Combos. I don’t like them when they’re intentional by the developer, they need to be something that you feel like you’ve discovered on your own. I hear Baba is You is pretty good about that.
I recently observed a game of MtG where a newish player was playing a scry deck, some premade or something, had a guy who would scry every time a creature dropped, and a guy who would place counters every time he scried. He’d edited the deck slightly, added a creature that spawned tokens every time it received counters. Managed to get them all out at once before realising what he’d done; straight up had to ask if tokens count as creatures dropping because he wasn’t sure if infinite combos were real. That’s a good feeling, because it’s something he did, not something that was given to him.
Contrast League or Overwatch or whatever where the devs have specific ideas about how characters should work and will aggressively destroy things outside of that. Or just modern Magic.
Diablo 3 was fucking terrible about this. anytime a good combo was discovered they would nerf it. it's a single player game, just let me have my overpowered bullshit.
Have you ever tried Skullgirls? You can form a team of up to three characters, and you can select just about any move they have as an assist, forming some wild synergies.
Game state can be a tricky thing. By saving at certain points you just need to maintain a few things, like player health and inventory and which checkpoint they were at. And it’s only got worse the more things a game has to keep track of.
The solution was used by all last gen and current gen consoles and even the DS and 3DS, which is to suspend the game. This is fine, the Steam Deck can do this too. It’s not perfect. Power loss can lose the data, and some won’t let you play something else while another game is suspended. But for general use over short sessions, it’s alright.
It’s less useful on PC because it probably will crash the game anyway, and normally you’d want to use the PC for other things.
It was tricky when the hard drive space was limited. Now we have basically free SSDs and saving the game is just the nature of serealisation of all the data. You don’t have to write your own solution even, it’s all was figured out decades ago
Sure, but none of it is as simple as just saving what you need to at fixed points, and letting the console handle the suspend function.
Oh, and additionally: what happens when you softlock yourself by saving just as you’re about to die? Is the player to blame? Sure. Will they blame you anyway? You betcha.
Depends on how weird of a bullshit you’re doing and what engine are you using, but sometimes it’s even easier, you just use the readily available module.
As for the second point, you avoid it by giving the user control on when they save, you allow them to save unlimited amount of times, and you do some autosaves here and there. We have this technology since forever, we just never used it on consoles before because hard drives for it were expensive
Do huge fucking cliffs and invisible walls count as mechanics?
I know equipment durability does and that can fuck right off.
One thing I love is when the game mechanics are well grounded in the world. A recent good example of this was in Tears of the Kingdom; in one cutscene you actually see Zelda use the Purah Pad to fast-travel out of trouble just like you also can. It elevates it from a gaming conceit to something actually part of the world.
I usually dislike weapon durability (eg, in Fallout), but Zelda is the one game where I actually liked it. Perhaps because in Zelda, it was a central mechanic that the game was designed and balanced around.
For most games, durability is something that the game isn’t really designed around and feels more forced in. When you can repair your gear (as you usually can), durability just means every now and then you gotta deal with the annoyance of repairing.
The annoying part in Zelda was where you'd acquire and destroy your weapon in just a small handful of swings, like the kingdom of Hyrule had the world's worst blacksmiths.
The new Zelda games are what solidified my hatred of durability. Oh look I finished this quest line and got a fancy sword that's a reference to an older game! Time to put it on a shelf and never use it so it doesn't explode and go away forever.
The one thing they could've done that would have made the whole thing tolerable was if the special weapons from your allies were unlimited. The Eagle Bow, the Boulder Smasher, etc. At least then you would always have one thing in whichever style you liked that you could just use without always worrying about. Instead those are the most expensive hardest to get weapons and they still have fucking durability. It just makes everything worse and every reward less rewarding.
I agree with you on those special weapons. I dunno why the heck they made those so rare or expensive while also not being that durable. I don’t find it an issue for most normal weapons, though, especially with the fuse mechanic in TotK. I like how it forces me to vary things up and allows for regular treasure chests or drops to actually give you something you can use (even if it’s basically like a short lasting consumable).
Here’s one I genuinely love and hate at the same time. In Dark Souls and Elden Ring, you drop your souls/runes (currency) on the spot where you last died, and if you die again before recovering them, they’re lost forever. You get souls and runes by killing enemies and generally progressing, so this leads to some interesting scenarios.
One one hand, it incentivizes you to spend your currency (to minimize risk of losing it) instead of just sitting on it, forcing you to make decisions on how you spend it, and whether to take the risk to save up to get more expensive items or level ups. It also forces you to play very deliberately, since there’s a penalty, but only if you die twice.
But… it makes me scared to progress, because I don’t know what to expect, and I don’t want to risk losing my souls/runes. Unless I have just recently lost everything and I have nothing to lose, I feel pressured to play overly carefully and never take risks and play the game in the most fun way possible, out of fear of loss. And even when I DO die and lose my currency, the freedom to play in risky ways only lasts for a short time, because as I kill enemies I start to build up my souls or runes again, and then I’m back in the same situation of not wanting to lose them.
I think that’s the main reason why I haven’t finished Elden Ring despite getting so close to the end. That overly careful playstyle is not very fun, but I can’t get over that fear of losing my runes in order to enjoy the game more.
The run back to your body helps you build up runes too, where a game where you’re loading a save it reverts progress. The souls style allows death to create progress for people struggling. If you’re dying then you’ll be forced to build runes up and can then go level or upgrade gear.
Usually you shouldn’t be too worried about losing souls though because they’re fairly easy to come by. It’s a bit of a trap in souls games to value your souls too much. There are many ways to farm them that don’t take much time or effort, including just going exploring side content and finding new equipment. Once you level up yourself or your gear a few times, the part you were struggling with will be easier. That’s how Elden Ring especially, but even Dakr Souls, is supposed to be played. If you’re struggling and don’t want to be, just go somewhere else. There’s plenty of content to do.
This is definitely one of the things I originally didn’t like about Souls games that have come to realize is a pretty cleverly designed mechanic. Earning enough souls to purchase something shouldn’t take very long and it if is, then it means you already have what you need to be succeeding in your current area. The ‘git gud’ joke is worn out, but genuinely you just need to learn how to face off with enemies (or run past them) until they stop being scary.
The game will not let you progress without learning how to engage with the systems it presents to you. There are typically several or many viable strategies, you just have to figure out what works for you.
By the time you’re dragging yourself through a toxic poison swamp you’ll realize that your level is just a number and nothing lasts forever.
I have several hundred hours across the 3 souls games and ER, and I totally get that it’s a well designed mechanic, which is why I love it. and yeah, I know that valuing souls too much is a mental trap that prevents me from enjoying the game, but I just can’t shake it in Elden Ring for some reason, despite doing so more easily in souls games. (though, it especially sucks in DS2 because of soul memory but that’s a whole can of worms)
The souls series is one of my favorite game series of all time, and I would definitely not change the blood stain mechanic whatsoever because I think it’s about perfect. Especially with rings of sacrifice (or the weird twigs) and homeward bones to give you chances to mitigate the penalty when you really think you need to. It’s excellently designed and forces you to improve at the game.
Despite that, it still causes me hesitation and demotivates me from playing the games sometimes. I have to be in a specific mood to want to improve at a game, and I’m in that mood less often as I have more things I need to spend my time on, and usually play games just to relax and have an easier time nowadays. I still love Elden Ring to death and it’s genuinely one of the best games ever made (in my opinion), and yet I have a love/hate relationship with death mechanics in these games.
I do use that. I have a Series X but I play on PC as well. Some games aren’t available on xbox and sometimes the TV might be occupied or I might want to squeeze in some quick gaming while already at my desk.
I'm trying to make a game in this genre though I describe it as a base-building/simulation/survival game, other favourites include Oxygen Not Included, Timberborn, Factorio and Satisfactory.
I hate when games try to make you feel like you have player agency when it’s really just a cutscene and you’re pressing a button. Whether it’s a QTE or “Press F to Pay Respects.” Recently RDR2 was a huge offender of this, featuring probably half a dozen cutscenes where all you do is press W or up on the controller to walk forward or whatever you’re doing. Like there’s one where it’s probably 5 minutes of walking forward interspersed with dialogue. I understand why the developers made you walk that far. It adds to the tension and it adds to the feeling of despair that the character is currently going through. But I think it would’ve been fine if it was just a regular cutscene instead of “Press W to walk” and if you let go you stop walking, meaning you can’t even take a break.
edit: also I dislike stealth games with unrealistic “alert” systems. In a good example like Metal gear solid v, you get a solid 5 to 10 seconds if a guard is outside hearing / sight range of other guards, so even if you’re spotted you’re still fine as long as you take them out quickly and silently. And even if you dont take him out quickly, he’ll still only be able to alert people nearby or he needs to take some time to alert on the radio. On the other hand, in cyberpunk 2077 if just one guard saw you for even a fraction of a second, the entire base would be alerted. I guess lore-wise it makes sense, but from a gameplay perspective it was the least fun I had in that game. Trying to stealth my way through an entire place only for the whole thing to come crashing down because somebody saw my shoulder from 15 meters away. It came to a point where I was just going in guns blazing because stealth just wasn’t worth it.
Spider-man from 2018 was also like this. The enemy hideouts or whatever were based very heavily around the game’s stealth mechanics, but if just 1 guard became alerted, everybody would become alerted and it would start its stupid wave system. The game heavily encouraged you to take out guards silently so it didn’t send in wave after wave of them, but it was just so incredibly punishing to be silent in that game.
Yeah it makes me feel like a dumbass.
I recently bought marvels midnight suns because it was on sale, i didn't even onow it was a card game. I usually don't really play card games. The game is fine, actually i kinda like it. But the things i don't like are the things when you don't play the card game. You just awkwardly walk around in 3rd person. After every fight it's the same. You walk to a guy, go to bed, skip 3 cutscenes, walk to the forge, walk to the upgrade thing, walk to whoever you have to talk. Probably 1/3 of the game is walking the same path every ingame day.
Make an option to skip all of that. Make it a drop down menu or something.
Ehh I disagree with using RDR2 as an example, but I think QTEs in general are probably my least favorite game mechanic. I actually quite like walking around in RDR2 during the missions. A huge aspect of the game is just immersing yourself in the map/world and listening to the NPCs. I can see it getting old during replays but for me it's a hell of a lot better than watching a cutscene and being prompted to hit a button. I vividly remember fishing with Dutch and Josea for at least a half hour just listening to them chat with Arthur
Agree with you, I remember where the person is talking about, press x to walk on guarma, which did drag on, but they were shipwrecked and he didn’t know what was happening yet. Rdr gets exceptions to me because it’s so cinematic, to me the game is realistic, but so much that you aren’t playing a game, you’re watching a movie.
My issue is less that it drags on and more that it’s basically barely even gameplay. You’re pressing a button for minutes on end, then letting go when they talk, then pressing again when they walk again. It’s boring. For a game as cinematic as RDR2 you’d think they wouldn’t be afraid to just make it a cutscene. If they wanted gameplay then at least let me walk around a bit.
Right but it’s a story, it doesn’t all have to be rootin tootin cowboy shooting, the storytelling is a major part of it. It helps the player really feel like theyre expercing Arthur. I get what you’re saying, but they definitely purposefully chose these devices from a storytelling perspective.
Yes and I’m saying the made a bad decision, no matter how purposeful it is. I find your reasoning to be really flawed here. Just because they chose to tell the story that way doesn’t mean I can’t complain about it.
Remnant 2 has been a blast. I do wish there was 1 more world in it to make it feel a little more full, but I love every moment of these games.
Its crazy to find a secret area in a secret area, pick up a melee weapon, then discover that the secret secret weapon unlocks a secret area with another hidden area inside it for a super secret ability.
Remnant 2 is so great! What an unexpected surprise treat of a game! It really scratches a lot of my gamer itches at once.
I agree that I wish it had one or two more worlds to explore but there is so much replayability already, it’s easily worth the $50 price of admission. Looking forward the first big patch; hopefully they make respeccing significantly cheaper.
Honestly I wouldn’t mind the traight cap if they would just let us do loadouts and pay a small fee in our inventory to swap them.
It feels stifling to need to run to Wallace to make any build changes in traight layout.
Basically my only complaint though. I want this team to keep making these style games. I’ve always been a big fan of randomized tiles or other forms of procedural generation.
It’s incredible how they manage to still blend some of the best puzzles and lore into this system of world generation.
For me, I enjoyed D4 as a nice campaign. Played through a few times, once with my partner and another solo.
D4 pros: Impeccable game feel, moment to moment combat, graphics and even some nice storytelling. Enjoy the QoL features for alts and the myriad of endgame loops; Helltides are a lot of fun.
D4 cons: Dungeons are boring to me. Builds that feel fun and powerful are limited to 0-2 per class; a big letdown. Weird network / instance lag which stands out among the otherwise polished aesthetic. Middling open world re: exploration to reward ratio.
PoE pros: Deeeeeep. Hardcore. Aspirational? Still haven’t cleared the campaign despite getting closer each league. Lots of builds and skill variety.
PoE cons: Feels like the oldest baguette ever to exist. Wildly stiff gameplay. Ugh its such shit compared to D4. Like DMC vs Skyrim level of difference. Disparate, cheap feeling UI and tacked on storytelling. Exudes HardXCore__Statzz.xls energy and feels practically impossible to navigate a viable build without a guide.
In the end I think Grim Dawn outplays both D4 and PoE. Check it out if you love ARPGs
bin.pol.social
Aktywne