/games/ - Games

>>44212
that's good to know, armedpuppygirl

^ peak png

>>44212
These games are too chuddy for me

It's funny and also sad that RWS changed the ending of Postal 1 because a school shooting wasn't shocking any more

>>44221
sadly true.. :(

>>43829
It's because they've released a lot of more annoying (gameplay-wise) characters since then.

>>43829
Bro, why do you keep reposting old ass threads? I know I've seen you post this thread and this one:>>44195 before.

What kind of super autism is this?

>>43938
I just picked up SotN. It's pretty good but I need to get good so that I'm not constantly taking damage just from touching enemies

>>43908
San Andreas
Sims 2 (including ps2 versions)
OG resident evil 4

chess :)

>>43991
This

Mercy main here btw

>>44194
I was forced into the tank chair lol

I’ve only played the napoleon one which is fun but after a while i just end up creating “meat grinders” (positioning troops in a line and waiting) and picking off generals with my cannons

Anybody have any advice on how to play the game properly?

>>44131
I used to play this realism mod with my friend online. I remember it was hard as shit. You'll find your troops getting wasted potentially in a few volleys.

I think it was Darthmod and I played it a few times with the creator. You got to be good or you get stomped in online.

>>44131
>>44132
Oh, but they still had to have a "no general sniping" rule in MP because it's so easy to cheese the game like that.

>>44130
It's would be fun without the shit UI

>>44129
this is what i posted in the other TW thread

idk i always come back to TW but it never holds my attention for too long. the problem for me hasnt ever necessarily been the particular problems title to title but the overall gameplay loop. the strategic campaign/tactical combat is a massive draw and has so much potential, but it always ends up feeling kind of clunky and unsatisfying. like its strangely rare to actually feel like the tactical combat is a hig stakes, pivotal battle. if youre playing the campaign right youre moving around with a couple big stacks and not overextending yourself, and then the most challenging battles are playing as a garrison fighting off a small enemy army that snuck behind your borders. even if its a fun combat, it ends up feeling tedious. ultimately everything is just about managing a very linear economy to maintain enough garrisons to go on the offensive. which doesnt sound terrible in theory, but in practice youre constantly jumping between relatively inconsequential economic decisions (upgrade building now or later) and relatively inconsequential battles (need to spend 30 minutes defending a location peripheral to the main action). and halfway optimal play means you need to micromanage all of it, which means spending a few hours jumping between decisions that rarely feel like they tie together and payoff.

then they add in this half-baked dynastic politics that isnt important enough to be satisfying but is too important to ignore completely.

i think Total War might benefit from leaning in to the more focused premises, and adjusting the priorities of campaign strategy so that attrition/training of your armies is more of a priority than managing country economy. in Napolean youre either trying to defeat Napolean or conquer Europe as Napolean. in Attila youre either trying to survive the hordes or you are the hordes. even with the other flaws present, at least when the campaign has this clear context it feels like what youre doing has some stakes and narrative so that its easier to enjoy the process

>>44140
>jrpgs
trve. the success of octoslop nothingburger says all there is to say about the state of the genre

>>44171
Gta San Andreas is the best game of all times and was released in mid 2000s
The Sims series had its peak (The Sims 2) in this time too

>>44165
Rollslop, gachaslop, multiplayer shooters (horde shooters and Battle royale mostly) and boomer shooters.

>>44163
I miss vehicular combat games so much

Have they made any games like Blast Corps where you wreck shit.

what

>>44069
>people play-acting as tortured geniuses on the promise that their work will be worth millions
That problem has more to do with producing art as a commodity. I see all art in the way Scaruffi talks about music: Things that manage to express specific emotions are more interesting than those that are technically impressive for whatever reason. The latter is how exchange value is assigned, while the former has, despite appearances, little to do with speculative pricing, which is an entirely different can of worms.
<The Velvet Underground were among the first bands to conceive rock music as creative art, not as a commercial product to sell in this or that format. As a consequence, they were also among the first bands to show total disregard for the charts. The aim of their music was to transmit emotions, to express uneasiness, to communicate within their environment. The early albums are first and foremost examples of creative freedom: the band wrote what it felt like, arranged it as it pleased, and played it how it wanted. The only rule was not to play blues, because too many bands were already doing it.

>>44074
speak for yourself

>>44070
Of course, it was an exaggeration. But I find it fascinating how much of the buzz around new releases seems to be drama bullshit. Makea one wonder how much of it is manufactured by advertisers.

>>44083
I dont think it is actively astrosurfed, more of a symbiothic relationship between corporate product marketing and right wing outrage media.

>>44077
I know that's what art people like to say, but high modern art fails even in that regard. Most modern art doesn't make you feel anything, it's just incomprehensible nonsense. It's incomprehensible nonsense made by people essentially LARPing as tortured geniuses on the model of Van Gogh because his works sold for cheap and are now worth millions, which caught the attention of rich people. The point isn't to evoke emotions. The point is to appear avant garde for the sake of appearing avant garde.

>>44062
Sorry, the title of this thread was supposed to say “are espers too powerful for gaming”

Seems like everything esper can do wizard can do as well, but not vice versa.

>>44064
Not quite. Wizards are restricted to mana and soul based spells meaning no reality manipulation, casual defiance of physics, or spells capable of bypassing real space. Espers don’t have the regenerative abilities that wizards have, but barrier creation and instantaneous reflexes more than make up for that. Plus espers don’t need mana, chi, stamina or “energy”, their power is all raw willpower which depending on the esper can be unlimited. Balancing something like that in a game would be very difficult

>>43963
>you can only name a bunch of really old freeware passion project games
Fine, let's look at common tropes of the JRPGs. Turn-based battles are their main point of player interaction and they primarily achieve build variety through pre-made characters, equipment, a lot of consumables and sometimes skill acquisiton and/or materia some kind of aspect slot system. This type of character building is complex in its own right, despite being unwieldy with pen and paper, considering the amount of options most games throw at you, and clearly the point of JRPG combat. You can find a lot of people complaining about FFVII, because it reduced the maximum party size in ATBs from 4 to 3.

>>43964
"Build complexity" doesn't really mean anything in the "RPG flavor" context if ultimately all "build complexity" amounts to is the numbers going up.

>>43969
Yeah, that's why in pokemon combat rare skills, items like heat orb or focus sash and the monsters themselves are the most interesting aspects of combat, while nature marginally so and everything else a matter of mindless optimization. It's about linear upgrade paths you would see in a bad rpgmaker game vs. interesting tradeoffs or other unique rules that increase complexity exponentially. Ideally the complexity isn't collapsed into dumb number checks, the way speech skills usually work, but determines the way the player interacts with another system accomodating to it, usually combat.

>>43952
Larian is actually an example.

While I liked Divinity: Original Sin 2, and messing around with the various elemental abilities and how they interact with each other can be fun, its a game about being a sorcerer where you don't really get to do much sorcerer stuff beyond doing damage in various ways, and the meta was actually focusing on physical damage over spells. In addition, it's all based around a classless system which I've never been a big fan of since they're kind of boring.

Then they make Baldur's Gate 3, which is tied to the D&D 5e ruleset, and suddenly all the cool wizard shit is back in, along with classes and all the flavor those classes bring.

>>43974
I'm still waiting for Larian Studios space opera kino, I hope it turns out well.

Steel Battalion looks cool.

>>43898
siht, this looks rly cool

Signalis immediately comes to mind :)

>>43898
Dude steel battalion is really cool. It's just a shame no one will ever make one with another huge controller.

>>43898
I wish I could play Steel Battalion so much… I think the only way this kind of game is going to be done now is through VR or something. Mechwarrior is kind of like it at least, it is very immersive being in the cockpit, but I just can't get over how the mechs have open cockpits with canopies, I just headcanon when I play that the pilot is sitting in somewhere more defended and the canopy is actually a set of screens.
>>43901
The Signalis UI is so fantastic, I love especially the weird unexplained tabs in the character screen. I think it is the best example of this kind of UI but Nier Automata also does a good job (even if IMO the UI getting damaged is underused). I've been playing Cyberpunk 2077 and it also has this kind of thing, all 3 games do an error message on death, which is just so cool.