"Seems like gamers just can't accept this."

Cos the game is DUNG. HTH. 

Nice style, excitingly boring premise
http://www.firewatchgame.com/ 

I really liked the ending of MW3, as well as the sandstorm level. The mp did have some decent ideas with the Strike Packages, but those were nullified by poor balance and Death Streaks.

I've completed the story for the latest CoD, and have 20 hours on the mp. What would you like me to elaborate on? 

I would appreciate if games on Steam had to meet an acceptable level of quality before being offered for sale or as 'Free to Play'. By quality, I don't mean theme or appearance; I mean that you can load it, play it and finish it without becoming Mr Fixit or scouring the Net seeking answers to things that could be in a readme.txt file.

I recently added 'Only If' to my library since the trailer looked kind of interesting. It wes free and the reviews were reasonably okay. It installed fine but what it was could only be considered a beta or a concept prototype by the game designer. There were no instructions or notes (text or pdf) which would be okay if you could find all that you needed to know in-game. It used the Unity engine key and mouse binding menu that let you select inputs but your selections were completely ignored. I had problems with contolling the game character and getting interactions to work. I'm stuck on a puzzle and I'm not sure if it's me or a bug. It will not allow me to resume a game that I quit. Considering that the game creator put a lot of work into this short game, is it asking too much that they also include a game instruction manual or text file considering that Steam is a very wide distribution method? When I looked for answers to such things as non-functioning keybindings, how to quit (ended up alt-tabing and killing the process), what functions were actually present in the game or even a basic gameplay guide; I found very little to no help.

Sure the game is free but so are many Quake maps. With Quake maps, I could go to review sites and find out quickly if they were worth playing. I thought Steam had a similar degree of quality screening and curation to some degree. Now I know better.

All I'm saying is that games on Steam should meet a minimum level of quality (in the QA sense - the games can still suck otherwise) or certain titles should be indicated as beta or alpha quality with no meaningful supporting documentation. If Steam doesn't want to do that QA screening, those who support getting their work on Steam should proactively provide notes to players to avoid poor reviews borne out of inadequate knowledge of the game or false expectations of game performance/stability/quality or level of completion.

Only If is not the only title that draws my comments but it is a great example of my gripes. 

Valve doesn't believe they need QA. They have customers, like you, who will report any issues. Which shows their ignorance as to QA's function - resolving issues before it can become one for the customer.

The curator aspect of Greenlight is basically a catch-all to decide as they wish. But yeah, they do need a basic check at least for functionality, and perhaps a request of developers for an instance of the game in the final hour of content, so that they can reasonably view the conclusion.

However, indie devs also have a lot to learn about packaging and messaging. Steam is not Dropbox, it is a platform of distribution, and putting your free game on it without basic polish is no different than getting it stocked on a shelf at Wal-Mart or such, placed next to the latest AAA titles. 

its cool! Still on sale on steam 

So how are the "rooms" in Ziggurat? My dubiousness about procedurally-put-together shooters is that the environments won't be that interesting to explore through or fight in. (And I saw a complaint about Ziggurat over on the SA forums that fit in that bucket.)

Obviously it could be that everything else about Z is fun enough to make up for any blandness or aimlessness in the environments... although for me that would have to be a LOT of fun-ness to counterbalance. :-) 

The rooms are pre-made but arranged randomly when you start the level. The environments are very simple and easy to navigate with little to no Z-axis fighting occuring apart from in a few rooms or if you have flying enemies attacking you.

The rooms are intentionally generic I think because you don't know what you will be fighting in there, and the enemy variety and combinations are what make ziggurat fun, along with your character build and weapons.

I was initially worried that the character build stuff was too shallow as there were only a few choices in the first game I played. However the system is quite interesting in that you can unlock new "cards" which are then added to the card pool that is randomly picked from when you level up or find reward crates in the maps. This slowly increases the build diversity as you play the game and has kept things very interesting on each new game.

You can unlock new playable characters in the same way. These characters have modifiers to certain stats or new traits that others are missing. One can move faster than others etc.

It really comes down to if you like random roguelike elements in your games. I think Ziggurat does it very well. The combat feels like Doom and the enenmies are very well designed in this regard also. They have great tells and you can avoid all their damage if you engage correctly.

The only thing I don't really like about the game is that the enemies visual design is all over the place and very silly in areas. For example there are giant carrots that chase you :P I think the game would feel cooler with a more concise design for all the enemies. 

Yeah I forgot to mention that sandstorm level in MW3, but you're right that was an awesome level. It reminded me of Heavy Rain from L4D, only not annoying. 

Just got a PS4 (my first console since the sega master system) only to realise I can't go and play all the console/ps exclusive games I missed because you can't play ps3 games on a ps4. Fucking what?

I can play PC games from the 80s on my current rig, yet I can't play anything prior to about 2013 for the playstation. Absurd. 

PS3's processor/architecture is supposed to be a development hell, it might have been too costly to integrate or emulate. PS3 can emulate PS1 and got emulation capabilities for PS2 later in it's lifecycle.
PS2 emulation is only for popular games iirc, the lower-level the emulation of the hardware the more precise but also orders of magnitude slower, more efficient higher-level emulation often need hacks for compatibility with some games. I guess Sony didn't want angry customers with their old obscure game having glitches.

But yeah, it's BS to the end user. 

it wasn't that bad. The Xbox/360 was easier since it didn't divide the memory allocation, and because you're building on one MS product to put it onto another. 

Ya feel the gentle slide of a greedy dick up your arse there Kona :D ?

Seriously what did you expect from Sony ?
You forgot what they pulled with the PS3 ? Linux, PS1 emulation... Features that were real quick to disappear.

At least they didn't claim this was going to be possible with the PS4 at any point. Right ? 

Do they use a serial key or something similar?

I found both and a expansion for PK on a second hand store for 1 euro, look almost as if they were new, but i can't find the key on them, and a videogame without a key has almost the same value as downloading it from Piratebay, so i am doubting about buying them, as i don't like to have a permanent reminder of a bad purchase in my home. 

They come from that era, so I would expect such. 

http://imgur.com/a/InefF neat :D 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMli33ornEU 

.. just posted exactely the same on General abuse thread :) 

Wrapping up my AW review, and beginning the slow descent into Dark Souls - as I rarely get to game for more than 10 minutes at a time, sessions will probably be few and far between. Got 30 minutes last night at a cost of sleep. 

Bulletstorm yesterday. Cool game actually. Some of the lines, while juvenile, are pretty fucking funny. Especially when general sarrano shows up. Pussyzilla and the part where a big ugly miniboss shows up and grayson says to trishka "hey trishka, your boyfriend's here" really cracked me up. Then a plank hits it in the head and he falls into the lava while you just stand and watch.

The developer did a much better job at this type of game than serious sam 3 and dnf.

Combat all pretty good, the levels looked fantastic, some of the best and biggest set pieces at the time (feb 2011) that had ever been done. Only thing wrong was the extremely linear progression and ridiculous clipping everywhere. But really it's no different to many games like COD. It's a shame Bulletstorm was a massive flop, there are far worse games that have multiple sequels. 

I picked it up on steam a few months ago for next to no money with 0 expectations and enjoyed the shit out of it. 

I've played through Bulletstorm twice now and really love it. It didn't get the love it really deserved and I think the humor and language were what held it back. 

I think BulletStorm could have greatly benefited from a more sandboxy/open-ended approach. There were some really amazing vistas I wish I could have gone to and run around, but invisible walls blocked my path :(

Even if it was more Borderlandsy in its approach but kept its combat system would've been awesome. 

I was thinking the same in comparing it to Borderlands while playing, Zwiffle. If only it had the Borderlands sandbox, I'm sure they could have still progressed the story the same but added more to it. I guess that kind of game is much more time consuming to create though.