The last few games you beat and rate them IV

[93LEAFS]

Bought the Switch Oled after not owning a Switch previously. Have been quite busy lately so, I wanted a simpler game to give it a go with in Super Mario Odyssey rather than sinking a bunch of time into BoTW (which I will next month when I have more free time). I just "beat" Mario Odessey but am far from completing it (need to get more power moons to unlock the extra levels, and am way off getting all the power moons). I'd give it a 9/10. It's amazing at what it is trying to be. Primarily played in docked mode, and found that more enjoyable despite testing out BoTW mostly in handheld and Super Smash Ultimate primarily in handheld. Probably 4 years too late with this recommendation, but if you have a switch this seems like a must-play especially if you are nostalgic for mid to late 90s 3D platformers.

 

[Ceremony]

​

Batman: The Telltale Series (PS4, 2016)

Looking at my PSN profile and all the games I've played, I don't think there are any genres defined by a game's developers. If I call something a "Rockstar sandbox" or a "Ubisoft sandbox" anyone reading this thread would be able to understand the distinction and the nuance, but they're not really unique enough to exist as clearly defined terms. The closest any developer has really come to establishing themselves as their own description over the past couple of console generations is Telltale Games. Which is convenient for the easy description of their output as Telltale games, of which Batman is an example. A cross between point and click adventures and quick time events, you control Batman as he does Batman things, then Bruce Wayne when he's pretending he isn't Batman.

I lied earlier, I've played Tales from the Borderlands. That said, I like the general format of Telltale games. From what I understand of the rest of their output the writing and characterisation is good, so you're pretty much guaranteed to get an engaging story. The quick time events during combat are just enough interactivity to keep you awake between conversations, and given Batman is a character renowned for hand to hand combat the visuals here are engaging enough, and appropriate given the game's art style gives it a comic-book feel. There are a few sections where you investigate crime scenes by looking at stuff and connecting the parts that are related to one another. There's not much complexity to it but it's a nice nod to Batman's roots as a detective, and something different to the rest of the game.

The real heart of a Telltale game lies in its dialogue options and moral choices. As conversations happen you have a choice of responses, and you can occasionally choose to go somewhere or do something which will all, as the game constantly reminds you, affect how your story plays out. I've mentioned before when I've played Quantic Dream games (is that a term worthy of being fully capitalised?) that I enjoy this format of storytelling. You can unequivocally get a unique story and unique results, assuming the game is well-made enough that everything works out effectively no matter what an individual player chooses.

Batman falls short on some of these fronts. The game puts you in several positions where you can make a choice between excessive violence or restraint. In one notable moment early in the game you can beat someone up after a fight at the top of a skyscraper or you can handcuff them and hang them from a wall. I went for the tame option and later on I'm interrogating a guy who says we all saw me beating him up. There are some choices which force you into paths which feel somewhat contrived. I can't tell if the game's trying to make you both-sides it or if it's just the result of trying to contain several different action paths, but aside from that instance which feels more like a technical glitch the game runs into the perhaps inevitable problem where you find yourself asking why you can't just say this, or just do this, or just explain something rather than pick the limited options available.

On a technical level the game isn't very good. For something which is mostly quick time events in terms of gameplay there are several things that just don't work properly. The frame rate dies frequently even when you're not in combat. Some characters don't load properly, one had a face but no hair, so she looked like a doll that had been sliced in half. Sometimes you'll be watching a news report on the TV and the newsreader will be fine, but the rest of the screen will be out of focus. The best case I had was a character who didn't actually appear at all, and I didn't realise at first because I thought she was hiding behind something because there had been a gunfight. To me it seems like the art style and interactive cutscene-based gameplay would preclude some of these issues, but apparently not.

My biggest criticism of the game itself would be the episodic format that Telltale is also known for. I don't know that I could play a game like this in the five episode structure that they usually come in, with each episode releasing separately every few months. I'd never remember what had happened whenever a new one came out. You can also get through each episode in 1-2 hours at the very most, so it doesn't seem like a very engaging format to follow unless you can binge them all in a day or two. It also doesn't help in this case since each episode is directed by a different person or team, and this is noticeable in subtle ways like the tone of the dialogue or the events that take place. The game doesn't start strongly in this respect, and I think a lack of consistency from episode to episode is noticeable and to the game's detriment.

Aside from the gameplay, my biggest issue was with the story itself. I've never really been a big superhero fan. I've spent more time with Batman than any others, and I realise there are different stories and different versions of the character. The thing is, I struggled to take all of that in when I was playing this. There's Bruce Wayne and Harvey Dent and they sound remarkably like Nathan Drake and Sully. Fine, I can get past that. But I'm watching what's going on and spending the whole time thinking "this isn't Batman." It's not Christian Bale confiding in Michael Caine. It's not Gary Oldman trying to keep Gotham's police force honest. I really struggled to take the game and the characters seriously for about the first half while I adjusted to them not being the way I perceive them in my head when I think about them now.

I realise this is my problem much more than the game's. The story and the characters are pretty much universally praised in reviews, so I assume they did something right. Is this a positive or benefit to superheroes as a character, being able to reinvent and reuse characters in different ways? Batman's origin story is altered quite significantly in this game and I spent most of it feeling the same way as Bruce, not being able to believe what was going on. Are characters and tropes stronger or weaker for being able to be altered and manipulated like this, from platform to platform, era to era, writer to writer? Maybe you need to be a more dedicated fan of them to appreciate them all appropriately in your head at the same time, or to switch from one to the other, but I'm not sure how well I've managed it. I see people talk about the trailer for the Uncharted movie having Spiderman in it and I'm just confused, thinking "that wasn't Tobey Maguire." Am I now old, Abe Simpson not knowing what 'it' is anymore?

There you have Batman: The Telltale Series. A technical embarrassment which is enjoyable in the way most of their games are, with an added existential crisis thrown in at the end. There's another Batman Telltale series and I'm going to get that when it's next on sale, so I guess this one must have done something right.

 

[pistolpete11]

Funny enough, your post made me go ahead and buy Sekiro. I put a couple hours in and my god the game play is awesome. There's a lot similar to Jedi Fallen Order and even Ghost of Tsushima (though much less). It's definitely a FromSoft game in the sense that the quality is way up there.

How's Sekiro?

I've got Ghost and Sekiro on order. Any recommendation on which to start with?

 

[pistolpete11]

As I continue my journey through the free PS4 games I get with PS+:

Ratchet and Clank (2016) - 6.5/10 - It was fun and the animation is good. Just a little too childish for me. It's also pretty short and simple. The only hard part was the final boss and that was more to do with the mechanic to change weapons mid-fight. It's probably something I was doing wrong, but it wasn't really the boss being hard. It was a nice change of pace after Bloodborne and for being free, I can't complain. I think the new one got great reviews, but I'll wait until it's offered as a free game in a few years

A Plague Tale : Innocence - 7/10 - I'm only a few chapters in, so this might change, but it's pretty good. It looks good, especially for being a smaller developer if I'm not mistaken, and the Plague backdrop is cool. It's straight forward with basic stealth and not much combat to speak of. It's very much a narrative driven game and so far, so good. The sequel is coming in 2022 and I'll be curious if they add a little bit more depth to the gameplay. Might be worth checking out.

 

[Andrei79]

How's Sekiro?

I've got Ghost and Sekiro on order. Any recommendation on which to start with?

I'd say Sekiro is now part of my favorite games of all time. It's amazing. Ghost is very enjoyable too, but I found it generic. Im a big fan of FromSoft though. I'd say it depends if you prefer FromSoft world building/challenge with likely among the best combat I've ever seen in a game or if you prefer Horizon Zero Dawn style open world games with a lot of Assassin's Creed elements, but done better than Ubisoft.

 

[pistolpete11]

I'd say Sekiro is now part of my favorite games of all time. It's amazing. Ghost is very enjoyable too, but I found it generic. Im a big fan of FromSoft though. I'd say it depends if you prefer FromSoft world building/challenge with likely among the best combat I've ever seen in a game or if you prefer Horizon Zero Dawn style open world games with a lot of Assassin's Creed elements, but done better than Ubisoft.

Mostly loved Bloodborne. Horizon Zero Dawn was OK.

The initial tracking numbers said I'd get Ghost this Friday and Sekrio this coming Tuesday. Sekiro got bumped up to today, so I will take that as a sign.

 

[BaileyMacTavish]

Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous (PC)- 8.5/10
A single playthrough: 142 hours (and I even missed some side quests). I got this the week of release because 1) I am a big Pathfinder player and have played the TTRPG for 10 years so I was stoked that they ported this particular module and 2) I really love CRPGs and well and wanted to play this one.

My thoughts: While the game itself is pretty faithful to the 3PF ruleset, it takes some mechanical liberties (missing feats, skills being pruned, etc) that change how the game is played. Class/Character customization is really in depth (just like the TTRPG counterpart) allowing you as the PC to play however you want. That also means build effectiveness varies by playthrough. To play on Core difficulty or higher, one should know how to min-max the ruleset for ridiculous BAB and AC bonuses.

Story: It's a very enjoyable story, and the companions are (mostly) very good, but the companion dialogue is super front loaded so banter won't be present unless you are doing their respective side quests. The story also has some changes from the original module to facilitate more role playing opportunities for Evil aligned characters (The original table top module had good characters in mind as the whole story revolved around you, the PCs, fighting demons and driving them back into the Abyss and ultimately trying to close the Worldwound).

Gameplay (aka Combat): The ability to switch between RTWP and Turn Based at any point is a god send. I find that I'd use RTWP for trash packs and Turn based for more important fights. Mythic Paths on top of your base levels give your character more power and options to play with and as an RPG, that's great! More options means more fun! Unfortunately while I find the game VERY good, some encounters have inflated stats which make some monsters seem almost impossible to deal with, causing unreasonable difficulty spikes. This is exacerbated by the fact that the majority of enemies are demons (Pathfinder demons mean high Spell Resist, Some Energy Resistance, and a straight up immunity to electricity on top of random prebuffs). The puzzles to break up the combat in this game are also unintuitive and obtuse. One endgame dungeon tied to a companion's quest in particular is one of the worst slogs in the game because it is filled to the brim with these puzzles.

Despite its shortcomings, I found my time well spent. As there are multiple Mythic Paths and multiple dialogue options (RPG, duh), the game has high replay value.

 

[Ceremony]

​

Metro 2033 Redux (PS4, 2014 - originally PC/Xbox 360, 2010)

Looking at my PSN profile and all the games I've played, I don't think there are any games explicitly adapted from a book. Things like BioShock have literary influences and I know there are games based on Walden and Metamorphosis, but I get the feeling they'd be little more than walking simulators. Plus I've never really cared for Kafka. Going back further than that I think the only games based on books I've ever played are the Harry Potter games, and even then I don't think I got past the third one.

This opening paragraph is partly a lie, because I've played Metro: Last Light before. That's not as directly related to a book as Metro 2033 however, which I've played now. Based on the book of the same name by Dmitry Glukhovsky, the year is 2033 (I know) and things aren't so good. Nuclear war in 2013 destroyed most of the world including Russia, forcing what was left of civilisation into the underground Metro system. Things developed over those twenty years and there are different factions and even states from station to station, with a whole new societal structure emerging. You play as Artyom, a man from Exhibition station who eventually has to leave as the mutant creatures that live on the surface force him into going to deliver a message to someone in another station. Along the way he meets communists, Nazis, lots and lots of mutants, and he starts having strange visions about what's now going on in the world.

Gameplay is mostly standard FPS survival horror stuff, with a few interesting stealth options. There are a range of weapons you can find in the tunnels or the surface, and there are stalls in some locations where you can exchange ammo for weapons and upgrades. Shooting and throwable weapons are mostly okay. There's a tremendous amount of satisfaction in the pneumatic weapons that fire ball bearings or darts. You have to pump it up to build the pressure, then you can slot someone silently from miles away. It makes the act of shooting enemies feel very manual and deliberate, as it would be in reality. An inspired design choice.

Enemies take on an almost quiet/loud approach as if the entire game is a giant post-rock album. Tunnel sections featuring human enemies almost always have the option of stealth and non-lethal takedown options. Like most games with optional stealth mechanics these are tremendously satisfying when you get them right. If you don't, there's a healthy checkpoint system. I didn't realise until near the end that your wristwatch lights up if you're visible to enemies, which I could have done with earlier. These sections definitely reward patience and exploration, which good stealth gameplay should.

If that's the quiet, the loud parts aren't always as fun. Usually they involve mutants. A lot of mutants. There are a few different types, but the standard Lurkers usually show up in a pack of about fifty. There's nothing to do but just stand and shoot until you're done. As I played through the game twice I really got to notice how out of place these encounters felt, as if sheer volume was supposed to overcome the lack of any need for tactics or strategy from the player. If you can keep moving long enough to reload, or have some fire grenades to throw to buy yourself some space, you're pretty much fine.

In addition to the pneumatic weapons there are lots of nice gameplay... I don't even know what to call them. Necessities? Additions? Things which make the experience feel more real. You carry a gas mask for when you go to the surface or an exposed area. If you get damaged the mask cracks, the filters don't last as long and you can change it if you find a non-broken one. Your wristwatch (difficulty dependent) will show you how long your filter will last, so you know when to change it. If you kill an enemy that's close to you blood will splatter across your mask, and you need to wipe it off. You carry a charger with you that you need to use to charge your torch when it runs out. Although there aren't lots of things you need to do there are just enough to keep you immersed and involved and remind you that the world you're in is difficult. I compare stuff like this to my semi-frequent attempts to play Red Dead Redemption 2, and there's really no contest.

I've not read the book, so I don't know how closely the game's story follows the original. I'm not going to insult myself by calling the story linear, so I will say that at times it can be hard to follow. Artyom starts off with one objective to travel to a certain station and meet a certain person. On the way there he visits several stations and is led around by several people, most of whom are killed. Even playing through the game a second time and picking up all the diary entry collectibles, it can be hard to keep track of who and where everyone is. It doesn't help that Artyom is silent outside of a brief voiceover before the start of a new level. Artyom is an interesting character for reasons I'm about to outline, but it feels like an effort to try and discover most of that detail.

Metro 2033 features something I don't think I've ever technically seen in a game I've played. A functioning, logical moral choice system. We all know what moral choice systems in games are now, and we can all think of a game we've played where we fell foul of one. Here though, I'll quote the game's Wikipedia article:

Throughout the game, there are certain moral choices that can be made. If the player is compassionate to the people living in the tunnels, they may be able to watch a different cutscene at the end of the game. These moral choices are never explicitly mentioned, and it is possible to play through the game without knowing of their presence.

I played through the game twice for trophies. The first time I played I tried to get the good ending and was genuinely surprised when I didn't. I hadn't, to my mind, done anything bad. Then when I realised how many good points there were I realised how stupid I was and how great the game's system is. Rather than present a bunch of obvious binary choices the game simply rewards you for looking around and doing things. Talking (or listening) to people. Interacting with things. Not interacting with other things. Paying attention to the various characters and cutscenes that tell you things aren't just good and bad. It's genius. The endings themselves are quite sudden, which isn't helped by the revolving cast of supporting characters, but the path of getting there makes complete sense and the game deserves massive credit for providing that platform for the player to explore.

If nothing else, Metro 2033 is a game which really proves how valuable trophies are to my game playing habits. If I didn't have to play this twice to get two endings and to play on different modes (there are various difficulty levels and gameplay modes which change enemies and resource amounts) I would never have been able to appreciate how complex and subtle the world is. I probably wouldn't even have finished it the first time, I got lost in one of the tunnels with a vague objective about blowing something up and was getting really annoyed until I figured out what to do. I'm writing this on the day a new Call of Duty is released and it's refreshing to think there are FPS games with a degree of intelligence about them. It must be the literary influence. 2033 and Last Light are usually on sale for a very small amount on the PSN store, so they're definitely worth buying.

I always try to sum up at the end of these without actually saying that's what I'm doing, but I feel sick and I'm not writing very well. I'll be quick. Gameplay - good. Combat - good and bad. World building - excellent. Graphics - average and probably not helped by me generally playing games with the brightness several notches above recommended levels. Implementation of established video game tropes and mechanics on a unique story - subtle, intelligent, rewarding. There you go. I guess it's time to read the book.

 

[Shareefruck]

Sekiro >>> Ghost, IMO

 

[Ceremony]

​

The Lego Ninjago Movie Video Game (PS4, 2017)

I have a confession to make. I lied to you in a recent review of the Batman Telltale game. Sort of. In the list of game genres defined by their developers, there are few as unmistakable as the concept of the Lego game. I actually surprised myself when I realised the Lego Star Wars games went as far back as the PS2 era. Since then the same basic formula has been expanded into every money making franchise possible, to the point where surely making one of these is as simple as changing the skins on characters and making new cutscenes. In this case, I can happily report that I hated every second of The Lego Ninjago Movie Video Game and I'm going to make myself feel better by tearing it to bits.

The Lego Ninjago Movie Video Game is a video game about the Lego Ninjago Movie. I assume such a thing exists. The Ninjago are a bunch of teenagers led by a mysterious old Chinese man who gives them special ninja powers. They protect Ninjago City against the evil, four-armed Lord Gano...Ganodar? Gamodar? I want to carry on not remembering to show you how little I care but it'll annoy me too much. Garmadon! I could've written out ten joke answers and not got there. He lives in a volcano nearby and attacks the place every week.

If you've never played a Lego game, the premise is quite simple. An assortment of mostly linear levels lie between you and the end of the game. There are two playable characters, but if you don't have any friends the AI will control the other one when there are puzzles to solve or doors to open. There's an assortment of combat, puzzles and platforming between you and the end of the levels and different characters, which you can switch between in-game as necessary, have different capabilities to deal with these. Enemies and environments are made of Lego too, and most of the environment is interactive and destructible. Although the games are largely aimed at a younger audience, in my experience of the Star Wars games there's enough charm for older players to not get bored.

The Lego Ninjago Movie Video Game has no redeeming qualities whatsoever. Let's start with gameplay. The game starts with you in a training Dojo learning the three different ways you can press square to make enemies go away. Each of these methods has a fancy name, but when enemies appear all you'll do is spam a mixture of jump and attack until they've stopped. The different Ninjago characters have different weapon types but none of them differ functionally in any way. If you do run out of health you'll just respawn, so it's at least easy to keep playing if something happens to you.

It's been a long time since I was a child but I don't think this game would appeal to me at any age I've ever been. Wikipedia tells me The Lego Ninjago Movie had its screenplay written by six people and its story by seven, and I can only assume that lack of focus is what's responsible for the terrible characterisation and narrative in The Lego Ninjago Movie Video Game. Initially I thought it was going to be somewhat self-aware. The game starts with Garmadon attacking the city. As stuff starts getting destroyed and people run around you see someone saying "so what? he attacks the place every week." Ah, I think. It's a post-modern reflection on the nature of Lego as a toy, where you can endlessly play out different scenarios on your own and then constantly rebuild to start again. Very clever. This comes up again when the Ultimate Weapon that's somehow relevant to the plot turns out to be a laser pointer that causes an actual real cat to jump into the city and start destroying stuff, but these are the only interesting moments throughout The Lego Ninjago Movie Video Game.

I have no idea what the game's plot is. The objective seems to be to stop Garmadon, as the Ninjago learn their Spinjitzu elemental powers along the way to interact with different puzzles in the environment. But then Garmadon gets captured by them halfway through. We then get a flashback scene where Garmadon meets a woman on a battlefield and they turn out to be one of the Ninjago's parents. I genuinely don't even remember the ending. Do they drive the cat away? I'm not sure. Either way, what story there is just sort of happens, with the levels having very little relation to that.

As I played through The Lego Ninjago Movie Video Game I kept wondering what my problem with the environment was. When I dug out my copy of the Star Wars game I realised. There's too much of it. There's Lego everywhere, and it all looks the same. In the levels set in Ninjago City absolutely everything is made of Lego, and most of it is exploding. Playing through this game me a good idea of what it must be like having ADHD. It's impossible to know what's going on or what you're doing half the time. Is this supposed to appeal to kids? It doesn't help either that the game constantly interrupts you when you unlock an upgrade and brings up a screen to let you pick which one you want. It was barely possible to follow the game to begin with, now you're throwing up these things every time I enter a new area? The level design should be a strength it the entire experience is so overwhelming I just ended up resenting it.

To pad out what's a much shorter game than it feels, The Lego Ninjago Movie Video Game offers free play of its levels. Like previous games, here you can choose from any of the characters you've unlocked to access areas which might not have been accessible the first go round. Let's look at some previous Lego games and see what they have in common. Star Wars. Lord of the Rings. Harry Potter. Batman. Aside from being established, long-running media which have an established, long-running audience they all have characters. Lots and lots of characters. Lots of different types of characters, who can do different things. The Lego Ninjago Movie Video Game, in what was about seven hours to complete the story, has 101 for you to unlock. You might remember me mentioning the Ninjago teenagers (five of those), the old man and the bad guy. Where do the others come from to make up the final total of one hundred and one? I've no idea, but they're in there. Snakes, ghosts, robots, guys who can throw explosives, they're all in there. So is Garmadon dressed up like Dwight Schrute from The Office. If you thought a flimsy story that's constantly being broken up was enough to break interest, it doesn't help when there's a seemingly endless cast of characters you can play as who don't actually feature in the game at all. Who the f*** are these people? Why should I care?

Since in addition to The Lego Ninjago Movie Video Game there's a Lego Ninjago Movie and a Lego Ninjago Animated Series, I'm going to assume that watching all of those and owning the Lego sets themselves would make players more familiar with the world and the things in it. That doesn't excuse the game being as consistently off-putting as it is. If anything it makes the entire enterprise feel even more cynical, a self-repeating and perpetuating cycle designed purely to make you spend more money to try and understand what's going on. This, unsurprisingly, doesn't make for a good video game. Regardless of what format or platform something takes it needs to survive on its own merits. You can't turn a book into a film and leave out details that are important to the story.

Vaguely related to that point, I need to mention the cutscenes. These are animated in what appears to be the modern style, that is to say computer animated but made to look as realistic as possible. As if it's actual Lego moving around and talking. I don't like this. Aside from these sequences being just realistic looking enough to make me understand what the Uncanny Valley is for the first time in my life, I just really do not like this style of animation at all. I'm old enough to remember when Shrek and initially Toy Story were groundbreaking, and to see films like that compared to the classic animation which was more prominent at the time you can see the progression. You can see the detail and the intricacies of it, and the possibilities that arise from not having to hand-draw every frame. Here though, there's nothing. I don't even really know how to describe it, it just looks completely unremarkable. It's not that it looks so real as to be unreal, it's more that it doesn't actually register in my head as something I've seen and paid attention to.

The Lego Ninjago Movie Video Game is a bad video game, but not just for all the reasons I've described. To my mind it barely feels like a video game at all. It feels like a harbinger of some hideous corporatised future, where the only focus anyone in society has is in making you consume with no thought, only ravenous appetite for more content on a particular theme. If you consume media which is technically about one subject you will and you must consume as much of it as possible in as many different formats as it can be transplanted on toy. The less objectionable it is the better as this makes it easier to take in for as wide an audience as possible, with nothing to challenge anyone or make them think about anything critically, even the things they're presently occupied with. For a video game based on a toy which is so well-loved because of the endless possibility and replayability, it's genuinely remarkable how little this is reflected in the final product.

I don't remember the specific details, but I got The Lego Ninjago Movie Video Game for free at some point in 2020 during one of the world's various pandemic-related lockdowns. Were I a cynical person I might look to my last paragraph and think this was part of Their plan to keep everyone at home, as docile and unthinking as possible. Free was an overpayment. I wasn't expecting it to be a harbinger of societal and artistic erasure, but here we are.

 

[Blitzkrug]

Finished Guardians of the Galaxy. Solid 8/10

Really wasn't expecting it to be as good as it was. When early impressions and reviews drew comparisons to Mass Effect and action games like Vanquish i was like "alright let's see." And sure enough, those comparisons were actually pretty on the mark.

Story/characterization:

The story as far as i can tell, is somewhat of an original one. The Guardians are two bit mercs who get caught where they're not supposed to be by the Nova Corps, are told to pay a fine and while trying to scronge up the money to do so they get sucked into a battle where the very fate of the galaxy hangs in the balance thanks to the church of truth (fairly new to the marvel comic universe from what i understand as well)

Writing wise, it walks a similar path to the movies but also strays just enough from it to stand out on its own. In the movies, Star-Lord is shown to be a lover of 70s disco/pop because those represent some of his fondest memories with his mother before she passed away. In this version, there's several instances where you play as a 13 year old Peter Quill, growing up in the middle of the 80s as a mullet having, denim wearing metalhead. The game's soundtrack plays off this with a really good mix of 80's music ranging from everything harder rock (Kiss' I Love it Loud, some Iron Maiden and Def Leppard) to more pop stuff like Tainted Love and stuff from Wang Chung and Frankie Goes to Hollywood. the rest of the guardians follow a similar style of characterization too. the MCU version of Drax the Destroyer has become more of a comic relief meathead as it has went on. This game goes more with the "humor comes from complete incompatibility with other cultural practices and metaphors" version we see in the first movie. Gamora also goes from assassin with daddy issues to a smug, confident killer who's also a closet doll collector. Very enjoyable all around.

Gameplay:

Combat is designed to be a slick, smooth run and gun experience as you're locked into Star-Lord while commanding the rest of the guardians on the fly with command prompts. Drax is your heavy hitter used to stagger and make enemies weaker via fear, Gamora is your "assassin" (gee shocker) who focuses on dealing heavy damage on singular targets, Rocket serves as your AOE/ranged damage while Star-Lord is a more jack of all trades type, using his guns to deal elemental damage and being able to use melee attacks. Melee combat is incredibly fun but the problem is it's largely useless. I can see why people complained about being locked into Star-Lord. Melee combat feels so good i'd like to see how it could have been if they let you run around with say, Gamora.

The Mass Effect comparison largely comes from the fact that the game has branching paths as well. As you go through the game, there's dialogue options or actions that lead to changes in the story. For example, there's a part where you're faced with having to cross over a gap. There's the logical way where you use the environment and find a way. Or; you can get Drax to hurl Rocket across the gap to hack the bridge controls. This leads to getting across, but Rocket being incredibly pissed at you to the point he leaves the team for a bit midstory. Looking at youtube, these choices seem to actually alter the game a little bit, be it simple changes in dialogue or having the player go down alternative paths. Well done

Bugs/glitches

Runs pretty smooth for the most part. I noticed a bug where "huddling up" (basically this game's super meter) where triggering it leads to the cutscenes where the guardians run up, and huddle up with you (since you need to do a dialogue thing to get full value for it) but instead of them talking and triggering the rest of it, they just stand there. May be an issue for some but since i only popped it in big fights that usually came right after a checkpoint, it was basically trivial. And then the game would tank the shit out of its framerate towards the end but rebooting the game fixed that so...eh.

All in all, a solid game and shows that the Square/Marvel partnership might not be completely garbage after how bad Avengers was.

 

[Osprey]

I just finished Far Cry 4's Valley of the Yetis DLC. That might be the first DLC that I enjoyed more than the base game. I still enjoyed the base game, but a number of things were annoying and they're gone or minimal in this DLC.

First, there isn't much story, so there are no lengthy, unskippable cutscenes. There are no radio towers to climb or even any fog over the map. There's a lot less grinding and, especially, a lot fewer hunting quests. There are no missions that require you to kill targets a certain way. There are almost no missions while you're in a stoned, dream-like state. You're given a base at the very beginning. Finally, enemies don't re-spawn at outposts, so there's a permanent sense of accomplishment when you clear out an area.

It's a DLC that felt more open world than the base game. It took me at least 10 hours to finish, so it's a lot of gameplay for only a DLC. I was impatient to get through the base game because I wanted to move onto another game, but then started this DLC, had fun again, and wanted to keep playing it until I explored every corner and unlocked every item.

It was especially nice after being extremely disappointed in the Escape From Durgesh Prison DLC (20% positive reviews on Steam... haha... glad that I'm not alone) , enough that I gave up on it after 30 minutes and moved onto Valley of the Yetis.

 

[Frankie Spankie]

Divinity: Original Sin 2 - 9.5/10

Divinity Original Sin 1 & 2 are some of the best RPGs ever made. The stories are amazing, the approach you can take to everything is great, and the combat is top notch. If you're new to the Divinity: Original Sin series, I definitely recommend playing the first before jumping into 2. The combat plays very similar but I think 2 does a great job at fixing some of the problems with the first.

First, let me start by saying the combat is some of the most fun turn based combat out there. You can mix and match different abilities across different characters and even use enemy abilities against them since all the elements react with each other. For example, if you have an enemy that casts some sort of water spell, you can teleport them onto the water and then electrify them, stunning them in place. You can mix and match all sorts of different elements to your playstyle and find what the best party combination for you is. I personally had a knight all focused on a two handed weapon, a battle paladin between dual wielding for melee and using aerotheurge (lightning/wind attacks), a ranger, and a healer/necromancer. That's just the build I went with that I had great success with, you can go with any other build that you see fit and have some fun mixing powers up in combat! The combat doesn't really change much between the first and second Divinity Original Sin games so if you like the combat in one, you'll absolutely like it in the other.

One thing I really enjoyed about Divinity Original Sin 2 over the original is the fact that there are set characters you can pick from the start. Some people may not like that but from a story standpoint, I think it was a much better decision. I can understand the appeal of a choose your adventure kind of RPG where you make your own character but by giving premade characters, you get much more detailed, in depth, and meaningful quests for those characters. You can only have a party of 4 characters so you'll miss out on some quests for characters not in your party but that can potentially give you even more replay value if you want to do that. Frankly, seeing the story grow organically around your party members where their input has meaning in your decisions was a lot more appealing to me than running into a town, finding someone that I have no history with, and making all my decisions based on just that. Furthermore, unlike the original, you can make each character whatever class you want. In the original, when you found a new party member, they were already premade select classes. In this one, you get a mostly clean slate and can pick the character's class and abilities. For example, you can make the Red Prince be anything, you can make him be a knight, healer, ranger, etc. This welcome change allows for better story telling while not affecting your play style as you get to run the characters you want for their stories/lore and not be forced to a certain playstyle that may feel frustrating.

The story is also amazing. You're never sure who to trust. You need to constantly talk with your party members and other NPCs throughout the world to gauge people's reactions to certain characters and make your own decisions from there. One big change as far as questing and story lines go is that each Act was its own individual region. Once you finished an act, you could not return. The game would prompt you to make sure you are done with an act before leaving. This may be frustrating if you missed a side quest that could have been beneficial later on for completing. Quite frankly, the story and lore is great enough that you should be exploring everything before going off to the next act anywhere but you'll be bound to miss something in your journeys. My biggest complaint about the original was fixed in this one. Spoilers for Divinity Original Sin 1 below:

Spoiler

In the first Divinity Original Sin, to reach the end game, you had to collect 12 blood crystals. I wasn't really paying attention at all times and often left them behind so I had to refer to a guide and run around for hours just collecting them all just to reach the final dungeon. This game didn't have anything like that so I didn't feel like I had to backtrack for hours just to reach the final area.

Overall, this is another top notch game. If you love RPGs, this series is a must play. If you enjoy turn based combat, this game is right up your alley. It's very complex but also simple to learn. You'll often find yourself making mistakes in combat not realizing how some spells can affect others and that's all part of the fun! Save often and learn from your mistakes. The deeper you dive in, the more enjoyable it is!

 

[Andrei79]

Divinity: Original Sin 2 - 9.5/10

Divinity Original Sin 1 & 2 are some of the best RPGs ever made. The stories are amazing, the approach you can take to everything is great, and the combat is top notch. If you're new to the Divinity: Original Sin series, I definitely recommend playing the first before jumping into 2. The combat plays very similar but I think 2 does a great job at fixing some of the problems with the first.

First, let me start by saying the combat is some of the most fun turn based combat out there. You can mix and match different abilities across different characters and even use enemy abilities against them since all the elements react with each other. For example, if you have an enemy that casts some sort of water spell, you can teleport them onto the water and then electrify them, stunning them in place. You can mix and match all sorts of different elements to your playstyle and find what the best party combination for you is. I personally had a knight all focused on a two handed weapon, a battle paladin between dual wielding for melee and using aerotheurge (lightning/wind attacks), a ranger, and a healer/necromancer. That's just the build I went with that I had great success with, you can go with any other build that you see fit and have some fun mixing powers up in combat! The combat doesn't really change much between the first and second Divinity Original Sin games so if you like the combat in one, you'll absolutely like it in the other.

One thing I really enjoyed about Divinity Original Sin 2 over the original is the fact that there are set characters you can pick from the start. Some people may not like that but from a story standpoint, I think it was a much better decision. I can understand the appeal of a choose your adventure kind of RPG where you make your own character but by giving premade characters, you get much more detailed, in depth, and meaningful quests for those characters. You can only have a party of 4 characters so you'll miss out on some quests for characters not in your party but that can potentially give you even more replay value if you want to do that. Frankly, seeing the story grow organically around your party members where their input has meaning in your decisions was a lot more appealing to me than running into a town, finding someone that I have no history with, and making all my decisions based on just that. Furthermore, unlike the original, you can make each character whatever class you want. In the original, when you found a new party member, they were already premade select classes. In this one, you get a mostly clean slate and can pick the character's class and abilities. For example, you can make the Red Prince be anything, you can make him be a knight, healer, ranger, etc. This welcome change allows for better story telling while not affecting your play style as you get to run the characters you want for their stories/lore and not be forced to a certain playstyle that may feel frustrating.

The story is also amazing. You're never sure who to trust. You need to constantly talk with your party members and other NPCs throughout the world to gauge people's reactions to certain characters and make your own decisions from there. One big change as far as questing and story lines go is that each Act was its own individual region. Once you finished an act, you could not return. The game would prompt you to make sure you are done with an act before leaving. This may be frustrating if you missed a side quest that could have been beneficial later on for completing. Quite frankly, the story and lore is great enough that you should be exploring everything before going off to the next act anywhere but you'll be bound to miss something in your journeys. My biggest complaint about the original was fixed in this one. Spoilers for Divinity Original Sin 1 below:

Spoiler

In the first Divinity Original Sin, to reach the end game, you had to collect 12 blood crystals. I wasn't really paying attention at all times and often left them behind so I had to refer to a guide and run around for hours just collecting them all just to reach the final dungeon. This game didn't have anything like that so I didn't feel like I had to backtrack for hours just to reach the final area.

Overall, this is another top notch game. If you love RPGs, this series is a must play. If you enjoy turn based combat, this game is right up your alley. It's very complex but also simple to learn. You'll often find yourself making mistakes in combat not realizing how some spells can affect others and that's all part of the fun! Save often and learn from your mistakes. The deeper you dive in, the more enjoyable it is!

Agreed 100% with everything here, including the 9.5. Its an amazing RPG, it's the best I've played since Baldur's Gate 2.

 

[Andrei79]

Sekiro: shadows die twice - 9.5 /10.

Easily one of the best games I've ever played. The combat, the exploration, the lore.

Beating the final boss (the real one) is probably the most satisfying gaming moment I've ever had.

Brilliant, I recommend it to anyone who likes action games.

 

[pistolpete11]

Sekiro: shadows die twice - 9.5 /10.

Easily one of the best games I've ever played. The combat, the exploration, the lore.

Beating the final boss (the real one) is probably the most satisfying gaming moment I've ever had.

Brilliant, I recommend it to anyone who likes action games.

Just trying to get a gauge on how bad I am at video games and how difficult the final bosses will be.

How many times would you say it took to beat:

General Seven Spears whatever
The Guardian Ape
Genichiro at the castle
The final boss

 

[Andrei79]

Just trying to get a gauge on how bad I am at video games and how difficult the final bosses will be.

How many times would you say it took to beat:

General Seven Spears whatever
The Guardian Ape
Genichiro at the castle
The final boss

Seven spears was pretty quick.

Guardian ape 2-3 tries.
Genichiro, around 1 hour.
Sword saint isshin. No idea, by around 3 1-2 hour sessions.

If you beat Sekiro, I think youre good to go lol.

 

[GlassesJacketShirt]

Seven Spears wrecked my soul. Don't want to say more.

The Guardian Ape was actually fine, a few tries at most. Second half was easier, but I really found it satisfying.

Genichiro, about two hours. Every time I got close, I f***ed it up.

Sword Saint Isshin.............I think a few less times than Demon of Hatred? Also up there was Gael as all time great final boss fights.

 

[Andrei79]

Seven Spears wrecked my soul. Don't want to say more.

The Guardian Ape was actually fine, a few tries at most. Second half was easier, but I really found it satisfying.

Genichiro, about two hours. Every time I got close, I f***ed it up.

Sword Saint Isshin.............I think a few less times than Demon of Hatred? Also up there was Gael as all time great final boss fights.

Démon of Hatred was a chore. It took me longer for Sword Saint, but it felt quicker because the fight was so much fun.

Genichiro, Owl, Demon of Hatred and Sword Saint were the highlight bosses for me. They all took me over an hour.

 

[pistolpete11]

Seven spears was pretty quick.

Guardian ape 2-3 tries.
Genichiro, around 1 hour.
Sword saint isshin. No idea, by around 3 1-2 hour sessions.

If you beat Sekiro, I think youre good to go lol.

Oh f*** me

Seven Spears wrecked my soul. Don't want to say more.

The Guardian Ape was actually fine, a few tries at most. Second half was easier, but I really found it satisfying.

Genichiro, about two hours. Every time I got close, I f***ed it up.

Sword Saint Isshin.............I think a few less times than Demon of Hatred? Also up there was Gael as all time great final boss fights.

Glad to know I'm not the only one who had trouble with Seven Spears I think I found him too early in the game. Both in terms of my stats and just not really having the combat system click for me yet. And then the run back to him was so frustrating.

I didn't pick those because they were the 4 toughest. Just tried to get a sampling of what were supposed to be different levels of difficulty.

I'm around you guys with Genichiro, so that makes me feel a little better. I have to redo everything because I accidentally triggered the Shura ending. Doh!

 

[Frankie Spankie]

Soldier of Fortune - 6/10

I wanted to relive some nostalgia so I grabbed Soldier of Fortune on GoG. It's from 2000 so it definitely looks dated. I remember playing it when I was a kid (probably shouldn't have) and thought it was awesome because of how violent it was. You shoot a guy in the leg with a shotgun and his leg gets blown off. Back in 2000, that was new, no games did that. I remember it being on lists of games that needed to be banned for being too violent at the time. It is old so it certainly feels very aged. The gameplay is solid enough but for whatever reason, the controls feel so weird. Not sure if it's a Windows issue or what but there was so many times where I just couldn't really move. I'd have to stop moving all together and then press the movement keys again. It happened pretty often, especially while crouched. It took away a lot from the game. Otherwise, it was a ton of fun. It's pretty much 80s action cheese movie made video game. Just go around, violently kill people, watch cheesy cutscenes, repeat. If it wasn't for the movement bugs, I would have given this game a much higher score because the game itself is a ton of stupid fun.

 

[Osprey]

Soldier of Fortune - 6/10

I wanted to relive some nostalgia so I grabbed Soldier of Fortune on GoG. It's from 2000 so it definitely looks dated. I remember playing it when I was a kid (probably shouldn't have) and thought it was awesome because of how violent it was. You shoot a guy in the leg with a shotgun and his leg gets blown off. Back in 2000, that was new, no games did that. I remember it being on lists of games that needed to be banned for being too violent at the time. It is old so it certainly feels very aged. The gameplay is solid enough but for whatever reason, the controls feel so weird. Not sure if it's a Windows issue or what but there was so many times where I just couldn't really move. I'd have to stop moving all together and then press the movement keys again. It happened pretty often, especially while crouched. It took away a lot from the game. Otherwise, it was a ton of fun. It's pretty much 80s action cheese movie made video game. Just go around, violently kill people, watch cheesy cutscenes, repeat. If it wasn't for the movement bugs, I would have given this game a much higher score because the game itself is a ton of stupid fun.

I remember liking it for how violent it was, too. Being able to shoot arms and legs off was the one thing that made it stand out from most other shooters.

As for the movement issues, it probably wasn't the engine, which was id Tech 2, the same as in Quake II. It could be a high framerate issue. Apparently, the player can slide across the floor unless you cap the framerate at 60fps. Even if you didn't experience that, maybe it caused your issue.

Also, apparently, there's a fan-made patch called SoFplus that helps the game run on modern systems. Maybe it, too, would've fixed it for you.

SoFplus - Soldier of Fortune addon (aka SoF+ or SoF plus)

FYI, I learned about the framerate issue and the patch from the game's page at pcgamingwiki.com. It's good to check that site when you're having issues with PC games, especially older ones.

 

[Unholy Diver]

Everybody's Golf 8/10

part of the Hot Shots Golf family, after finishing Mario Golf Super Rush, I still had a golf itch, this game satisfied it, deeper and not as arcadey as Mario's trip to the course but still plenty of fun and wacky characters and challenges. Worth a play through

 

[Frankie Spankie]

I remember liking it for how violent it was, too. Being able to shoot arms and legs off was the only thing that separated it from most other shooters.

As for the movement issues, it probably wasn't the engine, which was id Tech 2, the same as in Quake II. It could be a high framerate issue. Apparently, the player can slide across the floor unless you cap the framerate at 60fps. Even if you didn't experience that, maybe it caused your issue.

Also, apparently, there's a fan-made patch called SoFplus that helps the game run on modern systems. Maybe it, too, would've fixed it for you.

SoFplus - Soldier of Fortune addon (aka SoF+ or SoF plus)

FYI, I just learned about the patch and the framerate issue from the game's page at pcgamingwiki.com. It's always good to check that site when you're having issues with PC games, especially older ones.

Yeah, makes sense. I should have figured it was a framerate issue. Oh well.

 

[Tw1ster]

Seven Spears wrecked my soul. Don't want to say more.

The Guardian Ape was actually fine, a few tries at most. Second half was easier, but I really found it satisfying.

Genichiro, about two hours. Every time I got close, I f***ed it up.

Sword Saint Isshin.............I think a few less times than Demon of Hatred? Also up there was Gael as all time great final boss fights.

Genichiro and Owl (father) owned my ass for evenings at a time. I found both much harder than Sword Saint, but man I don’t think I’ve ever cheered harder than I did when I beat Owl. What a game