1. #3001
    Quote Originally Posted by VinceVega View Post
    I started playing Pillars of Eternity 1 and 2 in the last few weeks.
    1 is a solid 9/10. Bit long at points but amazing overall with a captivating story and stellar voice acting
    2 is a 8/10. Not that convinced by the whole ship stuff also i find the factions are a bit confusing. But overall a great game with a great story.

    And yesterday i played Mass Effect 3 again. That is a 10/10 for me all the way. Ending while disapointing was not as bad as people make it out to be and the game overall was just simply perfection for me.
    Ahhh I miss Mass Effect. The weird thing is that I downloaded Andromeda to play, started playing it and the graphics felt inferior compared to 3? The gameplay was also weird. SOMETHING was off with it and I can't pinpoint what, beyond just how worse it looked.

  2. #3002
    Observer Floofi's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Kalliefournya, Yü Ess Ayyy
    Posts
    216
    5D Chess With Multiverse Time Travel [8/10]

    A fun spin on a classic. The game allows you to send pieces into the past to create multiple timelines so near the end of the game you're playing 15+ simultaneous games of chess that are all interconnected. To make matters more ridiculous, pieces can move/check across dimensions leading to scenarios where you can win by sending your bishop to the past to prevent your opponent in taking your queen, who then creates an opening for your knight to checkmate your opponent 2 timelines over.

    The main downside to the game would be the lack of tutorial; you pretty much have to learn how to play via trial and error with the CPU.

  3. #3003
    Total War: Warhammer 2 10/10

    So much DLC, so many factions, so many Legendary Lords, so many different ways to play what is essentially the same campaign be it Vortex or Mortal Empires.

    All this and all rolled up into one of the greatest fanatsy universes ever (imo).
    Back to your bridge, you evil Troll!

  4. #3004
    Quote Originally Posted by CarlingBlackLabel View Post
    Total War: Warhammer 2 10/10

    So much DLC, so many factions, so many Legendary Lords, so many different ways to play what is essentially the same campaign be it Vortex or Mortal Empires.

    All this and all rolled up into one of the greatest fanatsy universes ever (imo).
    I agree it's easily a 10/10 game and we still have part 3 to look forward to making the huge game even bigger.

    Plus they said they will rework sieges for part 3 and that's the only thing i could think off that needs fixing.
    Do you hear the voices too?

  5. #3005
    Horizon: Zero Dawn (PC) : 9/10 for the game, 5/10 for the port.

    Got this one for my birthday, so despite news of the shitty port I gave it a bash of course. Good news is, on my end the port hasn't been awful. I had no crashes, and no significant bugs or visual glitches once I installed Nvidia's latest drivers, after more than 12 hours of play time. Bad news is, performance is ass. My rig isn't the best by any means but I can run the vast majority of games at a steady 60 FPS @ 1080p. This one? Steady 40, maybe, and it stutters all over the place, especially when entering a foliage heavy area, and that's with most settings on Medium, the equivalent of the game on PS4 which has vastly inferior hardware. This is not acceptable, and besides me not having bugs doesn't mean those experienced by loads of others don't exist.

    The game itself, however, is friggin great. Production values are sky-high except for the bad facial animations that stick out like a sore thumb. Aloy is a good protagonist, especially thanks to her sometimes funny lack of social graces. All the open world tropes are present but well executed; the radio towers are giant robot giraffes that you gotta climb from a few vantage points, the crafting is simple, health system is well thought out, exploration rewarded by interesting locales, collectibles easily marked on your map and in no way essential, and discovering new enemies is always cool because they're huge killer robot dinosaurs. Only complaint there is the side-quests, which aren't always the most inspiring or well written. The main plot is by the numbers so far, but I like the mystery that permeates the events before the apocalypse.

    What makes this game shine is the combat and enemy design. Man, but fighting the machines never gets old, and rarely have I seen a game make a more effective use of a diverse enemy roster and player tools to combat them. Big sabertooth tiger or bull charging towards you? Get the tripwires out, stun it and riddle with arrows. Crocodiles makes smiles at you? Get it out of the water and kill with fire. Annoying ass birds? You could ineffectually fire normal arrows at them... or bust out a Tearblast arrow and target center mass to deal massive damage, freeze them and ground them so you can pleasurably spear them in their silly bird faces. I even faced some machines that I ran away scared from, like a massive bipedal mofo with the firepower of a tank division or a giant bird that shot lightning and two-shot me before I bought a lightning resist outfit and extracted bloody vengeance.

    Fighting the machines felt so, so much more organic and fun than fighting the inflated health bars of other open world games like AC: Odyssey. I love a AAA game that feels it rewards patience and smart thinking instead of having big stats and dodge rolling a lot.
    It is all that is left unsaid upon which tragedies are built -Kreia

    The internet: where to every action is opposed an unequal overreaction.

  6. #3006
    Quote Originally Posted by ParanoiD84 View Post
    I agree it's easily a 10/10 game and we still have part 3 to look forward to making the huge game even bigger.

    Plus they said they will rework sieges for part 3 and that's the only thing i could think off that needs fixing.
    The sieges are also why it's not actually a 10/10.
    The AI is horrible on those and they are very boring, when they should be the most fun battles throughout a campain.

  7. #3007
    Quote Originally Posted by Lor_Azut View Post
    Gta v - 11/10
    A few months after release yeah probably.

  8. #3008
    Quote Originally Posted by KrayZ33 View Post
    The sieges are also why it's not actually a 10/10.
    The AI is horrible on those and they are very boring, when they should be the most fun battles throughout a campain.
    Yeah hope they make them really epic in part 3.
    Do you hear the voices too?

  9. #3009
    Quote Originally Posted by KrayZ33 View Post
    The sieges are also why it's not actually a 10/10.
    The AI is horrible on those and they are very boring, when they should be the most fun battles throughout a campain.
    Not sure how they can be turned into the most fun. Siege battles means walls so you to approach it the same almost every time. use siege towers to get on walls and siege weapons to break down walls / and or gates or just wrecking enemies. Narrow paths inside makes moving around tricky and turns into a bundled mess.
    I probably just don't see it how it can be fixed. Especially when the fun aspect for me is using environment and flanking in which there are more variety outside the siege battles.

    I guess people expect epic siege battles as portrayed in other entertainment mediums or history, but not sure how it can be translated to a game. Siege battles sorta already work just like Battle for Helms deep for example, it's just more portrayed more epic due the it being a movie medium.
    Error 404 - Signature not found

  10. #3010
    Quote Originally Posted by Kumorii View Post
    Not sure how they can be turned into the most fun. Siege battles means walls so you to approach it the same almost every time. use siege towers to get on walls and siege weapons to break down walls / and or gates or just wrecking enemies. Narrow paths inside makes moving around tricky and turns into a bundled mess.
    I probably just don't see it how it can be fixed. Especially when the fun aspect for me is using environment and flanking in which there are more variety outside the siege battles.

    I guess people expect epic siege battles as portrayed in other entertainment mediums or history, but not sure how it can be translated to a game. Siege battles sorta already work just like Battle for Helms deep for example, it's just more portrayed more epic due the it being a movie medium.
    If you want to min max siege battles that's on the player.
    All I want is a cinematic approach, with multiple layers of defences, fighting in towns.

    You can add multiple victory points, walls that actually *work* and units can shoot down from normally, walls where cavalry can ride on (as this is actually in-lore in Warhammer) etc. etc. yada yada.

    You aren't looking at medieval cities when you talk about Warhammer. You have (not exclusively) big alleys, big forums, big stuff everywhere. Regiments can actually form up lines and not turn into a cluster fuck. Flanking is still possible inside cities because the streets are connected.

    The reason they removed them from this game was supposedly that they don't work well with the AI, but guess what, it's just as bad with the more simple-clusterfuck layout that doesn't actually work either. The AI doesn't do anything during sieges, moves awkwardly along the walls and keeps it's strongest units so far back that they are worthless (such as dragons and stuff)
    Last edited by KrayZ33; 2020-08-15 at 10:56 AM.

  11. #3011
    Quote Originally Posted by Kumorii View Post
    Not sure how they can be turned into the most fun. Siege battles means walls so you to approach it the same almost every time. use siege towers to get on walls and siege weapons to break down walls / and or gates or just wrecking enemies. Narrow paths inside makes moving around tricky and turns into a bundled mess.
    I probably just don't see it how it can be fixed. Especially when the fun aspect for me is using environment and flanking in which there are more variety outside the siege battles.

    I guess people expect epic siege battles as portrayed in other entertainment mediums or history, but not sure how it can be translated to a game. Siege battles sorta already work just like Battle for Helms deep for example, it's just more portrayed more epic due the it being a movie medium.


    from 2:33. Something like that.

  12. #3012
    Quote Originally Posted by KrayZ33 View Post
    If you want to min max siege battles that's on the player.
    All I want is a cinematic approach, with multiple layers of defences, fighting in towns.

    You can add multiple victory points, walls that actually *work* and units can shoot down from normally, walls where cavalry can ride on (as this is actually in-lore in Warhammer) etc. etc. yada yada.

    You aren't looking at medieval cities when you talk about Warhammer. You have (not exclusively) big alleys, big forums, big stuff everywhere. Regiments can actually form up lines and not turn into a cluster fuck. Flanking is still possible inside cities because the streets are connected.

    The reason they removed them from this game was supposedly that they don't work well with the AI, but guess what, it's just as bad with the more simple-clusterfuck layout that doesn't actually work either. The AI doesn't do anything during sieges, moves awkwardly along the walls and keeps it's strongest units so far back that they are worthless (such as dragons and stuff)
    So increase the size of the cities which turns them into non-siege maps when it comes to maneuverability. Which I agree, it should be done because moving armies around inside a city is kinda meh at this point. That however makes them more up to par to other maps rather than being the most epic thing in my eyes.
    Even if that's fixed the main thing that makes a siege battle and a normal map separated from each other is mainly the walls. The rest are obstacles with various coats of paint.

    Making siege battles more epic is more difficult than people realise I think. At least I have no idea how to solve it since sieges in nature are about chokepoints which is what defense relies on. Chokepoints means less options as an attacker. Defending a siege is definitely more fun than attacking since you have more control over it.

    If they manage to fix it in warhammer 3, I'm all for it. I just don't think it will ever be "epic".

    Quote Originally Posted by Aliven View Post


    from 2:33. Something like that.
    That's a cinematic.... Everything in that cinematic is already in game? Walls, siege weapons and armies rushing each other... got anything more tangible and concrete on how to make the gameplay for sieges better?
    Error 404 - Signature not found

  13. #3013
    Quote Originally Posted by Kumorii View Post
    So increase the size of the cities which turns them into non-siege maps when it comes to maneuverability. Which I agree, it should be done because moving armies around inside a city is kinda meh at this point. That however makes them more up to par to other maps rather than being the most epic thing in my eyes.
    Even if that's fixed the main thing that makes a siege battle and a normal map separated from each other is mainly the walls. The rest are obstacles with various coats of paint.

    Making siege battles more epic is more difficult than people realise I think. At least I have no idea how to solve it since sieges in nature are about chokepoints which is what defense relies on. Chokepoints means less options as an attacker. Defending a siege is definitely more fun than attacking since you have more control over it.

    If they manage to fix it in warhammer 3, I'm all for it. I just don't think it will ever be "epic".
    There are other total war games with much better sieges like thrones of britannia (best part of the game other then that it's pretty meh) Rome 2 had some epic sieges like cartage and Medieval 2 for it's time had very good sieges. Didint try Troy yet but i heard they are great there too, Three Kingdom had some good ones too and so had Atilla and it looked great where you could put everything on fire.

    Cities where much bigger and had alot more space to move around in those games compared to Warhammer.

    I hope they will pull ideas from all other titles to make for some epic sieges in part 3. Or perhaps they will do something new and different we will see soon enough.
    Last edited by ParanoiD84; 2020-08-15 at 01:48 PM.
    Do you hear the voices too?

  14. #3014
    Quote Originally Posted by ParanoiD84 View Post
    There are other total war games with much better sieges like thrones of britannia (best part of the game other then that it's pretty meh) Rome 2 had some epic sieges like cartage and Medieval 2 for it's time had very good sieges. Didint try Troy yet but i heard they are great there too, Three Kingdom had some good ones too.

    I think they will pull ideas from all other titles to make for some epic sieges in part 3.
    Playing Troy atm and settlement battles are better, they have no walls but they have built the settlement at a strategic point which results in choke points and such. Since there are no walls the attackers have more choice as well since there are more entries into the city. Sieges are the same though. I think improvements to unit movement and pathing makes it more enjoyable to navigate through these sections and they are also a bit bigger than warhammer 2's.
    What I recall from three kingdoms sieges were the same as Warhammer. That could be me approaching it the same however.

    looking at the other examples you brought up it seems like scale is the biggest issue. Which I agree they are abysmal in warhammer 2, but gameplay seems exactly the same due to the walls, which is my problem with sieges. Doesn't matter to me if there is a city which has tremendous scale and being surrounded by walls because walls have to be approached in the same way. Destroy wall, climb wall or destroy gate. For me they have to sort out that part but I can't for the life of me figure out how.
    Maybe if you can incorporate some spy stuff that can open gates in the midst of battle to allowed attacker units to flank. You have pretty much 100% vision over your walls which means if attacker splits up, you do the same and then it's the same fight but on 2 places instead of one etc etc.
    Last edited by Kumorii; 2020-08-15 at 01:58 PM.
    Error 404 - Signature not found

  15. #3015
    Quote Originally Posted by Kumorii View Post
    Playing Troy atm and settlement battles are better, they have no walls but they have built the settlement at a strategic point which results in choke points and such. Since there are no walls the attackers have more choice as well since there are more entries into the city. Sieges are the same though. I think improvements to unit movement and pathing makes it more enjoyable to navigate through these sections and they are also a bit bigger than warhammer 2's.
    What I recall from three kingdoms sieges were the same as Warhammer. That could be me approaching it the same however.

    looking at the other examples you brought up it seems like scale is the biggest issue. Which I agree they are abysmal in warhammer 2, but gameplay seems exactly the same due to the walls, which is my problem with sieges. Doesn't matter to me if there is a city which has tremendous scale and being surrounded by walls because walls have to be approached in the same way. Destroy wall, climb wall or destroy gate. For me they have to sort out that part but I can't for the life of me figure out how.
    Maybe if you can incorporate some spy stuff that can open gates in the midst of battle to allowed attacker units to flank. You have pretty much 100% vision over your walls which means if attacker splits up, you do the same and then it's the same fight but on 2 places instead of one etc etc.
    Yeah mostly scale some cities in warhammer look amazing and are huge but most of it are locked off so it would be great if they opened them up more and perhaps made the inside like streets and stuff larger scale so you can maneuver your armies better there too.

    I think modders who have made custom made maps did a awesome job with much bigger siege maps in warhammer.

    I like your ideas though.
    Do you hear the voices too?

  16. #3016
    Quote Originally Posted by ParanoiD84 View Post
    Yeah mostly scale some cities in warhammer look amazing and are huge but most of it are locked off so it would be great if they opened them up more and perhaps made the inside like streets and stuff larger scale so you can maneuver your armies better there too.

    I think modders who have made custom made maps did a awesome job with much bigger siege maps in warhammer.

    I like your ideas though.
    Which mods would that be? I downloaded some of the top rated city maps but they were mostly a lot tighter in space and they seemed to have focused more on aesthetics rather than gameplay so I didn't keep them for long :P
    Error 404 - Signature not found

  17. #3017
    Quote Originally Posted by Kumorii View Post
    Which mods would that be? I downloaded some of the top rated city maps but they were mostly a lot tighter in space and they seemed to have focused more on aesthetics rather than gameplay so I didn't keep them for long :P
    The GCCM mod, though i just tried a couple but they where pretty nice.

    Exited to see what CA does with sieges in part 3 though.
    Do you hear the voices too?

  18. #3018
    Quote Originally Posted by Kumorii View Post


    That's a cinematic.... Everything in that cinematic is already in game? Walls, siege weapons and armies rushing each other... got anything more tangible and concrete on how to make the gameplay for sieges better?
    From that cinematic alone:

    - Siege weapons mounted on walls/towers.
    - Multiple layers of defense.
    - Multiple levels of ground high.

    Additionaly, from playing:
    - Spectral units should just pass through walls - they are incorporal after all, but also cant use any siege equipment.
    - Bring back arrow block for units in sieges.
    - As of now the EVERY city is the same square to capture, no matter what. Make them unique.
    - Give town fights, with choke points, streets, etc - no siege just town/city/hamlet map.
    - Introduce bridges and moats.
    - Give defenders options to build traps, spray oil in the zone, dig holes, use proper siege defenses.
    - Scrap the idea of a archery towers.

    From top of my mind.

  19. #3019
    Quote Originally Posted by Kumorii View Post
    Which mods would that be? I downloaded some of the top rated city maps but they were mostly a lot tighter in space and they seemed to have focused more on aesthetics rather than gameplay so I didn't keep them for long :P
    The custom maps are often buggy, sadly, like - invisible walls and stuff.
    And the tools for AI control are, afaik, rather limited, so you can't really give them goals to defend/attack etc. (this might have changed by now - but the game mechanics at this point don't support siege battles)
    And Walls don't even work well for defenders in Total War Warhammer, so no matter what you create as a custom map, it won't feel right because the game is limiting archers in siege battles so much

    for example, it's no coincidence that custom maps like these use terrain for archers to stand on and shoot instead of actual walls where they could shoot down from.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fm3TJ_amRoI

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTxQxgDDAb4

    these maps need more victory points that buff units etc.

    You can have battles on a field, battles on the walls, battles on the market square and battles on some outer defences all at the same time. But the Total War games actually have to give players some incentives to do that.
    The siege is over once you've reached the walls currently and the layout after that are most of the time rather buggy (i.e. units can't line up correctly) and so small, you can't even place your units!. That's the biggest insult to it all.
    I have 40 units and only room for like 20 without them blocking each other.

    Even maps that are only slightly adjusted are better in that regard, such as this one
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeHzNZ4bsjU

    And it's not just siege battles.
    Most open maps are absolutely flipping boring too. It's just a flat surface 9 out of 10 times.

    That's why I'd never give the game a 10/10 score as long as battles are *that* boring tactically speaking on maps that look stunnig when you look *out* of the battlefield, but like a game from 10-20 years ago when you concentrate on the battlemap itself.

    This is how at least half of the open maps should look like:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mu7UUYEhK3E
    Last edited by KrayZ33; 2020-08-15 at 03:34 PM.

  20. #3020
    Quote Originally Posted by ParanoiD84 View Post
    I agree it's easily a 10/10 game and we still have part 3 to look forward to making the huge game even bigger.

    Plus they said they will rework sieges for part 3 and that's the only thing i could think off that needs fixing.
    Ah yeah, I forgot about the wonky siege battles. Still giving it a 10 though as I love the game! 3 should be an interesting game with even more factions, LLs and stuff, can't wait!

    Oh and your signature? Yes. Yes I do.

    Quote Originally Posted by KrayZ33 View Post
    The sieges are also why it's not actually a 10/10.
    The AI is horrible on those and they are very boring, when they should be the most fun battles throughout a campain.
    You do have a point but they're not game breaking for me and don't detract from my enjoyment so keeping it a 10 from my own point of view. Hopefully the 3rd game fixes them.
    Back to your bridge, you evil Troll!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •