You'll need to invest in a better chair, my friend.Le Saboteur said:Playstation, of course. I thought about obtaining it for PC, but I spend enough time in front of a computer as is. Plus, I would rather sit on my couch.
You'll need to invest in a better chair, my friend.Le Saboteur said:Playstation, of course. I thought about obtaining it for PC, but I spend enough time in front of a computer as is. Plus, I would rather sit on my couch.
Finn said:You'll need to invest in a better chair, my friend.
...and now you're eagerly awaiting for Black Ops 2 to come out?Nurhachi1991 said:I played the Witcher 2 for a while hated the game play though. I got Dishonored when it came out and only played the first 3 levels so far. I killed everyone in the golden cat
Finn said:...and now you're eagerly awaiting for Black Ops 2 to come out?
The Drifter said:I've heard good things about Dishonored, but I'm saving my cash for Assassin's Creed 3 instead
The Drifter said:...but I'm saving my cash for Assassin's Creed 3 instead.
Le Saboteur said:And you're still saving?
Finn said:I finished my second playthrough of Fallout New Vegas today. After what could be described as four months of very meticulous gaming, as I hardly touched other titles during said time.
When I re-installed the game, the plan was to simply check out the DLC content, using my previous character. But in the end, I ended up making a whole new Courier simply because I'd made some choices with the last one that felt a little off in retrospect.
Now, the game world in New Vegas is a sandbox in every sense of the word. It's not simply that the world itself is mostly void of invisible walls insurmountable fences, it's also a narrative sandbox. The thing is, most open world games still have a very linear story structure. You'll have to complete objective or mission or quest A to move on to B and then that to get to C and so forth. In the meanwhile, you can always roam the world in search of side activities, but the story doesn't really edge forward unless things are done in certain secquence. In the Fallout games, however, you can simply ignore all the pointers you're given and go your own way if you will.
Now, most of the games based on open narrative don't really have much of a narrative at all. One is simply given an overarching goal and then left to ones own devices pursuing it. Fallout 3 mostly does this (and is often berated for having a weak plot because of it). At the beginning the game simply tells you to find your dad and leaves it at that. There is a trail of breadcrumbs to follow, but they're very few and easily scripted into submission if the player decides to do things differently.
New Vegas, however, takes a very different path. Even if there's a way to ignore it all, it still constantly gives the player direction. In a sense, when most sandbox games still force you down the linear path and try to hide it in an open world, it felt as if New Vegas was an open world that hides a linear path. And soon it became sort of a game within a game or a goal that overarches even the actual main quest: to find this path.
Okay, now that I'm done, do I think I succeeded? Well... let's just say that I do, and leave it at that. There definitely is a way to play the game in a manner where you constantly seem to have some narrative motivation from moving from one place to another other than simple gamer's curiosity, and never run into a quest-giver and then notice you've already done the thing s/he wants you to do. Now, it does require some premature knowledge and willful ignorance at times, so it's probably something one is not likely to experience at first playthrough. But it's definitely there for those who want as story-woven experience as possible.
In the end, it turned out to be an experience that perhaps revealed me a little more about the nature of gaming in general than the game itself.
Okay, enough about that. When I began that little experiment in late July, I predicted I'd be done in a couple of months' time, so that I could then just move on and sample whatever the late-year release season brings along. Well, given how New Vegas is pretty much the only game I've played during the past few months... so much for that plan. Now I've got one loose-woman of a backlog to dig into, not only games released recently, but some from earlier quarters as well, since most of this year has been spent playing those epic RPGs, (first Mass Effect 3 in spring, then The Witcher 2 EE over summer and now this).
But some good came out of this as well, given how my most recent engagement kinda put these other interesting titles to the backburner and made me postpone pouring some of my hard-earned monies in them at the moment they were out. Now then, the recent Steam sale allowed me to pick up some of them with half the price already, leaving me a little more to invest than I originally predicted.
But now, time to go play... catch-up.
The Drifter said:You would love Far Cry 3, Montana. I disliked part 2, but adore this one. It is my game of the year, and most likely in my top five of the past decade. All that was wrong in FC 2, they fixed. FC 3 is MILES better. It's even got an Indy reference in there. I implore you to try this gem out. I will review it here when I am done with it. 15 hours in so far.
Might be due to the fact that they aren't really FPSes, but RPGs. The shooting mechanics are nothing but something that's been implemented on the top. The core game is elsewhere.Montana Smith said:Fallout 3 and Fallout: New Vegas remain the most enjoyable games I've ever played. Not that I play many games now, though.
Other first person shooters seem lacking after being immersed in the world of Fallout. Your actions have real consequences on the world and its inhabitants.
The fire mechanics that never got old and the novel setting were pretty much the only things that kept me connected enough with Far Cry 2 to warrant a playthrough. The gameplay got repetitive quick and some of the design choices (like those irregular malaria attacks) were downright silly.Montana Smith said:I dipped into Far Cry 2 a few times recently, and the only thing it really has going for it over the Fallouts are driving, scenery and fire. (It's frustrating that it takes so many bullets to kill a person up close, but only one sniper shot if you can make it).
Finn said:Might be due to the fact that they aren't really FPSes, but RPGs. The shooting mechanics are nothing but something that's been implemented on the top. The core game is elsewhere.
Finn said:The fire mechanics that never got old and the novel setting were pretty much the only things that kept me connected enough with Far Cry 2 to warrant a playthrough. The gameplay got repetitive quick and some of the design choices (like those irregular malaria attacks) were downright silly.
Finn said:From what I've gathered from Far Cry 3 from external sources, it goes miles inroad to amend it all. It's still not a deep RPG of course, but the best bits from FC2 still seem to be there, and the rest of it is actually fun this time around. Definitely one to look into, once an opportune moment comes.
I'mBatman said:Would anyone o as far to say that Connor is a better (backstory/motivations-wise) character than Ezio?
Finn said:The thing I'm playing currently is Assassin's Creed III, and I guess there isn't really need for that many elaborate words for this one.
The Drifter said:You would love Far Cry 3, Montana.
Finn said:The fire mechanics that never got old and the novel setting were pretty much the only things that kept me connected enough with Far Cry 2 to warrant a playthrough.