"This game is worse than I remember"

 Pages PREV 1 2
 

Meiam:

Dalisclock:

Grouchy Imp:
Baldur's Gate 1 & 2 for me. It's not so much that the games have aged poorly or anything like that, it's just when I used to play them back in the day I was used to 2nd Ed D&D rules. Over the years I've moved on to other RPG systems and pretty much forgotten 2nd Ed rules. And going back to them for the first time in years? Jeez, it's tough going.

I played Vanilla BG1 way back around the time it first came out and it was....rough. I do want to play through the games leading up to BG3 here pretty soon(So BG1, BG2 and Siege of DragonsSpear) but I know at least BG1 is not going to be an easy ride going back to it now. I suspect I'll be looking up exploits and optimal builds left and right just to survive through to 2, where the real good stuff apparently is.

Before anyone chimes in with "Play it Blind", I don't have to patience to keep party wiping(which I remember was super easy to do) because you picked the wrong build to start with. It's one of the downsides of WRPGs like Balders gate. I had to restart Planescape Torment a few times before I found out it's easier to play as a magic build and you get access to more of the good dialogue to boot.

Magic is almost always the way to go in WRPG adapted from tabletop. Magic in tabletop usually work where you can cast each spell a number of time before you take a rest. In table top this is usually controlled by the GM setting set point where the party can rest (or really screwing up the party if they take too many rest mid dungeon). But in video game adaptation you can usually rest whenever you want, so that you can use all your amazing one time a day spell every encounter.

For baldur gate that usually mean running a all mage party with one tank guy who just goes first to stop the enemy for a second while you use all your spell on them to immobilize and then nuke them. I really hope BG3 doesn't let the player rest whenever, the source system from divinity original sin 2 was sorta there attempt to limit these kind of ability, but I don't think it really works. To me the obvious answer is to only let player take rest at set point and make those one off (and have the game always make a save from before the area so that the player can always leave the area if they find out they can't complete it mid dungeon).

I liked the Pillars of Eternity model where you had to carry a limited resource but could do it anywhere. I also liked how lower level spells became per combat and you didn't need to rest. I also like the different circles for spells to affecting everyone or just affecting the enemy. I also like the stamina system which lets a few downs before the person is killed.

But then, I've always found the whole 'rest to do spells' thing utterly stupid and is a huge impediment for me to enjoy D&D or games based on it. It doesn't make sense.

trunkage:

But then, I've always found the whole 'rest to do spells' thing utterly stupid and is a huge impediment for me to enjoy D&D or games based on it. It doesn't make sense.

I'm pretty sure it's a balancing mechanic to keep Magic from getting too OP, though I'm hardly an expert on D&D or tabletop gaming so I'm not really in a position to really debate the merits of Vancian Magic vs other types. I think it's just the inherent issue of how to translate the ability to manipulate the laws of nature into gameplay terms(especially tabletop games that were initially based on wargames, like D&D).

CritialGaming:
How dare you sir!?

I'm just kidding, it aint for everyone. Hopefully you give the Remake a chance.

I am hyped for the remake. The original is, just... hrm. There's so much I simply can't get past. Normally I'm not a graphics snob, but holy shit this game is fugly in places. I know I know, early 3D, but meh. Plus it sounds like it has little things about it that would bother me too much otherwise. The remake, however... It sounds a lot more my jam, and I can't wait to see it play out

Dalisclock:

Grouchy Imp:
Baldur's Gate 1 & 2 for me. It's not so much that the games have aged poorly or anything like that, it's just when I used to play them back in the day I was used to 2nd Ed D&D rules. Over the years I've moved on to other RPG systems and pretty much forgotten 2nd Ed rules. And going back to them for the first time in years? Jeez, it's tough going.

I played Vanilla BG1 way back around the time it first came out and it was....rough. I do want to play through the games leading up to BG3 here pretty soon(So BG1, BG2 and Siege of DragonsSpear) but I know at least BG1 is not going to be an easy ride going back to it now. I suspect I'll be looking up exploits and optimal builds left and right just to survive through to 2, where the real good stuff apparently is.

Before anyone chimes in with "Play it Blind", I don't have to patience to keep party wiping(which I remember was super easy to do) because you picked the wrong build to start with. It's one of the downsides of WRPGs like Balders gate. I had to restart Planescape Torment a few times before I found out it's easier to play as a magic build and you get access to more of the good dialogue to boot.

2 is by far the better of the pair. The issue is that old D&D problem - that when your character is low level pretty much everything is a trial, but when you hit kinda level 10 onward that's where all the cool abilities are. As it is with Baldur's Gate 1 & 2. During 1, when you're slowly levelling up your novice character into something worth a damn, the game can be a real slog. But 2, which picks up from the events of 1 and either starts you off with your imported BG1 character (at whatever level they were) or with a brand new character at level 8 (I think), lets you jump straight into the good times.

How dare you sir!?

I'm just kidding, it aint for everyone. Hopefully you give the Remake a chance.[/quote]

I'd imagine at the least, the Remake would have to address some of the pacing problems. Otherwise I foresee a sharp drop off when you have Episode 3, the quest for a dune buggy because our heroes are too obtuse to use whatever transport everyone else in the world uses.

I found a copy of killzone 1 at a thrift store and wanted to checkout the fist "Halo Killer." Holy crap was it clunky, and does the sniper rifle have to sway like a belly dancer's hips?

Grouchy Imp:

Dalisclock:

Grouchy Imp:
Baldur's Gate 1 & 2 for me. It's not so much that the games have aged poorly or anything like that, it's just when I used to play them back in the day I was used to 2nd Ed D&D rules. Over the years I've moved on to other RPG systems and pretty much forgotten 2nd Ed rules. And going back to them for the first time in years? Jeez, it's tough going.

I played Vanilla BG1 way back around the time it first came out and it was....rough. I do want to play through the games leading up to BG3 here pretty soon(So BG1, BG2 and Siege of DragonsSpear) but I know at least BG1 is not going to be an easy ride going back to it now. I suspect I'll be looking up exploits and optimal builds left and right just to survive through to 2, where the real good stuff apparently is.

Before anyone chimes in with "Play it Blind", I don't have to patience to keep party wiping(which I remember was super easy to do) because you picked the wrong build to start with. It's one of the downsides of WRPGs like Balders gate. I had to restart Planescape Torment a few times before I found out it's easier to play as a magic build and you get access to more of the good dialogue to boot.

2 is by far the better of the pair. The issue is that old D&D problem - that when your character is low level pretty much everything is a trial, but when you hit kinda level 10 onward that's where all the cool abilities are. As it is with Baldur's Gate 1 & 2. During 1, when you're slowly levelling up your novice character into something worth a damn, the game can be a real slog. But 2, which picks up from the events of 1 and either starts you off with your imported BG1 character (at whatever level they were) or with a brand new character at level 8 (I think), lets you jump straight into the good times.

I've heard that and the only reason I want to replay 1 is because apparently the expansions were better then the main game and I want to have a good character to jump into 2 with. I do remember the early levels being "Everything can and will kill you because you suck at everything" and it's worse if you don't know how to build a character to survive the early game. If you're into D&D I imagine it was easier but if, like me, BG was your first D&D character building experience, then it becomes a lot tougher.

It feels like 90% of the route to success to these games is picking a good class to start with and knowing how to build it right. I had a real problem with Arcanum due to this very issue, and why I still have yet to make any real progress it in no matter how many times I've tried to get into it.

Admittedly I never played Tabletop D&D because I didn't know anyone who played it(or if they did, I was never told about it/invited) so computer games are the next best thing.

Grouchy Imp:

Dalisclock:

Grouchy Imp:
Baldur's Gate 1 & 2 for me. It's not so much that the games have aged poorly or anything like that, it's just when I used to play them back in the day I was used to 2nd Ed D&D rules. Over the years I've moved on to other RPG systems and pretty much forgotten 2nd Ed rules. And going back to them for the first time in years? Jeez, it's tough going.

I played Vanilla BG1 way back around the time it first came out and it was....rough. I do want to play through the games leading up to BG3 here pretty soon(So BG1, BG2 and Siege of DragonsSpear) but I know at least BG1 is not going to be an easy ride going back to it now. I suspect I'll be looking up exploits and optimal builds left and right just to survive through to 2, where the real good stuff apparently is.

Before anyone chimes in with "Play it Blind", I don't have to patience to keep party wiping(which I remember was super easy to do) because you picked the wrong build to start with. It's one of the downsides of WRPGs like Balders gate. I had to restart Planescape Torment a few times before I found out it's easier to play as a magic build and you get access to more of the good dialogue to boot.

2 is by far the better of the pair. The issue is that old D&D problem - that when your character is low level pretty much everything is a trial, but when you hit kinda level 10 onward that's where all the cool abilities are. As it is with Baldur's Gate 1 & 2. During 1, when you're slowly levelling up your novice character into something worth a damn, the game can be a real slog. But 2, which picks up from the events of 1 and either starts you off with your imported BG1 character (at whatever level they were) or with a brand new character at level 8 (I think), lets you jump straight into the good times.

I like the part where your 6 characters are swinging at the enemy for 15 mins and hit nothing. It's even funnier when the enemy has the same problem.

And when I say funny, I mean incredibly boring and stupid.

Throne of Baal is where your God tier and the combat is wacky and fun

Silentpony:
ODST was great

ODST was only great if you were completely new to the Halo series or just hadn't bought Halo 3 yet.

the game was a mediocre campaign and was a walking simulator from point A to point B for the most part with about 5 minutes of action before doing the next walk from point A to B

ODST included all of the Halo 3 DLC maps in the multiplayer so that was cool but firefight was just a boring horde mode that Gears of War already did better and if you already owned Halo 3 and all the DLC before ODST came then ODST just became a fucking rip off.

ODST was sold as a full price package and the package that was only good if you didn't already own Halo 3 and all its DLC already, if you did then you were just paying full price at launch for a short and extremely mediocre campaign

i played through the entire ODST campaign once and that was more than enough for me, i was so bored i have never felt the need to go back to it and replay it since.

Yoshi178:

Silentpony:
ODST was great

ODST was only great if you were completely new to the Halo series or just hadn't bought Halo 3 yet.

the game was a mediocre campaign and was a walking simulator from point A to point B for the most part with about 5 minutes of action before doing the next walk from point A to B

ODST included all of the Halo 3 DLC maps in the multiplayer so that was cool but firefight was just a boring horde mode that Gears of War already did better and if you already owned Halo 3 and all the DLC before ODST came then ODST just became a fucking rip off.

ODST was sold as a full price package and the package that was only good if you didn't already own Halo 3 and all its DLC already, if you did then you were just paying full price at launch for a short and extremely mediocre campaign

i played through the entire ODST campaign once and that was more than enough for me, i was so bored i have never felt the need to go back to it and replay it since.

See that's how I feel about Master Chief's games. They're so boring. Its the same invulnerable dude fighting the same ducky aliens game after game. ODST at least introduced new characters, and a new atmosphere. And i did play it before Halo 3 and I thought 3 was weaker in every aspect.

Silentpony:
ODST at least introduced new characters, and a new atmosphere.

Every Halo game has introduced new characters. And by those standards, ODST falls flat. Oh sure, you'll get some distinction between the titular ODSTs, but "some" is the key word. Also, the Rookie - a character with no personality whatsoever, a character who, like practically every silent protagonist in gaming, is barely a character at all.

I'll give you the "new atmosphere" thing, but it's an atmosphere that doesn't gel with the series, and more importantly, is impossible to enjoy because it's impossible to see anything or sneak past anything. Also, again, "new atmosphere" isn't unique to ODST - Reach and Halo Wars have significantly different atmospheres from the main games, and are much better than ODST at that.

Hawki:

Silentpony:
ODST at least introduced new characters, and a new atmosphere.

Every Halo game has introduced new characters. And by those standards, ODST falls flat. Oh sure, you'll get some distinction between the titular ODSTs, but "some" is the key word. Also, the Rookie - a character with no personality whatsoever, a character who, like practically every silent protagonist in gaming, is barely a character at all.

I'll give you the "new atmosphere" thing, but it's an atmosphere that doesn't gel with the series, and more importantly, is impossible to enjoy because it's impossible to see anything or sneak past anything. Also, again, "new atmosphere" isn't unique to ODST - Reach and Halo Wars have significantly different atmospheres from the main games, and are much better than ODST at that.

Yeah but Reach and Wars came out after. ODST was the first Halo game that wasn't just centered around Master Chief and Cortana doing the buddy cop routine. And for that I give it props because it was the first attempt to go 'Oh yeah, other people exist in this world" And by new people I mean new main characters, not just a new background exposition character. Truly I think it was a terrible world-crafting choice to have all the Spartans dead save one by the time Halo 1 starts. It meant no one could ever keep up with Chief and his only go-to dialogue choice was to Hmmm and nod to Cortana being kinda snarky. If any character needed to be on the Noble team, it was Chief.

and everyone keeps saying you can't see anything 'cause its night. You guys know you had a flashlight and night vision goggles in that game, yeah? I never struggled to see anything 'cause it was never that dark

Silentpony:

Yeah but Reach and Wars came out after. ODST was the first Halo game that wasn't just centered around Master Chief and Cortana doing the buddy cop routine. And for that I give it props because it was the first attempt to go 'Oh yeah, other people exist in this world"

Okay, fair enough, but that raises the question of what's more important - who does it first, or who does it better? Because without doubt, IMO, Halo Wars and Reach both did the ensemble character act much better than ODST.

Truly I think it was a terrible world-crafting choice to have all the Spartans dead save one by the time Halo 1 starts.

Except they're not all dead.

I know, the manual of H1 states that they are, and you can attribute that to a Watsonian explanation (at the time, John genuinely believed he was the last Spartan-II left) or a Doylist one (lack of communication with Nyland). Honestly, the latter is far more likely, considering that Halo: Reach is in sharp contrast to Halo: The Fall of Reach, to the point where Halsey's journal had to jump through hoops to bring both works together. But that aside, John isn't the only Spartan-II left.

Though personally speaking, I think the Spartans are over-exposed, or, rather, they're over-exposed as of Halo 4. The Spartan-I to Spartan-III Programs each have in-universe rationale and are each distinct from each other. The Spartan-IV Program is every Halo fanfiction writer's wet dream come to life. And before you point it out, yes, I've written plenty of Halo stuff, no, I never dabbled with "Spartan Fours" before the series actually went with it.

It meant no one could ever keep up with Chief and his only go-to dialogue choice was to Hmmm and nod to Cortana being kinda snarky.

You're underselling his dialogue there. Look at Halo 1 to Halo 3 - John's dialogue increases with every game, and increases even further with Halo 4. It's possible I'm reading too much into this, but just as possible (IMO) that I'm not, that the increase in dialogue is representative of a humanising factor. Certainly the humanisation of John is a key theme in Halo 4, and one of the few things the game does well.

If any character needed to be on the Noble team, it was Chief.

Yeah, except that wouldn't be possible, since he was with Blue Team at the time, and wouldn't even know that Noble Team existed, since they were a Spartan-III group, not a Spartan-II one. Also, Noble Team's characters, while generic, are at least distinct from each other, to the point where Noble Six has the least personality of the bunch. Even if canon prohibited it, what would adding John change at this point? I don't know, but it would take away the emotional impact of Six's last stand and whatnot.

and everyone keeps saying you can't see anything 'cause its night. You guys know you had a flashlight and night vision goggles in that game, yeah? I never struggled to see anything 'cause it was never that dark

Yes, I used the VISR system. Yay, I get to see faint green outlines that are barely visible in the dark, as blue and green plasma bolts come my way from Brutes (which should really be Elites, but fine, whatever).

trunkage:
System Shock 2

This was just irritating to replay. Everything feels really jank and the only good part of the story is the twist. The rest is fetch em quests that I just stopped caring about.

Baulder's Gate 1 and to a lesser extent 2

BG1 would only be a single mission into today's RPG landscape. I doesn't really bother having anything story related until you reach BG, which you are blocked from unless you somehow won the lotto. I remember slight adventures in other parts of the land but nothing that sticks.

BG2 is way better, and the side mission are far more memorable. By Throne of Baal, you are god tier and its ridiculous and finally makes BG combat fun.

As much as I respect System Shock 2; Bioshock 1, Dead Space, Prey, and Evil Within 2 pretty much fill that void and is nowhere near as tedious or obtuse. Speaking of all things Shock, I consider Bioshock Infinite the worse in the series, and has only gotten worse with time. Wasted potential in terms of themes (racism is window dressing and barely touched upon) and story, limited level design, the horrible two weapon limit, regenerating health [1] popularized by COD/cover shooters following gears, and a fuck you of an ending. Honestly, the only games that copied the get behind cover to heal are the older WWII CODs (2, 3, WaW), COD4, and Bulletstorm. Bulletstorm at least let you use three weapons & in the updated version, you get a weapon wheel in NG+. That makes it even better than before. Everything else from that generation ages like milk.

[1] I know it's a regenerating shield in this case with a fixed health meter, but the concept is still the same.

CoCage:

trunkage:
System Shock 2

This was just irritating to replay. Everything feels really jank and the only good part of the story is the twist. The rest is fetch em quests that I just stopped caring about.

Baulder's Gate 1 and to a lesser extent 2

BG1 would only be a single mission into today's RPG landscape. I doesn't really bother having anything story related until you reach BG, which you are blocked from unless you somehow won the lotto. I remember slight adventures in other parts of the land but nothing that sticks.

BG2 is way better, and the side mission are far more memorable. By Throne of Baal, you are god tier and its ridiculous and finally makes BG combat fun.

As much as I respect System Shock 2; Bioshock 1, Dead Space, Prey, and Evil Within 2 pretty much fill that void and is nowhere near as tedious or obtuse. Speaking of all things Shock, I consider Bioshock Infinite the worse in the series, and has only gotten worse with time. Wasted potential in terms of themes (racism is window dressing and barely touched upon) and story, limited level design, the horrible two weapon limit, regenerating health [1] popularized by COD/cover shooters following gears, and a fuck you of an ending. Honestly, the only games that copied the get behind cover to heal are the older WWII CODs (2, 3, WaW), COD4, and Bulletstorm. Bulletstorm at least let you use three weapons & in the updated version, you get a weapon wheel in NG+. That makes it even better than before. Everything else from that generation ages like milk.

And I want to be clear, SS2 was great when it first came out. I respect it. It lead the way for level design, interconnectedness, story telling and plot twists. I also wont ever play it again after my last playthrough a couple of years ago.

[1] I know it's a regenerating shield in this case with a fixed health meter, but the concept is still the same.

Theme Park on the Mega Drive! I used to love that game and completed all areas - but I tried it recently and it's god awful in 16bit if you try it today. I should try the PC version instead to see if it's loads better. By contrast, Theme Hospital is still amazing. "Doctor required in slack tongue clinic"

Hawki:

Silentpony:
ODST at least introduced new characters, and a new atmosphere.

Every Halo game has introduced new characters. And by those standards, ODST falls flat. Oh sure, you'll get some distinction between the titular ODSTs, but "some" is the key word. Also, the Rookie - a character with no personality whatsoever, a character who, like practically every silent protagonist in gaming, is barely a character at all.

I'll give you the "new atmosphere" thing, but it's an atmosphere that doesn't gel with the series, and more importantly, is impossible to enjoy because it's impossible to see anything or sneak past anything. Also, again, "new atmosphere" isn't unique to ODST - Reach and Halo Wars have significantly different atmospheres from the main games, and are much better than ODST at that.

He has "some" but only some. He plays around with one clue, and I can only assume the flashbacks are him trying to peace together the events. And that's it. We know he's an FNG, and despite being smaller than the token big guy, can carry a turret gun like a Spartain.

saint of m:
and I can only assume the flashbacks are him trying to peace together the events.

I doubt it. There's no way he can piece together the flashbacks just from a single object.

The flashbacks are definitely happening, but I think it's more an accurate depiction rather than the Rookie's fever dream.

and despite being smaller than the token big guy, can carry a turret gun like a Spartain.

Yeah, that.

It's so jarring, how we're meant to be an ODST, but we're also capable of flipping vehicles or pounding on Covenant vehicles hard enough to break their hull to shove a grenade in them. I mean, sure, why not?

I did recently replay Halo 1 since it got added to the MCE.

I definitely do not remember Assault on the Control Room being this much of a drag. There's definitely a few rooms, bridges and elevators too many. Back in the day I remembered it being the 'fun' mission cause it had a fair bit of vehicle usage(Banshees, Scorpion etc.) and potential stealthy segments(some rooms you can sneak around the sleeping grunts and stealthily take out the few elites and jackals to save yourself a lot of trouble). But man, you barely need the Scorpion. You have to walk hella far to secure yourself Banshees, and there's a part where if you fail to get the Banshee(the Elites can board them pretty quickly), then you are stuck climbing down the building and doing a lot more fannying about. There's just sooo many rooooms of enemiesss. Doesn't help that you have to return to the same map for the Two Betrayals.

The Library... well is still just as awful as it was back then.

Dicking around in MP is just as fun as it was though.

===

My main issue with Halo Reach is... why Noble Team? In retrospect, I think it would've been a great place to introduce Blue Team. I read the books, so I'm a bit of a fanboy when it comes to certain characters. I haven't played 4/5 yet, but I heard Blue Team gets added as characters. If H5 ever gets to PC, I'd be right at home with them since I read the books but I can imagine the games only players going - who the hell are these guys?

I suppose Bungie never planned on connecting the games and books too much and couldn't have guessed what 343 would've done.

But even before Reach came out, there was some marketing and silhouettes of the Spartan team and I was absolutely going all - oh man this better be Blue Team or something!

 Pages PREV 1 2

Reply to Thread

Posting on this forum is disabled.