General Gaming Megathread: What are you playing?

Just finished L.A. Noire, and I am quite happy with the experience. Good old puzzle solving, take all the time you need, and be thorough. If slow, lumbering games are not for you, steer away. But I have asked so often, for slow games, oh how I like them slow, and this game was just slow enough. It wasn't even that slow, every now and then you are thrown a lil car-chase or shoot-out

All in all, very cool game.

I loved walking up to people, telling them to disperse from the crime scene >:I

 

Has anyone played Divinity Dragon commander ? If the game is as good as their trailer:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LvnLAimI9PQ

It must be amazing, in either case it looks like mesh of several genres and a lot of fresh takes on things.

 

Spellcross: The Last Battle
It's a turn-based strategy game with tactical combats, created by Slovak studio Cauldron back in 1997. Friggin' sweet game with outstanding graphics, excellent soundtrack and well polished feature-rich gameplay. One picture is worth a thousand words, so I took a pair of screenshots for you:

1. Strategy center.
Here you'll recruit your troops, create your platoons, battalions and regiments with assigned officers. There's also place for researching new technologies, managing your resources and so on.



2. Tactical map.
This is how the game actually looks like most of the time. Here you are fighting the evil forces in your struggle for very existence, commanding your troops and accomplishing different kind of military missions. (Troops' LOS/LOF is improved when they're standing on higher ground. They could also dig trenches over time for improved defense - indicated by yellow dots on the infobars.)

 

Are you controlling every units or some of them are automatic ?
Is the plot good ?

 

Yup, every single move or action on tactical map is fully controlled by you.
As for the plot, can't tell you much about it, never played it before. The setting is quite ridiculous though, you're fighting against some magic and fantasy creatures. With tanks and infantry! Anyway, that doesn't matter at all, because core gameplay consist mostly of tactical combat and those creatures are more than satisfying opponents so far.

 

Been playing Dead Head Fred on a PSP a lot, an action-adventure game that sadly got ignored by many people when it was released.
I wonder why there was not a PS2 release as well as that would certainly have drawn in more people.

The game is sort of like games such as Zelda, Okami, Mega Man Legends, the player having to gather items and weapons in order to progress and unlock new areas and world parts.
Atmosphere wise it is a mix between Film Noir and cartoon horror with 50s elements. (it does not take place in the 50s despite some of the aesthetics, there are desktop computers, and video recorders)

Sadly one of the few original games the developers made, most of their other games are tie ins to cartoons and television shows. I would have loved to have seen a sequel and other original games from these people.

 

Hmm, Spellcross. Had the demo of that game and the weird setting alone makes it worth a look. Not sure what basic human infantry are meant to do as all they did was die horribly.

 

When you'll research corresponding new technologies, light infantry can be upgraded to commandos, rangers, mortar team, or badass deadly pyromaniacs armed with really effective incendiary grenades and grenade launchers. Also, soldiers are rewarded with experience points, promotions and stuff; granting them bonus attacks per round, better armor class, attack rating and so on. Do not underestimate your grunts!

Cauldron doesn't sell or support this game anymore, it's abandonware now. Some ripped english version without cutscenes could be find on this Slovak abandonware site, if someone is interested: http://www.bestoldgames.net/spellcross
It's excellent game, I'll rate it 10/10 propane tanks anytime!

 

Currently I'm playing Berzerk, GTA5, Ocarena of Time, Battletoads, Banjo Kazooie, And in 2 weekends, ima re-binge Rayman Legends... Lol I like to play many at once

 

I last left off saying I needed motivating in order to play the DLC for Bioshock Infinite, and a few weeks ago I finally got around to that. I'm all "done" with said DLC, but for a while I was playing it day in and day out.

I HATED the "Clash in the Clouds" DLC, but not for gameplay reasons, just because I didn't enjoy having the ignore the core gameplay to try and figure out, "How do I accomplish this inane challenge?" CitC DID show me a myriad of different combat possibilities, so I came away from that with a greater appreciation of the depth of the game's core combat mechanics, but that was never what I liked about Bioshock to begin with. I was always thoroughly amused, years after beating the original game on my 360 when it was originally released, to watch the demo video on the PS3 version of Bioshock showcase dozens of "creative" ways to play the game and approach combat, and it says a lot about the game's combat that I beat it several times and NEVER so much as thought about trying those sorts of things (why make a tornado trap to launch a splicer into a ceiling where I've planted a sticky mine, when I can just plant a sticky mine on the floor instead of the trap and blow them up anyway?) but it says equally as much how little I cared about that. CitC was the same: I was impressed at how much more there was to the combat than I had realized, but ultimately what did that matter?

The 2 Episodes of "Burial at Sea" were a different case. I didn't really care for Episode 1 all that much, since it was just a revisit of Rapture with gameplay totally lifted off of BSI, so it all felt rather out of place, and like many reviewers I came away from finishing Episode 1 with an impression of "WHY was this even necessary, what was the point of this?" Episode 2 was a complete turnaround from there; I was blown away by that DLC! The idea of playing AS Elizabeth didn't strike me as anything but a gimmick, but actually playing her was impressive. They didn't take the route of giving me a godlike entity to play who could summon a tornado to exact vengeance on a whim, but rather a character physically inferior to all the other heroes we've been familiar with. In Elizabeth's own words, "A scared little girl". Some of THE BEST Survival Horror gameplay followed that decision, and it was masterfully pulled off. I wasn't left feeling disappointed by the ending, rather I came away completely impressed, and the theme of the first Bioshocks' "illusion of choice" was revisited on top of Infinite's "constants and variables" theme. Taking a stand on which ending of BS1 was canon was also a nice touch, and I further appreciated how they addressed all of the intricate lore of the game without so much as mentioning ANYTHING stemming from BS2. It reminds me a lot of how I think of FO3 and FOBOS relative to the rest of the series. =)

Anyway, that was weeks ago, but for a while I was playing those DLCs over and over, and I enjoyed them abundantly. They didn't offer as much replay value as the core game, but they were fun nonetheless.

 

I want to play Child of Light and I have the money.... but my debit card is not compatible with Steam and I don't have a credit card..... this sucks.

 

Survarium beta and Age Of Mythology right now. Got tired of Path Of Exile and Dota 2... Might install Bioshock Infinite again and do the DLC's since i havent touched em.

 

Civilization V. I just downloaded the Gods & Kings expansion pack which supposedly adds religion (one thing I was kinda upset Civ V didn't have) and more scenarios (Civ V only had one.... really Sid Meier? Making me go through Steam wasn't bad enough you greedy prick?).

After the download for the extra scenario packs are done (Korea, Polynesia, Span/Inca, etc. etc.) I'm going to decide if I like Civ V or IV better.

 

Since the game's added visible MMR, have you switched to playing Ranked, and if so what's your MMR? Just curious.

I've stayed away from Ranked because I hated how all those millions of morons who placed too much stock in numbers suddenly had a gigantic epeen to point at. It seems like once the hype died down (not that that stupidity has gone anywhere) the large majority of players who actually bother to TRY are in Ranked, so if I want games that aren't ridiculous then I ought to stick to Ranked... ~_~ Haven't even played enough Team Ranked to calibrate my MMR yet, but I play with buddies who are in the 4000 range, and I'm either better than them or completely on par with them, so I'll be quite surprised if my calibration comes up 3500 or lower. XD

 

Playing support so no way in hell i would touch ranked unless i was going into it with some friends Got tired of carrying quite a long time ago since most of the heroes doesn't really fit me.

 

How would playing support stop you from attempting Ranked, though? It's always been my observation that the worse the teammates, the bigger the impact a capable support makes. I got far more praise for a good Glimpse as Disruptor or a long chain-disable as a Lion than I ever did for multi-kills with an Anti-Mage. XD

 

Trying to support a 1-11 carry is not a fun thing to do Especially when you are the only support.

 

That sounds like you're treating the job of a support as something that starts later into the game, when it starts from before the horn even blows. A few games ago I did my job as a support to the best of my ability, but my lane carry was a fucking moron. I kept lane vision and I gave simple instructions on how to help him out best, but he was still really stupid, largely ignored my advice, and fed. He never stopped being bad, but at least he farmed his ass off and DID a great job of a carrying once we reached the 50 minute mark. If I didn't do my job as a support and I didn't look out for him and ward the lane and watch his back, he would've done worse, and if I didn't help him AT ALL then the game was without a doubt a total loss. But supports make the game. Even before 6.79, the statement "carries win games" was always false, because carries just win late games, but SUPPORTS have always been the ones who win games. Supports are the heroes that make bold and impressive plays; carries just get to clean-up.

If you focus on support, that on its own is a winning formula for success, because support by its very nature is geared towards the team's benefit, whereas it takes a rational distinction on the player's part to recognize that a carry's job is also for the sake of the team (a distinction that most carry players never realize). You'll be the reason your shitty carry who doesn't know how to play Void will only feed 1-6 in the first 10 minutes of the game instead of feeding 1-11, if you support him well. =)

 

Good seeing you back, Toront! =D Hope all is going well with you.

My explorations into Bioshock Infinite and its associated DLCs has finally run its course: I'm now playing Bioshock again! XD It was partially because the disc came with an installation copy of the first game on it, but largely I was developing a nagging desire to replay it because of my nitpicks towards Infinite's many plotholes. I feel like BS1 is definitely the best out of the entire series, despite minor improvements in mechanics here and there in BS2 and BSI. While BS1 was never particularly overwhelming as far as Survival Horror goes, it was dedicated to the mood of the setting, and 7 years later that dedication still shows. The combat is definitely much more unwieldy and clunky, and it was definitely improved upon in BS2 and the mechanics of selecting and using your abilities were further perfected in BSI. The pacing was interrupted when tense fights were "paused" as you began a hacking minigame, and that was replaced with a more appropriately real-time minigame in BS2 and done away with altogether in BSI. But small gripes like this which saw improvements in later titles don't really address how awesome it is to PLAY Bioshock and how that sense of awe and impression is simply lacking in the following games. I know Infinite wasn't meant to be Survival Horror, and it was much more a story of 2 characters interacting with each other, which it did very nicely, but it also rang a small degree shallow, ultimately.

The recurring theme of "choice" left lasting impressions on me from BS1, and none of the themes or stories in the games afterward left such powerful impacts on me. I felt ZERO empathy towards or bond with Eleanor and I despised how black-and-white the morality was regarding Sofia's fate, because for once I was presented a villain I truly, deeply, emotionally LOATHED, and unless I acted like a villain, myself, I was prohibited from seeing justice visited upon them. Yet again a game which could have told a much greater, deeper story was bogged down by the simplistic approach to morality and choice and boiling it down to the 2 childish notions of saint and devil. Say what you will about the disappointing ending of the first game, but at least Ryan and Fontaine got their due comeuppances, regardless of what kind of person Jack was. Infinite didn't leave the ending up to in-game decisions, it just showed you a definite story, and then ended on a perfectly ambiguous note of "What wait just happened?" I liked that, but it was spoiled by the DLCs on many levels.

In the end- and at the risk of sounding like simply parroting Yahtzee's criticisms of later installments in the PoP "Sands of Time" trilogy -Bioshock seems to be a story of taking one step forward and two steps back. BS1 had a letdown of an ending and the game mechanics needed improvement. BS2 nearly-perfected those mechanics but at the cost of a a massive letdown in the entire story feeling pointless, plagued further by countless plotholes and inconsistencies, and worst still shoe-horned a completely unnecessary multiplayer that played like ass. BSI wove a marvelous narrative, not repeating the mistake of included needless multiplayer so it could focus on polishing said narrative, but it took away much of the dynamic gameplay that made me want to revisit it several times and in telling a single story that only had 1 interpretation clashed with the game's story of LITERALLY "infinite possibilities", ending on a sour note of things only having transpired one way, nailing its tragic coffin shut when any glimpses of interpretation were killed off in the DLCs. I can get over the mechanics of Bioshock, and that leaves me with a wonderful game with a beautiful, enchanting, yet chilling narrative. It was memorable when I first played it, and it spawned countless memes and references throughout gaming culture because of its massive impact, and it's simply the lack of any of that from Infinite that leaves me thinking that, even with all its flaws, Bioshock is still the best game in the series.