Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
See, here's the thing. It only has one flaw, but I feel like that one flaw is more likely to make a player stop playing than every flaw in the first game put together.
And I did say "based on the first act."
If this does wind up being true, then I'll give it a 10.
I think you mean "but with high HP and the ability to two-shot you." That's fairly significant.
It's a pretty significant flaw indeed, but if the requirement for a game to achieve a 10 is contribution to the medium, then The Witcher 2 hits that one on the head.
Also, both my favourite RPGs this generation teach their own systems horribly, so there's that.
Yeah, I'm definitely open to the notion of giving it a 10 based on later stuff. Like I said in my revised Human Revolution review, that game would be an 8 if it weren't for the debate system, but that earned it a 10.
Mind you, The Witcher 2 isn't a 10 game by the standards of "near technical perfection", if only because of some of its design elements seem to have gone backwards since the first game. That could be my preferences speaking, though; The Witcher didn't have me scrounging for better weapons due to its focus on weapon damage being primarily the result of your character's traits, whereas the second game went in a more standard direction that I feel is almost always a worse way to go.
Also, FWIW, my favorite RPG of the generation, Dark Souls, is definitely getting a seven because of the whole "not telling you how to play" thing. There's no way to justify a 10 because it's a polishing of the Demon's Souls formula.
My scoring system is a little weird like that, but I'm okay with that.
On the other hand, the combat is a lot more interesting in the second game. They just made some of the encounters too damn hard.
Incidentally, I find it kind of funny that I got that reaction, but haven't yet had anyone comment on my putting the covers of Custer's Revenge and Assassin's Creed: Revelations in one image.
I don't know what those games are, so I can't react.
Not knowing about Custer's Revenge is enviable.
Not knowing about Assassin's Creed is...unexpected.
I know what Assassin's Creed is, but not Revelations in particular.
I want to say that AC: Revelations is a game that deserves a 4, since it had some good moments, but really it had no real reason to exist except to make Ubisoft money. Even the Desmond plot they could have picked up with whatever they were doing in AC3, instead of... whatever the hell it was that we got.
Yeah, it has moments that don't suck, but the entire game could have easily been a thirty-minute sequence at the start of AC3.
You've clearly never met a Dwarf Fortress fanatic.
Few games have manuals that are published by a tech manual company.
Is that supposed to invalidate that? Because I never said that Dwarf Fortress was good about this or anything. Dwarf Fortress is terrible at that, and I shudder to think how many people have been driven away from the game by the complexity of the controls and the lack of guidance in how to use them.
No, I'm actually agreeing with you.
Dwarf Fortress would be a terrific game if its controls weren't absolutely Byzantine. The fact that the community takes pride in its complexity only makes the whole thing that much worse.
The thing about the manual being printed by a tech manual company wasn't a joke, by the way. The unofficial Dwarf Fortress beginners' guide is in fact printed by one.
I would be willing to bet money on Dwarf Fortress never leaving Alpha.
Besides, Minecraft is in continual development too, and doesn't have even a fraction of the UI problems DF has.
^Isn't Minecraft finished? And has been for a while?
It's technically out of Beta, and Notch himself has moved on to other projects (a Space Sim and Scrolls in particular), but the game is still updated constantly. A new Snapshot update came out a few days ago.
First I've ever heard of such a list.
And anyway, my point is that Dwarf Fortress' lack of meaningful UI makes it overbearingly complex.
Okay, so the relaunch is finished, and I'll be posting new articles every friday starting 11/2.
I don't wanna wait 'til February >:c
You Australians and your date writing systems that actually make sense.
I can never even know whether you guys are talking days or months unless one of the numbers goes above 13
Yeah, I definitely meant a week from Friday.
Reviewed Vampire: the Masquerade - Bloodlines.
Reviewed: Ultima IV.
And...updated it with a couple of paragraphs on things I'd missed: the magic system and the upsides of abstract graphics.
Reviewed: SOTL.