It’s all about nailing the hairpin on the final sector, of the last race.
That’s where I was losing most time. Once I’d found a line that worked for me it wasn’t a problem.
It’s all about nailing the hairpin on the final sector, of the last race.
Same here. Nasty turn into the hairpin then the hairpin itself. Very easy to get spun by any other cars around you there too.Suits wrote: ↑October 6th, 2019, 8:47 amIt’s all about nailing the hairpin on the final sector, of the last race.
That’s where I was losing most time. Once I’d found a line that worked for me it wasn’t a problem.
Very similar thoughts at my end. Good fun for about ten minutes, tiresome for another ten and I haven't touched it since.hazeredmist wrote: ↑October 6th, 2019, 11:34 pm Untitled Goose Game (Switch)
I enjoyed the first section then it quickly became a fairly irritating stealth game for me as the novelty rapidly wore off. I was relieved to see the end credits and won’t be bothering with post-game stuff. Art style, music direction and general vibe very nice though, I just didn’t enjoy playing it much after a while.
Although I regret this particular purchase of Untitled Goose Game, and the fact I love a good shmup & roguelite, I disagree with almost everything you said hereclippa wrote: ↑October 7th, 2019, 9:39 am Honk!
Even if that 4 hour indie game about a duck was the best 4 hours I'd had in a long time and it was really life affirming and it made my top ten list. I'd still end up thinking "what is point?"
I can't be chuffed with any of that nonsense nowadays. Give me a big hairy roguelite or a shmup, a proper game, made to be infinitely replayable. Something I'm gonna get lost in and pump hours into, not this one and done shit.
What's the point in downloading all these little bitty, throwaway games. I hate all those indie platformers for example that are built around one gimmick, one gimmick that seems purposefully designed to outstay it's welcome exactly just before the 8 hour mark when you finish the game. You buy fucking ten of them throughout the year. just buy spelunky, play that, get better and better and better at it.
I buy these short games, it's fun learning to play for the first 5 hours or so and 5 hours later the games fucking finished. I want to refine my skills and take it the next level. Games for people with low attention spans who probably enjoy the shopping thrill of spending money and the novelty of the new more than actually playing these games.
Huge imelda marcos shoe cupboard style steam libraries teaming with disposable shite. High heels they wore for five minutes 3 years ago, just sat there rotting.
I've tangled myself in mixed metaphors. Send help! Do shoes rot? Do games? Do brains?
Other people can do what they like, but it's just something I've noticed about myself, over the last 5 years or so I've been way more careful about what I buy. There was a point where I was buying a little indie game every couple of weeks and just moving on to the next one. I wasn't hurting anyone and I don't regret it, but there was a point where instead of buying a game I liked the look of, I'd just bookmark it instead. I went through the big list the other day and they all looked naff. It was just a big list of bullets dodged. There wasn't one I fancied playing in the cold light of day.
Miserable old bastard.
I understand the gist of what you're trying to say but I would advise against painting with too broad of a brush. There are plenty of AA and AAA games with elaborate cutscenes and an official "10+ hours" completion time that nevertheless possess enormous replay value and are built from the ground up towards mechanical mastery and long-term engagement. And I'm not talking about inflated completion times based on pointless collectathons or randomized grindfests, but games that reward actual skill and dedication. Perhaps not to the same extent as pure shmups and rogue-likes, but certainly more so than one might assume at first glance from the outside.
I totally get that, really. Lemme give you a few examples of the sort of games that hit that specific spot for me in other genres.
They tried with one of the sequels but it wasn't well received by long-time fans at all. The 2016 reboot and its sequel on the other hand thankfully take a complete 'back to the roots' approach and are as slow, methodical, strategic, and True-Hitman-y as it gets. Fantastic games, the complete opposite of dumbed down action shooters.
Oh no, I wasn't implying that. But in my experience a lot of people tend to play these superficially and end up missing out on a lot of what makes them such rich and rewarding experiences. There's playing and then there's playing.
Hello!
I totally understand why long time fans were disappointed, but Hitman Absolution was the first one I properly played, and really enjoyed it. There were some shooty sections, but a lot of the game was the big open sandbox type levels with loads of different ways to reach your objective. I think a lot of people (and I'm certainly not implicating you with this comment) really didn't give the game a fair chance, because the Hitman they loved is truly there. It's just linked together by some more outright action sections that played like an Uncharted/Gears cover shooter. I think the game was really quite decent.KSubzero1000 wrote: ↑October 7th, 2019, 5:04 pmThey tried with one of the sequels but it wasn't well received by long-time fans at all. The 2016 reboot and its sequel on the other hand thankfully take a complete 'back to the roots' approach and are as slow, methodical, strategic, and True-Hitman-y as it gets. Fantastic games, the complete opposite of dumbed down action shooters.
I'll openly confess to not having played it at all!Alex79uk wrote: ↑October 7th, 2019, 8:19 pm I think a lot of people (and I'm certainly not implicating you with this comment) really didn't give the game a fair chance, because the Hitman they loved is truly there. It's just linked together by some more outright action sections that played like an Uncharted/Gears cover shooter.
Very true.ThirdMan wrote: ↑October 8th, 2019, 7:23 am The best thing that has happened to me in gaming terms over the past 3 or 4 years has been shaking off all my preconceptions of what a game must offer to be a 'real game'. I find that type of language very reductive. It's also quite self-serving as I suspect many of those same people would consider videogames as works of art. They (rightly) want the definition of art to be extended to include their favourite interactive, goal-oriented games, yet don't seem willing to similarly extend the concept of 'game' to include those other types of experiences - those indie creations that are to videogames what videogames are to traditional art. People seem forever destined to plant their little flag in what they think is the 'real thing'.
Genuinely puzzled as to how anybody around here could not know what I mean by now considering how often I like to rehash the same old shit. I'll keep it in spoiler tags so as to not annoy everybody else: