SukeBancho
My only gripes with it are genuinely just that it isn't as big or refined as its sequel. This became a new standard for a lot of action games to compete with for a reason.
2021
The most impressive feature was one that appeared in Depression Quest. Even there, it was a mechanic that played into the game's themes and how you played the game.
That same feature here is only used as an emotional twist that doesn't land as well due to it being so removed from how the game is played or anything substantial. There is no gameplay aspect to this game's most striking trick. The game would be exactly the same if those choices were removed. You don't get points for showing me something interesting, and then preventing me from engaging with it. This is an interactive medium.
That same feature here is only used as an emotional twist that doesn't land as well due to it being so removed from how the game is played or anything substantial. There is no gameplay aspect to this game's most striking trick. The game would be exactly the same if those choices were removed. You don't get points for showing me something interesting, and then preventing me from engaging with it. This is an interactive medium.
2024
[20 hours on record - Rank 19 - 3 suicide missions completed - mission completion rate +90%]
A genuinely really well designed and fun game. It plays like a more intentionally clumsy version of MGSV. The controls are precise and accurate, but with a bit of "fumble". You aren't super soldiers as much as very vulnerable and replaceable cannon fodder. Your limbs can break and each one can cause your soldier to suffer a number of negative ailments as a result. Most aren't fatal, but they will impact your ability to complete your objectives in various ways.
The events/random effects that different planets have in response to the different enemies that appear on those planets paves the the way for very interesting gameplay. Some missions will demand you to play differently if the planet itself or side(blue) objectives interfere in some way. Some of those side-objectives makes the main objectives or others easier by providing information and/or additional stratagems.
This game also does something that Assassin's Creed had attempted with the premium currency that can be earned in-game. Instead of being tied to a fixed daily limit or a required quest, various points on the map (seen with a yellow/gold light) have the chance to give you premium currency. It's usually in low quantities, but by their nature, it is possible to grind for them, or achieve more simply through persistent play. This currency and the points of interests tied to them serve as a great motive for players to explore the map or take alternative routes to their objectives. These locations also typically have a few enemies in the way, meaning the decision isn't trivial but a conscious choice.
The bonuses at the end of missions are also a great motive to drive players to tackle harder missions, survive longer, and complete jobs faster. The higher the difficulty, the higher the final bonus you get added at a flat percentile rate. Extreme missions (Difficulty 6) grant a 100% reward bonus while Suicide Missions (Difficulty 7) grant 150%.
My only genuine concern is the player base. A player base that might become too focused on optimal strategies to determine if people can stick with them when browsing quickplay or trying to assist on missions. I've largely been playing with friends, but the games I have played with randoms is a mixed bag. I've avoided any discussion about meta weapons and have been playing the game mostly after the railgun nerf. As of time of writing, the heavy enemies are an appropriate level of difficulty that makes them rewarding to fight both head-on and with use of my pre-planned stratagems. I've had little issue using the default rifle, machine pistol, sub machine gun, and marksman rifle. These heavier enemies do take much longer to defeat without specific stratagems, but then the discussion becomes about opportunity cost instead of "don't put bad gun in game". Each gun does serve a purpose in their small ways. Becoming too attached to personal equipment has been the reason many of my squad mates lose up to 5 lives before giving up on retrieval and continuing on with the mission.
To be clear, I do not think the game should change to better align with the ways player are playing the game, I believe players should be more willing to meet the game half-way and attempt to understand how the game asks you to engage with it.
Helldivers 2 is a remarkably fun galactic warfront simulation game. Controls and impairments that are just below razor tight like MGSV, but instead of simply trying to be like those MGS games in terms of feel, it carries the spirit as well. Open areas that provide multiple angles and means of taking on objectives, limited supplies and precarious ammo system that makes you value every bullet, and a set number of tools you can call on at your disposal as quickly as you can input their specific arrow commands. Helldivers 2 is a remarkable co-op PvE experience that more than justifies the $40 I spent to play it with friends. I hope this game gets to continue and that players begin experimenting more with the many emergent gameplay decisions I'm discovering on every new deploy. If you attempt to optimize it, you'll quickly drain the magic of what this game truly is capable of.
P.S. Please just watch Starship Troopers. The game is so in your face about having the same tone as movies like it, unironically chanting "for the glory of Super Earth" just makes you weird.
A genuinely really well designed and fun game. It plays like a more intentionally clumsy version of MGSV. The controls are precise and accurate, but with a bit of "fumble". You aren't super soldiers as much as very vulnerable and replaceable cannon fodder. Your limbs can break and each one can cause your soldier to suffer a number of negative ailments as a result. Most aren't fatal, but they will impact your ability to complete your objectives in various ways.
The events/random effects that different planets have in response to the different enemies that appear on those planets paves the the way for very interesting gameplay. Some missions will demand you to play differently if the planet itself or side(blue) objectives interfere in some way. Some of those side-objectives makes the main objectives or others easier by providing information and/or additional stratagems.
This game also does something that Assassin's Creed had attempted with the premium currency that can be earned in-game. Instead of being tied to a fixed daily limit or a required quest, various points on the map (seen with a yellow/gold light) have the chance to give you premium currency. It's usually in low quantities, but by their nature, it is possible to grind for them, or achieve more simply through persistent play. This currency and the points of interests tied to them serve as a great motive for players to explore the map or take alternative routes to their objectives. These locations also typically have a few enemies in the way, meaning the decision isn't trivial but a conscious choice.
The bonuses at the end of missions are also a great motive to drive players to tackle harder missions, survive longer, and complete jobs faster. The higher the difficulty, the higher the final bonus you get added at a flat percentile rate. Extreme missions (Difficulty 6) grant a 100% reward bonus while Suicide Missions (Difficulty 7) grant 150%.
My only genuine concern is the player base. A player base that might become too focused on optimal strategies to determine if people can stick with them when browsing quickplay or trying to assist on missions. I've largely been playing with friends, but the games I have played with randoms is a mixed bag. I've avoided any discussion about meta weapons and have been playing the game mostly after the railgun nerf. As of time of writing, the heavy enemies are an appropriate level of difficulty that makes them rewarding to fight both head-on and with use of my pre-planned stratagems. I've had little issue using the default rifle, machine pistol, sub machine gun, and marksman rifle. These heavier enemies do take much longer to defeat without specific stratagems, but then the discussion becomes about opportunity cost instead of "don't put bad gun in game". Each gun does serve a purpose in their small ways. Becoming too attached to personal equipment has been the reason many of my squad mates lose up to 5 lives before giving up on retrieval and continuing on with the mission.
To be clear, I do not think the game should change to better align with the ways player are playing the game, I believe players should be more willing to meet the game half-way and attempt to understand how the game asks you to engage with it.
Helldivers 2 is a remarkably fun galactic warfront simulation game. Controls and impairments that are just below razor tight like MGSV, but instead of simply trying to be like those MGS games in terms of feel, it carries the spirit as well. Open areas that provide multiple angles and means of taking on objectives, limited supplies and precarious ammo system that makes you value every bullet, and a set number of tools you can call on at your disposal as quickly as you can input their specific arrow commands. Helldivers 2 is a remarkable co-op PvE experience that more than justifies the $40 I spent to play it with friends. I hope this game gets to continue and that players begin experimenting more with the many emergent gameplay decisions I'm discovering on every new deploy. If you attempt to optimize it, you'll quickly drain the magic of what this game truly is capable of.
P.S. Please just watch Starship Troopers. The game is so in your face about having the same tone as movies like it, unironically chanting "for the glory of Super Earth" just makes you weird.
2016
Still finds multiple ways to be surprising despite being very open about it's nature as a "meta-game". It's also just a genuinely fun and engaging 2D action game on its own without needing to rely on the meta aspect to carry itself across the finish line. The controls might take a bit to get used to and the final boss has some pretty annoying traits (at least on Hard) but it's well worth taking a spin if you enjoy meta-games and/or 2D hack n' slash combat.
Could have been a standalone game. Incredible concept and turns the game's cumbersome gear system into a survival sim that functions strangely organically. Bracing the low visibility, cold, limited resources, and ability to form unsteady alliances with other players for the sake of survival comes together to make an alternative mode into a memorable survival experience unlike anything on the market.
I put 20 something hours into this game. I remember none of it.
2019
Including Lethal Script -
Incredible game. Uniquely interesting concept involving using audio to deduce clues and information from the environment. The base game is fairly tame with the concept with decent challenges near the end. Lethal Script is not only a great case to solve, the performances are incredible from all actors involved to make a complex idea work so well.
Incredible game. Uniquely interesting concept involving using audio to deduce clues and information from the environment. The base game is fairly tame with the concept with decent challenges near the end. Lethal Script is not only a great case to solve, the performances are incredible from all actors involved to make a complex idea work so well.
2010
A game made in 2010 that, if released now, would be called a style movement shooter and compared to Ultrakill.
2016
Remote stealth hacking is one of the best mechanics this series has ever had. A bigger emphasis on driving and stealth missions, but mostly creative use of the first game's mechanics with far more clear intent in a setting much better suited to its strengths. If the lack of hacking use in the first Watch Dogs was your major complaint, this feels clearly made in the hopes to embrace it. There are also non-lethal options so not everything needs to be a shootout.
2014
A game too scared of its own ideas. The hacking abilities are both as boringly simple as uniquely interesting as you can learn to employ them. Too little of the game focuses itself around the idea of being a hacker with backdoor keys to an entire Smart-City. You're doing what you've been always doing in a third person open world game with cars in it. But this time there's a really good idea literally in your hands, yet the game can't decide what to do with it.
2017
Please play with the PC Mod to restore original music and sound effects to one cutscene before (roughly) the mid point of the game. Location change.
2016
I've been through an entire game already with Brawler, Beast, and Rush. Why are you making me do it again? Why are you locking the style I wanted to use in the new engine behind random Majima spawns? Great story with interesting characters, but weak follow-up to 0 beginners
A game that has no right being as good as it is. One of the best platforming beat 'em ups that retains all of MK's characters and essence while drawing upon the rich material the series had for an outstanding experience playable from start to finish in co-op with even more unlockable characters and a hidden versus mode. How this game isn't brought up more or brought back for even a re-release is beyond my comprehension.
2017
A beautiful game. It's truly hard to put into words just how much I love to even just turn the game on and fall around. It's an incredibly fun and beautiful setting to just exist in. A game that deserves to be learned from.
2012
A truly beautiful game. Rough, and unorthodox but truly one of a kind. This is the kind of game that made me fall in love with studios like JapanStudios. Smaller, tighter games, committed to unique ideas, and the confidence to fail falling upwards.