Zekhariah's forum posts

#1 Posted by Zekhariah (700 posts) -

@sergio: Nice, I had no idea that was an option O.o. There are a few people I need to tell that to.

#2 Posted by Zekhariah (700 posts) -

I have all of the console but the XONE (I purchased a 360 and played a total of 3 games after buying ~30 games on it, apparently I don't care about their first party stuff as much as I thought). For a purchase right now, I kind of think the PS4 is nice to get sooner so you can begin accruing PS+ games. So far I have gotten a new just released indie game every month since buying the thing, and PS+ is 2.50 a month if you purchase the 1year cards on black friday. But if a like Nintendo games the Wii U has good versions of most of the Nintendo line-up. If your not feeling their work, I would just avoid it.

Though in general I think PC is a better selection at the moment. Maybe invest a bit more (the cost of two consoles instead of one), but then you have one box that is at least 2x the performance instead of 2 lesser devices. And the cheaper games with more exclusives in the long term. PS4 dashboard and operating experience is pretty nice though.

#3 Edited by Zekhariah (700 posts) -

@seppli said:

@believer258 said:

On a scale of 1-10, 10 being Borderlands, how much of this feels like Borderlands?

On that scale? It's a 1 out of 10 - because opposed to Borderlands, Destiny is actually a great shooter.

In terms of critical reception at launch? It feels like the kind of game that'll have a metacritic of at least 90%.

From what I have played, I dislike combat in Destiny in the same way that I do for the Halo games (especially in CE). It does seem to have bullet sponge galore parts, and the look of it reminds me of a less sharp Killzone Shadowfall (aside from the great skyboxes).

But it probably deserves a 7 on the borderlandsyness, with the hub world on MMO elements putting it into a more evolutionary category than a clone. It really does not seem fun to play though, and the voice acting and atmosphere feel straight out of a COD/HALO love child to me >.>. I'm really glad I got to play it early though, since I was unsure where it would land on my radar. Maybe it could get a high metacritic (it seems well made, and certainly not alpha); gameplay is close enough to other titles that get those kind of scores without otherwise additive MMO attributes.

Borderlands 2 is probably one of my favorite shooters, so it might also be the fact that everything is played so straight that puts me off. The hardcore military voice thing is really off-putting, and seems like it would be intrusive to a fun co-op session.

Edit Note: Playing on PS4

#4 Posted by Zekhariah (700 posts) -

There will be impressions posted. And don't buy an early access game unless you feel very strongly toward it (to the point of being okay with it barely working).

As an aside from that, reviews are usually less useful than the random trailer a developer releases in guessing the appeal of a game from a personal prospective anyway (in my experience, YMMV, etc).

#5 Edited by Zekhariah (700 posts) -

Alex is closest in terms of not having very high placement on games that I thought were bad.

Reckless purchasing from the last few GOTY results (especially 2012, coinciding with steam sales) has had least got me to the point of realizing that Jeff/Patrick unique games should be avoided (Syndicate..... ugh).

#6 Posted by Zekhariah (700 posts) -

If you are already at a comfortable point in your budget, I would leave it alone.

The FX cpu parts are objectively worse than the Intel equivalents (worse performance with much higher power consumption, inferior motherboard related features). But from a practical standpoint the 8320 is a reasonable choice for the money in price:performance. Unless you are shooting for years down the road - in the long term the 8320 will probably cripple a 2016 video card upgrade compared to an i5 from lacking PCIe 3.0 alone - there are no real issues. And by then you could probably cheaply upgrade to a way faster CPU/mobo/memory setup anyway, so net cost difference in 2016 might be minimal.

Getting a liquid cooler for a budget build is probably the biggest unnecessary item (if you need higher performance from overclocking going to an i5 first is cheaper than fancier cooling), but it should allow it to at least run fairly silently. So even that theoretically has a nice benefit on a AMD, especially if you purchase it for a good price.

#7 Posted by Zekhariah (700 posts) -

Tomb Raider, for the scale and quality of its natural environments. With further bonus points toward how exceptional animation and control allow a better sense of the world and characters existing within it. It was the first game since Witcher 2 (and I guess Unreal 1 and Crysis before W2) that made me feel like a video card upgrade was worth something.

#8 Posted by Zekhariah (700 posts) -

My first experiences with games started with the NES, but it was late 90s shooters like Half-Life 1 and Quake 3 Arena online multiplayer mods (along with Deus Ex) that really grabbed me. In particular:

Half-Life 1 - Team Fortress Classic playing in STA league (not post 1.5 patch), Science and Industry, early janky Counter-strike, Action Half-Life, and Wasteland.

Quake 3 - Quake 3 Fortress, Weapons Factory

#9 Edited by Zekhariah (700 posts) -

The niche Japanese game are, in terms of home console, were locked into PS2 for a long time and will probably transition to PS4 after the PS3 run is over.

In terms of owning a Wii U, my issue is that, while it has some good games, the hardware is very poor. Load times and operating system behavior are difficult to work around. User interface is very unpleasant (Gamepad face buttons are not horizontally off-set from sticks enough, face buttons to small, poor triggers, loose analog sticks), and the resistive touch screen is a tech item I was past using years ago. 1080p does not really occur on the console (e.g. new super mario bros U is 720p even), but that is really less of a concern than how backward it feels. With the more modern elements seemingly poorly tacked on through long loading times.

To me, since I do not have enough time to play close to all the worthwhile stuff on the platforms I own, it becomes difficult to play games on poor hardware (if I cared about off-screen lay more that may change). That makes purchasing hardware for exclusives a bit beside the point. But sales wise, I kind of think Nintendo deserves to stop playing in the home console market. Purchasing yet another console that is very similar, except sharply inferior, to other options at a slightly lower price tag is not a value to me. Especially when adding a decent amount of external storage to a wii U ends up being a ~$100 extra cost anyway. So from a downloadable user prospective it is price equivalent to a PS4 (except for free online..... but very few games support online on wii U).

So far Super Mario World (the SNES one) is my favorite thing I've played on it. I've not used mine in 8 months, will probably take it out for the new 3D mario soonish, and put in away for another year or so until X or w/e comes out.

#10 Posted by Zekhariah (700 posts) -

This seems like it would be a policy in keeping with traditional publishing rights. In terms of fair use, you are generally afforded the option to use small portions and pieces as required to show something. But 15-30 hours of straight playthrough of a single player game probably does not quality.

Kind of a crummy outcome, but the major companies do seem happy to permit live-streaming. I'm not sure there is enough data to definitively answer whether permitting long form archiving of Let's Play type videos causes damage or helps long term sales. For a decent number of games, where story can be the main draw for all or part of the audience, it is pretty close to identical to allowing a full movie to be up-loaded to youtube with commentary.