donkeymong
Scholar
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2012
- Messages
- 210
When she doesnt use tons of makeup i guess.When did Natalie Dormer suddenly age twenty years?
When she doesnt use tons of makeup i guess.When did Natalie Dormer suddenly age twenty years?
This is just gonna be another DA:I style bore/chore-fest ain't it?
This is just gonna be another DA:I style bore/chore-fest ain't it?
say it ain't so
You are an idiot.im so hyped
Yeah, it must be. Shooting is, at least, an excercise in point and click. DA:I combat is just holding down the right mouse button until win.At least shooting has to be funner than whatever DA:I's combat was.
... right?
RIGHT?!
6 to 8 in ME2 and ME3. IIRC.The previous mass effect games didn't have a lot of enemies on screen as well, most firefights were small.From the video, viewer focus was a lot on the big beast, but did you notice how other grunts still stayed in game even hit by biotics and various weapons point blank. Before that, player sunk cloaked shot with Widow or Black Widow, that should be most of the health bar gone (or one shot kill on lower difficulty levels) but nope. I didn't bothered to re-watch to see how weapons were upgraded, but for weapon combat, either guns were pea shooters or enemies are bullet sponges. Effect is still the same, grind like hell to upgrade your weapon, weapon related skills and ammo powers.
Also did you notice how few enemy combatants there were in a map simultaneously? And it isn't just this video, it's been like that in all videos I have seen.
One more thing regarding gun play, I wonder if located damage (read: head shots) is in the game.
What comes to skills, combo attack appeared to be powerful which can make combat fun, but for now I'm sceptical.
Note: I'm writing this pretty much thinking how MP will turn out.
Since it's frostbite, the console version of battlefront and battlefield ran on highI never understand the recommended specs for games anymore. They are always significantly better than anything a PS4 or XBox1 has. Do the games on those systems just run on minimum/low or do they actually just try making those versions playable for worse hardware?
I never understand the recommended specs for games anymore. They are always significantly better than anything a PS4 or XBox1 has. Do the games on those systems just run on minimum/low or do they actually just try making those versions playable for worse hardware?
Nope, the Ps4 Pro is comparable with the recommended specs(atleast Gpu).I never understand the recommended specs for games anymore. They are always significantly better than anything a PS4 or XBox1 has. Do the games on those systems just run on minimum/low or do they actually just try making those versions playable for worse hardware?
Nope, the Ps4 Pro is comparable with the recommended specs(atleast Gpu).I never understand the recommended specs for games anymore. They are always significantly better than anything a PS4 or XBox1 has. Do the games on those systems just run on minimum/low or do they actually just try making those versions playable for worse hardware?
They not just run on lower settings (the older the generation, the lower the settings become), they sometimes unable to hold 30 fps, even if the game is exclusive to that platform (see Until Dawn for example).I never understand the recommended specs for games anymore. They are always significantly better than anything a PS4 or XBox1 has. Do the games on those systems just run on minimum/low or do they actually just try making those versions playable for worse hardware?