I’ve been finishing up random challenges in monster hunter wilds. There’s not much left on the ‘achievable without rng shenanigans’ list for me to get, so I’ve started planning for the next one.
Metal bringer. It’s a looter rogue lite in which you play as the daughter of amazing science family whose legacy has been besmirched or something, causing you to have to get out into a world of bots that need some good 'sploding.
The game loop eventually leads to starting with a massive mech and trashing the early game. The boss designs and weapons are really nice though some of the areas give me a headache.
Super Mario World - just a fun game. Lots of little secrets and fun to speed run.
Titanfall - I played an absurd amount of this one and really wished there was a 3rd one. 1-2 remind me of the pattern seen in trilogys where 1 sets the stage, 2 deviaties pretty far and polarizes fans and then 3 uses the best of both while trying to feel more like 1. (Mario 1-3, Halo 1-3). My favorites in this pattern tend to be 3 so I’m disappointed I never got Titanfall 3.
Pubg - when it was new. Lost me years ago now but that first 6 months to a year was awesome. So many crazy games and absurd fun.
I loved Titanfall 1 so much. Titanfall 2’s campaign was absolutely fantastic but I didn’t get on with the multiplayer so much.
I actually think that was a “me problem” rather than a problem with the game. I think that I had just had enough of multiplayer shooters as I’ve not played one since.
I’m still surprised how well received it was, not because I disagree, but just because of the numbers. It’s currently sitting at 95% positive ratings on Steam, and that’s with 229k reviews, for a game that plays so different from what gamers expected out of FromSoft.
I got stuck on it and then stopped playing for so long that I feel that I need to start again. I do intend to start it again if I ever get the time to put into it.
It’s a difficult question to answer. I personally barely consider Disco Elysium to be a game, more like an interactive story that uses certain game mechanics as grammar elements and punctuation in its storytelling. It’s a novel masquerading as a game. It’s three novels in a trenchcoat. But if we do count it then it is my pick, by a landslide.
Otherwise it’s probably Baldur’s Gate 2. It’s the story game I’ve replayed the most over the years and it was absolutely fundamental in my journey as a gamer, the definition of a formative experience. Even though parts of it are dated now (some clunk is to be expected from a 25-year-old game) I still prefer it to BG3. It’s got a great story, great companions and an all-time great villain. David Warner put in an incredible performance and even all these years later there aren’t many video game villains who have surpassed Irenicus in sheer aura.
I played BG1 and 2 for the first time shortly before the release of BG3, and I just wanted to hear Irenicus talk more.
Disco Elysium, on the other hand, just did not hit for me. The only things I hear about it are praise, but my friends list is filled with people who played it for a few hours, like I did, and stopped, so maybe the dissenters just aren’t so vocal.
Like I said, the game itself on its store page claims to be a “detective game RPG” while in reality I would argue it’s barely any of those things. So a lot of people probably come into it with the wrong expectations. It’s more like a novel about love and loss, about addiction, depression and the past looming over the present like a grey ghost. It’s a story about finding hope in the midst of overwhelming nihilism. As someone who has struggled with all those things it hit incredibly close to home, and was the most meaningful experience I’ve ever had playing a video game.
I don’t think I came to it with many expectations other than that people praised it for the writing, but I found the characters to nearly universally be abrasive and the story delivered via info dumps.
That’s not an inaccurate description. Though context is important - most of the characters know yours through behavior and actions that neither you or the character remember. A lot of the game is playing with how you handle that.
I can sympathize that. The whole game is intentionally bleak and rough, which can be pretty off putting (though it does make the few nice parts exceptionally nice). The devs made a pretty heavy handed choice to focus more on being confrontational art rather than being particularly accommodating to the player.
I think that’s another thing as well, a lot of people go in with the idea that you can to some extent “play as yourself” like you do in many RPGs. And they get frustrated when they’re only given stupid or horrible dialogue options like “why would I ever say any of these things?!”. Because the game is actually rather restrictive in terms of roleplay: yes you can choose your flavour and variety of crazy but at the end of the day you’re always Harry, you’re always insane and damaged and you can’t change that.
For me personally, I’m also an utter failure and I hate myself deeply, so maybe that’s why I easily resonated with the protagonist. And in the end, much of the actual story is about dealing with failure, about finding hope amidst despair and about overcoming and letting go of the past.
I’m totally fine with playing a character who is always a shitty person, but when the world was littered with those characters, it was undesirable to spend any more time in it, especially considering my issues with the story’s delivery as well.
I don’t know how far you got, but you might have gotten unlucky with who you spoke to in game. Lena, Anette, Tommy, Mañana and Roy are all immediately accessible for example and are all rather lovely people, providing some soft contrast to other more abrasive characters.
Can’t say anything about the delivery of the content though. It’s certainly extremely info dumpy and text heavy - part of why I was saying to start with that it’s less than a game and more of a novel.
I personally consider Disco Elysium very much a game (a way better role-playing gamer than most), because an “interactive story” is a game. Combat shouldn’t be a necessary condition. Planescape: Torment should have had the guts to scrap its lackluster combat and focus on its strengths.
Best single game is probably Portal. The pacing, storytelling, innovation, sound, all are top notch even 20+ years later. Graphics aren’t phenomenal, but don’t need to be. The challenges and easter eggs made it a blast to 100%.
I felt that Portal 2’s difficulty curve was a little off but was perfect other than that. It was too easy for most of the game and then ramped up to what I consider to be a good difficulty level later on.
Star Control 2 - it’s a mix of RPG storytelling with zany aliens mixed with Asteroids style PvP arcade gameplay. Like Ham and Cantaloupe, you think the combination wouldn’t work but it just somehow does. The writing and lore of the whole universe is just super rich and really immerses you into the whole universe.
I play and enjoy most genres at this point, but my favorite has to be Skullgirls. There are 18 characters and so many ways to combine them that you can still come up with new strategies in this game over a decade after its release.
Fallout 2 is probably one of my favourite games of all time. Absolutely amazing game, if a bit sprawly. I've played through it many times and expect I will do again.
Red Alert 2 - the pinnacle of the isometric RTS genre. Bordering on too silly but without tipping into absolute farce. Mechanically very strong, the art is lovely, and even has nostalgia for me.
The Binding of Isaac: Rebirth. Massive game but a run can be completed relatively quickly. I always disable the music because I don't like games that try to scare and intimidate me. I'm pretty good at the game so it tends to be pretty relaxing for me, if a bit fugue-state-y.
Battlefield: Bad Company 2: the apex of the Battlefield multiplayer games for me. The others have plenty going for them, but BFBC2 was the best compromise between destructibility, player counts, etc. for my tastes. Sniping took significant skill and one couldn't go prone - it meant that open areas didn't feel like a death sentence (looking at you, later BF games!).
Assassin's Creed: Origins/Odyssey two open world games with beautiful maps and locations to explore. I think I preferred the setting of Origins but the story of Odyssey. A bit of escapist fantasy, I suppose. I loved the Ezio trilogy too, mind you.
Fallout 2 is absolutely stellar. I get the arguments some old-heads levy against in when they prefer Fallout 1, but I think I just played FO2 at the perfect time. The wackiness and pop culture references and humour hit with me when I first played it. It is sprawly, but it is also amazing for how big it is and how much there is to do in it.
Did you ever play it modded? The Restoration Project, Updated has two amazing addons that add more talking heads and more voice acting and they’re both of phenomenal, basically seamless quality. It’s really like putting on a fresh coat of paint on the old thing.
I agree that the original is tighter, but I love the free-form adventure of 2.
Did you ever play it modded? The Restoration Project, Updated has two amazing addons that add more talking heads and more voice acting and they're both of phenomenal, basically seamless quality. It's really like putting on a fresh coat of paint on the old thing.
I agree that the original is tighter, but I love the free-form adventure of 2.
While that is also true, what I hear most about is the tone. Fallout 1 is really rather dark, grim and gritty. It leans more into the heavy side of a post-apocalyptic setting and some people really liked that, and were disappointed when FO2 came out and leaned noticeably more into the wacky side of things.
Played it? I voiced a talking dog in it!
Wait, really? That’s so cool! Do you know the current status of the project? The last update was over two years ago…
I’m a teacher, and as soon as students figure out I play games, they inevitably ask me this question, but I largely think it’s an unfair question to ask someone who games as a genuine hobby rather than just a kill time.
I like to tell them that’s a really impossible question to answer and instead offer them my favorite franchise of games: Monster Hunter. I feel like I can more reliably say that I am a massive fan of the franchise, with it reliably being my favorite videogame franchise, without that seeming weirdly inaccurate considering the wide variety of genres and sub-genres that make up video game interests.
To say that Monster Hunter Rise is my favorite game would be a massive disservice to the captivating, genre-breaking storytelling power of Hades, my deeply rooted love of the flight mechanics in Elite Dangerous, my history as a brief world record holder for a Mario title, the thousands of hours of Team Fortress 2 I’ve shared with friends, or my experiences grinding World of Warcraft arenas to the top 0.5% of players. And I’ve somehow listed 5 formative titles from the top of my head without even representing my deep passion for rhythm games, with Hi-Fi Rush being a genuine contender for that “favorite game” slot that I am arguing doesn’t exist. So I don’t answer with any of these games, because not only would my answer be fundamentally untrue, but it’s not really the question my student means to ask, either. They want to know what I am into, and giving them a standout franchise that automatically gets my money when a title is released gives them a much better answer than any one title could ever do.
I don’t like that, but I’m still refraining from buying the game altogether because of it’s ridiculous always-online requirement. The predecessor wasn’t like that, and there’s no reason for the singleplayer segments of a racing simulator who enjoyed extreme longevity through modding, to be stuck on remote servers that can and WILL be shut down at some point in the future.
Old School RuneScape, MTG Arena and tested out Hearthstone but not completely sold yet.
I am getting way deeper into OSRS. I feel like this could be a main game for a long time. The experience is so different from other gaming experiences. You are never done, and it is not really a question of going faster. The slower you go, the more you plan ahead, and executing that plan is smoother and more rewarding. Also you end up getting pleasantly distracted a lot, and that’s fine. No rush. It is a slow game. Currently not using guides much, I enjoy the organic discovery for now.
MTGA is what it is (amazing). I am playing more bo3 instead of bo1 which is a lot more fun for me.
Hearthstone seems like a mess of overpowered cards. Sure I imagine eventually you get to know the meta, but compared to MTGA were you after the extensive tutorial can actually wim even with starter decks on lower ranks this just seems very stcked in favor of those with better cards that I am not sure you can reliably plan against, but maybe I should just read about the meta some more. Don’t want to discard it yet.
bin.pol.social
Najstarsze