|
If it lives up to its promises, this game would be pretty awesome, but I'm thinking that we're ultimately going to get a sort of blend of Uncharted and Resident Evil. That's what all the footage has basically looked like. If they can put some really smart level design into the game, you may have a solid title, but I'd like to play it first before I form an opinion, or at least watch somebody play the first thirty minutes and see how the gameplay works.
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2013 17:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 09:22 |
|
|
Hizawk posted:Theres an IGN video where they play for an hour. It really did put all my fears to rest. Fair enough, I'll have to look for it. My Tomb Raider experience has been with the PS2 reboot (the one that everyone really liked, not the one everyone really hated) and with Anniversary on the PS3 and I've found both to be cumbersome to play, sporting awkward control schemes and really dodgy platforming, with confusing level design and a terrible camera. Well, the PS2 one was alright, actually, it was just very boring. I swapped it for God of War and never looked back.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
Ronnie posted:Since I'm not sure if their is a better place to post and ask I'll tr here, Does anyone still play Lara Croft: the Guardian of Light? I'm really enjoying the game but have been told that co-op is the best experience. However when I try to find or make a game no games are found or no one is around and the Steam boards are dead. Has everyone given up on it or is it a bad game for match-making? I found Guardian of Light to be a very enjoyable, if maybe a little repetitive, romp. The levels were well designed, the graphics were great, the action keeps you engaged and the game even offers a decent challenge at points, although some of the puzzles (like that hosed up spike floor...thing...in the spider tomb) are just a pain to do, even if/when you know their solutions.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2013 21:16
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:The story literally features the police training EVIL PARKOUR COPS. It's really stupid. Eh, they made sense from a gameplay perspective, and besides, the actual writing and general characters of Mirror's Edge were pretty good. Considering how generally light on characterization it was, you got a fairly decent cast with at the very least well-defined, if perhaps a bit undeveloped, personalities.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2013 04:57
|
|
|
Attention Horse posted:Batman Arkham + Uncharted + Far Cry 3 You mean they are finally making an Animal Man game!?!?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2013 18:10
|
|
|
Saint Freak posted:Nope, Vixen. I'd have preferred Huntress. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2013 18:19
|
|
|
Mazed posted:See, the problem with things like that impalement, is that it's so clearly, blatantly played for shock value. It's not even physically possible, because if something went clear through your neck like that, it'd hit your spine and paralyze you from the neck down -- and that's assuming it doesn't hit the brain, in which case it'd just be instant death. So all that writhing and gurgling is just in to make it as gratuitously sickening as it could possibly be. Well, Resident Evil 4 had loads of hosed up death scenes and they all largely made the game more memorable. If you can make failure interesting, you've succeeded. I'd be more annoyed if they did the Dead Space thing and had really, really long death animations that just waste your loving time and can't be skipped. In general, I think gamers have a higher threshold for sadistic treatment of their in-game avatars, and if the game isn't going to impale her on a pole, I'll probably attempt the same thing if I ever get bored near a spike pit.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2013 04:47
|
|
|
Mazed posted:I guess I don't see it that way, and maybe I envy that a bit. So much else about this game seems cool, but it's just ruined by the prospect of being forced to watch something as horrifying as that if I fail a QTE that pops up while I'm slogging through the island. If you're this squeamish about violence, how have you possibly made it into the modern era? The biggest hit of the Xbox 360 was a game whose defining feature was inserting a chainsaw into a person's crotch and hewing them in half. Lara Croft comes from a series where she can get eaten by T-rexes, so how is any of this stuff any more visceral or violent than anything else the genre has presented? The Mario example is also a pretty bad one because Tomb Raider was never geared for children. Lara's "sex appeal" has always been her most defining characteristic, and the one major element of Tomb Raider that any laymen to the series (i.e. me) recognize outside the games. So, in a violent video game intended for adults, it is somehow problematic to feature gruesome violence in a garish keeping of a series' tradition? I'll admit, I'm just not seeing it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2013 05:51
|
|
|
Samurai Sanders posted:In that video back on the first page, she used an arrow as a melee weapon (probably just inside a special counterattack animation but whatever). Something inside of me yelled "SOLD!" but then I remembered that I have almost no extra money (the only reason I could buy Metal Gear Rising was because I had a gift card left over from Christmas) and if I get this game it may be the only full priced game I can get for months, and I want the new Dynasty Warriors too... It kind of looked like the areas are effectively linear, but within the individual stages along the path, you can branch off and explore for bonus poo poo.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2013 19:20
|
|
|
Dan Didio posted:Just the first one to spring to mind. Amy Hennig had a fairly large role in making the Uncharted series what it is as head writer and creative director. Mirror's Edge, as mentioned above, is a Rhianna Pratchett joint. It's also what I bought in lieu of Tomb Raider: Legend and is easily one of the best games of this console generation, despite the opinion of crazy idiots who should never be listened to. I, too, love Mirror's Edge, though I'm hesitant to say it was "one of the best games of this console generation", that poo poo had some pretty major flaws, and pretty much all of them were at the end of the game, which sours the whole last impression of it. It is really good, by and large, if rough around the edges. I liked the story in Mirror's Edge, if only because it was fairly unobtrusive and didn't do anything really dumb. It didn't do anything really EXCITING either, but nothing dumb. I do sort of wish there was more...to it. Like, you never see the evil government really being evil to anyone but you--and there wasn't really a very good villain either, the bad guy you encounter is sort of just...there? And then there's a traitor. Then there's the bad guy! Then you win! Somehow! Yeah, everything's fixed now, have your credits! ...Mirror's Edge sort of falls apart in the last two hours, I think is what I'm saying here.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2013 23:52
|
|
|
It is sort of unfortunate that the marketing for this game has been such rubbish. You'd think a game like "Tomb Raider" wouldn't need much to sell it--tombs, raiding, shooting. Easy, yeah? So why is it that this game has been struggling so hard to assert some sort of new identity? It's troubling--it either indicates the market is truly as finnicky as is assumed, or that the industry is desperately out of touch, and have no idea how to sell a loving video game because it has a woman as the main character instead of a man. Neither option really cheers me much.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2013 05:13
|
|
|
Dominic White posted:On the subject of gory death sequences, I'll tell you this - the ones in Resident Evil 4 were the best incentive I've ever seen to avoid dying. The first time I got cornered by the chainsaw guy was absolutely gut-wrenching, and I instinctively just turned and ran whenever I heard a chainsaw in the future. Well, to be fair, Super Meat Boy is a platformer (and one developed for Newgrounds no less). Its priorities are different. In a platformer, you want to be moving quickly, and lengthy deaths get in the way of moving quick and precisely. This is a game with much more to it--you'd have to aim, shoot, hide, look for treasure, platform, climb (if they are seperate mechanics), heal at the bonfire, reinforce your estus, get the power bomb, max out your social links and break the damage cap. It has a lot more going on mechanically than Super Meat Boy, and as such, the pacing of the two games couldn't be more different. Compare, say, a game like 999, which actually has all of its game-overs take the form as entire "endings" to its saga, forcing you to replay the entire game numerous times just to, likely, fail and die. The deaths in that instance are drawn out and terribly cruel and unfulfilling. There's no satisfaction as a gamer there, so you seek out an alternative (or look at GameFAQs). We need to remember that things like "enemies" and "death" in video games all serve a purpose, or should: a death in a game is a result of you playing the game incorrectly, being forcibly extricated from that incorrect path, and set back to where you can resume playing the game as was intended. An enemy in a game is merely an obstacle that is presented to prevent you from completing your designated task. Go back to Mario--the reason Goombas exist is to force you to jump, and thus learn jumping. An enemy's existence should prove either educational or obstructive. It either guides you to playing the game the ideal way, or forces you to adjust your style to keep the challenge intact. It is why Dead Space 2 has so many issues. Enemies are obstacles, yes, but the whole of the game lies in their elimination, and failure to do so results in long, sadistic death sequences. The levels are all fairly rote, with the exception of the zero-G elements, and the battles lose their impact once you've established an effective strategy. Uncharted sort of does this too--all the shoot outs are largely the same, you'll almost always have either a sniper, rocket guy, or grenade thrower to eliminate first, and your goal is to largely figure out what order to kill your enemies in, and once you know that order, the game becomes routine. So, the death scenes in Tomb Raider should, ostensibly, discourage the player from performing badly--or, if performing badly is anticipated due to extreme challenge, a la Super Meat Boy, it should be relatively unobstructive and fluid, preventing as little flow and momentum of gameplay from being depleted as possible. It then stands to reason that the deaths in the new Tomb Raider are intended to be viewed as either ghoulish trophies of failure or stern incentives not to. Until we know what the difficulty curve is like (and how many insta-kills like that pipe in the rapids there are) it won't be possible to really tell what sort of design sense the game demonstrates.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 28, 2013 05:32
|
|
|
Between Nier, RE6 and Deadly Premonition, it is clear that game reviewers have no idea what they are talking about. It is why I value Giant Bomb's quick looks, since they offer a good glimpse of actual rote gameplay, and not just trailers or a summary by a reviewer--you can see for yourself what a typical game session plays out to.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2013 03:25
|
|
|
The thing is, a good critic's goal is to disseminate a product, be it a book, movie, song or game, and explain to the viewer why it is/is not worth their time. For a video game, this requires even more, since a good reviewer should be able to explain a hard-to-understand game to their audience, or at the very least take the effort to learn the game. Resident Evil 6 is the best modern example I can think of--the game has one, fairly small, flaw in that it doesn't really explain its core mechanics very well, especially dodge moves. Because of this, game reviewers shat on the game because they didn't understand how it worked, and covered that lack of understanding by saying idiotic things like "this doesn't FEEL like a Resident Evil game" and "enemies don't react to gunfire!" despite the former being a kind of superfluous statement considering how radically RE has changed between 4 and 6, and the latter is proof positive of just how badly they failed to understand the game, since every enemy DOES have a means to stun it with gunfire, but like every previous RE game with the new engine, you have to carefully aim at the appropriate individual limb to do so. A reviewer dismissed Nier because he didn't think to check his map, nor did he bother to really attempt to understand the task he was having trouble with. His review focuses entirely on this one incident in the game, extrapolating wildly from it. This is lazy reviewing, but since games reviewers serve a gatekeeper role between the industry and the audience, it means that a good game that was already criminally undermarketed ends up being dismissed as garbage without even a decent explanation as to why.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2013 06:43
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:RentCavalier turned into some kind of whackadoo RE6 evangelist all at once, his opinion on the topic is a little too skewed to bother with. This is really true, and I'll stop mentioning the game from here on out...outside the LP thread. It IS a criminally underrated game though. I can't wait to get some goon feedback on Tomb Raider, but to be honest, the more I remember Uncharted, the less interested I am in it. Uncharted is basically a shooter with really pretty window dressing and time-padding climbing sections. I hope Tomb Raider's gameplay is a bit more involved, at least. Give me boss fights at least!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 3, 2013 11:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 14, 2024 09:22 |
|
|
4 Day Weekend posted:uh ok what Oh hey, you found the entrance to Ash Lake. Beware of clams!
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2013 16:50
|
|
