Llyranor

Haha, Eldar made the headlines at the Codex.

Assuming you mean Forza 2, I haven't had any problem with it. That being said, I've only played a few hours (which is great fun with a wheel), and haven't touched multiplayer.

Heh. PvP/competitive multiplayer is completely irrelevant to me. Co-op is virtually all I play nowadays (except for some sp titles - but those need to be really good). There are many things I don't find particularly enticing about Halo. Admittedly, it doesn't have good level design, particularly the second half, once you're introduced to the second faction of losers. In fact, sometimes it's downright cut-and-paste, which can lead to several areas in a row looking quite similar to each other. I would have a problem with this if the individual battles weren't enjoyable in and of themselves. But this forum is made mostly of RPG fans, criticizing repetitive gameplay here seems hilarious. Otherwise, story/characters/music/production values overall seem greatly overrated. If no one would have told me that the series was one of the most popular last gen, I wouldn't have noticed. One could argue that this warrants the game's dismissal as not worth playing, but I find it succeeds quite well at the '30 seconds of fun' philosophy the devs were aiming at, which complements the co-op really really well. The previous design points are pretty disappointing overall, but there are many things that it executes exceptionally well. Now, it didn't break any new ground in any particular field, but I don't really give a crap. Recharging shields, lots of ammo lying around, respawning in co-op when out of danger, among other things, add greatly to focusing the co-op experience on the fun gameplay itself, rather than managing other things instead. I find them quite conducive to co-op. Lastly, and I know I wouldn't like the game nearly as much if this wasn't there, the Legendary difficulty is awesome. Especially in the early levels, I can't even remember the number of times my brother and me have gotten ourselves killed over and over and over and over again fighting completely overwhelming numbers/odds. In this diff, depending on the circumstances, even fighting a few of the stock enemies can be quite challenging, especially given how quickly your shield runs out when you're out in the open. This led to a lot of creative planning, heroic kamikaze actions, or hectic escape missions while being attacked from every front. This wouldn't be nearly as fun without co-op, either. With both of these elements (Legendary diff + co-op), I probably would have dismissed the game, but they completely make up for the rest of the game's flaws and so much more. I'm fully aware of its flaws, yet it's my favorite FPS. Other games like HL2 may theoretically have superior design aspects in almost every way, but they don't have those two. In that, I get much more fun out of generic co-op FPS #235 (lol halo) than I would out of a great sp FPS (such as Bioshock, supposedly). Halo 3 is pretty much my GOTY by default unless some other game completely surprises me. Now, this doesn't really apply if you're not the type of gamer who likes to share awesome gaming experiences, or if you'd rather be killing other players instead. Now, depending on the game, though, killing the other players can be a very frequent occurrence even in co-op ('whoops'). I'm not even a Halo fanboy or a populist or whatever label you people call Eddo anyways, I don't like a lot of aspects in Halo. I'm just a co-op player, and Halo excels at that. And that's all I need. Nick and me are playing quite a bit of Rainbow 6: Vegas co-op while waiting for Halo 3. If any of you co-op players are interested in jumping in, or preemptively so for once Halo3 comes out, PM some death threats.

Freaking bloody 4-player online campaign co-op. That (and that alone, probably) will make this my GOTY, most likely. I'm nearing the end of Halo 1. The level design *has* been repetitive, especially the latter parts of the game. But, co-op + the XTRME Legendary difficulty (seriously, why can't more games have ultra-difficult mode? HL2 on hard was a flaming joke) has made it a thoroughly enjoyable experience. Halo 3 may or may not disappoint in the way of the campaign/level design (after Halo 1, I'm really not expecting much at all - though I may be pleasantly surprised), but its core gameplay is pretty much a guaranteed winner even if they play safe. I won't even be picking up Bioshock and Mass Effect until they drop in price.

Who bloody cares, you flaming morons? It's the same freaking game.

You guys should probably make a new spoiler-free impressions thread so that people who don't have the game yet can come and read without fear of being werewolved.

They're not making Dead Rising 2, at least not at the moment. #1 didn't sell the pants off of Nipon. So go the priorities of Capcom. Well, yeah, selling over a million overseas isn't much incentive.

I didn't play Daggerfall. In any case, I wasn't terribly surprised with how Oblivion turned out. I certainly understand (but not agree) with some of the design decisions for the series. That being said, mediocre (at best) storytelling/writing and subpar real-time combat aren't the highlights of the series, and doubtfully had anything to do with the series' success. I was led to believe those things would be fixed in Oblivion. They were slightly improved, but that hardly means anything. In the series' defense, I've enjoyed some of the exploration, though the lack of meaningful choices/consequences ultimately kills it for me. But this isn't a TES bashing thread, despite my subtle jabs. I do enjoy sandbox games - it just depends on their implementation - though they're not my favorite genre. The gameplay has to excel in many ways in order to compensate for the lack of direction. When executed well, I can imagine it being quite good. Despite its flaws, Dead Rising was overall a pretty neat experience - the sense of urgency and time limits added to it, I believe, though some do not agree. Actually, if this had splitscreen or online co-op, I would get it in a heartbeat. It does make quite a significant difference.

Hmm, looks like my concerns were justified. http://www.sonydefenseforce.com/?p=83 Unacceptable.

It doesn't sound like a class-specific feature, though. Paraphrasing from other stuff I read since, but it has its own interface, and supposedly involves story, dialogue and combat. Heh. Spirit Shaman is really just a sorcerer with druid spells, no?

4% is pretty trivial. Then again, the score itself means little. Though, when Oblivion came out, pretty much every big review site gave it high praise. It ended being a tart (still leagues above Morrowind, for which I gave it decent props for, but that's because of how low the bar was to begin with from the previous game). Morrowind is probably the worst game I've paid full price for, but I'm going off-topic with my holy war. The same is being said for Bioshock. Now, I'm pretty sure Bioshock will be the better game, as I've played the demo and the it actually has a solid foundation for gameplay. But, I read through a few reviews and the same crap seems to come around. This will change how you view games in every genre forever? Now, gameplay-wise, it looks like it'll be pretty fun, but to go that far from various sites makes me a bit skeptical. I've also seen how they've mentioned that the story is so good that it'll make you question yourself etc etc and that they don't want to spoil anything for the reader. From what I've seen from the demo, the PC will be a silent protagonist (oh, sorry, you can 'roleplay' your own dialogue, it's immersive!) - even though he did speak while on the plane - while other characters will tell you what to do, etc. Kind of like HL2. Now, narrative-wise, I found HL2 (which I find a great game, actually) urg, especially Episode 1. I did not need that stupid hag PMSing to me in a freaking monologue with my PC not being able to say anything or shut her up. Monologues usually ensure for me that the suspension of disbelief never actually occurs. The promising thing about Bioshock is that you'll be able to have more choices via your actual actions (or so it seems), and that's something to be commended. But then, it HAS been done before as well, and isn't necessarily the pinnacle of narrative. Then again, a lot of games that supposedly had good story I found pretty lackluster. Maybe I shouldn't be dissecting that aspect of the game and just focus on the gameplay - which sounds pretty appealing. I probably sound more negative than I mean it to be, but that's better than a whole thread (or a full page of threads) of hype and praise about the game, which I've seen elsewhere. This isn't the second coming of Zeus, though I'll happily eat my words if it is. EDIT: Wait, SS2 had freaking co-op??? Why the bloody crap doesn't this game have it? I don't care about deathmatch, but give me co-op!1!1!!!!1!11 Jerks.

After Oblivion, the gaming press means very little, though relying solely on reviews was never such a bright idea. I'm pretty sure I'll find this a good game at the very least, since the demo showcased that it has a solid foundation in terms of FPS gameplay, before adding in the various other features. Now, what IS Bioshock? Sure, Rapture is supposed to be a living, breathing world. An environment where characters interact with each other rather than simply with the PC. Exploration surely sounds like one of the appeals of the game. The demo had good atmosphere/production values/details, but given that it was the intro, it was terribly linear (the story didn't make me go boom, either). Will the full game allow more freedom? I don't doubt it. However, I have seen a fair number of previews, where the devs try to explain what the game is about, showing gameplay examples and so on. I'm pondering how much interaction you'll actually be allowed. The plasmids certainly look interesting, and the full game having about 70 of them might end surprising me, given that I've barely seen a fraction of that. Maybe that's where the freedom/interaction will come in. Tinkering with the environment, setting traps, making enemies turn on each other. But has that really never been done before? That being said, it does sound like quite a breadth of different options, and makes the game sound like experimenting around will be fun. So, maybe a thinking man's FPS. With RPG elements. Choice is good, consequence is good. I can live with that. I don't doubt that gameplay-wise, with 70 plasmids and a 'living breathing ecosystem' of various characters that have different relationships with each other, it will be good. Maybe it'll be great, if the full game really has a lot more surprises that we haven't seen yet. I'm certainly willing to see for myself. Maybe it's just that the concept doesn't click for me in just the right way. Or it could just be that the game has been a victim of its own hype for me. I have been getting tired of the Big Daddy-Little Sister awesomeness they keep bragging about. The game is supposed to be about moral choices or whatnot. You can kill the Big Daddy and the Little Sister, which is shaped as a little girl!!!! Or you can choose not to. Perhaps that's where the skepticism stems from. This Levine guy is trying to convince me that that choice is supposed to be mega-deep, but I don't see it. Now, from a gameplay perspective, planning around how to take down a Big Daddy (exploring the surroundings, setting traps, waiting for the right moment, etc) certainly sounds very interesting. From a story/choice perspective, not so much. Maybe I'm just burnt from all that gaming press crap about how Oblivion is supposed to be the epitome of immersion or whatever. Or maybe it's just that the examples I've seen from Levine hasn't really impressed me. I may eat those words someday when I actually do play it, but we'll see. Then again, I haven't played SS2, so maybe I haven't seen the light. I've never experienced Ken Levine's talent as a storyteller in one of his actual games. As for when... months is fine with me. I have a massive backlog. Some games jump the queue and I buy them day 1, but this one hasn't convinced me yet.

You lot should PMS in Skeeter's Junkyard.

While the demo was enjoyable and I'll be picking up the game when I see a good deal, it already sounds like it's getting way overhyped. From what I've read of some of the reviews, is it really going to make us rethink how we view gaming? 9.9 average on gamerankings, heh.

Just finished Phoenix Wright - Justice for All. Absolutely charming series. Trials and Tribulations can't come soon enough. Also going through Metroid Zero Mission. The exploration in the game is pretty nice.

http://rpgvault.ign.com/articles/812/812667p1.html New interview. Fewer but deeper/optional characters sounds good to me. Is the game still max 4 party members including the PC? Hopefully this will be more interesting than just additional equipment. I haven't heard about this before? What the crap is this? Yay for modders. I have to say I'm more interested in the xpac now than I was after finishing NWN2. I'll pick this up once it's available through D2D (which is my NWN2 version).

Regardless of whether the argument actually holds any water or not, does Ebert-dawg even know the first thing about games?

Since I don't plan on getting the game anytime soon unless there's a good deal around, I'll just stay away from discussions of the game. I'm pretty glad the demo included what I thought was a major spoiler from previous trailers

Thank Zeus for new members!

Nice intro, nice atmosphere, nice music, nice setting. Gameplay is okay, but it should be better once you get access to more choices in battle. It didn't wow me as much as others gamers would claim it to, but I'm certainly interested. I'll pick it up for the 360, probably when the price drops a bit. The real main flaw is that subtitles aren't in sync with the voices. The 'broken' UE3 engine comment, I believe, is a stab at the Silicon Knight lawsuit against Epic, in which they claim Epic provided other devs with a broken engine, hence their inability to make their Too Human game properly or something.

6% ^_^

I tried a few times to connect, but it didn't work. Something about the host aborting the session when that's not the case. Wasn't interested enough to be more persistent. Also, map pack 1/2 are available for free. Pack 3 will apparently be free next week. I had played the mp demo before. It was okay. I also had the same connection bug back then as well.

Heh, Lost Planet is is possibly my favorite game this year so far. Boss battles are freaking awesome and very challenging on hard difficulty. Thermal energy is a nice concept that works very well on that difficulty level. Co-op would have made this a serious contender for my GOTY, but even without right now I think it has a decent shot. I can't wait to replay on extreme difficulty. Now, I understand that the game is supposedly a cakewalk on normal and too hard for the average gamer on hard, which is too bad. And perhaps why reviews and the gaming community at large hasn't been too receptive of the game. On a sidenote, Forza2 with a wheel is surprisingly fun. I probably wouldn't even look at this game without the wheel. Strange how a simple peripheral makes such a difference, but I guess that also applies to Guitar Hero.

I don't really do much PC gaming nowadays, and it's mostly reserved for the wargame genre. This is pretty much as hardcore as it gets, though, and I don't except consoles to steal the thunder from PC gaming in this area. That being said, I don't really care much for the usual popular genres here (RTS, FPS, etc). What I really like the 360 for is casual gaming, particularly co-op. Co-op, splitscreen or online (for which I do appreciate the convenience of Xbox Live - the yearly fee is pretty trivial), is the main reason why I often favor this system. More games need co-op. The DS is also very cool for casual handheld gaming. I really like being able to just sit or lie around anywhere and still be able to play games. Other strengths of the system are good 2d support and some unique touchscreen gameplay when properly implemented. Now, currently, my bias leans towards the 360 since I've been doing a lot of co-op lately. The PC is great for hardcore wargaming, but I only spend fairly short sessions on them, since they can be pretty exhausting/demanding. The DS is more for 'on the side' gaming, for which it's great. The PC/console elitism rampant here and elsewhere can be pretty pathetic, though. People should focus that energy and volunteer in the community or something.

My favorite are Sand and Khelgar, in that order. These are the two I'm more or less miss in the Xpac. I found most party members so-so; Elanee, Casavir, Bishop, Shandra. Ammon was ok, but his scene at the farm was touching. Grobnar I didn't find too annoying (nothing like that freaking Deekin I'M GOING TO MURDER YOU YOU BLOODY KOBOLD), and his 'sidequest' was pretty amusing. Neeshka and Qara are absolute messes. Annah-wannabe with the personality of a 2-yr old, who ends up backstabbing you because I didn't shower her with attention? I enjoyed gutting her. I also enjoyed gutting Qara. I understand the spoiler brat persona blah blah, but it was so badly implemented. This is especially bad because pyromaniacs are awesome, and I still found her pathetic. Heck, even the freaking Construct had a better personality. I'll be looking forward to a new cast of party members in the Xpac, and they better be, er, better. EDIT: Haha, I completely forgot that Gith-chick existed. Which speaks for itself. Actually, the best party member is Amie, because she tried to pull an Imoen and got murdered. That was priceless. Extra props to Obs if that was intentional.