Jump to content

DrBloodmoney's Super Scientific Ranking of Games!


DrBloodmoney

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, dieselmanchild said:

Hey good idea.. I second this request! I just picked up Far Cry Primal in a sale a couple weeks back and was planning on playing it pretty soon. My brother says it’s one of the best Far Cry games and I’m interested to know if this is scientifically accurate?

It’s a typical Far Cry game as far as gameplay/missions go but you can ride around on a sabre-tooth tiger hunting wooly mammoth with a bow and spear, how could that not be scientifically awesome. Hurk is pretty good funny as well. I’ve played 6 Far Cry games and I would put Primal in my top 3.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Engaging read as always.

 

Bloodborne's ranking was pretty much on par with what I expected! Starting to understand how this science thing works.

 

For me the strong art design and atmosphere were addictive (Bloodborne was like crack) but the lack of accessibility of any sort of logical narrative or character writing/development (a *crucial* pillar of this artistic medium IMO) had me at odds with this game. Imagine how good it could have been with quality writing. Here's to hoping Elden Ring bucks From's trend of relying on VaatiVidya to tell their story for them :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, dieselmanchild said:

Hey good idea.. I second this request! I just picked up Far Cry Primal in a sale a couple weeks back and was planning on playing it pretty soon. My brother says it’s one of the best Far Cry games and I’m interested to know if this is scientifically accurate?

 

Depends how much you enjoy people saying "boogly woogly ugg ugg" in long conversations to you instead of english for quests just like a standard Far Cry entry. All Far Cry games after 3 are just Far Cry 3... except Blood Dragon. Play that one instead :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, GonzoWARgasm said:

Engaging read as always.

 

Bloodborne's ranking was pretty much on par with what I expected! Starting to understand how this science thing works.

 

For me the strong art design and atmosphere were addictive (Bloodborne was like crack) but the lack of accessibility of any sort of logical narrative or character writing/development (a *crucial* pillar of this artistic medium IMO) had me at odds with this game. Imagine how good it could have been with quality writing. Here's to hoping Elden Ring bucks From's trend of relying on VaatiVidya to tell their story for them :)

 

I genuinely love the fact that the Souls games (The FROM ones at least) are so absurdly back-loaded in the narrative - the fact that there is clearly this massive, complex and well thought out lore, but it's encased in this impenetrable crystal, and you can only ever glimpse little pieces of is by investigating every angle, and lining yourself up just right ?

 

It's a pretty bold move to do story that way - I remember reading that it was a deliberate move on the part of the director - he had a memory of reading books and watching movies in the fantasy genre, which he loved, but they were all in English, which he didn't speak or understand particularly well, and so his understanding of them was really just what slivers of info he could glean, and what his own mind could fill in in the gaps in-between - that's what he was trying to recapture for people with the SoulsBourne formula.

 

It's definitely an acquired taste though - I don't think its a coincidence that I love that aspect of FROM games, and would also count David Lynch as my favourite director - FROM games are absolutely the Lost Highway of videogames ?

 I have a real penchant for media in which I am along for the ride, but not necessarily getting 100% of it the first time through - but can trust that the lore is there - and will be waiting for me when (and if) I finally manage to crack it's impenetrable shell ?

Edited by DrBloodmoney
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bloodborne!! My intro to the Soulsborne genre.

 

....er, WILL be my intro rather, once I become less intimidated by it than I am by whipping out my wallet in the ps store during a great sale in the wee hours of the night with a few drinks in me.

 

Seriously though, yet another glowing review has reminded me that I need to human up and handle me some gaming business. As usual, you have given me a gentle nudge in the right direction by way of another excellent review. Thank you, Doctor?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, YaManSmevz said:

Bloodborne!! My intro to the Soulsborne genre.

 

....er, WILL be my intro rather, once I become less intimidated by it than I am by whipping out my wallet in the ps store during a great sale in the wee hours of the night with a few drinks in me.

 

Seriously though, yet another glowing review has reminded me that I need to human up and handle me some gaming business. As usual, you have given me a gentle nudge in the right direction by way of another excellent review. Thank you, Doctor1f44a.png

 

Bloodborne will be a really interesting entry point to the Soulsbourne genre!

 

If that's your first, you absolutely need to promise to do a review after you're done - I'd be fascinated to hear the thought of a Souls-neophyte who's entry point is that one - it's got all the good aspects that are common to the genre, but being as atypically fast paced and aggression-based as it is does make it something of an outlier - and almost everyone who has reviewed it (myself included) is familiar with at least a few previous ones, so naturally all their thoughts are from a baseline of 'Standard' Souls combat.

 

It will be really interesting to see how you view other ones after starting with Bloodborne too - I wonder if, for you, Bloodborne will seem like a baseline, and all others will feel languid and slow by comparison? :hmm:

 

 

Edited by DrBloodmoney
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I liked Prince of Persia 08 as well. I had no problem with the no-death feature, I think it suits the game well. I also liked the art style and level design, enjoyed the emphasis on platforming, liked the battle system (excluding the endless QTE sections in late game fights), loved Elika, and even Prince himself. The difference between stoik princess and careless adventurer made their relationship very interesting to me. It develops a bit, our Prince starts taking shit a little bit more seriosly, Elika starts making sarcastic quips ?. Most importaintly, they start caring about each other by the end. 

 

Speaking of which, what did you think of the ending? The main game one, not the DLC. I thought the DLC was meh, but the main ending was more interesting for me. Especially after replaying the game. Now I think of it as TLOU before TLOU. Okay, stick with me here ?.

 

Spoiler

The main character doesn't care about anyone in the beginning, doesn't see himself being attached to a person ever. Then he meets Elika, they fight a little bit, then agree to work together because it's too important. They go through some shit together. By the end, he gets so attached to her, that he makes a selfish decision that puts the world back in danger. It was all for nothing.

 

TLOU's story is stronger (the brilliant intro part gives a lot of context for what happens in the end, for example), it is told better as well. But I think the similarities are clear. These games kinda tried to do he same thing with their story, didn't they?

 

15 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

Unfortunately, beyond the visuals, there is little else positive to say about the game, in the context of the series it represents.

While Rift Apart is a marvellous looking game, and a towering achievement in that area, in virtually every other aspect, it falls well short of the games that preceded it, and the bar set by the series generally.

 

OOF. Didn't expect Rift Apart to be ranked lower than the very first game. 

 

It seems like every professional critic praised the game, saying it was the best Ratchet game ever, etc. So when I watched Dunkey's review (which was mixed), I reckoned it an outlier. Dunkey has had a fair share of those. But I see some points he made in your scientific analysis as well. Now it makes me question my excitiment for the game. Not like Dunkey's criticisms weren't valid before, but they kinda have more weight now when I see the game ranked 104 on your list ?.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Slava said:

I liked Prince of Persia 08 as well. I had no problem with the no-death feature, I think it suits the game well. I also liked the art style and level design, enjoyed the emphasis on platforming, liked the battle system (excluding the endless QTE sections in late game fights), loved Elika, and even Prince himself. The difference between stoik princess and careless adventurer made their relationship very interesting to me. It develops a bit, our Prince starts taking shit a little bit more seriosly, Elika starts making sarcastic quips ?. Most importaintly, they start caring about each other by the end. 

 

Speaking of which, what did you think of the ending? The main game one, not the DLC. I thought the DLC was meh, but the main ending was more interesting for me. Especially after replaying the game. Now I think of it as TLOU before TLOU. Okay, stick with me here ?.

 

  Hide contents

The main character doesn't care about anyone in the beginning, doesn't see himself being attached to a person ever. Then he meets Elika, they fight a little bit, then agree to work together because it's too important. They go through some shit together. By the end, he gets so attached to her, that he makes a selfish decision that puts the world back in danger. It was all for nothing.

 

TLOU's story is stronger (the brilliant intro part gives a lot of context for what happens in the end, for example), it is told better as well. But I think the similarities are clear. These games kinda tried to do he same thing with their story, didn't they?

 

That's a pretty interesting parallel - it's not one I would have thought of at the time - but yeah, I guess there is some similarities there in terms of the cyclical nature of selfishness - at first the character is only out for themselves, over the course of the game, there is a conflict when they have that viewpoint questioned by another character, they come to love that character because of their viewpoint, but when the chips are down, their own nature prevails, and instead of their own viewpoint moulding to meet that of the other character, the other character simply becomes a 'possession' of theirs, to be protected with the same selfish outlook that he started with :hmm:

 

When you look at it that way, it's probably quite an astute comment on the elasticity of peoples engrained nature - and a bit of a depressing one ?

 

 

Quote

 

OOF. Didn't expect Rift Apart to be ranked lower than the very first game. 

 

It seems like every professional critic praised the game, saying it was the best Ratchet game ever, etc. So when I watched Dunkey's review (which was mixed), I reckoned it an outlier. Dunkey has had a fair share of those. But I see some points he made in your scientific analysis as well. Now it makes me question my excitiment for the game. Not like Dunkey's criticisms weren't valid before, but they kinda have more weight now when I see the game ranked 104 on your list ?.

 

I'm generally quite comfortable being a little out of step with popular consensus, and can often see the point of view of the other side, and still comfortably disagree - but I have to admit - every time I see a super positive review or opinion on Rift Apart, I feel like Will Ferrell in Zoolander.... 

4zv.gif

 

I just can't understand how anyone who has played a significant number of previous Ratchet games could possibly see Rift Apart as anything other than a sub-par entry on anything other than a visual level :blink:

 

 

It's certainly not terrible though - the visuals alone are worth seeing, and I never felt like it was a waste of my time - it just never asked for much of my time - and never really made good use of the time it did ask for.

 

 I don't want to necessarily shoo people away from it though - bear in mind - I would still say I like both Until Dawn, (which is one notch above, currently) and Q.U.B.E (which is currently one notch below)...

... this is, after all, a list of the most awesome, not necessarily a list of "best to worst" - there are relatively few games that qualify for ranking that I out-and-out dislike -  most games I hate, I just wouldn't bother to finish, and therefore they wouldn't get ranked at all!

 

 

Edited by DrBloodmoney
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DrBloodmoney said:

 

Bloodborne will be a really interesting entry point to the Soulsbourne genre!

 

If that's your first, you absolutely need to promise to do a review after you're done - I'd be fascinated to hear the thought of a Souls-neophyte who's entry point is that one - it's got all the good aspects that are common to the genre, but being as atypically fast paced and aggression-based as it is does make it something of an outlier - and almost everyone who has reviewed it (myself included) is familiar with at least a few previous ones, so naturally all their thoughts are from a baseline of 'Standard' Souls combat.

 

To inject myself into this: Bloodborne is my one and only experience with a FROM game and even a Souls-like at all. The combat system that involves having to stay aggressive and attack as quickly as it is safe to do so after taking a hit was inspired. The atmosphere of Yharnam and the Lovecraftian aesthetic were also a key part of why I enjoyed it. Getting health consumables for leaving funny messages around the place for other players is something I also look back on fondly. As I understand it, those three key things I enjoyed are Bloodborne-exclusive. Despite that, maybe I need the take advantage of the Doctor's prescription to get more FROM games in my life...

 

3 hours ago, Slava said:

It seems like every professional critic praised the game, saying it was the best Ratchet game ever, etc. So when I watched Dunkey's review (which was mixed), I reckoned it an outlier. Dunkey has had a fair share of those. But I see some points he made in your scientific analysis as well. Now it makes me question my excitiment for the game. Not like Dunkey's criticisms weren't valid before, but they kinda have more weight now when I see the game ranked 104 on your list 1f605.png.

 

The Ratchet and Clank reboot was given the same praise... and it was not good man.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, GonzoWARgasm said:

 

 

Depends how much you enjoy people saying "boogly woogly ugg ugg" in long conversations to you instead of english for quests just like a standard Far Cry entry. All Far Cry games after 3 are just Far Cry 3... except Blood Dragon. Play that one instead :)


According to my lil bro it’s just cave people screaming “WENJA!!! WENJA!!!” constantly. But he swears it’s one of the best ones. 

 

4 hours ago, DrBloodmoney said:

I remember reading that it was a deliberate move on the part of the director - he had a memory of reading books and watching movies in the fantasy genre, which he loved, but they were all in English, which he didn't speak or understand particularly well, and so his understanding of them was really just what slivers of info he could glean, and what his own mind could fill in in the gaps in-between - that's what he was trying to recapture for people with the SoulsBourne formula.


This is so fascinating if it’s true! There is no doubt in my mind that the storytelling and world building style of Dark Souls is deliberate, I’ve just always wondered why that was.

 

I’m not always a fan of games that deliberately hide crucial information or don’t take the time to explain things to the player. For ex. I just finished the Castlevania Requiem collection and while I loved it overall, this was one of my few gripes with SOTN. There were quite a few major mechanics like combos, special attacks and abilities that were completely hidden and I never would have figured out if not for extensive guides and videos online explaining this stuff. I googled some history on the game in my incredulity and gleaned that many of these things not stumbled upon by sheer luck were probably only discovered thanks to the official strategy guides released back in the day.

 

With Dark Souls, the games may appear to be like this at first, the player quickly realizes that the game actually provides the player with all the necessary information on how things work, how to progress, as well as the extensive backstory and lore that shapes the world. It’s just all carefully hidden in plain sight through environmental clues, NPC dialogue, item descriptions etc.

 

I think it’s risky to make a game like that these days, but somehow From Software always pulls it off brilliantly. It adds to the challenge (and fun). of the game by rewarding observant players and punishing inattentive ones. It forces the player to slow down a little bit, experiment, explore, and truly pay attention to their surroundings lest they miss something important. I think this element is a big part of what makes these games such wonderfully unique experiences, especially the very first time you play.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I own all the Soulsborniro titles and for some reason Bloodborne is the only one that really clicked with me, with Dark Souls 2 following close behind. That was until Demons Souls on PS5...

 

Demons Souls was my 3rd or 4th PS3 game that I bought about 11 years ago for the PS3 off the used game shelf at a GameSpot (when they were all around). Went in completely blind on the purchase and started playing it knowing nothing. I can be persistent with games, but as confusing as the game and as bad as I was back then, I got about half way through it. I was also mostly into games with story or a game that ended in Warcraft...that took a lot of my time.

 

Shortly after that, I bought Dark Souls on PS3 for some reason. Hearing that it was like Demons Souls but more entry friendly. Again got about half way through and the lag really started to bother me, especially in the cliffside town.

 

A few more years later and I felt more seasoned in challenging games and had more patience. I picked up Dark Souls 2 on PC through a Steam sale and gave it a shot. This one for some reason got me a little bit more interested and ended up beating it twice getting almost everything.

 

Then along came BloodBorne, hyped up after Dark Souls 2, I actually pre-ordered this one. Cruised through the first playthrough using the switchaxe, clearly the best weapon with its charge up attack. Loved the atmosphere and the combat was more fluid and kept me coming back for more. I am a huge fan of Lovecraft type settings and this one hit the spot.

 

Of course I ended up buying Dark Souls 3, but this time on sale for PS4 as I wasn't in a hurry to play it. Tried it out and it had the same feel as the original Dark Souls. I plan to go back to it to play it more, but it's been on the back burner.

 

Even though I knew Sekiro was going to be harder and more technical(?) I gave it a shot. It was definitely hard to get use to, but once you got a chain of perfect parries and beat a boss, it was very satisfying. The game held my attention enough to complete 1 playthough.

 

Lastly, after I got my PS5, I wanted to get Demons Souls on it and see if it's how I remember it at all from a decade ago. (spoiler alert, I didn't remember shit) I went in with the attitude that I was going to at least do one full playthrough this time, but at the end of the first playthrough, my friend also had it and just about finished his run and asked to do our 2nd run in coop. I don't know if this is the element I was missing in the other Souls games, but coop in Demons Souls was so much fun. From doing 2v2 pvp battles where I feel like we actually had chances to win against magic users (I was a bitch bow dex build) and he was the giant sword meat decoy...I mean shield I needed, to having really stupid things happen in boss fights, I felt like this was the true Souls experience for me. This was the first souls games I actually got the platinum/100% for and it has made me rethink revisiting the rest.

 

TLDR; Demons Souls on PS5 was my best Souls experience due to coop, but for soloing I put BloodBorne on top. That being said I'm happy where it ended up for you, even if I do think it's better than the original Dark Souls....but it's been a while since I played it so maybe I'll give it another go. It's a tough call between that and Dark Souls II for me.

 

 

 

Edited by Grotz99
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

newtestsubjects.jpg

 

⚛️!!SCIENCE UPDATE!!⚛️

 

 

The next 5 (somewhat) randomly selected games to be submitted for scientific analysis shall be:

 

 

Beyond Good & Evil HD
Eventide 2: Sorcerer's Mirror
Far Cry 3
Resident Evil 3 Remake
Unit 13 

 

 

 

Can 'Current Most Awesome' game, Prey, cling to its title once again?

 

Is last-in-show Kick-Ass: The Game going to have any competition for 'Least Awesome Game' ?

 

Let's find out!

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1f6a8.png1f6a8.pngSCIENCE ALERT1f6a8.png1f6a8.png

 

Eagle-Eyed Science Chums will note - there are no 'Priority Ranking's this round - currently there are only 2 left on the books (both care of @Copanele):

 the final Prince of Persia game (which will be done next round, but I'm taking a break, just so my reviews of the series don't get stale

and Far Cry Primal - which I am leaving until next round, as I want to get Far Cry 3 ranked first, for baseline purposes! 

 

All other priority spots are free - I'm happy to simply do randomised picks in the absence  - but if you have a game you would like to see ranked, this is the time to guarantee quick turnaround of Priority status!

 

The only stipulation, as always, is that they must be on my profile, at 100% (S-Rank)....

 and aren't already on the Rankings! 263a.png

Edited by DrBloodmoney
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking forward to what science has to say about BG&E. Played it on PS2 some time ago. Didn't beat it back then, but enjoyed it enough to buy and finish the remastered version years later. The game is showing its age, but nevertheless, it might hold a spot in my top 20 games of all time ?. 

 

3 minutes ago, DrBloodmoney said:

All other priority spots are free - I'm happy to simply do randomised picks in the absence  - but if you have a game you would like to see ranked, this is the time to guarantee quick turnaround of Priority status!

 

If it's not too soon, how about we finish up the PS2 Ratchet trilogy? ?

 

There will still be 3 games left in the series, but we could move on and analyse the Sly series next. I haven't played that one yet (although I've seen some playthroughs and speedruns long time ago and played a demo of the 4th one) but I've heard you got some spicy opinions on it. Especially the second game ?.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Slava said:

Looking forward to what science has to say about BG&E. Played it on PS2 some time ago. Didn't beat it back then, but enjoyed it enough to buy and finish the remastered version years later. The game is showing its age, but nevertheless, it might hold a spot in my top 20 games of all time 1f914.png

 

 

If it's not too soon, how about we finish up the PS2 Ratchet trilogy? 1f601.png

 

Good shout my friend - I'll flag R&C 3 with your name ?

 

 

Just now, Slava said:

There will still be 3 games left in the series, but we could move on and analyse the Sly series next. I haven't played that one yet (although I've seen some playthroughs and speedruns long time ago and played a demo of the 4th one) but I've heard you got some spicy opinions on it. Especially the second game 1f60f.png.

 

Haha - yeah, there are defiantly some rants of mine in the deep history of PSNP railing against Sly 2 at the time I played it ?

 

I may have actually pulled back a little on that one - not much, but it does feel a little different to, say, my dislike of Jak II.

 

where my aversion to Jak II seemed to harden with age (like a stale cake), my dislike of Sly 2 seems to have softened (like a stale biscuit!) ?

 

 

Nevertheless, only Science can tell - so I will flag the three PS2 era games with your name too ?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/19/2021 at 3:55 AM, DrBloodmoney said:

All other priority spots are free - I'm happy to simply do randomised picks in the absence  - but if you have a game you would like to see ranked, this is the time to guarantee quick turnaround of Priority status!

 

Dug a little more than I meant to and found a blast from the past that I hundo'd on my 360 - The Saboteur! I'd like to request that, please?

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

☢️☢️SCIENTIFIC SCHEDULING NOTE☢️☢️

 

Due to work commitments and this being the school holidays in (unusually sunny) Scotland at the moment, so my son is off, it's likely to take a bit longer for updates to come over the next few weeks.

 

For those with requests in, I will still get to them, but I'm having trouble finding time to even play for pure fun (as my own paltry trophy count in the last week or so will attest!), let alone go back to any older games to refresh myself for reviews - and there are a few in the current batch that it would be impossible to review without a few hours blast on the game as a refresher first. 

 

All requested reviews are still in the works, and will remain priority - promise!

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, JoesusHCrust said:

Good call. That game was ace!

 

We need to wait for the science to confirm this... ?

 

*removes lab-coat for a moment*

 

Hell yeah it was! ?

 

*puts lab-coat back on*

 

...ahem...

 

...sorry, I don't know what just came over me.

...What were we talking about? :hmm:

Edited by DrBloodmoney
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this talk of ace games brings me on to games that are decidedly un-ace and my first scientific disagreement with you! Man, that 'Shadow of Mordor' game fucking stank! I struggle to think of another 'AAA' game that I've disliked more! I've played some God-awful 'indie' games for a quick and easy platinum but none of the 'proper' games I've played can hold a candle to SoM!

The story sucked, the game-play was horrible, the combat made me want to gouge my own fun-gland out with a spoon and feed it to my kitten (and I don't even have a kitten), the 'progression' was horrible and stilted, the combat was so horrible and have I mentioned the combat? I didn't enjoy it. 

 

I think this goes to show that gamer skill is a factor in how awesome a game feels. Even the most avid disciple of Joesus would happily admit that gaming is not my strong suit! I can imagine that carving your way through crowds of orks, progressing through each area and planting your 'agents' amongst the ork hierarchy until there are more fifth columnists than at the 1997 Labour Party conference feels satisfying and fun if you have the skills to pull it off. If you're a bumbling muggle like me though, you're subjected to suffocating waves of enemies and the constant resetting of the aforementioned 'hierarchy' so that you feel stuck in the same position in the game with little sense of progress. 

 

I likely will go back to it one day for a second pass as I want to grind out a few more of those trophies but for the time being, I've had to park it!!! 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/23/2021 at 2:37 PM, JoesusHCrust said:

All this talk of ace games brings me on to games that are decidedly un-ace and my first scientific disagreement with you! Man, that 'Shadow of Mordor' game fucking stank! I struggle to think of another 'AAA' game that I've disliked more! I've played some God-awful 'indie' games for a quick and easy platinum but none of the 'proper' games I've played can hold a candle to SoM!

The story sucked, the game-play was horrible, the combat made me want to gouge my own fun-gland out with a spoon and feed it to my kitten (and I don't even have a kitten), the 'progression' was horrible and stilted, the combat was so horrible and have I mentioned the combat? I didn't enjoy it. 

 

I think this goes to show that gamer skill is a factor in how awesome a game feels. Even the most avid disciple of Joesus would happily admit that gaming is not my strong suit! I can imagine that carving your way through crowds of orks, progressing through each area and planting your 'agents' amongst the ork hierarchy until there are more fifth columnists than at the 1997 Labour Party conference feels satisfying and fun if you have the skills to pull it off. If you're a bumbling muggle like me though, you're subjected to suffocating waves of enemies and the constant resetting of the aforementioned 'hierarchy' so that you feel stuck in the same position in the game with little sense of progress. 

 

I likely will go back to it one day for a second pass as I want to grind out a few more of those trophies but for the time being, I've had to park it!!! 

 

 

This is..... interesting.

 

I definitely agree Shadow of Mordor was rather overrated. Those conversation bits with the Uruk Captains got old after a while. Still enjoyed it.

 

Different strokes for different folks.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, AJ_Radio said:

 

This is..... interesting.

 

I definitely agree Shadow of Mordor was rather overrated. Those conversation bits with the Uruk Captains got old after a while. Still enjoyed it.

 

Different strokes for different folks.

I'm being a bit facetious for dramatic effect but I really didn't enjoy it! I think the skill element is important. You and Dr.B both have a reasonable degree of gaming skill. I can imagine I'd have found it OK if I could progress through it more easily but I'd still not like the story aspect. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 23/07/2021 at 10:37 PM, JoesusHCrust said:

All this talk of ace games brings me on to games that are decidedly un-ace and my first scientific disagreement with you! Man, that 'Shadow of Mordor' game fucking stank! I struggle to think of another 'AAA' game that I've disliked more! I've played some God-awful 'indie' games for a quick and easy platinum but none of the 'proper' games I've played can hold a candle to SoM!

The story sucked, the game-play was horrible, the combat made me want to gouge my own fun-gland out with a spoon and feed it to my kitten (and I don't even have a kitten), the 'progression' was horrible and stilted, the combat was so horrible and have I mentioned the combat? I didn't enjoy it. 

 

I think this goes to show that gamer skill is a factor in how awesome a game feels. Even the most avid disciple of Joesus would happily admit that gaming is not my strong suit! I can imagine that carving your way through crowds of orks, progressing through each area and planting your 'agents' amongst the ork hierarchy until there are more fifth columnists than at the 1997 Labour Party conference feels satisfying and fun if you have the skills to pull it off. If you're a bumbling muggle like me though, you're subjected to suffocating waves of enemies and the constant resetting of the aforementioned 'hierarchy' so that you feel stuck in the same position in the game with little sense of progress. 

 

I likely will go back to it one day for a second pass as I want to grind out a few more of those trophies but for the time being, I've had to park it!!! 

 

 

1 hour ago, JoesusHCrust said:

I'm being a bit facetious for dramatic effect but I really didn't enjoy it! I think the skill element is important. You and Dr.B both have a reasonable degree of gaming skill. I can imagine I'd have found it OK if I could progress through it more easily but I'd still not like the story aspect. 

 

What's interesting about your take to me is that you single out the combat - as I think that is actually one area in which the game is fairly strong, but very specifically counter to the open-world games Shadow of Mordor was likened to at the time of release.

 

It's telling that you don't have any Arkham games on your profile - I actually think that if more people had played Mordor without having any Arkham experience prior to it, there would be a lot more folks sharing this sentiment.

 

I wouldn't say that the Shadow of Mordor combat (or the Arkham combat it was aping) are super skill-based necessarily, however, they are a little bit deceptive when you first approach them, as they operate in a completely different sphere than a gamer might initially expect. Being very familiar with brawler / character action games is not likely to help in approaching them, because - in combat specifically - they aren't actually in those genres - they are rhythm games.

 

I would wager that a familiarity with, for example, Rhythm Heaven or the Persona Dancing games is far more applicable to fighting in those games than, say ,God of War or it's ilk.

 

In terms of the story - yes, it's bat-shit. 

As a long term LotR fan - I can recognise it is non-canonical, but....

... I'm also a DC Comics fan, not a Marvel one -  which mean one thing above all: I don't really put a lot of stock in 'canon' ?

 

I'm always happy to see weird side-story stuff that plays with an established narrative, and don't really mind if it breaks the original story a little to tell it's own - and I thought the specific story within SoM worked well enough within its own rules. Sure, it's not the strong suit of the game - but it does enough to keep me moving from combat to combat, and the Nemesis took up any slack on that side for me.

Edited by DrBloodmoney
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...