Solus Grimwelder 最近的評論

This is a good idea with poor execution. First off you are talking an increase of 1% per article of clothing, unless I am missing some way of getting upgraded schematics. So even a full outfit all crafted with the same upgrade would increase any given stat by less than 10%. While that type of minor upgrade would be fairly easy to ignore normally, the other component of this is the components. These resources take up a ton of inventory weight. I don't know about anyone else but I'm not going to forgo additional ammo or health packs so that I can give myself a 1% boost to my fire resistance. Basically the trade off just isn't worth it. If the components had no weight then I would be fine with this and simply ignore it. But now I have to carefully select all of the items in a chest but the crafting ones instead of just looting all, slowing down the pace of the game. I like the concept of crafting, but I just don't think this implementation works.

If I may offer a suggestion to the devs (since they did ask for some), why not instead of doing all this crazy resource stuff, you have players feed lower tier gear into their outfits to increase their stats, or have them feed guns into each other to raise their tier. Basically get rid of the components and use what you already have as the crafting materials. The possibility of getting a higher tier gun would be the type of risk/reward scenario where I might keep a bunch of tier 1 loot and not just choose more ammo/health. And being able to increase buffs on your outfits over time by feeding more guns into them would make that system eventually yield some meaningful changes to the core gameplay and, again, make the risk/reward feel far more worthwhile.

A game so short and lacking in content that if I were 10 minutes faster I could have played every second of content in it and still hand time to refund it. There is no multiplayer. The levels are linear. There is a scoring system but it isn't explained and there are no leaderboards anyways. Also the game looks like Call of Duty from 2003 but was made after Modern Warfare. Even at $3 I wouldn't recommend it.

EDITED

This game is currently more or less unfinished. I played through an entire campaign as the English before this review so this covers the full scale of the product as is. First off the positives. This is a quick, fairly simple, strategy game with a tactical layer that is clearly meant as the main draw. The grand strategy here is okay but limited in the early game and straight up broken in the late game. Unlike many similar titles you do not start Kingdom Wars off as the ruler of a Kingdom. You first start as a lord within a kingdom. I was the Duke of Dover, a region on the Southeast coast of England.

Your first task is to take over your kingdom. This is the most challenging portion of the game as you have very few options open to you as a feudal lord. You cannot declare wars, forge alliances, or open trade routes with foreign nations. If the king demands you join him in a foreign war you could care less about you better do so or you risk being branded a traitor and executed. This portion for me was a lot of back and forth, trying to manage my own competing interests while at the same time trying to follow enough of the king's orders to remain in his good graces.

This sounds like it could be a lot of fun, and it was honestly the most enjoyable portion of the game, but it is still incredibly lacking. In your quest to become king you do not have to worry about religion. In fact religious affiliation is not simulated at all, despite being one of the main reasons medieval kingdoms went to war. Also not simulated is any sort of Crusader King's style dynasty system. You are not represented on the map, nor is there any aspect of illness or assassination to worry about. Of course that means you have incredibly few options at your disposal when dealing with any issue. Those options being go to war or don't go to war.

So long story short, the strategic layer is more or less non-existent in the early game. Once you do become king you open up the diplomacy menu which is just straight up broken. How does one forge an alliance or end a war in Kingdom Wars? You pay the nation you want the treaty with a sum of money and they call off the war or join your alliance. I kid you not. As long as you pay them enough money they will drop whatever war they are fighting. Let me give an example from my game. When I became king I learned the previous king had felt it wise to declare war on every other nation in the game at once. Hence I had no allies, no trading partners, and enemies from every side. The four largest powers were myself, France, The Holy Roman Empire, and Castille. France and Castille were allies. The Holy Roman Empire was enemies with all of the parties mentioned. So I thought to myself that I should be able to convince them to call off our war so we could get France in a pincer hold. So I looked on the diplomacy menu and was told that to end our war I needed to reach a certain diplomatic standing with the HRE and then pay a fee of 20,000 gold. How did I reach high enough standing? Simple. I bribed the Emperor. After paying him 10,000 gold I proceeded to pay him another 20,000 gold and the war was over. 10,000 more gold later we were in a military alliance. This took place all at once. While paused I went from war all the way to military ally with a perfect 100 point diplomatic rating.

So I was fighting my war with France and while things were going better, I was still worried about Castille. And I thought to myself, well maybe I can just bribe their king too. I expected it to be harder. After all I had never personally engaged the HRE. We had fought some proxy battles but the actual damage was limited. Castille had directly invaded my territory. They were already allies with my greatest enemy. So what did it take to turn Castille against its old ally and forget the tens of thousands of lives lost in a pointless war? 40,000 gold. The exact same amount as it took to forge an alliance with a nation whose blood I had never spilled.

So I basically bought my way to victory over France. After subduing the Italian and Germanic nations I returned to Castille and promptly betrayed them. That just left the HRE. Now due to what was now a lengthy alliance, the HRE had many towns under their control deep in my territory. Too many for me to strike all at once. So I was worried I was about to enter a very difficult war, as the HRE could raise armies all around Europe to harass me. In order to cause the damage before they had a chance to strike back, I thought I would attack before declaring war. This was supposed to give an extreme diplomatic penalty to remaining players, but there were no remaining players. So I hit a town, razing it to the ground. I expected an immediate declaration of war but nothing. So I hit another, and then a third, fourth, and fifth town. Finally after the sixth and luckily final town they controlled within my territory they declared war. But by then it was too late. I was fighting them on a single front now and my military power vastly exceeded their own. Without the need to leave forces behind in case of behind-the-lines attacks I could push my entire might to the front line and thus made short work of them, winning the game.

While it makes for a nice story, it is a busted system. Despite having betrayed two allies already, the HRE still let me take a half dozen cities before fighting back. I can't think of any other game I have played where hitting some relationship threshold meant that you had a 100% chance of succeeding in diplomatic talks. I was super excited to finally reach the diplomacy portion of the game, and I found out that somehow the early game was better, despite the strategic layer barely existing.

So those are my issues with the strategic component. The good news is that the tactical layer fairs much better. It's still not great, mind you, but it is functional. I think it is best described as a cross between Stronghold and Total War. From Stronghold you get the lengthy, complex siege battles. While you can't free build walls, you can upgrade them, add numerous weapons to the battlements, place burning oil, reinforce the gates, and more. It is definitely a step up from what is available in most tactical components of a grand strategy game. You also can continue building your town and recruiting units while in the tactical mode. This is maybe the biggest unique selling point of the game. Basically, while not a full fledged RTS, you can construct buildings, conduct research, and produce units while the battle is occurring. You can also do this from the strategy layer of course, but unlike in, say, Total War, getting surprised by a larger opponent force is not always going to lead to failure here. If you can hold off the enemy long enough you can usually build up enough of a defense to hold out. It leads to some fun and tense moments as you struggle to contain the enemy in your outer defenses while you fortify your inner keep and build units to defend it. I actually really enjoyed the siege battles because of this element. It was very unique feeling, even compared to Stronghold.

Now the attacking side is where things kind of fall apart. See the AI in this game is bad, really bad. And that makes any sort of tactical component to an attack fall apart. Allies and enemies alike do incredibly stupid things, and keeping your units organized is just not possible with the current systems. So in open field battles I largely won by kiting the opponents forces with my calvalry while my archers shot them to death, while siege battles became a cinch once I unlocked the English Longbowman, who has a greater range than any other unit and therefore could easily kill every defender of a city before they were hit. You might think the AI would march out to face such a threat but they didn't.

So to sum things up, I really enjoyed defending castles in this game. And everything else was either half baked, broken, or just plain not fun.

While I have overall enjoyed my time with Chasm, this thumbs down comes exclusively due to the crash bugs that I have experienced while playing this game. While two crashes in four hours of playtime might not seem like enough to warrant a negative review, these crashes were severe. The first corrupted the entire game installation and required me to uninstall and reinstall it. Then after rebooting my computer the game would finally launch again. Of note, I know the exact cause of this bug although due to its severity I have not attempted to reproduce it. My wireless keyboard ran out of batteries in the middle of playing (I was using an Xbox One controller and so didn't notice). Upon plugging the keyboard in the game crashed and corrupted.

The second crash was so bad that programs on my computer would no longer execute and I had to perform a hard reset of my whole system to fix it. Note that my computer is custom built with a very limited number of programs running on it at any time. It also has the latest drivers and Windows firmware updates, and exceeds the system requirements of this game by several orders of magnitude.

I have nearly 1500 games in my Steam library. Probably over 500 of them played on this computer. Of those not a single one has ever caused me to hard reset my machine. That includes AAA titles, indies, classics, and random forgotten relics that I'm running in emulators like DOSBox. And if an already awful game from the mid-nineties can manage to not crash my whole system, I expect an otherwise good game that is only a year old and still receiving regular updates to achieve that bare minimum requirement.

As such, despite very much enjoying this game, I have to recommend people stay away unless these bugs are fixed or people want to risk damaging their systems.

Written in case anyone else wastes time downloading this. Game is locked to 30 fps. No settings to unlock it even in the encrypted config files. Engine is hard coded to 30 fps. Played for about five minutes and felt like puking. Looked like it could have been a fun game but I could not physically handle it.

My Impressions After 20 Hours

Start by playing the prologue. Playing as the Visigoths. Need to defeat the Ostrogoths before the Hunds come and burn me to death. Defeat all but their capital. Siege their final city. Allies come up from the south. Full 20 stack plus city defenders plus Ostrogoth army stack against my 15 stack. Not gonna lose a freaking tutorial. Hide my calvalry in the forest. Circle around behind enemy army and kill their king. Troops lose will to fight. Defeat army when outnumbered 5 to 1. Thinking this game is great. Post battle game tells me I have successfully beaten the Ostrogoths. Wait what? I was just fighting their allies, I haven't attacked the city yet. Game doesn't care. Huns pour in from the East. I'm told to migrate from town I haven't yet captured. Try to hold off huns long enough to capture town. Fail. Screw prologue.

Start grand campaign. Playing Attila's Grandfather. Start looting and pillaging. Atilla is born. Prepare great army for him to command when he comes of age. Atilla is 18. Great cutscene says he will conquer the world. I instate him as new general of strongest army. Hidden enemy spy assassinates him as soon as I end turn. Atilla dead at 18 having never fought a single battle. GG Creative Assembly.

Attempt 2. Give birth to Atilla. 2 years later Atilla's father dies of natural causes. Atilla's Mom becomes regent until he comes of age. 2 years later Atilla's mom dies of natural causes. Atilla's Uncle becomes king, Atilla no longer in line to lead Huns. That's fine. I can send Uncle on a suicide mission. Pop up window. Uncle has given birth to Son. Now have to wait 18 years before I can kill him. 18 years pass. Atilla and Uncle are leading two full stacks alongside Atilla's other uncle with a 15 stack. Suddenly all of Northern Europe unites against me and send about 10 full stacks to kill me. Don't worry. I got this. I'm Atilla, ♥♥♥♥♥! Fight battle. Am managing to win when outnumbered 10 to 1. Atilla's younger Uncle falls. Realize if his older Uncle falls his cousin will become king. Uncle is charging a unit of heavy axemen. Things don't look good. Send in out of ammo horse archers to flank axemen. Somehow Uncle lives and I defeat an army 10,000 strong with my army of 1500. Feeling great. Turn starts. Pop up tells me my Uncle has died of natural causes.

10/10 Would defeat overwhelming odds before losing to an RNG again

Before I begin, I just want to note that I have not yet completed a playthrough of this game, as my mere 45 hours of playtime should indicate. Still I have been enjoying my time enough that I felt the need to write this.

Kingdom Come is a medievil Life Simulator. Among other things you will have to regularly eat, sleep, bathe, and do laundry. Don't expect your lady friend to want to go out with you if you come to her covered in mud and blood. And don't expect a Nobleman to take your requests seriously if you are dressed in rags. A significant amount of time in this game is dedicated to regular chores. You need to sharpen your sword after a battle. You need to brew various concoctions to increase stats or promote healing. Both of these tasks take a very long time to complete correctly. There is no just hitting a button and watching results occur, at least not early on in the game.

If all of what I've described sounds like your type of simulator than this game is going to blow you away. If it sounds like something from your nightmares you will hate it. Combat can and does occur but you can go hours without getting into a fight. While some quests lead you down a road of violence, more often than not your duties include the type of tasks befitting a squire of the time. At one point you have to accompany a lord on his hunt. Later on you have to settle a dispute between a construction crew and the monks of the monestary they work at. There is little in the way of action in either of these sequences. You spend much of the early and mid game chasing after bandits. At one point you oust them from their stronghold and partake in one of the handful of full scale battles in the game. It is awesome. If you have the From the Ashes DLC you then get to be the Bailiff of the town built on the ruins of their base meaning that you have to decide how the town is erected and settle disputes and legal issues.

While obsentibly an RPG and often compared to the likes of Skyrim, Kingdom Come is more than anything a simulator. You have to know that going in. Even the combat itself is a simulation. There are no fantastical combos being performed here. Every battle is a life or death struggle that you will only barely survive. Even with late game gear and highly leveled up, a single thief can kill you in an instant if you are not careful. Fighting a heavily armored and skilled soldier is a major risk that rarely ends favorably.

Kingdom Come is brutal and unforgiving. It is also incredibly rewarding in a way a game like Skyrim rarely can be. This isn't a game about watching numbers go up. Success depends much more heavily on your skill and critical thinking capabilities. Yes, there are plenty of visual bugs, as well as the occasional game breaking kind, but nothing as awful as what was present at launch. If you are in the mood for a difficult but accurate take on life in Middle Ages Bohemia then give this a go. If you are looking for a power fantasy then look elsewhere.

Etherium is a game full of good ideas poorly executed. At its core Etherium is a combination of a Relic style RTS (think small unit counts, focus on control point captures, little base building, short matches) and a barebones 4x space strategy game. That is not a bad idea for a game combination but several things ruin the fun. First off let's address the technical issues. As numerous reviews have reported this game likes to crash and crash often. I have never actually managed to complete a game because they all inevitably end up crashing. Now even if everything else about the game was perfect that alone would be enough to give this game a downvote. But alas it is just one of many problems with Etherium.

Let's look at the two components of the game, starting with the 4x grand strategy layer. Now I call this 4x but really you can remove 3 of those 4 as there are only five planets to vie for control of and you can see them from the start of the game. And while you do gain bonuses for holding planets, you aren't really exploiting them in the traditional sense. And there is no diplomacy option. What can you do? Well you can research new units and abilities to use in the RTS portion of the game, and you can play a variety of politcal cards that can have any number of effects. These cards are fine and add a touch of randomness to the game that could theoretically allow for some decent comebacks, although the crashing issue has never allowed me to progress far enough in a game to see this in practice. Other than that you build fleets and invade the planets.

Once an invasion begins you move to the RTS layer which is a fair bit more successful than the grand strategy layer. As I started earlier, the game involves capturing control points throughout the map from which you can spawn units. Units require etherium to recruit, a resource which you gain slowly over time as long as you control the point in a region with an etherium egg. The major strategic wrinkle is that only certain control points become full on forward bases, while the rest are just outposts, useful for little more than connecting your main base with your forward positions. But often times the etherium is located in a region that does not have one of these more desireable control points. And so the game boils down to deciding when to go for etherium and when to expand your area of control. It's a decent idea that, like much of Etherium breaks down in execution. The largest issue I've had wit the RTS portion thus far are the inclusion of neautral factions, up to three per map. These factions stay within their starting region and don't bother either player unless provoked. But, instead of dedicating your control points to building defenses or mining etherium, you can dedicate them to recruiting these factions. This is meant to be something of a risk/reward. You are giving up short term benefits for long term gains and could theoretically get destroyed by a rush attack while you focused on gaining an ally. The issue with that is that maps only allow for two players and there are 10-20 regions per map. So you can easily devote a portion of your resources to gaining an ally while devoting enough to immediate defense that it would be difficult for an opposing player to steamroll you before you gained the ally. And once you do gain the ally it is basically game over, especially early on in the campaign. See two of the three neautral factions have incredibly powerful units that can easily wipe out your opponents entire army until you've reached the latest stages of the tech tree. But it is unlikely for a match to last that long, mainly because the game will crash long before then, but also because you can use this technique to win almost every match against the AI. And even if on harder difficulties the AI was smart enough to use the neautral factions that still means that instead of multiple paths to victory you have just one. Race to see who can gain control of neautral factions first and whoever gets them wins.

All that is fairly damning but the final nail in the coffin for this game is that while each of the RTS matches only last 20 or so minutes, you have three players each with up to three fleets that can each attack up to three locations a turn. As such it is not unthinkable that you might have to play over 20 of these matches a turn. And the game is just not fun enough to do that for dozens of turns on end. Especially because the tactics of the RTS portion rarely evolve and the maps are not randomly generated. So even if my first two complaints were fixed, I still couldn't recommend this game because it is horribly paced. Of note, there is no option to just have the computer resolve the battle, like you could in a Total War game. After all, even if the combat were more fun, at some point I just don't want every turn to take 10 hours and certain battle are going to be a forgone conclusion. As the human player you can always forfiet a hopeless encounter, but the AI seems determined to fight even when it has no real chance of winning. And going through the motions gets boring after the 100th go. So overall I would not recommend this title in the slightest. Even if gotten for free in a bundle I wouldn't waste the time or space to download it. It broken, boring and unbalanced and not worth your time or money.

Prevent The Fall is a traditional and incredibly limited dungeon crawler. You play as a nameless, noncustomizable character who kills things in dungeons. There is no story or lore beyond that. Quests are given to you by a tavern keeper who is also nameless and voiceless. Each quest in the game involves either killing a certain enemy in a dungeon or collecting a certain number of items, at least after 2 hours of play. The dungeons themselves are basic both from a design and visual standpoint. They are linear and simplistic, with no mazes and only a few easily avoidable traps. There are also no puzzles or true boss battles either. As such every run through a dungeon is identical. You kill all the enemies, loot the one or two chests and then repeat.

The leveling and combat systems are both functional but barebones. Each weapon type (of which there are about a dozen) comes with its own skillset and most can be used in either hand. Hence you can mix and match skillsets based on both your playstyle and the needs of a specific dungeon. An earlier review mentioned that the game does not have damage type immunities or weaknesses and that is actually not true. While most enemies will fall to any type of damage, using a holy sword against a zombie is more effective than using a regular one, while blasting a phoenix with a flame staff does little if anything to harm it. That said, at least in the first couple hours, enemies that require such tactics are far more the exception than the rule. The combat itself could best be described as clunky, floaty, and unrewarding. It works but it isn't a ton of fun, which considering it is all you do in the game is a major problem. Enemies simply charge at you and attack, making them both easy and boring to fight.

The leveling system is similarly uninspired. There are three skill trees, once each for melee attacks, elemental attacks, and defense. These trees are just basic buffs unfortunately. You might get more health, mana, stamina, or crit chance for example. You do not gain new abilities making leveling a fairly boring affair as enemies will likewise level as the game progresses, making the challange remain flat throughout.

From a presentational standpoint Prevent the Fall is amatuerish at best. Simplistic visuals that would not look out of place in a 15 year old dungeon crawler, barely tolerable audio samples, and UI and interface ugliness abound. I did appreciate the support for numerous different formats of control. VR users can select from both Vive and Rift motion control options or opt to use an XInput controller. Monitor users can also make use of standard mouse and keyboard controls complete with hotbar. Also worth noting that as far as I could tell VR mode must be played in first person while monitor mode must be played in third.

All told, while there is some interesting ambition in making support as wide as possible, Prevent the Fall is a boring and simplistic dungeon crawler that is barely worth $2 on sale and certainly not worth $10 full price.

I would not normally write a review so long after the release of a game, but with the sequel recently released I thought some people might want to know how the original holds up several years later. The answer really depends on what you are looking for. The Evil Within is not scary. There are no real jump scares, and the story is so nonsensical and the characters so nondescript that the psychological horror just doesn't work. The things you see and do in this game are insane, but so are the things you see and do in Super Mario Bros. Simply put, this is not a survival horror game as there is no horror aspect.

So what if you are here for the tense resource management survival gameplay that Mikami popularized with the first Resident Evil? Well you'll likely enjoy the first half of this game. The first third takes place in a rural village filled with possessed "zombies", not unlike Resident Evil 4. And like in that game you spend a significant amount of time roaming about the environment looking for health restoratives, ammo, and weapons. The Evil Within adds a stealth mechanic to the RE4 formula which gives you are third option in addition to shooting everything that moves and running away.

These early levels largely move at your own pace, and reward careful exploration and a mastery of the mechanics. If the game ended after chapter 4 or 5 I would likely have no trouble recommending this game to anyone looking for some more RE4. But there are another 2/3 of the game to go after this intro segment and each chapter gets progressively worse. By the final levels, gameplay has devolved into running through a series of linear corridors from one-hit-kill monsters who you have no hope of hiding from or killing. This is interspersed with segments that have you trying to navigate through a series of death traps that are also filled with one hit kills, many of which are almost impossible to avoid your first time through.

These final five or so levels are so frustrating and incompetently designed that it is a wonder they were made by the same designers. Meanwhile, the art direction which starts out fairly moody and atmospheric eventually just leans into the whole random things floating through the void look that just feels lazy. Exploration is not only no longer encouraged, it is often impossible due to the ultra linear nature of the level design, and/or the fact that one wrong step leads to an instant death.

Meanwhile the middle third is merely average. It includes sequences in a hospital, a run down mansion, and other horror movie tropes connected by no real narrative tissue. The mansion level specifically is a decent little puzzle in and of itself, but it has almost no connection to anything else that occurs in the game.

So the concluding third of the game is borderline unplayable, the story is barely present and the game isn't scary. All that seems fairly negative, but I will say that I think players who enjoyed RE4 will likely find a lot to like with the first 2/3 of the game. A more robust upgrading system gives you more and more options as the game progresses and lets you tailor the game to your preferred playing style. Overall, were this a traditional gaming website I would likely score The Evil Within a 5 or 6 out of 10. Not horrible by any means but certainly not great.

As a final note, I played the game on a system using a Geforce 1080, Intel Core i7 6700k, 16 GB of DDR4 RAM, and a PCIe connected SSD. I had no issue on that system with running the game at max settings in 1080p. Your mileage may vary, and The Evil Within is certainly not a good enough looking game that it warrants the degree of technical issues many users experience. So while I can't say whether all of the game's technical issues have been entirely fixed, I can say that I didn't experience anything outside of some rather poor framepacing that occasionally made the game seem like it was juddering. This issue was fairly minor though, and other than that the game performed fine on my machine.