I’m trying to see some stuff in BG1 and 2 that I missed as I take another lap through the entire series, and I remember BG1 being a fairly easy, straight-forward game, but now that I’m replaying it, I remember that’s only the tail end of the game. Early in the game, when you’re stuck at level 1 for hours, lots of attacks just one-shot you, and it takes so long to get level 2. In Baldur’s Gate 3, you’re barely out of the tutorial area before you get level 2, so you just don’t have that problem with low HP.
I don’t have an encyclopedic knowledge of 2e, but I think first level HP might be set in stone by class, and the Enhanced Editions of BG1 and 2 give you a max HP per level option, which doesn’t really help at level 1. Dynaheir keeps getting smoked with her mere 6HP, and she can’t get to level 2 fast enough.
If you’re revisiting BG1 via the Enhanced Edition it’s actually been changed a lot from the original game. One of the biggest differences is that summoning spells don’t scale in the number of minions you get the way they did in the original. I remember summoning great big walls of skeletons with Animate Dead and just having my entire party pelt the enemy with slings and arrows from relative safety. Can’t do that anymore!
Pelting the enemy with slings and arrows still works, but now and then they’ll still target me at range and land a hit. I don’t have a summoner in my party either, so I doubt I’d see a difference, especially at level 1.
I actually prefer walls of text these days. I find myself too impatient to sit through long, voice-acted diatribes. I can read 10 times faster than the voice actor can speak, so I just end up turning on subtitles and skipping most of the voice acting anyway.
I also just find that voice acting tends to compromise the amount of writing. They just won’t have the VA read a wall of text and instead they’ll cut it right down, removing tons of nuance. Voice also similarly compromises the amount of dialogue options available to the character. I have yet to see a voice acted game with the sheer breadth and depth of dialogue option choices as games like Planescape Torment or Fallout 2.
While I agree with you on how mediocre voice acting drags down most games, BG3 is one of the very few where the voice acting elevated the dialogue for me and the dialogue felt a lot less rambling than in NWN and other similar games. In BG3 the player character dialogue options are pretty robust, sometimes having six or more options to choose from, since the character doesn’t speak. I haven’t played Planescape Torment or Fallout 2 to compare, so I’ll take your word on them.
On a side note, BG3 was one of the games where the dialogue choices do matter. The worst are games where there are only a few poorly described choices and they have zero impact on what happens after! While I live Battletech (2019) the dialoge choices were completely pointless other than microfosing information. They would have been better off just having the NPCs banter after a single choice.
Personal preferences of course, which is why I love how many games there are to choose from.
I don’t normally like that kind of character but he really grew on me fast. Astarian, Gale, and Karlach are my absolute favorites but the cast as a whole is solid.
That’s what I am glad they included enough for personal preference and included the ability to respec them so they weren’t locked into their starting classes.
While I didn’t like his class much, it was his personality that really got me. I saw he can become a literal god in some endings. Sure didn’t happen in mine!
XCom and XCom 2 can be played entirely with the mouse. Minor typing if you want to name your soldiers, but nothing requires quick reflexes. Everything is turn based.
There’s an older breakout style game on steam called Shatter that can be played entirely with the mouse and has a banger soundtrack and neat visual style.
Emulation opens up a lot of options for old school turn based games. RPGs, turn based strategy. Any of the Pokemon games gen 1-3 can be played one handed with some clever button mapping. Any game made to use just the Wii-mote as a pointer would also work, but I don’t know those off the top of my head.
You might want to look into one handed controllers, or something like the FLIR USB dongle that you can use to map IR TV remote signals to keyboard button presses. Just need to use a remote that doesn’t already control something.
As I mentioned in another comment it plays quite well. At least with the Steam Index that I use. Most games seem to work out of the box. One thing that isn’t currently implemented is BT communication with the lighthouses which is a bit annoying but there are other apps and tools to workaround that.
Completely agree. 6 has some fun elements and really cool guns, but the enemy health system they implemented completely ruined the game and franchise (among other shitty things)
Reasons why Ubisoft is in the shitter, facing hostility from both gamers and shareholders alike. It seems the Guillemot familly is hellbent into destroying every last shred of good will left.
4 is very similar to 3, in my opinion. It generally ranks lower than 3, but I’d attribute that to 3 defining expectations and 4 meeting expectations rather than pulling another groundbreaking move. 3 shared some notable elements with 2 but refined the direction of FC. 2 doesn’t have magic and FC enjoyers begroaned 3’s supernatural element, but here we are.
5 removed the supernatural element and got some mixed feelings. I’d put some of that on the fact that they brought the white American savior trope home to America. Instead of a foreign land under a whimsical authoritarian regime the West likes to go to war with, it’s a religious cult in classic Americana rural towns. It’s like changing from 1990s Batman movies to the Nolan trilogy. Gritty, more realistic, closer to historical fiction than fantasy. It harks back to the 1993 Waco Massacre.
I’ve played 6 on and off over the last few years. I read lots of hate but still enjoyed it. It’s in Cuba, so it was back to being a far-off fantasy for me, with lots of story rooted in the 1960s revolution (though the game is present day). That is until the Gaza war flared up. Suddenly the game got uncomfortable for me. You play as a terrorist group fighting the military. That’s not exactly different from 4. Sure, if you win, it’s a revolution, but if you lose, historical speaking, the winners call it terrorism. I suppose the story could be considered weaker, but it’s a change up. Instead of basing the story on you vs the big bad, it’s rooted more in the friends you make along the way. You’re building a revolution as one faction gathering 3 more.
There’s also 3 half-games. Between the main titles, half of the prior maps for alternate experiments. I’d wait for all the titles to be discounted but would say the halfsies need to be discounted more. Granted, they’re probably all regularly under $20 now anyway.
After 3 came Blood Dragon, using one of the islands for an over the top 1980s synthwave action comedy. It has corny 80s moves in lieu of superpowers. It’s fun.
After 4 came Primal, a prehistoric version of the FC formula. I think it’s neat that they developed a proto-proto-indo-european language for a 10,000BC setting. Spears, slings, clubs, and knives are the weapons here with some grenade-like items. There’s spiritual elements resembling living a mythology. It’s also fun.
After 5, New Dawn is actually a continuation of the story. A quasi-Fallout/Mad Max post-nuke-apocalypse world in which Joseph Seed still lives - and becomes an ally. I think it brought in supernatural powers from nuclear stuff. Probably my least favorite of the 3, but still enjoyable. It also introduced a number of the elements people begroaned in 6, so maybe that’s why I don’t mind 6 as much.
I’m surprised there hasn’t been a halfsies between 6 and, presumably, an upcoming 7. 6 does have some extra story (dlc?) that has you relive parts of the prior titles. I haven’t done them nor read about them much so I can experience them myself.
I liked 4, it’s very much a victim of being a Ubisoft game though, as in it’s more of the same. I’d say the only difference is the setting.
5 is similarly pretty good, I feel like it removed a lot of the “Guerrilla Warfare” feel of the combat but the villain is really good and the setting is pretty solid too. I haven’t played 6 though. If I had to guess though it’s the same. More of the same.
Worth mentioning that some of these earlier titles were built for IPX networking, which is no longer supported by modern operated systems. I get the impression OP is asking for games with LAN gaming supporting to get recommendations, so I feel it’s important to make sure they or others checking lists like this one understand they may need to go through some hoops to get some of these titles to work with a modern machine.
Yea I’m not sure of OP’s ability and the requirements for games was vague. But IPX isn’t that big of a hurdle, DOSBox has an emulator for it: www.dosbox.com/wiki/connectivity
Bigger issues would be sourcing and playing some of these games on modern systems at all. And some dedicated servers can be a pain.
Holy shit, I had forgotten about SOLDAT. My friends and I used to play that on the library computers in middle school.
IIRC it had a portable version that you could boot from a flash drive. Or at least the installation happened on your local user account, so it didn’t require admin rights from the school IT team.
Also, the old Dungeon Siege games. IIRC, 1 and 2 both had LAN multiplayer, where each person took control of a different character. It was basically the groundwork for the gameplay that Dragon Age Origins built upon.
It’s easily The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past.
It has everything I could ask for in a game: Sword fighting. Magic. Secrets. Dungeon crawling. An alternate dimension. Side quests. Different tools and items. There’s enough content that it feels fulfilling to complete it. Peak art. Peak music. NPCs don’t talk too much, and there are just enough of them to make the world feel alive. Bosses.
I saw one comment on Steam: “I hope so because it really made no sense at all selling the game at its current price. I feel I didn’t really pay enough given the typical cost of games”.
Eagle Dynamics would like to have such fans in DCS.
Plenty of G*mers out there who would gladly just give their wallet over to their favorite developer/publisher. Even here on Lemmy. I even got downvoted for telling someone that no one was forcing them to buy the next new console when it comes out, and they replied that yes they will if their partner finds out about a particular new game. I was flabbergasted.
It doesn’t surprise me at all. In fact I’ve seen other similar comments on other steam games that people like riding the dick of.
Kunos has built a lot of good will in the community with the modability of AC and long term support for both AC and ACC. The AC Evo early access has been real clunky but they earned their fans and their understanding.
Reminds me of Bethesda's storefront for paid mods that they tried out for Skyrim's special edition in 2023. Hopefully they don't pull a bait-and-switch on their players and it's just a platform for free mods.
There are a lot of paid mods for the original AC, so I expect that will be part of it. However, I do think that there are two other reasons for the devs to want to host a platform of their own:
Being able to remove content ripped from other games, which will help keep them out of trouble
Giving users the option to automatically download the mods necessary to join a multiplayer game
Wow. I thought it might’ve been the community rather than my instance, but now I’m thinking not. You can see my swears and those of the guy I asked about the swears, right? Or do they appear as “removed” for you too?
People generally don’t talk too much about stuff that things that don’t particularly stand out. If a game is bad, people will complain. If a game is good, people will praise it. If a game is middling, most people will just move on. Nobody’s going to start a discussion about a game that was vaguely enjoyable but not noteworthy, unless expectations were unreasonably high to begin with.
I think it’s great. The maps may be smaller than some other open world RPGs but it is packed with content. The voice acting is great, I don’t know what the hell people here are talking about. Graphics are good enough although the facial animations are pretty wooden and stilted.
This is my biggest problem. I don’t like the real-time combat. When I originally played the demo of part one of the remake and discovered it was real-time combat, I went into the settings to change it to turn-based, only to discover there was no such setting. Stopped playing pretty soon after that.
It’s a modern game, nobody but people who played the original would play it if the combat stayed the same. There are many criticisms of the game, but the change in combat isn’t one of them.
Feels slightly hyperbolic. Atlus’s games are mostly turn based and seem to have sold in only somewhat worse numbers compared to FF7 remake (Persona 5 in particular). One series (Yakuza / Like a Dragon) even switched from action combat to turn based.
Anyway, I found the combat to be kind of forgettable and didn’t really add to the game, although I understand there have been improvements in the second game.
The combat is fanatastic. But they don’t lean into it enough, and so you don’t get to fully engage with it beyond a superficial level. Except for some fleeting moments most people wont even notice.
I love it, but I hate how they’re too afraid to commit, even to the point of not allowing you to play Rebirth on hard until ng+.
Why do you say that? Lots of other old games get remakes that don't try to completely change genre. Just because a game is old doesn't mean no one would play a faithful remake, that reasoning doesn't make any sense.
Hell, SE themselves have done faithful remakes of games that are much older. Dragon Quest III HD just came out and I hear it's been selling pretty damn well.
That said I really like the combat system in modern FF games. It’s a mix of hack n slash + strategy you don’t really get anywhere else.
They’ve made something unique, and I approve. My only complaint is that they don’t lean into it, and all but the highest difficulty lets the player get away with button mashing.
M$ did hella shady, monopolistic stuff (patent theft, market manipulation, very likely corporate espionage, and certainly most visibly prefferential treatment of their own software ecosystem and sabotage of third party software on their platforms) to create and enforce market dominance. Unless Valve has been doing something I’m unaware of to kill other platforms, they’re not really similar situations.
Valve runs a couple of online casinos that target children specifically, not sure we should be arguing who’s worse here. I think Steam is a clunky piece of software that’s popular mostly because everyone else missed the moment to start competing and Valve gained monopoly unopposed. Other viable competitors tried and failed at even gaining a foothold and are relegated to small niches because it’s impossible to move people who amassed content libraries over the years. Valve skims 10-30% of an insanely large volume of transactions and should be held to a much higher standard. You’re ignoring all of the warning signs because they didn’t screw you over yet.
Valve runs a couple of online casinos that target children specifically
I’m interested in which of their games that have loot crates you think are targeted specifically at children? Basically all of their games, but especially their games with loot crates, tend to be targeted towards adults. Hell, TF2 came out in 2007, which is 18 years ago, so no one who is a child today was even alive when it came out. It’s mostly elder to mid-Millennials. You can dislike loot boxes (I do), but don’t try to paint Valve like they’re Roblox or Epic Games.
everyone else missed the moment to start competing and Valve gained monopoly unopposed.
Other platforms were around before Steam was fully dominant, but they tended to be focused on the creators’ first-party games, and excluded other publishers and titles from using their platform. Desura and Central/Impulse both had decently large user bases. Stardock Central actually preceded Steam’s release, but was overtaken because Stardock was mostly just using it for its own games, but also billing the service more as a way to unify your physical and digital libraries, and to provide patches and whatnot, whereas Steam went all-in on digital-only.
because it’s impossible to move people who amassed content libraries over the years
Yes, but this is sadly just the natural reality of digital sales. Because you are buying a license, it’s not trivial from a company’s perspective to make those portable, and the company you’re moving the license to is then having to host your content without ever actually receiving the money for it, which isn’t super appealing. GOG actually tried this for a while(GOG Connect), where you could essentially redeem your Steam games to your GOG account, but they realized it wasn’t worth it (especially since there isn’t game parity on the 2, so most people have to keep Steam anyways).
You’re ignoring all of the warning signs because they didn’t screw you over yet.
I must have missed where I said Valve would never do something bad? But yes, I don’t believe in condemning someone for what they might do in the future, preemptively. If and when Valve goes darkside (probably when Gabe dies, and it ends up under new management), they should be condemned. Acting as though they’re bad just because they’re dominant in the market is silly, though; they didn’t get there through anti-competitive business practices, they got there through others failing to do better.
Adding gambling to video games without verifying user age is targeting children with gambling. There’s a lot of convenient combinations of circumstances that Valve is fully aware of and profiting from. I don’t care about plausible deniability because Valve employees were visibly smug and amused when questioned about it. There is no absolving Valve after this.
You blame others for Valve monopoly. Yeah, I said they missed the ship. We have a private monopoly in PC gaming storefronts now and that’s not good. It doesn’t matter if they won fair - they are a parasitic middle-man that makes everyone lose.
Ask yourself and be honest about it: if Valve had a true competitor would their cut be as high as it is now? This is the only thing you should be concerned about, not that they engage in Linux philanthropy or that they make cool games.
Valve runs a couple of online casinos that target children specifically, not sure we should be arguing who’s worse here.
I agree with the sentiment of this… MTX/lootbox shenanigans are a bad, harmful practice that should be much more heavily restrained…
But that has nothing to do with being a monopoly.
At this point, its a widespread industry problem.
You’d address that with regulation, but not on the basis of Steam being a de facto monopoly, instead based on some kind of consumer protection regulation.
… But Trump and Elon are blowing all of that up, so, probably not gonna happen anytime soon.
Valve skims 10-30% of an insanely large volume of transactions and should be held to a much higher standard.
10 - 30 % really isn’t that unreasonable compared to a lot of existing comptetitors… though I guess we’ll see how their ongoing lawsuit around that ends up.
Either way, this also doesn’t make or not make them a monopoly, unless you or the ongoing lawsuit can prove that a 30% is functionally an outsized monopoly rent, wildly out of step with the rest of the industry.
If this is instead roughly in line with the rest of the industry, you’d again need to address this with some other legislation that spans the whole industry, not specifically targeting Steam as a monopoly.
The monopoly case against MS was bullshit. They had all kinds of bad business practices to go after and they decided to go after them for including a web browser in the OS. They fucking made the whole process a waste of time.
Pressure on their web browser monopoly was necessary because IE6 was stifling entire industry. From a legal point of view it’s not illegal to be a monopoly but to abuse that position so there isn’t that much you can do about it, especially in the US. Going after operating system or office suite monopoly should have been done but matters less and less these days.
MS prevented you from using other browsers by using vendor lock-in. It was a prime example example of now misunderstood concept of embrace, extend, extinguish. You could download Mozilla Phoenix but you couldn’t use it for everything because CSS rendering in IE was so detached from standards. On top of that you had ActiveX which meant you HAD to use Windows for some websites.
bin.pol.social
Ważne