Wormerine

And.... I watched it all. Ready for the part 2. I must say, it's been quite chaotic. I admire his commitment to exploring reactivity even including seeing through what will happen in Witcher 3 if he allows Thaler to die in W1 Meantime I am still to start the Netflix show.

According to the most recent trailer Early Access release is July 28th

July 28th

Meh. The overall "story" didn't grab me, though it had potential. The only parts that annoyed me, were pretty obvious attempts at recreating "Tormement" - the game has it's "What-can-change-the-nature-of-the-man" moment, which falls so very very short. I felt the game got better once you reach the flesh city thing. Overall, it's full of irrelevant wall of text, which while sometimes entertaining don't add up to a cohesive whole.

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2020/04/02/gears-tactics-will-appeal-to-xcom-fans-and-classic-gears-of-war-fans-alike/ Huh... Gears Tactics... Due to IP this one completely flew under my radar.

Noclip is to release 5 videos long documentary series on The Outer Words. I shall update as they become available.

Wait till she survives being wrapped around a tree... that is generally the point the game looses me... as well, as endless chain of explosions that follows soon after. I did like the sequel much better, and am yet to play 3rd one.

I think those games are easier to play then watch. Didn't play Dooms, but they look fun.

I think it'is fine for optional, high difficulty enemies to require more discovery and trial&error, though Kangaxx is also a example how artificially difficult fights in BGs could get. I liked the fight more, when I didn't undestand the underlying systems. As I tend to be mechanics driven these days, slapping much of immunities on the enemy doesn't particularly excite me. The most extreme example of this problem were Basilisks in BG1, who were the deadliest/the easiest enemy depending if you happen to have one specific potion or spell. Memorable? Yes. Good and fun design...?Noooooooooooo. I wouldn't qualify this as safescumming, though. Casting finger of death on a dragon and reloading when the roll doesn't go your way is safescumming (guilty as charged). Having rolls on skillchecks, encounraging quick-saving before every lock and box and reloading if dice doesn't go your way is savescumming. What you mentioned sounds to me more like "you should have all the tools you need to succeed when you get locked into combat", which in general sounds like good design principle. There's also a part of Megabosses I didn't like, as they like to start pulling new moves deep into the combat without chance for you to know they are coming, like the bloody mage who unlocks all the wards. It's just a waste of player's time. A good rogue-lite gives you all the tools and information you need from the get go, you just won't succeed without the practice. An RPG system with good amount of depth, should be able to achieve the same thing. Using meta-knowledge instead of difficulty is cheap, but PoEs do have a tendency to be undertuned with how easy it is to overlevel most of the content. That's a problem, but BG design you mentioned is not a solution, I don't think. I am certain of it, in fact, thanks to some encounters in the Pathfinder, and its limited inventory making sure you won't have what you need at any given time.

True, but only if certain situations. Some reloading might be impulsive, rather then voluntary. I for one hate skill checks in single player RPGs - failed trap or pickpocket roll in Kingmaker or Wasteland2 result in re-load for me. Not because it is fun. Getting unlucky roll simply sucks, and not being able to open a chest, which I could open or having a trap blow up in my face is not interesting. It's a failure outside my control. Disco Elysium managed to do rolls somewhat right, as failing a roll usually resulted in memorable story bit, led you to take a different path, sent you on a mini-quest to improve you chances. Though those lasted only for a while... Passing rigid "wind" check is easily the bottom point of the game, and in the hindsight the roll-system did damage other parts of the game, like leveling up, by encouraging to hoard points, rather then spending them.

Oh man, my favourite bit of PoEs. If all of the PoEs were White March it would be glorious series. Overall, I feel DLCs show what PoE could be, with a bit more time.

Any data on that number, or are you just pulling it out of your ass? There are likely some lost, or delayed sales, but I find it unlikely that 50% of potential purchasers would refrain from buying it, even if a big chunk might be complaining about the platform. Even so, people who played the game on Game Pass (like myself) aren't lost sales, especially if they release an expansion with the steam release. All data I have seen suggests that Epic release doesn't affect sales - major releases seem to sell as well, if not better then it's precedessors - and in big volumes extra 18% makes a difference. Also: 2K's Private Division signed the deal with Epic. As to expected sales: no one could predict in what fortunate time Outer Worlds would release. Replace Fallout76, with traditional Bethesda release, and demand for off brand, small scale, modest budget, not moddable Fallout-like might have been far smaller. Unintentionally, OW cashed in on bad will that Bethesda has gathered in the last year. Any shortcoming OW has, was completely overlooked. It is possible, that in this setting OW could benefit from unhindered release, but the question is: would it be beneficial for Private Division? OW is not the only game they sold to Epic. I have heards Ancestors, wasn't good. Did money they got from Epic compared to sales, balance whatever extra profit they could make off OW?

Little damage is most likely a result from rolling a graze, which can severely reduce the damage. If you mouse over (plus shift I think? For details. It’s been a while) the roll you are interested in (bottom right text box) you will get a detailed breakdown of what contributed to final number. As Boeroer mention, number calculations aren’t straightforward, and maluses are more severe then they might seem. but on to the point I wanted to make. Due to people finding misses frustrating in turn-based combat the threshold for graze has been lowered significantly (Graze has been extended from 50-25 to 50-01). That means, that unless enemy deflection is significantly higher then your accuracy you are guaranteed or very likely to at least to grace him, even if you have about 50% chance to hit. (And them you for that matter) The chance to hit tooltip (percentage number above enemy heads, above penetration tooltip) uses “graze” as it reference, which became quite unhelpful in the turn-based system. For example in your first example you have only slightly more accuracy then the enemy, but the chance-to-hit shows 100%, while you have 56% chance to actually properly hit him and do full damage. Most damage you do to him will be severely reduced, meaning a buff/debuff is encouraged.

Yes, have been hearing good things about it. I really like Max Paynes but after that they seemed not to be able to be able to find their footing. Played through Alan Wake recently, and I must say, I wasn't a fan. I don't think anyone will jump into Remedy's third person action game wanting an RPG :-).

I would rather struggle a bit and have fun, then die of boredom. Try making FPS RPG on a budget of your average isometric game, and see how smooth it plays. Give isometric game a budget of a FPS and we will have a grand RPG.

Fallout1 is very compact. First games in the series do have tendency to be either spread to thin, or small compared to other established IPs. Building engine, systems and world from the ground up does take time.

The problem is with the design, not with the difficulty. Skill checks represent the problem well - being able to lockpick something, passing a dimplomatic check rarely opens alternative avenues. It's just a progression in the game - it is a design more in line with Bioware games - where you are to open every box, explore every dialogue, and do every quest rather then craft a character which interacts with the world in an individual way. Making lockpicking harder would bring interesting results - most of them give access to more items that you don't need. My guess would be, it's quality over quantity approach - OW still allows for unlinear progression, but how things evolve and how players can move through enviroment and interact with enviroment is more static - less fixing needed, or worrying if players who pick less obvious skills will be able to progress. Everyskill contributes to combat, because it is a "talk, explore, kill" game, rather then role-play RPG. Hopefully, we will see more depth in the sequel, rather then just more of it.

Also cosmetic stuff, like animal hold and nice captains quarters don't transfer. It's in the description.

Did it improve upon the original? I did like VC quite a lot, but it was poorly balanced - getting “S” tank usually meant buffing one scout and rushing through map in one turn - shame the only thing the rating care about was speed.

Curious. Could you expand a bit? Is it changes to combat system, or the structure of the world? In theory PoE2 offers more flexibilty with more interesting item system to shake things up.

XCOM2 came to GOG. A bit to pricey for me to buy a second copy though.

As my work has been put on hold, I sort of have too many things going on right now: Actually playing: 1) Two Point Hospital - darn its pleasant fun. At first I was worried it's more of a clicker then a game, but as "missions' progress some management becomes required for success 2) Hades - the game progressed a lot, and with the next update being months away, I felt it's finally time to explore more indepth what game has to offer. 3) Wolfensteins New Order and Old Blood - two in the row was too much. I getting tired of it a bit. Enjoyed New Order and will push through to finish Old Blood though. It's getting... old though. Trying to play: 4) Pathfinder: Kingmaker - writing really makes it difficult to stomach. I find timed quest annoying - I usually welcome this kind of stuff, but as Pathfinder is clumsily designed as the game likes to punish for not having extensive metaknowledge. 5) Banner Saga 3 - I need to finish. Why can't I finish. Intending to play, but just end up staring at it: 6) Phantom Doctrine - mehhhh 7) Divinity: Original Sin2 - BG3 looks fun. Maybe D:OS2 isn't as tedious as I remember... maybe.... maybe....................................

Keep in mind Larian is likely to introduce modifications to system it is based on. How it plays out in Pen%Paper, won't necessary translate into BG3.

I would describe is as lack of depth, not lack of content. They went for polish and presentation, rather then breadth and dearth. Seemed to work out fine for them, though yeah: even though I enjoyed it, it is not a game I feel a need to return to. There is a DLC at works. Perhaps they wait for Steam release?