame.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 06:12
|
|
|
That was always my personal theory. I saw what was done to those men; they're dead.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 06:47
|
|
|
It's not exactly a lie, dead people don't tend to be conscious.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 07:32
|
|
|
10 Beers posted:I really liked the parts in Asylum and City where a riddle question pops up and you have to take a picture with detective vision solve it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 08:54
|
|
|
I wouldn't mind the riddler stuff if he would shut the gently caress up while I'm doing other stuff.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 10:53
|
|
|
The item pick up mechanic in the EDF series is really stupid. If you want to actually get new weapons you end up ignoring enemies half the time as you go around trying to find the drops, then the fact that it's all randomized means you can end up doing a stage and not getting anything new.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 11:51
|
|
|
My Lovely Horse posted:I like those in theory but at least in Asylum they boiled down to "find the unique model/texture in the room." Yeah, in City it was more "find the thing that relates to the question." I know for the Flying Graysons it was a poster from their circus act, and for Bane it was a travel agency ad for Santa Prisca. I still had fun with them, though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 14:57
|
|
|
Screaming Idiot posted:I like the theory that Batman is pretty much killing people, but Alfred just tampered with his detective mode to mark people he'd killed as "unconscious" so as to keep Bruce from killing himself in shame. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1byycwl8qgc
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2016 15:18
|
|
|
I've been playing a lot of Cities: Skylines lately and I really like the game. The only problem is that they make getting the mega buildings a huge chore and require you to run your city into the ground. See, in order to unlock these mega buildings you have to build a number of 'landmarks' (I forgot what the actual names are) that, in turn, require you to reach certain goals in order to unlock them. A few of the unlock conditions are as follows - Average Citizen health under 20% - Have over 50% Unemployment - Go into debt - Have a crime rate over like, 70% I really can't understand the logic of locking away the end tier buildings behind items that require you to actively gently caress over your city in every way imaginable. Not to mention that it's much easier to unlock all of this poo poo in the super early game as opposed to late game. I have over 13 million dollars, how am I supposed to go bankrupt?
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 17:57
|
|
|
moosecow333 posted:
Go for the one building that requires all tax rates to be at 5% for whatever length of time.  I wish more city building games had more options around making a lovely city instead of just a really nice one.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
If you were writing a letter and someone comes into your room and with two outstretched arms throws everything on the desk including the pen in your hand onto the floor and said "gently caress all that did you know that you died in a video game? just thought you'd like to know" you would probably punch that person. I really hate it when anything fucks with my chat input especially if it throws the entire message into the garbage and makes me stare at my dead body for fifteen seconds before giving the chat back.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
Similarly, games that waste your time before reloading whenever you lose. I'm of the opinion that any time in between the player losing and getting control back that is not either loading or informing them in some way what they did wrong is a waste of their time. It makes losing feel unnecessarily obnoxious. From software games are terrible about this, and for the most part only indie games like super meat boy seem to get it right. Just stop prancing around and let me loving try again already. Amazingly, a competitive multiplayer game even managed to get this wrong when battlefield 3 removed your ability to change anything about your loadout and spawn point immediately after you were killed. In bad company 2 you could immediately press enter to change your gear and select your spawn point, while in battlefield 3 you had to sit through something like 10 seconds out of the 15 second respawn time before you could change anything. This is especially bad because there are a huge number of different components of your loadout in that game, which require you to page through multiple menus to change. So if you wanted to change gear, you had to wait until you could be spawned and doing something to help, which means you became a dead weight to your team anytime you were swapping something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 00:02
|
|
|
Digirat posted:Similarly, games that waste your time before reloading whenever you lose. I'm of the opinion that any time in between the player losing and getting control back that is not either loading or informing them in some way what they did wrong is a waste of their time. It makes losing feel unnecessarily obnoxious. From software games are terrible about this, and for the most part only indie games like super meat boy seem to get it right. Just stop prancing around and let me loving try again already. Weird, because when you mentioned that my immediate thought was 'Dark Souls knows how to do that poo poo right'. You die, it informs you that YOU DIED, and then within three seconds you're loading through to the last bonfire again. That level of bungling of a competitive multiplayer respawning is horrible, though. Respawn and recovery times serve a crucial purpose in times like that, they let you step back, slow down and make necessary changes according to what the game's calling for. I've played Valve's games a lot, and in TF2 that's the time to change up your class and loadout, in Dota it's when you start gearing up for what else is going on in the game. Without the ability to even do that, you don't even have anything to do during respawning.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
Digirat posted:Amazingly, a competitive multiplayer game even managed to get this wrong when battlefield 3 removed your ability to change anything about your loadout and spawn point immediately after you were killed. In bad company 2 you could immediately press enter to change your gear and select your spawn point, while in battlefield 3 you had to sit through something like 10 seconds out of the 15 second respawn time before you could change anything. This is especially bad because there are a huge number of different components of your loadout in that game, which require you to page through multiple menus to change. So if you wanted to change gear, you had to wait until you could be spawned and doing something to help, which means you became a dead weight to your team anytime you were swapping something. This pisses me off so much in Battlefield 4. Nothing like getting killed by someone who is laying flat somewhere, at the perfect pixel to shoot over cover yet cannot be shot back and he just stands there the entire round. Everytime you die you just have the camera focused on him and he's just standing completely stock still, 10 seconds you have to just sit there and look at him. And iirc, if someone tries to revive you and even if you decline to the revive (or just get shot once while choosing) it resets the timer. Let me look at the map, let me change my loadout. Let me do ANYTHING besides look at this chucklefuck sitting still for 10 seconds.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
Digirat posted:Similarly, games that waste your time before reloading whenever you lose. I'm of the opinion that any time in between the player losing and getting control back that is not either loading or informing them in some way what they did wrong is a waste of their time. It makes losing feel unnecessarily obnoxious. From software games are terrible about this, and for the most part only indie games like super meat boy seem to get it right. Just stop prancing around and let me loving try again already. you might uh want to skip metal gear solid 5, there's a lot of sitting around waiting for your helicopter to drop you off and so on. Whoever made the engine was a genius, whoever thought it was cool to show off what it can do in brooding intros over and over should be dragged out of their bed in the middle of the night and shot in front of their family by the secret police
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
Just because I can't get enough Dark Souls chat and I'm still playing the first two while waiting for three, I still hate the gradual health reduction in two. In Dark Souls you were either human or hollow, you knew where you stood, same with Demon's Souls. You began to treat your undead HP as the default and worked around it. In Dark Souls 2 reducing your HP each time you died was just a kick in the pants if you were stuck at a part you couldn't quite grasp yet because one death might mean instead of being able to take two hits now you could only take one. Or maybe the boss would even just start one shotting you when before you could survive. So now things have changed, you have to work your strategy around the increasing reduction. It felt less conductive to overcoming the challenge at hand, basically.
|
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
The Hitman series has a mechanic where if you get killed the game goes into slow-mo and starts to fade to black as you fall but you can still aim and shoot, and if you kill someone you get your second wind and come back to life with a sliver of health. Only it's a stealth game so if you get busted odds are you're going to want to just start over, and once you start dying you can't access the menu to reset so you're stuck waiting for Agent 47 to die for real to restart.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
Nuebot posted:Just because I can't get enough Dark Souls chat and I'm still playing the first two while waiting for three, I still hate the gradual health reduction in two. In Dark Souls you were either human or hollow, you knew where you stood, same with Demon's Souls. You began to treat your undead HP as the default and worked around it. In Dark Souls 2 reducing your HP each time you died was just a kick in the pants if you were stuck at a part you couldn't quite grasp yet because one death might mean instead of being able to take two hits now you could only take one. Or maybe the boss would even just start one shotting you when before you could survive. So now things have changed, you have to work your strategy around the increasing reduction. It felt less conductive to overcoming the challenge at hand, basically. You do get a ring that mostly negates the HP reduction in one of the first set of accessible areas, but it is still kind of annoying.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
Worst is when games do that outside of context- I triggered slow mo via fall damage or something, and just had to sit there waiting to bleed out. So very unfun.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:14
|
|
|
Nuebot posted:Just because I can't get enough Dark Souls chat and I'm still playing the first two while waiting for three, I still hate the gradual health reduction in two. In Dark Souls you were either human or hollow, you knew where you stood, same with Demon's Souls. You began to treat your undead HP as the default and worked around it. In Dark Souls 2 reducing your HP each time you died was just a kick in the pants if you were stuck at a part you couldn't quite grasp yet because one death might mean instead of being able to take two hits now you could only take one. Or maybe the boss would even just start one shotting you when before you could survive. So now things have changed, you have to work your strategy around the increasing reduction. It felt less conductive to overcoming the challenge at hand, basically. I don't know if this is still as viable since the multiplayer population has probably dropped off over time, but when I was playing it was really easy to just drop a small white soapstone down and help someone briefly in co-op, which would restore you to being fully human with a max-size health bar. The small white soapstone does really short-duration summons compared to the full-sized one but you still get the full benefit of restoring your humanity.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:16
|
|
|
Nuebot posted:Just because I can't get enough Dark Souls chat and I'm still playing the first two while waiting for three, I still hate the gradual health reduction in two. In Dark Souls you were either human or hollow, you knew where you stood, same with Demon's Souls. You began to treat your undead HP as the default and worked around it. In Dark Souls 2 reducing your HP each time you died was just a kick in the pants if you were stuck at a part you couldn't quite grasp yet because one death might mean instead of being able to take two hits now you could only take one. Or maybe the boss would even just start one shotting you when before you could survive. So now things have changed, you have to work your strategy around the increasing reduction. It felt less conductive to overcoming the challenge at hand, basically. I get where you're coming from but the game did give you items to circumvent this a bit, There was one ring that made the health reduction minimal and then several that prevents all losses from death, you just had to go repair them every 2 deaths or so depending how many you were carrying. Just same hp alive or dead would have been better no doubt though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
Nuebot posted:Just because I can't get enough Dark Souls chat and I'm still playing the first two while waiting for three, I still hate the gradual health reduction in two. In Dark Souls you were either human or hollow, you knew where you stood, same with Demon's Souls. You began to treat your undead HP as the default and worked around it. In Dark Souls 2 reducing your HP each time you died was just a kick in the pants if you were stuck at a part you couldn't quite grasp yet because one death might mean instead of being able to take two hits now you could only take one. Or maybe the boss would even just start one shotting you when before you could survive. So now things have changed, you have to work your strategy around the increasing reduction. It felt less conductive to overcoming the challenge at hand, basically. There was a well in the center of town. I had a ton of souls on me and didn't want to spend or lose them yet. I figure: Let's jump down the well. If I succeed and there's some bullshit down there, I can always teleport home. No problem. If I die horribly, my souls will be safe at the TOP of the well, the last piece of solid ground I touched before dying. No risk! I very nearly almost died from the first drop. Wow! I drank up to full and died dropping to the 2nd furthest down platform. Now my souls were on that first platform halfway down the well and I have got to go get them. Okay well I know it's possible let me just jump down there. And die. They took that 2% off my life and that was the 2% that kept me alive the first time. Huge souls cache lost. Perfect logic every step of the way, it was safe as houses, but I never took into account what happens if I partially succeed, and I didn't know about the health decay.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
RPATDO_LAMD posted:I don't know if this is still as viable since the multiplayer population has probably dropped off over time, but when I was playing it was really easy to just drop a small white soapstone down and help someone briefly in co-op, which would restore you to being fully human with a max-size health bar. The small white soapstone does really short-duration summons compared to the full-sized one but you still get the full benefit of restoring your humanity. I could never get this to work, even at launch, because my internet is poo poo and Dark Souls netcode is poo poo so on the off chance that I managed to connect to someone, the game was literally unplayable. It's stupid busywork that takes way too long to circumvent a terrible game mechanic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
It's particularly bad if you live in a country with bad internet and a not-huge community on your platform. I've played through DS 1 & 2 and I could count my summons on two hands.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 02:38
|
|
|
Or you could just use human effigies. That's what they're for.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 02:42
|
|
|
I really didn't like it because it meant I was rarely in a position of having nothing to lose. I felt pressured to be a lot more conservative in an unfun way, so I just played at 75% almost all the time. Equipped weight also increases fall damage. I can't think of anything in normal play, aside from the well, that involves taking a lot of potentially lethal fall damage in rapid succession. There's no enemies in the well that would interfere with putting all your armour back on, and I'm not sure the game tells you your weight increases fall damage.  The biggest impact this mechanic has that I can remember is making you waste a little bit of your time if you have almost but not quite enough health to survive the first fall in the well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
GIANT OUIJA BOARD posted:Or you could just use human effigies. That's what they're for. I burnt through my supply of human effigies in 2 hours, and never found any more, and was getting one-shot by just about everything in the area.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 03:27
|
|
|
Inco posted:I burnt through my supply of human effigies in 2 hours, and never found any more, and was getting one-shot by just about everything in the area. "git gud" and all that. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 06:46
|
|
|
Woodburger posted:"git gud" and all that.  Have we got that point across yet? Did we get it across that any faults you find with the game is just faults within your abilities and you should just  at the game? Have we made that point yet? Maybe if you stopped sucking you'll finally see the perfect majesty that is Dark SoulsIn FF14 blackmage's (along with mechanist and archer) requirement to stand still to do attacks gets incredibly frustrating when you have bosses who just AOE everywhere and you're stopping every 4th attack to move out of the AOE. Also positionals are annoying when bosses randomly turn to attack other party members regardless if the tank has aggro. Nothing like loving up your trick attack cause the boss snapped 90 degrees to another party member the second you hit the button, now to wait a minute before using it again
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 07:25
|
|
|
It is no secret that the early game of DS2 is stupidly hard compared to how it is once you got a few essentials (some Estus charges, 75% health ring, a healthy backup of effigies, basic knowledge of changes from DS1 if you're used to that, and perhaps most importantly, more than one path to choose when you get frustrated in one). "I struggled starting out" is the last statement that should be met with "git gud", seriously guys. DS2 is great and all but its beginning is a BITCH and for many wrong reasons. That said, you maybe should be smart enough to spend your Souls before attempting platforming in a From game :iamafag:.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 09:45
|
|
|
Speaking of Stupidly hard I've just beaten the original Mother. The enemies toward the end of the game are LITERALLY unbalanced. In that Itoi admitted in interviews that they never had time to balance Mt Itoi properly so the last hour of the game was me using a walkthrough and maps to blaze towards the stuff at the ending.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 09:58
|
|
|
Like I said, I had a lot of souls, but nothing to spend them on ~yet~. Needed more or whatever. Maybe I was saving up for armor, or maybe I was waiting for the scuttlebutt to shake out what stats were useless, like DS1's resistance. And I was 100% sure I'd either make it safely down the well or pick my souls up at the top. It was fool proof! A fool cannot determine what is foolproof, however.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 10:00
|
|
|
All of the games are very frontloaded in their difficulty. I had such a bad experience with a triple wall of bosses early in dark souls 1 that I almost quit (it was one of the first 3D action games of that style I had played) but after that stretch I had extremely little trouble. Every boss after smo&O I beat on either my first or second try. Bloodborne is much more balanced outside of the chalice dungeons, although a total newcomer to the genre would probably have a super hard time in the first couple areas. A lot of it just comes down to learning dumb things that become second nature to you after you've played for awhile, but that are really unintuitive to learn the first time. For example the way you avoid attacks in dark souls, monster hunter, lords of the fallen etc is by throwing yourself right into them because you will pass through them while you're invincible. You thought the point of dodging was to prevent that massive swing from colliding with you? Not here scrub, aim your center of mass right at it and throw yourself into it with as much force as you can. In other cases, you fight the giant intimidating monster by charging right at it and dancing around its feet because it can't pivot fast enough to aim at you, which means the safest place to be is somehow right next to the monster.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 10:11
|
|
|
Salt and sanctuary takes the "rolling into stuff" tactic in a more logical direction but it ends up getting pretty tedious, where instead of trying to roll through attacks (which is often not possible as your invincibility frames don't last long enough) you just roll through the enemy itself so you're on its other side. There is really no way to avoid many attacks without doing this if you are not using a shield, so a huge number of boss fights amount to rolling through them, watching them whiff an attack on the side where you just were, and then rolling back to the other side when they swing at where you are now. Their attacks can cover half the screen in front of them, so the only safe place within reach is behind them. The game has some very good and creative boss fights, but it also has a whole lot of bosses where this is all you do.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 10:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 30, 2024 02:15 |
|
|
Krinkle posted:Like I said, I had a lot of souls, but nothing to spend them on ~yet~. Needed more or whatever. Maybe I was saving up for armor, or maybe I was waiting for the scuttlebutt to shake out what stats were useless, like DS1's resistance. And I was 100% sure I'd either make it safely down the well or pick my souls up at the top. It was fool proof! Did you buy be Silvercat Ring before you attempted this?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2016 10:21
|
|
