Noita. Got a good deal on the steam sale. Took a while to get over the hump of not knowing what the heck is going on and dying a bunch but getting better at it has been fun
Come on, none of us will ever play all their games. I’d bet around 2000 of my games on steam are some free keys or other incredibly cheap shit I wouldn’t touch with a 10m-pole. If I’d ever find them again in the library, that is.
Playing for an hour to see how shitty it is? Or actually bought to enjoy for manymany hours, as intended? Thought so 😁 For us peeps with way more than a few k games, 20% actually been played would be already the big numbers I’d guess.
Hey, most games are not meant to be played for thousands of hours. And actually, most games I own can be completed in less than 100 hours. Especially if they’re not RPGs. Then there’s arcade games which are often not meant to be completed at all.
But then again, I’ve already said I’m not a completionist. I only complete games if they’re compelling enough to complete.
My completion rate is obviously much lower, but I've played at least two hours of 628/788 games in my 19 year old Steam account. I guess I'm a bit pickier with accepting freebies or buying on sales.
That is the result of a deliberate effort. Two year long project to play at least 2 hours of every game in my backlog minimum before I can uninstall it. Until there's nothing let but the dregs. A YouTuber inspired me, except he had a time limit deadline for the video.
Backlog was 258 games, now 160. Really there's about 30 left worth at least looking at. A lot of old crap from the very first Steam sale in there.
Most recent from the backlog was Alpha Protocol with some pcgamingwiki fixes. Yep that's been sitting in there a long long time. Loved it so much I finished it!
Definately one of the more wiser purchase-guys :-) I went a lil nuts when inventory-gifts were a thing. You know, doing what the corporations all do: Exploit globalism to my advantage. But for many years I rarey buy anything anymore, only if i REALLY intend to play it. I’m old, not wise :-)
You can play it single player, I played all the souls game single player, but more recently prefer doing bosses with others because I’m not a patient player and from software bosses require patience. Lots of it. Lol.
Never bought a single game at full price. Almost all the time, it’s at least 90% off. Lots of game bundles abound. And free games are given away all the time.
Oh sorry sir you are not playing these games on a phone or tablet platform therefore you are not really playing true games, you are only consuming mindless entertainment.
You’re really busy posting on the internet for someone that has 7.000+ games to play with 77% of them in backlog, and a family to spend time with.
Tends to go that way when the take is so dumb and disconnected from reality. Might as well have shown dick pics with diamond encrusted micro transaction “rewards”.
You can still play it but increasingly games are becoming very different from what you bought.
I’ve started noticing a disturbing trend. More and more games that are older being sold at steep discounts or “free to play” and simultaneously jampacked with invasive telemetry and/or ads/microtransactions. And since Steam won’t let you play older versions, those games are effectively dead.
The most recent ones I’ve noticed are Riders Republic and Borderlands 2. Helldivers also introduced a bunch of new microtransactions years after it’s launch.
So it’s the fault of the delivery-device? Why didn’t you make a backup of an older version just in case? Besides, last time I checked, you can. With a bit more hassle. All not the case for a “live” online-game. Which borderlands wants to be.
If BL is “exactly the problem”. And GOG does it better. Why is it still steam’s fault? Use GOG then? Where is it the delivery-device’s fault? As BL2 offers online-coop, and is also the major selling point of that game, a fragmented market is impossible.
It doesn’t matter if you prefer offline or not or that you CAN play solo, it is online coop. I never played it coop either, but that’s what it is and hence everyone has to have the same version. Simple as that.
Point with gog was that they do it better. Vastly so. Yet only a tiny fraction of devs choose them. Hence it begs the question whether it’s the platform’s fault per se.
It only matters in the sense that you’re allowed to not purchase online games.
Virtually every game in existence has some sort of online element. But what you seem to be unable to grasp is that many of them have single player modes that don’t require any internet connection.
It’s as simple has having a server that checks the version of the game installed before allowing access to online services.
[…] because they don’t allow you to run older versions of games.
They do if the dev makes it available, I’m looking at four different versions of Terraria in the beta menu right now that stretch back four major versions. I’m pretty sure a couple games in my library somewhere have their entire update history in there, though I can’t think of one to name off the top of my head right now, that’s not a feature I use very often. [Edit: Rift Wizard is one that does precisely this, I knew I had at least one in here]
This is not true of all games, but it could be, either directly by game devs without Valve even having to care, or via pressure by Valve by just making older versions available whether the devs want it or not. I think the latter option is probably the better move, but there’s technically nothing stopping the former other than the game devs themselves.
There’s also a valid argument that making downpatching very easy would be a huge boon to piracy. This is a reasonable talking point no matter which side of that fence you sit on. It would also probably benefit modding as well, which I think is a more objective good but some game developers or more likely publishers would probably disagree.
I’m looking at four different versions of Terraria
Literally never seen that before. I think I see if the dev pushing their 4th update that day and now I have to wait a half an hour to play the damn game.
downpatching very easy would be a huge boon to piracy.
Not my problem. Guess I’d better just pirate the game instead.
Firewalls and especially sinkholes are VERY necessary, far beyond silly game telemetry.
They don’t allow this for a good reason. Imagine 1 million clueless gamers running an older version of their game because they’re too lazy too update. And, of course, then complain about a buggy game and the tech-support will drown even more and review would end up more badly. nothing worse than a fragmented game-world. how should online games work if every Joe and Jane got their “own” favorite version? the average user is a total clueless (pc-wise) person.
Also, you can install an older version. Just with more hassles. Also you could by GUI with many games IF the Dev wants you to be able to. Like a select few versions, if you’d prefer an older state. But, of course, only indie devs do that.
Gog does it, but Gog only offers a mere fraction of what Steam has. Also your example of BL2 is not on gog either. For that reason.
Sure, Valve could enforce that, but…as said…why? They already offer the option for different versions. If the devs don’t use that, they will have their reasons. The biggest one i mentioned before: Fragmentation and the resulting nightmare of customer-support. On steam’s AND the dev’s side. Look at the Android or Windows-market. Someone complaining “my windows sucks”, but still uses Windows Vista. Or people screaming for support because “my favourite app doesn’t work” and use android 10.
Don’t get me wrong, personally I’d value the freedom of choice. But the vast majority of people are clueless (and still use those devices) and need to be “guided”. Every system gets dumbed down to the lowest common denominator. That’s why apple does so well (besides the “brand”-shit ofc).
Just because YOU don’t see why support on both sides hate fragmentation, doesn’t matter. They do nonetheless for very obvious reasons unless you are very alien to tech.
And yes, people do need guidance. If they’re not forced to update, they rarely do. And then they complain shit’s not working. People don’t read manuals, FAQs, guidelines and also they don’t update unless forced to (or strooongly motivated or just nagged to death). I’ve been in this industry for nearly 4 decades now. From all sides. The average Joe or Jane is the worst.
And yeah sure, it doesn’t matter at all for some games. You play the version you want and it’s all fine. But either you offer this option (which steam does BTW, as mentioned before) or you don’t. If you don’t, maaaany devs would be going to use another platform. Maybe fucking EPIC. That’d be grand.
While you’re not wrong, by that logic, it’s actually fairly trivial to take my Steam downloads drive and run it on any computer even without my Steam account.
It works in the same way that dumping your GameCube games and running them on Dolphin works… It’s quick and easy, but it’s against the ToS and requires breaking DRM.
Steam’s DRM is weak, and in some interviews some Valve developers even gave hints that this is on purpose. Many Steam games will simply run without Steam if you just double click the .exe in the install folder, and the vast majority that only rely on Steam’s DRM can be opened by running a free “Steam Emulator” software that pretends to be an active Steam account with a correct license.
A lot of Steam games don’t have any DRM, and most of the rest are pretty easy to strip.
Give it a shot sometime. Completely quit out of Steam, turn off your internet, and try running some of your older Steam games directly from the Steam folder.
I do this somewhat often when my kids are on my other computer playing games on my account and I still want to play something. It’s a little trickier on Linux since you need something to run the Proton/WINE layer, so I mostly stick to Linux-native games in that pretty rare case.
It used to be that if anyone in the group was playing any game it would lock you out of playing anything else on the main account without kicking them off.
But they eased up on it now so you can both play at the same time as long as you aren’t playing the same game at the same time.
So just make a burner account for you or for your kids and family share the library to it and now you don’t even have to go offline unless everyone in the house wants to play BG3 simultaneously.
Really? I haven’t tried that since they revamped the sharing thing. I have three accounts, one for me, my wife, and one my kids share, and they’re all linked. Most of the time my kids use my account, but I can easily change that if it’ll allow simultaneous play (on different games).
Exactly. I have something like 10-20 “complete” games because they either give 100% completion for rolling credits or I really enjoyed the game and ended up completing the achievements anyway. Of the rest, I’ve probably rolled credits on 80% of my “played” games, because sometimes I just lose interest before I reach the end, while still enjoying my time w/ it.
Games should be fun, and if they stop being fun, move on.
It already supports single player 🩷 Enemy health, poise, and runes are adjusted to balance the lack of teammates. You can also buy a few Wending Graces that will allow you to self-revive since you won’t have teammates to revive you. Some of the final day bosses can actually be easier to manage solo. I sooo recommend the game, and I also recommend giving multiplayer a chance when you’re comfortable with the overall loop and navigating the map. While I do occasionally get a mess of a team, I would say the majority of my matchmade runs have been super smooth and fun!
Have they changed the game a lot since launch? When I was watching the reviews of it, everyone made it seem like you have to have a cohesive party all working together and using their skills properly and the game is impossible solo.
From what I saw, solo is a lot easier than coop (streams of the game, not played it myself yet). Enemies have basically no HP, and you can predict what they do, just like in a normal Souls game. Also, you’re not getting matched with randoms.
If you’re playing with friends, sit in voice chat, that might get easier for you again.
In co-op you have fully infinite lives, your teammates can pick you up at any time and even if they fail to do so you’ll respawn back at a grace. If you fall over in a boss fight you have an unlimited timer to be picked back up and automatically rez at the end of the fight even if they don’t do it.
In solo you’re fighting a boss intended for 3 players and if you die twice the game is over completely.
Co-op, even with randoms, is much much easier by an order of magnitude. I’m usually a solo player in most games and thought this would be awful for me, it isn’t at all. Map pings are plenty of communication for most matches. It is, however, definitely better with friends on a voice call.
In solo you’re fighting a boss intended for 3 players and if you die twice the game is over completely.
Ok, but what if…you just kill bosses in five hits, because they don’t have any HP?
It’s an overexaggeration of course, but the enemies definitely have a lot less HP than in coop, not even just 1/3 or whatever (seemingly).
Also, are the enemies designed for multiplayer, except in scaling? Everything I’ve seen looks like standard Fromsoft stuff, no weird abilities that just fuck over solo players.
Big boss fights in particular (and some of those in particular, in particular, looking at you Maris and/or Gnoster) often have either a gigantic AoE attack that is very difficult to dodge when you’re the only source of aggro, or else charge across the entire arena after every attack and have you spend half an hour in the fight, 27 minutes of which was spent just chasing the guy across the map. Not impossible, but very annoying.
But 90% of what makes coop easier in my opinion is just having a spare body around that can pull aggro so you can heal. Elden Ring base bosses were designed around being able to be beaten solo so they usually have big wide windows where you can get a breather if you need it. Nightreign bosses have much less of that because they expect you to be running 3 deep. Nerfing their defenses helps with the solo DPS race but it doesn’t really solve the problem that these fights were designed from the ground up for a team who is able to rotate aggro. Nightreign bosses were designed with a sort of raid-boss mentality.
I think if this game were going to be appropriately balanced for single player they would need to go in and edit a lot of the main bosses’ movesets. But that was never part of Nightreign’s design philosophy and trying to shoehorn it in now isn’t doing them any favors in my opinion. This is the equivalent of a World of Warcraft player complaining that they can’t solo all the endgame raid bosses. Sure, you can’t. They weren’t designed to be fought solo. We could try to nerf them down to the point that you can fight them solo, but then it’s no longer a raid boss, you’ve lost the essence of why people wanted to come to this fight in the first place.
Also, are the enemies designed for multiplayer, except in scaling? Everything I’ve seen looks like standard Fromsoft stuff, no weird abilities that just fuck over solo players.
Compare base game Morgott and Nightreign Morgott and I think you’ll see what I mean here. Boss enemies are much more cracked out with longer combos and shorter downtime than in Elden Ring proper, because the developers expect you to be trading aggro with your teammates to give yourself a heal break.
Both with friends and with random players. The map pinging system honestly works so well for the pace of the game! The goal to be as efficient and quick as possible generally doesn’t leave much room for arguing or debates which makes things feel so not toxic. Someone usually just takes control of routing, puts a pin down, you or the other player can place a pin in the same location to second the vote, or you can place a pin where you think is best and the other players can second it or not. When I’m playing with friends they leave the routing up to me, but when we’re playing with a matchmade player it’s 50/50 if they’ll be routing or I will. Sometimes it’s chaos, but it’s usually super smooth!
I was watching a friend who got it and he tried it solo initially before swapping to online play and it seemed waaaay harder. Not sure if he screwed up a setting and it was really the 3 player version or something.
Nice! I gravitate to DEX builds too as it’s just so nice to have bow access. My favourite stylish build is probably dual wielding the Tracers, but that’s basically NG+ only.
bin.pol.social
Gorące