I appreciate seeing games referred to as soulslike. Immediate hard pass. The genre has a lot to offer and I see why so many people like the games, but for some reason I just really don’t ever want my own skills as a player to determine the outcome of combat.
That’s the one thing I would really appreciate about Souls-likes: no RNG, less being forced to grind for better stats/gear, if I want to beat the challenge I have to improve my own skills and legit “git gud”, as they say. When you finally beat it, it feels so much more satisfying. So I appreciate the genre from a design standpoint. That said, the frustration of the hours to days it would take me to do that is enough to keep me from playing them myself. That, and the super-dark art and aesthetic of so many of them turns me off from them too. I prefer brighter, more colorful games.
I just really don’t ever want my own skills as a player to determine the outcome of combat.
I don’t think I’ve ever heard anyone voice this sentiment before. I think I get what you are saying, but it just doesn’t sound like what most people say.
It’s not terrible, but it’s pretty much what I was expecting.
Could really do without the crafting shit and leveling system. I know the Arkham games also had skill trees and what have you, but it wasn’t ever as bad as this.
I do think I fucked myself over a bit in not focusing on the main story early on, because I very nearly burned myself out on the side activities.
Turns out that a lot of my issues are kind of addressed at key points in the main story as well, so I really should focus on it more (like getting the glider thingy from Lucius, which I had no idea existed and would have been a tremendous help earlier on when I was navigating the unnecessarily large - and, to be honest, very boring - open world).
Friend and I were looking for our next co-op game after Remnant 2 (very good btw) and were somewhat eagerly awaiting this one. Turns out it has the same PvP invasion mechanic as the Souls game unless you play offline. That’s a deal-breaker for us unfortunately.
It gets better. According to Oroboro (popular pvp streamer), it looks like you can invade people of any level. Your stats will be scaled down but you can still use your overpowered gear and invade someone that just started playing.
Thanks, this info is super useful. Story progression not carrying over isn’t a huge issue to me, so long as you’re allowed to keep playing with the host past where your own game world is. I never liked how dark souls required you to play levels multiple times in a row if you want to keep playing with friends.
These two bits are really nice to see too
When playing online, the host’s game world will reflect their progress in the storyline. As an accompanying player, you won’t advance your own story, but you’ll keep any items, levels, achievements, and currencies you earn during the online session. These will carry over when you return to your own game world.
As a joining player, you have only one life. If you lose it, your body will fall to the ground and you’ll switch to spectator mode. The host has two options for resurrecting you: they can either interact with your fallen body on the spot, risking exposure to enemies as it’s not a quick ritual, or they can do so via a nearby Vestige.
This post falls to meet the only rule at Beehaw: Be(e) Kind.
You’re entitled to your opinion, and this is a great space to share your opinions on things so long as you do so constructively, in good faith. The title of this post is divisive ragebait, the original post has no depth or detail, and the edit only adds more complaints about bugs without adding any detail to explain your original claims.
I enjoyed a few of them. GtaV, or Borderlands 3 (altough part 2 will be my favorite part forever)
Civ6 was merely only a demo version, and TW:Troy really sucked and helped me save some bucks.
But mostly I just add them in the hope that Tencent will pay a few cents to The developers who created those games in the first place.
But I won't buy anything there. Games that are only sold via this platform don't exist.
Played about an hour and a half last night. It seems essentially a glorified Trek themed Stellaris expansion. Which given it was only £25 quid I don’t mind too much.
Seems to have massive performance issues that get worse the longer you play. Hope they manage to fix that. Was looking forward to playing it coop with a friend.
I’ve put a couple hundred hours into RimWorld (base game without expansions) and haven’t run into any bugs. The only bugs I’ve seen relate to the multiplayer mod.
I second rimworld in general but I‘d say its a management sym rather than strategy. Real strategy games (and the best ones I know of) are starcraft 1 and c&c red alert. They’re as old as time but don’t have bugs afaik since games were made different back then.
Agreed, I would call CK3 or Rimworld “simulation” games not “strategy” games. When I think strategy I think turn based strategy like XCom, FF tactics, or Civ games. SC2 and C&C would be Real-Time Strategy, but from OP’s examples it didn’t sound like that’s what they’re looking for. Maybe they’d like Northgard though.
bin.pol.social
Najstarsze