mwak

It's a good game if you're seaching for a sandbox post apo shooter. A bad one if you're seaching for a RPG. Fallout 3 had its drawback from the first Fallout RPGs. Then came Fallout:NewVegas that was pretty good. Now we have Fallout 4 and it's not a RPG anymore, it's more like a shooter with pre-made choices. Visualy, The environment is gorgeous and more beliviable than ever but the lack of dialogues options make it empty and frustrating. The major drawback is that you can't be the person you want. You are forced on some choices that are not the one you'd take. So you don't attach to your character because it doesn't feel like the one you'd play. Eventually you can do some side quests but even there it's really poor in story writtings and globally lack of fun. The funniest part are : - the exploration and find all the eastereggs and the attention to details. - the construction workshop I just hope some mods will do the trick and make it a good RPG game. I should have waited for the goty version :)

This is not a very bad game. It's just like if the developers tried to make something and then switched to make something else. There are plenty of things to do but nothing feels like it's completed. For example the cars physics are terrible but the crs acceleration feelings are great. The background story seems deep but the campaign scenario and the characters are so B-movie like ... In fact nothing intends you to stay in the game, it's not serious, it's not funny, it's repetitive. Passed the 3 first hours of fun and discovery you will be bored. The most impressive is the city, it's big, but yet you don't fell atracted to play in it. The game felt a little like "infamous" for me but really more boring. There are some good ideas (the prison for example) but yet ... it's only some minutes of fun in hours of game ... Moreover if you want to play an ethical hacker forget about it, you will take gun and shoot people ... ho and the police doesn't care, so ... This game is a good concept, had a very impressive commercial team and finally is disappointing. Buy it when it will be around 20/30$ else is too much expensive.

I have some relations in CQB specialists. I must admit this game is an "hardcore" FPS but not a "tactical" one. Let me explain why the game mechanics are totally flawed. CQB must be quick and you work with a team mostly 2 or 3 team-mates. It fully works with vocal communication and fast but precise reactions. For example the way you penetrate a hall with 2 doors, there is more than one way to do it. BUT any-time everyone will act as synchronized as possible. First case, everyone follows it's leading element and follow a wall with for each a NON-CROSSED cover (AI are really dangerous). Second case, one takes left, two take left, three covers the back. Etc etc etc. NEVER (as in NEVER!!) fire if you have a tea-mate in sight (basics always cover YOUR sector even if someone fires the opposite way. Moreover, in real life you lean (eventually not a full lean) even when walking, you take different stances, you use different movement speeds, you can pre-aim your weapon, you use the wall as weapon stabilization so many small features that could have made this game unique. I'm really sorry guys but ArmA III is a better (from really far) tactical shooter, even CQB than this. This game looks more like a cheap unreal tournament mod or Source engine mod than a professional game. You should have sticked on a rainbow six remake. Anyway i laughed hard in front of some AI reactions enemies or teammates so that allows you a three

I've followed every game of blizzard since their first SNES ones, but this one is a real fail. That's a strange idea not to allow offline play in a the solo mode ... if they fear hacking they should have put the auction for multiplayer only. At the end you feel like playing a cheap MMO. Now regarding the game ... the evolution system is too much guided, it looks like blizzard is taking its players for dummies as it's so very hard to fail your specialization. Finally it has been 12 years of waiting for so little ... I put 2/10 for the art and universe and -8 for the drm and the extreme simplification of the game.

A game from another time, it would have been great 1 year after the first modern warfare. It cans only wait on its fans to be played , other players will see it as a short single player with no surprise and a multiplayer that hasn't really evolved since the first modern warfare. It you are attracted du great visual details, pass your way the engine looks old and some of the animations really poor. MW3 may be bought at 15â

Not the size nor the scenarii of a neverwinter night (1 or 2) but a good successor. Classes are simple but complex,the game system is nearly perfect, difficulty is challeging. The universe is deep and dark. The inherited tactical pause is very appreciable. A must play, for every RPG or D&D fan.

+2 for the artistic effort. But even if you look at it like a hack and slash, it's not fun and repetitive. If you look at it like a sequel to Dragon Age , it's ... not that ... it's just a name + II on a box. The scenario is no so bad ... realization is so very bad. It's not a bioware game at all ... just a bad-o-ware game. Too Human was really more interresting in the same game style. (how is it even possible :( )

A big manual with an interesting background story, some tutorials to be more confident with the "complexity" of the game ... and no story only skirmish missions (online or VS AI). Economical, social and trading dimensions are totally are useless and obfuscated by the endless battles, and the baddest point of all is obviously that trying to put some strategy in combats is nearly impossible : ships are slow (slloooow), maps can be huge, HUD design is not adapted ...in fact every battle looks the same and is solded by this equation : the alliance with the more ships on a battle wins, it's that simple. One the most frustrating point is eventually your capital ship (sort of mother-ships) that are firing thousands of lasers on a small frigate for some minutes to destroy it... in fact developpers should have called them bigerandmoreexpensiveships it would have been more appropriate. Techno trees are interesting but very complex and not easy to understand. So let's say that we are far from a space opera like X3, not even close to a civilisation-like and distant from a space strategy game like Homeworld ... in fact we are really far from a good game for 2010 (maybe in the 2000's for 10 bucks).