raisinlungs
i was pretty close to beating the game, probably like 1-2 hours left, but my file corrupted and my last save file was a couple of in-game hours before. i have no intention of redoing the previous shit again, especially with me playing the game on the hardest difficulty. i wasn't really enjoying the experience with the game anyways. the story was boring as hell. the gameplay was uninspired and didn't justify it being a sequel. i also think this game unfortunately deals with the inherent evolution of game technology. the game feels way too sluggish and "realistic" for my liking. one thing i loved about "return to castle wolfenstein" was the beautiful fluid movement; it's the type of game i would love to speedrun. the fast-paced movement and smooth controls allowed for more fun gameplay. this game doesn't have any of this, and it's sorely missed for me.
fun! until the final boss who almost ruined my entire experience.
wolfenstein: the new order isn't as fluid as the return to castle wolfenstein in terms of gameplay, but i still enjoy this game overall. there are some interesting ideas in the narrative, but it starts to get pretty boring and repetitive. the amount of times we see blazkowicz get saved last second is pretty funny. the gameplay was fun for the most part, except for some really clunky movements, especially during some of the more intense fights in the game. i played this on uber cuz i'm not a little baby, and that movement got me killed way too often. i also really enjoyed the return to more stealth mechanics, which i think the previous wolfenstein (2009) installment sorely missed. there's a lot of potential in this game that i don't think was fully realized, both with its story and gameplay, but it's still worth my time.
wolfenstein: the new order isn't as fluid as the return to castle wolfenstein in terms of gameplay, but i still enjoy this game overall. there are some interesting ideas in the narrative, but it starts to get pretty boring and repetitive. the amount of times we see blazkowicz get saved last second is pretty funny. the gameplay was fun for the most part, except for some really clunky movements, especially during some of the more intense fights in the game. i played this on uber cuz i'm not a little baby, and that movement got me killed way too often. i also really enjoyed the return to more stealth mechanics, which i think the previous wolfenstein (2009) installment sorely missed. there's a lot of potential in this game that i don't think was fully realized, both with its story and gameplay, but it's still worth my time.
1992
clearly an important and influential game, but i'm way too young to really appreciate this game due to its outdated controls. nonetheless, it still had its moments, and it's pretty cool to see what they were able to do in 1992 for one of the earliest fps games. some interesting level design as well. however, the game kinda loses its novelty once i realized how bullshit the difficulty can get as you progress in the game.
2013
dumb.
it had been years since ive played the bioShock series. the original bioshock, a true masterclass in level design and world-building, still holds a special place. bioshock 2 had its moments but felt like it was chasing the greatness of the first.
now, bioshock infinite – a mess, to put it mildly. i couldn't even finish the game; the story and artificial game design just didn't cut it for me. what i adore about bioshock 1 is its forced linear design, using the decaying world of rapture to naturally limit exploration. broken floors, destroyed walls – they all make sense in rapture, contributing to a more immersive world.
yet, bioshock infinite abandons this in favor of basic, lazy-level design. areas aren't available because the world dictates it; it's the game telling you no.
now, the gameplay – bioshock 1's freedom of choice and natural weapon and plasmid progression stand out. it feels organic, fitting seamlessly into the narrative. infinite, on the other hand, feels forced, more like a video game checklist. only holding two weapons is a questionable move, and the plasmids lack the charm of their predecessor. the horror vibe, too, is sorely missed.
sure, bioshock 1's gunplay may not have been groundbreaking, but its scarcity and emphasis on mood and atmosphere compensated. infinite, however, drowns in relentless action, with mediocre gunplay at best. the big question – what's the point?
on the flip side, the world of bioshock infinite, especially the early moments in columbia, is captivating. however, my gripe lies with the artificiality of character interactions. in the early game, it feels like the world is dead unless the player is in a designated spot. it's one of my biggest gripes with modern games – the lack of cohesion between characters and the city they inhabit.
as for themes and narrative, i can't delve too deep since i didn't finish the game. from what i experienced, it felt pretentious and lacking in inspiration, a far cry from the first game's depth. bioshock infinite seemed to try too hard to be smart and profound, ending up as neither. i can't bring myself to complete the game again – it's dumb, lame, and barely even qualifies as a "bioshock game." even a different title wouldn't salvage much.
call it an exercise in artificial game design or some dumbshit like that
it had been years since ive played the bioShock series. the original bioshock, a true masterclass in level design and world-building, still holds a special place. bioshock 2 had its moments but felt like it was chasing the greatness of the first.
now, bioshock infinite – a mess, to put it mildly. i couldn't even finish the game; the story and artificial game design just didn't cut it for me. what i adore about bioshock 1 is its forced linear design, using the decaying world of rapture to naturally limit exploration. broken floors, destroyed walls – they all make sense in rapture, contributing to a more immersive world.
yet, bioshock infinite abandons this in favor of basic, lazy-level design. areas aren't available because the world dictates it; it's the game telling you no.
now, the gameplay – bioshock 1's freedom of choice and natural weapon and plasmid progression stand out. it feels organic, fitting seamlessly into the narrative. infinite, on the other hand, feels forced, more like a video game checklist. only holding two weapons is a questionable move, and the plasmids lack the charm of their predecessor. the horror vibe, too, is sorely missed.
sure, bioshock 1's gunplay may not have been groundbreaking, but its scarcity and emphasis on mood and atmosphere compensated. infinite, however, drowns in relentless action, with mediocre gunplay at best. the big question – what's the point?
on the flip side, the world of bioshock infinite, especially the early moments in columbia, is captivating. however, my gripe lies with the artificiality of character interactions. in the early game, it feels like the world is dead unless the player is in a designated spot. it's one of my biggest gripes with modern games – the lack of cohesion between characters and the city they inhabit.
as for themes and narrative, i can't delve too deep since i didn't finish the game. from what i experienced, it felt pretentious and lacking in inspiration, a far cry from the first game's depth. bioshock infinite seemed to try too hard to be smart and profound, ending up as neither. i can't bring myself to complete the game again – it's dumb, lame, and barely even qualifies as a "bioshock game." even a different title wouldn't salvage much.
call it an exercise in artificial game design or some dumbshit like that