huber 最近的评测

SUCKS ♥♥♥♥

no sex

this is the game valheim wants to be

it sucks but the people i kill are definitely a lot more mad that i killed them than they should be so it sustains me

it sucks

edit: psn linking lol

It's a buggy, barely functioning early access game LARPing as a fully developed game that was ready for launch.

Patrols literally phase into existence in front of your eyes, hitboxes are atrociously bad, weapon balance doesn't exist whatsoever, the metagame is scripted, and also barely works with the major/personal orders, on top of genuinely hostile devs -- with the CEO acting like a wholesome big chungus 9000 PR machine to make people forget that.

There's also atrociously bad performance issues, and an equally terrible anticheat. Hope you don't have a modern 7000 AMD CPU or GPU, because this game might just not work!

Mission difficulty was increased, not for the sake of challenge, or fun, but rather in spite of players who were completely missions too 'early', in the eyes of devs. In the same vein, mission difficulty wasn't considered whatsoever -- the modifiers exist to make the game less fun, as they're all incredibly uninteractive and brutally uninteresting.

Enemy spawn rates are horrendously jacked up, which is especially noticeable on bugs, since they were left barely half finished. No weakpoints truly exist for them, besides slamming them with AT -- you could say this is intended, but every bot is killable with grenades/primary weapons.

The meta game, which was, really, the main attraction of the first game returns -- but in worse form. There's a gamemaster who 'definitely doesn't pull any nefarious strings' and is simply 'directing the story', making it immediately worse than the first game. War progress is hilariously slow -- playing on higher difficulties doesn't really contribute 'more' to the war, since you're spending 3-4x the amount of time for an extra 'point' in comparison.

Weapons -- obviously, are barely functional, too. Every primary is a joke besides two or three usable ones, unlike the first game where a majority of them were usable at all difficulties. Stratagems, which the CEO/Devs claim are what you rely on to actually play the game, have terrible balancing as well -- there's about five imo (eagle strike, railcannon, orb laser, 500kg, 380mm) that are actually worth taking, ignoring the support weapons.

Mechs, which were hyped up for the longest time, are significantly worse than the first game, have critical hitbox errors, and made out of tissue paper. They're only usable for bugs, because bots will immediately destroy them with 9mm glocks. They also lack the stratagem launcher the first game has.

With all those egregious errors stated, why are people addicted to this game? Because the core mechanics are 'different' and fun. It's a game designed specifically for causing engagement, goofs, and gaffs with people in a voice chat. In a vacuum though, it fails to really hold up as a decent game.

The movement is 'heavy' and clunky (in a good way, mind), but paired with ragdolling you get some goofy moments. It's really funny when you're in a VC, and you or a buddy get sent to the moon, but it's horribly inconsistent and can happen at varying ranges. The weapon handling is intentionally bad, and designed to propagate stress, which can be fun again, with friends.

I could barely get through a few solo difficulty 9 missions on this game -- not because it was too difficult, but because without any social aspect that makes even the most ♥♥♥♥♥♥ of games (Orion: Prelude comes to mind -- aka Orion Dino Beat Down), it gets mind numbing.

Compare this to Deep Rock Galactic -- which I've roughly 400 hours on, and about 100 solo on haz 5. The core game is fun, the social aspect makes it better. Helldivers 2's core gameplay is frustrating and tense, the social aspect makes you forget that, and have fun instead.

If they end up getting this game out of its blatant early access stage, it would be a solid pickup, but otherwise I couldn't recommend it.

s'aight

oops

7/10

rog ston :D