>>22273
I played a bit last year, got as near to full rune as is possible without killing the dragon because I couldn't be bothered to do that quest.

>>22268
I wouldn't say it's shit, it's just basically unrecognisable from the version you know. I just logged back into my old main out of curiosity, here's a screenshot. The interface is all customisable but would be confusing as hell the first time you log in.

>>22275
Also I have to concede it's quite pretty. This is Falador castle now.

>>22276
>quite pretty
That's Neverwinter Nights with better aliasing, not exactly pushing the boat out graphics wise.

>>22277
I didn't mean as a standard for the whole gaming industry, just that it's nice to explore a familiar world re-rendered in this way.

>>22275
>>22276
Wow! That's actually impressive for RuneScape. It looks like World of Warcraft now.

>>22277
Don't be an arse.

Finished Kingdom Hearts 2. I started it when I was 14 and never finished it at the time as I didn't want it to end. But now I've finished it 11.5 years later. It had a satisfying ending, so I'm curious to see how the prequels/sequels keep the story going after such a definitive conclusion.

>>22266

I've just spent a whole week levelling up my mining. Thanks for reminding me that Runescape exists you massive bellend.

There are pros and cons to having one, universal Microsoft account. However, being called "loser" by a lad who beat me on Fifa an hour and a half after I've turned the Xbox off is definitely a con.

>>22288
It's best when you do it with an unfashionable club, that really seems to irritate them. I haven't had a FIFA game in ages, but my favourite team to play online with was Flamengo when they had Adriano and Vagner Love up front.

>>22288

What in god's name have you done to your browser, lad?

Did you accidentally tie-dye your computer?

>>22290
I think he's gone all a bit Aztec in that late eighties style.

I bout Quake Champions hoping it wouldn't be shit, because if you buy it in early access you get all the champions and that without having to go through the unlock bollocks.

Unfortunately it's shit.

I mean my first 3 or 4 matches I quite enjoyed it, but that's about as long as the matchmaking held up before it just crumbled and I found myself playing against 43 year old Q3A veterans without being able to get a kill in edgeways. The champion abilities are complete horseshit too, there is no place for those in a game like this, they just feel cheap and unfair when you die to them, and effortless when you use them. Even instagib is ruined- Instagib, the most level playing field you can think of, where only aim and reaction time matters- Cunts will still fucking cheap-shot you using the Ranger ability. Nothing is sacred.

But of course, it's still in beta they say, it hasn't had the flaws ironed out they say, it will get improvements they say. And yet I can see they've clearly been putting their effort where in it counts- making fucking overpriced gambling crates with more cosmetic shite than you can ever hope to unlock by normal means. There's so fucking much of it. Every champion has about 5 different skins and dozens of colour shaders. But the game itself barely has ten maps and 3 game modes.

Why did I try pretend it would be any different?

>>22335
I don't see who it's made to appeal to. Old school arena FPS fans seem like they'd be put off by the modern additions like champion abilities and lootboxes. And the more casual audience seem like they'd be put off by the more hardcore gameplay compared to stuff like Overwatch. So who is it for?

>>22335
>Q3A veterans
I never really got into Q3A myself but I used to watch videos of the top players and I've honestly never seen anything like it since - as a test of pure twitch reflex it's hard to match. I guess it might not even be possible these days, since there's always a few frames of latency in modern, more complicated engines.

>>22337

What really makes a world class Q3A player is game sense. Good players have an uncanny ability to anticipate the movement of their opponent. At best, human reaction time is about 200ms, so you're at a huge advantage if you pre-fire at angles where you expect your opponent to arrive. This is doubly true with slow projectile weapons like the rocket launcher, but it still applies with hitscan weapons like the rail gun. You see it a lot in CS:GO too - entry fraggers pre-firing all the common CT spots and AWPers making speculative wallbangs etc.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rce75JYlJd8

>>22336

Precisely, it's just the worst of both worlds. If they wanted the hardcore audience, they could (and really should) have just done a direct remake of Q3 into the new engine. If they wanted the casuals they'd be better off building on the success of Doom 4 and making a single player Quake.

In fact if they wanted to be really clever they'd do a sequel to Enemy Territory: Quake Wars. It's a much more natural fit for the tropes of modern shooters, and they could have bundled in a little deathmatch side mode just to keep everyone happy. But of course that makes too much sense.

>>22338

Jesus, I'm getting twitchy just watching that.

Modern Warfare 2 and 3. It's the first playthrough actually, could have played it way back but life interfered.

MW2 is ok. Actually, really ok. They went the 'take all the good parts from MW, add more, turn up to 11' route and that's all good but Russian invasion of USA seemed a bit overdone in pathos/drama to me. But then, it's CoD.

MW3 is a tad shite. Nothing really memorable about it. I can only recall the mission in Paris where you get to fight both for ground troops and for the C-130 team. Everything else was sub-par.

I've found a tarball with Cataclysm:DDA in it and decided to give it another go. It's pretty fun for a game with no graphics besides ASCII symbols.

I died about 20 times before the god of randomness sent me an almost intact Humvee with a fucking Mark 19 GL installed on it. I managed to sweep clean two settlements before I ran out of ammo. Bloody outrageous.

And again, for a game with no graphics it's been unproportionally fun to 'nade things, same for running them over at ~80 kph.

Autism thoroughly checked.

I’ve been on that CK II shit for a long while now. During this save I changed characters from my Emperor of Britain to some Persians and what the AI let happen to my former realm was nothing short of vile. They let the vikings reconquer Kent ffs, and my Lollardy reformation was all but totally undone. Makes me sick, lads

Invested every hour I'm not at work or sleeping in Yakuza 0 since it came out.

Fucking brilliant game, I was going to buy a PS3/4 just to play them.

>>22422
There's been too much Yakuza this year. 6, remake of 2, and then the Fist Of The North Star Yakuza game in October. I can easily sink 30-50 hours into a Yakuza game, but with so many out this year I'm struggling to find the time.

>>22423
I'm a PC player so I'll likely be getting a slow dripfeed of them. I've put 88 hours into 0 - I've just got enough cash to get to Lvl 99 Dragon, so just need to spend a few hours on that infuriating upgrade tree.

>>22417
On a second playthrough I'd take my words about MW3 back. It's quite ok. Thoroughly enjoyed the team Metal missions.

Gone are the days I can walk into an FPS and be better than average. I think I'm gonna refund BlackOps 4 and hang up FPS forever.

I barely understand how bad to average players can possibly enjoy battle royale.

>>22452

>I barely understand how bad to average players can possibly enjoy battle royale.

Because you can win a match by just killing one person. In a traditional FPS you might have to get upwards of 40 kills to win.

>>22453
You don't need any kills to win. And what sort of victory is that? Where's the fun in seeking bye after bye in every engagement? You don't see hide and seek games gaining... Dead by Daylight is actually one of the most popular games on Steam. Fuck me.

>>22454
You may have missed the point of BR modes entirely.

>>22455
My experience leads me to think this thriller narrative fades very quickly after your first couple of wins.

>>22452
Not played the battle royale mode yet, but I'm pretty poor at CoD multiplayer but still have fun. I think because you don't have to wait long to respawn so I don't feel I'm being punished for failing. Mainly getting it for the Zombies mode though.

Operation Flashpoint: CWC again. I wanted something more realistic than CoD and... bollocks, didn't I post exactly this about 2.5 years already? Right I did.

Fuck me.

How many roads must a man walk down
Before you call him a man?
How many seas must a white dove sail
Before she sleeps in the sand?
Yes, and how many times must the cannonballs fly
Before they're forever banned?

Bought RDR2. Was going to ignore it as it's not my type of thing, but the glowing reviews made me feel like I was missing out. One of the most boring games I've ever played. Maybe it gets better, but first three hours were mostly spent slowly following people through the snow. Controls are the worst I've ever experienced in a AAA game. Sometimes square picks up items, sometimes it's triangle, the player character takes way too long to respond to your inputs, it's just dreadful. Worst £50 I spent.

>>22489

I read that the first ten hours are essentially character introduction and tutorials. I'm still looking forward to it as I quite like that sort of thing. Hopefully the controls are better on Xbox, I'll let you know when I play it tonight. Does it not just control like GTA 5?

>>22489
>first three hours were mostly spent slowly following people through the snow.

How realistic are the horse testicle physics?

RDR2 might've been a game I'd have bought a new console for when I was a teenlad, but these days I don''t really get hyped for linear, cinematic games. It just serves as a reminder that what you're basically doing is watching a movie with mini arcade game style interludes to shoot the baddies. I'm really into westerns so I'd definitely still find it fun, but it could be so much more. On top of that, I'm not really keen on supporting Rockstar's sheisty practice of releasing games on consoles first, knowing full well that many people will double dip and buy it again when it's released on PC.

What I really lament is the death of the first person RPG. Games like Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines and Fallout: New Vegas did a great job of combining all the choices and consequences you'd find in old school isometric RPGs with the immersiveness of the first person perspective and voiced NPCs. Nowadays, every developer wants voiced, pre-defined, 'cinematic' characters, which always takes away from the roleplaying. Sure, we've still got plenty of great isometric RPGs being released these days, but the fact that the best new RPGs are the same kinds of RPGs they released in the 90s is a bitter pill to swallow.

>>22492
I much prefer well designed linear games over open ones. Open ones just end up bland, I don't care about two or three 'choices' you make affecting it, I'm not the dude, I'm a player.

>>22493
Bland if you are talking about the main quest but the gist is that the open ones aren't as much about the main quest as they are about the game world and lore.
I don't even think it's fair to compare the two, they are different beasts really, about different things.

>>22494
I've found I feel much better immersed in a well built atmosphere and story like Dead Space than in psuedo randomised crap like Skyrim or Fallout.

>>22489
I loved RDR1 and bought RDR2 on opening day - never fall for the pre-order shit. I love it. It's a "slow" game, the first couple of hours is a bit of a walking simulator as you do missions on rails that show you how to do things. Once you get to the truly "open world" bit out of the snow, it is very playable. I find it more of an old-school adventure game with a bit of third-person shooting thrown in.

Played it all last night until about 4am. Going to try not to do the same today....

Graphics: truly amazing - a great demo of what a modern console can do. Controls: bit hard to get used to, have accidentally shot some characters in the face when I meant to talk to them.

It'll easily be my game of the year, given Battlefield V's continually shifting delivery date. If you liked RDR1, then the second version is an excellent evolution for modern consoles. If you didn't "get" this game first time around, I'm not sure you will now.

Stellaris; 4X 'grand' strategy - S'fun but you're pretty much in for the long haul. Starting any new game feels like a project. I've taken to writing notes at each save so I can remember just where I'm at and what I'm doing on my return. The retracted content, later to be sold as DLC, is really noticable too. Fucking £50 there abouts for all the features.

Darkwood; top-down survival adventure (i guess?) - The scenes are pretty cool, setting very atmospheric. I've enjoyed it a lot but there's just something about the looting - especially dying - that turns me the fuck off and kills any enjoyment I've had of the game.

Pretty half arsed reviews there but whatever.

I'm fast realising that gaming is losing it's 'escapism' for me - the moments of catching a glimps of my reflection in the dark monitor are becoming more and more frequent. I've posted about it before, I'm posing about it again. Climbing trees is more fun. Making things is more fun. but I'm still looking for the next game that'll hopefully help me forget myself for a moment.
[/fag]

>>22496
>never fall for the pre-order shit
People say this all the time but I don't even understand what pre-ordering is. Like back when you bought physical media from a shop I can understand reserving a copy so they don't run out on release day. But that's not an issue with digital distribution so what on earth is the point? It boggles my mind.

>>22498
It's to get more money out of you sooner. Also they do silly things with in-game content and balancing and spew some BS about "player choice" when they make the same content available to everyone else via endless grinding.

Apparently publishers do this because they want all the money in the world. Given how massively profitable the big names are, there's really no other sensible explanation for them trying to make even more.

>>22499
Plus they need a backup plan for when loot crates are eventually banned as unregulated gambling.

It's surely about customer retention also. A person's desire to buy something might cool to the point where once the game is out they'd not overcome the inertia of inaction and make a purchase, but crucially not to the point where they'd cancel their preexisting preorder.

It's analogous to free trials.

>>22498
It gets people to buy the game based on all the previews telling them how awesome it will be, before their friends or the handful of honest game reviewers can tell them how shit it is.

>>22498

>I can understand reserving a copy so they don't run out on release day. But that's not an issue with digital distribution so what on earth is the point? It boggles my mind.

When I pre-ordered RDR2, my Xbox downloaded most of the game immediately, despite this being a few weeks before release. If you're itching to play a game at midnight release, then I can see how that could appeal. I personally like to have the digital version as it's just easier for me, and I knew 100% I was going to buy the game so I thought I might as well pay for it earlier. I'm sure there was probably some preorder bonus in there, I didn't check because I really don't care. I think I might have got a free horse or summat.

I don't particularly think preordering is a great idea, but certain games like Red Dead, Fallout, Elder Scrolls, that sort of thing, I know I'll be buying it so I see no reason not to do it on Xbox marketplace a few days early so the game's ready at release. I might just be killing the games industry, and it makes little sense as I didn't exactly play RD at midnight on release, but fuck it.

>>22503
Christ. The state of this gamer.

>>22513

I play about three games a year m8