The last game you completed, and rating.
- Thread starter CaptainRAVE
- Start date
Associate
Borderlands 2 + All DLC.
9.5/10.
Played it all the way to OP8, and then played the whole lot again @ OP8 for the challenge and the best loot. Over 1200 hours for £8.00. Only loses .5 of a point because a lack of storage space, which means constant juggling with your inventory.
Overall I would say this is the best game I have had the pleasure to tangle with, hence the HIGH Score!
Roll on BL3!
9.5/10.
Played it all the way to OP8, and then played the whole lot again @ OP8 for the challenge and the best loot. Over 1200 hours for £8.00. Only loses .5 of a point because a lack of storage space, which means constant juggling with your inventory.
Overall I would say this is the best game I have had the pleasure to tangle with, hence the HIGH Score!
Roll on BL3!
Associate
Ryse: Son of Rome 7/10.
Nothing monumental in terms of gameplay, but looks pretty on a decent rig maxed out. Just a shame about some glaring historic errors (but clearly not the focus of this game
)
Worth picking up on a Steam sale but wouldn't recommend otherwise.
Nothing monumental in terms of gameplay, but looks pretty on a decent rig maxed out. Just a shame about some glaring historic errors (but clearly not the focus of this game
)Worth picking up on a Steam sale but wouldn't recommend otherwise.
Associate
Played through the whole of Ultimate Doom with the Project Brutality mod last night and this morning, absolutely awesome
Some of the new enemy types are a little annoying and one or two of the new weapons are a little overpowered, but other than that it was a joy to play through, the fact that these things can be tweaked out in the options menu makes me excited for a playthrough of Doom 2 now
10/10
Some of the new enemy types are a little annoying and one or two of the new weapons are a little overpowered, but other than that it was a joy to play through, the fact that these things can be tweaked out in the options menu makes me excited for a playthrough of Doom 2 now
10/10
Played through the whole of Ultimate Doom with the Project Brutality mod last night and this morning, absolutely awesome
Some of the new enemy types are a little annoying and one or two of the new weapons are a little overpowered, but other than that it was a joy to play through, the fact that these things can be tweaked out in the options menu makes me excited for a playthrough of Doom 2 now
10/10
I was looking at the Project Brutality mod recently on YouTube. Seems pretty darn good.
Associate
The Division Beta (beta completed)
8/10
Detailed graphics which add some nice effects. The fact you can reply the same Encounters seems odd. I get why I would reply the missions but not the side quests. Hopefully this is just because it's the beta or it means their isn't enough count.
8/10
Detailed graphics which add some nice effects. The fact you can reply the same Encounters seems odd. I get why I would reply the missions but not the side quests. Hopefully this is just because it's the beta or it means their isn't enough count.
XCOM 2 - 8.5/10
Pretty much my type of game, loved EW / EU and this was more of the same. story was patchy at time, but the game play was spot on. A few more non-timed missions mixed in would have been great also. Of course the re playability is going to be amazing.
Pretty much my type of game, loved EW / EU and this was more of the same. story was patchy at time, but the game play was spot on. A few more non-timed missions mixed in would have been great also. Of course the re playability is going to be amazing.
Fallout 4. Non-spoilery, but definitely some bad grammar etc.
The good:
Combat: Vanilla F3 was weak, as while 3D VATS was a nice touch, content was too unbalanced/ungated (e.g. easy access to power armor and other items compared to F1&2), aiming down sights wasn't allowed (despite VATS animations showing it), and clunkiness. NV mostly has minor fixes/tweaks and overall decent progression (similar to F1&2) that combine as an alright step-up. Balance has regressed, otherwise or broadly this is much better. Guess they were inspired by the Bullet-Time mod for the VATS change? I like it, tho I'd also like a toggle; I didn't try all top mods, like the artillery/defence ones. The power-armor fuel and ground-vehicle concepts are cool (not a fan of the jetpack) and versions may have even fit F1&2, particularly balanced/gated across 2; maybe an irreparably "damaged", laughably unreliable one in BH (Marcus & co. could lol @ our struggle), Salvatores could get a few incomplete low-tiers (earn or steal/sabotage), and so on. Anyway, AI etc. generally seem a notch or two above.
Crafting: There are microscopic roots in F1 (Razlo's antidote and the two upgrades in Adytum); increased in F2 and still separate (Myron, Hakunin, Algernon(?)). F3 brought those weapons... And NV is more of a leap, with ammo/chem/food focus. Now it's pretty crazy...I dabbled, so unsure how they handled it all...
Sound: Basic design seemed fine. The score is good in its own way, just not my cup of tea. And since I previously modded in oldies, I can't remember for comparison here, but I'll say I prefer the thematic consistency of NV's.
Superficial variety/reactivity: VA count, NPC comments, encounters and such. It's kind of like icing, tho I really wish it were on a cake instead of this crêpe. Besides bits from the others, it reminded me of F2, for example (spoilers).
Graphics: Some improvements, but graphics aren't a priority for me. Well, the lighting and faces are obvious, unsure about the rest.
Misc.: Character appearance editor; weather (storms inspired by emissions in Stalker? or the weather mods I forgot to try?); certain aspects of the map; technical improvements, etc.
The bad:
Atmosphere/lore/style: So much dumbing down, cheap rehashing, inconsistency...it's extremely soulless. The especially questionable bits of F2 have some self-awareness or irony (questionable too!), except what I consider flaws, like some of the wackiness, things devoid of context, or development-related problems - and even that world fits together better than this. Don't get me wrong, I know F2's style and the series' overall - it's relative and subjective.
Storyline: I'd say...F1 is pretty good; F2 is okay; F3 is a train-wreck (particularly the awful ending, elsewhere it's largely poor); NV is generally best (but not great or even very good; and I include all related story C&C, Ulysses, etc.), and F4 is a heap of meh and wreckage. I dislike pitiful post-play, including F2, without extensive story/quest changes (involving many past choices). DLC may prove me wrong, otherwise I'll always take F1/2/NV's endings (I just stop in 2, usually tired, with killap's RP) over F3/4's which are so disappointing, e.g. F4 vs NV (spoilers).
Voiced protagonists: I dislike the guy / I've always liked Courtenay and sympathise with what she had to work with here. It's really the awful scripts and dialogue system, mainly a lot of basic context mishandling and a ridiculous amount of useless options. Bioware did it better back in ME1, and DX:HR is probably the highest standard I've seen. In F1/2/NV, I enjoy making a low-intelligence character with some different, amusing dialogue. F3 cut 95% of that, yet NV revived it decently (closer to F1&2's levels, at least). While I naturally expected it'd be cut again, I didn't expect this sort of "low intelligence" stuff. Of course there are times when a silent protagonist doesn't fit or isn't written well, but I can't imagine it ever being anywhere near as unsuitable as this pair of itchy strait-jackets.
Quests: Radiant version -2.0, YAY!!1 ...In Skyrim I quickly began to avoid them or use the "setstage" command to skip, and the other quests often weren't much better. Déjà vu, and worse. Yeah, past Fallouts have relative filler quests - and they're collectively superior to radiants. And "proper" quests here are very inferior, on writing and roleplay design, as C&C is usually weak or non-existent. While there's some clear inspiration from NV on main questline structure and such, it's all undermined so badly. Quest design is kind of important...NV and F2 are best on this front (I'd say F2 takes it if I exclude NV's DLC quests, whereas NV wins with them). Here's an excellent demo of a very good quest.
RPG mechanics: They've cut down or completely gutted nearly all of it: Skills, Traits, Reputation, Karma... Character building is severely limited or impossible. It still could've been handled to an extent via basic quest and dialogue design, if those weren't already garbage. For combat, it's stupidly imbalanced as I had to heavily self-regulate because itemisation and the perk layout are a mess. F3's set-up wasn't close to F1&2's quality, but not this bad. Obsidian largely stepped things up, e.g. Karma alone was cheap in F3, yet NV revived Reputation (+ Traits), making it alright. For me, lots of great immersion stems from having proper character builds.
Companions: I only like 2/13. Simply unwanted for combat. The affinity system is crap in shifting too easily, and annoying as it reminds the unironic jarring disconnect of actions vs strait-jacket. Of course, even with needed combat mods, NV's (5/8) also depend on what I care most about - interesting quests and dialogue. Plenty of garnish/appetisers here, yet the meat is very poor, and dat jacket. I'd place F2's (4/14) ahead as well.
Misc.: At least early on (I restarted, couldn't stand the guy), the female seems more of an afterthought (both are, basically); jet written as pre-war (2077) contradicting that Myron invented jet circa 2241 (one of the best characters of the entire series); too much theme-park nonsense, etc. Separately it's fairly minor/subjective, but collectively it really damages and cheapens.
BTW, settlements are boring, as I'd want far better quests and story integration. I don't consider the feature bad, just meh.
~
I heavily avoided hype/info and played my housemate's copy. I almost expected they'd step up after seeing Obsidian's key improvements (writing, quest design, RPG elements, relative coherence...). So a bit surprised to see they went largely opposite, in leather jacket + skis, landing somewhat even worse than F3. Considering dialogue, romances, VAs and the endings in a way, maybe they were also vaguely inspired by Mass Effect 3's "Action Mode". I have a lot more fun with the freedom to choose, like completing NV's main quest and a good chunk of non-fetch side quests without ever pressing the attack button (no companion kills or exploits, only normal sneak/speech-based play).
I have no relevant nostalgia for the original Fallouts; F3 was my first taste and back then I thought it was mostly great. Around then I switched to PC, and after playing F1&2 my rating of F3 took a nose-dive. Obsidian are led by ex- F1&2 devs, and despite inexperience with pooey gamebryo, lesser budget and <18 months, despite flaws NV is very superior to F3 and, in those key areas, it's levels above F4. The latter has simple, non-RPG type fun, which I like doses of, just not so much in Fallout... But that, my completionist tendency, and an odd fascination, carried me to the end.
For me, there are three true Fallout games: 1, 2 & NV, and I struggle to properly rank them. NV variously beats F1&2 as said, and is by far the best 3D one from a roleplaying perspective. It's generally a superior RPG to F1, and trades a few blows with F2 (one thing NV has over both is it's the only Fallout that allows roleplaying a true pacifist, whereas F1&2 absolutely require killing in a few spots). The relative incoherence of F2 holds it back, tho not far, and I see how some people prefer it to F1 and I almost agree. However, F1 isn't just about OG status but mainly its atmosphere and consistency, discovering it over a decade late was irrelevant to me loving it. Some nice ideas since, some ups and downs, and where the series is at right now...
As a Fallout game? 4/10.
If I pretend it's not a Fallout game or those three Fallouts don't exist? Maybe about 5-6/10.
Edit:
My housemate told me Far Harbor was a big improvement, so I came back to try the story DLC, not the main game.
Already played the hell out of Autumn Leaves which kind of dampened enjoyment of the best FH quest. However, it's pretty damn good, above all F3 DLCs and 1-2 of NV's, and trades some blows with the rest, considering the remaining problems from F4. DM and LR are still my favs (mainly the former's writing and the latter's atmosphere). As for NW, the literal theme park combined with those problems require a level of mental detachment I struggled with, and after "setstaging" or ignoring any radiant quests and settlement stuff, I don't rate it. Automatron is poor. The season-pass price should've stayed where it was or lowered a bit.
I wonder what the next Fallout will be like...
The good:
Combat: Vanilla F3 was weak, as while 3D VATS was a nice touch, content was too unbalanced/ungated (e.g. easy access to power armor and other items compared to F1&2), aiming down sights wasn't allowed (despite VATS animations showing it), and clunkiness. NV mostly has minor fixes/tweaks and overall decent progression (similar to F1&2) that combine as an alright step-up. Balance has regressed, otherwise or broadly this is much better. Guess they were inspired by the Bullet-Time mod for the VATS change? I like it, tho I'd also like a toggle; I didn't try all top mods, like the artillery/defence ones. The power-armor fuel and ground-vehicle concepts are cool (not a fan of the jetpack) and versions may have even fit F1&2, particularly balanced/gated across 2; maybe an irreparably "damaged", laughably unreliable one in BH (Marcus & co. could lol @ our struggle), Salvatores could get a few incomplete low-tiers (earn or steal/sabotage), and so on. Anyway, AI etc. generally seem a notch or two above.
Crafting: There are microscopic roots in F1 (Razlo's antidote and the two upgrades in Adytum); increased in F2 and still separate (Myron, Hakunin, Algernon(?)). F3 brought those weapons... And NV is more of a leap, with ammo/chem/food focus. Now it's pretty crazy...I dabbled, so unsure how they handled it all...
Sound: Basic design seemed fine. The score is good in its own way, just not my cup of tea. And since I previously modded in oldies, I can't remember for comparison here, but I'll say I prefer the thematic consistency of NV's.
Superficial variety/reactivity: VA count, NPC comments, encounters and such. It's kind of like icing, tho I really wish it were on a cake instead of this crêpe. Besides bits from the others, it reminded me of F2, for example (spoilers).
Graphics: Some improvements, but graphics aren't a priority for me. Well, the lighting and faces are obvious, unsure about the rest.
Misc.: Character appearance editor; weather (storms inspired by emissions in Stalker? or the weather mods I forgot to try?); certain aspects of the map; technical improvements, etc.
The bad:
Atmosphere/lore/style: So much dumbing down, cheap rehashing, inconsistency...it's extremely soulless. The especially questionable bits of F2 have some self-awareness or irony (questionable too!), except what I consider flaws, like some of the wackiness, things devoid of context, or development-related problems - and even that world fits together better than this. Don't get me wrong, I know F2's style and the series' overall - it's relative and subjective.
Storyline: I'd say...F1 is pretty good; F2 is okay; F3 is a train-wreck (particularly the awful ending, elsewhere it's largely poor); NV is generally best (but not great or even very good; and I include all related story C&C, Ulysses, etc.), and F4 is a heap of meh and wreckage. I dislike pitiful post-play, including F2, without extensive story/quest changes (involving many past choices). DLC may prove me wrong, otherwise I'll always take F1/2/NV's endings (I just stop in 2, usually tired, with killap's RP) over F3/4's which are so disappointing, e.g. F4 vs NV (spoilers).
Voiced protagonists: I dislike the guy / I've always liked Courtenay and sympathise with what she had to work with here. It's really the awful scripts and dialogue system, mainly a lot of basic context mishandling and a ridiculous amount of useless options. Bioware did it better back in ME1, and DX:HR is probably the highest standard I've seen. In F1/2/NV, I enjoy making a low-intelligence character with some different, amusing dialogue. F3 cut 95% of that, yet NV revived it decently (closer to F1&2's levels, at least). While I naturally expected it'd be cut again, I didn't expect this sort of "low intelligence" stuff. Of course there are times when a silent protagonist doesn't fit or isn't written well, but I can't imagine it ever being anywhere near as unsuitable as this pair of itchy strait-jackets.
Quests: Radiant version -2.0, YAY!!1 ...In Skyrim I quickly began to avoid them or use the "setstage" command to skip, and the other quests often weren't much better. Déjà vu, and worse. Yeah, past Fallouts have relative filler quests - and they're collectively superior to radiants. And "proper" quests here are very inferior, on writing and roleplay design, as C&C is usually weak or non-existent. While there's some clear inspiration from NV on main questline structure and such, it's all undermined so badly. Quest design is kind of important...NV and F2 are best on this front (I'd say F2 takes it if I exclude NV's DLC quests, whereas NV wins with them). Here's an excellent demo of a very good quest.
RPG mechanics: They've cut down or completely gutted nearly all of it: Skills, Traits, Reputation, Karma... Character building is severely limited or impossible. It still could've been handled to an extent via basic quest and dialogue design, if those weren't already garbage. For combat, it's stupidly imbalanced as I had to heavily self-regulate because itemisation and the perk layout are a mess. F3's set-up wasn't close to F1&2's quality, but not this bad. Obsidian largely stepped things up, e.g. Karma alone was cheap in F3, yet NV revived Reputation (+ Traits), making it alright. For me, lots of great immersion stems from having proper character builds.
Companions: I only like 2/13. Simply unwanted for combat. The affinity system is crap in shifting too easily, and annoying as it reminds the unironic jarring disconnect of actions vs strait-jacket. Of course, even with needed combat mods, NV's (5/8) also depend on what I care most about - interesting quests and dialogue. Plenty of garnish/appetisers here, yet the meat is very poor, and dat jacket. I'd place F2's (4/14) ahead as well.
Misc.: At least early on (I restarted, couldn't stand the guy), the female seems more of an afterthought (both are, basically); jet written as pre-war (2077) contradicting that Myron invented jet circa 2241 (one of the best characters of the entire series); too much theme-park nonsense, etc. Separately it's fairly minor/subjective, but collectively it really damages and cheapens.
BTW, settlements are boring, as I'd want far better quests and story integration. I don't consider the feature bad, just meh.
~
I heavily avoided hype/info and played my housemate's copy. I almost expected they'd step up after seeing Obsidian's key improvements (writing, quest design, RPG elements, relative coherence...). So a bit surprised to see they went largely opposite, in leather jacket + skis, landing somewhat even worse than F3. Considering dialogue, romances, VAs and the endings in a way, maybe they were also vaguely inspired by Mass Effect 3's "Action Mode". I have a lot more fun with the freedom to choose, like completing NV's main quest and a good chunk of non-fetch side quests without ever pressing the attack button (no companion kills or exploits, only normal sneak/speech-based play).
I have no relevant nostalgia for the original Fallouts; F3 was my first taste and back then I thought it was mostly great. Around then I switched to PC, and after playing F1&2 my rating of F3 took a nose-dive. Obsidian are led by ex- F1&2 devs, and despite inexperience with pooey gamebryo, lesser budget and <18 months, despite flaws NV is very superior to F3 and, in those key areas, it's levels above F4. The latter has simple, non-RPG type fun, which I like doses of, just not so much in Fallout... But that, my completionist tendency, and an odd fascination, carried me to the end.
For me, there are three true Fallout games: 1, 2 & NV, and I struggle to properly rank them. NV variously beats F1&2 as said, and is by far the best 3D one from a roleplaying perspective. It's generally a superior RPG to F1, and trades a few blows with F2 (one thing NV has over both is it's the only Fallout that allows roleplaying a true pacifist, whereas F1&2 absolutely require killing in a few spots). The relative incoherence of F2 holds it back, tho not far, and I see how some people prefer it to F1 and I almost agree. However, F1 isn't just about OG status but mainly its atmosphere and consistency, discovering it over a decade late was irrelevant to me loving it. Some nice ideas since, some ups and downs, and where the series is at right now...
As a Fallout game? 4/10.
If I pretend it's not a Fallout game or those three Fallouts don't exist? Maybe about 5-6/10.
Edit:
My housemate told me Far Harbor was a big improvement, so I came back to try the story DLC, not the main game.
Already played the hell out of Autumn Leaves which kind of dampened enjoyment of the best FH quest. However, it's pretty damn good, above all F3 DLCs and 1-2 of NV's, and trades some blows with the rest, considering the remaining problems from F4. DM and LR are still my favs (mainly the former's writing and the latter's atmosphere). As for NW, the literal theme park combined with those problems require a level of mental detachment I struggled with, and after "setstaging" or ignoring any radiant quests and settlement stuff, I don't rate it. Automatron is poor. The season-pass price should've stayed where it was or lowered a bit.
I wonder what the next Fallout will be like...
Last edited:
Caporegime
This is a good thread but it puzzles me somewhat.
Games are obviously different to movies as they can take 20 hours plus to finish whereas movies are done in 2 hours.
If you think a game is really bad, how can you play it to the end? Dont you just think "No, this is utterly craptastic" and just ditch it and move on the next game? It's hardly like there's a shortage of games on PC.
Games are obviously different to movies as they can take 20 hours plus to finish whereas movies are done in 2 hours.
If you think a game is really bad, how can you play it to the end? Dont you just think "No, this is utterly craptastic" and just ditch it and move on the next game? It's hardly like there's a shortage of games on PC.
Soldato
Just finished Dawn of War 2 (no DLC). 7/10
Bit old I know, but I picked it up cheap. I liked the original but didn't bother with the second one as I think my tastes had moved on.
When I played the first one I tolerated the single player game but really enjoyed the skirmish mode, even playing solo.
With this game I've not touched that mode yet. I've only played the campaign, but I really enjoyed the different mechanics used in an RTS game. I do like RPG games so I guess there was a good chance I was going to enjoy it.
Some tough choices to be made, not story based choices but which squads to bring along, how to build them (melee/ranged/bit-of-both) and how to equip them.
Not a game I expect to replay, but enjoyable enough.
Bit old I know, but I picked it up cheap. I liked the original but didn't bother with the second one as I think my tastes had moved on.
When I played the first one I tolerated the single player game but really enjoyed the skirmish mode, even playing solo.
With this game I've not touched that mode yet. I've only played the campaign, but I really enjoyed the different mechanics used in an RTS game. I do like RPG games so I guess there was a good chance I was going to enjoy it.
Some tough choices to be made, not story based choices but which squads to bring along, how to build them (melee/ranged/bit-of-both) and how to equip them.
Not a game I expect to replay, but enjoyable enough.
Soldato
All my ratings in this thread are high for the reason you state. I only complete games if I'm enjoying them!
Yeah undertale was a short game to begin with. I didn't actually complete it, I got to the last boss. I actually regretted spending money on it. If a game is terrible I tend to drop it pretty quickly, things like fallout 4 I'll push on to the end in case it gets any better... I'm an optimist at times 
- Joined
- 21 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 46,107
Tales from the borderlands - 9.5/10
Absolutely brilliant game.
Absolutely brilliant game.
Associate
The Park 3/5 (Funcom)
I gave it a three a the game was way to short, but bloody good. Gave me a few jumps hehehe
Would like to try it in VR though!
I gave it a three a the game was way to short, but bloody good. Gave me a few jumps hehehe
Would like to try it in VR though!