Altho CoD and GTA are my main games I still play other things and I have like, 251 games on my Steam account, and countless others outside of it… Like, you do not need to restrict yourself to only yearly release triple A stuff… Those games get boring eventually.
You got lucky… A lot of people haven’t, it’s pretty much completely RNG depending on your ISP. And my internet is not slow at all (500 Mbps down/250 Mbps up fiber with a decent ONU) so I’m just confused.
It got a LOT better after the last update, but the fact it took this long is absurd.
Yeah it seems to be a desync between client/server that can happen depending of your ISP. I once turned on the event graph and recorded an entire match on OBS while trying to get in as many gunfights as possible. I had 153 client hits (AKA hit markers that went off on MY end) but only 98 server hits!! The server ate almost TWO entire magazines of hitmarkers…
The idea that this same person would actually play something with as much soul as Until Dawn is pretty unbelievable. Can you believe they have like, emotions and crap? Plus just so much talking, I mean come on. They don’t even have a BattlePass!
Such clean lines and effective shading. I’m in grey scale mode on my phone so at first I thought this was a photo of a metallic miniature. Really impressive work.
The math don’t add up. 5.5h/wk x 52 = 286 h of gaming, but all those games together are an average of 425h to complete the main story. You are playing alot more than you think!
I’m jealous you had that much time, i love rpgs as well ;) have fun.
We need the year they started playing each game to calculate it correctly anyway since this assumes 2025 is both the year started and the year completed.
If I finally finished Skyrim this year, it would represent a decade of half-assed gaming on my part. 🤣
Yeah like… A lot of people out there like Taylor Swift, Imagine Dragons, a lot of bands/music artists that are kinda generic, and also a bunch of TV shows and games that CAN be considered “generic”… like, sometimes you just want bread and butter, you know?
Indepth tutorials told by dialogue boxes. Run 5 steps.
[Hey player!]
[You know some boxes can be moved right?]
[Just walk up to the box]
camera pans 3 feet to the left to show the box in the centre of the screen
[Press X to grab it]
[And when youre done press X to let go]
[Im sure youll find many uses for this during your adventure]
[Why not try it on that box over there?]
<hmmmm. Seems like im going to need to move that box if I want to get anywhere>
When you get near the box a massive X symbol flashes madly and unmissably above your head, and theres lines on the floor showing where it needs to be pushed to, which is also the only way its programmed to move, literally impossible to do wrong, and you push it like 5 feet.
[Wow! You did it! Looks like you can get to the next area now!]
<I should probably remember that, it could be useful in the future>.
You’re now free to play the game, all the way to the next room, where you’ll spend way longer than necessary learning something a fucking 4 year old could figure out, and you dont even need figured out because its been a staple of games since before you were even born.
I know there are folks out there who are profoundly bad at games, and that’s who these things are made for. I’m reminded of that one gaming journalist who gave Cuphead a bad review because he couldn’t figure out how to double jump and never got out of the tutorial.
But just make it a quick selection when starting a new game. “I’m new here, show me guides” and “I’m an expert, skip tutorial content”. Or even just make the tutorials an optional object interaction in the game that you don’t have to touch if you’ve already figured it out.
But the best games are the ones that teach players how to play organically. Level 1-1 in Super Mario Bros is the common example. Setting the camera controls in the older Halo games was also a work of genius. Newer games are a bit too dense to be able to cover everything quite as quickly and organically as Mario, but you can still offer some similar diegetic hints and just add a little “Help” button for anyone who can’t figure it out on their own.
Yep. Not to say that people who struggle with games aren’t valid or there shouldn’t be accessibility options to cater to them, but when writing professionally about games, you should be a near-expert in how to play those kinds of games, at least at their baseline difficulty.
It’s fine to say “I don’t quite get this game, but I’m sure there are people who do and who enjoy it.” But that can’t be a “review.” When you’re a reviewer, you’re supposed to be an authority. If you admit to not being an authority, then you’re not quite qualified to review it.
It shouldn’t honestly matter, but knowing how many publishers tie aggregated review metrics to their developers’ wages/bonuses/raises (or even if anyone gets to keep their jobs at all), it’s crazy for a publication to have journalists who don’t actually know how to play games just reviewing them on vibes alone. It’s too easy to run the risk of not understanding a core part of the gameplay and just assume it’s the game that’s wrong instead of me (because I want to continue getting paid to review games). So I assign it a negative score because my lack of understanding made the game feel bad, and then a level designer somewhere loses their bonus because the aggregate score was half a point lower than the total stipulated in their contract.
bin.pol.social
Aktywne