Painkiller Hell and Damnation, thoughts?

hardcore_gamer said:

I am sorry, but anyone who has even played the game for more then just 10 min knows that this is crap.

Painkiller has a large collection of very varied monsters. In fact, fallowing the release of the original Painkiller one of the things that many people praised it for were the large amounts of different monsters.

It's an accurate description.

It may have a lot of reskinned enemies that fit the same generic function, but definitely not what I'd call monster variety in the Doom or Sam sense.

To make it worse, you get 3-4 of those generic monster types per map only.

Cool weapon design wasted on a boring game.

Edit: So yeah, I'm basically repeating what Kristus and Jodwin said about the monsters.

Painkillers ultimate failing imo, was to take a workable idea that SS brought to the table and turn it into a solo experience for some goddamn reason I can't fathom. SS was built from the ground up to be a coop slug-fest through and through, which I can imagine is why large parts of the SS games are wide open areas, to afford room for 8 players running around. You cannot have that in painkiller, many of the levels are pretty damn claustrophobic in nature and honestly, would suck to try and coop if it was even available.

Belial said:

Cool weapon design wasted on a boring game.

That brings up another point of contention I have with the game. The game feels like it's railroading your weapon choices by limiting the available ammo to one or two types at a time, which means the weapons charm wear off quicker than they should.

I've always despised the design and feel of the shotgun, myself. It looks like it's made from copper pipes.

Its funny that this game is mentioned, cause there is an update for this game on steam, that comes in at 2.5 Gigs....one heck of an update to say the least.

Quast said:

Painkillers ultimate failing imo, was to take a workable idea that SS brought to the table and turn it into a solo experience for some goddamn reason I can't fathom. SS was built from the ground up to be a coop slug-fest through and through, which I can imagine is why large parts of the SS games are wide open areas, to afford room for 8 players running around. You cannot have that in painkiller, many of the levels are pretty damn claustrophobic in nature and honestly, would suck to try and coop if it was even available.

They actually added Co-Op for Hell and Damnation though I have no idea if it's worth a damn.

Captain Red said:

They actually added Co-Op for Hell and Damnation though I have no idea if it's worth a damn.

I have played it a few times..its ok...Especailly durning the boss fights.

TheDarkArchon said:

That brings up another point of contention I have with the game. The game feels like it's railroading your weapon choices by limiting the available ammo to one or two types at a time, which means the weapons charm wear off quicker than they should.

I don't agree. At least in the HD remake I often had lots of ammo for lots of different weapons and was free to choice which weapons to use.

Speaking of Painkiller, I found the ninjas to be the most irritating next to those skeleton creatures in later episodes.

Also Overdose with the half angel/demon protagonist got really annoying with his lame one liners over and over and over.

Technician said:

That generic rock tune that could play when a horde of monsters would rush on screen was annoying as fuck.

Painkiller had some great maps, but having to start-stop-horde-checkpoint, start-stop-horde-checkpoint every new room was grating. That kind of game mechanic is not appropriate for a fast action FPS.

In a lot of ways, "Painkiller" almost feels like it should have been an arcade game.