Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action > #47974

Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024?

Show all headers | View raw

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote at 15:27 this Tuesday (GMT):
>
> September always feels like such a short month. There's just so much
> going on that the days just whiz by. Maybe it's just me. Anyway, at
> least it was long enough for me to get some gaming in.
>
> Case in point:
>
>
> Whereupon I list the games
> ---------------------------------------
>   * Still Wakes The Deep
>   * The Last of Us Part 1
>   * American Truck Simulator: Arkansas
>
>
>
> Whereupon I discuss in length (and length and length and length)
> ---------------------------------------
>
> * Still Wakes The Deep
> Forty-five minutes into my adventure and deep in the bowels of a
> collapsing oil derrick,  I heard the monster moan, "Don't look at
> me!", and all I could do is sigh to myself and say, "Oh, it's one of
> _those_ games."
>
> Not that it really was that much of a surprise to me. By "those games"
> I meant "Still Wakes" to be an example of what I've taken to call the
> 'don't look' genre of survival horror. You know the type; you're stuck
> in a dark place and there's a horrendous, invulnerable monster
> stalking you; a monster so fearsome that merely looking at you will
> drive you mad. Technically, "Still Wakes" doesn't hew that closely to
> that genre's rules --gaze upon the monstrosities all you like; there's
> no sanity meter-- but it doesn't stray too far either. You can't kill
> the beasts; all you can do is hide from them.
>
> But my tired comment was more a sigh of disappointment because I'd
> been hoping that "Still Wakes" might be more than that. That it might
> offer something new and unique to the genre. It was developed by "The
> Chinese Room" after all; the same guys who had also created "Dear
> Esther" and "Everybody's Gone to the Rapture" and were known for their
> detailed worlds and ambiguous stories. There was such potential for
> "Still Wakes" to be more than it was.
>
> To be fair, the levels are gorgeous and intricately designed. The oil
> rig where the action takes place all looks incredibly... well, maybe
> not realistic per se, but believable, in a sci-fi Hollywood sort of
> way. There's an incredible tactility to the world. Too, aspects of the
> plot are as enigmatic as in any of Chinese Room's other games; is the
> entity behind it all hostile? Where did it come from? <ROT13 spoiler
> protection> Vf gur cebgntbavfg qrnq ng gur raq? </ROT13> There's a lot
> of questions left unanswered by the end of the game, and the story is
> the better for it.
>
> It's just a shame the gameplay can't live up to the rest. Because
> "Still Wakes" is completely unoriginal and unsurprising in that
> regard. Once the adventure kicks off, you can pretty much predict
> what's going to happen; the tactics you're going to have to take, the
> scares the game is going to throw at you. This lack of originality
> isn't necessarily damning... IF the rest of the game can offer
> anything else. If it's gameplay is better than its competitors, or its
> story is stronger or its visuals head-and-shoulders above its
> contemporaries. 
>
> But "Still Wakes" isn't particularly memorable in any of these areas;
> it's a dead-average game at best. Actually, some parts are fairly
> tedious, and there's a number of areas where a lack of clear direction
> make the game frustrating, albeit not challenging (the game is only a
> couple steps above a walking sim in its lack of difficulty). There's
> nothing about "Still Wakes" that makes it stand out; its gameplay
> isn't exciting, its locale or monsters aren't unique, and its story
> doesn't give you anything to think about. If you like games of this
> sort, there are so many better ones to try (the original "Amnesia",
> for being one of the first-of-its-kind, or maybe "SOMA" for its
> thought-provoking story).
>
> But what's truly disappointing is how much talent was put into this
> game; that so much artistry and love was put into a product that,
> ultimately, was a generic survival/horror clone. It feels such a waste
> and more than anything, it's what made me dislike this game. All that
> skill and _this_ is what you decided to make? 
>
>
>
>
> * The Last of Us Part 1
> I bought the game on sale and regretted it almost immediately.
>
> Not because "The Last of Us" is a bad game; it's not. Quite the
> opposite, I rank it as one of the _best_ games in my collection. It's
> got pretty much everything going for it; good story, strong
> characters, excellent level design, well-developed game mechanics, an
> excellent difficulty curve, very good voice-acting and music, and
> gorgeous graphics. It's a highly regarded game for a lot of reasons,
> and I agree with the critics: "The Last of Us" is a game worth
> playing. 
>
> The problem I have with it is... I've already played it. And even on
> sale, I just don't think that it justifies paying twice for it. It's a
> terrific game, I tell myself... but if I'd wanted to play it again,
> couldn't I have just played it on my Playstation?
>
> To be fair, this is an enhanced version of the Playstation 3 game I
> already own. It's got improved graphics (albeit the original was so
> pretty, I really have to squint to see the difference). It includes
> the "Left Behind" DLC. I can play the game (quite well, actually)
> using my preferred keyboard and mouse. All good things, to be sure.
> I'm just not entirely convinced it's worth the price of admission.
>
> The game is proving to be a good burn-in test for my PC though. I
> don't think _any_ game I've played has pushed my CPU quite as hard as
> "The Last of Us". It's hard to see why it needs all that horsepower,
> though; its beauty is due more to its artistry than its graphical
> flourishes. I've seen better games that didn't peg the CPU quite as
> high. Fortunately, I have CPU cycles to spare, and even on "ultra"
> settings, the framerate was silky smooth... but I'm not really
> convinced of developer Naughty Dog's PC coding skills. It seems like
> they could have done more without torturing my CPU like that.
>
> I played the game. I enjoyed the game. It's great. If you've never
> played the game (and have a computer that can handle it) this version
> is probably the one for you. But I can't help but feel that maybe I
> should have waited for a steeper discount before buying.
>
>
>
> * American Truck Simulator: Arkansas
> Yeah, we're back with more Truck Simulator. There's a new map
> expansion DLC released; what do you expect, that I _not_ play it? This
> time around we get to explore Arkansas, a state about which I know
> particularly little (it was home to a US President and borders the
> Mississippi River; that's about it). So I wasn't sure what to expect
> from this outing.
>
> I certainly didn't expect that I'd enjoy it as much as I did.
>
> Mostly, it was the visuals. Now that American Truck Simulator is
> finally leaving the American West, we're starting to get into greener
> and lusher climes. After 8 years of meandering through desert and
> scrub-land, we're finally coming into forests and farms; it's so
> welcome to be in a territory where the primary colours aren't grey and
> tan. The developers apparently also loosened the purse strings enough
> to purchase some new vegetation assets. It was a joy seeing trees
> other than the scraggly pines or palms; never was the sight of a
> thick-waisted oak so welcome. 
>
> But more than the change in environment, some credit needs be given to
> the map designers too. Despite actually being one of the smallest map
> DLCs released, ATS: Arkansas felt a lot wider and open than a lot of
> the previous expansions. The roads were broader, the sight-lines
> better arranged. The lay of the terrain felt a lot more natural too;
> many of the earlier DLCs felt unduly flat, as if hills and gullies
> were afterthoughts placed onto an unnaturally flat plain. The
> topography in Arkansas felt a lot more natural. Well, most of the
> time; there were areas that still seemed to use the old paradigm. But
> when it worked, it worked great; it added a lot of verisimilitude to
> the world.
>
> Similarly, the layout of the towns and roads felt a lot more
> realistic. I wouldn't call any of the towns of Arkansas -at least not
> as portrayed in the game- picturesque, but the improved design made
> them feel less like cardboard stand-ins of cities for me to drive
> through, and more like places people might actually live. The addition
> of so many highway billboards was exceptionally welcome; now it
> _really_ felt like I was driving down an American highway!
>
> Also, props to the developer who designed the completely superfluous
> park in the city of Hot Springs. Completely useless for hauling cargo
> - the road is far too narrow and twisty- it's an absolutely gorgeous
> drive.
>
> The driving in general was incredibly pleasant. The roads were, as
> mentioned, wide and well laid out; there was a minimum of extraneous
> turns, sudden speed limit changes, and annoying curves. In too many
> previous DLC, navigating the road network was just... aggravating. I
> never got that feeling in this expansion. If I've any real complaints,
> it was the overuse of 'security checkpoints' outside large industrial
> parks. While arguably realistic, waiting for the game to recognize my
> truck is there and then slowly open the gate was a tedium I didn't
> enjoy. In fact, it was such an annoyance, I think I'll find a mod that
> just keeps them open all the time (I'm sure one must exist).
>
> Overall, the Arkansas DLC was incredibly well done. The state might
> not have any real jaw-dropping set-pieces, but overall it was very
> good looking; enough so I often wished I could have gotten out of my
> truck and just wandered down some of those inaccessible roads and
> paths to see more. It actually made me consider maybe visiting the
> _real_ Arkansas at some point, which I can't say has happened with any
> of the other DLC in this game. It's almost certainly catapulted itself
> to the top of my list of favorite ATS expansions (sorry Montana;
> you're a very pretty state in real life but your DLC wasn't as good).
> Rarely have I been as happy to have paid day-one prices for a new
> expansion as this. Good job, SCS Software!
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Not a lot of games, but -like I said- it was a short month. It's
> better than the no-games I played last month, anyway. Anyway, I'm
> satisfied. But what about you? 
>
> What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024?


Well, I've been replaying bug fables (a really good paper mario-like)
and I've been meaning to get back into Factorio.
-- 
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Back to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 11:27 -0400
  Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? "rms" <rsquiresMOO@MOOflashMOO.net> - 2024-10-01 10:56 -0600
    Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 15:08 -0400
  Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2024-10-01 17:50 +0000
    Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> - 2024-10-02 11:23 -0400
      Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2024-10-03 00:37 +0000
        Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> - 2024-10-03 10:26 -0400
          Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> - 2024-10-03 07:53 -0700
          Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2024-10-04 05:15 +0000
            Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> - 2024-10-04 10:31 -0400
              Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2024-10-04 18:57 +0000
                Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-10-08 21:40 +0000
                Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) - 2024-10-08 23:33 +0000
                Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-10-09 11:30 +0000
        Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-10-03 16:20 +0000
  Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> - 2024-10-01 12:04 -0700
    Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> - 2024-10-02 11:28 -0400
      Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> - 2024-10-02 10:29 -0700
  Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-10-02 10:20 +0000
  Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? H1M3M <wipnoah@gmail.com> - 2024-10-02 12:53 +0200
    Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? candycanearter07 <candycanearter07@candycanearter07.nomail.afraid> - 2024-10-03 16:20 +0000
  Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? Anssi Saari <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> - 2024-10-03 00:23 +0300
  Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2024-10-03 06:03 +0000
  Re: What Have You Been Playing... IN SEPTEMBER 2024? Kyonshi <gmkeros@gmail.com> - 2024-10-09 15:45 +0200

csiph-web