Recenzii recente de Justicier10-7

An excellent game from a bygone era. Minor graphical improvements including a bit crisper texturing, and a very noticable lighting overhaul which is very well done and looks great. The audio was possibly the most obvious change, as the original game had horribly compressed audio files which sounded like they were all 11025 8bit mono samples. The audio in this version is cleaned up, and much less 'offensive' to hear, infact for the most part I no longer hear compression distortion.

The gameplay is somewhat comparable to GTA in some respects, though most likely the closest analogue to Red Faction Guerilla is the old XBox 'Mercenaries' game series. So if you like either of those you may want to give RFG a try. As the title denotes, this is a game about guerilla warfare... so you will be outgunned, and the game encourages the player to think up unorthodox tactics in order to accomplish objectives. As an example, at one point I recieved word of an enemy cargo convoy that was transiting the area. It wouldn't arrive for a while, so I decided that my best bet to successfully destroy it was to create a roadblock and place charges on the road. I commandeered a couple huge dumptrucks and created my roadblock. The convoy halted well ahead of it, and I got to high-ground and threw demolition charges down on it... with the press of a button, the charges blew and took out the whole convoy. This is only one example, and there are many mission types to choose from, such as hostage rescue, sabotage, demolition challenges, courier interceptions, assaults, defending against assaults, and a few more that I'm forgetting off the top of my head. There are many side-missions, you can go freelance about and do what you want, and of course there's the main story as well. As for the story, I won't give much detail so as not to spoil, but essentially it is all about liberating Mars from the oppression, subjugation, and murder of the rather Stalinist Soviet-like EDF.

The gameplay itself is well done, with fully destructable structures that are really the hallmark of the game. I think that the structures are too durable at times, with some towers and bridges not collapsing when 75% of their support structure is eliminated with the only remaining support at too extreme a fulcrum point to support the weight. But then again, it's Mars... so there is less gravity to force a complete collapse.

Support for the game has been excellent, and the removal of the Games for Windows Live "service" means that multi-player is again possible. Because I had purchased the Steam edition of RFG after it was released, I recieved the Re-Mars-tered edition for free, a nice gesture that is not common anymore with game publishers.

As an older game, it's a classic with solid gameplay. By today's standards, some things are lacking, like some voice-acting for briefings and story characters... along with some story elements... but for the most part it is still quite good. If you've never played a game in the Red Faction series, I'd recommend looking into RFG as it is, in many people's opinions, the pinnacle of the franchise. Now, get your *ahem* "donkey" to Mars.

Love the game.

But the combination of seemingly flawed matchmaking and a rather toxic community kills my desire to play it.

I have very mixed feelings on this.

On the one hand, it's a Mechwarrior game... I love the universe and there are precious few options for this franchise.

On the other, it's got alot of longstanding core gameplay issues that reduce the fun-factor, at least for me. PGI, the developers, have tried addressing numerous issues in the past. However, due to outcry from certain very vocal groups within the community, PGI decided to essentially leave things as-is instead of "rocking the boat." It's unfortunate because in pandering to this vocal minority, what seems to be the majority has suffered. Matchmaking disparities are possibly the least concerning issue when compared to heat-sinks not working the way they are described in TT. Heatsinks not working properly result in builds that enable alpha-strikes (All weapons fired at once) that were never possible in previous MW games, due to the fact that you would simply self-destruct your own mech. Heat thresholds are too high, and going to double heatsinks from singles should NOT increase heat cap, but instead simply increase cooling rate. This is a very small, but significant difference that dramatically alters gameplay.

Now, these core gameplay issues won't necessarily be noticable to new players. It won't be until a new player rises up in the matchmaking tiers before they start to recognize the issues. Once reaching the top tier, for the most part, MWO is all about the meta-game. There are some that consider this a good thing, but in terms of gameplay... it makes things very dull. Similar (if not identical) mech builds become extremely common, certain tactics exploiting core game discrepancies will be common, certain mech chassis are ignored because "they aren't competitive," and overall MWO starts to feel a bit "soulless" compared to past Mechwarrior games.

New players just need to be aware of what you are getting into. There's alot of fun to be had, but eventually it turns into something of a bitter experience. This game is so close to being an excellent Mechwarrior title, but unfortunately due to a lack of willingness from PGI to tackle the longstanding issues, it just doesn't quite cut it. Another thing that may irk some would be a few questionable design elements that are unfortunately common in Free-to-Play games, such as certain unique mech variants being locked behind a premium pay-wall, more mech-bays being locked behind a pay-wall, and a skill-tree that requires a fair amount of grinding.

Due to the issues at the game's core, it's unfortunately difficult to recommend MWO.

After completing my first playthrough, I believe it's time to write a brief review.

First and foremost, this is primarily a stealth game. While you can take a more action-oriented approach, it is not exactly ideal for the tiny, "squishy" Styx. You'll feel vulnerable to attacks, especially at first. However once you level up, several playstyle options open up for those who wish to "ghost" missions, sadistically assassinate any enemies that stand in your way, or perhaps sacrifice a few goblin spawn to the guards for the greater good. So there's some decent gameplay variety to be had.

Since the comparison is inevitable, yep, Shards of Darkness feels rather similar to Thief. The big difference is the main character. Styx is a little, ugly, green goblin with a personality not terribly dissimilar to Deadpool. The character may not be everyone's ideal, especially if you're coming into this game with expectations derived from the old Thief series. I didn't mind the character, in fact on occasion Styx gave me a chuckle.

Another big positive is the map design. For the most part, the maps/missions are large, sprawling areas with a great variety of paths to accomplish your goal. The only down-side is that there is some slight re-use of maps. What this means is, you'll do a mission on a specific map, then a couple missions later, return to the same map for a different mission. I can forgive this because the time of day has changed. Now, that may not sound like a big thing, but doing stealth in broad daylight when the first time you were on the same map was at night provides a much different experience.

The game is not without faults however. I would say the most glaring shortcoming of Shards of Darkness is related to the controls. Controlling Styx feels a bit clunky, certain animations feel a bit clunky, and as a result of this clunkiness, you'll probably die a few times. You could hit the right button, be looking the right direction, yet Styx just doesn't grab that ledge and instead plunges to his death while yelling "F--- YOU!!!" (with doppler effect). One thing to keep in mind is that the Steam controller emulation interferes with the in-game controller support, so you'll want to disable the Steam controller emulation prior to starting the game otherwise there will be reduced functionality.

TL;DR
While the controls can be frustratingly clunky, the excellent level design and fun gameplay reminiscent of the classic Thief games makes Shards of Darkness well worth playing.

Fantastic, classical table-top style RPG.

PROS:
+ Unique and fun sense of humor that doesn't take itself too seriously
+ D&D Dice-roll Table-top feel
+ Engaging main story with a plethora of side-quests
+ Outstanding turn-based combat system
+ Fun Co-op Multi-player
+ Interacting elements create dynamic strengths and weaknesses
+ It doesn't "hold your hand"
+ Very good audio design and voice acting

CONS:
- Cosmetic appearance for armor is somewhat limited
- Character creation cosmetics are basic
- Rock, Paper, Scissors arguments can be fun against other players, but tedious against AI
- Turn-based combat may not appeal to "modern" gamers
- It doesn't "hold your hand"

The only elaboration I will make so as to not destroy the experience will be regarding the turn-based combat and "hand holding." This is a cRPG, and it's true to its roots. This means it doesn't tell you exactly where to go and what to do, it gives you a general idea of the objective and lets the player figure out how to go about it. This is more evident in side-quests than the main quests, as it gives little sense of direction. This may infuriate some, but to me it is one of the game's endearing qualities, it actually has you think about how to accomplish things, and where you must go to do so.

The other possible point of contention with some players may be the turn-based combat. It is excellent, and stays true to table-top in many ways. But I can understand how it may be off-putting to some who wish for in-depth, real-time combat.

All-in-all, Divinity Original Sin (Enhanced Edition) is excellent. It's more than worthy of purchase if you like the genre, an intriguing story, and in-depth strategic turn-based combat.

Ahh where to begin. Well, this certainly isn't your average RTS. Far from it in fact. This is frankly the kind of strategy game I've been hoping to see for over ten years. Now, I have heard some say that you really need to be a military or cold war history enthusiast in order to appreciate Wargame. I may be biased as I have studied military weapon systems since I was a little kid, but I have to disagree. From the standpoint of an RTS game, I believe it is unmatched and I will give some reasons why.

It’s actually a bit difficult to compare to other games... see with many RTS games you're building your base, having little skirmishes toward the beginning to gain unit experience, with the ultimate goal of massing units for a big push. With Wargame, there is no base building... it is all actual military maneuvers, weapon system knowledge, use of cover and concealment both for survivability and ambush, use of recon to spot enemy units for more combat oriented units, gaining Line of Sight (LOS) prior to and maintaining it during engagements (more difficult than it sounds), use of support systems such as Artillery, AAA, and SAMs to provide cover for advancing infantry and armored units, use of special forces infantry to wreak havoc behind enemy lines, capitalizing on terrain features to enable better LOS, spreading out of units so that a single airstrike won't eliminate half your assault force... but not so thin that they cannot cover each other. At the beginning of a match, there is usually a push to gain strategic positions (which supply reinforcement points) and dig in, then using recon to find gaps in enemy defenses and pushing through, encircling the enemy and/or simply cutting off their supply routes and territories. So... Wargame really is an interesting combination, it’s slow like a chess game at times... and then in a matter of literally seconds it can turn into a massive brawl.

In multi-player, which is really the heart of the game, it utilizes a "Deck" system where you will pick and choose what units you wish to deploy into battle not terribly dissimilar to the Total War series of games. Thinking of it like a deck of cards, each one can only field a certain number of units... and once they're gone... they're gone. More advanced or higher trained units will mean that you will only be able to field a very limited number of them, making highly specialized extremely advanced Decks very difficult to play with as EVERY unit loss is a major one... but if you are very careful, and very clever, you can win.

Bringing more units into battle requires reinforcement points, which are gained by capturing strategic points on the map. While this system will sound familiar, it plays out differently than in most RTS games in that not just any unit can capture and hold a point. In fact, a single insignificant and vulnerable command jeep or other "CP" unit can capture and hold a point. If the enemy discovers this command unit, then you are just one artillery or air strike away from losing the point and having to bring forward another CP unit to secure it again.

Another system worth mentioning is support via supply trucks and helicopters. Every unit can run out of ammunition, and any unit utilizing a combustion engine will run out of fuel. The only way to keep your units in the fight is to resupply them utilizing cargo transports. These supply units are very vulnerable... they have no defensive weapon systems, and little to no armor. Special Forces units can ambush and capture enemy supply units, so if your enemy is pounding you with a constant barrage of weapons fire... chances are there is a major resupply operation in progress and if you can disrupt that, you can deal a crippling blow to your adversary. With resupply made impossible, your opponent's constant spam of shells and bullets will render his units helplessly dry on ammunition... easy targets.

Air forces are a big part of the game. Frankly a single well executed air strike can shut down an entire assault, and force your opponent into a defensive posture... but that is not to say that attacks from the air are TOO powerful. In fact, aerial units are very easy to shoot down, very expensive, and fixed wing aircraft can only fly for a short period of time before they have to bug out due to low fuel. Jets can also be particularly difficult to utilize effectively because most of the time the enemy will cover their ground forces with AAA and SAM units. However, in the off chance your opponent miscalculates or sends his forces in with little to no cover... responding with a couple A-10 Warthogs along with fighter cover and witnessing the destruction they are capable of is truly mezmerizing.

Now, I haven't messed around so much with the naval aspect introduced in Red Dragon... but there are some balance issues and tweaking to be made there. However, for ground forces, the game is amazing, made even more so through the use of amphibious units. Your opponent think that you're helpless against his wall of tanks overlooking the lone bridge in the area? Not a problem, send in a group of amphibious tanks or anti-tank missile equipped vehicles to traverse the river around the flank and put fire into the sides of the aforementioned problem. Did I mention that all vehicles, armor, helicopters have differing top, front, back, and side armor levels? Tank armor is usually very strong to the front, and weaker in the rear or side... makes flanking maneuvers or ambushes on unsuspecting armored units quite devastating.

In closing, the learning curve is high, the 1300 units is daunting to think about, and the pacing may not be what everyone is looking for. It can be very slow and almost chess-like at times, and then turn into a firefight with unrivaled intensity. If you're looking for a unique blend of game and simulation, that you could play for years and still learn new things, it's tough to beat Wargame.

I've played KSP since before it was even on Steam... v0.18 if memory serves. Combined with the play time before Steam, I have well over 2,000 hours into the game. KSP is limited by your own imagination, so If you are not a terribly creative person, it will be less impressive and perhaps frustrating. The physics are modeled reasonably well (although simplistically) for rocket craft in a vacuum (simple Newtonian physics), which is what the game excels at. Aircraft and in-atmosphere flight is incredibly simplistic, though nearly all shortcomings can easily be fixed with mods. The game teaches basic orbital mechanics in an intuitive... "trial by error" method, and it is great fun. Landing on the Mun for the first time is a tremendous rush, and as you push further out into the solar system and design increasingly complex spacecraft it feels like a big accomplishment, even without arbitrarily set achievements or objectives.

If you are remotely creative and/or interested in orbital mechanics, pick the game up, especially if it is on sale.

Many Kerbals were harmed in the making of this review.