VelocityGamer writes: Hot on the heels of the critical success of Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Square Enix is primed to have a full booth at PAX. But 2 games are suspiciously absent.
GF365: "Here are our picks for the eight best sci-fi RPGs. Science fiction is a great genre for any medium of entertainment. These games are the best in the genre."
The og deus ex is magical. Im also very exited about mass effect legendary edition from the gp. Its next on my playlist never played mass effect game before.
Never played ME? It's imo the greatest trilogy of all-time and perhaps the best setting outside maybe Fallout. Play it. Great DLC as well. In 2 & 3 at least. Skip Andromeda. Also, Human Revolution was great as well even if OG fans claim otherwise.
Mass effect 1 was great. I feel they dumbed down alot on the 2nd one and seemed more action like. Mass effect 1 the citadel was an explorable city. Far as I got in Mass effect 2 it was reduced to a location list no traveling through it. I disliked it alot(the citadel) part. I also feel they went more action oriented then rpg
It always makes me mad when you see something you have done in the first mass effect or dragon age can make something change in the 3rd because bioware make 6 games in what 8 years? that did this but today 0 games do this.
I wish we had trilogies today were we can share saves and have multiple endings/path's on all 3 because of choices from anyone of them.
Its so funny being the bad sheparad from one to 3 then the end having just you and joker ha ha yet everyone is like hey your a hero with a 90% casualty rate.
Fallout can't hold Mass Effect's jockstrap. The one Fallout even in the ballpark is 3, and that's only because the DLC was extremely good. When Ken Rolston was in Bethesda's employment were they good. That's about it. They're now the world's greatest copy/paste developer out there. Bioware at their pinnacle was ten times better a studio than Todd's team. Go look up the games
Mass Effect is my favorite, followed by 2 and 3. Yes, ME2 was dumbed down but also refined in terms of polish and accessibility. ME2 had an awesome story, great DLC, and a solid cast. Mordin in particular. It's a great game. Even 3 which was the weakest was still solid imo despite the ending. If u love ME how do u not enjoy all 3?
Fallout is not a better game though FO3 was great. In terms of setting though Fallout is Mt Rushmore. The 50's post apoc setting was brbrilliant. I still put ME setting n lore above but FO is up there with setting.
Right? There's a serious lack of classics on this list.
The original 2 Star Oceans. Rogue Galaxy...
Why aren't there more? A Star Trek RPG for one. Or something with non humanoid aliens?
Cause for some damn reason medieval is more popular ugghhh. I'd take some sci fi sh anyway over it. I've said time and time again I hope the elden guys are working on a sci fi type game.
Something non-post apocalypse or dystopian. Just world saving. Fighting bad guys while doing good and dealing with ethical/moral/psychological quandaries.
The reason why fantasy RPGs, and Fantasy as a genre, are more popular than Sci-Fi, is because of the low technology/high magic tropes. If all of your problems can be solved with looking up the answer on a smartphone, well, there's just lower stakes than if a character has to have a sword fight, and climb the tower, and rescue the fair princess and recite the ancient incantation to seal the evil.
Obviously you can have universe ending stakes in Sci-Fi, but that requires abstract reasoning, and an ability to RP in a way that is progressive instead of regressive. Couple that with Sci-Fi games and media generally being faster paced, and you've got a genre that attracts a very specific demographic of gamers.
or go crazy and make a starship troopers rpg can you survive the bug fight?
The animated show was great showed what someone can do with the lore.
A Starship Troopers game as a real time strategy like the command and conquer series would be awesome.
@fist
We have that today but its a small team with a smal budget
https://www.youtube.com/wat...
Its not a major rts sadly but a start
I really hope Naughty Dog is doing a Sci-Fi game. As a lover all most things RPG I would love to see Naughty Dog quality in an RPG.
They could do some really great stuff with sci-fi. The sense of grand adventure of Uncharted, but also with the stealth and crafting of The Last of Us. Different planets, creative alien races, collecting junk to craft repairs and upgrades for your ship and weapons, etc.
He'll yea , hope we here something about that if they are. I'm not to worried about factions at all
TLOU2 is the finest game ND has made. U4 was fantastic. New ND is a more impressive ND. I don't rate Crash n Jak like i do Uncharted and TLOU. Even Uncharted 1 and 3 were not as well crafted as TLOU, TLOU2, U4 imo. Idc if ppl troll TLOU2, most ppl are clueless, that game was incredibly impressive.
TLOU2 combat, visuals, and acting were the best of the genre. I found the story deeper and more profound than most but it's subjective. The level design was excellent also. The score. Audio. Animation. It was a masterpiece to me. The rope physics, detail. TLOU2 deserved Elden Ring scores and ER deserved TLOU2 scores. If any game deserved 97 in recent years it's TLOU2. Best game i ever played and if ppl come with Abby bs i already know it's not worth it. Those who call TLOU2 trash are foolish. Just look at it running...
Crystal Dynamics' daring reboot of Tomb Raider brought Lara Croft back into the spotlight.
An attempt at a reboot with no momentum for continuance. Just a torture-porn trilogy about a poor rich girl with daddy issues reluctantly being pulling into a world of violence, versus say the adventures of a quipping Brit treasure hunter who solves ancient puzzles while gunning down rare and extinct animals that it originally was?
Honestly, don't have all that killing. If the devs had been truly clever, not focused on mangling a message about the senselessness of killing which was seemingly and quickly forgotten, they could have worked, if not bloodlessly then not directly by Laura's hand, dealing with enemies as part of the puzzle solving - they didn't have in the game in the first place...
"Revived a '90s Gaming Icon"
LOL
the only thing similar between the 2 is the name of the protagonist. if they would have given the game a different name, NONE would even think that it was somehow a resurrected Tomb Raider IP. the last game with the real Tomb Raider DNA was TR Underworld.
The Survivor Trilogy was a drastic reimagining of Lara Croft and Tomb Raider, and it provokes changes for the character that are truly fantastic.
Deserves less IMO, i think the 1st in the new trilogy was a perfect 1st step for the new direction. The next 2 games were half steps at best. Not only that, every character in the series including Lara is just annoying and doesn't make sense in terms of motive, like yes they have a motive, but none of it seems proportional to the lengths they are willing to go through for it. The most annoying thing is every one of the games say "become the Tomb Raider" yet 3 games later and we're still not there? No thanks. Then there's the mess of the 3rd game, massive skill tree that serves almost no purpose as there's literally only like 3-4 short encounters in the whole game, and they took till the 3rd game to finally manage some decent puzzles even remotely close to previous games in the series. Nah, the trilogy infuriated me to no end as a long time fan of the series, i hope we get better going forward cause that crap sucked.
The first in the trilogy was my favorite. I thought they were going into the right direction with that one until the second one came out and seemed like a graphical downgrade but the gameplay was okay. As for the Third, Graphics were really nice but it was kinda boring me to death with its non-stop platforming and exploring with not enough action! Well, for me anyway...
Graphics on the 3rd one were abysmal. It’s more colorful and has more variety, but everything else was a noticeable downgrade.
The more open world with NPC quests was also handled very poorly, to the point I missed Angel of Darkness.
I know it is your opinion, but she did progress as a character in each game, she even got more muscular and seasoned.
That is the thing, people first complained that there was not enough platforming and actual tomb raiding in the first and second games. Shadow remedied that and kept the combat elements.
3-4 encounters? huh? did we play the same game? there was plenty of combat and, the skill tree did matter, like being able to hang enemies from trees, set explosives traps on bodies, being able to counter, and that are just a few of the combat skills. The skill tree also had things like being able to hold your breath underwater longer, crafting upgrades, zipline upgrade, and climbing upgrades that all changed how you can approach situations.
Not knocking your opinion, but we definitely had different experiences. I had 98% completion on the shadow.
Sorry but i'm with him about the low number of encounters, the game throws loads of weapons and skills you're way with a comparatively low amount of places to actually use them, so they felt under utilised.
Yeah...no
It was awful, for THREE GAMES it was "become the Tomb Raider" where she went back to square one after each game. Not to mention after a huge reaction of killing someone for the first time she then becomes Rambo straight after and goes on a slaughter spree without a single other reaction. Her development was all over the place.
She was whiney, weak and in later game a little arrogant and selfish
Oh and the voice actress compared to the previous ones was not as good
Lara Croft deserved better and while they are decent games as they are, we deserved actual Tomb Raider games, we could have had better survival games if they just stuck with the original Lara Crofts origin about her plane going down. Surviving 2 weeks in the Himalayas...I'd have liked to seen that, who knows what mystical threat she could have faced in the mountains or underground some secret concealed cave.
I thought Shadow of the Tomb Raider had better gameplay than Rise, but it annoyed me the most of the trilogy when I stopped to think about the story.
It's like they deliberately decided to make her unlikeable and did nothing to make the character you're playing as likeable or have even one sign of humility.
2013 I thought was a fine entry, but Rise and especially Shadow were painfully mediocre follow ups imo, I really didn't like how selfish and angry her character was in those two.
First one was decent, played through it twice.
Second one was okay, played through it once.
Third one was really bad, tried twice a year apart, still can't get through the first two hours, it is just really bad.
Honest question, what did you find bad about it? the opening 2 hrs of Shadow were fantastic imo.
The opening was very similar to the first 2, what did you find really bad?
Not looking for an argument, just an honest question.
3rd one just didn't feel like a tomb raider game. Possibly because the development was passed to another development team. Big mistake! Microsoft killed tomb raider making the first game a timed exclusive. Never recovered after that.
Missing?.. Versus13 I suppose
Tomb Raider and FFvs13 are coming out late next year (at the earliest), so SE is focusing on games coming out in the near future... Obviously.
tgs is all that matters in terms of what square enix can do. Even there rumored line up featuring dragon quest X is incredible.........
And theres more rumored games such as 4 warriors of light 2, and things we dont even know about headed to tgs
Tomb Raider.........yum.
I don't Final Fantasy VII on that list.