What games are you playing?

The opening sequence of God of War 3 is one of my all time favorites. That's a good choice right there.

I just bought Flower and it was a lot of fun, although only about 2 hours long. Good replay though and my kids love it. Journey will be next. You should also get Uncharted - those are PS exclusives I think. Uncharted 2 was by far the best imho, the puzzles are awesome and it's not all about shooting like Uncharted 3. If you like driving games, Gran Turismo is incredible and the graphics will blow you away. I put in a lot of hours on that game.
 
On the PS3, bored of Fight Night Champion and UFC 3.
On the PC, Bored of Mw3, Skyrim, BF3, CSS, Taking a break from gaming in general at the moment, but was enjoying Shogun2 and Fall of the Samurai, I have Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning waiting to be played, likewise with Batman Arkham Asylum and Arkham city, to be honest I haven't touched 90% of the games on my steam list, currently I guess I'm mostly playing Football Manager 2012, something I can do while multi tasking and watching movies.
 
I shall hopefully be finishing off Dragon Age 2 this week - if I don't get distracted, that is.
 
I'm playing Skyrim again, after a long break due to bugs. Loving the Kinect activation on Xbox but I'm afraid my neighbours may think I'm nuts! I just can't seem to get the dragon shouts right...
 
What do people think of Diablo 3? I'm about level 12 and so far I'm "meh" on it. It just seems VERY close to Diablo 2, to the point where I can't beleive they didn't crank it out in a year. <pause> I just went and looked up differences between Diablo2 and 3, and many of them involve multiplayer. I don't really play multiplayer, so that is probably one of the main problems.
 
phil_geo said:
What do people think of Diablo 3?
Click to expand...
It's over-priced, over-hyped, it's been in development far too long, has some rather barbaric and pointless always-on requirements and some very questionable design choices with regards to armour.

And I haven't even thought about playing it.
 
I played Diablo I and Diablo II like a fanatic, with every character type, on every difficulty level. But always in single player mode, in my own time. I'm not going to touch this new one, not until they release an offline playable version. I'm actually waiting for Torchlight 2, a simpler verson of the same hack and slash principle.
 
algernoninc said:
I'm not going to touch this new one, not until they release an offline playable version. I'm actually waiting for Torchlight 2, a simpler verson of the same hack and slash principle.
Click to expand...
You'll probably get the offline version the same time as SC2 gets LAN support.

As for other similar games, Path of Exile is great. It's still in beta, but it's probably the closest thing to D1/2 out there.
Grim Dawn and Lineage Eternal also look interesting, but neither has a release date yet, I think.
Torchlight is too bright for me.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I noticed a lot of people were upset about the online requirements, but I could care less since it plays as a single player game. By that, I mean that you have no idea you are online, so who cares? It seems like making a big deal out of nothing to me, like refusing to rent from Netflix anymore because the DVDs don't have extras, even though you never watched them.
 
phil_geo said:
What do people think of Diablo 3? I'm about level 12 and so far I'm "meh" on it. It just seems VERY close to Diablo 2, to the point where I can't beleive they didn't crank it out in a year. <pause> I just went and looked up differences between Diablo2 and 3, and many of them involve multiplayer. I don't really play multiplayer, so that is probably one of the main problems.
Click to expand...

It gets better. I have played through normal and the story kept me going. Now I am playing hardcore and just finished Act1.

I see myself playing this game for months if not years :)
 
phil_geo said:
Yeah, I noticed a lot of people were upset about the online requirements, but I could care less since it plays as a single player game. By that, I mean that you have no idea you are online, so who cares? It seems like making a big deal out of nothing to me, like refusing to rent from Netflix anymore because the DVDs don't have extras, even though you never watched them.
Click to expand...
It's nothing like that at all. The existence of Always-On DRM (as it's called) is a very touchy subject for PC gamers, as even the smallest hiccup in your connection can boot you out of games or cause issues. And what happens if the servers go down or are hacked (as happened with Assassin's Creed 2 a few years back)? You can't play the game. What happens if the servers are overloaded (as they have been since launch)? You can't activate the game to even play it! You pay an above-average price for a game you can't even play when you want to. It's ridiculous.

On top of that, it's necessary for features you won't necessarily use. It's more akin, to use your example, to having to have an online connection whilst watching a DVD because of the extras, even if you have no interest in using them.
 
I agree your analogy is better, but again, if your computer is actually connected to the internet all the time, it doesn't matter. All of the things you mentioned would be annoying if they ever happen, but they basically never happen. Given that, not buying the game is a policy statement, not an actual reflection of problems with the game.

I admit one DID happen to me last night - the servers were overloaded and I couldn't log on to play - for about 20 minutes. It worked flawlessly after that, and I am guessing will never happen again. If it happens a lot (I played Dark Age of Camelot so I remember) it would be annoying, but for now I'm pretending I'm not online.

Plus, I found I did enjoy one piece of online Diablo 3 - the auction house. You seem to be able to get better gear than the vendors have for a lower price by buying online.
 
phil_geo said:
I agree your analogy is better, but again, if your computer is actually connected to the internet all the time, it doesn't matter. All of the things you mentioned would be annoying if they ever happen, but they basically never happen. Given that, not buying the game is a policy statement, not an actual reflection of problems with the game.

I admit one DID happen to me last night - the servers were overloaded and I couldn't log on to play - for about 20 minutes. It worked flawlessly after that, and I am guessing will never happen again. If it happens a lot (I played Dark Age of Camelot so I remember) it would be annoying, but for now I'm pretending I'm not online.

Plus, I found I did enjoy one piece of online Diablo 3 - the auction house. You seem to be able to get better gear than the vendors have for a lower price by buying online.
Click to expand...
Dark Age is an MMO, Diablo 3 isn't. There's no need for it to be perpetually online.

If you live in an area with a very low level of internet connection problems, then good for you. I'm lucky to. But a lot of people don't have that luxury (UK infrastructure is not that good, for example), and it bars them from playing games like this. Whether the occurrences of the game kicking you happen or not, it doesn't stop the always-on requirement being a poor decision.

Ubisoft have moved away from it to some degree, and they pushed it for a few years. That's how much ire it attracts from customers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Sponsors


We try to keep the forum as free of ads as possible, please consider supporting SFFWorld on Patreon


Your ad here.

Latest posts

Back
Top