Recent reviews by Metallica93

6.5/10

Given how much this trilogy has been referenced over the years, I decided to give it a try. This first game was... basically Mediocre Shooter: The Game. It boggles the mind that, outside of some features and smoothness, this plays exactly like the last one a buddy would have us play back in 2012 or 2013. That's terrible for a five-year gap, but indicative of this being more like an annual-release E.A. sports game than an innovative shooter.

It still gets a thumbs up because it's not bad, but it's wholly forgettable, particularly nowadays. The only reason to pay is for nostalgia, for those who have it.

• Pretty straightforward.
  
• The characters aren't annoying.
  
• Guns feel alright.

• The most narcissistic credits I have ever witnessed. Not only did they throw in audio from what sounded like a pitch meeting for the game, but they then got someone to rap that audio and quotes from the game like Will Smith trying to add himself to a movie's soundtrack? And then there was some meaningless bonus mission at the end that had nothing to do with anything. Baffling.
  
• Lots of dumb design decisions. Smoking at night during a stealth mission because you have to show your character is effortlessly cool? Russian "ultra-nationalists" and a random Middle Eastern country with G36Cs, M9s, and the M1014? What's the point of even hiring military advisors, at that point?
  
• You seem to get tripped up on the smallest objects lying around (or by your teammates). Made for quite the nuisance on the third-highest difficulty.
  
• Lots of instances where enemies could shoot from behind cover as if they saw you (or them shooting immediately after taking a corner).

9/10

Me, less than 30 minutes in: "Oh, that's a pretty cool swarm visual in the background there. I wonder if..."

[shoots weapon]

[hitbox marker appears]

"OH, LAWD, THEY COMIN'!"

Look, I was peer pressured into buying this. I simply don't purchase games new or at full price; I've done it twice since 2011. But the friend group generally plays things I find boring like Apex Legends and Destiny 2, so I thought "I know nothing of Warhammer, but I'll give it a shot. I can always return it."

But I will not succumb to such heresy, brothers.

• In a game about big people in big armor shooting big things with big guns, it needs to sound big. And holy smokes, did the audio team deliver. You can hear the weight of your armor just walking around. You know you're firing massive chunks of metal downrange. And charging the handle on the Heavy Bolt Rifle? So. Dang. Chunky.
  
• The game is absolutely gorgeous. It certainly helps that I can now mostly run things at Ultra at 1,440p on my machine, but, I mean... it's gorgeous.
  
• The intro was absolutely insane. I genuinely went "That's some impressive visual filler" until I realized it was the actual number of enemies I was about to face. That moment was everything I wished Starship Troopers: Extermination could be.
  
• For being thrown into a brand new universe, the campaign's writing felt like a really nice blend of "Newcomers will get the gist" and "The old guard will understand these references." I really wanted to play the first game before this one's campaign, but they highly recommended you finish the campaign so the co-op missions didn't spoil anything. The campaign is still well worth a replay, at any rate.
  
• As someone who generally finds melee boring, it's diverse enough to keep me from avoiding it altogether. However, the game doesn't force me into that play-style, which I was also grateful for.
  
• The design was something else. A starship bridge that was part candlelit cathedral, part '80s tech hub? I've never seen anything like that before. The worlds were a weird blend of Gothic architecture and steampunk aesthetic, as well. Super interesting. Incredibly foreign, to me, which kept drawing my attention.
  
• Incredibly minor, but I really appreciated the variety in repetitive tasks and using different assets for the same underlying mechanic. Example: mechanical access wasn't always the same big, red button. It could have been the big, red button or a code (granted, the same code) or a throttle level you pushed up. Same with obstacles: lifting a boulder (or part of a stone structure, in another map) or pushing a giant metal container out of the way.

(ranked from most to least impactful)

• I had a couple of disconnects during the single-player campaign. If I wanted to connect to a server, I'd have joined the co-op or multiplayer. That's just unacceptable. Luckily, they occurred after (or just before) anything cool, but imagine how many players probably had that happen in the middle of a genuinely awesome moment or epic battle? No one deserves to be taken out of the moment like that. Breaking immersion is the cardinal sin of a good video game story.
  
• So. Much. Loading. Maybe I just haven't played that many brand new games, but I've never encountered one that has required as many load screens as this. Example: if you join a co-op match and the host disconnects, you could very well encounter three load screens that total out to, at least for me, 35-50 seconds.
  
• The campaign was great, but the Chaos sections were the least interesting parts of the game. Maybe I assumed Warhammer 40,000 would be strictly sci-fi, but the fantasy elements were almost as empty as the suits you fought. Luckily, your last stand, Calgar's entrance, and the final push ended things on a high note.
  
• With how great the graphics are, the destruction of the Tyranid ship was laughably lackluster. It was the equivalent of a TV show saving on special effects money by having someone do a quick animation, instead.
  
• The game runs smoothly for me between 60-75 fps with everything maxed out, but one section of a later campaign mission saw a good 20 fps drop while the bridge explosion scene in that co-op mission drives it all the took it down from 60 to 20 fps.
  
• Look, I know it's the aesthetic of the universe, but the Ultramarine armor looks ridiculous. Having "Ultra" on the pauldron looks like goofy advertising.

6/10

Buggier than I recall it being twelve years ago, this remains such a downgrade from Battlefield 2 in all but graphics. This marked the first main game in the series that was aimed more at the console crowd. I only bought it to give the campaign a go again, but even that played like a mediocre Tom Clancy novel. The multiplayer is still plenty active for those that want it, but the nostalgia isn't there like it is for earlier games in the franchise.

• Overall, it plays decently well. There is plenty of jank, sure, but it's mostly smooth and the gameplay is average to above average.
  
• Tons of weapon variety as well as attachments.
  
• A decent array of vehicles to play with on large maps.

• The campaign is just... meh. It has a couple of cool moments or sections of a level, but not worth replaying.
  
• It's pretty much Lens Flare: The Video Game Experience. It looks like it was made by J.J. Abrams.
  
• This game had some of the dumbest additions to the franchise. 3D spotting (i.e., anyone spamming 'Q' could see you through smoke, mark you with a big, orange triangle over your head, and kill you), infinite ammunition in vehicles, always-on scope glint, removing the server browser and menus from the game and putting them in a web browser, etc.
  
• While obviously not an issue nowadays, DICE were quite inept and decided they would fracture the player base in as many ways as possible: a single difficulty was split up into Normal versus Hardcore, small maps that weren't meant for 32v32 (e.g., infantry-only Noshahr Canals), introducing DLC actually meant for a Battlefield game (i.e., Armored Kill), then pushing out very Call-Of-Duty-esque maps in Close Quarters, etc.
  
• Operation Métro remains one of the worst-designed maps I have ever seen in a video game. Again, great for a very small console match, but not for 32v32 on P.C.

7/10

Wrapping up the newer Wolfenstein games with this was a bit of a disappointment, but Youngblood is nowhere near as bad as the reviews make it out to be. I found the sisterly banter refreshing, the '80s-Paris backdrop was interesting, and both the combat mechanics and level design were above average. Sadly, as many have stated, it's still repetitive and has a lot of backtracking if you play the side missions. At least co-op (which I did not do) might alleviate some of that.

• Sisterly banter is not really something I'm used to in video games that are by and large about male power fantasies. I've seen people describe it as "cringe", but I'm fairly certain they didn't grow up with siblings. It was fun, lighthearted, and dorky. Your very first mission with Jessica/Sophia was hilarious and I think this was the easy highlight of the game.
  
• Combat was solid. Some pros and cons versus the other three games, but I think it was probably the best of the bunch overall.
  
• Level design was pretty good. There were some truly "Oh, son of a..." moments when trying to find collectibles that made me chuckle. Plenty of verticality along Parisian balconies and rooftops, as well.

• I think what helped make The New Order the best game of the bunch is that it's pretty linear; it's a straightforward path with a sign that says "Kill Nazis." Since Youngblood tried to spice up the formula (which isn't inherently bad), it ran into the issue of backtracking a lot for side missions. This led to repetitive gameplay. I'm sure it would have played at least somewhat better if I had turned down the difficulty and only played the main story.
  
• The ending was... not great. The New Colossus already had a writing problem and I guess Youngblood apparently decided it was going to compound it. Nothing earth-shattering, but a good plot twist at the end was hampered by a goofy decision that won't have any impact on a possible third game centered around B.J. Just... an odd decision.
  
• The upgrade tree implementation was strange. At least one upgrade pretty much negated the need of another. Some of the upgrade order felt arbitrary. Not my favorite.
  
• Stealth was incredibly difficult at the start of the game. It got considerably easier, but man... That was the roughest start out of any of the Wolfenstein games, by far.

7.5-8/10

While still a solid game, the quality of writing didn't feel the same as what drew me in to The New Order so much. Plenty of Nazi killing and gameplay improvements on the first game, but too many goofy sub-plots that took you out of it.

• Killin' Nazis.
  
• Killin' Nazis with even more knife takedowns.
  
• Killin' more Nazis.

• Fergus not being able to control a robotic arm being an actual plot point was so disappointing. Apparently, Wyatt has a significantly better story in this game than in the first.
  
• There was a moment in the game where two characters had the exact same line, you thought it was a dream, B.J. even asks if this was a dream, and then it's never brought up again. Terrible writing.
  
• A disappointing final battle that is completely optional.

7.5/10

Basically, it's a not-as-good Wolfenstein: The New Order. Sure, the mechanics are mostly the same and if you liked those from the first game, you're golden. However, the story is mostly quite average with only two or three real peaks, the music isn't quite as gripping as the previous game's (although, that outro credits song was great), and you don't really care about the villains like you did Frau Engel or Deathshead.

• It's pretty much the first game, mechanic wise. There are a few minor additions to spice things up, but it's nothing that radically alters the formula The New Order introduced. If you liked the first game, in that regard, you'll like this.
  
• There was an atmosphere shift later on in the game that I did not expect that was rather well done.
  
• While I would rank this as objectively "worse" than The New Order, it was by no means a slog. While probably not something I'd replay, I was still quite content with finishing it and getting it off my list to get to The New Colossus.

• The first chapter was pretty boring. More boring than the moon mission in The New Order, but for a different reason than just the same-ol' enemies with different cosmetics. Maybe it was the level design, but it fell pretty flat and was a bumpy introduction to a game that already felt like more of the same (yet was somehow less, at the same time).
  
• Same issue as the first game: you get to digging into the story, you've collected all of these letters, you've read all of these news snippets and notes strewn across the maps, you're excited to see where it goes, and... the big reveal is a big "Really?" :/

8.5-9/10

Having never played a Wolfenstein game before, all I was really expecting was a straightforward (perhaps even on-rails) Nazi shooter that paid a halfway decent homage to its predecessors as well as an alternate history shooter that, ideally, played better than the disappointing Homefront and Homefront: The Revolution. While that Nazi-killing core element is certainly there, I was not prepared for the level of effort that went into making this game much more than that. There is something here for both story-minded players like myself as well as those that just want to switch their brains off and blow some baddies to smithereens.

• I didn't know the score was Mick Gordon going in, but it didn't take long to realize it. Everything from the combat to the somber scenes was elevated by track after excellent track.
  
• You actually gave a hoot about the characters. I enjoyed BJ's monotonous monologues in a world with little hope. Wilhelm "Deathshead" Strasse was a superbly terrifying villain. Fergus felt like the backbone of the entire game. And then you had little moments or overheard conversations that really added to the bleak atmosphere of it all.
  
• Above-average combat. Dual-wielding, weapons that have heft to them, pretty good stealth mechanics, etc. I don't think anything really bogged me down here, which is all you can really ask for in a game about it being open season on the Wehrmacht.

• Most of the game, I was wondering how Nazi Germany got such a leg up on the Allies and assumed the reasoning would have stayed mostly grounded save for some quicker-than-usual scientific discoveries that I could brush off. However, once we actually learned the reason for the sudden advancements, the story fell a bit flat. It's like the writers gave themselves a magical hat in which they could pull out anything they wanted to, which is great for them and not as great for the players, in my opinion.
  
• There was one point in the game where you moved to a very different location and were given a completely different weapon, but both the weapon and the enemies just felt like the same enemies as before with some cosmetic changes. It was at this point that I felt myself getting a bit bored, but it luckily did not last that long.

8.5/10

The intellectuals stating that Rocksmith 2014 can no longer be played are technically illiterate because my (modded) game launches just fine. These are probably the same scholars claiming that Ubisoft "bricked" the game or stopped selling it to pivot to Rocksmith+, but I guess math is hard because, last I checked, a ten-year music licensing contract expires... after ten years.

Check out The Riff Repeater website or the unofficial Rocksmith Discord server for more information on the DLC delisting schedule so you don't miss out on anything you might want! Still plenty of DLC left to buy.

For a game that only received one major update in ten years, though? It definitely kept me playing on days when I might not have, otherwise. Sadly, it was always more "game" than full-blown music learning service (e.g., lots of missing features, no new lessons, etc.), but it was fun for what it was. Significantly better transcriptions than Yousician, solid tones (until you got into high-gain territory; Rocksmith+ has it handily beat, in that regard), etc.

Rocksmith+ has the fundamentally improved audio engine and note detection, but this is still great to come back to for both the song library and local co-op.

Click "Recommended"/"See Full Review" to read this with proper formatting. Steam still hasn't added bullet points to reviews on product pages, for some reason.

• Before you do anything, you can search the entire song library for your country (for free) here: www[dot]rocksmith[dot]com/songlibrary
  
• Music varies by region, just like every other music streaming service. This is the nature of the music licensing beast, sadly, but we do know the team tries when they can (e.g., Metallica going from launching as a non-U.S. artist to finally being added to the U.S. roster recently).
  
• The Steam version of Rocksmith+ still opens up Ubisoft Connect (as it does all modern Ubisoft games), but it's pretty decent at staying out of your way, otherwise.
  
• There is, unfortunately, no offline mode due to the nature of the new music licensing structure (i.e., basically being akin to a music streaming service).
  
• There is no local multiplayer, presumably also because of the new music licensing structure. We haven't heard any updates on if this will (or even can) be added.
  
• The free trial gives you access to 4-5 songs to play across bass, guitar, and piano. This is obviously because the team can't give out licensed music for free, but they absolutely need to update the product page description with this information.
  
• The free trial gives you access to the full suite of practice tools, including Riff Repeater, Adaptive Difficulty, tablature view sheet music view, note-by-note, Chord Explorer, etc. You can also use (via audio interface or Real Tone Cable) Tone Manager to essentially use the service as a free, virtual amplifier. Sadly, you can only use the pre-built tones and can't customize them, at the moment.
  
• The free trial gives you access to a limited selection of lessons.
  
• Take the time to use the free trial to make sure your audio setup has as little latency as possible.
  
• If you do subscribe, use the Apple or Google store to pay. Mobile payment has been the most stable (e.g., no double charging that Steam seemed to be doing; note that this might have also been fixed as of 7/6?).
  
• If you do subscribe, it carries over to all platforms (i.e., P.C., mobile, PS4/PS5, etc.), so you can still download/play on P.C. if you buy the subscription on your phone, first.

• Ubisoft did not purposefully "brick" Rocksmith 2014 to push/sell Rocksmith+. Both previous iterations of Rocksmith ran on 10-year music license contracts (including all of their DLC) and those contracts expired. Anyone stating otherwise probably failed math in high school.
  
• You are not "locked out" of the previous two games nor DLC that you already own. You simply cannot purchase the older games and any DLC that is older than 10 years old because of expired licensing.
  
• Note detection is not worse than in Rocksmith 2014. This is most likely because someone hasn't set up the intonation on their guitar properly. Rocksmith+ reads your playing more accurately, particularly bends and full chords. The team even had to loosen note detection after the beta because it was so accurately strict, if that tells you anything.
  
• Rocksmith+ does not allow songs to be added to the game because... that's pirating music. Just like it was pirating music in Rocksmith 2014. This is apparently a mental hurdle folks can't seem to clear.
  
• "Ubisoft is just greedy!" Uh... guys. They're a corporation. No duh. But they also just licensed Metallica, the most recommended artist since Rocksmith 13+ years ago and a band that has been nigh impossible to license for just as long. If anyone thinks Ubisoft honestly made money off of that deal, they are absolutely stoned.
  
• "They could have just re-licensed every single song from Rocksmith 2014!" Hilarious. People who say this think Ubisoft should have spent money renegotiating contracts (and most likely not gotten all of the songs back because music licensing is not the cakewalk the community likes to claim it is), spend even more money marketing a ten-year-old game that had a single update eight years ago, and then think they would make their money back or not expect backlash from the community? Again. Stoned.
  
• Let's say they did magically re-license every single song in the base game and several years of DLC. The game engine that the previous two Rocksmith songs were built on, Gamebryo, was already old by the time Rocksmith was released. We already know for certain the team was close to a technological ceiling, so new features/lower tunings/more accurate note detection/constant lessons? Probably wouldn't have even gotten them.

Rocksmith+ certainly has some good things going for it (e.g., an audio engine miles better than Rocksmith 2014 with its awful high-gain tones), but some of the negative reviews absolutely have merit. Someone's view of the current song library is going to be highly subjective, for one. Luckily, finding out for yourself is free. I just wanted to provide some much-needed clarity between Ubisoft's lack of information and reviews from people wanting a ten-year-old game back while complaining about subscription services (yet owning Netflix/Spotify).

6.5/10

Just Cause 3 was as much of a massive improvement over Just Cause 2 that the latter was over Just Cause. But wow, did Just Cause 4 feel like the first step back. Things feel tedious. The map took way too long to adjust to. The menus are a chore. Apparently, there are challenges that give you upgrades (at least for the wingsuit)? I cared so little, I didn't even notice. So many missed opportunities to fine tune what made Just Cause 3 great.

• Watching from overhead as an allied train duked it out with an enemy train and the former derailing the latter was pretty awesome.
  
• It looks pretty.
  
• It's finally over.

• There was a bug in Just Cause 3 where object geometry wouldn't load and you couldn't destroy things or grapple to them. It still exists in this game and it's incredibly annoying.
  
• Controls don't feel like they were improved over Just Cause 3 and some even feel worse. Helicopter sensitivity is absolutely horrendous and makes it difficult to aim. Being attacked by drones? Good luck ever hitting them. The developers used the same flight controls from Just Cause 3 and it's criminal that it sucks the fun out of flying jets (why wouldn't you just steal the simple flight control mapping from War Thunder!?). You also can't remap the 1 through 4 keys for weapon swapping because they forced 1 to be your map key. Just... why?
  
• Major tonal shift compared to Just Cause 3. You went from a fun, well-paced game with likable characters and a terrifying bad guy to a bit of a slog with characters you mostly didn't care about despite the game throwing you into the story like you should. I had a few chuckles, but 90% of them were after the halfway point. The story wasn't even close to being on par with Just Cause 3. As a Stargate fan, it was mostly just nice to hear Tony Amendola's voice again.
  
• Weapons weren't the best. The secondary fire on most of them was just goofy. The DLC weapons felt even worse, at least for the Agency mission. Naturally, the weapons I did enjoy from the "Army Of Chaos"/rebels? You can't obtain unless a friendly NPC dies or is killed by you. Terrible design decision not to include them in weapon drops (that don't even give you full ammunition when you request a weapon).