|
Breetai posted:All of the best FPS games were released back when people called them "Doom
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 02:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:46 |
|
|
runnypoops posted:Im so sick of the Slay The Spire rip offs not one of them captures the feel of it I've been playing similar games. Ratropolis? Good. Star Renegade? Okay but the interface is poo poo. One Step from Eden? Good but my brain isn't exactly good at dodging and paying attention to what spell I have. I think Monster Train is my favorite of the not Slay the Spires. I think I might like it more even though I've played it less. edit: Oh I forgot Griftlands. It's good but I found the plot prevented it from giving as smooth an experience as Slay the Spire. edit 2: Well I suppose Step From Eden isn't all that similar, but it's still good. Duck and Cover fucked around with this message at 07:18 on Jul 14, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 02:47
|
|
|
Breetai posted:All of the best FPS games were released back when people called them "Doom clones". We need a current gen Redneck Rampage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 03:05
|
|
|
I have over 400 hours in StS and haven't found any StS clone that interests me at all really. The one exception is Loop Hero, but even that I played far less and it doesn't have so much in common with StS anyway. StS is so popular because everything was playtested a lot and the game is extremely well balanced as a result (even if you account for Watcher being stronger than the other characters). More importantly, every decision is interesting and really matters, you rarely get to a point where you're so OP by the halfway point that you can just click on random cards for the rest of the run. I think the fact that it's a deckbuilder roguelike has little to do with it's success. I would much rather play a classical dungeon crawler with StS-level balancing than any other mediocre StS clone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 07:50
|
|
|
I miss old single player games, especially RPGs, that gave no fucks about balancing by the end. The numbers were in line, everything checked out. But once you got to the end game you could break it and the game was totally chill. Because let's face it, if you're a wizard or something and you can modify poo poo why would you not break the system if you could? There was an old rear end dungeon crawler called Morder: Depths of Dejenol. It ruled. Extremely difficult game but once you got momentum you could make your character(s) quite badass. It could get ridiculous but it was just fun anyway. I'm tired of every game being like "no, even tho story wise you're a god or whatever we have to keep the numbers sensible or the enemies always on par!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 07:54
|
|
|
hell yeah, balance usually just means that everyone is equally shite
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 07:59
|
|
|
Yeah honestly the more I think about the more it annoys me. Like, what, even tho you're supposed to have superpowers or you're a wizard or a god or what the gently caress ever amazing person you're meant to be, things have to be sensible and (the worst) enemies have to always be a challenge? I get that games are better generally when there's balance. But drat it, if I play a game for like 60+ hours and I never feel like the amazing hero I'm meant to be then it just feels poo poo. No matter how much your character gets better it doesn't matter because the random henchmen are still challenging. I want a game that gives you options that break the game in a fun way. Like gently caress it, sure, build your character right and you can zip around and teleport and lift things with your mind or whatever because it's been sixty hours and I don't want a loving challenge any more, I wanna throw minions around like loaves of stale loving bread.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 08:09
|
|
|
Rutibex posted:ahahaha of course they have firmware updates to block MadCatz controllers. wow i haven't bought a modern console since PS3 i didn't realize how bad it has gotten Lol
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 08:26
|
|
|
Duck and Cover posted:Sonic Spinball is the best Sonic game. Well maybe Sonic pinball wins. There's this pacman game that's a pacman game and a pinball cabinet, called baby pacman. Owns. I played it at this bar that had about 6 extremely rare pinball and video games for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 08:30
|
|
|
Old school FPS games are fun and still hold up well but it's crazy how hyperbolic people can get about how good they are. Like, it's probably the most explored genre in video game history at this point and encompasses every style of game you could imagine, but that wont stop people from claiming they piqued when you just walked around a maze of the same corridor for 10 hours and aimed in the general direction of some 2d sprites.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 08:35
|
|
|
Caesar Saladin posted:hell yeah, balance usually just means that everyone is equally shite That sounds like poor balancing in my opinion. Good balancing to me doesn't mean that every option you can take in a game is equally good (or bad), it means that everything has it's place and that there are no pointless decisions. If everything's equally poo poo then that's just as boring as when there's one objectively best strategy that works every time. Slay the Spire has some extremely broken card combinations that are far better than almost everything else (Nightmare+Wraith Form comes to mind) and you feel extremely powerful when you get them (they're usually very rare), but even the boring basic cards all serve an important function. There are situations where you might want to take a card that's terrible 99.99% of the time but actually really helpful in your specific situation. Moreover, the enemies all get so powerful by the end that you really have to play well or get one of the broken combos, especially if you want to kill the superboss. If a game lets you get OP there should be a way to let you test how OP you are exactly, either by an optional superboss or a really hard endgame. Otherwise there's no point in getting powerful.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 08:37
|
|
|
syntaxfunction posted:I miss old single player games, especially RPGs, that gave no fucks about balancing by the end. The numbers were in line, everything checked out. But once you got to the end game you could break it and the game was totally chill. Because let's face it, if you're a wizard or something and you can modify poo poo why would you not break the system if you could? I'm the opposite. I can't stand when I spend all of this time learning a game and the game just gives up half way through, once I am finally good at it. Backwards difficulty curve is probably the number one thing that makes me bounce off games and get bored with them. I feel like this is super prevalent in modern games though. I associate it with modern open world stuff more than any older stuff. Like, the game is decently fun and challenging. I'm really getting used to it's systems and controls and then all of sudden I've bought my way into it having no challenge whatsoever via upgrades and then it just gets dull. Apparently this is also an unpopular opinion, because most people seem to disagree with me and would rather just do god mode for the last half of the game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 08:44
|
|
|
syntaxfunction posted:Yeah honestly the more I think about the more it annoys me. Like, what, even tho you're supposed to have superpowers or you're a wizard or a god or what the gently caress ever amazing person you're meant to be, things have to be sensible and (the worst) enemies have to always be a challenge? It's stupid to see Dull Henchman #2 grow to have 9999 HP for some reason. There's always been a little bit of the obvious thing, where what used to be the big scary baddie becomes the low-level baddie in a later area. But I've never seen it taken to its obvious conclusion, that is: every level there's one or two new big baddies, and the old baddies stay around with the same stats and moves, but they become massively more numerous, so there's a sea of rats and wolves trying to kill you, but they get mowed down incidentally as you focus on whatever the new big bad guy is, which you are more than capable of killing with your huge wizard powers and guns, but by the end they're so big and bad that you look like an ant fighting titans
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 08:45
|
|
|
syntaxfunction posted:Yeah honestly the more I think about the more it annoys me. Like, what, even tho you're supposed to have superpowers or you're a wizard or a god or what the gently caress ever amazing person you're meant to be, things have to be sensible and (the worst) enemies have to always be a challenge? Witcher 3's final DLC did something about this from the fluff / ludonarrative sense; it's post-post-endgame DLC, and so when you walk into town everyone treats you as a renowned hero and acts appropriately. There's a few other nice things, and you suddenly realize how much difference they made when you return to the main game and some rear end in a top hat tries to send you on a fetch quest in the middle of the rain.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 08:45
|
|
|
Pathfinder km is quite good for that with the optional turn based mode, because when you roll into an easy encounter midgame you just select all and point them in the direction of whomever you wish to have gelatinised
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 09:08
|
|
|
syntaxfunction posted:I miss old single player games, especially RPGs, that gave no fucks about balancing by the end. The numbers were in line, everything checked out. But once you got to the end game you could break it and the game was totally chill. Because let's face it, if you're a wizard or something and you can modify poo poo why would you not break the system if you could? The Surge 2 is better than the original in every way except one: the new game+ mode. Briefly, they're both soulslike games where the majority of your character's useful combat abilities and stats are governed by mountable implants that you find dotted around as the game progresses. In Surge 2 if you pick up an implant in NG+ that you already have, it just gives you a large amount of generic resources instead. But in the original you would get a copy of the implant you already have. And if mounted its effects would stack. Which means that your first playthrough would be a well balanced challenge, and successive playthroughs would be all about selectively pumping stats and abilities well beyond the thresholds they were designed for and breaking the game over your knee. An implant that heals 30% of your health when you execute an enemy is one thing. Three of them working in tandem is quite another.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 09:12
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:Old school FPS games are fun and still hold up well but it's crazy how hyperbolic people can get about how good they are. Like, it's probably the most explored genre in video game history at this point and encompasses every style of game you could imagine, but that wont stop people from claiming they piqued when you just walked around a maze of the same corridor for 10 hours and aimed in the general direction of some 2d sprites. About 2 years ago I went through every major singleplayer FPS and liked exactly Doom and Doom 2. I thought I didn't like FPS but also vaguely remembered liking Doom so I went back and played it and thought oh man this is amazing maybe I do actually like FPS! But no, literally nothing else interested me just through it's shooting. I like FPS hybrids like Deus Ex or Fallout: New Vegas or Farcry 3, where the shooting wasn't really the main draw. And I've enjoyed counter-strike and battlefield in the past for multiplayer. But when it comes to just straight up shooting AI I only really like the first 2 Doom games. The games play so very differently from literally every other FPS it's insane to me. Even the "Doom clones" don't play similar. Nor do the "old school" FPS games we've had more recently, which mostly play like Quake. And none of the Doom sequels are even close.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 09:27
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:Old school FPS games are fun and still hold up well but it's crazy how hyperbolic people can get about how good they are. Like, it's probably the most explored genre in video game history at this point and encompasses every style of game you could imagine, but that wont stop people from claiming they piqued when you just walked around a maze of the same corridor for 10 hours and aimed in the general direction of some 2d sprites. I will probably replay Doom another 100 times before i touch a call of duty campaign.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 09:44
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:I'm the opposite. I can't stand when I spend all of this time learning a game and the game just gives up half way through, once I am finally good at it. Backwards difficulty curve is probably the number one thing that makes me bounce off games and get bored with them. I feel like this is super prevalent in modern games though. I associate it with modern open world stuff more than any older stuff. Coming at this perpendicularly I think it boils down to a broader sense of gameplay pacing. You definitely don't want the player to just roll over the second half of the game because you accidentally included exponential scaling, but if you keep things too tightly wound then it just feels like the player is treading water, always vaguely ahead of the enemies but only by a half-step or worse not at all. The #1 problem, and the reason why open world games are especially prone to it, is because they use RPG systems to provide a sense of progression that is then wholly divorced from the entire rest of the game. There ends up being a distinct lack of care in balancing or somehow compensating for player A that blazes through the story missions and gives zero shits about loving around in side content and player B that shows up to the final mission with all the unlocks and upgrades. And even when a game does try to equalize these two extremes, the most arbitrary and lovely methods are employed. See: any game where the skill tree seems expansive and never-ending and full of possibilities and then oops drat near every last skill is actually locked behind story progression. Dumb. On a separate note, there's also the final boss dichotomy that's a bit of a microcosm of this problem: Should final bosses of games be the absolutely most challenging encounter, thoroughly and exhaustively testing all of player's skills and pushing them to their limits? Or should final bosses be comparatively laid back, more of a story-first experiential bow to tie around the rest of the game that leaves the player going out feeling good instead of frustrated (generally leaving the tougher challenge for either 2/3rds through with a rival fight or post-game with a super hard bonus boss)? I don't think there's a singular correct answer there. John Murdoch fucked around with this message at 10:13 on Jul 12, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 10:03
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:I'm the opposite. I can't stand when I spend all of this time learning a game and the game just gives up half way through, once I am finally good at it. Backwards difficulty curve is probably the number one thing that makes me bounce off games and get bored with them. I feel like this is super prevalent in modern games though. I associate it with modern open world stuff more than any older stuff. Yeah, I definitely agree with you. It's the same reason why I can't stand New Game+ modes, especially in JRPGs. Making number go up is half of the game, if you already start with big number what's the point?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 10:43
|
|
|
veni veni veni posted:Old school FPS games are fun and still hold up well but it's crazy how hyperbolic people can get about how good they are. Like, it's probably the most explored genre in video game history at this point and encompasses every style of game you could imagine, but that wont stop people from claiming they piqued when you just walked around a maze of the same corridor for 10 hours and aimed in the general direction of some 2d sprites. When I was younger, the appeal of FPSes was that they used to be the games with the most impressive graphics/technology behind them, at least on PC. Now that's been mostly taken over by open world games, so interest in FPses seems to have reduced accordingly. I guess people who like boomer shooters (I don't) are nostalgic for a time where FPSes used to be the most popular genre.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 10:49
|
|
|
I like the old shooters because you get to spend every minute of your play time having fun, instead of watching cutscenes or listening to dialog and thinking about how fun the game might be once it lets you play.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 10:51
|
|
|
The real trick to Doom is that it has actual level design.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 10:58
|
|
|
i feel like most people that like old shooters are just gen x dudes who have abandoned any enthusiasm or energy for new video games and just keep playing them out of habit
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 11:15
|
|
|
Sally posted:Max Payne 3 is also an excellent cover shooter for the same reasons as Vanquish... you are encouraged to not use the cover. I beat MP3 again a few months ago and I think I spent 5 minutes in cover total. It feels like it has the feature because it’s expected now but didn’t have it as a major part of the game design.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 11:22
|
|
|
Caesar Saladin posted:i feel like most people that like old shooters are just gen x dudes who have abandoned any enthusiasm or energy for new video games and just keep playing them out of habit Whatever you say boy, I'll just play anything that's not a modern military shooter battle royale grind levels for skins nightmare. I've put like 75 hours into Apex Legends and over 100 into warzone and the best way to win is to avoid shooting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 11:29
|
|
|
i don't understand that post at all, the two lines seem to completely contradict eachother in every way
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 11:31
|
|
|
Most modern shooters are poo poo, OP
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 11:36
|
|
|
but you have 175 hours into two modern shooters
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 11:39
|
|
|
That's how I know
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 11:45
|
|
|
I feel like there's definitely balance in the whole power balancing thing in games. My personal opinion probably falls more along the lines of numbers can be fine and balanced but if a player wants to take the time to figure out a build that works so well for them that they can exploit it who cares. This is largely why I singled out single player games. Alright keep the numbers good. But let's say a player can, through planning or whatever, get skill A which is balanced, and skill B which is also balanced. But combined they produce an effect or technique that is really powerful. I honestly don't see why that is a problem. Like who cares, you're playing by yourself. If it's so broken don't take it or use it the broken way. Balance is important and good. But not everything has to be perfectly balanced, and I'd rather more unbalanced but fun things than perfectly balanced and boring.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 11:50
|
|
|
Mescal posted:There's this pacman game that's a pacman game and a pinball cabinet, called baby pacman. Owns. I played it at this bar that had about 6 extremely rare pinball and video games for some reason.  The Pac-man half of Baby Pac-man is the jankiest, knocked-out-in-a-weekend-for-a-dorm-pc version of Pac-man. It's shockingly bad. The pinball isn't good either, and the way they merge isn't great, but that Pac-man is nearly unplayable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 12:05
|
|
|
Vic posted:That's how I know if you played a game for 100 hours you obviously liked it, otherwise you are an insane person
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 12:17
|
|
|
Caesar Saladin posted:if you played a game for 100 hours you obviously liked it, otherwise you are an insane person The warframe thread title used to be “why do I have 1000 hours in this terrible game” and I can see it. There’s definitely games where you can enjoy yourself and hate them at the same time. For me it’s War Thunder.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 12:28
|
|
|
Caesar Saladin posted:if you played a game for 100 hours you obviously liked it, otherwise you are an insane person No. It's how I keep in touch with my friends - playing a F2P game everybody owns, talking and shooting poo poo sometimes. Are you familiar with those games? You spend a lot of time waiting. Those games are basically a step up from staring at a wall.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 12:32
|
|
|
syntaxfunction posted:
Game balance aside this is the best kind of skill system and is entirely the reason why Transistor is such a great game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 12:48
|
|
|
Vic posted:No. sounds like you have a great time playing them with your friends for 175 hours combined but i suppose i have seen your steam stats. If you enjoyed them you'd probably have 1500 hours in them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 12:48
|
|
|
runnypoops posted:Im so sick of the Slay The Spire rip offs not one of them captures the feel of it no you are wrong. it is fantastic that so many people are cloning it because you get a gem 1% of the time, and thats all you need https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZZuo7Xpmqs
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 14:33
|
|
|
That's not a slay the spire clone dummy, it's a megaman battle network clone
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 14:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 14:46 |
|
|
veni veni veni posted:Old school FPS games are fun and still hold up well but it's crazy how hyperbolic people can get about how good they are. Like, it's probably the most explored genre in video game history at this point and encompasses every style of game you could imagine, but that wont stop people from claiming they piqued when you just walked around a maze of the same corridor for 10 hours and aimed in the general direction of some 2d sprites. FPS did peak at mazes. every development afterwards is just putting lipstick on a pig. FPS is a genre about shooting guys in a maze, that is its essence. anything else is cruft https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C4yIxUOWrtw
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2021 14:38
|
|