What are you playing now?

[GhostofAnakin]

I hate, hate, HATE the section in Metro 2033 when you're on the railcar and have to make it through that station with all those enemies shooting at you.  Hate it.  Mainly because you can't move or really duck out of the way, yet they're firing at you relentlessly and don't miss a single shot.

 

I barely got through it on the easiest difficulty level.  I can't even imagine on the hardest.

[Bartimaeus]

The "easiest" difficulty is, IMO, the hardest. Everyone - yourself, enemies - can take like 10x as much damage compared to if you're playing on the hardest. So you don't die in a few bullets like you would on the hardest difficulty, but the same goes for enemies. The result is that gun battles are way, way too long and drawn out for no real reason. Playing on hard, whether ranger or not, is much, much preferable, IMO. Weirdly, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. had a semi-similar difficulty system...is it a coincidence that both games are from Ukraine? Hmm...

 

Out of a few playthroughs, I think I've died on that section maybe once.

Edited July 14, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[SadExchange]

For those of you who have played and beaten Dragon Age: Inquisition, what class were you playing as and how did you like it?  

[GhostofAnakin]

The "easiest" difficulty is, IMO, the hardest. Everyone - yourself, enemies - can take like 10x as much damage compared to if you're playing on the hardest. So you don't die in a few bullets like you would on the hardest difficulty, but the same goes for enemies. The result is that gun battles are way, way too long and drawn out for no real reason. Playing on hard, whether ranger or not, is much, much preferable, IMO. Weirdly, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. had a semi-similar difficulty system...is it a coincidence that both games are from Ukraine? Hmm...

 

Out of a few playthroughs, I think I've died on that section maybe once.

 

That's a back-asswards way of doing things.  I figured lower difficulty would make it easier to kill the enemies, not turn them into bullet sponges.

[GhostofAnakin]

For those of you who have played and beaten Dragon Age: Inquisition, what class were you playing as and how did you like it?  

 

Duel-wielding rogue the first time, mage the second.  I hated the first, enjoyed the second.  Combat, IMO, doesn't favor duel-wielding rogues.  Whereas if you specialize as a Knight-Enchanter, you can take on dragons all by yourself.

[spellbound99]

Warning: Long post.

 

So, Satellite Reign.

Is it the Syndicate / Syndicate Wars sequel you have been waiting for?

I don't know. It sure seems to be the one I was waiting for though.

I heard Satellite Reign was buggy as hell when they hit Early Access. Did it improve since then? I didn't really follow.  

[majestic]

For those of you who have played and beaten Dragon Age: Inquisition, what class were you playing as and how did you like it?  

 

Warrior/Champion, but tanking is relatively boring and can be done well enough by the AI (standing in the middle of all the chaos is probably the only thing they're really good at). Knight-Enchanter and Tempest are powerful specializations. Artificer is pretty awesome too but requires very specific gear and one of the best companions is one anyway, so... go with Mage/KE for an easy first playthrough.

[Hurlshort]

I finished with an archer.  I liked it in that I just got to sit back and kill stuff.  The combat wasn't for me, really.

[melkathi]

 

Warning: Long post.

 

So, Satellite Reign.

Is it the Syndicate / Syndicate Wars sequel you have been waiting for?

I don't know. It sure seems to be the one I was waiting for though.

I heard Satellite Reign was buggy as hell when they hit Early Access. Did it improve since then? I didn't really follow.  

 

 

 

I didn't have time to play then.

 

It still has some bugs. For me the problem mostly is the pathfinding mesing up every now and then.

But they are churning out small patches like there is no tomorrow, with a nightly test build for anyone interested. I'm quite confident that they will have a great product for their release date. It is really enjoyable already.

[marelooke]

 

For those of you who have played and beaten Dragon Age: Inquisition, what class were you playing as and how did you like it?  

 

Duel-wielding rogue the first time, mage the second.  I hated the first, enjoyed the second.  Combat, IMO, doesn't favor duel-wielding rogues.  Whereas if you specialize as a Knight-Enchanter, you can take on dragons all by yourself.

 

 

I was doing it the other way around (Knight-Enchanter Mage first, dual wield rogue second). I did find playing a mage more enjoyable in DA:I than in DA2 at least, whereas in the second game I just quit the mage and rerolled a dual wield rogue to get through the game I stuck with the mage in DA:I.

 

I mostly started the new playthrough to see if I'd notice any differences with my new graphics card on the Nvidia recommended settings, not sure if I'd want to go through the entire game a second time. Either way I upgraded from a GTX460 to a GTX970 btw, didn't notice that much difference so far, game does seem to run smoother (no more occasional stuttering so far) and loading times seem shorter (but I reserve judgement on that until I try to load Hinterlands for the first time) other than that it looks mostly the same, I think I'll try and up some more settings beyond what Nvidia recommends.

[Luridis]

Tried the new Wolfenstein and hated it. Then, I reinstalled HL2. FPS games are absolute hot and cold to me. Either they have that certain charm that makes me like them or they don't.

 

Also slogging my way through the last of the Ice & Fire books. It is sheer curiosity that keeps me going at this point. I found that I don't actually like these books. Don't misunderstand, I do not argue that the books are not well written because they are. But, it is the presentation and story that I find to be just terrible. I'm convinced the writer is a sadist who relishes putting his readers through endless paragraphs and even pages of detail that are redundant, obvious, frequently repeated or otherwise unnecessary. Not only that but, then the current narrative abruptly drops just as it gets interesting. Even "The Stand" wasn't this boring... geeze.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Luridis

[GhostofAnakin]

Tried the new Wolfenstein and hated it. Then, I reinstalled HL2. FPS games are absolute hot and cold to me. Either they have that certain charm that makes me like them or they don't.

 

Also slogging my way through the last of the Ice & Fire books. It is sheer curiosity that keeps me going at this point. I found that I don't actually like these books. Don't misunderstand, I do not argue that the books are not well written because they are. But, it is the presentation and story that I find to be just terrible. I'm convinced the writer is a sadist who relishes putting his readers through endless paragraphs and even pages of detail that are redundant, obvious, frequently repeated or otherwise unnecessary. Not only that but, then the current narrative abruptly drops just as it gets interesting. Even "The Stand" wasn't this boring... geeze.

 

George Martin lost steam after the third book.  Books IV and V (the last one, especially) weren't as good, IMO.

 

Then of course there's the issue with how friggin' long he takes to write subsequent books.  Dances was released, I believe, in 2010.  I'm not even sure when the next is out.  Maybe late this year/early 2016.  I start to lose interest in a series when I have to wait half a decade or more to read the next installment.

[GhostofAnakin]

Finished Metro 2033 tonight.  That ending ... ummm ... yeah.  I think I've found a contender to Mass Effect 3 in terms of a "what the eff did I just play through to end the game?" moment.  Seriously, WTF was that?

[Cantousent]

The Long Dark.  Yeah, it's a bit of auto-eroticism, but I think it's fun to see how long I can survive.  Right now, it feels like maybe indefinitely, although that means moving on as my resources dwindle.  Frankly, I can live to the perimeter of the sandbox.  I'm not quite at a month yet and I just moved into the Carter Dam from the Lake area.  Plenty of skins and food right now, so we'll see.  Once you make the craftable clothing, daytime cold almost becomes a non-factor.  Apparently, you can't repair, craft sewing kits, so that's a bit of a bummer.  If that weren't the case, I think I could set up shop at the lake and live there forever... or until I went mad from loneliness.

[Katphood]

The Elder Scrolls Online: Tamriel Unlimited(PS4). I am not much into MMO's and such but this is quite fun. A lot of the quests are similar to the quests in your average single-player Elder Scrolls RPG, you even get to make choices every once in awhile. It's also fun to see people suddenly join you on your battle out of nowhere, it makes the most basic quests feel unique and memorable since you can also hear the players. I still haven't teamed up with a buddy but I can imagine that it would only add to the fun.  The graphics look pretty dated but all of the characters are voiced(which is pretty well done for a game this massive) and the world feels alive. There are also raids and large scale pvp battles but I still haven't tried any of those. 

 

In short, the only complaint I've had with this game so far has been the graphics, the rest is superbly done. Compared to a game like Destiny, it has a lot more to offer whether you're playing solo or with a friend.

[Keyrock]

Finished Metro 2033 tonight.  That ending ... ummm ... yeah.  I think I've found a contender to Mass Effect 3 in terms of a "what the eff did I just play through to end the game?" moment.  Seriously, WTF was that?

You mean the tripping balls sequence at the end?  Yeah, that was... something.  Did you get the bad ending

nuke em

or the good ending

don't nuke em

?  Regardless of which ending you get in 2033, the bad ending is canon in Last Light.  Thankfully, Last Light has a more satisfying less WTF ending, plus it's just overall a better game to boot.

[Malcador]

Trying to avoid the criminal route this time in The Guild 2, but the easy money is too alluring. So just using a character's wife to provide me rogues as side income (and trying to produce as many kids as possible to be rogues). Perhaps being a tailor was a bad start, certainly less painful than Patron in my experience. Going to be a while before I get enough money to hire goons to murder my enemies (nothing like 6 guys beating a 70 year old to death on the road).

[Bartimaeus]

Regardless of which ending you get in 2033, the bad ending is canon in Last Light.  Thankfully, Last Light has a more satisfying less WTF ending, plus it's just overall a better game to boot.

Did it? I never actually learned how Last Light ends: the absolutely pants-on-head-ridiculous love plot line was enough to put me off of that game for forever. The complete revamp of Khan's character from an old, wise sage type character (with possible hints of not being totally correct?), to a crack-smoking hippie type character didn't sit well with me, either: throw that in with the LSD tunnel or river or whatever it was as well as Anna, and you've got yourself a nigh insufferable game.

[Keyrock]

 

Regardless of which ending you get in 2033, the bad ending is canon in Last Light.  Thankfully, Last Light has a more satisfying less WTF ending, plus it's just overall a better game to boot.

Did it? I never actually learned how Last Light ends: the absolutely pants-on-head-ridiculous love plot line was enough to put me off of that game for forever. The complete revamp of Khan's character from an old, wise sage type character (with possible hints of not being totally correct?), to a crack-smoking hippie type character didn't sit well with me, either: throw that in with the LSD tunnel or river or whatever it was as well as Anna, and you've got yourself a nigh insufferable game.

 

Well, at least the final gameplay sequence is a lot better.  You get to go through a pretty badass firefight instead of tripping balls sequence.  As for the love plot, yeah that was ham-fisted to say the least, I basically just ignored it to the best of my ability.  Personally, I thought Khan's character was pretty consistent between the two games.  Also, Last Light has actual proper villains.

[Bartimaeus]

My issue with Khan's character may have been more one of presentation than actual substance, I suppose: he just didn't feel like the same character to me at all. In Metro 2033, he felt like he was supposed to be a wise teacher...odd, but full of different experiences and strange ideas. He was also more serious, reserved, and, IMO, respectable. In Last Light, he didn't seem like any of that: just some loudmouthed guy who seemed as equally small-minded as his opponents, just in a different way. In M2033, he didn't even seem to be in direct opposition to the Rangers: his character was just alluding to the idea that their approach may not always be the correct one - he never told you upfront "hey, save the dark ones", and didn't really seem to be the type to pass judgement on others because he recognized that people will make the choices that they'll make, and unless it's something he would feel the need to actively work against, que sera, sera. I don't know: none of that felt like it carried over to LL, so his character seemed pretty radically different to me.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Keyrock]

Khan may never directly say "don't harm the dark ones" in 2033, but, come on, it's pretty f'n clear that's what he means.  Also, I personally never felt like he was in direct opposition to the Rangers in LL.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Keyrock

[Bartimaeus]

No, that's kind of what I liked about him: he never directly said it either way. He tells you to look at things as clearly as you can, to examine things from a different point of view...to see the true nature of things, instead of the assumptions we have a tendency to immediately come to about them, regardless of what they are. He never says, "don't kill the Dark Ones": he just alludes to that being a possible choice to make. If the Dark Ones had turned out to actually be evil, then what Khan said still would've held meaning that you could've looked to: his character and the things he said were not so one-dimensional and one-note as they were in Last Light, where he's actively telling you what and what not to do with little wisdom behind it.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Keyrock]

To me it seemed appropriate, given the bad ending is canon.  In 2033 he's more cryptic about things, but obviously he's telling you "don't kill the dark ones" ("the dark ones are not the enemy" was literally the first thing that popped into my head when I fist met Khan in 2033), so in LL he decides to be more direct in what he's saying since dumbass Artyom was too thick headed to catch on before.  Seems like logical character progression to me.

 

/shrugs

Edited July 15, 2015 by Keyrock

[Bartimaeus]

The difference is in approach: in LL, he's actively dictating you what to do while not providing any reasoning behind what he's telling you to do. He's also very active in making sure you do what he thinks you should do. In Metro 2033, he's alluding to what he thinks he should do, but doesn't pass judgement either way, and he lets you reach your own conclusions about the Dark Ones, and lets you make your own choices. His behavior in LL is so overwrought and so hyperactive: the very opposite of how he acts in 2033, where he's mostly content to let things play out. If he really was so sure of the Dark Ones being worth fighting for by the time of the end of 2033, then he should've already been interjecting himself into the plot like he was doing in LL. He doesn't...so they seem like two entirely different characters to me.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Bartimaeus

[Keyrock]

Again, to me it seems like logical character progression.  In 2033 he's being cryptic and "hands off" because he wants Artyom to find out the truth and to come to the correct decision on his own because of some kind of philosophical young padawan must find things out for himself bull****.  When Artyom doesn't come to the correct decision on his own and nukes the Dark Ones instead, Khan decides he needs to be more direct and hands on because, well, look where being hands off got him and the dark ones.  His change in character seems very appropriate to me.  Yes, his demeanor is different, but it seems natural to me given the events of 2033.  I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Edited July 15, 2015 by Keyrock