|
Carlosologist posted:I have no idea what to play today, Assassin’s Creed or Mario. Assuming you got AC on PC, you might wait a little bit and see if they patch it to optimize it a bit.
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 16:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 06:14 |
|
|
doingitwrong posted:I have an itch to pick up Destiny 2 because I’ve been playing a bunch of thinky turn based games and I feel like flowy shooting in gorgeous environments would be a nice change. The Destiny 2 console thread is full of bitter people complaining about the tedious end game now. Should I ignore them and pick it up for the early sense of fun and then put it all down when HZD expansions comes out or should I heed the terrible warning and just go play Borderlands 2 or the Pre-Sequel again? It's fun for a few weeks but don't expect to be playing it in a month.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 16:29
|
|
|
doingitwrong posted:Holy poo poo the first run experience of Destiny 2 is so poorly designed. On the PC you click one button, the Battle.net launcher accurately reports the download progress for the entire game, and then you start the game  The Moon Monster posted:It's fun for a few weeks but don't expect to be playing it in a month. It's getting a major DLC in a month, isn't it
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 16:30
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/metalsocks240/status/924117044336971777
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 16:35
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:In Training's argument seemed to be that fps games branched out and got more advanced and attracted a wider audience at the expense of losing what originally made them unique (fun core shooting). ergo now they are Bad he's right about everything except pegging the start of the decline at 1998
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
broadening the audience of a genre is only good if it brings people to appreciate the things that made the genre good in the first place otherwise you just get the ludic equivalent of people who only read harry potter except even worse because anyone can write a book which makes books as a medium moderately resistant to "the kind of thing you like will never get made again because there's no market for it" whereas for video games that can very easily happen because of the scale and resources involved
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 16:40
|
|
|
Can't a Doom-style run'n'gun FPS be done well with lower production values? Like, what do people need from the AAA sector that doesn't just improve the "cinematic" quality of the game which would be the opposite of the complaint? It's just strange to see arguments floating around about the narrowing of possible game experiences in this era when like six or seven years ago people were, say, lamenting the death of turn-based tactics because no big publisher wanted to make them, and now we are flooded with them again Edit: Like just last year I was thinking about how much I was enjoying FPSes again with the wave of Overwatch/Superhot/Titanfall 2/Doom and we keep on getting more now, what experiences are people not getting that would cause them to lament what is probably the genre of game that continues to enjoy the most amount of developer attention and titles CharlieFoxtrot fucked around with this message at 16:50 on Oct 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 16:48
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:except even worse because anyone can write a book which makes books as a medium moderately resistant to "the kind of thing you like will never get made again because there's no market for it" whereas for video games that can very easily happen because of the scale and resources involved Eh, that was true some years ago when popular genre shifts really would starve others real hard, but now indie games mostly fill those holes. Want super  builder games, they'll be there, want old styled ballbusting point & clicks, there's plenty of them, we got turn-based tactics out the rear end, germany's got you covered on whatever mundane simulation game you could likely ever want and so on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 16:50
|
|
|
A Spider Covets posted:Do amiibo other than the ACNL set have card versions? I like getting fun things in my games, but I don't really care about figurines and enjoy how cheap the cards are comparatively. Not officially, but you can search on Google and find third party card fabrications of all the figurine amiibos.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
Can't stop playing mario
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:It's just strange to see arguments floating around about the narrowing of possible game experiences in this era when like six or seven years ago people were, say, lamenting the death of turn-based tactics because no big publisher wanted to make them, and now we are flooded with them again We aren’t really flooded with them but I’m really really glad we are getting more of them now
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 16:58
|
|
|
And yet no one is making a new TIE Fighter/Freespace/Colony Wars
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:02
|
|
|
An indie developer can make a fantastic modernized Quake clone but they can't provide anywhere near the same level of marketing, online infrastructure, and so on. Nothing they make is ever going to attract the population of an Overwatch or Call of Duty LXVI, and multiplayer games in particular require a certain threshold of players to function. You can't have much in the way of skill-based matchmaking in a game played by 300 people in the world. Part of what makes the industry so much more sophisticated now is that they know exactly what it takes to retain the greatest possible audience. Some of that stuff is design-neutral or even positive, but expensive -- UI polish, matchmaking servers, community moderation, that sort of thing. These things are wonderful, but generally only available to developers/publishers with greater resources. Some of it is kinda gross but at least doesn't affect gameplay -- cosmetic lootboxes are fantastic for keeping a large population because sunk cost fallacy, for example. And some of it is actively bad for the game, but sticks around because it helps pacify and retain people who just don't actually like the core mechanics of the genre. FPSes are not improved by characters or weapons you literally don't have to aim. Fighting games are not improved by slowing them down so that everything is a matter of reaction rather than prediction. Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 17:07 on Oct 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:04
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:An indie developer can make a fantastic modernized Quake clone but they can't provide anywhere near the same level of marketing, online infrastructure, and so on. Nothing they make is ever going to attract the population of an Overwatch or Call of Duty LXVI, and multiplayer games in particular require a certain threshold of players to function. You can't have much in the way of skill-based matchmaking in a game played by 300 people in the world. I thought PUBG was an indie thing
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
PUBG is made by Bluehole, a huge Korean studio who had a hit MMO I forget the name of.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:13
|
|
|
Help Im Alive posted:I thought PUBG was an indie thing Well, most of what I'm saying is basically lamenting that certain games only could have existed at the exact intersection of a certain level of naivete on one hand, and a certain level of organization and development resources on the other. It's possible that the industry will continue to evolve -- maybe there's more demand for the things I like than I thought, maybe AAA gaming will collapse and indie devs will inherit their fractured but still-large audience, maybe if the industry expands even more they'll discover that they can do better making five games that their respective five audiences love to death instead of one game that everyone tolerates and sticks with because it pokes the pleasure centers of their brain with lootboxes. Who knows?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:15
|
|
|
I finished Deus Ex: Mankind Divided. My opinion: It's not great. As I got closer and closer to the end game I started heavily regretting my non-lethal approach, and everything started to become irritating rather than fun. Layers of robots and cameras, there's a section that gives you an automatic alert, the ending gives you another choice like at the end of chapter 2, but this time it doesn't matter and you get to do both. Also you don't go to the moonbase at the end even though the Samizdat guys directly talk about it. 6/10.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:16
|
|
|
Ometeotl posted:PUBG is made by Bluehole, a huge Korean studio who had a hit MMO I forget the name of.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:An indie developer can make a fantastic modernized Quake clone but they can't provide anywhere near the same level of marketing, online infrastructure, and so on. Nothing they make is ever going to attract the population of an Overwatch or Call of Duty LXVI, and multiplayer games in particular require a certain threshold of players to function. You can't have much in the way of skill-based matchmaking in a game played by 300 people in the world. I don't know what you're arguing though other than a new game that's exactly Quake 3 (which had hitscan weapons and a million skins). I don't know what these games are with weapons you "literally don't have to aim."
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
al-azad posted:I don't know what you're arguing though other than a new game that's exactly Quake 3 (which had hitscan weapons and a million skins). And I don't know what this sentence is trying to say. al-azad posted:I don't know what these games are with weapons you "literally don't have to aim." Not an Overwatch player, I take it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:37
|
|
|
There aren't any weapons in overwatch where you Literally Don't Have To Aim, are there? I don't like the auto-aim weapons like Winston's electric thingy but you still have to at least point yourself at an enemy, it doesn't just take care of it for you. Soldier 76's aimbot is pretty explicitly supposed to be a trump card and is his ultimate ability because the devs understand that not having to aim is so powerful.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:There aren't any weapons in overwatch where you Literally Don't Have To Aim, are there? Torbjörn's turret. It was a massive balancing issue on the console versions because the sole concept that you could damage people without having to aim was so powerful
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:43
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/NomComms/status/924007519680262144 .... I don't have a switch, have no way to get a switch anytime soon, but.... I want one...
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
CharlieFoxtrot posted:Can't a Doom-style run'n'gun FPS be done well with lower production values? Yea absolutely. Shadow Warrior, Painkiller, Serious Sam, probably a few others I'm forgetting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:And I don't know what this sentence is trying to say. I literally don't know what kind of game you're asking for? You're talking about multiplayer and how indie studios can't generate the kind of attention a AAA studio can so I can only assume you literally want Quake 3 to happen again with the popularity of Overwatch idk? CAPTAIN CAPSLOCK posted:Yea absolutely. Shadow Warrior, Painkiller, Serious Sam, probably a few others I'm forgetting. Throw in Devil Daggers and Dusk which is basically Blood done the style of Quake.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:57
|
|
|
CJacobs posted:There aren't any weapons in overwatch where you Literally Don't Have To Aim, are there? I don't like the auto-aim weapons like Winston's electric thingy but you still have to at least point yourself at an enemy, it doesn't just take care of it for you. Soldier 76's aimbot is pretty explicitly supposed to be a trump card and is his ultimate ability because the devs understand that not having to aim is so powerful. A 90+ degree lockon isn't aiming. Think about it in terms of why aiming is good in the first place -- why we would bother to test the ability to line up one dot with another bundle of dots. Like any good mechanic in a competitive game, it's about sorting people by skill, and sorting finely and proportionately enough that virtuoso play is both possible and worthwhile. Winston's not an awful character -- there are lots of other things for him to be good at -- but the mindset behind something like Winston or Symmetra or Mercy, that voice going "having to be good at aiming at the same time as positioning and resource management is too spooky for our players, we should make sure they don't have to do that" -- is especially depressing coming from the studio that made one of the highest skill-cap games of all time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
To compensate for that, both of the weapons you cited have really low range instead of the nigh infinite range of hitscan weapons and weapons like Lucio's blaster thing, meaning you have to get into basically melee range no matter what. The tradeoff is that aiming is less important and positioning is much more important. Like, you're free to be disappointed by that if you want. But to say that it's dragging down fps games that they're playing with elements of the games other than just raw shooting and the skill that precision itself takes, you're just straight-up wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
i think its fine, its a matter of accessibility and while there are characters that require aiming having something for people who might be newer to games that allows them to contribute to a team is important and ultimately gives the opportunity to those people to broaden their horizons and try other games in the future
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:05
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:A 90+ degree lockon isn't aiming. Think about it in terms of why aiming is good in the first place -- why we would bother to test the ability to line up one dot with another bundle of dots. Like any good mechanic in a competitive game, it's about sorting people by skill, and sorting finely and proportionately enough that virtuoso play is both possible and worthwhile. So you're saying that position and resource management isn't a skill in a game that's largely about position and resource management? Those characters aren't attackers, their weapons are tertiary. But if you think that means those characters don't have to be played with any skill you're mistaken. Going back to your Quake 3 analogy, you can be the absolute god at aiming but if you don't know the level layout and where health/ammo pickups are you'll lose every time. Those characters are about controlling resources and what's a gun without ammo?
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
Let me guess, the best games that "sort by skill" are the ones where the skill gating keeps you in as opposed to, say, just the people with the top 1000 twitch-reflex response times in the world
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:08
|
|
|
If Blizzard cared about fostering a competitive community they would take design lessons from the highly skill-intensive, unforgiving gameplay of Lawbreakers. But it seems like Overwatch will soon be doomed to obscurity.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
As a Rick and Morty fan and *Libertarian Gamer*, I can safely say that LawBreakers is the greatest video game of all time
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
It's not like the character's with lock on in Overwatch don't have their damage adjusted and move set adjusted to account for that. I don't really see why it's a problem to have those options, especially when you can play other styles if you want and it's also not like the classes that have kicking abilities are overpowered or don't require their own set of skills.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:11
|
|
|
al-azad posted:I literally don't know what kind of game you're asking for? You're talking about multiplayer and how indie studios can't generate the kind of attention a AAA studio can so I can only assume you literally want Quake 3 to happen again with the popularity of Overwatch idk? "Literally Quake again" would be a good start, but no, it's not quite what I'm asking for. 90s or early 2000s games weren't perfect, but they exhibit certain design principles that could be taken even further -- ideas about how you balance games, how you raise skill caps, how broad or narrow the range of skills you test should be, whether or not to embrace difficult-to-perform "glitches" when they make the game more interesting, and so on. I want developers to feel comfortable making games like Brood War where there are so many things going on at once, all of which benefit from precision input, that the fastest 18-year-old wunderkind in the world can't keep up. I want games like Tribes or Quake 3 where the act of moving around the level quickly involves a tremendous amount of map knowledge, mechanical control, and understanding of the game's physics engine. I want games like Marvel vs. Capcom 2 where every character played at a high level gets manifestly "unfair" advantages, and the game is about leveraging yours harder than the other guy's. I want games like Bloodline Champions where the devs advertised it by saying "every ability in the game must be aimed, is more effective when aimed well, and has no random element" because they knew that people liked and respected those qualities. If I had to summarize briefly, I would say that modern developers tend to overestimate the cost of complexity and underestimate the value of depth. Some very good game mechanics reduce accessibility; this is unfortunate, true, but instead it's treated as if it were disqualifying, and that sucks, especially when we have better tools than ever to increase accessibility without compromising gameplay. (In the form of matchmaking, online tutorials, ready access to streams and recordings of better players to imitate, and so on.) Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Oct 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
al-azad posted:So you're saying that position and resource management isn't a skill in a game that's largely about position and resource management? Those characters aren't attackers, their weapons are tertiary. But if you think that means those characters don't have to be played with any skill you're mistaken. Going back to your Quake 3 analogy, you can be the absolute god at aiming but if you don't know the level layout and where health/ammo pickups are you'll lose every time. Those characters are about controlling resources and what's a gun without ammo? I'm not and I don't understand how you could possibly get that from what I said. Like I literally address all of this in the post you're quoting. Tuxedo Catfish fucked around with this message at 18:17 on Oct 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
Part of your argument is that games shouldn't have to be accessible to everyone and attempting to be drags them down, but games like doom and quake are the most accessible fps games of all time because the shooting is all there is to them
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
It's not like games recently haven't tried to cater to the 'high skill gamer guzzling g-fuel' crowd. There have absolutely been games that have and they did not do well with the exception of fighting games. The industry has moved on, if unforgiving high skill cap games were the way to go we would see the resurgence of arena shooters like it was 1999.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:23
|
|
|
I'd be curious to see a turn of the century style fps with modern day logistics like matchmaking. The biggest turn off to games back then, that I heard from a lot of friends and family who hadn't been practicing since the mid nineties was that you'd log on to those games to play for an hour after work and the 16 year old kid who didn't have a job or a life and just practiced all day would instakill you seconds after spawning with heads Hots over and over. That's the mostly inevitable self-selection any high skill ceiling game will experience over time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:24
|
|
|
Tuxedo Catfish posted:I'm not and I don't understand how you could possibly get that from what I said. You called it depressing that characters focused on resource management don't have to be good at aiming like a character with a sniper rifle. That's not their focus and making them also have laser aim actively harms their purpose in the game while adding absolutely nothing to the design of the game. Frankly I think you underestimate the level of skill that actually goes into these games. I know it's fun to rag on CoD and Blizzard for corporate nonsense but the people who are truly good understand the game inside and out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 1, 2024 06:14 |
|
|
CJacobs posted:Part of your argument is that games shouldn't have to be accessible to everyone and attempting to be drags them down, but games like doom and quake are the most accessible fps games of all time because the shooting is all there is to them I don't think that's really true though? Games that emphasize any mechanic with a high skill ceiling are intimidating because the ability to be very good at something necessarily implies the possibility of being really bad at something, and that comes at a cost in accessibility. On top of that the more narrow the range of skills, the fewer people are good at that one thing, specifically; narrowing your focus comes at a cost in accessibility. One could imagine a game that's narrowed down to (almost) a single metric -- something like running a 50-yard dash. Quake and its close relatives aren't that, there's, as I alluded to, aim, movement, positioning, resource management, respawn timings, etc. On the other hand I think it's true that some things which are perceived as inaccessible or alienating sometimes aren't. For example, Capcom made huge cuts to the gameplay of Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite compared to the previous two games in the series in the name of simplicity, and that game flopped horrendously. I'm sure some of that is down to "no mutants" and "ugly faces," but some of it could also have been what we're talking about here. Ostentatious posted:It's not like games recently haven't tried to cater to the 'high skill gamer guzzling g-fuel' crowd. There have absolutely been games that have and they did not do well with the exception of fighting games. Exactly. I'm not saying "this is bad because they would be so much more financially successful if they did things my way." I'm saying that, as always, capitalism corrodes aesthetics. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2017 18:28
|
|