OmarBradley

11 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

It was some dev interview behind the scenes thing I saw, could have been about stuff like weaponry but they were also talking about how respectful to soldiers/dead they were being and how important that was for them It's not at all respectful to them imo. 12 year olds screaming in your ear and everyone having fun playing a game in the trenches with mustard gas. Just feels kind of awkward and tonedeaf. Like imagine going back in time and talking to those who fought and died in the mud and telling them how much fun you had 'remembering' them. "I love this map! *stares at their confused soon to be dead faces*"

I roll my eyes at something like women soldiers in a WW2 game but tbh the more I think about it the less I care and actually would prefer if they went in that direction of fuck it; women, cyborgs, fiction etc. Rather than feign any kind of authenticity because it isn't. I love videogames too and I'm well aware of how people use the medium as a scapegoat, I'm not, I'd criticize any other medium it's just that I happen to be talking about this specifically.

Something like "press X to go into the gas chamber; achievement unlocked" is disrespectful, in poor taste and exploitative. It's a cheap and jarring attempt at pretending to be more than it is and isn't doing it correctly. Like in CoD "Press X to pay your respects" at literally a recreation of an actual veteran graveyard.

Here's two examples of doing it right; SpecOps The Line and Wolfenstein II The New Colossus

I looked up SpecOps, the gameplay looks nearly identical to the Clancy/BF/CoD style single-player campaigns, with the addition of a cover mechanic. Wolfenstein's gameplay meanwhile, bears almost nothing in resemblance to real battle. And the plot of Wolfenstein is the Nazis won WWII... and you think a veteran would be more offended that someone could play a digital rendering of the lands they visited and the weapons they used to fight the Nazis ~75 years ago? Even if that rendering is not 100% accurate, it still gives the player a rough idea of real history. If you said "MP40" or "Market Garden" or "ACOG" or "heavy barrel" to almost anyone (more likely male*) aged 18-35 right now, there's a good chance they're familiar with those terms solely due to games like CoD and BF. 

And I don't consider Wolfenstein offensive, but it seems you should given your standards. Or you may want to redefine what you mean by tone-deaf/mockery of real wars. I agree that a WWII game shouldn't have soldiers with bionic limbs and katanas (unless they're Japanese). But that craziness in BFV is an outlier, generally these games are within realistic and respectable bounds of the aesthetics of the time period(s).

Thanks for clarifying that statement, I see what you mean. Yeah, I get that it seems odd to take such an emotionally-charged and serious topic and insert perfunctory actions like "Press E to examine the charred corpses." But to me, that's minutiae - it's just there to make it easier for you to move along the narrative, because it's a game and it can't take control from you too much - you are the one doing it. That being said, I'd agree when treating a tragic and serious topic in game development, it probably is better to let the game take control for a few moments to respectfully put you into the situation. 

Movies are better at historical accuracy and dealing with the tone's presentation, but video games have to be created to fit the consumption of a singular person's active interaction. A film is a passive activity. While this doesn't relinquish developers who create historically-related games from responsibility in maintaining accuracy, it means game development sometimes requires a bit of leeway in that area. There is more control available to the developer in single-player modes, where the narrative can guide your actions and push you through the game. But in multiplayer (which BF, CoD, etc. are known for and played for), the developer does not have as much control.

And my last argument, from your post, it seems you have more of a problem with the maturity of the audience than the nature of the games themselves. Sure, there are immature 12 year olds (mostly on CoD #sorrynotsorry), but there are huge mature communities for all of these games. Like I said above, that includes a large amount of active and reserve military personnel.

*According to Wikipedia, it's 15%m vs. 6%f that identify as gamers, and 60% of that 6% plays almost exclusively mobile games. Data is probably ~5 years old though, so it's possible there's been a shift. 

10 hours ago, DeadSlash said:

@OmarBradley  Yeah, Battlefield openly pushed the historical accuracy thing.  It was mostly around when they released the initial trailer and screens.

I looked up that SWG Jedi thing, and it's really hard to find articles from launch, the closest I could find was an interview with the dev team post release, where they were asked about there not being Jedi and how to become one, but the dev's played coy and said that they were tracking it and some players were getting close.  I couldn't find anything talking about the Jedi being pre-selected, and not anyone could be a Jedi.  It certainly was a thing, because half of the people I played with left, and it was reported by like EGM or something.   I wonder if it was changed quickly, or simply misunderstood because the dev team was so mum on the process.  The way I understood it was that there was a long journey to unlock the force sensitive, and it took a long time to complete.  At the end of this, you would find out that you had no midiclorian<sp?> and could not become a Jedi.  There were stats and explanations about it and all.  1 was in the stats, so it was like 1 in 10k or something and the reasoning was that it would not be Star Wars if everyone was a Jedi.  In retrospect, it might have been a rumor that the dev's simply didn't deny because they wanted people to figure it all out, but once it exploded and started costing them players, they clarified? idk.  Nothing like that would ever happen today, the path for becoming a Jedi would have it's own wiki page 6 months prior to release, sigh.

Now that's sounding sort of familiar, but I don't remember the details. And I'm having a hard time believing it was basically just a lottery (side note: remember player-run lotteries in cities? one of the many small but cool details in SWG). I'm going to re-look at that article I linked and talk to some fellow SWG expatriates, see if we can get to the bottom of this .

Funny you recall the devs saying "someone was close." In the article, the guy says they ran projections after SWGs' release, and the results indicated the first Jedi would show up around 2012 (9 years later). So, someone was lying or very wrong when they said that.

20 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

I'm 100% against censorship unless it's something insane like brothels being advertised next to a school. I think it's okay to take liberties with serious subjects like WW1, WW2 etc to create fictional scenarios/stories but when it gets to a point where you're acting out a specific terrible situation that happened in real life like the Normandy beach landing or something in an unrealistic way for entertainment like Battlefield 1 which actually has the audacity to pridefully advertise as being accurate - that's in poor taste imo. I mean what's next, press X to go into the gas chamber? Achievement Unlocked "#NeverForget"

Battlefield 1 was WWI, so Normany wouldn't be featured. Battlefield V is WWII, and the rumor is Normandy will be in DLC. Was it a horrific loss of life for the allies, despite it's strategic decisiveness? Yes. Does that mean that games shouldn't recreate the setting if they're not adhering to 100% realism? No, I don't think so at least.

I think the Battlefield games strive to attain a realism more-so than CoD, but no player would agree that BF is overall "historically accurate." I don't recall which marketing you're referring to, but if that phrasing was used, I would assume it referred to things like weaponry and weapon mechanics, maps/settings from the war, solider's uniforms, etc.. There are probably inaccuracies too, but other forms of media suffer from that as well.

I also fail to see the leap you assert in your last sentence. I'm not even sure what you're exactly arguing. Why shouldn't gas chambers and Nazi cruelty be depicted in video games? Games are a form of media, and media can teach and invoke emotion. When done correctly, it's a really special thing that's pretty unique compared to other media, and that's why I love video games.

12 hours ago, DeadSlash said:

 

@OmarBradley SWG was among the many games my friend and I tried in our vain attempt to relive out Asheron's Call glory days.  The thing I remember most about that game was a huge momentum killer it had early on.  The process of becoming a Jedi was cloaked all through development, and shortly after release it was discovered that only a few people would have the ability to be a Jedi and they couldn't find out if they had the power until end game levels.  It was like luck of the draw type of thing, there was no path for *anyone* to become a Jedi.  It really pissed people off hardcore.  I remember my friend calling me and telling me, he was so mad! I was too, but he was really pissed.  I think we bailed before the combat was changed, but I went through that in Asheron's Call 2.  AC1 outlasted it's own sequel going from 1999-2017, whereas AC2 only had a five year run.  The biggest dagger in the games heart came about 6 months in.  Now, granted, it was already a massive disappointment that is wasn't Asheron's Call redone with modern graphics, but it was still a fun game... until they took a steaming shit on it by nerfing all classes like 40% or 55% in damage.  The Dev team got a bee in their bonnet because they wanted people to play in parties, but people seldom did.  Their solution was to make everyone so weak, that grouping was mandatory, and soloing was not an option. I quit by the end of that month, and my friend had already quit.  It was a ghost town in 3 months, and never rebounded.  One thing I'd like to point out was that my friend and I didn't "rage quit" in protest, we quit because it simply wasn't fun and we went back to AC1.

There was definitely a learning curve/slow pace to the beginning of progression in the early SWG days. But once you made decent progress into 1 or 2 initial professions and started participating in guilds/groups, it made it a lot more fun. Like with AC2 as you're saying, SWG was definitely made to encourage group play (at times at least).

I was fine with the Jedi thing. Jedi get too much of the spotlight in the SW universe. The movies revolve around them, but the SW world often doesn't - especially in the time period SWG took place (original trilogy timeframe). And SWG was about being immersed in the SW universe, not following the storyline from a movie. Given the lore, it wouldn't make sense to have 10,000 Jedi running around (but they did it anyway with the NGE).

There was a methodical way to become a Jedi, it just wasn't revealed initially. I think that's more hardcore than just immediately loading up the game, starting a Jedi quest-line from "the Jedi quest-line NPC," and grinding what you needed to in order to get through. In the article I linked, they talk about their original ideas for Jedi, and one was basically the profession/holocron unlock system the game shipped with, but applied to every action in the game, not just mastering professions. And it would have been different for every player. The intention was to reward people for pursuing their preferred playstyles (as long as it included moderate diversity), instead of forcing a profession grind on everyone - which is basically what happened once word got out about the game's actual system.

There weren't really "levels" in pre-NGE SWG, but yeah you probably would have mastered at least one advanced profession before unlocking Jedi. It took probably at least 50 hours of play to unlock Jedi, and IMO, why should it be easier or less work? I get that the unknown of "how do we even do it?" was annoying in the beginning, but there was so much else to do in that game. 

I don't recall the announcement you're referring to, about only a few people being able to become Jedi. I am pretty sure anyone had the potential, you just had to go through the lengthy, uncertain system. Even if they did explicitly say "only a few people will become Jedi," I'd still stand by that system/statement. Jedi should be rare, powerful, and difficult to acquire. Every player should have the access to unlocking it, but by no means should every player be able to succeed at getting it easily or without arduous work. I like the system because if you really really wanted to become a Jedi, you could put in the time to do it. But if you just sort of casually wanted to become a Jedi because it's like, "cool, Jedi, lightsabers, shoot lightening out of my hands, etc." then you had to decide if it was really worth it for you. I remember everyone was sort of continuously trying to become Jedi, but only a very few people were seriously trying. 

You would have preferred the village system, probably introduced in 2004. Every player had the same set amount of actions to undertake (explore place X, get badge from helping NPC Y, master two professions, etc.) and once you completed the list, an NPC would arrive and tell you how to get to the Jedi village (after a fight, if I recall correctly). Then you'd go to the village and start your Jedi quest-line. The forums/gaming sites had the process detailed exactly within a few months of its inception into the game. That's not as much fun IMO.

18 hours ago, DeadSlash said:

Why it was so awesome: It was a massive open world, without loading screens.  I had never seen anything like it (not sure if there WAS anything like it) and it was the wild west.  You could pick a direction and go running and eventually find things you had never seen before, and had no idea if anyone else had.  You learned of things from other players, in game, in real time.  It 1999, and the internet was NOT what it is today.  Not every quest/mission/dungeon was documented on well laid out web sites.  You even had to figure out how to cast spells through experimentation!  Spells were a a candle, a scarab and a combination of 12 herbs and powders out of like 50 and you just tried different combinations until your spell did something beside *fizzle*.  Once you knew a spell, you would tell all of your clanmates.  Same thing with new dungeons, chests etc.  There was no global chat, so if you wanted to talk to people, you went to a town.

Some of the most fun online gaming that me and my best friend ever had came during those days.  Just running around looking for shit (The visuals were good for that time, also)  We run across old notebooks with spells we hand wrote, coordinates to dungeons, etc.  snap a pic and send a "remember this?" text and get a good laugh.

 

A lot of this reasoning is why I loved SWG so much too. I missed Asheron's Call, but SWG generated a lot of these same feelings and had similar mechanics.

EDIT: I thought all of these replies would naturally be added to my initial post. Instead, I've just triple posted.  pls don't ban

10 hours ago, Oldest Goat said:

Military shooters. I used to play Medal of Honour and Call of Duty back in the day. MoH is absolutely dead and after CoD4 that series went down hill and is now shit. Also, I've decided games like this are tone deaf and basically make a mockery of real wars and atrocities.

While I agree with your last sentence to a degree, I don't think it necessarily means we shouldn't be able to enjoy these products. I'm not a big CoD fan, but I do love Battlefield. CoD and Battlefield both have large military communities. I'd recommend it if you haven't tried it. Battlefield 4 could probably be gotten for pretty cheap.

I also would add that although these games in a way aim to mimic war/fighting, they're not really comparable to real battle. CoD is so far from actual fighting that I consider it more of an arcade game than a war game (multiplayer at least). Battlefield's a bit better, but still not really accurate. Arma is probably the closest thing.

I do agree that we (Americans at least) romanticize war and fighting, partially due to video games, movies, and novels. But I don't think that means these forms of media should be prohibited from exploring battle, despite the fact they very rarely get it 100% correct.

Cool thread.

Genre: MMORPG

Pinnacle: Star Wars Galaxies (pre-NGE)

How I found it: I was in middle school at the time. I had played Jedi Academy with a friend, and he kept telling me about this huge SW game where you could be anything you wanted to be and explore iconic locations from the films (and much more!). This would have been mid-2003 if I remember correctly. I picked up the game a month or two after he did, in late '03.

Why it was so awesome: I had played a decent amount of games, but nothing before was like this. I know Everquest was a thing, and maybe the first Guild Wars was out around that time too? But in terms of 3D rendered MMOs with complicated profession, combat, and crafting systems... nothing compared to SWG. At least, nothing I'd played or heard of. I started out as a Rifleman and worked my way up to a Bounty Hunter/Commando build before unlocking Jedi. I had a little green Rodian, wish I still had screenshots. Think I made it to Lieutenant in the Imperial faction. My character's name actually ended up being one of the main few names I use when creating online accounts (forums, new games, messenger software, etc.). I've been using it for close to 15 years!

PVP and guilds/clans were very big in SWG, as with most MMOs. There was a stupendous community of hardcore SW fans and gamers, as the game's mechanics attracted a bit more of a sophisticated crowd than some of the comparative MMOs (WoW, etc.). The game wasn't perfect on release, quite a few things had to be added in via patch (speeders, space travel, bug fixes, etc.), but the feeling of openness and being in the SW world was unparalleled. I still consider myself a decnetly big gamer, but these days it's rare for me to play anything for more than 2-3 hours in a row, and that's on the upper bound. Back in the SWG days, I played for... a lot longer than that sometimes LOL. 

I could probably type endlessly about the game and my experience in its unfortunately short-lived golden era. But no one wants to read that (except me ), so I'll stop.

However, if anyone played SWG too, check out this article. Fascinating account of the game's development and initial release from a lead developer.

Why it is now DEAD to me: 

The Combat Upgrade was jarring at first. It pretty radically changed the game's combat and introduced other changes as well. I believe the Jedi village showed up around this time too. It made the game a bit different, but it was still the mostly-familiar epic MMO it was before. 

Then, about a year later, the NGE came. New Game Enhancements... or Experience? I don't really remember. All I remember is that everyone hated it and it came out of nowhere. I think it was announced like 2-3 weeks before it was rolled out (fall 2005). It significantly changed the game, almost to the point that I'd say SWG pre-NGE and post are two different games, just both in the SW universe with the same planets. So many of the mechanics were simplified and streamlined. Anyone could now become a Jedi, there was no arduous path of learning and experience toward it. They also shaved it down from something like 26 professions, to 12. There were some balance problems in the beginning of the NGE, don't know if they were resolved as I never really went back to the game after that.

I kept playing for a month or two after the NGE's release, but the game was so different, and worse. It just wasn't as much fun, it wasn't the same game. So I cancelled my subscription and left, along with hordes of other players during this time period. I would check in every now and then via free trials maybe once a year, and each time less and less people on my friends list/guild list would be active. 

I didn't really follow the game after this, I know there were some expansions like Hoth and other stuff, but eventually the game was shut down. When ToR was announced, everyone knew it likely meant SWG was heading toward its demise, especially given the radical shift in gameplay it endured, and the poor reception it received for it.

1 minute ago, Dean said:

Can't thank you enough mate. Unfortunately the video has been taken down due to copyright, is there any chance you can send it to my email if I PM you?

Seriously?! I uploaded it like 20 minutes ago . It plays for me, but I guess that's since I uploaded. I'm not too familiar with YT's anti-copyright operations, but I suppose they scan the audio of uploads to detect copyrighted material? I know a bunch of stuff was taken down over the past few years, but this is really the first time it's directly affected me.

Makes one ponder if strict business rigidity is really worth it. Sure, GNR doesn't have their copyrighted material being listened to for free (half of which would never see the light of day for release anyway), but does GNR really win by taking away the few things fans have? Can't even show someone how to play a song on YT without Homeland Security issuing a freaking red threat level (I exaggerate... but still).

I think the video is too large for email, but I can upload it to Dropbox. I'll send you a link in a bit.

On 10/11/2018 at 8:18 PM, Dean said:

I greatly appreciate it man and thank you for being the first to document the tab. It's just mostly basic stuff I know so I'd went to look at some of the chords that are on there. Played about with it for a bit but I couldn't get it sounding anything like the song. 

I found some time today to look at it and do some recording. I'm visiting family out of state, but I brought my guitar and little practice amp. The sound quality may not be great as I did this via phone, but hopefully if gives you an idea of the roots and rhythm.

That being said, upon looking at this song again, I'm not 100% on a few parts. Namely, the F#s don't sound quite right, even though I'm pretty sure that's the note the bass is playing (I remember grappling with this when I first tabbed it out, I guess I decided to leave it that way). I'm listening on computer speakers and the Going Down mix isn't finished to begin with, so it's a bit difficult to hear exactly what's going on regarding guitar in the verse. Every few seconds I can hear a chord being strummed with some hammer-on type stuff, but it seems inconsistent, in this mix at least. I think the guitar is there, but very low in the mix, hence why the full strums on chords are more audible (the higher pitched notes come through the bass more than the lower pitched roots/power chords that I tabbed out). The bass is pretty loud in the verses and a lot of the song, which makes sense since this is a Tommy Stinson song.

The impetus behind this tab was actually people on MyGNR asking for a tab when the song leaked. I tabbed out the main/chorus riff first and then looked at general roots/rhythm just so people could play along at least. It was never meant to be a 100% complete dissection of the guitar parts, hence why I didn't really tab out any leads.

Also, upon examining the song again now, it may be possible it was written/recorded a half-step down, contrary to much of CD (or all of CD was in standard tuning, don't recall, but a lot of it was I'm pretty sure). We actually had a big argument about this when it first leaked and if I recall correctly, I was supported in my assertion it's in standard tuning (though now I'm not 100% sure, haha). Anyway, I tabbed the the parts in standard tuning at the time.

Alright, enough excuses.

Embarrassingly... Kiss/Ace is what directly influenced me to pick up a guitar. How tastes change...

On 10/8/2018 at 8:12 AM, Dean said:

Hey guys, can any of you run through this when you get time to see how accurate it is?

I've played about with the intro and it sounds nothing like it, though I'm hoping it's just me 

https://tabs.ultimate-guitar.com/tab/guns_n_roses/going_down_tabs_1413768

Looks pretty darn accurate to me . I'll take a closer look later and maybe record it to show you.

11 hours ago, Ralphelmo said:

He played for 18000 people in Argentina in 2012 or 13, managed to gather 13000 in Poland in 2014 just because World On Fire came out. LTD is pushing sales. He's not playing GNR songs and both fans and promoters are aware of that.  

He's always done well everywhere except the US. He's still playing the same 2-3K person venues here.

On 10/3/2018 at 8:40 PM, OmarBradley said:

It's pretty good so far. The main character (I picked Alexios, but I believe Kassandra is canon) is much more likable than Bayek IMO. The story and setting are a bit more gripping too. Although still taking place a couple thousand years ago, the historical era is a bit more well-known and relatable than Origin's was,

Regarding the graphics, the same thing happened with Origins, but I'm not as impressed with the visuals as I hoped I'd be. I see a lot of people noting the graphics as one of the game's best qualities, but I don't think it looks exemplary. I'm playing on mostly maxed out settings with a GTX 1080. I really think at least their rendering engine needs a significant upgrade, and a surprising amount of the textures look poor. This has been the case with certain textures since at least Unity, and I'm blaming it on console optimization. But other series' release hi-res texture packs for PC, while I don't believe AC has. Very annoying, as a lot of the textures in question really take away from the game's overall aesthetic. 

A lot of the mechanics from Origins were basically dropped into Odyssey with little revision/updating: the ability system, the inventory system, and the items/loot systems are pretty similar, as is combat (but a parry mechanic has replaced the shield/blocking). I've noticed things like the squeezing between two rocks to get into/out of a cave and the Eagle Vision system being about identical to Origins' systems as well. But honestly, all of that stuff works so it's not a major complaint. And hopefully there are new mechanics being introduced throughout the narrative, since I'm still pretty early on.

Overall, so far it's pretty fun, I just wish it had more of its own identity and looked a bit better. This is running a lot better than Origins though, it's less taxing on my hardware and I've encountered no stutters/crashes or bugs (yet).

Okay, I was wrong about the graphics. While there are a few surprisingly poor textures (namely, rocks on mountainsides and a few others here and there), this game looks incredibly good. Once you get past the first area and start seeing the sights and the rest of the isles/mainland, it's really pretty spectacular. Though this game shares a lot of assets with Origins, the shading is a lot better and the color diversity is mesmerizing at times. The lighting is well done, except I think midday is too bright and sometimes dark spaces act oddly in regards to light. But overall, this is an excellent looking game. Though I still maintain a hi-res texture pack for PC would be welcome for some of the lower quality textures.

The Greek cities are perhaps my favorite cities in the series, simply because of how good they look and how they are designed. And there are so many! Not all of them are huge, but most are decent sized and it really makes the world feel more populated. Obviously with Origins, you had a large portion of the map being uninhabited desert, so it's no surprise the small Greek isles feel fuller than Egypt, especially when a city/town takes up a quarter (or more) of the island/map. A decent portion of this map is also water, something to consider.

For the first time (didn't use it in Origins), I was actually compelled to use the photo mode, and I got some pretty awesome shots (double click to enlarge):

https://postimg.cc/gallery/2k8w90v9q/

Now, this is on PC at 1440p with one of the top gaming monitors with maxed settings, but I have to imagine the game still looks darn good on consoles or lower powered rigs.

After I finish, I think I'll do a more general review, but I am thinking this is a contender for GoTY.

On line in NY now.

On 10/2/2018 at 2:35 PM, Tom-Ass said:

It is official, my tickets for the Boston show just sold on Ticketmaster.  I feel it was the right move but at the same time I have a sick feeling in my stomach.  I never miss a Slash show with any of his bands.. EVER..   I am just not feeling the new album or the setlists at all.  There literally isn't one song off LTD that I would be excited about seeing.  It is that bad. I am still a Slash die hard and he is one of my top two favorite guitarists of all time but the whole SMKC this is boring me.  Seeing a show of basically all SMKC songs doesn't look appealing to me.  I do like some of their stuff but it just isn't strong enough to carry a whole show in my eyes.  The best part of the Slash solo shows for me was watching him showcase the best of all his bands including plenty of Guns and some VR. 

I am still glad that some people are getting enjoyment out of LTD and I hope everyone that is going to the shows has a blast. 

Feeling the same way man. Die hard Slash fan, until now. The lazy record, same setlists, 19 minute Rocket Queen, stupid signature guitars, etc. has done it for me. 

Hit the nail on the head with what made Slash shows so great for a while. His new stuff was good AND you got to hear Snakepit, VR, and some GNR. And a cool cover every now and then. 

Agreed with the sentiment.

Living the Dream is probably Slash's worst career release. The songwriting is lazy, repetitive, and uninteresting. Don't know what happened, as AL and WoF were full of creativity and stylistic risks. All of that is void within the new record.

He's also doing the GNR thing of playing an identical setlist every night, which he never used to do.

And his Signature guitar shenanigans has always been ridiculous, and this new one is no different. And there's the Explorer for some reason, and the Epiphone version of course because even if you aren't wealthy, Slash still wants your money.

$la$h.

On 10/1/2018 at 4:36 PM, Oldest Goat said:

It does sound like they've stepped up and actually made a proper game rather than their usual churned out bs.

It's pretty good so far. The main character (I picked Alexios, but I believe Kassandra is canon) is much more likable than Bayek IMO. The story and setting are a bit more gripping too. Although still taking place a couple thousand years ago, the historical era is a bit more well-known and relatable than Origin's was,

Regarding the graphics, the same thing happened with Origins, but I'm not as impressed with the visuals as I hoped I'd be. I see a lot of people noting the graphics as one of the game's best qualities, but I don't think it looks exemplary. I'm playing on mostly maxed out settings with a GTX 1080. I really think at least their rendering engine needs a significant upgrade, and a surprising amount of the textures look poor. This has been the case with certain textures since at least Unity, and I'm blaming it on console optimization. But other series' release hi-res texture packs for PC, while I don't believe AC has. Very annoying, as a lot of the textures in question really take away from the game's overall aesthetic. 

A lot of the mechanics from Origins were basically dropped into Odyssey with little revision/updating: the ability system, the inventory system, and the items/loot systems are pretty similar, as is combat (but a parry mechanic has replaced the shield/blocking). I've noticed things like the squeezing between two rocks to get into/out of a cave and the Eagle Vision system being about identical to Origins' systems as well. But honestly, all of that stuff works so it's not a major complaint. And hopefully there are new mechanics being introduced throughout the narrative, since I'm still pretty early on.

Overall, so far it's pretty fun, I just wish it had more of its own identity and looked a bit better. This is running a lot better than Origins though, it's less taxing on my hardware and I've encountered no stutters/crashes or bugs (yet).

Well, tomorrow I'll be playing Assassin's Creed Odyssey. I was initially not planning on preordering or buying the game at all. But I found a good deal for the Gold version which includes the Season Pass and Early Access on 10/2.

This game seems to be a step up from Origins, which was several steps above the past few AC games. I'm not thrilled like I would be in the days of playing AC:B/III/Revelations/IV on release, but given the reviews and footage I've seen of this game, this may actually be not that bad. I didn't like Origins much, but that was mainly due to the narrative - which is supposed to be a lot better in Odyssey. along with more fleshed out RPG mechanics. I slightly prefer this setting too, as Thucydides is one of my favorite authors/historians. 

2 hours ago, Edward Nigma said:

What do you guys think Guns plans will be in 2019?

Gouge the fans for a much money as possible while putting in a minimal amount of effort.

On 8/9/2018 at 3:43 PM, Axeli said:

 Best Slash song.

Heaven's Basement vs. Silvertide. Tough call.

Honorable mention for Operator.

On 9/19/2018 at 9:02 AM, SoundOfAGun said:

Finally started BF1 singleplayer last night, having a great time with it! Played a conquest match to finish the night off and also had a good time (on some snow/castle map). Still can't get over the announcer woman calling Alpha "Apples" and Bravo "Butter", it really annoys me for some reason...

I've been playing BF4 since the V beta ended, and I am having a GREAT time. Forgot how much fun this game was. Odd that a game that's now three iterations old in the series has more complicated mechanics than the recent two. I suppose there was far less tech involved in WWI and WWII, but I feel like two historical games in a row is a bit much,

I'm eager for World War 3, will probably do early access when it's ready.

2 hours ago, marlingrl03 said:

These people that make fun of his looks and aways choose the most unflattering photo to make fun of are plain ol scum with nothing better to do. Fuckin lowlifes. Now this is a more accurate pic of the Axl I saw in San Antonio. And yeah I was 20 ft away from him and mesmerized. Hell yes I was! 

 

First of all: no they are probably not scum with nothing better to do. Decent people do dumb things at times, especially on the internet. No need for hyperbole. 

Second of all: the photo you posted is blurry, there are multiple lights (some colored) shining down, and he's almost certainly wearing some makeup. I'm not justifying the original post, but going 100% the other direction isn't really fair either.

13 hours ago, DeadSlash said:

Is attrition mode a new gameplay option, like CTF or Domination, or is it a mechanic that is just a part of the game now?

As of the beta from last week, it is a standard part of every game mode.