@“rejj”#p85070 i did not. i used to be a completionist but my new tactic is just to play the one everyone likes first and then explore a series further, if i like the popular one. very interested in checking out III because of the music. hopefully one of my retro handhelds can run it well
@“RubySunrise”#p85249
>
I played the Harvestella demo. Well, most of it. I will definitely finish. I really like it so far with some caveats. Hopefully the demo is built around introducing the story, because having a story beat to get through every morning and only getting to my crops at noon was frustrating. The tone is alternating maudlin and absurd-silly, which I find charming. So far there’s always been an “advance the story” quest marker waiting for me at all times I’m in control, leading to that classic JRPG tension of “the world’s in danger but I really need to fish rn.” It’s dumb but I think that tension is pretty funny and often makes maudlin or overly sentimental stories go down easier for me, so I actually like that it’s there. I do wonder if the whole game will be like this.
Played a bit of the demo the other day too. I like the idea of the story being important in a game like this, but I have a feeling that this game is just not for me. IN theory, I love everything it's doing, but I also found myself just wishing I was doing something else. Which says more about me than the game!
I started playing Fire Emblem: Shadow Dragon and this game feels bizarre. Not in a bad way, but I find it structurally very odd and also unforgiving. I should just keep going with FF Tactics but I keep picking up other games to dick around in for a while now that I'm approaching the ending.
I find this sometimes happens to me near the end of a game. Like I don't want it to end but also a mild frustration about choices _not_ made by me that would have led to a potentially more interesting final act of the game. I think this especially happens to me with games that allow so much customization. I just keep thinking, _What if I only had ninjas who could cast holy_ or _What if instead of having a powerful summoner, I had a powerful time mage_ and on and on in every possible permutation. Which really shouldn't be a barrier, but I keep collecting paths not taken and finding the path I have taken less satisfying.
I am Rooting. Tooting. Hooting, and hollering. Unmoisterized. Staying home on my range.
My main thought about _Red Dead Redemption 2_ so far is that I won't have a fully formed thought until I can get used to this wacky control scheme, but that it's probably pretty good.
@“Gaagaagiins”#p85799 hopin you have yerself a real hootenanny, pardner.
@“nickfourtimes”#p85549 i have completed a playthrough of this, saw what i guess is the vanilla ending. very interesting little experiment.
Going to be superbrief into this and mince you some impressions:
Arthur Morgan has just been playin' cowboy poker for 48 hours straight
I finally decided to buy the Klonoa 1 and 2 collection since it’s on sale. I don’t know that I would have guessed it, but apparently I find Klonoa to be a sort of soothing game to play. The ‘remaster’ isn’t going to win any awards or anything, but these are a pair of extremely solid games to start with. Given how mascotty Klonoa is in a non annoying way, and given how most of his mascot contemporaries were that particular kind of 90’s EXTREEEEEME, it’s always been surprising to me that he didn’t have better staying power.
I've got a real hot scoop of for everyone here at the Insert Credit forums: it turns out Red Dead Redemption 2, the resoundingly critically acclaimed game that took perhaps a million hours of cumulative work (if not more (billed hours and otherwise)) is actually quite good.
I haven't played a Rockstar game since _Grand Theft Auto IV,_ that's the one with a _IV_ in the title, not the other, now more notable entry in the same franchise. If I were to describe what I figure to be Rockstar's overall design goal with their flagship franchises, I would say that the goal is to make you feel like you are controlling the protagonist of a blockbuster genre film or prestige TV show (and to a lesser extent taking some relatively minor authorship over the characterization of said protagonist within the greater context of the overall narrative).
It's far from perfectly executed on (to be fair it might be a little less imperfectly executed once I install potentially 4 years worth of patches that I had neglected to install until now), but when _Red Dead Redemption 2_ clicks, it really feels a lot like you're really the protag of a hyperviolent spaghetti western. Unlike the _Grand Theft Auto_ games from the age of yore that I remember, I actually look forward to the main story missions, and I would say there hasn't been a single dud yet.
I don't think anyone here needs to read me go on more about like literally one of the biggest games of the past decade, but hey, for anyone out there who still hasn't played it, perhaps in particular anyone who also like me hasn't really dug into a flagship Rockstar game since before the previous decade, you really oughta.
the way Jake is localized in Advance Wars Dual Strike is hilarious in 2022. maybe it was less so in 2005, but he‘s all, "Yo! You got dropped like a phat beat! Word, that’s what‘s up! Let’s roll up on ‘em! Peace, I’m out.“ and all the other serious adults around respond with, ”Yes, indeed, your sincere encouragement is much appreciated. Perhaps I just need to believe in myself, the way you do. Thank you, Jake. Let's do our best in the coming missions."
anyway, what a bonkers tone the game sets in general, you know? i can see why Nintendo chose not to release that remake of AW 1&2, given the current global climate. you've got your little rainbow-coloured tanks and helicopters, you're going in and capturing cities, but it all feels as gratifying as being handed a freshly-scooped ice cream cone.
i haven't really played any games at all in a meaningful way for the past few months, but recently, i decided to take a look at Advance Wars Dual Strike, because for whatever reason, it's the one entry in that series that i haven't spent much time with.
as a big fan of the first two AW games, both of which i completed back in the days of original GBA hardware, where eystrain was part of the grueling test of my competence and stamina, i have to say that i'm really digging Dual Strike, because it feels like a slightly fancier version of those two GBA games. it's just a collection of minute-but-important decisions, combined with fun animations and a sense of progression. time flies by unreasonably quickly while you're involved in these tiny little skirmishes. what an absolute delight. no other game that i've played nails that exact flavour of snappy satisfaction. maybe it's the fact that you've got no player characters on the field of battle, combined with the minimal-but-important resource management and unit production.
plus i love being able to change the COs' colours. that right there is an extremely satisfying reward to unlock as you progress through the missions.
Now that I‘ve played through the Mario games I own with my son, we’re onto Castlevanias. And, man, these ancient games are fucking hard!
I think I'll stick with Castlevania IV first because I find Castlevania I intolerable right now.
@“edward”#p86048 Castlevania IV is a great choice to start getting into them. It‘s much easier than the NES ones. I’d say to definitely give Bloodline on Genesis/Megadrive a shot. I think it's very underrated and still a top notch and beyond game.
I've recently gotten back into Street Fighter V actually. We only have local tournaments every 6 to 8 months, and they aren't doing Strive this time. So I'm hopping back on SFV to refresh myself and honestly having a lot of fun. More fun now than I have had since probably 2016 maybe 2017. I think after playing so much Strive that my overall fighting game experience has gotten much better.
Sfv does have flaws or even just things I don't like still. I still feel like something is holding the game back from being really great and I'm not quite sure what it is still.
@“Gaagaagiins”#p86032 I'm really curious to see how your experience will evolve over time and how far you were into the game at the time of writing this, because as someone who finished the whole thing + the epilogue I have… very different feelings towards this game.
RDR2 are two very different experiences stitched together not very elegantly, one is good or at least decent, the other is kinda terrible. On one side you have the cowboy simulation, which is cool and very immersive, go hunting, brew coffee in the middle of the wilderness, get into interesting mini-narrative threads, play cards, get drunk, go get a massage, browse through the local shop catalog, etc. It's very diegetic and it almost feels like a western themed Shenmue.
On the other you have the campaign/story mode, which, to me, is the exact opposite of a videogame. You don't really play RDR2, RDR2 plays you, you follow orders, you are workforce hired to push the script forwards. You read whatever the game puts on the bottom of the screen, and execute as the game desires. If you deviate ever so slightly from what the text prompt says, you'll get a game over. In my understanding a videogame is what happens when you are presented with a set of designed problems for which you are given certain tools (mechanics) and a set of rules to mediate between the problems and your input. A videogame needs to have at least some degree of agency for me to call it that, if said videogame kills me for taking cover on a different rock other than the one rock it wanted me to, because that's the rock that the following action scripted sequence requires to function, I'm sorry but that videogame either sucks or is not a videogame at all. The experience that RDR2 story provides only really makes sense if Rockstar payed the player for their time, but considering it was exactly the opposite, I _had_ to pay to do this, it's kind of insane.
I'll end this post that by saying that this is not me dunking on you @Gaagaagiins, if you're enjoying your time I sincerely hope you keep doing so. It's just the specific case of RDR2 blows my mind and is one of the greatest examples of how the public perception and understanding of a game can get sidetracked by extremely high production values.
I will also say that despite everything, there is a genuinelly good story and characters behind all the mess which are worth experiencing, with some really good moments in which some of the game systems intertwine with the narrative, and some really intelligent structuring of the whole thing. Overall I didn't regret the time I put into this game but it was very very rough and barely made it.
that‘s always been a dilemma with rockstar games trying to prime a setpiece sequence. I think everyone can bring to mind GTA mission X that took 1000 attempts because of a weird jump you just couldn’t make. I didn‘t personally have that problem with RDR2, but that’s just happenstance since anyone can have the misfortune of getting caught on some picky control snag during a mission sequence
One thing I really liked about the story presentation in RDR2: how many short, incidental story vignettes could just sort of happen either through chance encounters or low key, discrete events. And cumulatively, over time, all of those fed into the main course of the narrative
I played the new Star Ocean demo last night and I thought that was some pretty tasty nonsense. Couldn‘t tell what was going on in the combat most of the time, but by the end of the demo I was getting a handle on things. Traversing the areas is pretty fun.
Heard the main character was pretty annoying but I was playing in japanese and not paying attention that much, might do another play in english.
It’s worth noting that I also thought the last SO was actually pretty decent.
>
@“yeso”#p86106 anyone can have the misfortune of getting caught on some picky control snag during a mission sequence
It can and will happen for sure. But my take was more aimed towards that, even if you're lucky and it doesn't, the result is never good level design/mission structure. Reading instructions on the bottom of the screen and executing them in the most literal way possible isn't good videogame design imho. Say what you will about TLoU2, a game that has been dunked on to oblivion on these forums, but at least you have good level design and interesting moment to moment gameplay on that game.
>
@“yeso”#p86106 how many short, incidental story vignettes could just sort of happen either through chance encounters or low key, discrete events.
These are great, and what I was thinking about when I said this in my post
>
@“JoJoestar”#p86102 get into interesting mini-narrative threads
The "cowboy simulator", or the connective tissue between the story missions if you'd like to frame it that way, is good and can be potentially a great time if you are into open-ended free-roaming experiences. There were some situations ||like that one dude trapped inside the basement of someone you end up finding out was a serial killer|| that made me lol hard and genuinelly surprised me. But those all happen on the side of what understandably is regarded as the "main game". Something that also doesn't help RDR2's case is that all those mechanics and interesting interactions become invariably disabled during story missions, unless it's a story mission specifically dedicated to explaining and introducing the mechanic.
But as I said, there is some interesting and good stuff to find (I'd say salvage from the wreckage), so I wouldn't want to disencourage anyone to play the game, specially if they are already having a good time.
TLOU2 is an interesting comparison bc I think I‘d prefer a game just having me do the dumb violent stuff as part of a transparent spectacle rather than “game play” producing those events. IDK why, I’ll have to think about it more
I guess I just don't think gameplay or good game design is that important
Getting instructions from the bottom of the screen definitely felt odd, as someone who doesn‘t play a lot of Rockstar games (only RDR1 and 2) but I framed them in my mind as stage directions because they’re really just trying to involve you in an interactive movie, at least when it comes to the story missions.
A director's voice should shout CUT when you die in these games à la Viewtiful Joe.
I wouldn't say those are objectively and invariably important aspects, nothing works in a vacuum like that, gameplay and game design become relevant as part of the whole experience, the role they have in them and how that role is executed. But I would argue that player agency is, and being directed in such a granular and detailed (annoying) way is very agency-depriving in the context of an interactive experience.
>
@“connrrrr”#p86117 stage directions
Keep in mind that this is a job and some people get payed for doing it. It is the same reasoning why I jokingly said that people should get payed to play RDR2, instead of people paying to play RDR2. I was obviously kidding, but serves to illustrate the problem I think.
RDR2 is a weird one for me, I find it very difficult to recommend to anyone. On the one hand it looks amazing, has an incredibly detailed and fleshed out world, wonderfully realised characters and probably the most cinematic game I have ever played.
So it kinda casts this spell on you while you're playing it, but so often the spell breaks for me. Like what are you _doing_ actually? It's long game and essentially all the gameplay segments are cut from a very small selection of templates. Ride horse to map marker, ride horse with someone else chatting to another map marker, shoot some people, ride horse back. There is really nothing mechanically interesting going on in the game, certainly not the critical path anyway. Maybe all games are like that? I don't know, horse riding is like "hold x to follow path".. at least in GTA for example, you can zip in and out of traffic at high speeds, always risking a crash. The shooting is so dull as well, lock on and tilt slightly upwards for instant headshots - just like every Rockstar game since GTA..4?
Still, the stuff that's good really probably is the best I've ever seen in any game. I guess maybe the high production values/realism means they had to just make everything so tight that you can't really get creative with any of the mechanics.