Around 2010, I remember this game studio sharing a innovative technique of game design where as people failed a boss battle, the game would slowly make the battle easier.
Some companies ran with it. Nintendo gives you extra help if you die multiple times in a level. Where some studios do it more behind the scenes. For example - giving you a bit more ammo. Or slowing the boss down a little more. I can’t remember the game, but they have a feature where a boss can’t one-shot you. And they give you more of that buff the more you die, so it “feels fair”.
Making the boss easier after I die to it would frustrate the hell out of me unless it was optional. I want it to be a challenge, not just something I can beat if I die enough times.
You’d have to die a few times to it too even notice it getting easier. Almost nobody wants to grind out a boss 20 times in order to beat it. And if properly done, the variables changed are so small each time, that it’s not noticeable.
It’s a system to help everyone enjoy the game without quitting out of frustration. Because the majority of people, in general, quit after a bit too much resistance.
There’s a quick drop off of enjoyment when a player feels the game is too difficult.
Far: Lone Sails is a beautiful art piece with unusual gameplay, and the sequel is great too.
Bedlam is kind of a love-letter to 90s and 00s FPS games. The gameplay isn’t amazing, but if you spent a lot of time in games like Quake, Unreal Tournament or Halo CE back in the early days of online multiplayer, this game is for you.
Unless it’s an MMO, or something like an online aRPG, the tag “live-service” immediately means that you’re fully expecting to release an unfinished game, collect your preorder money, get backlash for the game being unfinished garbage, and then release a few patches as a “Sorry we got caught” excuse.
The days when you’d buy something, and you would know that is the final version of your software, have been over for a long time
Even MMOs tend to be terrible live service games. This mode necessitates a good cadence of content (actual content, not stuff to buy) that most studios seem incapable of doing.
The point is that when you printed something on a disk, and had 0 capability of pushing patches down the road, you were forced to finish your product. Now it’s not the case, evidently
I’ve been playing a bunch of old NES and SNES games, and they all could use a few patches. Many are buggy as hell.
They were still cranking out unfinished trash back then because the cover art and box description was all we had to go by. No refunds on opened games, your money was gone and you had no hope of it ever getting better.
I agree it was very boring and the writing in the intro was incredibly weak. Every time I expected that wow moment (helgen, opening the vault) i just found disappointment instead. “Wow a fight! oh I’m just randomly handed a ship? ok sick time to fly, oh it’s just fast travel. New Atlantis is about to be crazy, oh it’s just a bland city” and everything being beige didn’t help. Fallout has the cool roleplaying in the wasteland factor, Skyrim has the cool fantasy aspect, Starfield seemed to just be ‘space’ but other games (Mass Effect, Outer Wilds, hell even the first half of The Outer Worlds) did it better.
It seemed p clear they don’t feel the need to innovate or have any ambition because their dedicated fan base is so large now that they don’t really have to. Which is fine but wasn’t for me.
I think I’ve grown past enjoying Bethesda’s wide, shallow ocean design philosophy and bare-bones dialogue trees. There are simply better RPGs on the market now.
I want to agree but... what other RPGs on the market fill this niche of a sandboxy open world that you can practically live in? Skyrim and Fallout feel like proper open world immersive sims at moments. Cyberpunk might be the closest one in recent memory but it fails in so many other aspects. Other than that I honestly can't think of anything.
Yup, they just keep making the same game with a new map and skins. Everyone had such insane hopes for this game, but I always assumed it’d be at best like fallout 3, better graphics in space.
Kind of interesting that the vast majority of negative/mixed reviews are regarding gameplay/story rather than complaining about major bugs (although jank has been noted in a few, and I’d honestly be a bit disappointed if there wasn’t any).
We’ll have to wait until release (Cyberpunk’s bugs weren’t that prominent in reviews either), but I really hope this “lol Bugthesda” meme can die.
Regardless of how buggy it is, I expect Dunkey to somehow break it as soon as he boots it up, which should be entertaining.
Skyrim for PS3 is in an unacceptable state to this day. The longer you play a save the worse the performance gets. My cousin finished the game at like 5 fps.
Fallout Nee Vegas has crash on startup issues day one on PC. Lots of folks couldn’t play it and I believe an unofficial patch came faster than an official.
Watching a few people play it on stream, they didn’t come across any bugs but the AI was making really silly choices still. Like Rushing a gunner with a melee weapon from far away. It’s essentially still the “Gary” AI. From everything I’ve seen, it’s going to be Fallout but you can drive the alien crashed spaceship to another planet.
As much as I love them, I’m about to be a hypocrite and say I don’t know if Bethesda will ever have non-janky AI. It’s the one thing that’s been fairly consistent over a very long time now.
Whether it’s enemies or your followers, or just pathfinding weirdness with NPCs, it’s like their AI is just kind of… there sometimes. If had a conspiracy theory about it, I’d say they’re doing it on purpose to get you to explore the world by finding your missing followers (of which I’m sure we’ll see many get stuck on different planets entirely now).
I mean it wasn't a meme. Bethesda games are buggy on release. The PS3 edition of Skyrim was notoriously not fit for release, I honestly do not think that level of bugs would ever have been tolerated nowawdays. It's also something that Microsoft's QA team really ought to be credited for because it seems they are the reason this game stands out amongst Bethesda releases in recent years.
That said imma wait till a few days afterwards just in case. And the story getting bad reviews is not unsurprising as Bethesda has not really had a good one since Morrowind, or maybe Point Lookout in F3.
You are right, but I just get tired of it sometimes as a “predictor” or that they should be lauded for not releasing something that falls apart at release.
Bethesda have a reputation for a reason, but the lack of QA (or at least publishers willing to listen to QA) in a lot of modern gaming has made some of Bethesda’s previous issues seem almost normal.
I guess that’s more an indictment of modern gaming than really a defense of Bethesda, lol. And for all the shit they get about “modders fixing their games”, they were the ones who actually went and fixed a lot of FO76’s issues after that launch disaster.
Either way, regarding the story… Yeah. I find that oftentimes the side quests (particularly faction quests or the FO4 follower quests) tend to be way more interesting than the main quest in some of their games.
The lolbugthesda meme exists because it’s true. There aren’t many games I’ve had to completely start over because of a game breaking glitch in a side quest, but that was Skyrim and the infamous thieves guild glitch.
They’re good games but pretending there are no bugs, either funny cosmetic ones or serious progress blocking ones, helps no one.
Sure. I don’t think I was pretending there weren’t any bugs. I think it’s more the dismissive approach toward their games before release that gets a bit tiring, even if it is often warranted in some respects.
Creation Engine is buggy as fuck, and I’ll always expect their games to have a fair amount of jank at the very least. Even Obsidian had troubles with it (though some of those bugs could also be attributed to lack of time and testing).
But I hope that if this does prove to be have better release than their others (admittedly, it can be a low bar), that it sticks.
I played from 5 pm yesterday at release until 5 am today, and I literally encountered one single bug, which was that I managed to get a big enemy’s pathing hung up on a rock, so I could kill it.
It's a shell of a game, it looks like an early prototype that was rushed out the door. And that's probably exactly what it is, it's an attempt at a quick cash grab using an old popular IP. If you enjoy it, that's fine, but let's not keep collectively lowering our acceptable standards.
PolyMC (with one L) is the launcher that had the controversy. Prism Launcher was forked from PolyMC, and PollyMC (with 2 Ls) is a new project forked from Prism Launcher.
The PolyMC controversy is that one of the devs went rogue and kicked everyone else off the project, so they didn’t really have a choice but to fork. They explain what happened on the FAQ of their website.
Personally, I think that the Denuvo protection on Switch games would probably be a simpler system than the full-fat PC DRM. It would probably be too intense for the Switch’s meagre processing power, and customers are definitely going to be annoyed when their game takes a minute or two to load up.
Could it pave the way for that crap on other consoles as well?
At this moment, the only current-gen console to be jailbroken is the Nintendo Switch. There’s no need for external DRM on the PS5 and Xbox because publishers can trust that users will only be able to play legit copies of games. Switch games, on the other hand, don’t have that guarantee, because dumping games on a jailbroken switch is very easy to do. Hence why Irdeto is planning to offer DRM for the Switch only.
Interestingly, this isn’t the first time that third-party DRM was used on a Nintendo console. Some DS and Wii games were protected by an anti-piracy system called MetaFortress, which aimed to protect against flashcarts and pirated copies. Here’s a video from the Dolphin emulator team about its use in the all-time classic, “The Smurfs: Dance Party”
Denuvo phones home constantly. Unless denuvo is removed from the game, the game won’t be playable unless it was legitimately purchased and can be verified on denuvo’s servers.
Furthermore denuvo encrypts the game files and the denuvo files and scrambles them all together, like mixing two jars of sand from different beaches, but the denuvo sand pieces know where everything is, so the game and copy protections still work.
I wonder if an emulator that breaks DRM could be considered illegal. I would imagine that emu teams would tread carefully around this sort of thing to avoid litigation.
Not to dismiss your issues mate, but I don’t know if a gaming sub is the best place to ask. Most of us in here probably put a few hours a day into games ourselves without considering it an issue.
I actually agree with you but the mental health communities on Lemmy haven’t caught up yet, and I figured one could find more people here that could relate.
Since everybody in this thread got themselves into a big fucking tizzy about it because they have no actual problems. People for many years now have used it to jokingly put down their hobby obsession, e.g. “normies don’t glue green foam to toothpicks to make trees for their model trains like I do”, and while some people are huge wierdos who use it as a perjorative, the fact that they exist doesn’t matter and refusal to consider context is idiotic.
My biggest gripe, although I can understand the reasoning behind it, is that the encounter rates are totally backwards. All the Pokémon, stops and gyms are in cities, and there are scarcely any in the wilderness, skewing the game in favour of those who live in or near cities.
Also, the Pokémon games contain all the elements to make a great ARG MMO. Why reinvent it? They could’ve easily put their paywalls and micro transactions in place while still keeping the traditional Pokémon formula.
It’s not a terrible game, and it obviously has a following and makes money, but it could’ve been so much better. They totally dropped the Pokéball.
I buy games to have a library to pull from when the mood takes me. If I finished them all then I would no longer have that, which seems bad.
The reward for finishing a "backlog" of games is having nothing more to play. That's like trying to finish a meal in a restaurant quickly to get to the after dinner mint.
I despise treating gaming as an obligation like this. I have a collection of games, not a "backlog".
I don’t buy anything I don’t want to play right now (or after the current game, and it’s on sale right now), so don’t have the backlog issue, but I need closure. I can’t leave my games unfinished. I can drop a game if I want, but I need to mentally “finish” it. Either by completing it or by dropping it.
I have something in the region of a thousand games collected over about twenty years. If the price is good and it looks like I might like it (and I can afford to fritter the money away) then I buy it.
That's a thousand (ish) opportunities for entertainment, not a thousand (ish) obligations.
I bought all the rainbow six games in a bundle just to play Vegas, got to Vegas 2 maybe a year ago. I might get through the other 5 over the next 20 years.
Personally, I don’t really go out socially. Like ever.
So once a week or so when my friends go out to the bars and spend $50 on food and beers, I might spend a $20 on a game that’s on sale and get the same or better return on my time and money for it. If I buy a game for $20 and spend five hours on it and never touch it again, that’s about equivalent to a night out with the boys, both in dollars spent and in hours enjoyed.
I’ve built up a collection of indie games on this mindset and I don’t see any of it as wasted. If I get a lower return than $5 per hour enjoyed then I’ll refund the game or not recommend it for others. But I have a ton of games that have kept me well entertained for 3-6 days for the price of a beer and a kebab. I consider that good value.
bin.pol.social
Ważne