Heh, yeh, I get a lot of raised eyebrows about my feeling that Portal's a bit overrated but, y'know, I can see it's clever and WHY people really rate but I just don't get the same fun out of it. Usually, anyway, I can't be bothered with puzzle games(I'm one of those freaks who prefer a good crossword,however, which might explain a great deal)and I think I just happened to actually, for a change(usually the only games I consider myself actually some good at are GOW and PES/Fifa!)find it quite simple to sort out. Whatever, people can be quite shirty just because you find you don't share an opinion over Portal!
As for FO3-I was told repeatedly how much I'd love the game and had been a big fan of FO1 and 2 so was really up for FO3 and kit just didn't fly for me at all. A few people I know who share my love of the earlier games also feel it's light on atmosphere so maybe it's something us existing series fans may be more prone to? IDK.
Mainly, however, if you're making a genre splicing game with one half being "shooter" I think you have to go the ME route and make the core shooting really sound and, for me, it wasn't while VATS just felt a bit gimmicky and I didn't feel the percentages worked out as I was playing that well.
What's worrying, though, kis how both Oblivion and FO3 were SO glitchy and buggy(whatever you played on as well)that you could easily get annoyed by having to scrap a long time in game because of one curtailing further progress. Whether this is increasingly prominent in games these days because devs can path post release IDK but some devs(esp Bethesda) seem to be leaning on it way too much-and what of people without their consoles online? Also, devs and publishers sometimes leave things in when they COULD patch them(Tecmo and the camera they fixed for Sigma but never sorted for the original NG2 and Bethesda with a lot of Oblivion's problems spring to mind). Paying for games that, at best, feel unfinished and under tested isn't really on, imho.
As for FO3-I was told repeatedly how much I'd love the game and had been a big fan of FO1 and 2 so was really up for FO3 and kit just didn't fly for me at all. A few people I know who share my love of the earlier games also feel it's light on atmosphere so maybe it's something us existing series fans may be more prone to? IDK.
Mainly, however, if you're making a genre splicing game with one half being "shooter" I think you have to go the ME route and make the core shooting really sound and, for me, it wasn't while VATS just felt a bit gimmicky and I didn't feel the percentages worked out as I was playing that well.
What's worrying, though, kis how both Oblivion and FO3 were SO glitchy and buggy(whatever you played on as well)that you could easily get annoyed by having to scrap a long time in game because of one curtailing further progress. Whether this is increasingly prominent in games these days because devs can path post release IDK but some devs(esp Bethesda) seem to be leaning on it way too much-and what of people without their consoles online? Also, devs and publishers sometimes leave things in when they COULD patch them(Tecmo and the camera they fixed for Sigma but never sorted for the original NG2 and Bethesda with a lot of Oblivion's problems spring to mind). Paying for games that, at best, feel unfinished and under tested isn't really on, imho.
