I really want to love this game. The artstyle is amazing, the music and sound effects are to die for, it’s truly magnificent. However, the gameplay seems too mechanic for me, like there’s no actual freedom to the game, you need to do these tasks on these days at these times or else you’re playing it wrong.
To be fair, that’s just the culture that’s come up around the game. You have to plan how you play if you want to “win” in the first 2 years, but the only thing you get is a few candles lit in your backyard, and you can still “win” in later years if you play more slowly. You absolutely can just plant some stuff around a sprinkler, sleep until they are grown, and do everything you want to do without being at all efficient with it
100% agree, i personally just don’t enjoy that background feeling that i have saying I’m doing this wrong and the stress i feel over having to get certain things done everyday. i already feel enough of that outside of videogames, I’d rather my time spent gaming to be an escape from the norm. Love the game, love the community, heck I play it semi-regularly, it’s just not my cup of tea, that’s all!
The weird thing about Stardew Valley is I cannot understand why I don’t like it. I’ve tried to like it. I’ve poured many hours into games in the same genre, but I haven’t even managed to get 2 hours into Stardew Valley and I do not understand why. I can’t point at anything in particular that doesn’t work for me, and it’s exactly the kind of game I love to play, so I’m honestly perplexed as to why I don’t like it.
The first time I tried my time at Portia, I found building stuff took forever. I was trying to build a bridge(iirc?) And I felt like it was just going to be a lot of waiting. Was I playing it wrong?
The first time I played My Time at Portia, I had the same issue, and it felt like it took ages and ages to do the bridge. It was much easier on subsequent playthroughs. Basically what I did was build about 6 furnaces to get the crafting going early on, and always had at least 2 of each subsequent crafting station (more as space and resources allowed, although there were a few that just one was sufficient for. Making sure you get a crafting commission every day really helps as well, because that’s your main source of income, which makes it easier to afford more land, inventory upgrades, etc. Fishing is also ridiculously lucrative once you get good at it.
What my Portia daily routine normally looks like is something like this:
Wake up, check mail (if any).
Grab resources that have crafted overnight (if any).
Go to town hall and pick a commission, looking for something that I have most or all of the materials to craft. The plan is to get it made and delivered that day if possible, so if there’s a choice of something that doesn’t pay well but can be done immediately or something that pays better but will take 2-3 days to make happen, I pick the low paying one.
Check map to see if any locals have quests that day. If they do, go and get the quests.
Go home and craft the commission item, plus any items required by other quests picked up that day. If any crafting stations have finished production, set them going again.
Deliver crafted item to recipient(s).
Gather resources for the rest of the day. I usually pick one activity and stick to it, say mining, fishing, hunting (the sound of dying colourful llamas makes me sad, but I want their pelts), etc.
Check crafting stations when stamina has run out. Set more crafting going if needed.
Go to bed.
The other thing is that the big “main” quests for building those major projects aren’t necessarily meant to be done quickly, as they’re the bigger story events that gate your progress through the game. Once I stopped trying to get them done as quickly as possible, and let myself get sidetracked on other stuff, I enjoyed the game a lot more. I spent quite a lot of time just spending whole days on, say, just mining, or harvesting wood, or fishing, while ignoring the bridge entirely. (I actually think I spent about two weeks fishing once. I got really, really into it. It then took me another week to sell them all.) By the time I thought “oh yeah, I should do that bridge thing”, I had more than enough of all the resources needed, and then it felt really quick to do. I ignored quite a lot of main quests for a really long time, including one that narratively I should have done much quicker. Let’s just say that
spoilerPortia went without clean drinking water for so long that everybody should have died
Speaking purely from my own experience, the mistake I made with My Time at Portia the first time I played it was I was too focused on being goal-oriented by following the main quest. But the game’s not really about that. I had a much better time when I slowed down, focused less on the main quest, and more on crafting stuff for the locals (so many stone stools) and selling them preposterous amounts of fish.
Sorry for the late reply! This is an incredibly extensive list, thank you so much! I’ll have to give the game another go at some point here. It seems super charming, so maybe if I go into it with this added knowledge, I’ll be able to get my bearings. Have you tried the new game that just released a while back? I think it was called my time at Sandrock?
I love the game, but I like extremely slow progress, so I use mods and modify the wealth multiplier(?) as well in the vanilla to make it more challenging. I also really love mods that add content, and there are quite a few out there! it’s annoying to always update mods manually (as compared to the steam workshop) but I did really enjoy when I was playing with my partner and we had 30+ mods!
a family member who I’m close to who also plays Stardew Valley likes to refer to me playing “Dark Souls Stardew Valley” which I thought was funny, especially because I’m terrible at Dark Souls.
overall I really like the game on it’s own. it helps that ConcernedApe has kept adding to it even though he absolutely doesn’t have to (it’s a big game as it is!) and I appreciate him for that. I do get a tiny bit stressed about the timer on days (notably when I’m playing with someone else and they’re really stretching the time thin) but it’s a very, very small thing. I had never played Harvest Moon or any other farming sim games before SDV, so I have no point to compare, but I just really appreciate the game being chill and a change of pace from games I’d usually play, that are almost entirely based on combat.
So I played it for a while several years ago and kinda got bored with it. I got to the bottom of the mine and had married one of the characters, and my farm (such as it was) was mostly automated so not much to do there. I know there are a bunch of story moments but I got tired of wandering around randomly trying to meet the conditions to trigger them. I wanted it to happen organically without looking it up. I just felt like I ran out of things to do and there was no point to keep playing.
At the same time, I want to play it on my Steam Deck because I did enjoy what I did play!
I just felt like I ran out of things to do and there was no point to keep playing.
To each their own of course, but it sounds like you basically just “beat” the game, in the same way someone beats Animal Crossing. You just stop playing eventually. I don’t see that as a negative if you enjoyed that time.
I only played one The Sims many years ago. I wonder if it was the first or second.
It certainly was a good game with good mechanics and content.
I’ve only seen a little bit of how it evolved in videos. I wonder how much EA is reiterating and republishing the same content and mechanics, and how much has evolved and changed? Did the products warrant regular and many releases and DLC?
Each Sims game is quite different. The biggest difference is between Sims 1 and 2 simply due to the change from isometric 2D to 3D graphics. Not the first game in the genre to have 3D graphics and they weren’t even particularly impressive for the time nor good compared to its competitor, but the charming animations and attention to detail make it a far more enjoyable experience than the comparatively sterile predecessor. Sims 2 ended up becoming an evergreen with very long legs, to the point that people are still playing it, although it helped that EA distributed the complete version with all add-ons (the game is older than the term DLC) for free for a while (you can still find it if you know where to look).
Sims 3 was fundamentally different from Sims 2. Gone were the isolated homes of the predecessor (initially in Sims 2, you couldn’t even see your neighbors’ homes unless you were on the map screen; later they added in low-res stand-ins) and instead, it’s an open world game where you can see your Sim commute to work in real-time. Neighbors can be visited without going through a loading screen - it all feels more organic as a result. Customization saw a huge upgrade as well, the AI was improved, etc. Sounds nice in theory, but the problem was that it was too ambitious for PCs of the time. This series has traditionally attracted non-gamers who don’t deeply upgrade their machines all that often and instead play on laptops bought for homework or old rigs inherited from big brothers. Sims 1 ran on a toaster, Sims 2 on a pizza oven with some kind of GPU grafted to it - whereas Sims 3 was one of the most demanding games of its time in order to facilitate gameplay changes that few people actually asked for and rounded, bloated looking Sims that are somewhat offputting. It was still a massive success and a huge hit with modders as well, but Sims 2 remained popular due to its more focused nature, the fact that it ran on anything and the fact that it was complete with a massive library of add-ons that took years to be replicated in Sims 3.
Sims 4 reset the series back to Sims 2, but went too far initially, limiting player freedom in regards to neighborhood creation. Instanced homes returned, customization features and open world of Sims 3 were cut, the AI saw a massive improvements, Sims didn’t all look obese anymore, hardware requirements were modest again - but at the price of having incredibly intrusive DRM, an attempt to monetize the proud modding community and being very bare-bones in the beginning, requiring years of DLCs to reach feature-parity with Sims 2 and 3. IIRC, even pools - an absolutely essential part of Sims lore - were missing initially. All of the improvements to the building mechanics in particular were overshadowed by EA’s corporate nonsense. It’s come a long way since though. Just like with the predecessors, buying all DLC at once will make you poor - but the base game is free now and the actual intention is that you only buy the DLC that have features or items you care about. The modding scene is as vibrant as ever, making any non-feature DLC unnecessary anyway.
This series is an interesting and unique phenomenon. It’s a prime example of something that only ever truly works on PC. All of the many console, mobile and browser spinoffs and ports were nothing but mere blips on the radar, because fundamentally, it can only work on a platform as open as the PC. It primarily attracts female players who rarely play anything else, yet dive deep into modding and modifying every little aspect of these games like the most hardened PC nerds. It started out and still is in many ways a faksimile of ideal American suburbia, although enhanced by both some quite subversive humor and subverted by an astonishing level of player freedom that goes against the conformity of the real world - while at the same time replicating the fads, consumerism, cliques, feuds and other less wholesome aspects of the real world through its behemoth of a community. It’s ultimately a platform for individual creative expression and the worlds (both in-game and outside of it) that emerge as a result of it, a sandbox that was only ever bested by Minecraft, which literally broke everything down to its individual building blocks. Each game and its DLCs become more like car payments to seasoned players, something you pay for so that you can travel where you want to go, which in turn keeps the experience fresh, finances further development and prevents the community from getting stagnant as it has to learn to adapt to changes from the developers.
I’ll end this here. This wasn’t meant to turn into an essay and now my fingers hurt, because I typed all of this nonsense on a touchscreen.
Sims 3 has the most hours played in my steam library, but I haven't played it recently. I seem to go in cycles where it's all I'll play for a few weeks, and then I won't touch it for several months, and then I'll come back to it again. It's a great game to have mindless fun in, and last I checked, the mod community was still going strong.
I love the dragon age series, my favourite RPG games by far. I honestly think inquisition was my favourite game of the series so far and has a lot of replay ability. I can say enough good things about this series the combat, story, characters, crafting, I absolutely love these games. I’m hyped for dreadwolf.
I have replayed Half Life 2 a few times. Some parts of the game feel really goofy now. There are many physics based puzzles in game. Like needing to weigh down a see saw like platform with cinder blocks to get across a gap. I think at the time these were really revolutionary, but they feel silly now. At the same time, I’m hard pressed to think of shooters that still include that type of puzzle (but I also don’t play many shooters nowadays).
EarthBound was the first JRPG I ever completed and the first JRPG I ever enjoyed. Before it I'd never been able to get into JRPGs: there was just too much complexity while also having too little going on. Wandering an overworld only to be randomly pulled out of it for no apparent reason was maddening. As a kid, trying to piece together the backstory of some undefined thoroughly detailed fantasy world while also taking in the emerging plot in the opening sequence wasn't anywhere near as appealing as firing up Mario or Mega Man and getting straight to the action.
EarthBound neatly sidestepped all of the things that had stopped me from liking JRPGs. The equipment system was simple without being braindead. The setting was a pastiche of suburban life that I could easily understand. The stakes were high but the tone was still whimsical and amusing. And above all I knew why I was suddenly getting dragged into battle with a snake or a crow or a dog instead of just being clotheslined by combat.
EarthBound still is my go-to recommendation in the (increasingly unlikely) event that someone says "I've always wanted to get into JRPGs, what should I start with?" It is the perfect "intro to JRPG" game without feeling trivial or like it cannot stand on its own. It singlehandedly made me love the JRPG genre, and I probably would not have played literally every other JRPG I've ever played if it wasn't for EarthBound.
Earthbound and Super Mario RPG are the two best entry points to SNES-era JRPGs. I haven’t played many JRPGs since the OG PlayStation generation, though, so I’m out of the loop on newer games. But they’re both better entry points than any of the PS1 JRPGs that I know of/played.
I’m more partial to Super Mario RPG, personally. Timing attacks in battle made the grind more engaging, and the Mario world is well known by pretty much any gamer already, too.
I consider myself a pretty big science fiction fan. I’ve read a ton of science fiction novels, both old and new. I enjoy Star Trek. Love Star Wars. I like a lot of science-fiction themed video games, like Zone of the Enders, the original Bioshock, Borderlands, Prey (both the original and remake), Halo, Metroid, Half-Life, Fallout, etc.
I utterly loathe Mass Effect. I consider it one of the worst pieces of science-fiction ever created. I consider the overly sleek aesthetic of everything, from the ships, to the weapons, to the armor hideous. I consider the characters underwritten. The political entity that runs the galaxy is an uninteresting and derivative bureaucracy. The conflict between the various member races and their respective histories are far more interesting than the looming conflicts of the giant undead space robots looking to destroy the galaxy. And as a game, the gameplay is repetitive and uninteresting. Many of the enemies eventually just become damage soaks. The weapons and abilities are generally forgettable. I don’t think I’ve ever had less mentally impactful combat in a game before (as a note, I consider this a general issue with third-person shooters). And the inventory management in the first game was painfully terrible. I remember getting to the end of the game and having to spend an hour to manage my fucking inventory right before the last fight because I literally ran out of space and at a certain point all the crap you’ve collected just becomes worthless and pointless to have.
I played the first two games. I hated the first one when it came out and still hated it when I revisited it years later. I did like the incredibly janky Mass Mobile, as it was so poorly implemented that it was hilarious to watch it bounce off of random pieces of landscape like it was made of rubber. The second game I also really disliked because of the bifurcated Paragon and Renegade oppositional morality system that seemed really popular with that era of RPGs. And I didn’t even bother with the third. The games are just dull and frustrating, and I’ve never understood the love people have for them.
I really didn’t get it when I visited a planet, then the next…then the next and they (collection missions??? absolutely forgettable) seemed very monotonous.
I did like the robots/bad guys who spoke in a blur of noise, and thought the way the wepons worked (using the “mass effect”) was interesting…but…that was about it.
literally everything else was forgettable and…meh… which is a shame for me because I really wanted to like it.
In terms of AAA video games, I can’t help you. I really like Becky Chambers novels, though. Lots of people talking about their feelings in a space opera setting. Big emphasis on character development. These are things I enjoy. The ball numbing action violence of your typical mass-media space opera stuff? Much less so.
Funny, I feel the same way about Fallout and The Witcher. Just… don’t get the appeal. As always, to each their own. Hence why I generally try to avoid yucking other people’s yums.
If anyone enjoys the game, that’s great. Nothing I say should take away someone else’s fun, but from my perspective, if you let another person’s negative perception of something you enjoy diminish your enjoyment of that thing, the only one who has “yucked your yum” is yourself.
Ahh yes, the old “sticks and stones” defense that completely ignores human nature and basic decency. I use the same logic when I tell other people their babies are ugly. “Look, if you ask me your kid is an eyesore but it’s just my opinion so I don’t know why you’re so mad right now…”
I’m emotionally incapable of accepting that other people dislike things I enjoy and I perceive their criticism of those things as personal attacks. When they tell me that this is a personal problem that I have and that I should learn to accept that people are complicated and that enjoying something someone else does not is perfectly valid and shouldn’t impact my sense of self-worth, I piss and shit myself and tell them that they’re calling my baby ugly. Because that’s how I think of the mindless entertainment I consume: as the closest thing I’ll ever have to children.
Even though I agree with you and feel that you did nothing wrong with your original comment, I believe that there are less combative ways to point this out.
That’s fair. I’ll admit that I have a problem with getting overly mad at people for making stupid, accusatory comments that actively misrepresent what I say for their own benefit. I mean, they made a dumb comment and I can, and should, just ignore it. But I also have a difficult time letting things like that go and it’s something I should try to be better about.
I think they are in their right to give their opinion on something no? Telling someone that their kid is ugly is such a wrong comparison to make. You’re directly offending them as it is their child, plus talking about something that neither parent nor child can do anything about (their looks).
I love talking to people who despise stuff I adore, this can give very interesting conversations. It also broadens my perspective on things. I love Mass Effect and still found the original comment very interesting.
You’re not saying the other person is wrong to love it, you’re just saying that you yourself hate it. I think this is an important distinction to make? Especially on a discussion thread, it would be rather boring to only hear the same voice?
Please correct me if I’m wrong, we’re all learning.
It’s all about tone. The original comment was incredibly combative and hyperbolic (“I utterly loathe Mass Effect. I consider it one of the worst pieces of science-fiction ever created.”) so much so that it would easily be mistaken for flamebait given the thread was likely to attract fans of the series.
It certainly didn’t strike me as the start of an open-minded conversation.
But in hindsight I should’ve just downvoted and moved on rather than commenting as I did, so that’s on me.
beehaw.org
Ważne