When I was younger (child/early teenager), I found it nearly impossible to get scared while watching a movie or playing a game. I was brought up to always look at them through the eye of "It's not real, it can't hurt you." It wasn't until I got older that I learned that I could suspend my disbelief a little bit. Now I definitely get startled by certain movies in games. I don't audibly yell, but a jump scare will startle me, and I can tense up when tension is high.
Although The Rock has sucked ever since his return, I will say that something always stirs in me whenever I hear his music hit out of nowhere. I get goosebumps (which is said literally every time he comes out at this point).
Also, despite the (mediocre) Rock appearance, that was one of the worst Raws I have seen in a long time. Wow.
I love the game. I think the Nemesis system adds a lot. What some people here claim is "frustrating" I find refreshing. The side activities, which in most games I find mind-numbingly boring, are actually interesting because I have to worry about the captains showing up and ruining it for me. This, in turn, makes me hate them and want to hunt them down. I also think the Batman combat isn't copied enough (since I think it's great) so I just love fighting things in this game, which I could never say about Assassin's Creed.
I agree about the traversal not being great. It's a little better than Assassin's Creed, but barely, and I think the problem would be a lot worse if the world wasn't so open and had more structures. Still, I haven't run into a scenario where flawless traversal is imperative, so it doesn't matter if I accidentally climb up something. Nothing is more frustrating in Assassin's Creed then falling when you don't intend to. Mordor's traversal is a lot faster, too, so mistakes can be correctly a lot quicker.
The game is not perfect, and I don't think the Nemesis system has that great of a stake in the world outside of one's personal attachment toward the captains that you interact with, but it is about as good of a first step as something can possibly be. I can't wait for other games to utilize and implement on this system because it's such a cool idea.
While I haven't played the multiplayer in Destiny, I can say that I've heard people complain about shotguns in many, many games. The reason being is that nobody likes to be killed in one shot. They want a chance to retaliate, and if you die in one shot, you can't. It can be frustrating while you're in a groove to run around a corner and instantly die. I get it.
But shotguns are not unfair, just like sniper rifles aren't unfair. They kill people in one shot with the trade-off of being absolutely useless except in their ideal scenarios. The reason you use an assault rifle, for example, is because it's a jack-of-all-trades/master-of-none sort of deal. It's GOOD for just about any situation, but it's bested by weapons that are designed for specific situations. Wouldn't it be unfair if an assault rifle was better at close range than a shotgun while still retaining its range and fire rate?
If someone is good at staying in close range and picking people off with a shotgun as they run by, then that's how he or she should be playing the game. If everyone was running around with the same basic assault rifle, it would be super boring and tactics would never change.
While the language isn't the best, I really don't think they are doing it with ill intent.
I try not to let language like that slip, but it definitely happens. When I was a kid, everyone used the terms ---- out of frustration. I get that by using those as negatives you imply that being ---- is a negative thing, but it's really just the equivalent of calling something stupid. It's just words you use when you're angry or annoyed because those are the words that you grew up using in those scenarios.
I'm not condoning the use of the words, though, but I wouldn't necessarily jump on someone for letting those words slip out. If it's bothering you that much, just go to them and ask politely to not use that language around you. Don't go to them acting like they're bad people, because they're probably not.
I actually agree that the design feels better in League than it does in Dota. The learning curve in Dota always felt like you were just trying to figure out the best way to work around the interface, where as League kind of cuts that out. I struggle to navigate the store most of the time in Dota and it feels super easy in League (granted, I've played very little of Dota). I also think it's silly that Dota doesn't have an innate ability to teleport back to your base, although I'm sure there is a balance reason that I'm not aware of. League just feels faster and tighter. I don't think League is without fault, though. I think of a lot of characters in League rely on dash/stun/ultimate combos, whereas the characters in Dota are inherently more interesting (and I would say complex), which could be why people say it is a deeper game. It also has denies which I hate, but people seem to think it's good.
I would say it's more like Ground Zeroes in the respect that you can approach your objectives from multiple angles, but each level takes place in different small-ish battle areas. There are eight individual levels that are all in separate (but similar looking) environments. Some are smaller and more linear than others.