What's an absolutely medium quality game? Not great, incredible or terrible or any single ended extreme. Dead medium quality
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
Anything from Ubisoft
-
The outer worlds . it was just meh in my opinion. Not to be confused with the outer wilds game that I've yet to play
I was going to say outer worlds as well (outer WILDS is a fantastic game IMO) the game was entirely competent, just unimpressive in every way. Except Pavarti, she is a precocious sugar dumpling and must be protected at all costs.
-
I remember feeling this way about Die Hard: Vendetta for GC. Strong meh/10.
Die Hard: V for Vendetta would be a hell of a crossover.
-
From recent memory: Starfield.
I didn't think it was terrible in and of itself, but it also wasn't very good. It was just missing that certain something Bethesda RPGs had before it. Just a meh experience the whole way through.
Star field was just mediocre enough that it pissed me off, the loading screens and menues are egregious enough to make me go ballistic. It's hilarious because instead of criticizing the game for actuall gameplay, at launch it was lambasted for "pronouns". Then normal people got to playing it and actually explained the issues.
-
Square Enix games
(FInal Fantasy, Neir Automata, Sleeping Dogs. Tomb Raiders)They are all... good - certainly not bad games
But nothing makes them... greatwrote on last edited by [email protected]I’ve been frustrated with these Japanese games lately like FF and Yakuza because of the graphics. Japan likes to use an anime style on their character models, which I personally don’t think looks good but whatever. The issue I have is that you walk around in a yakuza or FF or resident evil game and half the characters and NPCs look very realistic and like real people, and the main characters and some NPCs look like anime characters, different bone structure and art style. It’s distracting. I frankly think you stick to anime style or realistic modern style, you can’t just swap between the styles at will within the one game.
Does final fantasy still have invisible enemies that just attack you and put you into battle mode? Cause I found that outdated and stopped playing the games, im done with turn based but especially done with games where you can’t even see the enemy till they just battle you
-
Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning
Had all the individual makings of an exceptional game (with input from Todd Macfarlane, R A Salvatore and Grant Kirkhope), and while it was definitely enjoyable enough - it lacked any wow-factor whatsoever, winding up an otherwise forgettable 7/10.
The main thing I remember about this game is that it was financed by the fortune of a former MLB baseball player, independent of any game studio.
-
From recent memory: Starfield.
I didn't think it was terrible in and of itself, but it also wasn't very good. It was just missing that certain something Bethesda RPGs had before it. Just a meh experience the whole way through.
Starfield faked me out for a bit when I took the character creation perk that gave my character living parents that I could go visit and would show up from time to time. They were funny and adorably charming, and I thought it was an inspired touch. Little did I know that was the absolute best part of that game...
-
The main thing I remember about this game is that it was financed by the fortune of a former MLB baseball player, independent of any game studio.
Sort of. Their funding was also tied up in the state of Rhode Island. Reckoning was purchased by 38 Studios, who were making a Kingdoms of Amalur MMORPG, and then the game was made to be in the same universe. The MMO burned through cash and never released, and the sunken studio brought Reckoning's developer down with it.
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Anything ubisoft makes. Or generally most things big companies make to cater biggest possible amount of people.
-
i still enjoyed the crap out of it. Sometimes zoning out and just running around collecting stuff is just what I need.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]I mean, that's exactly what makes it so "mid" to my mind. It's not an atrocious disaster like Gollum. It's not appalling bad, or even moderately bad. It's just mid. The shooting isn't dreadful, just dull. The map, the movement, the exploration... None of it is exactly bad, but none of it left any kind of impression on me. Like you said, it scratches that "running around and collecting stuff" itch, the numbers go up, you unlock new powers, etc. But it all just kind of passes straight through you and at the end you're left with "Well, that sure did kill a few hours."
Horizon: Zero Dawn suffers from all the usual modern open world hallmarks, the map littered with things to collect, the towers, the grinding to level up abilities, etc, etc. But the story is an absolute banger, and even a lot of the random collectible junk is full of little moments of deeply moving storytelling. I remember collecting every single one of the vantage points because I absolutely needed to hear all of the short story you unlock by doing it. It has zero relevance to the plot, but it's just a great piece of writing. In comparison Ghost Wire is just, sort of... There.
-
In my opinion ( haven't played or really seen the DLCs, so I'm just talking about base game ), Pokemon Scarlet and Violet.
Definitely had ups and downs when I did my only playthrough. Absolutely middle of the road compared to the official games ( completed gen 3, part way through gens 4-7 ) I have played and still even middle of the road compared to some of the fan games I've played over the years.
If you're an adult Pokemon fan, these days fan-mades or rom hacks are the way to go. Nintendo/The Pokemon Company/Game Freak are pretty damn risk averse with this property, so the really cool stuff comes from fans (at least until they get the cease and desist).
-
Nier Automata
How dare you feel this way, you scruffy-looking Nerf-herder!
I am unhappy with your comment! But I respect it, so I hope you have a great day ahead.
-
The Halo series.
I like shooters, so I got the full bundle and I tried hard to like it.
None of the games gave me a lasting impression. The plot didn't stick with me, the enemies were weird, the guns felt weak and flimsy, the rooms kept repeating in some sections and it got very boring. There were some fun bits with the vehicles, etc., but overall the experience was... pretty much average.
I was expecting something like the Half-Life series, but this wasn't it.
Halo was best when it was Halo:CE played 4v4 on two linked systems, with the teams on two screens in an undersized dorm room in 2002. Alternatively, two people playing through the entire game in co-op mode and finishing at 3 in the morning.
Everything since then has been mid at best
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
Elex 1 and Elex 2
-
As a big fan of space sims and action RPGs, I wrote that game off when looking at reviews and how the spaceship building system and space travel were.
It's like they choose the worst of Elite Dangerous and mixed it with the worst parts of previous Bethesda RPGs.
It always felt to me they wanted to create what star citizen is supposed to be someday (press x to doubt) and the. Looked at no mans sky and were like, we should add that too! And then realized the scope of that was ridiculous and half assed both of those parts.
-
Anything ubisoft makes. Or generally most things big companies make to cater biggest possible amount of people.
I disagree. Some of them are actually bad.
-
Ghost Wire: Tokyo.
It sells itself on cool aesthetics, but the moment you get past that you realise it's just a very, very generic open world shooter with incredibly bland and boring shooting layered over an impressively faithful recreation of Shinjuku. And even the aesthetics wear thin very quickly, being largely just a whole lot of "Hey I know that anime" level stuff cribbed from Japanese culture. The game is mostly just running around a map collecting stuff.
Defo agree. But I will admit that the soundtrack is fire
-
How does U2 compare to UT2003/4 in multiplayer?
It's a very different game, although it does have vehicles, so it has something in common with UT2004 in that way.
Unreal 2's multiplayer only has one game mode. It's kind of like capture the flag with some resource management. There are power generators that you need to take for your team in order to use vehicles. You can also capture respawn points which give your team more choices of where to respawn from.
You choose one of three classes when you spawn, with each class having specific weapons. You don't pick up weapons as you go.
There is a release of the multiplayer that's available for free here: https://xmpcommunity.com. After Epic tool all Unreal titles off of digital stores a while ago, they specifically mentioned xmpcommunity.com in a blog post as a way of still playing the game. So it has their blessing.
-
Following up on this comment since I haven't seen a thread about it: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/comment/14639216
Portal 1 & 2. Far too short.
-
The thing that gets me the most is they dont push the story forward. It felt like they said "lets slap some shit together so we can focus on competitive multiplayer"
I wouldn't know what the thing that gets me the most is, there is so much that Cyberpunk 2077 corpo ass studio has done to ram the franchise into the ground after digging it up from its sacred resting place.
Other than brand loyalty (which at this point shouldn't even exist anymore), I wonder how H:I ended up lasting years more than Concord.
