probably has to do with “negative minority being the loudest” on the internet, but as you can see from this thread there’s a LOT whole of concern for a game nobody has tried out yet. I guess I understand where they’re coming from since Konami’s record with the series isn’t great, but I still genuinely fail to see why silent hill f isn’t perceived as a good game from the trailers we’ve seen thus far.
I don’t know but its fucking annoying. Yes, the Team Silent games were the best, but that doesn’t mean we can’t have more great SH games. I’d like to think Konami learned their lesson with Downpour. Homecoming was alright except for it contradicting previously established lore. I’m going to play f with an open mind. Being an SH fan can be exhausting sometimes.
honestly, imma just say it: silent hill shattered memories had a very interesting take on the series, and I don’t see anything wrong with spin-offs or minor titles deviating from the original formula of gameplay. Are we just bathing a tad too much in nostalgia?
I dont mind spin-offs. I avtually like Silent Hill The Arcade and I wanted to play Book of Memories until I saw its not supported in Vita3k still. I ain’t buying a Vita just for that one game.
I don’t understand IP fans that think spin-offs are mainline entries. Metroid Prime Pinball and Hyrule Warriors (the original one) are among the best of the best spin-offs. I can’t imagine why anyone would think they taint the series they are based on. They are supplemental material made to be fun, not to contribute to the mainline story.
I’m sure the fact that Ghibli movies and BotW are best-in-class examples of their respective mediums has absolutely nothing to do with anything.
Looking forward to the metric shittons of open world ghibli knock-off garbage being currently greenlit by frothing execs hoping they have at last found the blueprints to the dopamine machine.
Heh, I just played Smash Ultimate after a long while too. Had a few matches with my kid. I started strong, beating him in first few matches, then he got better and I lost 70-80% of the matches. 😀
My problem with Smash is I just can’t commit to one character and I’m just kind of bad at all of them. If anything, the most decent I get might be with the Links and Belmonts. I guess projectile jank is kind of my thing.
It really can be like that. I started strong with my younger brothers and now i’d say they can beat my ass a good 6/10 times if they try hard enough. Granted i don’t play nearly as much as they do
I’m the opposite boat with technical fighters. I just cannot get the hang of them. The closest I ever got was Tekken 7 because Negan from TWD was in it
Oh fuck, Hard DK has found his way to you too then :)
Streamer Alpharad got a “Hard DK” bit running since they got their ass handed over to them by a crazy Mario Party CPU DK that was just gambling like mad and winning everything.
They trained an incredibly good amiibo CPU DK in Smash they called Hard DK in reference to this.
I’ll never forgive DK for Mario Party that faithful evening. Maybe i should look into the DK Amiibo, it’d be fun to contribute to my friend group’s bit like that. Assuming the Amiibo isn’t crazy expensive.
Amiibos are a bit expensive. There are a few DK amiibos, they should all work with Smash because amiibos have a character identifier that’s recognized between games and amiibo series.
The ones from smash bros and super mario series should be around the “normal” price (for me it’s about 13-15 euros). Maybe you can find a second hand one for cheaper.
There’s a new one with DK and Pauline for Bananza, like other new amiibos it costs a bit more (around 18€ for me). It unlocks a costume in Bananza as an extra.
There’s also an old Skylander DK figure that doubles as an amiibo if I remember correctly. It’s kinda ugly and cheap-looking, and probably not easy to find, but who knows.
Damn, Skylanders is a name I haven’t heard in a while. I wonder if I had the DK one growing up. I collected those things like hot cakes so it’s possible. Anything to avoid spending more money. Alternatively I think I bought some NFC tags I can write myself now that I think about it specifically for this purpose
Because they fucking suck. Silent hill is a resident evil clone. I don’t even REALLY want silent hill, I want more resident evil. So when you give me a copy and the copy isn’t what it’s supposed to be either? It’s upsetting.
The game industry has damned near forgotten about single player, third person action-adventure games and it fucking sucks.
Damn man, I love Resident Evil and have never finished an SH game, but we have so many of the former (especially considering the indie scene) this seems like an excessively presumptuous comment.
Silent Hill was never a Resident Evil clone. It always had a unique identity. Resident Evil, except the original game, has the identity of a Hollywood Action movie. The developers of the game have stated that is what they wanted from the series starting with RE2. Silent Hill, on the other hand, is like a much slower Alfred Hitchcock Suspense film. Slower paced, methodical, and plays on the viewer’s imagination. Where Resident Evil might explicitly say something in the lore, Silent Hill is more likely to only imply it.
And then we get to Silent Hill 2 Remake which basically is just a copy of Resident Evil 4 Remake, sadly.
I'm struggling with this question, because these days I almost do that backwards. I will get a game and ask "what's the device I'd like to use for this"?
I mean, I've been playing a fair amount of Monster Train 2. I have no interest in sitting at a desk for that, or to put it up on a massive screen. Been playing a bunch of Tetris the Grand Master, which is not a great fit for a heavy handheld. Donkey Kong Bananza? Mostly TV, felt off on the handheld screen.
I think when you go back to emulation there's a bunch of games that are deceptively better on the go. That was the Switch's original party tirck, right? Hey, turns out Mario 64's short star runs are a great fit for sitting on the toilet. Who knew? Random JRPG being played one-handed on a tiny Android device? Surprisingly decent.
But at this point software is just this weird blob, I just pick a controller/device combo that fits for each game.
In Skyrim you can romance any of a wide variety of characters marked as “marriageable” in the game’s files. That really just means the voice actor was willing to record the marriage ceremony lines. Since voice actors were reused, if a voice actor recorded their lines, most if not all of their characters would be marriageable. To marry a character, you complete a task for them that makes them call you a friend (typically a quest they give you when you first meet them). You then wear an amulet of Mara (the game’s goddess of love) and speak to them. They ask if you fancy them, you say yes. They propose marriage, you go to the temple of Mara and be there the next day. During the ceremony you can say yes or no. And the game does not give two shits what your gender is. If you’re a male character, you can freely marry any marriageable male character, and vice versa for females. I play female characters because I like to look at them. I’d rather look at a female than a male. And I always marry Mjoll the Lioness because she’s trying to tear down the most fun guild in the game, so I move her out of town and make her a housewife. (Her quest is a lot of fun, too.)
In Fallout 4 you can romance maybe half a dozen characters? All of your companions who are not robotic or animal. One of the robots can be converted into an android you can hook up with. You can’t marry any of them, and you can romance all of them. None of them care what your gender is. Many have quests you have to do, but even beyond that, you have to push up their approval rating of you, by doing things they approve of (e.g. Matt Mercer’s character loves when you pick locks and steal) and by not doing things they don’t like (e.g. there’s a junkie girl who loves when you do drugs, until you cure her addiction, then she hates when you do drugs). Once they’re romanced, you can take them to any bed for a fade-to-black sex scene (neither heard nor seen).
In Cyberpunk 2077, there are four characters you can romance and hook up with, but no marriage. Each one has a genital preference and a voice preference. So you can absolutely be trans in the game. You choose a body type (fem or masc) and a voice type (fem or masc). Depending on your choice, you get 2 people you can romance. The other two will not reach the romance stage with you no matter what.
I guess the characters in GTA are straight? I don’t play bro shooters and such. Not my thing. Tomb Raider? Up in the air what Lara Croft prefers. You could take that either way. I love the Life is Strange games and those lean gay/lesbian. In the first one, Max can kiss both a girl and a guy, and it seems equal, but if you read her diary, she has no attraction to the guy, but she absolutely crushes on the girl. In the second one, the guy is absolutely gay, but the focus is on his little brother who is too young to have a sexual orientation (I think he’s 8?). It’s less obvious in the third one, but that girl definitely has lesbian vibes. And the fourth one is Max again.
What you are describing is a concept of the mechanically bisexual. The options as given often allow players to choose in a sandbox game whether they experience the game as a completely non-queer experience or not. It sometimes creates queerness as an option rather than a core part of an experience which rep wise is considered a step better than when all romance options in games were mandatorily heterosexual but also kind of a cop out where player choice means all characters are often Shrodinger’s bi. If you want to experience say Skyrim as an almost entirely queer free experience - you can. Your choices flip that representation on and off like a lightswitch so if you have queerphobic tendencies the game doth not offend much. No one ever hits on you first.
Rep wise Gay characters are ones specifically ones where the queerness isn’t optional, it’s a part of the canon of the character. Straight characters often are so in fixed story narratives where they have hetero relationships and if they have brushes that look like same sex romance it’s played for laughs and treated as not really an option. Since culture still sort of assumes straightness as a default if the character only ever is coded romantically by the frame of the game to be attracted to the opposite sex they can be termed a “straight character” because as a player the game’s interfacing with that character’s sexuality is mandatory. An example is the Prince of Persia games or the Final Fantasy series which have a romantically coded opposite sex paramours that you don’t have an option not to interface with the character’s sexuallity.
This is way more common in older games and fixed story franchises.
So outside of visual novels, are there good queer games where you get hit on first? I’m in if the story is good and the gameplay is engaging. I am straight but not narrow, and games are fictional.
By making the player make the first move, they empower the player to choose.
By making the player make the first move, they empower the player to choose.
The problem often becomes that the entire sexuallity of mechanically bi characters or all characters in the game are often under player control. In a some circumstances games with this mechanism will have the characters who are not chosen as romantic options pair with no one ever or defer to straight behaviour. This is in deference to games wanting to have it’s cake and eat it too.
Examples of this in action :
Stardew Valley where if you don’t choose a same sex option to romance - no other characters ever have any romances ever. The one exception is Leah who has an ex who shows up late in the romance pursuit who tries to win her back. However, the ex is whatever gender the PC is so if it’s a hetero relationship, it still appears to be a hetero relationship.
Harvest Moon Mineral Town (later editions) give the player to options to romance same sex options… But everyone you don’t choose pairs up in hetero relationships and no other characters.
In both games there is no other queer rep so the player essentially opts in or out to all queer representation in the game. Blanket Heterosexuallity or bi-invisibility until given player approval is the default.
Indy games are generally the leaders for actual queer rep that isn’t optional to the game’s plot where characters sexuallities are not revealed by the player opt in.
Okay, I definitely agree with you on the player being the only romance option for NPCs… for the most part. Looking at it, I do see plenty of existing romances in Skyrim, Fallout 4, and Cyberpunk 2077 — the examples I gave — and I think they’re mostly straight. In Cyberpunk, Judy Alvarez, an established lesbian character who will only romance you if you’re female, has a female ex who is a main character. You meet her before you meet Judy. She’s the one who gets you the heist gig, sort of. The one who hires Dex, who hires you and Jackie. It may not be obvious at first, but if you follow Judy’s story, even as a male character, it will be obvious. And Fallout 4 had a romance with two robots, but that’s mainly played for laughs and most people will never see it. (You have to go to the school in Diamond City and speak with the female robot, who will ask you about love. Give the most heartfelt answer and, the next night, you will see her wed a male robot outside the all-faith chapel, if you’re there for it — you could be elsewhere and you will miss it.) But that’s a robot relationship, and it’s hetero.
I do want to say one or two of them had a couple gay/lesbian romances.
Going a bit off-topic, Animal Crossing — largely considered a kids’ game — actually has a bunch of stuff just beneath the surface that most people will overlook. Flick, the bug collector, is considered by many fans to be FTM trans. He identifies as male but appears to be AFAB. There’s a peacock who identifies as female — peacocks are specifically the male of the peafowl species. Peahens are the females, and they don’t have the big feathery thing. So that’s a female character who was AMAB. Plenty of other characters rock the trans flag as well. Kids would never notice this, and being a Japanese game, they have to be very careful as that country is super conservative. (There’s actually a pretty deep rabbit hole on that game’s lore. Some characters hint toward the game being a game, breaking the fourth wall. There are also hints the game takes place in a post-apocalyptic world and you’re the last human.)
I’m with you though, in that I would like to see more same-sex relationships and LGBTQ+ representation in my games.
It sometimes creates queerness as an option rather than a core part of an experience
Because, surprise surprise, most non-romance games don’t have romance as significant part of the game. You don’t get straight tailored experience in Skyrim either. Unless you believe killing bandits or mammoths is how you romance a straight person.
kind of a cop out
This mentality is why so many gamers outside the homophobic conservative circles are pissed at game developers and groups like Sweet Baby Inc. Not cramming gender politics into a game that has nothing to do with them is not a cop out. It is good game design. Skyrim is not a romance simulator and it shouldn’t be turned into one just to “be more inclusive”.
Hey, just a heads up assuming “gender politics” don’t matter and being upset if a character is noticeably queer - makes you a part of the homophobic conservative circles. People, irl are queer, omitting queer people from settings where they would just exist as part of the world because “they shouldn’t be there” is a little queerphobic.
Conservative circles have been screaming about woke games forever just when options to have non-binary people exist at character creation or when there is one gay side character. A lot of folks in the arts, including in game development, are queer and like to make stories that didn’t exist when they were growing up. Your opinion is your own but assuming it’s universally considered “good game design” to force developers to exclude the things they are passionate to put in their games to appease a howling mob that is never happy even when they get what they say they want is a bit rich.
No. Not wanting to have your car stolen by a gay person does not make you a homophobe. It just makes you a normal person that doesn’t want to be stolen from. Equally, wanting a game to be entertainment, not political messaging does not make you conservative.
Most people had no issue with diverse characters that are part of a game, see Life is Strange. They do when you turn a game into political PSA at the expense of the rest of the game, see Valeguard.
Ah yes, the two sexualities - political and non-political. You really aren’t as far along as you think.
I can accept that you are unhappy and want your games to not make you feel uncomfortable. Gods forbid they ever be like every other form of media and actually have a message they want to convey or try anything new. I can say having something tailored specifically for you is quite nice - now that more of us actually get to experience that.
and want your games to not make you feel uncomfortable.
You are missing the point entirely. Playing as a homosexual character did not make me feel uncomfortable, even though I understand if it did for some people. Even so, not every game is for everyone. It is fine to have games focused at different audiences.
But when you hand over writing your game characters and story to groups like SBI, whose only qualification is “inclusive writing”, than it destroys games for everyone and you get entirely justified backlash from gamers.
Same if you take an established franchise and change the target audience.
Unfortunately, just like you don’t make distinction between the actual homophobes and people who just want good writing and game design, a lot of gamers once pissed of don’t distinguish between good inclusion and forced, badly executed one. And than you get the polarized BS of today.
There’s no “actual homophobes” vs " not homophobic but still unhappy that queer people and ‘forced inclusion’ are in a game people" - that’s just different degrees of homophobia.
Games changed a bit so that they aren’t all made for you specifically. Those franchises didn’t belong to you and for some people those ‘ruined games’ are their favorite games. Everyone has studios they don’t like. Not all representation is gunna be great because not all writing is going to be great but when inclusion “ruins it for everyone” in your veiw look around and ask if the people around you who are discussing it is actually a good cross section of “everyone”.
There’s no “actual homophobes” vs " not homophobic but still unhappy that queer people and ‘forced inclusion’ are in a game people"
That’s the same kind of argument as saying criticizing Israeli genocide is antisemitism. There are objectively bad things done in the name of inclusion. Criticizing them is not homophobic. If you are going to pretend they are, that you are somehow above criticism just because your stated goal is noble, don’t be surprised when people turn against you.
Are these “bad things in the name of inclusion” just making a game you don’t like? The push against “inclusion” on a general scale has lead to real world harms because a bunch of babies can’t come to terms with there being pieces of media with choices they don’t like and threw a fucking tantrum. There isn’t really a side anymore where railing against the harms of “inclusion” isn’t propping up the arguement that minorities “earned” the actions against them by asking “too much”.
People will take your words as tacit endorsement that queer people “had this coming” because a bunch of businesses responded to a body of queer theory and made some fucking games. The anti-DEI crowd is the Conservative crowd and you might be on the fringe but you aren’t outside the radius.
People will take your words as tacit endorsement that queer people “had this coming” because a bunch of businesses responded to a body of queer theory and made some fucking games.
That is exactly why your stance is pissing me off so much. People like you, who don’t care how their ideas impact other people as long as they are inclusive, are pushing massive amounts of people towards the conservative side of the argument. I don’t think that makes those people conservative, for some reason you do. Regardless, we both agree it hurts queer people.
So was it worth it? A bunch of poorly written queer characters in games and movies in exchange for pissing off a portion of otherwise tolerant population and pushing it towards conservatism?
EDIT: Forgot to say, this game never released in English but there is a fan translation patch available that should be easy enough to find if you’re interested.
There’s a growing trend in indie games for the King’s Field-likes; Lunacid, Dread Delusion, etc. I’m a huge fan and if anyone has any other good ones to recommend, please let me know! EDIT: Just found Caput Mortem which looks like it might fit the bill near enough and also features music by Ockeroid of Crow Country notably …
But for this I thought I’d return to the roots. I’ve picked at King’s Field I (JP) and II a bit before and while I enjoy them, they’re overall still very clunky and I usually get distracted. I wasn’t sure how long I’d stick with Shadow Tower Abyss, but I feel like this one I may very well see through, I’m enjoying it quite a bit so far. That’s not to say it’s not still a clunky slog, and it’s certainly not for everyone, but there is real charm there.
(Scoring system: 1-5 being bad, OK, good, great, excellent with decimals being vibe based to push it closer to one rather than the other. For example 3.2 is meant to indicate a bit better than just good, but still not great. 3.8 might indicate close to great, but missing a few aspects that prevent it)
Sound: 3.2/5, Good. Like a lot of FromSoft games, there’s not really much music aside from the occasional musical sting which provides effective ambience. The sound design is minimal as well, but there are some very good moments of creepy thrumming, droning, and distant screeching that make it an intense environment to inhabit.
Graphics: 3.5/5, Good. What’s on display is generally competent and atmospheric, each new area has its own theme which is interesting to explore, but still, I feel like they could’ve done a lot more with the PS2 graphics. It’s certainly an improvement over King’s Field '94, but exactly how much is debatable …
The monster design is pretty good, everything has this kind of alien/abyssal feel to it. The overall theming is on point. Areas of the game have simple descriptions (i.e. Blue Light Area) that give the impression the player character is a foreign explorer rather than anyone with innate knowledge of this weird world. It’s a small aspect of world-building I appreciate.
Gameplay: 3.8/5, Good. Overall control still feels dated, but much less clunky than previous entries. The player moves at a brisk enough pace, but still slowly enough that you soak in the environment and progress feels meaningful. Being an older game you can’t really rebind the controls, but there are a variety of schemes including Type 4 which allow for the expected, modern dual analog stick looking/movement.
Combat can still be a little boxy and clunky but each weapon offers a left and right slash as well as an overhead bashing and frontal thrusting attack. Each weapon also has related stats for these types of attacks and enemies will have weaknesses or possible points of dismemberment making them vulnerable to particular attacks. Unlike some of the earlier King’s Field games, connecting attacks always feels good and has satisfying feedback.
The stats system is definitely very obtuse, even if you are familiar with From’s games and I recommend consulting a guide quickly before your first time playing. Again, as is very typical in From’s fashion, there isn’t an abundance of items but what exists is very deliberate. Money consists of these single large coins which you usually only find 1 or occasionally 2 at a time. Most things will only cost a handful of coins with healing potions being 2, boxes of ammo (for your gun!) being 1(?), and weapons and armor ranging anywhere from ~4-15. You’ll also find a plethora of items scattered throughout the game so there’s no shortage.
There is a unique balancing though as in order to heal yourself from the rare healing stations you have to sacrifice items for their value, although I’m early enough in the game that a basic Hat still seems to fully heal me from low health. In order to repair durability on your items from the rare purple repairing stations, you must sacrifice health with items like magic rings requiring sometimes more health than you currently have! This creates a tense and balanced management situation that feels like you might possibly softlock yourself by eating through too many resources, but so far hasn’t proved an issue for me. As a personal aside, I’m a big fan of playing games as they were designed so I’m doing my best to only save at the rare save points and not save state my way through the game, although this is of course up to your own tastes and discretion.
But is there a poison area with forced damage, I hear you ask? Yes, you fool, YES! Why would you even doubt it? Don’t let this discourage you though as understanding the stats system and equipping proper armor allows you to minimize the damage per poison tick such that it creates urgency as a pressure point more than a pain point. Definitely sacrificed a few lives just scouting the area out, though. Game Over means reload a save.
Summary/TL;DR Shadow Tower Abyss is a very competent dungeon crawler with a unique theme and atmosphere that’s worth exploring if you’d like to see historic FromSoft (it’s 20+ years old, as an ancient gamer I can use “historic” if I want). Miyazaki gets a lot of credit for modern From games and while a lot of that is certainly due, it’s fascinating to see how many of these deliberate design concepts have always been in their DNA.
As an aside, one day I’m going to write an entire essay on what makes a Soulslike a Soulsike. I missed the boat on the original hype and only got into them during COVID lockdown in 2020. I didn’t think I’d be a fan of the grueling, “git gud” experience but I’ve come to realize that’s not what makes those games interesting. It’s one concept and some people may find it unsatisfyingly vague, but it’s not the bonfires, or the losing souls on death, or the dodge rolling. It’s the stone-cold deliberateness. A lot of the difficulty from these games arises out of that deliberateness; what items you choose to equip and how you observe and approach unique situations. The games aren’t good because they’re hard, the specific design elements that make them hard are also the things that make them good.
Almost thought the pic was a shitpost before I remembered Smash exists (forgive me I hate fighting games). Lovely that we live in a timeline where Shirtless sephiroth, Kirby’s Pokemon cousin, and a gorilla named after another animal, and crossover fighting game characters can all fight each other.
Lol I know what a Thwomp is, I was more so noting the fact that the pic is missing a fourth player, so I just was thinking about fighting game crossovers in general.
“Another fighting game character”, take your pick. Just with non-nintendo IPs at this point it could be Ryu, Ken, Terry Bogard or Kazuya Mishima.
And then you can throw Solid Snake, Pac-Man, Sonic, Mega Man, Simon Belmont, fucking Minecraft Steve and a Mii disguised as Sans from Undertale into the mix.
Fair enough on the fighting games lol. Smash is the only one that i’ve really found stuck to me. It having multiple franchises i think helps (and contributes to how surreal the image is)
Yeah I love watching them and really wanna get into them (P4AU, Guilty Gear, Street Fighter, etc.), plus their soundtracks are banger. But I fucking suck at fighting games and the only one I ever tolerated was the soloplayer Pokken Tournament campaign. I honestly got bored of both 3DS and Wii U smash as a child very quickly, and to this day I feel bad for the money wasted.
bin.pol.social
Najstarsze