Nintendo has historically been slow to change and, more specifically, innovation. They also have been fairly antagonistic when it comes to fan interactions in terms of things like streaming, fan games, and porting old games. On the flip side, they do a pretty decent job with quality control. The “entertainment” field is already pretty bloated with lots of things competing for time. Regardless of success, I’m sure they’ll be trying to squeeze every nostalgia penny they can out of customers.
You’re right, I should specify. I’m thinking more in terms of flagship games. Mario has always been big and adaptive over game generations, but there have been a lot of different stretches of time where other major Nintendo games felt miles behind contemporary titles on other platforms, if they were made at all. Recent years have been a lot better, and there have been performance improvements. I guess you could say it is an extension of the IP issue, with titles going through a sort of dark stretch. Starfox, Metroid, and even Legend of Zelda have had that. Innovation was the wrong word to pick.
Nintendo has historically been slow to change and, more specifically, innovation.
The company was founded in 1889 and produced physical playing card games. From a historical perspective, I think they had more than their fair share of change and innovation, all things considered.
Eh. Can't say I had fun watching my higher end weapon break on the stronger, bullet sponge enemies later on, and replacing it with a crappy short swords that do barely any damage. ToTK though was certainly better thanks to fusion.
That it kind of the thing tho, if you just violently smash your sword around, it's gonna break. Like katanas are pretty flimsy and a german greatsword for example could just snap it off. Let's take elden ring for example and you use your sword to find an invisible wall, that's terrible for a sword and it would go to shit really quick. So i guess in a way it's realistic. But i really don't like it when games do that. All it does for me is that i'm never going to use the nice things in the game, because they break, then you need a new one or repair it or whatever.
I'm fine with encumbrance... especially in these Bethesda games. All they do is litter the world with garbage for the player to pick up and carry around for no reason other than make the game longer.
Baldur's Gate 3 doesn't really have an encumbrance system. It has a "send to camp" button that basically negates 99% of that. Camp supplies? Send to camp. Bunch of valueable loot items you only intend on selling "pick up and add to wares" the "send to camp". When you're ready to sell things between adventuring shove it all in a backpack, give it to someone stronk, and teleport to a merchant.
I’m a hoarder in these games. If I can store all my stuff back at my base like in Fallout 4 and Skyrim then I’m happy. As long as they don’t pull the Fallout 76 stunt where you need to pay monthly for extra storage.
I’m a pack-rat in games and ive only hit the first (of three) stage of encumbrance two or three times in Baldur’s Gate and I’m in the final act. And my character is a bard with 8 strength so he has no muscles which means the lowest encumbrance threshold. I wouldn’t consider encumbrance even a little bit of a problem in BG3 since if you ever do become encumbered you can just move stuff from your player character to one of the NPCs used as a pack mule.
You can also send stuff from your bag directly to the camp chest without having to go there. On pc it's right click send to camp, on ps5 it's square button send to camp. I'm not sure if there is a limit as to how much you can send there i havent hit it yet if there is. You can access camp from anywhere but a red zone so no real reason to carry what you are not using.
I don't mind encumbrance, unless it's painfully low. Stalker is a bit annoying with it, though it makes sense. Then when it's so high it becomes a non issue is also annoying because eventually I hit the cap. The one in bg3 is fine with me. I tend to choose my companions to carry specific items, so it's evenly spread out. Then I take breaks to go sell off my junk, usually every few in game days. I think I gave only hit cap once, I gave Karlach all the weapons I find and she was overloaded. I don't mind encumbrance most of the time.
Actually I think I'm the opposite. I hate encumbrance more when it's massive. When I played survival mode in Fallout NV, I found it so much more fun to only pick up essential items. I would commonly pick up water bottles and food instead of valuable weapons or ammo. I was usually way under my low encumbrance because I had a mindset switch to only pick up stuff that will allow me to survive the desert.
I prefer no inventory or encumbrance but just collections. Perm objects once you collect you have it forever and if you get a new one it just auto converts to coins or whatnot and consumables you get a number in the collections and if it is 0 then you can't use it. Sure its not realistic that a character can carry tons of crap but they stick in magic chests or unlimited space motorcycle trunks or whatever anyway. Just pretend your character is only carrying the equiped items and every thing else is in the magic mcguffin that allows you to essentially carry around a bunch of crap but take the inventory management aspect out. I play to have fantasy and have fun. Not organize crap. I have to organize crap (or at least should) in real life.
@stopthatgirl7 Thanks, I hate it lol. I still loved both #baldursgate3 and #starfield but dislike the inventory busywork. Also the vendors have limited money to buy my loot. These games are retraining our old looting habits and I don't know if I like it.
I haven't played Starfield, but on Bg3 you can do a partial rest (not using any camp supplies) you can initiate this standing right in front of the vendor when you leave camp after the rest your vendor will have money again. You can repeat this until you run out of things to sell.
I like having both unlockable extra fighters (a reward for your dedication to the game) AND having post-launch roster expansions.
For me the problem with the latter comes with highly aggressive monetization practices. Give me a fighters pack with multiple new fighters and alternate costumes at a reasonable price and that feels like adding value to the product (example: SSBU). Price me out at expensive single fighters and single costumes and you can go fuck right off. Battle Passes and FOMO can likewise fuck right off. Anything that requires me to work to unlock something I paid for (in this genre) should be included in the base game as a reward.
gaming
Aktywne
Magazyn ze zdalnego serwera może być niekompletny. Zobacz więcej na oryginalnej instancji.