Average User Score: 8.3Oct 10, 2012Although not a horrific game, I think this is a step back for the "Deus Ex genre" - or whatever you want to call it. A hybrid of stealth andAlthough not a horrific game, I think this is a step back for the "Deus Ex genre" - or whatever you want to call it. A hybrid of stealth and action - the action falls flat. You can run and gun in this game, but there's no omph to it. It's on par with the original Deus Ex in terms of pure gunplay. Or, maybe that's too generous - Deus Ex gives you a wide array of weapons over a decade ago. In Dishonored, you have three kinds of bolts to hurl with your tiny dart-slinger, and a shabby pistol. Action just isn't there, with gameplay revolving around running straight at enemies, using up your small ammunition stockpile, and then chugging mana potions while you hurl rats and wind about. There's very little to engage you, as most of the levels are extremely linear if you choose to take the action route. ||| The stealth side of things is better than I was expecting, but most of the depth of stealth is lost thanks to Blink. Granted, you can choose not to use the spell, but the stealth is balanced around it. And choosing not to use it simply makes every level a chore. In Deus Ex, sneaking involves passing through guard patrols, crawling through vents, utilizing security systems, and hacking. In Dishonored, stealth is patiently waiting about for your enemies to turn their heads toward the sea for a moment and seldom more than that. Occasionally you encounter a security system you need to bypass, but the ways of approaching those security systems involve blink, at least until you can slow down time. ||| What I'm trying to imply is that the depth of choice in Dishonored falls a little flat. It's easy to see that they tried, but the most striking failure of Dishonored is its lame level design. For a game as short as it is (… Expand
Average User Score: 8.3Aug 23, 2012Not sure how this has a lower score than Skyrim, as Sleeping Dogs and Skyrim define mediocrity in video games. Not once did I feel like I wasNot sure how this has a lower score than Skyrim, as Sleeping Dogs and Skyrim define mediocrity in video games. Not once did I feel like I was playing a video game while playing Sleeping Dogs. Maybe it's lack of a cohesive gameplay mechanic? The game offers a huge sandbox city to play in - but offers you almost nothing to do inside it. From tired racing mini-games, shallow beat-em-ups, to inane "follow the yellow beacon" side-missions, to a total lack of mayhem you can cause - Sleeping Dogs is but a linear romp through a poorly constructed character-based narrative... where the main character's development stops after the major twist. It's the tired and true "cinematic experience" games like Call of Duty are built around - nice visuals, a place to be, a person to follow, a cutscene to watch... but in the end, you're just wondering why you're going to burger town, or why you're doing any of the things the game tells you to do. Most of the game's major story missions are basically: "Follow the guy." And those that aren't, devolve into a "run from the police" sequence. There's never one moment where you, the player, make any decisions of your own. What's worse than that? Well, the fact, for a GTA clone, you're actively discouraged from causing mayhem on missions, as that reduces your "police score". This can be as arbitrary as scraping a guard rail costing you 25% of your mission experience. But don't worry, there are plenty of inane things to do to grind experience on. I won't even get into the story, suffice to say, it's built up very well in the beginning, introducing several interesting characters - but it never expands upon them, and instead stagnates into a head-scratching ending. There's nothing so awful with this "experience" (I refuse to dignify it as a game) - you might be thoroughly entertained for several hours at least, but it isn't worth $60 and it wasn't fun to play.… Expand
Average User Score: 6.7Jul 5, 2012http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hr-a8Gh8tcg&list=UU-RLIs7vYFbNioh5_FsPMsA&index=1&feature=plcp
Don't need to write a review - RC64 does ahttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hr-a8Gh8tcg&list=UU-RLIs7vYFbNioh5_FsPMsA&index=1&feature=plcp
Don't need to write a review - RC64 does a fine job of it.
Don't waste your money on this game. It has some of the worst design decisions for a horror game and a PC port I've ever experienced. The game's story is so flimsy and tired that it wouldn't even pass as C grade horror. It's not even good B movie material. It makes ludicrously awful game.… Expand
Average User Score: 3.9May 17, 2012Read the professional reviews. Read how they describe the game. Does that sound like an 87 to you? No, it sounds like an 80 or a 75, butRead the professional reviews. Read how they describe the game. Does that sound like an 87 to you? No, it sounds like an 80 or a 75, but because Diablo III has the Blizzard name and advertising dollar attached to it, it gets an 87 on metacritic. It's criminal.… Expand
Average User Score: 5.2Mar 8, 2012Mass Effect 3 is a bitter disappointment. I will do my best to briefly explain its flaws without spoiling anything.
1. Very little care wasMass Effect 3 is a bitter disappointment. I will do my best to briefly explain its flaws without spoiling anything.
1. Very little care was paid to the story. There are many nagging plot holes that will distract you throughout the game. Glaring logical flaws that have existed since Mass Effect 2 and even Mass Effect 1. More importantly, characters behave very erratically in this game, seldom true to their original characterization in the previous games. BioWare took the easy way out in most cases, killing off characters at obvious moment. The plot is predictable (I found myself calling out what would happen hours before it did) and the characters and concepts new to Mass Effect 3 are either ridiculous (Kai Leng, the future space ninja) to just shallow (James Vega, token mexican-american space marine). The endings, suffice to say, will leave you in shock with how lazy they were crafted.
BioWare did impress me with how it handled some of its lesser side characters though, I did not expect so many of them to return as cameos and not simply emails saying, "Hi, remember me?"
2. None of your choices impact much in ME3. If you played the previous games, you'll find ME3 a little easier to play with some difficult decisions removed (such as choosing one character or another to live), but overall very little changes depending upon your choices in the previous two games. Almost nothing changes based on your choices in ME3, which is a bit surprising. Not even your paragon/renegade status really seems to influence anything.
This is really wrenching. Major decisions like letting the Rachni living in the first game or not, have no bearing on the game's events in any meaningful manner. But also, deciding who you ally or help or not in ME3 really has no effect on the game's ending... or really much of anything.
3. This game is ugly. BioWare really outsourced its artwork this time. Facial animations and modeling are inferior to ME2. Many big game reveals (a picture of Tali's face) are stock photo touchups (and by that, I mean literally importing a stock photo into photoshop and putting a lens flare over it). Level design is not as creative as in the original ME. There are occasionally some good in-game environments (such as a certain vegetated piece of Tuchanka) but they are few and far between. In order save memory consumption, BW even had to remove the ability to holster your weapon in combat areas. This broke immersion for me, with my character always hunched over looking down the barrel of their gun.
Whoever designed Diana Allers' "dress" should be shot.
4. The voice acting in this game is tolerable, though there are some spotty moments (Wrex stands out at times).
5. The dialogue wheel is horribly dumbed down in this game - I was shocked. Immensely. There is always a "top" or "bottom" choice to pick (two choices) and every once in a while you'll get an 'investigate' option with 3-5 choices there, but less than 10% of the time do you ever get a "middle" option to pursue in dialogue. You're either paragon or renegade in this game, you can't walk the line through any situation. You're either on their side, or you're not.
6. The gunplay is a little improved. Some of the new abilities are interesting. However, level design has not been improved from ME2/Me1, I'd say it's gotten worse actually. A lot of corridors, people constantly shouting at you to keep moving -- you can't even stop to look around and enjoy the scenery you like, or even plan an approach to your enemy. Corridors and guns are pretty much all you can expect in this game.
I did enjoy the aspect of building up an army to fight the reapers though, and for a moment (towards the beginning of the game), I felt a little desperate as to whether I would be able to reach maximum army strength. I thought that the more time I dawdled on side missions, the less chance I would have at beating the game. But I shouldn't have been so silly - of course not. Why challenge the player?
7. The multiplayer is trashy and I don't understand why they wasted development time on it -- besides marketing purposes anyway.
8. The different difficulty selections are nice, but narrative is immersion breaking and insanity is pretty much 'dumb' in some instances of the game, where enemies zerg you.
9. The AI is atrocious. Many encounters in the game are made easy when enemies funnel in through drop points or doorways - you can't just stun them all with a Biotic spell. AI tend to just get behind something and shoot from it.
10. Not a single boss fight was designed well. They feel really tacked on and lame.… Expand
Average User Score: 8.8Jul 13, 2011It's a good action game. But don't go into it expecting much. It is definitely improved over the first game, for sure (except barring theIt's a good action game. But don't go into it expecting much. It is definitely improved over the first game, for sure (except barring the story) but it is hindered by a horrible camera system and lack of imagination. You are no more an assassin than Duke Nukem, something that is corrected I hope, by the time this series reaches the modern era.
It's laughable, because there are points in the game where Ezio, a master "assassin" is told by lowly chums how to be more stealthy, and the guy wants to run into palaces like Rambo and kill his targets. Really? There's no stealth to this game, no finesse. The way guards detect you is poor. The game is thus, at times, boringly easy, and unfairly hard (there are certain missions where you must not alert guards, even if you kill the immediately after alerting them, forcing you to restart over and over), especially when the 'context camera' comes into play - there are certain timed platforming sections where, I would rather have Tomb Raider I's camera system than ASII's. It's like Ubisoft hasn't learned from over twenty years of 3d platforming. I don't intend to purchase any more of this series, I've been burnt out by this awful mess (22 hr complete time too, which is kind of short for a single player action game).… Expand
Average User Score: 5.3Jul 13, 2011This game is the epitome of bad. It has the groundwork to be an okay game, with a large dynamic world which you can grow and interact with,This game is the epitome of bad. It has the groundwork to be an okay game, with a large dynamic world which you can grow and interact with, but...
The story is childish. The characters are forgettable. The combat system is trash. The objectives are tired. The interaction with the world is fairly limited and much too varied in tone. There's no sense of urgency, no empathy, no coherent theme. It's a game that is without challenge and grows stale quickly, with no redeeming features.… Expand