What are you playing now?

[Woldan]

But I think you meant 2,000,000 creds and not 200,000. Then I can understand why you have issues, I had issues with that in GT5, but I just run good sponsored B-Spec races to get more money while working at home office. This cannot be applied to GT6 unfortunately .

Ah, in GT5 I could win 800k credits just by doing one of the 5-lap seasonal events with the Suzuki GSX-R, a supercar killer machine in disguise. You know, that event that gave you bonus money for racing an underpowered car and still winning. The GSX-R had like 115PP less than the opposition and I still smoked them winning me tons of money.  Now I have to work my butt off with that stupid AI to get 70k in 10 minutes.

And yes, I meant 2 billion credits, not 200k.

[ManifestedISO]

Let me know more about Tomb Raider as you play it. Looking for something good on the PS4

 

The Dualshock 4 is downright fun to play with. Instead of pressing and holding a button to light/extinguish a torch, I just swipe up or down on the touchpad--works every time, usually I'm thumbing it.

 

This is my third playthrough, I never thought it could look better than the PC version, but it's a pat more buttery smooth and for sure has better physics. There's not enough guess-and-jump tomb traversal, but I love the mix of combat and item hunting.  

[Sarex]

Finished "The Banner Saga", pretty fun game with an interesting setting and story.

Edited January 27, 2014 by Sarex

[GhostofAnakin]

Sam's DLC is actually pretty rad. Between double-jump, air-dashing, taunting and charge attacks, he plays pretty differently from Raiden. Found it harder, too.

 

Bladewolf is not worth it if you have to pay. I found it a decent diversion, and the new boss was fun enough.

 

You played on normal or hard? You should up the difficulty next! Select continue or chapter select instead of 'new game', otherwise you will reset everything in that save.

 

Currently playing the game on Revengeance difficulty myself. <3 <3 <3 Rising

 

Are the DLC backstory DLC or something?  Or do they run concurrent with the main game's story?  Or are they even story at all, but rather just "challenge maps"?

[Majek]

Samuel's is about how he came to work for Armstrong, so backstory. Don't know about Bladewolf,  other DLC is challenge maps.

[GhostofAnakin]

Hmm.. Sam's is a definite yes, then.

[FTL_Dodo]

Trying to slog my way through Spec Ops: The Line, and so far i'm less then impressed. It's a mediocre, bland whack-a-mole corridor shooter, and whatever grand revelations are prepared along the storyline, they won't make up for terrible gameplay (I just got to the firs bif "plot twist" with the white phosphorus. Movement is wonky, aiming is wonky, cover system is inconsistent, the whole experience is completely linear - like Mass Effect, only without all the good stuff.

 

How could anyone think it's a good idea to preach about the eveils of war via a cover shooter that gives you achievements for murder, I have no idea.

[melkathi]

I reduced difficulty to the lowest setting, just so I can check out the story. It has a bit of a Apocalypse Now vibe going at places, and that is the only reason I play it when I do.

[FTL_Dodo]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it won't tell me anything that Apocalypse Now and a bunch of other movies and books haven't said a hundred times before (and better). Even if does, it's no excuse for being a terrible game.

[melkathi]

Though I found it refreshing that (at least so far) the game is not rehashing the old nazi enemies that games seem to be so fond of since the old Wolfenstein. Or islamic terrorists. Or evil russians. Seems you can't go wrong with evil russians...

Seems that a certain part of the entertainment industry in the US finds it difficult to portray bad guys as anything but foreigners. So everytime a movie or game breaks that partial taboo, I am delighted

[Hurlshort]

For me, Spec Ops: The Line was a good looking game that told an interesting story.  But in general I dislike FPS gameplay, so it didn't seem better or worse than anything else out there.

[Hassat Hunter]

Spec Ops gameplay is not worse or better than any other cover-based shooter... which is to say, horrible.

 

It shocks me how many people like ME2 combat over ME1... and I just shake my head and go "no". I find it's action much more fun than Me2's "cover, 1, shoot, cover, heal, 1 shoot, cover, heal, 1, shoot"...

The worst thing of ME1 combat? Getting stuck in %@%#@# cover...

 

The best cover-based shooting is ME1, GTA IV and Alpha Protocol. Why? Since they completely allows you to ignore cover altogether. That's the best cover gameplay

 

(but yeah, I completed ME2, ME3 and Spec Ops besides the horrible system just for the story. If there was none, well, I wouldn't imagine doing a shooter like that for fun... cover-based gameplay can't die too soon if you ask me...)

Edited January 28, 2014 by Hassat Hunter

[Majek]

I have no complaints  with Spec Ops combat. Especially on PC nothing could stand against you, not for long.  And i thought ME1 combat was best too,and then i wanted to replay the game. Ugh.

Edited January 28, 2014 by Majek

[Bartimaeus]

I felt like Spec Ops gameplay was *extremely* boring. Not only that, but the game was also really preachy, too. I felt like they really didn't have to (and really shouldn't have) talk(ed) about the stupid crap the game was forcing you into doing every single time something happened. I felt like the events should've spoken for themselves enough.

 

Also agreeing on Mass Effect >=2's gameplay - yuck. Horribly repetitive, especially on the hardest difficulty. Pop out to shoot until your shields break, hide until they heal, pop back out until your shields break, hide until they heal...pray to God that nobody tries to actually, y'know, flank you, because you'll be complete toast if they do...ugh.

Edited January 29, 2014 by Bartimaeus

[GhostofAnakin]

Wasn't a big fan of Spec Ops: The Line.  I don't know what it was about it, to be honest.  I just didn't dig the story.

[Humanoid]

Never played it, but all the feedback I get regarding it seems like a case of some cleverclogs being annoyed at one constant property of modern shooters, then, instead of taking a few minutes to write a forum post about it, decided to make a whole generic and mediocre game as a delivery method of that singular point instead to ram the point home in a tedious fashion.

 

It's the same reason why I despise the critically acclaimed Lord of the Flies (both novel and film adaptation) as being terrible wastes of time. But in Golding's defense, he had no Internet forums to outline his points on back then.

 

 

Huh, that rant turned a bit more vitriolic than I had intended.

[melkathi]

Never played it, but all the feedback I get regarding it seems like a case of some cleverclogs being annoyed at one constant property of modern shooters, then, instead of taking a few minutes to write a forum post about it, decided to make a whole generic and mediocre game as a delivery method of that singular point instead to ram the point home in a tedious fashion.

 

It's the same reason why I despise the critically acclaimed Lord of the Flies (both novel and film adaptation) as being terrible wastes of time. But in Golding's defense, he had no Internet forums to outline his points on back then.

 

 

Huh, that rant turned a bit more vitriolic than I had intended.

 

 

To be honest, in my opinion of course, Spec Ops the line's story (as far as I have gotten) is superior to Mass Effect's and does no more shoving down the throat of political ideals than that (garbage) does

Edited January 29, 2014 by melkathi

[Humanoid]

Well I despise ME3 and discarded it after maybe a quarter of the way through (it's somewhat irritating that it's often defended by people saying only the ending is bad - no, the beginning is just as terrible, and so is the middle), so it's not an unreasonable guess that I'd prefer Spec Ops over it had I ever played it.

[Nordicus]

Never played it, but all the feedback I get regarding it seems like a case of some cleverclogs being annoyed at one constant property of modern shooters, then, instead of taking a few minutes to write a forum post about it, decided to make a whole generic and mediocre game as a delivery method of that singular point instead to ram the point home in a tedious fashion.

And yet, I'm glad Spec ops exists because having the criticism of modern shooters manifest in a game will likely have more of an effect than any forum post, single game journalist editorial, Tasteful Understated Nerdrage, Jimquisition, petition, etc. will.

 

I will not say Spec Ops presented its point 100% perfectly, and I'll have my avatar's reaction when somebody argues "But Spec ops' gameplay is designed to be boring!", but god damn did I feel like I needed a cigarette when that game ended, and I hope your preconception of the game isn't heavily influenced by the opinions of a forum where everything, except some really obscure/old RPGs that even only very few fans of the very genre have played, will get tons of snarky ****

Edited January 29, 2014 by Nordicus

[Humanoid]

I guess it is a bit of a preconception, but also a bit of an irrelevance in that it's something I'd never have been interested in anyway even if it featured genuinely good gameplay. I believe the last military-themed shooter I played was the original Battlefield 1942, and even then only briefly.

 

(Incidentally, I remember one of my very early posts in this community, back in the BIS days, was about whether it was worth getting as a single-player game. The answer is hindsight is obviously a firm 'no'.)

[melkathi]

 

Never played it, but all the feedback I get regarding it seems like a case of some cleverclogs being annoyed at one constant property of modern shooters, then, instead of taking a few minutes to write a forum post about it, decided to make a whole generic and mediocre game as a delivery method of that singular point instead to ram the point home in a tedious fashion.

And yet, I'm glad Spec ops exists because having the criticism of modern shooters manifest in a game will likely have more of an effect than any forum post, single game journalist editorial, Tasteful Understated Nerdrage, Jimquisition, petition, etc. will.

 

I will not say Spec Ops presented its point 100% perfectly, and I'll have my avatar's reaction when somebody argues "But Spec ops' gameplay is designed to be boring!", but god damn did I feel like I needed a cigarette when that game ended, and I hope your preconception of the game isn't heavily influenced by the opinions of a forum where everything, except some really obscure/old RPGs that even only very few fans of the very genre have played, will get tons of snarky ****

 

 

I think your view of this forum is a bit biased. The amount of praise given to some mainstream games amazes me on here. If you want truly snarky, you should go to some indy game forums

 

I didn't think I'd say this but I miss Drowsy...

[BruceVC]

 

Never played it, but all the feedback I get regarding it seems like a case of some cleverclogs being annoyed at one constant property of modern shooters, then, instead of taking a few minutes to write a forum post about it, decided to make a whole generic and mediocre game as a delivery method of that singular point instead to ram the point home in a tedious fashion.

And yet, I'm glad Spec ops exists because having the criticism of modern shooters manifest in a game will likely have more of an effect than any forum post, single game journalist editorial, Tasteful Understated Nerdrage, Jimquisition, petition, etc. will.

 

I will not say Spec Ops presented its point 100% perfectly, and I'll have my avatar's reaction when somebody argues "But Spec ops' gameplay is designed to be boring!", but god damn did I feel like I needed a cigarette when that game ended, and I hope your preconception of the game isn't heavily influenced by the opinions of a forum where everything, except some really obscure/old RPGs that even only very few fans of the very genre have played, will get tons of snarky ****

 

 

Nordicus that's why its incumbent on you to be positive about games that you enjoyed or  if you feel a particular forum is being overly negative. You can't let people on any forum tell you what games are worthwhile or not, only you can determine that

[FTL_Dodo]

It wasn't really the best move on the part of the Spec Ops developers to express their objections to violence in video game via a tedious third person shooter that nets you achievements for murder. I've had no idea that real world violence is a bad thing, thanks for opening my eyes, developers. This kind of snide pontificating is exactly what I needed.

 

The game: Only monsters kill a lot of people with guns and other shooty things!

The game: Now kill a lot of people to clear this level.

*press [LMB] to kill a lot of people*

The game: OMG you monster! Now see the consequences of your actions which we didn't give you any choice in committing! Do you feel terrible yet?

 

And the gameplay is really crappy even by cover-based TPS' low standards.

 

Shooting in Mass Effect 3 was really well done, I think - the thing is, you don't have to use cover. The biotic and technical combos really add a new dimantion to combat, it's one really worthwhile thing that ME3 has t offer. The excellent coop multiplayer is based on it. I still play it occasionally.

[Janmanden]

You can't let people on any forum tell you what games are worthwhile or not, only you can determine that

That sucks.

 

Hmm.. ME3 MP. I suddenly realized why I removed Origin. After I moved to Ukraine it's all in russian. I should really learn this language, but it's too alien aand full of soft sounds.

[BruceVC]

 

You can't let people on any forum tell you what games are worthwhile or not, only you can determine that

That sucks.

 

Hmm.. ME3 MP. I suddenly realized why I removed Origin. After I moved to Ukraine it's all in russian. I should really learn this language, but it's too alien aand full of soft sounds.

 

 

How are doing in the Ukraine with all the civil unrest at the moment?