I’d downvote this comment because it’s not a guilty pleasure at all, but I’ll upvote it instead because Link’s Awakening is a beautiful game, and I had it as a kid too :)
Final Fantasy VIII impressed me in my childhood and since then I’ve finished it 4–5 times. The story is a bit of a mess and doesn’t make sense sometimes, the fighting mechanics are peculiar, but the game is very dear to my heart. Thinking about giving it another go now, ha!
As a kid I picked up VIII before VII (thanks to demo discs) and it has always been my favourite FF game despite its predecessor’s huge shadow. Learning all of the quirks of the games systems felt really rewarding, though I can understand why it didn’t appeal to many.
I just mash mod key + backspace on hyprland to kill it haha. Bye mfer!
But also sometimes lately hyprland hasn’t been playing as nice with steam games and my mouse doesn’t interact with the game. The fix I found is to fling the steam client over to the other monitor. Works I guess. Linux problems lol.
Relatedly, I’ve noticed ports of console games, particularly by Japanese devs, and especially Sqeenix, not actually having an option to quit to desktop. Sometimes hitting Esc will pop a plain system theme window with an option to close the program, but I’ve seen ones that didn’t even have that and had to be killed externally. It’s not as bad as it used to be, but even exiting DragonQuest 11 is a pain.
This is also hella common in a lot of online or multiplayer live service games recently. Forces you to alt-F4 if on PC. Especially bad with Sony’s playstation ports; they treat it like you’re on the PS5 and can just switch games to automatically close the running one.
I just want to let you know that when I was director of production at a multimedia studio, one of the rules in my ux design “bible” was that an interface must never present an “are you sure” prompt to a Quit action. Yes there were fights over it.
Historically, it was conventional to have a “you have unsaved work” in a typical GUI application if you chose to quit, since otherwise, quit was a destructive action without confirmation.
Unless video games save on exit, you typically always have “unsaved work” in a video game, so I sort of understand where many video game devs are coming from if they’re trying to implement analogous behavior.
There’s a roguelike I play, which combats save-scumming by only giving one save slot per character. And so the only reason to save the game, is when you’re done playing. So, you hit Ctrl+S to save, and it instantly quits as well. 🙃
Which is interesting, because at least for me, the main reason I try to save often like that is because of games like bethesda games or other games that don’t autosave and will crash, losing you HUGE amounts of progress.
Gameplay settings menus that allow you to turn off gameplay mechanisms you simply don’t enjoy, or tune them.
I’m talking about ones that are like one line of code being set to true instead of false etc. That type of thing.
Basically things like that and the Atomfall gameplay/difficulty settings menu
I don’t give a fuck if some pretentious asses “artistic vision” requires the player to backtrack half way across a level on every death or thinks a shitty minigame should be played no less than 153 times every play through. I want to be able to just turn off the unfun shit, and leave on the fun shit.
This is a game. I don’t care if the developer thinks X Y or Z adds to the experience. If I don’t, within reason I should just be able to turn it off.
I disagree because it solely approaches games as some sort of “electronic commodity” and outright despises a development group’s artistry.
Sure, not every game is trying to be art. But games have long gone beyond the realm of simply “entertain me”. That opinion is like saying “books should be made in a way that allows users to change the story whenever and however they want.” It is something you can do but there’s no imperative to cater to it.
I disagree because it solely approaches games as some sort of “electronic commodity” and outright despises a development group’s artistry.
This is meaningless pretentious gibberish. It’s like saying that watching movie on an unintended device is disrespecting the playwright.
Why should your desire to put entertaining past times on a pedestal restrict what I should be able to do.
If you feel that way, then play games as they intend. There is no reason to be against other people having an option just because you don’t like it.
You are in essence gatekeeping enjoying a video game as a concept. Like people must enjoy them the way you envision.
That opinion is like saying “books should be made in a way that allows users to change the story whenever and however they want.” It is something you can do but there’s no imperative to cater to it.
This makes no sense at all as an analogy. Books don’t run on game engines and don’t have recycled bits of logic that game mechanics are comprised of that can be mass changed to great effect. The feature you’re describing would require the equivalent of writing the book a million times over. The changes Im describing are often accomplished on day one by modders, or just included by the developers as a quality of life feature set.
You are in essence gatekeeping enjoying a video game as a concept. Like people must enjoy them the way you envision.
What an incredibly inaccurate statement. I love modding video games, I spend more time modding video games than I spend playing video games. I understand that the vision developers have doesn’t often align with what I want from their product.
I don’t agree that developers should be spending dev cycles making a game functional for a user that turns off any configuration of gameplay mechanics.
Saying you can just set a variable from “true to false” is so laughably misunderstanding what goes into software development much less game development that it sounds entitled. What gameplay mechanics are you even saying should be configurable? All of them? Just turn off the combat in a fighting game? At what point is a gameplay mechanic integral to the genre/experience? And who is the person or persons that decide?
Developers should be free to create what they want, and the end user is free to mod it however they want. That includes, for the devs, not purposefully obfuscating things so that modding is more diffcult.
don’t know how many, if any, settings matching the true/false + 1 line of code restraints even exist.
Absolutely. For example, turning off running out of stamina, removing item loss, turning off minigames is close.
There are tons. Atomfall has a ton of options that are similarly simple.
If you can change a setting, even if it’s a binary choice, someone had to think about, implement and test everything pertaining to these choices.
Nah. Some choices just arent that complicated. I think you’re over complicating it. We can especially see that this is true in many games where things are modded in. Like in Cyberpunk, just not having to play the minigames is a better experience imo. Like its slightly more than the one line hyperbole, but not much.
Depending on what kind of mechanic we’re talking about and how deeply integrated into the rest of the game this mechanic is, that could be a big task.
I feel like you’re getting away from the spirit of my comment here/getting carried away with finding exceptions and technicalities to this thread about no game in particular and hypothetical wishlists of features.
I didn’t mean to get caught up in exceptions or exaggerations. I’m no developer either, so I have zero background-knowledge about game-development or game-engines.
Though as I work in IT (again, no developer) and live within a zero-IT-knowledge friend circle, I tend to try and shine a little light on some things that, to the outside, might seem simple but maybe aren’t. I guess sometimes I’m trying to err on the side of caution a little too much.
I definitely think there are a few of those one-line, true/false settings that could just be toggled, especially things that are handled by the engine instead of the game-logic itself, though I cannot speak of experience here.
I don’t give a fuck if some pretentious asses “artistic vision” requires the player to backtrack half way across a level on every death or thinks a shitty minigame should be played no less than 153 times every play through.
Then just don’t play that game or use cheats (if its a singleplayer game)?
I don’t see why a game developer needs to intentionally provide an option to remove mechanics they designed a game around just to please someone that doesn’t want to play the game as they designed it.
Lets talk about QTEs as an example. Because for QTEs, a developer can easily add an option to entirely circumvent them, with just a single boolean and a single line of code in the QTE input method.
I think that, for accessibility reasons, it is perfectly reasonable to ask for an option to switch between tapping a button and holding a button to complete a QTE. I think it is unreasonable to ask developers for an option to completely remove QTEs from their game (such as auto-succeed/auto-complete). For many games, this would turn an interactive part of the game which is normally followed by an uninteractive cutscene into an uninteractive cutscene immediately followed by another uninteractive cutscene. Players that disable QTEs could easily be sitting through very long stretches of uninteractive parts of the game instead of interacting with the game, leading to those players complaining about long cutscenes since they usually completely forget they disabled QTEs.
Shenmue has Quick Time Events. A lot of them. If someone hates QTEs, it would be better for them not to play the game at all than to play without them. It is a core part of the intended experience that enhances the player’s time with the game. You get to interact with the cutscene instead of dropping the controller and turning off your brain. As a player, you pay more attention and keep your controller ready because at any moment you could be hit with a QTE and you want to be ready for that. You as a player have anticipation, excitement, nervousness, fear, etc that the developer makes you feel using mechanics like QTEs. You are more engaged with the game than someone that wants those deleted from the game, and in the end that means you will get more enjoyment out of the game. Someone that wants that turned off wants to play a different game.
Not every game is made for every person. And thats okay, thats good even.
I also think ANY game should have a “full potato” mode capable of running in older computers with NONE of the fancy graphics stuff that we have access to today, despite having a decent computer now.
Problem is that the fancy graphics stuff isn’t just additive.
For example, raytracing is actually relatively simple to implement, since you just make light behave like it does in real-world physics, according to a couple relatively straightforward rules and material properties.
Lighting without raytracing involves tons of smokes and mirrors hacks and workarounds. For example, mirrors were often faked by building the same room behind the wall, with everything inverted, including the player character’s animations.
So, making a game with potato graphics typically requires building a second version of the game.
Of course, there can be a mode that does just turn off the additive stuff, so only that which does not require changing the game implementation. But that can just be one of the graphics presets…
Customisable difficulty. Have a single or multiple presets balanced to what you’d like your players to experience but give me an option to adjust some of the stuff to my liking. There are SO MANY games I’d love to play way more than I do but none of the difficulty options feel “right”, bringing the whole experience down.
It’s also a great feature from an accessibility standpoint - pretty important thing for those who literally can’t play your game for reasons that could be easily worked around if such customisation was there.
“But my artistic integrity and vision!”
No, shut up. Your vision doesn’t mean squat if my experience with the game is annoying to the point where I don’t even care about the lore implication of an enemy placement or how gameplay systems intertwine with themes and story of the game. It’s important, sure, but it shouldn’t be more important than player’s enjoyment of your product.
Balance your game how you imagine it but let me play with the sliders to make it feel how I want it to. Just drop a scary message about it not being the intended way to play and it’ll be fine.
I’m generally with you, but there are implications for the online game and matchmaking in the likes of Dark Souls games. By the time they got to Elden Ring, they seemed to care way less about things like invasions.
Oh totally, I’m mostly focusing on solo and co-op titles like Terraria/Minecraft/Raft or whatever is popular for multiplayer these days. That said, it’s not like Souls games have to by played with online functionality even now - it’s already off when not in human form after all.
It’s not a perfect choice for every single title but a good chunk of games could support it without worrying about matchmaking and the like.
No, shut up. Your vision doesn’t mean squat if my experience with the game is annoying to the point where I don’t even care
Nah, miss me with this bullshit. Not every game is for you, and it doesn’t have to be. An artist is not required to water down their vision because you’re picky.
I agree to an extent but there’s a difference between “we made a specific design choice because it fits with what we want the game to convey” and “well, normal mode works like X and feels super easy to anyone experienced with gaming but on hard all the enemies are bullet sponges with 5x HP and player dies in one hit”. The latter approach brings nothing to the table and that’s what I’m against. Plus already mentioned accessibility options for those who need them.
Besides, many games ALREADY HAVE easy modes - giving me ability to adjust things manually (which in my case is usually up, not down) wouldn’t affect their vision any more than it’s already possible.
Monopoly has been one of the most popular board games for about a century, and hardly anyone plays by all of the official rules. Once I buy a game, if I want to play with house rules, I should be able to. Putting the sliders and such in game, even with the warning message mentioned above, just makes it easier to do so without having to rely on the community to make mods.
I have successfully (?) played (sometimes semi-suffered, cough, Sekiro) through a buncha popular hard games and have a way less „strong“ opinion on this but also think that an „easy mode“ as an accessibility feature is a good thing.
If, for example, a parent wants to connect with their child and also experience that game they‘re playing, it‘s really no big deal to me if they could turn on easy mode in, say, Sekiro to stand a chance. Not like it‘d impact my own experience at all, and I don‘t feel the need to force them to go through my own experience either. In Celeste, for instance, you can literally fly through the whole game if it makes you happy, and yet I still grabbed all strawberries the normal way and don‘t care if others did as well or just flew to them.
It‘s less of a demand from me and more of a „if you can you should definitely include it,“ though. Obviously doesn‘t work for full on competitive multiplayer titles or something similar though.
Not even sure how much of this addresses your remark specifically, but my feelings on this felt best placed below yours lol
Sekiro can be used to make an interesting point about easy mode. One could argue that the first playthrough is the easy mode because in new game plus you can give away Kuro’s charm which means only perfect blocks prevent chip damage. Does easy mode mean it has to easier or does it mean it has to be without challenge?
Absolutely. Normal is easy mode, charmless is normal mode and charmless with bell demon is true hard mode. After I completed a charmless run, normal really did feel so much easier.
Whether it should have a dedicated “easy” mode or not, I’m really torn. It took me months to get through my first playthrough but the sense of achievement was immense and like no other gaming experience before. I simply wouldn’t have had that feeling without the struggle. But I also have no accessibility concerns so it’s a very one sided opinion.
I’m fully of the opinion that difficulty is a matter of determination. If a quadriplegic can beat Elden Ring then I really don’t know what kind of a disability someone would have to have to not be able to play difficult games.
I’m not against difficulty options. I turn the difficulty down in some games because I think the higher difficulties simply funnel you into a certain playstyle (looking at you Bethesda). But difficulty options IMO are more of am accessibility for the sake of convenience rather than a necessity and as such I don’t think every game requires difficulty options.
Video games are the only art medium where people find it acceptable to gate-keep the art from the unskilled or the disabled.
Imagine buying a movie ticket, then the theater goes “no you aren’t good enough at watching movies to watch this movie. You only get to see the first 10 minutes. It just isn’t for you.” Imagine paying to go to a museum, and they tell you “sorry, you are only allowed to look at the art in the foyer because you aren’t good enough to enter the rest of the museum.”
Difficulty settings are, first and foremost, accessibility settings. Don’t want the game to be too easy? Don’t fucking turn down the difficulty. Saying “I don’t want the game to be easier” is really just saying “I know I don’t have any self-control, and would inevitably turn down the difficulty when I hit a roadblock.”
Video games are the only art medium where people find it acceptable to gate-keep the art from the unskilled or the disabled.
Yes, deaf people are famously well-accomodated by music, and paintings are always very accessible to the blind. Games are the first medium to ever be inaccessible to people.
Don’t want the game to be too easy? Don’t fucking turn down the difficulty. Saying “I don’t want the game to be easier” is really just saying “I know I don’t have any self-control, and would inevitably turn down the difficulty when I hit a roadblock.”
You’re complaining about players opinions, but I’m saying the artist is not required to sacrifice their vision for accessibility reasons. Not all art is for everyone, and that’s fine. You don’t have to play every game.
That’s a pretty ignorant take. I work in a music venue and art gallery as an event planner and curator, so it’s pretty funny that you listed those two things specifically. I personally know three blind artists who consistently blow me away with what they are able to produce.
One has tunnel vision, and can see an area about the size of a quarter held at arms’ length. He tends to work with textiles and wood carvings, which he can feel.
The second can see shades of brightness, but very little color; she primarily works in shades of grey or sepia. She has a bright light over her workbench, so she can see the contrast as she lays down darker material that soaks up the light.
The third went fully blind in his 20’s due to a degenerative condition. He grew up with full vision, then he had to adapt later in life as his vision degenerated. He uses paint thinner to thin out the various colors to different consistencies, so he can feel which colors are where. I have one of his prints hanging on my office wall right now, and it is absolutely breathtaking even before you learn he’s fucking blind.
Art galleries have taken steps to make things like paintings accessible to blind patrons. Unless it’s something like watercolor that soaks into the canvas and lays flat, paint has depth and texture. Especially thicker paints like oils. 3D scans of paintings allow people to feel the paint layers on printed busts. Artists like Van Gogh used paint texture as an inherent part of their piece, and galleries have attempted to turn that into a tactile experience. You haven’t truly seen Starry Night until you have seen it in person, (or at least seen a 3D scan of it). Flat prints simply don’t do it justice. And for other mediums, guided tours have descriptive service options for blind patrons.
And we get deaf/HoH patrons at concerts all the time. They enjoy the crowd experience, and they can feel the beat via vibration. Hell, I just organized a concert for next week, where we have an ASL interpreter. Deaf/HoH people regularly have music fucking blaring on kick ass sound systems. They may be able to hear certain parts of it if it’s loud enough, or maybe they just enjoy the beat. But regardless of the reason, they absolutely can enjoy music.
You gave lots of examples that accommodate these disabilities, and that’s awesome and obviously I support that!
What you aren’t arguing for anywhere in this comment is that every artist be required to do these things. Somehow game developers are exempt from this grace? You called out watercolor but don’t appear to be angry at watercolor artists like you are at game developers. Why are all games required to accommodate all people, but other art isn’t? Why is that where your line is drawn?
What you aren’t arguing for anywhere in this comment is that every artist be required to do these things. Somehow game developers are exempt from this grace? Why are all games required to accommodate people, but other art isn’t? Why is that where your line is drawn?
Quite the opposite. I fully believe that if art can be accessible, it should be. That’s why I listed things like 3D scans for oils, descriptive services, or textiles and sculptures that people can feel.
And things like ASL interpreters are legally required by law, and we as the venue can be sued if we refuse to make reasonable efforts to accommodate them. We can’t even charge those patrons extra for tickets, despite the fact that the ASL interpreter is more expensive than the entire price of their ticket. If they request it within a reasonable timeframe, we are legally obligated to hire an interpreter for the show that the patron will be at, even though we know we will lose money on it. We can’t even ask for proof that the person is deaf, because that would put an undue burden on the person with the disability; We just have to take them at their word, and hire the ASL interpreter on blind faith that they’re not forcing us to spend money extraneously.
We also have hearing assist devices integrated into our sound system, for the HoH patrons who just need a private audio feed. We can provide either wireless headphones, or a magnetic loop which hearing aids can tune into. So they have the option of controlling the volume directly with headphones, or using the hearing aids they already have and like. That cost is taken on entirely by the venue, because it allows those HoH patrons to get a similar experience as the rest of the audience. Because (again) the law requires that we make reasonable accommodations to ensure every patron (including those with disabilities) gets an equivalent experience.
As someone who regularly has to do extra work to accommodate people with disabilities: People with disabilities shouldn’t be excluded from art simply because it is extra effort to accommodate them. Accessibility isn’t something that should be optional, because it helps everyone eventually. Would you argue against accessibility ramps for building entrances, because it would ruin the architect’s artistic vision for a grand staircase? Would you argue against subtitles for a movie, because it would take up screen space that the director had intentionally used for action? Would you argue against Velcro or bungie-lace shoes, because the fashion designers had flat laces in mind when they designed it? Would you argue against audiobooks for blind people, because the author is dead and couldn’t collaborate to choose a narrator that fit their artistic vision? No? So why is other art required to take reasonable steps to provide accommodations, but video games aren’t? Why is that where your line is drawn?
What you aren’t arguing for anywhere in this comment is that every artist be required to do these things. Somehow game developers are exempt from this grace?
Would it be better if every piece of art was accessible like this? Yes.
Same goes for games. That’s what this thread is: it would be better if every game had X
You believe some forms of art shouldn’t exist at all just because a small percentage of people can’t experience it? Watercolor as an art form should be abolished? Music without strong bass shouldn’t be allowed? All paintings must incorporate strong textures?
Difficulty settings are, first and foremost, accessibility settings.
I’m not opposed to more options but I think this tactic is distracting and generates more pushback than it wins converts.
Are games art? I’d say so, usually. Some are more like toys than art, but many have creative expression
If they are are, must all art be accessible to all people? Well, what does accessible mean exactly? To understand it completely? Then I’d say trivially no, because there are many books that are incomprehensible to many people. No one is going to say “House of Leaves” is inaccessible and the author did a gatekeeping by writing it as such. No one is going to say Finnegans Wake is ableist because it’s hard to understand.
Must all aspects of all art be completable by all people? I’d also say trivially no. You might have a segment in French that doesn’t translate well. You can dub it or subtitle it, but the original experience will remain inaccessible unless the audience spends years mastering French.
I bring that up because some games will have within the game, not a metagame menu setting, easier or harder routes. For example, Elden Ring with a big shield and spirit ashes is significantly easier than a naked parry build. Is the expectation that everyone should be able to finish in both styles? If there’s a hard mode, must everyone be able to finish it?
Should everyone be able to trivially 100% every game?
Personally I think the floor is everyone should be able to interface with the game. Change inputs. Add subtitles.
I don’t really think “I can’t party this spear guy” is an accessibility problem the same way “I’m color blind and can’t read the text” is.
But again, I don’t care if someone wants a god-mode with auto-parry. It just feels like it’s bundling some unrelated ideas together. You’re not necessarily disabled if you’re bad at parrying in dark souls.
Difficulty settings are, first and foremost, accessibility settings.
I have to disagree with this. Difficulty settings are at best a bandaid solution to accessibility. The vast vast majority of difficulty settings change the overall gameplay experience, games are far too complex for ‘just make it easier’ to be an appropriate approach to accessibility.
Just reducing enemy health, simplifying enemy ai, etc. can only make a game more accessible as a side effect, it doesn’t address the actual accessibility issues people might have.
I also don’t think games should have hard modes. They should have exactly 1 difficulty the developers balance around.
There absolutely should be accessibility options that have the side effect of making the game easier but making the game easier is the wrong approach to make it accessible.
My suggestion would be stuff like tuning response windows to the results of a reaction time test, aim assist options, visual cues for sound effects, etc. Those make the game easier but do it by addressing a single specific issue, or combination of issues, someone’s dealing with instead of just slapping on a one size fits all solution.
I think it’d be better to have assist modes than difficulty options. As difficulty is traditionally associated with changing things like health and damage (or worse, opaquely disabling mechanics) that are fundamental to game balance I think it is too easy to be abused as a cop out from having to balance the game.
Things like slowing the pace of the game, adding aim assist, visual indicators for audio cues, more lenient hit boxes, more frequent saves would be way more useful imo. Optional mechanics or modifiers can exist, but they shouldn’t be bundled with other random stuff.
I completely agree that accessibility/assist modes are more important and if I had to choose I’d go with that. Since we’re in a fantasy land however I’m still going to advocate for customisation because, let’s be honest, most of the difficulties (besides “the main one”) are usually not that great.
I’m speaking from a perspective of someone who tends to go for the higher difficulty options which extremely often go with the laziest possible decisions like turning enemies into damage sponge and increasing their attack power. That’s it. Stuff like improved enemy awareness, faster reaction times, smarter tactics aren’t exactly common and that’s my main pain point when selecting difficulty. There are also other things like ammo/loot scarcity, need drain in survival games etc.
Having an option to tweak at least some of these things could help folks like me who often end up in a situation when one difficulty is piss easy and the other feels like a drag. Peoples skills and expectations vary way too and there’s simply no way few basic difficulty settings will be right for everyone. And if someone damages their experience? Oh well, let people make mistakes and take responsibility for their choices. Inform them that changing this stuff will affect their experience and leave them to their decisions. We can’t (and shouldn’t) baby-proof everything, in my opinion.
I’m fine with that, dishonored 2 did a really good job of this with its custom difficulty option. I’d argue that games should just have 1 difficulty, developers can balance around that. Let people mess with any of the easy values difficulty modes usually change
I’d be down with that. Or at the very least give us modifiers like skulls in Halo games - dunno if that’s just Master Chief Collection addition or if they became a thing after 1 but it’s better than nothing.
Grappling hook with freedom on wear to place it, swinging physics, idc if it makes sense, ill take it in all games. And wingsuit gliding, I may have been one of the only few ppl online who liked that in battlefield. Such a funnway to traverse the map.
Not quite a setting, but every game should be required to tell you how long ago the last save was when you quit the game. I absolutely don’t understand why it’s only a tiny minority of games that does this, it is such an obvious thing to do
Well yes and no. Stellar Blade for example. When you click exit to desktop it pops up the usual unsaved data will be lost stuff but also has a timer below it showing when the last save was made
I’m thinking specifically when you exit the game, and it says “Are you sure? All progress since you last saved will be lost”, it should just have an additional “(last saved 2 minutes ago)” line in there. I think the recent Spiderman games did that, iirc
Description of the effects and hardware demands of graphics options.
An actual benchmark for ’optimized settings’ (even if it’s just crunching numbers) instead of hardcoded GPU names.
Clear indication of which difficulty the game was balanced for.
Msaa. Hate running old games at 200 fps with jagged edges and blur thanks to fxaa.
Instant controls switching between controller and keyboard. Tired of games that pick input type at startup, pick input glyphs at startup, ignore first button press from a different input before switching, disable controller if keyboard input is detected etc etc.
Not games but steam: just let me force steam input on all games like Proton.
Also how ‘full potato’ do you want it to be? I assume the settings don’t scale below low, so it’d be just turning off shadows, reflections etc. Would even the lowest resolution textures fit in the vram of an older card? And besides, the engine is probably designed for modern multi core cpus so even if the graphics could be scaled down it might not run well
I always dread picking up a new game that is kinda demanding on the hardware because I hate to keep testing all graphical settings to have the best graphics with good fps. The least they could do is show a split scene with each setting on or off so you can judge with your eyes, but a button that you set the fps and the game crunches some numbers and benchmark to find the best quality graphics settings it can do at the target fps.
If it can adjust the graphics on demand would also be awesome because some games can have variable demands during gameplay.
I didn’t realize it had gotten that bad. I bought 2x16gb DDR4 RAM in 2021 for $204 CAD. I bought the identical set for $69 in 2024. The same set (this is all on Newegg) today is $279. That is insane!
Same but I upgraded to 4x8 a while ago so I have 4x4 just sitting here and it’s worth like 20 western money units (pick a currency, doesn’t really matter)
Like one AI deal bought half of Samsungs global output next year. There are many others. It takes a couple of years to bring new facilities online. This is a capacity issue, not competition.
This is totally unrealistic but it would be sweet if there was a button for showing you a compilation of recent cutscenes or something for when you havnt played a story heavy game in a while and forgot what’s going on.
Like in the main menu give me a memory button or whatever that basically brings me up to speed to where I left off. Could be replaying cutscenes or showing me text of recent events, who knows 🤷♀️
But there are too many times i have to put a deep rpg down and then life gets in the way and picking it up again becomes impossible when it doesn’t feel like I’m there anymore
One of the latter Final Fantasies did this. I think it was 13? Despite that game’s many other rather glaring shortcomings, that part was pretty neat. I agree it should definitely be standard for most RPG and heavily story driven games.
I’ve seen a variety of half baked implementations. Sometimes you have a decent in game log but sometimes it’s also just the dialogue of your last conversation and nothing more 🥲
Oddly enough I think that porn games are a little closer to do what you suggest because rewatch the cutscenes is kinda important it seems in that genre 😅
A way to start a fresh save. Or better yet, allow multiple saves/profiles. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve had to search online for where save files are located and delete them myself.
And if it’s a Steam game, you also have to worry about cloud saves undoing whatever you did. Please, just make it simple for players to do this.
for that matter, why can’t we ever add a note or a tagline to save files? too many rpg’s and console rpgs have multiple save slots, multiple endings and all that other added content jazz, but no way to internally identify the save files that matter?
bin.pol.social
Aktywne