Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by bit-tech, 26 Jul 2019.
Stormtrooper in article screenshot: It's good to see Paul Lynde is still getting work.
Against every fibre in my being I bought this. I was doing a self boycott of Bethesda, but I can't miss out on a good co op romp.
Will get started when my pal returns from his vacation. Looks pretty good.
I know someone who disagrees with this review, the excellent WorthaBuy on Youtube with another fantastic evisceration of a shite game.
Apparently, it looking and sounding good is where the good stuff ends.
So we have two dissenting voices. We need a third review to determine if the game is shite or not.
I've played the first hour, and it's not the game for you if you require any sort of depth at all. If you like pointing your mouse at characters and clicking lots of times then you're in luck. It's OK for that.
Was that really necessary?
The guy is basically a troll, best ignored really.
So when people told me to wait for reviews that was bs too it seems. Sigh. It's bad enough that games these days are bad, but worse that nobody in video game journalism can even spot a bad game. Seems like all that could have been pushed out of the industry.
I'm so tired of being told what is good these days. It makes it so much worse when you find out it's crap.
Wolf 2 suffered most of the problems of this, yet seemingly no reviewer managed to point out that the good bit (gunplay) was short and boring. I wasted money on that too.
It sounded like he/she was taking the p*ss
Happy to retract and apologise if I got it wrong.
Also, not a troll.
While I found the start of the Wolfenstein reboots gripping, I found the actual game
(once you get out of the care home)
so mind-numbing for 95% of it that I won't bother buying any of the later ones. If I want the story, I can watch a playthrough on Youtube... or find a synopsis or transcript.
Pity because in a few of the screenies it looks rather promising.
The first reboot was ace. Totally acebest. The second one actually had me squirming in my seat with boredom. I waited for it to get better but no, just plodded on and remained yawnsome. It was like tiny levels of Doom...
I shoulda known really. Oh well, back to boycott.
On another note, can someone stage an intervention for fictional Nazi architects? Stop it with the concrete worship already
Also, can we please stop mentioning 'shooting Nazis' at every chance we get? You switch to calling them enemies in the latter half of the review, but I literally cringed when I read the first half. In Bethesda's keynote at QuakeCon (and basically every time they talk about Wolfenstein) they make sure to mention 'killing Nazis' in every second sentence for easy cheers from the crowd. Yes, killing enemies is what shooters are about, but shouldn't we focus on clever enemy design or AI instead of the type? What do the enemies in Youngblood do when you face them? Are they smart, i.e. flanking you? How do they look? All the same or innovative and interesting? What does change with higher difficulty? Number, intelligence or accuracy of enemies? Nothing is mentioned here that let's me decide whether or not the enemy design makes me want to buy the game more or less.
Sorry, but this is something the really gets me.
Separate names with a comma.