jc_denton

**** story, narrative and pacing make more sense if the player ignores the open world and just rushes through the main story, the open world design has failed. In a weird way, that's the best way to enjoy Cyberpunk 2077, as it hides the glaring issues with the static open world from the player and maximizes the potential of the really good stuff, which is the story and the characters. First the good stuff. The game looks great visually. The art style is beautiful. The city is gorgeous. It's what I imagined a future Blade Runner video game to look like after seeing the movie for the first time. Shooting mechanics are great. Audio design is absolutely top notch. It sounds as good as it looks. The problem is, the city is a mere facade. It looks good and is massive, but it's a hollow experience. NPCs walk around like mindless zombies. Tons of stores around you, yet the only ones you can interact with sell the same garbage. Cars can be smashed at 150mph with basically zero cosmetic damage. I actually stole a cop car with three cops standing right next to me. They didn't give a damn. The open world in Cyberpunk 2077 is a Potemkin village. It's a facade. It's not real, it doesn't even feel real. I've seen more interactivity in GTA: SA, and that's a 15 year old game. There are some glaring issues with stealth mechanics where enemies home in you as soon as you've been spotted, inconsistent difficulty and RPG mechanics that are overly simplified, but I'll chuck that to either me not understanding them completely or misusing them. Nevertheless, my impression of them hasn't been very good. The story is great, and the characters are interesting. Every single storyline mission I've played has been engaging and well designed. This game would have been a lot better if it was linear, as that would have controlled the pacing and kept the player from engaging with the most disappointing open world I've taken part of.

I chose my nickname based on this game's protagonist. Needless to say, it's the greatest game of all time, and it's a milestone in the genre of immersive sims.

This game looks like your run of the mill Chinese mobile game knock off that's heavily advertised on social media platforms, and after playing it for 30 minutes, it feels like it too. This game is kind of like Dubai in a sense. It's just as hollow, vain and materialistic. Godfall has 0 substance. Its weird graphical style looks like a 2005 rappers mouth with all the bling, and I guess it has its fans. But for me it simply feels tacky and unoriginal. It's like plating your entire home in gold.

The true existential horror is in the story, not the monsters. In fact, I'd call it one of the best video game stories of all time, right up there with the likes of Metal Gear Solid, Deus Ex, Silent Hill 2 and Bioshock. This game gets a 10 just for that. Please remember a score of 10/10 doesn't mean perfection in my book. SOMA has some glaring issues, most of which has to do with the jumpscare tactics and loud noises the game likes to throw at you. There are also some issues with the main character and how stupid he is not understanding what's really going on when it has been obvious for the observant player for quite some time. But these issues are just me ****. They are minor, and I honestly shouldn't even have spent the keystrokes it took to type them out when I could have gushing about story. But I don't want to spoil you. Go out there and experience the game for yourself. It's absolutely worth it, and while the story would work out well in a book or movie, the video game medium actually strengthens the delivery of that story, as you yourself have to walk around, pick up the pieces, and try to tie everything up.

I'm a big fan of the original and I think this is a faithful remake that Hangar 13 should be proud of. There are some glaring issues in this remake like very inconsistent difficulty, control issues (especially in combat) and facial animations that looks like something from the early Xbox 360/PS3 era, but apart from that, the game plays well, the music is good, the city looks beautiful especially at night, and the story is still harrowing and sad, just like it was back in 2002.

Ubisoft games are the McDonald's burgers of the gaming world. Not the tastiest food, but they're served quickly and the quality is consistent. In other words, you know what you're getting. If you like the stuff, good for you. If you don't, do yourself a favor and don't play them. Far Cry 5 is the worst Far Cry to date. The formula is extremely stale at this point and there's very little that's going to surprise you in this game. You've seen it all before in Far Cry 3 and 4, and other Ubisoft games. Far Cry 3 was a good game since what they brought out was fresh, and they had great villains (and some great other characters as well). Far Cry 4 was a copypaste job that didn't improve on Far Cry 3 except for graphics in some parts. In fact, I'd say Pagan Min was the only reason Far Cry 4 was even playable from start to finish. The gameplay was just as boring, but my desire to learn more about this dude kept me playing. Far Cry 5 doesn't have a charming villain or anything fresh in it to redeem it as a gaming experience. It's the same goddamn McDouble you've have had the chance to eat for the past 10 years. It's not going to magically taste better all of a sudden.

This series is getting tiresome. This is now the fourth Tropico game follow the same exact formula. This is the best one of them all in a technical sense, the game looks good, is responsive and supports the simulation of a decent amount of Tropicans before the engine taps out. Soundtrack and atmosphere wise, this is probably the worst one. The funny radio is gone and replaced by your sycophant lackey throwing out dad jokes ad nauseam. The soundtrack isn't as good as say in Tropico 3 and 4. The campaign is divided into separate levels now. This has its advantages, as it teaches you the ropes as you go along and early game mistakes won't come back to haunt you in the same way as in Tropico 5 where you revisited the same island in multiple missions. But it sort of leaves the campaign missions feeling a bit flat. You'll never nurture your own little island from a crown colony to a banana republic to an authoritarian off-shore tax haven in a single mission, which is a shame. DLC policy is pretty bad as always. My recommendation to fans of the earlier installments is to just wait and get the whole thing at a bargain price. If you ask me, there isn't enough fresh content here to warrant paying more than 15 bucks.

This is a fantastically underrated game that emphasizes player choice. It that sense, it's the closest thing we have to a Deus Ex or System Shock 2 in the modern era. It's an RPG at its heart - don't expect to go in guns blazing and winning the gunfights unless you've maxed out the weapon skill tree. It's a thinking man's game. The game features some of the world building I've ever seen. There snippets of information spread here and there and its up to you to piece the puzzle together. This is one of those games where getting spoiled really ruins a large part of the experience, since the joy and thrill of finding out what's REALLY going on is what keeps this game going. So stop reading reviews, and go get this game. It can probably be had for less than 10 bucks these days.

The most impressive lighting ever created in a real-time game, and they even chose to do it on the greatest and most underrated Quake game. The game itself is just as fun as it was in 1997. The weapons are great, the levels are great, the cutscenes have aged quite a bit but it still brings that fast paced, old school first-person shooter action that's hard to find these days. I've always maintained that Quake 2 would have been better off being called something else (as id Software originally planned), as calling it Quake II draws comparisons to the original Quake and Quake III: Arena. Quake II is a different game entirely. It's not as tight online, and the rocket launcher isn't as good as it was in QuakeWorld and Quake III: Arena, but it carries a decent story and a very well designed and brutal enemy force (the Strogg) for you to blast to smithereens. If you have an RTX card, go play this game. Make sure to download the official soundtrack separately (use Google), as the Quake II RTX installer doesn't include it. I played on an RTX 3080 and got anywhere from 60-80FPS at 1440p.

Mixed feelings all along. The racing itself is good, the AI punishes you for mistakes, makes mistakes of their own and provides a great challenge on Very Hard difficulty. The game looks fresh, with great weather and sun effects. The cars sound good too. It's not a sim, but it doesn't pretend to be. But the content and for lack of a better word, soul, is missing. It feels rushed and unfinished. There is no real sense of progression, no real sense of being part of a team or being an aspiring young race car driver. You just go from one soulless race to the other. The cars get quicker and the races get tougher, and that's basically it. Money in this game seems to serve no purpose apart from buying new cars (which you are forced to do if you want to progress) and customization options. Fans of the original GRID will lament this game for having no team ownership aspect, no rivalries against other teams. Fans of Autosport will lament this game for its lack of tracks. Fans of both will lament this game for it's piss poor damage modeling. For now, I can't really recommend the game. Wait for a sale or the inevitable complete edition once DLC cars and tracks have all been released.