Wormerine legutóbbi értékelései

When I played Bayo for the first time on its PC release I thought it was the best action game I played. After playing DMC5 I am far more critical of it: the combat is still very, very good but button mashing and stick swirling (some of that can be avoided through Steam’s controller setup though), instant death gotcha QTAs, poorly paced and incoherent story, lack of control over target lock, enemies pouncing as soon as the cutscene ends, and rather poor camera: all have rather negative impact on the overall experience.

Especially the last one – the camera has a lot of issues even in 1on1 combat, not to mention stuff like torture attacks that will take away your control over it, while allowing enemies to shuffle around. Those are mere annoyances on casual playthrough, and the sheer spectacle of the combat can cover for those issues. However, when trying to platinum the game I found them really frustrating. Ah, also anything non combat related stuff – minigames are pretty poorly implemented and overstay their welcome, and hidden chapters and trials are some of the laziest hidden content I have seen. Essencialy there was no design put to cleverly hide things from player – just bunch of invisible triggers requiring players to backtrack through the level, at specific points. Not fun, considering this hidden content is counted in the end mission score.

Still, if you have controller and are willing to do a bit of learning this is one of the better spectacle/character action games you can get on PC. I would love to see the experience get some refined, but unfortunately with Nintendo funding the sequels there is little hope for Bayo2&3 on PC.

As far as all-rounders go, this is one of the better one. God of War has combat, where smashing enemies brings very basic but undeniable satisfaction, God of War has story, which a bit too sequel-bate-y for my taste, is for the most part written well enough to be engaging. God of War has exploration that had surprisingly a lot of design put into it. It's a great "zone out on your couch and play" kind of a game.

If you focus to hard on any individual part the cracks become apparent. GoW mostly is powered by it's production value - the game looks and sounds terrific, but it's not a very good.... game. Combat has some ugly issues once you try to increase difficulty even a bit - and in spite of a decent supply of unlockable moves, few of those are practical or impactful enough to be useful. It is a very passive combat system, rewarding and encouraging the safest and dullest way to play. The game has frustrating tendency to propritise presentation (zoomed in camera, sluggish animations, visual effects making it impossible to see what is happening etc.) while at the same time spamming the screen with UI elements for the combat to not be a complete mess, which takes away more immersion, then if you just zoomed out a bit for smashy bits.

Movement is incredibly rigid, making explration frustrating especially if you decide to hunt for collectables. GoW has one of the worst fast travel systems I have ever seen. In general GoW has a lot of lengthy "hidden" loading screens, but it is frustration to have to go through a lengthy mandatory elevator ride, knowing that my PC can load the content in a handful of seconds - but as it is a console exclusive I am somewhat sympathetic as the game wasn't design with potential future hardware in mind.

What is straight up bade are the light RPG elements - they fuel exploration, sure, but otherwise have negative impact on the game. Love RPGs, hate when those systems are used to conceal how basic and repetitive combat system is. For how lengthy the game is, there is also relative lack of enemy variety - or I should say, that the variety that there is, doesn't help to distract how basic the combat is.

Story is mostly good. There is just on "bit" about 3/4 ways through the story that feels like it was leftover from a different script - one of the characters makes a "U" turn for no good reason doing some horrific stuff, only to do "U" turn to previous self at a whim, and no one seems to mind.

Still, it is a decent time, but I don't expect to return to it anytime soon. Sequel could be really good, if they learn from shortcoming on this title, and add more depth and fairer difficulty to it's combat.

[Edit]
The initial negative review (below) is still relevant, but it's improved enough to warrant a change of recommendation.

Technically the game is a much better now. I haven't encountered any major issues in my most recent play session.

The game received a free, fairly small scale mission. While Hitman3 is still the weakest entry content wise, the trilogy has been repackaged and repriced making it far easier to recommend.

A neat addition is the new Freelancer mods - it's a rogue-lite campaign using existing maps. It's pretty much a set of procedurally generated contracts, and is a nice way of dipping back into Hitman and engaging with its rich sandbox in am unpredictable way.
[/edit]


Hitman3 is just disappointing. It's not terrible, it's fine and enjoyable, but it offers the smallest, and weakest selection of missions, with technical issues such as: regular disconnects to the server, crashes, mechanical and visual bugs. Sandbox nature of the game has been reduces. Not sure if it is creative decision, prioritising one time playthrough experience over replayability, or a money-saving decision. While content might not be as "premium" as I would like, the pricing certainly is. Hitman reboots have always been expensive, but you tended to get bang for you buck. It's not quite the case here, with additional insignificant content being sold for a price of a premium expansion.

The game is still worth your time, but be careful with how much money you are willing to spend on this one. If you are a returning player don't expect the same return as you got on previous releases, and if you are new to the series just hunt for a discounted key for Hitman2Gold+Hitman GOTY Legacy Pack and you will have about 100-200h of excellent stealth-puzzle content to burn through, before having to consider touching this one.

Just to be clear – you can have fun in Deathloop. It’s just that while you could make gameplay repetitive and boring in Dishonored and Prey, in Deathloop the game actively encourages you to play in a boring and repetitive way. Deathloop in my mind is built on three pillars and those unfortunately detract from each other, preventing neither from being great.


I put “immersive” in bracket as I don’t think it applies here, but if you played Arcane’s previous titles I think you get the idea – first person, intricate levels to explore, systemic design allowing for creative use of weapons, skills and environment.

It’s ok, but not brilliant – the game is painfully easy, and it has to be. It has to be because of the repetition (making things more difficult would make later loops incredibly tedious) and because of multiplayer. While there is plenty of skills and weapons to use they are honestly skipable against NPCs – a silent SMG you are likely to find early in the game will be enough to handle anything. 5 enemies? Just pop them with easy headshots with you SMG with what seems like almost unlimited range and accuracy. You CAN have more fun than that, but it’s shallow fun as enemies provide no resistance.

There are neat things to find in levels, with some side activities to do, but again – rewards aren’t very worthwhile – you will be drowning in epic gear before long (more on that later), and extra weapon with unique properties does little for your singleplayer playthrough. Levels are very small by Arcane standard and easy difficult level, and lack of reward for keeping enemies alive means that the most efficient way is just to run through the level and pop every enemy with a quick SMG headshot. Level design is decent, but not terribly well utilised.


It’s the least timeloopy timeloop game I played. Essentially each day consists of 4 times of day, and you can visit most of the four levels within each of those four times – each level changes a bit depending on when you visit it – enemy positioning is a bit different, different parts of the level can be opened or closed. I never felt engaged by this system – because of the time passes when you exit levels, it doesn’t really feel like the time passes – it’s more like the game cut each level into the pieces and forbid you from accessing everything at once. Progressions worked for me like that: part1 – lengthy and dull introduction to story and core systems. Part2 – the part I enjoyed the most. Exploration of levels, fighting each of the “bosses”, acquiring new skills and weapons. Part3 – lengthy end game where you complete errands waiting for Colt to figure out how to finish the game (and I mean Colt – player isn’t required to do much thinking). At this point I was bored with the game, and only multiplayer kept me entertained from time to time.

I think good game loop succeeds in players wanting to explore the timeframe – the same way a good open world makes players ask “what’s over there”. Deathloop is like a bad openworld game – with lots of marker, inability to figure things yourself unless storyline tells you to do something, and lack of faith in its world, its loop and the player. You are also able to keep skills and weapons between loops, so it feels more like you are replaying the same levels over and over again, if more and more OP character, rather than getting better as player in each run.


Deathloop has dark souls like “invasion” mechanic – where an enemy player can invade your level and try to kill you. Don’t be afraid – odds are stacked heavily in favour of Colt. This was to my surprise my favourite part of the game. Enemy players offer a resistance that NPCs simply don’t, and those weapons, skills and upgrade finally come in handy. The system suffers from two things:

1) as far as I can tell it’s peer-to-peer connection which means quality of the experience varies quite a lot. Sometimes I had a decent opponent, and sometimes lag was so bad, that taking out a machete and hoping that the game will register an instant-kill was my best bet.

2) balance – one can have a lot of fun with various toys in our disposal, but the most effective ways of playing are also the most boring ones – especially if you need to be ready to compensate for extreme lag that you might encounter. And it is difficult to justify being adventurous with Colt if game progression is at stake. Some encounters I had where by far the best time I had in Deathloop (both as invader and as the one being invaded) but the quality of the experience is highly uneven. If you opt out of multiplayer (which you can do) Juliana will be AI controlled, making her about as useless and unthreatening as the other opponents.



So those are three imperfect pillars of Deathloop – and I am afraid they all make each other worse – you can't have a tighter, more demanding “immersive sim” without making time loop and multiplayer frustratingly tedious. You can't have better loop, and roguelite mechanics, in a game where other levelled up players can invade you (I personally think that less progressions and "scavenge what you can and fight" would be far more interesting), and multiplayer can’t be truly great without better rules, better balance, and better netcode/connection system.

You can have fun with immersive sim sandbox, but danger of invasion encourages sticking to things that work, and things that work are usually boring.

You can come up with interesting loadouts for multiplayer but you have to hope that connection is decent, your opponent isn't a try hard, and you have to accept that experimentation might mean lack of progress in the story.

Time loop is just not very interesting.

The game is unique, but mediocre. If you wanna play it, I would recommend doing it sooner than later though, while the online community still exists. I think it will become a dull ghost town once there are no players to mess around with.

If you haven't, play: Dishonored1&2 and Prey. All are better Arcane's singleplayer games. Hopefully upcoming Arcane's vampire thingy, will be a better mulitplayer game.

Frankly, initial impressions were rather disappointing - compared to the predecessors visually this game is lacking. While not technically demanding, Trines have always been elevated by a great art style, but Trine4 looks plain, janky, unfinished. Is it lack of some fancy post processing/lighting effects? Rushed art? I have no clue, but while Trine4 has some nice areas a lot of time it doesn’t quite look right.

What’s more disappointing is that moving around just doesn’t feel good. Item physics are off, character movement is floaty, sword swings have little impact, and character skills have no weight behind them. Out of curiosity I booted up Trine2, and it just looks and feels better to play, in spite of being good couple years old. And while Trines always went for charm, rather than a good story per-say there is something very awkward about how the story is told and paced. Combat is simply bad – it’s chaotic, messy and completely unenjoyable.

So why the recommendation? I still think that Trine2 is the strongest entry, but I warmed up to Trine4 as I spent more time with it. Reason: puzzles. While all previous Trines had some puzzles, they tended to be more free-form, at least in singleplayer – generally the more players you had, the trickier it became to move around, though it was always fairly easy to cheese your way through the obstacles. Trine4 limits possible character interactions, and from what I understand edits challenges depending on number of players, but it uses those things to create more coherent (though limited in possible solutions) puzzle. Even bossfights, tend to revolve more around puzzles than action.

Whenever, it is a change for better or worse is up to you to decide, but personally as puzzles were getting more complex I started to enjoy the game more and more.

If you decide to play, pick up the DLC. It delivers on “nightmare/dreams” theme far better than the original game, and has far better looking, varied levels and a more enjoyable story. So, if you are a Trine fan, give this one a go, and give it time, if you don’t like it at first. And if you are new to Trine, then pick up Trine2. Then come back here.

I must say, I am quite disappointed considering how much praise this game got. Still, it’s good and original enough to recommend.

Nier is an openworlish (think central hub branching off to multiple linear levels) hack&slash action RPG. If you come here expecting Platinum’s trademark spectacle fighter, then look away. Animations are still top notch, but combat is far too shallow and enemy design far too repetitive and bland to keep your attention. Game, rather than doing one thing well switches a lot between game styles – and it is really cool and novel to see same controls getting effortlessly utilized for ground melee action combat, and twin-stick shooter section. Unfortunately, the game prioritizes this novelty over depth, and while it’s fine at first, the spectacle wears off rather quickly. It is especially a problem on subsequent playthroughs, where new half-baked mechanics is added overshadowing core systems and it makes the experience even more repetitive than just having to do the same thing over.

RPG systems are a mixed bag – there is a system that allows you to collect and craft programs and instal them in your “memory” – granting passive boosts, extra utility or granting special abilities. That’s a flexible system that allows you to design custom“classes” depending on how you want to play. Brilliant stuff. There is also a generic crafting system – you just boost power of your weapons/programs you can equip/power if your special abities. And the bad one – jRPG style levelling system. The last one hurts the game a lot: when kill enemies/complete quests, you get XP and get stronger. Enemies have their levels as well so unless you happen to be at the exact right level, you will either have a boringly easy time, or a frustratingly tedious one. Levelling system ensures the game is badly balanced for most of your play style, and fails to add anything of worth, unless running on a hamster wheels and seeing XP bar getting filled is your jam.

Story is fine, but it’s nothing worth playing exclusively for. Characters aren’t well developed enough for anything that happens to land with much impact, and if it is not your first “Do Android dream of Electric Sheep” story, it will do little to surprise you. What’s completely broken, though, is pacing. There is an incredible amount of filler in this game. Sidequests are basic and are ok, but amount of running through old levels you have to do is unacceptable. That drags down the overall experience quite a bit – for example the OST is quite great – but it’s not very dynamic and having to run back and forth through the same locations, made me dislike the tracks due to the repetitive nature, even though they are quite good.

There is also one thing I have to mention: the port is pretty bad. FAR mod is strongly recommended, and it took me some tweaking and research to be able to run the game between 40-60FPS – on a rig AMD5600x/RTX3070. Apparently different systems have slightly different experiences, but the port is simply poorly done, and is not set up to utilize PC hardware properly.

Mafia is not GTA in 30s – it’s a story driven game, using the city as a backdrop to heavily scripted and linear missions, rather than a sandbox to play in. There is a Freeride mode, but there is little to it. Play it for the 10h+ story, and little else. I would recommend it alongside the original rather then instead of it (just remember to mod back original music, which was removed due to licensing reasons). Still, it looks and sounds better, and is more consistent; even so, I do have some nitpicks.

I am a long time fan of the original Mafia. The sequels didn’t manage to satisfy me (at least 2nd one didn’t – have little interest in the 3rd one), and while I was curious on how this from-the-ground-up-remake will stuck up – I was somewhat sceptical. Game’s story, while good, was corny in good and bath ways, and I was worried the devs will try to “Scorsese-it-up” too much, as they did with the sequel. Tonally, Mafia had less to do with Goodfellas or even Godfather (though it steals from both without shame) and more with black&white gangster films from 40s – a very sanitised story of greed with simple moral and a city populated almost entirely by white people with some Asians on the side.

Luckily, this remake handled it really well. The script is heavily rewritten and modified, without straying too far from the original. There are countless in dialogue, some of the more awkward scenes are modified, lots of stuff is added (like radio chatter during driving), world-building is more consistent, motivation expanded and strengthened. The entire cast is doing fantastic job, even if some characters have been somewhat expanded or modified.

It’s fine. I am pleasantly surprised by how well the cars feel. I played on Classic difficulty (for authentic Mafia experience) and it felt mostly good – the infamous race is actually far worse than it was in original – in OG Mafia all you had to do was to remember to slow down before turns – here, winning the race is genuinely difficult... never again will I attempt it again.

It's just a bland "meh" – it is a third person shooter (ala. Mafia2) and I just dislike this approach. It heavily favours single shot accurate weapons of shotguns, which heavily limits weapons variety or tactic of engagement. Chest-high walls are spoiling combat areas and make the whole thing feel more artificial then it needs to be. Melee combat somehow ended up feeling even worse than the original. Overall, the whole thing feels awkward and dated – but PS3 dated, not old PC game dated – whichever you prefer most likely depends on your preferences, but overall I like original games combat more.

I feel torn on this one – overall, its good, mostly faithfully recreating ones from the original using M:DE systems. They do some trimming though – there is a lot of driving in Mafia, and especially later in the game M:DE tries to keep things going and shortens the missions quite a bit. That is a blessing (for pacing) and a curse. OG Mafia had this procedural (as if "proceducal drama", not "procedural generation") feel to it – it was cinematic, yes, but also had this simulation feel to it - experiencing a day in Mafia Enforcer's life - together with going, and getting back from job. For the most part it is fine though – only two or maybe three missions were IMO quite negatively impacted by it, but for better or good, it feels more action packed, and less immersive.

Speaking of feel – artificial failure states are more common in this game. You will see a game over screen if you don’t act to the script the game is giving you. It can be annoying at time – for example the game can be very picky as to where you park. This was rarely the case in the original, as a matter of fact, you could bypass scripted sections if you were clever and game would acknowledge it just fine. Having your hands tied like that disengaged me quite a bit.

There are also some small things missing. You also can’t drive in public transport, and the draw bridge doesn’t seem to draw. Luca’s side quests were cut, and instead he is used for “hidden car hunt” during freeride. Those are small things, overall, but do make the city more static and less interactive. Still, other things were preserved (like reloading with bullets in the gun will waste those bullets, and non-regenerating health), so it's 50-50.

There are also some technical annoyances – the game is clearly set up as missions, but checkpoints will make a save after an initial cut scene – and there is no way of restarting the missions, beside dying, which due to handholdy nature of DE, it might take some time. (ALT-F4 works just fine if you want to quit, and continue from the start of said mission next time). Awkward slowdown and time before you can reload after death is Hitman: Blood Money bad. Key bindings are just awkward, no matter if you use keyboard or pad. Game is also a little bit buggy, though nothing game breaking.

I was quite disappointed when Hades was announced for the first time. Supergiant is one of my favourite studios and I have an appreciation for every game they made so far. Their creativity and ability to weave gameplay and storytelling together made be appreciate even the one game I didn’t like (Transistor). And after unique and brilliant Pyre what next will Supergiant deliver?

Procedurally generated roguelite with combat quite similar to Bastion. Hades seemed like a desperate attempt to jump on the roguelite moneytrain even though the world has moved over to Battle Royale by now.

In addition Hades is precisely roguelite I don’t like – I love my Spelunky, FTL/Into the Breach, Invisible Inc – systemically deep games that require learning curve but are fair: I am not a fan of artificial gain of power with every run, as to simulate skill improvement in games lacking sufficient depth.

And that’s what Hades is – combat has quite a bit of variety but little depth and there is little for player to meaningfully interact with. Level and enemy generation is fairly basic and things get repetitive quickly. What varies between run to run are boons players will get - they are well balanced, and enable players to win in any configuration, they are also designed as to work in pretty much any combination. While they will impact gameplay a bit, they don’t really change things dramatically.

There are couple things that do keep the game from becoming too boring too quickly though – before each run you pick a weapon of your choice (essencially a class), this singular choice has the biggest impact on gameplay between the runs. Each weapon also has several aspects, that increases variety even further.

Once you beat the game, you also unlock “Pact of Punishment” – a system that allows you to make things harder in exchange for valuable resources when you succeed. It’s a good system, but it becomes grindy – you are encouraged to raise difficulty one step at the time, tracked seperatelly for each weapon. You can overshoot difficulty, but rewards will still progress one at the time. I wish one could skip several difficulty levels at once and progress quicker.

When you die (or win) you go back to home hub, and spent – buy cosmetics, but also make yourself stronger – have more health, regenerate health between rooms, have more lives, get better boons. Those upgrades aren’t decisive (biggest power boosts come during runs) but are impactful. Luckily this shouldn’t halt your progress too much, as maxing most essencial onces shouldn’t take too long.

So overall, it’s a competent action rogue lite which substitutes depth with grind. Luckily it is still Supergiant game through and through.

Artstyle is superb, music and songs memorable, and story – it’s there, it’s very good and it’s effortlessly integrated with gameplay! When most roguelites try to add story (Invisible Inc) it falls flat as they try to use traditional means of storytelling in a genre that doesn’t support that. Hades does something different – consequent runs and failures are baked into the narrative. You will be meeting and talking to an impressive cast of characters during your runs and inbetweens your runs in your home hub – your enemies are characters, your upgrades are characters... and then there are couple extra characters on top. There are relationships to develop, romances to have, problems to solve. As you might have guessed game is drawing from Greek mythology – and I mean it is really drawing not just using familiar iconography. This is easily the most satisfying part of Hades, and one that made continue playing long after I lost an interest in gameplay itself. I won’t spoil too much, as it’s all best to be experienced by yourself, though I did find ending underwhelming. It is most likely due to the open ended nature of a roguelite and all things considered I thing Supergiant pulled it off brilliantly. I just wish it would be closer in tone to the source material.

This implementation of narrative is I think what Hades will best be remembered by, and what other games should take a note of. And a reason you should play it.

Early impressions - great sequel. By sequel I mean: more of the same, but more of everything - more systems to play with more enemy types and fine tuned mechanics. As with original prepare to die a lot - even if you played original - old habits can get you killed. Level generation is more robust and more dense, game is less forgiving and, so far trickier to exploit. Fun, fun times. Deja vu, but still a very fun deja vu for those who wanted to play Spelunky fresh once again.

Cuphead is an ok platformer with a superb art direction.

Let’s start with the selling point – art style, soundtrack and animations are topnotch. It’s goes for an old-timey cartoon feel, goes all the way and nails it. Enemy design is really creative, each stage and enemy is well visually designed and wonderfully animated. The joy of the game is seeing what crazy boss you will fight next, and what the next stage of the boss fight will be. This alone helps to overcome some of Cupheads shortcomings as the game. I wish sound effects would be more layered by they can be excused by artstyle choice.

As to gameplay – Cuphead is a boss-rush game – it consist almost entirely of boss encounters with couple sidescrolling stages to mix things up. I have two major complains about the game – for one, it doesn’t have much depth to it: your move set is very limit, very basic (not much depth to be discovered) and not very fun to use. In a good platformer jumping around and shooting should feel good – in Cuphead it doesn’t. It looks great, but doesn’t play well – jumping doesn’t have weight to it, shooting gives little to no feedback.

The second complain is the extension of the first one - this lack of depth leads to game being rather repetitive – there isn’t much gameplay depth to be explored, meaning that while bosses look interesting and different, they all kinda play the same. Difficulty comes from learning their patters, but most of them don’t stand out gameplay wise. There are some interesting gimmicks in the last three encounters though.

There are some other annoyances – on some stages enemy projectiles blend with the background, sidescrolling sections just aren’t all that interesting and highlight game’s weak movement and combat.

Still, sometimes great looks and sound is all you need to stand out.