Gelaos

I played Crysis 3 just to conclude the trilogy story. Beautiful graphics. That's it. The rest is Crysis 2 all over - linear levels, "meh" storyline, generic FPS gameplay combined with a cool supersuit. Nothing more, nothing less.

I applaud the developers for rebooting the franchise and Lara Croft herself. The story is quite good. However, the game doesn't feel like a "Tomb Raider" to me, mainly for these reasons: 1) the puzzles (and/or tombs) are either non-existent or incredibely easy, 2) combat itself is enjoyable but there's too much of it, 3) unnecessary RPG and crafting elements (skills, weapon upgrades) 4) level design is too linear (previous Tomb Raider games were also linear, but the levels - unlike in this game - didn't feel like taken out of a FPS) 5) Lara talks so much (to herself) that it's annoying. Hey, I want to figure out things myself and don't need to constantly hear Lara's remarks about every little thing. 6) Too many QTEs and cinematic sequences. In short, new Tomb Raider feels and plays like a generic "Uncharted" adventure game. While that is okay and the game is fun enough, it's not fair to call it "Tomb Raider" because there really isn't much left from the original gameplay formula that made previous Tomb Raider games (both the original series and Legend series) so popular.

Underworld, just like Legend and Anniversary before, is overall a decent modernization of original Tomb Raider formula. Out of the trilogy, Underworld has the best story and stunning locations. Puzzles unfortunately aren't as elaborate as in Anniversary and camera is really messy sometimes which makes controlling Lara frustratingly harder. The final mission and ending are a let down (I expected them to be more challenging and epic) but despite its flaws Underworld is a good (but definitely not great) and fun conclusion to this Tomb Raider trilogy.

Similarly as TR: Legend, Anniversary is overall a decent modernization of original Tomb Raider formula and more-or-less faithfull re-imagining of 1996's Tomb Raider 1. The game focues on puzzles and exploration which is an improvement from TR:L. The puzzles are harder than in TR:L, but still not at the TR 1 level and enviroments are much more linear/condensed than in TR1. Camera angles and controls are sometimes frustrating and combat is also annoying at times due to messy auto-targeting. Although Anniversary overall isn't better than original TR 1, I enjoyed playing it.

Tomb Raider: Legend improves some things from the original games, yet at the same time over-simplifies other things. The biggest difference, apart from new engine and control scheme, is the heavy orientation on story and Lara's personal motivation for tomb-raiding. Unfortunately while the tombs and levels themselves are nicely designed, they're too linear and puzzles are too easy. Same can be said about combat - it's "just" fine. Voice acting is great and I like the cinematic approach in storytelling. Tomb Raider: Legend is overall a decent, although too linear and easy, modernization of original Tomb Raider formula.

Planescape Torment has no equal. A pinnacle of RPG storytelling, one of the most original RPG worlds ever and one of the most unique and memorable videogame protagonists. While the story itself isn't THAT good, it's told and expressed in a very captivating way. The amount and complexity of dialogues is unparalleled to this day. And it's all written in a literary manner, as if the texts and dialogues were taken out of a book. Astonishing. However, the heavy orientation on story and dialogues makes the game unbalanced, because characters focusing primarily on Intelligence and Wisdom have a significant advantage over other characters focused on, for example, Strength and Constitution. Combat, whilst not bad, is also underdeveloped. Overall Planescape Torment totally deserves it's status as one of the greatest RPGs/videogames ever made.

GRIS offers basic platforming and few easy puzzles here and there, but the game's superiority lies elsewhere. GRIS is less a game and more an art. Both the soundtrack, visuals and dream-like landscapes are breathtaking. The atmosphere feels out of this world and GRIS can truly be classified as art.

Very likeable, though too much easy. The entire game has a sort of fairy-tale aesthetic that is present in the story (which is okay enough) and in the gorgeous visuals and sceneries. The main characters Prince and Elika form a cute duo and have great (non-romantic) chemistry together. Movement and parkour is fluid, combat offers some nice combos but overall the mechanics are very simple and the game doesn't pose almost any challenge. Biggest drawback is the need to collect light-seeds in order to unlock other levels or one of few parkour features. I don't mind jumping around for fun, but when the game tells me to collect 300 light seeds scattered in several different (and already discovered) levels, it quickly becomes tiresome. Despite the all-encompassing simplicity and frustrating light-seeds grinding, I enjoyed playing PoP and I'm a bit sad, that there is no sequel. The characters and plot were the best part.

I started Observer expecting it to be a dark cyberpunk adventure game. And it was exactly that. Blade Runner-like setting and captivating atmosphere are by far the best thing about this game. Also, Rutger Hauer does an excellent job as the main protagonist. Story-wise the game is okay, but gameplay could be better a bit however. Sometimes it wasn't exactly clear what to do or where to go, which caused me to roam blindly. Observer is overall a decent adventure, although little rough around the edges.

Remember Me had a huuuge potential that, sadly, wasn't utilized. The main idea behind story is cool (memory technology), but the behaviour of characters is often quite illogical. Gameplay is average - platforming is like watered down Assassin's Creed, combat like simplfied Batman Arkham series. It's not bad, I enjoyed it in the first hours actually, but it quickly becomes very repetitive and monotone. However there are few cool bossfights. The cyberpunk-ish setting and Neo-Paris on the other hand are simply breathtaking... too bad that the game is strictly linear and player can't roam around. Remember Me could be a stunning game with some great ideas and concepts. Unfortunately the actual game is just (slightly above) average, although still enjoyable.

For obvious reasons (it's a prequel, it's short, setting) this episode is considerably weaker than its predecessors. But Farewell isn't a full game, just a simple nostalgic send-off. And as that it's okay.

Before the Storm is like its predecessor, but weaker in all important aspects (story, characters, soundtrack, puzzles). But it's still an enjoyable and engaging game, although not as memorable as the original Life Is Strange.

Excellent game. Characters are well-written, plot is intriguing but it often got too melodramatic/stereotypical/cliché, it feels rushed and somewhat messy towards the ending. But mostly I enjoyed it. The choices often don't have much conesquences after all but still I was choosing carefully what to do. I like the cartoon-ish visuals, however it was most likely done to cover up game's aged engine. The soundtrack and voice acting are very solid. Time travel is fun to play around with, the puzzles, despite being quite easy, are okay. Life Is Strange is like an average Netflix show - it has some great moments, memorable characters and immersive, enjoyable (although somewhat average) story.

KCD is really good. The graphics, atmosphere and soundtrack are wonderful. Story is a bit on a cliché side and the characters could have more depth, but otherwise it's intriguing and entertaining. Game mechanics are well-thought and feel fresh when compared to most other genre titles. Combat is truly a masterpiece - it feels clunky and very hard in the beginning, but as you play and train more, it gets better. And guess what - that's how we learn skills in real life. Overall, the attention to detail in this game is incredible. KCD is one of the most immersive RPGs I've seen in a long while.

Tyranny excells in storytelling, lore and characters (Voices of Nerat for example). Also the moral choices and overall treatment of "good and evil" concept feels lot more realistic than in other RPGs. The game felt oriented too much on action and fights. Basically every quest had at least 1-2 enemy encounters. I wanted to solve most quests in a diplomatic way but in 4 out of 5 cases all options led to a fight. The combat mechanics aren't great and it got boring pretty early, AI's not great either. The character development offers lot of ways for character building but I didn't have to think much about stats and skills and still got through 80 % of my game without any trouble. The UI could be better. Also, I didn't need any item management and the most of the good and powerful items are acquired too late in the game. Tyranny can't compete with other isometric RPGs like Baldur's Gate or Neverwinter Nights, but it's still a good game. But when I compare it with other modern "RPGs" (DA: Inquisition, Witcher), it's a gem that reminds me of the good old classic RPGs of early 2000's.

Firstly, I'd like to thank Mr. Andrzej Sapkowski, without whom there wouldn't be any Witcher universe, and CDProjekt for their (albeit non-canonical) expansion of Mr. Sapkowski's work. Thank you. ----- So many memories... When I've been reading the Witcher books, I loved the fairy-tale-styled duchy of Toussaint with its chevaliers and culture. I loved vampire Regis who became one of Geralt's closest friends (and who died heroically in the end of the book saga) and I loved Mr. Sapkowski's non-stereotypical approach to vampire mythology. And this DLC has all of these things and adds a lot more. Story, characters, soundtrack, new gameplay mechanics, atmosphere, jokes... Simply great. And when "Dusk of a Northern Kingdom" started playing during one cutscene I almost died from nostalgia. Blood and Wine is well-crafted DLC and and excellent send-off to Geralt. Va fail, Gwynbleidd!

First and foremost, I'd like to thank Mr. Andrzej Sapkowski for his Witcher book series that served as inspiration for all the Witcher games. Dziękuję bardzo! Also, READ THE BOOKS BEFORE PLAYING THE GAME! Or at least find someone who has read them to give you detailed summary of the plot and events in the book series. ----- Just as the W2, Wild Hunt works best as a story-oriented action adventure. The universe, lore, characters, story and dialogues are simply great. The gameplay is average to above-average and when judged from this perspective, Witcher 3 isn't really memorable game. The combat is too simplistic, but still fun. RPG elements are way too primitive (I don't consider any Witcher game to be an 'RPG'), the world's too big and exploring it feels somewhat dull. The main problem with W3 is that it gets repetitive and predictable too soon. Almost all quests go like this: talk to NPC -> use Witcher sense (which is INCREDIBELY dumb ability from both lore and gameplay perspective) -> fight with generic enemies -> (repeat 2 times) -> get a reward. Enjoyable at first, pretty dumb and boring after a while. Same logic applies for other aspects of the game. Witcher 3 has great story, universe and characters. But apart from that it's just well-crafted modern open-world game - enjoyable but lacking any deeper gameplay value. Nothing more, nothing less. ------ Again, GO READ THE BOOKS FIRST.

Hearts of Stone brings phenomenal story and characters. The Man of Glass, the haunted mansion (the scariest quest in the entire Witcher series for me so far), the village wedding (the funniest quest in the entire Witcher series, I couldn't stop laughing), heist mission, challenging boss battles and more. Great DLC.

Witcher 2 has great storyline, memorable characters, well-written dialogues, outstanding soundtrack and overall it's one of the most immersive games of it's time. However, apart from the great universe and its lore (mostly the work of Andrzej Sapkowski), Witcher 2 is not that good game from the gameplay perspective. The combat and RPG elements are almost non-existent, combat is waaaay too simplistic, maps are small and very limited. It's not bad, but it definitely isn't great either. Witcher 2 is great as an story-oriented adventure but it's average game otherwise. And it's not RPG in any way.

This game is considered a classic and that was the reason I decided to play it. It wasn't easy (nor hard) but I successfully finished it. Yeah, it was repetitive but mostly I enjoyed playing the game. Since it's 1996 game it is understandably dated and in some aspects it obviously didn't age well. But I can't count old graphics, clunky controls or convoluted level-design as negatives because that would be like complaining that old movies are black&white.

There's so much to do in Skyrim, I don't know where to begin. Pinnacle of sandbox fantasy games. The base game is great on its own and the mods make even better experience.

Syberia is an adventure game with a big heart. The main plot is magical, interesting, both incredibly sweet and sad. Puzzles are not too hard, yet certainly not easy. Voice acting is top notch, dialogues nicely complex and the visual design is simply marvelous. Timeless classic!

Really very well done old-school adventure game. No WASD, no highlighting of usable objects, no in-game help. Patience and rational thinking is the key, my dear player. The voice acting is solid, puzzles pose challenge but everything is purely logical (if somewhat too convoluted ). The engine is old and controls aren't perfect but the game is a great tribute to the world's greatest detective.

Really very well done adventure game. Perfect voice acting, exciting puzzles that require logical thinking and overall the game follows the tone of A. C. Doyle's work. However, the Cthullu element could be used in a much better way.

Well, what can I write about this... It's easy adventure for kids, however I liked is when I was a child.

Risen 3 is Risen 2 with some upgrades, nothing more. I'm long-time fan of Piranha Bytes but I couldn't force myself to enjoy this game, no matter how hard I tried. Story is incredibly stupid, dull, crappy - probably someone thought that more fantasy clichés = better fantasy story. Quests are mostly about fetching stuff and only 2-5 quests in the entire game feel at least a little bit original. Combat was improved over Risen 2 but enemies still stun you very often and 99 % of fights have the same style: roll, attack, roll, attack, roll, ... Frustrating. Voice acting is horrible, soundtrack is forgettable and graphics looks plastic and cheap. World is a little bit more open than in Risen 2, but it's still mostly corridors. Skip Risen 3, you won't miss anything. And if you want to finish Risen series, prepare that this game will torture you with it's immense stupidity.

Unforgivable disappointment. Story is dull and full of plot holes, combat is absolutetly horrifying (free camera + rigid animations + sometimes unresponsive controls, enemies stun you all the time), whole piracy theme is absurdly exaggerated, characters are incredibly shallow... Quests are stupidly unimaginative. Example: NPC: "Hello, I lost artifact. Will you help me find it?" Hero: "OK." (you walk 5 steps ahead and pick up the artifact) Hero: "Here's your artifact." NPC: "Oh, thank you. Only big hero like you could find it. Here, take 2000 gold as a small reward." World is just bunch of linear corridors and everything looks cheap, like from some low-budget game. Only challenging thing about Risen 2 is being able to finish it without getting crazy about stupid this game is.

Risen is a great spiritual successor to Gothic 1 and 2. The world with it's inhabitants feels authentic, like a real living place. The combat is pretty good, I don't understand why so many people hate it so much. Quests are typical RPG standard, factions and characters intrigued me, story isn't bad. Risen is easier than Gothic 1 or 2 but it won't hold your hand and you must learn to play this game. Solid RPG with old-school vibe.

Excellent puzzles, sometimes horrible camera angles, mediocre combat. It can get frustrating sometimes (I remember reloading one puzzle 20-30 times before I succeeded) but mostly it's really rewarding game.

Certainly not a game for mainstream players. Deep character development, good weapon and armor upgrading, really complex micromanagement of army/town/kingdom, the economic-political model and interactions of factions is also something that you won't see anywhere else. The combat is truly innovative and makes you more immersed into the tough medieval world of Warband. And if the game starts to bore you, there are thousands of mods from community.

Stunning atmosphere, perfect narrative that can be interpreted in many ways, brilliant visual and sound design, some breathtaking sceneries, simple yet innovative puzzles and mechanics. A game that is truly art.

I started GTA:SA several times but never finished it. But I loved it every single time. Tons of stuff to do, catchy story, great gameplay, good world design, excellent soundtrack. And the fun I had with cheats!

If you're allergic to feminism, homosexuality or walking simulators, then you will hate this game. Actually it's not a game, it's just interactive visit of someone's house. But I loved it. All subplots of the main story (sister's sexuality, father's middle age crisis, problematic marriage, ...) are something that was explored in literature, movies or other media hundreds of times. Yet it still grabbed me and didn't let go until credits started rolling. But for a game that takes 1-3 hours to finish (depending on how much of a completionist you are) the price of (currently) $15 is way to high.

I thought that there can't be anything worse than Gothic 3 and boy, was I wrong. Graphics is for some reason much uglier, everything looks plastic and unnatural. Quests are even more horrible than in G3, dialogues are unimaginably crappy, typical dialogue goes like this: -"Hey, I have a quest for you. Find my sword." "Fine, I'll do it" (after finding sword) "I found your sword." - "Thank you." Combat is horrible, because it's the same clickfest from G3 but limited by your stamina. If stamina is at 0, the only thing one can do is run. Typical fight: click, click, click, click, click - run in circle like an idiot, waiting for until stamina increases - click, click, click, click - wait until stamina.... The world is empty and besides main quest there's basically nothing to do. It is completely normal to go through huge forest and not encounter a one single enemy or anything interesting. The ONLY GOOD thing about this game is that it wasn't developed by Piranha Bytes, because any developer who develops such a horrible, horrible abomination deserve to play it in hell for eternity.

The worst game from Piranha Bytes, it's not Gothic in any way. I almost regret finishing this game... Story is nonexistent, combat is stupid clickfest (Actually, "stupid" can't express how much bad, bad the combat is.), character development useless (e.g. it doesn't matter what skills you have, everything's clickfest all the same), absolutely horrible quests (99 % is like "bring me 5 flowers", "kill 5 wolves"). I could go on and on describing how much shallow this game is. However, I liked first 5-10 hours, graphics and music is nice. But Gothic 3 is 50-80 hours long and not in a single moment did I feel any sense of actually achieving something in this game.

For those complaining about glitches and bugs, download unofficial patch called "Gothic 2 System pack" which removes a lot of the glitches and makes Gothic 2 run on modern Windows without much technical problems. --- I love Gothic 2 (and The Night of the Raven DLC). It's Piranha Bytes's masterpiece which many players don't truly understand. Yes, G2 is really tough at the beginning and even weaker monsters can easily kill you. But that's the point! You have to become stronger, learn the combat mechanics, use some tactic, be patient and then you will be able to kill that damn goblin who kicked your ass several hours ago. -- Combat -- I had no problem with controls, it came all naturally to me. The combat is perfectly balanced. You can hit, block, dodge back and strafe (circle around enemy) and your enemies can usually do exactly the same. Big troll won't strafe too much because it is slow for him, instead he will punch you - and he will punch you hard. Small goblins will strafe to make it harder for you to hit them, humans will try to block your attacks etc. Combat in real world is about hitting the enemy and avoiding hits from the enemy. Combat in G2 is inspired by this reality so if enemies manage to corner you, you're probably f*cked. Lesson learned, load the game and try again. And even if you tried 30 times and the enemy still smashes you, then try to come back later. You didn't expect to kill a group of bandits while wearing light armor and armed only with a sword that you can't even handle properly, did you? -- World & exploration -- World in G2 is not like in modern open world games. There are no warning signs that "you're approaching area with high-level enemies". The only warning you'll get is from other characters who mention something like "don't go to forest, you will die". And if you go into the forest unprepared, you will most likely die - but that's *your* responsibility. Again, world in G2 feels like a real place. People are mostly in town and farms, skeletons in tombs, wolves near forests etc. If citizen from town tells you to find the hideout of bandits, you have to think what would be a logical place for hideout (probably somewhere near the town) and then pay attention while going through area. Seek and ye shall find. World isn't big, but it's easy to get lost for a first time. Did you buy a map? No. Can someone near you point you to right direction. No. Well, it was *your* decision to go into the world unprepared. Lesson learned, load the game and try again. -- Character development -- You can learn melee or ranged weapons, magic and some other things. But invest your points wisely. It's not wise to decide on level 20 that you switch from melee to magic. "Jack of all trades, master of none" is approach that will only make the game harder for you. While the game is easiest when focused on melee, it can be finished only with bows, only as a pure mage... It just requires some experience. You learn the skills and attributes from teachers. You have to find each teacher. This helps to immerse you in the game because you gain strength by talking to person, not by clicking some virtual button. -- Equipment -- There's a lot of armors, weapons and magic. The money is scarce at the beginning. But that's the point! You have to think twice what you sell, keep or buy. Want more money? Do quests, learn to pick locks and loot chests, steal from houses etc. But don't break the law, because penalty costs something... Want to get better armor and equipment? Join a faction, advance in story, help somebody, loot some ancient tomb. -- Story, quests & dialogues -- Not much to write about story - it is linear, generally uninteresting. Quests are usually entertaining and some of them offer several ways how to complete them. Will you rat on thieves guild or join them? Or perhaps join them, take their money and then rat on them. Did you give a fee to soldier when he politely asked? No. Well, don't be surprised if he refuses to help you in the future. Dialogues are natural and reasonable. Talk with people, it can give you valuable information. You may miss lot of quests (and money) if you're too lazy to listen to people. -- FINAL VERDICT -- Gothic 2 is a game that you can't just 'play'. You need to 'understand' the game. You will be weak. You will die. You will get better. You will die again. But it will never be unfair. You start as a weak man and end as a saviour of the world. Gothic 2 is a fabulous old-school RPG that requires only one thing from you - to understand the game.

For those complaining about glitches and bugs, download unofficial patch called "Gothic 2 System pack" which removes a lot of the glitches and makes Gothic 2 run on modern Windows without much technical problems. --- I love Gothic 2 and The Night of the Raven DLC. It's Piranha Bytes's masterpiece which many players don't truly understand. Gothic 2 was considered easy by community. As a result, developers made Gothic 2: The Night of the Raven (a standalone game containing the base game + DLC, G2:NR for short) much harder. Yes, G2:NR is really tough at the beginning and even weaker monsters can easily kill you. But that's the point! You have to become stronger, learn the combat mechanics, use some tactic, be patient and then you will be able to kill that damn goblin who kicked your ass several hours ago. -- Combat -- I had no problem with controls, it came all naturally to me. The combat is perfectly balanced. You can hit, block, dodge back and strafe (circle around enemy) and your enemies can usually do exactly the same. Big troll won't strafe too much because it is slow for him, instead he will punch you - and he will punch you hard. Small goblins will strafe to make it harder for you to hit them, humans will try to block your attacks etc. Combat in real world is about hitting the enemy and avoiding hits from the enemy. Combat in G2:NR is inspired by this reality so if enemies manage to corner you, you're probably f*cked. Lesson learned, load the game and try again. And even if you tried 30 times and the enemy still smashes you, then try to come back later. You didn't expect to kill a group of bandits while wearing light armor and armed only with a sword that you can't even handle properly, did you? -- World & exploration -- World in G2:NR is not like in modern open world games. There are no warning signs that "you're approaching area with high-level enemies". The only warning you'll get is from other characters who mention something like "don't go to forest, you will die". And if you go into the forest unprepared, you will most likely die - but that's *your* responsibility. Again, world in G2:NR feels like a real place. People are mostly in town and farms, skeletons in tombs, wolves near forests etc. If citizen from town tells you to find the hideout of bandits, you have to think what would be a logical place for hideout (probably somewhere near the town) and then pay attention while going through area. Seek and ye shall find. World isn't big, but it's easy to get lost for a first time. Did you buy a map? No. Can someone near you point you to right direction. No. Well, it was *your* decision to go into the world unprepared. Lesson learned, load the game and try again. -- Character development -- You can learn melee or ranged weapons, magic and some other things. But invest your points wisely. It's not wise to decide on level 20 that you switch from melee to magic. "Jack of all trades, master of none" is approach that will only make the game harder for you. While the game is easiest when focused on melee, it can be finished only with bows, only as a pure mage... It just requires some experience. You learn the skills and attributes from teachers. You have to find each teacher. This helps to immerse you in the game because you get better at something by talking to person who knows the stuff, not by clicking some virtual button. -- Equipment -- There's a lot of armors, weapons and magic. The money is scarce at the beginning. But that's the point! You have to think twice what you sell, keep or buy. Want more money? Do quests, learn to pick locks and loot chests, steal from houses etc. But don't break the law, because penalty costs something... Want to get better armor and equipment? Join a faction, advance in story, help somebody, loot some ancient tomb. -- Story, quests & dialogues -- Not much to write about story - it is linear, generally uninteresting. Quests are usually entertaining and some of them offer several ways how to complete them. Will you rat on thieves guild or join them? Or perhaps join them, take their money and then rat on them. Did you give a fee to soldier when he politely asked? No. Well, don't be surprised if he refuses to help you in the future. Dialogues are natural and reasonable. Talk with people, it can give you valuable information. You may miss lot of quests (and money) if you're too lazy to listen to people. -- FINAL VERDICT -- Gothic 2: The night of the Raven is a game that you can't just 'play'. You need to 'learn' the game. You will be weak. You will die. You will get better. You will die again. But it will never be unfair. You start as a weak man and end as a saviour of the world. Gothic 2:TnotR is a fabulous old-school RPG that requires only one thing from you - that you will understand this game.

Oh, the game of my childhood. So many good memories... Joining my first camp, killing my first orc, giving water to peasants, smoking my first weed... OK, enough with the sentimentality. I never had any problem with the controls, it just came naturally to me. Catching story with some great twists, great atmosphere, challenging combat, memorable characters, tough enemies, EXCELLENT world design and exploration. You will lose, you will die, you will lose again but you will gain experience with this game every time. Gothic won't give you anything for free but it's really rewarding game.

Wonderful game. It is "only" walking simulator but boy can it be absolutely thrilling at times. The voice acting is top notch, the story is above average (but the ending is... "unexpected" to say it politely) and I liked the artsy graphics. Dialogues between the main protagonist and his colleague felt really like something a real person would say. Navigating through the terrain quickly became boring and for only 4-5 hr. adventure the prize is quite high.

Great sequel. Gripping story, perfectly balanced duo Eva-Neil, nice soundtrack. It's unbelievable how a game with resolution 640x480 and no voice acting can induce emotion of suspense, fear or happiness. Played in one go, took me about 5 hours. If you liked To the Moon, then it's your duty to play Finding Paradise.

Dead Space was scary for me in first 4-5 missions (mostly just jump scares), then it was "just" a good shooter. Graphics is nice, HUD elements are displayed on protagonist's suit which **** me more inside the game. Enemies are truly repulsive, agressive and smart. It took me a couple of minutes before I learned how to properly immobilize (not kill) them. Shoot away it's limbs, let it crawl and move forward. Customizations of suit and weapons also came in handy. Great game.

I liked the graphics and I don't want to debate whether Crysis 1 was better in this aspect or not. I liked the graphics, end of story. While I enjoyed playing Crysis 2, I can't ignore that it has been simplified in almost every aspect when compared to it's predecessor. Crysis 2 is strictly linear (C1 had some freedom of movement), basically only two nanosuit modes are left (C1 had four), in some missions you are forced to wait 1-3 mins. for scripted event while hordes of enemies surround you (C1 was more balanced). Crysis 2 is overall worse than C1, but it is much better and funnier game than Call of Duty or Battlefield.

Best graphics in it's days. Plot isn't bad (definitely not good either) and I had fun playing it. Missions in most FPS games are all the same: go from start of the corridor to it's end and shoot everything that moves. It soon becomes repetitive and frustrating. In Crysis I could solve missions in several ways. Shoot everything like Rambo, stay cloaked and sneak past everything, run fast like lighting or any other combination.

I played MW3 only to finish the story of MW trilogy. If you played MW or MW2, then MW3 won't offer ANYTHING new for you. Finished the singleplayer in 5 hours and uninstalled it immediately after last story cutscene ended. CoD is dead series for me from now on.

The graphics is beautiful, the combat is finally a bit challenging (for the first time since AC:B) and revolutionary Paris has a strong atmosphere. But characters and plot is totally, horribly uninteresting. But my biggest problem with Unity? No, it's not the bugs. It is the French Revolution. This revolution is widely considered to be one of the most important revolutions for entire mankind (Western world especially), thousands of volumes were written about it. Fall of monarchy, rise of Napoleon, Roberspierre, left and right, crumbling of entire state, Reign of Terror, fall of Bastille, political intrigues, civil unrests, chaos... And what does Unity focus on? On a totally cliche, dull, boring lovestory between some French assassin (the protagonist) and some Templar girl. Really, Ubisoft? Is this the best you can do?

I played this only because singleplayer :) Basically it's just the same game as previous Modern Warfare, still funny for a few hours though.

I played only singleplayer and I enjoyed it. Story is, of course, stupid. Action is pretty intensive, levels are nicely different and it never bored me.

Uninteresting gameplay, stupid story but fun for first 3-5 hours. I ignore multiplayer. The destructable environment is great idea. I remember that in one mission I was covering myself in a house, shooting at dozens of enemies coming from hill above. After 10 minutes, there was no house.

Definitely the weakest Arkham game, however still very well crafted and offering dozens of proper gameplay. Despite using same mechanisms like AA and AC, it felt more easy than those games. But plot, characters, combat, exploration - despite being little less interesting than before - are still very good. Origins doesn't offer almost anything new when compared to it's predecessors, but it's very enjoyable nonetheless.

Apparently I got lucky and Arkham Knight ran without any problems on my PC. Anyway, the technical flaws have been dealt with, so the reviews should stop focusing on them. Best game in the Arkham series. Combat is perfect and funny (just as was in previous games), Batmobile is tremendous fun (although a bit overused) and everything else is great. Plot and cinematography feels like from a professional movie, voice acting is absolutely superb (Noble as Scarecrow is perfect). The ending is incredible - full of emotions, logical yet still mysterious, focusing on Batman's darkest fears. If you played previous Arkham games, then Arkham Knight is a must have.