|
I didn't see any questions about real time with pause, or to my surprise any mention of Torment or Alpha Protocol. Either way, it will be absolutely fascinating to read the results in due course.
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 11:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 22:18 |
|
|
Gort posted:What's good about it? Definitely not for everyone for all kinds of reasons but there was a free demo I played before buying and it gives a pretty decent impression of the game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 11:35
|
|
|
I felt my answers were really the same to every game. I always replay to see other sides of the story and the world, never to min-max.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 11:41
|
|
|
Beefeater1980 posted:I didn't see any questions about real time with pause, or to my surprise any mention of Torment or Alpha Protocol.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 13:58
|
|
|
zedprime posted:Its kind of weird they went with New Vegas over Witcher 3 for the open world representative I don't think any Fallouts are good for an open world representative really. They aren't exploring and discovering a whole new world, just a spoilt America.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 14:23
|
|
|
Kundus posted:Far Cry 2! Seconding this, far cry 2 sounds like what you're looking for. It also has the best fire mechanics in an fps
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
It also has the worst respawn rate, where you'll clear a checkpoint on the road, turn around and it's fully guarded again. I've kinda gotten tired of open-world gameplay. I don't get a lot of time to play games anymore so the less BS I have to jump through to finish it the better. Also getting extremely let down by games like Mass Effect and The Walking Dead has made me hate branching storylines.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 17:18
|
|
|
Oh yeah, the infinitely respawning checkpoints and the fact that even when you're doing a mission for a faction they still shoot you are the worst things about Far Cry 2. Far Cries 3 and 4 are better games.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 17:42
|
|
|
Far Cry 2 is a victim of being immersion shattering for some people with very video gamey concepts glued into something trying to be a gritty realistic experience. But if you can put blinders on long enough to live with playing an FPS first, its easier to live with stuff like checkpoints respawning after a mission or factions being an illusion because in the end it reinforces the basic gameplay loop of shooting fools guerrilla style by supplying you a never ending supply of enemies. But its like a totally weird combo of having to take your anti-malarials for reasons, with a city hub that implies very specific rules of law for the conflict you are participating in, and then you go outside and guys materialize when the mission bit flips from on to off and the only war happening is everybody versus you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
There's a mod that dials down on the respawning checkpoints and balances the game better, but it's definitely flawed. You can also get it off steam for like 5 bucks so it's worth checking out at least
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
zedprime posted:But if you can put blinders on long enough to live with playing an FPS first, its easier to live with stuff like checkpoints respawning after a mission or factions being an illusion because in the end it reinforces the basic gameplay loop of shooting fools guerrilla style by supplying you a never ending supply of enemies. It's worse than that, as well - the checkpoints don't respawn after missions complete, they respawn when you go a few hundred yards from the checkpoint.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
my copy of far cry 2 was a gift from my grandparents, who, as a joke, gave it to me in an (empty) container of kitty litter. ("we heard you like cats, so here's your birthday gift!") this left the game package, and everything inside it (including the disc), perpetually reeking of kitty litter perfume. i'm not going to say that was fair to the game. but i will say that this was a Serious Game which had a section of its map labeled "the Heart of Darkness". you decide
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 20:40
|
|
|
Gort posted:It's worse than that, as well - the checkpoints don't respawn after missions complete, they respawn when you go a few hundred yards from the checkpoint.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2016 20:53
|
|
|
Despite all that it has a certain charm and immersion that got polished out as they refined the concept into FC3. Far Cry 3/4 are certainly better games but Far Cry 2 I think is worth playing. An RPG where you aren't either the most important person in the world or associated with them would be a nice change of pace though. Not many games give you the sense that you're just one person out of many trying to accomplish things. New Vegas was close in that regard as the political forces felt much larger than the player but even there you could run the world or at least single handedly change its fate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 06:59
|
|
|
It's been a while, but I do remember spending quite a lot of time playing FC2. Disproportionately so to any other release at the time. I do recall the main plot was quite bland and the checkpoint and patrol respawns to be rather infuriating, but the upside was that it allowed me to strategise new and exciting ways of setting them all on fire. The open world seemed massive, beautiful and allowed for lots of fun exploration to be had.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 12:25
|
|
|
The only good Far Cry is Blood Dragon. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 17:19
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:The only good Far Cry is Blood Dragon. Game of the Year, every year.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
I wanna be blinded by your cyber-love!
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
Chief Savage Man posted:Despite all that it has a certain charm and immersion that got polished out as they refined the concept into FC3. Far Cry 3/4 are certainly better games but Far Cry 2 I think is worth playing. An RPG where you aren't either the most important person in the world or associated with them would be a nice change of pace though. Not many games give you the sense that you're just one person out of many trying to accomplish things. New Vegas was close in that regard as the political forces felt much larger than the player but even there you could run the world or at least single handedly change its fate. I think being able to change the fate of the world/take it over is fine; it's just that a lot of RPGs make the PC into the keystone of the crisis from the very beginning.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 18:31
|
|
|
The funny thing is that, even though you are usually saving the world,in most games every NPC still treats you like you were just some joe minding his own business "yeah I have this magical sword you need to kill the demon that's about to devour the universe. its 1000000 gold. oh, you dont have that much? well, tough luck"
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:The only good Far Cry is Blood Dragon. I played through that last week and it was pretty bad. The humour wasn't funny enough for the amount of repetition there was of it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2016 20:33
|
|
|
Gort posted:I played through that last week and it was pretty bad. The humour wasn't funny enough for the amount of repetition there was of it. Sounds exactly like regular Far Cry then.  I like 80's rip-off parodies.  EDIT: Also helped that it was $15 as opposed to $50. GenderSelectScreen fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Aug 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 17:32
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:Sounds exactly like regular Far Cry then. Actually, yeah. It is exactly as boring as FC3 and FC4 and presumably FC: Primal as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
I found it significantly more boring due to a lack of weapon types, enemy types, and missions, but I eat Far Cry games like junk food.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 19:05
|
|
|
The Cheshire Cat posted:I think being able to change the fate of the world/take it over is fine; it's just that a lot of RPGs make the PC into the keystone of the crisis from the very beginning. This is why F:NV is one of the best contemporary RPGs. I still play it every now and then and I suspect I will continue to do so for many years to come. There simply isn't anything out there that comes close.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
I hate being "the Chosen one" in RPGs. It's stressful. Oh and how are RPGs so bad at not making sidequests seem like you're wasting valuable time. The main quest always features this huge impending threat, and the games nearly always encourage you to mess around with irrelevant stuff. For the most drastic example of this, see Fallout 4. The only game I've seen pull it off is Fallout New Vegas, and that's for three reasons. 1. The threat is only going to happen "eventually, probably soon". The lack of immediacy really lets you just sit back and enjoy the game. 2. The sidequests nearly all relate to the main conflict in some way, so you never feel as if you're frivolously wasting away time. 3. And as others have pointed out, you're just some random courier, you'll only be important in the grand scheme of things by making yourself important. And how do you accomplish that? By doing sidequests. It's a brilliant piece of game design. Essentially, in most RPGs you're important because the game tells you you are. In FNV, you're important because you made yourself so. And that's something I really appreciate. ThaumPenguin fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Aug 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
Yeah New Vegas is probably the best modern rpg out there. For the reasons poster above together with some decent worldbuilding and a nice way of setting the mood thru music n poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 20:52
|
|
|
I'm still just upset at the setting used for F:NV. Having so much of the map be a huge empty desert was lovely. Much preferred F3s downtown, which felt downright claustrophobic at times.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 20:57
|
|
|
ThaumPenguin posted:I hate being "the Chosen one" in RPGs. Stress is fine, the problem is that it just throws a whole load of baggage in terms of story and probably gameplay which are totally worthless or actively detrimental unless you're someone specifically looking to be "the hero". Open world survival games have the stress without the baggage 
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
I disagree, having a lot of barren land made it feel so much more real than something like Skyrim where Those Bandits that have been hounding us for generations lived a stones throw away from the village, and where the huge trading hub for all of Skyrim has about 3 dudes and a cow in it. Post apocalyptic stuff works well for the limitations of not actually being able to put in half a million NPCs plus the desert felt appropriately wastelandy. If anything I wish things were even more spread out.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
I loved that in New Vegas you could trace the rivers and roads, and settlements are where they actually make sense. Unlike F3 where there's a high-rise apartment in the middle of an empty field, a city around a nuclear bomb because ??? and a cave city full of children because ???
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:I'm still just upset at the setting used for F:NV. Having so much of the map be a huge empty desert was lovely. Much preferred F3s downtown, which felt downright claustrophobic at times. I'm with Koramei, the desert seemed a lot more real than bland buildings. Especially when you start to notice how all the building have the same layout after a while. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 22:14
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:I'm with Koramei, the desert seemed a lot more real than bland buildings. Especially when you start to notice how all the building have the same layout after a while. That's what an 18-month dev cycle does to you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 22:16
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:a city around a nuclear bomb because ??? and a cave city full of children because ??? those were pretty clearly explained in-game. did you actually play it?
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 22:19
|
|
|
Yes, and the explanations were incredibly dumb.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
PleasingFungus posted:those were pretty clearly explained in-game. did you actually play it? Thing is, those explanations feel more like the devs trying to justify why something that nonsensical would exist, rather than some decent background lore for an already at least somewhat believable locale. ThaumPenguin fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Aug 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I disagree, having a lot of barren land made it feel so much more real than something like Skyrim where Those Bandits that have been hounding us for generations lived a stones throw away from the village, and where the huge trading hub for all of Skyrim has about 3 dudes and a cow in it. Post apocalyptic stuff works well for the limitations of not actually being able to put in half a million NPCs plus the desert felt appropriately wastelandy. Well yeah, F3 wasn't much better in that respect. Really almost nothing in the Fallout universe makes even a little bit of sense, most especially "it's been two hundred years, but this pre-war food is still here and also fine to eat". Pretty much every settlement in F3 defied any sort of explanation; NV did a little better I guess. One thing NV actually did really well was taking all the good mods and jamming them into a compatible package. But I just didn't like the desert I guess. Too open, you can see too far.
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 22:37
|
|
|
Wayne Newton gently reassuring me that I'm just as beautiful as the day we met is much better than Threedog calling me an rear end in a top hat no matter what I do.PittTheElder posted:"it's been two hundred years, but this pre-war food is still here and also fine to eat".
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 22:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 19, 2024 22:18 |
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:Yes, and the explanations were incredibly dumb. this is a game and a series that features giant mutant ants and a superhero called The AntAgonizer idk what you're expecting
|
|
#
?
Aug 16, 2016 22:43
|
|