Jump to content
Please support this forum by joining the SH Patreon ×
Sturgeon's House

General PC games master race thread. Everything about games. EVERYTHING.


LoooSeR

Recommended Posts

I played Rome 1 extensively, with and without mods.  It sounds like a lot of the things that frustrated me about it are still in later games.

 

The pathfinding is excruciating.  It makes me want to scream.  Open fields just with infantry aren't so bad, but in cities combat looks fake, fake, fake.  And nonsensical.  Add in cavalry, and the limitations of the engine will really show.  For some bizarre reason, in Rome 1 cavalry are terrible at running down fleeing units.  They have trouble targeting routing infantry, seriously, try it some time.  You will throw your keyboard skyward in exasperation.

 

Rome 1 may have been my first grand strategy game, so at first I was perfectly content with the interface.  Then I picked up Civ IV.  Then I put some interface mods on Civ IV.  Then I realized how poo RTW's interface was.  There was absolutely no attempt to streamline the turn-based portion of the game.  Important stat modifiers are completely hidden from the player.  Important functions (like moving retinue from character to character and determining income breakdown) are buried in nonsensical places, and it's not immediately obvious to a newbie that you can even do these things.  Optimal play involves a lot of tedious micro-management that the interface in no way obliges you in completing.

 

The AI is completely idiotic and predictable.  In open maps when I was polished I could routinely kill infantry-centric armies with horse archers that the auto-resolve would give me 90%+ odds of losing, because the game is just that bad at handling anything that isn't line infantry slugfests.  While this did allow me to get my Genghis on, it got really old after a while.

 

And the worst part?  None of this aggravating shit can be fixed with mods.  New units, new unit animations even,new maps, and new cosmetics could be done, but the most grating parts of the experience were absolutely untouchable.

 

Tell us when you get the youtube channel going; I'm interested in seeing what you've got.

 

I can agree with a lot of this. TW originally made a good choice with the diet grand strategy in that it lets you play the massive battles without forcing you into structured campaign missions. The problem is that the grand strategy is a diversion at best and a boring, frustraing slog at worst. Warhammer is incredibly refreshing to me because at most I can spend maybe five minutes clicking around on the map before I decide to have a battle. Attila was atrocious in that you were required to micro-manage a bunch of little features (turns could take up to an hour in late game Attila), and the AI did everything it could to avoid getting into giant RTS fights.

 

I'm torn on anticipating For Honor. Playing so much TW lately has given me an itch to be in a massive battle between ancient factions, but Dark Souls 1 spoiled me on medieval combat. After that all games, even Dark Souls 2 and 3 make that kind of combat look like a bunch of flailing hitboxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's more of a thematic issue than a technical one in my warped brain. In general I have issues with Dark Souls 2 and 3 over 1. The biggest is that DS1 appealed to me because it really gave a feeling for Medieval combat like no other game. Weapons and characters had real weight and force. It felt like I was dueling with the humanoids, and amplified the feeling of really just being a Guy versus a Monster when I fought bosses. This fueled the satisfaction of overcoming obstacles for me, because I was just a guy, and I was getting better while still feeling like I was just a guy. The level design felt great. The environments felt natural in a way that where I was crawling through castles that were designed to be hard to assault, but there were also places that felt so organic, created by the people in-world with no real concern about how someone would fight a duel in certain places. It was a strange concept of intentionally poor level design being actually intentionally good level design, which I'm sure makes no sense because I'm putting it in a really bad way.

 

The sequels, saying nothing of how I felt overall about them, just never recaptured that magic for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DOOM has ruined me. I'm normally a shooter guy, but DOOM was so perfect, that it's hard for me to pick up shooters that aren't as well-designed and fun. Probably explains why I've been playing nothing but RPG and strategy games for months, now. I hope some publishers took notice and we get more of the same.

 

 

Once I'm finished with the Dragon Age games, I'm probably going to finally suck it up and go through The Witcher.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brick Fight, I understand what you mean. DS1, for me, definitely cannot be topped. And that's because it was the first. High school sweetheart sort of game when comparing it to the others. 

 

I still think DS3 has far superior mechanics. 

 

Hilariously, I've got more time in DS2 than either of them. But that'll change. 

 

 

DOOM has ruined me. I'm normally a shooter guy, but DOOM was so perfect, that it's hard for me to pick up shooters that aren't as well-designed and fun. Probably explains why I've been playing nothing but RPG and strategy games for months, now. I hope some publishers took notice and we get more of the same.

 

 

Once I'm finished with the Dragon Age games, I'm probably going to finally suck it up and go through The Witcher.

 

 

Have you ever heard of Painkiller?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Profile of a hacker

 

Look at this little shit.

 

My buddy and I ran into a hacker tonight. And, like most, it was a subtle thing. I fought him once and noticed that, on top of using a hideously overpowered combo (It's an insta-stun, buffed, that can erase half your health in one hit), I felt like my attacks weren't doing much. 

 

They were doing damage, sure, but something felt off. 

 

Fast forward. We're winding down, my friend and I. Then we get this guy again. My friend fights him and gets obliterated. 

 

Which is odd, because he's better than I am. He exclaims, "What the fuck, he's hacking. He should have been stunned from that hit. He's got to be hacking."

 

So I take out a rather large weapon, one that stuns quite nicely. When I fight him, I smack him HARD. He wasn't attacking, or running, or dodging. Just a straight up solid smack. 

 

And he wasn't stunned. 

 

In fact, the hacker went ahead and slammed me with a combo that took half my health. 

 

Quick lesson on "hyperarmor"

 

In DS3, certain weapons give you "hyperarmor". That is, while swinging said weapon, you can't be interrupted by a smaller, faster attack. Small weapons don't get this, because they are already fast and hit hard. But with small weapons, you can be interrupted with any attack. 

 

He was using small weapons, and he had infinite hyper-armor activated. He would not be stunned, no matter what. 

 

Well, I took a picture of his steam profile. Let's see what a Hacker looks like. 

 

Ooo, we've got an edgelord on our hands.

 

MZ5Y5Zz.png

 

 

What's that he's saying in his profile? Let's take a closer look

 

PdPkItd.png

 

 

Watch out, guys. We've got a real edgy son of a bitch on our hands.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...