What are you playing right now?

[Guard Dog]

 

I think Skyrim worked for me because all it did was dump the player character into the world, no strings attached: no silly backstory, no contrived motive, no one-note voice acting. You were free to play whatever character you liked. Fallout 4 completely failed because it effectively had a fixed protagonist. i couldn't shake the feeling the whole time I was playing it (for a total of 10-15 hours) that I was playing Bethesda's character, not mine. Fallout 4 might have been a good game if it abandoned all that pretense, and had simply gone "you're a visitor to Boston, have at it".

This is precisely how I felt. I played FO4 for a few hours, and it didn't have that aimless adventuring/roaming qualities with a character you've rolled yourself. If you are to have a fixed protagonist, you really need to get it all right, like Arkane Studios did with Dishonored, for instance.

 

I thought the same thing about DA2. But it's not like I loved that lukewarm bowel of vanilla mush that was DA1.  

[HoonDing]

Considering the nature of FO4 main character it's hard to even consider replaying with a new character.

Probably why Bethesda included Preston and settlements.

 

The idea must've already occurred to them when they made Hearthfire for Skyrim.

[Gromnir]

I'd say about a 1/5, but I'm also a bit snobbish with my game time

am not particular forgiving o' games, as can be recognized from our reviews here and elsewhere.  the thing is, we play so few games, and our 6 month rule allows us to thorough vet developer claims before our purchase.  for example, our steam library is as follows:

 

dragon age origins: ultimate edition

poe

shadowrun returns

shadowrun: dragonfall

torment: tides of numenera (beta... obviously)

wasteland 1 (came free with wasteland 2 and have not played... well, not since late 80s)

wasteland 2

xcom: enemy unknown (all dlc)

 

that is all.

 

fo4 came with our xbox, but we ain't played it

dragon age: inquisition were a goty purchase for us last december, but is still in the shrinkwrap

we purchased siege of dragonspire, but am not planning on playing 'til 6 months has elapsed post release.

 

other games current on our computer:

 

swtor

bgee

bg2ee

kotor2 (heavily modded)

ps:t (modded)

 

our 6 month rule results in fewer mistake purchases.  we wait for reviews from like minded friends, observe gameplay, and given that our current gaming preferences is extreme limited (crpg and strategy) results in a relative low fail rate for game purchases. is actual kinda surprising just how many disappointments we suffer given our game buying habits.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Bartimaeus]

"it's so plain to see just how much more fun and engaging it could've been with some minor tweaks."

 

 

games that we can see marked improvement from minor tweaks?  games we see having displayed "wasted potential" as 'posed to being a waste of our time?  

 

yeah, 1/4 is 'bout right.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

I mean, personally, I feel like pretty much almost literally every game I've ever played could use at least a few minor tweaks (in terms of scope and how much work it'd take to implement such tweaks) that would markedly improve the game, both for the initial playthrough and QoL (quality of life - aka, replaying). Some games need more tweaks than others, and some games need bigger changes to make use of that 'wasted potential' than others...

 

...which is probably why I'm into modding all my games so much.

Edited June 11, 2016 by Bartimaeus

[Tale]

 

I finished Blood & Wine. A real masterpiece. The only thing preventing me from immediately jumping into another playthrough is the commitment required.

The leveling ruined Witcher for me. It's when the leveling becomes part of the gameplay loop and the reward system that things start to go wrong. The next level is always around the corner, otherwise the player will lose interest. The thing is, leveling alone is not enough to make me want to play on, and it ruins so much in the constant focus on new loot and becoming 1% better every 15 minuites.

 

Once you start getting witcher sets, you stop even caring about loot except for selling it. Or maybe that was just me.

[Lexx]

I don't think "a few tweaks" are what would save Fo4. This game requires a total overhaul, starting with the horrible interface (perk screen wtf), the way dialogue works (always repeating lines, no choice at all), and this total Borderlands-feel, which - in my opinion - is highly unsuitable for a Fallout game (the way quests work, respawning loot dungeons and what not else). Eh, I also really can't stand this humanoid android theme and the lack of any real roleplaying, but that again is a matter of taste, I'll guess. By now I think Fo3 is a better Fallout game than Fo4, and that really shows a lot....

[mkreku]

I don't think "a few tweaks" are what would save Fo4. This game requires a total overhaul, starting with the horrible interface (perk screen wtf), the way dialogue works (always repeating lines, no choice at all), and this total Borderlands-feel, which - in my opinion - is highly unsuitable for a Fallout game (the way quests work, respawning loot dungeons and what not else). Eh, I also really can't stand this humanoid android theme and the lack of any real roleplaying, but that again is a matter of taste, I'll guess. By now I think Fo3 is a better Fallout game than Fo4, and that really shows a lot....

 

..and all this from borrowing your friends game for a few hours a couple of months back.

[Hurlshort]

I'd agree with the lack of roleplaying though.  I didn't like the character and had very little options to be a different person in FO4.

[Fenixp]

All right, I didn't really get the complaints about Homeworld Remastered using RNG instead of ballistics simulation previously, but now that it got re-introduced into the game I absolutely do as it does genuinely change the way you play the game. To summarize, RNG means that when one ship's shooting another, whether or not it hits the target is essentially determined by dice roll. Ballistic simulation, however, sees a projectile leaving the nozzle of the ship's weapons and then it becomes a stand-alone object with velocity and direction - then it just sort of hits whatever it connects with. Gearbox spent last few months gutting Homeworld Remastered engine to re-add the latter, especially since it was already present in the original Homeworld.

 

I thought the change is going to look cool, but at the end of the day, won't change much. Boy was I wrong. First of all, when I leave my fighters hanging in space (or ambush opponent's fighters while they're not moving), this means massive losses before the combat even begins. Obviously, hitting stationary targets is far easier than maneuvering ones. Similarly, giving your fighters a predictable trajectory is a death sentence. With RNG combat, sending bombers unescorted meant they'll still do a lot of damage with minor losses - well, since bombing runs put them on predictable trajectories, they get shot down fast unless you make sure opposing fighters have their hands full with your own. With RNG, withdrawing fighters from engagement was non-issue. Since withdrawal also means putting them on somewhat predictable path, you first need to engage enemy using a different group or shield them using a capital ship and only then withdraw. It's kind of amazing - and in spite of not having an intention of finishing it again, I'm now halfway trough Homeworld: Remastered campaign again.

 

TLDR: Bullets are cool.

[213374U]

Finally got around to trying Dead State. Looks like crap and runs like crap. Wow. Good thing I'm not a graphics whore, I hope the gameplay is interesting at least; the setting is fairly generic.

[Lexx]

 

I don't think "a few tweaks" are what would save Fo4. This game requires a total overhaul, starting with the horrible interface (perk screen wtf), the way dialogue works (always repeating lines, no choice at all), and this total Borderlands-feel, which - in my opinion - is highly unsuitable for a Fallout game (the way quests work, respawning loot dungeons and what not else). Eh, I also really can't stand this humanoid android theme and the lack of any real roleplaying, but that again is a matter of taste, I'll guess. By now I think Fo3 is a better Fallout game than Fo4, and that really shows a lot....

 

..and all this from borrowing your friends game for a few hours a couple of months back.

 

 

You probably have a very low standard in games if you can't see such flaws in but a few hours of playtime. Besides, there are more than enough comments from other players about the same issues.

Edited June 12, 2016 by Lexx

[Rosbjerg]

Yeah I played it for 6 hours on my flatmates setup - that was enough for me to never wanna return as well.

[Hurlshort]

Finally got around to trying Dead State. Looks like crap and runs like crap. Wow. Good thing I'm not a graphics whore, I hope the gameplay is interesting at least; the setting is fairly generic.

 

I got pretty addicted to it, but it took a couple attempts.  What helped me was looking at the list of characters available to recruit (save) and then just focusing on finding as many as possible.  That was obviously a bit spoilerish, but it kept me interested until the end.  

 

Also that biker gang was a bunch of jerks.

[HoonDing]

"You probably have a very low standard in games if you can't see such flaws in but a few hours of playtime. Besides, there are more than enough comments from other players about the same issues."

 

My preconceived notions are more than enough to know a game sucks

[marelooke]

Finished the main quest of the first non-tutorial area for the Dominion in Elder Scrolls Online, unfortunately it was as predictable as I feared... Even a generic plot twist would've helped. Oh well...

 

One of the things I liked was that generally when you complete some part of a quest enemies in the area became non-hostile, or disappeared completely. Eg. if you removed a curse that kept souls bound then they'd actually disappear (or at least become non-hostile). In this new area that seems to be less the case so far which is a shame.

[GhostofAnakin]

I'm going to download Blood & Wine for the Witcher 3 soon, and then I'm going to disappear for the next two weeks playing it.

[Fenixp]

Finished Blood and Wine, everything there was to do in there. That was ... Wow. An amazing conclusion to the Geralt's story, of both all of his books and games. Words of caution: Make sure to play it with a save where you've already finished the base game. While it can be played before ending W3 main story, it makes absolutely no sense in that situation.

[Gorgon]

All right, I didn't really get the complaints about Homeworld Remastered using RNG instead of ballistics simulation previously, but now that it got re-introduced into the game I absolutely do as it does genuinely change the way you play the game. To summarize, RNG means that when one ship's shooting another, whether or not it hits the target is essentially determined by dice roll. Ballistic simulation, however, sees a projectile leaving the nozzle of the ship's weapons and then it becomes a stand-alone object with velocity and direction - then it just sort of hits whatever it connects with. Gearbox spent last few months gutting Homeworld Remastered engine to re-add the latter, especially since it was already present in the original Homeworld.

 

I thought the change is going to look cool, but at the end of the day, won't change much. Boy was I wrong. First of all, when I leave my fighters hanging in space (or ambush opponent's fighters while they're not moving), this means massive losses before the combat even begins. Obviously, hitting stationary targets is far easier than maneuvering ones. Similarly, giving your fighters a predictable trajectory is a death sentence. With RNG combat, sending bombers unescorted meant they'll still do a lot of damage with minor losses - well, since bombing runs put them on predictable trajectories, they get shot down fast unless you make sure opposing fighters have their hands full with your own. With RNG, withdrawing fighters from engagement was non-issue. Since withdrawal also means putting them on somewhat predictable path, you first need to engage enemy using a different group or shield them using a capital ship and only then withdraw. It's kind of amazing - and in spite of not having an intention of finishing it again, I'm now halfway trough Homeworld: Remastered campaign again.

 

TLDR: Bullets are cool.

Are people playing it. I was never able to join a game without crashing. 

[Tale]

Finished Blood and Wine, everything there was to do in there. That was ... Wow. An amazing conclusion to the Geralt's story, of both all of his books and games. Words of caution: Make sure to play it with a save where you've already finished the base game. While it can be played before ending W3 main story, it makes absolutely no sense in that situation.

CD Projekt got the memo, it's possible to do a great ending for a story without killing people off.

[Malcador]

 

 

I finished Blood & Wine. A real masterpiece. The only thing preventing me from immediately jumping into another playthrough is the commitment required.

The leveling ruined Witcher for me. It's when the leveling becomes part of the gameplay loop and the reward system that things start to go wrong. The next level is always around the corner, otherwise the player will lose interest. The thing is, leveling alone is not enough to make me want to play on, and it ruins so much in the constant focus on new loot and becoming 1% better every 15 minuites.

Once you start getting witcher sets, you stop even caring about loot except for selling it. Or maybe that was just me.

I forgot to get those but am too lazy to get the Superior and Master sets.

[Lexx]

Finished Blood and Wine, everything there was to do in there. That was ... Wow. An amazing conclusion to the Geralt's story, of both all of his books and games. Words of caution: Make sure to play it with a save where you've already finished the base game. While it can be played before ending W3 main story, it makes absolutely no sense in that situation.

 

Can you continue the game after finishing the main story? I was under the impression that I should do the DLCs before the main story ends, because... it would end the game.

[teknoman2]

 

Finished Blood and Wine, everything there was to do in there. That was ... Wow. An amazing conclusion to the Geralt's story, of both all of his books and games. Words of caution: Make sure to play it with a save where you've already finished the base game. While it can be played before ending W3 main story, it makes absolutely no sense in that situation.

 

Can you continue the game after finishing the main story? I was under the impression that I should do the DLCs before the main story ends, because... it would end the game.

 

they had stated since before release that you can keep playing after the end of the main story to complete whatever you left undone. they hinted that the ending you reached would make a difference in the way the world is when you go roam it after but i don't know if they implemented that

[Fenixp]

Can you continue the game after finishing the main story? I was under the impression that I should do the DLCs before the main story ends, because... it would end the game.

Honestly, I'm not even sure why doesn't Blood and Wine quest write a big message over half of your screen saying "DO NOT PLAY BEFORE FINISHING. WHAT THE HELL, MAN?" So yes, the game does continue.

[Lexx]

Damn. So I could as well just have finished the main quest and therefore saved the grind of leveling up. Oh well, gonna stop with Blood and Wine then and wrap up that stuff first.

[Tale]

Tried out three strategy games to hold me over until Book 5 of Dreamfall Chapters. XCOM: Enemy Within, Crusader Kings II, and Homeworld Remastered.

 

XCOM: Enemy Within came out the winner. So addictive.

 

Homeworld came in at a far second place. It reminded me that I'd played it before, either a demo or a pirated copy in my less upright college days. The game's controls were the big hurdle causing it to fall behind. I'd forgotten vertical movement within minnutes! And building and launching seem a hassle when you're trying to keep other ships docked, like your harvesters. I'll come back to it, but play just wasn't smooth.

 

Crusader Kings II got third place simply for having the largest learning curve. I was looking for something I could get into quickly. The learning scenario doesn't even seem to tell you about armies, just the bare basics. And I was less clear on how long I'd have to wait for things to work. I arranged a marriage and there was nothing indicating I'd actually done the dang thing between the arrangement and the marriage actually happening. And then I plotted to kill my brother/heir, because it seemed the right thing to do, with 63% power, but there's no telling if/when that'll happen. I had an ambition to have a son, is there more I need to do for that to actually happen? I don't know. But I did raise an army and march it against another brother because I was completely at a loss as to what else I could be doing at the time. Or should be doing.