|
Deakul posted:Origins definitely felt more like a labor of love than Odyssey in a lot of ways, the world was more alive and I really miss finding little lore tidbits to read. One thing I liked was how riddles added to the world. They made you appreciate some hand-placed unique stuff in the world. They gave you directions. In Odyssey, riddles are written with an assumption that you chase them immediately, you're given directions from where you've found them.
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2019 14:34
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 20:01 |
|
|
fuf posted:I guess it was their way of dealing with the classic open world cognitive dissonance between an urgent main plot and a bunch of relatively trivial side activities. This makes me appreciate Fallout 3 retroactively. It's probably the worst game in the series but it's the only one apart from 1 that has your motivations straight. You are 18-year old dude abandoned by his father. It would make sense if you look for him. It would make sense if you don't. You can play as any character going from there. In Fallout 2 you transform from a tribal into a master hacker wielding laser minigun but for some reason, you still supposed to care about your little village. In Fallout New Vegas you're relentless determinator - the game just assumes that surviving a bullet to the head would make you want to catch a thousand more bullets with your head for 500 caps you're promised for delivery. Fallout 4 makes you care for your child, but you get sidetracked so often that your child is an old man by the time you get to find him. Both Origins and Odyssey are fine in that regard. Bayek is an Antique Cop who's got involved in a great conspiracy, his wife can take care of herself so it makes sense he might want revenge or he might help people. Eagle bearer is a mercenary, the war is going on forever - no real reason to hurry.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2019 14:46
|
|
|
LASER BEAM DREAM posted:Is Fallout 4 worth playing? I got it for free from some deal or another, but never bothered with it since I recall it had bad reviews. Yes, if you know what you're getting in. It's a huge game where there's some adventure every 100 meters. The combat is fine, there's some depth to character development and level design is good. Just don't expect to get a good story with choice and consequence - there are glimpses of that but mostly in Far Harbor expansion. And as usual with Bethesda, the game looks and sounds good From gameplay perspective, I adore Survival mode they've added later. Mostly it means you have to drink, eat and sleep as well as cure infections and whatever. More importantly, it turns off fast travel and saving, you only have autosave when you sleep in bed. This turns the game into a hardcore RPG experience and also makes you appreciate the world much more: you no longer stroll around the world doing whatever you want but instead learn the lay of the land, think very hard about whether you're going to engage that specific random encounter and so on. Settlement building which has almost no purpose in a vanilla game becomes mandatory, as you can't teleport wherever you want to sell loot and rest, you need those settlements to drop your loot and sleep, and you need those all over the map. As its a Bethesda game you'll still get bullshit deaths from glitches and physics but it makes your choices much more meaningful. I wouldn't recommend this mode for a first time player cause you need some meta-knowledge to understand what you're doing (surprisingly, Charisma becomes extremely important in that mode). But I would recommend cranking up difficulty to max level cause it makes you think hard about your equipment and skill choices. Unlike previous Bethesda games, this difficulty doesn't just double HP and damage of your enemies. Usually it means that, say, stealth becomes less useful as you can no longer one-shot enemy from stealth and thus you'd better get combat skills instead. You can still one-shot weaker enemies but also meet more unique bosses, each one brings some unique equipment. The most important recommendation about that and other Bethesda game is to stop being completionist. All those boring mindless quests exist to be boring and mindless, it's something you do when you're passing by or starve for resources. A good indication that a quest is its own reward is a special pipboy animation. Don't bother doing other quests just because someone tells you that [raiders] from [south-west] stole my [favourite books]. This also means that you'd probably want to skip Minutemen faction.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2019 08:11
|
|
|
Deakul posted:and the story from what little I remember of it was surprisingly worse than Fallout 3. It really wasn't. It's partly a futile job of differentiating between the quality of poo poo as no Fallout game had really good writing or strong main storyline. There are interesting sci-fi concepts, great worldbuilding and background lore. But even the best of them - New Vegas - is very unevenly written. And Fallout 3 is the worst of the bunch but it has some of the best writing in the series like Eden's speeches (though it may be just Malcom McDowell being able to make supermarket cheque sound interesting). Fallout 4 has dropped the idea that every quest should have multiple solutions. Most "big" quests still have that but it's more about which quests you do or not do at all. But the writing itself and voice acting is far better than in Fallout 3.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2019 15:49
|
|
|
jisforjosh posted:The two bolded parts aren't related are they? On Survival, you do 150% damage and take 200% damage so it's somewhat balanced (until you run into an NPC that tosses a molotov, you've got a split second to react and you die on contact from it). Very Hard turns enemies into bullet sponges by halving the damage you do and doubling the damage you take. They are related. Survival certainly feels better balanced, but as I've said it's not for everyone. On Very Hard or whatever it's called your damage is lowered, yes, but in reality, it means that the game switches from "anything goes" (by Cole Porter) to forcing you to specialize. All those +20% damage perks make sure that you can't use unfamiliar weapons effectively, except maybe Fatman (but it's very heavy and dangerous so it's balanced in a different way) or grenades (which is a support weapon anyone can use). So enemies never become spongy enough so that you can't stealth one-shot grunts or heavily damage stronger enemies. Previous games (Fallout 3, Skyrim) also allowed you to fight bullet sponge enemies in an ineffective manner if you had enough stimpacks and didn't give you enough tools to compensate for sponginess.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2019 09:27
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:All the AC3 'remaster' does is update the graphics a bit, but it still looks like a 5 year old game. And some graphics are strange, faces were weird. Another problem is that it's released right after previous AC game and picks up the storyline from a cliffhanger. It expects you to care. And you won't care about any of the modern BS. Writing is relatively good in this game but it's full of traditional AC padding and very constraining mission design. AC Odyssey is refreshing with many of its missions being "make sure that dude doesn't live" that you can do however you want. Older AC games force you to do very specific things and fail for no apparent reason. My will to play this remake has died out very early: right after you get to America you witness some thief stealing something and running away. Naturally I run to catch him... Mission failed, restart. Turns out what I had to do was continue walking with my slow talkative companion. And at the end of that walk 3 minutes after getting to America you meet Ben Franklin.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2019 11:03
|
|
|
For quite some time I've enjoyed playing AC games as if it's Batman Arkham game or even Deus Ex game. Run around the fortress and throw ancient gadgets at enemies. It was also on the highest difficulty so when the enemy got to me they really got to me. Then I got tired from this and lowered difficulty to just Hard. I still try to be quiet but when things go south I can usually handle it. Plus many story missions felt very cruel on the hardest difficulty. For some time I bowed to game's command to grind my problems but then I realized it's not fun anymore and I need enemies on comfortable level. Glad that expansions seem to drop the level idea. You get to ~50 by doing the main storyline and after that everyone is the same level as you.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2019 09:03
|
|
|
Now that all DLCs are there I'm back at it. Elysium looks great, but I hope I don't really have to lower Persephone's power in every region. It will get old very fast. I've killed the leader of one region and cleared up the fortress and it's just half of the meter gone.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2019 21:40
|
|
|
Uh. That's the real problem with the game, not the fact that they dared to include playable dude in it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2019 21:42
|
|
|
Note that plenty of people don't play with English voices. Russian voices are both great. Ubisoft, in general, is good with localizations.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2019 10:56
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:At no point in this entire game do they manage to even glimpse Witcher 3 on the horizon Except having an actual interesting gameplay as opposed to Witcher's masing attack and casting a spell that your journal says you have to use against that specific monster. I loved Witcher 3 for the story and atmosphere, but clearing up a single fortress in Odyssey required more effort and tactics than completing the whole Witcher 3 game. Mind you expansions were much better adding some bosses you have to worry about, but other than that highest difficulty just means that Drowner 2 levels above you can one-shot you. ACO has this too but there are also some interesting skills to use, big fights and environment interaction.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2019 10:35
|
|
|
Lobok posted:there's still no sense of what Ubisoft wants these games to be Ubisoft wants every game to be a soulless focus-group approved set of mechanics giving players a maximum playtime and things to spend money on. Obviously, some people in Ubisoft love what they're doing and sometimes, just sometimes, we see them being allowed to make products of love, like Might & Magix X Legacy or Deus Ex Human Revolution. And it's clear that artists had a field day with Origins and Odyssey. But as for a big unifying vision - there is none.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2019 11:22
|
|
|
Oh, my bad. Just M&MXL then. Also Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2019 11:38
|
|
|
ACO combat is running around the place, finding lone enemies you can get rid of, setting up traps, looting the place without anyone noticing, combining abilities to get rid of several enemies at once, choosing the right tool for each encounter. But even if we ignore stealth and immersive sim-style dispatch of enemies - fights are much more interesting by themselves. You have a bigger variety of moves in 1v1 fights and there are mercenaries, each with their own quirks. Witcher 3 has you using the same spells for the whole game (with added alternative mode, mostly useless). Bombs and potions add some variety but, like spells, they mostly have specific use against a specific enemy (silver thing is against ghosts, stun thing is against humans, explosive thing is against everyone else) or are ridiculously unbalanced. E.g. you create your best concoction in the tutorial (the one that gives you vampirism) and you'll need a very specific build if you ever want to use any other one. I'd say that they took all this "silver sword is for monsters, steel sword is for humans" as a game design ideal, but they had much more interesting systems in Witcher 1 and 2. You probably talk about how those games are played in practice when you go with lower difficulty setting. That would be a fair reprimand for ACO because it very rarely forces you to be creative. However, on the highest difficulty setting, when the game is supposed to make all of its parts necessary to master, you still play Witcher the same way, maybe you spend a little more time running around looking for a right herb to then make a strategic choice of using greater anti-vampire oil next time you encounter a vampire. But ACO makes you use every tool in your disposal as any fight where you're outnumbered is deadly. ilitarist fucked around with this message at 12:48 on Jul 22, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2019 12:44
|
|
|
mysterious frankie posted:Dear god tell me the third Atlantis dlc is short. At this point I just want to finish up the dlc then do the remaining 34% of main story missions and flee from this game forever. It feels like I’ve been strapped in a rollercoaster for 150 hours straight and also the rollercoaster moves at an acceptable fixed speed and is completely level. I really liked the game but dropped it in the middle of the first Atlantis DLC. Also, haven't finished sidequests in a previous DLC. This is the case of too much game, true. And now that they got rid of level cap and added a lot of stuff I can clearly see it transforming into an infinite treadmill with looking for better loot and clearing out fortresses again and again even if you don't get DLCs. Not something I want to do but I've seen this idea done worse.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2019 12:45
|
|
|
Simone Magus posted:Unity is aggressively mediocre I'd say Syndicate is the epitome of mediocrity. It has good songs in it like Jokes Jokes Jokes but is shy of showing players anything good so you will almost certainly not hear those. Unity at least tries to show you big crowds of people and connect to the era it portrays, Syndicate is all about gangs of New York but also Dickens and there's Marx with a funny accent and the Queen is not amused. Then again the series had probably broke my mind cause after playing the whole series (except 2D games) I consider Odyssey to be the best game in the series if not the best action-adventure game ever. I'm surprised that people aren't bonkers about it and hardcore AC gamers even consider it to be bad AC game. So my opinions about the series are all off. But looking at Valhalla and seeing next(cross)gen AC game to take all the best from Origins and Odyssey fills my heart with optimism.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 12:38
|
|
|
fuf posted:That new footage shows the gender select screen and the middle option is: They said you could change gender at will. Since they went with gender being purely cosmetic there's no reason not to do that. In Odyssey it would be a little too much because of spoilers but it's probably fine in Valhalla. You can probably change all skills of your character with a little gold, who says experienced Viking Animus Shamans can't help you with other changes.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 12:44
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:I thought Odyssey IS considered the best of the series? People raved about it when it came out, and when I finally got to play it I was blown away by how good it was. I've seen some AC YouTubers as well as AC subreddit hating the game because it's not "true" AC game. First there are too many "non-historical" things in the game. And before you think it's about women not being in the kitchen it's more about mythological creatures and DLCs. Also 300 intro and in general battles not featuring phalanxes. That makes me wonder how people perceive historicity in media because Odyssey goes out of its way to portray historical freaking everything - city layouts, house furniture, clothes, songs etc - and you can see it all in discovery mode. Really Origins and Odyssey put to shame everything that came before with their attention to detail. Up to that point, you probably had some historical buildings and light specialization of city districts. In Origins historical complaints go into "Hebrew district of Alexandria doesn't have enough Hebrew signs" territory. The second problem AC fans seem to be having is RPG systems. As in you can't assassinate people without min-maxing. I guess it's a valid complaint cause previous protagonists of the series were all universal soldiers. In Odyssey you have to make a choice and on a higher level, you have to commit to specific tactics. I like it cause it makes gameplay choices feel more substantial than in many "true" RPGs like say Witcher 3 (no matter what build you're using in Witcher 3 you always roll, slash and cast an enemy-appropriate spell). The third problem I've heard talked about is that the map is huge and empty. I suppose if you are the kind of person who collected all the feathers in AC2 and animus fragments in later games you might lose your mind trying to complete every location in Odyssey. It's also connected to the fact that you can't just do the main quest, you'll be underleveled. I think this was a much bigger issue in Origins cause in that game you'd only get substantial XP rewards and challenge from quests designed for your specific level. Odyssey used level limitations for the gradual unraveling of its world and I like it. But I see the contradiction it put in people's minds: you can't just play the main quest, you have to explore. But if you want to explore then you'll see dozens of similar caves and forts with little narrative component. I got a lot of joy from just running around the world clearing out locations, doing minor or auto-generated quests after I've finished the game. So I guess the complaint comes from the fact that people who got bored of gameplay wanted to just complete the story and the game doesn't allow that. I remember reading that Valhalla won't have that problem, as in if you're playing just the main story you won't run into characters you just can't damage.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 15:37
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:I feel pretty strongly that AC should never go beyond rpg-lite choices like in Witcher 3 or in the Batman/Mordor games. Let me specialise, give me choices of interesting perks, but all gameplay styles and mechanisms should always be open at the same time. Note that in Odyssey you can respec at any point for a modest sum, upgrade any item and add different bonuses to it, change the way any item looks... It's still quite hard to make a character who would be equally deadly with bow, sword and assassination on a highest difficulty level but it's still possible. And if you don't minmax too much it's still quite easy to get a couple of assassination perks to be able to oneshot anyone apart from bosses while being great at close combat fighting. It's just you still have to get those couple of assassination perks and it makes people angry that good old blade to the throat suddenly stops working.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 16:08
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:Either go the D&D route and give me a choice of fundamentally different gameplay styles, or go down the Witcher/Shadow route of giving me a well defined set of character skills that I can tweak with perks, but don't go down this middle of the road Ubisoft bland 'push button to make number go up so archery/stabbing/stealthy-stabbing is a viable way of getting through enemy hitpoints' solution. I don't quite get the criticism. There's no promise of replayability, your character choices only have some inertia as you have to spend some money to respec. You chose between ton of abilities and you can make some of them your main attacking force or situational helpers. But if you see the whole game as repeating the tutorial island I guess character development system doesn't have enough variety to change that basic gameplay loop.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 19:52
|
|
|
Ainsley McTree posted:It sounds like one-shot assassinations are at least back in this one (dunno about the headshots). You get quick-time events when you try to assassinate stronger enemies. It's easier if you are skilled assassin. Alchenar posted:The criticism is: what does the game gain by making the ability to one-shot assassinate someone mutually exclusive with the ability to one-shot headshot them with a bow (as an illustrative example, I know you can technically spread your points to do this)? You gain interesting challenge. You go adventuring knowing that you can't rely on your bow but can kill more people if you come close and personal. Thus some challenges that are easier for other kind of character are hard for you. You have to look for new ways to take on challenges. Your own unique set of abilities leads to a unique walkthrough of every encounter. I'm still puzzled by this question. Like why action games allow you to use just a couple of weapons instead of carrying every weapon? ilitarist fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Oct 14, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 20:22
|
|
|
Yeah, I've heard people complaining about Odyssey being too long and repetitive. For me it was the only AC game that didn't bore me to death with gameplay making me rush for the ending - even in Origins I was made at the game cause I needed to do some sidequests to have a high enough level to tackle the end game. Odyssey had me playing postgame probably longer than I've played the base game, doing all the small quests, clearing out fortresses and so on and so on. I've enjoyed the basic gameplay loop. Really it's probably the first game I liked enough to continue to play after the official end for a long time. ilitarist fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Oct 14, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2020 21:41
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:everything above is an objective truth If we're talking about objective truth then mercenaries were kinda half-baked feature of Origins and were vastly improved in Odyssey.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2020 02:59
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:Like, killing that tenth and final guy out in the wastelands in Origins was memorable. I think I only fought 3 of those guys in Origins. One time I was curious about them and twice they came in after the alarm was raised. I remember them being strong and that's it. I'm not not sure why would you even interact with them. In Odyssey I remember meeting high level mercenaries out of my league just wandering the world, plotting their demise so that I can get higher rank and associated boosts. You can hire mercenaries you like and then summon them. Some of them are story characters involved in quests. Some have unique artifacts. They are the main counterweight to taking fortresses head on: even if you don't cause an alarm a longer fight will attract mercs. It's very strange to me that this mechanic deeply connected to the rest of the game both narratively and mechanically can be called half-baked.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2020 06:58
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:The problem every Ubisoft open-world game has (because they all follow the exact same formula) is that there's about 10-15 hours of 'good' content and then it's just repeated over and over and over again until you are overwhelmed with blandness and quit. I see it as a problem with gameplay, not content. If you don't like navigating the world or fighting or developing character or whatever there is in the game then you can talk about how the game should have been shorter cause you had to endure challenges to get to the story and nice views. Earlier AC games had simpler gameplay but tried to be very long tutorials for a long time so it didn't matter as much if you don't actually want to play AC game. I guess this way you turn bland AAA game into an artful experience like Pathologic 2. Origins and Odyssey really want an average Joe to have fun exploring and engaging with gameplay systems. For me Odyssey had ~150 of good content and most of it was emergent gameplay not connected to goofy quests with bad writing many of which I'd rather replace with unambitious "kill 5 Athenian archers" randomly generated quests.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2020 10:50
|
|
|
Wolfsheim posted:See, I disagree with this. Origins has a few lame sidequests but for the most part they're pretty lovingly crafted and tie into the narrative. Odyssey has a few too but much fewer and far between, and the fact that you conflate them with the 'kill five archers' bullshit shows they kinda hosed up? Like why even add a mercenary system and a region conquest system and a recruitment system when narratively they have less relevance than that one time Bayek helped find a cat and then starred in a play? Origins stories might be somewhat better than Odyssey, but both of those games have awful stories compared to any book or a movie I'd spend more than a 10 minutes on. But no book or movie can give me Odyssey gameplay. So I'd prefer simpler unintrusive lighthearted quests of Odyssey as long as the writing is not offensive. Even if Origins has cool individual cutscenes its plot is much more separated from the game. Bayek is an inconsistent character: all the good cutscenes showing off facial animation tell you he's determined avenger who only thinks about his dead son. But then right before the final showdown he doesn't have enough level so the story basically requires him budding up with some Roman architect. In Odyssey your character doesn't have an urgent mission and he might not actually be into this whole family business that much, the plot actually works for the kind of game I'm playing. ilitarist fucked around with this message at 15:39 on Oct 15, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2020 15:36
|
|
|
...Julius Caesar?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2020 15:57
|
|
|
Hanging out with Rurik sounds like a great idea for DLC. You can also have his son Oleg as a mystical dude.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 15, 2020 21:05
|
|
|
There were some QoL additions for Odyssey month after release and you had to wait for big additions till after the first expansion, I think. But then it mostly concerned post-game content most people wouldn't get into anyway.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2020 09:10
|
|
|
Kin posted:I've not really taken in the gameplay videos yet but is the core mechanic of all enemies scaling to your level going to be like Odyssey or Origins? Eh, I don't know. For me it was a chore in Origins meeting all those enemies I was supposed to fight 5 levels ago and now they're just boring meat shield on my way giving me no challenge and no rewards.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2020 19:59
|
|
|
Actually in Odyssey they've already adressed this. Unless you play on highest difficulty level autoscaling never brings enemies to your level, they're always weaker than you but not enough to be pushovers. And yeah, I'm not sure why AC really needs levels. Or rather open world like that. I like the whole progression system and it gives you some additional goals when you explore a huge open world. Guess they've decided their budget calls for games too big to be enjoyed without adding World of Warcraft on top of it. ilitarist fucked around with this message at 20:51 on Oct 19, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2020 20:47
|
|
|
Simone Magus posted:True but it's still pretty dumb. At level 50 you're running into level 47 chumps and it's like, why even have a level system then The real dumb thing is empowering of enemies 3 levels above you. As in it's not just it's hard to beat them because of their high stats; they get huge bonuses on top of that turning everyone into almost impossible challenges. Witcher 3 did exactly the same thing and for some reason people didn't care. In Odyssey, like in Witcher 3, there's enough questing and exploring for you to never bump into level gating. But it really hurt me in Origins were sidequests were really main quests unless you want to go looking for caves you can clear out or something, cause we have 1 sidequest for your level and you have to like it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2020 21:13
|
|
|
Arbite posted:Two questions: Not quite. Tougher enemies give you some sort of quick time event. So in theory you can murder anyone but as I understood it would borderline impossible to kill some enemies unless you invest into assassination skills.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2020 09:19
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:I never really had a problem with the enemies feeling too grindy in Odyssey. If you commit to a specialization and wear gear to support it then you'll quickly outpace enemy defenses, even with the level scaling. And regardless of spec you can always get Rush Assassinate, the most broken skill ever made. Same for me. I quite like even the postgame incremental updates in Odyssey. Really I think it's a brilliant game. But I remember coming to Origins right after playing Black Flag I think and being infuriated by the worst beef gating ever, it felt like suddenly I'm playing hardcore German RPG where open world is actually a corridor where you figure out where you're supposed to go by going the wrong way and being one-shot. It also didn't really have specialization and I never felt like I'm sculpting my character. So I can totally see someone not into RPGs coming into those new AC games and being disgusted by the fact that franchise about connecting your knife and enemy throat is now about upgrading your sword to level 34 and adding fire damage and 10% higher power attack damage to it.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2020 10:39
|
|
|
Arkham games don't do big open worlds. There are no beefgates and you can explore anywhere you want. Modern AC try to give you an open world that unravels step by step without being too overwhelming and without giant computer walls in the middle of a historic location. The adrenalin rush of the possibility of fighting someone you're not yet supposed to fight is an added bonus. Odyssey has some enemy variety, especially when we're talking about mercenaries. But Spartans and Athenians are very similar. Cultists and daughters of Artemis are very different but you don't see them often. Also what you said about shields is compensated by a higher difficulty. There shielded enemies and archers become a problem. It's still a bad design, you shouldn't raise the difficulty to feel the difference between enemy types. But I'd recommend anyone who plays Odyssey to try it at least on Hard if they're interested in combat. ilitarist fucked around with this message at 12:24 on Oct 20, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2020 12:20
|
|
|
thrawn527 posted:That sounds like one hit kills, and not quick time events, to me. But I could be wrong. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jXHoXi3bQ2o&t=1079s (timestamp) By default, you get a quick-time event. But yeah, it seems you can customize the game so that QTE always succeeds. What's intriguing on this page is separate difficulty settings for combat, stealth and exploration. ilitarist fucked around with this message at 14:20 on Oct 20, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2020 14:17
|
|
|
Maybe it's Final Fantasy X sphere grid, who knows!
|
|
#
¿
Oct 20, 2020 14:40
|
|
|
bike tory posted:The Atlantis DLC for Odyssey was good in its own right but story-wise it was barely the same game. It was like someone's sci-fi short story that they had shoehorned in. I quite liked it visually but gameplay-wise there were a lot of flashy but not very interesting abilities. And the story was all over the place.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2020 08:45
|
|
|
For me the problem with old combat system is that it's simple and easy. I think the intent is to not overcomplicate it and allow you to enjoy other parts of the game like stealth, exploration, feather gathering, ship combat, board games and estate economy. However it lead to an issue that you can solve every problem with a fighting. See that fort? You can sneak around it for minutes trying to be clever or you can kill everyone inside in 20 seconds using guns, swords, berserk darts and so on. So to make you appretiate sneaking and fleeing they design missions with infuriating requirements like no alarms or even don't ever be spotted. New AC games feature very few of missions like that. Odyssey has quests where being spotted results in a bad quest ending but it's never a game over screen IIRC. And while the combat is more complex you are interested in stealth and running away because you can't take on the whole enemy fort on your own even on normal difficulty. But of course it also means that combat is in the center of the game, even if you fully focus on stealth you're evading the most complex part of the game designers clearly want you to engage with. ilitarist fucked around with this message at 10:54 on Oct 21, 2020 |
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2020 10:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 20:01 |
|
|
Simone Magus posted:I picked up syndicate for 9 bucks because I never really got past the first act before and I forgot how drat good it is. The best thing about it was the music and architecture. So they made sure you don't see that in gameplay as with bat hook there's a little reason to see any part of a building that is not a roof. And original songs about the events of the game are sang inside of taverns but you only visit like one tavern in a Dickens sidequest so you probably won't ever hear those. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkC0r3P9z_k
|
|
#
¿
Oct 21, 2020 14:13
|
|