Rate the last game you played

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fallout 3 - 4/5
Great game, but it's not Fallout.
You just can't finish the game without any kills. No way. You have to be rude.
Also not the best gameplay, kinda boring.If you're not a sniper or FPS fan, you use VATS. And in VATS you are way weaker than your enemies because they fight in real-time. Really, it's a good game, but not THAT good.
 
Dawn of War II (singleplayer campaign only): 9/10

First RTS game I've ever played to completion in singleplayer. I'm proud of myself! It got a bit repetitive at the end for me, but that was because I did all these optional missions and hit the level cap on my main 4 dudes before doing the final mission. Good characters, great setting, fun combat, good progression system (combination of leveling up, equipment, mission-choosing, building control, infestation levels, etc.)... all makes a very cool game.

I haven't even touched the multiplayer portion yet... think I'm playin' the new Star Ocean before jumping into that, though!
 
Tom Clancy's End War PC -2/10

A game that doesn't have any features from the last 5 years of RTS, Free camera? No! You must follow a set of units with camera so close behind them you can not get a decent fell of the map at all. Multiple group selection? No! You must control 1 group at a time.
Worst RTS I have ever played. Yes, that included Force Commander.
 
Well let's see...

All the half life series: 10/10
Don't think i realy need to tell you why :p
Call of duty 4: 9.9/10
I think it was a great game (one of a few games i actually enjoyed playing), with a good enough story.
 
stemot said:
Tom Clancy's End War PC -2/10

A game that doesn't have any features from the last 5 years of RTS, Free camera? No! You must follow a set of units with camera so close behind them you can not get a decent fell of the map at all. Multiple group selection? No! You must control 1 group at a time.
Worst RTS I have ever played. Yes, that included Force Commander.
Click to expand...

Wow, that sucks.
I was kind of looking forward to it on the PC.
 
World at War - 7/10

Decent WW2 action shooter, but brings nothing to the table. +1 for Nazi Zombies.
 
Killzone 2 - 100/10

If this game's whole singleplayer is anywhere near as good as its multiplayer (which apparently it is, havent even looked at that yet, too busy on the addictive cod 4 system), then this game could easily be the greatest fps ever made.

If not that, then DEFINITELY the best console fps ever made.

If this game got ported to the PC, it'd knock CoD 4 off the multiplayer hotspot.

The multiplayer changes it's mode DURING PLAY. So one minute youre playing deathmatch (body count), then it rolls right into Assassination or Capture and Hold (once the previous mode is complete of course), and you havent even left the game. Its so addictive.
 
Halo 8/10 - Finally put the time and skill into beating Legendary. Few bits early on are just pointlessly hard, but once the flood arrives, it all gets pretty straightforward. Trouble is, the early part of the game is where all the better levels are, the later where the dullard repetition sets in. Nonetheless, still a quality title, and fully worth the replay to bring myself back to appreciating it.

That said, the final level was always absolutely brilliant, and it's a massive high to go out on, so deduct a point up there. You always feel best about something when you've just beaten it. *insert domestic violence joke here*
 
F.E.A.R. 2 - 6/10

The bad:
They took what made the first game do good and nerfed it.

The music, while the same, seemed subdued. The tracks original to this game stank.
The human enemies didn't seem to have quite the same AI. A number of times I covered my six with proximity mines, expecting someone to come through that way. Not a one. They also sounded like a bunch of wankers (whereas the voices of the enemies from the first game sounded like tough dudes).
Walker parts were too contrived. You were able to walk, but never had far to go, and were really on a rail.
Vestigial debris from its incarnation as a console game. Press space to start? No save games (yes, you can reload chapters, but seriously.)
Puppeteers had huge potential to put together intense fights. Too bad there's only, what, two? three of them in the entire game?
...didn't care for the 'frame' that was supposed to be my glasses.
Too many explosive barrels. It was pretty fun for the first few, but eventually everyone was exploding with just a few rounds.
Stokes' potty mouth seemed a little contrived - for those of you intimate with those sorts of expletives, you'll know what I'm talking about. It's like she's swearing for the sake of swearing.
Alma at the end. I won't spoil anything, but meh.
Too carried away with the easter eggs? Almost everything was trying to be overly funny (magazine covers, advertisements, class pictures... too much, and it took away from the immersion on occasion.

The good:
The wall crawling guys were awesome - creepy as hell, fun to deal with. Scared my wife pretty bad, actually, when the first one came at me.
Puppeteers had huge potential to put together intense fights. Too bad there's only, what, two? three of them in the entire game? I thought they were well executed anyway.
The environments had a lot of detail, and I thought they were quite nice. Their vision of the ruined city was well done.
The engine looks and sounds good with everything turned up.
It was interesting to learn a bit more about Alma's existence at the research facility.
 
Adabiviak said:
F.E.A.R. 2 - 6/10
Too many explosive barrels. It was pretty fun for the first few, but eventually everyone was exploding with just a few rounds.
Click to expand...

The irony of posting this on a Half-Life 2 message board is amusing.
 
F.E.A.R. 2 - 4/10

Overall this game fails. It's has removed everything that made FEAR great, yet left in most of it's problems.
The cinematic battles are no longer present. Going into a room and shooting it up no longer creates the same amount of carnage. Parallax mapping is removed, dust particle effects for walls being shot is removed, physics toned way down (mugs,papers no longer break when shot) and blood decals fade away far to quickly. The guns don't feel powerful and sound lame. The Soldiers speech over the radio sounds rubbish, and i prefer the replica and ATC models from the first one. The battle music in this doesn't come anywhere close to FEARS.

The AI are dumber than the Combine and their main goal seems to be flipping over stuff.

Some example of the bad AI i have seen are:
Coming face to face with a shotgun wielding solider in a corridor and me expecting to die, instead he turns runs all the way down knocks over a vending machine and then shoots.
On multiple occasions having the AI kill themselves by shooting the explosive barrels.
Having the AI throw a grenade at me in which i retreat and he advances onto his own grenade.

The scare scenes for me fell flat. On to many occasions when the screen turns blur like and the music indicating something is happening i miss it. I look around franticly but see nothing. The Alma quick time events where they supposed to be scary? The occasions where the game removes your flashlight and keeps turning the lights on and off with ghosts coming wasn't scary it was bloody annoying. FEAR had me in a bundle of nerves while playing, FEAR 2 did not. Ravenholm in HL2 is more scary.

The story was decent if not getting predictable. As soon as i got to the school i knew Armacham would be involved, doing some shit to the children and it didn't disappoint. The first game was disturbing hearing about all the questionable things Armacham did. Fear 2 what's to keep going further and it does feel like they are trying to make them seem even more evil just for the sake of it. Also who's idea was it to remove phones and laptops with text base intel? A huge part of the environment was listing to the things that were happening, now i just got to read it all. On the plus it was great finding out more about Alma.

The good things that i did like were the environments, Monolith really captured the look of a nuked out city. The lack of shadows does hamper it a bit, but overall it's pretty solid. The wall crawler guy's were great just not enough of them. Also the puppet guys also great enemy's yet only 2-3 of them, why?
The robot sequences were fun if not way overpowered, if Monolith actually made it a bit challenging i think it would had made it more enjoyable.
 
PimpinPenguin said:
F.E.A.R. 2 - 4/10

Overall this game fails. It's has removed everything that made FEAR great, yet left in most of it's problems.
The cinematic battles are no longer present. Going into a room and shooting it up no longer creates the same amount of carnage. Parallax mapping is removed, dust particle effects for walls being shot is removed, physics toned way down (mugs,papers no longer break when shot) and blood decals fade away far to quickly. The guns don't feel powerful and sound lame. The Soldiers speech over the radio sounds rubbish, and i prefer the replica and ATC models from the first one. The battle music in this doesn't come anywhere close to FEARS.
Click to expand...

It does not fail at all, they have scaled back te smoke effects because the smoke in the original was so overdone that you couldn't see in a firefight, some may like this, I prefer to be able to see what I'm doing.
I also disagree about the guns, but that's all opinion.
As for the soldiers, I had this discussion on the official forums about how the originals replicas battle chatter sounded like amateurs in battle with their "Where do I go now" and "Shut the **** up", in the second one, they actually at least sound like pro's.
As far battle music, that's all opinion, as far as I could tell they both did a good job of actual battle music, but F.E.A.R. 2 has ambient music too which the original F.E.A.R. was missing.
As for the old models being better, have you played F.E.A.R. and compared them lately, F.E.A.R. 2's models are plainly better.

PimpinPenguin said:
The AI are dumber than the Combine and their main goal seems to be flipping over stuff.
Click to expand...

That's just a ridiculous statement.


PimpinPenguin said:
Some example of the bad AI i have seen are:
Coming face to face with a shotgun wielding solider in a corridor and me expecting to die, instead he turns runs all the way down knocks over a vending machine and then shoots.
On multiple occasions having the AI kill themselves by shooting the explosive barrels.
Having the AI throw a grenade at me in which i retreat and he advances onto his own grenade.
Click to expand...

The original was guilty of some of this too. Just because it had the illusion of AI because they dove through a window now and again and flanked the other way to go, the first F.E.A.R.'s AI wasn't that great either to be honest, yes, I'll agree that it's reaction time was better, but I have seen them blow themselves up in the original too.

PimpinPenguin said:
The scare scenes for me fell flat. On to many occasions when the screen turns blur like and the music indicating something is happening i miss it. I look around franticly but see nothing. The Alma quick time events where they supposed to be scary? The occasions where the game removes your flashlight and keeps turning the lights on and off with ghosts coming wasn't scary it was bloody annoying. FEAR had me in a bundle of nerves while playing, FEAR 2 did not. Ravenholm in HL2 is more scary.
Click to expand...

I think the mood they were going for with F.E.A.R. 2 was more of an uneasy feeling all the way through rather than the shock jumps of the original, but I agree the first was scarier, but I would be lying if I said I didn't find the sequel scary at some points.

PimpinPenguin said:
The story was decent if not getting predictable. As soon as i got to the school i knew Armacham would be involved, doing some shit to the children and it didn't disappoint. The first game was disturbing hearing about all the questionable things Armacham did. Fear 2 what's to keep going further and it does feel like they are trying to make them seem even more evil just for the sake of it. Also who's idea was it to remove phones and laptops with text base intel? A huge part of the environment was listing to the things that were happening, now i just got to read it all. On the plus it was great finding out more about Alma.
Click to expand...

The way the story was told was far better than the originals badly told mess which needed it's external material for people to make any sense of it after playing.
The phone messages were removed because some people couldn't be arsed waiting round for the message to finish before they could carry on, that's why a PDA works better, people can read them at their own speed. I miss the voices though, an ideal system would be like Bioshock where it plays while you move, but I prefer PDA's to phone messages.

PimpinPenguin said:
The good things that i did like were the environments, Monolith really captured the look of a nuked out city. The lack of shadows does hamper it a bit, but overall it's pretty solid. The wall crawler guy's were great just not enough of them. Also the puppet guys also great enemy's yet only 2-3 of them, why?
The robot sequences were fun if not way overpowered, if Monolith actually made it a bit challenging i think it would had made it more enjoyable.
Click to expand...

The reason they cut back on shadows is due to the environments being so much better lit that using 100% dynamic lighting like the original for this would have crippled the frame rate, hence they had to introduce some static lighting to keep the detail in the world. I think it's a fair trade off as the game looks far better.
The Remnants I guess were not overused because they wanted each encounter to be remembered, if you start dropping them all over they wouldn't really be that memorable, besides, they clearly have to have whole areas built around them so they can be effective in combat, which if every environment was like that would have taken them longer.

As for being more difficult, that's getting addressed in the next patch as they have confirmed it.
 
stemot said:
It does not fail at all, they have scaled back te smoke effects because the smoke in the original was so overdone that you couldn't see in a firefight, some may like this, I prefer to be able to see what I'm doing.
I also disagree about the guns, but that's all opinion.
Click to expand...

Fair enough, but they didn't have to remove them just scale them back. It was just a great sight after having a frantic battle and watching the dust settle and seeing all the damage. Also in Fear 2 your crosshair turns red when over an enemy and even has a yellow cross indicating your shooting him. With those hints i'm sure they could have kept some of the effect.

As for the soldiers, I had this discussion on the official forums about how the originals replicas battle chatter sounded like amateurs in battle with their "Where do I go now" and "Shut the **** up", in the second one, they actually at least sound like pro's.
As far battle music, that's all opinion, as far as I could tell they both did a good job of actual battle music, but F.E.A.R. 2 has ambient music too which the original F.E.A.R. was missing.
As for the old models being better, have you played F.E.A.R. and compared them lately, F.E.A.R. 2's models are plainly better.
Click to expand...

I just like hearing the panic in the voices when i just wiped out half the squad, with them franticly try to plan their next move. This one just sounded to dull. Also the other gave better feedback. The models i don't know if it's my PC but they seemed really poor. Perhaps it's the letterboxing that are making them look bad as i'm on a 5:4 monitor.

That's just a ridiculous statement.
Click to expand...

I don't believe it is. The AI are a lot slower in this. Also the AI in FEAR did knock over stuff, but not to the extent of FEAR 2. I they looked cool in FEAR, but it's just overdone in FEAR 2. The balance seemed off in this. In FEAR the AI would go for attack over cover while FEAR 2 goes for cover over attack. This may sound good but on to many occasions i could off them while they were hiding and not shooting. Not once did they flank me. Rarely was i ever without full armour and 3 med packs

I think the mood they were going for with F.E.A.R. 2 was more of an uneasy feeling all the way through rather than the shock jumps of the original, but I agree the first was scarier, but I would be lying if I said I didn't find the sequel scary at some points.
Click to expand...

I think the main reason i didn't find it scary is cause i knew Alma wasn't a threat. Apart from the quicktime events you don't really see her which is a shame.

The way the story was told was far better than the originals badly told mess which needed it's external material for people to make any sense of it after playing.
The phone messages were removed because some people couldn't be arsed waiting round for the message to finish before they could carry on, that's why a PDA works better, people can read them at their own speed. I miss the voices though, an ideal system would be like Bioshock where it plays while you move, but I prefer PDA's to phone messages.
Click to expand...

You make a good point. However i feel they should have keep some in atleast. Listening to someone on the phone trying to find out what happened to their loved one has more of an impact than reading it.

The reason they cut back on shadows is due to the environments being so much better lit that using 100% dynamic lighting like the original for this would have crippled the frame rate, hence they had to introduce some static lighting to keep the detail in the world. I think it's a fair trade off as the game looks far better.
Click to expand...

I understand they couldn't use Dynamic shadows and lighting everywhere that was the reason FEAR was kept in closed environments. However i feel that for example in the school and subway there should have been more.

The Remnants I guess were not overused because they wanted each encounter to be remembered, if you start dropping them all over they wouldn't really be that memorable, besides, they clearly have to have whole areas built around them so they can be effective in combat, which if every environment was like that would have taken them longer.
Click to expand...

I supposed so. But it's still a shame not being able to battle these great creatures more.

As for being more difficult, that's getting addressed in the next patch as they have confirmed it.
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised. On hard it's a breeze. What were they thinking leaving so much health and armour about? They need to make the AI more aggressive.

Overall i'm going to stick with FEAR. I've got rid of FEAR 2 and put FEAR in it's place where it belongs. I see no reason at all replaying FEAR 2 the multi-player is poor and is going to die. And since the battles are toned down to much for me there no point going though SP again. I suppose i wanted more of the same yet Monolith tried something new and it just didn't work for me.
 
PimpinPenguin said:
Fair enough, but they didn't have to remove them just scale them back. It was just a great sight after having a frantic battle and watching the dust settle and seeing all the damage. Also in Fear 2 your crosshair turns red when over an enemy and even has a yellow cross indicating your shooting him. With those hints i'm sure they could have kept some of the effect.
Click to expand...

There is some smoke left fading after battles, from grenades etc, I guess I just didn't like the smoke in the first one :(

PimpinPenguin said:
I just like hearing the panic in the voices when i just wiped out half the squad, with them franticly try to plan their next move. This one just sounded to dull. Also the other gave better feedback. The models i don't know if it's my PC but they seemed really poor. Perhaps it's the letterboxing that are making them look bad as i'm on a 5:4 monitor.
Click to expand...

They do still panick, for instance "He's wiped out half the squad" "He's too fast" it's just they seem to come across as more organised in this one.
I can assure you the models are far higher quality than F.E.A.R., check out the "Lets play....fear 2" High def videos from thatenglishdude on Youtube to see how they look.


PimpinPenguin said:
I don't believe it is. The AI are a lot slower in this. Also the AI in FEAR did knock over stuff, but not to the extent of FEAR 2. I they looked cool in FEAR, but it's just overdone in FEAR 2. The balance seemed off in this. In FEAR the AI would go for attack over cover while FEAR 2 goes for cover over attack. This may sound good but on to many occasions i could off them while they were hiding and not shooting. Not once did they flank me. Rarely was i ever without full armour and 3 med packs
Click to expand...

I was referring to your statement that the Combine AI in HL2 was better, which really, as much as you hate F.E.A.R. 2, is a pretty daft thing to say when it's quite obvious it isn't true.

PimpinPenguin said:
I think the main reason i didn't find it scary is cause i knew Alma wasn't a threat. Apart from the quicktime events you don't really see her which is a shame.
Click to expand...

You do see her, you've just got to be looking at the right places to see her, she's more like the G-Man in this one, hiding in the shadows, and behind you at some points (look behind you in the school dream sequence when you and Stokes are separated for one).

PimpinPenguin said:
You make a good point. However i feel they should have keep some in atleast. Listening to someone on the phone trying to find out what happened to their loved one has more of an impact than reading it.
Click to expand...

Like I said, I think a Bioshock way of doing it would have pleased everyone.


PimpinPenguin said:
I understand they couldn't use Dynamic shadows and lighting everywhere that was the reason FEAR was kept in closed environments. However i feel that for example in the school and subway there should have been more.
Click to expand...

The school and the indoor sections are actually more lighting intensive than the outside area's, but yeah, if this had been pushing the hardware as the first F.E.A.R. did maybe they would have, but they probably decided that less system requirements = more sales, as I'm one that doesn't believe it was the consoles that nerfed it since the PC has far higher res textures than the console versions. I couldn't even run F.E.A.R. properly until the end of 2006, which meant I only had to pay ?10 for it when I could finally run it perfectly, and I'm sure many did the same, which means not as much returns for Monolith.
Makes sense really if the sales were disappointing.

PimpinPenguin said:
Overall i'm going to stick with FEAR. I've got rid of FEAR 2 and put FEAR in it's place where it belongs. I see no reason at all replaying FEAR 2 the multi-player is poor and is going to die. And since the battles are toned down to much for me there no point going though SP again. I suppose i wanted more of the same yet Monolith tried something new and it just didn't work for me.
Click to expand...

You do know they are releasing DLC for the game shortly don't you? They have also promised quite a bit in the patch, as well as stuff they can't discuss yet, so I'd hold onto it for a little bit yet and wait and see, they might make it playable for you.
 
Audiosurf 9/10

I just bought this and can't imagine why I've waited so long, its a great game to just jump in and play for 15 minutes. No need to invest your life into it.
 
Call of Duty 4 Singleplayer 9/10

A fun experience filled with memorable moments, exciting battles, and a well-presented (if rather cliched) plot. IMO the ending ranks up there with HL2: Episode Two's.

The bad:
1. Way too short. I could feel this even before I finished the game, with the levels abruptly ending just as the excitement peaks.

2. Battles with enemies that never stop respawning unless you advance suicidally. Rather annoying.

3. Not an issue to 99% of the fanbase, but as a native Arabic speaker I could tell that Infinity Ward did most of their research on the Middle East and Arabic language by watching action movies and using online translators.

Call of Duty 4 Multiplayer 8/10

Like the SP, it's the basic FPS multiplayer formula implemented as well as it can be. Like almost all online FPS that aren't Battlefield and TF2 though, I have a feeling that it will become boring and repetitive after a while, although the RPG-like aspects look like they'll extend the lifespan by quite a bit.
 
Apocalypse89 said:
Call of Duty 4 Singleplayer 9/10

A fun experience filled with memorable moments, exciting battles, and a well-presented (if rather cliched) plot. IMO the ending ranks up there with HL2: Episode Two's.

The bad:
1. Way too short. I could feel this even before I finished the game, with the levels abruptly ending just as the excitement peaks.

2. Battles with enemies that never stop respawning unless you advance suicidally. Rather annoying.

3. Not an issue to 99% of the fanbase, but as a native Arabic speaker I could tell that Infinity Ward did most of their research on the Middle East and Arabic language by watching action movies and using online translators.

Call of Duty 4 Multiplayer 8/10

Like the SP, it's the basic FPS multiplayer formula implemented as well as it can be. Like almost all online FPS that aren't Battlefield and TF2 though, I have a feeling that it will become boring and repetitive after a while, although the RPG-like aspects look like they'll extend the lifespan by quite a bit.
Click to expand...

Dear god THIS
 
Painkiller 9/10

Good ol' school shooting, where you don't care about lives and ammo. And ooh, Necrogiant is a scary sight.
 
killzone 2 9/10
Plays well and looks ****ing gorgeous



Replacing my broken PS3 with a new one and extra stuff courtesy of gamestation 9/10
My hard drive is now 80 instead of 160 but I did get Sf4, KZ2 and an extra 60 quid off instore :)
 
Team Fortress 2 9/10

BONK
BONK
BONK

I love Valve.
 
Ninja Gaiden 2 7/10

Fear 7/10

both of them okay so far. cant really be arsed at the minute. Especially as my 360 is acting up.
 
Age of Empires II: Conquerors

8/10. I always finish a game feeling satisfied, LAN is always good fun. There's a shortage of great civilizations to play as, but you can pretty much win no matter who you play, save the Koreans (played them once. man they suck, no wonder they needed us in the 50s).
 
Musk said:
:O They came in 160GB sizes??
Click to expand...

It was a limited edition thing that was done in november last year.

The US got uncharted with it and the UK got the better bundle of 4 PSN games with it (GT5 prolouge, ratchet + clank quest for booty, super stardust HD and the last guy).
 
Star Ocean 4: 7/10

**** it, I had this big long review all typed out and I really doubt anyone here cares.

In short, I was hoping for the same "magic" as Star Ocean 2, but it doesn't even come close. But the combat's pretty good... so I'm still playing all the bonus content that you can do after you finish the terrible, terrible story. Just terrible. The "main" character's name is Edge... Edge Maverick. It doesn't get any better from there. The game's actually better now that it's over... there's more stuff to do, and I don't have to listen to anyone open their goddam mouths anymore.

That may sound harsh for a 7/10, but I've seriously been hooked to this bastard the past week... that kinda speaks for itself. It really is fun, but it seriously ****s up so, so many things that I could not possibly justify more than a 7.
 
BF2 (after coming back to it): 9/10. I friggin love this game so much now. After coming pretty skilled with the anti-tank class I love nothing more than blowing up an enemy car full of players. Some things I don't like are the hitbox issues (rockets going through players, TV missiles going through choppers) as well as getting raped by planes on the occasion I play air maps.

My XFIRE is 3sc4p3 if anyone want's to hit a game up sometime.
 
World of Goo

10/10

May be the greatest game ever made. It seems to reinvent itself more times than most other games do. Just when you think you've seen everything, something surprising happens. Not finished with it yet.
 
FEAR 2 - 7.5/10
solid FPS but nothing spectacular

Medieval II: Total War - 8/10
i love the series and this game is no exception. however, it isn't really a huge step forward compared to Rome... still need to get Empire
 
B_MAN said:
FEAR 2 - 7.5/10
solid FPS but nothing spectacular

Medieval II: Total War - 8/10
i love the series and this game is no exception. however, it isn't really a huge step forward compared to Rome... still need to get Empire
Click to expand...

Empire isn't either. In fact I am slowly disliking it the more I play it lol.
 
Wanted: Weapons of Fate Demo - shitty/10

Very repetitive and the controls feel awkward.
 
Oddly, I was debating about picking Star Ocean 4 up, but....I think there are other things I'd rather have.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

ríomhaire
Why you should play the Game of Throes RPG (warning: long)
Replies
4
Views
2K
ríomhaire
ríomhaire
Laivasse
Film Noir
Replies
11
Views
2K
Yorick
Y
unozero
'Hello mum, this is going to be hard for you to read ...'
3 4 5
Replies
164
Views
8K
Absinthe
Absinthe
ComradeBadger
Comrade's Top 5 most wanted!
2
Replies
53
Views
2K
Dinkleberry
Dinkleberry
Bob_Marley
Notice to the Citzens of the USA
2 3
Replies
105
Views
6K
Tyguy
Tyguy
Back
Top