Simulacrum said:
Well my other thread went to all talk about Valkyrie so I thought I would make thread about it.
I just had very dissapointing experience when played it..
I can see that its actually good game but my personal taste didin't like it.
I was sure it would be one of best games ever since crazy hype here, good scores and I love strategy games and Jprg:s.. And strategyjprg:s.And anime/manga.
Gameplay was kinda unique, but I don't like strategy games to be luck.Most of times I go with lancer behind tank, shoot it from 0,5m and seems missile went little miss from blue power generator and then tank destroys my tank..
You can have many kinda unique character in your army, but you won't be using but 10 max. I remember when 1 of them died...Had to restart >.<
Main character is such a wuss. Flowers etc. Not that I have big problem in most of games but..
And it is WAR game. Didin't feel like one bit.
I remember in around 11 mission I rly started to love it but then I took around 2 week break when I traded my Ps3 away for Wii.. Then when I got it back, boring missions and boring story started.
I think I'm about only one who thinks this way so I got my shield on.
|
Funnily enough, I really liked VC once I got into it - and I don't normally like turn based strategy games!
In terms of your comments:
a) I agree sometimes the 'misses' were a bit much - I know they way the game works some chance of a miss is possible, but it should never be at point blank range. I felt they system should have felt less 'random' and more tuned to actual distance and conditions. The underlying code might well have been based on that, but in the end 'misses' always felt random to me.
b) I thought Welkin was fine, if a little 'weak'. The game was going for a different 'feel' than most I've played regarding war, something more lyrical and sorrowful. Welkin's character defined the idea that even a total pacifist might have to fight, and might fight well, if what they believe in is threatened. He could have been a little more dynamic though, and a little quicker on the uptake romantically. I can accept what his character represents, but I think someone who ends up in charge of a large squad would nonetheless be more dynamic than Welkin as initially presented.
c) Again, it felt like a war game to me - but not one revelling in the combat so much, or the idea of superbad soldiers, but as I said a more lyrical take - one that played more on the impact of war, the victims put in camps, towns left in rubble, lives destroyed, etc. Think 'The Thin Red Line' or Tom Hanks character in Saving Private Ryan, who it turns out is a school teacher.
d) I agree on the huge cast of characters, most of whom you ignored. I didn't lose one of mine, and only ended up focused on a core team. I'd rather the character list was shorter and there were more missions - or the game really ate through your characters, forcing you to face losses and pick replacements. As it was it was too easy (if you were cautious like me) to keep them alive. I mostly got C's for my scores, though, so perhaps if I'd played more agressively for A's I'd have lost some then.
I didn't think it was perfect - but it was clearly made with real affection and I found it overall worthwhile. But I can totally understand how you could find it lacking as it's clearly the kind of title that either works for you or doesn't, with most people either loving it or failing to see what the fuss is about.
