I keep quiting and resuming when I fuck up the interrogations at the end of cases. I feel cheated with lie/doubt sort of things as lie tells you the evidence you need to prove it but the conversation doesn't seem to be going in that direction so I assume doubt.
You can always choose lie, see what Phelps actually says (which will usually hint really heavily at a certain piece of evidence if its actually a lie), and then back out if you need to.
Great article Patrick. I played the game once and lived with all my mistakes - which I believe is the best way to play that game. It also helps that I bought the PS3 version and don't give a shit about trophies; where as, if I had a 360 copy, I would of been pissed each time I missed something.
@RiotBananas: I wasn't comparing the quality of the two games, just that the Quick Look (and in Brink's case, the reviews as well) aren't the best reflection of the game's strengths. In Brink's case, Jeff's dislike of the worst parts of the game is understandable but there is a fairly lacking commentary from him or other reviewers on the game's few good points - due in large part to the lack of a community for playing multiplayer during the review cycle/time frame. I guess that is me defending the game...but I see it more as me not agreeing with the way people are calling it shit without having played it.
I guess I'm saying the "Brink is shit" talk is somewhat equivalent (or at least reminiscent for me) to the "Demon's Souls is too hard and thus shit" talk in terms of how quickly a game can acquire a reputation based on a few opinions that are then repeated by people who have not and will never play the game regardless.
" I am already fucking sick of people trying to think of ways to make this game better 'Oh play it with a full group' or 'Play the PC Version' Shut the fuck up, it's just a bad game. "
The same can be said of Team Fortress 2 and Monday Night Combat. Team based and heavy objective based shooters are only "good" for a general audience given certain circumstances.
The game has a lot of flaws and is most definitely not worth $60. That being said, I actually own the game and have played it - unlike, I would surmise, the majority of people saying its a shit game based on Jeff's or (God forbid) Mcelroy's review without having played it themselves.
This is a Demon's Souls situation. Initial impression by the GB crew is that it is shit so that gets repeated by everyone on the Whiskey sites (like Will Smith on the Tested podcast and Joey on TNT, neither have played the game but feel just fine bashing it). However (and not to compare Demon's Souls to Brink in terms of quality) it is entirely possible for a review or quick look to distort the basic conceits of a game, how it is played or meant to be, and focus far too heavily on minor negative aspects.
I don't disagree with the game getting 2 stars as a single player experience/offline bot game - shit, I would probably give it 1 star there. On the PC, with a group of real players (which is the only way I have played by and large) this is a solid albeit flawed team based shooter - worth at least a 3.5 given those specific circumstances (which most reviewers didn't wait for because there has to be a review on day one). So even the 80s on metacritic are BS, this whole thing is just kinda screwed really. "shrugs"
Log in to comment