I think I got it on my third attempt. Though I haven’t actually finished it yet! Only 2/3 in and then something shiny distracted me - I’ll pick it up again soon. People described it as a soulslike, so after Elden Ring clicked for me I decided I would try the funny bug game again. Glad I did!
Having all pins present, I wouldn’t be surprised if the drive still gets detected while bending a SATA cable back juuuuuust right so its connector makes contact with the pins.
I’ve used computers for years like that, also these card edge connectors are pretty standard and can be easily replaced by anyone who can do basic soldering.
Seconded. If OP lives anywhere near a city, there’s probably an electronics repair shop within reach that would solder on a new connector for less than the cost of a new SSD.
Dude, I remember people going OFF on Returnal not offering any saves and people having to keep their consoles in rest mode for days at an end because they wouldn’t want their runs to end. I kept arguing with people on rexxit that any respectable rogue-lite/-like has a save function - STS, Hades, Dead Cells - yet they still kept arguing that implenting saves would “ruin the vision of the game” and “make it too easy”.
Guess what Housemarque did: they added a save on exit option. You can now suspend your run and finish it whenever. Not having to potentially brick your console just because you can’t save mid-game sure is a boon lol. The game sure got a lot easier with this implemented. /s
STS does allow you to cheese the game with its save system, which is why most roguelikes also delete the save file after they load it, only saving the game when you need to put a bookmark in it to come back later.
It certainly helped me during my first Slay the Spire runs, when I’d often mess up the order of the cards (the most common being applying vulnerable AFTER doing all of my attacks).
It's a problem when cheating changes people's opinions on how fun the game is. If the game forces you to use a certain mechanic that you otherwise would have ignored, that often gives you a better appreciation for the game. In the case of a roguelike, if you can cheese the save system, you're no longer required to actually get good at the game systems and can instead keep reloading until the memorize the solution, which is the entire problem the genre is out to solve.
I mean, if you're knowingly turning on cheat codes in a game, you know you're deviating from the intended experience, but if you're doing something the software lets you do, that's something the designer is trying to tune to steer you toward having a better time. Often times you can take a dominant strategy and think less of the game for it being too easy or one-note, which can and does happen when you can exploit a save system like this. I got through the first Witcher game mostly by save scumming, and I didn't think particularly highly of it, but the sequels did a much better job of introducing me to the potions, oils, and monster hunting mechanics that would have made the game easier and more solvable without save scumming. Had I known for the first game what I knew of the sequels, I might have enjoyed the game more, but that first game especially didn't force me into learning those systems.
You’re viewing games as perfect and the designers’ vision as always correct. That’s not always true. Take XCom 2. Many people may tell you that ironman mode (prevents save scumming) is the only real way to play but the game is buggy as hell. Not only do things not always work right sometimes the game just crashes. A buddy of mine has lost multiple save files because of it. The game doesn’t force you to use ironman mode so it’s not a counterargument to what you’re saying but it is illustrative of the point I’m making about games not being perfect.
Also, why do you view save scumming as the dominant strategy? In reality, many difficult and unforgiving games all but force players to use specific strategies to win. Everything you’re saying about gamers avoiding fun choices for optimum ones is not unique to save scumming. Many games already force players to do this and things like save scumming can actually allow players to try different builds that are less optimal.
It’s like someone saying the only true way to enjoy a book is by physically reading a physical copy and that audiobooks are more optimal and therefore less fun. No. Different people just want different things.
Many of the B side challenges in Celeste I played with the 90% speed accessibility option. Trying for 30 minutes to try and get a single damn strawberry was just too much for me. I still had a blast playing it.
I'm neither assuming that a game is perfect or that the designer's vision is always correct, but the designer is intending for you to experience a game a certain way, and it's often most fun that way. If certain strategies are dominant such that they invalidate large portions of the game that are there, it usually results in that game being boring. Your mileage may vary, of course, but that's how these things tend to go. The Witcher is a much more interesting game for me when you utilize potions, oils, and monster manuals, and I found the combat to be quite boring when I didn't know how to interact with those systems and instead just reloaded saves for better dice rolls. By forcing you to play a certain way, like by omitting certain save systems, they're making sure you play the way they intended, and if the game is as good as they hoped to have made it, it will result in the most people having the best time.
Here's another example. Batman: Arkham combat is an amazing replication of what Batman is in video game form. It's one man taking on dozens of others, usually more lethally armed than he is, with some athleticism and a bunch of gadgets. You're incentivized via the scoring/XP system to never button mash, use every move in your arsenal at least once, never get hit, and to take out every enemy in the room in a single flowing combo. However, it didn't steer most players into playing that way very effectively (at least on normal difficulty), and many leave the combat system disappointed that they can beat it just by attacking with X and countering with Y.
We won’t see large language models. We will likely see a stripped down version like a small language model (or Domain Specific models if you want the fancy marketing wank term) because a NPC in a fantasy game doesn’t need to know about 13th century Europe or 19th century Asia.
Yes, LLMs are too costly for this and require a cloud service, smaller models could run on the client. The main difficulty is getting the training data and preparing it for machine learning.
I separate games into two categories basically: Games I can play any time/in-between other games, and games I need to follow until the end or I forget everything and have to start over.
I only play 1 big game at a time if I can help it until I either finish it or lose interest. That said, I can play as many secondary games as I want like Binding of Isaac, UFO 50, Balatro, and whatever multiplayer game I’m into right now.
Especially as I got more busy IRL it became really annoying to play a bunch of big games at once. I ended up restarting Ori Will of the Wisps because I came back to it later and forgot where I was and what I was doing.
Add on to this: Slay the Spire, Rouge Legacy 2, that card game… Balatro? Pretty much any rogue like. Hades… Etc.
Secondary games are my main. Sometimes I will play a good story game but it gets broken down into like 1-2 hr segments and only if I can stay awake after everyone goes to bed.
When it comes to "games I need to follow until the end or I forget everything and have to start over" that's when I really focus down the games.
Story heavy games like the Ace Attorney series or Danganronpa are best marathoned so you don't forget the small details that matter (at least until you clear the chaper). Likewise, puzzle heavy games, specially ones that build on your knowledge like The Witness, Tunic, Return of the Obra Dinn or Chants of Senaar are ones I also focus down so I don't forget vital info involved in even playing them.
Journey. You can get it on PlayStation, iOS, steam (on sale for $5 atm) and epic. It is 2-3 hours short and not very challenging, but it does look absolutely stunning and has a very beautiful gameplay mechanic that you better find out for yourself. IMO it is one of the best games of all time and one that really demonstrates what the medium is capable of.
I wish someone had told me what Journey was about so I could have avoided it. I went in blind and didn’t enjoy it at all. It was a cool concept but it wasn’t for me.
Tap for spoilerThe person I matched up with was a 10/10. I went in blind but I knew it would match me with someone. I found them right away and they stayed with me the whole game. My partner got a person who dropped out, then restarted. Got another person… speedrunner. Tried once more and got someone who dropped out after an hour. Got another person they finished with, super frustrated. They did not have my experience.
Thank you for this. Just recently picked up and played through twice Gris and Neva. Even though they’re short as well I really find myself loving the visuals, gameplay and the atmosphere created by these games.
That lawsuit might take years, and the requested damages from Nintendo are only $66,000. Palworld isn’t going to be shut down anytime soon, even if they lose the case.
The Palnoctahedron. “It’s a totally different shape and it’s just the fact that it’s very small, and we enabled smooth shading, that makes it look like we haven’t done anything to it.”
There was a request to halt sales until the specific mechanics were removed, with the mechanics being throwing pokeball like items and riding monsters.
One of the patents was for seamlessly transitioning from one type of ride to another, as it happens in Legends Arceus, ie: jumping into the water while riding the stag will automatically change to the giant piranha. The irony here is that palworld lacks anything like that, you never transition between 2 different mounts without player input. The closest to that is using some pals as gliders, but you’ll just get back on your feet once you touch the ground or water.
Another patent was for throwing stuff at enemies in order to begin combat. They’re all hard reads, mostly because they read like they’re describing how Legends Arceus works in minute detail.
They would still have to face the courts in Japan if they want to sell in Japan.
Your line of thinking is the same thing that X fell for with Brazil. Just because you don’t have your HQ in a particular country doesn’t mean the legal system can be ignored. Otherwise the EU wouldn’t be gifting fines to Google and Apple every 15 minutes.
The suit is effectively not about the money at all. It’s about setting a precedent in Japanese court to basically allow Nintendo to patent whatever they want, whenever they want, so they can go after and shut down competitors with ease. Pirate Software has a decent and short breakdown on their youtube channel iirc
Yes, they can be a personal device like a game boy, but they can also be a shared device.
The regular Nintendo Switch (and I think the OLED one) can be played handheld or docked (aka. plugged into the TV). I’d recommend this version.
The Nintendo Switch Lite cannot be plugged into the TV, and is also harder to play multiplayer with other people in the same room. So avoid the “Lite”.
The controllers on the regular Nintendo Switch are removable. This means that you can buy a console and have two controllers for some games. Some games require more buttons, so each player would need a pair, but some simpler games like Mario Kart or Mario Party can be played with just one half (aka. Joy-Con).
The games are generally sharable between consoles and within consoles.
Between consoles: The cartridges will work no matter how many consoles you swap it between. Only the console with the game inserted will be able to play the game. However, the saved games (progression in a game) are usually saved to a console, not the cartridge.
(The same holds true for digital games only if the account that bought the game is connected to a console. Accounts can be connected to multiple consoles. An account can only be logged in to one console at a time, so ALL digitally-owned games on that account are locked to one console at a time…but if they aren’t logged in, then the another console can log in and play the digital games. So no multiplayer, but taking turns playing the digital game on different consoles. Saves might be shared here, though)
Within consoles: Almost every game allows each profile on the console to have their own saved game. So you could buy one Pokemon game, and up to 8 people can have save files for that game. Depending on the game, they may not be able to play simultaneously (e.g. trading), but they can all have their own save files with their own progression.
So, what you suggested is overkill. Here’s my advice:
If you want family game time, you just need…
One OLED Switch (connects to TV)
Buy games physically if you foresee anyone wanting their own console in the future, or digitally if not
Check if the games you’re buying can be played with a single Joy-Con. If so, the console comes with 2. If a player needs 2 Joy-Cons each, you have 1 controller with the console. Buy enough Joy-Cons or Pro Controllers (which are equivalent to a pair of Joy-Cons, but can’t be “split”) so that you have enough for all your players.
This console can still be played handheld whenever someone wants solo game time or when someone else wants the TV.
This will allow everyone to play single-screen multiplayer games on your TV together. Note that most games allow up to 4 players at once. More is rare.
Or, if you’ve got older kids who want their own individual games that they’ll play independently at the same time, it gets more complicated. But here’s what I’d suggest.
Get at least one dockable (non-Lite) Switch in the family. This Switch “gets” access to the TV, but may also have to “share” for family multiplayer time.
Get Switch Lites for anyone who REALLY needs to be playing something else independently when the TV/“main” Switch is in use
Get physical games: Any kid can play it in any console, and as long as they’re on the console that has their profile, they can continue their saved game. You DON’T need multiple copies of any game except in very rare scenarios.
Having extra consoles is rarely necessary to play games together. The only time they’d need It is if they’re playing games online together and the game doesn’t offer split-screen. Maybe Fortnite? But then they can take turns, unless you really want to buy separate consoles, lol
Please ask any follow up questions you have. I’d be glad to help clarify anything! Typing this up was surprisingly fun, lol
Get Switch Lites for anyone who REALLY needs to be playing something else independently when the TV/“main” Switch is in use
Obviously only if the budget allows, but if your kids are at the age where they’ll take their Switch when they visit friends or family, then the version with detachable controllers is probably better.
The Switch has a built in kick stand, and some games, like Mario Kart, let you disconnect the controllers and have one each for a two player game. It’s handy for keeping the kids quiet for a bit, and you don’t need to carry loads of stuff.
If the kids regularly go somewhere, like your parents perhaps, you can buy an extra dock to plug into the TV there, and the non lite Switch can use it in exactly the same way as the one at home. There’s nothing special about the dock, it essentially just connects the Switch to the TV.
It’s a great little console with some fun, if sometimes expensive games. I play mine probably as much as my kid plays theirs 🙂
Great addition! I was trying to keep budget in mind, but truthfully, I don’t know the price difference.
It’d be good for OP to know the different capabilities of what the Lite vs. the other consoles can/can’t do. But I think my comment was long enough as it is! Haha
I personally stick to only physical games since they cost the same, but are stored on the cartridge, meaning I don’t have to upgrade my switch’s measly 32GB of storage.
The Switch is an insane device to me. It’s been underpowered before it launched, but 32GB storage? I had flash drives twice that size when the Switch came out. What the fuck?
I also prefer physical games. I have very few digital games on my Switch – only for massive digital-only sales, or for games that had limited physical runs that I missed. Or when I didn’t know a game had a physical release, lol
Some people prefer digital games, and I get it. Especially with kids who might break, lose, or “trade” physical games.
Back in my day I had to share a single console with my siblings. We had to take turns playing single-player games. This can be fine, and can even be a bonding activity. I’m not sure if it’s “ideal”, but nothing is. Most likely your kids will outgrow the Switch soon anyway, or they could not even like it to start with, so don’t go overboard buying them each a console. You can decide in the future to buy more if you want, but the new Nintendo device is also on the way, so that’s something to think about.
That makes sense! I was picturing a scenario where each kid was begging for a Switch.
If there are two kids who each want to play their own games independently (or niche cases like they really want to trade Pokemon together or play games online together that can’t be played with couch co-op), then having multiple devices would be important. Of course, it depends on where the budget is, lol
Buying two SNES consoles would be crazy. Buying two Game Boys probably happened in some households.
Yeah, good point. The Switch isn’t just a console. I guess that’s probably why it’s portable; to sell one for each child. We did each have our own Game Boy in my household, mostly I think to make road trips less hell.
I mean, it’s like a hobby. If you are unlocking them with a program you’re just cheating on yourself. If you feel like you need to cheat to make yourself feel better about something that doesn’t impact anyone else, then I think you should reflect a bit on that and ask yourself why you wanted it in the first place.
But that’s just like, my opinion, man. It doesn’t really harm anyone in the end. I just think achievements are used as carrots on a stick, exploiting the human psyche of “number go up = dopamine” to make the player think the game has more value than it does, or is “worth the price” because you got so many hours out of it (grinding for those last shitty achievements).
I think it’s fair for someone to want to cheat in achievements of this nature. OP put over 100 hours into this game and is only 0.1% of the way there. If I put 100 hours into a game, I would also want to fast track past these two middle fingers the devs threw in
The subscription hike is something, but U.S./U.K. inflation from 2008 to 2022 is about 40%, and that’s not accounting for any changes in corporate taxes. Its… well, it’s kinda mad that WoW hasn’t increased the subscription price that whole time, if that’s true, but that’s partially because they sell expansions, right? And those probably creep up with inflation.
The problem is the choices they’ve made with that money, aka shoving more aggressive monetization into the game instead of keeping it simple, which was so central to its appeal long ago. Of taking short term profits instead of investing in R&D, new game development, and deeper development for Runescape. This is the real corporate greed. Making money is fine, but just taking it as pure profit at the expense of long-term health is destructive, greedy, unfair to the employees and wrong.
Also, I played Runescape ages ago, and well… I just got tired of the game. I feel like thats why many people left, and I also think it’s kinda mad expecting most players to play the same game forever.
Well, I mean wow was already at $15 a month back in the day. When it came out in 2004, It was like paying $25 per month today. It was damn pricey back then. At this point I think they’re getting all the money out of it that the market will bear. Yeah the expansions help but I suspect they’re running leaner now than they were.
I doubt anyone knows how much of the playerbase it makes up, but the WoW subscription effectively went up to $20 a month for anyone that’s using in-game gold to fund it.
bin.pol.social
Ważne