I mean…you just described large portions of 1997 and 1998. On the weekend.
Some houses had a rule. No oddjob. I had a different rule. You’re oddjob. It was no fun if it was an even fight. I needed a handicap to make it harder.
1v1 where you’re expecting Oddjob is a lot different than 4P deathmatch where one guy is Oddjob. That’s where it’s a real dick move cause he’ll catch you by surprise.
Check out the site dark pattern games, it shows a list of games and their “dark” side like money and time wasters. They also show the “healthy” side of mobile gaming as well
Dave the Diver. I had put down gaming because of tiredness and this game was such an unexpected joy of exploration and cute story for me. Easy to pick up and do a quick dive, decent progression based on a mix of skill and leveling up your character, and the writing was excellent. First game I 100% in forever and it was while playing it 30 minutes at a time.
Yeah. I would probably start with Dave the Diver, in their case.
It’s so good. Decently chill. Great vibe throughout. The Boss fights each have a simple gimmick to win, and they don’t try to be clever about it. (Nothing pisses me off like “we changed the pattern of interaction five to turn a narrow victory win into a loss”. Game designers need to cut that out.) Thankfully Dave the Diver has the classic two patterns per battle, and aims for predictable fun. And the Boss fights are rare, anyway.
Well, you already say it: physics games. They NEEDS to be accurate with their collision detection since they relay on it to the game to be fun. The majority of action games don’t need such accuracy cuz THAT IS NOT FUN. You know how frustrating is to swing your sword in a narrow passage in Dark Souls to it to bounce on the walls?
Also, is a extremely demanding process to calculate such precise collisions.
Maybe games with destructible structures? It depends on which is the main mechanic of the game, if it’s relays on physics, there would be accurate collision detection (or at least as accurate as it needs them to be).
The niche isnt there because its not really practical. No consumer device can run modern high poly 3D structures with full physics simulation in real time. There is a reason why the only physics sim games are very low poly. And even those are performance hungry despite custom engines.
Realistic physics for realistic looking scenes is something that you give to a renderfarm that will throw 100+ times more compute at it than the most expensive consumer GPU on the market.
If some geniuses do invent a robust framework for physics based combat which results in realistic sword swings unlike Dark Souls’ bounce/no-bounce mechanic, it will be very fun
The damage could be calculated depending on how powerful the swing was and where it hit the enemy. I fantasize about this often
Its a little bit half baked right now but it’s been under construction for the better part of a decade. I think the plan now is to use Exanima as a proof of concept and then pivot that technology into a “real” game. But I find it very fun in its current state and does exactly what you’re asking for.
Exanima is basically the prequel to the main game they are also currently working on (Sui Generis).
It’s also planned to have multiplayer after the story part is finished.
Check out Exanima.
There’s a nice video of theirs showcasing some complex object collisions - www.youtube.com/watch?v=R9-ihvHJdJE
And some neat cloth physics at about 14:25
It’s fun because of all the extra role playing stuff, the actual combat is slightly frustrating because of how slow it is. Most humans cannot wield a long sword in a very efficient manner. If you swing and miss it takes time to correct, time to compensate for momentum, by which point somebody’s probably stabbed you in the eye with a little knife.
Or you just get by an arrow because the sword is so heavy you can’t move quickly.
What is your obsession with WoW? First you make multiple posts about the costs vs. investing that money, now this? Didn’t you also complain about the art style changing, even though multiple people said it’s always been like that?
You really just need to understand that different people have different feelings.
It could fall under rule 4, but would require to be sure that it is indeed AI generated.
There are people that throws AI accusation around with no evidences other that a gut feeling, so I prefer to be cautious.
In the sense of “do they require lightning fast reflexes or mastering a deep combat system”, no not at all. They mostly require paying attention and learning.
I don’t mind learning. I suppose it’s sort of like solving a puzzle. I’m used to horror games with puzzles so I’m used to thinking things through in games.
This isn’t to say it’s not a game that won’t challenge reflexes if you let it. I think it’s fair to say better reflexes in a souls like can serve to make a boss easier as you play more on the edge. Of course this takes having your game knowledge and pattern recognition on point.
Guess not, but as far as I ever knew, M$ has been known to try to maintain backwards compatibility for longer than most users would even consider necessary.
XP supported DirectX 7/8/9
I would have figured that would have continued on with future versions of Windows, but I guess Satya Nadella decided to scrap backwards compatibility.
Oh well, all the more reason I switched to Linux as my main daily runner after Windows 8 came out. 🤷♂️
But it IS backwards compatible in the way you are describing. You can play a dx9 game on windows 11. So it is backwards compatible. What you cannot do (usually) is force a game built with dx9 features to use dx11/12 features. If the game wasn’t built with new API features (because it released before those features even existed) then you cannot expect it to be able to just “be dx12” all of a sudden.
DirectX 12 was released in 2015 with Windows 10, so it’s unlikely to have been ported back to 8.1 and lower.
MS usually only does current+ with compatibility - so for example FF11 (DirectX 8.1 I think) still works (mostly) on Windows 11, but DX12 won’t work on W7
I wasn’t suggesting that I’d expect newer DirectX to work on older versions of Windows. I was suggesting that I would have expected newer DirectX standards to still be backwards compatible with older DirectX standards.
Sigh, I guess Satya Nadella decided to scrap backwards compatibility. Oh well, I switched to Linux after Windows 8 came out anyways. 🤷♂️
I mean… DX 9, 10, and 11 were all released prior to Nadella being CEO/chairman.
But in software, it’s very commonplace for library versions not to be backwards compatible without recompiling the software. This isn’t the same thing as being able to open a word doc last saved on a floppy disk in 1997 on Word 365 2024 version, this is about loading executable code. Even core libraries in Linux (like OpenSSL and ncurses) respect this same schema, and more strongly than MS.
Using OpenSSL as an example, RHEL 7 provides an interface to OpenSSL 1.0. But 1.1 is not available in the core OS, you’d have to install it separately. 1.1 was introduced to the core in RHEL 8, with a compatibility library on a separate package to support 1.0 packages that hadn’t been recompiled against 1.1 yet. In RHEL 9, the same was true of OpenSSL 3 - a compatibility library for 1.1, and 1.0 support fully dropped from core. So no matter which version you use, you still have to install the right library package. That library package will then also have to work on your version of libc - which is often reasonably wide, but it has it limits just the same.
Edit because I forgot a sentence in the last paragraph - like DirectX, VC++, and OpenGL, you have to match the version of ncurses, OpenSSL, etc exactly to the major (and often the minor) version or else the executable won’t load up and will generate a linking error. Even if you did mangle the binary code to link it, you’d still end up with data corruption or crashes because the library versions are too different to operate.
Yeah I tried getting it running on my Steam Deck and when the launcher kept telling me it couldn’t find Fallout 4 I just uninstalled them both. Not worth the storage space and hassle.
Gah, you’re right. I had it that way at first, but then glanced down a list to check my count and they listed 2002’s Harem Adventures as a separate game even though it’s just the Java phone port of the original.
bin.pol.social
Ważne