I briefly played SCARLET NEXUS' free weekend. Too many cutscenes and not
a fan of animes. Otherwise, not bad. No time to play again. :(
Spalls Hurgenson <spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:
* Comanche (2021) (new)
* Crusader: No Remorse (replay)
Six games in one month; while that's a shadow of what I've played in
my heyday, it's a good deal more than I've been playing recently, so I
think that's a great start to the year.
How 'bout you? What have you been playing... IN JANUARY 2023?
Well, I guess we're officially in 2023 now. Somehow I thought - when I
was younger - the future would be shinier. But at least we got cool
video games.
Anyway, let's do this thing.
My Five-Second Long Summary
---------------------------------------
* Quake Enhanced (new?)
* Doom Eternal - Ancient Gods pt 1 & 2 (new)
* Comanche (2021) (new)
* The Hunter: Call of the Wild - New England Mountains (newish)
* Mechwarrior 5 Mercenaries (replay)
* Crusader: No Remorse (replay)
My Hours-Long Summaries
---------------------------------------
* Quake Enhanced (new)
Lipstick on a pig. That was the phrase that kept circling my brain as
I played "Quake Enhanced", the updated version of the venerable
shooter released a year ago (but only finally available on GOG). A
phrase which is, I admit, rather unfair to Quake. I may not be the
biggest fan of the game - I was on Team Nukem in the mid 90s,
preferring games with a bit more context and character - but I
admired Quake for its technology and influence on the industry. A
'pig' Quake certainly was not.
But Quake Enhanced certainly is unnecessary lipstick. Largely a visual upgrade, it all feels rather pointless. While the lighting, textures
and models have been improved, it's still very obviously a game of the
'90s; it isn't a complete revamp. If the 30-year old visuals were what
kept you from playing this game, I doubt an upgrade to 25-year old
graphics are going to bring you back. I can't even admire the update
for its technical prowess -- "Ooh, lookit what they made the idTech-1
engine do!" -- since "Quake Enhanced" isn't using /any/ idTech engine, instead having been translated to the proprietary Kex Engine developed
by Nightdive Studios.
The gameplay remains largely the same, though. Well, the movement does
feel a lot more 'slippery' than I remember, which made some of the platforming a lot more tricky than it should have been. But it's still
the fast-paced arena-shooter of yore we all remember. That's good if
you like that sort of thing (I'm lukewarm on it), but did we really
need a half-assed enhancement just to revisit it? QE also features an entirely new episode ("The Dimension of the Machine") which adds some
much needed new textures to the game and has some impressive (for
Quake) architecture, but its pacing and hub-based level design feel
more akin to slower FPS games than the archetypical Id shooter.
So in the end, the whole thing felt gratuitous. "Quake Enhanced"
wasn't really bringing anything new to the table - certainly not when compared to what the various sourceports and modders had been offering
for free for decades. It wasn't even using a Carmack-designed engine.
It felt more like an opportunity for Bethesda/Microsoft to line their
wallets by reissuing a 30 year old game. Lipstick on a pig.
* Doom Eternal Ancient Gods pt 1 & 2 (new)
Like the original "Doom 2", "Doom Eternal" took the ideas of its
predecessor and played around with it. The core gameplay mechanics
remained the same in both games, but both "Doom 2" and "Doom Eternal"
felt a lot more experimental with their level designs and monsters.
With "Doom 2", the technology just wasn't up to some of the ideas the developers wanted to implement, leading to a lot of levels that felt gimmicky, and with way too much platforming. "Doom Eternal" felt
better balanced, and was overall a much better sequel.
"The Ancient Gods" DLC, on the other hand, feels like "Doom 2" to
"Doom Eternal"; a continuation of an idea implemented with poorly
polished levels. None of the levels are bad (with one notable
exception at the end) but neither are they particularly good. The maps
are often retreads of ideas already explored in the main game, and in
fact the overwhelming feeling I had while playing was that the maps
were the rejects that were culled out while finalizing "Doom Eternal".
Overall the new maps tended to be smaller, with less intense combat
and an increased emphasis on between-battle platforming. There were
fewer areas to explore, and the maps were almost (but not entirely)
devoid of secrets. The fights themselves felt less reliant on the
'push forward' mechanic that made "Doom (2016)" and "Doom Eternal" so
novel; too often the winning strategy seemed to be to fall back and
circle strafe the fight, picking off the stragglers and only rushing
forward for quick rearms. There was much less emphasis on 3D
maneuvering during fights too.
The storyline - which, amusingly, was always the part that interested
me most in these new games - was less enthralling too. Doomguy, having blunted the demon invasion, goes off to kill the 'king demon' and end
the threat of Hell once and for all. Unfortunately, the Biggest Bad
turns out to be (ROT13 minor spoiler) n zveebe-Rnegu irefvba bs
Qbbzthl uvzfrys, which greatly negates the feeling of threat. After
facing off (and winning!) against a thousand-foot tall Titan at the
end of "Doom Eternal", this new foe feels almost inconsequential.
The big end-game boss-fight is also possibly one of the most annoying
I've played in a long time. Because the big evil is invulnerable
/except/ when he makes one specific attack, and because you can only
stun him with a very specific - and randomly dropped - type of ammo, a
good deal of time is spent dodging attacks and waiting for your foe to
leave himself vulnerable. The fact that any damage he inflicts on
/you/ automatically heals /him/ doesn't help, nor does the fact that
you need to 'kill' him in six nearly-identical fights. It's an
extremely drawn out and tedious battle that probably accounted for a
quarter of the run-time of the second DLC. The reward for your victory
is - despite a very late plot-twist at the end - very unfulfilling
too. If I ever play "Ancient Gods" again, it will only be until I
reach that final fight. It's just not worth doing it a second time.
Overall, the experience was fairly disappointing; the whole package
felt lackluster and without the refined gameplay that made "Eternal"
so memorable.
* Comanche (2021) (new)
The 2010 "Medal of Honor" (that's the Modern Warfare clone, not the
original set in World War 2) was an utterly forgettable game, except
for one part. That bit was when you got to fly around the Pamir
mountains in an Apache helicopter and 'blow shit up'. Between the
impressive (for the time) graphics and the easy flight model, it was surprisingly fun, and - on playing that section of the game - I
wondered why nobody had made a helicopter sim with comparative visuals
and arcade action; it couldn't help but be great, right? But the 2021
reboot of "Comanche" is proof that combination doesn't necessarily
result in a good game.
The original Comanche, released way back in '92, was a groundbreaking
game. Not only did it introduce the gaming world to voxels (allowing realistic - if blocky - rolling terrain to flight sims for the first
time ever), but it was a fun mix of arcade action and realistic
simulation. It really was all in a class to itself, and it almost single-handedly elevated Novalogic, the game's developer, into
becoming a top-tier publisher.
Ashborne Games, the new developers of the license, are nowhere near as skilled. The graphics engine offers some acceptable visuals (although
not as groundbreakingly advanced as the original) but that's about the
extent of the game's positives. Everything else about this game is disappointing: from its flight model, its arcade-action, its map
layout, its story, its voice-acting... everything.
Its missions are aggravating; the game can't seem to decide if it
wants to be a run-n-gun game like an FPS, or a more serious simulator.
On the one hand, your helo can take an outrageous amount of damage
(and there are magical "nano-pads" which heal you up if you land on
them), as well as ridiculous amounts of enemies to gun down. On the
other hand, the floaty movement is more reminiscent of actual (if
greatly simplified) helicopter flight, you have a very limited amount
of ordnance with which to complete your missions, and your chances of
hitting your target is pretty low compared to a regular FPS. But the
end result is that whether you want an arcade shooter or a simulation,
you're going to be disappointed by what "Comanche" provides.
But even if the flying were acceptable, too much of the game is
interrupted by having to navigate a tiny drone through building
interiors. In this regard the game resembles "Descent" somewhat -
minus the intense action - but it feels greatly out of place compared
to the rest of the game. It's as if the developers worried that the
game wasn't /enough/ like an FPS so they forced in some (poorly
designed) corridor-shooter mechanics.
It's rare that I say this - I always try to see the good side of any
game - but "Comanche" is just awful. It's not fun to play, it's not
exciting to look at, it has an awful story and setting... it's bad.
Primitive as the older games may be, I can still eke some enjoyment
out of them. This game, though? It's crap.
* The Hunter: Call of the Wild - New England Mountains (newish)
At this point I only have myself to blame. The quality of the DLC
packs for this game has been steadily decreasing, almost in equal
measure to the rate at which my disappointment has been increasing.
Every time I buy a new map pack, I conclude that - while the
fundamentals of the game remain strong - there's little gained by
adding new territory because it's all too similar to the maps I
already own. There's just no /value/ in the DLC; I'd be better off
saving my money and exploring already purchased regions. But I
couldn't resist getting the "New England Mountains" DLC.
See, a lot of the map packs are representations of places I've never
gone. The rolling hills of southern New Zealand, the deep savannah of
Africa, the forests of Patagonia; I've no idea how accurate to reality
the game is. But in the past I'd hiked many trails in New England, and
I was excited to revisit them, even digitally. And since some of the
areas in the game that I had visited in real life - the forests of
Germany, the mountains of the US West - weren't completely inaccurate,
I had hopes that the "New England Mountains" DLC would resemble the
real thing too.
It didn't of course. Not in the least.
The thing about New England forests is that they're positively
jungle-like at times. Between the mess of fallen trees and branches,
the clinging vines, the high underbrush, and the constant boulders and
rocks, it's often all but impossible to push your way through the
woods unless you're on a track. The soil is thin, creeks and crevasses
are everywhere, and beaver swamps dot the lowlands. It's a beautiful
place, but it can be a real pain to traverse.
There's none of that in this DLC. The woods are on smoothly rolling
hills and the forests are cleared of any obstacles. The designers
obviously knew only one thing about the region - the famous red and
orange foliage that briefly appears in Autumn - and that seems to be
the only indicator that the area is supposed to be New England (even
that is poorly done, with every tree in the low lands a garish red
regardless of species, and not one deciduous tree outside of the
valleys). It's such an obvious paint job using the AutoTree tool, done
with no care for realism or even artistry. Other oddities include a
weirdly stunted white pine tree (of a sort I've never seen in real
life), used too often and with so little variety that it can't help
but stand out, and some weird animal sounds (years I've spent
wandering New England, and I never heard a white tail deer hiss like a
bobcat so loudly it can be heard across a valley).
Beyond the poor map design, there's a lack of novelty to the DLC.
There aren't any animals we haven't seen in other maps, and the new
guns fail to stand out. While I haven't explored the entire map, I
haven't seen any new map assets - it's the same cabins and structures
we've seen before - and the biggest 'gimmick' of the map is a
returning character from the base game (who's naught more than a voice
on the radio anyway). The usual problems - floating plants and rocks, brain-dead animals, boring quests, static water, buggy scripting, etc.
- remain unimproved. The whole thing comes across as a lazily done
project foisted off onto the newest intern. While it isn't any worse
than any of the other maps, it certainly isn't any better. It
definitely isn't worth paying money for it.
Maybe I'm just extra sensitive because I miss my time in New England
and this disappointing representation just reminds me that I can't
sneak off into its wild woods for a weekend hike anymore, not even
digitally. But I think it's more than just its inaccuracy, although
that bothers me a lot, since now it calls into question the realism of
all the game's other maps. But more, I worry that the developers see
me - and people like me - as 'whales' who'll unquestioningly buy any
map they shit out... and seeing as (so far) that is the case with me,
it depresses me a lot. Thanks game.
* Mechwarrior 5 Mercenaries (replay)
Whenever this game starts, it presents you with a still-image, using
in-game assets, of its war-machines placed in thrilling set-pieces.
These vignettes are cunningly lit in a way that all the units look as
if they're the tiny pewter miniatures from the table-top game upon
which the Mechwarrior franchise is based. I can't help but feel that
these images are indicative of all the problems with this game;
everything seems great, and true to its source material... so long as
it is all frozen in time. But once all those parts start moving, you
can't help but see the problems.
Just for a start, lets take those visuals. They make for great stills,
but in action? You start to wonder why everything looks so glossy.
There's a visible sheen to everything that seems out of place on the
giant gritty battlemechs, especially after they've been pummeled with artillery and crashed through buildings. It's not that the mechs look
bad... just out of place. Animations feel sort of janky, and the
lighting unsophisticated. Even though - thanks to the game's
procedural generation - there are nearly an infinite number of maps,
most feel very similar thanks to a lack of variety in level assets.
The gameplay suffers too. Worst is the AI, which is completely
brain-dead and does little more than charge at you and - maybe - circle-strafe. If you're lucky, that is; more than once I've found
enemy units hung up behind rocks they should have been able to
maneuver around. There's no strategy to the enemy; units with
long-range weaponry don't hang back and pummel you from afar, and
damaged mechs stay in the fight long after they should retreat
(especially given how, according to the setting's lore, battlemechs
are expensive and rare). The developers were obviously aware of these deficiencies, but rather than improve the AI, instead resorted to
sending endless waves against the player, using numbers rather than
skill to increase difficulty.
Or take the lack of meaningful options for the player as commander of
his unit. You can't, for instance, send your soldiers off to defend a
ridge across the map (you can only send them - rather inaccurately -
to points you can actually see. Send out light mechs for scouting? No
go. Route a couple mechs around a hill to capture the enemy in a
pincer maneuver? Nope. The AI has no tactics, but - because of the deficiencies in unit control - neither does the player. Ultimately,
the best you can do is load up your squad with the heaviest weapons
you can bear, keep them close to you, and concentrate firepower on the brain-dead enemies until, eventually, you get a mission-complete
signal.
"Mechwarrior 5 Mercenaries" is such an aggravating game, not because
of its faults (of which there are many) but because how this game
could easily have been so much better. The core of the game is solid;
the underlying tech and mechanics are impressive and fun to play with.
The mechs have feel massive, the weapons have punch. Razing a forest
with your lasers or popping a VTOL from a far with a flight of LRMs is extremely satisfying, and leaving a city smashed flat behind you after
an epic firefight is simply awesome. But then you run into so many
niggling problems - like that unskippable cutscene every time you
travel between solar systems - and can't help but grind your teeth.
Worse, the game has seen very little in the way of meaningful updates
in the two year's it has been on market. Oh sure, several DLC have
been released, but the content therein has been fairly weak and fixed
none of the underlying issues. Actually, in some ways the DLC made
things worse, since they broke a lot of mods that DID fix some of the problems.
In many ways, I love "Mechwarrior 5", because it does a great job of immersing me in the fantasy of riding around in one of my beloved
'rompin', stompin' robots' from the Battletech franchise. But it could
have been so much better than it ultimately ended up.
* Crusader: No Remorse (replay)
It's been a long, long time since I have played this game start to
finish. Oh, I've fiddled about with it over the years; I've watched
the intro, played enough of the first level to remind myself of what
sort of game this was, enjoyed the soundtrack. But navigate the entire
game until its climatic end? We're talking decades since I've done
that.
And while I enjoyed the game, I'm not sure it was worth the investment
of time. Back when it was release - in the long-ago year of 1995 -
"Crusader: No Regret" felt really special; it had SVGA graphics (a
full 640x480!!!), a rocking digital soundtrack (no more MIDI!),
full-motion video, speech, destructible terrain and multiple ways of
getting past obstacles (both within limits, of course; this was still
the era of the 486 after all). Compared to the games released only a
year or two prior, "Crusader" felt almost like something from the
future; few games had so many impressive technological features packed
into it like Crusader managed. Because of this, we tended to ignore -
or at least forgive - it's less impressive features.
Things like the amazingly clunky controls, for instance. Its
tank-controls were sluggish and limited to moving in only one of eight directions at a time. This made maneuvering around the cluttered maps
a challenge, and getting a bead on an enemy was far more challenging
than it needed to be. There was - fortunately - only a limited amount
of platforming, but when it was required that the Silencer - your
on-screen protagonist - needed to jump or roll, it was always a
struggle to get him lined up /just right/... and even then it often
took several attempts. The instant death by falling into the various
pools of water (or toxic ooze) didn't make things anymore enjoyable.
The maps were annoyingly mazelike and - being a game of the mid 90s - required a lot of searching for keycards. Too often those hunts seemed make-work, put in for the sake of lengthening the game (sometimes
you'd find a key to open a door, only to find another key just beyond
for some other door... why not just have the first key open the second door?). At least later on - once you started acquiring some heavier
ordinance - you could just blow the doors open with some explosive
weaponry, skipping the hunt altogether... if you didn't mind setting
off the alarms and spawning new enemies.
The AI was unsurprisingly deficient; camping behind a corner and
letting them walk into your fire - one after another - was a valid
tactic. Or just blasting them from afar; if you couldn't see them,
they couldn't see you and randomly shooting across a room to
(hopefully) kill some unseen foe worked Even when they did see you incredibly well. The AI was often slow to react; a blessing actually,
since the controls made it a challenge to spin about and get a bead on
them. Difficulty was largely a matter of the AI receiving more
powerful weapons.
Although its full-motion-video was panned by most critics of the time,
I personally enjoyed it. The acting is so incredibly hammy and
over-the-top that I couldn't help but smile as the actors chewed the
scenery (extra special props to Marco Perella as the slimy weapon's
dealer Weasel; its obvious he was taking great joy in his role). The
story itself is incredibly 90s in tone (evil businessmen ruin the
world!) but is almost inconsequential to the overall action.
Despite all the fun I had with it, "Crusader" doesn't really measure
up for modern gamers. A lot of what it did became de rigueur for
action games, but it suffers from a lot of rough spots because it was
such an early attempt at the formula. Even with the rosiest of tinted glasses, the shallow often repetitive gameplay and aggravating
controls required a lot of willpower on my part to keep playing the
game to the end. It's certainly not an old-timey game I'd recommend to others, except maybe in short doses to see what some of the 'best of
1995' had to offer PC gamers of the time. But beyond its historical curiosity? It's better left on the shelf.
---------------------------------------
Six games in one month; while that's a shadow of what I've played in
my heyday, it's a good deal more than I've been playing recently, so I
think that's a great start to the year.
How 'bout you? What have you been playing... IN JANUARY 2023?
I can't seem to get into the anime games either, so that lowers it a bit in >my mind too. I like watching most anime, so I'm not sure what it is about >the games?
On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:22:49 AM UTC-8, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
* Comanche (2021) (new)
I keep having nostalgia for Gunship 2000, but I'm 90% sure if I tried
to play it now, I'd get frustrated and quickly drop it. I feel like I'd
love a more modern arcady helicopter game, but my brain says,
no, it's probably be too annoying. There are helicopters in EDF,
but the controls are horrid and they have no health, there is one
rather difficult mission for one of the characters I did finally get
past by using one, but that's 1 out of 120.
* Crusader: No Remorse (replay)I can't remember if I actually played the whole thing, or just the demo,
but I do remember it fondly. I had almost bought it on GoG recently,
but the reviews mentioning the same issues you do of clunky controls
and pixel perfect platforming were red flags that helped me decide
not to.
1. Witcher III
* Witcher III - It didn't really click with me immediately, and I just quit >when I got to the first tavern. It seemed fine though, and I need to give
it another try when I'm more in the mood.
Well, I guess we're officially in 2023 now. Somehow I thought - when I
was younger - the future would be shinier. But at least we got cool
video games.
Anyway, let's do this thing.
My Five-Second Long SummaryStardew Valley.
---------------------------------------
How 'bout you? What have you been playing... IN JANUARY 2023?
Stardew Valley.
On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 13:29:12 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
Stardew Valley.
Wow. How do you manage to squeeze an entire month's worth of
video-games into just two words? I've never been able to do that. ;-)
Stardew Valley.
How 'bout you? What have you been playing... IN JANUARY 2023?
The Witcher 3
I have umpteen hours in this already, just wandering the countryside to
all the '?' marks, fighting monstars & collecting herbs. No doubt I could've finished the game already, but as is am not even 20%. It's
just so pretty, and the sidequests are well-written, with unique voiced cutscenes and dialogue -- how can I skip them?
* Crusader: No Remorse (replay)
Did you play the original as I did like that but the second one I just
didn't get into although I was never sure entirely why even taking into >account it was no longer a new IP to me?
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> writes:
* Crusader: No Remorse (replay)
Oh, I do remember this fondly. MOD-style soundtrack too. I even tried
the GoG version at some point but not really willing to subject myself
to this level of clunkiness. Or I don't know, maybe I should give it a
try.
I remember at least some reviewer back when made a big deal out of the >gruesome deaths you inflict on the enemies and civilians alike. Blood
pools under corpses riddled with bullets. Plasma vaporizes them
outright. Rockets set them on fire so they run around screaming and
would then fall down and burn into a pile of ash. Over the top and very >comic-booky or Spy-vs-Spy like gore in other words. Were you completely >unmoved by this silliness? I remember you could even remote control
little spider bombs right into your enemies.
Did you play the original as I did like that but the second one I just >>didn't get into although I was never sure entirely why even taking into >>account it was no longer a new IP to me?
That's exactly what happened. The first game was tense and amazing (that
ending cinematic, omg), the second game didn't make much sense (and it still >doesn't) so I rushed through it. But in this 3rd Witcher game, the magic is >back. Every little sidequest has some unique dialogue or aspect to it, >cutscenes fully voice-acted and mocap'd, facial animations are realistic and >pleasing, the architecture and surroundings complex and varied, the sounds >and incidental conversations as you wander around a city believeable, the >combat interesting enough if you mix up movement, potions, oils, signs, >bombs, parrying etc, and with a new videocard it all just looks outstanding.
On 2/2/2023 7:35 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 13:29:12 -0800, Dimensional TravelerKnowing no one will read or comment on it helps.
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
Stardew Valley.
Wow. How do you manage to squeeze an entire month's worth of
video-games into just two words? I've never been able to do that. ;-)
Well, I guess we're officially in 2023 now. Somehow I thought - when I
was younger - the future would be shinier. But at least we got cool
video games.
Anyway, let's do this thing.
On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 08:37:49 -0800, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, >Dimensional Traveler wrote:
On 2/2/2023 7:35 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 13:29:12 -0800, Dimensional TravelerKnowing no one will read or comment on it helps.
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
Stardew Valley.
Wow. How do you manage to squeeze an entire month's worth of
video-games into just two words? I've never been able to do that. ;-)
Well, bad assumption there. Response-wise, that is. You must be new here.
My life is consumed by Return to Monkey Island. At once, I hated the art >style, but now my eyes have basically gone blind to the affront.
+1, would recommend.
So rather than being able to ignore the game, I actually have to
consider getting it.
Did you play the original as I did like that but the second one I just
didn't get into although I was never sure entirely why even taking
into account it was no longer a new IP to me?
That's exactly what happened. The first game was tense and amazing (that ending cinematic, omg), the second game didn't make much sense
(and it still doesn't) so I rushed through it. But in this 3rd Witcher game, the magic is back. Every little sidequest has some unique
dialogue or aspect to it, cutscenes fully voice-acted and mocap'd,
facial animations are realistic and pleasing, the architecture and surroundings complex and varied, the sounds and incidental conversations
as you wander around a city believeable, the combat interesting enough
if you mix up movement, potions, oils, signs, bombs, parrying etc, and
with a new videocard it all just looks outstanding.
Huh. That's disappointing. I was hoping for an 'oh god stay away'
because that would make things so much easier for me. The art style is >attrocious,
On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 12:22:33 -0500, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
My life is consumed by Return to Monkey Island. At once, I hated the art >style, but now my eyes have basically gone blind to the affront.
Well, I guess we're officially in 2023 now. Somehow I thought - when I
was younger - the future would be shinier. But at least we got cool
video games.
Anyway, let's do this thing.
IOW: It got better. Or less worse. Whatever.
Game is pretty easy so far, excepting one really obnoxious puzzle for
getting the eyepatch disguise to work which basically left you hanging >without a clue and had a pretty dumb, but not entirely irrational,
solution. Just super obscure. I assume this happened because I chose
"hard mode."
On Act IV rn. The story and humor are spot on. There are regularly
occuring trivia cards and achievements. It's fun.
+1, would recommend.
On Fri, 03 Feb 2023 13:47:58 -0600, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:
On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 12:22:33 -0500, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
My life is consumed by Return to Monkey Island. At once, I hated the art >>style, but now my eyes have basically gone blind to the affront.
Well, I guess we're officially in 2023 now. Somehow I thought - when I >>>was younger - the future would be shinier. But at least we got cool
video games.
Anyway, let's do this thing.
IOW: It got better. Or less worse. Whatever.
Game is pretty easy so far, excepting one really obnoxious puzzle for >>getting the eyepatch disguise to work which basically left you hanging >>without a clue and had a pretty dumb, but not entirely irrational, >>solution. Just super obscure. I assume this happened because I chose
"hard mode."
On Act IV rn. The story and humor are spot on. There are regularly
occuring trivia cards and achievements. It's fun.
+1, would recommend.
*---
I stopped playing it because of the "vector" artwork. Not sure if I
can get used to it.
On Sat, 04 Feb 2023 21:44:33 -0700, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, PW >wrote:
I stopped playing it because of the "vector" artwork. Not sure if I
can get used to it.
Yeah, it's pretty bad. I'm in it for the humor and story, so I just
switched that part of my brain off.
I'm sure there's some nagging, unconscious struggle going on underneath
the surface that will require therapy. ;^)
Stardew Valley.
Games like this or I guess minecraft? that have you create your own
environment I just look at and think I could never do that.
I've always
enjoyed being given a gameworld others have created and being surprised by >what is presented, basically interactive movies.
How 'bout you? What have you been playing... IN JANUARY 2023?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 107:41:52 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Calls today: | 4 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,335,499 |