^Ditto. Currently I'm waiting for Xcom 2 to go live, and for BDO in the near future.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
Odd timing, most games "turn" mid-week... you plan to make some statistical analysis?
Anyhow, for me the Sky race in CO is going on for a few more days, and then TSW starts the Golem week on Wednesday. Above that I'll check LotRO, hopefully they fix the mess of last week's move - too bad Frostbluff's end went down the the drain with their F-ed up move...
On the offline side nowadays I play old titles, currently Torin's Passage, without a "h", so not related to the grumpy, beardy, Hall-owner in LotRO (that'd be Thorin)
Not really in the mood for mmos for the last few months and probably won't be for a long time. So, right now it's a bit of Halo 5 mp and Killer Instinct on the Xbone and just started Dragon's Dogma on the pc. Not a big fan of the fantasy genre but i gotta say, the game looks solid so far.
Nothing heavy at the moment. I repatched SWTOR the other day just to see how it was, but I have never been terribly impressed with it.
Star Conflict because it popped up on my Steam Discovery list one day and was free, and it's surprisingly not too bad in short play sessions.
Trying to get into Shadows of Mordor because I got if for Christmas, but I sux and it royally kicks my ass.
Recently finished DA:I (another game I got for Xmas), and got about as far in Destiny as I care to really get (all the solo stuff, none of the raid stuff)
I still check out FFXIV, Marvel Heroes from time to time.
I know, my playlist is a couple of years behind the times.
I downloaded BnS today, went to log in this morning, #875 in queue and didn't get in. Tried this evening, #4780 in queue. So I may get around to that one in a couple of years. I may try out World of Tanks now that it's out on PS4 - never played it - no idea if I will like it or not.
Trying BnS (hopes are not high), probably darkest dungeon full release a little, DOTA2, and generally trying to find a game to pass the time until a playable MMO comes along. I would have resubbed to EVE most likely until I checked PLEX prices and saw the inflation since I last played.
The other games I may put time into: Risk of Rain CiV WAR:ROR Total War Atilla (finishing coop campaign) probably other stuff, just depends on time and boredom.
Path of Exile. Not sure when they fixed the OOS problems, but it's way more enjoyable now than when I was rubber-banding every fight.
Battlefront. Fun game in spite of some rather severe shortcomings (like horrible matchmaking.)
Battlefield 4. While Battlefront is fun, I'm gradually transitioning back to more Battlefield 4 play. It's just a deeper more feature-rich shooter.
Off and on:
Ghost in the Shell First Assault Online. Still feeling this one out, as the quality and depth doesn't quite feel there (especially in the Counterstrike-like game mode; Counterstrike is fun and all but I was sort of done with it by CS1.6 apart from a brief stint in CS:Source.)
Alien Isolation. The stealth gameplay doesn't quite feel refined enough.
DA:Inquisition. Got reasonably far on my old computer but it crashed excessively. Was able to continue from a cloud save on the new computer, but man is the gameplay tedious (and the combat just doesn't live up to DA2.)
Witcher 3. Barely got into this, and for some reason I can never work up the motivation to get back to it. I think because the progression elements feel so disinteresting for some reason (super bland talent choices) and the story hasn't moved at a snappy enough clip to keep me coming back for that reason. Still, I think this one probably has the highest chance of eventually sucking me in if I could only give it a decent chance.
Seen some friends getting into Darkest Dungeon recently, so I might give that another go at some point. It was fun for a while when I tried it months back, but I think a key character or two died off for me and it kinda stagnated my interest in continuing on.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
DA:Inquisition. Got reasonably far on my old computer but it crashed excessively. Was able to continue from a cloud save on the new computer, but man is the gameplay tedious (and the combat just doesn't live up to DA2.)
Not sure why they decided to take out companion AI scripting in DA:I. I literally played 4-5 battles fighting terrible AI that I couldn't customize before I shelved the title out of disgust.
What was the point? It was an option that never HAD to be used in the older titles (if you chose not to). Why the hell take the option away from fans of the series? What possible good (besides saving a relatively tiny portion of development time) did that do the title?
Ugh, I'm still incredibly annoyed about that title.
DA:Inquisition. Got reasonably far on my old computer but it crashed excessively. Was able to continue from a cloud save on the new computer, but man is the gameplay tedious (and the combat just doesn't live up to DA2.)
Not sure why they decided to take out companion AI scripting in DA:I. I literally played 4-5 battles fighting terrible AI that I couldn't customize before I shelved the title out of disgust.
What was the point? It was an option that never HAD to be used in the older titles (if you chose not to). Why the hell take the option away from fans of the series? What possible good (besides saving a relatively tiny portion of development time) did that do the title?
Ugh, I'm still incredibly annoyed about that title.
I am not a big fan of the character design in DA. All the characters start with makeup on by default. I don't really like the voice selection much.
The worst part is probably the tactical view though. It would be been much better if they had a controller mode where the companions are fully automated and can be scripted to perform certain actions. Then have a mouse and keyboard mode where you can play zoomed out in a more traditional Baldur's Gate style.
I am not a big fan of the character design in DA. All the characters start with makeup on by default. I don't really like the voice selection much.
The worst part is probably the tactical view though. It would be been much better if they had a controller mode where the companions are fully automated and can be scripted to perform certain actions. Then have a mouse and keyboard mode where you can play zoomed out in a more traditional Baldur's Gate style.
I agree completely. None of this would have taken a significant amount of dev time.
Why they decided not to give players the options is beyond me. It was infuriating to watch my Mage cast Barrier as soon as battle started only to have it drop right before my tank entered melee combat with the enemy. Or issuing tactical commands to my party members only to have them forget 10 seconds later and do the dumbest thing possible (like why would you ever run TOWARDS that boss, Mage? That's not your job, man!).
It was highly disappointing, especially considering I had very much enjoyed the previous entires in the series.
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Since i over played Dishonored,i 'll take a break and still fit in some FFXI. Likely some Age of Empires,some Romance the Three kingdoms,some Unreal tournament,some Quake,Wizardry 8 and some Hearthstone,so yeah i have PLENTY of games to keep me occupied and why i don't need to jump on any bandwagon hypes.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
Not sure why they decided to take out companion AI scripting in DA:I. I literally played 4-5 battles fighting terrible AI that I couldn't customize before I shelved the title out of disgust.
What was the point? It was an option that never HAD to be used in the older titles (if you chose not to). Why the hell take the option away from fans of the series? What possible good (besides saving a relatively tiny portion of development time) did that do the title?
Ugh, I'm still incredibly annoyed about that title.
Well I sort of feel a game is designed wrong if you reach the point where you really want to script AI just to succeed at combat challenges.
It's the Baldur's Gate inspired one-foot-in-oldschool approach that seems to be the cause of DA:I's combat problems. Each individual character doesn't quite have enough decisions to be interesting, but micromanaging the entire party (including their movement and pathfinding in a 3D environemnt) adds up to be way too much micromanagement without many meaningful decisions.
A lot of better options existed for the game:
Turn-based gameplay. Disgaea and Final Fantasy Tactics give you full control over all party members, but it's not a pain because the only mode of play is turn-based. While you might play DA:I in a pseudo-turn-based way by pausing a lot, it doesn't flow well at all.
Limit options per character. Eye of the Beholder and Final Fantasy 6 are examples of games with real-time combat, but where each character's decision set was fairly narrow, so combat flowed better than DA:I largely because you didn't have to deal with micromanaging each character's physical location, and also because the majority of those decisions were right in front of you with a convenient interface (it's all onscreen, as opposed to having to hop between characters to control them in DA:I.)
Full options for main char, very limited for others. Mass Effect's companions mostly just did their own thing, and their main benefit was 1-2 key abilities that were effortlessly part of your main character's spell menu, so it flowed a lot better. It's not quite a fair comparison as Mass Effect characters can just fire off shots from behind cover and feel like useful party members, whereas in DA:I you have a lot more melee and a tank character who needs to grab aggro, which puts a lot more pressure on the AI programmer to make the characters considerably smarter.
So it's really just the marriage between the 3rd person camera and BG's full party control combat system that causes DA:I's combat to play out poorly, and rather than give players the ability to script the AI to improve it I think they just should've chosen a better overall combat direction from the start.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Marvel Heroes Online. No other game comes close in terms of F2P, fully voiced and being part of a great IP. I'll be definitely give a try to Blade & Soul this week though. I always keep a back up game.
Same here. Just bought Deadpool when I heard his 52 went up on the PTS, waiting for it to go live. Playing Dragons Dogma in the meantime.
Other than that Trove, like always. Maybe I'll try out Blade & Soul to see what's up with that.
Not sure why they decided to take out companion AI scripting in DA:I. I literally played 4-5 battles fighting terrible AI that I couldn't customize before I shelved the title out of disgust.
What was the point? It was an option that never HAD to be used in the older titles (if you chose not to). Why the hell take the option away from fans of the series? What possible good (besides saving a relatively tiny portion of development time) did that do the title?
Ugh, I'm still incredibly annoyed about that title.
Well I sort of feel a game is designed wrong if you reach the point where you really want to script AI just to succeed at combat challenges.
It's the Baldur's Gate inspired one-foot-in-oldschool approach that seems to be the cause of DA:I's combat problems. Each individual character doesn't quite have enough decisions to be interesting, but micromanaging the entire party (including their movement and pathfinding in a 3D environemnt) adds up to be way too much micromanagement without many meaningful decisions.
A lot of better options existed for the game:
Turn-based gameplay. Disgaea and Final Fantasy Tactics give you full control over all party members, but it's not a pain because the only mode of play is turn-based. While you might play DA:I in a pseudo-turn-based way by pausing a lot, it doesn't flow well at all.
Limit options per character. Eye of the Beholder and Final Fantasy 6 are examples of games with real-time combat, but where each character's decision set was fairly narrow, so combat flowed better than DA:I largely because you didn't have to deal with micromanaging each character's physical location, and also because the majority of those decisions were right in front of you with a convenient interface (it's all onscreen, as opposed to having to hop between characters to control them in DA:I.)
Full options for main char, very limited for others. Mass Effect's companions mostly just did their own thing, and their main benefit was 1-2 key abilities that were effortlessly part of your main character's spell menu, so it flowed a lot better. It's not quite a fair comparison as Mass Effect characters can just fire off shots from behind cover and feel like useful party members, whereas in DA:I you have a lot more melee and a tank character who needs to grab aggro, which puts a lot more pressure on the AI programmer to make the characters considerably smarter.
So it's really just the marriage between the 3rd person camera and BG's full party control combat system that causes DA:I's combat to play out poorly, and rather than give players the ability to script the AI to improve it I think they just should've chosen a better overall combat direction from the start.
I was a huge fan of being able to customize my companions' battle AI, though.
I could specialize two members of the same class to perform different functions that way. I could have a melee Rogue assisting my MT and another, ranged Rogue who stayed in the back line using CC abilities on any enemies who managed to make it to the back line. Most importantly, since their AI was set beforehand, they generally fulfilled those roles with little to no input from me once the dust started flying. I simply had to maintain situational awareness of my party during the fight and respond when needed.
It was a pre-battle prep that allowed me to customize my whole-party-tactic without having to micranage EVERY action in battle.
In the attempt to make a DA that was more "action-oriented" I feel the need for pausing the action so often and micromanaging awful AI had the opposite effect. I spent more time playing my created character and watching him do cool stuff in the older games.
I agree with your sentiment: they attempted to do a sort of Half&Half that ended up just seeming half-assed instead.
Comments
Currently I'm waiting for Xcom 2 to go live, and for BDO in the near future.
My SWTOR referral link for those wanting to give the game a try. (Newbies get a welcome package while returning players get a few account upgrades to help with their preferred status.)
https://www.ashesofcreation.com/ref/Callaron/
Anyhow, for me the Sky race in CO is going on for a few more days, and then TSW starts the Golem week on Wednesday. Above that I'll check LotRO, hopefully they fix the mess of last week's move - too bad Frostbluff's end went down the the drain with their F-ed up move...
On the offline side nowadays I play old titles, currently Torin's Passage, without a "h", so not related to the grumpy, beardy, Hall-owner in LotRO
Star Conflict because it popped up on my Steam Discovery list one day and was free, and it's surprisingly not too bad in short play sessions.
Trying to get into Shadows of Mordor because I got if for Christmas, but I sux and it royally kicks my ass.
Recently finished DA:I (another game I got for Xmas), and got about as far in Destiny as I care to really get (all the solo stuff, none of the raid stuff)
I still check out FFXIV, Marvel Heroes from time to time.
I know, my playlist is a couple of years behind the times.
I downloaded BnS today, went to log in this morning, #875 in queue and didn't get in. Tried this evening, #4780 in queue. So I may get around to that one in a couple of years. I may try out World of Tanks now that it's out on PS4 - never played it - no idea if I will like it or not.
The other games I may put time into:
Risk of Rain
CiV
WAR:ROR
Total War Atilla (finishing coop campaign)
probably other stuff, just depends on time and boredom.
- Path of Exile. Not sure when they fixed the OOS problems, but it's way more enjoyable now than when I was rubber-banding every fight.
- Battlefront. Fun game in spite of some rather severe shortcomings (like horrible matchmaking.)
- Battlefield 4. While Battlefront is fun, I'm gradually transitioning back to more Battlefield 4 play. It's just a deeper more feature-rich shooter.
Off and on:- Ghost in the Shell First Assault Online. Still feeling this one out, as the quality and depth doesn't quite feel there (especially in the Counterstrike-like game mode; Counterstrike is fun and all but I was sort of done with it by CS1.6 apart from a brief stint in CS:Source.)
- Alien Isolation. The stealth gameplay doesn't quite feel refined enough.
- DA:Inquisition. Got reasonably far on my old computer but it crashed excessively. Was able to continue from a cloud save on the new computer, but man is the gameplay tedious (and the combat just doesn't live up to DA2.)
- Witcher 3. Barely got into this, and for some reason I can never work up the motivation to get back to it. I think because the progression elements feel so disinteresting for some reason (super bland talent choices) and the story hasn't moved at a snappy enough clip to keep me coming back for that reason. Still, I think this one probably has the highest chance of eventually sucking me in if I could only give it a decent chance.
Seen some friends getting into Darkest Dungeon recently, so I might give that another go at some point. It was fun for a while when I tried it months back, but I think a key character or two died off for me and it kinda stagnated my interest in continuing on."What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
What was the point? It was an option that never HAD to be used in the older titles (if you chose not to). Why the hell take the option away from fans of the series? What possible good (besides saving a relatively tiny portion of development time) did that do the title?
Ugh, I'm still incredibly annoyed about that title.
The worst part is probably the tactical view though. It would be been much better if they had a controller mode where the companions are fully automated and can be scripted to perform certain actions. Then have a mouse and keyboard mode where you can play zoomed out in a more traditional Baldur's Gate style.
Why they decided not to give players the options is beyond me. It was infuriating to watch my Mage cast Barrier as soon as battle started only to have it drop right before my tank entered melee combat with the enemy. Or issuing tactical commands to my party members only to have them forget 10 seconds later and do the dumbest thing possible (like why would you ever run TOWARDS that boss, Mage? That's not your job, man!).
It was highly disappointing, especially considering I had very much enjoyed the previous entires in the series.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Likely some Age of Empires,some Romance the Three kingdoms,some Unreal tournament,some Quake,Wizardry 8 and some Hearthstone,so yeah i have PLENTY of games to keep me occupied and why i don't need to jump on any bandwagon hypes.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
It's the Baldur's Gate inspired one-foot-in-oldschool approach that seems to be the cause of DA:I's combat problems. Each individual character doesn't quite have enough decisions to be interesting, but micromanaging the entire party (including their movement and pathfinding in a 3D environemnt) adds up to be way too much micromanagement without many meaningful decisions.
A lot of better options existed for the game:
- Turn-based gameplay. Disgaea and Final Fantasy Tactics give you full control over all party members, but it's not a pain because the only mode of play is turn-based. While you might play DA:I in a pseudo-turn-based way by pausing a lot, it doesn't flow well at all.
- Limit options per character. Eye of the Beholder and Final Fantasy 6 are examples of games with real-time combat, but where each character's decision set was fairly narrow, so combat flowed better than DA:I largely because you didn't have to deal with micromanaging each character's physical location, and also because the majority of those decisions were right in front of you with a convenient interface (it's all onscreen, as opposed to having to hop between characters to control them in DA:I.)
- Full options for main char, very limited for others. Mass Effect's companions mostly just did their own thing, and their main benefit was 1-2 key abilities that were effortlessly part of your main character's spell menu, so it flowed a lot better. It's not quite a fair comparison as Mass Effect characters can just fire off shots from behind cover and feel like useful party members, whereas in DA:I you have a lot more melee and a tank character who needs to grab aggro, which puts a lot more pressure on the AI programmer to make the characters considerably smarter.
So it's really just the marriage between the 3rd person camera and BG's full party control combat system that causes DA:I's combat to play out poorly, and rather than give players the ability to script the AI to improve it I think they just should've chosen a better overall combat direction from the start."What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Other than that Trove, like always. Maybe I'll try out Blade & Soul to see what's up with that.
I could specialize two members of the same class to perform different functions that way. I could have a melee Rogue assisting my MT and another, ranged Rogue who stayed in the back line using CC abilities on any enemies who managed to make it to the back line. Most importantly, since their AI was set beforehand, they generally fulfilled those roles with little to no input from me once the dust started flying. I simply had to maintain situational awareness of my party during the fight and respond when needed.
It was a pre-battle prep that allowed me to customize my whole-party-tactic without having to micranage EVERY action in battle.
In the attempt to make a DA that was more "action-oriented" I feel the need for pausing the action so often and micromanaging awful AI had the opposite effect. I spent more time playing my created character and watching him do cool stuff in the older games.
I agree with your sentiment: they attempted to do a sort of Half&Half that ended up just seeming half-assed instead.
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.