dwarf

Changed my mind about the game having just finished it. It's meh. The ideas weren't fleshed out, there's no real art behind shop management, the RPG side of the game is all mapped out on a plate (i.e. if you reach the third dungeon, you need to buy the third weapon upgrade). It felt like the game set up some interesting mechanics but didn't properly follow through with them. Art design was fantastic, but the writing was crap - grammar errors all over the place and while I wasn't expecting anything from the story, there wasn't much in the way of charm or humour.

Yeah you're best off playing the game blind. Resist the urge to use guides even for small things. The hints at loading screens change throughout the game if I'm not mistaken so it's unlikely you'll miss out on anything too major.

Although I got the wrong impression from the trailer, the game has grown on me. I was expecting more of a Pokemon-style adventure. There isn't a great deal of depth to it, but the tasks don't feel chore-like to complete and they give you just about enough sense of achievement. Figuring out the menus and systems and becoming more efficient with them is incentive enough to carry on. There's a lot to be said for relaxing games which have you applying a method with gradually increasing levels of complexity. You're never really going to be challenged by Moonlighter, but the predictable nature of the progression comes with its own pleasures.

My PC isn't good enough to run the glut of survival games that have become popular over the past 2 or 3 years (most of which seem to spend a long time in development in Early Access on Steam) but I'm hoping they eventually come to console in some form because some of them look really interesting. I'm talking about games like The Forest, Day Z, H1Z1, Minecraft to a lesser extent, and Battlegrounds, the latter of which has recently caught my attention. Wikipedia defines the genre as: It still feels like a refreshing genre that developers haven't recognised the potential of, and to me the games seem like a response to jaded FPS players who've had enough of tightly-engineered maps that can be mastered and exploited, in favour of large scale maps that allow for slow-burn, emergent battles that become intense because of the downtime. Anyone here tried these games out, or have thoughts about what they'd like to see more of? I kind of love how shitty they look. Throwback to the PS2 era.

@Nicktendo I saw your thread reaction @lostmario You might be breaking the two games per franchise rule, but then it isn't terribly well defined. This thread needs a few more replies I feel Mine: 1) Metroid Prime 2) Super Mario 64 3) Fallout 3 4) The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild 5) Dark Souls 6) Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door 7) Super Smash Bros: Melee 8) The Last of Us 9) Super Monkey Ball 10) Resident Evil 4

Fucking devastated.

How does this look graphically less impressive than the 2013 reboot on previous gen hardware? Is it because of Eidos' involvement in development this time? Crystal Dynamics was approaching Naughty Dog levels of sheen back then.

I seem to remember Ellie raging out with an overkill stabbing moment in the first game, but the beheading at the end of the recent demo felt a little gratuitous and out-of-character. Ronnie said something similar about violence in the Death Stranding thread and I was pleasantly surprised he didn't get shot down. Obviously I'll still be playing the shit out of this but...yeah.

I was a little disappointed to hear it was first person and then I remembered Fallout 3 and Metroid Prime, both of which are in my top 5 games of all time. Projekt Red seems to be the sort of dev who could easily shake up first person exploration games. Imagine a sci-fi FPS with strong RPG elements, tons of non-weapon gadgets, and a Mirrors Edge-style traversal system... that shit would be insane. OK that's not necessarily what we'll get, but I'm curious about the possibilities.

Came for Dreams gameplay, stayed for Death Stranding lookalike dude:

Jesus wept. If genre parameters were that narrow then every new game, book or film would constitute its own unique genre. Genres are fluid and somewhat arbitrarily defined by critics. They change all the time with new ideas, and all works of art straddle a mix of genres to some degree. So to get aggy over a perceived colour inaccuracy is beyond pathetic. As for this game - I'm digging what's been teased so far, and I like how they've gone for an on-the-nose title as well.

LMAO at the Gears announcement. LOL, what was with the switcheroo?Why would they play with their dudebros like that. Bizarre.

Furi's first boss is a tutorial.

I think it's set in several different, less well trodden areas.

I just defeated the androgynous human cyborg that gets queefed out of the robot horde and... I'm just not feeling this game. There's so much going for it - the aesthetic, the music, the inviting open world, the wackiness, the transitions between 2D and 3D etc - but it struck me after a while that it's not actually fun to play. The combat is rigid and dull, the enemy variety is pants, and when you get down to actually exploring the world the invisible walls and dead environment make travel time a pain in the arse. It's like the character is really expressive but there's nothing for it to interact with. I can't muster the enthusiasm to keep picking the items up, or bother engaging with the odd batch of enemies when you can either run past them or pick them off slowly from distance without the need to take any risk at close-quarters. I completed Furi yesterday and there are a lot of similarities between that and Nier. It's not the deepest action game out there but Furi was challenging and kept me coming back for more. Can't say the same for Nier. Cba/10

I don't know what it is but there's something a little bit Cod-like in the shooting mechanics. I don't know if it's the FOV, character model size, or the more predictable recoil patterns or something. Not necessarily a bad thing and I'm still interested in seeing more footage. Seems like a strange map for them to focus on first though.

I like the fluidity of the movement too but I'm not sure the open world suits it. The game is laced with some of the most egregious invisible walls I've ever come across as well.

I'm a news reporter for my local paper, so a little bit different! Argh, I don't know who to believe anymore.

The only thing that made me discount that was the fact it was originally a Vita game. Otherwise yes, looks rad. Worth getting on PS4? I've played a fair bit of Overwatch at mates' houses and it's lit af but I know I'd spend too much time on it. Plus no hype for it. P.S I'm on an apprentice's wage so I'm essentially a pauper

Ha! Completely forgot about that. That's an incredibly tough question and would probably require an essay to answer. Broadly I like games that do interesting things with narrative (form) and games that give you freedom - be it to explore the world or tackle problems. But then I do play a lot of straight-up 3rd person shooters and FPS games if they look pretty and feel satisfying to play. Even there though some the things I mentioned above still apply - for example, I'd take the freedom and creative possibilities offered by Battlefield over the more 'closed' design of Call of Duty. As someone who likes the Souls series, get Nioh. It's really good. If I had infinite time I would definitely consider it. On the last PS4 I played: Uncharted 4, Dark Souls 3, Rocket League, Black Ops 3, Fallout 4, Firewatch, MGS5: Ground Zeroes I recently bought Nier. Of those games, only Uncharted, Firewatch, Rocket League and Nier were really worth playing. Of the stuff that's already out which I haven't played, I'm definitely going to buy: Furi, Moonlighter, What Remains of Edith Finch, and Persona 5 Then the list of unlikely maybes: Detroit, God of War, Nioh, Doom, Prey, The Witcher 3, Monster Hunter, XCom 2 (it's on Plus, might give it a try), Bound, Sonic, Transistor I've yet to be blown away by a PS4 game that really justifies the system (don't get me wrong, there's a hugely varied and solid library), so my hopes are resting on Red Dead and TLoU.

Ideally I'd have something in-between normal and hard - I like the freedom and responsibility of aiming manually on hard mode, but I don't like the one or two-hit deaths. Difficulty is an interesting issue in gaming in general. When your time for playing games is slim sometimes it would be nice to balance the settings to preserve the feeling of being challenged without the hassle of constant death. Yet I understand that being able to massage the difficulty away would take away from certain games like Dark Souls. [Mark Brown covered the subject pretty well]

Just started this on hard mode and died twice at the boss before being booted to the screen. Is it worth persevering with this level of difficult or do the unskippable transitions/cutscenes and punitive checkpoints persist in a similar fashion?

I'm buying this bitch. How much of it is procedurally generated?