randoM vidEo gAme News

[Humanoid]

21 minutes ago, Lexx said:

small american towns

 

22 minutes ago, Lexx said:

cult-site

Aren't those synonyms?

[Lexx]

Dunno, my experience with small american towns is pretty limited. : >

/Edit: I just think the bits of the town shown in the trailer are looking super creepy, and I'm not sure if I could sleep there peacefully at night. Like, if something looks too good to be true, I just can't trust it.

Edited March 19, 2021 by Lexx

[Oner]

5 hours ago, Keyrock said:

It's pretty sad that we've reached the point that the games industry is remastering 5 year old games. 

 

5 hours ago, Lexx said:

Yeah, I was thinking as a free update, sure, but if you have to buy it again ... ehhh.

Also, that town in LiS3 ... is that really how small american towns look like? It feels completely unbelievable to me. More like a cult-site or something.

Well LiS 1 had some relatively weak character textures, poor lip syncing and some bad animations, so prettying it up is a good idea. But yeah, making me buy it again is a pretty lame attempt on my wallet.

The town is meant to be idyllic, saying they overshot it is fair, but at the same time there's a murder so a feeling of too-good-to-be-true could be intentional on their part. Hopefully they don't take a cue from 2 and make the villains a secret Trump voting KKK cult or whatever.

[evilcat]

I am a bit curious about upcoming LiS: Xavier's School, they are always trying to making something else than shooter_current_year, and that really counts. In worse case they provide nice indiepop chillmix.

The town looks pretty.

[bringingyouthefuture]

On 3/17/2021 at 8:31 AM, Wormerine said:

I don't know what @kanisatha has exact problem with but from myself:

1) technical issues: UI is tedious and not fit for purpose. It's the same how they shipped two previous games, and DnD makes it worse. I refunded EA purchase on this base alone. 

2) I dislike some of DnD designs in cRPG setting so I am all for modifications, but I found Larian's changes to be detrimental - it's far too easy to gain high chances to hit thanks to how easy it is to gain advantage via hight or backstab. That paired with riddiculus movement and being able to effortlesly bypass engagements through bonus actions jump&push, means I use spells sporadically, fights tended to be very repetitive, as same tools dominated every encounter. The only one fight I had to do extra was a hag fight, as it had scripted boss stages - not necessarly bad, but I must say - playing BG3 didn't feel like DnD - and while I am not familiar with 5e, the short Solasta demo I played... did. Larian seems to try to impliment their D:OS2 design philosophy into DnD systems, which I find problematic - not because DnD>D:OS2, but because both are quite different. I think they are in danger of doing neither good DnD nor a good D:OS3 game. It is not about game being too easy - it's about making core DnD systems irrelevant due to easily accessible solutions. 

....

I feel in all fairness since such passionate opinions of why BG3 isn't a good game were made, it is only fair to add that it isn't a bad game at all.  I have found it one of the most challenging and interesting RPGs I have played in years, and though I was skeptical too it would be very much like DOS 1/2 just with DnD rules, it is very much its own experience, and I am like 60 hours in and starting to love it more and more.

I will offer only one other perspective since comparing it to Solasta and then commenting on the disengagement mechanic is somewhat erroneous.  Solasta to has a disengagement mechanic, you push a button and then can walk out of any engagement.  BG3 just did it slightly different by making it an action such as pushing or jumping out of the way.  While I agree they could of made jumping into dodging perhaps, both Solasta and BG3 have the same disengagement mechanic, its just BG made it "hell" (get it hell) of cooler by turning it into an action.  I think BG3 did okay by the rules ... I have my gripes about the game too, no day/night cycle the major one, but in my humble, probably ignored opinion the game is good.

[melkathi]

18 minutes ago, bringingyouthefuture said:

but in my humble, probably ignored opinion the game is good.

You play Troubleshooter, your opinion has merit

[Humanoid]

A not-uncommon opinion is that BG3 is a case of Larian ruining a D&D game. But I'm more inclined to say that BG3 is a case of D&D ruining a Larian game.

Okay, maybe "ruining" is too strong a word. I don't dislike the game as such. Perhaps it's good that Larian are held back from some of their most lavish immersion-breaking tendencies. But many times it does really feel like the D&D licence is a strait-jacket that stifles the overall design direction - many D&D tropes are after all immutable and sacrosanct and I would not expect and subversion of these to be allowed by the terms of the licence. Furthermore, I did find that the worst parts of my experience tended to come whenever it tried to lean really hard into rolling that ol' d20 for outcomes.

Now, there's a good counter-argument that "failure is interesting", and in principle I agree. But practically speaking, having checks structured in the way that they are increases the number of potential outcomes by 50% (and that's assuming a single roll situation, many times the game demands multiple consecutive rolls for success), and the extra writing and scripting required quickly explodes to levels unmanageable by any game developer if they want to keep all the branches interesting and unique. The reality then becomes that the "failure" state simply becomes the mindless fallback of hostilities breaking out. It's like games where failing a pickpocket attempt similarly turns an entire town hostile, it's not a useful or interesting turn of events and just leads to save-scumming.

[Wormerine]

6 hours ago, bringingyouthefuture said:

Solasta to has a disengagement mechanic, you push a button and then can walk out of any engagement.  BG3 just did it slightly different by making it an action such as pushing or jumping out of the way.  While I agree they could of made jumping into dodging perhaps, both Solasta and BG3 have the same disengagement mechanic, its just BG made it "hell" (get it hell) of cooler by turning it into an action.

Isn’t disengage in Solasta and DND 5e a standard action? (That’s what I believe, but didn’t play either)
In BG3 push/jump being a bonus actions means that that getting out of engagement is not a commitment. With high enough strength jumping moves you farther then walking. And archer can jump away, move to a high ground and still perform an attack of an opportunity - engaging the enemy or getting engaged means nothing. You can perform a standard attack and still roll a bonus chance on instantly killing/putting at great disadvantage an enemy with a bonus push. Jump make it easy to appear in a backstab/high ground, which then adds advantage just doubling the issue. 

I can understand merging jump and disengage into one action, but jump/push are too powerful and too easily available when combined with free advantage when backstabbing/attacking from height. At the very least both should be standard actions, and on top of that I think advantage is just too much. 

Edited March 20, 2021 by Wormerine

[Wormerine]

double post

Edited March 20, 2021 by Wormerine

[bringingyouthefuture]

2 hours ago, Wormerine said:

Isn’t disengage in Solasta and DND 5e a standard action? (That’s what I believe, but didn’t play either)
In BG3 push/jump being a bonus actions means that that getting out of engagement is not a commitment. With high enough strength jumping moves you farther then walking. And archer can jump away, move to a high ground and still perform an attack of an opportunity - engaging the enemy or getting engaged means nothing. You can perform a standard attack and still roll a bonus chance on instantly killing/putting at great disadvantage an enemy with a bonus push. Jump make it easy to appear in a backstab/high ground, which then adds advantage just doubling the issue. 

I can understand merging jump and disengage into one action, but jump/push are too powerful and too easily available when combined with free advantage when backstabbing/attacking from height. At the very least both should be standard actions, and on top of that I think advantage is just too much. 

EDIT - I was totally wrong below, Wormerine you are right, haven't been trying to disengage much with my melee fighters so never noticed.  But Jump / Disengage is a bonus action for the moment, and agree it should be changed to a standard action, I am not so sure about push though I would keep it as a bonus action.

Jump is a "standard" action so you can't attacks after so it would count as the official "disengage" action, while push is a bonus action but it is based on a D20 roll to hit, so it doesn't always land, and while you can push someone down, run away and shoot them with a bow, knocking someone down doesn't cancel their turn or take away an action from them (it takes away from how far they can move), so you wouldn't officially disengage unless you move far enough away from them after you push them down as they can stand up an threaten you again.  It's not bad as the playing field is even in these terms, and have been pushed from a perch myself by an enemy.

It's all a matter of taste really, I find the challenge of the game interesting not so much in that each encounter it presents you with is impossible to overcome, but more that each encounter has a particular obstacle to tackle, and if I just walk in without stopping to consider my options, my party either gets beat to a pulp or totally wiped, and this doesn't just include combat encounters but each situation is pretty unique ... and I have made some role playing choices already that have come back to hurt which ups the stakes in the choices I make even greater.  I don't mind Larian games in general though, so I am really getting into the challenge of each new encounter, trying to get past them on the first attempt is really slowing the game down for me and making me think.

Edited March 21, 2021 by bringingyouthefuture

[bringingyouthefuture]

16 minutes ago, bringingyouthefuture said:

 

somehow I went to edit and double posted too

Edited March 21, 2021 by bringingyouthefuture

[kanisatha]

19 hours ago, Humanoid said:

A not-uncommon opinion is that BG3 is a case of Larian ruining a D&D game. But I'm more inclined to say that BG3 is a case of D&D ruining a Larian game.

Okay, maybe "ruining" is too strong a word. I don't dislike the game as such. Perhaps it's good that Larian are held back from some of their most lavish immersion-breaking tendencies. But many times it does really feel like the D&D licence is a strait-jacket that stifles the overall design direction - many D&D tropes are after all immutable and sacrosanct and I would not expect and subversion of these to be allowed by the terms of the licence. Furthermore, I did find that the worst parts of my experience tended to come whenever it tried to lean really hard into rolling that ol' d20 for outcomes.

Now, there's a good counter-argument that "failure is interesting", and in principle I agree. But practically speaking, having checks structured in the way that they are increases the number of potential outcomes by 50% (and that's assuming a single roll situation, many times the game demands multiple consecutive rolls for success), and the extra writing and scripting required quickly explodes to levels unmanageable by any game developer if they want to keep all the branches interesting and unique. The reality then becomes that the "failure" state simply becomes the mindless fallback of hostilities breaking out. It's like games where failing a pickpocket attempt similarly turns an entire town hostile, it's not a useful or interesting turn of events and just leads to save-scumming.

I completely agree with this as a critique of D&D. I myself have often ranted about my intense dislike of everything depending on a die roll in D&D. However, I stand by my critique of the "Larian" parts of BG3. Larian obviously considers those systems in BG3 that are imports from their D:OS games to be cool and awesome. I strongly disagree, and find them to be aggravating, silly, and immersion-breaking.

[ComradeYellow]

On 3/19/2021 at 4:39 AM, Humanoid said:

 

Aren't those synonyms?

From personal experience,

Yes.

[Mamoulian War]

PSN will shut down PS3, Vita and PSP stores, so if you have anything bought and not downloaded, you should make a backup copy soon...

https://www.gameinformer.com/2021/03/22/ps3-ps-vita-and-psp-stores-are-closing-permanently-this-year-according-to-new-report

[Keyrock]

On 3/17/2021 at 3:57 PM, Keyrock said:

I'll wait for the inevitable 4.01 hotfix coming in a few days before downloading the new expansion and jumping back into X4. 

Aaaaaand it's here. The hotfix has arrived just as predicted. It's almost as if I have been playing Egosoft games for well over a decade and have been through this exact situation numerous times.

Downloading now.

[LadyCrimson]

On 3/19/2021 at 1:09 AM, Keyrock said:

It's pretty sad that we've reached the point that the games industry is remastering 5 year old games. 

Won't be long before I'll figure why bother buying on original release - wait 2-3 years and you'll get the new and improved, extra features, no bugs,  remaster version.

Y'all developers/publishers aren't tricking me into double-buying again! Nope, nosiree, neveragainever! What? No that isn't a bridge in my pocket. 

[Lexx]

16 hours ago, Mamoulian War said:

PSN will shut down PS3, Vita and PSP stores, so if you have anything bought and not downloaded, you should make a backup copy soon...

https://www.gameinformer.com/2021/03/22/ps3-ps-vita-and-psp-stores-are-closing-permanently-this-year-according-to-new-report

But they only write that you can't buy games anymore. They don't mention you can't download bought games.

[Wormerine]

Disco Elysium: The Final Cut refused classification in Australia.

More importantly it seems it is still releasing on March 30th. 

[Lexx]

Weird, did they allow the current version?

Good advertisement to make people more interested in the Final Cut, I guess.

[Wormerine]

17 minutes ago, Lexx said:

Weird, did they allow the current version?

I assume so. Must be something about new content added to the game. 

[Mamoulian War]

9 hours ago, Lexx said:

But they only write that you can't buy games anymore. They don't mention you can't download bought games.

It's Sony, you never know, but I always expect the worst case scenario, after they moved from Japan to California

[ComradeYellow]

1 hour ago, Mamoulian War said:

It's Sony, you never know, but I always expect the worst case scenario, after they moved from Japan to California

Japan is the 3rd strongest economy in the world what are they doing moving to the heart of the Empire?

Oh right it's a business, I'm sure they're just capitalizing on the weeaboos here throwing their money at anything Japan.

Upon reflection, why Sega got destroyed in the console market was conservative Japanese executives wishing to remain independent and "Japanese"

I guess Sony is taking the diametrically opposite approach to what Sega did because of prior algorithms.

[Humanoid]

4 hours ago, Lexx said:

Weird, did they allow the current version?

Good advertisement to make people more interested in the Final Cut, I guess.

The original never required submission to the ratings board in the first place. They don't rate every single title that's only available digitally on PC.

[Malcador]

 

[Azdeus]

7 hours ago, Malcador said:

 

So Brothers in Arms, but exclusively urban.

Might be interesting.