The last few games you beat and rate them III

Status
Not open for further replies.

Frankie Spankie

Registered User
Feb 22, 2009
12,432
442
Dorchester, MA
I also had the same issue with Fez, got stuck and just couldn't figure it out even trying to go through guides. I should probably give it another go though, that was years ago.

Pikuniku - 7/10

Pikuniku is a cute little adventure/platformer. The story is pretty charming with some good humor. It's much more of an adventure game than a puzzle game though. There are some puzzles thrown around the game but they're all rather simple. There's not too much to describe about the game other than that without spoiling anything. The game is rather short but it worked well. I feel like if the game was much longer, it would have overstayed its welcome. Overall, it's a pretty fun casual platformer. If that's what you're looking for, give this game a shot.
 

GlassesJacketShirt

Registered User
Aug 4, 2010
11,676
4,720
Sherbrooke
COD Campaigns Redux (2003-2017)

That's right: with the exception of the long lost COD 3, I went ahead and replayed every campaign from the original COD and its expansion up to COD:WWII. I played them on hardened so I could have something challenging without getting too frustrated (exception being Infinite Warfare, which I had on Specialist difficulty). It drove me insane. Here's my assessment.


The Beginning
Call of Duty (2003) - Good but not great campaign, with chilling moments throughout but too many boring solo soldier missions. Still, a nice first effort for the start-up company that flashed their potential for more. 6.0

United Offensive (2004) - Brilliant expansion that built the franchise's blueprint for future success. 8.0

Golden Age
Call of Duty 2 (2005) - It's one note, but boy do they ever hit that note well. Non-stop intensity and the true tone setter for the franchise's golden age. 9.0

Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare (2007) - Anti-climactic ending slightly mars a brilliantly paced, mostly plausible storyline. 9.0

World at War (2008) - Without the WWII fatigue around, WAW represents a great step forward for Treyarch after COD3. 8.0

Modern Warfare 2 (2009) - A tonal shift towards action film aspirations, the constantly regenerating enemies were most annoying here. Not the classic I once believed it to be. 7.5

Black Ops (2010) - Interesting story with memorable levels and characters. The Vietnam levels are the best ever constructed for that era. 8.5

Signs of Weariness
Modern Warfare 3 (2011) - Plays like a greatest hits collection rather than a tight game, but the lessening of regenerating enemies made it easier to stomach compared to MW2. 7.0

Black Ops 2 (2012) - Top notch villain and fun experimental elements rise Black Ops 2 above mediocrity. 7.5

Age of Decline
Ghosts (2013) - Has elements of Modern Warfare's glory, but the disposable gameplay elements and contrived story sink this one. 5.5

Advanced Warfare (2014) - Once upon a time, I really dug AW. In retrospect, only three levels were any good. Wasted potential across the board. The constant removal of player agency took a toll on my mental state. Weakest writing in the series as well. 4.5

Black Ops 3 (2015) - Intriguing yet confusing story can't save the franchise's least inspired level design. Pretty aesthetics, but the actual layout works for co-op and nothing else. Powers feel trite. 4.0

Signs of Life?
Infinite Warfare (2016) - Stunningly, this one has aged well thus far. Plot fails towards the end, and I would argue there's a few too many corridor sections, yet I still enjoyed the well paced campaign and characters. Future space warfare may have been a marketing faux pas, but I do see the older COD in the finer details. 7.5

WWII (2017) - The production values on display are stunning, and they truly enhance the experience. The level design, however, often feels restrictive. Despite the return to boots on the ground, I feel like this one did less to remind me of COD's magic THAN THE f***ING SPACE GAME. 6.0

A few extra notes:
-While a lot of these games could get frustrating on difficulties higher than regular, MW2 and certain parts of WAW were the worst offenders (despite me liking them).

-I think Infinite Warfare would have been fantastic if they just made it a single-player experience and put all their resources into making a longer campaign. This is one game where the brand hurts it more than the game hurts the brand, despite the fury towards its existence.

-Infinity Ward is a developer that fell prey to the brand over time, while Treyarch flourished somewhat (despite my complete dislike of Black Ops 3). At their best, IW can create the better, more immersive experiences.

-Sledgehammer is a total wild card at this point. They aren't devoid of talent, but both of their efforts provide the least opportunity for player expression.

Rankings:
1. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
2. Call of Duty 2
3. Black Ops
4. World at War
5. United Offensive
6. Infinite Warfare
7. Black Ops 2
8. Modern Warfare 2
9. Modern Warfare 3
10. Call of Duty
11. WWII
12. Ghosts
13. Advanced Warfare
14. Black Ops 3
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ceremony and NyQuil

Ceremony

How I choose to feel is how I am
Jun 8, 2012
114,296
17,374
twom_tlo_01.jpg

This War of Mine (PS4, 2016)


When I repurchased The Sims 3 from Amazon last year to finish the trophies in it, I spent some time beforehand waiting for the price to drop. This didn't happen to the extent I wanted it to, but in the time I spent waiting I saw the game's expansion packs becoming more prominent. As far as EA properties go, this must be one of their favourites. You have a game. You have innumerable expansion packs offering mostly cosmetic items, being sold for a premium each time. After a few years you bring out a new game and repeat the process, offering innumerable expansion packs offering mostly cosmetic items. While I understand EA's method of operating (let's face it, if any company knows about conning people into non-transferrable purchases for a game series with regular releases it's them), I don't really understand why people would buy into it. Literally or emotionally.

On the subject of not really getting things, when I wrote about The Sims I mentioned how I struggled to get any enjoyment from the game when faced with what was really an experience where the player is beholden to the whims of their characters, with little freedom experienced in-game or in real life as a result. You have to feed them you have to make them piss you have to make them go to work you have to make them do a leisure activity to get more money. Really, it's a bit of a pointless experience. There's no real endgame for you to try and reach. Maybe I'm too goal-oriented to enjoy it.

One avenue EA hasn't yet gone down for Sims expansions is the possibility of throwing your Sims into a civil war in a fictional Eastern European country (it's not Bosnia, honest). This is where This War of Mine: The Little Ones comes in. A 2D "war survival" game, This War of Mine is ostensibly a resource management sim, in which you control a few characters who're trying to scrape together enough resources, food and medicine to stay alive while waiting for the war to end. In addition to maintaining your home and producing enough food to eat or items to trade, the human cost of conflict is also explored, as characters become depressed and catatonic if enough bad things happen or if you don't try hard enough to keep spirits up.

Gameplay is divided into two modes. During the day you maintain your home and characters. During the night, one of your characters can go out scavenging for supplies. During the day the game is little more than a stressful race against time to do everything you need to while only controlling one character at a time. You need to make fuel to burn for making food. You need to make filters to get clean water to make food. You need to make more filters to make moonshine to trade with. You need to set up the rat traps to get food to cook in the first place. You need to make medicines and bandages for when people get sick. You need to upgrade your workbenches to make tools and weapons, or to board up the holes in your house. You need to talk to everyone to stop them from getting depressed. This is probably the most stressful part of the game it has nothing to do with war. It's hoping you've found enough things while out scavenging to keep everyone alive and happy, then it's hoping you'll be able to do everything you need to.

The night-time scavenging is a bit more interesting. There are twenty-one locations in all for you to visit, assuming you can and they're not blocked off by fighting. Some are abandoned, some are guarded, some have people to help or trade with, some have you under sniper fire. Trading is largely a wrench any time you have to do it, because the few items you can get which are worthless to you but valuable in trade still return very little of value themselves. As a result it can be awkward to know what to take or try to salvage. I suppose in a real-life situation like this it's a problem you'd face, but in this game it feels more like an inconvenience when you know you'll have to retrace your steps and try again if you're trying to get one more electric part you need to be able to make bullets.

The game has a combat system which I used once over my playthroughs. I knew the Supermarket location had an event where a soldier tries to rape a girl, and you can step in to stop it, then being free to search the whole Supermarket with no ill-effects to morale. I tooled up. Body armour, helmet, gun, the lot. I waited until his back was turned and stepped out. I shakily used the combat controls for the first time, hoping I would have enough bullets and hoping I was doing it right. This was probably the purest war survival experience I had playing the game, and it lasted for a few seconds.

This isn't necessarily a criticism of the game. It's not supposed to be a combat simulation. It's supposed to be about human desperation and the enforced bonds generated when a disparate group of people are forced together in order to survive, with the occasional burst of desperation and bravery when the need arises. In that sense it's quite an effective game. In that one brief glimpse, I got it.

For the most part though, I didn't feel as if I was part of an especially human experience. Once you've finished the initial playthrough (or quit and gone straight to the menu) you can set up your own game with your own parameters - survivors to play as, length, difficulty, and so on. I tried playing on medium where resources are scarcer and there's a crimewave mid-game. It feels too difficult to get any enjoyment from. You're not supposed to, I get that. Your game can end prematurely if everyone dies when you don't have any food or supplies (or if they get depressed and run away). It's not always supposed to be a happy ending. The problem is you don't feel as if you have a lot of control by the time it gets to that stage, so what should be a raw, realistic experience ends up feeling frustrating and detached.

I think the best way to sum up this game is to say that the problem isn't the amount of things you do, but what you don't. It's not the daily checklist to keep everyone fed, healthy and happy, it's the futility you feel when you can't. Although I suppose that's an unavoidable consequence of surviving a civil war in these circumstances, it doesn't always make for an enjoyable game.
 
Last edited:

Unholy Diver

Registered User
Oct 13, 2002
20,192
3,854
in the midnight sea
Trover Saves the Universe 7.5/10

From Justin Roiland of Rick & Morty fame

Crass, gross, and obscene, it is very Rick & Morty-esque on the comedy, so if you are a fan of the show you should enjoy the game

Pretty basic gameplay, your first person character the Chairorpian controls Trover in a third person view to do all the moving, lifting and combat with a lightsaber type weapon, a lot of button mashing/ hack and slashing
 

GlassesJacketShirt

Registered User
Aug 4, 2010
11,676
4,720
Sherbrooke
Halo Series Redux

I did the same thing as with COD, played all the campaigns on hardened difficulty (sometimes with friends). Fewer games than COD (helps that I don't have an Xbox One for Halo 5). I played them all on my Xbox 360, all original versions. Here's the results:

1. Halo (2001) - 9.0
The classic. Big levels, great vehicles, fun weapons, nothing more to say.

2. Halo 2 (2004) - 8.0
Provides a ton of improvements to the Halo formula. Both 1 and 2 have iffy second halves, but 2's issues in level design are more pronounced (likely a result of increased visual fidelity hurting the scale of levels). First half is top notch.

3. Halo 3 (2007) - 10
At the time of release, Halo 3 was terrific. Over a decade later, the campaign holds up tremendously and helps towards elevating Halo 3 into all-time territory.

4. Halo 3: ODST (2009) - 7.5
Fun diversion with outstanding atmosphere.

5. Halo: Reach (2010) - 8.5
So-so characters with dumb friendly AI were noticeable then, and time didn't make those elements any better. Still, huge scale and level variety help make this campaign fun to this day.

6. Halo 4 (2012) - 7.0
Really pushed the Xbox 360 to its breaking point, and the visuals are still gorgeous today. Much like 2, I feel like this push for high fidelity may have hurt the scale of levels. Repetitive objectives were used way too often. Story had heart which helped towards redeeming my opinion on the campaign overall.

Rankings:
1. 3
2. Halo
3. Reach
4. 2
5. ODST
6. 4
 
Last edited:

Frankie Spankie

Registered User
Feb 22, 2009
12,432
442
Dorchester, MA
Birdgut - 6/10

Birdgut is a free platformer with some light puzzle mechanics on Steam. It's hand drawn and looks great considering it's all black and white. It's pretty fun and short. Overall, cool game to play if you're in the mood for something more casual that you can beat in a sitting.
 

Frankie Spankie

Registered User
Feb 22, 2009
12,432
442
Dorchester, MA
Thronebreaker 9.5/10

Thronebreaker is an RPG where the gameplay is just gwent from The Witcher 3. In between battles, you control Queen Meve in an isometric view as you click for where to go. There are two types of game modes you will run into, puzzles and battles. Puzzles will give you a particular set of cards with the same rules and you have to figure out how to meet the condition to beat the puzzle. Battles are just like standard Gwent, there are cards to damage opponents, lower their powers, boost yours, etc. It is fairly different from the gwent you may be used to in The Witcher 3 but the basic principles are the same and you'll get used to the changes very quickly. Overall, if you loved gwent and The Witcher story, you'll love Thronebreaker as well. I only have a couple minor complaints:

* The history of moves shows up on the left hand side but it doesn't show everything that happens, just the last card played, which can make you miss a lot of what just happened if you weren't paying attention. In addition to that, sometimes (though rare) actions will be performed that you have no idea why. The poor history on the left hand side can lead to confusion with that.
* The game feels kind of slow paced just traveling around the world. There's plenty to see and do but it can get a bit tedious running from one place to the other.
* Not really a problem but something that I wish they continued was after the first act, you are pretty much forced to rework your entire deck. I thought it was a cool feature to force you to change things up to the theme of the act. You have to do that less and less as you progress and can even get to the point where you use mostly the same deck throughout the last half of the game, only adding a few character cards you run into in your journeys.

Overall, those complaints are very minor because not only is gwent an incredible card game, but the story was incredible all the way through, in typical Witcher fashion. If you want more gwent or Witcher style story lines, this game is a must. Even if you just want a good card game and don't know much about the Witcher world, I still think this is a must. The game lasts about 35 hours and the only time it felt like time was flying by.
 

GlassesJacketShirt

Registered User
Aug 4, 2010
11,676
4,720
Sherbrooke
Another on the list of games that desperately needs a sequel - or at least a remastering.

Not that I necessarily trust BioWare to make good games anymore.....

Actually felt like the game was incomplete, or the chapters were poorly thought out in terms of length: first three chapters take place in relatively non-linear areas, latter four are completely linear and, combined, about as long as chapters 2 or 3. Still have some fond memories, the world felt fresh and exciting in 2005 and time hasn't changed that.

And yeah, Bioware is done. It took me too long to admit it as a long time fan, but it's the truth.
 

heatnikki

Registered User
Dec 18, 2018
163
44
I started playing light quickspin slot games and I can play them for hours. So entertaining. They offer bonuses for new players and the best part is that I can win some cash while playing.
 
Last edited:

Ceremony

How I choose to feel is how I am
Jun 8, 2012
114,296
17,374
k6KHU2o.jpg

Tearaway Unfolded (PS4, 2015)

Tearaway Unfolded is a platformer made by Media Molecule, the same people who did (do? are they still a thing) the LittleBigPlanet games. At least, it's a remake of the PS Vita game Tearaway, with some extra stuff added in they couldn't fit in the handheld. You play as Iota, or Atoi depending on which gender character you pick, who has to go and fix a hole in the sky. They do this with the help of the You, ie the player, who interacts with the game using the controller.

Saying the player interacts with the game using the controller is, well, ridiculous, so let me explain. The game is your standard 3D platformer, although special moves like jumping and attacking are unlocked as you progress through each chapter. Among these abilities are a few forms of interaction with the player, like using the touchpad on the controller to create wind in-game, or pressing it to use pads to jump higher than normal. From what I've read, Unfolded is quite substantially different from the original game on Vita, but I still dread to think what playing this game on a handheld must have been like. I now know what it must have been like trying to play a Nintendo 64 for the first time and holding that controller, as I have both hands at the sides doing different things then having to switch to the middle.

That isn't to say the controls are a downside to the game. They feel more like an inconvenience that's a result of the sheer amount of things packed in. It's also one of the few times I can remember using motion controls with any sort of originality. You can shine a line on screen to interact with the environment. You can pick up objects, throw them "in" to the controller, then aim at targets you need to hit in-game with the motion controls. Although it can get awkward at times, the controls and concept of the You (more on that later) combine well to create a sense of immersion you don't normally expect with this sort of gameplay.

One little sidenote I should mention here, on multiple occasions the game bugs you to download the companion app, where someone else can control aspects of the game. I'd assume things like the wind and other secondary elements I mentioned. I can't stress strongly enough how things like this can f*** right off. Why is a game spending so much time trying to direct my focus on to something other than itself? If you want it to be a co-op game where two people using certain techniques can combine to make the gameplay easier then great, but with the story in mind that's probably not the intention, since it's very strongly focused on the player character being alone in the world. I don't like the idea that games are encouraging the player's attention to be elsewhere while they're playing the game. That isn't going to end well.

Sadly, the platforming elements themselves can be a pain. The one thing you want from a platformer is precision. You want the thing you're controlling to react consistently and instantaneously to your inputs, and you want the environment to be consistent and predictable. Neither of these things happen. It does that really annoying thing where you can be moving and jumping at the same time and you somehow time it wrong at the edge of something, running straight off rather than jumping. Sometimes if you're jumping to a smaller platform it can be hard to judge the depth and trajectory of your jumps, making it feel like guesswork where you're going to land. Dying isn't a problem as you respawn nearby instantly, but it's still frustrating when it feels like a lottery put you there.

By far the biggest irritant in this game however is the camera, which is responsible for most of the complaints in the previous paragraph. You can control it with the right stick like any game, but a lot of the time it moves where it wants to regardless of what you're trying to do with it. Usually when this happens it moves really close to the player, or gets stuck behind an object. Better yet, sometimes it does it on its own. My favourite time was when I was running along in a level with no problems only for the camera to start rotating. I stopped moving and corrected it. The camera kept turning again. I did a full 360 in the direction the camera was moving, and the problem stopped. A camera that acts like a twisted wire in a platformer with poor depth perception during jumps isn't a good thing. I'm honestly struggling to remember the last time I played with a camera this bad.

These problems coalesce awkwardly in the game's combat. That hole in the sky led to a bunch of things called Scraps flooding in, which are small boxes with legs and a single eye. There's a range of them, some can fly, some are on stilts and shoot at you, some stack up in a big tower. In combat sections the game can throw loads of these things at you at once, and the awkward camera and sometimes clunky controls make taking them out more annoying than it should be. You can only take two or three hits before dying and there's no immediately obvious health indicator to encourage wariness. Half the time I didn't even realise I was getting hit. Things like this, the camera and the platforming, coupled with the rate at which new gameplay elements are introduced, all contribute to the sense that the game has a lot of content and innovation crammed in, but little chance to properly explore and enjoy them.

On that note, the game is surprisingly short. There are 18 chapters and you can rattle through each in about half an hour. Some are shorter. Some have gameplay mechanics that only exist there, such as the accordion you can use to suck up enemies and fire them out, like a simplified version of the controller trick. There are three over-arching areas the chapters are set in and it feels like there's very little connecting them. The third section in particular feels like a lot of conceptual stuff that didn't fit into to the Vita game - it doesn't fit in here either, but it's easier to play - thrown on. The pacing doesn't always feel like a problem because the base elements are the same, but so much of the story and gameplay comes and goes so quickly the game ends up being a lot less memorable than it should or could have been.

I think I like the general concept of the story, even though it suffers as a result of that rushing. It ends up being a BioShock-esque self-referential subversion of the typical format of games, where the world is collapsing because the Scraps are trying to build a controller like the You has, since ultimately the You (ie the player) has ultimate control over everything that happens in the world. It's unquestionable that the people who came up with this story felt pretty smug and satisfied at how clever it is, because I would in that situation. The pacing of the game probably helps slightly in this sense, since you can't dwell on any of the holes for too long. Ultimately I think it's good to see games with this level of questioning and intelligence in them, even if the way it's presented isn't perfect.

With that in mind, it's worth mentioning the actual style of the game as a final point. It's made by the LittleBigPlanet team, and it shows. There's a similar art style, hell there's a similar irritatingly vague platforming style, but there's something... youthful about the whole thing. I spent most of my time playing the game to think of the right word and all I could come up with was "childlike", but that's not right. It's not a game primarily for children. The controls are too annoying. But there's an overwhelming sense of imagination and creativity that's perfect for a game aimed at a younger audience. There are even things called Papercraft items which you can take a picture of in-game then go online to get instructions of how to make that design in origami. It's another example of how rich and content-packed the game is, but I think there are too many obstacles between the problems I've detailed and a pre-teen audience.

There's not really much point in summing up after all of that, but I'll give it a shot. There's a lot of stuff in this game, maybe too much. It's fun to play when the controls aren't making you tear your hair out, and there's an attempt at a truly thought-provoking story that's probably in the wrong game. Neither this or the original Vita version sold very well and it's a shame when you consider how much effort obviously went into it, but I think it's a bit too rough and unpolished to have expected anything else.
 

Frankie Spankie

Registered User
Feb 22, 2009
12,432
442
Dorchester, MA
Supraland - 8.5/10

The description calls this game a mix of Portal, Zelda, and Metroid and it does not disappoint in that field. It's definitely one of the best first person puzzlers out there. The puzzles are really challenging and forces you to think outside the box. The exploration within each area is also great. As you progress, you'll unlock new abilities to solve puzzles blocking your path. You can also go back later on with new abilities to try to find some hidden chests if you'd like but they're usually minor upgrades that only help in combat.

Speaking of the combat, it is pretty bad. Melee just consists of spamming your sword. The gun combat is interesting, you can shoot an orb and then right click on it to make it explode wherever it is with a laser. That's the funnest part for the sake of being different but the shooting still is weak in general. Enemies respawn pretty often once you leave an area so you're forced to fight the same monsters in the same areas pretty often which gets old. My only other complaint is a lack of a map. It would have been a nice addition to add a map you can look at at any time, especially if you can add notes to it so you know where to backtrack and when.

Overall, other than the weak combat (not that it's a focus of the game) and a lack of a world map, it's still a great game and should be played if you enjoy puzzle games.
 

Do Make Say Think

& Yet & Yet
Jun 26, 2007
51,445
10,261
Control on PC

Got it with my new GPU and was really pleased with it. Nice focused story that had some Twin Peaks similarities, great atmosphere, very smooth and engaging combat and good metroidvania-lite exploration: the best part of open world without all the bloat.

I probably enjoyed my first run through as much as I enjoyed Sekiro. Not quite as good as REmake 2 in terms of big 2019 releases I have actually played.

8/10
 

Frankie Spankie

Registered User
Feb 22, 2009
12,432
442
Dorchester, MA
Doki Doki Literature Club - 8/10

OK, not sure where to start with this one considering it's literally just an interactive novel and not much of a game. I kept hearing, "just play it, you don't want to be spoiled." I had it install then forgot about it when my old PC died and ran into the game again so finally gave it a shot. It definitely gets nuts as you go. You really have to force yourself through the first 3 hours though because it doesn't start getting interesting until about 3 hours in but once you get to a certain point (it's obvious what point it is when you reach it,) the game starts going all over the place while you have no clue what's going on, you're just along for the ride. I don't want to spoil anything but the whole game took me about 5 hours and the final 1.5-2 hours was definitely worthwhile. I wish they would have cut through the first 2/3 of the game faster. I even recommend if you can't muscle yourself through the first 3-3.5 hours, just skip all the dialogue. Like I said, you'll reach a cutscene that you'll realize when it starts getting interesting, and just pick up from there. I feel like there's still enough context there without knowing what happened prior to still enjoy what goes on. It's free, in the end, it's definitely worth some time for the experience.
 

mmalady

Registered User
Jan 31, 2013
1,185
223
minden, ontario
silent hill 2
I don't know what to rate this as I completely sucked at trying to figure out what I needed to be doing to progress in the game...and I never really had command of the controls until halfway through..no real "combat" other than mashing or avoiding...story ended up being ok but again it took a while to unfold...to be honest , I have never looked up a "walkthrough" more than I have in this game..I mean I was LOST at times...I consider myself to be pretty competent in most genres of games but sheesh...I give this game 5/10 for making me look bad and for interesting me enough to start silent hill 3 grrrrr
 

guinness

Not Ingrid for now
Mar 11, 2002
14,521
301
Missoula, Montana
www.missoulian.com
Astral Chain.

Beginning of game: 6/10
Middle of game: 7.5/10
Final boss fight: 1/10

The story had it's good moments, but it just dragged on and on and on once more pieces came together, and disappointingly, it never did go into the heart of the backstory.

However, the final boss fight, consisted of the old stand by, of where you fight this form...but wait! It's not their true form! Which the final form wouldn't had been so bad, save one move that was nearly a one hit death every time...insta rage.

I've never considered skipping an ending before, but this close. Overall, a 5/10, glad to see IP that isn't a port or sequel, it let me dust of my Switch, but I wasn't floored by it.
 

Osprey

Registered User
Feb 18, 2005
27,921
10,802
Blocks That Matter (2011) (Windows/Linux/MacOS/Xbox360) - 8/10 (Loved it)

What was a game that I couldn't get into when I tried playing with mouse and keyboard years ago and put off is now one of my favorite puzzle games. Having a controller makes a night and day difference with this game, since it's puzzle game that plays like a platform game. You run, jump and break blocks (like Super Mario Bros), but you can place the blocks in the level (like Minecraft), yet only in sets of four (i.e. Tetris shapes), with the goal being to reach the exit. The "sets of four" limitation was frustrating at first, but I quickly realized that it's a large part of the challenge, since the levels would be far too easy if you could simply place individual blocks anywhere. My only criticisms are that you have to restart the whole level if you make an fatal error and some sections of levels rely on twitch and precision rather than puzzle solving. Despite those, I still had so much of a blast that I basically replayed the game twice over to get all of the achievements and 100% the game. I normally don't care much for achievements, but I wanted to keep playing and they gave me new challenges to pursue. Anyways, I highly recommend it if you're into puzzle games, also like platformers and have a controller. It's only $4.99 on Steam and likely priced similarly on other platforms.
 
Last edited:

saluki

Registered User
Nov 18, 2017
730
397
Gun - 8/10

Gun is shallow but fun. Depth is not always a requirement for enjoying a game. It's set in an open world Wild West with an entertaining main plot and plenty of side missions.

The side quests are necessary since they increase your stats. I had to go back to a much earlier save when I met up with a boss who was way too strong for me. After bulking up and returning to fight him again he was no problem. Backtracking took me around 2-3 hours.

The combat is a blast. Gun includes an early version of "bullet time" that allows you to throw yourself into battles and blow enemies away with abandon. Switching targets is accomplished by flicking the left control stick and is very intuitive. You'll feel like Billy the Kid in no time.

How much a person would enjoy this game today really depends on how well they can handle older graphics, since Gun looks like a game from the late 90's. I adjusted to the look of the game very quickly.
 

Unholy Diver

Registered User
Oct 13, 2002
20,192
3,854
in the midnight sea
Gears 5 - 8.5/10

Best looking game in the Gears series by far, story was a good continuation of the series, gameplay was right in line with previous entries, some tweaks such as the semi-open world parts. Overall a good game, and should be enjoyed by GOW fans
 

Frankie Spankie

Registered User
Feb 22, 2009
12,432
442
Dorchester, MA
What did you play Gears on? I heard the PC port is fantastic. I never really played the Gears franchise since I never had an XBox but I'll probably pick it up when it goes on sale. Looks like it can be good, over the top violent fun.
 

Super Cake

Registered User
Jun 24, 2013
31,155
6,613
Gears 5 - 8.5/10

Best looking game in the Gears series by far, story was a good continuation of the series, gameplay was right in line with previous entries, some tweaks such as the semi-open world parts. Overall a good game, and should be enjoyed by GOW fans

The only part i didn't like about the story is when you have to decide to who dies between JD and Del. It would make more sense if this game was the last game in the series, but it is obviously not. I get the feeling that the developers are going to retcon my decision of saving Del and have JD be the one who survives in Gears 6.
 

Unholy Diver

Registered User
Oct 13, 2002
20,192
3,854
in the midnight sea
The only part i didn't like about the story is when you have to decide to who dies between JD and Del. It would make more sense if this game was the last game in the series, but it is obviously not. I get the feeling that the developers are going to retcon my decision of saving Del and have JD be the one who survives in Gears 6.

Yeah I was thinking along the same lines, I did the same as you
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad