well, after several hours and levels in, i can say that it's a great graphics adventure. but that's it.
i still love how you can finish the quests in so many different ways, yet, gameplay wise, it's really just not good enough.
1)too easy
- at level 5 i found a jacket that regens my magic 75% faster.
- the dual casting for free is overpowered
- the basic flamethrowing spell is op
- with horse + companion you do 3x damage
- fast travel is ridiculous
- sprint with 299 pounds on (399 with Deep Pockets)
- you can pay to level up (i just bought 2 levels and have money for 2 more)
- quicksave/load makes for some easy lockpicking/stealing/speechcraft/you name it
- using potions instantly makes for some easy fight, even with bigger mobs. sure not every fight, but since potions weight 0.5 (you can carry 600 if you wanna), some key fights can be easily won at earlier levels.
- shouts use no mana. Also, everyone can use magic. AND armor. so you can be a 25% magic resisting, 50% magic absorbing, dual spellcasting firethrower mage with plate armor, two handed sword and stack of potions who can stun enemies for free every 15 sec. AT LEVEL 1. ad it gets worse.
- and let's not forget the racial abilities (once per day. which translates to once per fight) and the blessings.
2)it's buggy and/or stupid
- kill that giant at level 2 by getting him stuck in the game geometry
- kill that dragon, solo, at level 9 by hiding behind a rock where he can't hit you (but thinks he does) and fill him with iron arrows
- melee weapons, don't even think about it. touch the arrow keys and your stamina goes bye bye.
- press Alt to sneak, press Tab to access inventory. Alt+Tab?? who the **** thought of that one?
- press Tab to open inventory. use arrow keys to scroll to bow. click with mous on bow when highlited. press F. press Tab to close screen. press Q. use arrow keys to select bow. press 1. THAT IS HOW YOU SELECT YOUR WEAPONS ?!?!?!?
- why on earth you cant fast travel within city locations? it takes more time to go from the blacksmith to the alchemist than it does to go from Dragonsreach to Solitude.
- seriously? still using encounter scaling? what's the point of levels then?
thats about all i can think of now.
actually, it's about all. Skyrim doesn't have bugs in the classic sense of the word, it's just that the game mechanics are really weak. even QL/Q3 has physics light years ahead of Syrim. gameplay isn't too buggy, it's just poor. but if you played Oblivion you already know all of this.
Surely tho Syrim is not a proper RPG game.
(he didn't like it)
Sunday, 13 November 2011
Sunday, 23 October 2011
Waiting for Ivy Bridge
Waiting for Godot Ivy Bridge.
Technology has gotten so good that it's competing with itself;
The release date for Ivy Bridge CPUs nears, yet i still don't see any new features that lack from my C2D setup.
Of course, IB will have more power, lots more, and lower temperatures (so low in fact that many once-awesome aftermarket coolers are now totally redundant.. once you get your hands on a Coolermaster Hyper 212+, you are set for life), much better memory controllers (i'm actually hoping to see DDR4 with IB), more overcloclability... in fact, IB will be *exactly* like SB, but better in everything, if by little.
And of course the first thing that comes to mind is the Tic-Toc, where CPUs are designed in two steps, one of architectural change, and one of die shrink and refinement; knowing how things work, do you opt for the Tic, the new technology with new features, or do you wait for the Toc, which at the same price point delivers better performance and has less bugs'n kinks?
Now i would have gone Sandy bridge long ago were it not for that i was broke, and couldn't afford to even think about it - which leaves me to consider the Toc, as it's not a good idea to get one now since IB is "just around the corner" (IB has been "JATC" since jan, but whatever).. however here comes the big if:
Should i go Ivy bridge??
As people say on Hardforum, "i'm concerned that these chips will be made to not be any faster than Sandy Bridge" - of course, why whould Intel want to compete with itself, expecially now that AMD is nowhere to be seen and SB chips could be still sold successfully for another couple years.
Well, they won't be revolutionary, but they will certainly be better than SB. In fact you *will* get a lot more, mostly out of the new chipset; the problem here isn't whether Ivy Bridge will be lots better than Sandy Bridge - it will be at least a little better, and that's all that matters - but it's if Ivy Bridge will finally manage to make my C2D setup feel old. Will it?
You see, i'm working and gaming on a 5 year old machine, with a 280GTX bought on eBay for £50, and everything still works perfectly.
Many years ago,in the infancy of computers, things used to go horribly wrong - in fact, the was hardly ever a platform that didn't have several things going horribly wrong at once, and each technological step-up would fix only a few of these, often adding a couple more in for good measure..
But around the years of WinXP SP2, and the C2D, everything started to fall into place.. OSs were stable, hardware got its bugs sorted out, and essentially my machine can do everything that any modern one can.. in the same way. Maybe, just maybe, a very little slower but, hey, is that really worth two grand????
Here is an example (if i find it): FLASH/NAND based storage, or SSDs to us, hailed as revolutionary, "hard disk has always been a bottleneck", "you will be amazed at the speed" and all that shit.
Mind you, a decent SSD today is around £400.
Then, you get articles like this one Anandtech forums:
I got an SSD, why doesn't Windows boot much faster?
And Lol 'n behold, your £400 doesn't actually do anything that you can see.
Cue excruciating explanation of this new and amazing technology that offers very little real life improvement, unless you have ADD and really think its ok to spend £400 to wait two seconds instead of three to watch a film on your computer.
So, will Ivy Bridge truly outperform my Core2Duo ?
Honestly, i don't know. I almost hope it does, because CPUs have become less and less of an interest for me since this build, as i hardly feel that i have a need for more computing power. Ask me, and i can easily tell you the Nvidia 560Ti is the best GPU on the market, and yet, why would i want to buy one?? I still play everything that comes out ..
And again.. i mostly just play QL ...
Technology has gotten so good that it's competing with itself;
The release date for Ivy Bridge CPUs nears, yet i still don't see any new features that lack from my C2D setup.
Of course, IB will have more power, lots more, and lower temperatures (so low in fact that many once-awesome aftermarket coolers are now totally redundant.. once you get your hands on a Coolermaster Hyper 212+, you are set for life), much better memory controllers (i'm actually hoping to see DDR4 with IB), more overcloclability... in fact, IB will be *exactly* like SB, but better in everything, if by little.
And of course the first thing that comes to mind is the Tic-Toc, where CPUs are designed in two steps, one of architectural change, and one of die shrink and refinement; knowing how things work, do you opt for the Tic, the new technology with new features, or do you wait for the Toc, which at the same price point delivers better performance and has less bugs'n kinks?
Now i would have gone Sandy bridge long ago were it not for that i was broke, and couldn't afford to even think about it - which leaves me to consider the Toc, as it's not a good idea to get one now since IB is "just around the corner" (IB has been "JATC" since jan, but whatever).. however here comes the big if:
Should i go Ivy bridge??
As people say on Hardforum, "i'm concerned that these chips will be made to not be any faster than Sandy Bridge" - of course, why whould Intel want to compete with itself, expecially now that AMD is nowhere to be seen and SB chips could be still sold successfully for another couple years.
Well, they won't be revolutionary, but they will certainly be better than SB. In fact you *will* get a lot more, mostly out of the new chipset; the problem here isn't whether Ivy Bridge will be lots better than Sandy Bridge - it will be at least a little better, and that's all that matters - but it's if Ivy Bridge will finally manage to make my C2D setup feel old. Will it?
You see, i'm working and gaming on a 5 year old machine, with a 280GTX bought on eBay for £50, and everything still works perfectly.
Many years ago,in the infancy of computers, things used to go horribly wrong - in fact, the was hardly ever a platform that didn't have several things going horribly wrong at once, and each technological step-up would fix only a few of these, often adding a couple more in for good measure..
But around the years of WinXP SP2, and the C2D, everything started to fall into place.. OSs were stable, hardware got its bugs sorted out, and essentially my machine can do everything that any modern one can.. in the same way. Maybe, just maybe, a very little slower but, hey, is that really worth two grand????
Here is an example (if i find it): FLASH/NAND based storage, or SSDs to us, hailed as revolutionary, "hard disk has always been a bottleneck", "you will be amazed at the speed" and all that shit.
Mind you, a decent SSD today is around £400.
Then, you get articles like this one Anandtech forums:
I got an SSD, why doesn't Windows boot much faster?
And Lol 'n behold, your £400 doesn't actually do anything that you can see.
Cue excruciating explanation of this new and amazing technology that offers very little real life improvement, unless you have ADD and really think its ok to spend £400 to wait two seconds instead of three to watch a film on your computer.
So, will Ivy Bridge truly outperform my Core2Duo ?
Honestly, i don't know. I almost hope it does, because CPUs have become less and less of an interest for me since this build, as i hardly feel that i have a need for more computing power. Ask me, and i can easily tell you the Nvidia 560Ti is the best GPU on the market, and yet, why would i want to buy one?? I still play everything that comes out ..
And again.. i mostly just play QL ...
Thursday, 4 August 2011
Thursday, 14 July 2011
Saturday, 11 June 2011
Friday, 10 June 2011
Videogames
I want to review briefly a couple of games that i have played lately and that - since i always whine on about how bad games are - were pretty nice and worthy of their shelf price.
All these games can be either purchased from your local retailer, or downloaded illegally from any of a number of websites, the choice is yours; in the end, game companies must be rewarded when they put out a good product, and there is nothing wrong with paying for something you like.. honesty is its own reward.
The First Templar
This is a easy going third-person combat game, rather arcadeish, where you run around in a closed environment killing scripted encounters; it's easy, the combat is rather simplistic, and that's about it. Not a great game by any extent, but it's got some nice writing, and even though you have seen it all before, it's all done rather tastefully.
The graphics are delicious, even if the coding behind them seems pretty horrid since this game will try to murder you graphics card, but i love it, great atmosphere. TFT also tries to do away with classic hollywoodian scripts and even if the sidekick is a bit out of place, the main character is very well written, in person and historically. The story flows well, and keeps you interested; this is one of a very few games where i wasn't skipping the cutscenes at the first chance. The "costumes" being locked in chests which are quite hard to find is sux, but costumes are just a bonus, and you can whizz through the game and not miss out on anything. Truly recommended, and hating the fact that most reviewers have ripped on this game and called it shit.
On a sidenote, i'm playing The Witcher 2 and i'm hating it.
The Black Mirror (part 3)
I have not played parts 1 or 2, but part 3 is truly engrossing. This is a point&click adventure reminiscent of the olden days, with very good graphics and a rather nice and realistic story. Why i like TBM3 is because of two things: first, the puzzles - which are the core of these games - are REALISTIC, not some weird "use hat to move stone" combinations, along with the fact that item locations make sense; this helps with the gameflow and makes you feel like you really are solving the mystery. Second, the writing is really, really good. I mean it, the game directing is truly superior and the script is good, and the whole game design is absolutely fantastic, at times you feel like everything you see onscreen is real. These people really know how to write a P&C game.
I am also playing some games which are absolutely horrid, and therefore feel that i have to warn you;
Brink
Which has had a massive, nationwide publicity campaign, is tripe; "Revolutionary" if you have lived under a rock for the last twenty years, and nothing more than a ripoff of Team Fortress 2(and every other online FPS ever). It's shit.
The Witcher 2
Fantastic graphics, really eye-watering splendor, but truly horrid gameplay. Two things.. three things i hate about this game. The Combat, which is not that far from TFT, in being arcadeish, truly random, but also way too fucking hard; The Interface, which is the worst fucking interface i have ever seen in a game since i was born, and lastly, The Interface, which is so fucking bad it makes me want to open my blog and write up a post on how fucking bad it is.
Also, The Witcher 2's writing is dark, mature, blah blah blah, but horribly hollywood - same old shit, but with swear words.
Dungeons & Dragons, Daggerdale
Fuck me this is really shit. Would have been a great title on launch date for your PS2, thirteen years ago.
I'v been out of the loop for a while, but meh.
All these games can be either purchased from your local retailer, or downloaded illegally from any of a number of websites, the choice is yours; in the end, game companies must be rewarded when they put out a good product, and there is nothing wrong with paying for something you like.. honesty is its own reward.
The First Templar
This is a easy going third-person combat game, rather arcadeish, where you run around in a closed environment killing scripted encounters; it's easy, the combat is rather simplistic, and that's about it. Not a great game by any extent, but it's got some nice writing, and even though you have seen it all before, it's all done rather tastefully.
The graphics are delicious, even if the coding behind them seems pretty horrid since this game will try to murder you graphics card, but i love it, great atmosphere. TFT also tries to do away with classic hollywoodian scripts and even if the sidekick is a bit out of place, the main character is very well written, in person and historically. The story flows well, and keeps you interested; this is one of a very few games where i wasn't skipping the cutscenes at the first chance. The "costumes" being locked in chests which are quite hard to find is sux, but costumes are just a bonus, and you can whizz through the game and not miss out on anything. Truly recommended, and hating the fact that most reviewers have ripped on this game and called it shit.
On a sidenote, i'm playing The Witcher 2 and i'm hating it.
The Black Mirror (part 3)
I have not played parts 1 or 2, but part 3 is truly engrossing. This is a point&click adventure reminiscent of the olden days, with very good graphics and a rather nice and realistic story. Why i like TBM3 is because of two things: first, the puzzles - which are the core of these games - are REALISTIC, not some weird "use hat to move stone" combinations, along with the fact that item locations make sense; this helps with the gameflow and makes you feel like you really are solving the mystery. Second, the writing is really, really good. I mean it, the game directing is truly superior and the script is good, and the whole game design is absolutely fantastic, at times you feel like everything you see onscreen is real. These people really know how to write a P&C game.
I am also playing some games which are absolutely horrid, and therefore feel that i have to warn you;
Brink
Which has had a massive, nationwide publicity campaign, is tripe; "Revolutionary" if you have lived under a rock for the last twenty years, and nothing more than a ripoff of Team Fortress 2(and every other online FPS ever). It's shit.
The Witcher 2
Fantastic graphics, really eye-watering splendor, but truly horrid gameplay. Two things.. three things i hate about this game. The Combat, which is not that far from TFT, in being arcadeish, truly random, but also way too fucking hard; The Interface, which is the worst fucking interface i have ever seen in a game since i was born, and lastly, The Interface, which is so fucking bad it makes me want to open my blog and write up a post on how fucking bad it is.
Also, The Witcher 2's writing is dark, mature, blah blah blah, but horribly hollywood - same old shit, but with swear words.
Dungeons & Dragons, Daggerdale
Fuck me this is really shit. Would have been a great title on launch date for your PS2, thirteen years ago.
I'v been out of the loop for a while, but meh.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)