Not bad. Managed to get through several hours of the story and still struggled with the control scheme. The mapping doesn’t even use half the buttons on the controller, assigning punches to right stick. The over-the-shoulder camera angle is odd considering that almost every fighting game has either a top-down or side view. Perhaps I’m just a little disappointed after hearing everyone sing their praises about the game, but I found it rather lacking, the story taking precedence over gameplay.
It’s a good game, but I struggled to get past the first section. Playing on hard difficulty, the combat was one-dimensional button mashing that was ridiculously easy. I am aware that the combat becomes more engaging and challenging later on, but why would I play for five hours if I can’t be bothered to play for one?
The most impressive part of this game was the graphics; however, playing on a TV, the resolution was lower than what I’m accustomed to. I could count each individual pixel. Similarly, the game ran at a cap of 30FPS and suffered frequent frame-drops.
If the resolution was upped, and a 60FPS enhanced version was made, I could see myself enjoying this game. Right now, the low performance is not what I’m used to and irritates my eyes.
Amazing story with fantastic gameplay. I won't say anything about the story, but it is not something you would expect from a Sci-Fi shooter.
Now, the multiplayer. The PVP is good, but it’s what is holding this game back from a 10/10. Map design and the implementation of the titans into multiplayer is not well done. For example, for a game focused on fast movement, with an emphasis on wall-running, many of the maps contain open spaces with no buildings or walls so the titans can walk freely; this leaves gaps in the map that leave you exposed to enemy fire.
Combined with the absurdly fast TTK, it’s frustrating sometimes when you’re caught in the open.
If more time was spent on ironing out the PVP maps and titan system, perhaps, this game would get a 10.
Its decent. The map is mostly empty with very impressive visuals, but feels daft and lifeless. Gameplay is good, especially on the higher difficulties, but is not the tactical shooter Ghost Recon fans want. For example, the tiered loot system is a blatant cash grab from the devs wanting to hop onto the Destiny train. Nobody wants tiered loot in a tactical shooter. Luckily, the new game mode allows you to disable tiered loot and bypass the RPG aspects of Breakpoint. Additionally, cranking the difficulty to max and disabling every single hub elements makes the game incredibly immersive. However, even on the highest difficulty settings, enemies are practically blind and don't react when someone four feet away from them drops dead. Overall, if you look at the subreddit for Ghost Recon, its a decent game. I've seen much worse, but most players play Breakpoint like a Mil-sim and military dress-up game. Breakpoint is a make your own fun kind of game. Moreover, I recommend buying this game on PC, not Xbox or PS because of mods.
The game is very solid, but very lacking. Perhaps I’m a little underwhelmed after hearing all the praise about the game, but the movement and combat are not as good as people say. Reviewers tend to say that the combat is weighty and heavy, but I just don’t feel it, maybe it’s because I’m playing on the hard difficulty, but enemies just take way too long to kill. The progression system is great and easy to understand, but took way too long to progress. Even with most of the damage skills maxed out, combat still feels slow. But then again, that’s just the style of the game. For a melee-based combat system, the melee is poorly implemented; the repair and crafting system fits the setting, but simply makes combat annoying, especially when confronting human NPCs. Speaking of which, hostile humans NPCs are difficult to kill with just melee, requiring repeated use of molotovs and throwing stars. Compared to the human-zombie combat, human-human combat is awful.
The second most praised aspect of the game, the parkour, isn’t nearly as developed or intricate as I had thought. The beginning area of the game, ‘The Slums’, doesn’t fit the parkour system due to the lack of buildings to leap across, and it isn’t until you reach the ‘Old-Town’ area that parkour becomes fluid and fun due to the density of taller buildings. The positives of this game are greatly exaggerated. However, there are many aspects that are not hyperbolized and do live up to their expectations. Firstly, the nighttime atmosphere is perfect. The day-night cycle is an awesome feature, but daytime is a little boring. Nighttime more than makes up for it in being dark, but not too dark, just enough to mask the backdrop while leaving what you need to see visible. The addition of fantastic sound design and the ‘Volatile’ enemy types makes nighttime frightening and incredibly fun. Unfortunately, Dying Light features next to no accessibility features, like removing motion-blur and screen shake which are cranked to 11. Honestly, for me, it’s a little too much and nauseating. All in all, the combat and parkour did not live up what I had expected, but the atmosphere and overall game design was very well executed. The foundation is there, but lacks focus and intricacy. I had a decent time with the game.
It's a pretty decent game. Playing the game on Series X, the game is poorly optimized. The frame rate, even on performance mode, is capped at 30 frames per second. Gameplay and story are alright, but not exceptional. Combat is smooth with well animated finishers; character interactions between combat is mediocre, but the rest of the game is rather difficult to enjoy. Traversing the world with minimal fast travel quickly turns the game into a walking simulator. Fun moments are few and far between in the lackluster open-world. Lock picking is nigh impossible. The mechanic takes hours of practice that most probably aren't willing to do. Like lockpicking, the game will grow on you. As you progress through the litany of side quests, the pace of the game changes a little bit.
Another departure from the original Assassin's Creed franchise. If you're looking for an action/stealth game with parkour, please don't waste you're money on this. Valhalla lacks all of the good traits of the classics. Consider buying the Ezio Collection, AC4: Black Flag, or AC5: Unity. All of these games provide a far better stealth and parkour experience. That said, as an action-combat/ARPG game, Valhalla isn't the worst. Of course, the AI is a complete downgrade from Ubisoft titles prior to 2015 and the combat isn't fantastic compared to the greats of the genre. Animations are clunky and movement is somewhat annoying. Like any other AC game, the story is predictable and semi-decent, but fails to grab the player's attention. The world itself is empty and stretch thin to pad out player retention/playtime. With combat, not stealth, you can have fun. But, if you really want to play an action-combat game, there are much better options out there with a cheaper price tag. At best, Valhalla is a mediocre ARPG. At worst, it's another half-baked departure from the AC franchise.
It's a decent game, but I'm not interested in the visuals or dialogue of the game. Gameplay is decent, but not anything special or outstanding. Visually, although impressive, the game is rather dull. The use of colors is fantastic and the game has a clear art direction, but still looks very grayscale and empty. I understand that the washed colors and emptiness of the environments is by design and part of the story/style, but it isn't done well. The idea was there, but the execution was not. Gameplay, for at least the first several hours, is very dull. I can't comment on the latter half of the game as I didn't go past a few hours of playing. The game isn't for me. I find it mediocre. But who knows, you might like it.
The state that this game launched in is completely inexcusable. Series X is unplayable and, on other platforms, riddled with game breaking/soft-locking bugs that prevent you from progressing. Some players on Xbox have even lost all of their progress. Many PlayStation players' consoles are crashing; I, and many others, can't get past the main menu on Xbox; and Nintendo Switch, although slightly better, has just as many bugs as PC. Now, I have no doubt that the DLC will be a solid 6-7/10 after bug fixes, but in its current state, the game is awful. Ghor, a former programmer for the Risk of Rain franchise has tweeted out about how awful the game's code currently is after seeing it for himself. The code written for certain characters, like Chef, is so poorly done that it causes a plethora of inconsistencies and annoyances during runs. The lack of deltaTime ties damage and movement speed with certain abilities to the user's framerate. For some reason, many of the bugs experienced by PC players were previously exclusive to consoles. The teleporter, which is needed to progress the game, spawns inside inaccessible boxes on certain maps, soft-locking your progress and preventing you from moving to the next level. I wouldn't recommend buying this game now, especially if you're on Xbox. Wait for bug fixes from Gearbox. As of the date of this review, Gearbox is in talks with Microsoft about the Xbox situation, but none of the smaller issues, such as the lack of deltaTime and run-ending bugs, have been addressed or mentioned (As of August 30, nearly 4 days after the launch of the DLC, the Xbox version of the game is playable).
I understand that this game was designed for the Nintendo Switch, but the gameplay and graphic downgrades aren't appealing in any way compared to Monster Hunter: World Iceborne. If you are looking for a faster, more casual game on a handheld like the Nintendo Switch, buy it. But if you're willing to spend some time and have a console/PC, consider buying Monster Hunter: World and its DLC, Iceborne, instead.
This is a review for the expansion, not the 2.0 update. Story is more interesting than the basegame's main plotline. Songbird and Reed are great characters, Silverhand's occasional bits of advice really helping to confuse the player in their decision of who to trust and side with. Gameplay wise, there isn't anything new besides a plethora of new side quests which, of course, are phenomenal and on-par with the base-game. Phantom Liberty really expands upon characters who were previously quite shallow, and Silverhand's dialogue is much more influential on the player's emotions. Overall, characters are much more engaging than they were in the basegame. Certain mechanics, like the Dogtown black market are really great; being able to buy 'Iconic' weapons that you'd missed is a fantastic QOL feature. Speaking of Dogtown, the environments are as immersive as always, moreso considering the interactive areas, such as borders and whatnot. Still, there is the occasional empty plot of land devoid of people.
A brilliant puzzle-platformer. The Pedestrian innovates the puzzle genre in ways never thought of previously. The graphics are stellar, the transitions are incredibly smooth and the swaps between signs are seamless. The only notable flaw of the game is that it isn't long enough. If they introduced more of the three-dimensional puzzles like the last level, the game would be much more interesting. Because the game is so short, I wouldn't buy it unless it's below $10. Get this game for free somehow if you can.
It is much better than what I imagined. Cyberpunk 2077 is infinitely better than what it was at launch. The story, progression, and world are great. Firstly, the story of the game, although shorter than I expected, is spectacular. Of course, I'm not expecting a Fallout: New Vegas level of story and freedom of choice, but I would prefer if there was some more flexibility in what you can choose to do in the story. Performance issues have been mostly fixed and bugs aren't nearly as prevalent as they were before. But game crashes and bugs will still occur, mostly when in a vehicle. Complaints and critiques of 1.0 still apply. For instance, the game is too easy: all aspects are, including the skill tree which barely requires any thought/planning; enemies/bosses are bullet-sponges that barely fight back; and parts of the world still feel empty. With better-tuned AI and difficulty, the game could be a 10. Outside of those empty areas, most parts of the world is perfectly fine, densely populated, visually pleasing, and immersive. On console, these areas, unforetunately, suffer from massive framedrops.
The beginning of sad downfall of a franchise, AC: Origins introduces another new, very different setting and time period that none of the other games in the franchise have. However, the flashy visuals hides the horrible combat and subpar stealth. Parkour is better than it is in the subsequent games in the franchise, but no where near as good as Assassin's Creed: Unity or Black Flag.
A complete downgrade from previous games. Halo 5 lives up to its reputation as a bad game. The dependency on the thruster pack for movement in PVP took away from the multiplayer experience. While the campaign attempts, and fails, to replicate the narrative storytelling and fun of Halo: Reach. Besides the focus on the thruster pack movement, the PVP is very alright, but can't compare to any of the previous Halo games. The story is less than stellar and boring. The introduction of Locke's character is refreshing, but doesn't save the campaign. Halo 5: Guardians just can't compare to previous games and Fireteam Osiris isn't as lovable as Noble Team.
The second game improves on it in almost every way, but not much better. Remnant 1 is better than the second in certain areas. The environments are more dynamic and colorful than the sequel and the beginning of the game is less dull. But, the game is so dull: all the enemies are brainless bullet-sponges.
A failed, half-hearted attempt to return to form. Assassin's Creed Mirage takes a step back to the original gameplay of older AC games, forgoing to open-world action RPG format of Odyssey and Valhalla. It isn't as bad as Valhalla or Origins, but fails to deliver the same experience that games like Assassin's Creed: Black Flag and Assassin's Creed: Unity do. Firstly, the parkour and movement is atrocious. It feels slow, clunky and forced, no where near the smooth movement of AC: Unity. For example, a wall which, at first, looks scalable isn't climbable in any way. Certain surfaces bug out and make Basim start rubber-banding or get stuck. In turn, the inability to easily scale and descend structures or run across rooftops directly affects the stealth combat experience of AC: Mirage. Speaking of the combat, the melee combat is flashy and full of flair. The amount of needless spinning/jumping attacks is ridiculous, done to conceal to idiocy of the combat system. The animations of attacks are also horrendous. When you hit an enemy they don't flinch or react; the sword just passes through them like jello. Assassin's Creed: Mirage, by far, has the worst melee combat of any AC game. Older AC games from more than a decade ago do melee combat more justice. I digress, Mirage attempts to innovate its stealth experience in unneeded ways. The addition of tall grass to hide in has long been overdone in recent AC games. Like the fear takedowns in Batman: Arkham Knight, a game that does stealth combat right, Mirage introduces a mechanic that allows you to kill multiple enemies in an instant. But, unlike Arkham Knight, it isn't cool or cinematic: Basim literally just teleports to his enemies instead of rushing at them one after the other. Ubisoft attempts to hold your hand and ease you through every single stealth mission. No mistake feels punished and no success feels rewarded. Overall, the game tries to recreate the success of Unity and Black Flag, but fails to deliver everything that made those games good: a smooth, immersive experience with cool parkour and action.
Incredible game. The combat is responsive and very satisfying while being the perfect level of difficulty. The art style and level design are among the best I've seen the the last two decades. Largely underappreciated, the story of Sifu is a simple "that guy killed your father, so you're going to kill him". However, camera management and isolating enemies is so important that it could turn new players away. The attacks, although telegraphed, are incredibly quick and can be concealed by either the camera angle or character model. This has happened to me a few times, but not enough to ruin the experience. You'll need patience to play this game. Through the 'Age' system, Sifu demands perfection in how you play to minimize the amount of years you age. In this way, it can be frustrating to many that dying may feel like a punishment rather than a learning experience like it is in Soulsborne games. Still, the system gives the players a second chance that many games don't, increasing damage at the expense of health as you age. The system also causes more replayability as there is an incentive to replay and master every level to gain an advantage in the next.
Not an Assassin's Creed game. If you're looking to buy an AC game and play as an assassin, don't buy this game, save yourself the money and look into Assassin's Creed 1, 2, 3, 4 (Assassin's Creed: Black Flag), and 5 (Assassin's Creed: Unity). First off, because this game is set before the formation of the Hidden Ones and Brotherhood of Assassins, there aren't even assassins in this game. The core gameplay isn't horrendous and can be fun at times, but the RPG mechanics and plain open world, although visually impressive, doesn't hold a candle to Assassin's Creed: Black Flag or Assassin's Creed: Unity. The open-world is excessively large, and unlike Black Flag or Unity, there isn't any interesting activities or fluid movement to have fun with while on the move. Simply put, there is too much. The content in the game is stretched out and unfocused. In this way, Odyssey milks the open-world RPG format as much as possible while putting in the least funding and effort into quest and map design. To put it into perspective, trying to 100% Assassin's Creed Odyssey takes, on average, 12 hours longer than trying to 100% Elden Ring. You would think that the setting would be interesting or refreshing, but it leaves most of the open-world empty and bland. The emptiness makes opportunities to use the parkour system, which is horrendous, very scarce. Unlike AC: Unity, you won't be jumping across rooftops and scaling buildings to gain an advantage or hide from enemies that have spotted you. This makes stealth, in an Assassin's Creed game, basically non-existent. Obviously, the game does still have some positives. At times, character interactions and dialogue can be interesting/humorous and combat can be fun. However, the lack of proper stealth and parkour in an Assassin's Creed game leaves much to desire.
Great game, but it gets painfully boring after several hours in creative and multiple survival playthroughs. Nonetheless, there isn't anything else to say about the game, it's a timeless kid's classic.
Fairly priced, fun game. To be honest, there isn't much to say about the game other than that. The game practically has no negatives or super outstanding, notable positives. It's great while watching a movie or listening to an audiobook on the side.
It's actually pretty good. I wasn't too excited for this game at release given the disappointed that Hardline turned out to be, but it was just as refreshing and different as Hardline with none of the negatives. First off, the graphics and fidelity are outstanding, especially when considering the date this game was released. It genuinely looks better than most next-gen games on the market today. The gameplay is fun, like any other BF game, it's a good mix of arcade and mil-sim. Fun if you want to sweat or turn off your brain. Unfortunately, the game is set during WWI. Don't get me wrong, it's one of the only FPS games set in WWI and is very refreshing. But the historical setting limits what the developers can implement in terms of weaponry and vehicles. If you're looking for a BF game set in modern-day, buy Battlefield 4, if you've played too many FPS games set in the modern-day, buy Battlefield 1, you won't regret it. Of course, just like the classic BF gameplay, Battlefield 1 lacks a good story. But, who cares: the multiplayer is what you want in a BF game.
Out of all the Bethesda RPGs, the one not developed by Bethesda is the only good one. Compared to every other Bethesda Fallout game, Fallout: New Vegas' writing is absolutely incredible. The storyline and player freedom is beyond anything else I've ever played. The game doesn't hold your hand and funnel you in one direction. Of course, no game published in 2010 is without flaw, and New Vegas is no exception. That said, New Vegas is the best Fallout game in the franchise; it also completely overshadows Starfield in every way.
Great, refreshing game with no bullsheedo. Unfortunately, the live service isn't heading a good direction and there are too many in game currencies. The endgame (IE. lack of an endgame) ruins the game. I can't give Helldivers any higher than an 8 because it is too repetitive and boring after reaching higher levels and unlocking everything.
Remnant 2 is a half decent game. The game's concept is interesting and different, but borrows from other games and doesn't innovate in areas it needs to. Firstly, the beginning of the game is painfully slow and tedious. The environments in the beginning areas are incredibly dull and colorless with no life whatsoever. The weapons, skills, and abilities are as basic as can be. As mentioned previously, the Remnant IP borrows a lot of ideas from other games. Most notably, the Estus flash healing system is taken from From Software's Souls-borne games. Of course, more build variety and freedom for experimentation will open for the player later in the game. However, the amount of time it takes to get out of the beginning stages of the game and freely experiment with builds is ridiculous. The looter-shooter aspect of the game is done rather poorly, weapon and build customization being rather mundane. I would give this game a 6/10 to 7/10 if more effort went into the design of the beginning areas and new player experience. Even then, the late game is repetitive and a chore.
It's pretty much impossible to complete this game without a guide, as the steps on what to do next are very specific and obscure, but the first and second playthroughs of the game are so incredible that you get used to it. Unlike games like Minecraft, Terraria doesn't need mod packs or online servers to be fun, the game is fun on its own. That said, like Minecraft and something like Sea of Thieves, there isn't a lot to do after you've played for a long time. In this way, Terraria is a "Make your own fun" kind of game.
Honestly, it's much better than I thought it would be. The story is pretty good and the combat isn't horrible. But I find that the game is very lackluster after completing the story; beyond the campaign, the game doesn't motivate you to play the game anymore. There is armor that can upgrade characters, but playing online is a genuine hassle.
Very good game to play as a fidget tool. Fun gameplay and massive map with dazzling visuals, especially considering how old the game is Unfortunately, the game lacks a proper progression system and has no help, dropping you into a huge open world with no guidance at all. I've basically finished this game, completed every challenge and explored every area. I can say confidently that this game is hit or miss. You'll either love it or find it excruciatingly boring.
Great game with smooth movement and satisfying stealth gameplay. The parkour is a little finicky at first, but is easy to get a handle of yet difficult to master. Gameplay is overall very engaging and fun. Parkour and free roaming is also great for fidgeting while watching something or listening to an audiobook. Overall, animations are excellent, the game provides a great amount of freedom to the player, which is incredible and gives the player a lot of opportunities/options when it comes to playing the game. The story is slightly disappointing for fans of the series as it's more of a revenge/love story and less about time traveling assassins, but isn't as bad as people make it seem. The Brotherhood is also described and introduced with much more depth than any other AC game, which is very welcome. A lot of the negative reviews are about bugs and performance issues, but most of them have been patched. Personally, I've yet to experience any performance issues or major bugs. The infamous missing face bug that you've likely seen online has only been seen by a few people, the large majority of players having never seen it, so don't worry about it. Although, I have experienced some bugs, they've never ruined my experience or immersion. Oftentimes, they are actually quite funny.
Very active for a decade old game. Visually impressive as well. Recommend people who have never experienced a BF title to start here. Many of the maps are locked behind DLC, but most of the DLC maps, excluding Operation Metro, are almost never played, so don't worry about missing out on too much of the content. The game has a lot of progression and content to work through. Gameplay is a good mix of arcade (like COD) and mil-sim (like ARMA). If you're looking for a story game with a fantastic campaign, this isn't the game for you. Story has the standard gung-ho military dudes with terrorists and very predictable; the characters have no depth to them, so don't expect to get attached to any characters or invested in the plot. Many of the negative reviews talk about major bugs, but I have yet to experience any bugs, game breaking or minor. The majority of the negative reviews are from the initial release of the game, many which have complaints about bugs/performance issues that are no longer present. That said, visibility is a bit of an issue. Especially in dark or colorless maps where it is nearly impossible to see anyone without maxing out your brightness. If you're epileptic or have issues with frequent loud sounds, I don't recommend playing CQB maps like Operation Locker and Operation Metro. HE grenades, smoke grenades, and flashbang spam is very prevalent on these maps.
It's an MMORPG, there isn't a lot to expect. The majority of quests and boring fetch quests with no satisfaction. Combat is boring, literally just DPS checks that don't require any skill whatsoever. The story is basically non-existent with practically nothing interesting in it. The majority of the game is fast traveling and walking.
Improves upon Battlefront 1 and is actually surprisingly good. All the issues from the previous game were fixed in this one. However, scummy loot box monetization ruins the game. Ignoring the loot boxes, the gameplay is more than good.
Very impressive visuals for its time and a strong multiplayer. But, besides the fun multiplayer gameplay and visuals, the positives end there. Certain heroes are beyond overpowered and feel clunky to play. Lightsaber duels are also lacklustre and incredibly dull, but the FPS Part of the game is actually really good.
I wouldn’t recommend you get this game now, especially with a sequel released and a dead community.
I don't have anything to really say about the game. LOL has a big enough reputation that I don't need to say anything other than to try it if you like MOBAs.
For a file size of 80 gigabytes, Apex doesn't have a lot of content to play through. Gunplay is decent while movement feels slow and clunky. Apex exacerbates the problems of Titanfall while taking none of its positives. Firstly, the battle royale maps are needlessly large. You'll get a few kills at landing before walking around the map in search of a fight for the next 10 minutes, only to get third-partied after winning your next fight. The mixtape mode takes looting out of the equation and sets everyone at equal ground, but rotates between game modes, preventing you from choosing which map/game mode you want to play. Along with a few more questionable game design choices, like removing the option to play Duos, the graphical fidelity, map design, and color scheme ruin the visibility of the game, making it difficult to identify enemies.
A lot of review bombing due to some unrelated controversy, so ignore some of the negative comments.
The game is actually pretty good, but gets quite boring after finishing most of it.
Not a big Harry Potter fan, but it’s a solid 7 out of 10, minimal bugs, decent gameplay, and has flaws.
Better than people make it out to be. But, overall, is very disappointing and lacking in all departments. Gunplay doesn’t feel responsive and snappy while graphics seem washed, and make it difficult to see enemies.
The campaign is unique and refreshing, but executed poorly. It’s hit or miss whether you like it or not.
Not a bad game by any means, just a bit lacking in every department. The game falls short of its predecessor, STEEP, do yourself a favour and buy STEEP instead.
Painfully boring. Planets are barren and have nothing worth exploring, NPC AI is subpar and very outdated, and gunplay is horrendous. There is no variety in weapons, just the same gun copy-pasted several times. The design of the weapons is also awful, there’s just nothing that looks or feels satisfying. But I’ve yet to reach the worst part. Firstly, the loading screens. Why are there so many? It’s like an old Resident Evil game with the amount of loading screens needed whenever you open a door. Secondly, the story is nonexistent and uninteresting.
Overall, the game is heavily flawed and half-baked. Gameplay can be fun if you really try. But, there are a lot of better games and Bethesda style RPGs out there.
Very, very good. The game is a blast to play with some friends. The game does have some performance issues, at least on Xbox, but doesn’t have too many problems.
The camera work and movement can be nauseating for some people, but should be fine for most.
That said, Astroneer is incredibly boring and monotonous when played solo. DO NOT buy this game if you intend to play it by yourself. But you can still find it fun if you’re into the base building, exploration, and automation kinda stuff.
Pretty Good. Hit registration is a little off and the game is very P2W. Certain classes are completely locked behind a paywall. Gameplay can be fun and satisfying, but very frustrating with the 0.25s TTK. If you are a fan of games with slower time to kill, than this game is not for you.
Visibility is also horrendous and the graphics are incredibly washed and generic with no distinct style.
Uninspired and boring gameplay with invasive marketing practices. The First Descendant is a gross mixture of Destiny 2 and Warframe with more monotonous and repetitive enemy encounters in an empty, lifeless map. The First Descendant is like playing Destiny 2 public events over and over again, with Warframe-esque gameplay and a Destiny 2 style loot system. That said, The First Descendant overcomplicates everything inspired by/plagarised from Destiny 2 and Warframe. The way armor and weapons are rolled in this game pad out play times as much as possible while minimizing the amount of actually fun content in the game. Having played both Warframe and Destiny 2 for an extensive amount of time, The First Descendant borrows every done bad from each game and dials up the monetization and microtransactions to 11. The menus and hub area only make the game more confusing when you're bombarded with icons and numbers that mean nothing to you, as if they're trying to distract you from how dull and bland the maps and characters are. However, the worst crime of the game is its quest design, with most quests summing up to killing a few grunts before moving to next location to repeat the same objective. Boss encounters are even more disappointing as they're more or less bullet sponges with no interesting mechanics or moves. The game has its merits, but overcomplicates and inflates every part of it.
Very solid game with nice art and good gameplay loop. Slay the Spire is quite challenging and takes a little time to learn how to play properly. There really aren’t any complaints that I have, but not a lot of positives besides the gameplay, which is the most important part of any game.
It’s not awful, just falls short of MHW in almost every way. The gameplay loop is repetitive and attacks feel scripted/unnatural and incredibly easy to dodge. The balancing of weapons is also awful. I would recommend Monster Hunter: World instead.
Got this game for free on Gamepass, but I can’t understand why people enjoy it so much. Maybe it’s my fried Gen Z brain, but there’s nothing of substance to me in this game. The overall gameplay loop is extremely repetitive with no difference between runs. I want to like this game, but can’t. I’ve played for an hour now and unlocked more than a few characters. Yet, it still feels dull and uninteresting. Don’t get me wrong, the game isn’t bad, but I wouldn’t spend more than 2 dollars on this game. Get it for free somehow.
Very mediocre. No changes from the first game, unsatisfying gameplay loop and boring combat that feels like I’m slapping a brick wall with a pool noodle. The game isn’t awful, but it doesn’t do anything right. It’s just a big nothing burger.
Hands down one of my favorite games, MHW is amazing. A fantastic gameplay loop and satisfying combat. With a large amount of weapons to choose from and a large roster of fun monsters, MHW never has a boring moment. Introducing the game to a friend is especially satisfying as they will fall for the game just like you did. If you are searching for a monster hunting game with a deep, well-developed story, the Monster Hunter series is not made for you. This game does not have a good story. Monster Hunter games have never had a good story. Of course, it isn’t without flaw: certain monster animations, especially tail/flying attacks, can look janky, but are hardly noticeable during combat, and hit boxes can be awkward or absurd at times. But that doesn’t subtract from the incredible experience that MHW is. However, the biggest problem that does ruin the game for many is the UI, it can appear overwhelming and poorly designed at first and it’ll take some getting used to.
The game is free, yet I feel as if I lost money. Warframe can be fun for the first tens of hours, but quickly becomes boring when you don’t have the time to put into it or the gameplay loop simply becomes too repetitive. The game does have its merits, with a player driven trade market and completely free season pass, but quickly tapers off when you realize that premium currency is necessary to play the game. Now, the premium currency can be acquired through trading, but other than that, there is no other method other than spending money. In this way, the player is forced to rely on others or spend money to enjoy their experience. Along with drop rates for rare items being <0.5%, Warframe quickly becomes tiring and tedious, especially when you become so overpowered that the gameplay loop feels like a chore. As of writing this extension paragraph, I had put over 400 hours into the game. I have enjoyed my time with it and made many friends, but I wish the game was something better. Many of my previous complaints still remain the same. From Destiny to Warframe, it was difficult to adjust; the wounded dog cannot fathom being treated correctly. Adjusting my idea of looter-shooters and actually taking the time to enjoy the mechanics instead of rushing to collect the next best item, I started to enjoy the game. Warframe deserves a higher score than what I initially scored (ie. 5/10).
