PC & Video Games

Console Gaming General Discussion

  • Last Updated:
  • Oct 20th, 2017 1:27 pm
Tags:
None
Deal Fanatic
Feb 11, 2007
5911 posts
1243 upvotes
Cuphead looks intriguing. Digital Foundry says Cuphead is much easier than most games of its type from the SNES era.
They say games like Contra and Batman and Robin are far more difficult games.



The game itself has an 86 average on metacritic, which exceeds expectations for it considering only 4 people worked on the game for its initial years of development
(and only 20 people in total worked on Cuphead).

http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-one/cuphead
SpicYMchaggis wrote:
Oct 3rd, 2017 1:31 pm

I imagine there is going to be tons of disappointed people with this game, the artstyle is fun and inviting but the game itself is super punishing and difficult, I could see people giving up without even beating a single boss. Ive was hooked over the weekend, I've beat I think 14 of the 17 bosses and some were easy but others took literally hours of retrying and playing through each section until I mastered everything.
Deal Addict
Dec 12, 2006
4754 posts
609 upvotes
XFactor11 wrote:
Oct 9th, 2017 2:19 pm
Cuphead looks intriguing. Digital Foundry says Cuphead is much easier than most games of its type from the SNES era.
They say games like Contra and Batman and Robin are far more difficult games.



The game itself has an 86 average on metacritic, which exceeds expectations for it considering only 4 people worked on the game for its initial years of development
(and only 20 people in total worked on Cuphead).

http://www.metacritic.com/game/xbox-one/cuphead
I beat it over the weekend, I think it took me about 15 hours to beat all 17 bosses plus the 6 run & gun levels. I immediately restarted the game on expert mode but I don't know if I have the time and energy to go through that all again.

Id say most bosses are not that difficult and its just a matter of going through the various stages and learning/mastering the patterns. You will die a lot regardless as you learn the different stages. Most bosses I could beat in about 15-20 minutes but there was a couple (a certain dragon and pit boss) that took me much much longer.

Id say its definitely not as hard to beat as the old school contra games but its not really designed the same way. This is more like dark souls (right down to the difficulty) if it was just instantly repayable boss fights, which is right up my alley because it's difficult but it doesn't waste a lot of your time.

I also spent a bit of time with the Star Wars BF2 beta this weekend and was pleasantly surprised. I was not at all a fan of the original SWB and was not expecting to enjoy the second one but as a fan of the movies I checked it out and they made a number of improvements to the game. Where as the other one felt like a mediocre arcade game that looked and sounded great, this one manages to do a much better job of capturing the feeling of being in that universe. Im definitely looking forward to at a minimum at least playing the trail version through EA Access. Also the game looks really nice with HDR, even on XB1, can't imagine what this will look like on a PS4Pro/Xb1X.
Deal Addict
User avatar
Jul 5, 2001
4767 posts
1565 upvotes
SpicYMchaggis wrote:
Oct 10th, 2017 11:37 am
I beat it over the weekend, I think it took me about 15 hours to beat all 17 bosses plus the 6 run & gun levels. I immediately restarted the game on expert mode but I don't know if I have the time and energy to go through that all again.

Id say most bosses are not that difficult and its just a matter of going through the various stages and learning/mastering the patterns. You will die a lot regardless as you learn the different stages. Most bosses I could beat in about 15-20 minutes but there was a couple (a certain dragon and pit boss) that took me much much longer.

Id say its definitely not as hard to beat as the old school contra games but its not really designed the same way. This is more like dark souls (right down to the difficulty) if it was just instantly repayable boss fights, which is right up my alley because it's difficult but it doesn't waste a lot of your time.

I also spent a bit of time with the Star Wars BF2 beta this weekend and was pleasantly surprised. I was not at all a fan of the original SWB and was not expecting to enjoy the second one but as a fan of the movies I checked it out and they made a number of improvements to the game. Where as the other one felt like a mediocre arcade game that looked and sounded great, this one manages to do a much better job of capturing the feeling of being in that universe. Im definitely looking forward to at a minimum at least playing the trail version through EA Access. Also the game looks really nice with HDR, even on XB1, can't imagine what this will look like on a PS4Pro/Xb1X.
Such a Sony fanboy! Face With Tears Of Joy I couldn't get into the beta, froze at the user agreement screen. Looking forward to it though - mainly for the ship battles.
Deal Addict
Dec 12, 2006
4754 posts
609 upvotes
9394 wrote:
Oct 10th, 2017 11:43 am
Such a Sony fanboy! Face With Tears Of Joy I couldn't get into the beta, froze at the user agreement screen. Looking forward to it though - mainly for the ship battles.
Same issue here, Had to shut the controller off and open the game with the Xbox app, then it prompted me to connect my controller once I hit the TOS.

The ship battles are a huge improvement in this version, they added some level specific objectives and they improved the controls and it makes the whole thing feel much more authentic. Also the rollouts of heroes/special ships is much improved, it totally random before unless you were willing to wait at the coin but the heroes have to be earned in this game and can likely only be used once a round if you get enough points.
Jr. Member
Jan 28, 2013
147 posts
42 upvotes
Canada Eh
9394 wrote:
Oct 10th, 2017 11:43 am
Such a Sony fanboy! Face With Tears Of Joy I couldn't get into the beta, froze at the user agreement screen. Looking forward to it though - mainly for the ship battles.
Same problem but a hard reset of the console seems to to fix the issue.
The space combat was a absolute blast! Brings me back to the old Xwing vs Tie Fighter days.
Deal Fanatic
Oct 23, 2004
5170 posts
1630 upvotes
Toronto
I read last week that the entire Battlefront 2 leveling and progression system is based on lootcrate gambling in addition to having some pay-to-win elements. I didn't look into it in to much detail but that sounds awful if true. You don't progress and unlock stuff normally through performance like say Battlefield rather things unlock randomly based on lootcrates you earn through playing or buying
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 20, 2009
5872 posts
743 upvotes
Grimsby
You can apparently but it takes forever. Loot crates need to die, its glorified gambling mechanics and gaming companies do not moderate themselves on this kind of thing. There is always the profit justification to make something awful for consumers.

People say "oh just ignore them" but you can't, their presence alone inherently influences design and you are getting the same or less than what you paid for, not more.
Deal Addict
Dec 12, 2006
4754 posts
609 upvotes
Im okay with loot crates and RNG when its cosmetic items only, as its an increased form of revenue for these developers (which in turn means free DLC) and its fun collecting/showing off in game items and they take on a bit more meaning when they have to be earned but it seems recently its transitioned over to gameplay altering mechanics and has started to show up in single player only games for some reasons.

I've read a bit about the Star Wars BF2 loot boxes and it does sound disappointing in its current form, hopefully they can fine tune it from the beta so the chances of getting a class specific ability or whatever is so high that you don't really have to worry about those skills and you can max it out over a few hours. I like knowing I can spend 60$ and play every bit of content thats released for free but the flip side to that is if it ruins the competitiveness of the game then I wont really want to play it.
Deal Fanatic
Oct 23, 2004
5170 posts
1630 upvotes
Toronto
I can barely tolerate the "normal" performance based progression system in Battlefield and only do because I love the gameplay but it seriously sucks constantly feeling left behind and missing content because I don't have 50-100 hours a week to dump into a single shooter. The thought of having progression being entirely random by grinding out lootcrates is even more offputting. At this point I've come to accept that this genre isn't for me anymore as it's obviously targeted towards young people who have hundreds of hours and dollars to sink into a single game. I really miss when you would buy a multiplayer FPS and be on an even playing field with all the content available no matter how much or little you played which is exactly how the original 2005 Battlefront II was iirc
Deal Addict
Dec 12, 2006
4754 posts
609 upvotes
ReeGee wrote:
Oct 10th, 2017 4:47 pm
I can barely tolerate the "normal" performance based progression system in Battlefield and only do because I love the gameplay but it seriously sucks constantly feeling left behind and missing content because I don't have 50-100 hours a week to dump into a single shooter. The thought of having progression being entirely random by grinding out lootcrates is even more offputting. At this point I've come to accept that this genre isn't for me anymore as it's obviously targeted towards young people who have hundreds of hours and dollars to sink into a single game. I really miss when you would buy a multiplayer FPS and be on an even playing field with all the content no matter how much or little you played
I think this is why I've come to appreciate Overwatch and Halo 5 so much. Its cosmetic only with constant streams of free updates and events, also unlike a lot of multiplayer games nowadays weapons/perks/items are not hidden behind some meter that fills up the more you play.

Unfortunately I don't think those scratch the same itch as these big expansive 64 player MP games like BF1 & BF but I guess that's also why they think they can get away with hiding some player boosting perks in loot boxes.
Deal Fanatic
User avatar
Aug 20, 2009
5872 posts
743 upvotes
Grimsby
ReeGee wrote:
Oct 10th, 2017 4:47 pm
I can barely tolerate the "normal" performance based progression system in Battlefield and only do because I love the gameplay but it seriously sucks constantly feeling left behind and missing content because I don't have 50-100 hours a week to dump into a single shooter. The thought of having progression being entirely random by grinding out lootcrates is even more offputting. At this point I've come to accept that this genre isn't for me anymore as it's obviously targeted towards young people who have hundreds of hours and dollars to sink into a single game. I really miss when you would buy a multiplayer FPS and be on an even playing field with all the content available no matter how much or little you played which is exactly how the original 2005 Battlefront II was iirc
Yeah, I feel the same way dude. I play less and less of each BF game because they used to be about teamwork and competition but are now simply about grinding out your own personal goals. So you see people doing horrible, anti-team stuff just because it furthers some dumb XP bar for themselves. Companies love it because they just keep putting out DLC for people who like XP bars too. I hate what progression systems have done to MP games. I don't need some weird dopamine reward hit every time I play an MP game. Make the game fun and competitive, people will play it. We played games for decades without this crap.

It is really weird seeing the gaming industry basically turn into glorified casinos and games into slot machines.

Oh well I speak with my wallet and try to reward companies who do the right thing. I just wish more people shared my attitude about it.
Deal Fanatic
Oct 23, 2004
5170 posts
1630 upvotes
Toronto
SpicYMchaggis wrote:
Oct 10th, 2017 4:53 pm
Unfortunately I don't think those scratch the same itch as these big expansive 64 player MP games like BF1 & BF but I guess that's also why they think they can get away with hiding some player boosting perks in loot boxes.
Yup DICE is the only studio making polished large scale MP FPS games and they're all ruined with these dumb carrot on a stick progression systems which seems to be getting worse with every new game they release. That was part of the reason I skipped BF1 at launch and when I finally got around to playing it on Access it's exactly what Redmask described with so many players basically playing solo for XP, not pushing the objective or playing support which is like the entire appeal of BF for me. It's a shame because they absolutely nail the visuals and game mechanics then ruin it with this crap
Sr. Member
May 9, 2007
777 posts
199 upvotes
ReeGee wrote:
Oct 10th, 2017 2:12 pm
I read last week that the entire Battlefront 2 leveling and progression system is based on lootcrate gambling in addition to having some pay-to-win elements. I didn't look into it in to much detail but that sounds awful if true. You don't progress and unlock stuff normally through performance like say Battlefield rather things unlock randomly based on lootcrates you earn through playing or buying
Yep tons of people calling out this BS practice like Angry Joe and Jim Sterling. Middle Earth Shawdow of War is another with very intrusive single player microtransactions.

I bought SW Battlefront at a deep discount and really enjoyed it in short bursts. Only thing missing was a single player campaign which the sequel will have.

Surprisingly there's not much coming out this year worth looking forward to. Looks like we are going to get bombarded with games at the beginning of 2018 again! Detroit Become Human, God of War, Spiderman, RDR 2 etc...

Currently playing through the Uncharted and The Last of Us remasters. Boy they sure are gorgeous.

Top