I tried both and I feel like Wildlands is better. The world is very alive and expansive, plus the movement feels better. Something feels very clunky about breakpoint’s movement. Oh, and I enjoyed Wildlands’ primary enemies quite a bit more than Breakpoint. Wildlands does a good job of letting you SEE just how depraved the Sicarios are and their effects on the world.
As someone who really enjoys PeerTube, I also feel like the technical barriers to it being as popular as other platforms are a bit tougher to overcome.
I would love for it to be more popular. I also know it's really hard to convince content creators and live streamers to embrace it.
I love PeerTube. I have been trying to help the projects however I can. I also know that the economics of moving to PeerTube is quite different. Very few people make money microblogging (Twitter). Very few people make money posting to Reddit.
Streaming on Twitch or YouTube, or making content for YouTube can and for many people does bring in money, though. Creating an ecosystem where viewers are willing to pay, while increasing viewer counts of content so that sponsorships can be more common, all while trying to slowly convince people that we should be supporting things financially that up to now has been "free(not really, but experientially it 'feels' free)" is a lot of work.
I plan on supporting PeerTube as much as I can in the future. I want it to grow. Maybe someday, it will get there. I can hope.
Been plugging away at Armored Core 6. I’m kind of over it. It’s been a fairly average experience and at this point I’d like to wrap up the story and move on to something with a little more meat.
Its a somewhat more story and gameplay focused than Cookie Clicker, but still pretty chill. I won’t say too much more, considering that it’d just spoil the fun of discovery.
Despite having a pretty mediocre rating it seems like if you enjoyed the older assassin’s creed games, this one is pretty close. Many reviewers argue that the old AC gameplay of following NPCs and blending in hasn’t aged that well, though.
I wouldn’t say 76 is a mediocre score. Just looking at Opencritic of this year, the median score on PS5 is 73, so AC Mirage is at least better than the median. Now, I know game scores are skewed horrendously and barely any outlet uses full scale (more like half of it at most), but still 70 is probably closer to an idea of mediocre. It’s all subjective though, but it is fun to try and make sense of it all
Two player retro JRPG (a la Chrono Trigger, etc) where each player can play independently in the same world, but the story lines intersect and must work together in many parts of the story. Would work great if the story filled in gaps when you replayed as the other player.
Would both people always have to be playing at the same time? Or would it be possible for one person to play and progress while the other person isn’t playing?
I think the idea of an open world RPG with more than one player, not necessarily competitive or coop, but each with their own quests and motives, is interesting. I’m often hanging out in discord with friends, and we’re all just chatting while playing different games. We might as well be playing in the same world, and occasionally influence each other.
You’d have to somehow make it clear to the players that the goal is not to party up and just walk around doing everyone’s quests together, though. Ooo what if it was the world of the last airbender, and each person started as a different bender in a different part of the world? And maybe one person is secretly the avatar, but they don’t know until they’ve progressed. Ok, I’ll stop intruding on your idea lol.
Would both people always have to be playing at the same time? Or would it be possible for one person to play and progress while the other person isn’t playing?
I think you could go either way. If you want to be able to play without the other person also playing, you’d need a server or someone/something hosting the “game” where you connect in. If you were really clever as a programmer, you may be able to sync actions after both people are online without having a server, but that would be a challenge.
The other option is something like couch multiplayer, where you’re both playing on the same device. If one person isn’t there to move around, then no biggie.
I think the idea of an open world RPG with more than one player, not necessarily competitive or coop, but each with their own quests and motives, is interesting. I’m often hanging out in discord with friends, and we’re all just chatting while playing different games. We might as well be playing in the same world, and occasionally influence each other.
Me too! One thing I’m looking at trying out soon is the multiplayer mod to Elden Ring. It’s enables a mechanic that’s very similar to this goal, but not entirely.
In an open world where just a few people are playing their own game, together, you could have very fun friend interactions like trading and helping with quests or missions.
You’d have to somehow make it clear to the players that the goal is not to party up and just walk around doing everyone’s quests together, though. Ooo what if it was the world of the last airbender, and each person started as a different bender in a different part of the world? And maybe one person is secretly the avatar, but they don’t know until they’ve progressed. Ok, I’ll stop intruding on your idea lol.
Right – I imagine when you both start the game you both get a very different intro, and are clearly starting in different parts of the world. I don’t know much Airbender lore, but that sounds like a great theme for a game like this.
One feature I’d like to see is the two players’ stories intertwine in such a way that you absolutely do have to help/meet to beat the game. Like, one player is arrested in jail and the other has to help them break out, because the one in jail is the one that can get the one not in jail access to the dungeon/castle/area that he wants to go to. Ultimately, I think it’d be important to kill the final boss/end the game together.
bin.pol.social
Ważne