The heavy AI integration though? Thats more of an Aperture thing I think?
I mod a worryingly growing list of communities. Ask away if you have any questions or issues with any of the communities.
I also run the hobby and nerd interest website scratch-that.org.
The heavy AI integration though? Thats more of an Aperture thing I think?
Unironically, I would play this.
Black Mesa is working with select public and private-sector partners to evaluate and test the technology. If you are interested in partnering with us to usher in a new era of assurance and quality in biomanufacturing, please reach out.
Oh, that’s not good.
Lots of corporate jargon about AI mixed with biotech talk. Perhaps teasing some in-game AI related shennigans.
Mean at the Haunted Chocolatier…
I agree. Tech communities have a habit of drastically over estimating how much everyone else cares about the details of tech.
Even something as simple as PC gaming scares off a lot of people because of the perception that you need to be some kind of tech wizard in order to cobble everything together to make a game run. Actual cobbling together of software to pirate (no matter how simple it seems to people in the know) is just a bunch of technobabble.
It is interesting to me that the chorus always talking about “switching” to piracy after every incident is also intimately familiar with piracy already. Almost as if it’s just people who already pirate talking to each other about how hard they are going to pirate. Meanwhile general audiences don’t care.
Wasteland 3 is a good CRPG style game with modern presentation. There is backstory from the first two games, but the third one is self contained enough that you won’t be confused by the story.
I think making regions safe is a great idea but I would want it tied to a challenging side quest. Like maybe you can intentionally fight a harder version of an area’s enemies to make it safe?
That’s one way to tackle it. The point is that there is something to prevent the experience of being super high level and getting mugged by guys with rusty shivs. I’m throwing out many ideas, which could be refined by specific games.
When it comes to random mobs, a game which relies on them is Kenshi, as an example. Without wandering random mobs to encounter, the game loses a lot of flavor. Kenshi does a few things uniquely, with the main one being that many random encounters that end in defeat don’t end in death. Rather than it being a case where a random mob annoyingly forces a start from a previous save, Kenshi can often be played past the defeat with the player now enslaved, in jail, or injured. The emergent story telling from those fights is what makes the game.
Not every design choice fits every game (obviously). With that in mind, rarely is any specific design choice always 100% good or bad.
I think rather than just taking a vote, it is more useful to think about what makes a good random encounter, and what kinds of game designs work well with them.
I enjoy CRPG styled games. Often in these random encounters happen when moving through an overworld. This kind of design doesn’t disrupt exploration, since once it is over, you continue on your way. It does disrupt when you are going between known points and just trying to tie something up. That can be annoying. Ways that I think can make random encounters enjoyable for CRPG styled games:
Not every random encounter has to be combat. Some can be combat, some can be social, some can be vendors, and some can just be flavor. Non-combat encounters can be used as sort of optional bonus content for players to learn about the lore or explore, and they might even feel special since it is a random occurrence the player gets.
The ability to put points into some kind of skill that gives the player the option to avoid a random encounter and/or start a combat encounter with a bonus.
Encounters should be tied with regions of the overworld in a way that makes sense. Put tougher encounters in endgame areas to discourage players from poking around too early. Make encounters in certain areas tied to the main faction or location in that area.
Ease up on certain kinds of encounters as the game goes on, so they don’t outstay their welcome. For example, in the early game if there are lots of low level bandits attacking in random encounters, it can be fun, but it gets old once you are powerful enough to rip through them and are just trying to get bigger things done. Solve this by, for example saying that routes between major hubs are secured thanks to player actions. Now the player can travel between main routes without getting hassled.
Be very thoughtful about combat random encounters triggered by NPCs after the player due to player actions. These tend to be more annoying since these are usually higher level NPCs that pack more punch. Making their appearance totally random can be very annoying. It also often feels like a grind if the encounter happens repeatedly. I would prefer the consequences of player actions to firstly always be telegraphed so they know a certain action means a revenge squad is after them. Second, I would prefer this encounter to be scripted- either concretely in a specific location where the game knows the player hasn’t yet been by virtue of the trigger happening while certain areas are still locked by the main story, or in a floating fashion where one of various possibilities is chosen by the game based on whatever triggers first. Once the player defeats whoever is after them, they should never be chased by an identical kind of threat.
These are all CRPG ideas, but I think mostly translate to action RPGs conceptually.
09/12_20/30_2024/inf
Probably because it makes a ton of money. The opinions of people who post online represent a small fraction of people who play games.
Then it isn’t a filler. I never said I don’t swear, but have greatly reduced it. One effect of reduced swearing is that when swears are used, they have more punch.
I’m not sure why you’re so invested in debating that people who habitually swear won’t insert swears into unrelated thoughts, but the only support I offer is to listen to someone who habitually swears speak. I don’t want to sound like that, so I make the effort not to.
My choice on how I speak and type doesn’t impose anything on you.
I don’t recall saying every use of a swear is a filler word.
I have made a conscious effort to reduce swearing, which has brought my swearing down to near zero, both online and in real life conversation.
I have found that it streamlines the ability to make a point. A lot of swearing is simply thrown in out of habit, and if you remove it, all you do is make your point more clear without losing anything of substance.
I think for many people swearing is a “filler word” in the same way that “umm” can be. I have also worked hard to reduce my other filler word use. My goal with both of these is better articulation.
The next effect is that swearing is normally viewed as an extreme use of language for an extreme situation, and when you don’t constantly swear the times that you do actually conveys how notable the situation is.
I’m legitimately having difficulty following the flow of this question. The formatting vacillates between question and statement, and I am sincerely having trouble fully discerning the connection between points.
I think this post comes from disappointment with Star Wars Outlaws, which by all reports largely follows the Ubisoft formula for open world games. For this, yes Ubisoft has struck upon a formula that is applied to seemingly all of their open world games, which is indeed overly predictable. For that, I do agree that the rote steps of a collectation heavy game where the player secures territory of the game in order to advance the story is overplayed.
Otherwise, I am stuck trying to tease out the rest of the post’s intention.
Recently the 2 “highly praised” Star Wars “open world” games
I don’t know what the other Star Wars game referred to is supposed to be. Is this referring to Jedi Survivor? That game did have a number of technical problems, but it wasn’t ever intended or marketed as an open world game. Putting even that aside, why are two Star Wars games used as the pillars of western AAA games? What is the point or critique here?
Yes that new Delta Force game really looks like it is just cashing in on the attitude of modern Rainbow 6 Siege and generic modern military gameplay. Shame.
Yes, but I believe they are only a publisher. The actual dev team seems to be a two person operation with a few indie titles under their belt.
But I’ve never seen it done right.
So you don’t like GRAW, Brothers In Arms, or Full Spectrum Warrior. Thats fine. This game is made for people who do.
It sounds like you specifically don’t like the sub-genre as a whole. Thats perfectly fine, but can you accept that there are people who do like these games? I mean clearly, since those older titles still have fans those people exist. That is the audience for this game.
I’ve been off Reddit for a couple of years, but that’s still sad news. That was a legitimately good community, and the name flip was good, and I think they were partnered with worldpolitics which was the flipside community.