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
I'm wondering if I should pick up either War of the Roses or Chivalry. They cost more or less the same now, and are similar games...
Alex no Alexing
What about M&B?
^Not really interested in M&B single player.
Chivalry seems like a novelty game to me personally--not saying it is, but saying that that's my current personal perspective of how I might enjoy it.
Who was that person who said that M&B might be a game I might want? If so I could pretty efficiently add that to my SteamGifts searches, since I already search "blade" (for Blade Kitten).
^Just so you know, Blade Kitten is a pretty awful game.
I know.
Wait, since you seem to know more than I've heard...how is it awful, exactly?
sounds like an invitation to me
From what I gather, Chivalry is the faster-paced of the two, whereas Roses demands a more considered approach and better supports teamwork. If historical accuracy matters to you, Roses hit closer, with Chivalry being more anachronistic.
Even then, though, Roses has some weird stuff going on, like getting hit once with a sword while wearing full plate armour and then bleeding out. In fact, swords are kind of stupidly powerful in the metagame; while their current strength is appropriate in context of fighting lightly-armoured adversaries, it's kind of silly how universally-applicable they are. And for all of Roses' attempts to avoid unlock imbalance, having a good selection of unlocks makes the game much easier.
Both have that issue, though, I suppose. Efforts to make historically accurate medieval combat games are always dragged down by the fact that the developers don't seem to understand the actual use of the weapons and the way armour works, so they're forced to make concessions based on standard game design elements rather than designing with those things in mind. As I've said before, the most accurate medieval swordfighting games out there right now are actually a couple of Star Wars games; Jedi Outcast and Jedi Academy. And, y'know, when Star Wars is being more accurate to history in its combat system than you...
ahhh help
borderlands 2 or dishonored
I can get either for $30.
i want them both equally but i don't really have 60 dollars to blow.
^I've heard Dishonored doesn't really live up to its hype, and some plot elements aren't very good. While Borderlands 2 is, at least, a fun romp.
^^I would say get Borderlands 2 for the same reasons as Crimson.
Borderlands 2 it is.
I also picked up Serious Sam 3 and Civ V earlier from that deal Crimson posted at the top of the page.
Argh. My laptop can run Rock of Ages, but at minimum settings the framerate is still poor and there's terrible input lag. Any way to further whittle it down would be appreciated.
To be honest, I'd consider both kinda weak games. Dishonoured is an average game with a massive marketing campaign, and Borderlands 2, to my knowledge, doesn't fix the essential Borderlands issue of slamming FPS and MMO gameplay standards together without really thinking about how they meld. There's no accounting for taste, of course, but $30 can nab you a real gem or two on Steam, and both Borderlands 2 and Dishonoured lack something -- I find it difficult to explain, but the two words that sprang to mind were "emotive core". They're typical, modern AAA games, and for a variety of reasons, they seldom if ever succeed in providing any kind of impact.
too bad i had a stupid amount of fun with the first one so nyeh
no you are wrong blah blah game design stuff blah thpppt
nyeh i say nyeh
But going back to srs mode, I can't tell you what to enjoy, of course.
I did feel Borderlands didn't really take the optimal path to player empowerment, though. It was obviously wanted player power progression in a mechanical sense through both equipment and level ups, but I felt the execution wasn't thought over very well. It was kind of like the designers went "Well, MMOs and FPS games are both popular, right? So if we use an MMO player progression system in an FPS...". To their credit, the game turned out to be quite popular, but it's not exactly the most well-considered approach.
F'rinstance, how much copypasta'd equipment (henceforth referred to as "spaghetti gear") do you need with extremely minor differences? If you wanted to have player equipment progression like that, I think the better thing to do would have been to have a custom gun shop where you could spend your cash on upgrading a smaller set of "core model" weapons, up to and including selecting their colour scheme and naming them yourself. That way, instead of rummaging through hundreds of useless guns in the hopes that one will be moderately superior to your current ones, you could have a solid knowledge of what you've got and what values you need to upgrade it towards to make it better.
As for character progression, the kind of skill tree we see in Borderlands is an MMO favourite because it's easier to impose balance on that kind of limited system than on a free-build system. This is important in an MMO when you've got two or more player factions and a number of classes to balance, but when you've only got four allied characters, there's plenty of room to use a different system while maintaining balance. Tree systems like this also miss out on a lot of customisation options, which should really be present in a game that exists on such a small character scale like this.
So the imposition of skill trees and spaghetti gear on a FPS core makes the experience fly in two different directions for me. On one hand, the game wants to be a fast-paced action romp; on the other, it wants you to slave over small numerical differences in equipment, many pieces of which are visually identical, or at least extremely similar. Compare and contrast this with Human Revolution, which was a FPS, stealth game and RPG all, but avoided the use of both spaghetti gear and rendered trees almost meaningless by simply having a large amount of small skill trees pertaining to vastly different abilities. Human Revolution felt a lot more organic as a result, and the acquisition of a new weapon or weapon upgrade meant a whole lot more. It was with you for the entire game; in Borderlands, you knew that your current superweapon was going to be obsoleted at some point, and still had to be on the lookout for something better.
tl;dr I felt Borderlands' RPG elements interrupted its FPS gameplay.
Dishonored looks pretty good, and Borderlands 2 seems really dull...
oh
you already decided
>.>
To clarify what I was going to say: Borderlands, to me, seems to be a Torchlight-style "click on the thing until it falls over, then do some accounting" game, but with a different camera angle, and I've never really been able to comprehend why people play those games. It's entirely possible that I'm wrong, because I haven't played either Borderlands, though.
As for Dishonored...I'm about to start it.
^That is because they both can trace part of their game-play heritage back to Diablo 2. As to why people play those kind of games, collecting loot can be fun sometimes.
Yes, it can.
But there are games where you do that and do other stuff too.
This is the reason why I like Diablo-style games. That and I love messing around with skill trees.
>have over $1000 in your bank account during Steam Autumn Sale
>can't spend any of it
Also, Noimporta was right, Amazon has Dark Souls for $15 today and today only.
Diablo 1 and 2 had much, much more going for them than just clicking and looting, though. They were genuinely strong games in their own right.
I've heard Torchlight is a great game but I don't know how it is.
I played it on Easy, so it's kinda my own fault that everything was just click-and-die.
I played it on normal. And as of around two hours in...pretty much the same.
Sounds like it's not as much fun as some people say it is.
Also, I haven't been able to sign into Steam all day long. Trying again and again.
^^I played it on normal and I didn't have this problem. Torchlight II is much better in that regard anyway though.