| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 35 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 29:57:43 |
| Calls: | 333 |
| Files: | 990 |
| Messages: | 84,638 |
This was not a good month of gaming for me. I know I'm frequently
thought as a cynical gamer who doesn't like any games, but more often
than not I can find some value in the games I play; yes, I am
frequently disappointed (but Sturgeon's law, and all that) but there's usually an upside -however small- to most games I play. And if any one
game is truly irredeemable, well, the next game will surely be better,
right? But recently I just seemed to pick one bad game after another.
Whether it was bugs, bad level design, laziness or just a general lack
of skill and polish, I did not have very much fun gaming this month.
I hope you all had better luck than me!
Content
---------------------------------------
* Star Wars: Outlaws
* Titan Chaser
* Robocop: Rogue City
* Noble Armada: Lost Worlds
* Star Trek: Elite Force II
* Rage 2
Slop
---------------------------------------
* Star Wars: Outlaws
I thought I knew what I was getting when I purchased "Star Wars:
Outlaws". It was an open-world game published by Ubisoft, and it had
gotten mediocre reviews; I wasn't expecting a particularly memorable
game. The visuals, I expected, would be good; the primary game-loop satisfying, but the overall quest and writing would be --if other
Ubisoft games were anything to go by-- quite poor. But that was okay;
I wasn't buying the game for the gameplay. I was buying it because it
was Star Wars, and I'm the sort of person who feels obligated to buy
pretty much anything associated with that franchise. Still, I didn't
expect anything quite as bad as I got.
There were some good points, of course; Ubisoft is a multi-billion
dollar company and even for them it's hard to /completely/ mess up a
game. As expected, the game looks very nice. The visuals are sharp and detailed, and everything looks like it fits perfectly into the Star
Wars universe. There was a good amount of variety to the environments
too. Oh, and there's a prompt to skip the logos at the start of the
game too; that's neat (yes, I'm reaching to find something nice to say
about the game with that last one).
Beyond those few things, the game rapidly slides into mediocrity and
worse. Unusual for a Ubisoft game, the story wasn't terrible. It
wasn't great --it was absolutely predictable and failed to provide any memorable set-pieces-- but at least it wasn't the usual brain-rotting
crap that they usually attach to their projects. The overall mechanics
were workable too. Again, nothing about it stood out, but I never
threw my mouse down in disgust because the shooting or movement felt
wrong (Well, mostly. There's an abundance of walls that look
absolutely climbable that the game has decided are glass-slick
barriers, and differentiating between 'climbable' and not was often annoying). Still, overall the game just worked. None of it was all
that enjoyable, but it the game got the basics right.
But for all that it was well-put together, it just wasn't _fun_. It
lacked that spark that made the game more than a collection of
mechanics into a memorable experience. A lot of it had to do with the
level and quest design, which were paint-by-numbers and too heavily
scripted. Although it tried to present itself as an open-world
sandbox, your options were always heavily limited, and interactivity
was rare. The combat was almost entirely against humanoid enemies. The characters were flat and forgettable. The animations were clumsy and
too often you had to wait for them to finish before you could proceed.
The open world was huge and beautiful, but --despite the plethora of
hidden items to find-- it felt empty and pointless; something to
traverse rather than live in.
All that, and we haven't even gotten to the bugs. Because "Star Wars: Outlaws" is, bar none, the buggiest game I have played in many
decades. It had its usual share of technical bugs (crashes to desktop,
weird texture problems, etc.); more than any other game I've seen in a
long while, but those I can almost forgive. But it also suffered from
an endless array of gameplay-related bugs too; quests that didn't get
marked complete, items that failed to show up in the world, auto-saves
that got me stuck in an endless death loop, NPCs that refused to talk, in-world items that couldn't be used. None were, fortunately,
show-stopping bugs (I managed to get to the end of the main quest) but
they devastated the experience.
Without these bugs, I'd be hard pressed to recommend this game to
anybody except the most devoted Star Wars fan. It's just not a very interesting or fun experience but maybe, if you really love the
franchise, you can glean some enjoyment from wandering its beautifully detailed world. But with all the bugs, even that isn't enough to save
this turd. I've played a lot of awful games over the years, and none
have been as awful as "Star Wars: Outlaws". Not because this game is necessarily worse than all the other terrible games, but because it
didn't have to be. The sheer carelessness of the publisher turned what
could have been a marginally entertaining game into a frustrating
slog. It felt extremely disrespectful to the license and to their
customers in general. It's no wonder they lost the license after such
a half-assed release.
* Titan Chaser
"Titan Chaser" is one of those games I _really_ wanted to like. I
totally get what the developer was hoping to do: to capture the
mystery and majesty of kaiju without all the usual terror and
destruction. A walking-sim at heart, it's a game all about exploration
and atmosphere... except it does everything it can discourage the
former and lacks all of the latter.
It's the fog, mostly. A heavy grey pall sits atop the game-world,
obscuring your vision more than a few dozen feet ahead of you. It's
obscuring layer is reminiscent of old PlayStation 1 games, and it's
intended to make you move slowly, and keep the world shrouded in
mystery. But its actual effect is to make the world feel small and constrictive. You don't want to leave the beaten track because you
know how much of a chore it will be to get back. Besides, because you
can't see anything, going off into the fog probably wouldn't be worth
the effort anyway.
Unfortunately, that fog is also the game's main way of providing
atmosphere. It's an attempt to add mystery and uncertainty to the
game. "Oooh, you can't see anything; who knows what might be in the
mist?" But it's not enough to carry the game, and neither the level,
gameplay nor sound-design are up to the task of making up for the
lack. "Titan Chaser" is incredibly lacking in polish. It's
voice-acting is terrible, the music is forgettable, and it's obvious
that all of its models are pulled from an asset-store. The game gives
you no incentive to pursue its goals, and its mechanics --extremely
basic puzzle solving that mostly consist of running back and forth
across the map performing repetitive tasks-- are not in the least bit rewarding.
"Titan Chaser" is in every way an exemplary of too many Indie games;
it has the rudiments of a good idea that isn't supported by good
gameplay or production values. It is intriguing in concept but bland
in actual implementation. With more talent, better direction and a lot
more time, it might be worth playing... but as it stands now, it's got nothing worthwhile to offer its players.
* Robocop: Rogue City
I can say this much for "Robocop"; it didn't disappoint me.
But that's only because I had such low expectations from this game to
begin with. I can't remember if I played the demo or just watched a
preview video of the game, but when I first saw its gameplay some time
back, it didn't impress me in the least. It looked an overly-scripted,
dull corridor-shooter that relied almost entirely on emulating the
visuals of its license as reason to play, and now --having played
through the full game-- I can say that impression was entirely
justified. This is /not/ a good game.
Still, give the game this much: it does capture the /look/ of the
original 'Robocop' movies. From the maps to the characters to the
sounds, it is very representative of those classic action flicks.
Perhaps too much, since much of the main campaign is just an excuse to
go back and forth between various locations featured in the films, so
players can go, "Oh, that's the place where Robocop fought ED-209", or
"Hey, he said that same line when he killed that guy in the second
movie!". In the 12-hour campaign, I can count only one original
addition to the franchise (the new bad-guy robots, yet another in a
long line of attempts to replace the titular hero) and they look so
cheesy and fit so poorly with the rest of the game's aesthetics that
they stand out only because of their sheer awfulness.
But beyond that, there's almost nothing redeeming about this game. The gunplay is plodding, the weapons are boring, the AI is brain-dead, the
combat situations unexciting and tedious. The voice-acting is
atrocious, but you'd be hard-pressed to notice because the script is
so awful anyway. The "Robocop" movies were about as subtle as a ton of bricks, but compared to the story and situation in this game, the film
seems a masterpiece of nuance. The animations are stiff and
mechanical. This game honestly feels like a throwback to FPS games
from the late '90s... and not in a good way. Even the pretty visuals
are due more to the capabilities of the engine (Unreal 5) than any
real skill on the part of the developers.
I hate to trounce on this game, because it's obvious the developers
have a love for the franchise; they worked hard to fit in every
possible reference to the movies and TV show that they could squeeze
in. But it feels like bad fan-fiction and isn't fun to play, at least
not past the first ten minutes while you giggle at how Robocop's machine-pistol gibs the baddies (well, eventually; even the least of
the enemies seems to be able to soak up three or four hits. But once
their hit-point pool gets to zero, they explode _spectacularly_). But
once that novelty is past, there's very little reason to keep playing.
Honestly, if all you want to do is revel in the over-the-top gore and
action of the movies... just watch the movies. If you insist on seeing
the scenes rendered on a PC, just download some screenshots. But don't
bother playing this game. It's dull, badly designed nostalgia-bait.
* Noble Armada: Lost Worlds
It can be argued that I've no right to judge this game. According to
Steam, I've only played the game for a total of 12 minutes. On the
other hand, I feel that twelve minutes was more than enough for me to determine that not only wasn't this a game for me, it wasn't a game
for anybody.
I bought the game for a very simple reason: it's a successor to the
forgotten and flawed 4X strategy game, 1997's "Emperor of the Fading
Suns", which can be best described as the bastard child of
"Civilization" and "Master of Orion". "Emperor" was not a good game,
but it wasn't completely without merit either. The fairest description
I can give is that it's a game whose premise exceeded its developers'
attempt at implementation. It had some high points too; it's setting (licensed from a table-top game) was wonderfully detailed, and it's soundtrack remains one of my favorite of all times. The reviews for
"Noble Armada" weren't good, but given it's lineage, I just had to
give the game a chance.
But if "Emperor" was the developers biting off more than they could
chew, "Noble Armada" was those same developers not even taking a
nibble. At best, it looks like one of those half-hearted ad-supported
mobile games; it's an incredibly low-effort shooter (they call it a
strategy game, but the strategy element is incredibly thin) with
absolutely none of the style or thought that made its predecessor
memorable. The absolute nicest thing I can say is that some of the
loading screens look okay, but even those are fairly simple and
nothing you haven't seen hundreds of times before. They only stand out because they are the least poor part of the game. I played two matches
and decided there was nothing -absolutely nothing- that merited me
continuing to play the game. It has neither setting, nor gameplay nor worthwhile production values that might keep me interested.
Like I said, I only gave the game 12 minutes of my time. It's possible
that, had I stuck with the game longer, I might have discovered some
(very) hidden depths that might have made the game worthwhile. But
with literal thousands of other games waiting discovery and play in my library, I just don't have time to spend on such vain hopes. "Noble
Armada" looked and played terrible in the quarter hour I gave it; it
had its chance to impress me and it failed miserably.
* Star Trek: Elite Force II
I was really hoping I could be more positive about this game. I've
never really enjoyed "Elite Force II", but I always assumed that was
because I always played it right after the first game in the series,
and that's a really hard example to follow. My solution was that this
time I'd play "Elite Force II" without the first game, allowing me
enjoy the game for what it was, and not as a poorer copy of a better
game. But as it turns out, my dislike of "Elite Force II" was entirely deserved. This was not a well-designed game, and it was a real
struggle to keep playing it until the end.
In part, this was due to the visuals. It's hard to imagine that this
game came out only a year before "Half Life 2", "Far Cry" and "Doom
3"; it looks far, far older. While the graphics do alright in terms of texturing and models, the extremely flat lighting make this game feel generationally much older. Similarly, the stilted key-frame animations
(no motion capture here!) appear positively archaic. The complete lack
of physics was another throwback. The end result was a game-world that
felt static and lifeless. I can't entirely hold this against the game;
it is, after all, more than 20 years old at this point, but older
games have done more with less.
Worse were the actual gameplay mechanics. The level design is
atrocious. There is no sign-posting to help guide the player to the
next checkpoint, and too many interactive points blend into the
background with little indication that they are usable objects. The
maps are too often grey and dingy, with rooms looking all alike. The
combat is grueling, with annoying AI that bobs back and forth and
takes too many shots to down. Enemies teleport in and many of them run
right into your face until your weapon clips into them and you can't
shoot them. "Elite Force II" is not difficult, but its combat is in no
way fulfilling. The narrative lacks charm too; there's little impetus
to the story.
Still, I'll grant the game this much: it does give you a fairly
extensive tour of the Star Trek universe. With one mission you're
fighting off the Borg, and the next you are clinging to underside of
the Enterprise fighting off boarders, and later you're sneaking into a Romulan base. In between, you wander between locations on your
starship and interact with the NPCs. "Elite Force II" tries very hard
to capture the feel of an epic TNG-era Star Trek adventure. It doesn't
do a very good job at it, because the developers (Ritual
Entertainment) just aren't very skilled at level design or
story-telling, but they tried.
I was really hoping "Elite Force II" would redeem itself this
play-through; that lifted out from underneath the shadow of the
better-known first game it would prove it had some value after all.
But unfortunately, its reputation as an absolutely terrible FPS
remains intact.
* Rage 2
I'm really struggling to find anything good to say about this game.
"Rage 2" is such a lazy, uninspired game that seems to have been made
more out of corporate need for a sequel (probably to cash in on the
'Mad Max Thunder Road' craze) than any real desire on the part of the developers --or gamers-- for a new game in the franchise.
Even visually, the game underwhelmed. And I mean that literally. After starting the game, I was so aghast at how unimpressive the graphics
were that I had to double-check to make sure the settings hadn't been inexplicably reset to 'potato-PC' mode. From a technical level, I
suppose the game _is_ quite capable --there's a lot of lighting
effects and the game-world is pretty busy-- but it suffered from some
grainy textures and unimpressive models. At first glance, the game
looked a lot older than it really was.
The gameplay was completely uninviting. The combat wasn't much fun,
with poor AI whose primary tactic was to get in your face and swarm
you. Your guns are sufficiently powerful that most enemies go down in
only a few burst, but battles become tediously long. The game also
doesn't do much to mix things up with a wide variety of enemies; even
in the latter game, it rarely challenge you by having long-distance
snipers mixed with medium-distance rocket-men whilst rushing you with close-in melee fighters. It has all these enemy types in the game, but
never uses them effectively. It wants to be Doom but the developers
don't understand why that game's combats were so memorable.
Outside of the combat, things get even worse. The open-world is just
dull; yet another post-apocalyptic wasteland with the usual bases and dungeons and outposts to visit, loot, and move-on. The driving
mechanics are just about the least fun I've seen in any modern FPS,
and the game gives you little incentive to drive anything but the APC
you're given at the start of the game. Too much of the game is locked
behind crafting mechanics and you're constantly scrounging and
grinding to upgrade your weapons, your skills, and your vehicles. It
was so tiresome that at a certain point I just started ignoring all
the side quests. I never even found all the guns in the game (and
there are only seven!) because the few I found were good enough and it
wasn't worth the effort to find, collect and upgrade the remainder.
The setting, characters and lore are just awful. Imagine the 'humor'
and 'zaniness' of the Borderlands games cranked up to ten, and then
wrapped around a plot that you're expected to take seriously... and characters that are utterly forgettable. The level design is dull and
linear and does nothing to enhance the game's atmosphere. The whole
thing feels like a work-for-hire game, made not out of love or
inspiration but because somebody had to make it.
---------------------------------------
Well, that was my month of tedious and disappointing gaming. I should
note I don't go into these games expecting the worst (well, maybe a
little with "Robocop" ;-). With pretty much each game I played, I
really hoped that it would turn around my run of picking stinkers. And
I kept at each game hoping it would prove itself by the end. But no,
in the end all I had to show for my time and effort was six tick-marks
on the 'played' list and a lot of dissatisfaction.
But I'm sure next month will be better (I'm not sure it could be
worse!). And in the mean time, I get to hear what entertaining
adventures you all had. Which is to say, I'm asking you to tell me:
What Have You Been Playing... IN MARCH 2025?
What Have You Been Playing... IN MARCH 2025?
* Star Wars: Outlaws
* Star Trek: Elite Force II
What Have You Been Playing... IN MARCH 2025?
What Have You Been Playing... IN MARCH 2025?
but it suffered from some
grainy textures and unimpressive models. At first glance, the game
looked a lot older than it really was.