George-Roper Comments

Page 1 of 77

  • The Vanishing of Ethan Carter review

  • George-Roper 30/09/2014


    it is disappointing though that our overriding factor is value for money.
    That's a bit unfair. Price is integral to the whole thing. If this was priced at 30, would it still get a 9 do you think, or would the score have been marked down because of high cost, low content, no replayability?

    If it had been 4.99, would it have scored a 10?

    would you rather have a big plate of chips for tea or a nice meal out in a restaurant. the chips are better value for money
    This isn't a consumable hobby we have. Not every game is play once and never again. It surely has to be measured against other great games that do offer longer gameplay and which do offer replayabilty, for a similar price.
    Reply +1
  • George-Roper 30/09/2014


    I know this is a long running discussion, but over the last year or so I've completely changed my opinion on the whole price/content issue. While I used to care about the amount of game I got above all, these days, I value a 4-5 hour crafted experience much more than I do an game which is full of pointless busywork!
    I do see your point. If what content is there is massively better than the content of a 30 hour game then fair enough, but that 30 hour game in question can also vary in quality. Not every 30 hour game is full of fluff.

    If I compare the hours of entertainment I've had in, say, Skyrim, Minecraft, State of Decay or even Divinity Original Sin so far, though, this still comes off as rather expensive for what content there is. Content that has little to no replay value, unless I'm mistaken?

    Like I said originally, it sounds right up my street but that price tag, to me, doesn't reflect a suitable amount of content or replayability. I guess in the same way that I won't pay 15-20 for a new Blu Ray.

    All I really have is my own reference to go by and like I said, I have Mordor on preorder for 20 and the Borderlands Presequel for 22. By comparison, especially the latter, I suspect they'll offer a longer ride with more replayability. Had this come in at 10 that's my impulse purchase limit. Yeah, I know its only 5 out but its also only 5 away from a 'full price' game.

    One for a weekend sale or somesuch.
    Reply 0
  • George-Roper 30/09/2014

    As much as this looks right up my street, I don't think a couple of hours gameplay is justifying the 15 price tag. Not when I've got multiple other games on preorder for 20 and change, offering a lot more than that.

    Price tag to match content please devs.
    Reply -9
  • Project Cars shooting for 1080p 60fps on both Xbox One and PS4

  • George-Roper 29/09/2014


    So when they say they are aiming for 108060, I believe they are simply letting us know their honest development strategy. Some other devs might waffle about their goals, which later turn out to be baseless... but I don't think that is the case here.
    Based on what?

    These are professionals at their job expecting customers to pay for their product. So why can't they say the game will be unequivocally 1080p/60 and then make sure it is by reducing every other aspect of fidelity to make sure?

    I'm sick of hearing what amounts to hype from developers. If only 10% of the potential buyers end up preordering based on this, that's 10% more sales than they'd originally have, with zero guarantee that 1080p/60 will be hit.

    Enough is enough.
    Reply +5
  • George-Roper 29/09/2014

    The developer of racing game Project Cars is targeting a 1080p resolution and 60 frames per second output for both the PlayStation 4 and Xbox One versions of the game.
    There's literally no point to this article.

    Exactly the same kind of statements were said about Titanfall, pre and post release, which basically amounted to nothing. "We're aiming for 60fps", said Respawn. Sales came in, they didn't hit 60fps consistently.

    Either it will be 1080p/60 or it won't. 'Aiming for' means nothing.
    Reply +30
  • Digital Foundry: Hands-on with Ryse on PC

  • George-Roper 28/09/2014


    It was and is an absolute stunning looking game and a testament to what you can get out of a closed box system at launch.
    Don't disagree mate but remember its also a closed map, no roam title too. Do you remember the T-Rex demo on the PS1?

    Same applies, essentially. Limit what can be seen at any one time and remove player ability to roam away and you can focus much more on the immediate graphics. In the same way that Forza remains a pretty good showcase for the XBO, the same rules apply. Limited assets, limited player roam.

    Devs can work wonders with limitations like that. Show me how the same engine responds in an open-world environment like Watch_Dogs and GTA, because that's really the proof on how good the hardware is.
    Reply +7
  • Bethesda warns: you should have 4GB of VRAM to play The Evil Within PC

  • George-Roper 26/09/2014


    It doesn't matter how fast the internal bus of the gfx card is, if the frame buffer isn't large enough, as texture swapping to main memory is one of the greatest offenders when it comes to stuttering and sluggish performance and ditto gameplay experience

    Notice that over a couple years we've gone from 1.5GB on nVidia's top model cards such as the GTX 580, to what I expect will be 8GB of VRAM on the Titan II next spring. AMD cards have of course always been, relatively, more generous with VRAM size. a fallacy, based on your implication that VRAM allocation is rising due to issues in gaming, when PC gamers have only had these issues since the launch of the XBO and PS4.

    VRAM increases on PC GPUs have happened for a variety of reasons. How about resolution? Going from 720 to 1080 to 1440p requires a fairly hefty increase in VRAM, without even considering additional fidelity increases over even just the last few years.

    Titans aren't even gaming cards. They're computational GPUs. To name Titan 2 VRAM increase as an example of how you're right, shows how on the wrong track you are.

    The only reason why VRAM is currently an issue for PC gamers on multiplats is because the games aren't being coded specifically for the platform. That's all there is to it. We've had to deal with big textures on PC for several years now, so how comes it's only when unified arch rears its head that its suddenly a huge, VRAM cap popping problem?

    If developers don't choose to tailor their multiplats to work properly on the PC, separately to how they work on now-gen consoles, that's squarely their problem, it's their issue. It all comes down to cost. PC is clearly bottom of the ladder for multiplats because now-gen is so fresh and commanding 50-60 per game. Huge amounts of profit to be made, off console gamers gagging for a new game in a literal drought.

    Bad developer remains bad developer.
    Reply +2
  • George-Roper 26/09/2014


    I have no experience with game development so I speak from complete ignorance but how is it that games that require masses of VRAM don't then see a return on graphical fidelity?
    Having a large pool of VRAM solves one key issue. Loading and unloading textures.

    That's all it does. Now-gen consoles have access to a VRAM pool of 4-5GB or so, before it starts to infringe on RAM availability. So if you look at this from a console development POV, you're going to want to get as much loaded into your assigned pool of VRAM as possible, because the less loading and unloading you have to do, the more performant the game will be.

    That's literally all there is to it. I've said it already but Titanfall uses a dump and go approach to loading VRAM up once and never again because its better performance on consoles. I've watched VRAM usage on Titanfall on the PC and it never fluctuates. Ever. It's a static amount used up. If I then look at Battlefield 4, I can see VRAM usage go up and down throughout every single map played, because its loading and unloading textures, just like PC architecture should be utilized.

    This problem we're seeing, from the same core set of developers I might add, is corner-cutting. They don't want to put the prereq amount of effort into the PC versions so they shove it out in the state this is and the state we've see Ubisoft, Respawn and even Crapcom games.
    Reply +1
  • George-Roper 26/09/2014


    Yes, it appears they are going for a specific experience on PC they don't want to tarnish with downscaled textures.

    Troll or just plain stupid, hard to tell.
    Reply +3
  • George-Roper 26/09/2014


    If PC gamers are still buying games & developers are putting in a minimum amount of effort, why wouldn't a publisher release a PC version? It's easy money.
    Marketing is obviously going to play a big part in any sales. I almost took the plunge to preorder this based on some vids I'd seen and that it was coming in at around 25.

    That does not excuse their attitude towards the PC audience, though. I'm just very happy this was announced beacuse its cemented my decision not to buy it.
    Reply +5
  • George-Roper 26/09/2014


    Most developers don't care about PC
    Must correct you there, multiplat developers and even those (Ubisoft) have felt the sting of PC gamer backlash, putting out assurances that they're placing the prereq effort into their PC releases from now on. Time will tell.

    & I understand why PC owners avoid certain games because of that, but for most western publishers (& especially Japanese developers / publishers) they make the least money from PC versions of games, it's mostly going to be the least important platform for that reason. I'm definitely not saying that's good (it isn't), but that's the way things are.
    And that's fine, we'll always have devs and publishers that are console centric but then don't put a PC version out.

    What's better? Putting a full price PC game out with stupidly over-egged specs for requirements, where surely you already know that your market is tiny, or don't?

    As my dad used to say, if a job is worth doing, do it properly. We've now had a handful of PC multiplats that were obviously not built for the PC platform and suffered because of that. This example, however, is out and out the very worst that we've seen to date. It's almost anti-consumer in its vagueness about what will and will not work, let alone the blanket refusal to state minimum requirements.
    Reply +3
  • George-Roper 26/09/2014


    I'm not particularly a PC gamer but knew 2GB cards were a waste of time last year.
    But that's on the basis of console development being the lead platform.

    What about all the other non-console games?

    Setting everything aside, if a game is developed to the strengths of the platform then a new 2GB VRAM GPU is more than capable, because textures are just swapped in and out as required. Especially so for a corridor shooter.

    We saw exactly the same problem with Titanfall. Even loading up to just the main menu, 50% of my VRAM is used up. Why? Because they're dumping assets in. If it was coded to the PC, then assets would only be loaded up as and when they're required. Laughably, Respawn countered that in an interview with issues around pop-up. Texture streaming problems in a small map, low-res arena game with 6v6. Yet BF4 manages it in fast vehicles, much faster than anything moving in Titanfall.

    Developers who cite these kinds of reasons are lying to the PC community. This is nothing more than corner-cutting, whilst at the same time putting a significant price tag on top.
    Reply +14
  • George-Roper 26/09/2014


    It's not the devs you should be upset with anyway it's Nvidia and AMD, they are the ones who have been releasing GPUs with paltry amounts of VRAM in anticipation of newer games forcing people to upgrade again, it was all part of their business plan.
    It absolutely is the devs. Sorry, but it is.

    Up to now-gen, PC games utilized texture streaming and you know what? It worked just fine. Then along came now-gen and devs took the easier way out. Dump all assets into unified RAM and go. No management of textures, no streaming to worry about. Problem is, that method requires lots of VRAM.

    What we're seeing now are developers not building games to the strengths of the PC platform. Not all developers, mind. Just those who are too fucking lazy and console-centric to bother.

    The question I have is, why the hell would I as a PC gamer knowing all this, still decide to put money in their pockets. Not a chance. The game is currently 25-35 on the PC. Its not even like we're getting a cost to reflect.

    Fuck 'em. I hope their sales tank through the floor. Leave the PC platform to the developers who actually care.
    Reply +10
  • George-Roper 26/09/2014

    To all those people now considering moving up a ridiculously marginal level from a 780 or so to a 970, think again.

    4GB VRAM may be required for this game but there's absolutely nothing to say that the next game won't require 4.5GB VRAM, or even 5GB VRAM.

    Chasing after sub-par developers in this way is just going to cost you money. If you feel that you must upgrade, wait for 6GB VRAM GPUs. Anything less, if you're going for console multipats, is a potential waste of money.
    Reply +6
  • George-Roper 26/09/2014


    Oh great. And I bought a powerful 2GB card last year because everyone in forums was saying that 4GB are unneccesary and a waste of the extra money.
    Which is basically true.

    The problem here isn't your hardware, it's a developer short-cutting their way through to a PC release of a console-centric developed game.

    PC GPUs only need large amounts of VRAM to handle higher resolutions, like 4K and a myriad of game fidelity options like AA.

    If PC GPU VRAM is coded specifically for, then you don't need vast amounts. Battlefield 4 doesn't require more than 3GB of VRAM even at 1440p with all settings on Ultra and visually it still remains one of the most striking and beautiful games of this generation.
    Reply +16
  • George-Roper 26/09/2014


    you could at least wait for a review before throwing toys out of your pram. Bet it runs fine with 3gb
    It's as much the attitude they have towards the PC platform as any actual problems that might arise from the game itself.

    This press release basically says they can't be bothered enough to do what PC developers have been doing for years and state a minimum spec, alongside a recommended spec. They're just throwing lots of top end requirements in, in the hope that's going to somehow justify any issues that do arise.

    Issues that they themselves, just like Crapcom, are blameless for because of all the "Play at your own risk" and "Problems may occur" comments.

    No, fuck 'em. They don't deserve any support from the PC community. Just like Respawn and Ubisoft don't.
    Reply +25
  • George-Roper 26/09/2014


    so you've written the game off already? Fucking hell
    What? Should I buy a game where the developer itself states "(you should plan to have 4GB of VRAM regardless)", when I have 3GB of VRAM?

    Not only have I written off the game, for now, but Bethesda will never get a preorder from me again, not even when I bang a couple of 6GB VRAM cards into my machine in the future.

    Fuck 'em.

    Fuck all the developers who can't be bothered to treat my preferred platform with the due amount of respect. My money can just as easily go towards developers who do bother.
    Reply +46
  • George-Roper 26/09/2014

    Yep, Bethesda are one of the unholy trinity and shouldn't be trusted for multiplats on PC.

    Wolfenstein barely passed muster on 3GB VRAM but this is another level.

    One for the bargain bins. And to think, I almost preordered this game too. Well done Beth, that's one less sale.
    Reply +7
  • Bungie nerfs Destiny's magical loot farming Treasure Cave

  • George-Roper 25/09/2014


    The loot drop mechanic is fine. The problem are the people who think getting full legendary gear, and a couple of exotic items should be a QTE.
    Yeah, definitely agree. I think we're seeing these complaints stem from what has essentially been the opening up of an MMO to a huge console audience simply not prepared of even aware of how those kinds of games work.

    It's actually made for interesting reading.

    Grinding rep, and dungeon credits for gear is always a slow burn.
    Oh, don't remind me of my WoW days, though even that became less grindy and easier towards the end.
    Reply +1
  • George-Roper 25/09/2014


    I'm level twenty-three and haven't seen a single legendary item.

    People farm like this because the game's loot drops are pathetically harsh. Bungie should fix that first.
    Never going to happen.

    The entire game is built around the premise of chasing loot and hoping for a good drop. They have a decade plan for Destiny. Why would they purposefully increase loot drop chance when that's the only carrot on the stick?
    Reply +9
  • Total War: Attila is your chance to save an empire - or end it

  • George-Roper 25/09/2014

    Sounds good but you just know that it's going to be a hollow experience unless you also fork out for the multitude of DLC unit packs that are available.

    Right now theres 44 worth of unit DLC for Total War: Rome 2. What the hell are they thinking? It's nickel and diming your player base, through and through. They should be ashamed.
    Reply +9
  • Total War: Attila announced

  • George-Roper 25/09/2014

    Total DLC: Attila* announced.

    *Note: Attila available for 4.99, as part of the Attila Unit Pack DLC.

    CA have sold their souls to SEGA. Never again.
    Reply +6
  • Blizzard cancels Titan MMO after seven years of development

  • George-Roper 25/09/2014


    Um speak for yourself man, but starcraft 2 is considered the most greatest and most fun multiplayer on the planet by thousands, myself included.
    I don't doubt that some people will find it 'fun' but you must admit, Blizzard go above and beyond with their tweaking and balancing, which only serves to break the illusion of the game.

    SC2 has a definite Rock, Paper, Scissors vibe to it. You can't deny that if you play ranked, unless you perform a specific set of moves, in a specific set of time, with a specific set of units, you lose. Variance and flair take a firm backseat to fun.
    Reply +1
  • George-Roper 24/09/2014


    Starcraft II sold 3 million copies worldwide within its first month. "Smaller percentage of hardcore", eh?
    Even apart from the fact that hype and marketing plays a huge, huge part in sales figures (I'd love to see how it did in the proceeding 5 months), it's over in the East that really gives the game legs. The hardcore market.

    Now, I'm not saying there isn't said market for it. Starcraft enjoys huge, huge success still, over there, so Starcraft 2 being built as an e-sports title to appeal to the same market makes sense. But in this respect, I think the Starcraft franchise is somewhat of an anomaly. Its very diversive. I'd put good money right now on the player numbers being massively skewed to over there, not in the West.

    To put it another way, my Blizzard account showed my entire friends list on SC2 at launch and for a few weeks after, but then it ended. Much like Titanfall has done. Everyone returned to WoW. Yes, anecdotal but to me it showed how once you get past the initial glimmer of the game, the polish and the shine, its just a numbers game. Simon Says. Rock, Paper, Scissors. With no room for variation or flair.

    The fact that you don't like a game doesn't make it "niche" or pants.
    I didn't say I didn't like it. I said it lacked any sense of fun in MP. I played single player to completion, I don't do that for games I don't like but it lost its legs pretty quickly and HotS was also quickly swallowed up and forgotten about.
    Reply +1
  • George-Roper 24/09/2014


    But Starcraft 2 never "lost the fun". It just got old.
    A game shouldn't have you focusing on dots on a minimap, quickly switching between units and maintaining APM.

    I played single player to completion of course, because that wasn't mired in the problems of multiplayer but damn, as soon as I dipped my toes into MP it became pretty obvious that deviation from a standard template wasn't an option.

    Awful game, built for that smaller percentage of hardcore that absolutely do no represent gamers at large.
    Reply -6
  • George-Roper 24/09/2014

    And that's the problem with Blizzard. They're too close to the mechanics.

    It's why WoW has gradually lost the fun, it's why Starcraft 2 lost the fun from the offset and it's why Diablo 3 has required fairly hefty changes since launch to claw some fun back, especially on consoles.

    Games should be games, not numbers simulators.
    Reply +7
  • Wasteland 2 breaks $1.5m revenue in four days

  • George-Roper 24/09/2014


    Just gotta look past the graphics in this case and focus on the huge amount of detail on the back-end.

    It's also properly hardcore. My first encounter with a giant, mutant frog wiped out my party. My second encounter with it went better but my rogue got put down so badly that when I managed to get him back up, he had brain damage.

    Marvelous game.
    Reply 0
  • George-Roper 24/09/2014

    $1.5 million in 4 days is something most definitely not to be sniffed at.

    So happy to see old school RPGs making a huge, huge comeback. I love that publishers who write them off as non-starters are being given a massive middle-finger.

    Long may it continue. If PC only ever had games like Wasteland, Shadowrun and Divinity Original Sin I wouldn't complain in the slightest.
    Reply +6
  • Xbox One price cut by 20 in the UK, now 329

  • George-Roper 23/09/2014

    "We are always looking at ways to offer the best value for our customers," a Microsoft spokesperson explained
    Except retroactively, after an incredibly short period of time since launch that's already seen multiple discounts/bundles/SKU changes that said customers were led to believe wouldn't necessarily happen. I'm looking at you "Kinect is 100% integral to the XBO" statements.

    I don't think anyone can complain at cheaper hardware in general but the fact this has all happened in such a ridiculous short space of time means that its the brand-loyal gamers who are being fucked over.

    Microsoft needs to do something for those early adopters. Why the fuck they can't see that, I just don't know.
    Reply +9
  • Here's a (very) quick look at Counter-Strike Nexon: Zombies

  • George-Roper 23/09/2014

    Just looks nasty. Reply +4
  • Steam Discovery update personalises video game shopping

  • George-Roper 23/09/2014

    Interesting that they've removed the Forum link from the game homepage and instead stuck it inside the Community > Discussions tab.

    I found the game Forums to be the easiest way to gauge happiness with the product.
    Reply +8
  • New Oculus Rift prototype Crescent Bay unveiled

  • George-Roper 22/09/2014


    What's the George Roper official timescale for developing and mass producing a fully functional VR headset then?
    What are the requirements? What are the deliverables?

    You don't know?

    Seemingly, neither do they.

    And that's the problem.
    Reply -6
  • George-Roper 22/09/2014

    Rather it's "the latest prototype headset on the path to the consumer version".

    Getting pretty bored now, hearing about all these prototypes and how 'close' they are.
    Reply -6
  • D4 debut episode review

  • George-Roper 22/09/2014

    We'll hold off on a final score until the full season has been released
    Maybe someone from EG can elaborate on whether this is new policy or not, because we're seeing a few changes now on what state a game is in, or how long it must be played before it merits a score.

    Not that that's necessarily a bad thing but it would be nice to be clear on it.
    Reply +1
  • Kickstarter updates Terms for successful-then-cancelled projects

  • George-Roper 22/09/2014

    That's why Kickstarter updated its Terms of Use to provide guidelines for what should happen if such a thing occurs.
    Yeah, that'll fix it. Because everyone reads the TOU, right?

    But of course, they're not going to spell it out in big red letters on their site homepage, because every potential backer who doesn't put money into a future-failed venture means that venture may never get backed, which means KS don't get their cut.

    KS has been used to create some fantastic games to date but it's also been badly abused by mismanagement and people taking on far, far too much to handle. It needs to be crystal clear, IMO as a part of the 'Back Project' set of dialogs. The first pop-up before you even get close to completing it should be "BE AWARE! THOUGH SUCCESSFULLY FUNDED THERE IS NO GUARANTEE THAT KICKSTARTER PROJECTS MAY FULLY SUCCEED".

    It needs to be very, very clear.
    Reply +13
  • Nvidia GeForce GTX 980 review

  • George-Roper 19/09/2014


    It is probably more but the list of AAA developers is shrinking.
    And more will pop up along the way.

    Game development has never been an even line to this point. Companies start, companies are bought, companies close. Repeat.

    Your looking at developers backed by EA, Bethseda, ActiBlizz, EPIC, Warner Bros Interactive, Sony, Capcom, Microsoft and maybe Bohemia that are going to be developing games where they can really push these cards to their limits. Your looking at games with budgets in the tens of millions of dollars which for most studios and publishers is exposure to excessive risk.
    Most, if not all of those companies are going to realise, sooner rather than later, that putting out sub-par versions of PC multiplats is going to lose them not only money but reputation. We've already seen Ubisoft put announcements out about their PC audience, so clearly they're worried that their reputation is going to damage future sales, and rightly so. It's in their court now.

    But even forgetting all of that, there's more to this card than just expecting devs to add specific fidelity. It runs at higher resolutions, it runs at higher levels of fidelity, it runs more smoothly, it removes a degree of compromise that static hardware on consoles is going to see more and more of as they move down their lifecycle.
    Reply +1
  • George-Roper 19/09/2014


    No doubt console hand-me-downs like Watch Dogs and Dead Rising still unable to be brute-forced to a steady 1080p60. Guess I won't be opening my wallet.
    Do they need to be?

    I played Watch_Dogs to completion at 1440p at 90% of the very top settings, averaging an FPS of 40-45. With this card, you could push textures to the top and get even better performance out of it without having to subtract fidelity.

    Bad developer is bad developer always applies, always has done always will do but to cite a handful of games as proof of why cutting edge tech like this is a pointless upgrade, especially for those a few generations behind, is a little bit silly.
    Reply +1
  • George-Roper 19/09/2014


    The truth is that only a small group of say 20 developers have the money and technical knowhow to make games which really use this fancy new tech.

    On the upside water will look even more fabulous.
    Nice stat. No, really.

    Care to provide some links to back it up? Not that I'm doubting you....
    Reply 0
  • George-Roper 19/09/2014


    These products are made for the enthusiast. But you rather ignorantly assumed that they are made just for the gamer enthusiast.
    But to be fair, we are on EuroGAMER, not EuroBITCOINMINER.

    Even the context of the article is 100% gaming.
    Reply 0
  • George-Roper 19/09/2014


    Reply 0
  • George-Roper 19/09/2014


    What do you want that much memory for?
    Everything takes up VRAM.

    Resolution, fidelity settings, texture size, etc.

    Games that right now state a 3GB VRAM requirement to run the top texture settings aren't accurate, because those requirements don't also take into account the multitude of variables that also use up VRAM, resulting in capping and performance problems as a result.

    I now treat VRAM like regular RAM. The more, the better. It's easier to have a surplus than to have a shortfall. Much in the same way that I detest having to manage hard drive space.
    Reply +4
  • George-Roper 19/09/2014


    So ... Best upgrade from a 780? Add 1 more for sli?
    Speaking from direct experience, indeed.

    Huge performance gains.
    Reply 0
  • George-Roper 19/09/2014

    Very interesting and no need to upgrade the 780s for a while, it seems.

    Also, 4GB VRAM? Nah, come back when you have 6 or 8.
    Reply 0
  • Destiny becomes world's best-selling new IP

  • George-Roper 17/09/2014

    Destiny, a game no one is playing - even right now - has been crowned the world's best-ever-selling new IP, according to Activision

    No specific sales figures were given.

    Reply +26
  • Get scared and die trying in Alien: Isolation's Survivor Mode

  • George-Roper 17/09/2014


    the real question is whether that sort of trick can sustain itself for a full 10 hours (or whatever).
    Agreed and that's why I think the environment needed to be many magnitudes more interactive.

    Replayability on this could be immense, if each room, each corridor had dozens of aspects to them that differed through each game played. Vents. Bodies and associated gameplay elements. Broken fuel and oxygen lines. Randomized klaxons and alerts.

    Maybe it does and I'm just not aware of them?

    In any case, a nonchalant Xenomorph out for a casual stroll just doesn't tickle my Ripley-spot ATM.
    Reply +1
  • George-Roper 17/09/2014


    how else would it work? you walk around a ship for 5 minutes and then get eviscerated by an unstoppable killing machine?
    My opinion? Ok, the environment should have been made much, much more dynamic. As the player, the tension isn't ever about seeing the creature, it's about where the creature might be.

    Listen as Peter Capaldi said in his best episode to date.

    The game engine should have been built to allow many facets of the environment to be interactive, via the player and via the Alien AI trying to set the player up. For example, in the older AvP games, pipes fell from ceilings that caused hissing noises, your motion tracker to go off on one and for the hanging pipe itself to look, at distance, like an Aliens tail. This game needed that mentality, x1000. The player should never know if any of those kinds of events are real or false. That's what keeps a player guessing.

    Having an Alien barrelling towards you, in full sight, should be in the utmost minority, from the perspective of Alien, the movie. Instead players should find themselves suddenly staring into the jaws of oblivion, through their own fear distracting them.

    That's another thing, where are the sanity-effects? She must be scared out of her mind, right? So where's the occasional wiping of sweat from the eyes, involuntarily masking what's around for a moment? Wheres the vomiting from finding corpses littered around, that causes you to, again, involuntarily look at the floor and throw up, creating noise, smell and causing your vision to blur up for a few seconds until, again, you wipe your eyes?

    Wheres the madness around the edges of the vision as more and more horrific things are encountered, jangling your nerves to breaking point, creating shadows that aren't there?

    the films never showed them to have particularly perfect vision or senses anyway, not that it would really matter if they changed it to service the gampeplay.
    True enough but in Alien, it always seemed to be in the right place at the right time, so one might assume it can sense the humans, maybe pheromone tracking, maybe heat. Who knows. The point is, watching an 8ft killing machine slowly amble by kills tension in the game. The monster is revealed and its apparently easy to hide from.

    Game over.
    Reply -1
  • George-Roper 17/09/2014


    Newt survived for over 3 weeks "With no food and no training" so the Aliens can't be that clever.
    Pretty sure she did all her scavenging during the day, as they come out at night. Mostly. ;)
    Reply +12
  • Destiny hotfix doubles frequency of public events

  • George-Roper 17/09/2014


    I prefer tiered Engrams, accompanied with guaranteed results. That way you get the double hit of "oooh, shiny!" plus "but what kind of shiny!"

    To compare, it's like looting a Purple in WoW, but when you equip it it turns Blue and its stats drop. What's the point?

    1:1. Any other determination is in place to facilitate more grind. Or wouldn't it be a turn up to be an actual bug?
    Reply +1
  • George-Roper 17/09/2014


    That would just move the moaning to well I got a uncommon item and he got exotic out of an engram, why? WHY?!? Fuck my life!!! WAHHH!!
    But hang on, people are already getting blues from Legendaries that are worse than what they already have.

    So it's already happening. That's my entire point.
    Reply 0
  • George-Roper 17/09/2014


    because it is the ENGRAM that is rare or legendary. Not the item that it might turn into.
    I'm not sure what the relevance is there. Just make all different tiers of Engrams into 'Engrams' and then have a random chance of loot that comes out.

    What's the point in a Legendary Engram that doesn't result in a Legendary item? Surely it should just be 1:1, shouldn't it?
    Reply 0