You might be interested in Zero Sievert. If you already own (or obtain) Escape from Tarkov there’s an amazing Single Player Tarkov mod that is legitimately probably the best way to play the game.
How do people feel about this company using generative AI? That was a concern of mine around The Finals; they’ve defended the decision on voice acting and it made me wonder where else they’re using it.
EDIT: Learned some new things from the responses, certainly an interesting situation. I’ll consider them.
Embark released blog posts about how they’re integrating AI into their development workflow back in 2019/2020. The entire studio was founded by former Dice devs bc they were burned out with game development and had quit, then realized they could build tools and pipelines that allowed them to focus on the fun parts of game development, and got together to form Embark and do exactly that. Their vision preceded the vast majority of the public’s awareness of AI, and was not influenced by the current wave of LLMs and generative ai.
If you want to hate feel free that’s your prerogative, but be aware that anything Embark makes is going to be built on tools and pipelines that deeply integrate some form of AI/ML, and just stay away from anything the studio makes. It’s your loss really because their games are the first in a long time (in their genres) that I can feel the love the devs poured in seeping from every single aspect of the game, but again it’s your prerogative.
To defend the voice acting in The Finals - they obtained the consent for all the voice actors they use, and they pay them a commission for each new line they generate. It’s believed that one of the reasons they made that decision was to have things like improvised dialogue possible by the announcers (Scotty and June), for example.
They definitely aren’t cheating people out of money, fortunately.
Yeah, in the 15 minutes it takes to see if changing the setting caused any performance issues, I can easily just boot up Maze Mice and get through roughly 2 rounds with zero complications whatsoever. No need to change any settings from default or wait absurd lengths of time just to play a game without stuttering and other performance issues.
Also, your game is piss poorly optimized if you can’t get shader compiling working properly without tanking your experience in game.
I’ve played a handful of games that precompile shaders at boot up without it taking 15 minutes, and they try to hide at least some of it behind the splash screens and such. This is absurd. If pre-compilation or caching is needed, just fucking do it.
On top of what you said, that any company with the funds of Gearbox has no excuse for not being able to optimize it to happen during runtime without tanking FPS.
When you launch a game, and… your drivers have changed, or there’s been a substantial update to the game… it just tells you its compiling shaders before properly launching the game.
15 full minutes is pretty terrible though.
I think my worst ever is around 5 to 10, and that is when I am intentionally fucking about with mods and different versions of Proton and changing up Proton/Wine prefixes with new attempts at finding a working Windows component/requirement for some nonsense that by all rights should not work at all, lol.
I don’t understand exactly why but they’re not storing the computed shaders so you constantly have to redo it. But it also shouldn’t be taking that long anyway. It takes the new battlefield maybe 30 seconds to do this, so something weird is going on in the background.
Here, pick from various amounts of these 3 options, these have been the explanations for basically every ass-tier AAA game in the past couple of years:
UE5 is very flashy, ‘developer friendly’ garbage that explodes in complexity when you try to do any serious modification/customization of the engine or render pipeline
None of these AAA devs that are supposed to be experts in UE5 actually are
Management is beyond incompetent and tells devs to do things that are actively bad/harmful/destructive/broken.
A lot of comments tying runbacks to difficulty, when they have nothing to do with each other. I haven’t playing silksong but I played about half of the original and uninstalled it, despite the fact it is so many people’s favorite metroidvania and metroidvania is one of my favorite genres.
Not putting checkpoints close to boss fights is not difficulty. It is disrespectful of the player’s time, which is a problem hollow Knight was full of.
I liked Hollow Knight, but yes, it kind of was. Frequent destinations were far away from fast travel, and there was a low level area that they transformed into a high level area later in the game specifically so that crossing the map wouldn’t be a cake walk. I’d argue that earning the power to make an area like that into a cake walk is a core part of the fun.
Not putting checkpoints close to boss fights is not difficulty.
You're pointing a finger at the Soulslike genre here, not only HK. Some games may abandon it, but this is common enough to be called a genre stable.
Just like the "hit hit, dodge/parry, hit hit" combat pattern, losing/recovering currency, enemies respawning on bonfire use… etc.
I think this whole genre is wack, TBH. I don't even find it difficult, I just think what they test is perseverance in the face of misery and tediousness, which's a bizarre thing to test in a video game. It's almost as if it's straight up telling you: this is a serious video game, no room for fun here.
Meanwhile, Ninja Gaiden proved you can simultaneously have extreme difficulty AND fun like one million years ago.
It’s true that I’d prefer it in no games, but it’s also less frustrating in straight soulslikes. The problem with HK is that it is a synthesis of metroidvania and soulslikes in the most time-disrespecting ways possible. Really most of my frustrations are with map design, and then they add not getting maps until you find the map guy (in samey environments I can’t remember well enough without a map).
What made me put it down was playing for an hour going through multiple zones without finding either a map guy or a bench somehow then dying. I’m pretty sure just being able to see the map would have been enough to keep me playing.
For this new fangled soulsvania genre there are numerous better entries that I thoroughly enjoyed. Ender Lilies and Blasphemus are the first 2 that come to mind.
Personally I think we’d all be better off not even calling them Soulslikes, for this very reason. Full-blown Soulslikes have so many more nuances and systems that add to the experience.
Yeah, huh, apparently HK is tagged on Steam as a Souls-like, but I disagree… just brutal difficulty in a melee-heavy game isn’t enough to merit that badge, but oh, well.
Agreed. I’m not sure why I would waste my time with shit like this when it’s just objectively not fun for me to play.
Different strokes for different folks, so if you like it more power to you, but I’d rather play games that are fun to play for me.
I only have a certain amount of time to play video games, and if I can’t make any progress at all in an hour or two, why would I bother continuing when an hour or two is usually all I have in a day to play your game?
I’ve decided not to bother picking up silksong because I found HK tedious, frustrating, and unrewarding.
People who enjoy such games are clearly masochist who don’t know what a good game is if it hit them in the face. Idk why these sorts of “gamers” even exist. I long for the halcyon era where good stuff like Mario, Zelda and Sonic were the staples of hardcore gamers.
You're pointing a finger at the Soulslike genre here, not only HK. Some games may abandon it, but this is common enough to be called a genre stable.
You should try Salt and Sanctuary, Sekiro, Bloodborne, The Surge, Lords of the Fallen, or Lies of P—all had boss runbacks, and that's ignoring HK, Silksong, and the original Souls games.
Apparently I shouldn’t. But if there’s a list of soulslike games that do it, and a list of soulslike games that don’t, then it is not in fact true for the genre and is instead true for specific games.
You can make the case that it’s not a fun use of our time but how is it not tied to difficulty? Being able to get to the boss with enough health or consummables is certainly part of the intended challenge.
I haven’t played silksong, but most games like Dark Souls and the like, getting back to the boss without taking damage is pretty easy. It’s not difficulty, it’s just time.
I never actually liked FromSoft’s themselves, but several Soulslikes I really enjoyed did away with runbacks, or always had checkpoints right before bosses.
I really just want people to start evaluating each design decision Dark Souls made on its own - stop worshipping the whole as being perfect, because it most definitely is not. So many of the knowledge checks (poise, anyone?) are just there for experienced players to lord over confused shrubs.
I’m not really used to metroidvanias having runbacks honestly. Most I’ve played either have save points close to the bosses or just drop you outside the boss room if you die.
Have you considered that the run back is trying to tell you something? The game doesn’t want you to bash your face against the same enemy the same way. It may not even want you to fight that boss yet at all.
The run back is meant to be an incentive to think about your options. Do I have other areas to explore? What do I keep dying to? Am I overlooking an obvious weakness during a particular boss mechanic, or am I not using an ability as effectively as I could be to stay alive?
If you let the player immediately run back into a boss, they will veg out and do just that until they eventually get lucky and barely down a boss by the skin of their teeth. But that’s not how you should be approaching these fights.
Sometimes the most productive run back even involves a good night’s rest.
The other day, I fought the boss of the abyss in the dark souls 1 dlc. It took me 5ish attempts, and I changed my gear to have more magic resist after I got further in the fight and got merked by magic attacks. All spending 2 minutes between each attempt running back to the fog gate did was make me zone out and wish I could just get right back to it.
Btw, the original runback was mega man, where you get to try the boss until you run out of lives then you have to do the entire level again. Still way more interesting than running past everything in souls games.
Do you believe DS and Megaman could have been even more iconic if they had listened to players and made their runs back shorter?
My point is, it’s not like the designers didn’t know what they were doing, this is a very obvious aspect of their gameplay. And regardless of how minor inconveniences like this make us feel as players, we don’t know that it’s not precisely those lows that contrast with the highs to create the intended experiences which made those games cult hits to begin with. You wouldn’t look at a Rembrandt and say, “look how much of the painting is just black! You’re wasting all this space! You could add so much detail and context in there!”
I’m a firm believer that “given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game”. If players weren’t complaining about the run back, then they would be complaining about the empty flask drinking animation. Inconvenience is not a convincing argument to me. Just like any art, games are free to evoke any and all emotions. It only becomes a problem if the emotion they keep evoking is boredom lol. But even then, boredom is a valid tool on the artist’s palette; sometimes the only ones who are getting bored are the boring people.
I loved Ender’s Lilies and it had save points outside the boss rooms. I do not believe the game would have been more iconic if I had to run through several rooms of enemies before fighting a boss again.
The joy of victory came from overcoming a difficult fight, not from avoiding a tedious repeat.
Have you considered that the run back is trying to tell you something? The game doesn’t want you to bash your face against the same enemy the same way. It may not even want you to fight that boss yet at all.
The run back is meant to be an incentive to think about your options. Do I have other areas to explore?
Would be a lot more effective if I didn’t have to go pick up my shade. Which often can’t be accessed without locking yourself into the fight again.
I disagree, runbacks are as much difficulty as having to recover your currency after death, or even having to recover your items after dying in Minecraft. It’s a punishment for dying, and a way to make you treat it seriously.
It can incentivise the wrong things, punish experimentation and make players stick with what they know, even if better options exist. You’re free to dislike it, and it has downsides, but dismissing it as “not difficulty” is just dishonest.
Yeah same story for me every nintendo console. I’m like ahhh maybe I’ll skip this one. Then I blink and they’ve put out like a dozen masterpieces and I’m like ahhh they got me again
Seconded. Switch 2 at this point is mainly just worth it if you have a backlog of Switch 1 games that you want to play in better quality.
Donkey Kong is the first true “must buy” (MKW is good too but it’s mainly just for people who have played MK8 to death and want something new). It’s gonna be a bit for another tentpole franchise to carry the console further towards being a compelling purchase.
I’m not sure Air Riders will be that game either. I love the original Air Ride to death and I’m really looking forward to Air Riders, but I don’t think it carries a console. Metroid Prime 4 is probably the next big decider for a lot of people.
So… I noticed over the past few weeks that apparently Somebody had been running “guerilla marketing” and Wuchang was apparently the most important game ever released?
And now it apparently became the center of another culture war?
… What the flip? It looked cool but it very much looked likea “good first try” and the Iron Pineapple video mostly aligns with that.
ign.com
Ważne