I wasn't going to buy this, but reading this thread is very tempting. So many games in the backlog, the smart thing to do would be to wait for the inevitable Steam discount sale.
I wasn't going to buy this, but reading this thread is very tempting. So many games in the backlog, the smart thing to do would be to wait for the inevitable Steam discount sale.
You have to ask yourself: are you generally a smart person?Originally Posted by The Mad Hatter
Can you explain, in kindergarten terms as if you were speaking to a complete frickin moron, how to do the dispelling minigame?
I just randomly click on runes, sometimes they turn grey, sometimes they make a little bell sound, then I fail and get cursed. It pisses me off bigtime.
In the demo, there were three types of runes: 1-mark, 2-mark, and 3-mark. You have to click on all runes as the target rotates over them before any of them reset (the "timer" on the edge of the rune fills up). 1-mark runes take longer to reset than 2-mark runes that take longer to re-set than 3-mark runes. So, at least in the demo, you want to click all of the 1-mark runes first, then the 2-mark runes, and lastly the 3-mark runes. I hope I'm recounting this accurately.
you have
red rune = don't touch. explode GG
purple rune = click it.
once you touch a purple rune, a countdown starts on it(once countdown finish, the rune resets and you have to touch it again), the basic dispelling game is touch all of the purple runes before timer runs out.
the purple runes that's only have 1 slash take longer to reset compare to runes with multiple slash in them.
if you are crazy fast or play a shit ton of rhythm games, you can basically hit every rune on the first circle through, if you are slow, you want to tap the simple rune on the first cycle then hit the complex rune on the 2nd cycle.
oh yeah if you hit an rune that's already activated, you will deactivate it.
I'm not too good with dispelling on 360 controller, it takes too long to hit A on first cycle. on pc, I can reliably do the average dispel without any dispel skills, sometimes I get hard ones too. mouse click is faster than A tapping.
This does look kind of cool, but it also looks like it might be best to wait for a few patches.
I swear I tried clicking like that, and just nothing happened. I'm pretty damn fast at it too, using a mouse rather than a controller. I guess I'll give it another shot.
Thanks for this, I couldn't figure it out either!
if you click too fast, you end up activating and then instantly deactivate the runes.
for hard dispelling chest, I just save the game, then auto dispel and take the damage instead, unless I get a really bad curse, then I just reload and try again.
I find it far easier with a controller then with a mouse. But I guess I'm just weird like that.
Do you know if it supports non-Microsoft gamepads or is it another one of these games which makes you go through hoops to get something like my wireless Logitech controller to be recognized? I wish I'd known that would be such a hassle, I would have bowed to Microsoft and bought one of their controllers.
I got my Logitech controller to work with the demo, but I had to set up the X360CE library to do it.
http://code.google.com/p/x360ce/
The DLL goes into the directory where the game's binaries are stored, along with the controller profile generated by the configuration tool that is part of the X360CE package. I ended up making three copies of the DLL, naming them xinput1_1.dll, xinput2_1.dll, and xinput9_1_0.dll. Quite likely only one of these was actually needed, but I got lazy and didn't bother narrowing down the list to the one copy that was actually required.
Once you've generated a profile for a particular controller, you can just use copies of it with other games.
Last edited by Periastron; 02-07-2012 at 01:06 PM. Reason: Added more detail.
I just went with a wired Xbox controller. Amazon has them for $30.
Anyone even remotely competent at action-based combat should play on Hard. Normal is "so easy it's boring" once you get past the initial starting area. Even on Hard it's barely up to what most games would use as Normal. The only real difference is enemy health and damage output.
This. I love video games but am sadly very horrible at them. Even I am finding hard questionably easy.
The only way I saw hard as being genuinely hard is fighting overlevelled monsters in areas youre not "supposed" to be in.
Alright, I'll play on hard then. thanks!
And my interest sinks even further. As someone that wants a challenge out of his games, or even justification for all of the loot and skill trees, I am saddened to hear reports that Amalur falters on this balancing act.
It certainly can be challenging for developers to gauge, and certainly most games fail to execute properly in this genre. However, if a developer labels an optional difficulty setting as 'hard', don't hold back.
Playing on hard I've found that if I ignore a few sidequests in an area and move into the harder zones at lower level, the game is plenty challenging. It also depends on the archetype of enemy you are fighting. Some are always going to be easy, while some continue to kick the crap out of me even when they are conning gray to me.
There is so much content in the game that you can actually over-level yourself if you try to do it all. You won't be shortening your game by any significant amount if you go into higher level zones and miss out on some lower level sidequests.
Man, I hate having to carefully manage leveling in order to avoid messing up the game. That really sucks...If I'm going to play on hard then I want it to be a challenge. Not a 'challenge if you avoid this area and don't pick up that sword and don't put any points in stoneskin, etc.' crap...
G4 review from Adam Sessler here:
http://www.g4tv.com/games/xbox-360/6...koning/review/
I agree with most of his criticisms but think his score is probably a bit too low.
I'm not a fan of it either. However, having to skip some sidequests to put yourself into a harder area is infinitely better than scaling the entire game to whatever level you are no matter where you are or what you're doing.
It's much lower than I would score having played for only 5 hours, but maybe it falters later on. I guess the 360 version has technical issues, but the PC version is pretty flawless, framerate-wise.
Trouble with people frothing with rage over the G4 review (not that people here have done that, but just look at the comments) is that it's people with 5-10 hours of play versus someone with about 70 hours of play. After 120 hours of Skyrim I was still going strong and would have continued if SWTOR hadn't swooped in and distracted me for a month and a half. At 20 hours of Reckoning I'm beginning to feel the slog a bit.
I haven't read that review yet, but I got the game for 360 on last friday, and console version is definitely weaker tech-wise compare to PC version. oh yeah I really hate the text on 360 version, there are times I swear I was getting blurry vision reading the text.
I really wish the mobs level up with you since your main quest split off into 2 major areas after initial areas, and they are both around the same level, I finished one of the main quest area at lvl 27 and moved on to my 2nd part of main quest, and realized everything was gray...
Yeah, it's really weird that the desert area and the plains area (the two places you can go from the initial starting forest zone) are both roughly the same level, meaning that at least one of them is going to be vastly below your level by the time you get around to it. Seems like they should have gone with the Skyrim "zone conforms to your level within certain parameters" method for situations like that.
According to the Eurogamer review, the first half of the game is pretty bad, but the later half is amazing.
So far I've found the beginning to be really fun... so that bodes well for me.
I'm enjoying the beginning also. Like I said earlier, it's totally "gamey" and structured, but I'm having a good time.
Huzzah, my copy just arrived! Now to wait an hour or so before I can head home. ARG.
Eeek no! It's exactly the reason I didn't enjoy Oblivion at all. It sounds like the world could be better seeded with mobs of better suited levels though.
This debate is really strange. When the mobs auto level, some people complain because we don't have the old school sense of progression. When the mob levels are fixed, others complain because they are afraid of outlevelling a zone.
Guess there is no pleasing everyone either way.
Wendelius
I prefer the latter to the former. Overall I'm glad this has a bit more focus than Oblivion and so on. I like having focus.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote