Jack Brickman
Hall-of-Famer
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2012
- Messages
- 38,456
- Reaction score
- 61,544
- Points
- 148
Also downloaded Warframe at the constant urging of one of my friends who has been neglecting TF2 for that cyborg ninja game and...it's actually quite fun. I had always thought Warframe was a competitive shooter, and I really only have time for one of those in my life (TF2, obviously). I didn't realize that it was basically Destiny, and that PVE was a huge and majority part of the experience. In fact, playing it, it actually appears that Bungie borrowed a lot of ideas from it, or perhaps Warframe adapted to borrow elements from Destiny over time. Warframe came out a year before, but I'm really not sure how much it has changed since day one since I just now started playing it.
Still, it's basically F2P Destiny with cyborg ninjas, which surprised me. All I know is that I've got a bow and arrow with a 40% damage mod and I am stealthily tearing through levels destroying everything in my path. The game looks pretty good too, especially for a game that came out in 2013. Likely they've updated the visuals a bit over time, but still. I've only played it for a couple of hours, but it's been enjoyable thus far, and I've had my buddy explaining all the intricacies to me, which has been helpful since there's a lot to take in.
---
I don't know...it's just hard for me to see a melee-only game as worth sixty bucks, especially since past games of a similar style (War of the Roses, Chivalry) launched at much lower price points. For Honor is certainly prettier than those games, but graphics alone do not justify a price tag. I will say that it runs very well, which in this age of shoddy PC ports was refreshing. My computer is by no means a beast by modern standards, and the game defaulted to Extreme (the second-highest graphical setting) and rarely dropped below 40 fps (seemed to average closer to sixty most of the time, although it dipped a bit when a lot was going on). That may not be good enough for @TyGuy, but it works for me.
And for the record, I probably wouldn't have noticed the frame rate dips, but the game displays your frame rate at the top left, presumably for beta purposes, so I actually paid attention to it.
Still, it's basically F2P Destiny with cyborg ninjas, which surprised me. All I know is that I've got a bow and arrow with a 40% damage mod and I am stealthily tearing through levels destroying everything in my path. The game looks pretty good too, especially for a game that came out in 2013. Likely they've updated the visuals a bit over time, but still. I've only played it for a couple of hours, but it's been enjoyable thus far, and I've had my buddy explaining all the intricacies to me, which has been helpful since there's a lot to take in.
---
I had the opposite reaction. Seems like plenty of depth. That persistent map is cool. And plenty of other game modes it seems like. But I've only played for like an hour so far. Seems difficult to master, too.
I don't know...it's just hard for me to see a melee-only game as worth sixty bucks, especially since past games of a similar style (War of the Roses, Chivalry) launched at much lower price points. For Honor is certainly prettier than those games, but graphics alone do not justify a price tag. I will say that it runs very well, which in this age of shoddy PC ports was refreshing. My computer is by no means a beast by modern standards, and the game defaulted to Extreme (the second-highest graphical setting) and rarely dropped below 40 fps (seemed to average closer to sixty most of the time, although it dipped a bit when a lot was going on). That may not be good enough for @TyGuy, but it works for me.
And for the record, I probably wouldn't have noticed the frame rate dips, but the game displays your frame rate at the top left, presumably for beta purposes, so I actually paid attention to it.