Yeah what Valve is doing is great. Hopefully they will become more mainstream in the future and become more known with the super casual crowd. Nintendo definitely needs more proper competition in the handheld market.
Also FYI it’s Phillips with double L, Philips with one L is the Dutch electronics company.
I mean… Phillips heads are hood for what they’re actually designed for, which is, uh, to strip really easily so they don’t get over-tightened. Which is irrelevant if your manufacturing is precise enough.
Hmm… While it’s nothing like Outer Wilds and infamous for probably being the most obtuse video game ever created, I wonder if you’d like La Mulana? Metroidvania about being an archeologist where you sort of need to actually peice together the culture and history of the civilization you’re studying to move forward sometimes. It’s style of storytelling is closer to FromSoft (hence the obtuseness) but still.
Realistic naval fleet combat sims. There’s not a lot out there. I assume that there’s probably limited demand – flying fighter planes seems to be a lot more popular when it comes to military sims. Rule the Waves does keep seeing releases, but it’s not a genre with many decent entrants.
Kenshi-style games. I’m not sure that there is a name for the genre, but sandbox, open-world, squad-based combat with a base-building and economic side.
Mount & Blade: Warband certainly has got some similarities, and it was one of two games that I thought of when trying to think of games that are at least a little similar (the other being the X series from Egosoft, though there the sci-fi theme is pretty different), but it’s also got a lot of differences.
The similar:
You start out as one person.
It’s not especially easy, particularly at the start.
You can control multiple characters in different places in the world, and the companions and yourself are on the order of the number of characters in Kenshi.
You can form military groups – much larger than squads, normally – that are out and about.
There is a base-building (well, capturing) aspect.
There is an economic aspect.
The game world is dynamic, and factions take control of different portions to the map and can be wiped out.
But there are also some pretty substantial differences:
While you start out with small units, M&B focuses on considerably larger armies, and while the battlefields normally have armies enter at a limited rate to keep load on the engine workable (looks like 150 cap by default, increasable to 500), you’re still working with considerably larger groups of units. Larger armies are just generally better, and the end game is hundreds are thousands of units. Kenshi has you working with a squad-level size, and you’re going to know and equip each character.
You’re generally working with formations, not individual units.
Kenshi is about wandering around in a world and discovering what’s there. Unlocking tech blueprints, which are important, really requires traveling the world. There’s a very minimal exploration aspect to M&B – you’re mostly looking at the strategic map, and get dropped into pre-created battlefields when two forced run into each other.
Most of the M&B fighting is between, nameless, expendable soldiers that die in battles. A lot of what you do in the game is to recruit and train them to maintain your supply. Companions are immortal. In Kenshi, characters can die, but you’re aiming to keep all the members of your squad alive.
The economic and military envioronments in Kenshi are unified. You have characters that might be running around in a squad or producing things. M&B has a black-box economy that is pretty disconnected from individual characters. In M&B, most of what you’d do with your companions, if they aren’t in your main army, is to have them run around with their own smaller armies defending territory you hold.
M&B locations are all pretty much similar. There’s the type of soldiers you can recruit and the type of factions that might be nearby, and a few locations that are more-advantageous for different types of industry (which themselves are basically drop-in replacements for each other). In Kenshi, if you’re setting up an outpost in an area that is taxed or has environmental hazards, different power generation capacity, different agricultural or mining potential, or significantly-different monster attacks, it plays out rather differently.
M&B does have a limited form of base-building to the extent that you can capture fixed, pre-designed locations and purchase some upgrades for them, but Kenshi lets you put outposts anywhere on the map, and structures and fortifications anywhere in the outpost.
M&B has a limited ability to affect an economy in that building an upgrade will tend to result in more of whatever that produces, but Kenshi’s modeling the whole shebang; what’s being produced matters a lot more.
Honestly, Starfield has a more-similar outpost-building and economic model to Kenshi. No random traders, but the arbitrary placement of outposts, layout of those, and modeling production is more similar. And the environment affects what you can produce. Though there production is automated, not done by in-game characters. It’s just that in Starfield – at least vanilla; we’ll have to see where mods take the thing – there isn’t a lot of reason to build outposts other than for the purpose of accumulating resources to build more outposts. Fallout 4 (vanilla, at least) was kind of similar. My guess is that Bethesda wants to cater to people who don’t want any base-building too, but it really makes the bases less-interesting.
In Kenshi (and M&B, come to think of it), you really do want to ultimately get outposts to support the upkeep of your characters in the field, and it’s a first-class part of the game.
Don’t get me wrong. I like M&B too. It’s just that in practice, I don’t think that it plays all that similarly to Kenshi. You spend a lot more time traveling and exploring with Kenshi. You have bands of characters that you individually equip and know. The characters chatter with each other and in response to different areas. Expanding the tech tree by exploring the world is important. Characters can change drastically, become much tougher, lose limbs and have them replaced with robotic ones. M&B has one mostly fighting large battles on fixed battle maps, and once you’ve picked up the companions you want around the world, you can mostly settle down. You capture fixed outposts rather than building them and laying them out. Companions don’t individually change things that much militarily (realistic, but less RPGish); their major perk is that unlike regular troops, they are immortal, aren’t killed in battles, so having them fight in each battle constantly saves soldiers. You don’t really see the game world off the strategic map other than on the fixed battle maps. In battle, you control formations, not individual characters (aside from yourself). There’s a black-box economy. A lot of what you deal with is replenishing and training new troops, which isn’t really a thing in Kenshi. A lot of what you do in Kenshi is exploring and traveling, which isn’t much of a thing in M&B. In Kenshi, you have a starting character, but they are otherwise unimportant; you can switch to any other character. In M&B, you can only follow the main character in the game world – that’s what the camera follows on the strategic map.
I absolutely loved Carmageddon. My PC couldn't really handle it so it would turn into a slide show eith every crash, but I just loved it and didn't care.
Not op. I saw the good reviews and so I thought I’d give it a try. I don’t know what I’m doing wrong, but I am very bad at that game and die all the time. I looked up other negative reviews and some people seem to agree with me that I just need more armor or something. I don’t understand all of the positive reviews and how difficult I find the game to be. I loved MW one and two and three, but I guess this one isn’t for me anymore.
You… you do realize MW5 is single-player and definitely not a “gatcha game” right? And has a pretty robust modding scene? And has a clan-based sequel coming up in a new engine?
More stealth games that aren’t horror and don’t allow you to punch or shoot your way out of the situation, should you get caught.
If you have any weapons, make them underpowered to the point of useless in combat (eg. Thief) or you just have gadgets to use that won’t help if you get caught (except maybe something that helps you get away like smoke bombs or some shit).
At the same time, though, I don’t want that “get caught, immediate game over” thing. You should still be able to run away and hide or whatever. Just make it exciting enough that you don’t feel like you need to load up a quicksave.
Similarly (if not directly related to stealth), more espionage/spy games. Not as many as there used to be.
I’d also like more actual detective games. Zero action and preferably ones that let you fuck up a case by accusing the wrong person or making the wrong conclusions and have it impact the narrative. Like, if you get it wrong, you get it wrong and you have to live with that. There are several currently, but I’d love more.
You think about a Mix of Thief and dishonored, i guess? Least Puzzle, more Sandbox stealth but Open for the Player to approach the Situation (and Not so much Tool/scenario Drive Like the Hitman Games). I would add Safe zones/Houses as in Nobody finds you there. So you can avoid running away from every enemy on the Map, which offen Happens If you have to flee. This could add some kind of inbetween restock or Adaptation options etc. Think espionage Thrillers and so in.
Is it weird that I think of Halo 3: ODST as one of the real detective games? Not because it’s particularly dedicated to being that, but because the default ending of the game is that you don’t solve the mystery and leave unsatisfied. You’re just some grunt and what’s actually going on is above your paygrade. Learning the truth is a bit of a pain in this ass but it’s also basically half of the game’s story. I think it was a really ballsy move for what it’s worth.
…Also Goddamn how is ot that no one has managed to make something like Theif again outside of Gloomwood (which is admittedly rad as hell?) I only managed to play Theif recently and it’s still one of the best stealth games ever. Modern games need to learn how to leave the player alone for a while and let them cook.
I’ve been thinking a lot lately about Immersive Sims because, like, in theory they’re a lot of people’s dream games, right? Yet their actual audiences are small. Part of that has to be down to setting, for the same reason Blade Runner was never big, but… that can’t be it, right?
And why did people start calling Tears of the Kingdom an Immersive Sim? Is… Are classic Roguelikes immersive sims? Is Dwarf Fortress an Immersive Sim? Obviously not, but the definition we’ve given ourselves is too broad and what we actually consider a “reall immersive sim” seems too limited.
I’d like multiplayer shooters that put emphasis on clean visuals designed to transmit information as well as more emphasis on movement.
Even with all the hats, visibility in TF2 is a masterpiece compared to 90% of games. One team always bright red, one team is always bright blue. The maps aren’t full of noisy scenery and still look great.
Yeah… Diabotical looked like a promising update to AFPS (which is what I’d say you’re describing), but it didn’t change enough of the formula (I blame the weapon design choices) and it launched on EGS instead of steam.
Yeah, I kind of intentionally avoided saying AFPS because unfortunately these days that tends to mean (like with diabotical) games which are desperate to be the most hypercompetitive aspects of quake. Duels or FFA aren’t really my thing, give me teams and objectives!
Perhaps unsurprisingly UT2k4 is one of my favorite of all time
Diabotical did do teams and objectives. I think what really needs to happen to bring the genre back to life though is for there to be a really good campaign tied to a really good multiplayer experience that brings in some new weapon design instead of the Quake meta weapons with minor tweaks.
UT4 was looking promising in terms of multiplayer before Epic killed the project.
You might like roboquest it’s a very recent game that’s not PvP but has a lot of AFPS characteristics.
IDK, kinda feels like we need idSoftware to do a new Quake with new story and new weapons even if they don’t call it Quake (or to release a DOOM multiplayer experience that is actually fun).
Well, there’s another Quake 3 clone attempt every few years and every time no one cares. Diabotical made me especially sad because it shook the forumula up in some very smart ways and the Wipeout game mode needs to be stolen by pretty much everyone (and won’t be).
The best way to learn about any complex system is to bite tiny chunks out of it and ignore the rest, even if you know stuff is interconnected. You’ll never learn everything at once, so don’t try. Eventually you get bored with the little bubble you’ve carved out for yourself so you move over and learn about some other bit. You don’t even need to care about whether you’ll understand everything eventually.
I'm debating whether to get "Total War: Warhammer" (just part 1) and/or "V rising". They both appeal to me but I'm a frugal/patient gamer and the deals don't appear to be that special
TW:Warhammer 1 has the added bonus that if you like TW:W games and in a few years buy the second Warhammer you can ‘merge’ the campaigns in to a bigger campaign called Mortal Empires. You can play all the factions (and DLCs you own) from both games in that campaign. Same applies to Warhammer 3
Check out howlongtobeat. It takes about 20 hours to complete main + side content. OP is just a really salty poster - take a look at his comment history.
So I went and looked. OP seems like a very unhappy individual. I found traces of the below plus a lot of the “whiney entitled gamer” archetype. I sure hope they find happiness someday.
Lol a new monthly issue of a comic can cost about $4-$6, breakfast at a cheap diner can get $10-$20, a 2 hour movie can be $20+, and of course there are $60 video games selling that are less than 20 hours long. Its really funny how undervalued videogame entertainment is.
I like “cost per hour” which is what you’re getting at.
Movie at the theater: $16 total.
$8/hr
drinks with friends, at 1 drink an hour for 4 hours
$7/hr
Dinner out, decent restaurant 40/person
20/hr
Cyberpunk dlc, $30, 20 hrs to beat
$1.50/hr
Yeah I’d say that’s a pretty good entertainment value per hour compared to other leisurely activities for me. I apply this to most entertainment things and it does help. I find comparing things to going to the movies is the best, if it’s more per hour than a movie in a theater than no it’s probably not worth it. Those stupid $50 slingshot rides? Nah.
I criticized your chosen abstraction. “go there talk to somebody and come back” is basically the definition of most interactions. That describes “going shopping”, “going to work”, “going to a customer” and in extension describes almost every quest in every game. That discriminates nothing of value.
Okay, so you basically reduce the game’s content because you nullify major sections due you not liking it then claim it doesn’t exist? In the end all RPGs are based on the variations “talk to someone” with action being the second thing. I wish you don’t ever start playing Final Fantasy 14 which has like 60% of the content are cutscenes and dialogue.
Part of the definition is that you in fact play a role. This means making decisions from their perspective as if you were them and their world was your reality. Any game that doesn’t allow you to make informed, meaningful decisions isn’t actually a role playing game.
Naturally, video games can’t really give you total freedom in that regard, as any option you can pick needs to be anticipated and coded by the developer. But there are candidates that fit the requirement somewhat more and those that definitely don’t.
Cyberpunk, while being a fun experience, doesn’t really give you a lot of meaningful choices, at least not in the bigger quests, especially not the main plot. Most often different dialogue choices only lead to slightly different answers and the same outcome. You can’t decide to rat Panam out to Militech when stealing the tank for example. You’re not really playing the role of V, you’re watching their story play out and maybe deciding what to do first and last.
CDPR have their own inhouse example of a better RPG to compare against.
tbf the fast-forwarding way you can skip dialogue and just read the subtitles without missing anything is one of the best things introduced in this game
Are you fucking kidding? You should put this in your OP so everyone knows to completely disregard your post. You skip all the dialogue in an RPG and then complain that it’s too short and the missions are just fetch quests?
bin.pol.social
Aktywne