The thing is, this is likely going to affect their sales to some degree.
As a parent, you may have age lock on your child’s account, or search games by rating, or just not know what this game is when asked to buy it but judging by rating.
I don’t know how significant of an impact that is, but it’s unfair.
I think they’ve done them a favour in a way. If this was day one then it might hurt them but they’re past the point of like 90% of their sales I bet, and now pegi looking like incompetent dinosaurs is just a free second wave of social media exposure
The thing is though, they don’t care about women in video games, they just care about “ugly” women in video games. as long as they can look at an hourglass shaped woman with massive curves in a skinsuit they don’t mind.
don’t go down the rabbit hole of “fixing female characters”…
yes I really liked it. Even the analysis/hypothesis that it really is the moment of „not getting pandered to“ that enrages that demographic. Any moment they do not feel like the target audience they take grave offense.
Who the fuck finds game Ciri to be unattractive? She was specifically made prettier for the new medium. The books describe her as a tomboy with ashen hair, huge green eyes, young face, tall and slim. Later on, “losing on her charm” by being fed meals for what basically amounts to supersoldiers, despite being a kid and putting on weight. Even in the trailer for W4 she is depicted as the game version - no babyface, no “tomboyishness” etc. She literally is an hourglass shaped woman in a skinsuit.
What’s annoying as fuck is her being a mutant, not her being a woman. Witchers were successful because they had gone through mutations, which had like a 30% success rate for boys in the optimal moment in their life - pre puberty.
At the end of Witcher 3, she is a 20 year old woman. Post puberty, hasn’t been brought up preparing for the trials, quite the opposite - she had a relatively normal life. It’s like comparing a chess prodigy that has played the game since they were 4, and a random dude starting chess at 30 yo. Multiply that by 300x - since the mixtures were specifically made with human physiology in mind - with Ciri basically being a demigod in the universe past Witcher 3. Add in the fact that passing the trials basically slows down aging to a crawl, but she looks way older in the trailer.
The reality is, it doesn’t make sense from a lore perspective. But someone who doesn’t care about the lore made a decision that Ciri is now a Witcher, so she somehow has to be one. In reality - the trailer basically made her a Mary Sue of the universe (if she wasn’t that already). She is both a witcher and a mage and has unique bloodlines that give her additional powers.
What they could have done, is a million other things. Prequel to where witchers were created / early days of the cataclysm - conflicts between the original occupants of the universe and humans and monsters. They could’ve done a prequel with Vesemir. They could have continued wirh Ciri, but with her actual powers, instead of making her a witcher. They could’ve made a character creator letting everyone design their own witcher - with whatever characteristics they want.
People are pisses off for the same reason why the Netflix show quickly started sucking and why Cavill left it behind. Writers not caring about previous lore at all, pulling their own out of their ass because they think they know better than the author of the universe (who granted is a fucking asshole, but still).
this wasn’t even about witcher specifically… and sure, CDPR could have done all that, but they can also do what they showed in the trailer because it’s their game 🤠
The two were always inconsistent. It’s not the same universe. They’re two separate but related universes. CDPR takes pieces of the books to make the games that they want to make, and change pieces that don’t work. This has been the case since The Witcher 1. They are not consistent with each other, never have been, and never will be.
This is true for most series inspired by books. For example, the current Dune cinematic universe is inconsistent with the books. That’s fine. Sure, us book fans complain that the books were better, but we don’t complain that they can’t diverge and be their own thing. They must or they’d be bad adaptations because they’re different mediums.
You’re judging a made up story. CDPR obviously does care about the lore. We’ve seen that. Sure, they break from the books in order to make the games they think are best. They still care about the lore though. Wait for the game to come out and I’m sure it’ll all be explained. They’ve said she takes the trial of the grasses somehow. I’m sure it’s not just handwaved away like your made up story implies.
Again, it’s a separate universe to the books. Established bookore isn’t established game lore. Wait for the game to come out, then you can judge the story that’s actually there, rather than making something up and judging it.
The thing is though, they don’t care about women in video games, they just care about “ugly” women in video games.
Welcome to 2024, where preferring art to not be that is not ugly is despicable behavior.
I know most left leaning people aren’t this extreme, but this really gives them a bad image and puts off a lot of people. Especially when the non extreme people jump to the defense out of the feeling that opposing extremes is the same as promoting the right.
You conveniently ignored the quotes around “ugly” to go on your little rant there. These people already flip their shit when the woman is a mere mortal normal looking woman and not the perfectly shaped ridiculously curvy imperfection-free woman that incels think is the gold standard of attractiveness. Point in case: Star Wars Outlaws bad, Stellar Blade good
So they like their art to not be average looking, big deal. Different people have different preferences. If you prefer more average looking women, than say so and leave it at that. No need to belittle other peoples preferences or push your preferences onto others.
Yeah I guess we should just let people keep over analyzing the women in video games, pointing out every single imperfection, every pimple, every asymetry because thats what incels do. I’m sure the women in the real world love that behaviour 🤠 maybe you try talking to a women and see how she likes the portrayal of women in video games, and the coomers consuming said games
Yeah I guess we should just let people keep over analyzing the women in video games, pointing out every single imperfection, every pimple, every asymetry
Yes, you should let other people analyze whatever they feel like analyzing.
because thats what incels do. I’m sure the women in the real world love that behaviour 🤠
What does that have to do with you? If they want to stay incels, that is their problem.
I’m not gonna keep arguing because you’re clearly not interested in thinking about how the portrayal of women in media affects societies perception of women in real life. I urge you to take my advice and talk to women 🤠
One last try of getting you to understand this: when you go around and point out every single flaw in a female characters design you are setting a beauty standard for what a woman should look like (one that is most likely completely unrealistic anyways). letting people keep bullying game studios into designing their characters that way just reinforces that image. you’re essentially saying “a woman isn’t worth being in my art unless she adheres to these unrealistic standards”. women have imperfection, news flash.
it makes even less sense because male characters usually aren’t held to the same standards. it’s because gamers (mostly men themselves) don’t care about male characters because they’re not trying to satisfy their sexual frustration through them.
and it makes even less sense when the female character in question is living in a literal wasteland or on a dangerous quest. Senua has better things to do than perfecting her outfit, makeup and getting a plastic surgery to appease some lonely men in front of the screens.
the “art” as you call it is just gooning material for lonely men
point out every single flaw in a female characters design you are setting a beauty standard for what a woman should look like
If anyone is determining their self worth by comparing themselves to video game characters, they should probably seek out help, regardless of if it is Seuna or what’s her name from Stellar Blade.
letting people keep bullying game studios into designing their characters that way just reinforces that image.
To be clear, I am against bullying game developers in either direction. Seuna fits well in her setting and I don’t think anyone bullied them into her looks. Ciri is even better example of well made character overall.
I oppose things like Sony forcing censorship on Stellar Blade. I oppose DEI “consultancy firms” lobbying and even extorting game companies to make their characters uglier. Let game devs create their art as they see fit. And let gamers vote with their wallets on whether they like the games.
Most people including me did not complain about “ugly” characters in games until the above came to light. And since it is difficult to say which games are affected, there are innocent games caught in the crossfire.
it makes even less sense because male characters usually aren’t held to the same standards. it’s because gamers (mostly men themselves) don’t care about male characters…
I mean, yes. You are correct that we care less about male characters. I don’t follow why that would not make sense. Especially, since there was no push to make male characters uglier as far as I know.
because they’re not trying to satisfy their sexual frustration through them.
the “art” as you call it is just gooning material for lonely men
Idk how to react to you fixation on how you imagine some gamers reach sexual gratification.
I guess I can only add that IRL I know two people who oppose this push for uglier game characters, and both are happily married.
Dude, a lot of the most highly praised art in this world is weird and usually “ugly.” Art has nothing to do with being something you can masturbate to.
And this kind of shit is what I was talking about in the first place. Now it can’t even be art because it looks too lewd to you. Art is subjective, if you prefer
weird and usually “ugly.”
art, that is perfectly fine. But you don’t get to dictate what art other people like or what other people consider art.
What? It can be lewd too. Wtf? Art can be anything. You are the one that implied it has to be “beautiful.” Hell no. You don’t get to both act like you’re the dictator of art and that other people are actually being too strict with art. Art is whatever the creator wants it to be. You don’t get to decide that just because you can’t masturbate to the character that it isn’t art.
Yeah, that’s correct. You can like or dislike any art. The people arguing it must only have sexy women or it’s bad are in the wrong. You can like sexy women, but that’s not a requirement and has a totally different set of goals to The Witcher 4 presumably.
Yeah, that’s correct. You can like or dislike any art. The people arguing it must only have sexy women or it’s bad are in the wrong.
Yes, you are correct. But that is a small minority of trolls.
What most people protest against is that publishers like Sony force censorship on developers and that self proclaimed “DEI consultancy” firms, “game journalists”, and other people lobby, pressure and extort developers to make characters uglier.
That they’re being forced to make characters ugly. In the case of The Witcher 4, she looks how you’d expect given her age, physical abilities, what she’s gone through, and also the book descriptions. (The books basically say she looses her physical appeal.)
They’re making games primarily to make money. The companies are trying to maximize that. If they’re telling them anything about character design, it’s to make characters that sell the game. I think it’s significantly more likely games with the ridiculous clean, skimpy, sexy characters are having that dictated from above. The Witcher 4 is designing the character that they think works with the game they’re making.
Complaining when art isn’t being made to appeal to you specifically is the most entitled thing you can do. Play the game or don’t. I don’t care. If it doesn’t look appealing to you, then fine. You don’t get to have every game made for you. If you only want to play games with sexy women, there’s plenty of those. Go play them and stop complaining when anything else is made.
The Mona Lisa isn’t a particularly attractive woman, but it’s one of the most famous and renowned pieces of art. Personally, I think it’s highly overrated, but that’s just my opinion and doesn’t change the fact other people love it and DaVinci chose to make it on purpose.
What even is this? It looks like a mix of putting things in my mouth and making straw-man arguments.
In the case of The Witcher 4, she looks how you’d expect given her age, physical abilities, what she’s gone through, and also the book descriptions. (The books basically say she looses her physical appeal.)
I have no issue with Ciri and am looking forward to Witcher 4. Never said anything to the contrary.
They’re making games primarily to make money. The companies are trying to maximize that. If they’re telling them anything about character design, it’s to make characters that sell the game. I think it’s significantly more likely games with the ridiculous clean, skimpy, sexy characters are having that dictated from above.
I gave an easy to verify example in Sony and Stellar Blade, when the game developers publicly spoke out about their intentions to not censor.
It is difficult to verify what effect the pressure from “game journalists” like Kotaku had, but the articles are public so you can see them advocating for “less sexualized” characters and giving bad reviews to games that don’t comply.
There is also plenty more evidence like deleted tweets. But if this isn’t enough to protest against, then nothing is. So the question is, do you really believe that developers should not be put under pressure in either direction? Or do you believe it is only entitled when we demand “more beautiful” characters but perfectly fine when other demand “uglier” characters?
Complaining when art isn’t being made to appeal to you specifically is the most entitled thing you can do. Play the game or don’t. I don’t care.
Exactly what I was saying I want as well. Doubly so if you are not even the intended audience and are just pushing your religious/moral beliefs.
The Mona Lisa isn’t a particularly attractive woman, but it’s one of the most famous and renowned pieces of art. Personally, I think it’s highly overrated, but that’s just my opinion and doesn’t change the fact other people love it and DaVinci chose to make it on purpose.
What does that have to do with anything. DaVinci was not pressured into drawing Mona Lisa the way he did.
I have no issue with Ciri and am looking forward to Witcher 4. Never said anything to the contrary.
Thats what this thread is about. Why are you even commenting this kind of stuff if you don’t care?
I gave a very specific example in Sony and Stellar Blade, when the game developers publicly spoke out about their intentions to not censor.
Marketing. Hell, even still the incels complained that it was censored because a few outfits were slightly different, a few with a tiny bit more cloth. The Witcher has been far less “uncensored” than Stellar Blade, with full nudity. What does it even mean when their game with no nudity is “uncensored” when no one was trying to censor them?
Exactly what I was saying I want as well. Doubly so if you are not even the intended audience and are just pushing your religious/moral beliefs.
Which includes the belief that all the characters need to look attractive, right? You’re angry at them too, right?
What does that have to do with anything. DaVinci was not pressured into drawing Mona Lisa the way he did.
The point was that art can be whatever the artist desires. It doesn’t have to look attractive. Substitute it for any unattractive art made for profit if it’s not a good enough example. There’s plenty of them.
Thats what this thread is about. Why are you even commenting this kind of stuff if you don’t care?
I was replying to a comment that was general. In the first place, the few complaints about Ciri I saw was about playing as a female, not her looks.
Which includes the belief that all the characters need to look attractive, right? You’re angry at them too, right?
Yes. Not all characters need to look attractive. Ciri is an excellent example of a character whose looks fit her setting and story.
I am even more angry about them, since they muddle the argument I am trying to make and make me look bad.
On the other hand, I 100% support putting pressure on Games to not cave in to the outside demands for “uglier” characters in all games. This creates an awkward dynamic where there is no way to verify the original intent of the artist so we just have to guess based on how well the art fits the game. There may be some Games being falsely accused, but I find this less problematic than doing nothing and having the pressure in both directions not be balanced.
The point was that art can be whatever the artist desires.
This point we seem to agree on.
Hell, even still the incels complained that it was censored because a few outfits were slightly different, a few with a tiny bit more cloth.
I chose this example because it is easy to verify it was not the devs choice. Yeah, the difference is small, but the principle is the same.
On the other hand, I 100% support putting pressure on Games to not cave in to the outside demands for “uglier” characters in all games.
This is the entire issue. You’re assuming there’s some horrible outside pressure to make characters ugly, so you’re in favor of outside pressure to make them attractive. Isn’t outside pressure the issue you’re arguing about, not them being ugly? How is the outside pressure you’re in favor of better than the outside pressure you’re arguing against (and making up without any evidence of it even existing)?
I chose this example because it is easy to verify it was not the devs choice. Yeah, the difference is small, but the principle is the same.
First of all, modern games are not made by a single person. Second, how can you verify it was their choice? It’s marketing. They were making a product to make money, as all studios are doing. They saw a market and made up stuff about “not censoring” to sell their product. That doesn’t mean they weren’t forced to make a product they didn’t want to make. I’d bet on it being the opposite in fact. They saw they could put a sexy woman in the game and people would buy it, so they forced the devs to do so. (I’m pretty confident this is at least partially true, because the game doesn’t seem to do anything unique or interesting. It only copies other things. There’s no creativity or passion from what I’ve seen of it. There’s no reason for the character to be hot given, unlike Nier Automata for example.)
This is the entire issue. You’re assuming there’s some horrible outside pressure to make characters ugly, so you’re in favor of outside pressure to make them attractive.
I am not assuming there is outside pressure. Among other things, the articles criticizing games for unrealistic body standards and the negative reviews of otherwise good games from “game journalists” are public. (note that reviews are recommendation for which games to buy, so giving bad review as a journalist is the same as saying not to buy a game)
It’s marketing.
Ok, so in your interpretation, the Game producer/developer I am criticizing tricked me into criticizing them. Then fuck them. They reap what they sow and I still want to express I am opposed to what they pretended happened.
Among other things, the articles criticizing games for unrealistic body standards…
That’s totally unrelated to being ugly. Can people with normal shaped bodies not be attractive to you? Do you only get off to hentai?
You can find a games journist saying practically anything. Who cares? Don’t give the ones you don’t like views.
Ok, so in your interpretation, the Game producer/developer I am criticizing tricked me into criticizing them.
Maybe, but that’s not what I meant. I meant the people behind Stellar Blade were saying they weren’t censoring was pure marketing. It was stupid bullshit. No one was trying to censor them. It’s like yelling out “I’m going to eat this burger” and acting like you’re standing up to something, when no one was asking you to stop. Sure, it worked to make the stupid incels buy it, but it didn’t mean anything. They were going to make the sexy character regardless, because they knew those people would buy it, and the “not censoring” thing was just icing on the cake.
There are games that try to rage-bait too though. The incels yelling about it is free PR. Most people don’t give a shit, as long as the game is good. They wouldn’t even know some of these games existed without the rage though. The people angry about it were never the target market anyway, so it doesn’t cost anything.
You can find a games journist saying practically anything. Who cares? Don’t give the ones you don’t like views.
I just explained why I believe we shouldn’t let pressure from one direction be unopposed. So no, I will not ignore them. And yes, it absolutely is pressure, when bad reviews from several large sites try to lower sales and deprive devs of money they earned.
So do you care about people putting pressure on game devs or not? You can’t have it both ways where we should just ignore one group but the other one is an issue.
That’s totally unrelated to being ugly. Can people with normal shaped bodies not be attractive to you? Do you only get off to hentai?
What people get off to or what you find attractive is completely unrelated to whether it is what the devs wanted to make.
Also, you bringing this up and throwing around words like hentai and incel really makes me doubt that you want no pressure on artists in general, rather than just being opposed specifically to more “over-sexualized characters” or “beautiful characters” or whatever you want to call it.
I meant the people behind Stellar Blade were saying they weren’t censoring was pure marketing.
I have absolutely no idea what you are trying to say. What does that have to do with anything?
No one was trying to censor them.
So the last minute changes appeared themselves? Or the devs voluntarily made them, for some reason after already shipping some physical copies and after saying they would not make those changes? (whether for marketing or other reason) Consistently across multiple outfits? Together with other censorship-like changes, such as blood splatter reduction/removal? Unlikely.
Absolutely second the recommendations of Doom and Quake here in the thread. Boomer shooters in general. Even if the movement can be really fast, playing them on your own can be extremely cozy. Just get into the rhythm of circle strafing, shooting and weaving in and out of cover and you’ll be in the zone very quickly. Bonus point, that both Doom and Quake have 30 years of EXCELLENT quality player created content that can keep you playing fresh new levels for as long as you want to. You could play them for the rest of your life, at your own pace and preferred difficulty.
The new rereleases of both games even bundle a mod browser that you can access with zero knowledge of modding, just hop on.
Depends on what you consider “cozy”. OP listed Medal of Honor and CoD, I think Doom is super cozy. If shooting Nazis or demons is our comfort activity, anything can be cozy. I still desperately need to play Boltgun, too.
I will also add to this that there is absolutely no reason to buy the “new” re-release of Doom and Doom 2 that’s out on Steam now except to rip the IWADS out of it to put in a source port – any other source port – rather than the garbage it comes with. And only do so if you want the new Legacy of Rust episodes. Everything else is, er, readily available online. And has been for decades.
The new NEX based engine these run on now is maddeningly inferior to basically every open source Doom engine port currently available. In addition to not supporting vertical mouse look at all, “for authenticity,” (but by default it slaps a crosshair on your screen, which the original didn’t have…) it also looks like garbage on modern displays and crashes constantly which is something that baffles me. Running Doom ought to be a solved problem by now in 2024, but this fucker crashes on me more now than it did on my 486 back in 1994. It’s buggier than a trailer park mattress in a swamp.
I recommend GZDoom, personally. You can add Brutal Doom to make the gameplay experience significantly more bombastic as well, if that sort of thing appeals to you.
*sigh.*Not everything must be GZDoom and Brutal Doom. The new port is perfectly fine if they’re going to play mostly vanilla. There’s no need to be this angry at everything you don’t understand in the internet.
The new port is not perfectly fine if it randomly crashes to desktop all the time.
Oh, and I also forgot to mention that several of the achievements are still bugged and don’t pop, which has been a known issue since release and still hasn’t been fixed. So yeah. Bethesda is gonna do Bethesda stuff.
You can still have a “vanilla” experience using other source ports. That’s what, e.g. Chocolate Doom is for. Except it may stay running on your PC for more than eleven consecutive minutes at a time. So if that’s what turns your crank, go for it. You’re right – not everything needs to be GZDoom and Brutal. But other options definitely exist, and I recommend any of them over what was shoveled out officially. You can even have a pretty durn vanilla experience in GZDoom if you want to, while still retaining much broader support for mods than the official release. Me personally, I can’t do mouse control with no vertical look. It made me seasick in the 90’s, and it still does now. That’s a deal breaker. I was a keyboard-only player in the DOS era.
I will also add that if you are going to play the new Sigil expansions or Legacy of Rust, they’re virtually impossible on Ultra Violence and Nightmare without mouselook. These maps were clearly designed with a modern source port including mouse aim in mind, and this was apparently shitcanned later in development for some unfathomable reason. Like, why even leave the crosshair there, then?
spoilerLike, the shoot-the-switch secret on Legacy of Rust MAP10? Forget it. Yeah, you can hit it like 3% of the time if you ride the elevator up and down and pick at it with the pistol until you get it. I’m quite certain it was intended to be shot from either of the windows left and right of the elevator, the leftmost one lining up with it perfectly, and the elevator thing is only just in case someone is playing in some kind of purist mode.
I’m struggling to enjoy it. Some matches can be enjoyable but more often than not I find it a dull slog.
Theres nothing more boring than being stuck in a game for another 20 minutes when it’s well and truly clear you’ve been getting your arses kicked the previous 20.
Theres nothing more boring than being stuck in a game for another 20 minutes when it’s well and truly clear you’ve been getting your arses kicked the previous 20.
To be fair, you don’t have to do anything. You can hang back if you think the match is a loss or just farm lane and let them win once you think it’s over. This is also how League and Dota seem to work outside competitive, people will just give up if they smell a loss coming.
Dota does too but its fairly hidden and requires unanimous agreement. That said, Dota is far less snowbally, so unlike League or Deadlock, it rarely makes sense to forfet very early.
Dota only does in private matches, not matchmaking games.
I would also say it’s easier to snowball in Dota than Deadlock. You can take way wider and more restrictive control of the map since it’s smaller and everyone is less mobile.
I disagree with the implication that users should “settle down” when faced with user-unfriendly experiences.
User silence is often taken as permission to continue shitty practices that build up overtime. Bloated games that are unoptimized, online subscription to play online, not even fully owning the games, not able to use your own bluetooth headset etc.
This tweet just perpetuates how consumer-hostile nature of these companies. It attempts to play down a potential revenue stream at the expense of UX, subtle gaslight users into thinking this is part of the “over-reactionary culture” when this a perfectly valid criticism, and makes no attempt to be sympathetic about these implications.
Honestly, this has made me swore off a PS5 and future sony consoles. It’s no longer affordable, convenient, or simply. I do love my DS4 controller tho.
How about both? Writing your elected reps is definitely smart, but will be much more effective if there are numerous people calling for the same. I appreciate OP sharing their views, and catloaf sharing a specific action step all of us can do it we are concerned about this matter.
I worked for a few years as a gambling addiction counselor, and these types of games definitely prime people for addiction to gambling. Also, it’s worth noting that the demographic with the highest rates of gambling addiction are young men, aged 18-24.
Anyone that’s been to a casino can attest that major video game companies also make slot machines. The industry are aware of what they’re doing.
Starfield had a crippling issue that they made the wrong decision at the very start of development — thousands of procedural generated planets instead of a dozen hand-crafted planets.
If they hadn’t made that mistake than Starfield would have been a hit.
Having a space game where every planet and every place in space is a super interesting stage feels so fake and wrong because space is not like that. If we go out into space and to other planets we will find way more boring then interesting (for the normal person) planets and locations between the planets out there then anything else. I love that Starfield is brave enough to show space more realistic even if that means boring.
That’s why I don’t really get into No Man’s Sky, the space and planets feels manufactured.
If the game had a proper navigation between planets and less loadings I think the game would not receive so much criticism. The procedural generated content is not good but is not awful.
The game has proper navigation between planets, you gravjump because space even between planets are huge and nobody wants to travel multiple hours, days, weeks or months (depending how close to the limit of C your story allows) in empty interplanetary space from planet A to planet B in the same system.
And the loading screens well that is the price to have a engine that allows for large numbers of manipulatable and change objects. All other engines have less loading screens yes but their worlds and places are full of statics that look good but can’t be taken or manipulated in any way. And I am very happy to pay that price.
The game has proper navigation between planets, you gravjump because space even between planets are huge and nobody wants to travel multiple hours, days, weeks or months (depending how close to the limit of C your story allows) in empty interplanetary space from planet A to planet B in the same system.
The problem is how is presented, the loading screen play a role here too. If the gravjump was only the animation starting then you exiting without the black screen, or a more lengthy jump put you can move in your ship while the jump is happening the amount of loadings would not be so noticiable.
Gravjumps are Instant, there is literally no time to move on the ship. And the loading screen for gravjumps takes a second or two on my very middle class system, yes it short fades to black but why should I care?
Maybe I am way more tolerant to loading screens because I am old and my first experience were with C64 and Amiga 500. Or maybe I just like the game so much that the loading screens doesn’t bother me.
if they turned the procedural generator at people, food, supplies and weapons instead of the landscapes… game would have been amazing
the other problem was traveling, they needed to make travel a painful burden… because when it became a quick loading screen and you are there… omfg it ruins the stories the npc’s are trying to tell
wtf you left your crew out here to die?! it took me 5 minutes to get here…
It’s a Block Pushing Game is a sokobanlike from the creator of Baba Is You. It’s relatively short but has multiple novel mechanics. I enjoyed it enough to create a curses client for it.
PS: If you like Baba Is You, Hempuli publishes multiple new games per month, mostly clever sokoban-likes, at hempuli.itch.io
Sports games have been doing it faaaar longer. Madden started in 1988, released a sequel in 1990, then hasn’t missed a year ever since. The baseball and basketball counterparts existed just as long.
I think Spyro was the first mainstream game to standardise achievements, you could do random stuff in-game and it gave you a little pop up, carried over to Ratchet and Clank and now every game has official achievements
Not the first one on the PSX, that’s for sure. Also, getting some extra stuff for 100% a game wasn’t new by the time of Spyro, both Donkey Kong Country and Crash Bandicoot already did that
This. They were indeed called Skill Points, and Insomniac loved to tie cheats and bonus material to completing them. I played the shit out of Spyro and Ratchet and Clank back in the day.
I was going to say “ahh, too bad the Internet isn’t really helpful for that method of learning”, but with AI who knows, maybe that’ll be something your computer can do before too long
I don’t really understand your comment - sorry! - but I’ve played some games with the plasma deck and I still have to understand how to play exactly with it, I do good-ish at first but after a few rounds/first boss I do so little numbers and I can’t win, having someone watching what I do wrong and telling me would be great
For plasma specifically I’d focus on high additive chip jokers. While that’s normally bad advice, consider how crazy good a card with +50 mult on it would be. Now consider that a +100 chip joker is effectively a +50 chip/+50 mult (I know that’s not technically true but I’m illustrating a point). Also eventually you do hit a point of diminishing returns because plasma prevents you from having a super high multiplier or chips, so like every build, total score multipliers are the best
The one who played it before me said it was best to get the X multi jokers so I always ignored the + multi ones and even the X multi final score… I tried but I don’t exactly know which ones do that. I should try with what you said and see if it works, thanks! Which poker hand is better with it?
It’s hard to offer strong heuristics for Balatro because you could theoretically build up to a point where you’ve got a crazy high multiplier but if your chips are low it doesn’t matter.
For example let’s say you’ve got a face card 4 of a kind build going with: Pareidolia, Zany, Smiley, Trio, and Family jokers. These give you (respectively) all cards are face cards, +12 mult for 3 of a kind, +20 mult for each hand (all cards are face cards), x3 mult, x4 mult for a total of 384 multiplier! On base 4 of a kind this is
60x([7+12+20]x3x4)=28,080
However if you were to drop smiley face (+5 mult per face) for scary face (+30 chips per face card) which by almost every heuristic is a bad decision your score becomes:
(60+120)x([7+12]x3x4)=41,040
Which is a way bigger score!
So while people can offer general advice like stack high chips on plasma, always go for total score multipliers, etc. sometimes you just have to evaluate your specific build and figure out the best play
Finally outside of decks like abandoned and checkered which are specifically made to get certain hands, there isn’t a “best” hand to go for. The highest possible scores I’ve seen all come from high card builds but most normal players won’t get those. I’ve won two of a kind runs, flush 5 runs, straight runs, flush runs. You just have to evaluate your deck and tarot cards to see your options
This is interesting to know since I would love to win at least one game with plasma since people said it the funniest deck but for some reasons I can’t get past ante 2/3. I’m going to try to play a game or 2 trying to buy chip jokers and tarots hoping for the best, I do really need to understand better jokers and synergies between them
Well, you must have already got quite a bit of experienge then, since that one get unlocked after the second most difficult stake, right? Have you tried focusing on chips, instead of mult? Chips are way easier to raise.
With the plasma deck you don’t need to balance the chips with multiplier, as it does that for you. So what you want to do is to go all in on either chips or multiplier. Usually it’s easier to get chips bonuses early, and then, when you have the opportunity, to pivot into massive multiplier multiples. Or just keep going with chips, if you have enough levels on your main hand - that might be enough to get you through ante 8 on lower stakes
Generally some good advice is that Balatro is a math game first and foremost so you want to focus on things that raise your score the quickest. So adding chips is ok, adding multiplier is better, and multiplying your total is the best.
For example let’s say you are playing straights and you have a 10-6 with level 3 straights. So you’d have:
10+9+8+7+6=40
(40+90)x10=1300
So let’s compare how jokers impact that score:
Devious joker: +100 chips if you have a straight
(40+90+100)x10=2300
Crazy joker: +12 mult if you have a straight
(40+90)x(10+12)=2860
The order: x3 mult if you have a straight
(40+90)x(10x3)=3900
You can see those are very big differences! It’s also helpful to pay attention to the order of your cards. Generally Balatro cards are scored left to right. The most important thing is to take any card that multiplies any part of your score on the right so you can add as much to the score as possible, then you multiply that number
So in short: multiplier jokers are best, additive multiplier jokers are good, additive chip jokers are ok, and pay attention to the order of your jokers/played cards
This is basically correct but i would add sometimes it’s better to add chips than to add mult. For example, if your score is something like:
<span style="color:#323232;">10 x 50 = 500
</span>
Adding +50 mult here would give you 10x100=1000 points. Adding +50 chips will give you 60x50=3000 points.
Adding to the lowest of the two numbers improves your score the most. Especially early game, mult is much lower than chips, so you want to improve mult. However once you have some good mult jokers improving chips becomes important. Especially in high card based decks, where you get very few chips from your hand.
If the multiplier jokers come in, the picture can change again. It makes adding mult more valuable because the addition will be multiplied.
One thing to watch out for though, is that if you focus exclusively on mult, eventually the scale tips and chips become more valuable.
You’re always ultimately doing c * m, chips times mult, right? Increasing c by 1 increases your total by…
(c+1)*m - (c*m) = (c + 1 - c) * m = m
And vice versa for increasing m by 1. So, whichever is higher - your total mult or total chips - you should increase the other one. Usually this means increase mult, but building a bit multiplier can quickly make it outpace your chips for some hands.
I may be in the minority, but I kinda enjoy hearing Aloy muttering to herself throughout the game. Partly because I catch myself doing it all the time, so I don’t feel alone in the practice.
But also because I know the voice actress for Aloy (Ashly Burch) as Ash in the YouTube series, Hey Ash, Whatcha Playin’? and to this day, it’s still amazing to me to hear her speaking so deadpan seriously. I’m used to her Ash character basically being an animated, loudmouthed wildcard, not this dramatic, serious character. And I kind of enjoy knowing that Ashly has a bit of range to her acting; she’s not some kid who repeats the same YouTube personality she became famous for; she can actually act.
bin.pol.social
Ważne