Elden Ring and souls-like games really take a certain mindset to enjoy, and if you get stressed too much from failures, you’re probably not going to have fun.
Alternatively, if you’re someone who craves the challenge and can laugh off losing, it’s the best thing ever.
This reminds me of a semi-friend I knew in highschool, dude really thought he was a cool guy and everyone was always up his ass even though he was a huge jerk all of the time (like a wannabe Tosh.O kinda style). For some reason I let him borrow my WC2 Battle chest and after a few months I asked for it back and got only one disc that was so thoroughly scratched it never even registered.
Started hanging out with him like a decade later when he moved next to my bestfriend, got to tell him I thought he was a piece of shit in school because of how he treated my stuff but doubt he actually cared or really remembered.
Interestingly, had a meth head who was visiting my roommate for some drugs (had taken shit from our place in the past) who borrowed one of my vhs sets while I was at work (was thoroughly pissed thinking it was gone forever), he brought it back the next day and had even wiped down and fixed the broken flap on the box. I try not to judge people borrowing stuff because of that and only let people borrow items I’m ok with losing and wouldn’t sour a relationship over.
I modded my Wii and loaded the sucker w/ n64 emu, ds emu, gc emu & practically the whole catalogue of games to follow suit. 3 years later and I’ve only ever played Animal Crossing and Bionicle Heroes…
I think this is valid criticism. We buy games to have fun, not to have some more work outside of work. If the game forces you to “git gud” in order to have fun, it’s not doing its job.
Of course some people like the experience of honing a skill in order to overcome the obstacles posed by a game. But a developer cannot expect that of every gamer and not provide any means to reduce the challenge.
Counter-example: I badly suck at Sekiro, but it might be one of the best games I’ve ever played. It’s too stressful to play it unless I’m in the right headspace. Like trying to listen to Dark Side of the Moon during Thanksgiving dinner with your funny uncle, it doesn’t hit.
If you judge any art purely based on its entertainment value or the mere pleasure it gives you, the only value in art will be its market value. That’s just empty to me.
The difference is that I judge games on how I view the meaning and execution behind creative choices I noticed during play. Some will call that pompous or elitist, but it’s really just that I need to be seeking meaning in life. Otherwise why live?
Not joking. Meaninglessness feels worse than just being dead to me, sorry to the anti-intellectuals who are going to laugh at me or call this a new copypasta.
Whenever I leave negative criticism for a game, it’s typically about the “git gud” curve. If, after an hour, the game is still too hard or repetitive and not enjoyable, thrn it gets a negative review based on that.
Eh, Battlefield has crazy bloom (their version of deviation) on most guns except the SMG. The kind where you can stand 6 feet in front of a player and full auto a magazine at them and only hit them once or twice. Been an issue with BF forever. Even the SMGs suck with increasing range. Unfortunately there’s a glut of players exploiting Aim Assist with hardware, so far too many laser beam kills at 60+ meters with full auto tiny guns.
DMR’s are fine. No complaints there, Aim assist doesn’t help much in that class. There’s a definite difference in people using aim assist on SMG and not. I’ve got almost 2k hours in game and it’s really, really obvious when there’s aim assist abuse vs not. Doesn’t matter which weapon. Zero bloom vs some bloom on full auto. Rapid no-miss taps with DMR, etc. You really rarely encounter this stuff in big map modes like Rush or Conquest, it’s nowhere near as obvious thanks to the greater distances, but I play a fair bit of TDM and people abusing the aim assist feature stand out like sore thumbs.
I play on pc so aim assist isn’t really something I encounter a lot outside obvious cheaters, but aim assist in general isn’t something that should exists outside of singleplayer imo.
I tried to do an online check-in for a flight some time ago. After cursing the airline, all software developers, all of society and all the gods for about 30 minutes, I realized that I had to allow popups for the site.
I’ve been replaying Skyrim since I got the Special Edition on sale few days ago. The loading screen goes away so fast that I can’t enjoy any tips on information that it shows. The technology has come a long way.
It’s never really been an “issue”. The rolls have always been accurate, and the XCOM devs have even said in XCOM 2 they gave an invisible “buff” on hit chances on some difficulties.
The problem is we as people assume that something like 90% is a guarantee, and a miss in XCOM always feels so much worse, especially when they changed from time units to just a flat “do a shot, hit or miss them all” approach. So even though statistically you’re going to miss 1 of every 10 on a 90% shot, when it happens twice it’s “bullshit”. But that’s just odds man, gamblers fallacy is real.
Part of the issue is there’s a disconnect from what’s being shown and what’s already happened. So, XCOM, and I think XCOM2 (it’s been a while since I played both) create a table with “random” values on map load. This means, you can 100% save scum the shit out any encounter because cause and effect will always be the same, it’s not a live “dice roll”. Part of this sucks, because what happened is hidden from the player. Something like BG3, you can see “Oh, I swung, rolled a 3, and these modifiers, my total was 14 and they have an AC of 15”. Also, some games help by using a pseudo-random where the probability of something happening, actually increases over time. Example would be Dota2, where something like bash, shows a given percent, but it’s actually on a scale. Each attack changes the % chance the next bash may happen, eventually getting to a point it’s nearly a guarantee. This type of random is often used to make the game feel more fun for the player (to nudge the numbers one way or the other). However, with a pre-seeded table, this likely isn’t happening.
Then you add the visual component. Point blank range, it’ll say “99%” and you miss. Or the number will seem low, despite point blank range. And you have the visual of the %.
So you add those together, the game likely not helping the player and just using a pre-seeded table plus the visuals with the human notion of really only remembering the extremes and you get the overall feeling of “game not fair”. You made 10 shots in a row with only 30% chance, but you only remember the single 99% chance you missed
Actually no. Mostly, but some actions affect the PRNG and when loading saves they haven’t remembered to reset the effect of those, so the results can change a bit between loads. It has been a while, so I don’t remember the specifics. But you can abuse this property to get out of really tough spots by gaming the PRNG across loads.
Way too close for even a bullpup rifle. 65% is honestly pretty good if he’s already at point-blank range by the time brain impulse to fire the trigger is sent.
I think the game is meant to abstract away simultaneous actions. So it’s like the alien and you are moving at the same time, not like hitting a stationary target next to you.
lemmy.world
Gorące