The Curse of Dead Kel and The Teeth of Naros are the two DLC's that have been released for Amalur so far and I was honestly a little hesitant to buy them. I love Amalur, I just don't always love DLC. The Bordlerlands DLC never really appealed to me (quite a feat, given that I've played through Borderlands about three or four times), and even some of the Dragons Age DLC wasn't very good.
Not so with Amalur DLC! These are amazing add-ons that really feel like a whole other chapter in the main story, not like tacked-on adventures that are just more of the same.
OK, actually it is more of the same, in both cases. There isn't anything amazingly revolutionary in the DLC itself, but come on, that's why they call it DLC. It's not a whole new Amalur game, but it is some serious new storyline, lots of fresh gameplay, and well worth every cent.
Dead Kel
OK, so I actually didn't think I'd like Dead Kel because it sounded mostly like the game developers were sitting around in a room thinking "what do people like? oh, I know! Zombies. And pirates! Hey, let's make a DLC that combines them both and stick it into the world of Amalur!"
You'd think that, but you'd be wrong. Dead Kel is seamlessly interwoven into the Amalur world. It introduces another race, the Dverga, although you never actually meet the Dverga. You hear about them in legend, though, and that gives the world that sense of history that Amalur is so full of.
The storytelling style is still really bad. That's one thing that Amalur is clunky with. Sometimes you approach a character and ask them questions and they're telling you about how they need to rescue this person, or find this object in order to solve their problem. The thing is, they haven't even told you what their problem is yet, so you keep asking questions and the third or fourth option down is very obviously the introductory line they really should have started with.
You also finally (finally) get a love interest, which seems like a good idea since Amalur up until this point has been completely devoid of any romance. But the way it's introduced is just plain silly, and it doesn't develop. Nice try though.
The voice acting is still supremely annoying, as well. I don't know where they found the actors for Amalur, but I can't stand any of them. I wish there was an option to turn off all voices; I'll settle for subtitles when the acting is bad, but Grant Hopekirk's music is so amazing that I wouldn't want to miss that.
But the linear story isn't why I play Amalur. I play it for the rich history and lore within the world, and the combat, and the destinies.
Dead Kel introduces some new enemies, provides the player with a new homebase that they can build up, introduces a "pet" system (no, you don't get a wolf that follows you around and helps you, but you can have an NPC raise a pet for you and the pet gives you permanent boosts to health and mana and combat skills). It's set on an island, so there's a new sea-faring flavor that got hinted at in Rathir but is developed more strongly here, and has some really fun and amazing combat opportunities.
I didn't keep track of how many hours I spent on the Dead Kel storyline, but I'd estimate about 2 or 3 weeks of casual play.
Teeth of Naros
I figured the Teeth of Naros would be a big troll someplace that I had to go find and kill. Turns out, it's not a character but a geographic location. The story surprises you a little, so I'm not going to provide any spoilers. Besides, I'm still playing through this one.
I'll just say that this is a fun DLC with, again, lots of new little touches and a few new enemies, and even a new form of Magic. Definitely worth playing.
As for which one you should try? well, both. These are impeccable DLC's. They're true to the original spirit of the game, they're just as fun, and they introduce enough new ideas to keep you surprised and inspired. As usual, the art and music is amazingly beautiful and the history and lore is rich.
A few problems overall would be that it seems to be capping my level. I'm at lvl 40 with 62 XP points toward lvl 41, but no matter what I do I can't progress. The positive side to this is that I still get fate cards when I accomplish a significant triumph, but it's pretty annoying that no matter who or what I kill or what I accomplish, I'm just not progressing in my stats.
The other problem, really, are the only things I've already mentioned and that seem to be problems with Amalur as a whole: clunky storytelling with dialog choices that seem to have an intended order but are presented to you in a random order, and really really annoying voice acting. Sometimes comically bad.
Anyway, highly recommended overall. GET THESE DLC's@!!!!
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Monday, June 4, 2012
No Rage Today
Strangest thing happened today around 11 AM. I was playing RAGE and I started to feel a little sick to the stomach. I thought that I must have not had enough to eat or I made my coffee too strong this morning, so I made some food and ate an early lunch. Still didn't feel better, so I literally had to lay down and sleep it off.
The rest of the day, I had to do some real work, but I came back to RAGE tonight. I'd only been playing an hour and realized I was feeling sick again.
You guessed it, RAGE is giving me motion sickness. This is really surprising because I play lots of video games, FPS included, and I never get motion sickness. In fact I don' tget motion sickness ever, in real life or in movies or games. And I'd been playing RAGE before I got distracted by Amalur, and I hadn't ever gotten sick then.
So what has caused my sudden motion sickness? I really don't know. I did get a new monitor right around the time I stopped playing RAGE and started Amalur, so maybe the refresh rate of my screen combined with the frame rate of the game are affecting me.
I might try it on a different screen, if I can find one, because I enjoy the game. I have to admit, I am also suspicious that my brain is trying to force me back to Amalur or to an nth playthrough of Borderlands....
The rest of the day, I had to do some real work, but I came back to RAGE tonight. I'd only been playing an hour and realized I was feeling sick again.
You guessed it, RAGE is giving me motion sickness. This is really surprising because I play lots of video games, FPS included, and I never get motion sickness. In fact I don' tget motion sickness ever, in real life or in movies or games. And I'd been playing RAGE before I got distracted by Amalur, and I hadn't ever gotten sick then.
So what has caused my sudden motion sickness? I really don't know. I did get a new monitor right around the time I stopped playing RAGE and started Amalur, so maybe the refresh rate of my screen combined with the frame rate of the game are affecting me.
I might try it on a different screen, if I can find one, because I enjoy the game. I have to admit, I am also suspicious that my brain is trying to force me back to Amalur or to an nth playthrough of Borderlands....
Raging again
Now that Amalur is out of my system, I'm back to Rage.
Ok, I lied. Amalur is not out of my system but three back-to-back playthroughs feels a little silly.
Anyway, it's good to be back in Rage. I thrive on Borderlands and Fallout3, so Rage is refreshing. The exception to that is the voice acting of Rage. I'd forgotten how bad it was. John Goodman's voice acting is good but it's over so soon. The mutants and bandit groups all sound like they were voiced by 18 year old boys who were pretty into the job but were afraid of shouting or emoting too much because they were recording all the work alone in their bedrooms at midnight.
That aside, the gameplay is solid. I'm still getting used to the build-system and finding enough ammo and bandages, but I'm getting there. The driving bits are still pretty difficult for me. I'm good in the races but not so much in the wasteland. I feel the need to practice that more, but the controls continue to confuse me.
More on Rage as I play through it.
Ok, I lied. Amalur is not out of my system but three back-to-back playthroughs feels a little silly.
Anyway, it's good to be back in Rage. I thrive on Borderlands and Fallout3, so Rage is refreshing. The exception to that is the voice acting of Rage. I'd forgotten how bad it was. John Goodman's voice acting is good but it's over so soon. The mutants and bandit groups all sound like they were voiced by 18 year old boys who were pretty into the job but were afraid of shouting or emoting too much because they were recording all the work alone in their bedrooms at midnight.
That aside, the gameplay is solid. I'm still getting used to the build-system and finding enough ammo and bandages, but I'm getting there. The driving bits are still pretty difficult for me. I'm good in the races but not so much in the wasteland. I feel the need to practice that more, but the controls continue to confuse me.
More on Rage as I play through it.
winning amalur, Twice
since my last post, i have caught up on real life obligations, and also beat kingdoms of amalur! twice!
my first playthrough took a month or two, and i did nearly every side quest presented to me.it was so much fun, i love the world of amalur. i played as a rogue/sorceror, using mostly daggers in stealth and combat, plus a healthy dose of a staff and lots and lots of potions.
i'm talking, a lot of potions. hardened shell, phasewalk, lightning storm, magebane, essence of fate, damage boost, damage deflection.
i retired a very powerful rogue mage, with two houses, lots of money, trophies, and credit for the mel senshir victory (yeah, i hated that disgraced general and gave her no love after her death!)
the game is such a pleasure to play, the minute i won the first playthrough, i started over with a new character. this time i played as an alfar wth the might/finesse destinies. for the record, i'd only done an immediate re-play with borderlands, previously, so that should put this into perspective.
i thought i'd seen everything and yet during my second playthrough" i discovered a whole new quest in the house of ballads! between a few new quests and the fact that i was playing as a warrior, it literally felt like a completely new game.
This time i didn't do many side quests aside from the house of ballads, so it only took me four or five days to finish.
The only "negative" feedback I have about Amalur is the storyline. The story is pretty standard, which is fine, but they try to stick on the Fate and Fate Weaver plot that makes no sense. I understand that it's my fate to defeat the supreme evil of Amalur, but it doesn't feel any different to me than any other game. It's nice that I can re-align my skill points (which they call my Fate) and specialize in different weapons, but do I really want to do that after I've invested so much gameplay into learning a set of skills already? Also, I don't feel anything about being able to defy Fate. Maybe if I had some special ability to move back or forward in time and alter Fate and really change the course of the story, that would make it hit home a little better.
I also felt like Amalur was the least interactive game, for conversations, that I've played in a long time. I know it's no Bioware game; it's not Dragons Age by any means. But I was painfully aware that nothing I would say would alter the course of the game, ironic for a game that is all about changing fate.
That aside, all in all, kingdom of amalur provided me with great art, a good fantasy tale (good, not great; they had a very well-structured world and back story), great play-style, a huge world with lots of side quests, and hours and hours and hours of fun. Twice!
my first playthrough took a month or two, and i did nearly every side quest presented to me.it was so much fun, i love the world of amalur. i played as a rogue/sorceror, using mostly daggers in stealth and combat, plus a healthy dose of a staff and lots and lots of potions.
i'm talking, a lot of potions. hardened shell, phasewalk, lightning storm, magebane, essence of fate, damage boost, damage deflection.
i retired a very powerful rogue mage, with two houses, lots of money, trophies, and credit for the mel senshir victory (yeah, i hated that disgraced general and gave her no love after her death!)
the game is such a pleasure to play, the minute i won the first playthrough, i started over with a new character. this time i played as an alfar wth the might/finesse destinies. for the record, i'd only done an immediate re-play with borderlands, previously, so that should put this into perspective.
i thought i'd seen everything and yet during my second playthrough" i discovered a whole new quest in the house of ballads! between a few new quests and the fact that i was playing as a warrior, it literally felt like a completely new game.
This time i didn't do many side quests aside from the house of ballads, so it only took me four or five days to finish.
The only "negative" feedback I have about Amalur is the storyline. The story is pretty standard, which is fine, but they try to stick on the Fate and Fate Weaver plot that makes no sense. I understand that it's my fate to defeat the supreme evil of Amalur, but it doesn't feel any different to me than any other game. It's nice that I can re-align my skill points (which they call my Fate) and specialize in different weapons, but do I really want to do that after I've invested so much gameplay into learning a set of skills already? Also, I don't feel anything about being able to defy Fate. Maybe if I had some special ability to move back or forward in time and alter Fate and really change the course of the story, that would make it hit home a little better.
I also felt like Amalur was the least interactive game, for conversations, that I've played in a long time. I know it's no Bioware game; it's not Dragons Age by any means. But I was painfully aware that nothing I would say would alter the course of the game, ironic for a game that is all about changing fate.
That aside, all in all, kingdom of amalur provided me with great art, a good fantasy tale (good, not great; they had a very well-structured world and back story), great play-style, a huge world with lots of side quests, and hours and hours and hours of fun. Twice!
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Amalur crash :(
Well today I experienced my first Amalur crash, and it sucks. It wasn't a crash, actually. It seems to be more like corrupt save data, but it's not just corrupt save data on one save, it's on the autosave too!
I had just reached the isle of Eammon on Friday. Didn't get a chance to play over the weekend, and then on Monday went to Continue my game and experienced an eternal loading screen. I quit the game and restarted it, tried to manually load the saved game. Again, it just never loads. So then I tried loading the auto saved version from about 10 minutes prior to the manually saved game. Again, it wouldn't load! Both are on the Isle of Eammon, so I'm not sure if that's significant or not.
Then I tried loading data from earlier in the week (about 4 days earlier) and it loads fine.
Internet searches don't suggest this is a common problem, so I'm not sure what happened. The good news is that I only have to resume from level 24 (I was at level 26), but it bugs me to lose progress like that. Not a huge deal. My philosophy is usually that re-playing will actually render better results because it usually does. Still annoying though!
The lesson is the same as usual: save often, and keep old saves around. I didn't upgrade my harddrive to 320G for nothing!
Some people aren't clear on how much harddrive space saved games take up. Believe me, it's nothing. We're talking about 2mb for my level 26 saves. By the time I'm at level 36 it will be maybe at 5mb. So, save like you mean it, because you never know when you'll have to roll your game back a level.
I had just reached the isle of Eammon on Friday. Didn't get a chance to play over the weekend, and then on Monday went to Continue my game and experienced an eternal loading screen. I quit the game and restarted it, tried to manually load the saved game. Again, it just never loads. So then I tried loading the auto saved version from about 10 minutes prior to the manually saved game. Again, it wouldn't load! Both are on the Isle of Eammon, so I'm not sure if that's significant or not.
Then I tried loading data from earlier in the week (about 4 days earlier) and it loads fine.
Internet searches don't suggest this is a common problem, so I'm not sure what happened. The good news is that I only have to resume from level 24 (I was at level 26), but it bugs me to lose progress like that. Not a huge deal. My philosophy is usually that re-playing will actually render better results because it usually does. Still annoying though!
The lesson is the same as usual: save often, and keep old saves around. I didn't upgrade my harddrive to 320G for nothing!
Some people aren't clear on how much harddrive space saved games take up. Believe me, it's nothing. We're talking about 2mb for my level 26 saves. By the time I'm at level 36 it will be maybe at 5mb. So, save like you mean it, because you never know when you'll have to roll your game back a level.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
download sizes
I was watching a friend download Firefox 10 for her Mac and noticed that the download size was 78mb. I noticed because she (tried) to do the download while we were having breakfast, at a diner. Not exactly the fastest internet around, so she ended up stopping the download any way. And I had been the one to tell her to go ahead and download it, because I thought, 10 to 12mb at the most.
But 78mb for a web browser? WTF!?
So I went home and went to http://getfirefox.com on my Linux computer, and downloaded the Linux version just to compare download sizes. Of course I wouldn't really download it from Firefox's site normally, I'd just get it from the software manager on my computer, but I wanted to compare.
Well, on Linux, the download size is 16.2 mb. If I get it from my repository, it's even less (although Linux comes with Firefox already installed but that's just a detail).
16mb compared to 78mb is not something to sneeze at, so I compared more, and generally speaking this is very common. Sometimes the gap is huge and sometimes it's only about a quarter difference or half the difference, but there's usually a big difference in file size.
I asked some friends what was going on, and most of them didn't know, so then I asked some MOAR friends (programmer types) and they of course had the answer. Don't quote me on this because I have no idea what it means and I could be explaining it wrong, but this is the basic gist. Mac programs come packaged up in folders that are disguised as applican icons. That part I knew, because there's that old trick of "right-clicking" on an Application and choosing Show Contents, and you can see some of the things that go into making up an application on Mac. But the reason they are bundled up in this way is because all applications need special code (called libraries) to run. On Mac, all the libraries are bundled up INSIDE the application.
Now get this. If you have, say, Firefox, which needs a library called XUL, and then you download Thunderbird and it also needs XUL, then guess what? Yes, you're downloading XUL twice.
That doesn't seem so bad until you start downloading XUL four times, and OPENCL 12 times, and FFTW 8 times and FFMPEG 15 times, ad infinitum.
In other words, imagine if Mac applications could tell in advance that you already have XUL and Gecko and all these other libraries, and so instead of making you download and store 78mb for Firefox, it only sent you 12mb. And then Libre Office knew that you already had a bunch of Java stuff, so it only sent you 165mb instead of 225mb. And Celtx, and VLC, and Filezilla, and Chromium, and so on!
Well, it doesn't really matter that much until you're running out of disk space, or you're on a slow internet connection and can't get what you need when you need it.
Interesting, right?
But 78mb for a web browser? WTF!?
So I went home and went to http://getfirefox.com on my Linux computer, and downloaded the Linux version just to compare download sizes. Of course I wouldn't really download it from Firefox's site normally, I'd just get it from the software manager on my computer, but I wanted to compare.
Well, on Linux, the download size is 16.2 mb. If I get it from my repository, it's even less (although Linux comes with Firefox already installed but that's just a detail).
16mb compared to 78mb is not something to sneeze at, so I compared more, and generally speaking this is very common. Sometimes the gap is huge and sometimes it's only about a quarter difference or half the difference, but there's usually a big difference in file size.
I asked some friends what was going on, and most of them didn't know, so then I asked some MOAR friends (programmer types) and they of course had the answer. Don't quote me on this because I have no idea what it means and I could be explaining it wrong, but this is the basic gist. Mac programs come packaged up in folders that are disguised as applican icons. That part I knew, because there's that old trick of "right-clicking" on an Application and choosing Show Contents, and you can see some of the things that go into making up an application on Mac. But the reason they are bundled up in this way is because all applications need special code (called libraries) to run. On Mac, all the libraries are bundled up INSIDE the application.
Now get this. If you have, say, Firefox, which needs a library called XUL, and then you download Thunderbird and it also needs XUL, then guess what? Yes, you're downloading XUL twice.
That doesn't seem so bad until you start downloading XUL four times, and OPENCL 12 times, and FFTW 8 times and FFMPEG 15 times, ad infinitum.
In other words, imagine if Mac applications could tell in advance that you already have XUL and Gecko and all these other libraries, and so instead of making you download and store 78mb for Firefox, it only sent you 12mb. And then Libre Office knew that you already had a bunch of Java stuff, so it only sent you 165mb instead of 225mb. And Celtx, and VLC, and Filezilla, and Chromium, and so on!
Well, it doesn't really matter that much until you're running out of disk space, or you're on a slow internet connection and can't get what you need when you need it.
Interesting, right?
Friday, March 2, 2012
20 hours of Kingdoms of Amalur: The Reckoning
My initial report on kingdoms of Amalur was positive, but after 20 hours of gameplay, I have to report that I was wrong on a few things about Amalur. It's not a good game, it's possibly one of my favorite games ever!
Readers of my old blog will know that I don't say that lightly. There are games that I like, like Rage, Fallout 3, Bioshock, Res Evil, Dead Island. And then there are games that I love, which includes Borderlands, Dragons Age, Zelda, and Amalur. And those are the only "love" games that come to mind, so yes it takes a lot to get on my "love" list.
But Amalur has made it. Why? Well, first of all the world that it's set in. it's a perfect Fantasy land with all the traditional elements skillfully done and with just enough of a twist to make them unique, but not so drastically to set it completely apart from the genre. Dragons Age is perfect, so I'm not taking away from it when I use it as an example here, but in Dragons Age the ethnic divide between elves and humans is epic, so much so that it really sets it apart from traditional fantasy, for me. In Amalur, there's a little bit of that between humans and the Fae, but its less drastic, so the world still feels comfortingly traditional. I'm not saying that's all I ever want (obviously, since Dragons Age is perfect) but sometimes it feels good to settle into a comfortable well worn fantasy world.
The fighting in Amalur is the next great thing about it. This is where I see Amalur as a beautiful mix of Dragons Age and Borderlands. Amalur has all the serious RPG elements of Dragons Age or Neverwinter, but plays like a first person shooter the way Borderlands does. In RPG games, I rarely get a bloodlust and just want to go and hunt down bad guys to gratuitously kill them. It's always a very serious matter to defeat foes in RPGs for me. But in Borderlands and Amalur, the fights are a pleasure, and they make me want to kill again and again! The camera is perfect in Amalur and no matter what happens during a melee attack, I can always manage to manouver around like a pro. The targeting system is automated enough to make sure I'm not just firing blasts of fire off into a nearby plant instead of an enemy attacking me, but not too automated so all I'm doing is mashing buttons until I win. The dodging system is amazing, unlike anything I've ever used before.
The looting system is straight out of Zelda and Fallout 3. Get this, you smash boxes and barrels and urns, just like in Zelda, and you get small change and other little prizes, so if you want to nickel and dime yourself to wealth and riches, you can. The lock picking system is a mini game exactly like Fallout 3 except better. If you really try, you can feel when there's resistance, and back off so you don't break your pick, reposition, and try again. I'm getting damn good at it.
There's also a crafting system for weapons, gems (which upgrade armor and weapons, like ruins in Dragons Age), and potions. Dead Island and Rage both have something like this, and I avoid it in those games. Even in Amalur, I have no interest in the blacksmithing or the sagecrafting (like runecrafting in Dragons Age), but the potions I really enjoy, because no matter what you mix together you usually end up with some potion. The potion could boost your health or hurt you, you never know, but it's fun to play with, and sometimes you discover a recipe and then can mix together potions quickly from plants you find aroudn the world.
And the world is vast. I keep finding new places, climates, lairs, towns. There are so many side quests that in 20 hours of game play I've only bothered with two main quests points. It's just too much fun!
So, yes, Amalur is a game I love. We'll see how it ends...eventually. But either way, it's a classic in my book.
Readers of my old blog will know that I don't say that lightly. There are games that I like, like Rage, Fallout 3, Bioshock, Res Evil, Dead Island. And then there are games that I love, which includes Borderlands, Dragons Age, Zelda, and Amalur. And those are the only "love" games that come to mind, so yes it takes a lot to get on my "love" list.
But Amalur has made it. Why? Well, first of all the world that it's set in. it's a perfect Fantasy land with all the traditional elements skillfully done and with just enough of a twist to make them unique, but not so drastically to set it completely apart from the genre. Dragons Age is perfect, so I'm not taking away from it when I use it as an example here, but in Dragons Age the ethnic divide between elves and humans is epic, so much so that it really sets it apart from traditional fantasy, for me. In Amalur, there's a little bit of that between humans and the Fae, but its less drastic, so the world still feels comfortingly traditional. I'm not saying that's all I ever want (obviously, since Dragons Age is perfect) but sometimes it feels good to settle into a comfortable well worn fantasy world.
The fighting in Amalur is the next great thing about it. This is where I see Amalur as a beautiful mix of Dragons Age and Borderlands. Amalur has all the serious RPG elements of Dragons Age or Neverwinter, but plays like a first person shooter the way Borderlands does. In RPG games, I rarely get a bloodlust and just want to go and hunt down bad guys to gratuitously kill them. It's always a very serious matter to defeat foes in RPGs for me. But in Borderlands and Amalur, the fights are a pleasure, and they make me want to kill again and again! The camera is perfect in Amalur and no matter what happens during a melee attack, I can always manage to manouver around like a pro. The targeting system is automated enough to make sure I'm not just firing blasts of fire off into a nearby plant instead of an enemy attacking me, but not too automated so all I'm doing is mashing buttons until I win. The dodging system is amazing, unlike anything I've ever used before.
The looting system is straight out of Zelda and Fallout 3. Get this, you smash boxes and barrels and urns, just like in Zelda, and you get small change and other little prizes, so if you want to nickel and dime yourself to wealth and riches, you can. The lock picking system is a mini game exactly like Fallout 3 except better. If you really try, you can feel when there's resistance, and back off so you don't break your pick, reposition, and try again. I'm getting damn good at it.
There's also a crafting system for weapons, gems (which upgrade armor and weapons, like ruins in Dragons Age), and potions. Dead Island and Rage both have something like this, and I avoid it in those games. Even in Amalur, I have no interest in the blacksmithing or the sagecrafting (like runecrafting in Dragons Age), but the potions I really enjoy, because no matter what you mix together you usually end up with some potion. The potion could boost your health or hurt you, you never know, but it's fun to play with, and sometimes you discover a recipe and then can mix together potions quickly from plants you find aroudn the world.
And the world is vast. I keep finding new places, climates, lairs, towns. There are so many side quests that in 20 hours of game play I've only bothered with two main quests points. It's just too much fun!
So, yes, Amalur is a game I love. We'll see how it ends...eventually. But either way, it's a classic in my book.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)