Deus Ex: Human Revolution and Mankind Divided can be played as stealth games, and I really liked them. Note that they aren’t “pure” stealth games, there are some encounters where you cannot avoid fighting.
Also DE:MD kind of ends in the middle, so if you are a story player you will be frustrated to know that there seem to be no plans for the next sequel.
Yeah HR had unavoidable combat bosses in its original release. The Director’s Cut modded them all to allow for dealing with them by alternative means, such as hacking, robot/turret control and such. But because they weren’t originally designed that way it’s not the most organic, and you can’t pure stealth bypass them like the original Deus Ex.
Adding on to this I heartily recommend MGS V. It is the culmination of the MGS formula in a mostly open world. While I love Kojima's bullshit, the previous MGS games had deep mechanics that you rarely got to play with because most the games were movies with an occasional game.
The story is kind of all over the place but the gameplay more then makes up for for it.
MGS1 is available on GOG, but it’s definitely got that early 3D vibe that OP doesn’t seem to like. I think it’s aged pretty well, considering it’s a PS1 title.
I love RimWorld, and I love DRM-free, but RimWorld on GoG is a mistake.
Instead, buy RimWorld directly from Ludeon. Then you get both DRM-free files from them (to enjoy in the fallout bunker), AND a steam key (so that you can easily enjoy the metric boatloads of modding content on the steam workshop).
Finally, an arch distro where there’s a chance for some actual support and without a community that consists entirely of basement dwelling, self-righteous wankers, who have never learned social human interaction!
Seriously, Manjaro is kind of bad, but every time I’m tempted to install Arch, it takes minutes on the forums to convince me what a horrible idea that would be.
Idk, I wouldn’t really call Steam OS an Arch distro. It’s not quite as extreme as the relationship between PlayStation and FreeBSD, but it’s in that realm.
The user has very little control over the base system, which is distributed by Valve. Most of the user’s interaction is on the surface, such as through Flatpaks and whatnot, not w/ the package manager. It’s like other distros like Aeon (openSUSE) and Silverblue (Fedora) where the user doesn’t really interact w/ the distro itself.
it takes minutes on the forums to convince me what a horrible idea that would be.
The reason the forum is like that is because Arch is designed to be a system where you have the tools to solve problems yourself and not need to ask for help. That’s why the install process is so manual, the intention is that if you can make it through that, you probably won’t need much help from anyone else. The install process has gotten easier, but it’s still to a point where it generally discourages “casuals”, for lack of a better term.
I used Arch for about 5 years and I think I interacted w/ the forums like twice. If interacting w/ the forums is something that’s important to you, then Arch probably isn’t for you. Something like Debian or Fedora will probably be a better fit.
I really don’t get people’s fascination w/ Arch. It’s basically a LEGO-style Linux distro, and that’s not really what most seem to want. I switch from Arch to openSUSE because openSUSE had everything I liked from Arch (rolling release, mostly-vanilla packages, etc) and most of the reliability of a release-based distro. I still don’t recommend it for new users because the community is pretty small so getting help is a bit harder, but people are generally nicer than Arch users.
It’s a very interesting question. In terms of which game I’d rather play, it’s SMW. But in terms of technical achievement, SMB3 is unquestionably better (in my opinion of course).
SMB1 was a watershed moment for gaming - perhaps the biggest that there ever was. SMB3 was a revolutionary improvement on top of that. In light of that, SMW almost feels like a bland port. This isn’t to say it’s bad by any means, but in terms of the impact that it had on gaming as a whole, it’s not very significant and just feels like an iterative improvement.
SMW is still a great game! And if I could only play one for the rest of my life, I would choose it over SMB3. But in terms of historical impact on gaming, I would say that SMB1, Mario64 and SMB3 were more revolutionary.
Just as an FYI, you’re getting down voted because you’re asking for assistance on a “game” that seems to be App Store shovelware. The only resolution you will find is through the App Store itself. Best of luck getting the devs to respond!
3 is my favorite of the two, but World was objectively better in terms of mechanics and overall design. Still, I’ll always play 3 if given the choice between them.
Which SMB2 ? SMB2 in Japan was later released internationally as “The Lost Levels”. The SMB2 that got release in the US and Europe was actually a reskined Japanese game called “Doki Doki Panic” which means it wasn’t even really a Mario game in the first place!
I imagine they mean the US SMB2 aka Doki Doki Panic. I have actually played the “original” version and the SMB2 game is actually improved in some ways, not just reskinned. While I don’t think it is better than SMB3, I think it is a great Mario game, even if not initially intended as one.
The SMB2 that was a direct sequel to SMB1 came out for Famicom Disk System, not NES. There’s only one SMB2 that came out for NES.
Also, Yume Kōjō: Doki Doki Panic was an advertising game released specifically for Fuji TV’s Yume Kōjō entertainment expo in 1987. As such, because it was just a one-off event title, they took a prototype platform game that Miyamoto had already influenced Tanabe to make more “Mario-like” (but was shelved when the Famicom couldn’t run it as intended), reskinned it to feature the characters and setting of the expo, and released it for the Disk System.
So, NES Super Mario Bros. 2 was a polished, Mario-themed reskin of a rushed reskin of a prototype Mario-esque platformer.
All of that is to say that, yes, Doki Doki Panic was in fact most likely a Mario game in the first place.
I have lots of different controllers, and have had even more through the years. My personal recommendation is the 8BitDo Ultimate 2, should be plug and play either on wired, wireless or Bluetooth on most modern distros, comes with a stand for charging so you never have the issue of picking the controller and being out of batteries, has Hall-Effect track pads so you won’t get drift with time, has 2 extra back buttons which are configurable on steam. Plus specifically against each other major controller:
Thanks. Unfortunately this one’s on the expensive side and I am not a hardcore gamer. I think I will go with the ultimate C wired as it is in my budget as well as seems to work with Linux (atleast via steam; got mixed reviews with Lutris from some folks in the comments).
Fair enough, the ultimate 2 is the same price as the Xbox and Playstation, so I guess those are also outside your range. The ultimate 2C wireless is only $5 more than the wired, I think that’s a good benefit for that price difference, but even the wired should be good since 8BitDo does good hardware.
The ultimate 2 is over 100$ more expensive than the ultimate c wired and 50$ more than the official Xbox one. (All of this in rough ₹ to $ conversion) Interestingly, I just searched Amazon and I had to scroll down quite a bit to find the 2c wireless which is actually cheaper than Ultimate C wired (at 81% discount like wtf?!), so now I might go for that one. Thanks.
Edit: Sorry that 2C was just for the Nintento Switch. The reviews mentioned it didn’t support PCs. So now the actual 2c is 20$ more expensive than the Xbox. Now I am confused to put in the extra and go for the ultimate 2 lol.
Not sure how the prices are in your location, but these are the rough prices here in Europe that I had in mind when replying to you, I assumed the relative prices would be similar in your location, apparently I was wrong:
bin.pol.social
Ważne