@fisk0 said:
Crazy how divisive the reception has been. Like Vinny I think it seems really fascinating. Seems to have some issues, but right now it's metascore is on par with Rogue Warrior and Iron Man 2, which seems odd.
Some reviewers take jank and bugs incredibly seriously. I've seen a few. They don't bug me (ha... sigh) at all, personally. Another complaint seems to surround the permadeath/character recruitment system. It's super bizarre, but you learn to work with it. I never found it entirely unnerving like a lot of these uptight reviewers do.
This game is charmingly interesting. Personally, I'd still recommend it to friends.
@Aronman789 said:
So I've been hearing both good and bad things about this game, is it genuinely broken/bad, or is it one of those "diamond in the rough" types that get a large cult following but the mainstream journalists hate it with all their willpower?
Depends what your level of tolerance is, really.
@casperhertzog said:
ive only watched the quick look so i may be under-informed but i felt like the game wasn't living up to the promise created by its world/art style and i was expecting the combat to be more tactical. it just seemed like a hack-slash-loot game which is a tough position to be in nowadays
The game's difficulty certainly spikes at 'really stressful' at times. The Quicklook stuff was all super easy. But things will fuck you up, and managing 3 RPG roles at a time while worrying about positioning is not easy later on.
Calling it tactical is maybe a bit of a stress, but it requires some split-second squad management that almost makes you feel like a pianist. I mean, you're watching 3 health bars managing healer cooldowns, managing 3 character's aggro and tanking cooldowns, managing enemy status and control cooldowns all at the same time while doing the standard Diablo positioning and smacking things.
Log in to comment