Something went wrong. Try again later

WVUEers

This user has not updated recently.

134 0 0 5
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

WVUEers's forum posts

Avatar image for wvueers
WVUEers

134

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1  Edited By WVUEers

I think I've more or less learned to deal with it (again another thing I remember from previous ME's is that you learn to adapt to the control issues) but the inclusion of rolling in general kind of seems odd. Someone above mention the Cerebus grenade spamming and to me the rolls seem to be only included as kid of the counter move to this because it kind of seems so un-precise to use elsewhere (any other time you use it you tend to end up completely away from your desired destination). The grenades are... interesting. I appreciate they decided to somewhat test the player who in previous versions could for the most part sit back and pick off enemies from behind cozy cover, but it does get to be over kill when you're being flanked by Cerebus guards with shields and having nades ran down on you from above.

I also read somewhere that the reason that Shepard can no longer holster his weapon is that Bioware didn't have enough room to include the animation. For whatever reason (I read it had something to do with how much memory (or whatever tech shit it is) the PS3 game can hold) Shepard could only have a finite amount of animations, the inclusion of two roll types and a new ladder climbing animation made it so they had to scrap the holstering function. This kind of bums me out because A). I'm obviously not a big fan of rolls to begin with and B). the holstering function really helped immerse the player. Besides when Shepard would holster it used to pull the camera back which really helped in exploration. I kind of get adding rolls over holstering (even though I'm not a fan) but the ladder thing seems stupid, it adds very little to the game.

Avatar image for wvueers
WVUEers

134

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2  Edited By WVUEers

Haha I can't help it. I'm enjoying this game, but I find it difficult to play more than an hours worth because so often I'll be just dominating a match, avoiding head shots, keeping with my game plan, and BOOM, KO'd. I mean I get that is kind of how the real UFC works as well, momentum can swing in a second, doesn't mean I'm going to smile when it happens. Am I the only one who will rage quit when they get flash KO'd in career?

Avatar image for wvueers
WVUEers

134

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3  Edited By WVUEers

I'm still pretty early but something that's really bothered me is how damn clunky Shepard seems to be in battle. I mean I remember even in Mass Effect 1 getting caught on corners or accidentally sliding into cover but now this game has a full on enemy that will straight on charge you and presumably you can either run or roll out of his way after baiting him. The whole concept feels very Batman Arkham Asylum like but without the touch to the controls. Rather my Shep tends to bait the beast than decide he's either not going to roll or he'd prefer to roll into the path of the thundering creature, inevitably I get caught in a loop where he stands up under the hulking beast and is pounded into dust. This coupled with the precise direction you need to use his sword (cool concept though) really makes me long for the days of just shooting from behind boxes. I'm enjoying Mass Effect for what brings you to play Mass Effect (obviously not the combat, I actually didn't dig the combat in ME1 too much either) but I feel like some of this combat is just crazy chaotic. Maybe it's me but it's a lot more intimate and in your face than previous games and given how close the camera is to Shep that makes it all the more confusing. Agree/Disagree?

Avatar image for wvueers
WVUEers

134

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By WVUEers

The fights in career mode can be pretty frustrating on higher difficulties. You definitely feel as though at points the AI will have things happen for them that you'd never get. I remember this being an issue in the first game as well. The AI has that "cheapness" quality to it that afflicts so many fighting games. Also while I certainly appreciate that submissions have a meter as opposed to the first game where it was button mashing and randomness, I can't help but have issues with the system. Firstly I find it pretty disorienting at first, it always takes me a minute to figure if I'm red or blue and that's pretty important time. Also the chase sequence isn't that smooth, typically rounding corners my thing will get disoriented and might go the opposite direction. I also hate how not only the real life time slows down but they opponents bar has a slowing effect on my bar (this would have been a smart idea to implement the longer a fight goes on). Pretty much I have the same problem I had with UFC 1, seldom does a fight leave the first round for better or worse.

Avatar image for wvueers
WVUEers

134

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5  Edited By WVUEers

Typically when a game has a history like Sleeping Dogs it comes out kind of like a half aborted creation in which you get bits and pieces of the direction but also see a distinct lack of fluidity. Now obviously it's difficult to really tell a lot from a preview but what I have pulled are 2 very important things. #1 The video is comprised entirely of in game footage, and #2 the preview is lengthy. Given these two things and how far away we still are from release I think we can assume that all parties involved are very confident with how this has shaped up. Honestly I wouldn't have been surprised if this game had been kept on the low down until just weeks prior to its release.

Avatar image for wvueers
WVUEers

134

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By WVUEers

Honestly I would play them because they're great games (shooting feels way better in 2 than 1, found some of the shooting in 1 tiresome) but I wouldn't play them for the choices as they barely seem to matter to the story as a whole.

Avatar image for wvueers
WVUEers

134

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for wvueers
WVUEers

134

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8  Edited By WVUEers

Watching that demo on TV went a little something like this. "Do you know the *bleeeeeeeeeeeep* and that shi-*bleeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep* a *bleeeeeeeeeeeep* fuckin-*bleeeeeeeeeeeeeeep*" 

Avatar image for wvueers
WVUEers

134

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9  Edited By WVUEers

I hated Cole, he was annoying and a hypocrite. I actually found very few of the characters in LA Noire likable. Ironically this is perhaps the first R* game with people who weren't ridiculously flawed, and yet I find them all pretty unlikable. I think characters like Niko Bellic, or John Martsen who are trying redeem themselves and right their wrongs are things you can root for. Cole Phelps was a guy who claimed to be straight laced and do things by the book, but he was stubborn and full of it. He liked to get up on his soap box all the time, meanwhile he was having an affair (of which he shows no remorse and continues), he doesn't particularly fight the system all that much when he realizes it's corruption. It's only puts his own ass on the line when Elsa is in extreme danger. Jack Kelso is more of a man then him, he pursues the truth for no reason other then justice, although I found him annoying as well. To me the most likable character were the traffic desk partner, the arson desk partner, and even in his own twisted way the captain of homicide. 
 
Also if Cole just jumped in the time it took him to look down the tunnel, look up, and then say goodbye, he totally could have made it out.

Avatar image for wvueers
WVUEers

134

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

5

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By WVUEers

I don't like how they somewhat glossed over that he apparently killed the real BD killer too, so we're just not going to delve into how he figured out who the BD killer was, where the body is, or really how anyone derived that from the evidence in front of them aside from a throw away line about how he must have killed the BD killer. I liked the concept of LA Noire, I liked the gameplay as well but the game did have some flaws for me.  Firstly as cool as the faces were, the rest of the graphics kind of bogged it down. To be honest a lot of the characters look a like save from a few big ones, I think this is more on the graphics then them round up actors who all looked the same. I also hate how the desks sort of worked backwards in terms of interestingness, I mean your second desk is freaking homicide, every case is rich in plot, and the by the end of the game you are literally doing virtual paper work by reading through files. I know I'm not in the minority when I say I found the BD story arch far more appealing, and dangerous then the over arching storyline which essentially boils down to white collar crime. It just feels like the writers decided to take a really anti-climactic turn about halfway through the story. If they re-arranged the desks it would probably work better.  
 
Honestly not to spoil any thing but the way the game works, you go from investigating some of the most notorious murders in US history (assuming that the games fiction does in fact keep them on BD level) to glorified insurance investigator. It just seems like an odd choice to me.