Video games...what ya playing? And what are you looking forward to? (2 Viewers)

[Bull Dozier]

Looking forward to Star Wars Battlefront

Ditto. Could be amazing if they do it right. I know that's a big if.

Q: how is this different from the previous Battlefront(s)? Is it just a new reboot for the 4th gen consoles?

I know nothing about it other than the trailer I watched. I haven't played a Battlefront in about ten years. I'm picturing a CoD type game in the Star Wars setting. Maybe I'm way off.

 

[igbomb]

Witcher 1 on Steam for $1.49.

Witcher 2 for $2.99

Promotion due to Witcher 3 coming out.

That's over 100 of gaming for under $5.Ridonkulously good value.

Yep. The comparisons to ME was enough for me to pull the trigger.

Witcher 2 is like ME; Witcher 1 is much more old school - think Baldur's Gate rip off.

Never played Baldur's Gate but I think TW1 is very much in the vein of ME1 in both story and gameplay. Brilliant story with clunky mechanics, dated graphics, repetitive maps etc (TW IMO does have much better decision points & consequences IMO)...sounds awesome, doesn't it?

I don't quite share your affinity for W1, but I liked it. But it has nothing in common with ME from a gameplay perspective. It's an isometric RPG.

Doesn't isometric refer to top down perspective? Maybe I don't understand the definition but from my understanding of it TW1 isn't even a little bit isometric. It's a 3rd person perspective not top down like, say, Dragon Age Origins.

ETA: And a lot of people don't share my affinity for TW1...even I don't entirely. It was a very good first effort but it is definitely a flawed game, for me the truly impressive part (the part that kept me wanting more) is the depth of the universe they created not the stellar gameplay (but I feel the same way aboue ME1). They improved the game play significantly in TW2 and managed not to sacrifice the depth of the story.

The last two big RPGs I played are KOTOR and ME. The gameplay on KOTOR (in particular the instant pause when encountering an enemy) just ruined the game. Plus it is so clearly a turned based game.

ME, IMO, has terrific gameplay. It flows well, feels like a FPS, yet still has the pause feature to give orders, etc.

Which one is Witcher more like?

 

[NewlyRetired]

Witcher 1 on Steam for $1.49.

Witcher 2 for $2.99

Promotion due to Witcher 3 coming out.

That's over 100 of gaming for under $5.Ridonkulously good value.

Yep. The comparisons to ME was enough for me to pull the trigger.

Witcher 2 is like ME; Witcher 1 is much more old school - think Baldur's Gate rip off.

Never played Baldur's Gate but I think TW1 is very much in the vein of ME1 in both story and gameplay. Brilliant story with clunky mechanics, dated graphics, repetitive maps etc (TW IMO does have much better decision points & consequences IMO)...sounds awesome, doesn't it?

I don't quite share your affinity for W1, but I liked it. But it has nothing in common with ME from a gameplay perspective. It's an isometric RPG.

Doesn't isometric refer to top down perspective? Maybe I don't understand the definition but from my understanding of it TW1 isn't even a little bit isometric. It's a 3rd person perspective not top down like, say, Dragon Age Origins.ETA: And a lot of people don't share my affinity for TW1...even I don't entirely. It was a very good first effort but it is definitely a flawed game, for me the truly impressive part (the part that kept me wanting more) is the depth of the universe they created not the stellar gameplay (but I feel the same way aboue ME1). They improved the game play significantly in TW2 and managed not to sacrifice the depth of the story.

The last two big RPGs I played are KOTOR and ME. The gameplay on KOTOR (in particular the instant pause when encountering an enemy) just ruined the game. Plus it is so clearly a turned based game.

ME, IMO, has terrific gameplay. It flows well, feels like a FPS, yet still has the pause feature to give orders, etc.

Which one is Witcher more like?

Here is 35+ minutes of Witcher 3 game play if you want to get a look.

 

[The Tick]

Witcher 1 on Steam for $1.49.

Witcher 2 for $2.99

Promotion due to Witcher 3 coming out.

That's over 100 of gaming for under $5.Ridonkulously good value.

Yep. The comparisons to ME was enough for me to pull the trigger.

Witcher 2 is like ME; Witcher 1 is much more old school - think Baldur's Gate rip off.

Never played Baldur's Gate but I think TW1 is very much in the vein of ME1 in both story and gameplay. Brilliant story with clunky mechanics, dated graphics, repetitive maps etc (TW IMO does have much better decision points & consequences IMO)...sounds awesome, doesn't it?

I don't quite share your affinity for W1, but I liked it. But it has nothing in common with ME from a gameplay perspective. It's an isometric RPG.

Doesn't isometric refer to top down perspective? Maybe I don't understand the definition but from my understanding of it TW1 isn't even a little bit isometric. It's a 3rd person perspective not top down like, say, Dragon Age Origins.

ETA: And a lot of people don't share my affinity for TW1...even I don't entirely. It was a very good first effort but it is definitely a flawed game, for me the truly impressive part (the part that kept me wanting more) is the depth of the universe they created not the stellar gameplay (but I feel the same way aboue ME1). They improved the game play significantly in TW2 and managed not to sacrifice the depth of the story.

In fairness a lot of the universe depth comes from the books which is nice. Have you read them, if you are that into the Witcher, you should give them a shot. I enjoy them a lot.

I haven't made it into TW2 yet. My first play through I dropped at the arena, just didn't get the hang of combat. The second I dropped when I hit the first town, I was overloaded with gear hoping to get a big payday, and then saw that the buy/sell ratio's in the game seem horrible, I started doing some research and found there were some economy mods, and was thinking if I wanted to install any, and just never got back to the game. I need to give it a third shot soon and just run it. I know i'll like it when it get into it. the story driven RPG's are always my favorites. I'm actually worry about TW3 going sandbox-ish. I'm in the minority here I know, but I'm on the "skyrim was pretty eh" side.

 

[thecatch]

Doesn't isometric refer to top down perspective? Maybe I don't understand the definition but from my understanding of it TW1 isn't even a little bit isometric. It's a 3rd person perspective not top down like, say, Dragon Age Origins.

ETA: And a lot of people don't share my affinity for TW1...even I don't entirely. It was a very good first effort but it is definitely a flawed game, for me the truly impressive part (the part that kept me wanting more) is the depth of the universe they created not the stellar gameplay (but I feel the same way aboue ME1). They improved the game play significantly in TW2 and managed not to sacrifice the depth of the story.

This is what Witcher 1 looked like when I played it- 100% isometric. After spending some time on Google it it looks like the Enhanced Edition may have revamped everything. If that's the case then disregard my comment.

 

[jwb]

Witcher 1 on Steam for $1.49.

Witcher 2 for $2.99

Promotion due to Witcher 3 coming out.

That's over 100 of gaming for under $5.Ridonkulously good value.

Yep. The comparisons to ME was enough for me to pull the trigger.

Witcher 2 is like ME; Witcher 1 is much more old school - think Baldur's Gate rip off.

Never played Baldur's Gate but I think TW1 is very much in the vein of ME1 in both story and gameplay. Brilliant story with clunky mechanics, dated graphics, repetitive maps etc (TW IMO does have much better decision points & consequences IMO)...sounds awesome, doesn't it?

I don't quite share your affinity for W1, but I liked it. But it has nothing in common with ME from a gameplay perspective. It's an isometric RPG.

we get into these semantics in this thread from time to time, but when you say "isometric RPG" to most people, they think top-down, turn-based games like Balder's Gate (et al), the first two Fallouts, etc.

The Witcher games are nothing like that.

To me:

First Person = you are the character's eyes

Third Person = Camera is behind / slightly above your character.

Isometric = Mostly a top down perspective, either real time (Diablo games) or turn based (Baldur's gate)

 

[The Tick]

Witcher 1 on Steam for $1.49.

Witcher 2 for $2.99

Promotion due to Witcher 3 coming out.

That's over 100 of gaming for under $5.Ridonkulously good value.

Yep. The comparisons to ME was enough for me to pull the trigger.

Witcher 2 is like ME; Witcher 1 is much more old school - think Baldur's Gate rip off.

Never played Baldur's Gate but I think TW1 is very much in the vein of ME1 in both story and gameplay. Brilliant story with clunky mechanics, dated graphics, repetitive maps etc (TW IMO does have much better decision points & consequences IMO)...sounds awesome, doesn't it?

I don't quite share your affinity for W1, but I liked it. But it has nothing in common with ME from a gameplay perspective. It's an isometric RPG.

Doesn't isometric refer to top down perspective? Maybe I don't understand the definition but from my understanding of it TW1 isn't even a little bit isometric. It's a 3rd person perspective not top down like, say, Dragon Age Origins.

ETA: And a lot of people don't share my affinity for TW1...even I don't entirely. It was a very good first effort but it is definitely a flawed game, for me the truly impressive part (the part that kept me wanting more) is the depth of the universe they created not the stellar gameplay (but I feel the same way aboue ME1). They improved the game play significantly in TW2 and managed not to sacrifice the depth of the story.

The last two big RPGs I played are KOTOR and ME. The gameplay on KOTOR (in particular the instant pause when encountering an enemy) just ruined the game. Plus it is so clearly a turned based game.

ME, IMO, has terrific gameplay. It flows well, feels like a FPS, yet still has the pause feature to give orders, etc.

Which one is Witcher more like?

Witcher games are nothing like KOTOR, the combat from what I remember is very active and more fast paced, you need to move, strike, doge, block, it was probably one of the earlier games to try to do a good job with that and make sword combat feel really fluid. Good gun combat is so much easer, and I think witcher really tries to make sword combat interesting, and gets better as it goes along.

 

[Chaka]

Witcher 1 on Steam for $1.49.

Witcher 2 for $2.99

Promotion due to Witcher 3 coming out.

That's over 100 of gaming for under $5.Ridonkulously good value.

Yep. The comparisons to ME was enough for me to pull the trigger.

Witcher 2 is like ME; Witcher 1 is much more old school - think Baldur's Gate rip off.

Never played Baldur's Gate but I think TW1 is very much in the vein of ME1 in both story and gameplay. Brilliant story with clunky mechanics, dated graphics, repetitive maps etc (TW IMO does have much better decision points & consequences IMO)...sounds awesome, doesn't it?

I don't quite share your affinity for W1, but I liked it. But it has nothing in common with ME from a gameplay perspective. It's an isometric RPG.

Doesn't isometric refer to top down perspective? Maybe I don't understand the definition but from my understanding of it TW1 isn't even a little bit isometric. It's a 3rd person perspective not top down like, say, Dragon Age Origins.

ETA: And a lot of people don't share my affinity for TW1...even I don't entirely. It was a very good first effort but it is definitely a flawed game, for me the truly impressive part (the part that kept me wanting more) is the depth of the universe they created not the stellar gameplay (but I feel the same way aboue ME1). They improved the game play significantly in TW2 and managed not to sacrifice the depth of the story.

The last two big RPGs I played are KOTOR and ME. The gameplay on KOTOR (in particular the instant pause when encountering an enemy) just ruined the game. Plus it is so clearly a turned based game.

ME, IMO, has terrific gameplay. It flows well, feels like a FPS, yet still has the pause feature to give orders, etc.

Which one is Witcher more like?

ME, but you don't have party members and your primary weapons are swords so you have to get up close and personal.

I love KOTOR (and KOTOR2) but completely agree about the game play, the auto pause on encountering an enemy becomes seriously tedious.

 

[Chaka]

Witcher 1 on Steam for $1.49.

Witcher 2 for $2.99

Promotion due to Witcher 3 coming out.

That's over 100 of gaming for under $5.Ridonkulously good value.

Yep. The comparisons to ME was enough for me to pull the trigger.

Witcher 2 is like ME; Witcher 1 is much more old school - think Baldur's Gate rip off.

Never played Baldur's Gate but I think TW1 is very much in the vein of ME1 in both story and gameplay. Brilliant story with clunky mechanics, dated graphics, repetitive maps etc (TW IMO does have much better decision points & consequences IMO)...sounds awesome, doesn't it?

I don't quite share your affinity for W1, but I liked it. But it has nothing in common with ME from a gameplay perspective. It's an isometric RPG.

Doesn't isometric refer to top down perspective? Maybe I don't understand the definition but from my understanding of it TW1 isn't even a little bit isometric. It's a 3rd person perspective not top down like, say, Dragon Age Origins.

ETA: And a lot of people don't share my affinity for TW1...even I don't entirely. It was a very good first effort but it is definitely a flawed game, for me the truly impressive part (the part that kept me wanting more) is the depth of the universe they created not the stellar gameplay (but I feel the same way aboue ME1). They improved the game play significantly in TW2 and managed not to sacrifice the depth of the story.

In fairness a lot of the universe depth comes from the books which is nice. Have you read them, if you are that into the Witcher, you should give them a shot. I enjoy them a lot.

I haven't made it into TW2 yet. My first play through I dropped at the arena, just didn't get the hang of combat. The second I dropped when I hit the first town, I was overloaded with gear hoping to get a big payday, and then saw that the buy/sell ratio's in the game seem horrible, I started doing some research and found there were some economy mods, and was thinking if I wanted to install any, and just never got back to the game. I need to give it a third shot soon and just run it. I know i'll like it when it get into it. the story driven RPG's are always my favorites. I'm actually worry about TW3 going sandbox-ish. I'm in the minority here I know, but I'm on the "skyrim was pretty eh" side.

The combat in TW2 has a very steep learning curve (I can totally understand why people walk away after the arena) , it is the biggest flaw in the game but it becomes so much fun once you get it down.

 

[Chaka]

Doesn't isometric refer to top down perspective? Maybe I don't understand the definition but from my understanding of it TW1 isn't even a little bit isometric. It's a 3rd person perspective not top down like, say, Dragon Age Origins.

ETA: And a lot of people don't share my affinity for TW1...even I don't entirely. It was a very good first effort but it is definitely a flawed game, for me the truly impressive part (the part that kept me wanting more) is the depth of the universe they created not the stellar gameplay (but I feel the same way aboue ME1). They improved the game play significantly in TW2 and managed not to sacrifice the depth of the story.

This is what Witcher 1 looked like when I played it- 100% isometric. After spending some time on Google it it looks like the Enhanced Edition may have revamped everything. If that's the case then disregard my comment.

Interesting. Now that you mention it I think that there may be an option to use that view in the EE but, for me, the default was over the shoulder and I kept it that way.

 

[igbomb]

Witcher 1 on Steam for $1.49.

Witcher 2 for $2.99

Promotion due to Witcher 3 coming out.

That's over 100 of gaming for under $5.Ridonkulously good value.

Yep. The comparisons to ME was enough for me to pull the trigger.

Witcher 2 is like ME; Witcher 1 is much more old school - think Baldur's Gate rip off.

Never played Baldur's Gate but I think TW1 is very much in the vein of ME1 in both story and gameplay. Brilliant story with clunky mechanics, dated graphics, repetitive maps etc (TW IMO does have much better decision points & consequences IMO)...sounds awesome, doesn't it?

I don't quite share your affinity for W1, but I liked it. But it has nothing in common with ME from a gameplay perspective. It's an isometric RPG.

Doesn't isometric refer to top down perspective? Maybe I don't understand the definition but from my understanding of it TW1 isn't even a little bit isometric. It's a 3rd person perspective not top down like, say, Dragon Age Origins.

ETA: And a lot of people don't share my affinity for TW1...even I don't entirely. It was a very good first effort but it is definitely a flawed game, for me the truly impressive part (the part that kept me wanting more) is the depth of the universe they created not the stellar gameplay (but I feel the same way aboue ME1). They improved the game play significantly in TW2 and managed not to sacrifice the depth of the story.

The last two big RPGs I played are KOTOR and ME. The gameplay on KOTOR (in particular the instant pause when encountering an enemy) just ruined the game. Plus it is so clearly a turned based game.

ME, IMO, has terrific gameplay. It flows well, feels like a FPS, yet still has the pause feature to give orders, etc.

Which one is Witcher more like?

ME, but you don't have party members and your primary weapons are swords so you have to get up close and personal.

I love KOTOR (and KOTOR2) but completely agree about the game play, the auto pause on encountering an enemy becomes seriously tedious.

Was planning on taking a break from the sprawling RPGs after finishing ME, but Witcher sounds like exactly what I like.

 

[Chaka]

I'm actually worry about TW3 going sandbox-ish. I'm in the minority here I know, but I'm on the "skyrim was pretty eh" side.

I have similar concerns but I did play the hell out of Skyrim too.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I'm actually worry about TW3 going sandbox-ish. I'm in the minority here I know, but I'm on the "skyrim was pretty eh" side.

I have similar concerns but I did play the hell out of Skyrim too.

Same here. I wouldn't call it "eh," but it was most fun when you were just wandering around doing semi-random quests and crawling dungeons. The story blows in comparison to the Mass Effect series, and that's directly a result of Elder Scrolls being a sandbox and Mass Effect being far more linear.

 

[jwb]

I'm actually worry about TW3 going sandbox-ish. I'm in the minority here I know, but I'm on the "skyrim was pretty eh" side.

I have similar concerns but I did play the hell out of Skyrim too.

Same here. I wouldn't call it "eh," but it was most fun when you were just wandering around doing semi-random quests and crawling dungeons. The story blows in comparison to the Mass Effect series, and that's directly a result of Elder Scrolls being a sandbox and Mass Effect being far more linear.

Indeed - Skyrim is best played with a "make your own adventure" mindset. It's not for everyone.

After the first playthrough, I never followed the main quest again, and still went through many, many hours with two or three new characters. You could spend 50 hours just becoming a blacksmithing enchanter who collects Dragon Priest Masks on the side.

I think TW3 is going to be excellent - the feeling I'm getting is a solid mix of story and open-world, probably along the line of the latest Dragon Age, with more freedom.

 

[igbomb]

Not sure if this has already been posted or not...

Conan plays Witcher: Wild Hunt...

 

[SlaX]

There are a lot of rumblings that Bethesda will officially announce Fallout 4 next month at e3. Game on!

 

[Insein]

There are a lot of rumblings that Bethesda will officially announce Fallout 4 next month at e3. Game on!

 

[Gr00vus]

I know it's not new, but I've just started playing Crusader Kings II with The Old Gods expansion activated. I think being a viking is more fun than the standard ruler. It took a few false starts to figure out the raiding thing, but now I've got a good game going where I started out as the petty chief of Meddlepad. Not soon after a quick conquest of a neighboring Finnish county, I got subjugated by one of my neighbors. I bid my time for a bit, and lo and behold the Ragnar Lodbrok goes and takes over all of Sweden and makes me Duke of all Norrland. I've been raiding the heck out of Britain ever since. The money and the prestige really rack up via the raiding. I'm now planning my next move - either conquering some of Britain or some of the Baltic territories, maybe en route to establishing my dynasty as the Tsars of Russia. Good times.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

There are a lot of rumblings that Bethesda will officially announce Fallout 4 next month at e3. Game on!

About damn time! And . . .

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Nope, ended up being terribly annoyed by Wolfenstein. The final boss battle was the final straw. I ended up putting it on "Daddy, can I Play" difficulty level just to get over with it.

I think part of the problem is what games consider "average" ability. I thought I was at least average but now I'm not sure.

I don't mind being challenged but that's not the same thing as being frustrated.

 

[thecatch]

Not sure if this has already been posted or not...

Conan plays Witcher: Wild Hunt...

 

[Chaka]

Nope, ended up being terribly annoyed by Wolfenstein. The final boss battle was the final straw. I ended up putting it on "Daddy, can I Play" difficulty level just to get over with it.

I think part of the problem is what games consider "average" ability. I thought I was at least average but now I'm not sure.

I don't mind being challenged but that's not the same thing as being frustrated.

Still worth it for $10 or less or is it now not worth even that in your opinion?

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I personally liked Wolfenstein. It wasn't a GOTY-tier game or anything, but it reminded me a little of DOOM and was a nice change of pace from the sprawling sandboxes, multiplayer shooters, etc. that flood the market these days.

That said, I agree with Andy that the final boss fight sucks.

 

[Chaka]

Not sure if this has already been posted or not...

Conan plays Witcher: Wild Hunt...

 

[Chaka]

The Witcher 3 has 36 different endings, take that Mass Effect 3!!!

 

[IvanKaramazov]

The Witcher 3 has 36 different endings, take that Mass Effect 3!!!

I hope it's better than 36 different colors of laser beams.

 

[TheAristocrat]

I think I will go back to DA Origins and play a mage character this time. I really liked the game and it managed to keep me interested until the end. Something few games seem to be able to do lately.

This is a really fun build in DA:O. If you do it right, you will only need a second mage in 1 or 2 situations, if even then.

Additionally, unlimited money "cheat" so that's always cool.

 

[TheAristocrat]

Not sure if this has already been posted or not...

Conan plays Witcher: Wild Hunt...

Awesome. Love the Clueless Gamer series.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

Nope, ended up being terribly annoyed by Wolfenstein. The final boss battle was the final straw. I ended up putting it on "Daddy, can I Play" difficulty level just to get over with it.

I think part of the problem is what games consider "average" ability. I thought I was at least average but now I'm not sure.

I don't mind being challenged but that's not the same thing as being frustrated.

Still worth it for $10 or less or is it now not worth even that in your opinion?

Yeah, I'd still say worth $10 to most people.

I think my biggest problem is the difficulty level thing. It's almost like how men's clothes sizes have changed over the years. I am the same size/height I've been for 20 years but now my shirts are XL instead of L. And the difficulty level I should be playing at is a little below average. I just don't like how that makes me feel.

It's a pretty standard shoot-em-up game that seems downright unfair in places.

 

[Chaka]

Nope, ended up being terribly annoyed by Wolfenstein. The final boss battle was the final straw. I ended up putting it on "Daddy, can I Play" difficulty level just to get over with it.

I think part of the problem is what games consider "average" ability. I thought I was at least average but now I'm not sure.

I don't mind being challenged but that's not the same thing as being frustrated.

Still worth it for $10 or less or is it now not worth even that in your opinion?

Yeah, I'd still say worth $10 to most people.

I think my biggest problem is the difficulty level thing. It's almost like how men's clothes sizes have changed over the years. I am the same size/height I've been for 20 years but now my shirts are XL instead of L. And the difficulty level I should be playing at is a little below average. I just don't like how that makes me feel.

It's a pretty standard shoot-em-up game that seems downright unfair in places.

I am never one to ramp up video games to "nightmare" difficulty levels. I am not looking for that kind of challenge, I like to be immersed in a solid story and be able to build my character up to bad ### levels well before I hit the end game.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

I don't know how it would even be possible to defeat Wolfensein on the highest difficulty level.

 

[jwb]

Nope, ended up being terribly annoyed by Wolfenstein. The final boss battle was the final straw. I ended up putting it on "Daddy, can I Play" difficulty level just to get over with it.

I think part of the problem is what games consider "average" ability. I thought I was at least average but now I'm not sure.

I don't mind being challenged but that's not the same thing as being frustrated.

Still worth it for $10 or less or is it now not worth even that in your opinion?

Yeah, I'd still say worth $10 to most people.

I think my biggest problem is the difficulty level thing. It's almost like how men's clothes sizes have changed over the years. I am the same size/height I've been for 20 years but now my shirts are XL instead of L. And the difficulty level I should be playing at is a little below average. I just don't like how that makes me feel.

It's a pretty standard shoot-em-up game that seems downright unfair in places.

I wanted to like this one, but I agree - the difficulty is all over the place, and more frustrating than fun/challenging.

 

[NCCommish]

Yeah I never play on any super hard level. I usually just play normal first one up from easy. Although sometimes a dial back happens I must admit. I've got nothing to prove I just want to enjoy myself.

 

[Chaka]

Yeah I never play on any super hard level. I usually just play normal first one up from easy. Although sometimes a dial back happens I must admit. I've got nothing to prove I just want to enjoy myself.

Exactly, I want to be entertained and I find that a really solid video game tells a great story and puts you into the role of the protagonist.

To that end I really must say that Alan Wake is killing it, I am so surprised at how well it immerses you into the role of a Stephen King protagonist that I am actually disappointed in myself for sitting on this game for two years before firing it up. Sure some of the story is derivative of King (and others) but it does such a wonderful job of putting the words into action that I don't care if the story isn't entirely original.

Just finishing chapter 5 of 6 and I definitely will be playing the DLC and really hope there will be a true stand alone sequel.

 

[Mad Cow]

Yeah I never play on any super hard level. I usually just play normal first one up from easy. Although sometimes a dial back happens I must admit. I've got nothing to prove I just want to enjoy myself.

Exactly, I want to be entertained and I find that a really solid video game tells a great story and puts you into the role of the protagonist.To that end I really must say that Alan Wake is killing it, I am so surprised at how well it immerses you into the role of a Stephen King protagonist that I am actually disappointed in myself for sitting on this game for two years before firing it up. Sure some of the story is derivative of King (and others) but it does such a wonderful job of putting the words into action that I don't care if the story isn't entirely original.

Just finishing chapter 5 of 6 and I definitely will be playing the DLC and really hope there will be a true stand alone sequel.

Agreed on many points. I'm 43 and don't have hours a week to play. I want to enjoy a story and interact in the game world. I don't care to beat my head against the wall in frustration. I'm all for normal or even easy.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Yeah I never play on any super hard level. I usually just play normal first one up from easy. Although sometimes a dial back happens I must admit. I've got nothing to prove I just want to enjoy myself.

Exactly, I want to be entertained and I find that a really solid video game tells a great story and puts you into the role of the protagonist.To that end I really must say that Alan Wake is killing it, I am so surprised at how well it immerses you into the role of a Stephen King protagonist that I am actually disappointed in myself for sitting on this game for two years before firing it up. Sure some of the story is derivative of King (and others) but it does such a wonderful job of putting the words into action that I don't care if the story isn't entirely original.

Just finishing chapter 5 of 6 and I definitely will be playing the DLC and really hope there will be a true stand alone sequel.

Agreed on many points. I'm 43 and don't have hours a week to play. I want to enjoy a story and interact in the game world. I don't care to beat my head against the wall in frustration. I'm all for normal or even easy.

I trophy hunt so I do use the hardest modes when required but I can certainly understand not wanting to.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I have no quarrels with people who don't like super-hard difficulties, but I enjoy them under certain circumstances. The Uncharted franchise is a good example here -- on Crushing, they're challenging throughout and a little cheap in spots, but they're fine overall, and I like having beaten the game on a difficulty that the game isn't really designed around. By way of contrast, The Evil Within is quite difficult in spots on normal. I have absolutely no interest in playing it on everything-one-hit-kills-you mode (that's literally exactly what it is, by deliberate design).

One of my favorite video gaming experiences was beating Dead Space 2 on hardcore mode -- hard-to-very-hard difficulty and you're only allowed to save three times. That was a great, tense as hell experience. Perfect for that kind of game.

None of the Souls games are as hard as people sometimes make them out to be, but I love the lack of hand-holding and the complete not-giving-a-#### if you can't get past some particular boss. It's as if the game is telling you "Sorry, but if you want to see the rest of this game, you need to get good first." I really love that as an old school throwback. I've already platinumed this one, but I'm still working my way through the game again with a character built around the Blade of Mercy, which is sort of like activating hard mode when you're used to a weapon with reach and the ability to stagger enemies. This change of pace makes the game fresh again.

I have a mild OCD streak and I have no problem beating my head against the wall for a bit if it's a game I enjoy. But it really depends on the game.

 

[flysack]

I know it's a bit different than Uncharted and the such, but the only way I play Minecraft is on hardcore mode.

Hardest difficulty with monsters, and you only have one life. Once you die, the entire world is deleted.

I've been playing the same game for 2 months now. I'll consider it a major achievement if I meet the Ender Dragon.

 

[SlaX]

I used to be one of those people that felt like they had to beat the game on the hardest difficulty before I felt like I truly finished the game. Anymore, I just play for the fun of it and will play on a difficulty where I feel I'm challenged enough but I'm not so frustrated where I'm not having fun. Playing games should be for fun and that's why I changed. I'm still competitive in online play for the most part.

 

[Borden]

Since game difficulty is being talked about, Bloodborne was just a waste of time. I feeling guilty for giving it up just because people say that it is meant to weed people out but it's only true from time point of view. The first time you encounter a new bad guy or situation you have to learn how they attack then it's just timing.

Yes it's difficult but the amount of time you waste going all the way back to a save then not just the walking time but the fact you have to go through and wait for you counters and perries is just too much.

It might be also because of the way I play games, everything gets killed before I move on or search around, that adds to this time drain too.

 

[jwb]

I have no quarrels with people who don't like super-hard difficulties, but I enjoy them under certain circumstances. The Uncharted franchise is a good example here -- on Crushing, they're challenging throughout and a little cheap in spots, but they're fine overall, and I like having beaten the game on a difficulty that the game isn't really designed around. By way of contrast, The Evil Within is quite difficult in spots on normal. I have absolutely no interest in playing it on everything-one-hit-kills-you mode (that's literally exactly what it is, by deliberate design).

One of my favorite video gaming experiences was beating Dead Space 2 on hardcore mode -- hard-to-very-hard difficulty and you're only allowed to save three times. That was a great, tense as hell experience. Perfect for that kind of game.

None of the Souls games are as hard as people sometimes make them out to be, but I love the lack of hand-holding and the complete not-giving-a-#### if you can't get past some particular boss. It's as if the game is telling you "Sorry, but if you want to see the rest of this game, you need to get good first." I really love that as an old school throwback. I've already platinumed this one, but I'm still working my way through the game again with a character built around the Blade of Mercy, which is sort of like activating hard mode when you're used to a weapon with reach and the ability to stagger enemies. This change of pace makes the game fresh again.

I have a mild OCD streak and I have no problem beating my head against the wall for a bit if it's a game I enjoy. But it really depends on the game.

In general terms, I find the slower the game, the more difficult I like it. If it's a sneak game, I want it to be hard and tense. In skyrim, I regularly turned up the difficulty, and nerfed my character - it was more fun that way. I love the Souls games.

Shooters, on the other hand... I have little patience for really hard difficulty.

 

[Todem]

I have no quarrels with people who don't like super-hard difficulties, but I enjoy them under certain circumstances. The Uncharted franchise is a good example here -- on Crushing, they're challenging throughout and a little cheap in spots, but they're fine overall, and I like having beaten the game on a difficulty that the game isn't really designed around. By way of contrast, The Evil Within is quite difficult in spots on normal. I have absolutely no interest in playing it on everything-one-hit-kills-you mode (that's literally exactly what it is, by deliberate design).

One of my favorite video gaming experiences was beating Dead Space 2 on hardcore mode -- hard-to-very-hard difficulty and you're only allowed to save three times. That was a great, tense as hell experience. Perfect for that kind of game.

None of the Souls games are as hard as people sometimes make them out to be, but I love the lack of hand-holding and the complete not-giving-a-#### if you can't get past some particular boss. It's as if the game is telling you "Sorry, but if you want to see the rest of this game, you need to get good first." I really love that as an old school throwback. I've already platinumed this one, but I'm still working my way through the game again with a character built around the Blade of Mercy, which is sort of like activating hard mode when you're used to a weapon with reach and the ability to stagger enemies. This change of pace makes the game fresh again.

I have a mild OCD streak and I have no problem beating my head against the wall for a bit if it's a game I enjoy. But it really depends on the game.

Alien Isolation on hard is your dream game.

Ivan...I know you can beat it. You're a stick jockey.

I am playing on easy and it's still hard as freaking hell. Going to get back into it as I have not touched anything since The Show 15 came out. I need a break so this weekend.....Alien Isolation and Far Cry 4 to unwind from baseball overload.

I also pre-ordered Star Wars Battlefront from gamestop......can't wait to dive into that online.

 

[NewlyRetired]

Since game difficulty is being talked about, Bloodborne was just a waste of time. I feeling guilty for giving it up just because people say that it is meant to weed people out but it's only true from time point of view. The first time you encounter a new bad guy or situation you have to learn how they attack then it's just timing.

Yes it's difficult but the amount of time you waste going all the way back to a save then not just the walking time but the fact you have to go through and wait for you counters and perries is just too much.

It might be also because of the way I play games, everything gets killed before I move on or search around, that adds to this time drain too.

That sounds very similar to how all the Souls games work. Were you new to the series or did you find the 3 Souls game different?

 

[Borden]

Since game difficulty is being talked about, Bloodborne was just a waste of time. I feeling guilty for giving it up just because people say that it is meant to weed people out but it's only true from time point of view. The first time you encounter a new bad guy or situation you have to learn how they attack then it's just timing.

Yes it's difficult but the amount of time you waste going all the way back to a save then not just the walking time but the fact you have to go through and wait for you counters and perries is just too much.

It might be also because of the way I play games, everything gets killed before I move on or search around, that adds to this time drain too.

That sounds very similar to how all the Souls games work. Were you new to the series or did you find the 3 Souls game different?

New to the Souls games. The view/camera I also found to be an annoyance. That might have been me though.

 

[Borden]

Just started playing Crusader Kings 2. With very little experience playing these games and not being used to PC games I am completely lost.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Witcher 3 getting pretty stellar reviews. I have a family vacation coming up at the end of the month, so I'm not starting any new games before I get back anyway. Looks like this will be on deck though.

 

[igbomb]

Witcher 3 getting pretty stellar reviews. I have a family vacation coming up at the end of the month, so I'm not starting any new games before I get back anyway. Looks like this will be on deck though.

Yeah, those review scores are pretty terrific. I just wrapped up Mass Effect over the weekend and am about an hour into Crysis, but I think the first Witcher will jump to the top of my next-up list.

 

[jwb]

Witcher 3 getting pretty stellar reviews. I have a family vacation coming up at the end of the month, so I'm not starting any new games before I get back anyway. Looks like this will be on deck though.

Yeah, those review scores are pretty terrific. I just wrapped up Mass Effect over the weekend and am about an hour into Crysis, but I think the first Witcher will jump to the top of my next-up list.

preordered from Gamestop. I usually don't do that, but had some credit there, etc.

Really juiced for this one.

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

I don't need another game, but with reviews like Witcher 3 is getting.

who is firing up a new thread?

 

[Drifter]

Loving MLB The Show '15. I normally go heavy on Road to the Show mode but the mode where you collect baseball cards and build a team is pretty brilliant as well.