Nine Parchments - Top down Magic slinging romp. Similar to the Majica series, but with less knowing how to do certain key-press combos.
Orcs Must Die 2 - 3rd person tower defense where you place traps and use spells and weapons to take down foes. Continues the story of the first game, which did not have multiplayer, unfortunately.
Children of Morta - Top down dungeon crawler. Take on the roles of a family trying to hunt down an ancient evil. Like the Belmont’s of Castlevania fame.
Full Metal Furies - Top down action fighter. Fight the Titans as some of the last remaining survivors of Ragnarok. Fun dialing with a good-sized world map to explore.
Astroneer - 3rd person survival crafting on a randomized planet. Cute component designs and a unique air management system. Plays best with a mouse & keyboard.
Deep Rock Galactic - Space Dwarves Corporate mining simulator. You and up to 4 friends drive do into infested planetoids in order to make some Gold. Destructible terrain and shenanigans.
Is there any reason you recommend two specifically over three? I know there is a third Orcs Must Die game but I have no idea if the community considers it “good” or not.
Starfield did this the right way, just as you are suggesting. it’s the only game I’ve seen so far that does it, but your character body exists on a wheel of buff, slender, thicker, etc. you can adjust every little part of this to get a truly unique character. i believe there were also at least 4 voice options. the rest of the game was meh, but maybe other games will start doing it that way. i think inclusion is still a very new concept in gaming, everyone is trying new things, and i appreciate the effort. it’ll get there.
I definitely have to say, Body Type A/Body Type B definitely feels like a groan-worthy growing pain that will be ironed out sooner or later. It’s just disappointing that we have to resort to such awkward terms that mislead players about how much variety across the gender spectrum is actually being offered. It almost feels like a vegan menu that still heavily uses animal byprdouct.
This almost makes me want to buy Starfield to support a proper way to revamp gender selection, but it’s going to need the same amount of work that FO76 getting it from how it was at launch to the awesome experience it is now for me to dip my toes in that…
The Sims 4 actually added a similar approach to character creation about 2 years ago, but very different kind of game with a very different market
Off the top of my head it has options for male presenting body type, female presenting body type, sliders for fat and muscle (and you can generally reshape most of the body) and the available clothing and hairstyles got sorted into masculine and feminine with I believe more traditionally gender neutral stuff getting placed into both, then for biological purposes there’s “can pee standing up/cannot pee standing up” and “can impregnate/can be impregnated” It defaults to Male/Female defaults but makes it easy to customize, and a good mix of default townies (NPCs) are all over the spectrum.
They also recently added more complex relationship and romance preferences, so sims can be sexually bi but romantically straight for example, but also expanded to allow various levels of openness to relationships as well as poly relationships
Games should just get rid of character creators. Just play the damn game with whoever the main character is and learn to empathise with someone other than yourself.
See, I don’t really care that the player is referred to as “They/Them” in Deltarune, because it’s established that you are playing as Kris and those are their pronouns.
(and in Undertale, the monsters simply had no idea what Frisk’s gender was due to an unfamiliarity with humans so it’s kept intentionally vague… with they/them simply being the most gender neutral thing to call them and the fanbase having their own headcanons on what Frisk actually is. Personally my head canon is Frisk is male and Chara is female, which seemed to be the most common interpretation in the fanbase back then… my headcanon for Kris is that they’re intersex with they/them pronouns as I see them as being representative of both Frisk and Chara, but however you see the situation is just as valid unless the creator comes out and says “No it’s this specific way, everything else is wrong!” and to my knowledge Toby Fox has not done that)
Sidenote: First non-binary person I ever met used ey/eir pronouns, this was so long ago that ey called eirself “Genderless” instead of Non-Binary as the latter wasn’t a word. Ey was femme presenting, but very much not female. Sadly we’ve drifted apart and wherever ey is I wish eir well.
I always wished ey/eir had caught on instead of “singular they”, because personally I thought “ey” sounded cooler and was more straightforward than “singular they”. But hey I’m not non-binary myself so it’s not really any of my business.
On a similar note, I used to see shi/hir pronouns more often than I do now as well, though that was more for intersex individuals than non-binary. I still see some usage of shi/hir, though the people I see with those pronouns tend to self-identify as “hermaphrodite”, a phrase that is considered highly insulting by most. I guess what I’m saying here is that there are all kinds and it’s probably best not to make assumptions or assume gender to be a one-size fits all phenomenon.
I would like to thank you for taking your time to write this response. For some reason, I was feeling blue. Seeing the lenght of your comment made me feel heard and really happy. Thank you for sharing this with me, may you have a wonderful day/night!
I’m actually all for this as well, unless the game is some open-ended roleplaying experience just give me a character to play as and design the game around who this person is (I think the original Dead Rising did a good job of this with Frank West, the remake… well unless previews are from an earlier build than what we’re getting in September not so much)
And I mean a REAL open-ended roleplaying experience, not something like Fallout 4 that was blatantly designed for me to play as Nate, a lawful good heterosexual cisgender male military vet with predefined goals… with gay romance options and the ability to play as his wife Nora existing solely to give the illusion of choice… An Illusion I still appreciate because when I play I always wind up being Nora with Curie as my wifey.
(I feel like FO4 would be far less divisive if it was a spinoff about Nate’s journey rather than a sequel to a series that is known for player agency, and even then the Brotherhood of Steel suddenly being a bunch of Nazis is still stupid as hell)
I see the point of character creators, but games shouldn’t be afraid to do what’s best for them, for some games character creators are basically the only way that makes sense, but also yeah I’d like to see more games that didn’t have them at all
Then we’d be going back to having the vast majority of games having a cis male protagonist. No thanks. I don’t mind playing as them from time to time, but I want a choice, especially if the main character is one of those blank slate types.
I’m not advocating for that either and I don’t necessarily they think they would these days. Ubisoft is steadfastly ignoring the dumbasses around the black male / Asian female leads for AC, no matter how loud they whine.
Aloy from Horizon Zero Dawn made me realize I vibe so well playing as a woman. If I had had the choice I probably would have picked the masculine option since that’s my gender. I’m glad that game forced my hand, now when I have a choice I give it a real thought.
Games could have multiple protagonists with different bodies, genders, personalities, etc… something like Overwatch did have that, you could even play as a hamster or a robot!
I think that trying to please everyone is generally a bad idea, especially when it comes to niche social justice issues and identity, because everyone thinks their personal rules are universal these days.
With that said, body type over gender is step in the right direction.
Again, I feel like it would be if this wasn’t just “Gender Binary with feel-good buzzwords to fake inclusivity where little is present”
I just believe that you need more than “If we just don’t say the M-Word/F-Word then we’ve solved transphobia forever” for this to be a proper step in the right direction, as it stands it just feels like “Don’t say Latina/Latino! Say Latinx!” all over again, and we now how well THAT went.
You simply need more than a couple of rainbow pins on your jacket to make meaningful change.
They will turn off the live service and make it work offline?
I don’t understand. Industry bootlickers told me it was impossible and would cost billions to implement, hurting small indie studios the most. Yet, Nintendo does it voluntarily with seemingly no difficulties.
I would argue Nintendo does do a lot of pro-consumer stuff. Like making actually good games. It’s just their anti-consumer stuff is either so bad or just plain weird that we just scratch our heads and think Nintendo is going off the deep end. Still trying to avoid buying much Nintendo going forward.
Making a good game is the minimum expectation. Making an open platform to force competition to also endorse open platforms would be going above and beyond to be pro consumer.
You really have no idea how intellectual property works do you? The reason they’ve gone after emulation and rom hosting sites is pretty obvious, they have to protect their IP.
Why they’ve waited so long only to do it now? I honestly don’t have an answer for you on that one, but if I were to guess it’s because retro gaming has been going through somewhat of a renaissance as of late due to shitty AAA games and indie devs gaining so much popularity.
The bottom line is Nintendo lost the emulation battle once, and they don’t want to lose a second time. They’re more experienced and understand the risks of letting emulation replace services like Nintendo switch online, and so do publishers that own intellectual property from retro consoles. It sucks, but that’s corporate life, and you can’t really get around it without jumping through hoops or doing something illegal.
Your comment is very out of place as a response to mine, but since you brought all this up:
I don’t begrudge Nintendo for getting ROM sites shut down. I begrudge them for shutting them down without also making their games legally available for purchase where their customers want to play them. Those old games aren’t even legally available for purchase at all, because they want to just rent them to you forever, which is an enormous dick move. Then they further that with the dick move of trying to remove the place where we get those games the way we’d like to enjoy them, and getting them that way is a better experience than using their official solution.
So assuming you didn’t get lost and you actually meant to respond to my comment, I can’t consider them pro consumer when they’re not doing what’s in the consumer’s best interests.
Nintendo might be seeing the writing on the wall and looking to see how much profit they can make with this. If it goes well, we might see more of it. Corporations hate regulation and sometimes try and head it off long before it is coming.
Hi, industry bootlicker here! Nintendo is listening to their consumers. I was told corporations are evil and won’t listen to consumers and must be forced to do things by law. I much prefer consumers remain vocal about their wants because corporations do indeed listen. No government intervention required. I worry government rules could cause unintended problems that don’t benefit anybody.
Oh no! Not Microsoft Bingo! That’s a list of D list games nobody has ever heard of that all shutdown years ago. I don’t think the world would be a better place if the devs of Radical Heights, a free to play arena shooter that was launched and shutdown a month later in 2018 were forced to give their game out to everyone for free after.
Of course not every game is a certified banger, but there’s more than enough notable games on that list that made an impact on the industry and should’ve been preserved for that fact alone.
You didn’t create those games. Games are products people work to produce. Radical Heights was a free to play game that was shutdown in a month. What would you force them to do? Release their server code for free so anybody can run a Radical Heights server that people can connect to and play? So a whole bunch of people who never gave the developers a cent have the right to demand the game be given to them simply because it existed for 1 month?
If a game asks for money in any kind of way: Yes. That should be the cost of (trying to do) business.
Alternatively, a full refund for everyone involved, even Kickstarter backers, would also be acceptable.
That’s just blatantly false. People bought the founders pack were never refunded for example. Those people being entitled to the server software or a refund is anything but greedy, even if that only applies to a single person.
If they can play against bots, which already exist in the game, or band enough people together with access to the game to play on a server one player is able to host, then yes. That’s what I’d expect at a minimum.
If they want to keep some form of DRM then that’s not my job to figure out. This wasn’t a problem back in the day when server software being distributed was the norm, so it shouldn’t be a problem now.
Though personally I’d be in favor of abolishing online DRM entirely, but that’s another story.
So you want people to follow a law without knowing how it should be followed? You signed a petition and now it’s someone else’s problem if they get in legal trouble or not? This makes the world a better place because it protects theoretical people?
At least try to make an effort to understand what I write.
I said it’s their job to figure out how to do DRM -if- they want DRM. If they can’t figure out how to do that then the answer shouldn’t need to be spelled out explicitly: No DRM. Simple as that.
If you’d rather see games you spent money on being taken away from you based on the whims of corporations, just to make sure others who might not have payed for it also can’t play it, then I don’t know what to tell you.
Control of the server is the DRM. Radical Heights sold hats for $15. How do they ensure only players who paid for hats get them and that non-paying players couldn’t just mod them in? They control that information on the server. Which accounts have cosmetics is controlled by the server. That’s the DRM. If they had to release the server when shutting down then they’d have no way to ensure only paying customers play the game since the person who runs the sever can modify it however they want. Everyone could get the $15 hats for free! Or maybe they charge $2 for the hats. There’s no DRM that could prevent this because control of the server is itself the DRM.
So a dev is being required by law to give out their game without any DRM meaning anyone can play it for free and even give themselves the cosmetics the original devs were using to pay the salaries of the dev team. I worry very much that this would cause companies to stop producing free to play games or charge a subscription for these types of games instead (since subscription based games would be exempt). I wonder why people would risk this to “save” games like Radical Heights which, in all likelihood, would have no community. A game doesn’t shutdown after 1 month because it has a thriving community
Yes, you’re just explaining regular piracy here. I do not care. It’s a thing that’s already been possible for almost every single-player game in existence, and yet, there’s a constant stream of new single-player games releasing every day. Weird, right?
I have no authority over anything, so yes, they can. What I’d like to see is an option to buy an offline copy of the game and any add-ons I bought, but no one does that. What Stop Killing Games is looking for is for the server to be made available after the game’s end of life so that you can continue to use anything you paid for.
Looks like some of those are games that were cancelled, some were online multiplayer games that had the servers shutdown, some were simply removed from the Microsoft Store and some were single player games with always online DRM for which they shut the servers down. So it’s not all super scummy nonsense
If it’s a game like an MMO (which several on that list are) they’d have to publish the server software in order to avoid fully killing the game. And to publish the server software that was only ever expected to run in their own datacenters they’d then have to publish documentation, dependencies, etc. and this is all assuming that it can be contained in a single installer for a single machine without relying on additional services they host, and assuming it has reasonable system requirements for average users to self host.
That’s also assuming playing an MMO alone/with only 1-2 people doesn’t suck. Play some 2009scape single player without adventure bots. It feels lonely as all heck
Plus there’s all of the legal and PR hurdles to ensure you’re not exposing yourself to undue risk.
Basically a million reasons for a company to not spend a thousand work hours ensuring their crappy MMO (I’ve tried out a couple of the listed MMOs, they were unsuccessful for a reason) can continue to be played after they’ve divested from it
Licenses and middleware can be chosen more proactively to preserve and distribute the server if they know during development that it’s a requirement. There are tons of people who functionally play MMOs single player already, when the server is already running. And I play a 12 year old fighting game that’s easily able to coordinate 20-100 people to play it multiple times per week with nothing but Discord; there’s no doubt in my mind you’d be able to get 40 people together for a raid on a private server.
The other answer from @ampseandrew already covers most points, so I’ll just a few things:
Most game servers out there are already built in a way to allow for easy deployment. After all, devs have to have way to test changes, so being able to run a small server locally for debugging purposes is hugely beneficial to development.
I also can’t imagine that there’s any game server out there that shouldn’t be able to run on a single system. The heaviest one game I can imagine is Minecraft, due to the whole open world terrain generation, world streaming and physics calculations, and even that can be run off a Raspberry Pi for a small number of players.
I’ve had this exact thought in my head the past few days, including the idea that having 3 or 4 different types would actually fulfill the goal of avoiding “Male/Female” choices - something that only Saint’s Row has done, AFAIK.
The issue is that they only changed the label and Body Type A and B are still clearly Male and Female, but for some reason people praise it as not being gender locked because…?
Its even more ridiculous in games like Monster Hunter Rise for example, where you get the Type A and Type B body options…and then you still get gendered outfits where one is fully covered and the other is baring their midriff and wearing dresses! Wow, I wonder which is supposed to be which!? /sarcasm
I’ve heard that for Monster Hunter Rise “Type A/Type B” was decided upon by the localization and that in Japan (the country of origin for MHR) they just use Male/Female. Meaning it’s not the dev being lazy, it’s localization earning themselves a “You Tried” ribbon.
I recall Nintendo claiming they wanted to move away from mobile again a while ago but I didn‘t really believe it back then and I‘m still skeptical now. They‘ve received more criticism for their predatory mobile games lately so maybe that got something to do with it or it‘s simply not making enough money anymore to bother with it and they‘d rather get the devs working on something else.
That was the most logical answer I came up too. Its just crazy to do the right thing and make if work offline instead of just binning it like so many other live service games.
I mean, I never paid for it but I did the math many years ago, to explain predatory microtransactions, and found out that for a chance - a perfect rolled no dupes chance - it’d be cheaper to buy a 2DS and a physical copy of new leaf.
Like, there’s only so many times they can release a set or do a palette swap for a ‘new’ collection.
I think I remember reading a while ago that apps need to be updated occasionally to comply with .apk guidelines.
This is presumably dependant on which permissions the .apk requests. So a simple calculator app wouldn’t need to be updated, but the calculator plus app, which tracks my blood pressure, how many glasses of water I’ve drank, and my semen count, would need to be updated occasionally to comply with Google’s privacy policies.
But I’m not an app developer, so don’t trust me on a whim.
What if you’re a dummy thicc femboy with boyboobs?
You might think this identity is just a meme, but it’s not. And while some percentage of that is queer people secure in their identities, some of it is also questioning trans girls who aren’t comfortable selecting “female” yet but will try out exploring femininity through the “femboy” meme.
As an enby, I’ll pick body B most of the time, but I don’t like being called female. I’ll put up with it in an old game, but if a studio decides to not misgender me, I’m nothing but happy. I agree 100% that more options would be nice. But assuming that game companies aren’t going to spend money on artists to make diverse bodies, why yuck the yum I experience when a game at least tries to not misgender me?
Oh wow, I could never put to words why I didn’t like the body type system either, but you nailed it. Yeah, I also wish that games could just give you sliders and/or more presets or something to have actual variety. If a game will only support curvy girls and buff dudes, but won’t also let people make, for instance, cute androgynous cat boys, or anything else a person might fancy, then what’s the point of it?
bin.pol.social
Najnowsze