What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
Examples:
Let us know what it is, and why you feel that you missed out on it.
Company I work for has game nights (with prizes) as team building, mostly play free games, but occasionally a paid game as well. This week's game is paid and am looking for a place where I can buy about 20 Steam keys for the game that's legitimate.
Steam will only let you gift a game if you're friends with them on Steam, which complicates things and would be a pain.
Game is Move or Die in case that matters.
Hey all - after a couple threads discussing randomizers and Archipelago, we should try to get a multiworld game going here! I'm thinking this would start the night of May 8th depending on availability and interest. If you are interested, just shoot a reply in here and let us know your planned game! I'll tag a post about a week out asking for YAML files, and I'll likely make a Discord server for the event itself so we can stream and share info.
Per Archipelago.gg: This is a cross-game modification system which randomizes different games, then uses the result to build a single unified multi-player game. Items from one game may be present in another, and you will need your fellow players to find items you need in their games to help you complete your own.
Essentially, you choose a game and then load into it with few or no items. When you would normally obtain an item, it will either give you a random item from your game or send a random item to another player. Everyone must work together to finish their game!
It is, sometimes! But it's easier than you'd expect. Thankfully there are a couple things to get people moving:
Even though the items will be out of order, the default logic will scatter the items such that every game is possible to beat as intended.
Archipelago is asynchronous. There isn't a time limit, so everyone can take their game at their own pace.
The settings are fairly flexible and let you set your own difficulty if you want to make things a little easier or harder. Don't want to deal with trainer battles in Pokémon? Turn 'em off! Want to start without a sword in Zelda and get creative? Ditch it! Want the duck dragon in Adventure to be four times as fast? Something is wrong with you!
Almost every game has a tracker that actively tells you which checks would trigger an item in your particular game, where they are, and whether you are able to reach them with your current loadout. They'll help you figure out how the game logic works very quickly.
Should you get stuck behind an important check - eg Link's bow, or Samus's morph ball - you can earn points and buy hints. These will tell you which specific check in which game unlocks that particular item.
The list at Archipelago.gg should have you covered.
(...Almost! For anyone a little more savvy, there's also an extended list over here. Anything "In Review" or higher should be safe to run, if a little harder to set up.)
Don't feel like everyone needs to play something different! You can have as many instances of a game as desired within a particular multiworld setup.
Whatever will keep you most interested is best! I've personally had fun with Sonic Adventure 2, Pokémon Red/Blue and Emerald, and Super Metroid. My friends really enjoy LttP, OoT, Kingdom Hearts / 2, Hollow Knight, Stardew Valley, and plenty of others.
I think the only game I've seen people have a bad time with is OSRS due to the absurd amount of effort required.
First go to Archipelago.gg, find a game you'd like to play, and follow the setup guide. You'll generate a YAML file off of the game's settings page, which will dictate the settings for your run. Then you can send that to me before we start - I will throw it into the generator and get the game started. You will also want to download the Archipelago client, which handles the connection between your game and the Archipelago server.
Once we start, games running from an executable will run a mod, patch, or side program which handles the connection to the Archipelago server. They're fairly easy to install as long as you follow the guide to a T.
For games using an emulator, you'll need a clean ROM of the game (can't help you there!) and a version of the emulator BizHawk specified by the guide. The client will come with an installer which handles patching the game for you.Typically you flip a couple settings in BizHawk and restart the program. Then when you run the patched game, you will also run a provided Lua script which reads the game to communicate to the client and everything magically works. It's pretty cool!
First-time setup is probably the most difficult part of the whole thing, so I'm happy of help anyone running into issues.
This tends to be a game-specific question. The first time you play a game can be a little weird as you figure out how the settings play - too easy and it's like blowing through on cheat codes; too hard and it can be frustrating. The Archipelago discord can probably give some good first-time suggestions, and I'm happy to ask around for anyone who needs help.
Generally would I suggest for anyone doing RPGs to take advantage of EXP multipliers or other shortcuts that don't have to do with actual objectives, as it will save a ton of time on grinding. It's definitely a good idea to triple or quadruple EXP in something like Pokémon to keep the game moving - there are other options available like level caps if you'd like to introduce difficulty back in a more dynamic way than gating time. Think about things that annoyed you in the vanilla game and turn those off!
Keep Death Link off for the first time. I'd also suggest using Remote Items if it's available as an option. (If you obtain items in your own game, it may not be tracked by Archipelago because it's unnecessary to use the server to track. However if your save file corrupts or your game freezes/crashes, you would need to collect them again because the server doesn't handle them. Remote Items makes it so, in the case you lose progress, the server will track them and give them back to you as you load if they're missing for any reason.)
Pokemon Emerald: Set EXP to at least 3x and catch rate to minimum 30 (Snorlax's catch rate) if not higher or instant catch. Enable remote items. Add hidden items if you want more exploration checks and lean on the tracker plus a map. For shits and giggles: Randomize all parties and wild encounters, randomize abilities but blacklist Arena Trap / Shadow Tag, add all the extra roadblocks, add extra fly location, Turbo A (just be aware it's FAST). ALWAYS randomize music and fanfares. For some more difficulty based on progression add level cap plus bonus levels. You should blacklist Wonder Guard, but where's the fun in that?
Pokemon Red/Blue: Similar stuff to the above.
Hollow Knight: Randomize Dreamers, Skills, Charms, Keys, Mask Shards, Vessel Fragments, Charm Notches, Pale Ore, Geo Chests, Relics, Maps, Boss Geo. Set Egg Shop to 0.
Mario 64: Get the thing to work first, then randomize everything but 1-up Blocks. Disable 100 coins stars if that's a boring thing.
Ocarina of Time: Make sure it's not keysanity and shops are cheap. Everything is open. Lower big poe count to 1 and have all timesavers on.
Super Metroid: Make sure that Layout Patches, Varia Tweaks, Elevators Speed, Doors Speed, Spin Jump Restart and Infinite Space Jump are enabled. Refill Before Save can also help if you struggle with health and ammo
StarCraft 2: Grid for mission order and maybe turn off challenge/mastery locations.
Sonic Adventure 2: Randomizing chao keys and gold beetles is very reasonable for extra challenge. Do not randomize item boxes. For extras Whistlesanity should be pipes only, Omosanity is mostly fine but might get grating. Highly recommend disabling missions 2 and 4 for all characters (100 rings is particularly repetitive, time limits aren't typically that difficult but make getting extra checks annoying); kart levels are however many you wish to do. Recommend setting level gate density to early so you have more levels to work with before getting stuck.
Mystic Quest: Don't shuffle dungeons, keep Enemizer Attacks normal and Regions Strict for Progressive Formations.
Secret of Evermore: Shorter boss rush is probably nice, put Exp modifier at least 300.
That's OK! It's daunting, but the experience tends to be a little easier than expected. Don't throw really spicy limits at yourself in your settings and you should be OK. I never actually beat Ocarina of Time the first time I played it in Archipelago, but I still made it! (Hell, I still haven't played any of Ganon's Tower. I learned a skip instead off the entrance torches!) Having the tracker available helps a ton to point you in the right direction. There are also plenty of people on the Archipelago discord happy to give you suggestions if you feel stuck, as I'm sure we will be ready to help too.
Individual Archipelago worlds tend to play a little faster than playing the vanilla game, as the Archipelago versions of the game usually skip cutscenes, dialogue, etc. Occasionally you'll hit some gordian knot of backwards item progression which halts your progress; occasionally you'll get an overpowered item early and you can blow through half the game in a short bit. The progression balancing in every settings page can help you adjust if you'd like the earlygame to open up a little quicker, which will make the game go by a bit faster.
Multiworlds between my friends tend to take about a week to complete around 15 games.
Have I got the deal for you! Technically, if you'd like, you can play more than one game. Just generate two YAML files, set both games up, and switch between them at your leisure!
I promise there's no pressure if you need to take your time! But if you would like to jump ship, you have two options. One is that you can give someone your file and let them complete your save via your username. Otherwise, there is a !release option that will end your game and send out all checks hidden within your game.
This is a bit far into the future and I wanted to make sure the date would work for people interested, so no need to send YAMLs or anything yet. But do let me know if you'd like to join - no matter your skill level, we'd be happy to have you!
(edit: hid that bigass faq thingy)
So I've been playing a lot of WoW lately and that includes a ton of raids, always with voice chat on discord. Just now I found out that someone is a streamer and broadcast a full raid + the voice chat.
I was not part of this particular raid thankfully. And as far as I can tell he doesn't have a lot if any viewers. But it still made me uncomfortable that someone has been streaming my voice without my consent, without my knowledge even. I do not feel that it is unreasonable of me to expect someone to ask for permission before doing this, but maybe I am just completely out of the loop about streaming?
Is it naive to expect privacy in this regard? Is this what one should expect from online gaming nowadays?
I've had a lot of extra time on my hands lately, so I decided to take a crack at some highly acclaimed games I never got around to.
I love a big RPG and some of my favorite gaming experiences were playing Skyrim and FNV on the settings were things like eating, sleeping, and staying warm were an important part of the game. KCD seemed like a good fit, so I bought it on sale and have put in about 30 hours so far.
I want to like it. I want to enjoy fucking around in a medieval setting and appreciate the many details in this game. The story has me sucked in so far, and like I said, I love the prospect of a gigantic RPG. But wtf is this gameplay? I get that it's not supposed to be easy, and I can look past the weird puppet feeling when I try to fight, but I feel trapped. I'm a broke idiot with no charisma and I get my ass kicked everywhere I go. I thought the whole point of video games was to escape real life. I decided to take a break from the main story, so I tried to go hit up the Miller's daughter to see what my options were. Next thing I know, I'm hunting down flower petals and linen with her like she's Big Boss on a total stealth mission.
Does it get better? And by better, I mean manageable. I'm worried I stumbled into something that's out of my league as an older, unskilled, semi-casual video game player. I'm not a masochistic Souls-like player that needs punishment in order to feel something. Should I stick with this game, or am I better off learning how to swordfight and pick locks in real life?
Edit: I'M GOING BACK IN FOR SOME MORE TIME WITH BERNARD! Thank you all for your feedback.
Sometimes my girlfriend commandeers my desktop to play games like Fallout 4 (which she discovered after the Fallout TV series last year) and sometimes I’ll go on my laptop while she does that. I usually like to program when I’m on my laptop then but I’m looking for suggestions for games to play that don’t need a mouse or much graphical power. Is Dwarf Fortress something I should try?
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
I believe a few of us have Steam Decks, thus I wanted to do this kinda public announcement.
TL;DR
Long version
I have my Steam Deck since May 2022 and I put certainly over 1000 hours in gaming on it. I would believe if it was even approaching 2000 hours.
Lately I played demanding game and battery was discharging rather fast with remaining time on full charge being under 1:30 hours, which I wasn't used to just a few months ago when it lasted over 2 hours even in demanding games (I limit to 30 fps and I also limit TDP/power). This weekend I jumped into desktop mode and checked the battery life which showed me what I feared - 65% of original capacity.
I went on iFixit page and the price for new one is hefty 95€, but since Steam Deck got me so much enjoyment, I was ready to pay for it - if it was in stock, that is. I'm glad it wasn't!
Since I have a bit of electronics and software background (hobby level), I realized that the charging chip (or whatever keeps the info about state of charge) was running since day 1 on relative data. What I mean: I have never discharged my Steam Deck lower than 10% and most of the times charging anywhere between 30-80%. And since the charging chip likely measures last fully charged capacity (and thus battery health) based on, well, how much it was charged and discharged all over again, it probably skewed its measurements in those three years.
So I went on a "quest" to play until dead. And I was surprised when Steam Deck reached 3% battery and kept running for another hour (ligthweight game) until it was finally dead. Then I fully charged it and voila - battery health 90%!
I have already said how it likely happened, but once more and in short: the charging chip needs to reach both limits, 0% and 100% of battery, from time to time = You have to let it drain fully here and there if you want your battery level indicator (and remaining time) to be precise or if you want to get the real state of your battery.
A bit offtopic: I've had laptop that had 50% of original capacity. I have changed the battery cells inside the battery and let it fully discharge and charge again but the vendor locked the chip from "learning" the real capacity making the new cells useless because the chip still reported 50% thus telling me when I booted it up that the battery has to be changed and also telling me non-relevant remaining time based on this 50% battery health... I'm glad that Steam Deck is capable of re-learning this data and not playing dumb.
Hopefully the title says it all, I decided to make this generic because I think all game randomization is cool.
To be specific, this is not about games which have random elements, this is about games which have been modded to introduce some form of randomization.
The Pokemon games are reasonably famous for having fun randomizers.
I posted this because I recently started a Dark Souls 3 randomized run and got given a heap of really nice sorceries and miracles right at the start of the game. Luckily also a catalyst too. It was like it was begging me to be a mage, even though it's apparently hard as hell.
I've been a fan of the farming/life sim/role playing/cozy games or however you want to label these games since I was a kid and my older brother brought home a new game for the Nintendo 64: Harvest Moon 64. Over the years, I played several titles in the series through the Wii/NDS era, before my tastes changed, and I found myself playing more online games with my friends and just less gaming overall.
Stardew Valley releasing was a huge event for the genre and I do greatly enjoy the game (even though I've yet to finish a play through as I keep restarting after taking a break from playing) as it captured the feeling of the early Harvest Moon games really well. It also got me to start the habit of having an N64 emulator and a copy of Harvest Moon 64 on practically every device I own.
There have been some recent remakes of older games, specifically Friends of Mineral Town and A Wonderful life, but I didn't enjoy the art style and some of the changes made to the games, which ended up with me not picking them up.
I was curious if anyone else was a fan of the series (or one particular game in the series), or if there are any recent games that you felt are great in this genre.
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
I was reading the recent post about strategy games, and I'm still astonished to see for how many hours (at least hundreds, often 1000+) people are playing these. I'm guessing that in these cases, all your gaming time is exclusively taken by that single game.
So, do you have (or did you have) games, or series, like that? Do you play solo or multi? What compels you to spend so much time on a single game? How do you feel about it?
Command and Conquer Generals Zero Hour:
It has a very active community and there are lots of tournaments. Matches are very intense and fun.
Europa Universalis IV:
At this point of my life, I can say I am almost super pro at this game with thousands of hours 🥲
I also want to get into Red Alert and Star Craft series but I find them super complicated for some reason lol. Maybe I lost my game learning skills at the age of 29…
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
So Assassins Creed Shadows released this week, and so far the discourse surrounding the game is really all over the place with lots of good and bad reviews across the spectrum. I was a big fan of the Assassins Creed games from 1-3, and then I skipped the PS4 console generation so I didnt play any of the more recent ones. But this new one is about ninjas, which is rad, so Ive been following news about the game.
One thing I noticed, which is the main thing I want to discuss, when seeing clips of the game online is the focus on sword combat, and more specifically open combat. I dont know if this is a thing that became more of a focus in earlier games like Valhala or if its more a response to the success of Ghost of Tsushima. Im wondering if anyone else has thoughts on how the role of combat has evolved as the series has advanced.
In my personal view, a ninja assassin game should have minimal focus on direct combat. The ideal way an assassination should go is something like this:
Do some early missions to gather intel or do prep work
Take on "the approach" to your target, which will involve a combination of parkouring over rooftops and stealth kills to remove guards. Your efforts in step 1 will make this easier or harder.
Get into position and wait for the right moment when the target moves into the right place
Spring your trap, whether that be pouncing on them with a dagger or setting off an explosive or whatever
Drop a smoke bomb, disappear into the shadows, maybe jump off a rooftop into a haystack for good measure
When pulled off correctly, it should be like you were never there. Aside from the dead guy. If you are getting into a direct head on confrontation as a ninja, you have fucked up at ninja. To this end, I feel that in a stealth assassination game open combat should be more of a penalty for when you screw up and get caught, not part of the core strategy.
Looking back at the early games, this concept was applied in AC1. Getting into a fight with a Templar was pretty difficult and tedious. You didnt want to get stuck doing it, and if you did it was often better to just run. The times you were forced to fight head on it felt like you were trapped in a dire situation that was not to your advantage, so it was a good way to apply pressure to the player to make a scene seem tense.
In AC2 the combat was reworked and became significantly easier. I actually really like the way it was implemented. Technically you can get away with just hammering away at most weaker enemies until you break their guard, but the combat really shines when you fight defensively. If you focus in dodging and counter-kills, big fights become a thing of beauty. Ezio dodges and weaves effortlessly through the crowd, doing a slick spin slash every so often to slice a bad guys neck. Its all very stylistic and elegant and graceful in a way that makes Ezio look like a badass but is still very evocative of the idea of a master assassin.
And then AC3 is fine, I don't have a ton to say about that one.
Returning to Shadows, when I look at clips of people playing the game there is a lot of sword combat. The combat seems to often follow a pattern where the enemy will perform a fixed attack pattern with visual indications like a colored aura around their weapon, which the player must mitigate through precision by either dodge rolls or parrys, after which there will be a pause during which the player can whack at the enemy a few times and reduce their health bar. Repeat a couple times until they are killed. I think it is specifically the hacking away at an enemy like you are taking a machete to jungle foliage that I dont like about this. Whittling away at an enemy who just tanks it and soaks up damage feels decidedly un-assassiny to me.
Now, if open combat is intended to be a big part of the game then I can see why this is the case. You cant make every enemy a long drawn out chore like AC1 because if youre going to have to do this like a hundred times that will get old fast. And you cant do glorified quick time events like AC2 because itd be too quick and a major pillar of your gameplay will feel trivial. So I can see why this newer style of combat is being used, I just don't feel its a great fit for the genre.
What are your thoughts? Are you a fan of stealth-action games? Do you enjoy dodge-roll-centric combat? How would you want to see combat handled in an assassins creed type game?
I really love being able to see all sorts of stats -- number of games played, wins/losses, leaderboard rankings, even obscure stats.
I also love word, card, and puzzle games. Games like solitaire, for example, would be PERFECT candidates to lean heavily into the stats, but I just haven't been able to find a good one yet.
What are your favorite games in these categories? Bonus points if they have an emphasis on keeping records and stats.
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
I'm touching up a game with a dev who is getting their code ready for a FOSS build of their game. One of the more persistent bugs is something weird in the settings menu, where an option is focused and checked off, the text label disappears. Color override doesn't seem to affect the behavior, but if I go into the game editor and uncheck Clip Content and Follow Focus, the behavior flips and now it's focused and UNchecked text labels that disappear. I'm putting feelers out for advice on the usual haunts, and I thought I would ask here too.
Godot version is 3.6, the only modification is that it uses Godotsteam.
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
I've had some ideas for a game simmering for a while now and I've finally committed to learning Godot to see what I can put together. I'm still in need of some inspiration, though, and I know there's a few folks around here who have made games. Complete, polished, sketchy, half-baked - doesn't matter! - I'd love to see what people here have come up with!
My parameters are
[Edit: I should have specified - a modern racing game. I'm pretty versed on the options pre-2010, it's the new stuff I'm looking for.]
I originally wanted a rally game to scratch a hillclimb itch but I'm open to whatever now. Trawling through Steam has made my head spin though.
Previous racing games/series I've played and liked - Rallisport Challenge (really, if I could just play this again I'd be set), Wipeout 3, Road Rash, Ridge Racer Type 4, Twisted Metal 2, Jet Moto, Wave Race, Mario Kart, Sled Storm... OutRun! Showing my age here.
Somehow I've never really liked Need For Speed.
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
My kids and I recently picked up Deep Rock Galactic, and after playing a few rounds I feel a bit overwhelmed. I think either I'm just not fully accustomed to the game yet, or perhaps missing something.
Anyway, I thought I would ask the people of Tildes for tips and tricks. Anything you wish you knew earlier? Or maybe just some general advice for a new player?
Thanks much!
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
Let's list some great mobile games. Preferably ones you can pay for once and be done, or free ones that have microtransactions that you don't need to do to just play the game (e.g. Marvel Snap). Leave out pay for power or games that have "charges" to stop you from playing until you buy more or burn time.
Edit: Thank you everyone for your suggestions! I compiled a list here that is, I believe, mostly Android. If you're looking for iOS only suggestions it looks like Apple Arcade was recommended regularly and also user Recognition101 had a comprehensive list I will refer you to: https://recognition101.github.io/ios-games/
Here is the Android Games List:
-Square Enix re-releases
-Stardew Valley
-Monster Hunter Stories
-Disgaea series remakes
-Vampire Survivors
-Slay the Spire
-Shattered Pixel Dungeon
-Slice and Dice
-Bloons series
-Sproggiwood
-Pysol FC
-Lexica
-Mindustry
-Overboard
-Old PC Game ports like Baldur's Gate 1 & 2, SW:KOTR 1 & 2
-Hoplite
-Simon Tatham's Puzzles
-Rogue Adventure
-Cultist Simulator
-Mini-Metro
-Wordament
-Retro Bowl
-Antiyoy
-Marvel Snap
-Star Realms
-Wingspan
-Team Fight Tactics
-Battle for Polytopia
-Where's My Water?
-Underhand
-Badland
-Eat Me Please
-Z Origins
-Yellow
-Dawncaster
-Ollie's Arcade
-Orna
-Night of the Full Moon
-A Dark Room
-The Ensign
-Universal Paperclips
-Opus: Rocket of whispers
-Opus: The day we found Earth
-TerraGenesis - Space Settlers
-Sheltered
-Seedship
-Framed
-Plague Inc.
-Gravity Defied
-Magic Research
-Star Wars Galaxy of Heroes
-Peglin
-Civilization series
-Rebel Inc.
-Boom Beach
-Professor Layton Series
-Slay
-Ritual
This is primarily aimed at the younger folks here, but it can conceivably work for anyone.
Is there a game that came out from before you started gaming that you have since played and loved? An oldie for you, but still a goodie?
I’m curious because gaming has changed so much so quickly that a lot of older games feel like they almost require fond nostalgia to counterbalance their clunkiness. For others, they were sort of a “you had to be there” moment because gaming hadn’t developed fully as a medium so we players weren’t aware of their limitations at the time.
Without nostalgia or direct experience with them, a lot of their magic is gone.
Has anyone found that magic in a game even without the nostalgia? If so, which one(s). What made them resonate for you?
In particular, I’m interested in games that specifically aren’t remakes/remasters since those often modernize elements, but I won’t say they aren’t allowed for the purposes of the question or anything, since they’re also a very accessible way for modern gamers to access older titles.
Hey there! I've been modding Minecraft for a couple years now and recently have fallen down the rabbit hole of watching people play horror mods. I was curious if anyone knows any good YouTube series where people roleplay in a game with horror mods. Actual in-character playthroughs of games is a fascinating topic for me (think Neebs Gaming playing Subnautica), so I was curious if anyone knew any that involve Minecraft horror. Thanks in advance!
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
I just learned that I can use the Steam Link app (iOS link, Android link) to stream Steam games to my phone and tablet (within my home).
I have no desire to play M/KB or controller-based games on these devices (I already have a computer and a Steam Deck which can do those better), but I like the idea of playing some more casual stuff that only uses mouse input (in the form of me tapping the screen).
I'm thinking stuff like:
I'm interested specifically in lower-precision mouse-based games that would be comfortable to play on my relatively small phone screen (the device I'm most likely to use), though that's not a hard requirement. Anything requiring more precision I could play on my much larger tablet screen instead.
What games do you recommend?
I've mentioned a few times I'm working on making a tactical RPG engine, and I'm finally at the point where I'm doing the actual important part of determining turn order.
It's a harder design decision than I thought, so I thought I'd ask for opinions.
I'm trying to make a game in the style of Shining Force, where the turn order is determined by a unit's status. There's quite a few games like that, but I'm wondering if that design is actually good. The thing that makes that style of game good is that they're actually fairly easy, and the "noise" of stat-based turn order, where you can't depend on a specific turn order, seems to make the game harder. Or at the very least, it closes the door on more precise tactics. I've had plenty of experiences where I thought a unit was safe because they had enough HP for one more hit, and the enemy ended up hitting them twice before their turn came up.
In reality, I'm actually pretty set on keeping this in my engine for better or for worse (boy, is it hard to resist expanding scope), but I'd be interested in hearing some opinions nonetheless
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
This thread is aimed toward discussing video game mods, whether that be major overhauls, more tame additions to what is otherwise still pretty much the base game, simple QoL stuff, tech demos showing off black magic the game's engine only begrudgingly accepts to let happen, mods you're making yourself, modpacks, or anything else that is related.
Fix an annoyance.
Take out a level.
Revamp a system.
Expand a world.
Etc.
Pick a game, any game, and tell us what ONE thing about it you would change, and why. It doesn’t have to be feasible or reasonable or whatnot. You’ve got a magic wand with one charge left.
Also, your goal CAN be to make the game better, but it doesn’t have to be! Maybe you want to make the game more challenging. More chaotic. More hilarious. More broken.
Entirely up to you!
Also, you only get one change per game, but it’s fine to talk about what you would do for more than one game.
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
Hey folks!
I've recently become quite enamoured with a game called Empyrion Galactic Survival, because as a science fiction author, it gave me a chance to build and fly some of the ships from my books. So much so in fact, that I went and started a YouTube channel in order to "sell" them to other players (they're all free on Nexus, the videos I made just remind me of car reviews so far lol).
Now, Empyrion only goes so far in scratching the creative itch, and I'm on the hunt for more of its I'll to build and experiment with. I'm looking forward to playing with Space Engineers 2 when it drops, but are there any others you can recommend? It needn't be constrained to space games either... I'm a fan of all things mechanical, but mostly those I can hot rod a bit and paint flames on.
As is the case with a lot of my questions, "intended for multiplayer" is as open as you want it to be.
It could be that it's a game primarily known for its multiplayer that also happens to have a campaign (e.g. one of the Call of Duty games) or it could be you playing Mario Party against yourself by trading off between your own controllers (we've all done something like this, right?).
Entirely up to you how you interpret the question.
Let us know what the game was, why you played it solo, and, most importantly, how that went for you. Did you like it? Did it give you a novel gaming experience? Were you able to work around any of its limitations? Would you recommend other people try it?
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
I like to play games, but lately I've been avoiding certain types because I think they are not good for my health. At least, they don't make me feel well afterward. For me, this is a particular type of game that requires a very high level of skill, concentration, and dexterity.
I noticed this years ago when I would play online multiplayer. After the game, I would feel extremely aggressive and I could tell that my blood pressure must have been much higher than normal.
More recently, I notice this on very difficult games such as Elden Ring, specifically the boss fights. After playing for a while I have the same feeling that I would have if I had just walked away from a near fatal accident or something. Then sometimes that evening I would have trouble sleeping.
I'm sure my physiology is different than other people. I seem to retain adrenaline/cortisol levels longer than most others. And I know that some people find the adrenaline high to be one of the main points of gaming. Still, I wonder if in general it isn't good for people to stress themselves like this when they aren't burning it off with physical activity.
I read about this online a little bit. There seem to have been some studies about it that were mostly inconclusive. Most of the findings are more interested in games being a substitute for more physical activity, so gamers may be more sedentary or overweight than normal.
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
Do you have any favourite videos / playlists (or the rare cases of writing with screenshots) where someone plays through a whole game while supplying their own commentary in an entertaining and/or informative way?
What have you been playing lately? Discussion about video games and board games are both welcome. Please don't just make a list of titles, give some thoughts about the game(s) as well.
Heads up: the following is abnormally wordy even by my standards, and I'm the kind of person who regularly runs into the Discord character limit by accident despite the Nitro subscription increasing it. The underlying context is a set of two videos that by themselves reach almost 3 hours of runtime. I tried to sum up some of the main points enough that you don't strictly need to have watched the videos to follow while also not needing to slog through a play by play of the same video I recommended you to watch if you did. While I believe the subject is interesting, I fully understand if you don't have the time to dedicate to this. If you do and weren't scared away by the size of the scroll bar, feel free to read on.
This all starts with the seemingly straightforward question in the title: How many Super Mario games are there? You would think it would be easy to answer given that this series is so massively impactful in video game history that to many it defines what a video game is. The truth, like most things, is a lot more complicated. jan Misali, who you might also know for their Conlang Critic series and various video essays on other deceptively complex subjects they find interesting, gathered data through a survey to collect people's answers to that question, and made a video on the subject. The video is about 45 minutes long, and that's only because they deliberately cut it short. The discussion that sparked from this video eventually led to them starting another survey at a larger scale with a revised methodology, culminating to a sequel to the previous video, this time with a two hours runtime, and it, too, was cut short. If you have the time to set aside for this, I would greatly recommend watching both videos as they're very insightful and most of what I have to say is commentary to these two videos (and doesn't even come close to covering as much as the videos themselves do).
Like all good debates on the internet, it starts with an ambiguity issue: What is a "Super Mario game"? In simpler cases, a video game series can be defined as the first game and its sequels and that's enough to establish an uncontroversial list. Things get more complicated when we look at an entire franchise especially one as massive as the Mario franchise, which contains a ton of video games, an even bigger pile of non-video game media... and works that blur the line. You can probably see where this is going, but I'll get back to that particular can of worms later. Focusing on the video games, among the entire franchise, the question focuses on the "mainline" series. That is what jan Misali refers to as the "Super Mario" series, distinguishing them from spinoffs and other games that are part of the franchise. You'll note that I specified "what jan Misali refers to as the "Super Mario" series", not "what the "Super Mario" series is".
Using the video runtime as a yardstick, we are 2 minutes into the first part, and there is already a binary tree's worth of debate, and it's only getting bigger from here: the existence of a mainline series as a separate entity from the overall Mario franchise is commonly accepted, but not unanimously. Among those who do agree, there is disagreement on the scope of the mainline series (with how gargantuan the franchise itself is, even the spinoffs have their own spinoffs, and it would be a perfectly reasonable take to consider some or all of them, such as the Mario Kart games, as a core part of the series). Among those who agree on the scope, there is disagreement over what the first game of the series is (do we start at Super Mario Bros? Mario Bros? Donkey Kong? The Game & Watch series?). In order to keep the video at 45 minutes and not 45 hours, jan Misali picks one definition they feel is reasonable among others: the Super Mario series is one distinct series among others in the franchise, made up of Super Mario Bros. on the NES and its sequels, which are mostly platformer games. With this baseline established (even if the survey doesn't 100% agree), how do we figure out which of all the Mario games are the sequels to SMB1? There are many methods to go about this... And not only none of them converge to a single answer, they all diverge in different ways. Let's start with the most direct source of data jan Misali had access to as a direct result of the process of making the videos: the surveys.
jan Misali isn't just presenting their own thoughts on the matter, they're also analyzing the data gathered from a survey they made before recording both videos. The first one merely presented you with a premade list of games and asked you which of them you considered to be a Super Mario games, and the second one goes more in depth but still had the same overall goal. If there was any sort of consensus (assuming the survey wasn't sabotaged or otherwise flawed enough to distort the ability to interpret the data to the point of uselessness), you could derive the broadly accepted list of Super Mario games from looking at the most common answers to the survey, right?
If you interpret "the most common answer" as "which games people overwhelmingly (>95%) agree are part of the series", the survey gives us Super Mario Bros, Super Mario bros 3, and Super Mario World (by the time of the second video, the second survey added Super Mario 64 to the list, as well as Super Mario Bros. Wonder)... which almost anyone who has an opinion on the subject would agree is a grossly incomplete list. If you interpret "the most common answer" as "which is the list that the most people agreed is the full list of the Super Mario series", you end up with a much more complete list of 18 games which by definition is what the highest percentage of people answering the survey agree on. You could consider it the survey's overall answer to the question... except the percentage in question is less than 2% (although in the second survey analyzed in the second video, this same list, with the at the time newly released Super Mario Bros. Wonder added, actually stood at just above 5%. Closer, but still very much a minority group within the survey). Almost everyone who answered still disagree to some degree with that answer. While there is plenty of insight to be gained from the data (including regarding the limitations of the survey itself), it also conclusively establishes that public opinion (or at least in jan Misali's audience) doesn't have a truly agreed upon answer to this question.
So, we have an answer, but not the answer, and even worse (...or better, if you like analyzing seemingly trivial arguments that secretly hide a rabbit hole of semantics, linguistics and cognitive science) the only thing we can say about "the" answer is that it cannot exist. So let's try finding more answers by going from another angle. If we learned anything from politics, it's that an answer derived from polls can absolutely be wrong, so it makes sense to consider that there is an authoritative source that can give a definitive answer over public opinion. The most obvious lead would be Nintendo itself, the owner of the IP... except that instantly fizzles out because while Nintendo does provide a list of mainline Super Mario games on their website, the one they give you isn't the same depending on whether you ask Nintendo of America or Nintendo of Japan. We can also look at what Wikipedia deems to be the list of Super Mario games, which naturally is different from both Nintendo US and Nintendo JP's list, and on top of that is arguably inconsistent with itself: the page's release timeline lists Bowser's Fury as an entry like the others, but the infobox that redirects to the various Mario games under the "main games" section lists it between parentheses as a sub-entry to Super Mario 3D World, the same way it lists New Super Luigi U as a sub-entry to New Super Mario Bros U which the release timeline in turn omits completely. There are rational reasons to do it this way which I won't go into since jan Misali explains it in the videos themselves, but technically that means Wikipedia doesn't have an internal consensus either. The Super Mario wiki, while unaffiliated with Nintendo, is also a good candidate for an authoritative source, which gives you another, different, answer. We could go on, but let's stop here and conclude that, once again, there is no agreed answer.
Neither polling the public nor going by the authoritative sources have given a concrete answer, which leaves us in front of the semantic rubble trying to piece back a coherent understanding of the Super Mario series. Not to try and find the Correct™ answer, we've already established there isn't one, but it would give us valuable insight as to why no one can agree to a specific answer in the first place. jan Misali spreads this approach over both videos as they give their reasoning from various angles. They deliberately haven't gone over this exhaustively, and neither will I (not that I would be able to), but I do have thoughts I'd like to share based on their observations... Which yes, means I've written 1,5k words establishing the base around the videos I want to talk about despite operating under the assumption the reader has already watched them before going over my own thoughts. I'm certain I could have been more concise, but I felt this was necessary so that this post could stand as a coherent chain of reasoning and not a completely disjointed rambling that won't make sense to anyone who hasn't made the significant time investment that fully watching the video essays represents, and still not make sense to most who did (and if I misunderstood something critical, someone reading this can point it out from my attempt to lay out the context rather than after 12 confused replies down the thread). I'll try and tie my thoughts together in broader parts with increasingly silly titles.
I will start by addressing this not because it's the most important (if anything it's the least important detail I have something to say about) but because it lets me introduce a talking point I'll reuse later. Something that jan Misali mentions early on is what they call "home console purism", defining it as the belief that the mainline Mario series, as a rule, cannot include handheld games. While they don't explicitly state this at any point nor do I have a specific reason to believe implying it was their intention, it somewhat came off to me like bringing it up as a flawed argument just to dismiss it, especially after it was brought up again regarding Super Mario Run as a comparison to the belief that mobile games "don't count". If you leave it at that, I absolutely agree that it's silly to exclude a video game for that reason, especially with the Switch blurring the line. After thinking about it, though, while I'd still disagree with using it as a reason to exclude a video game from a series in this specific case, I think it deserves to be looked at in more detail.
The least charitable interpretation of this argument is that handheld and mobile games are deemed to not be worthy of being included alongside the "real" games released on home consoles or PC, usually with a side of implying that you're a "fake" gamer if you play them (not to mention the higher layer argument from the same basis that also excludes any console games, leaving only PCs as the "true" gaming platform and everything else as lesser toys for kids) which can safely be dismissed as elitist gatekeeping. However, from a perspective of classifying games within a series, there is a much more sensible way to approach this argument.
Nowadays, between the handheld PCs like the Steam Deck which can give desktop PCs a run for their money in terms of specs and the Nintendo Switch that refuses to be classified as a dedicated home console or handheld, the distinction would look a lot sillier, but the handheld game market used to be closer to an isolated sub-segment of the overall video games market than a fully integrated part of it. Disregarding the whole "exclusive releases" circus, faithfully porting a PC game to a home console was generally agreed to be feasible. Handheld consoles were another matter entirely. Most (all? was there a handheld notable for outperforming contemporary home consoles?) of the time, handheld consoles had vastly inferior specs to contemporary home consoles and computers making faithful ports of a given game to them a pipe dream if the game was too resource intensive, and a tendency to have a much more varied control scheme than you'd expect from home consoles, sometimes to the point of "porting" an existing game requiring restarting the game design process from scratch.
Where this starts mattering in this context is what this means for releases within an individual game series, and how game studios would treat developing a given entry for each system. Some just stuck to only home consoles or handhelds, some would aim for the best compromise between having a unified experience for a given game no matter which device you were playing it on and leveraging a specific console's unique features, some would confusingly release games under the same title on different platforms but actually make them completely different games (even Nintendo themselves are guilty of it!), and, most relevantly, some would deliberately make handheld games stand out from the home console games as a sub-series.
This outlook makes a lot less sense if you look at the Super Mario series in a vacuum, which, as a mainly platformer series, struggles a lot less with making a handheld release that convincingly fits the vibe of the home console releases than other genres might (in no small part because designing a 2D game makes just as much sense as it does in 3D for this genre, making the specs gap between handheld and home consoles a lot less important), and as a first party franchise, Nintendo isn't going to be blindsided by a new console's weird features like a third party studio might since they're the ones making the console... But if you consider the market in general across the years, siloing the home and handheld side of a given series as two separate entities, with the home console being granted the "mainline series" role was a very real phenomenon. If you start from this premise and look at the Super Mario series which debuted on the NES, it makes sense to apply the same framework and say "None of the handheld games are part of the Super Mario series, they're part of their own series". I would still disagree, but it's definitely a lot more sensible to base it on past observations of the market than gatekeeping.
To elaborate, I would find this argument a lot more convincing back when the DS (which was so atypical that even porting a game from another handheld to the DS' bespoke dual screen and touch screen setup was a non trivial affair, let alone the home consoles) was the current-gen Nintendo handheld than now where the Switch 2 (a console with a mostly conventional control scheme and powerful enough that porting an arbitrary PC/home console game to it without visibly changing anything about the game makes just as make sense as any other platform) is about to come out. And with this I'm finally arriving to the talking point I wanted to introduce. If the evolution of the broader market can affect the validity of someone's criteria to determine which games are (or aren't) part of the Super Mario series, then we can generalize that to the following: A game can be (or no longer be) considered part of a series depending on when you ask even if absolutely nothing has changed about the game in isolation.
One thing that jan Misali picked up on from the original survey is a major ambiguity that made answering (and therefore interpreting the resulting data) harder is the remakes, remasters, enhanced versions with their own release, and other related weirder cases. These games range from almost completely identical to previous releases to non-controversially a variant of the same title but still different enough to provide an experience meaningfully separate from the original title, to different enough they're arguably not the same game, adding a dimension to the answer that makes enforcing a flat "yes" or "no" choice less useful. This is why the survey that led to the second video made it possible to call an entry a "mainline Super Mario game", a "major spinoff", a "minor spinoff", "not canon" and finally "not a Mario game" (and "unsure", just in case) at the same time as you answer whether you think the title is a distinct entry in the series (or you're unsure), to be able to clarify the general sentiment that if a game saw more than one release under different versions, they can all be acknowledged as an incarnation of that game without making each individual release an entry to the mainline Super Mario series of its own. This allowed the answers to be more nuanced, but this by itself doesn't help answering the original concern: if multiple releases can all be the same game, and that game is part of the series, can more than one of these releases be called a "distinct" entry? If you think there can't, which one is it? And this last question is what I'm going to focus on for my next thought.
Forced reference aside, let's look at other franchises for comparison. Doom Eternal, originally released on PC in March 2020, got a Switch port later in December that year. Thanks to skillful optimization allowing it to somehow run on glorified 2015 Android tablet hardware, this port is faithful enough that I don't think it would be controversial to call it the same game as the PC release compared to, for example, The Sims 2, where while a game named The Sims 2 was released on the Nintendo DS, it is so radically different from the PC release that I would consider it an entirely separate game (and for that matter not a part of the mainline Sims series, but I'll put away that thought before I completely lose the plot). If I asked "Between the PC and the Switch release of Doom Eternal, which is the main release?" and we assume "both" isn't considered a valid answer (which is itself debatable) I would expect the natural answer to be the PC release simply because out of two functionally equivalent releases of the same game, the PC release came first. Similarly, if we consider, as a general rule, that there exists one, and only one, release of a given game that embodies a distinct entry in the mainline Super Mario series, with any other release not counting (while still accepting that they're a version of that game), the earliest release being the distinct entry makes intuitive sense. After all, they're the original version of the game. If it could be of the future ones it would mean a release could stop being the distinct entry in a mainline series despite nothing having changed about the release itself, which doesn't make sense... right?
Time to bring up that one point from earlier: there's nothing inherently preventing the status of a game release as a mainline series entry from being affected by external factors. Quick disambiguation note: I've been using the word "release" in the context of video games being made available for purchase, but the word "release" can also be used to mean a software update, no matter how minor. Video games also being software, this distinction is now going to matter. To avoid confusion, I will only use the word "release" to mean a game being made available to purchase and refer to a new software version for an already released game as an "update". With this cleared up: before internet connection became a standard feature in consoles, the general expectation was that releasing a game meant permanently locking down the state of its software. Game companies would not want to update a game between releases and end up with different versions of a physical game in circulation if they can't ensure that the customers would get the most recently updated copies as it would inevitably confuse players, so it would only be considered for truly major issues that weren't caught in time for the release. As broadband internet came into the picture, it suddenly became a lot less important to make sure the game stayed the same after release as you could simply get the customer to upgrade their game over the Internet. This quickly became standard operating procedure for PC games, with consoles catching up a bit later, including Nintendo's. And with it, came the practice of content updates over the lifecycle of a game before the next release.
Even if the individual updates don't change the game to a meaningful degree from one update to the next, as they pile up you can eventually end up with a wildly different game than what it was when it originally released, even if it's supposed to be the same entry into its series. If you agree that the release you accept as the distinct entry of its mainline series can change its characteristics over time, wouldn't it make sense to also agree that which release of a game you consider to be the distinct entry of the mainline series can also change over time? Let's turn to another series as an example: The Elder Scrolls, and specifically Skyrim which is infamous for its amount of re-releases. It is at the time of writing the latest game in its series, and has been since 2011... but is the by now almost 15 years old original release really still the main entry in the Elder Scrolls mainline series? As far as Steam is concerned, the game you can purchase if you search for Skyrim on its store isn't the original release, nor is it even the Legendary Edition release from 2013, but the Special Edition from 2016 (while also letting you buy the Anniversary Edition as a DLC to the Special Edition). With the original release no longer being on sale and the more recent Anniversary Edition being classified as a DLC rather than a "proper" release, it would make sense for me to call SE the "distinct" entry representing Skyrim in The Elder Scrolls over the original release. Is there an instance of this happening in the Super Mario series? It would be a huge stretch, but you could argue (although frankly I wouldn't agree) that Super Mario 64 isn't a distinct entry in the Super Mario series because you consider the Super Mario 64 DS remake to be the "true" entry in the series. Sure, claiming that Super Mario 64, the first Mario 3D platformer isn't a mainline Super Mario game sounds ludicrous, but so does "Skyrim (2011) isn't a mainline Elder Scrolls Game but Skyrim Special Edition is" and I did consider it a plausible argument. A slightly less unhinged instance would be to consider New Super Mario Bros. U Deluxe to be the representative entry in the mainline series over New Super Mario Bros. U.
By this point I've highlighted ambiguities over the meaning of pretty much word in the question "How many Super Mario games are there?".
There is one left to achieve total semantic obliteration: games. This was inevitable, really. How could you overanalyze this question and not bring up nitpicking over the meaning of the term "video game" itself? jan Misali has already done most of the work for me, as part of the second video involves them mentioning that attempting to derive an appropriate list of mainline Super Mario game solely from an objective definition while is doomed to fail. Whatever the approach, you will always be working with an unstated semantic "guardrail" of some sort that cannot be comprehensively worded into the definition. The first basic example they give is "Anything with 'Super' in the title is part of the Super Mario series." Under any reasonable context we know what is meant by "anything" but without it, this definition includes infinitely many things that very obviously aren't Super Mario games. But even progressively narrowing it down to something that sounds sensible will still leave a semantic hole that includes something absurd. This culminates into the following bit:
So, maybe you can use this "has Super in the title" method as a starting point and add more stuff to it until it becomes a useful definition. And, in the comments from part 1, many people have tried to do exactly that. And very often what they come up with something like: "The Super Mario series consists of the games developed by Nintendo for Nintendo consoles that have 'Super Mario' in the title, excluding RPGs, party games, Mario Kart, sports games, and reissues of previously released Super Mario games."
At which point jan Misali unleashes their inner Diogenes and reveals what I've been hinting at in the header: Behold, a man mainline Super Mario game! However, while I'm all for leveraging semantic technicalities for the sake of comedy, I think this is a part where jan Misali loses the plot a bit. Even accounting for a VERY permissive understanding of what a video game is, I don't think I am a teacher: Super Mario Sweater plausibly counts as one. Obviously knowing the incoming storm in the comment section, they supplied the following definition for a video game: "interactive software with a visual display for the purpose of entertainment". I agree that if you accept that's what a video game is, I am a teacher: Super Mario Sweater is in fact a video game. What I don't agree with is that the definition itself is accurate enough.
jan Misali's last argument in the video in favor of IaaT:SMS being a video game is regarding the value of knitting as entertainment, which I'm not disputing, but that's not where I believe the issue with this definition is in the first place. IaaT:SMS does have interactivity, yes, and it was designed for the purpose of entertainment, but to me that is not enough to constitute a video game. For it to be one, the interactivity needs to be a necessary part of the entertainment, which isn't the case here. The interactive part, inputting your measurements, choosing a file and scrolling through the selected knitting pattern isn't the entertaining part. The entertaining part, which is knitting a sweater, requires none of the interactivity provided by the software; a completely non interactive slideshow of the various patterns would accomplish the goal just as well. And, while this was ultimately just part of jan Misali's overall point that you cannot bolt together a purely objective definition without relying on some level of unstated common sense, I think that point would have been better served by highlighting the holes in the provided definition of a video game itself than taking it at face value to poke a hole in the definition of the Super Mario series that relied on in the first place (not that this is even required, as jan Misali proceeds to show more examples of games that clearly wouldn't be argued in good faith by anyone to be part of the mainline series and are still noncontroversially video games, and then goes on to explore the ambiguities in pretty much every other part of the definition). You know what else counts as a video game under that definition?
You will note that even with my caveat, you could still argue that a lot of these still fit this alleged definition of a video game, so whatever a video game is, it's not just that. Instead of continuing this list and losing the plot myself for the second time in the process of writing this, I will point out that jan Misali's second video has been classified under the "I am a Teacher: Super Mario Sweater" game category, meaning that apparently Google agrees that this is in fact a video game. Shows what I know.
And of course, you can't cover debating what's a video game without also covering the video part. When people ask "how many Mario games are there", the video game part is implied, but there is definitely an argument to be made that being a video game is not necessarily a prerequisite to be part of the mainline Mario series, especially if you hold the belief that the Game & Watch games aren't actually video games (I personally do think they are, but it's debatable enough for jan Misali to not be fully sure, at the very least) but are still significant enough to be part of the mainline series (there is a Super Mario Bros. game in there, after all, and it's even a platformer!). This can also be further argued to include other media that aren't even games (if the NieR series can include stage plays, what's preventing the Super Mario series from including, say, its licensed movie?), though I personally don't have any non-video game candidate in mind to argue in good faith that they should be part of the series.
At this point I don't think I have much else to add that isn't basically paraphrasing jan Misali themselves, so I'll wrap up this post so I don't have to spend another day adding to it and proofreading, and I'm fairly confident that between it and all the other interesting points the video raised that I haven't mentioned there will be more than enough jumping points for discussion (and if I forgot something I wanted to add, I can always do that later). What are your thoughts on this? And did you realize before I pointed it out that I wrote over 5k words about the question without giving my own answer at any point?
These are, according to me, the 23 games making up the mainline Super Mario series, as of writing this. If you're interested in knowing my specific arguments for including or excluding a given video game, I'd be more than happy to elaborate in the comment section if asked to. I just won't do it here because covering all of the games that are or aren't debatably mainline would probably double the already absurdly high word count, and I'd probably still miss something.
So, I got convinced by a KC fan to buy KC 1 cause at least it was only 5 bux so not much of my money was going to Daniel Vavre (and I'm sure there some other fuckheads working for KC since he's director and probably gets to bring in a few people to work under him). But I admit, I really really love the game. Even though I detest him, I have to admit he knows how to make a good rpg. In fact it is one of the best action based (vs turn based) rpgs I've played (I definitely think it rates much higher than Witcher and I even like it over Elder Scrolls).
But I'm not a patient person and I love what I'm hearing about KC 2 (other than the intro quest which with combined with who directed it, will really grate on my nerves cause I'll totally be focused on its treatment of women. Usually I just roll my eyes at that kind of thing or it doesn't even bug me much but when it feels like the director is actually condoning of this kind of behavoir it's different). But part of me is going to feel guilty if I cave and buy it. But, I'm weak (I eat meat and I totally agree with the fact it's unethical both for environment and for how they treat the animals).
Anyone else have a game (or that game) that they dislike the people making it but love the game and if you bought it, how did you resolve it with yourself?
Last night while my wife was going through my Spotify to pick a song to listen to while I was driving, she mentioned that 90% of my library consists of instrumentals. (Most of which are game OSTs) I find it much more pleasant to listen to, instead of song with lyrics.
Which made me wonder, there might be some hidden/not so hidden gems that I might be missing out on!
Please share your favorite game OSTs with everyone. (New gems, old gems! Either the entire OST or even 1 song of a game! we don't discriminate!)
Bonus point if it's on Spotify
What I currently listen to:
What were your favorite games that you played, and why did you feel that way about them? They do not have to be games released in 2024. Anything you played this year is fair... game.
Let's chat random tables, fellow game masters!
Imagine that your Steam account (or whatever other type of video games collections you have) gets permanently and irreversibly erased. Which of the titles you used to have would you then buy again without any hesitation?
