It’s funny—just a little over five years ago, gamers hated it. Not because they ever used one, but because it was a failure. And as we all know about gamers, there’s nothing they hate more than a failure.
Nice try, but that’s not why I hated it.
This smug revisionism triggers me hard. As a hard core steam fan I loved the idea of the SC, I bought it and really tried to use it, but the reality was just too clunky for primary use. It has no dpad, a single crappy convex analog stick, terribly placed ABXY buttons, horrible shoulder buttons, and just a bit too much input lag on the trackpads. On top all that was (actually, still is) a remapping system that’s way too convoluted to use regularly. There’s also the sad fact that alarmingly many games don’t allow simultaneous gamepad and mouse inputs, and simulating the mouse through right stick inputs feels like shit. I really didn’t find any use case where it’s ergonomically superior to a regular gamepad beside the always cited Civ on the Couch, and I’ve tried with sooo many games.
The deck’s control layout fixes most of the issues – the placement is better (except maybe the Salvador Dali inspired B button but I digress), there is a great d pad, two pretty good analog sticks and the input is snappier. Surprise surprise, the deck is a success.
Was the SC innovative, bold and ahead of its time in many ways? Sure. Was it a good controller to play games with? Hell no.
Fully agree. I tried to make the SC work and wrote off a lot of it as “I’m just not used to it”, but it really is asking a lot. In its defence, it was a first run product. The fact that it’s still ass usable and as weird is impressive enough to me. But it’s better as a piece of gaming history than a good product. It was just a good try.
I also agree with the Steam deck controls being actually good. I want the SC2 that’s just a steam deck without the screen or computer.
So I guess the opposite of the steam brick.
I’d gladly pay $100 to have a steam deck like control scheme for my desktop. Rechargeable batteries and a Linux first design would be awesome. I don’t mind just using cables all the time, but I would like better wireless options for Linux gamepads (though to be fair, I haven’t tried connecting a wireless controller to a Linux box in 5 years).
I bought it and really tried to use it, but the reality was just too clunky for primary use. It has no dpad, a single crappy convex analog stick, terribly placed ABXY buttons, horrible shoulder buttons, and just a bit too much input lag on the trackpads.
Hard truths.
Why did they feel the need to replace analog controls with these weird, inconsistently responsive, difficult to map touch controls when every other console platform had already demonstrated why that’s a bad idea?
Was the SC innovative, bold and ahead of its time in many ways?
NO. It was kitsch and poorly engineered and obviously not play tested sufficiently before release. It was a hobbyist’s attempt at reinventing the mousetrap that got shoved into a major distribution pipeline when Playstation and Nintendo and XBox had already demonstrated why you don’t build controllers this way ten years earlier.
Why did they feel the need to replace analog controls with these weird, inconsistently responsive, difficult to map touch controls when every other console platform had already demonstrated why that’s a bad idea?
I have no idea what you’re talking about. The DS4 had a trackpad that was clearly positioned and intended for menu navigation. Nobody used trackpads as a primary game control input before the SC. That’s not because sticks are some god-given pinnacle of technology but because potentiometer-based sticks are cheap and people are used to them. Analog sticks were always, and still are, a crappy way to control a camera. Building a 1:1 thumb based input source into a controller absolutely was innovative and, like it or hate it, I don’t see how you can contest that. The Steam Deck’s pads are actually pretty great to use.
Playstation and Nintendo and XBox had already demonstrated why you don’t build controllers this way ten years earlier.
Again, what are you talking about? The SC was released in 2015.
It actually is the most hilarious of ironies that despite what very real harm Thor might have inflicted upon the early stages of the movement through misinformation/mischaracterization; The fact is, I don’t think this movement would have come near to exploding the way that it has recently if not for the perfect Rube Goldberg machine of drama surrounding this man in the past 6 months.
Seriously. He could not have Barbara Streisand effected the “Stop Killing Games” movement harder if he tried. It really is such poetic justice. It’s a shame that I don’t live in the EU or I would gladly sign the initiate myself. Here’s to hoping that another EU regulation can have sweeping effects for the US. As a reluctant and very jaded US citizen myself, I harbor no illusions about any real and meaningful consumer protection regulations to ever make it over here. Mega-corpos have simply spent far too much money buying out every level of government, legislature, and regulatory bodies that exist.
Europe really is like a strange beacon of hope for US consumers, as odd as that sounds. Fight the good fight for us as well, brothers.
I can believe this, if he wasn’t such a narcissist or such a lying douche bag who always has to be right and has something to say about absolutely everything while having a story to go with it…
Then he would be a pretty cool guy…
Some of his advice isn’t actually bad though… I watched him for a bit but the more you watch him the more you see him for who he is…
I know it’s not going to happen, but I would love it if legislation could go as far as requiring companies to open-source their engines and servers after maybe a period of time, or on ending support for the game. It could be done ID-style where the company retains full rights of the content and trademarks, which would still require players to buy the game to legally play it.
I’m aware there are a lot of cases where games include middleware that’s licensed from 3rd parties that complicate preservation efforts. But if open-sourcing the code is the path taken, there’s a simple solution for that: just release what you can, even if what’s released is in an unplayable state without the middleware. It then becomes the responsibility of any volunteers to take that code and bring it back to a usable state however they choose.
This drama highlights that there’s still a great need for better computer literacy. Anyone with even a basic education in how software, source-code, and software licensing works can tell PirateSoftware is full of shit pretty much immediately. That is, anyone educated who are themselves not grifters.
You should only be granted copyright protections if you can guarantee the copyrighted material can become public domain after the time period ends. This would involve giving the government a copy of all source code and assets to preserve securely. This should be a flat policy for all copyrighted material, so 3rd party involvement wouldn’t complicate things.
The original intent of patents was almost exactly that. You’re protected for a handful of years, after that anyone can just use the patent as instructions for recreating it.
… then Disney and other fucking greedy ghouls of corporations got involved and greased the right palms…
Why is everyone here gaslighting OP as if this isn’t a valid privacy concern? It’s completely valid. Other messaging services allow you to disable typing indicators and message receipts. Even Google messages offers this. So yea, I’m with OP on this one.
It’s weird that Lemmy is super concerned with privacy yet shits on people for stuff like this. Good jobs guys. Really making Lemmy shine here.
Agree, but let’s not dilute the meaning of “gaslighting”. That word has a VERY specific definition and it had been getting used in inappropriate contexts so much that that very specific and necessary definition is being lost. It refers to a specific abusive behavior pattern which needs a good and concrete word to communicate it. My teen stepdaughter had it in her head that us educating her on the world was “gaslighting”, which is dangerous because she had the “gaslighting bad” reaction to things that were not gaslighting, and it is not limited to her. There is a concerted effort on the part of some political groups to break and weaponize the definitions of things like gaslighting and manipulation, we need to work to make sure it is not successful.
Feedback: that’s a great screen shot. I really enjoyed playing this screenshot. The screenshot download was fast and I was able to run it from my phone.
None of those games need sequels, and neither did Hades. I get why they did, because it was the first time they weren’t veering on bankruptcy and could use a bigger safety net, but doubling down on this lack of creativity is hardly what I expect from Supergiant.
I can understand what you’re saying with none of them needing sequels. Invaded that definition yeah sure none of them need them. But I would very much want a sequel to bastion and transistor. And if that puts me in the minority as far as that’s concerned I’m okay with that. I’m not going to boycott their team because they don’t make a sequel by any means.
I just learned that the intent for that level is to pause the game and switch which turtle you’re playing because they get a full health bar when you do.
A boss several steps up the chain decided to make changes to how the site operates that were incompatible with what Giant Bomb is, namely that they wanted an advertiser-friendly, “brand-safe” image with less swearing and streaming. This led to a number of key people leaving, at which point, the name Giant Bomb isn’t really worth anything to anyone. It’s been covered in tons of gaming circles this week alongside the similar destruction of Polygon, so I didn’t think it needed to be stated yet again as I was summarizing bullet points from a live stream.
It’s been covered in tons of gaming circles this week alongside the similar destruction of Polygon, so I didn’t think it needed to be stated yet again as I was summarizing bullet points from a live stream.
Very fair and valid.
I will just gently state that this is c/games, not c/gamingcircles and thus many of us are very interested in video games but not necessarily the industries on the periphery thereof, so what seems “yet again” to you might be a first time for others.
Very true. Though at the same time, you probably could have found that context you were looking for by typing a couple of those words into your favorite search engine or Wikipedia.
I agree with you, but I do believe that is an unrealistic expectation for interacting with casual lemmy posts when a custom of including relevant context exists. But all good, I’ll admit my lack of awareness on this one; you did nothing wrong.
Hate is often just a reflection of insecurities and a product of attempting to alleviate cognitive dissonance. Someone feels scared, doesn’t like feeling that way, and so converts their fear into anger – misdirected at someone else.
Balance is the key. True that fear leads to anger and anger to hatred and a path of the dark side, but the Jedi were also guilty of dealing in absolutes until they were fighting outright fascism via space capitalism and clone contracts they built killed them all.
In short. The higher the social status of the woman compared to the man, the more likely the man is to sexually objectify her. Wheras women aren’t more likely to do this based on relative status.
Objectification is defined as reducing a person to solely looks and sexual function.
Similar stuff is seen in primates. Females are easier targets to assert dominance over. Since they are physically weaker. Male long tail maqacues losing their status, would seek out younger/weaker targets to establish dominance over. Something that was interesting too, is that female maqacues with more masculine facial features, were less often subjected to dominance seeking behaviour (from both males and females if I recall correctly) than females with more feminine faces.
It seems to boil down to “who can I dominate with little risk?” Female? Easy. Big male? Stupid idea. Young male? No problem. Male of equal size? Potentially.
I'm just disappointed in the way Square Enix seems to think turn-based combat is anathema for some reason. The series has abandoned its roots, it just isn't FF to me.
I thought it was a really nice change. They kept the ATB system all the older games had, and it didn’t break between overworld and battle screens constantly, making for a seamless transition between the two.
I tried to like 12, but I found it painfully tedious. I couldn't carefully ration my MP the way I wanted to with gambits, and I don't want to automate the game anyway, I want to actually play it myself. But manual takeover just felt way worse than a normal turn-based system too, the way it grinds the pacing to a halt and takes forever made it apparent that the game isn't designed to be played manually.
I think that is what made that battle system interesting: More focus on delegation over micro management.
The main portion of the battle played outside of the battles themselves and was all about how you essentially “programmed” these workflows for each character to work in harmony together to win battles. You could get in the fray to fix any unintended outcomes of these flows, but was mainly to observe the outcomes and make adjustments.
I was actually very cold to the idea of the gambit system early on because “the game plays itself” sounded like such a cheap style of gameplay.
Later, though, when I got a better sense of what it was trying to accomplish, it made a lot more sense, especially when thinking about the game in the context of sharing the same world as Final Fantasy Tactics.
Tactics is all about troop strategy, simulating that experience of being a military commander. The gambit system in 12, meanwhile, is like taking that concept and moving it down to the ground level, where you have to strategize with your allies before an engagement and then trust that people know what to do in the moment, with the player intervention happening one character at a time being more like real-time improvisation than strategizing.
It's not like Square Enix doesn't know how to make good turn-based games. They've been hitting it out of the park with their smaller budget projects like Bravely Default and Octopath Traveler. So I don't know why they've rejected it for FF, imagine what they could do with a big budget title if they tried.
I joke about how halfway through development, someone at Square Enix must've realized that Bravely Default was actually a good game, and thus too good for the FF name. So instead they had to throw darts at an English dictionary to rebrand it.
The one by Eidos, where there are “vision triangles” and you have to slowly take out a whole ton of nazis before terminating your objectives in each level.
bin.pol.social
Ważne