Wormerine

Well, that's unfortunately not the case in Street Fighter6, but otherwise I see your point. Still, difficulty for me to not be apprehensive about every Capcom release, as they tend to come with a lot of red flags. It's like Bethesda not sending out review codes for Doom2016. Just... why? Maybe Capcom is playing a long game - releasing years of quality releases, making us complacent and make us stop worrying about microtransactions. And when we do: BAM, mictrotransaction driven Resident Evil live service.

I remember seeing a quote of one of the higher up suggesting that all WB learned from that was: “dang, we should have monetized Hogward’s legacy more”. I don’t hope that Capcom will stay its current awesome self forever. Line must go up and at some point continuing to release great games will stop doing a trick and they will start cashing in. Really, a line between good and bad Capcom is them being more forceful about current monetisation.

Well, no. Live-service doesn't equal post launch content/support. Live-service model sees games and platform, rather than a title. It's a game meant to be played endlessly and continuasly with a regular trickle of limited time content. There are of course games that blur the lines. Are new Hitman's live services? I would say they definitely try, but there is a great, selfcontained game there with live-service stink all over it. For a while now even non-live service games implement live-service like monatizations (Street Fighter6 battlepass for example). I can't speak of Conan Exiles, but I am pretty sure MMO was were a lot of live-service concepts were first born - than publishers became interesting in having same long term "engagement" through habit and ongoing revenue through microtransactions in other titles. I think that if a game releases post release content, and you are not pressure to log in play it/buy it right now, it is not following live-service design. It has less to do with how much post launch content it gets (god knows, a lot of services tend to die rather quickly) and more with how it tries to "engage" its players.

So far my fondest encounter in DD1 was a free roaming cyclops. Hired pawn mounted the monster and rode him off the cliff. Too bad I couldn’t sent the pawn back with a generous gift for his service.

Easily the think I have been looking forward most since Suicide Squad release

Ok I haven't made my gaming updater in a while, and I am sure you are all dying to know of my gaming habits. Dragon's Dogma I am commiting to finishing this one as my highest priority. I pushed beyond opening and the game became quite playable. There is originality to it, I appreciate, but so far I am still not convinced it is a "good game". I think it was a cult classic for a reason. But perhaps, it will get better as it goes on. I find quest design frustratingly uneven. So far they seem like excuses to get you our into the wild more than anything else, but them seem to range from handholdy to frustratingly obtuse. So far it more seems like uneven standard an inconsistant design, rather than intentional creative choice. More importantly, I am not sold on combat, and overal systems. UI is horrendous, that the first thing. But to me the game seems to land in the awkard spot for action-RPG where it is neither decent action game nor an RPG. I am not seeing much possible variation in builds so far, and gameplay seems to revolve around spamming attack and abilities with final result mostly coming down to stats (do I do enough damage and stagger, and can enemy kill me in a single chain of attacks). Of course, the most novel and interesting bit so far are enemy weaknesses - but while capturing imagination, I wasn't particularly blown away gameplay wise. So far it seems simply that certain enemies need to be attacked certain way to made the encounter more managable, but that's about all the depth it has. You either know or you don't. Climbing enemies is cool, though, at least from visual perspective. Still, games like Dark Souls also had optional limb removal/weak spots mechanics, and overall I think their system is far more competent and intricate in both halfs of action-RPG genre. I like thought, that it is an action-RPG focused on a party - but again, without controlling the party members it's not particularly deep experience. Edit. Oh, unprofeshional, out of tune singing in the main menu really, really irritates me /edit Prince of Persia: Lost Crown It's good, but I wasn't blown away by it. Being done by same devs as excellent latest Rayman games platforming is great. Combat is also more complex than your usual metroidvania experience (a bit of side scrolling DMC there), but I also wasn't particularly impressed by it. Yes, there are more attacks, and you can create basic combos, but I just didn't think the combat was deliberate enough to be rewarding. Yes, Hollownight had very basic attacks, but all upgrades, modifiers and player in combat decisions felt very impactful. Not so much in Prince of Persia, and in spite of fairly decent enemy variety, I didn't find enemies particularly memorable. Bosses were fairly challenging, but in what I found to be rather annoying way. In a dark souls fashion, you kinda need to memorise their moves and timing. At least on highest difficulty parrying and dodging isn't very forgiving, so reacting on what you see isn't really possible in my opinion. It's all about dying few times, learning of proper timings and responses to each attack sequence. As for the motroidvania bit - it felt quite handholdy. It took the game a long time before it actually allowed you to explore a bit, but every area felt to be designed more like a Dark Souls level - a maze that you explore in linear fashion and unlock shortcut, rather than genuine exploration. I was surprised, as with game giving you new ways of marking the map (with in game screenshots) and option at the start between guided and non-guided experience, I expected something a bit more freeform. Most things you need to get back to, are collectibles that you can see but can't get to due to power X, Y and Z being missing (think Arkham series) but personally I find this design more frustrating that rewarding. Still, overall a good game, though it feels a bit derivativede. It mostly just seems to adapt well tested designsed (a lot of Hollow Knight in there), which I think is a bit of a shame - I would prefer if there was more Prince of Persia in there. Diablo 4 Not much to say. With it coming to GamePass I gave it ago, played for two evenings and got bored. It's not really a criticism of the title, that's how my adventure ends with all hack'n slashes so far. Numbers going up just doesn't excite me much, which is good considering the state of my bank account. Street Fighter 6 150h in and still going. I exhausted single player content, and am deep in online play and getting my butt kicked, and occasionally kicking butt of even bigger noob. I am getting better, but the progress is gradually slowing. Looking at skill ranking I am still a below average player (and by a fair margin). I am still enjoying myself, though, and that's what's important. So yeah, after years of dipping into fighting games I can recommend SF6 for its onboarding experience. Lengthy singleplayer campaign is a good way of familiarising one self with controls, roster and various mechanics. There is also a fairly gentle transition into online play, where game keeps you in the noob section for a while, before allowing you to get pummeled. I double down on my commitment by buying an arcade stick in an impulse purchase: For one, I am a bit angry at myself that I bought it instead of a Flight Stick, as it would be a more versatile purchase. I am also not sure of how good of a purchase it was, but I am getting around to it. I am still getting proficient with it, and I had to dose my playtime as between it and violin playing I started to strain my wrist. By either my hand got stronger, or spring weaker, and I didn't encounter any issues lately. I am also getting more and more competent with using it, with less wrong imputs and quicker response time. It's this funny thing, where a stick definitely didn't make me a better player, but the game makes more intuitive sense. Chaining command inputs is far easier for me to wrap my head around, than with buttons. It being a Capcom game, one also needs to mention monatization. Game has been very stingy with cosmetics costing extra and new character not being earnable in game - now, the game isn't designed as annoyingly as other titles. Shop button is decreet enough, and the game doesn't bombard you with microtransactions like other games do. But the truth is, everything extra will cost you. Unfortuantely, that means that game will be pricey to continue playing as further character passes are released. It's definitely a financial commitment.

Cute socially awkward gingers though Yeah, you see my memories are completely opposite. It is the opening that I remember fodly as far as narrative is concerned (Alloy being shunned by her local tribe and longing to become), and after the intro I remember being somewhat bored by the story. Yeah, it was generic and predictable (humans created AI, bla bla bla) but it is a game about hunting robot dinasours. As I am trying to recall it I think my issue might have been that story missions weren't particulalrly interesting, rather than the plot itself. Anyway, I can't recall story well enough to provide strong opinion piece. Mostly what I remember is beautiful visuals and killing robo-dinasour with its own minigun. AH, I also absolutely hated "RPG" systems. There was some kind of inventory management, I think.

Hmm, I must say, I don’t remember H:ZD story to be much more than serviceable. I cool visual design though. Alloy was likeable, if a bit too one note. I am tempted to pick it up at some point. While Open World checklist simulators aren’t my cup of tea, Sony ones (Spiderman, Horizon) have been fairly pleasant time wasters, when I wasn’t in a mood to play anything demanding attention.

Meh. It’s a mixed bag. Obviously, if a game has some form of multiplayer functionality, it will require internet connection, and it will better have build in security features so I can enjoy multiplayer with minimal amount of cheaters. As long as non-online functionality works fine, I would call it less of a DRM, and more “realities of life”. I also dont mind minor, meaningless rewards like in BG3, but we are entering a slippery slope of devs incentivising connecting online by unique content (and how disposable such content is will depend player to player). I have been mostly happy with GOG releases I bought, but they did relax their policy in recent years somewhat.

It's perfectly fine to not like certain mechanic, but your post suggests that RTWP and turn-based are one and the same. "Turns" is a ruleset and has an impact on gameplay decisionmaking. Chess wouldn't be "better" if everyone moved at the same time - it would be fundamentally broken as the game is build around players taking turns with one move at the time. I think the issue with RPGs is that they don't have particularly great combat loop to begin with - so speeding through encounters tends to be more desirable. In general, though, I do find turn-based RPGs to have better designed combat - not every turn based game, but outside Pillars of Eternity, I can think of only turn-based RPGs in which combat does suck (ignoring action-RPGs systems, like Dark Souls). But yeah, if combat requires little decisionmaking, and it is resolved based on your character build, that it would be desirable for combat to be over as soon as possible - or not be there in the first place.

In case over 2hour long podcast/interview is too much here is a bit more concise Judas pre-preview impression.

Pretty sure I posted it earlier in this thread as well. Oh well, no one said life is fair.

That sound more interesting than I expected. Narrative rogue-lite?

Possibly, or something Divinity (there is more to the IP than Original Sin games) related. When asked about it (according to IGN):

Sven explains his reasoning in the video I posted earlier. Chasing trends was never Larian’s MO. It seems Sven has a vision that he wants to reach one day and BG3 was just a stepping stone toward it. They took BG3 IP as they needed money and profile to evolve beyond D:OS2. Now they have both and they can do the next thing. it seems BG success did give them pause and they started thinking about continuing with BG. But they decided against it. That’s good. Milking same IP until it runs dry has been business staple for a long time. But it wasn’t always so, and I don’t think it is a good way to do things. Sure BG3 sold well, BG4 would sell well as well - but is there more for Larian to do there? Gaming (and not only gaming) is stagnating due to risk averse strategies. They did BG3 and seems they achieved what they wanted with it. Cool, let’s move to something new.

Well, there are. Seems the game runs fine, aside from the city, and issues there seem mostly be related to CPU. A powerhouse of a CPU seems to be able to pump out about 60FPS with dips, but frametimes are all over the place. Edit. Soo, with all this talk about Dragon's Dogma, I booted up DD1. As PC port is crap and can't even display prompts correctly, I guessed wrong and attacked NPC instead of talking to him. Now I am in jail....

Returning to BG3, there is a lovely interview with Sven at gamespot. While no BG4 is a great clickbait, I think there is much more interesting stuff in there.

Reminds me of Tim's video where he mentions companies and publishers tend to not look at other peoples ideas as to not open themselves for a potenial lawsuit.

As I said: , but thank you for the clarification nonetheless. It seems it's similar to SF6 (they also charge premium currency for editing your avatar, while at the same time allowing to do the same for next to nothing in WT mode).

Yeah, I am playing SF6 right now. I don’t find it too offensive as most of purchasable content doesn’t interest me, but there is some dodgy stuff in there. Not nearly as bad as OW2, but also SF6 is a full price game with chunky expansions. They really could allow players to buy skins for in-game currency….

Performance issues are widely reported. The also launched with in-game store. It seems there is no way to create more than one character, and game charges you if you want to change the appearance of your PC or your pawn. Also bunch of currency and items available for purchase. it seems nothing that you can buy can’t be earned in game, but it does bring concerns about game’s balance integrity. still I was thinking about buying DD2 but between me struggling with the original, poor performance and microtransactions makes it a pass for me.

Praise GOG! They still remain a positive force in the gaming landscape. Comes with free GOG propaganda video: Ex-Uncharted director's Marvel game has cinematic trailer - to be out in 2025 Overwatch2 is lessening it's FreeToPay bull****. I might be diving back in when season 10 drops, as other than superagressive monatization I enjoyed the update. https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/overwatch-2-season-10-will-unlock-all-current-heroes-and-make-future-additions-free

Unfortunately, from what I know of @kanisatha he is particular enough, that finding something that would fit right into his preferences is tricky. I think Fallout: New Vegas is one of the better RPGs in recent memory so I would recommend it. It is based on Bethesda engine so you can play in third person, and you do have companions but like in Skyrim, you can't control them. Wasteland 2&3 are good, but they are turn based and combat heavy, and I don't think k. will like that (even I was a bit bored by frequency of combat encounters in W3: I played W2 too long ago to remember). Fallout1&2 are classics and must be recommended. I wish they would get a nice remaster to make UI less horrific, and add some quality of life features. Again, like New Vegas it is a single character control and turn-based, and quite clunky at times. How is Owlcat's new Warhammer RPG? I didnt play it, and didn't see much discussion about it.

Alright, here we go: KOTOR2 - Overall, I think it is a bit overrated - partially, because it is a sequel to an overrated game - system-wise KOTOR is just so very dull. It's a dumb down D&D, and unfortunately by doing it it stipped any remotely interesting things about D&D. Still, I like it a lot. I am not a fan of KOTOR1 vs. KOTOR2 conversation, as I think they complement each other rather well. Pacing of KOTOR2 is rather off, and its critique of established SW mythology is pulled of rather well for the most part. The whole of it could use more time and a hell lot of polish. Even with restored content KOTOR2 is more of a story of "what could have been", rather than what it actually is... but capturing imagination is sometimes all the game needs to do, and Obsidian is pretty good at that. Neverwinder Nights2 - I don't like it nearly as much as other folks. I like it much more than NWN1, but as NWN1 was less of a game, and more of a toolbox it's also unfair comparison. I find base campaign charming, but when I played it back in a day I found rather trite. Coming from BG2, I found it disappointing to see so many recurring elements - as far as I knew, unfamiliar with D&D lore and all, they took a sidequest from BG2 and tried to make a whole game out of it. Playing NWN2 I always wish I was just playing BG1&2 instead... or BG3. I really didn't enjoy my time with D&D 3rd edition. Personally, I find the system a bit too detailed to work well for a party RPG, but UI doesn't help. Whenever it is leveling up, exploring or combat NWN2 UI is clunky, uninformative and just unpleasant to use. I also didn't like 4 character party limit - I just find it to not be enough in a D&D game. That said, I do like both DLCs to NWN2 a lot. Alpha Protocol - Real, hate-love relationship with it. I was constantly frustrated while playing it, loved it when credits rolled, and am very reluctant to give it a 2nd playthrough. Another Obsidian game that really captures imagination, with some compelling ideas, and great reactivity. A lot of good, a lot of bad, and a lot of potential. Fallout: New Vegas - easily, the best and most complete game Obsidian has made. It made me do 360 and turned me into Obsidian fan, and made me angry at Bethesda that after playing Fallout3 it took me years before I decided to give NV a go. Great world, great reactivity to the character, and the best implementation of Obsidian style faction system. It's a game where you can create a character and there will probably be an interesting path for your character to take. Probably, the only downside for me, is Ceasar's Legion being a bit too evil. I think they are a great faction, but it's tricky for me to create a character who would see them as a valid option. Still, even so, three other endings one can pursue, allowing for variety of smaller decisions. While later games (like PoE2) did factions better, NV manages to offer both pretty free-style open world, while still managing to offer a coherent and compelling story. A brilliant balance of narratively dense game, and player agency. Pillars of Eternity 1&2 - In my opinion, a brilliant throwback to Infinity Games, keeping stuff I liked about those and changing things I didn't care that much for. Still my favourite modern cRPG system. PoE1 has a stronger narrative direction, and more consistant tone, but it feels like it is stretched thin, with too little content spread accross too much game. While story is great, too much of it is delivered through walls of text, rather than interactive quests. PoE2 addresses every single criticism for PoE1 I had, but tone feels more inconsistant, and narrative isn't as tight. Still, probably my 2nd favourite Obsidian game after Fallout: New Vegas. DLCs for both games are brilliant, with While March still being my favourite PoE pieces of content. Tyranny - 4 party limit, cooldown based combat, focusing on spamming same abilities over and over, rather than decisionmaking. And a lot of combat, with little enemy variation. Major reactivity favouring fewer more impactful decisions, over regular decisionmaking. All that I don't like. Still, pulpy, more approachable world than PoEs, but with some cool, edgy ideas. I wish we would get more of it, and in true Obsidian fasion, some really imagination capturing concepts - initial prologue setting the world state, custom spell creator. Fun game, worth a playthrough, even if not subsequent playthroughs. Unlike other titles, I found DLC for this one rather underbaked and forgettable. I struggle to recall what was it about. Outer Worlds - similar to Tyranny, I think it is a fun game to playthrough once, even if it lacks depth to warrant subsequent playthroughs. Not much roleplaying to do in this one, but it's a fairly tight, lighthearted adventure, with enough choice to keep me engaged. Combat got a bit old by the time the credits rolled, and it strongly overstayed it's welcome after DLCs were added. Grounded - played a bit of it. Installed on my PC for a while now. Survival games aren't my thing. Pentiment - great artstyle, unusual story for a game. It is a narrative adventure so it is, what it is, but I did find gameplay loop of running around the city and talking to everyone before progressing time to be tedious. Some activities pass time, so I felt pressured to find all there is to find before progressing time, and it just wasn't very fun to do. Edit. Hmm, there is a narrative going, that Obsidian isn't what it used to be, and while it is somewhat true, I am not sure if it's a bad thing. Overall, I think their output starting with New Vegas and going forward consists of the stronger output, with earlier games being interesting, but not well executed. I think biggest criticism for post New Vegas Obisidan, is that they started to be a bit more formulaic. They found a way to do factions, open world and companions into which they lean into, while it's been a bit more dynamic in the past. For that reason, I am somewhat excited to see Obsidian trying different types of games. Hopefully, they will find the spark of creativity that fueled their earlier, more one of a kind titles. Still, while one can draw pretty clear parallels between New Vegas and Deadfire, it's not like Deadfire didn't try new things as well. Unfortuantely, those new things (like companion reputation system) didn't work too well.