Search
Search results
Jodie Barker (70 KP) rated Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 in Video Games
Nov 19, 2018
I have been playing COD for years and my favourites have always been the black ops games. This one is probably my least favourite of the bunch to be honest. It is still a good game, but I wish that a couple things were different with it. I would have liked a proper campaign story rather than the character playthroughs/backstories etc. Blackout was entertaining for a couple days but I soon got bored of that. I do enjoy the zombies and I like the titanic map the best (Always hoping they'll do another Kino Der Toten on this game too though). I do like multiplayer too and I like that they have bought back some of the old maps such as summit and firing range, also excited for the new nuketown map. Overall it is a good game but not as good as the others
KalJ95 (25 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of STAR WARS Battlefront II in Video Games
Jun 10, 2020
Star Wars Immersion At Its Finest. (2 more)
Multiplayer Is Feels Fluid, Bouncy And Satisfying.
Frequent Updates Have Saved The Game.
Sometimes Buggy. (1 more)
Campaign Is Short, Bare and Repetitive.
Can EA Redeem Themselves? (2020 Update Review)
I will begin this by telling you a story. Back in 2016, I bought EA and DICE's STAR WARS Battlefront for £25, feeling like a got a pretty good bargain. Little did I know at the time that this was an EA project, I had very high hopes after spending hundreds of hours of my childhood playing the original, Battlefront and Battlefront II, on my original XBOX. To me, along with KOTOR and Rogue Squadron II: Rogue Leader, were the pinnacle of how good a STAR WARS game could be. I played four hours of this remake, and realised how much of a mistake I had made. I subsequently put the game on eBay, with the description, “Please take this abomination from me before I throw it at the wall!”. It sold for £9. Worth it.
Once I discovered EA and DICE were doing a sequel, I knew this was to be avoided at all costs. Upon launch, Battlefront II was slammed by critics and fans for various reasons, including a loot based system that gave a player a clear advantage over another, and a story which was so short and bare boned it barely even passed four hours. A complete disaster all round. Yet, a new hope arose. Frequent updates have come since then, and all updates have been free for players as a sorry for all the mistakes both companies have made with the property. So, with all this information in the past, I received Battlefront II as a free game with PlayStation Plus for June. A what a treat it is.
STAR WARS Battlefront II is a well improved shooter over its 2015 release, and an all round excellent game, and this is down to its updates being made free to all its players. Battlefront II must be broken up into parts in order to properly get a fair review, so let’s start with the campaign.
Narrative:
The story follows Iden Versio, an Empire Commander who’s morals are tested and sides are divided once she discovers the truth behind her allegiances as the story goes on. The campaign is the weakest part of the package, roughly taking around four to five hours to complete, and the missions feel the same; go to objective, kill enemies, find other objectives etc. The formula gets mixed a few times to introduce iconic heroes and villains through this timeline of STAR WARS history. Average would be the perfect word to describe this aspect, it doesn’t try anything new or experiment, and thats a shame because they introduce some new ideas that could of shaken up the story a little. They did add an expansion called Resurrection, following on some years after the campaign. Again, its too short for any real substance or replay value. Arcade mode is fun enough too, pitting you against different tasks for the Light and Dark side. Each one puts you with different Heroes, Villains or Soldiers, as you fight against a numbered amount of enemies. It all is enough to satisfy for a couple of hours, but if you're buying Battlefront for single-player purposes, don't bother.
Multiplayer:
The Multiplayer is fantastic, immersion filled experience fans of STAR WARS will love. I’ve recently lost a lot of love for the franchise, but this game has made me remember why I loved it as a child. The combination of John William’s score, the fluid gunplay that bounces with every successful hit, mixed with the amazing environments of each world and excellent sound effects. This makes it absolutely flawless. It features various different game modes to choose from, my personal favourite being Co-op missions, all your standard multiplayer shooter modes. Unlike before, where you had to buy the STAR WARS characters you want to play as, you now have to earn points during battle to play as them. The system works as you feel you’ve earned the way to play as, for example, Luke or Han. Sometimes it feels a little buggy in places, especially in modes with forty players, but it never ruins the overall game.
The issues, which they’re are many, occur in multiplayer frequently. The Galactic Assault is messy, and frustrating most of the time due to wonky controls. It feels like the controller doesn’t work for the ships, but works perfectly for the on-ground assaults. I did try this mode a number of times, and the same things happened again and again.
The package is finely finished with some great customisation options for your troopers and also the main characters of the franchise. The sheer number of characters in the roster is staggering. Some choices, like BB-8, feel a little shoehorned, but weirdly they all feel different, with their own unique perks. As a whole, it feels like for once EA has decided to put the consumer first with their product, rather than thinking of the money. They’ve taken the time to issue an apology for the awful services they’ve been providing, by putting a product they know the fans will love. I never thought I would say it, but props to DICE and EA. You’ve redeemed yourselves, for now.
Once I discovered EA and DICE were doing a sequel, I knew this was to be avoided at all costs. Upon launch, Battlefront II was slammed by critics and fans for various reasons, including a loot based system that gave a player a clear advantage over another, and a story which was so short and bare boned it barely even passed four hours. A complete disaster all round. Yet, a new hope arose. Frequent updates have come since then, and all updates have been free for players as a sorry for all the mistakes both companies have made with the property. So, with all this information in the past, I received Battlefront II as a free game with PlayStation Plus for June. A what a treat it is.
STAR WARS Battlefront II is a well improved shooter over its 2015 release, and an all round excellent game, and this is down to its updates being made free to all its players. Battlefront II must be broken up into parts in order to properly get a fair review, so let’s start with the campaign.
Narrative:
The story follows Iden Versio, an Empire Commander who’s morals are tested and sides are divided once she discovers the truth behind her allegiances as the story goes on. The campaign is the weakest part of the package, roughly taking around four to five hours to complete, and the missions feel the same; go to objective, kill enemies, find other objectives etc. The formula gets mixed a few times to introduce iconic heroes and villains through this timeline of STAR WARS history. Average would be the perfect word to describe this aspect, it doesn’t try anything new or experiment, and thats a shame because they introduce some new ideas that could of shaken up the story a little. They did add an expansion called Resurrection, following on some years after the campaign. Again, its too short for any real substance or replay value. Arcade mode is fun enough too, pitting you against different tasks for the Light and Dark side. Each one puts you with different Heroes, Villains or Soldiers, as you fight against a numbered amount of enemies. It all is enough to satisfy for a couple of hours, but if you're buying Battlefront for single-player purposes, don't bother.
Multiplayer:
The Multiplayer is fantastic, immersion filled experience fans of STAR WARS will love. I’ve recently lost a lot of love for the franchise, but this game has made me remember why I loved it as a child. The combination of John William’s score, the fluid gunplay that bounces with every successful hit, mixed with the amazing environments of each world and excellent sound effects. This makes it absolutely flawless. It features various different game modes to choose from, my personal favourite being Co-op missions, all your standard multiplayer shooter modes. Unlike before, where you had to buy the STAR WARS characters you want to play as, you now have to earn points during battle to play as them. The system works as you feel you’ve earned the way to play as, for example, Luke or Han. Sometimes it feels a little buggy in places, especially in modes with forty players, but it never ruins the overall game.
The issues, which they’re are many, occur in multiplayer frequently. The Galactic Assault is messy, and frustrating most of the time due to wonky controls. It feels like the controller doesn’t work for the ships, but works perfectly for the on-ground assaults. I did try this mode a number of times, and the same things happened again and again.
The package is finely finished with some great customisation options for your troopers and also the main characters of the franchise. The sheer number of characters in the roster is staggering. Some choices, like BB-8, feel a little shoehorned, but weirdly they all feel different, with their own unique perks. As a whole, it feels like for once EA has decided to put the consumer first with their product, rather than thinking of the money. They’ve taken the time to issue an apology for the awful services they’ve been providing, by putting a product they know the fans will love. I never thought I would say it, but props to DICE and EA. You’ve redeemed yourselves, for now.
Mothergamer (1514 KP) rated Death Stranding in Video Games
Jan 7, 2020
I just finished Death Stranding and it was quite the incredible journey for me. I have been a long time fan of Kojima's work so I was intrigued by this game. So many people have made the jokes about Sam being a glorified postman, but the game is so much more than that. Once the game started going, I got hooked into the story and was fascinated by the connections Sam made with each person during his arduous deliveries and how he connected them to each other. Seeing how people connect and witnessing how those bonds drew them together created a powerful and beautiful story.
One game mechanic I absolutely enjoyed was the fact that there is a multiplayer, but it's not multiplayer in the way you think. You never actually see the other players and they never see you. What you do see is what is left behind to help you on your journey and you can leave behind things to help other players. You can build roads, bridges, ziplines, or leave ladders and climbing ropes on steep cliffs to help others on their journey. There is also a shared locker function which allows you and other players to donate weapons and items for use on your travels. Again, it is a way we as people connect to each other from all over the world. You can also give likes to the helpful things people leave behind.
Exploring the open world of Death Stranding is an adventure in itself with treacherous terrain, dangerous people trying to attack you,(known as mules) and scary ghost like monsters (known as beached things or BTS) it makes you take your time planning out your routes and how you want to get out of those situations. The performances by everyone in the game is fantastic. There are raw emotional moments in parts of the story that moved me to tears. There are beautiful moments that gave me cause to smile as well and I had such a wonderful time with this game. Death Stranding is more than just a delivery game. It is a story about the strength of our connections, bonds, and a promise of hope.
One game mechanic I absolutely enjoyed was the fact that there is a multiplayer, but it's not multiplayer in the way you think. You never actually see the other players and they never see you. What you do see is what is left behind to help you on your journey and you can leave behind things to help other players. You can build roads, bridges, ziplines, or leave ladders and climbing ropes on steep cliffs to help others on their journey. There is also a shared locker function which allows you and other players to donate weapons and items for use on your travels. Again, it is a way we as people connect to each other from all over the world. You can also give likes to the helpful things people leave behind.
Exploring the open world of Death Stranding is an adventure in itself with treacherous terrain, dangerous people trying to attack you,(known as mules) and scary ghost like monsters (known as beached things or BTS) it makes you take your time planning out your routes and how you want to get out of those situations. The performances by everyone in the game is fantastic. There are raw emotional moments in parts of the story that moved me to tears. There are beautiful moments that gave me cause to smile as well and I had such a wonderful time with this game. Death Stranding is more than just a delivery game. It is a story about the strength of our connections, bonds, and a promise of hope.
Nick Friesen (96 KP) rated Halo 5: Guardians in Video Games
Jul 15, 2017
A great Halo adventure (3 more)
Shooting and new movement mechanics are awesome
Looks great and runs smooth
The addition of Master Chief's surviving Spartan squad from the books!
Too much time spent as Spartan Locke (2 more)
Give us more Master Chief!
No split-screen co-op
Too Much Time Devoted to Spartan Locke
When people play a main-line Halo game, they want to be Master Chief, and they want their friends playing as allies while sitting on the same couch. The inclusion of Master Chief's elite Spartan squad is an obvious split-screen co-op opportunity, but apparently not obvious to Halo's new developers. Halo 5 is in excellent game, no doubt, but it is marred by this baffling choice as well as another: you play as Spartan Locke more than you do as Master Chief. It feels as if you get barely any time back in the boots of everyone's favorite Spartan, and that sucks, big time. Outside the campaign, multiplayer and Forge are great as always, and the game is worth any FPS fan's time and money.
Nicholas Atkinson (0 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of Red Dead Redemption 2 in Video Games
Jun 18, 2019
The controls can get buggy from time to time and make your horse act weird or make it hard to run and jump on your horse. (1 more)
Sometimes i had to restart a at a checkpoint because it wouldn't progress on the story. The first chapter is horrid and takes 10 years to finish.
Pretty good but lacking
All in all it was a decent game but I wish they would have cut down the hand holding they do in the first chapter to like the first mission and let you do what you want from the start. It was the same way when online multiplayer dropped they made you do what they wanted you to do for like the first 2 hours. With that being said I loved the graphics, the missions were fun, being in the wild west lifestyle was fun, I would definitely recommend giving it a play.
Matthew Krueger (10051 KP) rated the Xbox 360 version of Rogue Warrior in Video Games
Dec 24, 2020
Does Anyone Remember This Game
This game was published by Bethesda. Yes Bethesa, you know Skyrim, Doom and Fallout.
This game is bad, like awful.
Enough said.
In Rogue Warrior, the United States has sent in Richard Marcinko, a veteran U.S. Navy SEAL, on a mission into North Korea to disrupt ballistic missile launchers. The plot is not based on the autobiography by the game's protagonist, Richard Marcinko. Marcinko is voiced by actor Mickey Rourke.
Rogue Warrior is primarily a first-person shooter with tactical elements.
The focus of gameplay is Marcinko's over-the-top methods and signature execution moves used in war situations.
Rogue Warrior was universally panned by critics, who cited it as one of the worst games of all time. Criticism of the game included its poor controls, multiple glitches, outdated graphics, frequent profanity, rushed production, uninteresting gameplay, short length, very limited multiplayer, and broken and exploited combat techniques.
Their is hilarious lines, and a funny rap end credit song.
Dont play this game.
This game is bad, like awful.
Enough said.
In Rogue Warrior, the United States has sent in Richard Marcinko, a veteran U.S. Navy SEAL, on a mission into North Korea to disrupt ballistic missile launchers. The plot is not based on the autobiography by the game's protagonist, Richard Marcinko. Marcinko is voiced by actor Mickey Rourke.
Rogue Warrior is primarily a first-person shooter with tactical elements.
The focus of gameplay is Marcinko's over-the-top methods and signature execution moves used in war situations.
Rogue Warrior was universally panned by critics, who cited it as one of the worst games of all time. Criticism of the game included its poor controls, multiple glitches, outdated graphics, frequent profanity, rushed production, uninteresting gameplay, short length, very limited multiplayer, and broken and exploited combat techniques.
Their is hilarious lines, and a funny rap end credit song.
Dont play this game.
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Set a Watch in Tabletop Games
Sep 26, 2019
Purple Phoenix Games Solo Chronicles
I love a good fantasy-themed game. We’ve all, at some point in our lives, probably dreamed of being adventurers – traveling across the land, fighting monsters, and saving all of humanity. Sounds like it could maybe be fun to me. So whenever I see a game that emulates that theme, I am drawn to it. Such was definitely the case when I stumbled across Set a Watch as I was perusing Kickstarter one day, and the rest is history.
The kingdom is under attack. Hoards of creatures are amassing at locations around the realm in an attempt to resurrect ancient Unhallowed monsters. Their ultimate goal? To take control of the world. You and your fellow adventurers have been tasked with stopping this uprising. By traveling to these various locations, you will attempt to clear the area of evil-doers and maintain peace in the kingdom. Keep a vigilant watch, and your team will be successful. But if you wane for even a moment, all could be lost.
DISCLAIMER: This review uses the Deluxe version of Set a Watch that we backed on Kickstarter. Some components may differ from components found other versions. -T
Set A Watch is a cooperative game for 1-4 players in which players must secure nine locations around the realm to prevent the release of the deadly Unhallowed monsters. The party always consists of 4 adventurers, regardless of actual player count. In each round, one adventurer will stay back at camp, resting and taking strategic actions, while the other 3 adventurers take watch and fight off the creatures attempting to infiltrate the camp by using special abilities and powers to aid in battle. The game ends in victory if the adventurers have successfully secured all locations. If, at the end of a round, all adventurers on watch are exhausted, the camp is overrun and the game is lost.
So how does solo play differ from multiplayer games? It doesn’t! A solo game of Set A Watch plays identically to a multiplayer game – the solo player just controls all 4 adventurers at once instead of being split up among the players. Obviously, as a solo player, you have to make all of the decisions, which is sometimes nicer than playing with other people. You get to play whatever strategy YOU want to, without having to compromise with other players. On the flip side, that could be treacherous if your strategy is too bold/too meek or if you get in a tight spot and are at a loss for what to do next. Other than the aspect of solo decision-making, the gameplay remains unchanged. One adventurer still rests at camp while the other 3 stand watch and battle monsters.
Typically, I am not a fan of solo games in which you are forced to play multiple characters. That just feels like kind of a cop-out way to say ‘Yeah, we have a solo mode’ when in reality you’re still playing a multiplayer game, just by yourself. That being said, I actually don’t mind this aspect in Set A Watch. Why? Because there really are no ‘turns’ to track. One adventurer stays at camp and acts first, but the other 3 go to battle and act whenever/however they want. There is no real turn order. I make the characters act when and how I want them to, and that really opens the rounds up to a lot of freedom. I don’t have to sacrifice special powers/abilities because it wasn’t that character’s ‘turn’ – I can come up with some sweet combos, utilizing whichever characters I need to, to really do some damage. The lack of turns makes this a truly cooperative game, even when playing solo.
Overall, I love Set A Watch. It was, admittedly, a little intimidating at first, but once I got the hang of it, it plays great! The components are nice and sturdy, the box transforms into the game board, and the artwork is very nicely done. Set A Watch is a game I would definitely play either multiplayer or solo, and not as a last resort. The gameplay is engaging, the strategic options give you a different game every play, and the theme itself is just exciting to me. I am very happy with this Kickstarter purchase, and I look forward to any expansions/reimplementations that could be in the works!
The kingdom is under attack. Hoards of creatures are amassing at locations around the realm in an attempt to resurrect ancient Unhallowed monsters. Their ultimate goal? To take control of the world. You and your fellow adventurers have been tasked with stopping this uprising. By traveling to these various locations, you will attempt to clear the area of evil-doers and maintain peace in the kingdom. Keep a vigilant watch, and your team will be successful. But if you wane for even a moment, all could be lost.
DISCLAIMER: This review uses the Deluxe version of Set a Watch that we backed on Kickstarter. Some components may differ from components found other versions. -T
Set A Watch is a cooperative game for 1-4 players in which players must secure nine locations around the realm to prevent the release of the deadly Unhallowed monsters. The party always consists of 4 adventurers, regardless of actual player count. In each round, one adventurer will stay back at camp, resting and taking strategic actions, while the other 3 adventurers take watch and fight off the creatures attempting to infiltrate the camp by using special abilities and powers to aid in battle. The game ends in victory if the adventurers have successfully secured all locations. If, at the end of a round, all adventurers on watch are exhausted, the camp is overrun and the game is lost.
So how does solo play differ from multiplayer games? It doesn’t! A solo game of Set A Watch plays identically to a multiplayer game – the solo player just controls all 4 adventurers at once instead of being split up among the players. Obviously, as a solo player, you have to make all of the decisions, which is sometimes nicer than playing with other people. You get to play whatever strategy YOU want to, without having to compromise with other players. On the flip side, that could be treacherous if your strategy is too bold/too meek or if you get in a tight spot and are at a loss for what to do next. Other than the aspect of solo decision-making, the gameplay remains unchanged. One adventurer still rests at camp while the other 3 stand watch and battle monsters.
Typically, I am not a fan of solo games in which you are forced to play multiple characters. That just feels like kind of a cop-out way to say ‘Yeah, we have a solo mode’ when in reality you’re still playing a multiplayer game, just by yourself. That being said, I actually don’t mind this aspect in Set A Watch. Why? Because there really are no ‘turns’ to track. One adventurer stays at camp and acts first, but the other 3 go to battle and act whenever/however they want. There is no real turn order. I make the characters act when and how I want them to, and that really opens the rounds up to a lot of freedom. I don’t have to sacrifice special powers/abilities because it wasn’t that character’s ‘turn’ – I can come up with some sweet combos, utilizing whichever characters I need to, to really do some damage. The lack of turns makes this a truly cooperative game, even when playing solo.
Overall, I love Set A Watch. It was, admittedly, a little intimidating at first, but once I got the hang of it, it plays great! The components are nice and sturdy, the box transforms into the game board, and the artwork is very nicely done. Set A Watch is a game I would definitely play either multiplayer or solo, and not as a last resort. The gameplay is engaging, the strategic options give you a different game every play, and the theme itself is just exciting to me. I am very happy with this Kickstarter purchase, and I look forward to any expansions/reimplementations that could be in the works!
Purple Phoenix Games (2266 KP) rated Villagers in Tabletop Games
Jan 16, 2020
The saying is, “It takes a village…” but that village didn’t just magically appear overnight. Creating a prosperous and thriving community takes not only time, but hard work, ingenuity, and a little bit of luck! Villagers is a game that takes you through that process, as you strive to create a village of renown.
Disclaimer: I do not intent to rehash the entire rulebook in this review, but rather provide an overview of the gameplay, and how it differs between multiplayer and solo play. -L
Villagers is a game of card drafting and tableau building in which players are competing to build the most prosperous village in the land. The game is played over a series of rounds, each broken up into the Draft Phase and the Build Phase. During the Draft Phase, players take turns drafting villagers from the available card stacks into their hands. During the Build Phase, players can add villagers from their hand to their tableau. Certain cards can be chained together, and provide more powers and/or end-game points – but they must be added to the village in chain order. At two points throughout the game, the First and Second Market Phases, all players will collect money depending on which cards they have in their villages. The game ends immediately after the Second Market Phase is completed, and the player with the most money is the winner!
As a solo game, Villagers plays very similarly to group play, with only a couple of differences. First, the solo player is battling against The Countess, an AI character, to create the best village. The Countess is incorporated into the game in a unique way. During the Draft Phase, whenever you draft a villager to your hand, you also select an available villager to go straight into the village of the Countess. The Build Phase is carried out as normal. At the end of every round, you blindly draw a face-down card from the Reserve (draw deck), and it automatically goes into the Countess’ village as well. The other twist to a solo game of Villagers is that there are Event cards in play each round. Events are resolved after the Build Phase, before beginning the next round, and are often detrimental to the player – like making you pay extra gold to unlock padlocks, for example. The First and Second Market Phases work the same as they do in a multiplayer game, and the game ends immediately after the Second Market Phase. If you have managed to accrue more money than the Countess, then you have won!
I want to start off by saying that I love Villagers. Card drafting and set collection are my JAM, and this is a game that highlights those really well without making it too complicated. Even when playing solo, those mechanics still feel balanced, and that makes the overall game enjoyable. From my previous Solo Chronicles, I have stated how much I dislike “Beat your own high score” solo modes, so I was extremely happy when I saw that Villagers pitted the solo player against an AI character – the Countess. For the most part, I think that the Countess works really well in this game. When you draft a card, the Countess gets a card as well. But the best part about that is that you get to choose which card goes to the Countess. That means that you are able to keep some semblance of strategy in your game, because you have the power to decide what cards go where, for the most part.
The other neat thing about solo play is the inclusion of Event cards in the game – which are not present in group play. The Events add an extra element that you have to take into account for the given round. Depending on the Event, it could compromise your strategy quite a bit, but that’s what keeps it interesting. You can’t just get into a groove and grind through the rounds, drafting everything you want, when you want. You have to adapt your strategy based upon the Event(s) in play, and the Countess’ village.
The only downside for me is that at the end of every round, the Countess gets the top face-down card from the Reserve, and depending on what card that is, it could throw a wrench into the strategy you’ve been working hard to set up. I guess that mimics a multiplayer game in a sense, though, because you can’t always control what your opponents will do. The biggest downside about solo play for me has nothing to do with actual gameplay, but rather table space. Every card that goes into the Countess’ village is a stand-alone, meaning that they do not chain together like cards in your village will. So depending on how long the game goes, the Countess’ village will get to be pretty large, and hog lots of the table. I think that just means I need a bigger table though…
All that being said – is Villagers a good game for solo play? I would say mostly yes. Strategy is still required for success, but adaptability of that strategy is what keeps the game engaging and entertaining. Nothing can quite replace the multiplayer experience, but playing against the AI character keeps the competitiveness alive in the game. As someone who does a lot of solo playing these days, I am glad that I have added Villagers to my collection. If you haven’t gotten a chance to play Villagers yet, I would highly recommend checking it out. Solo or multiplayer, it’s a great time!
Disclaimer: I do not intent to rehash the entire rulebook in this review, but rather provide an overview of the gameplay, and how it differs between multiplayer and solo play. -L
Villagers is a game of card drafting and tableau building in which players are competing to build the most prosperous village in the land. The game is played over a series of rounds, each broken up into the Draft Phase and the Build Phase. During the Draft Phase, players take turns drafting villagers from the available card stacks into their hands. During the Build Phase, players can add villagers from their hand to their tableau. Certain cards can be chained together, and provide more powers and/or end-game points – but they must be added to the village in chain order. At two points throughout the game, the First and Second Market Phases, all players will collect money depending on which cards they have in their villages. The game ends immediately after the Second Market Phase is completed, and the player with the most money is the winner!
As a solo game, Villagers plays very similarly to group play, with only a couple of differences. First, the solo player is battling against The Countess, an AI character, to create the best village. The Countess is incorporated into the game in a unique way. During the Draft Phase, whenever you draft a villager to your hand, you also select an available villager to go straight into the village of the Countess. The Build Phase is carried out as normal. At the end of every round, you blindly draw a face-down card from the Reserve (draw deck), and it automatically goes into the Countess’ village as well. The other twist to a solo game of Villagers is that there are Event cards in play each round. Events are resolved after the Build Phase, before beginning the next round, and are often detrimental to the player – like making you pay extra gold to unlock padlocks, for example. The First and Second Market Phases work the same as they do in a multiplayer game, and the game ends immediately after the Second Market Phase. If you have managed to accrue more money than the Countess, then you have won!
I want to start off by saying that I love Villagers. Card drafting and set collection are my JAM, and this is a game that highlights those really well without making it too complicated. Even when playing solo, those mechanics still feel balanced, and that makes the overall game enjoyable. From my previous Solo Chronicles, I have stated how much I dislike “Beat your own high score” solo modes, so I was extremely happy when I saw that Villagers pitted the solo player against an AI character – the Countess. For the most part, I think that the Countess works really well in this game. When you draft a card, the Countess gets a card as well. But the best part about that is that you get to choose which card goes to the Countess. That means that you are able to keep some semblance of strategy in your game, because you have the power to decide what cards go where, for the most part.
The other neat thing about solo play is the inclusion of Event cards in the game – which are not present in group play. The Events add an extra element that you have to take into account for the given round. Depending on the Event, it could compromise your strategy quite a bit, but that’s what keeps it interesting. You can’t just get into a groove and grind through the rounds, drafting everything you want, when you want. You have to adapt your strategy based upon the Event(s) in play, and the Countess’ village.
The only downside for me is that at the end of every round, the Countess gets the top face-down card from the Reserve, and depending on what card that is, it could throw a wrench into the strategy you’ve been working hard to set up. I guess that mimics a multiplayer game in a sense, though, because you can’t always control what your opponents will do. The biggest downside about solo play for me has nothing to do with actual gameplay, but rather table space. Every card that goes into the Countess’ village is a stand-alone, meaning that they do not chain together like cards in your village will. So depending on how long the game goes, the Countess’ village will get to be pretty large, and hog lots of the table. I think that just means I need a bigger table though…
All that being said – is Villagers a good game for solo play? I would say mostly yes. Strategy is still required for success, but adaptability of that strategy is what keeps the game engaging and entertaining. Nothing can quite replace the multiplayer experience, but playing against the AI character keeps the competitiveness alive in the game. As someone who does a lot of solo playing these days, I am glad that I have added Villagers to my collection. If you haven’t gotten a chance to play Villagers yet, I would highly recommend checking it out. Solo or multiplayer, it’s a great time!
Micah Ulibarri (79 KP) rated the PlayStation 4 version of STAR WARS Battlefront II in Video Games
Apr 3, 2018
Battlefront II had a lot to contend with this last year. Besides, Battlefront I being a very critically reviewed release, there was a large discussion created that could almost be referred to as a scandal concerning the loot crate system. I'm not here to talk about that. I want to review this game based on what we got.
First off, it's Star Wars. I'm a huge Star Wars fan and as such, I am always willing to buy in to anything no matter what the surrounding conversation may be. I did not buy the original game however due to it not containing a campaign or story mode. I'm usually not a big third person online shooter player so Battlefront I had nothing for me.
The story mode: I absolutely loved the story mode. The characters were originally introduced in the Battlefront: Inferno Squad novel so I was already invested in them. It involved following the continuing story of Iden Version through the end of Return of the Jedi, the 6th movie in the saga.
The plot was fun and engaging and involved not just the main character, but also scenarios in which you play as Han Solo, Lando Calrissian, Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia, and Kylo Ren. Thise were particularly fun because they change up the possible monotony of playing the same character, and also because they are beloved Star Wars characters.
There are also a number of different scenarios besides the basic run and gun you would expect from a third person shooter game. Sometimes there's a lightsaber involved. Also, and a particular favorite of mine: flight simulator in beloved spacecraft. The Millennium Falcon? Xwing? Bespin Cloud Car? You betcha.
The single player is what I bought the game for and I won't lie, that alone was worth my $60. I enjoyed it, it was properly challenging and it paid off even more when the additional chapters were added in December (free of charge).
The multiplayer wasn't as fun for me. I'm not very good against other players and I learned that quickly. I still jump on from time to time and play starfighters, but otherwise, my time with the game has been spent.
If it was just the single player I'd give it a 9. Total game is dropped due to me not enjoying the multiplayer so much.
First off, it's Star Wars. I'm a huge Star Wars fan and as such, I am always willing to buy in to anything no matter what the surrounding conversation may be. I did not buy the original game however due to it not containing a campaign or story mode. I'm usually not a big third person online shooter player so Battlefront I had nothing for me.
The story mode: I absolutely loved the story mode. The characters were originally introduced in the Battlefront: Inferno Squad novel so I was already invested in them. It involved following the continuing story of Iden Version through the end of Return of the Jedi, the 6th movie in the saga.
The plot was fun and engaging and involved not just the main character, but also scenarios in which you play as Han Solo, Lando Calrissian, Luke Skywalker, Princess Leia, and Kylo Ren. Thise were particularly fun because they change up the possible monotony of playing the same character, and also because they are beloved Star Wars characters.
There are also a number of different scenarios besides the basic run and gun you would expect from a third person shooter game. Sometimes there's a lightsaber involved. Also, and a particular favorite of mine: flight simulator in beloved spacecraft. The Millennium Falcon? Xwing? Bespin Cloud Car? You betcha.
The single player is what I bought the game for and I won't lie, that alone was worth my $60. I enjoyed it, it was properly challenging and it paid off even more when the additional chapters were added in December (free of charge).
The multiplayer wasn't as fun for me. I'm not very good against other players and I learned that quickly. I still jump on from time to time and play starfighters, but otherwise, my time with the game has been spent.
If it was just the single player I'd give it a 9. Total game is dropped due to me not enjoying the multiplayer so much.
SoCalEl52 (5 KP) rated STAR WARS Battlefront II in Video Games
Dec 13, 2017
Loot Controversy Aside, Still a Solid Way to Embrace and Enjoy the Star Wars Mythos
Mixing chance and meritocracy, I can get over the loot crate controversy, provided they keep the monetary element away from it, as EA has done for the time being. With an improved campaign mode from Battlefront I, and an intriguing, fanboy-pleasing array of levels and characters in Multiplayer, the gameplay is a fun, engaging time, and I have been passionately addicted. Marking the game down a couple points are some of the technical glitches in the game. One of the Collection rewards I earned twice, then exited the mode in which I was playing to see that the was not registered (it finally worked a third time when I played another level AFTER the one in which I earned it, instead of exiting to the main menu right away). Sometimes when I die, the screen fails to change back to the respawn screen, and some frame rate issues have been frustrating as well.
That being said, I tear it up as Luke Skywalker, Kylo Ren, and the aerial battles. Love it.
That being said, I tear it up as Luke Skywalker, Kylo Ren, and the aerial battles. Love it.