It looks way too expensive for what it is. When it drops below $20 I might give it a go. It's by the same people who made Left 4 Dead, and that game had the exact same problem. It was fun, but way, way too expensive for what it was at launch.
evolve seems worse though. actually, to clarify my stance, i thought l4d was priced just fine. that game was executed perfectly with years of free additional content (for pc). if someone can correct me, evolve looks like it's just one type of mode? 4 vs 1 scenario? doesn't seem like any lasting appeal to me.
I think it actually looks like it could be kind of fun. It's basically hide and go seek with 4 hunters and a monster. It just doesn't look like $60 + DLC kind of fun. More like $7.50 during a Steam sale level of fun.
The Witcher 2 The graphics are nice, but it's like someone took a steaming hot dump all over the controls. They're so clunky and overly complicated, and everything falls apart as soon as you enter combat. The clowns who designed this need to play Skyrim or Fallout 3 and see how RPG controls are done. Also the voice acting is very bad. Another $3 down the drain, just like with the first game. Hopefully I've learned my lesson and don't buy the Witcher 3 when it's $3 on Steam. I'd rather have a burrito for my money than another one of these shitty games.
Actually I think Batman or Shadow of Mordor should set the bar for action RPG combat. Skyrim is a great RPG but it's combat has always been plain and boring. Fallout 3 is perfect for a ranged turned based game but wouldn't work well in multi-opponent melee. Batman mastered it. Shadow of Mordor changed it to suit it's purpose. Action RPG melee combat should be like that.
Yeah you're right. Shadow of Mordor had excellent controls and combat, and definitely set the bar very high. But even Skyrim is leagues better than Witcher 2, which has controls, combat, and an interface so bad I would consider it unplayable. It's like no one who designed the Witcher games has played any modern action RPGs with good controls and streamlined interfaces. The combat in the Witcher games is just so clunky and overcomplicated. The story might be amazing, but I'll never know because there's no way I'm going to slog through 40 hours of this shit.
Well it does seem that a few people hate the combat. I don't recall having an issue with it but it's been about 3 years since I played it.
The bit I didn't like with Shadow of Mordor was the two button presses for special attacks/moves. Having X + S, S + T, T + O and O + X all mapped to things was a bit of a pain with the last being the worst. Getting your thumb in position to hit O + X (which I think was brand) after pressing Square for attacks or triangle for dodge was a bit of a faff. I think execute was X and Square so that wasn't too hard and it was the most useful. I am still on Lords of the Fallen. I find that bigger slower weapons are the way to go, don't bother with speed as you can tank everything pretty easily even with the starting shield. The problem with this is that the enemies also tank really well, just getting a hit on anything with a shield can be a pain, I find I shield bash whilst running and then mash attack hoping to hit. Having poison runes on your weapon is a must, if you can land a hit on something with a shield even if you only chip at them through the shield from then on they will die. The game is far less punishing than Souls, you can easily kill an enemy and then run back to the checkpoint to regain all your HP if you want to. Using a checkpoint doesn't respawn enemies, they only respawn if you move area or die so clearing areas is actually really easy. I have found the bosses a little easy too, I have killed most of them on my first attempt although the one I got to yesterday (Annihilator) did kill me twice before I had to turn it off and go do something else. Its a good game but it isn't as hard as a souls game.
Tomb Raider Reboot: So far so good. Liking the hunting aspect of the game so far and it being a bit like uncharted is also quite good.
I bought Dying Light and it's good-ish. I don't really get excited about the idea of playing it but it's perfectly fine as a game.
Far Cry 4 To those that thought it was exactly the same as Far Cry 3 you are wrong. Far Cry 4 has Elephants and Far Cry 3 didn't. Other than that it's exactly the same.
@alterego: I picked up the golf club but I'm struggling - mainly with low power shots and putting. Any tips? Had a go at your course but quit in the second hole after blasting a short range shot off target. It's not fair I tell you.
Picked The Order 1886 and got through first two chapters. Looks sooo good but the gameplay somehow doesn't stand, it's just so basic. Hide, shoot, watch an animation. What keeps me playing is the insane level of details put into the visuals. I would really like to see more games using this engine.
Swing tempo is the key in that game, and I had to play a couple of 18 hole rounds to really start to get a feel for it. For shorter shots like chipping and putting, keep an eye on how far back the club goes in your back swing. The further back it goes, the longer the potential distance. On the follow through, keep the tempo fairly relaxed, like maybe 1/3 to 1/2 the speed of your driving, depending on distance. There's a bit of trial and error, but just start out focused on a relaxed forward tempo and you'll get the hang of it with some repetition. Don't get jabby! Smoooooooth. Short putts are especially like that. I also like to use the 'flop' swing setting quite a bit around the green. Ball goes higher and stops faster.
Homeworld Remastered I can't believe how well this game has aged. It puts modern strategy games to shame in terms of its gameplay. There's still really nothing like it. It also looks fantastic. The game always had great art direction, and with a graphical overhaul it looks like a modern game. So far it's a 10/10. They took one of the gems of the golden age of PC gaming and made it even better. I just wish they had included Cataclysm, which was one of the best expansion packs I've ever played. If you've never played Homeworld, basically take a scenario similar to the Battlestar Galactica remake. You've got a rag tag fleet of refugees fleeing from a world that got nuked trying to find their fabled home planet while fighting against an evil empire. There are cryogenically frozen colonists on a mother ship that needs to be protected at all costs. The fleet carries over from mission to mission, and you can capture enemy ships, so it's often better to salvage enemies rather than destroy them. I also remember there being a massive, epic battle at the end of the game with the imperial fleet in orbit over the homeworld, so you really need to have your shit together by the end of the game. Hopefully this gets enough support that Gearbox makes Homeworld 3.
I'm gonna pick that title up at some point soon. you're correct in that it aged wonderfully. I actually picked up the original around 2008 and it even looked fine back then. the learning curve is pretty steep as the combat is so deep. you even have elevation as a tactic. I thought sins of a solar empire's learning curve was fairly rough. homeworld took it to a whole new level and it's older.