Played it on LSD. Loved it, bog business had me so fucked up during my peak. That soundtrack was… 👌 and then on the corporate assault level I had an interview with Mike Lindell playing in the background where he was talking about the “cyber symposium” and China and the election and I was so immersed going in and killing corporate HVTs.
Does anyone else remember bringing home free trials on floppy disks? Like you get the first level of Wolfenstein or Commander Keen and you just play that over and over because you don’t have any money.
A bit before my manufacture date but as a kid there used to be CD ROMs in cereal boxes which had games like Tonka, Hot Wheels, Timon and Pumba, Rainbow Fish, etc. Those were hype.
I started playing Ring of Pain. It’s a deckbuilder-ish roguelite. There isn’t really a deck, it’s more of a loadout-builder (or tableau builder in boardgame terms). Meteorfall: Krumit’s Tale is the closest thing I’ve played before. RoP is sort of like a 1d version of that. Fun and fairly unique mechanics, smooth implementation. Runs great on the steamdeck too, good controller support.
Cities: Skylines 2. Hugely problematic launch, but it runs acceptably for me on Linux (just over 40fps consistently on a Ryzen 5 7600X and a 6600 XT). I’ve got all settings on high (except Volumetric Quality set to Disabled and AA set to TAA) and it honestly looks quite good, especially with DOF set to tilt-shift.
In terms of the game itself, I’m very much enjoying it. Every mechanic seems more detailed than C:S1 and there is a lot more planning needed to make a really successful city. Not without bugs but nothing game breaking. Lacks some of the annoyances in the first game (like needing water pipes everywhere).
UFC 5. It’s very not-different from UFC 4 but that’s kind of okay. It was fun before and I need to catch up on my trophy collection after spending too much time with Diablo 4.
I played a few minutes of Spider-Man 2. It’s about as enjoyable as expected but I can play only one controller-heavy game at a time so I’ll come back to this later.
Super Mario Bros Wonder threads this needle expertly, in my opinion.
Each level has a difficulty rating from 1 to 5 stars with 1 being easiest and 5 being “Mario Hard.”
To complete the main story, you only really need to beat mostly the easier levels, like difficulty 1-3 stars. All other levels are really optional, but there are a lot of them, and they are the 4-5 stars level difficulty.
So the “main game” by default should be “easy enough” for most gamers, and for those who want a challenge, there are tons of extra challenges for them to pursue.
I think I prefer this to a “difficulty setting” because it allows both casual and hardcore gamers to approach the same game in different ways. It doesn’t make you feel like you are missing anything from either way you choose to play. It also allows you to practice the harder levels if you want to get better.
Some games like Halo, if I recall correctly, literally rewarded you with special cutscenes for the hardest difficulty in beating the game. That can leave players who “aren’t good enough” for such high difficulty to feel a bit left out.
I don’t feel the same about Super Mario Bros Wonder, it just feels pretty accessible to all and I think more companies need to attempt something similar.
Some games like Halo, if I recall correctly, literally rewarded you with special cutscenes for the hardest difficulty in beating the game. That can leave players who “aren’t good enough” for such high difficulty to feel a bit left out.
Those players can either youtube it or keep trying.
I beat Reach on SLASO (minus the skull that hides your gun and HUD after the first level) and it would have been less satisfying if the game made it easier when I died.
Yeah, also a way to skip certain missions in older GTA games. I usually play games on easy because I have a low tolerance for frustration. Hence, I tend to avoid souls-likes, etc, although I would love to play them.
I think there is a wide difference between soulslikes and GTA. The most obvious being that soulslikes are understood to be difficult, while GTA difficulty spikes are almost random and tend to be a result of poor design.
In something like GTA there shouldn’t be a need to skip story critical missions, because those mission should be ironed out. The really frustrating missions either need to be reworked or pushed into optional side missions.
I’ve added a number of games to my wishlist I probably would have blown past thanks to a great demo.
The flip side is, sometimes the demo shows a promising game that doesn’t quite deliver on the original premise or introduces new, chunky systems for no reason and it’s all the more frustrating because the demo got my hopes up.
It’s a sorta virtual novel type game, but it absolutely knew what it wanted to be and nails it 100% of the time. It’s teenage edge with an edge so sharp it actually breaks skin.
I went to several schools and had a lot of shitty drama growing up and it somehow nails that perfect catharsis while being funny as hell. They released an anime style trailer that made me buy it. I think it was the perfect limbic test for the whole game.
I learned about it from Civvie11’s video. I have unfortunately not played it yet, although I fully intend to. It’s stuck on a long backlog list. I really admire such an ambitious game that fully commits to a design and aesthetic which the devs surely knew would be obtuse and offputting to a wider audience. Making a game focused on a vision, without compromise is really a great thing.
I pirated more in the past than I do now. Big difference is that I can now afford it to pay for games.
Currently I’m more a retro games pirate. Older games are pretty much harmless to pirate.
You pirate with the intention to buy. IMO you’re one of the best possible pirates. A lot of people might never purchase a game unless it’s really necessary for online play or something.
I love supporting good games and awesome studios. What I don’t like it getting screwed because screenshots and trailers look cool and they game turn out to be shit and still cost me $50.
You've got to use reviews and video content. Get really acquainted with a few reviewers and what games they really like, what they don't, and their general mindset. Even if a reviewer doesn't like a game, if you understand their taste and preferences you can even tell when you might like it. Cross reference with general public opinion, or perhaps the development history of the studio and if you've played and enjoyed their previous games.
But basing anything off ONLY screenshots and trailers is a horrible trap and piracy isn't the exclusive way to find that out.
It depends how often you want to buy new games. I regularly consume gaming media for fun, so often I only need to watch a review or two to get a solid idea of if it's worth a purchase, so maybe 10-20 minutes, and often times you can just listen to the review in the background of doing other stuff. And I only need to do that maybe once or twice a month at the absolute most, I'm not super rich or anything.
This is all implying I already have good trusted review sources. I'd recommend ACG Gaming if you don't know any yet, he's a smart writer and goes very in depth in his reviews. He buys all of the games he reviews for integrity purposes.
Of course, if you're being absolutely honest that you always buy a game you like after pirating to try it, I think that's just fine, I have no qualms about using piracy as a tool that way, this is just how I do it.
Retro games are also widely unavailable, and often times when they are available, it's only on a subscription service for a machine that I don't want to play them on. Imagine instead if these companies steered into what their customers actually want. That would sure be nice.
bin.pol.social
Aktywne