algroth

You should give the games another go if the first game's beta is the last you'd tried of it. I think most here would agree that the game's gone through a lot of fine-tuning and changes all the way up to a rather polished and enjoyable state at patch 3.0.

Also, a Spacer's Choice watchface for y'all: https://www.facer.io/watchface/kP9ouwlwl0

(Credit: Instagram @the.outerworlds)

Not mine, but here's a couple I enjoyed: https://www.deviantart.com/mistfighter/art/The-Outer-Worlds-Parvati-Max-Render-820560722 "he didn't want to do it alone so we pretended like we could see his mom or whatever he was talking about"

Or it just tells you that divisive/controversial topics cause longer discussions. This is only so long because a lot of people *disagree* with the OP and the few others who have expressed disappointment, same as the only reason we're discussing Disco Elysium is because a couple of users expressed their disappointment with that and refuted its legitimacy as an RPG. By the same coin, you could say that conversation says a lot about Disco Elysium. It doesn't, but whatever helps you sleep at night.

I suspect we'll have to wait a few months before we get any confirmation either way. I think the company's future and performance of The Outer Worlds was relatively uncertain and far as I've been given the impression from interviews and the likes there were no DLCs in the works for the game at the time of its release, contrary to the likes of both Pillars which were simultaneously developing/planning expansions when both games came out. The demand's certainly there, at the very least.

I could see an Icewind Dale 3 being successful on the basis that Icewind Dale does have some IE nostalgia value attached to it, and the market's been so starved of official DnD RPGs that I think it'd get traction based off of brand value alone. But at the same time, with Larian proving the more successful company in this new age of CRPGs and Icewind Dale not being a particularly author-driven series the way Planescape: Torment or Fallout were, what value would there be for WotC to have Obsidian do one instead of Larian again? Unless they can't, but I don't see it being the case. If anything I'd see Obsidian getting a better chance at a third Neverwinter Nights, and at the same time that's Trent Oster's baby and he seems pretty determined in wanting to have a hand on whatever future that franchise has himself. He also wasn't particularly keen on the direction Obsidian took with it.

There's two separate points at play here, I think. Firstly, I think the argument came about because someone, maybe you or maybe someone else, was debating Disco Elysium's legitimacy as a GOTY/RPGOTY contender - in this debate what matters is how it compares regarding other games of the *same year*, and not whether it stands up to the classics. In this regard, let me know which RPGs released since Dec 2018 would you place over Disco Elysium, because The Outer Worlds aside I can't think of any legitimate contenders, myself. Secondly there's the matter of its comparisons with previous RPGs and so on, and whether it measures up to them. Now, I have only started playing the game and I don't want to give a final verdict over whether I'll find it to be as good as the classics or whatnot, but I'll say this: based on what I'd played so far, based on what I've seen and heard from various sources and so on, this isn't just a game all RPGs should be eyeing, it's a game the *entire medium* should be looking into. With the way it overtly approaches current real-life topics and philosophies without any fantastic lens or filter to soften it out, with the way the game is actively trying to expose ideologies and paint a particular landscape that doesn't just allude to but often directly reflects many of the discussions and debates of the last few years, this is the sort of game the medium needs to be doing more to be a contending artform. Next to it all your Witchers and Baldur's Gates and Morrowinds look like child's play, really. There's nothing inherently wrong with escapism but there's very few video games out there across the medium's history that dare to be more, and dare to be more on this level. I love the balls on it, I love the ambition and I love how it's a right middle finger to the manchildren who have a seizure every time someone dares bring "politics" into games. If this game opens the doors for more devs to treat video games as a legitimate outlet for more complex and layered discussions on matters that don't simply revolve around mental illness, it definitely deserves all the praise it can get.

Also since when is being your own new thing a bad thing? I would also say that Disco Elysium is very much an RPG because regardless of what you expect of RPG gameplay, the focus of the game is pretty heavily centered around *roleplaying*. That it's taking a new approach to this genre is only a plus in my book.

The issue is that Obsidian/Microsoft don't have the license for DnD, so even if they wanted to make an Icewind Dale 3 or Neverwinter Nights 3 the ability to do so wouldn't really be up to them. Personally I'm fine with them developing their new setting to create similar but more personal experiences the way they have with Eora - it's pretty evident that there's a lot of Josh in this setting what with the heavy emphasis on replicating historical/cultural trends and placing heavy attention on such details, and likewise it's given them the freedom to essentially mold and adopt the setting's history to their own desired themes and the likes. There's plenty of meat from a themes/ideas perspective that they've been sinking their teeth into that would probably have been much harder to do with an established IP the way DnD is (though they were certainly capable of much in the past, as evidenced with Mask of the Betrayer and Planescape: Torment). What I'm sadder about is that they didn't retain the rights to a few of their other original IPs like Alpha Protocol or Tyranny, as much of interest could've been done with either franchise/setting.

Disco Elysium isn't even nominated for GOTY. And I really don't see how it's any less a videogame than plenty of other narrative-focused games out there. There's plenty of interactivity in it which is deeply essential to the experience, there's interesting systems at play, all in all it's certainly a game. Might not be your cup of tea, but I see no reason to assume otherwise.

I for one would have liked even more awards/nominations for Disco Elysium and The Outer Worlds both. Both deserve at least a nod in the art direction/direction departments too. But I'm also glad for the attention they're getting.

These are so ridiculous, I love 'em.

Mastermind Hideo Kojima condensing the experience of living in 40 seconds:

Seems to be working fine again for me!

Site's broken for me.

Or maybe just get attacked because of the blatant sexism contained therein? It's one thing to say "I find the women in this game to be more sexually-appealing/attractively-rendered than the ones in its sequel", it's another entirely to say "this female looks like/was made into a male" when she very obviously wasn't, or calling Ydwin trans based on her appearance and assuming a disconnect when her "voice actress voice is beautiful". One doesn't have to be a BLM supporter to decry obvious racism and one certainly doesn't have to be a feminist to see how utterly misogynist some of your remarks are. No, I don't. Here's a random female PC on Pillars: Here's a random female PC on Deadfire: Granted, beauty is in the eye of the beholder and all that, but I honestly don't see how the latter isn't more appealing than the former already by virtue of not looking like a low-poly potatohead straight out of the 00s. And I certainly don't see how the latter is any less distinguishably female. But, you do you. Mind that like the others I'm not entirely in disagreement that the lack of sex appeal could've factored into the franchise's declining popularity, but the assumptions you make from game to game - and ffs, the way you express them - are very far off the mark. Personally I think the lack of sexualization in the Eoran setting was already evident in the first game: contrary to how you portray her the banshee *wasn't* an attractive lady in the first game, and even normally "attractive" mythical creatures like their take on the dryads were much more monstrous, what with their skin covered in thick bark and their limbs and hair resembling roots and branches, than other settings' green-skinned naked ladies and whatnot; or the lack of a succubus variant in the setting, or fampyrs not really exploiting the "sexual predator" parallel so prevalent in vampires and so on. In this sense Deadfire is no different, and if anything I'd argue it's a step *towards* a more sexually appealing franchise, what with the models being more detailed and giving clear predominance to traditionally attractive options and so on, and what with companion romance finally being a thing as well. The whole thing for me ties back to the streaming/media issue we spoke about a while back. Much like streaming and gaming channels have become another huge part of game consumption and promotion in the present day, so has fanart and cosplay for example, and it's no secret that the characters that tend to inspire most of these (or at least the most popular and widely-consumed products within these) are either very specific "mascot"-type characters (in Pillars' case, Edér and the space pig had a bit of love in this mold, but likewise other franchises have the likes of Minsc and Boo or Vault Boy) or, indeed, attractive female characters. Even entirely secondary characters like twi'leks in Star Wars can inspire art and cosplay beyond what even the male protagonists of these series have. After all, sex sells. Though much like some of the previous points I've mentioned, much like some decisions can overly alienate the audience or be too niche or in the sake of art, some can also harm the series as an artistic product. I wouldn't want to play a Pillars game that followed a heroic monomyth that's all about beating a big bad behind an army of minions and becoming a god simply because it's what sells, because there's way more interesting things being explored in this setting and games, all in a far more interesting and involving manner. I wouldn't want Pillars to be more like The Witcher or Dragon Age: Origins any more than I'd like Joon-ho Bong to be more like Michael Bay, and in the particular mood and setting they've established with the Pillars universe it would feel plain jarring to introduce overtly sexualized characters, creature types or scenarios all of a sudden. Regardless, all of this sure as hell isn't due to some completely imagined push away from sexual appeal from the first Pillars to Deadfire the way you're assuming above.

It's pretty neat, but it depends on the film. I'd actually suggest giving it a try for a Nolan film, given his films are never 3D, HFR or any other such gimmick and he likewise shoots a bunch of them on 70mm IMAX film cameras. It also helps that aside from the odd film here or there his films are pretty much the best-looking blockbusters out this decade.

Indeed, no one can resist the allure of ice cream.

True. Just so far at least - but it's worth pointing out that I'm not too down on the Disney Star Wars stuff so far either.

Watched the second episode, and I feel like I have to lower my expectations considerably for what remains of the show. I don't know what I was expecting, really - I suppose I was hoping for an interesting and more iconoclastic take on the Star Wars underbelly, but instead what we're getting is a pulpy space adventure serial dressed in self-seriousness and drab grey photography. Disregarding the satire, it's odd to see this so closely after playing The Outer Worlds as it feels like all the notes and points the game hit to make a fun space adventure, The Mandalorian seems woefully inept at. The character is the worst kind of "stoic" and the framing does him no favours, often attempting to get a Kulechov-esque reaction shot of his helmet to his surroundings whilst rarely exploiting the physicality required to make a performance and character like this interesting. The dialogues are stilted and devoid of detail or character to the point that they resemble Skyrim interactions, the whole thing is so utterly uncharismatic and humourless, so ponderous and yet meaningless thus far. We're two episodes in and already it feels like they're throwing a bunch of padding our way. Pretty handily the worst Star Wars venture since the Disney acquisition, bar maybe Solo which I haven't seen. It's an even bigger shame because I like all of the parties involved.

I'm curious as to what people who feel The Outer Worlds was lacking in content consider a game with content. Far as I'm concerned I've found plenty to do in each new map and section I arrived to in the game, each section likewise filled with interesting characters, each with their own unique set of idiosyncrasies and with a voice unique enough to make them feel like their own person independent of whatever function they fulfilled in the game. I'm honestly confused at how divisive this game is in certain circles whilst a game that to my mind feels far emptier or more mechanical like, say, The Witcher 3, is regarded as one of the finest games of the decade.

I'll watch the second episode of The Mandalorian in a moment, but I'm pretty unenthused by the first episode. It has serious tonal and formal issues: from a photography standpoint it's borrowing a fair bit from Rogue One but feels like there's always one too many elements that look silly and act as a complete tonal whiplash to the grimmer atmosphere all other elements seem to be setting - Rogue One in this sense was generally pretty reseved when it came to rubbery alien costumes, muppet-like creatures and the likes; meanwhile there's some very evident western overtones to the story and setting thus far but the photography is often so muted, claustrophobic, quickly-cut and needlessly handheld that it never really captures the Technicolor cinemascope vastness that is such a staple and such a large part of the genre's appeal, at a more formal level at least. The action scenes seem sloppy, Pedro Pascal, whilst a good actor, simply feels awkward and stiff as the protagonist instead of properly stoic the way Karl Urban's take on Judge Dredd came across, and by and large the whole thing felt like a series of tropey moments that did very little to offer a hook moving forward. Literally the best part of the episode were the closing credits, and I don't say that in a snarky fashion: I quite enjoyed the mural-like renders of events transpired throughout the episode, they felt more evocative and visually interesting than the actual scenes. Just... Not very good. Worse than The Last Jedi. I hear it gets better though.