Slay the Spire works great on a touchscreen as well. It runs great on my Surface.
However, there is a weird bug if playing on a Surface, that I feel obligated to let other know when recommending this game. You have to have the keyboard attached for the touchscreen controls to work in Slay the Spire. But you can flip it around the back and still play with the touchscreen.
Totally agree, I don’t want to have to do research before or during playing and have to consult a build guide for every level up, just so I don’t mess up my character.
Just let me fuck around, find out and do it better all over again in my own time.
Origins is definitely the best and the closest to that classic Bioware feel you like.
DA2 was polarizing but I enjoyed it. Very different from the first mechanically. Worth playing tho, IMHO.
DA:I was… not fun for me. I feel like they tried to modernize the formula and added all the worst parts of modern (at the time) games, namely HUGE time sinks for no reason because it’s not a fucking MMORPG that makes money by the hour. /deep breath Sorry, I am still a little bitter at how that game turned out. Anyways, probably worth checking out, maybe you will feel differently. But it wasn’t for me.
Dragon age 2 was insanely fun to me, i definitely played it more than origins. (Im aware I’m not in the majority with that) I thought the combat was so fun and i loved doing different play throughs with different builds in that game
2 definitely shows the issue of EA wanting to push the game out in 1.5 years. Many cut corners and a lack of assets with the repetitive maps.
I think it's the weakest entry in the Dragon Age series, and a lot of it's negative reception was because it failed to live up to expectations of DAO.
If Dragon Age 2 wasn't a Dragon Age game, it wouldn't have gotten the poor reviews it got. As a standalone game it's actually not bad.
I always recommend playing it, as it directly leads into the story of Inquisition and it has some great characters in it.
DA2 takes a different take for me when I realized that you’re playing through Varric’s retelling of the story. It kinda explains why people are falling out of the sky to join the battle and other inconsistencies.
This gets often overlooked, glad it got brought up. The entire game is an exercise in unreliable narration. Gives you a very different lens to experience the game through.
Ultima Online is a 25 year old MMO that still has the original servers running. The install is about 3GB and can run on any PC from the last 20 years. For the official servers, the player base is largest on Atlantic and you can sign up for a free Endless Journey account. PVP is only allowed in certain zones.
There are many many player run servers that fit a lot of play styles. The most populated being Outlands. That is where I mainly play as it is by far the most populated UO server, 2.5k-3k people on usually. Just beware, outside of the starting zone and towns, it is open PVP almost everywhere.
City of Heroes now has player run servers. The install is around 5GB. Homecoming is the most populated, with a lot of added content. Rebirth is less populated but tries to be the closest experience to the official servers.
Likewise, Everquest is still running, including some semi-official EQ-classic servers. Server population might be measured in hundreds – a far cry from the 500k peak in 2002.
i don’t think they are polarising. imo, 77% is mid. nothing bad with a “just okay” game. sometimes you just want to play the experience of a new familiar world and this is it.
with tiktokers though, a mid game has less to talk about and so their narratives make what little or so difference sound like a big deal. sensationalism is where the money is for them.
i guess a good list of fair and reliable sources would help out here.
A game is also more than the aggregate of its review scores. An average of 81 on Open Critic is derived from those who rated it a 6 and those who loved it enough to give it a 9 or a 10.
Being a skyrim and fallout fan, I wasnt necessarily disappointed by Avowed, just understimulated.
The whole 15ish hours I played i found myself just craving the depth of a bethesda game, which really wasnt there.
Cons: The lack of a fully integrated item physics system. No wanted or theft system. 1 dimensional npcs that only seem to physically adhere to any lore if they arent human. The human npcs look randomly generated in a character customization screen. The lack of an open world to explore and invisible walls all over. Shallow inventory management that doesnt feel like it matters. Very Mid story with a zero effort intro/character background. Weapons/magic combinations arent as versatile as I would like.
Pros: Streamlined inventory management, for people that dont enjoy it. Combat is solid. Magic and effects are beautiful, fun and tie into exploration well. Platforming is solid with excellent level design. Graphics and performance are great also. Unlimited stamina while exploring is great.
The scales just dont tip in the game’s favor, especially when a game from 2011 outdoes it in almost every way.
I understand that obsidian is focused on churning out more easily digestible games more often, but is that really what rpg fans want? More shallow games that leave us wanting?
Idk maybe skyrim left me with unrealistic expectations, but all i want now is that level of world building and depth when it comes to rpgs of this type.
Avowed reminds me a lot of Kingdoms of Amalur, in that it’s not really an RPG and is just an action game with some RPG elements. Still fun if you go in with the right expectations of just looting stuff and killing random enemies.
To each their own, but Bethesda’s games are all too often criticized for having breadth but not depth, and as time has gone on, I’ve agreed with that more and more. Avowed is scoped smaller than an Elder Scrolls, by a lot, but its depth appears to be in its combat.
I guess it depends on what kind of depth youre looking for. Depth of lore, attributes and upgrades? Skyrim has plenty. Depth of gameplay? Things get a little more murky.
I will agree that Elder Scrolls games have never had combat be their strongest feature and that is definitely what Obsidian focused on with Avowed to make it stand out.
I think attributes and upgrades tie back into gameplay, but we also all ended up playing stealth archers, and even if you never put stats into something that made things like lockpicking easier, it kind of didn’t matter, because the minigame wasn’t difficult and lockpicks are cheap. I think Bethesda’s games at least up to Skyrim have been great evolutions of the medium, but it also feels like, for all the work they put into their systems, they never got anywhere close to what Larian has built since Skyrim’s release.
I mean, yeah, the systems in skyrim werent deep, but at least they were there and somewhat entertaining. You just hold a button to “lockpick” in Avowed. You just roll a die like you do for everything in BG3. Personally I never used bows in skyrim, always enchanted single-handed weapons and destruction.
Larian Should have built more intricate rpg systems since then and they have, Skyrim is a decade and a half old. The caveat is that they have done so by abandoning active combat gameplay. Their combat systems are fun, they just arent engaging like Avowed or even Skyrim. Again to each their own, im sure many rpg players dont care one bit about active/realistic combat simulation. If Elden Ring’s success is an example though, then many people do want engaging combat.
Again with Avowed, it is a brand new game and compared to its only direct competitor(14yo skyrim) it feels lacking in every way except when you hit something with a weapon. And i guess thats ok, but only for like $30 or less.
I think what I’m getting at is that, from my perspective, the only thing that’s really in Skyrim’s favor compared to Avowed is how big it is, because if I wanted satisfying RPG systems or such, I’d find them elsewhere. I enjoy both real time and turn based games, and nothing about Larian’s RPG systems require them to be turn based, so it would be nice to see more of those kinds of systems in games like Bethesda’s going forward, but given how Starfield turned out, I doubt we will. Bethesda gives all of their NPCs schedules, there’s physics at play, and NPCs will care if you steal their stuff, but those systems never seem to manifest in anything more interesting than putting a bucket on someone’s head so they can’t see you thieving, so I’m not really missing anything in Avowed when those systems are absent.
Ok i understand that. I am of the mind that in Elder Scrolls games, the world is more than its physical size. The books, consistent lore in exposition and npc interactions, the many unique side quests that contribute to the lore, stumbling into a 2-3 hour dungeon that expands on a race you havent heard of and now get to learn about that lore…
None of that natural and self paced experience of a diverse world with rich lore happens in Avowed. It happens in Larian’s games and that is another thing that makes them great.
Starfield was definitely a sign that Bethesda isnt what it used to be, and it doesnt give me hope for the next Elder Scrolls. Starfield had alot of lore, it just wasnt very interesting because the galaxy was so dull. I loved the gameplay actually, but it didnt matter when exploring felt like raiding the same 3 structures on different shades of the same planet. There was too little to unique to find while exploring.
I guess thats what i have to have from an rpg, rewarding exploration. That allows me to be much more forgiving on other fronts.
Avowed has enjoyable platforming, but youre reward for it in the end usually only amounts to a backpack full of weightless items you dont need to care about, and maybe a few sentences on a note.
I do find the exploration in Avowed to be rewarding, and those items you pick up and a few sentences on a note are exactly the same as what I tend to find in Skyrim, with lore that’s marginally more interesting; I’m kind of surprised that you find them to be meaningfully different and better in Skyrim. The thing that Avowed solves by being a smaller game is that when I find a dungeon, it doesn’t feel like the last three dungeons I explored, because they didn’t need to make as many of them, so they could spend more time making that one dungeon.
Yeah Avowed definitely boils it down, i guess it all depends on what hooks you. I never got tired of exploring dungeons in skyrim, the variation in them was enough for me, and i feel like there isnt nearly enough in avowed to keep me interested.
The benefit to the added time making less dungeons in avowed was the depth of platforming and yes better level design. Probably my favorite part of avowed actually. It all just left me wanting though. My rewards for platforming were never more than a few inconsequential items i didnt care about. Thats how the game lost me.
Yeah you didnt often find much in skyrim dungeons, but the sheer amount of them, no 2 the same, with the majority of them corresponding with some lore or quest… That made me feel like i was in a real, fully fleshed out world.
Fair enough. The Outer Worlds definitely felt to me like it was as long as it needed to be and no longer, and that’s pretty rare these days, as so many games are ballooning in runtime.
Because a monopoly is a company that operates in their market unopposed. In this instance, it’s not Steam’s fault the opposition kinda sucks (or doesn’t quite aim to be a direct competitor in the case of GoG) but the argument is still there that Steam is sitting as the only distributor for PC.
Personally, this is why I keep wanting to root for GoG, Epic and such. Monopolies are dangerous to consumers and the markets they operate in. Right now, Steam is being surprisingly effective at remaining a “good guy” but there’s a lot of concern even among Steam fans of what the landscape will look like in a post-Gaben world. Setting the PC gaming market up to have Steam as the only option when that inevitably comes to pass (touch wood that that’s no time soon, of course) could spell a certain level of disaster in a world where the anti-monopoly law-makers have shown to not really care about upholding that standard.
Edit: missed words. Never type when struggling to keep your eyes open kids!
There’s absolutely concern about Steam if you’re looking at the discourse. Personally, I hate the Steam launcher and have kept having problems with it ever since they changed the design to be more Baby’s First like everyone else has done (not just taking about launchers here) but the Steam launcher is still better than the others, which is infuriating.
Emphasis, perhaps, on the “lite” part of Roguelite. But it does have that Roguelike run structure where the levels and the items you find therein are randomized. But with side scrolling platforming gameplay with a very distinct set of fast double-jump-dodge-roll-parry-combo mechanics that I think can best be summed up as ninja gameplay. And you will get killed… a lot. There is a permanent progression system of a sort in the form of unlocking more weapons and items (and later, to re lock items you don’t like), but your core stats remain the same. This is one of those games where the real progression is on your own personal quest to git gud.
I think it’s pretty unique in that it has no dud weapons or items whatsoever. Everything – literally everything – has the potential to be viable and can be absolutely deadly when wielded in the right hands. Even the joke items.
It also has not one, but two weapons which involve beating the shit out of your enemies with frying pans. What’s not to love?
bin.pol.social
Ważne