Average User Score: 6.7Aug 6, 2014First things first; This game deserve none of the 10's or 0's. It is neither perfect (nothing is) nor terrible as some may lead you toFirst things first; This game deserve none of the 10's or 0's. It is neither perfect (nothing is) nor terrible as some may lead you to believe.
The world of Firefall is beautiful. But at the same time, it feels empty. Over time, I only hope they'll add more event types, and distribute them around. Story is OK-ish, sounds are fine, gunplay is enjoyable. But the real problem I have with this game is, the identity crisis it is going through.
It wants to be a shooter. Then it wants to have RP elements. Over the beta phases, it has changed drastically, and I don't believe they have tested all of these changes properly. Many of the depth has been removed from the game, and now what we have is a shooter with a very shallow progression system. I wish they kept some of the complexity rather than trying to streamline everything.
Overall, I enjoy the game, but sometimes it feels like a chore. But as a F2P title, you should at least give it a chance.
(over 100, Graphics: 85, Sound: 60, Music: 70, Gameplay: 60, Progression: 30, Story/World: 50)… Expand
Average User Score: 3.3Nov 16, 2013Another case of "trying to appeal to a broader audience". A rough gem, perhaps much more rougher than previous X titles ever was. Instead ofAnother case of "trying to appeal to a broader audience". A rough gem, perhaps much more rougher than previous X titles ever was. Instead of making the game more accessible, and try to get you even more immersed in the universe, they add additional layers which feel like a chore and also are redundant.
The UI is a step backwards in my opinion, and that's something if you've played previous X titles. Poorly optimized, a lot of bugs, etc... However, it doesn't deserve a very low score, as most of these stuff can, and hopefully will, get better.… Expand
Average User Score: 4.2Oct 23, 2013In short, I call this game a failure in the series, simply because the changes over the previous titles, and the new additions are poorlyIn short, I call this game a failure in the series, simply because the changes over the previous titles, and the new additions are poorly implemented, and they are not fleshed out enough to make a difference. What I don't understand is, even though they had a bigger budget, and "experience" from the previous titles, accomplishments and mistakes, how have they come up with such a disaster.
Longer version, the battles play way more faster than any previous title in the series, and mostly it becomes a blob-fest where your orders doesn't matter. This is where you'll notice that nearly all units have an ability, maybe more than one, and this is another example to the bad implementation. You win battles by using to these abilities, rather than a careful planning and execution of the strategy. Which is a shame, as I think many people play this game for its epic battles. Not to mention that the AI is still troubled, and most of the time do stupid stuff.
Among the new features, now you pick a stance for an army. Why? It felt natural before; if you have slow moving units, your army movement was bound to those units. To move fast, you had to use cavalry-only forces to hit and run, or catch an enemy. To ambush, you had to set up "camp" in forests, and alike. It felt natural, you didn't have to click on anything to "toggle" those stuff. Also, the way the recruitment is done in this game is just retarded. Why change the old ways? Recruit from any city/town, group them up, send them to the general. While it seems logical in Rome; that your general has to stand still, it is not. Game tries to "emulate" the process for you, but it makes so in a stupid way. Shogun II's system was better, recruit at general, and recruits move to general, also can get intercepted. Recruit in towns, group them up and send them to general yourself. Etc...
Naval combat... I don't like it. The best naval combat was naturally in Empire Napoleon. There, you can execute some strategy. Any other game, where cannons are not involved, it generally ends up in an orgy on some ship, and all other ships around it. Still, combining naval combat with land combat, that's a very good step. However, that thing is bugged aswell, I am unaware if it is fixed but, there are just a few landing points, and when all of them are occupied, all your ships can just watch the rest of the battle.
City management also suffers. You cannot get a clear picture of what is what that easily, and this IS a big problem. UI has always been one of the weakest points in Total War games in my opinion. Instead of expanding on and improving what they had, they just skimmed the UI heavily, and buried the essentials even deeper. Introduction of bread, and changes to growth, while sounds sensible, takes away a part of the game; town/city development. In Shogun II, if you captured a well developed city that belonged to your enemy, you'd be keeping it intact, because any sacking/razing done would affect the accumulated growth aswell. Now, there is no point, a city is always the same, razing or sacking doesn't change a thing.
Among other new things, the political system is rudimentary, non-essential at best. It involves a few buttons that are totally unnecessary, and takes up hard-disk space in short. Also, (for Rome and Carthage at least), political system sort-of gets disabled after the major rebellions. As I've said, poorly implemented and not fleshed out fully.
The performance of the game is on the floor. While I can play Shogun II on extreme, and even Rome II offered me Extreme, it turns out, I can only play it at low-medium. Just unbelievable.
I can go on. But among this many negative reviews, I think you get the point already.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.3Apr 24, 2013Very nice art style, and music. Gameplay wise, it may seem like other "survival" games out there, but this one is really different. PlayingVery nice art style, and music. Gameplay wise, it may seem like other "survival" games out there, but this one is really different. Playing the game non-stop is not recommended; it may get too boring too fast, let this game be a break from other ones, and enjoy the experience as long as it lasts.… Expand
Average User Score: 2.2Mar 6, 2013Let me sum it up:
-"Unable to create your city at this time. Please claim a city again." This issue haven't got fixed on beta. 3 days afterLet me sum it up:
-"Unable to create your city at this time. Please claim a city again." This issue haven't got fixed on beta. 3 days after release, and I STILL GET THIS.
-Busy servers; either get in line, or go play on some other server (if you can) where your cities are NOT stored at
-VERY SMALL city areas. Are you kidding me? Areas should be AT LEAST 4 TIMES BIGGER.
-Always online DRM I'm mostly fine with this, but due to 1st and 2nd points I've made... the server load I mean... Enough said, I think?… Expand
Average User Score: 4.0May 15, 2012Cliche story. You are able to see what is going or who is who right from the beginning, which are signs of terrible story writing. PoorCliche story. You are able to see what is going or who is who right from the beginning, which are signs of terrible story writing. Poor in-game cutscenes. Average graphics. Below average music (with Matt Uelmen gone - the name behind Diablo 1 & 2 soundtracks, it just feels unoriginal & boring). Terrible level designs, very limited procedural generation which gets boring real fast. Being locked to 6 skills at a time, very few skills, automatic stat allocation. Etc... etc...
But my biggest problems are: EU is completely broken, login servers are down, game servers are heavily loaded & busy... Can't you add login delays & queue to keep login servers up? And how come game servers are loaded & busy? What was that stress test for? These are just amateur mistakes from Blizzard. It gets my rating down to 2 from 6.… Expand
Average User Score: 7.5Sep 6, 2011No co-op is a big mistake. Adding it as a DLC won't make up for it. Multiplayer is kind of a joke, given the amount of maps, and most of theNo co-op is a big mistake. Adding it as a DLC won't make up for it. Multiplayer is kind of a joke, given the amount of maps, and most of the time, it's a campfest. Singleplayer is also bad in my opinion. Story doesn't grasp you, neither does the atmosphere of the game. Having to execute something to get HP back is a BIG mistake. Also, there is no progression in SP. Also, it is short. Felt like a waste of money to be honest. After playing Darksiders, God of War, Mass Effect, and some other TPS games, this game doesn't excel in any of these; action/brawler/TPS. Average on all. And annoying as hell. While trying to get some HP back, being unable to move in animation while some rockets are heading on your way is surely fun.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.4May 25, 2011At first, I was disappointed a little bit, because some major mechanics of the game are entirely different. I loved the realistic inventoryAt first, I was disappointed a little bit, because some major mechanics of the game are entirely different. I loved the realistic inventory system of Witcher 1, that's gone completely. But that's not a big issue, we get a more traditional RPG inventory system now. It may use some tweaks however, and I'm sure they'll be delivered with the future patches. Combat is totally different. I always wanted more games like God of War, Batman: AA, or Darksiders on PC, because of their combat mechanics, and Witcher 2 delivers that. You need practice however, and higher difficulties punish the players if not careful, especially Insane; you cannot load your saves if you die. Hardcore mode so to speak. Really enjoying the combat mechanics.
Graphics are the best I've ever seen, and I've played other games that support DX11 and so on. I just can't believe this is a DX9 game. However, many players experience FPS problems with high-end PCs, but that's not entirely their fault, as AMD and NVidia are working on hotfixes to address the issues in the game. Patience, and you won't have any trouble.
Voice acting, music and sounds are really good. Especially the music, it is a vast improvement over Witcher 1 in my opinion.
I just love this game. And I throw my hat off to developers. It seems they knew what they wanted, aimed for it, and bullseye... A perfect PC game!… Expand
Average User Score: 4.4Mar 8, 2011After playing the demo, hoped that the full game would worth something. But, simply no. Basically, a hack&slash game with conversations,After playing the demo, hoped that the full game would worth something. But, simply no. Basically, a hack&slash game with conversations, companions, etc... And those alone doesn't make a game one RPG. Just an insult. I'll no longer buy any Bioware games, they don't exist for me anymore.… Expand
Average User Score: 5.2Nov 18, 2010I think this game supports only mouse and keyboard on PC. Till they give me something more that is my PC CAPABLE OF, I'm not going anywhereI think this game supports only mouse and keyboard on PC. Till they give me something more that is my PC CAPABLE OF, I'm not going anywhere near Call of Duty series, or anything from their developers/publishers lets say.… Expand