Nimbus1701

It is as good as they say. Has high replay and encourages experimentation and new tactics. It will also probably get you reading up on Greek history.

Exodus appears to have significant technical issues even in 2020. Audio has significant problems with relative dialogue/volume and the spatial simulation of sound. Enemies who are 100 metres away sound like they are inches away, and you have to keep turning your head to try and triangulate a source of noise. Dialogue audio is extremely poor as well, with random volumes at random distances and directions. Some people claim to have mitigated this by toggling a spatial sound setting in-game. I have had no success there, but using headphones has helped somewhat. The maps themselves experience significant clipping problems with the protagonist passing through solid objects at times. Enemies unfortunately do this a lot more, both before and after they are shot, breaking immersion. They also have tendency to shudder and shake once dead. Looking through the binoculars or scopes will reveal significant texture pop-in issues, as well as weird stop-motion animation at a distance. Weapon customisation is an interesting feature, and somewhat makes up for the limited variety of weapons. Like the previous Metro games, the background world's artwork is very good. The painted dysoptian world feels both real and plausible. The designs of both urban ruins and the wilderness have been well thought out against the human disaster that precedes all the metro games. Overall, it feels like mishmash of good literary ideas/artwork and poor technical execution. Grab it on sale, and make sure you play it after the first two Metro games.

Good game. Especially enjoyable if you are a fan of Baldur's Gate (and the like). Good artwork, music and writing. Treats the player with a level of respect, and expect you to apply intelligence in return.

Deadfire features a number of 'qualify of life' improvements over the previous game. The problem with Deadfire, however, is that the writers seem to have gotten lost in their own mythology. The lore is quite hard to follow, despite a familiarity to pacific cultures in real world. Even the logic behind the main storyline feels forced - and segmented. The player spends most of their time moving between large swathes of ocean, stumbling onto islands, where you 'play' multiple choice text-games - that is to say, it is mostly padding. Had the developers simply extended the storyline, and maintained every other aspect of the original PoE - you'd still have a superior game. It's worth buying on discount, to support the developer. But I can't recommend it at full price.

PROS : - Beautifully rendered environment. Graphics are very very good. - Orchestral soundtrack is brilliant. Similar to the Halo games. - Shooting/Fighting/Combat mechanics are very good. - Co-Op can be fun, even with all the Cons described below. CONS : - Extremely poor campaign/story. - Short campaign/story. - Weapon and armor customisation is limited - you can only make slight adjustments. - Content is full of padding and rehashed/reworded quests. - Content is repetitive, and similar to stuff found in budget F2P games. - Most of the game is empty space, empty corridors and empty buildings, connected by 'rooms' or 'courtyards' of enemies. Again, similar to budget games. - It feels like the game has been built as a DLC platform. First DLC being released a couple of months after the main game. - The endgame is relatively stale and empty, as other (non professional) reviewers have said. What content has been offered is unrewarding; The stuff that is rewarding is limited to weekly-reset quests. Score : a solid 4/10.

Only about 30 hours into the game. I can see why so many people call this the best game they have ever played. So much effort has gone into making this. It's immediately apparent that the developer is treating the story and its audience with a great deal of respect.

Fallout 4 is not a bad game. It's not a great game either. It's a more polished take on Fallout 3. The world-building is very good. The ruined cities, weather, dead forests have been painted with a more colourful (yet appropriately bleak) brush. For those of you who like combat - it's good - plays liker a shooter. The problem with the game mostly in the writing - in short, it's lazy. The game has been artificially inflated by using generated quests that are mostly fetch and kill quests. Sometimes you don't even realise you are doing a computer-generated quest. The actual written quests have a few shining moments, but unfortunately, gravitate towards the same point, and exhibit the same themes. The character building is also poorly paced, but some of the companions are very interesting. Critics have given this game a high score, I assume, because they never had to pay for it.

If you enjoyed Conviction, you will enjoy this edition of splinter cell as well. Sam Fisher's movements are more refined and the environments present a few different ways of approaching a challenge. Character animations are nicely done as well. There are **** AI issues where they can get stuck behind an object (just waiting to be killed), but broadly they can get pretty challenging. Be careful with the Heavy Soldiers.

Bioware promised too much with Mass Effect 3, and delivered an average shooter that was on-par with DeadSpace3. This is not an atrocious game. It's just average. Mass Effect 3's biggest problem is Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2. If this were a standalone production with a modular story I can imagine people would be more understanding. It had a lot to live up to but Bioware knew it didn't need to create a brilliant game to get the sales. In contrast to Mass Effect 2's cinematic rendered custscenes, ME3 only offers in-game cutscenes. The most notable problem in the character models are the eyes most human characters have a lifeless stare and feel like animated mannqueins. Environment and alien characters are however, very good. Combat is a tad nauseating at the start. It plays like DeadSpace, and differently to the previous two games. Many will feel that they're missing 40% of their screen to the large OTS-Character model. Ironically, one of the most contrversial features of the game, the "optional" multiplayer component, turns out to be better than expected. It may be annoying at the start, but you find yourself enjoying it more than the campaign storyline. I won't need to discuss the "endings" and the "choice" personally I found these issues to be secondary and would have been forgivable if I wasn't playing a rendition of Deadspace. It's difficult to understand why so many reviewers have marked this up in the 80s. It's definitely a reasonable shooter but not one for the books.

Gone Home is primarily an exploration/discover game that features more interactivity than Dear Esther, and is shorter than To The Moon. Most of the puzzles relate to following the content to make sure locked areas of the map can be opened. The game is narrated through audio and visual clues, and pays a great deal of attention to small details which must be examined to understand the full story. I can guess that many negative reviews are due to players expecting something more of a "game" you must be advised that this is more of a story but a very well executed one.

Pros A fairly large world map, engaging combat both as melee or caster, and enemies that move around a lot which makes combat interesting again. Cons utterly forgettable characters pulled out of a fantasy name-generataring-pot, and equally forgettable stories/quests. A great effort, but ultimately gets boring and repetetive almost like if you were playing World of Warcraft as a single-player game. Combat is dynamic and interesting, but it feels like the lead writers got bored at some point. Players will follow suit. Could have been much more.

Many years ago, this game may have been a bit more appealing. Voice acting and artwork are reasonable. The story is "not bad" like a midday movie that you don't bother turning off because it's not offensive. It offers an interesting "join the dots/clues" mechanic, but other than that, it's not what I'd call progress in Adventure Gaming.

I am playing this in 2013, for the first time. The Witcher is a long, immersive, detailed RPG. The story's flow is similar to likes of Baldur's Gate. The dialogue is mature, with some dry humour thrown in. Slightly different to your classic Warrior-Mage-Priest-Protagonist RPG types when it comes to character development, in that you are primarily a sword-user who can mix in various forms of magic during combat, as well as crafted/purchased potions. Combat itself can be a little difficult at times, but you get used to the click-to-combo fight style after a few hours (I found playing a warrior in Dragon Age to be harder). It covers mature themes and is probably not for children. If you had not played this when it came out many years ago this can fill the void. It's as enjoyable as Baldur's Gate and Dragon Age and while it's closer to those games than Skyrim, it tries to offer a similar level of lore and fantasy. A tremendous effort by the developers, and one for the history books.

The interface is clunky and difficult to use. Not too intuitive, and takes a bit of adjusting to. There are quite a few bugs that relate to lighting in the current release of the extended edition. The atmosphere is good and the story is released slowly. But the execution is not that great, despite a great effort in trying to build a game within a limited number of rooms. Full marks for the atmosphere, but does not really deliver at the end of the day. Worthwhile if you score it for under $5, as you can revert back to the non-extended-edition if the extended-edition crashes.

I often wonder what people would have felt playing this game if its predecessor did not exist. Probably a little less let-down. DA2 is more intensive when it comes to combat, but that's not the problem. The plot is poor, characters are not that appealing, and it feels linear and simplistic. Might have done better as a large XBLA arcade game in some ways. Another nail in the coffin for Bioware.

Don't play this game around other people. Play it alone. It will be a very personal experience, and one that you won't want to share. Emotions you feel will be reminiscent of Final Fantasy 7. The writer/developer is a master storyteller, and the music/song complete the artwork. Well done.

Amazing artwork, interesting and simple gameplay along with beautiful music is a well tested combination. Bastion has all of these. It also features a unique narration/voiceover system that I've never seen before. Can't really find anything wrong with this one.

An beautiful game that features hand drawn art, a suitably desolate atmosphere and a fascinating story. The mechanics are simple and the puzzles are interesting. Draws on experiences from some classic sci-fi movies and games.