Video Games - dragons, lasers and zombies

[Werthead]

Valkyria Chronicles is excellent. Well, the controls are clunky as hell, the sheer volume of cut scenes can be a bit grating (since you have to select each one at a time and play to advance, couldn't they have just run them all together?) and there is some standard weird gender stuff going on (women are soldiers like anyone else! Hooray! Their uniform includes a miniskirt! Wait, what?), but the combat is excellent, the characters pretty well-defined and the jarring tonal jumps from some more cutesy anime stuff to WWII-evoking horror are brutally effective. More importantly, the actual use of strategy and tactics is superb. On one mission in a forest I had to face down an enemy general in his super-tank with my own not-so-super tank. However, I simply held off from advancing into the enemy camp and flanked his position from a ridge overlooking the base with my anti-tank troops who popped up and shot him without him being able to retaliate, and forced him to withdraw with my own tank completely unscathed.

There was also a sweet urban battle which had a watchtower I could stick a sniper in to dominate the battlefield and knock out both tanks (thanks to handily-placed explosive barrels) and troops from miles away. The only problem was that I had to remember to get the sniper to bail out of the tower at the end of every turn otherwise he was zeroed by every tank and enemy sniper on the map on the enemy turn.

Great game. Surprised this did so poorly in sales on the PS3.

[Lyanna Stark]

I wish I was 100 yet, but alas I am not. From what I hear, Ashran is bugged pretty hard on a lot of servers, and imbalanced as well (30:1 in favor of one side or the other), but on those servers where it does work and the sides aren't a 100-man zerg versus five newbies and a bot, I hear it is incredibly fun. Like 24/7 oldschool Alterac Valley. I'm looking forward to it when I ding 100 though.

I tried it yesterday and omg addictive! Totally old-Skool AV type Zerg bridge play and hand-ins. Really unbalanced as you say but fun all the same.

[dajamieson]

I've been really enjoying WoD so far. The zones feel more epic in scale in comparison to previous expansions. No 100's yet though, due to limited playtime and the fact I'm actually taking my time and enjoying playing rather than levelling up to go raiding.

[Clueless Northman]

Took me 4 evening sessions to go from 85 to 90 in Mists of Pandaria. I wouldn't expect to go to lvl 100 in less than a week.

Still, compared to the 11 months it took me to get my first lvl 60 in 2005... Of course, I levelled 2 toons, Horde and Alliance, at the same time then, and was quite noobish. And levelling was longer, and mostly on foot since mounts were bloody expensive at the time.

Of course, I'm worse with LOTRO, but that's because I play for a 3-4 weeks once every 8-9 months, only since it's F2P, and I level guys from all classes with a 10-level gap at most, so it's hellishly slow. I think I'm just gonna drop most of them and focus on 2 toons from now on, otherwise I'll never make it to Gondor :D Still gonna try Beorning once I have enough points to spare on that - and it's on sale.

[Guy Kilmore]

Valkyria Chronicles is excellent. Well, the controls are clunky as hell, the sheer volume of cut scenes can be a bit grating (since you have to select each one at a time and play to advance, couldn't they have just run them all together?) and there is some standard weird gender stuff going on (women are soldiers like anyone else! Hooray! Their uniform includes a miniskirt! Wait, what?), but the combat is excellent, the characters pretty well-defined and the jarring tonal jumps from some more cutesy anime stuff to WWII-evoking horror are brutally effective. More importantly, the actual use of strategy and tactics is superb. On one mission in a forest I had to face down an enemy general in his super-tank with my own not-so-super tank. However, I simply held off from advancing into the enemy camp and flanked his position from a ridge overlooking the base with my anti-tank troops who popped up and shot him without him being able to retaliate, and forced him to withdraw with my own tank completely unscathed.

There was also a sweet urban battle which had a watchtower I could stick a sniper in to dominate the battlefield and knock out both tanks (thanks to handily-placed explosive barrels) and troops from miles away. The only problem was that I had to remember to get the sniper to bail out of the tower at the end of every turn otherwise he was zeroed by every tank and enemy sniper on the map on the enemy turn.

Great game. Surprised this did so poorly in sales on the PS3.

I think it was one of those games that didn't fit neatly in a box. (Well aside the casing it was packaged in. Har har har.) I loaned it out to a couple of people and most everyone enjoyed it and were bummed that they didn't have it in their library. It still remains one of my favorite games.

[Crom Dubh]

I tried it yesterday and omg addictive! Totally old-Skool AV type Zerg bridge play and hand-ins. Really unbalanced as you say but fun all the same.

I look forward to it then. And envy your ability to reach 100 so quickly. I have been PvPing as I level up, and I have to say, it's hilarious. I built a gladiator's sanctum in my garrison, and so I've been collecting broken bones. Got about 90 in an hour of PvP: I consistently 2v1'd several horde players on my Frost Death Knight, so that was fun and validating. Took me a long-ass time to find one single Tauren for the Nemsis: The Butcher quest: all you Horde bastards play Blood Elves. Be original, damn your eyes! Now a mere 500 Tauren to go before I get my Butcher title. Shall be worth it.

[eyenon15]

Anybody played Far Cry 4 yet???

Mine is still in the plastic, I doubt I'll be getting to it any time soon since Dragon Age: Inquisition exists.

[Jabronius Maximus]

Anybody played Far Cry 4 yet???

Mine is still in the plastic, I doubt I'll be getting to it any time soon since Dragon Age: Inquisition exists.

I got it on PC, and there are far less bugs than I anticipated given all the hubbub about ACU. Only thing that irks me is how much better this game supposedly performs on Nvidia hardware. There's even a graphics option above ultra, called 'Nvidia'. And here I was thinking that the efforts going into optimizing for consoles (which have AMD graphics) would pay off for PC versions as well. Guess not...

Aside from that small issue, the game is exactly like FC3, so if you liked that then you'll get right into it. Only thing is some of these fortresses (like fortresses in AC4) are damn near impossible to conquer. But you can play co-op in the open world (outside of main missions), which makes it easier to take em over. Then there are outposts which are exactly as they were in FC3.

There's been a couple of interesting characters so far too, but from what I've heard the story is pretty meh. I've been mostly messing around in the open world for now, so I'll eventually get back to the story. .

So there's my incomprehensible experience so far. I'm a Far Cry fan, so I love it obviously (minus the AMD/Nvidia issue). I really love the setting too, it seems much more dense than the tropical FC3 setting. There's also more variation, with nice forests and snowy areas.

[Inigima]

I keep thinking about buying DA:I. Which makes no sense. Not just the usual reasons, like lack of time... I didn't play DA2, and I didn't like DA1 and only played a little of it. It just sounds so appealing when people talk about it.

I think I will just give DA1 another chance. Maybe I won't hate it this time, and if I ever finish it I can move on to DA2 and DA: I.

I still have the vast majority of Mordor and Alien to get through, too, and most of my limited gaming time is still going to Fantasy Life anyway. And a friend just gifted me Insurgency from the Humble Bundle.

[Ser Jake]

Up until I just saw a picture of someone holding a copy of DA:I for the 360, I thought it was PC, Xbox One, PS4 only. Gotta say, I'm a bit more hesitant to buy it now. I probably still will, but as someone who's never played the first 2 games, I was basing my purchase on the fact that it looked good and I thought it was next-gen only. Kinda disappointed that it's not. I was hoping they were really going to focus on next-gen and take advantage of all the new tech. :/

[Jace, Extat]

Up until I just saw a picture of someone holding a copy of DA:I for the 360, I thought it was PC, Xbox One, PS4 only. Gotta say, I'm a bit more hesitant to buy it now. I probably still will, but as someone who's never played the first 2 games, I was basing my purchase on the fact that it looked good and I thought it was next-gen only. Kinda disappointed that it's not. I was hoping they were really going to focus on next-gen and take advantage of all the new tech. :/

Game was designed for PC, and it's simply gorgeous on it. Your 'next gen' PS4 and Xbones are backwards ports to 3 year old technology already. No great leap to scale the game down even further for 360 and PS3 users.

[Werthead]

DA:I is on the Frostbite Engine which DICE developed for the Battlefield series, and has always looked tremendously better on PC than console (old or new). It's a relief they didn't gimp DA:I to make the consoles look better, as the game clearly looks miles ahead on PC in the comparison videos. And the videos themselves are a bit misleading, as they're only comparing the 1080p versions. Get the game running at a higher resolution and it'll look miles better. Same for Mass Effect 4, hopefully, which is being built on the same engine.

I keep thinking about buying DA:I. Which makes no sense. Not just the usual reasons, like lack of time... I didn't play DA2, and I didn't like DA1 and only played a little of it. It just sounds so appealing when people talk about it.

Dragon Age is probably the most overrated franchise of the previous gen (unlike Mass Effect, which is very nearly as great as it rep makes it out to be, a few issues aside). I still like it, but constantly being told it's the greatest fantasy RPG series ever when it's not even fit to brush the boots of Baldur's Gate and is vastly less interesting than the Witcher games (despite their own enormous issues) got old a while ago.

Maybe DA:I is the moment that the series really takes off though. I guess I'll find out when the price drops to something less insane.

[Proudfeet]

How do you guys determine what is an acceptable price range for games?

For myself, I used to buy at release or as soon as I can afford it, but now I will only consider buying at release if multiplayer is an important part of the game and wait for the inevitable discounts. I'm still fairly price insensitive though, my bigger consideration now is whether I have time to play the game.

I don't play that many games though, probably less than a tenth of what the posters active here play.

[paddington]

How do you guys determine what is an acceptable price range for games?

For myself, I used to buy at release or as soon as I can afford it, but now I will only consider buying at release if multiplayer is an important part of the game and wait for the inevitable discounts. I'm still fairly price insensitive though, my bigger consideration now is whether I have time to play the game.

I don't play that many games though, probably less than a tenth of what the posters active here play.

£29.99 is just easier for me to justifiy as an Impulse buy, more than £49,99. I don't think there is much of a logical reason, just that £50 feels like it needs a greater amount of consideration before I spend it.

[Fez]

How do you guys determine what is an acceptable price range for games?

For myself, I used to buy at release or as soon as I can afford it, but now I will only consider buying at release if multiplayer is an important part of the game and wait for the inevitable discounts. I'm still fairly price insensitive though, my bigger consideration now is whether I have time to play the game.

I don't play that many games though, probably less than a tenth of what the posters active here play.

Although I always wait for reviews, AAA games that I know I'm interested in I'll almost always pay the $60. Game length doesn't really matter, just that I know I'll enjoy the experience. Other AAA that I'm not so sure on, but I think I'll still like, I wait until the eventual price-cut to $40. AAA Games that I'm not willing to pay that one, I have a pretty bad feeling about (one that's usually justified) so I don't take a flyer on them until they are under $10 and in the bargain bin.

Indie games are a bit more complicated, but I generally refuse to pay more than $15 for any of them.

£29.99 is just easier for me to justifiy as an Impulse buy, more than £49,99. I don't think there is much of a logical reason, just that £50 feels like it needs a greater amount of consideration before I spend it.

50 pounds? Is that a collectible/deluxe game price, or are games in the UK significantly more expensive than in the US? Last I looked, that was close to $80.

[paddington]

50 pounds? Is that a collectible/deluxe game price, or are games in the UK significantly more expensive than in the US? Last I looked, that was close to $80.

Thats the standard edition, I think games are a bit more expensive in the UK, alot of that is probably VAT though

[Inigima]

50 pounds? Is that a collectible/deluxe game price, or are games in the UK significantly more expensive than in the US? Last I looked, that was close to $80.

This is a major gripe of non-US gamers. Very often a company will change the currency symbol and nothing else -- oh, that game was $60 in the US? Tough shit Europe, it's £60, or 60, or whatever. And they use region-locking so you're stuck.

[Rhom]

Speaking of being cross generational, I realized yesterday that I don't own a single game for my PS4 that I couldn't have gotten on the PS3... :(

My current library:

Madden 15

Destiny

The Last of Us

Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes

Dragon Age: Inquisition

[Jon AS]

Tough shit Europe, it's £60, or 60, or whatever.

It's 'Euro'. :P

Standard price for a new PC game in Germany (and, apparently, France) is 50€ and has been for a long time, console versions cost 20 percent more, but that's the price you have to pay for having inferior hardware you can never upgrade.;)

More recently there seemed to be a trend of charging console prices for PC games and even more money for console games, but that seems to have died down again.

Not that I buy a whole lot of games at full price. There's only so many hours in the day, and Steam sales and Humble Bundles generally keep me well supplied.

[Jabronius Maximus]

Speaking of being cross generational, I realized yesterday that I don't own a single game for my PS4 that I couldn't have gotten on the PS3... :(

My current library:

Madden 15

Destiny

The Last of Us

Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes

Dragon Age: Inquisition

I had to think really hard about my collection, and aside from Halo MCC I'm in the same boat. Shouldn't we have moved on to 'next gen' by now? (Of course this isn't a problem on PC, but we're talking consoles)

This is a major gripe of non-US gamers. Very often a company will change the currency symbol and nothing else -- oh, that game was $60 in the US? Tough shit Europe, it's £60, or 60, or whatever. And they use region-locking so you're stuck.

I wish they did that for us in Canada, but nope! I guess it's not really their fault given how the loonie has dovetailed recently, but it's still a bummer now that games are $70.