Don't get it mistaken, the reason nobody made a Hellblade 2 thread is because it looks incredibly mediocre (5/10 vibes).

  • 86 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

39390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#1 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 39390 Posts

Lets not beat around the bush, the "gameplay" is walking in a straight line, and fighting one on one zoomed in with a 50 FoV. MS saw the success of TLOU2, wanted their "movie game", and epic failed like no other.

At this point even lemmings don't care about the game anymore, it looks this bad. You want it or not, this is Ryse Son Of Rome of the 9th gen🤭

Avatar image for Archangel3371
Archangel3371

44356

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#2 Archangel3371
Member since 2004 • 44356 Posts

I ended up enjoying the first game more then I thought I would and am looking forward to playing this when it comes out next year. Think it’s looking really good as well.

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

39390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#3 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 39390 Posts

@Archangel3371 said:

I ended up enjoying the first game more then I thought I would and am looking forward to playing this when it comes out next year. Think it’s looking really good as well.

Firstly, i expected your post to be... well, i think you know, the one that's fitting the "its fine" gif.

Secondly, you say that its looking really good, and i am not exactly sure what you're referring to? What looks good? If you're talking about visuals, assuming that this is not running on a 4090, and is real gameplay, yes, it looks good, and the lighting is even very very good. But so did Rome Son of Rome, which was most likely the best looking game on launch of the xbone/ps4.

Avatar image for SolidGame_basic
SolidGame_basic

45322

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 SolidGame_basic
Member since 2003 • 45322 Posts

Looking for actual gameplay?

Avatar image for moistcarrot
Moistcarrot

1478

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Moistcarrot
Member since 2015 • 1478 Posts

Didnt like the first one, looked great but the plot wasn't interesting and the voices in your head thing got annoying pretty fast.

Avatar image for Archangel3371
Archangel3371

44356

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#6 Archangel3371
Member since 2004 • 44356 Posts

@hardwenzen: Yep, mostly talking about the visuals although what little we’ve seen from the gameplay looks to be on par with the first game. I enjoyed that well enough. Also enjoyed Ryse: Son of Rome.

Avatar image for warm_gun
Warm_Gun

2467

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#7 Warm_Gun
Member since 2021 • 2467 Posts

Gave Hellblade a negative review on the client I own it on. Didn't mention the really corny lyrics in the end credits.

Hellblade has puzzles, but they are of the "Where's Waldo?" variety. Runes start appearing once you are in the general vicinity of the pattern you have to focus on. Easy. I know that the game is supposed to be about the mind (Hah!) and that some people pay more attention to patterns in their world (I used to obsess over that stuff when I was a kid.), but it shows a lack of thought. What I mean is that they designed the level, then put the patterns in after. They could have been placed anywhere. Why would you give them high scores for skipping the work, which would be designing the level as a puzzle? Remember that scene in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade where Indy takes the leap of faith and then the camera turns to reveal he is walking on a kind of optical illusion? There is some of that in here too. You have to look at the illusion from the right angle for bridges to solidify. It's a little cleverer than the "Where's Waldo?" stuff.

Playing on Hard combat difficulty (the highest available), I only died once against regular enemies, very early on when I was still figuring out the system, and maybe three times against one later boss. It's a really basic and forgiving system. Her hit points regenerate in combat. She is an averaged-sized woman, maybe five feet four inches, fighting men four times as big as her. I'm supposed to believe that she could stun lock these hulking giants (almost nine feet tall) by throwing straight forward kicks? That she could break through their solid parries or parry the attacks they deliver with arms thick as logs head on? For a game this grim and visually realistic, the fighting is absurd. It doesn't matter if they are phantoms and figments of her mind. The problem with that excuse is that before she came to this place she was taught to fight like men, against enemies who would be bigger and stronger than her. Viking warriors with much more mass, powered by testosterone. She learned to fight, at least initially, by watching her love. If he cared for her, he would have helped her to realize how limited she physically was and taught her to make up for her smaller size and weaker power by using her wits and building her other attributes up more, perhaps making her more of a sneaky, resourceful runner. Or at least put her in a place where she might figure those things out for herself. If these demonic warriors are her fears corporealized, then think about how comically delusional she must be to imagine herself beating them down like little boys, wiping the floor with them, even when it's three or four giants against her. That is what I did through almost the entire game: I wiped the floor with almost everything this hell threw at me, dodging most attacks (dodging physically THROUGH their attacks), my enemies constantly staggered by her unlimited stamina before they could deliver a blow. The voices always told me when the enemies who were not in the overly cramped field of view fixed on her back were about to strike. Once you get the mirror ability that slows them in time, forget about it! THIS is supposed to be her hell? Owning all? It's difficult to think of how she would take them on with any credibility. If we make her taller and significantly more muscular than the vast majority of women, then that just concedes the real problem: men and women aren't the same; a man will almost always win in physical combat. But that makes you wonder why every cinematic story-driven game has to be about defeating hordes, waves, armies of enemies anyway, and it brings me back to the alternative I proposed before. Why can't she instead hide, flee, defend, and only take on the enemy directly when an opportunity that disadvantages one presents itself? The player could have activated events and interacted with objects in the environment that gradually disadvantaged him. For the sake of the intended story, she would still have been a warrior, with agility, stamina and strength, but one who understood and heeded her physical limitations and used the tools available to her. When the enemy did take her on directly while at his best, she would have suffered and might have only gotten away by stabbing/jabbing repeatedly or biting or kicking while in his grasp. I would have increased the field of view and not fixed the camera behind her back for this mix of mechanics. Again, the overwhelming focus on shooting and hitting in nearly all of these types of action-adventure games is tiresome anyway.

The storytelling reminds me of Gone Home, that walking game from a few years ago that for some reason received all those rave reviews, in that without other people anywhere, with only memories of things that already happened, or in the case of Hellblade, spirits and voices in the head to speak to, you don't feel that invested in what is actually going on. None of the characters are tangible. I'm supposed to care because the voices tell me to as I have to watch Senua scream and suffer, on and on. (Why did the creators think that was an entertaining idea for a story? If it was nightmarish horror, then maybe, but this developer only makes action games with a high emphasis on melee combat. They don't know fear.) As if nightmares don't have people in them and the road to hell shouldn't have characters. It's a lot of audio-only exposition for a story-driven game this long. I don't really care about how inaccurate the psychological aspect is, but it's pretty embarrassing that the developers gave that medical notice in the opening when all their research amounted to finding patterns, being belittled and discouraged by the voices, and swordfighting.

The promise of 3D audio felt like false advertising. I put on my headphones, but it only ever sounded like stereo, the left and right. "Binaural recording," they called it, the same technology used for that impressive barbershop demo on YouTube, where the scissors appear to go all around you. Trying the game out with speakers, I found that the internal voices never or barely appeared in the surround speakers and the environment didn't use multichannel audio well. The game is best with headphones, but not what was promised in that configuration. I turned off the chromatic abberation with the files. Tried increasing the field of view as well with those files, but it looked weird. It created a fish eye effect because of where the camera was fixed. Did not find a way to turn off the dumb permanent screen dirt/moisture.

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

39390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#8  Edited By hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 39390 Posts

@warm_gun said:

Gave Hellblade a negative review on the client I own it on. Didn't mention the really corny lyrics in the end credits.

Hellblade has puzzles, but they are of the "Where's Waldo?" variety. Runes start appearing once you are in the general vicinity of the pattern you have to focus on. Easy. I know that the game is supposed to be about the mind (Hah!) and that some people pay more attention to patterns in their world (I used to obsess over that stuff when I was a kid.), but it shows a lack of thought. What I mean is that they designed the level, then put the patterns in after. They could have been placed anywhere. Why would you give them high scores for skipping the work, which would be designing the level as a puzzle? Remember that scene in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade where Indy takes the leap of faith and then the camera turns to reveal he is walking on a kind of optical illusion? There is some of that in here too. You have to look at the illusion from the right angle for bridges to solidify. It's a little cleverer than the "Where's Waldo?" stuff.

Playing on Hard combat difficulty (the highest available), I only died once against regular enemies, very early on when I was still figuring out the system, and maybe three times against one later boss. It's a really basic and forgiving system. Her hit points regenerate in combat. She is an averaged-sized woman, maybe five feet four inches, fighting men four times as big as her. I'm supposed to believe that she could stun lock these hulking giants (almost nine feet tall) by throwing straight forward kicks? That she could break through their solid parries or parry the attacks they deliver with arms thick as logs head on? For a game this grim and visually realistic, the fighting is absurd. It doesn't matter if they are phantoms and figments of her mind. The problem with that excuse is that before she came to this place she was taught to fight like men, against enemies who would be bigger and stronger than her. Viking warriors with much more mass, powered by testosterone. She learned to fight, at least initially, by watching her love. If he cared for her, he would have helped her to realize how limited she physically was and taught her to make up for her smaller size and weaker power by using her wits and building her other attributes up more, perhaps making her more of a sneaky, resourceful runner. Or at least put her in a place where she might figure those things out for herself. If these demonic warriors are her fears corporealized, then think about how comically delusional she must be to imagine herself beating them down like little boys, wiping the floor with them, even when it's three or four giants against her. That is what I did through almost the entire game: I wiped the floor with almost everything this hell threw at me, dodging most attacks (dodging physically THROUGH their attacks), my enemies constantly staggered by her unlimited stamina before they could deliver a blow. The voices always told me when the enemies who were not in the overly cramped field of view fixed on her back were about to strike. Once you get the mirror ability that slows them in time, forget about it! THIS is supposed to be her hell? Owning all? It's difficult to think of how she would take them on with any credibility. If we make her taller and significantly more muscular than the vast majority of women, then that just concedes the real problem: men and women aren't the same; a man will almost always win in physical combat. But that makes you wonder why every cinematic story-driven game has to be about defeating hordes, waves, armies of enemies anyway, and it brings me back to the alternative I proposed before. Why can't she instead hide, flee, defend, and only take on the enemy directly when an opportunity that disadvantages one presents itself? The player could have activated events and interacted with objects in the environment that gradually disadvantaged him. For the sake of the intended story, she would still have been a warrior, with agility, stamina and strength, but one who understood and heeded her physical limitations and used the tools available to her. When the enemy did take her on directly while at his best, she would have suffered and might have only gotten away by stabbing/jabbing repeatedly or biting or kicking while in his grasp. I would have increased the field of view and not fixed the camera behind her back for this mix of mechanics. Again, the overwhelming focus on shooting and hitting in nearly all of these types of action-adventure games is tiresome anyway.

The storytelling reminds me of Gone Home, that walking game from a few years ago that for some reason received all those rave reviews, in that without other people anywhere, with only memories of things that already happened, or in the case of Hellblade, spirits and voices in the head to speak to, you don't feel that invested in what is actually going on. None of the characters are tangible. I'm supposed to care because the voices tell me to as I have to watch Senua scream and suffer, on and on. (Why did the creators think that was an entertaining idea for a story? If it was nightmarish horror, then maybe, but this developer only makes action games with a high emphasis on melee combat. They don't know fear.) As if nightmares don't have people in them and the road to hell shouldn't have characters. It's a lot of audio-only exposition for a story-driven game this long. I don't really care about how inaccurate the psychological aspect is, but it's pretty embarrassing that the developers gave that medical notice in the opening when all their research amounted to finding patterns, being belittled and discouraged by the voices, and swordfighting.

The promise of 3D audio felt like false advertising. I put on my headphones, but it only ever sounded like stereo, the left and right. "Binaural recording," they called it, the same technology used for that impressive barbershop demo on YouTube, where the scissors appear to go all around you. Trying the game out with speakers, I found that the internal voices never or barely appeared in the surround speakers and the environment didn't use multichannel audio well. The game is best with headphones, but not what was promised in that configuration. I turned off the chromatic abberation with the files. Tried increasing the field of view as well with those files, but it looked weird. It created a fish eye effect because of where the camera was fixed. Did not find a way to turn off the dumb permanent screen dirt/moisture.

Jesus Christ

Avatar image for TheEroica
TheEroica

22825

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#9 TheEroica  Moderator
Member since 2009 • 22825 Posts

I played the first game and found it underwhelming for me at the time... I plan to revisit. Same with Prey. I just wasn't in the mood and I knew it when I started playing. This happens from time to time... I plan to revisit. Still, it didn't really movey needle is how I remember it.

Avatar image for girlusocrazy
GirlUSoCrazy

1138

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By GirlUSoCrazy  Online
Member since 2015 • 1138 Posts

@warm_gun: Well done

@hardwenzen: He's got some thoughts but there's reasoning behind it and whether or not you agree you can see where he's coming from

Anyway I thought the first one was alright for the starting price of $30 and you could often find it for $5. If they keep that the same I could see it doing alright.

Avatar image for lamprey263
lamprey263

44628

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#11 lamprey263
Member since 2006 • 44628 Posts

Combat looks like the first but with more evolved enemy designs so something new to expect there, no hint of combat ability changes from footage. I'm mostly just puzzled how they're going to be integrating the story with Senua and her army and then those moments where she gets lost in the spiritual/psychological realm by herself. But, guess we'll see later. I didn't think they really showed a whole lot what to expect from gameplay or story aspect but at least the trailer serves as proof of life and a ballparked release window.

Avatar image for mrbojangles25
mrbojangles25

58421

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 11

User Lists: 0

#12  Edited By mrbojangles25
Member since 2005 • 58421 Posts

@hardwenzen: I don't want to sound pretentious but I don't think you really "get" what the first Hellblade was about.

Sometimes there is more to gaming than just the game; these things we play are more than just products, there is room for art and expression and innovation, and sometimes the game elements suffer. That's OK if there are strengths to compensate for the weakness.

I understand wanting to be critical of it, but to dismiss it outright is kind of lame.

With that said, Hellblade 2 looks like a "proper" game and I am definitely excited for it. Same team, same talent, same IP...hopefully more "game" to go along with the "art" I love.

@Archangel3371 said:

I ended up enjoying the first game more then I thought I would and am looking forward to playing this when it comes out next year. Think it’s looking really good as well.

Yup! Same here.

It's also important to take the game in context; it was a passion project, and a charity project. They did not expect to make a profit from it (though they did make quite a huge one nonetheless!) and a lot of the money went to charity. A game made as an artistic exercise. And it succeeded in many ways!

I highly recommend watching the developer diaries, especially the ones about mental health and the more technical parts of the game development, concerning the first Hellblade game. Ninja Theory has a lot of talent, as demonstrated not just by the excellent Hellblade but other titles as well.

Link to diaries

Avatar image for blamix
blamix

2046

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#13 blamix
Member since 2006 • 2046 Posts

Didn't finish the first one. Got very boring after few hrs

Avatar image for pyro1245
pyro1245

9411

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#14 pyro1245
Member since 2003 • 9411 Posts

Decidedly a "not my kind of game" game

Avatar image for pixievalerie
pixieValerie

362

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 30

User Lists: 5

#15 pixieValerie
Member since 2019 • 362 Posts

I dunno, it looks pretty good to me and I loved the first game. I was very pleasantly surprised by it. It feels like you hate just to hate.

Avatar image for Life-is-a-Game
Life-is-a-Game

959

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 Life-is-a-Game
Member since 2005 • 959 Posts

Liked the first one, so looking forward to this one 👌

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

39390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#17  Edited By hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 39390 Posts

@pixievalerie said:

I dunno, it looks pretty good to me and I loved the first game. I was very pleasantly surprised by it. It feels like you hate just to hate.

The game seems as linear as an arcane light gun games. You fight 1v1 fully zoomed in. This is not hating, its critique of what was show. Again, this is not an opinion, it is what's shown in the trailer (multiple trailers in a row, actually).

Avatar image for pelvist
pelvist

9001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 23

User Lists: 0

#18 pelvist
Member since 2010 • 9001 Posts

The first game was a 4/10 game IMO.

Avatar image for tdkmillsy
tdkmillsy

6050

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#19 tdkmillsy
Member since 2003 • 6050 Posts

Game is looking good but unlike some people I'm not going to form judgement on so little information.

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

39390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#20 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 39390 Posts

@tdkmillsy said:

Game is looking good but unlike some people I'm not going to form judgement on so little information.

You had five years to form your judgement. Every time they show it, its looking the same. Don't be naive, tdkmillsy.

Avatar image for last_lap
Last_Lap

6410

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#21  Edited By Last_Lap
Member since 2023 • 6410 Posts

The OP is not taking Sony winning nothing at the awards show very well is he 😭

Avatar image for nfamouslegend
NfamousLegend

1005

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 NfamousLegend
Member since 2016 • 1005 Posts

This game doesn't interest me at all, has 5/10 written all over it. Looks like they are focusing more on visuals rather than making a game that is fun to play but we'll see.

Avatar image for saint-george
Saint-George

1332

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#23 Saint-George  Online
Member since 2023 • 1332 Posts

Best looking game by a distance at the Game Awards,made Ragnarok look like a mega drive game,and part of the Game Awards winners xbox line up.

Avatar image for adsparky
adsparky

2588

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 40

User Lists: 0

#24 adsparky
Member since 2006 • 2588 Posts

I liked Enslaved, so when the first one was announced i was hyped, but after a few more trailers it seemed obvious that it was not for me, and for this one my hype is even lower since the first one at least had hints of originality in it.

Avatar image for randy_lahey
Randy_Lahey

1803

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#25 Randy_Lahey
Member since 2022 • 1803 Posts

Lemmings don’t hype their own games up anymore due to how many times they’ve been kicked in the balls with a shitty release. This way when it does score 5/10, they can say “who hyped it up anyway?”

Greatest example is Starfield - “bu bu but who said it was an important title for Xbox???”

Avatar image for kathaariancode
KathaarianCode

3455

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#26 KathaarianCode
Member since 2022 • 3455 Posts

Very concerning.

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

39390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#27 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 39390 Posts

@kathaariancode said:

Very concerning.

Come on, don't be this lazy. I created a tremendous thread, and i expect quality responses.

Avatar image for Zero_epyon
Zero_epyon

20147

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#28 Zero_epyon
Member since 2004 • 20147 Posts

Still looking forward to it based on the first game.

Avatar image for kathaariancode
KathaarianCode

3455

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 5

#29 KathaarianCode
Member since 2022 • 3455 Posts

@hardwenzen: ok, I'm extremely concerned!

Avatar image for davillain
DaVillain

56276

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#30  Edited By DaVillain  Moderator
Member since 2014 • 56276 Posts

I wasn't kneen on the sequel to be honest despite I liked the first game. The sequel has the potential of being good but so far, I'm not all that hype for Hellblade 2.

Avatar image for kvallyx
KvallyX

13049

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 5

#31 KvallyX
Member since 2019 • 13049 Posts

Game of the show. Day one for me. So god damn pumped. Loved the first one.

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

39390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#32 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 39390 Posts

@kvallyx said:

Game of the show. Day one for me. So god damn pumped. Loved the first one.

Will you enjoy walking in a straight line or walk in a straight line?

Avatar image for SUD123456
SUD123456

6955

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#33 SUD123456
Member since 2007 • 6955 Posts

I liked the first one for the story, lore, setting, main character, visuals, and some of the puzzle aspects.

I really liked the mental health aspect. I will gamepass this on day 1, because why not?

Combat was pretty straightforward and simple, so just ok, but not great. Let's be honest here: Witcher 3 also has simple combat and that game gets plenty of praise.

So I say take it for what it is and pass if it isn't your cup of tea..or wait till a big discount.

But I would recommend you eventually check it out for the mental health aspect, if nothing else. I am not aware of any other game that addressed this in the actual gameplay.

Avatar image for randy_lahey
Randy_Lahey

1803

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#34 Randy_Lahey
Member since 2022 • 1803 Posts

@hardwenzen said:
@kvallyx said:

Game of the show. Day one for me. So god damn pumped. Loved the first one.

Will you enjoy walking in a straight line or walk in a straight line?

Avatar image for Pedro
Pedro

70019

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 72

User Lists: 0

#35 Pedro
Member since 2002 • 70019 Posts

@TheEroica said:

I played the first game and found it underwhelming for me at the time... I plan to revisit. Same with Prey. I just wasn't in the mood and I knew it when I started playing. This happens from time to time... I plan to revisit. Still, it didn't really movey needle is how I remember it.

Prey may worth a second attempt.

Avatar image for sargentd
SargentD

8317

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#36  Edited By SargentD
Member since 2020 • 8317 Posts
@hardwenzen said:

Lets not beat around the bush, the "gameplay" is walking in a straight line, and fighting one on one zoomed in with a 50 FoV. MS saw the success of TLOU2, wanted their "movie game", and epic failed like no other.

At this point even lemmings don't care about the game anymore, it looks this bad. You want it or not, this is Ryse Son Of Rome of the 9th gen🤭

Loading Video...

Shut up and go play your Last of us 2 remaster

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

39390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#37  Edited By hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 39390 Posts
@sargentd said:
@hardwenzen said:

Lets not beat around the bush, the "gameplay" is walking in a straight line, and fighting one on one zoomed in with a 50 FoV. MS saw the success of TLOU2, wanted their "movie game", and epic failed like no other.

At this point even lemmings don't care about the game anymore, it looks this bad. You want it or not, this is Ryse Son Of Rome of the 9th gen🤭

Shut up and go play your Last of us 2 remaster

That's not a way to be civil, is it? You should feel bad for what you just said.

Avatar image for adrian1480
adrian1480

15033

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#38  Edited By adrian1480
Member since 2003 • 15033 Posts

Hellblade will be an unforgettable experience just like the first.

That's enough for me.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

59180

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 86

User Lists: 2

#39 uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 59180 Posts

It's a game journo game.

3 hours long.

Do nothing.

Le_Emotion! I can relate! My blog is trauma!

90.5 increwdibles.

Avatar image for adrian1480
adrian1480

15033

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#40 adrian1480
Member since 2003 • 15033 Posts

@uninspiredcup said:

It's a game journo game.

3 hours long.

Do nothing.

Le_Emotion! I can relate! My blog is trauma!

90.5 increwdibles.

If it's 3 hours that you remember for years to come, why is that not enough?

If you need a 90+ hour slow burn, you have plenty of options. Why can't a 3 hour ride be good enough if it actually has something worth experiencing and is best told in that span of time?

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

39390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#41 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 39390 Posts

@adrian1480 said:
@uninspiredcup said:

It's a game journo game.

3 hours long.

Do nothing.

Le_Emotion! I can relate! My blog is trauma!

90.5 increwdibles.

If it's 3 hours that you remember for years to come, why is that not enough?

If you need a 90+ hour slow burn, you have plenty of options. Why can't a 3 hour ride be good enough if it actually has something worth experiencing and is best told in that span of time?

Because a game with zero replayability (and lets not pretend that there will be any), no multiplayer and only 3h long should never even approach $70.

Avatar image for uninspiredcup
uninspiredcup

59180

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 86

User Lists: 2

#42 uninspiredcup
Member since 2013 • 59180 Posts

@adrian1480 said:
@uninspiredcup said:

It's a game journo game.

3 hours long.

Do nothing.

Le_Emotion! I can relate! My blog is trauma!

90.5 increwdibles.

If it's 3 hours that you remember for years to come, why is that not enough?

If you need a 90+ hour slow burn, you have plenty of options. Why can't a 3 hour ride be good enough if it actually has something worth experiencing and is best told in that span of time?

It was 1.5 hours because I refunded it.

The only game ever refunded.

Def memorable.

Avatar image for hrt_rulz01
hrt_rulz01

22391

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#43 hrt_rulz01
Member since 2006 • 22391 Posts

You know cows are desperate for games when they get more enjoyment out of making sh*t threads like this over and over and over 🤣🤣

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

39390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#44  Edited By hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 39390 Posts

@hrt_rulz01 said:

You know cows are desperate for games when they get more enjoyment out of making sh*t threads like this over and over and over 🤣🤣

This is not a shit thread. And be glad i am not exposing your weakling Switch.

Avatar image for adrian1480
adrian1480

15033

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#45  Edited By adrian1480
Member since 2003 • 15033 Posts
@hardwenzen said:
@adrian1480 said:
@uninspiredcup said:

It's a game journo game.

3 hours long.

Do nothing.

Le_Emotion! I can relate! My blog is trauma!

90.5 increwdibles.

If it's 3 hours that you remember for years to come, why is that not enough?

If you need a 90+ hour slow burn, you have plenty of options. Why can't a 3 hour ride be good enough if it actually has something worth experiencing and is best told in that span of time?

Because a game with zero replayability (and lets not pretend that there will be any), no multiplayer and only 3h long should never even approach $70.

I understand your perspective and probably would have been of the same accord when I was younger and my funds were tight. Times have changed.

For me today, I'm not going to put a price on an great experience. As you get older, you begin to realize that making great memories is what life is about and that it's the great experiences that leave an impression -- however long or short -- that are worth paying for, regardless of medium. Great experiences breed great memories. I'll pay $200 for a good seat at a Cirque Du Soleil show in Vegas or jazz concert in Seattle, neither of which will last more than 1.5-2 hours. $4K for second row Miami Heat NBA tickets a few times a year, 2.5 hours each, give or take. I'm paying $1,100 for a Rose Bowl football game ticket to see my alma mater ball out and that's going to be 3 hours, maybe 3.5 tops + flight and hotel. Hell, I just got back from spending $95 on a 1-day ticket to go look at art at Art Basel (Miami art show) for a few hours. Why pay out for any of those? I could have been replaying something very long like God of War or playing whateverthehell long F2P game or binging a Netflix series. Entertainment for hundreds of hours for very little. So why? Because the experiences and memories from those short events can last for years too. Dozens of hours are not always required for the amazing. I've played and forgotten games that were long for the sake of being long (Final Fantasy 15 comes to mind immediately), but there are some games that were very short but very impactful (Portal comes to mind, along with Hellblade).

If $70 is too much for a short, amazing experience for your finances then it certainly makes sense for you to avoid outside of GamePass or some such. Too much risk. Plus subjective opinions and value and all that. But I will agree that if it's short, it does need to be special in that first play through.

That being said, I personally played through Hellblade 3x times and would say it was one of the most memorable games I ever played. But I also have really good headphones and an amp to match, so the whispers and atmosphere were perhaps more brilliant an than most had. I will absolutely be paying the admission price for the sequel and hope it's more of all the best parts of the first game's experience and then some.

Avatar image for adrian1480
adrian1480

15033

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#46  Edited By adrian1480
Member since 2003 • 15033 Posts
@uninspiredcup said:
@adrian1480 said:
@uninspiredcup said:

It's a game journo game.

3 hours long.

Do nothing.

Le_Emotion! I can relate! My blog is trauma!

90.5 increwdibles.

If it's 3 hours that you remember for years to come, why is that not enough?

If you need a 90+ hour slow burn, you have plenty of options. Why can't a 3 hour ride be good enough if it actually has something worth experiencing and is best told in that span of time?

It was 1.5 hours because I refunded it.

The only game ever refunded.

Def memorable.

Not every game is going to be for everyone. That's fine too. I refunded Oblivion. Not for me. But I don't feel compelled to go around and bash Elder Scrolls games. They have their audience and that's cool.

Once you get old enough to realize the world doesn't revolve around you, you'll find it okay that there are things that you don't like but others do and it still be okay. That's hard for communities like System Wars, which are largely predicated on hating on things that you don't like, even when they're good.

Avatar image for hardwenzen
hardwenzen

39390

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#47 hardwenzen
Member since 2005 • 39390 Posts

@adrian1480 said:
@hardwenzen said:
@adrian1480 said:
@uninspiredcup said:

It's a game journo game.

3 hours long.

Do nothing.

Le_Emotion! I can relate! My blog is trauma!

90.5 increwdibles.

If it's 3 hours that you remember for years to come, why is that not enough?

If you need a 90+ hour slow burn, you have plenty of options. Why can't a 3 hour ride be good enough if it actually has something worth experiencing and is best told in that span of time?

Because a game with zero replayability (and lets not pretend that there will be any), no multiplayer and only 3h long should never even approach $70.

I understand your perspective and probably would have been of the same accord when I was younger and my funds were tight. Times have changed.

For me today, I'm not going to put a price on an great experience. As you get older, you begin to realize that making great memories is what life is about and that it's the great experiences that leave an impression -- however long or short -- that are worth paying for, regardless of medium. Great experiences breed great memories. I'll pay $200 for a good seat at a Cirque Du Soleil show in Vegas or jazz concert in Seattle, neither of which will last more than 1.5-2 hours. $4K for second row Miami Heat NBA tickets a few times a year, 2.5 hours each, give or take. I'm paying $1,100 for a Rose Bowl football game ticket to see my alma mater ball out and that's going to be 3 hours, maybe 3.5 tops + flight and hotel. Hell, I just got back from spending $95 on a 1-day ticket to go look at art at Art Basel (Miami art show) for a few hours. Why pay out for any of those? I could have been replaying something very long like God of War or playing whateverthehell long F2P game or binging a Netflix series. Entertainment for hundreds of hours for very little. So why? Because the experiences and memories from those short events can last for years too. Dozens of hours are not always required for the amazing. I've played and forgotten games that were long for the sake of being long (Final Fantasy 15 comes to mind immediately), but there are some games that were very short but very impactful (Portal comes to mind, along with Hellblade).

If $70 is too much for a short, amazing experience for your finances then it certainly makes sense for you to avoid outside of GamePass or some such. Too much risk. Plus subjective opinions and value and all that. But I will agree that if it's short, it does need to be special in that first play through.

That being said, I personally played through Hellblade 3x times and would say it was one of the most memorable games I ever played. But I also have really good headphones and an amp to match, so the whispers and atmosphere were perhaps more brilliant an than most had. I will absolutely be paying the admission price for the sequel and hope it's more of all the best parts of the first game's experience and then some.

I might be tight on money when spending 1k+, but i am not tight on cash when it comes to $70 games. The difference here is simply a matter of principle. 3h of "one and done" entertainment for $70 is unacceptable, no matter what.

Avatar image for ghosts4ever
Ghosts4ever

24996

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 18

User Lists: 0

#48 Ghosts4ever
Member since 2015 • 24996 Posts

@warm_gun said:

Gave Hellblade a negative review on the client I own it on. Didn't mention the really corny lyrics in the end credits.

Hellblade has puzzles, but they are of the "Where's Waldo?" variety. Runes start appearing once you are in the general vicinity of the pattern you have to focus on. Easy. I know that the game is supposed to be about the mind (Hah!) and that some people pay more attention to patterns in their world (I used to obsess over that stuff when I was a kid.), but it shows a lack of thought. What I mean is that they designed the level, then put the patterns in after. They could have been placed anywhere. Why would you give them high scores for skipping the work, which would be designing the level as a puzzle? Remember that scene in Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade where Indy takes the leap of faith and then the camera turns to reveal he is walking on a kind of optical illusion? There is some of that in here too. You have to look at the illusion from the right angle for bridges to solidify. It's a little cleverer than the "Where's Waldo?" stuff.

Playing on Hard combat difficulty (the highest available), I only died once against regular enemies, very early on when I was still figuring out the system, and maybe three times against one later boss. It's a really basic and forgiving system. Her hit points regenerate in combat. She is an averaged-sized woman, maybe five feet four inches, fighting men four times as big as her. I'm supposed to believe that she could stun lock these hulking giants (almost nine feet tall) by throwing straight forward kicks? That she could break through their solid parries or parry the attacks they deliver with arms thick as logs head on? For a game this grim and visually realistic, the fighting is absurd. It doesn't matter if they are phantoms and figments of her mind. The problem with that excuse is that before she came to this place she was taught to fight like men, against enemies who would be bigger and stronger than her. Viking warriors with much more mass, powered by testosterone. She learned to fight, at least initially, by watching her love. If he cared for her, he would have helped her to realize how limited she physically was and taught her to make up for her smaller size and weaker power by using her wits and building her other attributes up more, perhaps making her more of a sneaky, resourceful runner. Or at least put her in a place where she might figure those things out for herself. If these demonic warriors are her fears corporealized, then think about how comically delusional she must be to imagine herself beating them down like little boys, wiping the floor with them, even when it's three or four giants against her. That is what I did through almost the entire game: I wiped the floor with almost everything this hell threw at me, dodging most attacks (dodging physically THROUGH their attacks), my enemies constantly staggered by her unlimited stamina before they could deliver a blow. The voices always told me when the enemies who were not in the overly cramped field of view fixed on her back were about to strike. Once you get the mirror ability that slows them in time, forget about it! THIS is supposed to be her hell? Owning all? It's difficult to think of how she would take them on with any credibility. If we make her taller and significantly more muscular than the vast majority of women, then that just concedes the real problem: men and women aren't the same; a man will almost always win in physical combat. But that makes you wonder why every cinematic story-driven game has to be about defeating hordes, waves, armies of enemies anyway, and it brings me back to the alternative I proposed before. Why can't she instead hide, flee, defend, and only take on the enemy directly when an opportunity that disadvantages one presents itself? The player could have activated events and interacted with objects in the environment that gradually disadvantaged him. For the sake of the intended story, she would still have been a warrior, with agility, stamina and strength, but one who understood and heeded her physical limitations and used the tools available to her. When the enemy did take her on directly while at his best, she would have suffered and might have only gotten away by stabbing/jabbing repeatedly or biting or kicking while in his grasp. I would have increased the field of view and not fixed the camera behind her back for this mix of mechanics. Again, the overwhelming focus on shooting and hitting in nearly all of these types of action-adventure games is tiresome anyway.

The storytelling reminds me of Gone Home, that walking game from a few years ago that for some reason received all those rave reviews, in that without other people anywhere, with only memories of things that already happened, or in the case of Hellblade, spirits and voices in the head to speak to, you don't feel that invested in what is actually going on. None of the characters are tangible. I'm supposed to care because the voices tell me to as I have to watch Senua scream and suffer, on and on. (Why did the creators think that was an entertaining idea for a story? If it was nightmarish horror, then maybe, but this developer only makes action games with a high emphasis on melee combat. They don't know fear.) As if nightmares don't have people in them and the road to hell shouldn't have characters. It's a lot of audio-only exposition for a story-driven game this long. I don't really care about how inaccurate the psychological aspect is, but it's pretty embarrassing that the developers gave that medical notice in the opening when all their research amounted to finding patterns, being belittled and discouraged by the voices, and swordfighting.

The promise of 3D audio felt like false advertising. I put on my headphones, but it only ever sounded like stereo, the left and right. "Binaural recording," they called it, the same technology used for that impressive barbershop demo on YouTube, where the scissors appear to go all around you. Trying the game out with speakers, I found that the internal voices never or barely appeared in the surround speakers and the environment didn't use multichannel audio well. The game is best with headphones, but not what was promised in that configuration. I turned off the chromatic abberation with the files. Tried increasing the field of view as well with those files, but it looked weird. It created a fish eye effect because of where the camera was fixed. Did not find a way to turn off the dumb permanent screen dirt/moisture.

too long. no one have time to read the book lol. summarize please.

also Sony movie game now on Xbox.

Avatar image for Litchie
Litchie

34698

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 13

User Lists: 0

#49 Litchie
Member since 2003 • 34698 Posts
@uninspiredcup said:

It's a game journo game.

3 hours long.

Do nothing.

Le_Emotion! I can relate! My blog is trauma!

90.5 increwdibles.

lol. This.

Avatar image for HalcyonScarlet
HalcyonScarlet

13669

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#50 HalcyonScarlet
Member since 2011 • 13669 Posts

No, it “looks” very good. But in terms of gameplay it’s a movie game, so it’s on the wrong platform. MS will save themselves a bunch of money if they realise movie games only really do well on PlayStation.

5/10 on Xbox, 9/10 on PlayStation.