Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Melissia wrote:

poda_t wrote:-shallow story. As far as i can tell, it's a chapter from DoW2 done in third person, but instead of red, you are blue.

The story was no more shallow than your average game. Although its story twist was given away by trailers, and wasn't that original, at least the interaction between the marines was more about finding a balance between playing by the rules and using one's initiative, rather than purely the latter like most vapid shooter games.

poda_t wrote:-maximum effort was placed in satisfying glamour and appeal to people familiar with the universe. Relic crammed as much crap into it without any thought to unique content or mechanics

I'm unsure s to what you are complaining about here. That they stuck too much to the lore or something?

poda_t wrote:-even with all it's glory, the game offers nothing to distinguish it from anything else I've played.

By that definition, the fps/3ps genre in general hasn't really innovated itself in decades. This statement could be applied to everything from CoD, to MoH, to Battlefield, to Halo, to Gears, to Dead Space, to mass effect or... well... anything in the two genres.

FPS games haven't innovated since quake and wolfenstein! Rabble robble rubble!

Gears, Dead Space, and Mass Effect are Third Person Shooters

Melissia wrote:

poda_t wrote:-maximum effort was placed in satisfying glamour and appeal to people familiar with the universe. Relic crammed as much crap into it without any thought to unique content or mechanics

I'm unsure s to what you are complaining about here. That they stuck too much to the lore or something?

I remember during one of the missions picking up a jump pack. I spent all of two minutes with it. What the hell was the bloody point of that? I spent 2 minutes pouncing aroudn before entering a cave with it and having to discard it. The jump pack was there in story mode for the simple sake of merely being there, not because it served a utilitarian purpose that added something to the story.
This is just the one example. The more I choose to think about, the more the game comes off as a minimum effort cash-grab. All it does is create a poor quality visual image of what I already know of the 41st millenium. With dinky and predictable characters.

poda_t wrote:-even with all it's glory, the game offers nothing to distinguish it from anything else I've played.

By that definition, the fps/3ps genre in general hasn't really innovated itself in decades. This statement could be applied to everything from CoD, to MoH, to Battlefield, to Halo, to Gears, to Dead Space, to mass effect or... well... anything in the two genres.

We know CoD as the game that rewards good players by extending their killstreaks with ridiculous perks. We know Halo as one of the first games to successfuly use the cooperative campaign mode. Battlefield is the father of integrating armored warfare with infantry skirmish in a large environment with rewards for cooperative play. Each of these can be recognized for something, though they do have a habit of recycling the previous formula unto boredom and death. Space marine struck me as Gears of War, reskinned. Simply put, Space marine doesn't offer anything to compete with. It uses peer-to-peer gaming (negative point), it's a 3rd person shooter (why should I care about this specific shooter more than anotehr?), it has gory melee (just like in GoW), and you can select perks (like in CoD). It pretends to reward team-effort (like battlefield), and yet, all it really does is combine these elements, without actually doing anything to distinguish this game, other than relying on the warhamer 40k brand as the magic element to make it stand out.

The addition of a psychic warfare element would have been awesome. You have to channel the spell, and the distance of the target, or their jittery behavior makes it difficult to target them. The longer you channel, the more powerful the spell, but channell too long, and you collect too much warp power in your veins and BAM you rip yourself inside-out into a seething mass of tenticulars. Or incorporate a game mode, where in order to respawn, you need your teammates to come collect your geneseed (so, there'd be a relevancy for the apothecary).

Essentially, I feel that this game failed to deliver even the basics for social or competitive gaming. This game is great for wasting the 5 minutes between now and dinner, or the 3:00am insomniatic spell, worthless for any real entertainment.

The addition of psychic warfare would have just been another weapon you choose from.

What you just described was essentially the Plasma Cannon.

Slarg232 wrote:What you just described was essentially the Plasma Cannon.

yes, and no...

The plasma cannon doesn't kill you on overheat, it just fires. I'd imagine the psychic thing to switch between fire-modes, something close-quarter, directed, and then lanced, and another ranged aoe. Unlike the plasma cannon, the shot could arc around obstacles. They wouldn't have to be aggressive. You could throw up a force wall, that's live while you're casting it, or you could arc lightning around, or blow out some fire out of somwehere. Unlike the plasma cannon, you wouldn't aim it like ordnance...

Let's say, you're opening a warp rift to suck your opponent through. Youd leave your third-person view, while you "move" toward the target destination of casting it. The farther it is, the more effort it takes, the higher the odds of failure, and casting said warp-rift on yourself. This way, you could go around the corner to cast it. And yes, your actual character played would be standing perfectly still and vulnerable while you're elsewhere, leaving your character to get shredded.

rereading my posts, and the responses, this only confirms that relic failed dismally with the oppoortunity before it in creating a boring 3ps instead of running with the options presented.

About Space Marine, I agree with poda_t. It was mediocre, but good fun for fans of the genre and 40k. I didn't pay full price, and I'm glad I didn't.

purplefood wrote:The biggest problem with Call of Duty the people playing it rather than the game itself

Just like 40k...

Or Combat Arms.

While I don't really hate or dislike them the games in the Saint's Row series are some that I just can't seem to get into.

Haha. Some of my favorite games seem to be the ones people are ripping on most. Gears, Mass Effect, Dead Space, Assassin's Creed. That's okay, we don't all have to like the same things.

And to defend Borderlands (just a little), it seems they've listened pretty well about Borderlands' flaws and are trying to remedy them in the second. Borderlands was a fun game that didn't quite live up to its potential, so we'll see how they do with the second.

Not definitive, but just something funny I notice, most people that make fun of Minecraft haven't actually played it. In my experience, anyways.

Now, to get on topic. Call of Duty for sure, played (most) of the games, never cared for them too much. The first Modern Warfare was fun if I had friends online, but that was about all.

Deus Ex: Human Revolution. It just didn't click with me, I don't know why, just wasn't a big fan. Not knocking it, though.

WoW. Coming from someone who played it for years. Over time, it lost its magic, and now, it's just so boring to me, I tried playing it with my friends again and felt like going to sleep because it bored me so much.

Now, for probably the most controversial one. Amnesia. I thought it was garbage. It felt really clunky, the monster looks like a moron, invisible water monster (really? That's what people think is scary?! Don't get me started on this one), the stupid thing the screen does when you're losing sanity makes me sick, I played through the game and could never get myself to give a crap about the story (coming from someone who generally looks for a good story), and all in all, I just wonder why people think this game is so damn terrifying, because I found it to be dull and can't help but slightly judge anyone who thinks it's scary. Sorry if that offends you, not a personal attack, but I think the hype around it is entirely misplaced.

dogma wrote:About Space Marine, I agree with poda_t. It was mediocre, but good fun for fans of the genre and 40k. I didn't pay full price, and I'm glad I didn't.

you're spending too much time agreeing with me, this leaves me concerned about how people perceive me on the forum.

Yeah, fragile breath, those reasons are kind of why I thought penumbra was better.

Just... dunno. Amnesia seemed like a step down, focusing too much on graphics and it really didn't help.

For me it goes as follows:
all the Gears of War games
all the Halo games (except Reach)
all the CoD games
Diablo 3
Starcraft 2
Armored Core 4
DRINK (thank god i got it as a gift or else i woulda stabed myself)

Tazz Azrael wrote:
Diablo 3
Starcraft 2

terrible terrible terrible games both, I agree. I got excited for excrementcraft 2, excpecting an upgrade, but it was the same thing again, quite literally, only prettier with different units. After about 6 hours into the game, I managed to convince myself not to take the box back and not to throw it at the employee behind the counter.

Diablo 3 apears to be the same thing too. Diablo 2 was fun for a while, but it's just the same stuff over and again. why? I would have loved to have seen something like torchlight. on a grander scale.


staring at my dual monitors, I would love to have a space-warfare game that makes use of the extra monitorsr....

I'm no longer terribly fond of World of Warcraft... it's not an awful game, I just got bored of it, am not interested in it, and even everything I've seen of the new upcoming expansion has met with a resounding "meh" from me.


I also did not like StarCraft at all when it was released but I was never a big fan of RTS games to begin with.

I also didn't even buy Diablo 3. I enjoyed the beta where you could only get to level 12, but I was a bit leery of spending money on it. From what I've read and heard, I feel I made the right choice.

I also have little to no interest in Halo, Battlefield, and CoD. I figure I might at some point buy a CoD game, but probably only one since from what I've heard from people who have bought several CoD titles, they all kinda blend together after a while. I'm sure someone somewhere will say "That's not true, you should play them for yourself before you decide, etc etc" to which I say, maybe, but I don't really care. If I do buy one of the games and it turns out that for some reason I really, really like it, then I'd consider buying another one. But right now? Meh. I can think of many other things I'd rather spend that $60 on.

I don't even really *hate* any of those games, I just... don't particularly like them and/or am not terribly interested in them.

Oh boy, I'm probably going to get crucified for this...I didn't like Baldur's Gate.

I'm not saying its a bad game; it's not. A lot of effort was put into it and it's pretty cool having a record of your party's exploits and all that.
It's just that my first impressions of it weren't that favorable; I found it a bit boring, tbh. But then again, I only played about 2 hours of it, right up to when you find that stuttering warrior and that druid lady. Maybe it'll grow on me.
Right now though, it's currently at meh.

And just to lay down even more vitriol, I'm going to add any game that you pay for that has an emphasis on multiplayer over single player.
Why? Because once the servers are dead (or even if you have gakky internet), that's money down the drain. I don't like that. To me its a waste.
Now if a game has excellent single player and excellent multiplayer, then I'm all for it. There aren't many games like that now-a-days, sadly.

Baldur's gate had its share of problems, to be sure.

I enjoyed it, but at the same time, I dont/ know if I could really go back to it after hte various improvements that NWN gave.

CoD 1,2 and 4 i enjoyed but all that came next were just clones of itself
Same goes for halo 1, 2 ,3 and reach, but ODST was pure and utter failure imo

JPRPG's: I don't get the appeal of JRPG's to me RPG's are all about choice and a unique experience which is something that I think WRPG's excel in. In JRPG's you're forced to play Character that you had no influence in creating, go through a story that you can't change, the combat often has a boring turn-base style, the visuals often look gaudy and you play in linear levels. What makes video-games unique and fun over other forms of media (movies, books, etc) is interaction but JRPG's seem to be designed to minimize as much interaction as possible.

Turn-Based Games: I hate turn-based games except for Fire Emblem and Advance Wars games. Mainly because the meaningful decisions that happens in theses games is during combat so that's why I'm glad that Fire Emblem and Advance Wars got rid of all the stuff that makes turn-based games boring (overly pretentious stories that you have to sit and watch, random encounters, dungeon crawling, long animation during turns, too many option in a turn, etc).

Cheesecat wrote:JPRPG's: I don't get the appeal of JRPG's to me RPG's are all about choice and a unique experience which is something that I think WRPG's excel in. In JRPG's you're forced to play Character that you had no influence in creating, go through a story that you can't change, the combat often has a boring turn-base style, the visuals often look gaudy and you play in linear levels. What makes video-games unique and fun over other forms of media (movies, books, etc) is interaction but JRPG's seem to be designed to minimize as much interaction as possible.

Yeah, I don't like JRPG's either. Its not really a role playing game now is it? You just play as generic hero X with personality trait X and some set skills.
I haven't seen any JRPGs so fair that actually allows you to change the story directly.
That, and the combat is silly.
"Oh, look the enemy is several feet away from us. Let's let them charge forward, punch us, and run back to where they were. And after they all had a go, lets do the same to them!"

I don't really like Legacy of Kain to be honest.
I found the game play and the controls to be horrible.
Too clunky for my liking.

CthuluIsSpy wrote:I don't really like Legacy of Kain to be honest.
I found the game play and the controls to be horrible.
Too clunky for my liking.

It went downhill after Soul Reaver on the PS1; Blood Omen 2 was especially poor. Have yet to play the final game but am very interested in studio talk about a reboot of SR1.

RossDas wrote:

CthuluIsSpy wrote:I don't really like Legacy of Kain to be honest.
I found the game play and the controls to be horrible.
Too clunky for my liking.

It went downhill after Soul Reaver on the PS1; Blood Omen 2 was especially poor. Have yet to play the final game but am very interested in studio talk about a reboot of SR1.

Yeah, I played the most recent one, Defiance I think it was, and the controls just felt unnatural to me.
Blood Omen 2 was slightly better, but it didn't feel right.

For me, i'd have to start with WoW...not because its a horrible game per se, but because i am 'forced' to hear about it regularly at work...

Any xbox360 'exclusive' title.

The cod series, starting to get the same with battlefield, but not MoH (probably because of how realistic moh was written)

The madden/ncaa franchises...i just dont see enough change from year to year as they claim, unlike their hockey franchise.


I recently went through searching for a 'good' spaceship type game, and found EvE to be entirely too complicated (settled on star trek online, fyi and having a blast there)


Thats about what ive thought up fpr now...there may be some later on.

Ensis Ferrae wrote:For me, i'd have to start with WoW...not because its a horrible game per se, but because i am 'forced' to hear about it regularly at work...

Any xbox360 'exclusive' title.

The cod series, starting to get the same with battlefield, but not MoH (probably because of how realistic moh was written)

The madden/ncaa franchises...i just dont see enough change from year to year as they claim, unlike their hockey franchise.


I recently went through searching for a 'good' spaceship type game, and found EvE to be entirely too complicated (settled on star trek online, fyi and having a blast there)


Thats about what ive thought up fpr now...there may be some later on.

I heard good things about freespace and descent...though I myself didn't like them that much.
Mainly due to the controls though. Don't get me wrong, the controls aren't horrible and clunky like some other games I've played...they are just a bit complicated for my liking. You might like them though.

Ensis Ferrae wrote:Any xbox360 'exclusive' title.

Why?

CthuluIsSpy wrote:Oh boy, I'm probably going to get crucified for this...I didn't like Baldur's Gate.

I'm not saying its a bad game; it's not. A lot of effort was put into it and it's pretty cool having a record of your party's exploits and all that.
It's just that my first impressions of it weren't that favorable; I found it a bit boring, tbh. But then again, I only played about 2 hours of it, right up to when you find that stuttering warrior and that druid lady. Maybe it'll grow on me.
Right now though, it's currently at meh.

The first one was good. Not amazing but still a good story. It really starts to pick up after you actually get access to Baldur's Gate, which sadly is quite a bit into the game so there's a bit of a trek to get there.

The sequel Shadows of Amn is amazing. A much more involved storyline with more varied locations and greater character development, not to mention the huge increase in character classes available to you (instead of just being a Fighter you could be a Berserker, Kensai or Wizard Slayer, each with their own pros and cons) . Even if you haven't completed the first I'd recommend trying it out.

Also there's a couple of mods out there which let you run BG1 using BG2s improved engine giving you access to the new character classes, better weapon specialisation, slightly better graphics etc. introduced in the second game, which I would recommend.

Since I already flamed a classic, I might as well flame another; Syndicate.
Didn't like it at all. I found the game play to be...awkward. I prefer X-COM, really.

However, the franchise still did not deserve to be butchered by EA.

Slarg232 wrote:

Ensis Ferrae wrote:Any xbox360 'exclusive' title.

Why?

in large part, because I have a PS3..

poda_t wrote:staring at my dual monitors, I would love to have a space-warfare game that makes use of the extra monitorsr....

Apparently EVE Online allows multiple monitor support (if you're willing to quit your day job), never played it myself so not sure of the extent of the support but I was looking to starting up a while ago (then I did the whole 'this is how much time I have vs how much time I need to put in to have fun' thing and decided not to sign up).

As for me, I really dislike the supreme commander games, mainly because games were always 'who gets to the highest tech level 1st wins' that consisted of
-Create a gigantic build queue with an ETA of about 2 hours
-Go get some lunch
-Get up to highest tech level
-start building the massive superheavys
-go watch tv
-come back, win game.

I think its the 'long term investment' style that irks me the most, when I play games I like there to be a lot of action (even in simulations and RTS games), rather than 'two dudes sit at opposite ends of map doing diddly squat for 3 hours, then wipe each other out in 2 minutes' (similarly why I can't get into the Civilisation series and/or the <insert nation>:Total War games either)

Also, I really wasn't a fan of the the baldurs gate and/or nwn games, I just didn't find them very engaging, and is places just really boring...