If we simply go by the title I'd say Far Cry 2. Technically sound game, looked pretty enough for its time. The subjective qualities, the storyline, characters and so on were rubbish however.
Dead Space was rather lonely, you only got the odd radio chat through from your two team mates neither of which you could fully trust. In Dead Space 2 you couldn't walk 5 steps without another human cahracter especially that woman who is completely forgettable talking with you. A big part of a horror amtosphere is to feel alone and powerless. Dead Space 1 managed alone but failed on powerless, The Plasma cutter alone could DESTROY enemies. Dead Space 2 failed on both alone and powerless therefore it wasn't as scary. (I still enjoyed the game though) Oh also Issac being silent doesn't make you feel like him but it does make him seem more distant from the other characters whcih enchances his loneliness.JesterRaiin said:Dead Space 2.
It's superior in most ways to its predecessor, however... Meh. There's something missing. I don't know, maybe i got used to silent Isaac or something...
That was poor objectively they made so many bad design choices it's unbelieveable just look at the travel times for every mission and how monotonous and routine it was to drive from location to location, stopping to take out a boring checkpoint, repair car, keep driving, rinse repeat.Istvan said:If we simply go by the title I'd say Far Cry 2. Technically sound game, looked pretty enough for its time. The subjective qualities, the storyline, characters and so on were rubbish however.
Believe it or not I have heard of people who felt it was a brilliantly designed and deep game. Design isn't a science, by objective I mean the technical point, and in my experience it worked well and looked good at the time, though a glorified tech demo is still a tech demo.Michael Hirst said:That was poor objectively they made so many bad design choices it's unbelieveable just look at the travel times for every mission and how monotonous and routine it was to drive from location to location, stopping to take out a boring checkpoint, repair car, keep driving, rinse repeat.
It looked good, I don't dispute that but it incorporated many elements one would see in an open world RPG but without being truly structured as such which lead to predictable encounters and an upgrade system that was never compensated for in the difficulty level. Taking down checkpoints and doing side missions were grinding elements, the design for the open world meant that all encounters had to be balanced for someone who hadn't unlocked anything so each checkpoint could only number with a few men because what if you'd just wandered in there with the starting equipment?Istvan said:Believe it or not I have heard of people who felt it was a brilliantly designed and deep game. Design isn't a science, by objective I mean the technical point, and in my experience it worked well and looked good at the time, though a glorified tech demo is still a tech demo.Michael Hirst said:That was poor objectively they made so many bad design choices it's unbelieveable just look at the travel times for every mission and how monotonous and routine it was to drive from location to location, stopping to take out a boring checkpoint, repair car, keep driving, rinse repeat.
My older brother raved and raved about how great Uncharted was, so I finally got around to trying it and...yeah. It just did nothing for me. I could understand what he saw in the game, but personally, nothing. I just found myself wishing I was playing something else.DracoSuave said:Uncharted. There, I said it. I didn't really like it that much.
I can see the appeal tho, and what it is to them.
This. As a fantasy world, I just can't seem to enjoy it. Although to be fair, Skyrim does look pretty awesome.endtherapture said:Elder Scrolls games. Everyone loves them, but to me the gameworlds just feel empty and lonely and too vast and I don't see the point in them - they're just like an offline MMORPG. I can understand why people like them and they're of course massive achievements but I just don't want to waste my hours on them.
One could also make the case that it was a design choice to leave out friendly AI, though I really don't feel like defending this tech demo more than I have to. Again, I heard praise about the stealth system being briliant and in my own experience it worked perfectly fine.Michael Hirst said:There's also fairly objective disputes with the game such as a stealth system that only works half of the time and the developers being completely unable to program friendly AI when you work for that faction then just leaving it out of the game completely.
How you prefer factions to be handled is a subjective, not an objective matter.Michael Hirst said:Lets also not forget how it introduces factions that have almost no effect on gameplay, you end up working for both no matter what because you can't progress otherwise...so what's the point? You're supposed to introduce 2 opposing factions with conflicting ideologies to add depth and make the player choose one of them to suppport, Far Cry 2 doesn't let you do this, instead you work for and get betrayed by both making the whole thing rather worthless.
Same here, when friends play them I get all excited and shout stuff like "reload" or "top left" or "GRENADE!" but when I pick up the controller I can play a few rounds and then it just falls of me. And the thing that bugs me is that I don't know why...Angry Camel said:The COD and Battlefield franchises. Both look fun and I enjoy watching them being played, but I can rarely stand to play them for too long.