|
Soul Reaver posted:Because it was a bug that resulted in nonsense in the second game and prevented a decision you made in ME1 being acknowledged in ME2, despite ME2 having been designed to do so. Fixing this bug would probably have been pretty easy too - all it required was for it to correcly set the flags during your conversation with Conrad in ME1 (and/or save them that way in the export file). Keep in mind that they wouldn't have needed to patch or explain anything in ME3 if they'd done so at the point they discovered the error (which was before ME3's development was complete.) I understand what you're saying here, but uh....have you watched the credits on any AAA title you've played? A LOT of people are involved in making a game that size. Fixing a bug costs money, and time. It's not as simple as "just go in and fix a few lines of code - easy peasy." It has to go through QA all over again (on every platform it's released for), and then it has to be pushed out to however many million people bought the original game. For a game that is no longer the current title, hasn't been touched in years, that's way too much time, effort and money to fix a non-critical bug which literally only results in missing a conversation option for which you are likely one of 10 people in the entire world who actually cares. Much easier to just retcon it in a later title like they did and leave it as a nod and a wink to people who caught it. Granted, there are times when the fix involves changing a line in a config file somewhere like the bug with Garrus' face mentioned, but usually it's not that easy, plus even if it is - a company has to go through their QA process on every platform, no matter how small the change. If they don't consider it worth it to do that for something which isn't critical, they won't.
|
#
¿
May 18, 2015 12:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 14:57 |
|
|
SiKboy posted:Most of it was was actually published in english, but the end was cut off. Masterful.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 20, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
This thread has been going on so long I can't recall if I have seen this one or not: The old Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Infocom text adventure game had a good one. Anytime you checked inventory throughout the game, it would say something like: quote:You have: But "no tea" was always the first thing listed. (You are playing as Arthur Dent, who is constantly trying to find actual tea) At some point near the end game, there is some sort of inventory limit or some artificial requirement imposed whereby you need to free up an inventory slot, but the only thing you don't need is "no tea". But there's no way to drop it because of how the game's parser works. Typing "drop no tea" results in an appropriate nonsensical response. I forget the exact solution now because it's probably been 20 years, but something removes the last bit of your sanity, and then the game will let you "drop no tea" because trying to do that before is insane. Or something. Anyway. Good one, Infocom.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2015 15:27
|
|
|
Hirayuki posted:
Ah yes. You're bringing back all kinds of memories. I really liked the old Infocom games back in the day. The HP Lovecraft one was really good too. That loving janitor on the floor waxer. 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2015 14:19
|
|
I remember getting stuck early on and buying the novel thinking it would help. It didn't, not much--I got the Invisiclues booklet eventually--but I'm glad it got me into the Hitchhiker books, anyway.
|
Digirat posted:https://www.reddit.com/r/DarkSouls2/comments/264t6s/the_actual_truth_about_hitboxes Soulsborne is my favorite series of games ever and I abhor Dark Souls 2. I can't imagine why anyone would defend it. It has all the problems people accused Demon's and Dark 1 of having (artificial difficulty!) when they didn't, and for some reason there are people who defend it. Yes - the quality of life improvements with the interface are better but that's literally it. Everything about the game, the story and the gameplay is TERRIBLE. While not as bad as Lords of the Fallen - it has the same problem - it feels like a Souls game done by someone who didn't quite "get it." Demon's/Dark 1/Bloodborne are all difficult in their own ways, but they are very rarely utter bullshit like Dark 2 is. That whole page full of hitbox nonsense bears this out. Add in enemies on turntables and it just gets worse and worse.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
Nuebot posted:Izalith was where the developers gave up. Don't the floating ballsack dragon statue guys not even have a death animation or something? You kill them and they just kind of fade away. One of the bosses is a recolor of a boss who was already another boss with a different weapon. At least there's a lore reason for the boss recolor - he and the other 2 are all brothers. DemonBros. You think the statue guys look like ballsacks? I always called them turd demons. They look like poop. The dragon butts tho. Yeah no idea. I'm too busy running past them to prevent my EYES FROM BLEEDING to really take a long look at them. That lava texture is the worst thing since worst things were even a thing. As for more thread content: Checked out the demo of Dying Light last night. I should preface this by saying that I really really wanted to like Dead Island, from the same developers, but I just....couldn't. Certain first-person engines are nausea inducing for me and I don't know why. I can't play Skyrim at all for this reason. Dead Island wasn't as bad - since I could play maybe 45 minutes before needing a break. But the clunky as poo poo combat, HP sponge/tank enemies and ridiculous weapon degradation stuff all sucked. Hard. And I was really trying to like it. So I was hoping that in Dying Light they had learned from their mistakes. Eh. Sorta. The combat is still super clunky. Enemies still feel HP spongy. The weapon degradation is slightly improved and at least I don't have to go find a workbench to repair it. The engine is slightly less nausea inducing as I only felt slightly woozy after the hour of gameplay the demo had. I think my biggest problem is: the zombies are a little too smart for you know....zombies. Even the basic mooks can see you from way too far of a distance and figure out a path to get to you even if it's complicated - which seems odd for theoretically "mindless" zombies. You get firecrackers which you are supposed to use as a distraction, but they don't work very well. You toss them in one direction and run in the other, look back, and most of the horde is coming after you anyway. The fast moving ones are even worse, since they will straight up dodge attacks and flip around like ninjas. Rotting corpses, flipping around like ninjas. I guess all this can be handwaved away with "not zombies, but infected humans" and fine - but it's not like most non-infected humans are physically capable of jumping around like ninjas, zombie or no. I only played a little bit of night time, but the "virals" or whatever they're called are pretty bullshit as well. The combat stamina system seems to make no sense either. I can parkour all around, jumping on top of cars and pulling up onto roofs and ledges and zip across trainyards, but I can't swing an axe 4 times without suddenly getting winded? I'm not asking for realism in my zombie simulator - but internal consistency would be nice. Yeah so - won't be picking up the full version, methinks. I will continue biding my time until Dark Souls III
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2016 13:56
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 14:57 |
|
|
aardwolf posted:Could you be getting motion sickness? I've found that lots of games with a small default field-of-view make me want to vomit (I'm looking at you Half Life 2 Oh it's definitely motion sickness. I meant I don't know why some engines are fine and some aren't. Usually for PC games I can adjust View Bob and FOV and make it somewhat better but I still haven't found a catch-all solution that just fixes it. I game primarily on console now anyway, and they usually don't have anywhere near as many options for adjusting.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2016 17:44
|
|