The General Videogame Thread

+
I'd say there's a drastic difference between emulating a certain style because one has a vested love and interest in that style...

...and intentionally trying to mimic something else's success in order to capitilize on it.

As long as the artists are working toward an artistic goal, there's no reason not to use what really works and feels right. But if the goal is not artistic, it's literally cheapening the product. I think that leaves a pretty bland taste in people's mouths -- even if the rest of the game or movie is pretty good.
 
How do you guys think "Ghosts of Tsushima" will be?

It looks beautiful visually, but I fear the gameplay might be a bit repetitive.
 
How do you guys think "Ghosts of Tsushima" will be?

It looks beautiful visually, but I fear the gameplay might be a bit repetitive.
apparently is not good. AI is very stupid, combat is unbalanced (the most effective move is very basic), stealth is totally broken, the story is average, and side quests are very repetitive. Also, all boss fights have the same cinematic.
 
apparently is not good. AI is very stupid, combat is unbalanced (the most effective move is very basic), stealth is totally broken, the story is average, and side quests are very repetitive. Also, all boss fights have the same cinematic.
Not what i heard. From what i have seen review range from good to great. Not without issue and maybe style over substance but still fun.
 
In the 2000's there was what is apparently the world's first ice-fishing simulation game, called Pro Pilkki. I seriously doubt anyone here (other than me) has played it because it only has Finnish as a language "option", is old, and of a rather niche genre. BUT, it's an amazing game and would be tons of fun even today.

Anyway, a few days ago I got a much newer (2016) ice-fishing game, called Ice Lakes. Also Finnish, because clearly we are the #1 ice-fishing enthusiasts in the world. :p

Feels more than a little weird to be ice-fishing in mid-July, but it's really enjoyable. I have quite a bit of experience of IRL ice-fishing, and the game does a pretty good job of being a simulation. It would even be possible to play it in VR, but I have neither the PC nor the equipment for that. Oh, and there is a battle royale mode... yes, you read that right: ice-fishing battle royale. :ROFLMAO:

Still miss Pro Pilkki, though. It's got a "sequel", Pro Pilkki 2, but that has none of the original's charm.

(Oh, and "pilkki" is just Finnish for 'ice-fishing'.)
 
apparently is not good. AI is very stupid, combat is unbalanced (the most effective move is very basic), stealth is totally broken, the story is average, and side quests are very repetitive. Also, all boss fights have the same cinematic.
Not what i heard. From what i have seen review range from good to great. Not without issue and maybe style over substance but still fun.

The truth is somewhere in the middle then :p
 

Yeah, they do look very interesting overall, some more than others for me. For instance, I tried the Ghostrunner demo not long ago and it’s a good enough game and I’m a bit interested in playing the full game once it’s released but it didn’t really “grab” me as much as I though it would, and Cloudpunk looks alright but I don’t expect it to blow my socks off.

The cyberpunk-ish/neon-noir-ish games than I’m currently looking forward to the most, apart from Cyberpunk 2077, are Gamedec (this one is looking way better than I expected), The Last Night (if it ever becomes a reality), and Observer: System Redux. Oh, and the (hypothetical) sequel to Deus Ex: Mankind Divided but I’m not holding my breath for that one :LOL:
 
The truth is somewhere in the middle then :p
Not necessarily. My trusty reviewers are usually on spot IMHO (not with those damn scores, those are totally useless).

BUT

since tastes are quite subjective, what "you" love about a game could be what I dislike and what I dislike could be an awful design mistake. :shrug:

The point is, reviews are there only to inform people and if you are sure you want to play a game because you were sold by a specific thing (setting, graphics, gameplay, you name it) then buy it. Or if you don't like a game even if everybody says it's good, don't buy it.
Everything is good except for stupid review bombing.
 
Last edited:
Not necessarily. My trusty reviewers are usually on spot IMHO (not with those damn scores, those are totally useless).

BUT

since tastes are quite subjective, what "you" love about a game could be what I dislike and what I dislike could be an awful design mistake. :shrug:

The point is, reviews are there only to inform people and if you are sure you want to play a game because you were sold by a specific thing (setting, graphics, gameplay, you name it) then buy it. Or if you don't like a game even if everybody says it's good, don't buy it.
Everything is good except for stupid review bombing.

It’s alright, I was being a little facetious with my remark... well, trying to at least, I’m no comedy genius :howdy:

No matter what critics say, from what I’ve seen about Ghost of Tsushima so far it seems to be very inspired gameplaywise by the latest Assassin’s Creed games, for better and worse. So, even though I find its art direction to be one of the best I’ve seen in the industry, I’m not too impressed by its gameplay. It’s not awful, not at all, but quite like with AC: Valhalla I’m a bit exhausted with the Ubi-like formula :sleep:

However, like I also said about AC:V, it’s alright if anyone finds GoT amazing, I can fully respect that. It’s a superbly made production and its shortcomings might not be that important for many.

About review bombings, I fully agree: regardless of what anyone feels about this or any other game, that’s just f**king dumb. Disliking a game to that point is the epitome of being an entitled whino :facepalm:
 
The gameplay looks excellent. I can see some crazy combos being pulled off with the grappling hook and various abilities. Other things like gun sounds and particle effects look unfinished but it's not coming out till next year. They have a long time to polish this Wang.
 
17 minutes of Wangness!

I'm not a fan of that type of irony, but I must confess it fits the silliness of the gameplay. I like it.
Im impressed by the intensity of those 17 minutes, pure adrenaline and several boss fights with slightly different situations. I wonder how long they can keep the game going with that frequency. Also intersting to see a game based on very small arenas with tailored level design to offer pure fun and variety. It's something we don't see often anymor in this world of huge and repetitive open-world aRPGs. It's refreshing. Thumbs up, and I'm optimistic for the game.

On a side note, if anyone is interested in the new crash bandicoot, stay tuned on Friday afternoon (European time). ;)
 
Top Bottom