FFXIV is exactly what an FF MMO should be, and it's over the top and cheesy and great.
You see, the final boss in 2.0 was Ultima Weapon, which although a really fun fight, is kinda milquetoast for an FF final boss.
In the Heavensward expansion, now they have an actual budget, the final boss is the pope, who called down a floating continent, so that with the power of a space dragon's eye, the body of the dragoon/saint who gouged the dragon's eyes out, and the Warring Triad (yes, that Warring Triad), he and his honour guard can become Knights of the Round. It's amazing.
And yes, we're one expansion in and we've already killed the pope.
Man is a most complex simple creature: see what he weaves, and how base his reasons for doing so.
I like those games a lot but also I had to like, look up solutions to puzzles so that lowers it a bit for me. But I found out about Jonathan Coulton because of it, so that puts it high in my eyes.
But it also it made a certain kind of Valve fan also very intolerable. So that's a negative.
Also looked up a couple of the puzzles in both because I'm the type of person who can do things for a bit and then hit a wall and lose all momentum afterward in puzzle games of Portal's ilk.
I did like the series a ton though, and I agree that they're some of those titles we'll probably still be talking about in nostalgic terms for a while.
I think IWBTG is an interesting game to talk about actually because it's not what it pretends to be.
How so?
it presents itself as a platformer, but whereas I think say Mario is more about dexterity and mastering a specific set of skills, IWBTG is much more about memorization of the obstacles it throws at you.
Man is a most complex simple creature: see what he weaves, and how base his reasons for doing so.
The Ancient Dragon in Dragon’s Crown, the final boss, is such a huge spike in difficulty. I’ve been playing conservatively: playing each path over and over until I beat every quest attached to it. I slowly move up the levels.
And this thing still wrecks me and my level 35 party within one minute.
I'd argue that IWBTG is more about memorization and (perhaps more importantly in a some cases) performance, while Eryi's Action is more about problem-solving, as its solutions are generally not that hard once you figure out what you need to do.
Planet Jane said:I can't believe that there are still people who don't think Portal and Portal 2 are modern classics. Am I in the minority here?
no, I think most people would say Portal and Portal 2 are modern classics.
that said, the best cake-related Portal-related line is this:
"at the beginning of the Portal development process, we sat down as a group to decide what philosopher or school of philosophy our game would be based on. That was followed by about 15 minutes of silence and then someone mentioned that a lot of people like cake."
I'm liking it, more or less. Pyro vs Spy with a Spycicle is now a pain in the butt for the Pyro (seriously, more afterburn immunity? Why do they hate the puff and sting so much?), but besides that, it looks good. Spies are a lot stronger, Engineers build faster but it's harder to keep their machines from dying
...doing away with the notion of "paying (specifically) to be entertained" by dissociating the payment and at least part of the provision of the "entertainment service", and viewing the payment as a way of expressing appreciation and support for the creative process and separately getting the game to work (such as through patches, if necessary), rather than demanding a refund based on dissatisfaction with the aforementioned service.
This way, one's demand pattern may exhibit a shift more toward (albeit still distinct from) a patronage model, since one supports projects based on their intentions and expectations, and thus chooses purchases proactively and with a consideration of existence value, rather than reactively choosing based on immediate availability and sending mixed signals between stylistic attributes, design details, and technical implementation problems.
And frankly speaking, it may very well be more accurate, especially for PC games and all games for emulatable systems.
Discuss. Or not. I don't really care. This just happened to be some shitposting that I had in my mind that had to do with the way a person (myself, specifically) views purchases of videogames.
This was spawned by my considering whether to refund my purchase of Empire Earth on GOG because it doesn't run on Windows 8, or search for a patch because I actually do want to play it. I think I'm going to continue my search, rather than demand a refund over a (known!) technical issue. This is because I actually legitimately want the game, rather than doing it as a try-before-commit-to-buy.
Which of course raises two questions: 1. Should people view games with a "try-before-commit-to-buy" mindset? 2. What should be the standards for committing to buy? Obviously, this has to fall somewhere between "impulse purchase" on one end and "free trial" on the other.
I'm arguing that it's better to enter a purchase decision with a pre-existing framework of what one would appreciate playing or even the mere existence of, rather than asking if oneself might be interested in buying any particular game amongst thousands. The latter puts the burden of rejection on the consumer, and is thus more likely to lead to excess purchasing and other unwise decisions.
Comments
You see, the final boss in 2.0 was Ultima Weapon, which although a really fun fight, is kinda milquetoast for an FF final boss.
In the Heavensward expansion, now they have an actual budget, the final boss is the pope, who called down a floating continent, so that with the power of a space dragon's eye, the body of the dragoon/saint who gouged the dragon's eyes out, and the Warring Triad (yes, that Warring Triad), he and his honour guard can become Knights of the Round. It's amazing.
And yes, we're one expansion in and we've already killed the pope.
> If you have played Rusty Hearts in the past you may know that hacking was incredibly easy.
If I ever make a game, I will need to keep this in mind to allow it to live longer than any commercial failure would dictate.
I did like the series a ton though, and I agree that they're some of those titles we'll probably still be talking about in nostalgic terms for a while.
Eh, no. That criticism is pretty much completely irrelevant.
Am I in the minority here?
no, I think most people would say Portal and Portal 2 are modern classics.
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
> have idle game running
> starts getting grindy
> program your own speedclicker
Three murders for the price of two!
Like, I can whip up a lightweight background process to hotkey...pretty much any input sequence I want.
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
This way, one's demand pattern may exhibit a shift more toward (albeit still distinct from) a patronage model, since one supports projects based on their intentions and expectations, and thus chooses purchases proactively and with a consideration of existence value, rather than reactively choosing based on immediate availability and sending mixed signals between stylistic attributes, design details, and technical implementation problems.
And frankly speaking, it may very well be more accurate, especially for PC games and all games for emulatable systems.
Discuss. Or not. I don't really care. This just happened to be some shitposting that I had in my mind that had to do with the way a person (myself, specifically) views purchases of videogames.
This was spawned by my considering whether to refund my purchase of Empire Earth on GOG because it doesn't run on Windows 8, or search for a patch because I actually do want to play it. I think I'm going to continue my search, rather than demand a refund over a (known!) technical issue. This is because I actually legitimately want the game, rather than doing it as a try-before-commit-to-buy.
Which of course raises two questions:
1. Should people view games with a "try-before-commit-to-buy" mindset?
2. What should be the standards for committing to buy? Obviously, this has to fall somewhere between "impulse purchase" on one end and "free trial" on the other.
I'm arguing that it's better to enter a purchase decision with a pre-existing framework of what one would appreciate playing or even the mere existence of, rather than asking if oneself might be interested in buying any particular game amongst thousands. The latter puts the burden of rejection on the consumer, and is thus more likely to lead to excess purchasing and other unwise decisions.
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead
Assassin poems, Poems that shoot
guns. Poems that wrestle cops into alleys
and take their weapons leaving them dead