SomTervo

Saw Interstellar at iMax last weekend. Man. This is one of my favourite movies. I've ever seen. For some people it definitely won't be all that. My dad gave it a 7.6/10. It's got some aspects which are too brave, too ambitious, and probably harm it in many people's eyes. But I've never seen a movie which captured hard-sci-fi concepts I've been reading in novels since I was a kid. Until this one. Fucking loved it. For my personal tastes, 10/10. I teared up a few times, too - the gf was full-blown sobbing at a couple of parts Edit: I love how, in an era when studios turn simple stories into three-part epics, Nolan comes along and drops a movie which is basically a trilogy in one film. Like, Interstellar is 169 minutes long, and feels like it has about 7 acts. All of which are dense, brimming with story and character, and are entertaining. Goddamn I loved it. The £12 at iMax was worth it - and I didn't think I'd ever say that.

popcorn.gif

Yeah I think that was... Rockstar San Diego? The one that made RDR. That was dark. I've met 4-5 people who work at Rockstar North in Edinburgh, and they all seem very, very happy to be there. I hope the crunch isn't too bad on their end. They must be the studio that get the biggest share of funding, and they must hire at least a few more staff per GTA game. PS I find folks' lack of faith in near-future game development disturbing

Yeah I get the vibe that Unity will be a one-off. I can't see a historical or narrative incentive for Ubi to return to Paris- even France. Maybe WWI or WWII Paris, but not revolutionary. That'll be two games set roughly around the late 18th century, in the two parts of the world where shit was really going down at that time. I can't imagine them going back. It's feeling increasingly like they should definitely be moving further East or South at this point. All the most significant bits of pre-modern western history are being sucked dry Is the umbrella story ever going to end? It's just so stupid. It could only end with either the Assassins or Templars getting killed off or finding out more about the precursors. Imagine a game where we play Adam and Eve... maybe that'll be the last one. Based on The Truth or whatever in the first AC. The two of them fleeing the precursors. Edit: I was looking at the GAF thread for the new AC game, and by god so many people are hating on Unity like it's some abhorrent creation. I actually feel personally insulted by some of the comments. It's like normalising negative behaviour. 9/10 of the people complaining about the game never actually touched it. They're just whaling on something because of facts which are exaggerated in reportage and will never give the playable experience a chance.

Yeah and the procedurally generated interiors looked dang good in that CryEngine test... And were all 100% destructible. Like, the procedures would only be used to create the skeleton of indoor areas. After that development staff would obviously tweak them, design stuff onto them, improve them. R* staff are notoriously OCD when it comes to making indoor environments look lived-in and realistic. Edit: but besides the point, Rockstar hate procedural things. They would probably hand craft all of it. And as said below, they have the manpower. Pre-edit: Seriously I feel R* could do it. Look at how unbelievably ambituous GTAV was on PS360, and they pulled it off. A smaller city like GTAIV but fully realised indoors would totally be within their reach. They must throw hundreds of thousands of man-hours at every GTA game nowadays. I suppose the 'look what they did on PS360' argument could be a little off, because apparently the only way they achieved it was with about a million tons of smoke and mirrors. But still, that hardware was less than 1/10th as powerful as PS4/XBone. I reckon they could do it. If anyone has the resources to hand-craft a whole city, inside and out, it's Rockstar. Like their last game made billions. And they've categorically said they want to keep making these games until they have a 100% true to life, full representation of a city or even the whole USA.

I've been waiting to have time to give you a proper response to your above post, Eleven, but I won't have time to do it justice! Obviously, what you like you like, and what I like I like. There's no breaking that ground. That's totally cool that you prefer the old AC combat and world mechanics. Totally cool. But obviously if you dislike the changes in Unity and wish they hadn't made the changes, it begs the age-old argument: why don't you just go and play the older ones? You've even got Rogue which uses all the old systems. Still, your opinion is totally valid and I won't wax about it any further! --- All this said, I played Unity last night between about 20:00 and 23:30. It was fucking amazing. A friend and I in co-op free roam in Paris. Running around being vigilantes, taking out goons. Occasionally doing a story mission or a Heist, planning attacks, sneaking, fighting, countless incredible emergent moments where we both dived on unsuspecting guys from above, hunting down Sync points in co-op missions, redoing Heists until we mastered them... Man, under all the jank and stupid multi-service integration, lies a near-masterpiece of a game The only frequent barrier we were coming up against was stupid level 3 lockpicking skill being locked until Sequence 10. Pretty stupid, though I guess they want us to play the story mode more. A lot of level 4-5 Heists are basically unwinnable until you have this skill. Edit: Far Cry 4 sublime 2 player coop and ACU great 2-4 player co-op... Could this be a golden age of online co-op in AAA budget games? The hyper-detailed open world sandbox factor really boosts co-op above what was previously achievable in linear games like Halo and Gears (which were still great, I would have happily called that the golden age of co-op until this came along.)

Yeah, traffic online seems to be about 70-90% the amount of traffic in singleplayer. The difference is only noticeable every so often, for the most part it's the same. I need to add you, Eleven! Multiplayer is still a generally broken thing, though. In concept, I mean. I think they really need to get Heists out for it to work. The idea of GTA Online being a free-form online crime simulator is great, but that's not what it is right now. I struggle to find any good (read: fun) competitive multiplayer matches. I think they should offer Lawful and Lawless rooms, similar to Eve Online's level of Regional Security. This would mean that if you do a small crime in a Lawful room you'd go to higher star ratings quicker, get higher bounties on your head quicker, and generally be penalised for doing bad things more. Maybe you'll get worse Mental State ranking too for doing bad things. Lawless would have no/very minimal negative feedback for doing bad stuff. This would help keep the Online free roam more focused for players - if you wanna mess about, go Lawless, if you wanna actually do things without other players messing it up, go Lawful. I was thinking today about what Rockstar could potentially achieve with their next GTA game on the new generation... Man the sky is the fucking limit. Then I thought about the next ways they could improve GTA's gameplay... I think they're getting close with combat, though it's not quite there. A big thing, though, would be the interiors for every building. A year and a half ago I would have said this is a ridiculous idea, but if you look at what they achieved with GTA V on last-gen - eg a world bigger than RDR, San Andreas and GTAIV combined, very realistic graphics, almost fully implemented online mode, unbelievably masterful cinematics-gameplay symbiosis, loads of great activities - ... all on 10 year old hardware... Then a fully realised city, indoor and outdoor, isn't too much to ask for. Like imagine how much of a difference it would make to police chases and general gameplay if you could run off the street, kick down a door (if your strength is high enough) to get into any random building, escape through it, or rob any shop or warehouse you pass through (probably with varying 'difficulty' levels, ie higher security and payoff)... It would literally be a gamechanger for what is already incredibly realistic and detailed world experience. It would also complete ideas they've brought in previously and properly integrate them into gameplay, eg the Burglary missions from San Andreas, and touches of open world interiors in GTA IV and GTA V. Assassin's Creed Unity has shown how good this can be, but frankly GTA would do it better now, with the police getting view cones once line of sight is broken, etc.

Nahhhhhh City improved all gameplay mechanics but utterly funked most of the level design and pacing (I still love it btw) I only say Arkham Asylum was best because it was so, so tight (bar the final boss fight, and arguably the Killer Croc fight.) It was concise, fit together like a 3D jigsaw, and had unbelievably good and memorable level design. It was designed like a representation of Batman himself: compartmentalized and controlled, a solved puzzle. It was like the Portal of superhero games. Almost perfect in size and quality.

Anyone who's anyone knows Asylum is the best, foo

Fuck it's the absolute worst isn't it At least... it could be a sign...? They did the same thing with Asylum right? And that was the best one!

I wrote a giant, giant post about this game and then the image I attached was too large and it never saved. 'Sake. The short of it: 4 players must be the perfect number of players, because we played with 6, and it was fun but not great. The issue was that: - for the first half of the game nobody could really do anything because victory is predicated on having the bomb or the intel (random draw from the item deck). - the person who ultimately won did so with no expectation and out of pure chance (they happened to be on the top floor when someone else called their side's chopper - to bomb it - and then they happened to pick up the intel from the Store Room the turn before, so they just stepped two rooms into the chopper and won) - with 6 players we were all bumping into each other all the time, and turns were being halted too much imo (you have to have an encounter when you meet another player) But it was still v. good. The Ballroom has a great effect (everyone gets drawn there and it becomes a safe room) and several times somebody locked off the upper or basement floor - hilarity ensued - and several times someone turned the lights off - they were obviously the only person with NVGoggles and hilarity ensued. Deffo need 4 players. Too much random chance and too many game-halting encounters with 6.

Flawless Just played that bit the other day too Though apparently they fully planned on having FPS mode in the original but found the tiny processors wouldn't allow for it at quite a late stage

Hi-de-hi! I just played a ceilidh at Scotland's biggest anime convention. It was awesome.

Heh, yeah, enemies could free run after you ridiculously effectively until Unity. In Unity, in a far more realistic fashion, enemies are now simply better shots and bullets do a ton more damage. I love that rooftop guards fire a warning shot now before trying to fill you with lead.

Yeah, the problem for you 11 seems to be that AC combat has always been 'this way', and now it's not. Imo, 'this way' is a dull, repetitive, over-easy mess which fundamentally undermines a lot of the other gameplay mechanics. After a couple of hours of AC1, it has never been fun for me. There was never any incentive to play better because it was so easy. But besides that deeper issue, combat in the series, since AC1, has been boring as fuck. It's not fun. For me, at least. And you cite this as the main reason for it being this way. I reach a stage very early in every AC game (until Unity) where I get so agonizingly bored by the by-the-numbers, slow, no-risk combat that I literally begin running away from every combat encounter. I just can't go through the terrible routine again. In AC1 and 2 this was passable because the simulation was so novel, but once the series went annual and they added the 1-hit-instakill-combo system (who the fuck thought that was a good idea), I just couldn't hack it any more. It's worse than watching a movie because after a couple of fights you've seen every combat animation. It's like a martial arts or action movie made up of the same fight scene over and over. Unity's system still has the badassery of being ableto deflect every strike (if you're good enough) and has improved the cinematic, cool as shit nature of combat - but most importantly, it props up every other mechanic in the game by providing a challenge. In vidyagames, every gameplay mechanic should make you use and engage with every other gameplay mechanic. Until Unity, more than half of AC's staple mechanics have been really tedious and effectively standalone. The only thing making you play better were arbitrary mission objectives or optional 'full synchronisation' parameters. The mainly 'fun' aspect, and what keeps me playing personally, is the amazing simulation, historical fiction, and adventurey progression. The gameplay itself barely kept me attached. But in Unity: - combat being harder forces you to use tools and stealth and freerunning more - Creed Points force you to play better (incl fight better) to improve gear and look cooler - new and more intelligent enemy positions, encounters and stealth options make you genuinely weight up whether you should fight, and make fights feel more dynamic (incl randoms in the street joining in, etc.) For me this improves the fun factor tenfold by: - making me feel thrilled and excited by near-deaths and cunning escapes which I control, not the game - I feel more immersed. Eg in The Last of Us and Metal Gear Solid one can feel far more immersed because of tension, if you know you'll be in trouble when enemies spot you, etc. This adds to thrill and fun factor (after encounters I'll sit back in my chair, exhale and go 'shit that was awesome') - actually having to pay attention in gameplay means I don't get bored. Unlike in 80% of combat encounters in other AC games. Your brain is in high gear focusing all attention on the events onscreen. In ACs of yore it was too easy to switch off (switching off can often be great, eg rampaging in GTA or playing online shooters, but there's a line between 'switching off' and 'being bored') The fun is maintained by never having arbitrary 'lose if you're seen' objectives and making things harder but never impossible, if you aren't prepared for a situation. Eg I love that you can get in a small fight in a corner of a huge assassination mission, and the target won't magically know about it and run away. PS a series maintaining core style and mechanics but changing them is surely a good thing? Even if they try things which don't work (or which you don't enjoy), it still shows that the developers are trying to mix things up, which is the only way for innovation or improvements to happen. Your whole argument seems to be predicated on 'I don't like change', which is always the worst argument in any discussion!

Yeah, the irony If ever there was a perfect definition for LTTP

Don't understand anyone in this thread Really? I hate, hate saying this but... You must suck at it pretty badly, man. Yeah it's not smooth, but it's a realistic system of needing to parry accurately and time your movements against the enemies. Any animation can be interrupted to counter an enemy blow, so the fact that animations are slow doesn't affect your efficiency. Also the pace is exactly the same as previous AC games, except being able to chain insta-kills between enemies. The animations seem a little slow perhaps, but it seems realistic. Standing there staring into the eyes of a guard, waiting for their strike, and knowing that your strike will take a couple of seconds... It feels awesome. I love it. And it's difficult but fair - you need to be on your toes. When I started playing I died all the time- now I barely die at all. I feel like I've genuinely improved, that I've become a more badass assassin, because I get the timings more. Helix credits can f*** off, but the other three are simples and awesome imo. I think it's the naming which sabotages them a good bit. As I said:

Amen to that, brutha But at least Dragon Age is a known quantity. Nobody knew what the fuck they were getting with Destiny. But DA:I is the third (?) in a series, so a much less risky purchase to go digital on. From now on, I'm going retail always and then if a game's really good enough, I'll sell it retail and buy it digital once it's cheaper.

These all look amazeballs, goddamn

Actually got it yesterday (my local store breaking street date again, they were literally unpacking the boxes which just arrived), and I had the day off so I played it for about 6-7 hours. Quite a game. FPS mode is incredible but also feels like it chops the experience in half. As a previous player, you feel obligated to use it because it's new, but a lot of the time third person is definitely what the game was designed for. Like the transitions from cutscene into gameplay are almost always seamless with TPS, but in FPS there's a weird throb/flash moment where we zip into the character's head. I also dislike that FPS default speed is run. Ruins the flawlessly real pace of the city. Still- rampages are actually playable now. Really immersive and sometimes the game looks like real life. Basically you have an amazing police-chase FPS, which is significantly more fun than rampaging in TPS. It must be an engine thing, but the game still only renders super-high detail in the nearest 10-20 feet. It's really offputting. Esepcially when in wasteland which is covered in rubbish - bits of garbage on the floor will actually appear 15 feet ahead as you drive slowly through it. Stuff in the distance looks okay but still not great- nowhere near as great as well expected tbh. Must be due to the engine being optimized for 7th gen consoles. Can't get past that fundamental coding... Anyway. Amazing thing. Amazing. New radio soundtrack is the fucking shit.

The best computer I have is a mid-range laptop from two years ago, which is my gf's so I can't really use it. And by 'mid-range from two years ago', I mean two years ago it was mid-range. For a non-gaming laptop.

Brill, I'm slowly bringing together all the bits I'd like for my own perfect desktop, I'll take note of this and what you've said elsewhere. Probably a purchase for mid-next year.

I suppose I couldn't reconcile how he looked and his character? Maybe that's the problem. When he first pops up it's all like "ooooh here's a badass cowboy" then the more he talks the more that image is torn apart... In a bad way. Like he comes across as a lame teenage wannabe. But that's a good call, it might be a grower- I got the first volume in that Humble Bundle, so maybe I'll download the rest of it and see how it goes. Need a good new comic to get going on. Re Crossed - you heard about Alan Moore doing a new 100 years later story arc? Now that has potential. Moore's work has been a bit fringe recently, but that might just work with this. Did you read Neonomicon?