General Gaming Thread

[DavidMarrio]

Got a free copy of Vampyr from my friend who reviews games for a couple of websites and got given an extra code. Sweet!!!  

[apsham]

Lucky you. All I got was a free copy of Shaq Fu because I bought that terrible NBA Playgrounds game.

It took over 3 minutes to initially boot up, and then proceeded to be suuuuuuper racist and homophobic within like, 5 minutes of gameplay.

[OctoberRaven]

2 hours ago, DMo Salah said:

Got a free copy of Vampyr from my friend who reviews games for a couple of websites and got given an extra code. Sweet!!!  

How is it? I looked at it but I don't think my computer can handle it.

[Hellraiser]

6 hours ago, Benji said:

I think it was the first one on PlayStation. Yeah, I meant it "died" if you played long enough not de-evolved, sorry.

That makes more sense. This wasn't a problem to me since I never played the game long enough for this to happen because the version of the game I own has a game-breaking bug which cause the Agumon which is supposed to let you into a castle it is guarding not to respond to you at all. 

[=BK=]

It didn't take too long to happen. It's not like you'd have two Digimon througout the course game. A single Digimon might make it through three events then it just reverts to an egg to start over with which isn't even inline with the show. Angemon only reverted all the way back to an egg when he sacrificed himself to kill Devimon. At most all the other partner Digimon revert to their baby form with food and rest letting them Digivolve back to their higher levels for battle. Only the first Digievolution into a form needed the desperation factor.

I get that they wanted you to try all sorts of Digimon instead of picking one and running the whole game with it but the way it was done was terrible and the only real flaw of the game.

 

[thatshortguy]

Bloodstained:  Curse of the Moon boss question:

Second phase of the two-headed dragon...the hell have you fine people done to beat dat boss?

[DavidMarrio]

19 hours ago, OctoberRavenO said:

How is it? I looked at it but I don't think my computer can handle it.

So far I'm enjoying it, It looks good and the premise is quite interesting but it could be built upon more and there are little tiny flaws which if they were improved upon slightly would help the game massively.  It's one of them games were I could easily see it being a cult favourite if you get me. It's a 7/10 but it had the potential to be more.  I wouldn't pay full price for it though I'd say that. 

[OctoberRaven]

22 minutes ago, DMo Salah said:

So far I'm enjoying it, It looks good and the premise is quite interesting but it could be built upon more and there are little tiny flaws which if they were improved upon slightly would help the game massively.  It's one of them games were I could easily see it being a cult favourite if you get me. It's a 7/10 but it had the potential to be more.  I wouldn't pay full price for it though I'd say that. 

If you're familiar with Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines, how would you compare the two gameplay wise? I mean, I know Vampyr is in Victorian London, but I mean like exploration, talking to NPCs, open-endedness that kind of thing.

[JasonM]

12 hours ago, OctoberRavenO said:

If you're familiar with Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines, how would you compare the two gameplay wise? I mean, I know Vampyr is in Victorian London, but I mean like exploration, talking to NPCs, open-endedness that kind of thing.

I've been playing a bit VampYr the past few days, it's a pretty fun game, really good sense of atmosphere. It's obviously not a triple A title in how it plays, and there's a few issues here and there, but nothing that turns me off from the game. The combat is Dark Souls like with dodging and attacking being the key to surviving battles. But it also reminds me of Ciri sections in Witcher 3, where you zip-dodge and razzle-dazzle the shit out everyone.

It also actually takes place in Post-victorian London, 1918 just after the war and right in the middle of the Spanish Flu outbreak. It's this very interesting mix of victorian elements and the slow creep of a more modern time, and it just gives those classic Dracula vibes when you're walking around in a trenchcoat at night.

The biggest part I love is that the difficulty is tied into your general morality. you can make the game easier or harder depending on how 'good' you want to be, you get XP in the game for killing and missions, sure. But those are marginal amounts compared to finding a healthy NPC and ripping his throat out. This kills the NPC, which in turn affects the district you're in, and even has ripples towards other npc's that have social connections with them.

So if you want to be a good guy, that means not eating NPC's, maybe only preying on the scum of society. That means you get less XP, but it does mean the city becomes healthier because you're not creating a trail of dead bodies.

Additionally the more you help NPC's, the healthier they get, which means they become worth more xp. So you're also rewarded for showing restraint and not eating everyone in sight, you're cultivating your XP. So even when you're on an evil playthrough you have incentive to help people out. Will you help the people of London because you want to make the city better, or because you want to become the strongest most unstoppable Vampire ever?

It's a really unique premise, and something that would really only work in a AA title like this one. I love the moral quandary of handicapping myself by being nice, because it's a direct inversion of where every other RPG handicaps you for being an evil prick.

Like, if you can get the game for 30 bucks, that's great, I think it's a truly unique game that has issues but brings such a unique style and premise to the table that it holds its own against bigger titles.

It's no VTM, but it kinda scratches the same itch, arguably better than VTM did due to the unique and realy well-done feeding/leveling/difficulty mechanic they put in.

Edited June 7, 2018 by Jasonmufc

[DavidMarrio]

1 hour ago, Jasonmufc said:

I've been playing a bit VampYr the past few days, it's a pretty fun game, really good sense of atmosphere. It's obviously not a triple A title in how it plays, and there's a few issues here and there, but nothing that turns me off from the game. The combat is Dark Souls like with dodging and attacking being the key to surviving battles. But it also reminds me of Ciri sections in Witcher 3, where you zip-dodge and razzle-dazzle the shit out everyone.

It also actually takes place in Post-victorian London, 1918 just after the war and right in the middle of the Spanish Flu outbreak. It's this very interesting mix of victorian elements and the slow creep of a more modern time, and it just gives those classic Dracula vibes when you're walking around in a trenchcoat at night.

The biggest part I love is that the difficulty is tied into your general morality. you can make the game easier or harder depending on how 'good' you want to be, you get XP in the game for killing and missions, sure. But those are marginal amounts compared to finding a healthy NPC and ripping his throat out. This kills the NPC, which in turn affects the district you're in, and even has ripples towards other npc's that have social connections with them.

So if you want to be a good guy, that means not eating NPC's, maybe only preying on the scum of society. That means you get less XP, but it does mean the city becomes healthier because you're not creating a trail of dead bodies.

Additionally the more you help NPC's, the healthier they get, which means they become worth more xp. So you're also rewarded for showing restraint and not eating everyone in sight, you're cultivating your XP. So even when you're on an evil playthrough you have incentive to help people out. Will you help the people of London because you want to make the city better, or because you want to become the strongest most unstoppable Vampire ever?

It's a really unique premise, and something that would really only work in a AA title like this one. I love the moral quandary of handicapping myself by being nice, because it's a direct inversion of where every other RPG handicaps you for being an evil prick.

Like, if you can get the game for 30 bucks, that's great, I think it's a truly unique game that has issues but brings such a unique style and premise to the table that it holds its own against bigger titles.

It's no VTM, but it kinda scratches the same itch, arguably better than VTM did due to the unique and realy well-done feeding/leveling/difficulty mechanic they put in.

Said it better than I would have haha!!

I'd definetly say it's worth picking up but either wait till it gets cheaper or if you've got old games to trade in do that. 

[Meacon Keaton]

That sounds like a blast. I'll definitely be getting that when it drops to $30/$40. 

[Owen]

On 05/06/2018 at 22:52, Pentashám Jr. said:

Lucky you. All I got was a free copy of Shaq Fu because I bought that terrible NBA Playgrounds game.

Hold up. There's a new Shaq Fu game?!? 

[OctoberRaven]

Playing Beyond Divinity now and holy shit who the fuck thought that controlling two characters in an already difficult real time rpg where if one dies the other dies too was a good idea.

When do they go into turn-based?

On the plus side, masochist skeletons

 

[Bobfoc]

In some bad news, Gun Media, publisher of Friday the 13th: The Game, has decided that, due to an ongoing legal battle, the game won't receive any new content ever from this point onwards.

[apsham]

Including single player? Fucking hell that sucks.

[Kaney]

Fucking hell seriously?

[TMM]

Has anyone got/starting Jurassic World: Evolution yet? Most reviews give it a good-to-okay score apart from IGN and which gave it a 4.8/10. I mean, I pre-ordered it because I know exactly what I'm getting but I'm still interested in getting some other opinions.

[Meacon Keaton]

4 hours ago, TMM said:

Has anyone got/starting Jurassic World: Evolution yet? Most reviews give it a good-to-okay score apart from IGN and which gave it a 4.8/10. I mean, I pre-ordered it because I know exactly what I'm getting but I'm still interested in getting some other opinions.

I didn't even realize this was out, so I'm going to be picking it up this afternoon after work. 

Oh wait, it's just digital released today. I may wait then. 

[Skummy]

The IGN review is really not pretty - makes it sound like a glorified mobile game, and incredibly tedious.

Considering "build your own Jurassic Park" seems like the most obvious game concept ever, it's amazing how mediocre the attempts at making that happen is. As a kid, I always desperately hoped that Bullfrog (objectively the greatest game developer ever ) would come up with one.

[TMM]

2 hours ago, Skummy said:

The IGN review is really not pretty - makes it sound like a glorified mobile game, and incredibly tedious.

Considering "build your own Jurassic Park" seems like the most obvious game concept ever, it's amazing how mediocre the attempts at making that happen is. As a kid, I always desperately hoped that Bullfrog (objectively the greatest game developer ever ) would come up with one.

That’s the only review that is that bad though. All the others basically say it’s pretty good but nothing special and certain things can be a bit repetitive but everything else kinda gives an average 7/10ish score