[Crunchy in milk]

Originally Posted by SamandMax

I don't think there's such a thing as a best or worst ending, BioWare have a pretty definitive finale for the series that everyone is going to see and from what I can tell there's only a minimal amount of change that can happen to it. Some people seem to have a problem with this - there's been a petition for BioWare to use DLC to change it, which is absolutely ridiculous - but I think it ends the series on a very satisfying note of finality. If you've invested 60+ hours into this trilogy, you want something conclusive, and I think that's definitely what you get.

The only problem I have with the endings are all of them are combinations of 'just because' and 'missed the whole point' pathetic.

The whole time you've been playing Shepard as the hero fighting for the self determination of organic (and perhaps synthetic) life in their cycle.. At the culminating scene you're given three options. Paragon blue, Stupid green and Renegade red.


Paragon blue.

Spoiler:

You decide to 'control the reapers', you know like mister super evil has been promoting for the last 2 games and you've been fighting against... but its ok because its you Shepard, you'll be controlling them... only you have to die (not explained at all). The relays and citadel will blow up removing the support structure that the Reaper solution relies upon, just ignore that destroying relays also wipes out planets within the same system (already established within the narrative). Its totally the paragon thing to do because its coloured blue!

Stupid green.

Spoiler:

Synthetic life is introduced to all organic life at the dna level like some magical, never before possible super bandaid. Forget that the Geth are already well on the way towards this if you saved them & the Quarians (as explained by Tali) Forget that EDI has basically gone the other direction. You have to die (just because, not explained), the relays and citadel will blow up, yadda,yadda,yadda. Please jump into the big green laser, I promise to fix everything!

'Renegade' Red.

Spoiler:

You can destroy the Reaper solution like you've been trying to for the entire trilogy... but for no reason all synthetic life is also destroyed. Put out of your mind the deaths of EDI and the now sentient and remorseful Geth fighting along side you against the reaper solution. We needed a reason to use the renegade colour scheme, right?

If you played multiplayer, put more money in EA's pockets via tie-in schemes, or you wasted time collecting banal doo-dads for chumps on the Citadel, you'll live! That's something right?

Just ignore that you wake up outside, in London, amongst rubble, right when this whole fucking dream sequence started.

[Crunchy in milk]

Even if the choices weren't so bad, its not even remotely explained how

Spoiler:

your crew, including the two who where RIGHT BEHIND YOU when you 'blacked out and magically appeared on the Citadel', got back onto the Normandy.

Confusing mess.

[SamandMax]

Spoiler:

I'd agree that the way they play out the ending and the final choice you make is a little simplistic and convenient but that'd be my only problem with it.

By the end of the game, it's made very clear that Shepard is no longer simply fighting to stop an alien invasion but to stop the cycle of destruction the Reapers have kept the entire universe trapped in for ages. When you're making your final decision at the end, you're not simply trying to protect human and synthetic life or trying to pick the most Paragon-iest option, you're trying to make the decision you believe will keep future civilizations safe from threat. You've spent the entire game building the Crucible knowing only that it can somehow save the universe and choosing how to use it is the ultimate decision the game has been building up to: a complete restart of the current era is the only weapon strong enough to defeat the Reapers and it's your difficult choice to decide how the next cycle will begin. It's not supposed to be an easy decision, it's not supposed to feel like a victory and it's not supposed to leave you certain that you made the correct choice. It's deliberately ambiguous with the faint hope that you've made the universe safe for all future life.

Again, I agree that the way they portray this is a bit rushed and simplistic but I still think it's the perfect conclusion to the series and far more satisfying than any traditional "kill the final boss and see a montage of scenes how your decisions affected the universe" ending would have been.

[nickwills]

I just complete the vice city game. I have to say completing the game without cheat codes was tough.

[JemyM]

Captive II: Liberation
Liberation is the sequel to the game Captive. It was released in 1994 (a year after Lands of Lore in comparison) and were one of few titles that were developed primarily with the Amiga CD32 in mind.

Story
In a dark future, the corruption of large companies represents an everyday part of life. Trill was innocently captured in Captive and were rescued by the help of four droids that could be remotely controlled from a briefcase he found.

From his remote location in the wilderness, Trill discovers that a large bunch of people have now been framed by the droid company "BioCorp" for murders that was actually carried out by their own malfunctioning policedroids that the feds payed millions to buy. He sends his droid-allies into the city to rescue the innocents and bring evidence of the corruption to the Emperor.

The game claims to contain 4000 missions but I decided to only play the first since they are just computer-generated anyway. In the first mission you have to find and rescue Toyogon. To find him you have to do some detective work, tracking down NPC's, addresses, places etc to eventually find where Toyogon is being held.

Engine: Graphics & Sound
In the same time Liberation delivers the most beautiful intro made for the Amiga and one of the ugliest games possible. In 1994 the 3d craze had begun, luring several companies to create 3d-games that would have benefited from 2d artwork. Liberation is one of very professional games that uses texture-mapped 3d polygons on an Amiga platform but the 3d is just awful and on a real amiga it were just slow and choppy. The 2d-art, such as inventory etc is good though.

Audio is really good though. It's one of the first and only Amiga games that used voiceacting and the music is quite good as well.

Gameplay
The core gameplay of Captive is like a free-roaming version of Dungeon Master. You control a party of 4 droids with their own weapons/inventory/stats and you see what they see when you walk around in the streets of a dark future city.

Your primary goal is to discover addresses which one by one will get you closer to game completion. You get addresses by speaking to NPC's and sometimes you have to use terminals to track addresses down. You can also access stores in which you can purchase new items like new weapons and upgraded software for your droids.

Let me be honest: The skill system in Liberation is the most complex I have seen in a computer RPG or PnP RPG ever. Even after reading the manual numerous times it took a long time to figure out how it work. I will not go into it here, but you boosts your skills by a combination of chips that can be configured the way you like. 4 droids, 5 configurable bodyparts, 4 chips (that works very differently from one another) in every bodypart equals 80 chips to tweak and upgrade. Finally I was able to go from "1" in Slug Guns to "13" in Energy Guns at which time I could drop a heavy police droid in 1-2 shots.

Final Conclusion
The sad story about Liberation is what it could have been. It's premise just reeks of goodness; a free roaming cyberpunk rpg with almost endless amount of gameplay. But the 3d just tears it down. I also encountered quite a lot of bugs and by accident uncovered a money exploit that granted me some of the best weapons in the game early on. Being extremely hard to understand also makes it very difficult to bother about this game unless you really know what you are doing. Still, I am glad I finally got to play the game.

[Crunchy in milk]

Originally Posted by SamandMax

Spoiler:

By the end of the game, it's made very clear that Shepard is no longer simply fighting to stop an alien invasion but to stop the cycle of destruction the Reapers have kept the entire universe trapped in for ages.

We've known this since speaking with Sovereign and Vigil in Mass Effect 1. In Mass Effect 2, Harbinger fleshes it out a little by going on about it being an elevation, ascension, a privilege…

Spoiler:

in Mass Effect 3 the reaper on Rannoch ties it up with a bow by confirming its to prevent the destruction of all future organic life. Everyone gets their turn then the slate is wiped clean.

If it where just a matter of survival at any cost, and for at least one of my Shepard's that's fine with her, then the destruction ending almost works (apart from killing all synthetic life). The problem is for most of the games you've been able (encouraged even) to take a moral stance against the Reapers. Be at intellectual odds with them.

For the most part, ME3 is about making good on that stance. You can cure the genophage, unite races, give the Quarians a home, elevate the Geth to true individuals, help EDI evolve a personality and a social identity. You're even forced to oppose a human who actively tries to embrace Reaper methods, and their notion that one race/being can believe itself so utterly superior that it feels compelled to control/end the lives of others.

The endings piss all over that. Shepard gets three buttons to push, and all of them are a capitulation to the Reapers.

Who built the Reapers? Did they rebel against their creators like their model predicts? Why does their model predict the wiping out of all organic life when they themselves don't do that? What about the Crucible? Its been in development for cycles, passed down and improved upon until finally this cycle manages to use it… The child avatar admits this is proof the Reaper solution was ineffective… but what about the reasoning behind it?

Is the model flawed? Did this cycle (Shepard) disprove it? No, just push one of the three 'I agree' buttons on the consent form. The ultimate decision isn't 'how do I save the future', the ultimate decision is 'do we measure up?' The past and present are as important as the future. Are the Reapers wrong? Is there something special about this cycle?

I loved ME3 right up to and including the Hammer rush to the teleportation beam. I'm kind of sad they cut the deaths of your squad mates (this was actually developed and later cut, you were supposed to watch Garrus and Liara get vaporised)

I enjoyed the interaction with TIM, much better than the originally planned 'Boss Fight' against him. I loved the brief discussion with Anderson, he was there at the start and its been as much his mission as yours. He watched you do the impossible and always believed in you. Cutting the conversation about Shepard having kids was the right move, but the 'not always proud of what I've done' confession by Shepard should have been included, its magic.

ME3 was always going to be the end of Shepard, I was always prepared for Shepard to die, but I was not prepared for them to capitulate like they do. What does that prove?

Shepard's choices are:

1) Admit the Reapers are right, reset the clock but keep them in reserve, kill yourself.
2) Admit the Reapers are right, reset the clock, rewrite every organic life form to avoid future synthetic conflict, kill yourself.
3) Admit the Reapers are right, reset the clock, destroy ALL synthetic life in this cycle… and then what?

I get why some people are upset by the 'reset the clock' bit. What's Mass Effect without the relays and Citadel? Even Bioware admit any future titles in the setting will be set before or during the Mass Effect 3 timeline. Also, its bloody dull. All three endings are functionally the same with a different colour energy wave.

I'm more concerned that none of the options really take into account that this cycle was successful when all others failed (this is even discussed between Liara and Javik. Its not Shepard, at least not directly). There was supposed to be more dialogue between the Catalyst avatar and Shepard but they cut it!

I will probably always end any replays of Mass Effect 3 right after the conversation with Anderson. Its a great, cinematic ending that has the series Protagonists enjoying a brief moment of victory over adversity together, Anderson slumps (dead or sleeping?). Shepard watches the device power up (POV) and their eyes close. The end.

What the Crucible does is unimportant. The Reapers are defeated and whether or not their predictive model proves correct or not is entirely up to the galaxy Shepard fought so hard to save, and had a hand in shaping. Not which of the three Reaper buttons they press.

[SamandMax]

Originally Posted by Crunchy in milk

We've known this since speaking with Sovereign and Vigil in Mass Effect 1. In Mass Effect 2, Harbinger fleshes it out a little by going on about it being an elevation, ascension, a privilege…

Spoiler:

in Mass Effect 3 the reaper on Rannoch ties it up with a bow by confirming its to prevent the destruction of all future organic life. Everyone gets their turn then the slate is wiped clean.

If it where just a matter of survival at any cost, and for at least one of my Shepard's that's fine with her, then the destruction ending almost works (apart from killing all synthetic life). The problem is for most of the games you've been able (encouraged even) to take a moral stance against the Reapers. Be at intellectual odds with them.

For the most part, ME3 is about making good on that stance. You can cure the genophage, unite races, give the Quarians a home, elevate the Geth to true individuals, help EDI evolve a personality and a social identity. You're even forced to oppose a human who actively tries to embrace Reaper methods, and their notion that one race/being can believe itself so utterly superior that it feels compelled to control/end the lives of others.

The endings piss all over that. Shepard gets three buttons to push, and all of them are a capitulation to the Reapers.

Who built the Reapers? Did they rebel against their creators like their model predicts? Why does their model predict the wiping out of all organic life when they themselves don't do that? What about the Crucible? Its been in development for cycles, passed down and improved upon until finally this cycle manages to use it… The child avatar admits this is proof the Reaper solution was ineffective… but what about the reasoning behind it?

Is the model flawed? Did this cycle (Shepard) disprove it? No, just push one of the three 'I agree' buttons on the consent form. The ultimate decision isn't 'how do I save the future', the ultimate decision is 'do we measure up?' The past and present are as important as the future. Are the Reapers wrong? Is there something special about this cycle?

I loved ME3 right up to and including the Hammer rush to the teleportation beam. I'm kind of sad they cut the deaths of your squad mates (this was actually developed and later cut, you were supposed to watch Garrus and Liara get vaporised)

I enjoyed the interaction with TIM, much better than the originally planned 'Boss Fight' against him. I loved the brief discussion with Anderson, he was there at the start and its been as much his mission as yours. He watched you do the impossible and always believed in you. Cutting the conversation about Shepard having kids was the right move, but the 'not always proud of what I've done' confession by Shepard should have been included, its magic.

ME3 was always going to be the end of Shepard, I was always prepared for Shepard to die, but I was not prepared for them to capitulate like they do. What does that prove?

Shepard's choices are:

1) Admit the Reapers are right, reset the clock but keep them in reserve, kill yourself.
2) Admit the Reapers are right, reset the clock, rewrite every organic life form to avoid future synthetic conflict, kill yourself.
3) Admit the Reapers are right, reset the clock, destroy ALL synthetic life in this cycle… and then what?

I get why some people are upset by the 'reset the clock' bit. What's Mass Effect without the relays and Citadel? Even Bioware admit any future titles in the setting will be set before or during the Mass Effect 3 timeline. Also, its bloody dull. All three endings are functionally the same with a different colour energy wave.

I'm more concerned that none of the options really take into account that this cycle was successful when all others failed (this is even discussed between Liara and Javik. Its not Shepard, at least not directly). There was supposed to be more dialogue between the Catalyst avatar and Shepard but they cut it!

I will probably always end any replays of Mass Effect 3 right after the conversation with Anderson. Its a great, cinematic ending that has the series Protagonists enjoying a brief moment of victory over adversity together, Anderson slumps (dead or sleeping?). Shepard watches the device power up (POV) and their eyes close. The end.

What the Crucible does is unimportant. The Reapers are defeated and whether or not their predictive model proves correct or not is entirely up to the galaxy Shepard fought so hard to save, and had a hand in shaping. Not which of the three Reaper buttons they press.

Spoiler:

I agree with almost everything you say but I still admire the bold decision they made to end this trilogy on a rather ambiguous note, even if they do it in a somewhat sloppy fashion. They could've easily ended it with Shepard using his last breath to activate the Crucible, turning it into a big laser which evaporates all of the bad guys leaving the universe in the same state it was in just now reaper-free, but they riskily attempt a bleaker, more ambitious end: the Reapers won this cycle, there's no doubt that they will wipe out all life if Shepard doesn't push one of the three buttons at the end (which is silly in its simplicity), but he has the ability to give all of life in the universe a future without Reaper threat even if it might require making a decision that goes against what he stands for morally.

I love that this is what the Mass Effect series has been building up to: to save the universe, you have to sacrifice the universe. It all begins again but this time there might be a happy ending thanks to the actions of our Shepards.

Even if we disagree on the ending, I hope we agree that it's at least successful enough to warrant some interesting discussion, which you can't often say about the typically conventional way video games end.

[Crunchy in milk]

Originally Posted by SamandMax

Spoiler:

Even if we disagree on the ending, I hope we agree that it's at least successful enough to warrant some interesting discussion.

This is a final in a trilogy, any future games in the IP are already penciled in as taking place before or during the Mass Effect 3 timeline.

Spoiler:

They did nothing with that freedom and sketched out 3 incredibly similar endings.

Why not let the paragons have a happy(ish) ending, The renegades have a defiant ending, and the futurists have a obscure, WTF!? technology ending. At least then the discussions would be over which was the best ending to the series.

I'd have preferred the synthesis ending to be far more obtuse. I should have been freaked out and curious but all I got was green circuit overlays. It should have been a complete dice roll.

I'd have preferred the renegade ending remain much the same, but leave the fate of synthetics to this cycle's inhabitants. A true defiance of the Reaper solution. I liked the notion that destroying the Reapers has such a huge impact on the galaxy by destroying the citadel & relays. Everyone is now stranded, in direct conflict with one another.

The Paragon ending? I don't know... would it have been so bad to let Shepard sacrifice their life to keep more of the galaxy and their legacy in tact? Its cheesy but there's desire for it, and if the other endings are different enough your bases are covered.

This is the end of a series, the endings deserved to be wildly different.

[TimovieMan]

Mass Effect 2 DLC - Kasumi / Overlord / Firewalker / Lair of the Shadow Broker / Arrival

Prior to starting Mass Effect 3 I wanted to complete all the DLC to make my imported character a FULL imported character (having played through ME1, ME2 and all the DLC for both games). That meant I had to complete some DLC I hadn't played yet: practically all of the DLC packs, except for Zaeed which was Day 1 DLC (EA's dick move to extort more money out of people - a move they've repeated with the Eden Prime mission this time around).

Kasumi is a decent character (the cloaking and popping up behind enemies is VERY useful in combat - keeps the enemies attention away from you), and the first part of the DLC mission is really good (no action for a change). The last part however, is quite difficult since it's only you two (no third squad member), and the gunship is hard to take down. Decent DLC.

Overlord changes things up by adding a Hammerhead mission in it. The entire thing is a pretty good mission (and the scenery during the Hammerhead part is gorgeous). I rather liked this DLC.

Firewalker takes the Hammerhead part a bit too far, though. The regular missions (as well as the mining) become tedious after a while. Not the best DLC, imo.

Lair of the Shadow Broker on the other hand is something else. They change the gameplay DRASTICALLY in this by having a car chase in it, as well as some opponents that have previously unseen abilties. That plus the fact that it's a really interesting mission makes this one of the best (as well as the meatiest) missions in the entire game. By far the best DLC you can get for Mass Effect 2, LotSB is a piece of genius.

And lastly there's Arrival. This one is just forced. You have to play it alone which adds some stealth (although you can hardly call it stealth, more like "don't open the obviously guarded doors and don't engage any of the guards who constantly have their back towards you"). When you get to Dr. Kenson, however, this DLC becomes insanely difficult because you're on your own. There are two sequences where you're fighting waves of enemies AND an YMIR Mech. Doing this alone is really hard, even on the "casual" difficulty setting. Plus half of the mission makes no sense. This has to be the first time in the entire series where Shepard makes a decision regardless of whether or not you want to. Over 300000 lives get sacrificed and you don't get the Paragon "I'm not sacrificing all those people" option. I get WHY this is, but it still bugs me. What puzzles me as well is why, when Shepard gets knocked out and sedated for almost two days, no-one on the Normandy seems to attempt a rescue mission. I'm Commander Shepard, for Pete's sake. If I go off the grid for even an hour, Garrus should've started a big-ass rescue mission.
I didn't like this DLC because it's too hard at times, it's too long (without any changes in gameplay, at least), and it feels too forced. They just crammed it in there as a bridge between ME2 and ME3 to fit the ME3 starting point. They could've handled it a lot better.

[SamuelGordon]

Yesterday

Too short
Easy-normal puzzles
No voice acting descriptions
Uninteresting story, main character
Great villains
Great graphics
Multiple endings a la deus ex (thankful because i so do not want to replay the game)

I give it a 3/5

[terhardp]

Yesterday

Finished the game yesterday. Although it had definitely made better impression on me than Pendulo's last game (The Next Big Thing, was it?), it certainly won't overthrow Runaway triology in my book. Ever since the third instalment, it seems to me that the team is thriving to add more and more bizarre and wacky elements to their games and less and less cheesy and indie ones that had marked Runaway: A Road Adventure. The result (for me): the characters featured in the last two games are nowhere as memorable and charming like the ones from Runaway saga.

The story seemed promising and intriguing, especially after the NBT debacle, but it's a mess too. Mostly because the shortness of the game, which made the storytelling rushed and the ending artificially convoluted. Even though the game supossedly has 4 possible endings, I'm not very intrigued about them, even though I'm certain I had picked the lamest one possible.

Yesterday is also plagued with symptom that often bothers me in adventure games. The promise of diverse locales is the factor that most often draws my attention toward particular game title, but I'm also often dissapointed to see how scarcely these locations are exploited in the game itself. The puzzles had also failed to impress me, even though I'm not (totally) addicted to head-scratching ones. But Runaway has IMO been both more diverse and fun in that respect.

All in all, better than The Next Big Thing but not than Runaway triology.

Verdict: 3,8 / 5

[JemyM]

Legacy
The premise of a modern Dungeon Master game have always intrigued me and Redshift's Legacy is one of the newest games of that kind. That doesn't mean it's fresh new however, because it's about 10 years old. Legacy was originally developed with the PDA (Windows Mobile) platform in mind. I bought the game but got stuck about half way through the main campaign, then I gradually stopped to use the PDA and eventually it took a long rest in a drawer and when I picked it up again it was dead. I only recently realized that there's a PC version that could be bought directly via Redshifts website by sending them money via paypal and so I did. I got both Legacy and it's Expansion Pack for 9.95$, which is a quite hefty price for an over eight year old indie game. But being a strong fan of Dungeon Master-clones I decided to grab it anyway. The game also came with two minor expansion packs, Mohr's Plan and Kings Aide.

And no, there won't be an iPhone version. The original developer left Redshift and they do not have the sourcecode. Their newer title "The Quest" is available however, but that's not a partybased game.

Story
The evil sorcerer that used to rule the land was defeated. Two brothers that used to be his servants took over; Sohl and Mersant. However, Sohl betrays his brother, imprisons him and begin to rule the land himself. Mersant might be the only one that can defeat his brother and liberate the land again, but that cannot be done unless he is first liberated himself. For now the only lead to where Mersant might be imprisoned is one of Sohl's fugitive servants who terrorizes the town of Decrantes. You decide to be the hero this time and take the journey over there in order to find this servant.

There are no cutscenes in Legacy. All story progression is done through dialogue. I cannot say that the story is either brilliant or exciting, it's mostly an excuse to go and kill some monsters. And if the main story isn't enough for you, the expansion pack almost doubles the size of the game with some really tough areas for high-level characters.

Engine: Graphics & Sound
Legacy was custom made for handheld platforms and the PC version seems more like a developers version. Left/Right strafe have no key so I had to make my own with the help of Autohotkey and the game is stuck in a 480x320 window so I often had to use the windows magnifier to make it large enough for me. That said, the game looks good. The game uses handpixeled sprites with both indoor and outdoor areas (outdoor reminds me about Ishar). The game definitely could have had a lot more variation for it's length though, which I will get back to in the section below.

Soundwise Legacy doesn't have much to offer. You hear some looped nature sounds when outdoors and sometimes monsters moaning from somewhere nearby, but the sound effects seems like generic soundbites that can be found floating around on the net.

Gameplay
Like I said, Redshifts Legacy is a Dungeon Master Clone. You run around and kill monsters, grab loot, sell loot, update your weapons, repeat. Eventually you make progress to a new area and some progress to the unfortunately weak story. There are tons of puzzles to figure out however and some can be really tricky. Unlike Dungeon Master, Legacy is turnbased so you can take your time to decide what action to do in every turn. Not that it takes that much consideration since most of the time you only attack with hands or throw an offensive spell.

You are given one random character at the start of the game, then you recruit three more. You can exchange characters, including your starting character, by switching them in the tavern. Classes contains a number of variations between mages and/or fighters. The knight for example have access to some spells, the battlemage some more, the cleric have cheaper healing spells and the mage have access to most spells but cant attack. The adventurer, highlander and swordmaster are melee fighters with different types of weapon proficiencies. Personally I finished the game with a Swordmaster and battlemage in the front row and a cleric and mage in the back.

There are about 20-25 spells in the game and you also have access to staffs and scrolls that can be used by non-spellcasting characters as well. There are also bows that eats quivers for breakfast (and you can't pick up arrows in this game). Long range stuff can be quite useful to fend off tough monsters however. Potions is also something that is frequently used here, in fact most of my money had to go to manapotions...

Verdict
With all that on the table, is Legacy a great game? Perhaps the main game is decent. It is a good engine, but it might be a bit too long for it's content. The Mission Pack was a tedious experience that didn't have too much to offer. It reuses too much from the main campaign and do not add enough new for it's length. I found myself taking longer and longer breaks since I couldn't handle yet another room to defeat the same kind of monsters again and again. The miniquests Kings Aide and Mohr's Plan were quite enjoyable though.

I might give one of the other expansion packs a try (Legend, Legend 2 or Revenge) as they are promoted for having strong storylines. Kings Aide and Revenge are done by the same author.

[TiAgUh]

The Last Remnant (PC)

A tactical JRPG without sexual innuendos, big breasted BBFs or cutesy wootsy sidekicks? The world must be coming to an end!
Sorta like a turn-based Totalwar game -- you flank enemies, support other units (each up to 5 characters), order to stand their ground, to keep distance, go all suicidal... you get the idea --, the game manages to annoy sooner or later with such things as an unbearably idiot protagonist (he kinda gets better), sudden difficulty spikes, huge loading times, a few obtuse mechanics, etc.
Still, double-flanking a Demigod with likable characters like the posh King Dávid and the weird expensive recruits you pickup along the way after an endless flow of mercenaries and bugs almost completely destroying your units' morale is one hell of a good time/feeling. Plus, the story isn't "bad" and the english voiceover gets the job done pretty nicely (with neat lipsync, too).



Frustrating as it is addicting, this one is definitely worth a shot if you're hungry for something a bit different.

[JemyM]

Dungeon Master
Yes, THE Dungeon Master. Having been a fan of the genré for so long it is surprising I waited up to now to play the original.

I played the game on WinUAE, v3.60 by Psygnosis (original game by FTL).

Story
In a dungeon beneath Mt. Anaias the wizard known as the Grey Lord had his laboratory. The place was rumoured to be the resting place of the Power Gem. One day he send his apprentice Theron to get some rope. Just after entering the teleporter that they use for short journeys the Grey Lord reveals to him that he found the Power Gem and he would go there and fetch it while Theron was away. When the teleporter send him away something happens. He have a brief dreamlike encounter with his wife to be, then he wakes up in a scorched land and when he lift his hands he realize he can see right through them. Soon afterwards he is tracked down by his master who now wishes to be called Librasulus or "Restorer of Order". He reveals to him that something wen't wrong and he was split in two, the other form is simply known as Lord Chaos who now inhibits the dungeon. He also reveals to him that a whole year appearently passed and Librasulus have already sent numerous champions into the dungeon, who are now locked by Lord Chaos in a museum-like gallery. Without a body, Theron can still go in there, release four champions and use them to defeat Lord Chaos. To do so, it's essential that they find and use the magical Firestaff that is sealed in a highly protected area somewhere below.

The story is actually nice for this era. It even have a moral point and a possible twist at the end.

Graphics: Engine & Sound
Dungeon Master is certainly no beauty, not even for a game from 87. Not only does the game use only 16 colors, all dungeonwalls are grey without exception, even character portraits are poorly drawn. There's no music (in the Amiga version at least) and almost no sound to speak about, those that are are quite bad. I actually updated the portraits and made my own for the characters I intended to use.

Gameplay
Dungeon Master won numerous prices when it first came. This is no surprise. It's amazing to consider that this is the first of a kind that spawned the genré that would come out of it, because for a game that have no previous titles to build upon the gameplay is simply brilliant (which I say without nostalgia mind you).

In the beginning you can resurrect or reincarnate 4 champions who will come with a set of items and skills. If you reincarnate you do not get the skills, but you get higher attributes and will probably get more powerful champions later in the game.

The skillsystem is a network that ties classes, attributes, skills and health/stamina/mana together. Experience is gained by using something. Let's say you punch alot, then your ninja class will increase along with your stamina, the attribute dexterity and your ninja skill "fight". Summon a magic torch instead and your wizard class will increase along with your mana, the attribute wisdom and your wizard skill "fire".

Weapons usually come with three specific actions, actions balanced through their chance to hit, damage dealt, staminadrain, duration between attacks etc. So a heavy weapon isn't neccessary the best for your character, as a lighter weapon with a lighter attack may do damage more often and thus win out in the end. There are ofcourse a couple of magic weapons that uses up charges when used.

You also have an encumberance system that makes it hard for non fighters to carry heavy stuff and you might even have to consider what you want to carry when the game offers you some really heavy armor. Carry too much so that one character gets encumbered and your entire party will move slower through the dungeon.

Food and water are here like many old titles. Water can be consumed directly from fountains (in the v3.60 that I played) or from waterskins or filled flasks. Hunting is certainly possible as monsters often drop consumeable items, but I found food to be aplenty and there's actually a central staircase that can be opened up as you go that can be used to access easy hunting areas and watersupplies even on the stages that are scarce with food and water.

Spells are cast through runes of which one rune is the power 1-6 followed by a combination of up to 3 other runes. There are fireballs, poison bolts, shields for your party and a couple of other classic ones. There are also potions, which are the priest spells in the game. Potions need a flask equipped in your hand before you cast it. Potions may increase your attributes, heal or cure poison.

Final Conclusion
Dungeon Master is a classic and carry historical significance to gaming history, but is it worth playing even today? Well, if you are looking for a history lesson you may find it here. That said, Dungeon Master was actually still fun to play even though I had never played the game before. It's one of those titles that captures the essence of old games that actually take an effort to learn how to play, an effort that pays off in the end. There are no best strategies to be found here, no best party. There's learning how to use your characters efficiently and come up with new strategies to face the often quite hard challenges.

[TimovieMan]

Mass Effect 3 - 5 / 5

Just finished Mass Effect 3, the epic conclusion of my favourite gaming trilogy. The first game was one of my favourite RPG's, the second game ended up as one of my favourite games ever. And now the third game lives up to the others' reputation. And how!

The third game improves on the "dumbed-down elements" of Mass Effect 2. Customizable weapon mods are back (although in short supply compared to the first game, but at least they're back), powers are expanded heavily, planet scanning is greatly improved (and had a nice mini-game twist in it), and the gameplay is a lot more dynamic (the maps are less corridor-y and a lot more open to enemy flanking). It's basically a good middle ground between the RPG-elements of ME1 and ME2.

Compared to ME2, the dialogue is a lot less badass and a lot more gloomy, but considering the billions of people dying in this installment, that's understandable. And I love the fact that practically EVERYBODY makes a cameo appearance in the third game without being too in-your-face with it. Agreed, some characters could've gotten a bit of a larger role this time around (especially my Krogan buddies Grunt and Wrex), but overall, I was very happy with the story and the character interaction.
Heck, ME3 is simply an emotional rollercoaster. And there are some epic sacrifices being made...

In the 47 hours it took me to reach the end, I have thought at multiple moments that I was playing the best game ever. Despite the flaws it has, I'm calling it the most awesomest trilogy of all time. And don't get me wrong: there are flaws. The first game had clunky vehicle control, the second game had tedious scanning, and this one had a couple of bad design decisions - most of which I blame on EA's pull over BioWare.

I hate the fact that they have Day One DLC. I hated it when they did that in ME2 (with Zaeed) and I hate the fact that I have to pay extra for the Eden Prime mission and an extra squad member who's not unimportant for the Mass Effect universe. This gets chalked up to the greedy bastards at EA (who've used these nickle-and-dime tactics a LOT these last few years).

I hated ME3's multiplayer campaign. I'm invested in the story of the trilogy (as proven by my 3 playthroughs of ME1, totalling 133 hours, and my 3 playthroughs of ME2, totalling 131 hours), but I'm not THAT interested in the action.
Being forced to play online in a multiplayer campaign to get a better result in the single player portion is something that's just not done. Especially if you go through the trouble of including a very easy "narrative" game mode where the difficulty is so low you could go through the entire game unarmed and come out unscathed. The multiplayer campaign reeks of DRM.
And the multiplayer isn't even good (well, at least not for me). It's exactly the type of multiplayer FPS that I don't like: surviving swarms of AI's on a small map - not my thing.
Luckily my Google-fu is strong and I was able to bypass the entire multiplayer portion of the game by doubling all war asset values in the game files. That meant that my Galactic Readiness of 50% now gave me as many war assets as I would have originally had with 100% Galactic Readiness. If you think that's cheating, bite me. It's basically me giving EA the finger.
I finished my full male Paragon Adept playthrough (of all three games with all DLC) with an Effective Military Strength of 6884 - which is not too shabby. According to my saves, that's taken me almost 142 hours - so yeah, I'm invested in the story!

And now, let's (finally) talk about the ending controversy. To be honest, I'm fine with the ending as it is.
Sure, there are plot holes, but suspension of disbelief carried me through them the first time. Right now, I wouldn't mind the game staying as it is. I'm not sure if I'd be this leniant on a second playthrough, but for now I'm good. I definitely understand the controversy, though.

Spoiler:

I chose the Synthesis ending. I always figured this trilogy would end with Shepard dying, so I was prepared for that. And sure, it's odd to see Joker fleeing with the Normandy (he had no reason to do so), and it's even more odd to see one of my squad mates - who was just behind me in the beam run - ON the Normandy, but I can chalk that up to lazy writing / lazy cutscene development, however odd that may be in a deep trilogy like this. It can't be due to a lack of time (or the Day One DLC wouldn't be there), but if it's a slip then it's only a minor one, imo.
I had enough closure to be satisfied - the conversations in the FOB made sure of that, so even if it would be nice to see what happens with your squad mates AFTER the end, I don't mind that they left that open.
Especially not because it's only the last five minutes of a 140+ hour adventure that are not 100% up to scratch with the rest. I'll call this entire controversy "ridiculous fan entitlement", and I'm not afraid to say that "modern gamers are whiny bitches".

But I have to admit: the Indoctrination Theory has a LOT going for it! It takes care of ALL the plot holes, it can be traced back to the first game (check this video for all details) and it would be a twist that's as awesome as the one in Knights of the Old Republic...
Unfortunately: no attempt whatsoever has been made to clarify it ingame. Sure, now that all the details are added up (like in that vid I linked to) it makes sense. But you basically need to see that video to understand it. If that was the twist they intended in the game then they did several things wrong: it's not clear enough that THAT was what was going on, and if it's true, then they didn't release a finished game.

No matter what BioWare does now, they're basically screwed.
If they don't change the ending, then they'll be left with hundreds of thousands of pissed off gamers. Most of whom seem fanatic enough never to buy anything off BioWare or EA ever again.
If they change it to a new ending, then they're admitting that they did a poor job the first time around and they'll be setting a dangerous precedent that will cause game developers to be at the gamers' mercy for years to come. This last part will take all risks out of game design, lowering overall quality and potentially crippling the entire gaming industry.
And if BioWare had intended the Indoctrination Theory all along, then they purposely withheld the real finale for the game. Seriously, if they release DLC in a few weeks or months that gives credit to the entire Indoctrination Theory, then that means that Mass Effect 3 is ultimately a game that had its finale cut to nickle-and-dime everyone further. This will wreck both EA and BioWare's reputation.
And even if they'd release it for free, given all the complaints and flack they've been getting, the damage is actually already done.

Yet, despite all this controversy surrounding the ending, Mass Effect 3 is still one of the very best games I ever had the privilege of playing.

I'll hold off my second playthrough until I see where they're going with the DLC-rumours (and to avoid Mass Effect fatigue), but that second playthrough WILL come!

[DustyShinigami]

I'm curious about playing the Mass Effect games; I've never played one before. But because I'm not really into RPGs, would I like it? I guess I could always rent them...

[TimovieMan]

While the Mass Effect games are technically RPGs, they play more like FPSs where you can customize your appearance, armor, weaponry and where you decide what to say in dialogues (making different decisions in the process).

That said, they offer a unique universe, with a good story and several great characters. I highly recommend them.

[TimovieMan]

Flower, Sun and Rain - 2.5 / 5

Flower, Sun and Rain for the DS is a strange little game. There's a whole lot of bad, but there's also some good making up for part of it. Let's start with the flaws...

The graphics are iffy, with cheap-looking 3D character models who should all get funded by the Ministry of Silly Walks, but that can easily be explained (and thus partially dismissed) by the fact that it's a port from a relatively early Playstation 2 game (2001).
Gameplay is tedious, with lots and lots of walking from A to B and back (covering the same corridors hundreds of times), and all puzzles are extremely similar in nature, no variation whatsoever.
The story - while very intriguing at first - is not only weird but it doesn't even get an adequate wrap-up. In fact it all turns out to be unexplained nonsense. The weird opening movies (part FMV, part 3D) don't make any sense whatsoever, and finishing the game doesn't help at fixing that. Basically, if you're looking for some kind of closure, this is not the game you want to play. Although apparently, if you're familiar with the developer's earlier title "The Silver Case", there's a lot of references to that one, and even a few recurring characters, so maybe you'd get the bigger picture if you played both games. Unfortunately this was all lost on me, and so my game ended as a convoluted mess...

But, with all that criticism out of the way, the game does have a few strong points. The story structure is interesting at first: more or less reliving the same day over and over again makes for an amusing opening to each chapter. Plus it's intriguing, you want to find out WHY you're reliving the same day. And the constant repetition of your "morning ritual" practically turns into a running gag that gets funnier every time you see it.
The game developer is also aware of the flaws in his game and constantly mocks them. This I consider a big plus, for it means that half of the tedious parts were intended that way. The distance you constantly have to travel gets mocked often and even most of the longer dialogues get mocked beforehand. Your character constantly asks if "this is going to be one of those long stories he'll have to sit through" when expecting a longer dialogue, and he seems aware that you're playing a game, even going so far as to actually say that "there's a lot of exposition in this script".
I kind of liked these touches. They make you overlook most of the flaws until you reach the unsatisfying end.

All in all, Flower, Sun and Rain is still little more than an average game, but at least it has some self-aware humour going for it to try and outweigh its weaker elements.

[DustyShinigami]

Originally Posted by TimovieMan

While the Mass Effect games are technically RPGs, they play more like FPSs where you can customize your appearance, armor, weaponry and where you decide what to say in dialogues (making different decisions in the process).

That said, they offer a unique universe, with a good story and several great characters. I highly recommend them.

Okay, you've convinced me...

...

Damn! It looks like my rental service doesn't have it available anymore. I may just have to take a gamble and buy it...

[Crunchy in milk]

Spoiler:

Originally Posted by TimovieMan

Spoiler:

I chose the Synthesis ending.

I hate this ending the most While all of the endings force you to suddenly agree, at least in part with the Reaper solution, the synthesis ending disappointed on a number of levels. It was even more of a last minute solution that came from nowhere than the crucible its self was. It felt like a betrayal of everyone's sacrifice to force them to marry the reapers at the DNA level. And its depiction was lacklustre, given the earlier Geth Consensus mission and ME2's Overlord DLC. As if they intentionally chose to lessen its significance by minimising the visual differences. Even more of a magical everything-is-better-now ending than the Jesus Shepard ascending in place of everyone else and delaying the wrath of a know-it-all God Reaper ending was.

Originally Posted by TimovieMan

Spoiler:

I always figured this trilogy would end with Shepard dying, so I was prepared for that.

I was too, but I was hoping they'd have Shepard die a soldier's death, the blue and green deaths seemed unnecessarily 'mystical'.

Originally Posted by TimovieMan

I'll call this entire controversy "ridiculous fan entitlement", and I'm not afraid to say that "modern gamers are whiny bitches".

If you're referring to the demand for a new ending, I agree. If you're referring to the vociferous criticism of the endings, then I disagree. Bioware actively sought this kind of engaged fanbase and they chose to work in a medium that allows for player interaction, including the possibility of multiple endings.

Originally Posted by TimovieMan

[…] [if] they didn't release a finished game […] that [could mean] Mass Effect 3 is ultimately a game that had its finale cut to nickle-and-dime everyone further. This will wreck both EA and BioWare's reputation. And even if they'd release it for free, given all the complaints and flack they've been getting, the damage is actually already done.

How final and devastating can you make an ending, when you're under pressure to release any post game DLC? This whole mess is a direct result of where Bioware/EA have steered the medium, we entitled whiny bitches are blameless. In the end DLC was announced, for free. Ignoring the fuss was never an option, it was of their own making.