Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Don't try it too hard though, I stopped playing Witcher 2 because I insisted on Dark difficulty.

[Bohandas]

Something I really noticed in Skyrim and Fallout is how those games are extremely formulaic.

You never get to see any too hard monsters or get to find any especially good items unless you are the right level. Every quest and dungeon is a direct copy of the others. The dialogue options are prefab.

I fucking hate it.

Skyrim much moreso than Fallout. The dungeons in Skyrim really were indistinguishable

[NullForceOmega]

Well, those dungeons came in exactly three flavors (tomb, cave and dwemer) and more than a few mixed elements from the sets, this makes them not just 'feel' the same, it actually makes them identical and forgettable.  Seriously, while it has become commonplace to gripe about jRPG tilesets and palette-swapped enemies, at least each area was pretty distinct and had a real theme.

[wierd]

I use skyrim as a sleep aid. I have beaten the game so hard that it cried like a frightened child-- So I just pick a random dungeon after it has had time to respawn, and just blow everything up.

I made myself a small mod to put in an actually functional garden plot at lakeview manor (As in, actually garden sized, complete with a buttload of functional planter spots), so I can pick and choose what potions I feel I will need to make to take with me for each little bandit busting trip.  I even added a few ingredients to the list of permitted items for such plots.

This was about the time I got into modding for Morrowind, but I find the Creation Kit for skyrim to be just too damned buggy to work with. A simple mod requires constant, tedious saves and regression tests.

Forget something that might actually be worthwhile-- The game engine is limited to 32 bit memory access, and already allocates pretty much the full amount. Same with the editor, which is why it crashes all the damned time.   Any really ambitious modding crashes the creation kit, and the game engine.

Bethesda needs to wake up and smell the coffee, and stop making 32bit crippled tools and titles.

[Bohandas]

Why the bloody hell do City Builders never have random map generators anymore!?

EDIT:
And why is 9/10 of the map always locked at the beginning of each game!?

[lemon10]

MMORPGs, for instance. From Asheron's Call (which debuted Nov 1999) to the monolith that is World of Warcraft (Nov 2004).

Subscription based games are even worse than pay-to-win

I have to heavily disagree with this. While I'm not a fan of subscription based games, at least every player is on a even footing, and you only spend a set amount each month.
Pay-to-win is the opposite. If you want to be the best you have to spend a huge amount of money every single month, and it also usually results in purposefully crippling players that don't spend any money.

[Flying Dice]

MMORPGs, for instance. From Asheron's Call (which debuted Nov 1999) to the monolith that is World of Warcraft (Nov 2004).

Subscription based games are even worse than pay-to-win

I have to heavily disagree with this. While I'm not a fan of subscription based games, at least every player is on a even footing, and you only spend a set amount each month.
Pay-to-win is the opposite. If you want to be the best you have to spend a huge amount of money every single month, and it also usually results in purposefully crippling players that don't spend any money.

True. But it's more like this: P2W < Sub < F2P.

Microtransaction-ridden games that only sell convenience, corner-cutting, and cosmetics are annoying, but they've got nothing on "Lol pay us the price of a new game every couple months in exchange for the same shit-tier support and QA that you get from F2P games."

The only subscription-model game I haven't regretted paying for was Runescape back in the day where it was like $5 a month and not a complete steaming heap of crap--I thought then  (and still sort of agree) that $60 per year was a reasonable price for a fun game with solid content, creative quest design, a choice between full-loss-risk and no-consequence PvP, and a constant stream of new content. $10/mo, never mind the ones that ask for $20+/mo, and which have shitty content? Don't make me laugh. GW2 would be a good example of the other acceptable model, except that they fuck you by asking for a full price purchase up front and then backload it with $60+ worth of "optional" expansions to character slots, bank slots, inventory space, &c. that are necessary to play the game at a meaningful level of involvement.

[Neonivek]

I dunno... I feel like I'd almost pay a subscription just so I won't get nagged anymore.

F2P might as well be called "Pay by being Nagged" as it constantly non-stop tries everything it can to get you to cough up money.

Which has infected F2P-suboptional games.

I just wish I could get a good idea if I wanted to subscribe to a game before I was in it for the long haul. I already learned I don't like Pirate or Wizard 101 the hard way (the games don't evolve)

[wierd]

I refuse to be part of the "always connected, always served ads, and pay to win" ecosystem.

Yes. Developers need money. They also need to budget thier money more wisely, and stop trying to squeeze every dime out of thier IP like pimps workin' ho's.

They dont need to play panopticon police with always-on validation, and they dont need to try to divert initial sales price onto bought DLC that just adds a single new quest or some special armor. (or worse, is just a bugfix.)

Selling a large game in installments is OK-- I dont mind, as long as each game installment can stand up on its own. But I refuse to be the game industry's fanbois bitch.

They try that shit, I pirate.

[Flying Dice]

The worst part is when the fanboys ask to have their shit packed in like that, as they did with Starcraft 2.

[wierd]

I was meaning more like how halflife 2 did it.


Half-life 2 episode 1 can stand on its own as a game. Selling it separate from the initial half-life 2 is OK in my book.

What isn't OK is more like what Bethesda did with say, Hearthfire expansion.  That's workin the IP like a pimp workin a ho.

[Flying Dice]

Yeah, I was agreeing with you indirectly in the sense that it's coolio when the parts are coherent wholes that have a meaningful reason for being released separately, while implying that that's not often the case.

[Bohandas]

I was meaning more like how halflife 2 did it.


Half-life 2 episode 1 can stand on its own as a game. Selling it separate from the initial half-life 2 is OK in my book.

Speaking of which, am I the only person who thinks Half-Life 2 wasn't as good as Half-Life 1?

[Neonivek]

I was meaning more like how halflife 2 did it.


Half-life 2 episode 1 can stand on its own as a game. Selling it separate from the initial half-life 2 is OK in my book.

Speaking of which, am I the only person who thinks Half-Life 2 wasn't as good as Half-Life 1?

You certainly are not the only one.

Though it helps that Halflife 1 was more cohesive and felt like everything belonged as part of a whole... and Half-life 2 was more a tour of gameplay mechanics that were often completely disconnected from one another.

As well Half Life, while having a narrative, did not disrupt the flow of gameplay to explore it like Halflife 2 did a lot.

As for me... I have no opinion. They are definitely way different games though... To admit, I do think I had more fun playing Half-life 1 then I ever did playing Half-life 2... I guess I had a very "busy work" vibe from it, but I don't know why... might have to do with the many "explore these many sections" segments.