The only one I’ve played is The Rise of the Golden Idol. If you haven’t played that one or its predecessor, The Case of the Golden Idol, I highly recommend both. They’re very good logic/deduction puzzle games. You basically examine a frozen moment in time and then deduce what happened based on that.
Every time I hear about eve, I remember how much I wished it was a slightly different game. There is no way to play eve without investing many hours each time. Everything takes a very long time.
On the plus side, just the feeling that someone may come up and kill you and take your stuff makes the game feel quite scary. I was doing wormholes for a while and pretty much was constantly nervous about getting killed. Never happened though.
Initial selection is only 23 games, not sure why they’re not just releasing everything. I guess they’re planning on parceling the music out like their emulators.
The choices of games are also kind of strange, like why 2 versions of Metroid? Why starfox 64 and not like Mario 64
The ability to extend songs up to 60 minutes is pretty cool
The idea of character specific playlists is interesting
It crashes semi frequently, not a good sign.
It does add value to the Switch online membership, but not much at this point.
This was something i noticed too. I probably won’t be using the app much because i already have all their music i want in my iTunes cloud library but the selection is odd and the choice too release the music selectively feels strange too me. I feel like they’d get more profit if they had most of their stuff on their from the get go
There is a steam group called “Wholesome Games” that lists cozy games. They also do nintendo direct style twitch streams. There is a ton of amazing cozy games. Of course there are some not so great ones. But the video seemed to focus only on stardew valley clones. Even though there are so many unique ones out there.
Well, I’m making one so i guess i can’t say they suck. I do feel like a lot of them aren’t great games, though. As in, they create a good vibe but they often lack solid gameplay. I think the writing in some I’ve played leans far too much into awkward and insecure characterizations too, and that gets tiring for me quickly. I’m trying to avoid those pitfalls in mine.
This was a really interesting video on how modern wargaming is used by the military and its links to the recreational scene, I just got done watching it yesterday. I think Quinns, in typical fashion, seems to try to moralize a bit much, especially with his pointed questions, but then does a good job of coming back around to show the other point of view, though I think the overall view he had seemed negative. He tried to present both sides at least.
He did recognize the need for militaries in general, but then seemed to equate any use of wargaming as resulting in deaths, which was automatically bad. I think some of the wargame professionals made pretty good cases for why it was justified and how “wargaming” is a bit of a misnomer, it’s more a way of contingency planning and working through possible scenarios you might encounter, so wargaming just helps prepare for different scenarios by showing the range of actions that players/actors might take in a given situation. They’re mapping out probabilities using human psychology, along with boardgame and videogame mechanics.
I think the ending portion where he called on gamers to “do something” about making wargaming ethical was kind of whatever. As if the gaming community was any sort of unified bloc that could even do anything about it. Something like that would probably require like a wargamer’s guild or union that added some sort of restraints on the kinds of projects they would work on (only scenarios that minimize casualties) or something like that, but that sort of defeats the purpose of trying to map out probabilities, since you’d purposely censor certain probabilities from your line of thinking. I think wargamers will just continue to do whatever they’re doing.
Yeah, it feels like the entire time he’s really trying to link these games to actual deaths during war that seems pretty tenuous, largely due to his own “ick” factor that “his thing” is being used by the military.
The section in the middle where he essentially asks all his interviewees basically “have you killed anyone” is pretty awkward. Like, of course these people don’t really want to talk about that. Nobody wants to go around thinking they’re directly responsible for preventable deaths. It’s like he wants someone to just say “Am i the baddie?” like that Mitchel and Webb sketch.
It also completely glosses over the way that “play” is often just training for something more violent. Tag is a fun game until someone brings a knife. But there’s a world of difference between “you sunk my battleship” and the Bismarck. It’s like he’s somehow taken the stance that video games cause violence in the most roundabout way possible.
It’s a shame because the video is good but it could be so much more interesting diving into examples about how these games actually work and are used instead of hemming and hawing the whole time over his imagined Cluedo to murder piperine.
I’ve had no excitement for this game since Ubisoft is such a disappointment of mediocrity. I grew bitter to them back when they announced the controversial shutting down of their legacy activation servers: this would prevent gamers from passing the online checks to play their games. Suddenly, despite me possessing a physical disc of Splinter Cell Blacklist on Wii U, I learned I would lose access to the DLC I paid for and “owned”. Certain missions would also become unplayable since you need online co-op. Ubisoft backpedaled after significant backlash from gamers, but since then I hesitate whenever I see them attached to any project.
I miss old Ubisoft. I’m playing Beyond Good & Evil 2003 on my GameCube for the first time, and this game is spectacular! Wish Ubisoft didn’t become evil, but it was inevitable.
I don’t trust any corporation. However, Valve has treated customers with respect and doesn’t try to bend us over. For that, I’ll keep buying from them.
However, I fear for the day Gabe Newell is no longer running the show.
I like the art style, I’ll have to see about the leaders.
Gwendolyn Christie is a really good choice for the narrator.
I don’t like the sound of there only being three ages, but maybe there’s more to it.
Also not sure about switching civs mid-game, but being able to do things like a French Cleopatra might be fun.
Are they going to restrict this to avoid potentially offensive combos, especially in multiplayer? I’m thinking of things like using real-world colonizers for leaders of places they occupied (like an English ruler in charge of India and stuff like that.) At the very least it seems like they’re inviting trouble unnecessarily.
The prices are completely bonkers, nearly $170 CAD for the Founders Edition! This is gonna be the first Civ game in a long time that I don’t pick up on launch day.
From what I’ve heard, the ages are going to be much longer and more game-changing that Civ 6 eras. Like age of exploration unlocking new parts of the world and new era appropriate civs to play with.
I'm a bit torn. On one hand it seems like a step back from the Civ 6 cartoon garbage. On the other hand the ground textures still look like blurry paint vomit. It's kinda weird because the foliage and mountains / rocks seem to be in a higher resolution and much more detailed. I guess it might be WIP and a remnant from Civ 6.
The unit sizes also seem gargantuan? I guess that part would not be as hard to fix via mods but that was already a compatibility nightmare before, especially when the mod authors quit.
So, graphically it might be a buyable Civ game again, but...
Picking a new civ or mismatching leaders makes me worry though, because that sounds awfully familiar to another game that had a similar terrible feature. The Aztecs turning into France while being led by some Japanese dude just does not feel right.
The FOMO unlocks to bait you into signing up AND buying the cartoon shit are a hard pass for me though. Selling that as a "thank you" is nothing but insolent.
Are you seriously claiming Civ 6 does not have a cartoon art style..?
And no, Civ V had a much better unit scale & diversity, especially with certain mods.
From what I saw of the gameplay is that civilizations are sorta locked on a path, but you get a choice of similar civilisations. Unless you play in the style of a different civ and unlock certain milestones you could unlock other paths. At least from what I understand.
No, you got it backwards. I don't play obnoxious eye cancer games that cause me migraines and look ridiculous. When you go from Civ V with diversified & smaller units that shows basically big armies, to some World of Warcraft-esque eye bleeding mobile game like art style that shows units as a single big cartoon unit, then that's just not what I want from a game like this.
youtube.com
Ważne