I'm interested in hearing about the first game you ever loved and, more importantly, what it was that made you feel that way. Don't just give me the game title, but tell me the whole love story!

If more than one game fits the bill, that's fine too. I'd love to hear about all of them.

In your opinion, what is a game/what are some games that were inventive/unique/original or just otherwise superb that you feel didn't receive the praise it deserved?

Personally, I feel that the Scribblenauts series (Mainly the first two) are amazingly imaginative games that I don't hear talked about often. I feel that this is perhaps due to its being on the DS, a platform that was sort of mired in shovelware. I hadn't ever seen a game quite as painstakingly made as this one. The developers clearly had fun thinking of all the different ways to solve their puzzles. The soundtrack is also unexpectedly wonderful, and is very reminiscent (imo) of Katamari Damacy

Edit: I suppose mediocre popular reception would have been a better way to say it instead if critical reception

Here's the task: pretend you're a professor! You have to do the following:

• Choose a focus for your class on gaming (with a snazzy title if you like)
• Choose the games that you, as a professor, will have your class dive into in order to convey key concepts
• Explain why each game you chose ties into your overarching exploration

Your class can have any focus, broad or specific: level design in first-person shooters; the history of pixel art; the psychology of non-linear narratives; the use of sound effects in mid-2000 platformers; the limitations of turn-based systems in tabletop strategy games, etc. Anything goes, and any forms of gaming are valid!

After choosing your specific focus, choose games that you would put on your syllabus as a sort of "required playing" for students, and talk about why you've chosen each item and what it brings to the table. If you decide to choose, say, NetHack and The Binding of Isaac for your class on "Roguelikes, Roguelites, and the Fallacy of the Berlin Interpretation", discuss how those particular games illustrate some of the key concepts you want to convey to your learners.

While I'm intending this to be serious and straightforward, I also like the idea of people having fun with it, so feel free to come up with some less serious or more entertaining classes. I'd love to see the outline for course that explored, say, the history of exploding barrels or an investigation of taste levels in the fashion of JRPG outfits.

This is different from the what have you been playing thread, which is more of an objective reporting of what we've been doing. I instead want to hear a story about your gameplay. Tell me about a discovery you made, the journey of one of your characters, an achievement you're working towards, a funny mishap, a close match, a puzzle that you got stuck on, a realization you had as a player, a glitch that ruined a save, etc.

It can be about anything noteworthy, interesting, exciting, funny, disappointing -- whatever you think makes for a good story. Also, while I'm intending for this to be mostly current -- for games we're playing right now -- feel free to share a great story from times past if you like.

I heard someone with the Sonic "ring loss" chime as their text message alert today and it instantly brought a smile to my face. Just wondered what other sound effects would be most nostalgic for you if you were to hear it in a similar situation, as there are many games/franchises/systems I have little to no experience with.

I’m a very incompetent gamer and won’t access much of the content if I use regular difficulty. That makes me feel like a cheater and a lazy bastard. I know that’s silly but I grew up with the Super Nintendo. Our generation has certain values!

The screenshot can be of anything you want to show off: a beautiful moment, a hard-earned achievement, a creative triumph, a funny visual glitch, etc. Take a screenshot of your game and then post it here, telling us what game it's from and, more importantly, why you chose that particular moment to highlight. What does it mean to you?

Also, if you're gaming on something that doesn't allow for easy screenshotting (e.g. older hardware or handhelds), feel free to snap a picture of the screen itself with a camera.

This is, of course, subjective, so go with whatever your feelings are. Also, you can choose to judge quality as based on the time of the game's release, or by current standards. However you choose to evaluate the question, I'm interested in hearing about which series haven't faltered in releasing good titles across a large number of entries or span of time.

I also think it would be fun to examine some that barely miss the mark: series that are almost entirely great -- if only weren't for those one or two titles that really brought them down.

Okay, so it's been around now for a year and a half. What's the good, bad, and ugly? I know they've got free games every week, I know they've got a bunch of timed exclusives, and I hear they've still got kinks to iron out. I'm primarily asking from the perspective of an occasional gamer who prefers to be as hassle-free, launcher-free, and DRM-free as possible.

Folks, I´m going crazy over here. My social interactions are extremely limited. Online gaming has been a timesaver, but my friends are not always available (I can´t even really work because both my computers broke down).

I play on the PS4 nights and daw, on the GMT-3 time zone, but that´s flexible. Some of the online games I have / can play:

• Path of Exile
• Rocket League
• Destiny 2
• Torchlight 2
• A Way Out
• Fifa 19
• GTA V
• Overcooked
• Doom
• Borderlands 2
• Titanfall 2
• Brawlhalla

My username on PSN is goombatrooper22.

Post your platforms and available games!

We're halfway through 2020 (can you believe it?) and I'm curious to know what everyone's highlights are so far. They don't have to be games released in 2020, just ones that you've played in 2020. Let us know what they are and why you took to them.

So recently I’ve started getting into the back end of games and looking at the people behind the scenes and it’s got me to research different developers and their history and the games they have produced, so I’m wondering what are your favourite game developers and why?

I'm interested in hearing about games that exist off the main map of gaming: games that I can't buy from any of the common storefronts and games that aren't easily playable through an emulator.

Examples of things I'm interested in hearing about:

• Long-forgotten abandonware
• Homebrew games for consoles
• Romhacks
• Legally dubious fan-games
• Total conversion mods
• ARGs
• Web games (not ones on sites like Kongregate/GameJolt though)
• Independently distributed games (that you can't get through, say, itch.io)
• Games for systems that aren't currently emulatable
• Games that have been removed from distribution
• Games with servers or content that are no longer operational
• Anything else you think fits the question, really

Tell me about the game(s) you know of and what makes them noteworthy.

Exploding barrels, invisible walls, cutscene deaths -- gaming has a whole host of tropes that range from loveable to hateable. Which are the ones you most like, and which are the ones you most dislike? Give examples of games that demonstrate these, and talk about how and why you feel the way that you do about them.

For those that you like, what games have really elevated their use? For those that you dislike, which games are the most egregious offenders? Also, have any games played with the tropes and subverted them in interesting or meaningful ways?

For the purposes of the question, these don't have to be tropes that only exist in gaming -- it's fine if there's crossover with other media.

Also, please mark any spoilers!

I'm currently reorganizing my Steam library, as I do every other year or so, and I'm curious as to how people here organize things (or not). Do you have certain categories or a taxonomy you put your games into? What are the benefits and limitations for the way you've chosen?

DLC can often feel nickel-and-dimey, where you're paying out real money for cosmetics or other minor additions. For example, Borderlands 2 has dozens of DLC packs that merely unlock extra skins for your in-game characters. On the other hand, DLC can also significantly expand a game's scope, or add a lot more value to the base game. Borderlands 2, again, several additional campaign DLCs that extend the game playtime by hours, with new maps, missions, stories, etc.

I'm curious as to what DLCs out there fit this latter category. Also, for the purposes of the question, assume "DLC" to refer to any official expansion or additional content, even if it's not explicitly referred to as "DLC" by the devs or storefront or whatnot. What are some of the most worthwhile DLCs you've played?

Assorted questions. As always, don't feel like you have to treat them like a quiz and answer them one-by-one (though you certainly can), but more like jumping off points for discussing whatever you feel is relevant:

• Who here games on Linux?
• How long have you been doing it?
• What is your setup like? Full-time Linux? Dual booting? GPU Passthrough?
• Which distro do you use, and why? Did gaming-related factors have an influence on that choice at all?
• What are some of the positives about gaming on Linux?
• What are some of the drawbacks/frustrations?
• What are some of your favorite native Linux games?
• What are your thoughts on the main gaming platforms' support or lack thereof for Linux?
• Do you personally feel a friction between open source philosophy and playing closed-source games?
• Do you think that Valve's Proton initiative is a help or hindrance for Linux gaming?

Share anything else you feel is relevant as well. I'm mostly interested in hearing what other people's experiences are.

Also, I debated whether to put this in ~games or ~tech and ultimately decided on the former, but if it's better placed in ~tech I'm fine with that.

My gaming group got to talking at our last game about how long we've been playing. Most of us were at 20+ years. I asked them if they'd ever played a 20th level character, and the answer was a unanimous no, so that's something we're going to remedy with the next campaign.

I got to fiddling around with characters and noticed that 5e caps itself out nicely once you hit 20th. No matter what you create, the limits on action economy, maximum spell/attacks, stats/scores all give rise to a nice plateau. The hit points getting huge is the biggest change, so you just end up trading healing word whack-a-mole for characters that can actually take some real punishment and using power word heal. Needs a wound mechanic so that going down has lasting consequences even if you get right back up, but that's easily workable.

I was bored and threw another twenty levels on for a 40th level character, and then another 11 for a meaningful dip into a third class. Just cap the character's proficiency bonus at +6/20th and nothing really changes except you have a far larger bag of tricks at your disposal. Twelve feats is like candyland. I'm anticipating some of my players are going to get ferret shock trying to keep up with their spell lists during combat. Too many choices, they'll make a hilarious mess out of it and it'll be fun. I have a tiny hourglass sitting on the table to keep the pressure up, I'm sure that'll get some use.

I told them to pick their favorite character they've played over the years that they want to revisit and make the best version they can, complete with character history, holdings, etc. They also have to explain everything on their sheet - every level, feat, item, holding, etc all have a story attached. You're a monk? Where and when did you get that training, etc.

Then one of my players turned me on to the epic level book for 5e from 2c gaming. It's perfect, plugs right into the limits and takes them up a bit, but also adds all sorts of epic madness. Every class/archetype gets its own ten level epic prestige class. That's the 'real' 21-30 I can use for their advancement. I can also torment them with the prestige evolutions from the campaign setting we'll be using. There's plenty of advancement to be had this way despite already being at 51st level. I'm working in all of their existing characters from adjacent games as well, so we've got a ready made pool of henchmen.

I have a feeling there's going to be a lot of spelljamming and planar travel in this campaign. There's probably a gods war in there somewhere too. I have my 2nd Edition monster manual binders right here, and a third of the critters in them can give these characters nightmares for days. I'm figuring I'll be making heavy use of Illithids as one of the main threats, that trailer for Baldur's Gate 3 has them back in vogue again. Psionics is such a wonderful foil for magic.

So what kind of character would you build if you were making a character that's already the master of his/her/its? tiny corner of the D&D universe? What do you do with those 51 character levels?

Any races allowed, of course. Racial abilities are the least of it at this point. Origin can be from any campaign setting, past or present.

I just started playing AER: Memories of Old which allows your character to transform into a bird and fly around a sky world of islands. I was struck by how good the flight feels in-game. The sense of speed, control, and freedom was immediately satisfying. I've spent most of the game not actually doing what I'm supposed to but just enjoying the ability to swoop, dive, and get from one point to another in a novel way.

It made me curious: what other games are out there in which just the act of moving your player avatar around is engaging, interesting, or fulfilling?

I recently became quite invested in this game, but my friends are not really interested in it. And talking to random people on PSN feels kinda creepy, TBH. Besides, most people don´t seem that interested. In these times of coronavirus, I´m playing from 1 am to 4 am (GMT-3) almost every day, but I´m open to playing at other times!

I have a level 24 duelist.

This questions ultimately rests on the supposition of what a game intends to be or what esport should be. This is partially why it probably won't spark too much discussion, but I'm interested in your opinions nonetheless, especially when it comes to the current state of esports. It seems to me that when we are talking about rules in any kind of sport we want to change as little as we can over time. If the rules changes enough, you could argue that people have over time played what essentially is a different game. It becomes harder to compare achievements between players within the a timeline. Meta's and achievements will only really be comparable after games has stopped adding content such as new heroes or mechanics. With a lot of games there seems to be a major content patch, then long period of balancing and this cycle basically repeats itself. Another point is that by adding content and changing the meta you are preventing the current players from reaching their full potential, the older players from retaining their hard earned experience and discouraging new players by promising them a game they can never "beat". That is until the content stops coming in and in today's world that might mean that you are not able to play at all due to a lack of dedicated servers. Further the players that might once have stuck to it might already have left, leaving no opponents left to play against.

This superficial take ultimately comes from someone who hasn't really played esports except a little bit of 1.6 counter strike and counter strike global offensive. It always struck me as odd that with MOBA's and especially with shooters such as overwatch and siege, that there seem to be no pushback on this. When I ask people that prefer this sort of drip-feed-service, what I usually hear is that it's something that is necessary to keep them engaged. Isn't there ultimately a trade-off here, between a sort of accessible fun and lack of constancy which prevents players from reaching their full potential?

I immediately see the talking point of financial aspect of games. It seems to me however that Quake and counter strike largely went without major changes when compared to modern esports games. Are there any good broad rules we can use when designing esport games in order to avoid the issues mentioned here?

In an ideal world, do you agree that we generally don't want kind of content and/or rule change that we see today?

If there is a need to add content (such as heroes) to keep a game feeling "fresh". Is there an acknowledgement here that the core-gameplay isn't engaging enough? I think there is a case to be made here when it comes to MOBA's since knowledge (about enemy heroes abilities) plays a more central part when compared to more archaic shooters. Is this indicative of a an audience that is more interested in an entertaining service, rather than a (e)sport that seldom changes?

When we look at games such as world of warcraft, which isn't an esport, yet there are achievements and historic events so to speak which became cheapened or not attainable until what was basically a restart of the timeline (story of the game). Is this not what we are risking with current service models in modern esports?