What game are you wasting time on?

[Ninja Destroyer]

Cool. Gonna fiinish the psx version of Re1 first.

 

[dunno lah]

Cool. Gonna fiinish the psx version of Re1 first.

What Ninja means is, play the original PSX version first and not the Director's Cut.

 

[Ivan]

I am. Just got to the Gardens and there's a creepy song that sounds just like:


Also, glad to see the Re2 style spiders back.

edit: found it


Back at the mansion. Getting almost insta-decapitated by reptile men (yes, I'm using Jill, and no I didn't know she has less hp than Chris). Holy shit, the segment following the second encounter with Yawn (snake boss) is fucking intense. I was near death, no health items, no remaining ammo. I dreaded finding another enemy and prayed for a save room. Finally made it back to the main hall, made my way to a save room, encountered a Hunter. Let off a round from the Magnum, somehow missed, got hit, tried to run away, and the fucker lunged at me with a killing blow. I love this. True survival horr-action.

 

[J_C]

After finishing The Dig, I decided it is time to play Quest for Infamy from start to finish. It will be my time waster until Pillars comes out.

 

[LeStryfe79]

The King of Fighters 2002 Unlimited Match

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

Starting my third Master of Orion 2 session in a row now, god I love that game.

 

[Tehdagah]

Yeah, so I wrote. Too bad you can kill her while doing this.

By missing the shot, which is the player's fault and not the game.

Huge wall of text incoming:

Spoiler

It's not hard as a gaming task. It's just shitty, cheap and irritating mechanic. I want to play a 3D shooter not some fucking Dragon's Lair.

QTEs are a bunch of reflex mini-games. I rarely struggle with them so why should I consider them cheap?

So the game being developed with co-op in mind justifies every retarded design decision?

No, a game developed with co-op in mind means the single-player is deficient by default. Like it or not, playing a co-op game solo isn't the way to play.

Cute. How about allowing the player to change it, like in many PC games, Dishonored for example? Oh, wait - better FOV could've been considered cheating in multi. So how about enabling it for single player only? How about fucking anything?
Your "BRO, this shitty design decision is justified" approach is kinda dumb. I wrote about things that irritated me. Those don't get on your nerves? Fine. But don't claim they are fine / good / not flaws / whatever.

Dishonored is in first-person, I'm talking about third-person games. For third-person games with a lot of closed environments, low FOV is the way to go because it reduces "camera tumbling". RE6 does allow the player to increase FOV, but guess what? The camera tumbles way more.

What happens when a third-person game has high FOV?

"Is supposed to"? By whom?

It only appears outside of the gameplay.

How about making it like it was in RE0-RE4. You didn't have to wait for chapter's end to access item stash.
Oh, wait - the new system is here because RE5 is a "co-op game", right? Or maybe because it's a badly designed game?

RE4 didn't had an item stash and the other RE games had backtracking (not suited for a co-op game)

Maybe you should plan better your inventory before playing. But if you can't handle it, I suppose you can still exploit the checkpoint system.

Learn 2 fucking read (my post). IMO:
1st stage: Wesker + Jill in main room,
2nd stage: Wesker + Jill (mostly) in popamole narrow corridor (Wesker throws Chris through the door) - after 7 minutes or if you check the door,
3rd stage: Jill.

Learn to read your own post, lol. You tried to prove your point by quoting a shitty faq:

"Survive first 7 minutes, avoiding both enemies. Wesker is invincible during this stage. After 7 minutes, the fight will switch to the 2nd stage, when he can be damaged". (?????)

My LTD was recharging and I didn't bother switching to something else (my mistake). Mostly, because this "dangerously looking red glow" didn't look that dangerous. Wanna bosses who "telegraph their attacks very well" - play Metroid / Castlevania / RE 0-3 / any game better than RE5.

RE0-3 bosses (and enemies) barely telegraph their attacks. Same for Metroid 1, Castlevania 1 and pretty much every NES title. Enemies either 1) attack without any kind of visual clue or 2) there's a clue, but the attack is faster than the character's mobility (enemies aren't designed around the controls).

How to NOT telegraph enemy attacks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tpuyg4BA7Jw

https://youtu.be/QPjgOIn9fhA?t=17m50s

How to do it:

https://youtu.be/PWWHmxnWa2A?t=3m13s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ah8RZ13dKv8 (with the exception of the dog)

Additional LOL is that AFAIR there's no attack whatsoever here: these tentacles don't shoot anything / don't hit you, you just get the "You died" info. Maybe due to this "dangerously looking red glow"? I may be wrong, but that's how it looked like.

I dusted off the game to give a better look at the boss. Here's exactly what happens:

- Cut-scene shows the four tentacles rising together (first tip)
- Cut-scene ends, Sheva says "Above you!" (second tip)
- The four tentacles are glowing red (third tip)

They charge the attack for 15-17 seconds before unleashing it. This is a MASSIVE amount of time for an obvious charge attack and it's hard to believe that you did nothing, especially after three clues. Maybe a letterbox saying "SHOOT THE TENTACLES" should have popped on the screen.

Btw, pretty fun boss. Hammering a tentacle with that big ass laser gun is always a pleasure.

a) You have to hit him from behind / cover, since he will dodge otherwise - bad. Bosses can be bullet sponges / have weak spots you have to aim for. But dodge masters?
b) You have to shoot the grenade - OK, but WHY exactly? It's p. stupid, since simple hitting him with the damn RPG would've had the same outcome (he becomes immobilized). But no, Capcom had to add more KEWL: Wesker struggles with the live RPG, which he grabbed with his bare hands!

This is how the boss was designed.

How fucking cool! RE1 is so antique in comparison, with Tyrant being unable to grab RPGs.

You have to shoot the Tyrant with the rocket launcher - ok, but WHY exactly? Because the game said so? Why can't I kill the Tyrant with other weapons? Dumb game lolololol!!!11

c) You and your AI-controlled friend have to move close to Wesker and QTE him to "kill" him. Stupid, since you have to repeat the entire process if Sheva is not close enough / if you fail the damn QTE / if you don't inject him the 1st time. And you won't, since Capcom decided that "LOLNO, you haven't succeeded yet, let's repeat" is a good mechanic (see fight against Jill).

I replayed this boss too. You need to damage Wesker enough to be able to grab him. This is the only REAL flaw of the boss - there's no clue about how much damage is necessary, which forces the player to rely on supposition.

"RE4's great combat"? RE4 combat is shit:
- low FOW (duh), so you don't see what's going on most of the time,
- you can't move/strafe and aim at the same time, which is basic fucking mechanic for FPP shooter and present even in many older TPP console games (Conker),
- enemies initially run fast towards you, then slow down (so you can aim better),
- shitty K + M controls (the game is designed for gamepad, but in RE5 K + M controls are fine),
- the abundance of QTEs.

- Omg I can't see anything!
- Not a problem since the enemies were designed around the controls (unlike the old RE games).
- See above.
- The PC versions of RE4 were shit, yes.
- Rarely happens during combat.

"Massive enemy diversity"? WAT? You basically have melee fags (shoot in legs, approach, QTE) and shooting fags (either take out from a distance or cut the distance and kill the same way as melee fags. Regenerators / some bosses: pop weak moles. Krauser – QTE fest.
Oh, maybe by "diversity" you mean different looks?

Let's just consider the primary foes of RE4 and Revelations (ganados and oozes) for a while.

Ganado types:

- Weaponless (grab attacks), pitchfork, sickle, dynamite, chainsaw, scythe, torch, flail, crossbow, rocket launcher, turret, sledgehammer (armored ganado) and stun rod.

Now add their altenatives (shields and/or helmets) and mutations.

How many types of Oozes exist?

Four, with no mutations.



Even if you consider all Revelation's enemies, it still can't surpass the ganado's list.

I also like how you think that context-sensitive actions are QTEs ("shoot in legs, approach, QTE").

"The old RE games had popamolish combat" You seem to have somehow missed the canonical definition of popamole combat. It's combat when you stay in one place while you pop some slower or faster moles.

I prefer to use the generalized version which means "shallow". But anyway...

And - surprise, surprise!

http://cdn.entertainmentfuse.com/media/2014/10/RE-4-screenshot-chainsaw-HD.jpg

...way to miss your own point.

Refuse to move and watch yourself being killed by the chainsaw guy. If you try to stun him at such short range, other ganados will have enough time to get close or throw projectiles at you. Movement IS necessary.

Also, the most efficient way to kill ganados is with the "stun + melee" trick, which requires constant movement.

Combat in RE0-3 can be considered "simple" (automated aim) or "bad" (fixed camera angles), but it's anything but popamole, since CONSTANT MOVEMENT is FUCKING ESSENTIAL. You can't move and shoot at the same time (which is too bad) but at least you have to keep changing your position (if only for better camera angle).

Enemies aren't designed around the player's controls; lack of proper aim means no contextual body damage (other than instapop headshots); encounters are completely uninspired and limited to "fight 2-3 zombies in this small room, "fight a Hunter in this small room", "fight 1-2 dogs in this corridor." etc

"you have to keep changing your position (if only for better camera angle)"

Top game design right here, lol.

Sure, so I get guns I can use only against bosses. Nice. How about adding shotgun and magnum ammo to the shop, but making it very expensive (same as with ammo for grenade launcher)? Such a revolutionary idea, I know.

And tougher enemies. What's the point of using a shotgun or a magnum against weak minions anyway?

Well, I think otherwise and will even explain (again) why: it's basically shallow "kill as many respawning fags as possible" shooting gallery. You can move around the map, but don't have to, TBH. It's all about popping them moles fast enough (so you get more time to pop more). The only reason for moving around are these "bonus time" thingies and maybe looking for better spot to pop them moles (cover behind, height advantage). It's shallow as fuck, because there's nothing more, you can only choose between different fags, which means different item setups and melee animations. Wheee!

Mercenaries IS a score-based mode, there is no reason to ignore the bonuses.

"It's all about popping them moles fast enough (so you get more time to pop more."

Enemies only give time bonuses if you finish them with melee attacks. Again, you're contradicting yourself. Is the game about shooting moles while standing still or not?

"you can only choose between different fags, which means different item setups and melee animations"

These melee animations have different timing, range and effects. Ex: Rebbeca can damage multiple enemies at the same time with her spray, Excella can instakill a single majini with her slap, Wesker can push enemies away, etc

How to play Mercenaries:

Really? First, it's about killing all enemies on the map. So you have to traverse the map back and forth, which allows the devs to place enemies in clever positions (fags spawning in front of you and behind, strongest foes at the end).

If I wanted to play linear levels with pre-determined enemy placement I'd play the campaign. Give me moar arenas and enemy spawn spots, which leads to unpredictable confronts.

Second, you got different characters, with different skills.
3rd, you can customize your weapons, which alters gameplay. If you invest into "stun", you'll get more melee finishers. Want more money? Add parts which affect drops. Etc. etc.

Different characters and weapons don't alter the extremely repetitive enemies and encounters.

4th, enemies have weak spots (which is clearly shown when you shoot them), so they're not bullet sponges. Want to conserve ammo - aim better. In RE5 it's mostly "go for the legs, Boo!".

Are you talking about Revelations 2 (I didn't played it yet)? Raid mode Oozes are bullet sponges even when you hit their heads, and this only changes when the player acquires powerful shotguns, magnums or sniper rifles.

Also, to stun them you need to shoot both of their hands, which is the most unintuitive thing ever since the hands don't look vulnerable neither stand out from the rest of their bodies:

Hey look, their hands are weak spots. You can totally see it, right? Nope. Now THIS is a terrible design choice.

5th, enemies are more varied than in RE5 (IMO): the exploding ones and DAT little fucking fish I hate this cunt come to mind – and require different tactics.

Single enemies? I prefer to fight 10+ enemies at the same time, each one with their own equipment and ability to mutate during battle.

If that's not diversity, I don't know what is.

Revelations has like, 12 enemies. RE5 has about 40.

Even if combat in RER is shallow (which I wrote about above), having additional layer of gameplay (weapon customization, different skills for characters) is still better than not having it (RE5).

I rather have a gameplay that prioritizes player skill (Mercenaries). "Additional layer of gameplay", lol. You're talking about upgrading your weapons to be able to kill repetitive bullet sponges enemies faster.

 

[Ivan]

Reisdent Evil

In spite of the bullshit encumbrance inducing backtracking, cheap Hunters who have inv frames when you stagger them, this is by far the most tense of the series. As mentioned above, the second boss fight with Yawn leaves you destitute. You will most likely have no ammor and no health. The segment following was the best of the entire series.

But bros, weird shit happened. I rendezvoused with Chris and got to the helipad and the game ended. I was expecting one more boss. WTF?

 

[BLOBERT]

BROS UPDATING MY MAME ROM LIST AGAIOAIN LOLLOLOL EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE I GET IN A SPRERE

NOW I AM GOINDG THROUGH SOME CLASSICASD I MISSSED AND GETTING ALL THE FIGTING GAMES

BEEN PLAYING ART OF FIGHTING 3 AND MORTAL LKNOMBAT THE MOST

ON THE FAGBOX STILL DRAGONS DOGMA DONT GET ENOUGHT TIMER WITH IT TO GET REALLY BOARD YET

 

[Cyberarmy]

Replaying Dungeon Keeper 1-2 while wating for Pillars. Just made a special mini dungeon for my little Horny.
And just learned that Richard Ridings is coming back with War for the Overworld!
at its finest.

 

[spekkio]

RE5 isn't THAT bad!!!

BRO, can we DISCUSS some better games than RE5?

QTEs are a bunch of reflex mini-games. I rarely struggle with them so why should I consider them cheap?

Don't you think that brainless "0 struggle, pop correct mole NAO!" = "cheap"?

No, a game developed with co-op in mind means the single-player is deficient by default.

Oh, so we agree that RE5 is underdeveloped? Thanks.

Dishonored is in first-person, I'm talking about third-person games. For third-person games with a lot of closed environments, low FOV is the way to go because it reduces "camera tumbling".

Low FOV in a 3PP game (especially like RE4-6, where your fag's ass covers 1/2 of the screen) reduces "camera tumbling" (you mean twitching around to see anything)? I hope you're kidding.
Anyway, how about letting me set it to a preferred value, like in Dishonored? Why do you think every newshit RE game has trainers / mods which allow you to modify the FOV. PROTIP: people want it, Capcom didn't bother.

RE4 didn't had an item stash

RE4 had merchant, who was basically a shop. You know, a place where you can buy items you need ATM and sell the ones you don't. Which RE5 lacks, as long as you don't want to quit the game.

And the other RE games had backtracking (not suited for a co-op game)

WUT? How exactly is backtracking not suitable for a co-op game? So, all co-op games have to be linear corridor shooting galleries?

Maybe you should plan better your inventory before playing. But if you can't handle it, I suppose you can still exploit the checkpoint system.

With only 2x9 item slots and no stashes, you don't actually have other options.

stuff about enemies telegraphing attacks and the tentacle boss

I'm not sure if you realize this, but in all movies you posted, enemies do "telegraph" (announce) their attacks. It's only that in case of the oldshit (RE1 and RE:CV) you have to be quick to react to enemy's actions (attack animation), while in case of the newshit (RE4-6) you get more time (slower animation / additional cues) so you can aim with the analogue stick.

They charge the attack for 15-17 seconds before unleashing it. This is a MASSIVE amount of time for an obvious charge attack

See above - maybe I'm not used to bosses charging their attacks for 1/2 of the minute. I dunno, maybe I'm too old for the newshit. I will take the oldshit bosses over this current QTE-infested crap any day.
BTW how does the insta-kill attack actually look like, I haven't found any clips on Youtube? "She" shoots some evil beam or sth?

Boss battle against Wesker is badly designed

This is how the boss was designed.

You have to shoot the Tyrant with the rocket launcher - ok, but WHY exactly? Because the game said so? Why can't I kill the Tyrant with other weapons? Dumb game lolololol!!!11

The point of the final battle in RE is to avoid Tyrant for the set amount of time. He's the only enemy you can't kill using regular weapons. Devs wanted to show you have powerful he is or someshit. It's not a well designed battle, but it's serviceable: run around, grab RL, fire in proper direction, the end. You missed? Repeat. Which is the only thing I have problem with.
The point of the battle against Wesker is to stun him, so you can QTE him. Now what's the point of adding the "Wesker grabs the RPG so you need to shoot it" part, when your goal is stunning him? This could've been done by simply hitting him with the grenade (he can dodge projectiles anyway). You still have to move close to him and have Sheva close to QTE him. That was my gripe.

Not a problem since the enemies were designed around the controls (unlike the old RE games).

Which was actually my gripe. Controls in RE4 are so shit, that Capcom had to design enemies around it. You sound like a newshit gamer here (it may be worse than in the past, but it's intentional).

Enemy variety

AFAIR almost / all "various" enemies in RE4 can be described the way I did: the ones you can shoot in close range, and the ones you have to shoot from afar.
Let's take a shielded fags for example. Normally, I would aim at enemies' legs, to finish them off with melee. With shieldfags, I will aim at their legs anyway, so they drop the shield first. Wheee, such diversity!
Now, enemies in RER aren't varied when it comes to numbers, but IMO require more diversified approach. RER2 improves on this even more.

I also like how you think that context-sensitive actions are QTEs

Well... Most of them are. Melee finishers are timed. You won't die if you "fail" them, but you have to time them, or enemies will recover. Some context-sensitive actions aren't of course QTEs (climbing ladders, etc.) but the ones I wrote about, are. You may not remember this, but in the past you won't get "context-sensitive" info for regular shit like climbing ladders or jumping out windows. How the times have changed.
Maybe we should call them "Slow Time Events", to distinguish them from the "press a key during a fmv or die" Quick Time Events, which are IMO 100 times worse?

No strife when aiming

BRO, RER2 allows you to strafe while aiming and reload while moving. Due to that, enemies and the whole gameplay are WAY faster than in RE4-5 and the gameplay resembles oldshit FPP PC shooters, where you could move and shoot at the same time. This is fun, probably even using gamepad.
Compared to this, RE4 is a console shooting gallery: move, switch to stationary aim mode, slowly aim with the gamepad, cancel aim to move, etc. For a person who played any mouse-controlled PC shooter, this is not fun. This is shit.

(In RE0-3) enemies aren't designed around the player's controls; lack of proper aim means no contextual body damage (other than instapop headshots); encounters are completely uninspired and limited to "fight 2-3 zombies in this small room, "fight a Hunter in this small room", "fight 1-2 dogs in this corridor." etc

Yeah. These games belong to so-called "survival horror" subgenre: action games with various elements: shooting, solving puzzles, exploring, managing resources.
RE4-6 are shooters. And not so great ones, BTW.
Guess which ones are universally considered better games?

Scarce ammo for shotgun / magnum

(Useful not only for bosses, but also) tougher enemies. What's the point of using a shotgun or a magnum against weak minions anyway?

So what's the point of upgrading them? Better idea is to use and upgrade one MG and one Rifle (plenty ammo for both, unlimited ammo in 2nd playthrough). Again: what's wrong with making ammo available in shop, but expensive (especially for better guns)?

Mercenaries / Raid mode

It looks like we like different things, no point of arguing here. It all boils down to:

If I wanted to play linear levels with pre-determined enemy placement I'd play the campaign.

That's what I would actually want.

Give me moar arenas and enemy spawn spots, which leads to unpredictable confronts.

That's IMO boring. If I wanted to play a "survival shooter", I would've played some better one (dunno, something like Serious Sam or Painkiller).

tl;dr

It looks like you like console shooters, so you find RE5 (especially in co-op or Mercenaries mode) good / acceptable. Myself, I would've preferred something more old-school: a single-player survival horror game. Actual Resident Evil game. Thankfully, RER2 went (a bit) in exactly this direction and I'm enjoying it right now.

Hugs and love, but I still think there are much better games (even console shooters) than RE5.

 

[A horse of course]

Why the fug has everyone been playing Resident Evil gnomes these past 2 months? I hadn't touched the series in years until RE6 and RE5 a year or so back, then took another break until REmake HD, RE4, Raccoon City Chronicles, REZero, REUMbrella Chronicles and onwards

(In RE0-3) enemies aren't designed around the player's controls; lack of proper aim means no contextual body damage (other than instapop headshots); encounters are completely uninspired and limited to "fight 2-3 zombies in this small room, "fight a Hunter in this small room", "fight 1-2 dogs in this corridor." etc

Yeah. These games belong to so-called "survival horror" subgenre: action games with various elements: shooting, solving puzzles, exploring, managing resources.
RE4-6 are shooters. And not so great ones, BTW.
Guess which ones are universally considered better games?

http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation/resident-evil

http://www.metacritic.com/game/gamecube/resident-evil-4

 

[spekkio]

By "universally considered better games" I meant of course "by Aryan elite" not some unwashed masses.

 

[Darth Roxor]

I finished Loom today.

It was p. cool, but damn was it casual. And damn was it short. It could have just as well come out today as one of those artsy indie games and nobody would notice a difference.

 

[A horse of course]

Resident Evil Code Verionica: similar to Resi3, I loved Claire's first chapter. the puzzles had a good flow, the environments were cool for a "military base." However, after the first chapter the game does away with interesting puzzles (my favorite in all 3 games was the legacy painting puzzle) in favor of bullshit use item x on y that are rarely intuitive. Oh, and fuck Steve. Starts off great but stagnates throughout, especially in Antacrtica. I guess most of the praise was due to the awesum graphx.

What config did you use?

 

[Ivan]

Code Veronica X PS2.

Finished the original series.
2>1 (Hunters are cheap motherfuckers, Had full health once and one insta-decapitated me, THE RAGE)>3>Code Veronica

Not touching Zero since it runs like ass on dolphin.

Waiting for a sale for Remake on steam.

Is RE5 good if I liked 4 (particularly because of regenerators, wolverine boss, the thing that stalks you in the underground, sexy reload animations).

 

[spekkio]

2>1>3>CV

My order exactly.

Is RE5 good if I liked 4

Tough question. AFAIK people who liked 4 disliked 5 because of reasons (co-op, different mood), while people who didn't like 4 disliked 5 beacuse of other reasons (still a shooter, worse RE than 4).
Check me vs. Tehdagah on this and previous pages.

 

[Modron]

Finally got around to playing Dead Space 2, didn't enjoy it as much as the first one years ago. I don't know if they speed up the enemies because I seem to remember using the starting cutter for pretty much the whole game the first time around whereas in the second game that proved more of an exercise in frustration and I quickly switched to different guns. Plus they inserted more jump scares because they were incapable of building tension through other means apparently.

Next I decided to play Summoner since some members here speak quite highly of it, it did not live up to the hype. Summoner had a decent character development system, combat was okay (chain system was basically a better witcher 1 melee system), and spell variety could have been better. Really the biggest issue with the game was that it's length was mostly determined by how long areas were and how many trash mobs they stuff said zones with.

In an effort to cut down my adventure game backlog going to require myself to beat 3 or 4 before I play other games, going to start with Syberia 1-2 and probably the Shiva before I look into playing BG 1-2 again or something.

 

[Ivan]

Did you play it on Zealot diffiuclty? I have very fond memories of Dead Space 2 particularly b/c of that difficulty setting. It made the gameplay feel more like a survival horror in terms of item management, except, you know, the game isn't scary since you're blasting or curb stomping every enemy in your way.

 

[Modron]

Did you play it on Zealot diffiuclty? I have very fond memories of Dead Space 2 particularly b/c of that difficulty setting. It made the gameplay feel more like a survival horror in terms of item management, except, you know, the game isn't scary since you're blasting or curb stomping every enemy in your way.

Played survivalist IIRC then pretty much switched to easy during the last 2 chapters because I was getting tired of the game.

 

[Jick Magger]

But bros, weird shit happened. I rendezvoused with Chris and got to the helipad and the game ended. I was expecting one more boss. WTF?

Let me guess; Barry died?

 

[Sceptic]

I finally finished the Bard's Tale trilogy. Good games, BT2 in particular is great and still very worth playing even now. I wish I had the forethought to start an LP with the first game, it would've been fun. I might do it in a year or two if I get the itch to replay the series.

It did put me in an LP mood, so I started one for Conquests of the Longbow instead

Finally got around to playing Dead Space 2, didn't enjoy it as much as the first one years ago. I don't know if they speed up the enemies because I seem to remember using the starting cutter for pretty much the whole game the first time around whereas in the second game that proved more of an exercise in frustration and I quickly switched to different guns. Plus they inserted more jump scares because they were incapable of building tension through other means apparently.

In terms of tone and atmosphere, I think DS2 is supposed to be to DS1 what Aliens is to Alien. Except Aliens was a good action movie. DS2 isn't a good action game. That it also in the process loses every single aspect that could redeem DS1 pretty much dooms it to being not worth playing. And then of course they added QTEs, just to be sure.

 

[Ivan]

I need to amend my previous post.

Resident Evil 2

Finished Claire's A scenario in 2 1/2 hours. This game flows so well. I love all of its locales. Also, this:


it's right up there with

 

[Unkillable Cat]

Out of curiosity I had a brief look at Shelter 2, the sequel to everyone's favourite (read: only) Badger Simulator.

The sequel ups the ante by replacing the cute and cuddly omnivore with a cuter and cuddlier carnivore - namely, the lynx. The game starts with the pregnant Lynx Mother needing to find a shelter for her and her future family. Once there, a short cutscene appears where 4 kittens are revealed, complete with purring, meowing, yawning and other similar cat antics - but then the game throws a curveball at you with a new feature that is both wickedly clever and fiendishly evil.

It assigns names to all 5 of the cats, with the option for the player to rename the feline family.

While playing the first game I realized that I was playing a badger leading her four cubs to safety, but at the end of the day they were just badgers. A certain emotional gap was always present. I wasn't bothered when I lost the first cub to the darkness on Level 2 - I was mostly wondering how I'd managed to lose it. This simple little addition closes that gap - now they're no longer just a bunch of wild animals in the forest, they have identities, traits, names - and it'll tear your heart out once you start losing kittens to the wild. This game goes straight for the feels, and doesn't dick around while doing so.

And it's precisely because of my love/hate relationship with cats in general that I decided to not play any further. For the first time in close to 30 years of gaming, I am refusing to play a game because it might make me feel bad. Besides, I doubt it's changed that much from the original - probably even has a twist by the end like the original.

 

[Abelian]

it'll tear your heart out once you start losing kittens to the wild.

Sounds like they need some help to become unkillable cats.