Nemo0071
-
Posts
236 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Nemo0071
-
-
I don't want to dump too much money with this Steam sales, it's too easy to just go 'ooh this costs so little! I'll grab it!' and end up with spending a hundred bucks.
Actually I intend to spend about a hundred bucks this sale.
BTW I just grabbed GTA Episodes from Liberty City (again, at the very last minute) for 15 USD.
I suspect the "daily special sales" stay the same way after the supposed "time's up gentlemen" moment. I'll confirm in a minute or five.
Confirmation Edit:
Ok, that was NOT the case. Interestingly, GTA EFLC is now 25% off (instead of 50%). It was full price just before the sale began... Hmm...
-
The Mac store is still pretty sad, though. I wonder if they'll get something in the way of back catalogue.
Didn't check the Mac Store, but I saw their "Steamplay" (Mac + Windows) logo on many games now (most of them indie titles, granted).
It's still fairly new, give it some time.
Oh, of course it depends mostly on devs/publishers rather than Valve/Steam.
-
Oh, and options. You can never have too many options. MOAR OPTIONS DAMMIT!
Erm...
The only problem with making everything optional:
Too many choices / long menus confuse some (most) average players, or they just don't bother. This can easily be overcome with preset option sets (much like low/medium/high graphics settings or easy/normal/hard difficulty settings, which are already present in any modern game I can think of).
For those dimwits who are easily confused you simply make 'set menus' like in a chinese restaurant. That way people can steretype themselves, or they can ultra-customise. Job done.
Exactly.
They don't even have to be dimwits. Like I said some people just don't bother with customization. They just want to get into the "real action" in 2-3 clicks. It's simply another kind of personal preference, I respect that.
-
Hmmm? Haven't you come across with what I have read in these boards? Reading about the explosion physics of FO:NV and the usage of PhisX in Dungeon Siege, Dark Messiah reminded me of Dark Messiah (I haven't played it except the demo, though).Is it so hard to achieve that comical & fluent effect in 3D engines / models? Hmm...Ice Sliding I wonder why they couldn't integrate it with the game play in a way such as knock-back effects rather than just kicking, though. For example, while using heavy weapons such as flail maul, and warhammer and/or employing sweeping blows of pole weapons in appropriate environments, cornering the opponents into falling could have been satisfying. The videos were nice, but I think you missed my point. There's always "alternative" fun to be had in games, I had a very good time with physics in HL2 and FO3 myself... I was talking purely about visuals. Something the 2D sprites did that the 3D imagery just can't do in the same way. Hard to explain.About knockback; I think it's harder to present realistically on "living" things then on ragdolls. Why else the super mutants (hell, even raiders) in FO3 didn't even flinch when hit with a super sledge or something? (I mean they "slide" a bit backwards, but the model in itself stays rigid/solid, maybe shows a pre-animated "I'm hit in the head" animation occasionally, and that's it.)
I found the game actually more challenging at parts when I played exclusively with vats, because it meant waiting for it to cooldown a lot.I think you found it challenging because you still "gimped" your game, only in a different way (different than using only Real-Time Combat). When you use RTC and VATS when appropriate you see that the latter gives a HUGE advantage (and that's not even counting the flawed RTC
)Think of it like this:
The best combat option in FO3 is RTC 20% of the time, and VATS 80% of the time. You cut out the 20%.
-
Currently smashing my head against the insane difficulty that is Veteran Difficulty in Modern Warfare 2. AI teammates that don't bother providing cover, backup nor help when taking out enemies (95% of the time) and enemies that have eagle eyes from 100+ feet while your trying to hide behind cover.
RAGEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Kids these days...
Joking, of course.
Veteran is absurdly difficult. For all the wrong reasons, which you described.
I got through it with WAY too many reloads. Oh, and I didn't start the game until it "recommended" me Veteran in the tutorial. Even then it was brutal.
-
If you're not a newbie in the genre the game belongs to, playing in normal/medium difficulty is generally a safe bet for your first playthrough. Not stupidly easy, not stupidly hard. Usually.
Like everyone said, AI is the biggest concern regarding challenging/frustrating. But even with a decent AI it's quite possible to make the game less enjoyable in higher difficulties.
I'll use Crysis as an example:
I tried it in normal/whatever for a little while, then started over in hardest difficulty (Delta, I guess) and finished it. Sometimes it was a bit tough, sometimes extremely ruthless, and sometimes outright boring (cloak, prone, decloak, shoot guy in the head; repeat for a whole squad). The AI was great, and enemies weren't tanks, just normal guys. I was a normal human too. With a special suit. With a quickly depleting battery.
If there was a difficulty option with the exact same sense of realism (solid AI, the Koreans speak Korean and you have no idea what they're planning, humans actually die when you shoot them in the head, etc.) but with a more powerful suit (it wasn't exactly a SupahSuit in Delta like you were told), then I'd go for it.
Edit: Of course it doesn't go for every game. Obviously, this is a "one man against a whole f***ing army" scenario. The reasoning behind this is "you got the suit, you got the power" but unfortunately, I didn't have the latter.
-
I think the idea is that VATS is designed to be able to be used for any situation.
The thing I like about VATS is that it means that people that don't typically care for FPS games or their mechanics are still able to play the game. I thought it was an acceptable nod to the history of the game, and actually enjoyed playing the game using almost exclusively VATS.
Can it be improved? For sure. But I had no issue with using it as it placed a bit more of the control in the character, not myself.
I definitely do not think that it should have any restrictions against using it at all (i.e. an agility requirement). Making it require a certain agility score greatly diminishes it's purpose IMO.
To me, VATS was a way to allow the game player the option to use their character skill to attack enemies. I can understand the DR (even if I don't agree with it), because control is suspended while in VATS.Except for the part I scratched, I agree completely.
The added DR made perfect sense (you queue up several attacks, then stand still until they're completed), but it was extreme. %90 percent DR means you're pretty much invincible. Yes, VATS took the player controls away but at the same time made your character invulnerable, which is a broken RPG game mechanic as far as I'm concerned in any conceivable way.
I wonder what the rationale was for making every single VATS attack a slomo event.To me, on the surface, when coupled with the ludicrously violent animations, there appears no point except to rub the players face in violent animations over and over again.
But maybe they were just thinking of how to do some sort of bullettime-esque feature and over did it.
Also, speaking pragmatically, with the amount of combat in the game, it must be rather wearisome to use VATS all or most of the time.
But again, it is optional, which is really the best approach.
"Over did it" is right on the spot.
Bethesda did a lot of good things, but took almost all of them to the extremes (see: VATS). FO3 shined with its variety, FO:NV will shine with its balance. I hope.
Oh, and options. You can never have too many options. MOAR OPTIONS DAMMIT!
Erm...
The only problem with making everything optional:
Too many choices / long menus confuse some (most) average players, or they just don't bother. This can easily be overcome with preset option sets (much like low/medium/high graphics settings or easy/normal/hard difficulty settings, which are already present in any modern game I can think of).
I got as tired of limbs exploding off in FALLOUT 3 as I did people slowly being ripped apart by bullets on a critical death in Fallout 1 & 2 (or even the slow as molasses collapse and bleed out animation).But maybe they were just thinking of how to do some sort of bullettime-esque feature and over did it.This is what I thought it was, what with the camera sometimes closing in on the PC's face and following a bullet to its targer.
Sadly most of the reality of VATS was that you were looking at a closeup of a supermutant's chin as your character unloaded a gun into his head while blocky blood spewed over the screen.
Again, Bethesda "meaning good" but not being able to deliver.
Let's settle this: Most gamers enjoy blowing up their enemies to bits. There's no escaping from that.
And no, imo, if done correctly it never gets old. Again, imo, Bethesda's (FO3) death / dismemberment animations got old pretty quickly, while FO1&2's didn't. I played FO1 with Bloody Mess and never got bored with it. I took Bloody Mess in FO3, killed a couple of guys, then immediately reloaded my save from just before leveling up. Disgusting. Not hilarious disgusting, boring disgusting.
I have some doubts about Diablo 3 for the exact same reason. Is it so hard to achieve that comical & fluent effect in 3D engines / models? Hmm...
Edit: Big a** post for the new page. Enjoy.
-
I haven't finished downloading ME yet and I honestly don't know when I'll get the time to actually play it... I hope the problem is resolved by the time I do.
On another note, my friend's having a hard time with his Steam account too. He can't play TF2, or any games from his Orange Box for that matter... Something like "can't connect to Steam server, please try again in a few minutes". It's been about a week now and he's still trying...
--- Oh, and after that, it says "validating" or something and takes a lot of time..... but still nothing. Any ideas? Anyone encountered that? I'll personally look into it asap.
-
Hmm... I'm fairly new to online shopping (especially for games) and it wasn't the deal of the century or anything... But $35 for both ME games? Pretty good I say.
Oh btw your mileage MUST vary...
I mean the Euro/Dollar thing on Steam we talked about earlier.
-
About an hour and a half ago, I think I grabbed ME & ME2 at the last possible minute. When I was done with the purchase, and saw the games in my library, I went back to the store tab and BAM it was Dragon Age day...
And here I had (mis)calculated I had time until 10pm local (about half an hour from right now).
Anyone has an idea how Steam handles time? I mean when does a "Steam day" start exactly? 12AM? 12PM? GMT? PST?
-
Save, see if you like the moded weapon. Reload if you don't.
...and if you do like it, you're stuck with it forever.
I think it depends on the nature of the modifications. I honestly don't mind having to make some of those choices. In fact, I prefer it that way. You do run into the situation where you hold out indefinitely waiting for THE gun to put the modification on, but that doesn't bother me very much.Like Wombat mentioned, character and equipment customization are different things. Skills, for example, are part of C&C (you choose it, you live with it); equipment is not (you can change it anytime).
I'd prefer it stayed that way.
-
As for the weapon mods being one time useable: why not?
Because it takes away the freedom of customization you'd have in the other case. It'll be like "should I use it on this weapon, or wait for a better one?"
Or, if you simply want to get rid of that scope or laser sight for whatever reason, you'll need to find another one of the same weapon.
I know, it's not game-breaking or anything, but it seems like an unnecessary annoyance from where I'm standing...
-
^ This is too good to miss. I'll check it out. Thanks.
-
once you've modded a weapon, you can't undo it.
Well that's a bummer... Here I was thinking we could mod the crap out of our guns...
I mean why the limitation? It's not like we would be invincible if we could just re-use a weapon mod...
To make mods a more integral part of the economy (so you have to buy a new mod if you intend to use it on another weapon) and avoid the possibility of switching mods on the fly (like taking out a mod from a weapon during combat and put it onto another weapon)?
To be honest, both explanations don't convince me, so I'll just wait a clarification from Sawyer, provided he has the time and will to give us any.
.... we knew this since the first previews though.
I must have forgotten about that, or I didn't read that bit in the first place...
About switching mods on the fly and such; there will always be powergamers who will use every little opportunity in a game to get the best result, regardless of effort required. I'll admit sometimes I come close to that myself...
BTW, refresh my memory;
- Isn't weapon modding going to be possible only on workbenches?
- Aren't weapon mods specific to weapon?
If that's the case, I don't see the logic at all...
-
once you've modded a weapon, you can't undo it.
Well that's a bummer... Here I was thinking we could mod the crap out of our guns...
I mean why the limitation? It's not like we would be invincible if we could just re-use a weapon mod...
-
BTW, JA2 is JA2, but what's the full name of this X-COM 3 ? (there's a whole bunch of them out there)
I might check it out...
X-Com 3: Apocalypse... I bought it originally when it was new and later "rebought" it from Gamersgate as part of their big X-Com package deal (all X-Com games, including Enforcer etc.). I think I paid like 10$ for that package including readymade dosbox configurations.
Thanks for the tip.
I haven't played Fo:T since the original demo was released (so my memory is a bit fuzzy on the specifics). I have the full version somewhere with my Fallout Trilogy pack, just never got around to play it.You should play through it at least once. It's not nearly as enjoyable as 1&2 imo (mostly due to the absence of a dialogue and C&C system; it's purely a combat RPG) but it got many things right that FO1&2 didn't. I have fond memories of the decent inventory system, for example. Unlike FO1...
-
I like FPS games who excel at the action part, Strategy games who excel at the strategy part etc. It's just that once in every 5 years, a rare gem emerges that manages to get the compromise right and create good hybrid. Unfortunately that rare gem is usually preceded by 9 disasters and succeeded by 10 hopeless clones trying to cash in on the success of "The One". I can't really think of a crpg from top of my head that got the mix (between action and "typical" crpg aspects) right, JA2 and X-Com 3 managed to get the strategy, tactical and managerial aspects mixed to my liking. A feat that is very hard to reproduce
I thought (hoped) that this new game would get the balance right between squad based FP combat and base management / tactics / strategy etc., hence my optimism before.
What I gained from this thread so far is that it'll probably be a generic 50's era shooter with the strategy elements "streamlined" (
).We'll know for sure once the game (or a demo / preview) comes out.
BTW, JA2 is JA2, but what's the full name of this X-COM 3 ? (there's a whole bunch of them out there)
I might check it out...
-
Again, personally, I wasn't a huge fan of the turn-based tactical squad combat in X-COM so I was happy to see that being replaced by FPS.
For the first two games, I would agree, but for the third one not really. It had the best combat of the series, only rivalled by the combat in JA2. Of course, I'm a sucker for tactical use of landscape and destructable environment as well as use of all 3d dimensions on the battlefield, so I might be biased. For the severely attention span challenged, the turn based combat was optional and missions could be played as a real-time strategy games.
Hmm... Considering I've played only the first games from both X-COM and Jagged Alliance series, I wouldn't know about that.
I recently played an X-COM clone, and turn-based combat was decent enough. Still, not the highlight of the game imo. And it's coming from a guy who enjoys turn-based and real-time strategy / combat games alike.
An X-COM FPS in a futuristic (and true to the original) environment with the management aspect intact sounded like an awesome idea (and a fresh breath of air) at first glance. Then it all went downhill from there for me, I guess...
-
For me personally, base building, research & manufacturing was the heart and soul of X-COM. I meant that taking these out of the game (or making them less accessible / controllable) for whatever reason would ruin it.
Again, personally, I wasn't a huge fan of the turn-based tactical squad combat in X-COM so I was happy to see that being replaced by FPS. But now it seems like the FPS part is going to be as generic as an FPS can possibly be, or worse.
(X-COM) + (boring-as-hell FPS) - (base management) = I won't bother playing this game, even if it's free.
I sincerely hope they prove me wrong.
-
you should marry this thing it's just that awesome!
WELL, I WON'T LET YOU! How does that feel?
.....
Sorry, I'm just too hyped about the Portal 2 teaser so I couldn't resist. I'll shut up now.
-
I may be over-reacting slightly.
It will probably be quite fun. But I despair of seeing anything which can't be controlled via an up-down left-right interface; which is what it really comes down to. They've cut any of the complex managerial side because it doesn't work on console.When bulky & impractical design is refined for better accesibility it's usually a good thing.
When deep & detailed design is "dumbed down" because "it doesn't work on console" it's always a bad thing.
-
Maybe I'm missing something, but doesn't the existence of the psn make steam a bit redundant on the ps3?
Yeah, I wonder how that'll work out...
-
Holy.........
-
sony conference in 20
Gametrailers here
There goes my gaming session...
)
).
It will probably be quite fun. But I despair of seeing anything which can't be controlled via an up-down left-right interface; which is what it really comes down to. They've cut any of the complex managerial side because it doesn't work on console.
Acti-Evil, or Evil Arts strike again!
in Computer and Console
Posted
Aaawwwwww... *group hugs*
Eh, maybe not.