DeltaRiley
2003
I don't think any amount of video essays or reviews detailing the troubled development of DMC2 could prepare me for this game. I'm sure they've probably said most have said this but I'm just going to repeat it. This isn't an opinion, I'm ready to claim that Devil May Cry 2 is awful as FACT. The controls are awful and janky, the story is non existent, and Dante, Lucia and the villain are just barely developed characters. The dialogue is somehow worse than the first game with people being overly edgy or overly hammy. The camera is also horrible and sometimes drifts offscreen when you're trying to fight or run through a level. Oh also how do you screw up flipping simple switches in the middle of the room with your sword? Do you know how many times I wanted to throw my controller in frustration? FUCK mission 9 for making me swing my sword around like an idiot under a timer. The lock-on system is atrocious because there isn't a combo system, it's swinging your thumbstick in the direction you want but it all feels like its by chance. Dodging is unbearably clunky, working half the time and even if you're successful an enemy will hit you not long after. Also FUCK mission 5 for the infected vehicles and a timed platforming escape mission up a burning building. For some reason there's no good indication for the doors because you have to click it or expect Dante to run up it if you're not supposed to go inside it.
The levels range from terrible to frustratingly bad, and the bosses exist for you to kill (Mission 17) or be killed by them in frustration (Mission 16). Ironically the second to last villain boss is the easiest whereas the one before with the three heads was difficult, and not in a good way. Then you get to the final boss...all I can say is that one can burn in hell for all I care. The secret rooms are all copy and pasted with the only difference being the enemy "variety" or lack thereof. The enemies are about as bland, boring and uninspired as the levels they're in. Then it ends without much fanfare and I got to see the DIESEL clothing collab. I'm so glad I was able to speedily complete this one, jeez. I can't believe DMC2 was greenlit at all, but I can at least be thankful that this monstrosity didn't kill the franchise. The only good thing I have to say about DMC 2 is Dante looks badass, that's about it.
The levels range from terrible to frustratingly bad, and the bosses exist for you to kill (Mission 17) or be killed by them in frustration (Mission 16). Ironically the second to last villain boss is the easiest whereas the one before with the three heads was difficult, and not in a good way. Then you get to the final boss...all I can say is that one can burn in hell for all I care. The secret rooms are all copy and pasted with the only difference being the enemy "variety" or lack thereof. The enemies are about as bland, boring and uninspired as the levels they're in. Then it ends without much fanfare and I got to see the DIESEL clothing collab. I'm so glad I was able to speedily complete this one, jeez. I can't believe DMC2 was greenlit at all, but I can at least be thankful that this monstrosity didn't kill the franchise. The only good thing I have to say about DMC 2 is Dante looks badass, that's about it.
Don't let the term "Special Edition" fool you, this is barely half a game let alone a particularly great Devil May Cry one. Where do I even start? Ok so I jumped into this before playing 1 and 3 initially, but I stopped myself after finishing most of Nero's half. To be honest what I played was great, however after having experienced games that felt complete it made me realize how empty and lifeless 4 really is. I was ready to give it a 4/5, but after finishing the other entries and beating the "better" games I am struggling to even give this a 3/5. Capcom you were given MORE time to improve the issues plaguing the base game and all you did was add some characters and called it a day.
Devil May Cry 4 is just bullet point list of good ideas that were never expanded upon or forgotten, and it shows. Kyrie is just barely much of a character, and we don't get to see her or anyone Nero interacts with developed at all. In fact the only well-developed one was the antagonist Credo. We had someone like Gloria who probably was supposed to be her own person before they just made her Trish in disguise. Like what? How do you 180 so hard on introducing a new character only for them to be "reintroduced" as a mainstay. I don't even remember what Trish or Lady did in this game either, and I'm not really a fan of Lady's lazy design (I'm pretty sure it was Kyrie's model modified only slightly). Kyrie seriously needed development especially with regards to Nero and she was kind of robbed of that. Kyrie exists nothing more than an objective/girlfriend which kinda sucks when you have a game like Devil May Cry 3 that's centered around Lady and how it naturally incorporates the stories of her and Dante's family. Lady had her time to shine, why didn't Kyrie get the least bit of leeway? Even Nero probably needed more time to actually develop his motivations or just see what he was all about. Capcom has shown us in the past they can do it well, and DMC 4 unfortunately doesn't do it well (if at all). I'd say Dante's introduction was necessary from a gameplay and story perspective, except that I'm just here wishing they would've done it better because it all falls apart when the spotlight is stolen from Nero. Plain and simple Dante is an OP protagonist, and there's nothing wrong with that. My issue comes from taking away any kind of urgency when you rip the rug underneath this newly introduced character without giving him a chance to fully shine. Dante's role doesn't add much either because you basically re-experience the same things from his perspective. Then in the finale you go back to using Nero and I'm wondering if Dante was even a necessity at all in the story considering we barely see what he actually did to get to that point. Most of the game is pointless padding.
The levels are really not great, and I'm finding it hard to say anything good about them. Nero is fun to play to a point, however most of the enemies range from okay to downright bad because of how annoying they can be to fight. I can't tell you how much I strained my arm just trying to spam them over and over again instead of doing the right combos. If I get carpal tunnel later down the line I'm blaming THIS game. In most cases I just loathed encounters and wanted them to be over with as soon as possible. The Mephisto and Faust have to be the worst in existence and I do NOT want to see them return ever. The story was very misleading too because half of it is built up and dropped when you switch to Dantes campaign. This game was all wasted potential because Nero's story just starts to get interesting only to get cut off abruptly. Right after Nero's story effectively wraps up, you swap over to Dante for a bit. Yes the gameplay improves significantly because Dante actually has proper dodging mechanics and is better equipped to fight the more difficult foes but man does the story fall apart. I wasn't particularly fond of the levels to begin with, and then it makes you play them again in the reverse order. It's literally copied and pasted for the latter half. What's even worse is you fight the EXACT SAME bosses too just with Dante, and it kills any desire within me to replay this game. You want to know what else? The game would randomly crash on me with an error and in some instances I would have to replay the same damn level a second time all the way through.
The only half decent characters is Nero until Dante shows up, and Credo because you only fight him once and he seemed interesting if a little underdeveloped. Most if not all the bosses in the game are unmemorable or unfun (Mission 18), and it's even made more apparent when you have to fight a majority of them for a SECOND time. When you think you're done with them you do it all again for a THIRD time and it kills the pacing near and makes me want to scream. The entire thing not only feels rushed, but it has me wanting to rush through it too. That "completionist" approach only works until the second to last mission. You want to know why? Mission 19 is boss fights AGAIN only now with that stupid random roll-dice mini game that might take 5 minutes or 20 depending on where what numbers you get. On normal that level took me 50 minutes and again this is something I NEVER EVER WANT TO SEE IN A DEVIL MAY CRY GAME EVER. I'd sooner take on quick time events before I go through the random-chance combat mini game. It's really bad, and if you thought some of the older games had some bad mechanics you're in for a treat with this one. The fact that I'd rather rush through combat to get it over with is telling on how badly this game's encounters are. Yes the combat is built on such a solid foundation from 3, but when you have such bland levels and enemies you do not want to fight it's kind of meaningless.
To be honest I don't even know how I'm still so lukewarm about this game because there's a lot I'm not particularly fond of. All I can say is the Nero's story for the first half and the solid gameplay just barely hold the package together and it's amazing it turned out as well as it did at all. The Special Edition tag only pads the game with extra characters. If the actual levels were memorable or the enemies were fun I would've considered replaying it with Vergil or Lady and Trish. The game felts like half of what it should be, and I'm fully aware of it's botched development behind the scenes. It pains me that Capcom never actually did anything new with the Special Edition to improve the core game at all because it sorely needed it. It's a filler game padded with filler content, and this is exactly what it is. It's not awful but it's a shallow repetitive mess that has little to no replay value for me.
Devil May Cry 4 is just bullet point list of good ideas that were never expanded upon or forgotten, and it shows. Kyrie is just barely much of a character, and we don't get to see her or anyone Nero interacts with developed at all. In fact the only well-developed one was the antagonist Credo. We had someone like Gloria who probably was supposed to be her own person before they just made her Trish in disguise. Like what? How do you 180 so hard on introducing a new character only for them to be "reintroduced" as a mainstay. I don't even remember what Trish or Lady did in this game either, and I'm not really a fan of Lady's lazy design (I'm pretty sure it was Kyrie's model modified only slightly). Kyrie seriously needed development especially with regards to Nero and she was kind of robbed of that. Kyrie exists nothing more than an objective/girlfriend which kinda sucks when you have a game like Devil May Cry 3 that's centered around Lady and how it naturally incorporates the stories of her and Dante's family. Lady had her time to shine, why didn't Kyrie get the least bit of leeway? Even Nero probably needed more time to actually develop his motivations or just see what he was all about. Capcom has shown us in the past they can do it well, and DMC 4 unfortunately doesn't do it well (if at all). I'd say Dante's introduction was necessary from a gameplay and story perspective, except that I'm just here wishing they would've done it better because it all falls apart when the spotlight is stolen from Nero. Plain and simple Dante is an OP protagonist, and there's nothing wrong with that. My issue comes from taking away any kind of urgency when you rip the rug underneath this newly introduced character without giving him a chance to fully shine. Dante's role doesn't add much either because you basically re-experience the same things from his perspective. Then in the finale you go back to using Nero and I'm wondering if Dante was even a necessity at all in the story considering we barely see what he actually did to get to that point. Most of the game is pointless padding.
The levels are really not great, and I'm finding it hard to say anything good about them. Nero is fun to play to a point, however most of the enemies range from okay to downright bad because of how annoying they can be to fight. I can't tell you how much I strained my arm just trying to spam them over and over again instead of doing the right combos. If I get carpal tunnel later down the line I'm blaming THIS game. In most cases I just loathed encounters and wanted them to be over with as soon as possible. The Mephisto and Faust have to be the worst in existence and I do NOT want to see them return ever. The story was very misleading too because half of it is built up and dropped when you switch to Dantes campaign. This game was all wasted potential because Nero's story just starts to get interesting only to get cut off abruptly. Right after Nero's story effectively wraps up, you swap over to Dante for a bit. Yes the gameplay improves significantly because Dante actually has proper dodging mechanics and is better equipped to fight the more difficult foes but man does the story fall apart. I wasn't particularly fond of the levels to begin with, and then it makes you play them again in the reverse order. It's literally copied and pasted for the latter half. What's even worse is you fight the EXACT SAME bosses too just with Dante, and it kills any desire within me to replay this game. You want to know what else? The game would randomly crash on me with an error and in some instances I would have to replay the same damn level a second time all the way through.
The only half decent characters is Nero until Dante shows up, and Credo because you only fight him once and he seemed interesting if a little underdeveloped. Most if not all the bosses in the game are unmemorable or unfun (Mission 18), and it's even made more apparent when you have to fight a majority of them for a SECOND time. When you think you're done with them you do it all again for a THIRD time and it kills the pacing near and makes me want to scream. The entire thing not only feels rushed, but it has me wanting to rush through it too. That "completionist" approach only works until the second to last mission. You want to know why? Mission 19 is boss fights AGAIN only now with that stupid random roll-dice mini game that might take 5 minutes or 20 depending on where what numbers you get. On normal that level took me 50 minutes and again this is something I NEVER EVER WANT TO SEE IN A DEVIL MAY CRY GAME EVER. I'd sooner take on quick time events before I go through the random-chance combat mini game. It's really bad, and if you thought some of the older games had some bad mechanics you're in for a treat with this one. The fact that I'd rather rush through combat to get it over with is telling on how badly this game's encounters are. Yes the combat is built on such a solid foundation from 3, but when you have such bland levels and enemies you do not want to fight it's kind of meaningless.
To be honest I don't even know how I'm still so lukewarm about this game because there's a lot I'm not particularly fond of. All I can say is the Nero's story for the first half and the solid gameplay just barely hold the package together and it's amazing it turned out as well as it did at all. The Special Edition tag only pads the game with extra characters. If the actual levels were memorable or the enemies were fun I would've considered replaying it with Vergil or Lady and Trish. The game felts like half of what it should be, and I'm fully aware of it's botched development behind the scenes. It pains me that Capcom never actually did anything new with the Special Edition to improve the core game at all because it sorely needed it. It's a filler game padded with filler content, and this is exactly what it is. It's not awful but it's a shallow repetitive mess that has little to no replay value for me.
THIS is exactly how you do a prequel-sequel. Devil May Cry 3 has more polished gameplay than 1, and a much more emotionally engaging story to boot. All the characters are given so much more depth and context within the universe, and there are so many great moments throughout. I was never big on the hack and slash genre, but I can thank the DMC series for making me fall in love with it. Extra points for not ever including quick time events (in all cases they are more frustrating than fun).
My biggest criticisms come from some dated mechanics, mainly backtracking and repetitive mission structures. Mission 18 or 19 can be hell depending on what difficulty you play on and it almost seems unfair to play it on harder modes (or maybe I'm just bad).
Although the goofy tone is set up in the beginning (sort of semi-dropped later on) and goes full force into serious, I have to say some of it does feel clunky in tone. Other than that it still retains and builds off it's predecessors gameplay mechanics and really manages to go all out. The gameplay, soundtrack characters is fantastic. Oh I also had an OH SHIT moment when they incorporated the name, and it was handled so well. Absolutely stellar, I'd dare say it was a super sexy style of a game.
My biggest criticisms come from some dated mechanics, mainly backtracking and repetitive mission structures. Mission 18 or 19 can be hell depending on what difficulty you play on and it almost seems unfair to play it on harder modes (or maybe I'm just bad).
Although the goofy tone is set up in the beginning (sort of semi-dropped later on) and goes full force into serious, I have to say some of it does feel clunky in tone. Other than that it still retains and builds off it's predecessors gameplay mechanics and really manages to go all out. The gameplay, soundtrack characters is fantastic. Oh I also had an OH SHIT moment when they incorporated the name, and it was handled so well. Absolutely stellar, I'd dare say it was a super sexy style of a game.
2001
This really is a solid hack and slash game and it pains me that I slept on the series for so long (considering I watched the anime first way back in my youth).
It would've been a solid 4/5 game but I do have some issues that bring it down half a star:
-Camera angles can be wonky for certain combat encounters when you need to be constantly running around and on your toes fighting an enemy
-The damn water levels should've been omitted entirely, I heard about them and there about as painfully annoying as described because it puts the fun parts of the game on hold (especially when you're binge playing them). The only upside is that they're relatively short but it still makes me wonder what kind of drug a Capcom dev was on to think this was a good way to change things up. Not all levels are greatly designed either and it's mainly the combat that keeps me invested; it's certainly no Nier: Automata in that regard, but the dark ambiance here (especially in a hack and slash) is appreciated
-No level select. For a collectible-centric person like me it was no biggie since I usually do them all in one go so it's mainly up to opinion since the levels aren't necessarily stand out unless you play the whole thing. Red orb fragments can be exploited in certain ones anyway so even if it wasn't intentional to have mission selects, I could also see why in that regard.
-Dialogue and voice acting is kind of wack (it's on Tommy Wiseau levels of expressionism), and plot is fairly basic and barebones especially compared to other PS2 era titles of the time.
-Why the hell are the controls inverted in the final boss fight, should've let me change those but whatever.
-The "oh wait it's not actually over" level felt meandering. It would've gotten the same point across had it been reduced to a cutscene instead of (yet another) series of fights. I already know how badass Dante through the entirety of my playthrough so it kind of dragged as I wanted to see the game wrap up and conclude. Like ok escape missions are fine, fighting enemies are fine, seeing an enemy reappear only to finally defeat him is fine, but did we actually need an aerial plane section introduced last minute?
Criticisms aside I'm really impressed to be honest because after the first boss encounter I was ready to hate it or give up playing the rest of what I thought would be a janky mess. After I died I kept asking myself what am I doing wrong, and I kept trying new things or buying proper move set that would counter the enemy. Like I didn't know how much fun it would be to actually learn this shit and have it work. This is what it must feel for people playing Dark Souls because the whole learn through trial and error really felt alive here. There's also a certain grittiness in this game that I know got lost along the way in its sequels that I appreciate. I absolutely adore the gothic atmosphere (I'm aware DMC's divergence from RE4) and I love the weird underworld stuff that reminds me of Silent Hill. Nobodys are the stuff of nightmares and I'm intrigued by their design.
Best of all it isn't filled with sweaty and frustrating quick time events like in many other hack and slash games (Bayonetta, Metal Gear Rising, God of War, etc). For as intense the game might often seem, it's actually a really relaxing game to play all things considered. Soundtrack is really on point too and really well done for its genre. For its time Devil May Cry really does stand up, and I have to say this one really surprised me in how much I actually enjoyed it. Would love a remake/re-imagining from Capcom but Resident Evil is their golden goose/child right now and I don't know if or when they'll do it. In any case Devil May Cry is a solid game and looking forward to delving more into the series.
It would've been a solid 4/5 game but I do have some issues that bring it down half a star:
-Camera angles can be wonky for certain combat encounters when you need to be constantly running around and on your toes fighting an enemy
-The damn water levels should've been omitted entirely, I heard about them and there about as painfully annoying as described because it puts the fun parts of the game on hold (especially when you're binge playing them). The only upside is that they're relatively short but it still makes me wonder what kind of drug a Capcom dev was on to think this was a good way to change things up. Not all levels are greatly designed either and it's mainly the combat that keeps me invested; it's certainly no Nier: Automata in that regard, but the dark ambiance here (especially in a hack and slash) is appreciated
-No level select. For a collectible-centric person like me it was no biggie since I usually do them all in one go so it's mainly up to opinion since the levels aren't necessarily stand out unless you play the whole thing. Red orb fragments can be exploited in certain ones anyway so even if it wasn't intentional to have mission selects, I could also see why in that regard.
-Dialogue and voice acting is kind of wack (it's on Tommy Wiseau levels of expressionism), and plot is fairly basic and barebones especially compared to other PS2 era titles of the time.
-Why the hell are the controls inverted in the final boss fight, should've let me change those but whatever.
-The "oh wait it's not actually over" level felt meandering. It would've gotten the same point across had it been reduced to a cutscene instead of (yet another) series of fights. I already know how badass Dante through the entirety of my playthrough so it kind of dragged as I wanted to see the game wrap up and conclude. Like ok escape missions are fine, fighting enemies are fine, seeing an enemy reappear only to finally defeat him is fine, but did we actually need an aerial plane section introduced last minute?
Criticisms aside I'm really impressed to be honest because after the first boss encounter I was ready to hate it or give up playing the rest of what I thought would be a janky mess. After I died I kept asking myself what am I doing wrong, and I kept trying new things or buying proper move set that would counter the enemy. Like I didn't know how much fun it would be to actually learn this shit and have it work. This is what it must feel for people playing Dark Souls because the whole learn through trial and error really felt alive here. There's also a certain grittiness in this game that I know got lost along the way in its sequels that I appreciate. I absolutely adore the gothic atmosphere (I'm aware DMC's divergence from RE4) and I love the weird underworld stuff that reminds me of Silent Hill. Nobodys are the stuff of nightmares and I'm intrigued by their design.
Best of all it isn't filled with sweaty and frustrating quick time events like in many other hack and slash games (Bayonetta, Metal Gear Rising, God of War, etc). For as intense the game might often seem, it's actually a really relaxing game to play all things considered. Soundtrack is really on point too and really well done for its genre. For its time Devil May Cry really does stand up, and I have to say this one really surprised me in how much I actually enjoyed it. Would love a remake/re-imagining from Capcom but Resident Evil is their golden goose/child right now and I don't know if or when they'll do it. In any case Devil May Cry is a solid game and looking forward to delving more into the series.
2018
Another fantastically solid HITMAN title. My only real gripe is that the maps may be overwhelmingly sprawling instead of hyper-focused like the 2016 iteration so it can be a bit much at times. Also with IOI parting ways with Square Enix we didn't get any photorealistic cutscenes with their lacking budget, but I'm still amazed at how much they were able to accomplish from a design standpoint. The first and final level were fantastic from an atmosphere standpoint; I really miss the darker brooding aesthetics in Contracts which I hope to get in III. Other than that a solid title and has exceptional replay value!
2008
Look, Fallout 3 is by no means a bad game. Honestly compared to 4, 3 is way more fun as an RPG even if its aged mechanics hold it back. A lot of the reviews I saw are extremely overexaggerated. Fallout 3 still had the decency to straight up have dialogue boxes compared to 4's wheel, so let's not take that for granted. That said, Bethesda wasn't perfect here either.
The choices and writing are what mainly feels stagnant, even some of the (questionable) lore decisions that still kind of irk me. The main story really isn't up to par with older Fallout titles let alone New Vegas, and the same goes for player choice. In fact a lot of the choices boils down to a "good" or "bad" karma option that don't do a whole lot besides make you a loved saint or an asshole with a higher payout. Actually there is another option, and you can just straight up shoot everything in plain sight. The other thing that's annoying is that you can't join any particular faction that you like, you're forced into the Brotherhood of Steel because of the story. If you like The Enclave like me, then too bad because that's NOT an option. Instead the plot is written as this "good vs. evil" struggle instead of a choose your own adventure. The lack of any kind of joinable factions really holds Fallout 3 back, and makes the inclusion of them kind of weightless to ones actions. Did I also mention there are some odd invisble walls where you have to enter in some other way? Kind of immersion breaking to some extent, sure I get they have a destroyed building here, but when I can clearly swim across the edge of this lake...why not let me? There are a lot of odd blocked off sections where I want to go explore but can't because I need to find an underground accessway or building to go into that area.
The main story starts off extremely strong, but fizzles out near the end leaving me really unsatisfied with my outcome. It was at the end that I realized that my choices didn't really have an overall affect on anything besides a small recap cutscene. Honestly, and this isn't hyperbole, but it's probably one of WORST endings in a Fallout game. Moreover the choices didn't even happen till the last half of the game. Fallout 3 almost ditches the personal vault dweller story in favour of its Brotherhood of Steel one. Even the Vault 101 story feels like one long series of fetch-quests and doesn't really explore anything meaningful within the world. On top of this, it practically rips off elements from the first two games without improving on them at all. The actual satisfaction of consuming the Fallout lore is mainly done through side quests that you happen to stumble upon your travels. In 3, mileage may vary from person to person as they get to roleplay their own scenarios as they discover them instead of getting a sense of it. The main questline feels fairly menial despite it boiling down to a "save the wasteland" plotline that tries so hard to get you to care about it. Still, Fallout 3 has an atmospheric world to explore and a heap full of memorable characters and quests despite its clunky moment-to-moment gameplay and waning story. Look I love New Vegas, it's a personal favourite, but please, let's stop putting down other Fallout games because of it, 3 is still a solid title despite its atrocious writing.
The choices and writing are what mainly feels stagnant, even some of the (questionable) lore decisions that still kind of irk me. The main story really isn't up to par with older Fallout titles let alone New Vegas, and the same goes for player choice. In fact a lot of the choices boils down to a "good" or "bad" karma option that don't do a whole lot besides make you a loved saint or an asshole with a higher payout. Actually there is another option, and you can just straight up shoot everything in plain sight. The other thing that's annoying is that you can't join any particular faction that you like, you're forced into the Brotherhood of Steel because of the story. If you like The Enclave like me, then too bad because that's NOT an option. Instead the plot is written as this "good vs. evil" struggle instead of a choose your own adventure. The lack of any kind of joinable factions really holds Fallout 3 back, and makes the inclusion of them kind of weightless to ones actions. Did I also mention there are some odd invisble walls where you have to enter in some other way? Kind of immersion breaking to some extent, sure I get they have a destroyed building here, but when I can clearly swim across the edge of this lake...why not let me? There are a lot of odd blocked off sections where I want to go explore but can't because I need to find an underground accessway or building to go into that area.
The main story starts off extremely strong, but fizzles out near the end leaving me really unsatisfied with my outcome. It was at the end that I realized that my choices didn't really have an overall affect on anything besides a small recap cutscene. Honestly, and this isn't hyperbole, but it's probably one of WORST endings in a Fallout game. Moreover the choices didn't even happen till the last half of the game. Fallout 3 almost ditches the personal vault dweller story in favour of its Brotherhood of Steel one. Even the Vault 101 story feels like one long series of fetch-quests and doesn't really explore anything meaningful within the world. On top of this, it practically rips off elements from the first two games without improving on them at all. The actual satisfaction of consuming the Fallout lore is mainly done through side quests that you happen to stumble upon your travels. In 3, mileage may vary from person to person as they get to roleplay their own scenarios as they discover them instead of getting a sense of it. The main questline feels fairly menial despite it boiling down to a "save the wasteland" plotline that tries so hard to get you to care about it. Still, Fallout 3 has an atmospheric world to explore and a heap full of memorable characters and quests despite its clunky moment-to-moment gameplay and waning story. Look I love New Vegas, it's a personal favourite, but please, let's stop putting down other Fallout games because of it, 3 is still a solid title despite its atrocious writing.
2009
The Pitt is actually a great location, and feels straight out of an Interplay Fallout title. My main gripe comes with the expected technical glitches that would not let me collect all the ingots as intended because I'd keep falling through the roof. On top of this there was an item I picked up (I think it was clothing?) that kept freezing my game, and of course Bethesda didn't patch any of these. I was about to lose my mind, but instead decided to not hoard everything and dropped it; which is good because you can come back and revisit the location at ones leisure.
Other than smaller technical issues I really enjoyed the aesthetic of everything. I just wish there was more to it because it feels so limited in scale. The Pitt is a VERY underutilized location that isn't explored enough behind it's façade of buildings, and I would love to see more of this.
Other than smaller technical issues I really enjoyed the aesthetic of everything. I just wish there was more to it because it feels so limited in scale. The Pitt is a VERY underutilized location that isn't explored enough behind it's façade of buildings, and I would love to see more of this.
I think the most fun part of Operation Anchorage was getting to do the Gary 23 glitch (yes this still works, and doesn't looks like it'll ever be patched out). Story and location really isn't anything special and neither were any of the characters besides the army guy who's your companion. There's a Call of Duty gameplay loop with the same kind of linearity, and combined with Fallout 3's horrid shooting makes for an especially mediocre experience. It's an ok Fallout 3 DLC, but it's pretty much a just an easy way to level up and get some great gear like the stealth armour.
2020
Currently just writing my thoughts as of right now because I JUST LOST HOURS OF PROGRESS. I was actually reading about people having this save issue literally this morning and thinking that it wouldn't happen to me, but to my dismay it did, and right now a lot of my goodwill towards this game has been lost like my saved progress. I'm honestly scared to take a crack at this game for fear of losing progress again and having to do the same damn things again.
From what I played I desperately want to love this game, and applaud the effort and lengths it went to present something unique. I think the foundation is solid, however they missed the mark in a lot of categories and stripped the series of key features that made the other game stand out. I will pick it up again, but right now Ubisoft needs to get their shit together and remedy this before I give up on this one. I'm really pissed because I was halfway done the game and completed some pretty substantial end-of-chapter segments. The honeymoon phase I had with this game is basically over, and I'm really starting to see the faults of Legion and its lack of polish. From the game freezing, crashing, and now the save issue being rampant, Ubisoft should've delayed this. I went from rooting for the "underdog" series in the hopes that it might achieve greatness to losing any potential excitement I have for any sequels, and all because of one game. UBISOFT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, DELAY YOUR GAMES AND POLISH THEM WHEN THEY'RE READY.
From what I played I desperately want to love this game, and applaud the effort and lengths it went to present something unique. I think the foundation is solid, however they missed the mark in a lot of categories and stripped the series of key features that made the other game stand out. I will pick it up again, but right now Ubisoft needs to get their shit together and remedy this before I give up on this one. I'm really pissed because I was halfway done the game and completed some pretty substantial end-of-chapter segments. The honeymoon phase I had with this game is basically over, and I'm really starting to see the faults of Legion and its lack of polish. From the game freezing, crashing, and now the save issue being rampant, Ubisoft should've delayed this. I went from rooting for the "underdog" series in the hopes that it might achieve greatness to losing any potential excitement I have for any sequels, and all because of one game. UBISOFT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, DELAY YOUR GAMES AND POLISH THEM WHEN THEY'RE READY.
2020
For something that was free, I can't really complain too much. Sure it's practically a sneaky way to get you to watch their promotional material, but they clearly had a lot of fun doing it. It's weird to me that something like this has so much polish and care for a seemingly one-off event game. Would love to see this concept brought to VR.
2016
Fun gameplay loop and fantastic concepts that the first game should've executed on. Every single level was done exceptionally well and gave an extremely open approach for every one of them.
Despite many complaints about the main cast, I found them fitting given the kind of hacker/gamer culture that they represent. However, the main story is erratic in tone and pacing with plenty of ludonarrative dissonance, and the villain is severely underdeveloped and certain arcs that barely make their presence known (see Horatio). For as edgy as the first game might've been, at least it was coherent and connected. Although Watch Dogs 2 is a far better game with plenty of relevant themes, it lacks a punch to make it memorable.
Despite many complaints about the main cast, I found them fitting given the kind of hacker/gamer culture that they represent. However, the main story is erratic in tone and pacing with plenty of ludonarrative dissonance, and the villain is severely underdeveloped and certain arcs that barely make their presence known (see Horatio). For as edgy as the first game might've been, at least it was coherent and connected. Although Watch Dogs 2 is a far better game with plenty of relevant themes, it lacks a punch to make it memorable.
As someone who was lukewarm about the sequels to the original Modern Warfare because of their heavy emphasis on Michael Bay action and less on grounded military escapades, Modern Warfare 2019 had me hooked from the get-go. In a way, this is exactly what I wanted from Battlefield 3's campaign or the Medal of Honor reboots, it fully delivers where those ones failed. If I'm completely honest, this Call of Duty did the whole "controversial" material presentation right without feeling unnecessarily contrived (see "No Russian"), and I'm glad it handled the material well without overstepping its reach, albeit they really drove home how bad a group of Rogue Russians can be.
This is a solid title that has some incredibly memorable levels alongside some bombastic moments that hold your attention, but not enough to sigh in disbelief. In fact, the entire game was quite memorable from a design standpoint and was done extremely well with plenty of open missions, and some great stealth ones as well. There is plenty of intense action as you go through hallways executing some CQC. It's moments like Clean House that had me really astounded that this was even considered within the realm of a Call of Duty game because it seemed so distant to what it's current identity had become.
I guess that's where some of my problems with the game are that something feels missing from the entire package as if there isn't this magic touch or flare that Call of Duty 4 had with its characters or even cutscene moments (Nuke scene comes to mind). The focus on such hard realism might be the cause of the game feeling underwhelming in certain places. On top of this, there are still tiny strands of Call of Duty DNA lingering from the previous decade of the old games (like MW2) where it prevents the 2019 iteration from reaching entirely new heights whenever it tries to go full-on tactical realism.
Speaking of characters we should talk about the ones we know. I actually love Captain Price's reintroduction and the new Gaz, yet Alex and Farrah didn't do much for me. On one hand, I get their key role in the story, while on the other they just felt fairly okay characters in a game like Modern Warfare. Farah might've felt half-baked but at least she had a backstory and some memorable moments. The same could not be said about Alex who I really can't remember all too well at all because his character just fades into the background for a majority of the game even though you play as him for some levels. In general, characters often felt shallow and much of their development was one note. Although the game left me fulfilled, at the back of my mind I just kind of wanted more from its a stupidly short story that's par for the course for most CoD campaigns which had me craving for more, especially in the character department. The levels are really well-paced with the only exception being The Embassy that dragged on way too long near the end. So having such well-paced levels in tandem with this short campaign might be the tradeoff.
All criticisms aside, the reboot is really good and I enjoyed it a lot, especially compared to MW2 and MW3, however at the back of my mind it's almost a tie between this and the original. Infinity Ward has sewn the seeds have for an amazing sequel that I'm highly expecting to surpass the original Modern Warfare 2, and the post-credits scene cemented my faith in their new direction. Modern Warfare 2019 is an extremely polished package with plenty of content that doesn't feel stagnant, and offers plenty of value, especially with Warzone being a free to play homerun. I really love this game and it does so much right. Suffice to say this is the best the series has been in ages.
This is a solid title that has some incredibly memorable levels alongside some bombastic moments that hold your attention, but not enough to sigh in disbelief. In fact, the entire game was quite memorable from a design standpoint and was done extremely well with plenty of open missions, and some great stealth ones as well. There is plenty of intense action as you go through hallways executing some CQC. It's moments like Clean House that had me really astounded that this was even considered within the realm of a Call of Duty game because it seemed so distant to what it's current identity had become.
I guess that's where some of my problems with the game are that something feels missing from the entire package as if there isn't this magic touch or flare that Call of Duty 4 had with its characters or even cutscene moments (Nuke scene comes to mind). The focus on such hard realism might be the cause of the game feeling underwhelming in certain places. On top of this, there are still tiny strands of Call of Duty DNA lingering from the previous decade of the old games (like MW2) where it prevents the 2019 iteration from reaching entirely new heights whenever it tries to go full-on tactical realism.
Speaking of characters we should talk about the ones we know. I actually love Captain Price's reintroduction and the new Gaz, yet Alex and Farrah didn't do much for me. On one hand, I get their key role in the story, while on the other they just felt fairly okay characters in a game like Modern Warfare. Farah might've felt half-baked but at least she had a backstory and some memorable moments. The same could not be said about Alex who I really can't remember all too well at all because his character just fades into the background for a majority of the game even though you play as him for some levels. In general, characters often felt shallow and much of their development was one note. Although the game left me fulfilled, at the back of my mind I just kind of wanted more from its a stupidly short story that's par for the course for most CoD campaigns which had me craving for more, especially in the character department. The levels are really well-paced with the only exception being The Embassy that dragged on way too long near the end. So having such well-paced levels in tandem with this short campaign might be the tradeoff.
All criticisms aside, the reboot is really good and I enjoyed it a lot, especially compared to MW2 and MW3, however at the back of my mind it's almost a tie between this and the original. Infinity Ward has sewn the seeds have for an amazing sequel that I'm highly expecting to surpass the original Modern Warfare 2, and the post-credits scene cemented my faith in their new direction. Modern Warfare 2019 is an extremely polished package with plenty of content that doesn't feel stagnant, and offers plenty of value, especially with Warzone being a free to play homerun. I really love this game and it does so much right. Suffice to say this is the best the series has been in ages.