Wormerine

“Josh is still make the game he said was making“. sounds a bit like “The Name of the Rose: the RPG”

I would assume something Dark Souls like (I am pretty sure that's the game that invented it to begin with) - other player ghosts, bloodstains, left messages pointing to secrets or screwing with you. If I remember well Elden Ring will have traditional DS pvp as well - though the last time they mentioned it would be only online for those who play coop. Horse would be disabled. Kinda werid way of doing it - I though DS already had a pretty good system for opting in and out of multiplayer.

Open-world is this concept that sounds good but rarely turns out interesting. If you let players to do anything at any point and go anywhere it's difficult to create something worth doing or experiencing - story wise you can't create a good one, as you have little control over story progression - a good story has to have arcs and developement and how do you create that stuff, if everyplayer can experience story in a different order (see Deadfire)? Gameplay wise - it's all about building complexity. You can't do that if you have no control over content. There is a reason, I think, why open-world games tend to have a depth of a puddle. And if you have progression system: how do you make sure that no matter where player goes the content will be sufficiently easy/challenging? And as stunning as open-world can be for first couple hours the spell quickly wanes as we realise how static the world is, how repetitive activities are, and one just wishes he could get to interesting stuff quicker. For example I prefered Metroidvenia like, developing world of Arkham Asylum over either of it's "open world" sequels, which felt more artificial and more static to me. So I like games which make you FEEL like you can go anywhere, but generally not open world - in that regard first half Dark Souls1 was all that it needed to be. There are open world games that I did enjoy: Witcher3, Gothic1&2, New Vegas. I do feel that while set in the open world, those games are more linear in nature, with open world being "a stage" rather then game itself. And there are sandbox games like Mount&Blade, but I think their nature is a bit different then your ususal Open World. There are also Metroidvanias - I tend to like those. So in case of Elden Ring, I am asking myself: what positive thing will be added to Dark Souls formula by going open world? Nothing comes to mind as of now, but I was sceptical about WItcher3 and it turned out to be the best in the series.

So pwetty. I suppose I won't know how I feel about it until I try it. Looks good - like they are expanding pure dungeon crawling of Dark Souls into a more well rounded aRPG. Will it be better for it, though? We shall see.

Yes, mods, something I very rarely engage with, and definitely not in games I don't like to begin with. It is a must for Bethesda, but I tend to limit myself to stuff like properly designed UI etc. I remember watching Noah's usual overly long Neverwinter Nights critique, and he made an interesting argument that NWN1 campaign was intentionally crap - a showcase of what engine can do, but formulaic, bland and uninspired enough so players reaction will be: pfff, I can do that better! I am not convinced about intentional brilliance of NWN1 undercooked campaign, but it did make me think of my experiences with Oblivion, Skyrim, Fallout3. I tried more mods with Fallout: New Vegas, but I found community made content was clearly of a lower quality then base game. Are Bethesda titles intentionally shoddy, so modding it feels natural? It's not like one can break things further.

I tried, and in true Bethesda game fashion I got bored. According to my steam I did sink over 32 hours into it though. I think those were two seperate attempts. I can't recall a single interesting thing from my time with that game. It's popularity truly confuses me.

It is complete. Dark Souls continuing fine tradition of the final boss being a complete pushover.

My library of installed titles is growing larged, so I am trying to trim some titles I am close to completion. First on the menu is Dark Souls3 from which I took a break once I started DLCs and realized it will be the most demanding part of the playthrough. After some weeks off I have been pushing through them, and it's been some excellent content. Honestly, this is first DS content IMO that reaches quality level of DS1 DLC. Maps have been intertwined and tricky, bosses ranged from good to excellent. I am not nearing of end of DLC2 - just dragon Midir and final boss are left. Managed to trigger 2nd phase of Midir so I hope I am getting near beating him - 2nd phase doesn't seem that harder then phase1 - unless of course, there is surprise phase3 which those DLCs rather liked to surprise with. I installed through Game Pass Doom Eternal, as a first on "free" games that I want to give a go but don't want to pay for. I didn't like Doom 2016 at all - I think I am not into shooters in general but it felt to me slow, repetitive and I found collectibles annoying. I am only 2nd mission into DE so we will see how it will go, but so far.... loving it. Mobility is far better then in D1, and I think enemy design is better as well - far more aggressive, but with weak points to exploit. It has energy and excitement that just wasn't present in D1. I also like that they seemed to embrace slapstick - glory kills seem both briefer, and have some hilarious animations. Collectibles are far easier to find on the first run, even without pricey upgrades - which I appreciate. Upgrade system now feels more like Devil May Cry - gradual unlocking of toys to play with tutorialising the game, rather then something tedious to grind for. EDIT: Yup, one dragon down. He didn't trigger his super, duper instant kill if hit beam attack this time. Didn't manage to learn how to survive reliably that one.

haha. I love platformers. It's just not a terribly good one.

Like the tone, liked the setting and liked the unlockable "documentary" videos. But, darn I remember platforming being very sloppy in this one.

Hey, $9.99 adds up overtime :-).

I must admit, while playing the latest build of BG3 early access, I was thinking to myself: I miss times when I was the target audience. As far as I am concerned if someone wants Astarion in their game, they don't deserve games.

I am concerned why there is only one dog. That's not a healthy people to dog ratio.

Moral of the story: don't rush games out for an easy buck. It makes everyone miserable. The thing I dislike most about ME3 ending, is that it distracts from how shoddy the rest of the game is. Devs should always do self contained one-game-at-the-time. The only trilogy that payed off was Witcher - and arguably it is a disjointed trilogy where games work better on their own, then in sequence. I replayed the trilogy a while back, and while playing ME I was already feeling sad by how disappointingly the set ups will be "resolved".

You see, the problem with adaptations of big games like Uncharted, that those games just borrow from movies. So when you adapt those games you kinda just steal from better movies that were made before. Huh, looks line inoffencive watch it on netflix film.

Is that news? No, but it will do:

Hellooooo norse

That takes me back. Somewhere back in my parents place there is a black book, with combined Lem's Solaris and The Invincible stories. Loved this stuff as a teenager. It's been a while, but I will be honest I fail to recognise anything familiar in the trailer.

I think I liked the most games that switch between linear and open design - they have more open acts, but also have "gates" through which you can't (or are unlikely) to progress until to dealt with the open are available for you, and some strong more linear bits, to give the game momentum. I did find PoE1 gates a bit too artificial. On the other hand, I adore White March, which while it offers some freedom, is very structured when it comes to main story areas.

What are you raving about? Both chess and checkers are turn based... I get that you are claiming that somehow turn based games automatically have more depth - but both RTwP and TB modes use the same system, have very similar depth and complexity. Really the only thing that changes is player bias, depending if you prefer TB or RTwP pace. I am also not sure what military training has to do with a story driven fantasy RPG. Most (some?) of us don't expect games to teach us how to kill people, especially that I can't cast fireballs in real life. Playing a tactics/strategy game is not exactly meant to be a military excercise, I don't think. I would feel guilty about playing them, otherwise.

Well, aside from (as far as I know) unresolved bugs it introduced to RTwP gameplay. Correction: you can’t manage your party, and don’t have enough attention span to play the tactical side of a game in a RTwP setting. I don’t mean it as an offence. It’s just has higher skill floor to be enjoyed - as on top the tactical gameplay you have to deal with time management, even if it’s as simple as pressing pause at he right moment. I do think that Turn-based makes games like that more approachable, and it seems that even as flawed as turn based implementation was in PoE2, it did bring new audience to the title.

Deadfire Post-Mortem & Reputation System.

They also purchased inXile, Double Fine and Ninja Theory (I think those are all major independed studios I care for). Sony did some purchasing on their own lately, though nothing as major. In short, Microsoft has been lagging behind exclusive front for some time. I think it tried to build some new studios and failed. So they decided to go out shopping, and bought bunch of great independed studios promising to not interfear into their culture and help them continue doing what they are doing. We will see how it will turn out. Psychonauts2 was IMO great, thought that's been in production long before the acquisition - however, according to Shafer the game benefitied a lot from Microsoft money when nearing the finish line - for example bosses would be cut from the final release otherwise. To me it is worrying that a massive corporations acquired some of the most succesfull mid market AA studios (honestly, not as moved by Bethesda). That biggest gain, is that now, once again, we can dream of Obsidian lead Fallout game :-). Now Microsoft needs to buy Paradox, so we can dream about Tyranny2, as well.