Games you really want to play, but can't or won't?
-
that's wild. never encountered such noticeable bugs myself, I guess I was lucky.
It's probably a matter of framing as well.
If you go into a game expecting a buggy mess, you're going to notice bugs more often.
Whether or not the objective amount of bugs present meets your criteria for "buggy mess" or not is of course highly subjective, even if you noticed 100% of the ones you encountered.
-
Diablo IV, for me. I love the Diablo series and just a bit ago, I sank 2 hours down to get my necromancer character up and set in Diablo II Resurrection. I have Diablo III and its expansion too, but they're online only and I almost can't be bothered to go through that. I've beaten it a long time ago.
And I really do want to get Diablo IV, but they've made that online-only as well. Like, I know I'm always online and everything but I do like to have that fallback where if I am without internet or I can't afford internet for a time, I can play or watch things to bide the time over. I can't do that with online-only games because it's like being gated away from something you bought.
So everytime I look at Diablo IV, I just get a little depressed at times. Blizzard should do what D2R did, have an online character and have an offline character.
Factorio, I might legitimately starve to death.
-
Arc Raiders took this trope and turned it on its head. The game is entirely about being a loot goblin around other people in a no-rules environment but if you don't pick fights, you will gradually get matched to servers with other people who don't pick fights, and you start to meet people and have adventures together, it happens very organically and pleasantly, and if you ever DO run into a PvPer the game doesn't really give a huge advantage to sweaty try-hards, a newb with a basic gun can defend themselves just as well as some well-equipped player hunter.
That's because Arc Raiders ISN'T a PVP! It's supposed to be a PVE.
-
That's because Arc Raiders ISN'T a PVP! It's supposed to be a PVE.
About 100% of shooter/survival games made with open PVP turned on all the time become kill-on-sight instantaneously, and those games usually give players a PvE mode for people too scared or annoyed with PvP, the segregation has been normal in gaming since the early days of online gaming. So it's not as simple as saying it's "supposed" to be PvE, it's that they tuned the mechanics and themes to encourage more cooperation in an unprecedented way.
-
They didn't sneak anything and they never will. Looked into it deeply. They used AI assets as placeholders during development. But everything in the shipped game is human-made. No further use of generative AI is expected, since the game awards controversy the company's management published a statement of banning AI use entirely in their company.
The whole controversy around indie game awards was also blown beyond proportions. A company used a new technology at a time when the tech was new and the debate around it's use was still inmature. Then dismissed it for it was not good enough. They failed at quality assurance and a couple of textures weren't deleted. They replaced them as soon at they found out. By all intents and purposes, this controversy does not qualify sandfall as an AI using company, and to affirm so is ignorant of the context of all that went down in reality.
You said a whole lot of words, but the fact remains that they did use AI during development, released a game with AI textures, and told the award organization they never used AI at all.
They, and you, can make excuses all you want, but for some of us they simply have lost some of their good reputation. We will see what they do next though, and I'm hopeful.
-
Sail the high seas. That way you don't support them and get to play it. I haven't pirated a game for many years but some game houses deserves what comes to them
Nah, pirating is not worth the effort. I just don't play it
-
Diablo IV, for me. I love the Diablo series and just a bit ago, I sank 2 hours down to get my necromancer character up and set in Diablo II Resurrection. I have Diablo III and its expansion too, but they're online only and I almost can't be bothered to go through that. I've beaten it a long time ago.
And I really do want to get Diablo IV, but they've made that online-only as well. Like, I know I'm always online and everything but I do like to have that fallback where if I am without internet or I can't afford internet for a time, I can play or watch things to bide the time over. I can't do that with online-only games because it's like being gated away from something you bought.
So everytime I look at Diablo IV, I just get a little depressed at times. Blizzard should do what D2R did, have an online character and have an offline character.
Daggerfall.
It has the most elaborate character creation and most freedom of choice of all the Elder Scrolls games.
You can walk, ride or fly through an open world that's as large as Great Britain, with thousands of realistically modelled towns and cities, and enter any house in them. You can turn into a vampire, werewolf or were-boar, buy a ship, make deals with the gods, invent your own spells, and commit bank fraud.
First time I played it, it took all night to download the 140MB installer from Kazaa.
But actually playing it now, after so much development in game mechanics has happened, is a chore.
When doing quests, you just go through the same loop of "talk to person, clear an absurdly huge dungeon, kill dozens of enemies that aren't scaled to your level, die a couple dozen times unless you cheesed the game to become invincible, solve a text riddle, find the McGuffin, return, repeat" over and over again. -
Daggerfall.
It has the most elaborate character creation and most freedom of choice of all the Elder Scrolls games.
You can walk, ride or fly through an open world that's as large as Great Britain, with thousands of realistically modelled towns and cities, and enter any house in them. You can turn into a vampire, werewolf or were-boar, buy a ship, make deals with the gods, invent your own spells, and commit bank fraud.
First time I played it, it took all night to download the 140MB installer from Kazaa.
But actually playing it now, after so much development in game mechanics has happened, is a chore.
When doing quests, you just go through the same loop of "talk to person, clear an absurdly huge dungeon, kill dozens of enemies that aren't scaled to your level, die a couple dozen times unless you cheesed the game to become invincible, solve a text riddle, find the McGuffin, return, repeat" over and over again.They really favored being a lycanthrope in that game. It's the most OP transformation, especially when you get a special ring that takes away some of the negatives of being a lycanthrope. All of your stats get maxed, you can instantly heal between transformations, you are immune from what the guards try hitting you with.
Being a vampire in Daggerfall, isn't as fun.
-
The Dark Souls series takes place in a fascinating universe and I'm sure the lore is enthralling… I just refuse to play games that are made artificially hard for the sake of it. If it's single-player, the devs shouldn't have an opinion on how much time each player is comfortable wasting on it. Give me "story" difficulty, cheats, etc., and let me decide what to do with them. All you're hurting are your own sales.
Agreed.
I love dark fantasy as a theme. But I can't enjoy the theme if the game is going to be padded like that. That's how you make games not fun and there's nothing fun when you're killed in one or two hits. There's challenge and then there's not fun and all soulslike games fall into the not fun part.
-
Even if you don't mind the online only part, ignore this abomination. They botched the D4 campaign. It's too easy and almost impossible to die during the regular campaign. It takes roughly two minutes to beat a world boss on the first play through.
That doesn't bother me. What made me gravitate to Diablo was how they did the story. The plot of evil vs good and angels vs demons in a eternal conflict is cliche and overdone. But I liked how Blizzard handled it and I've been glued to it for a while. Mephisto is my favorite character overall and damn they're having an expansion coming soon, that revolves around him, so my temptation will be even greater.
So no it doesn't bother me that it's "too easy" or "almost impossible to die", because my idea of fun is not to have a very frustrating experience.
-
Outer Wilds.
I very much want to play this game. It's everything I want from a detective puzzle game, but actually playing it gives me motion sickness.
I bought it and went in blind, just because I heard it's a really chill game with a great atmosphere.
But then the twist happened, and now that I know, it gives me anxiety, so I can't enjoy it anymore.
I simply can't play games with a time limit.
Without that, it would be one of my favorites. -
Daggerfall.
It has the most elaborate character creation and most freedom of choice of all the Elder Scrolls games.
You can walk, ride or fly through an open world that's as large as Great Britain, with thousands of realistically modelled towns and cities, and enter any house in them. You can turn into a vampire, werewolf or were-boar, buy a ship, make deals with the gods, invent your own spells, and commit bank fraud.
First time I played it, it took all night to download the 140MB installer from Kazaa.
But actually playing it now, after so much development in game mechanics has happened, is a chore.
When doing quests, you just go through the same loop of "talk to person, clear an absurdly huge dungeon, kill dozens of enemies that aren't scaled to your level, die a couple dozen times unless you cheesed the game to become invincible, solve a text riddle, find the McGuffin, return, repeat" over and over again.When doing quests, you just go through the same loop of “talk to person, clear an absurdly huge dungeon, kill dozens of enemies that aren’t scaled to your level, die a couple dozen times unless you cheesed the game to become invincible, solve a text riddle, find the McGuffin, return, repeat” over and over again.
That's pretty much all Elder Scrolls is. What's particularly impressive is that they've been releasing the same game since the 90s.
-
The Dark Souls series takes place in a fascinating universe and I'm sure the lore is enthralling… I just refuse to play games that are made artificially hard for the sake of it. If it's single-player, the devs shouldn't have an opinion on how much time each player is comfortable wasting on it. Give me "story" difficulty, cheats, etc., and let me decide what to do with them. All you're hurting are your own sales.
Part of what makes Souls games fun is that you can work together with others.
I pretty much only play them co-op.
-
Diablo IV, for me. I love the Diablo series and just a bit ago, I sank 2 hours down to get my necromancer character up and set in Diablo II Resurrection. I have Diablo III and its expansion too, but they're online only and I almost can't be bothered to go through that. I've beaten it a long time ago.
And I really do want to get Diablo IV, but they've made that online-only as well. Like, I know I'm always online and everything but I do like to have that fallback where if I am without internet or I can't afford internet for a time, I can play or watch things to bide the time over. I can't do that with online-only games because it's like being gated away from something you bought.
So everytime I look at Diablo IV, I just get a little depressed at times. Blizzard should do what D2R did, have an online character and have an offline character.
Star Citizen
Still waiting for it to release.
-
Emulating bloodborne is really good now. It is 100% playable with rare minor bugs now. Highly recommend playing it. It's the best souls orne out there. Imo
What kind of specs do you need to run it smoothly? Does any of the online stuff work?
-
I stopped Nier Automata midway because it felt completely awful. Then I was sternly motivated by someone to give it a full go and finish it all the way, and it got EVEN WORSE.
Stellar Blade, though, made the gameplay very enjoyable; and its writing, while following a very similar theme, didn't feel nearly so excessively ultra-grimdark. It kept some core reveals for close to the end (I guess unless you were paying attention to what few audio logs amounted to more than just "They're coming...! Agh! We're all dead.") but I liked the dilemma it posed.
Shame that you didn't like Nier Automata. If I have to point a flaw, it can have "im14andThisIsDeep" vibes, but I wouldn't call it awful.
100% I was (still am) biased. Shaun's was the only thoughts I had until here. Felt unfair that I hated a game so much I've never even played.
Opened Steam to check the price and OH BOY. $109 AUD. Guess the demo will have to be my thoughts for the time being
((Dark Souls 3 is older, also that price, and also not reccomended at the price. But I'm not paying 109 for a "maybe I will like it" game))
-
Diablo IV, for me. I love the Diablo series and just a bit ago, I sank 2 hours down to get my necromancer character up and set in Diablo II Resurrection. I have Diablo III and its expansion too, but they're online only and I almost can't be bothered to go through that. I've beaten it a long time ago.
And I really do want to get Diablo IV, but they've made that online-only as well. Like, I know I'm always online and everything but I do like to have that fallback where if I am without internet or I can't afford internet for a time, I can play or watch things to bide the time over. I can't do that with online-only games because it's like being gated away from something you bought.
So everytime I look at Diablo IV, I just get a little depressed at times. Blizzard should do what D2R did, have an online character and have an offline character.
Victoria 3, still the undisputed king of world economic simulation. I had a blast with Vic 2, but I just can't bring myself to support Paradox Interactive in their current form with ridiculous monetisation of DLC...
-
I couldn't get into it. I'm not a fan of westerns to begin with, so even the environment couldn't pull me in
-
@cyberpunk007 @Abundance114 that is if you play on PC. other platforms might require subscriptions of some kind in order to enable multiplayer feature(s).
And that's what you get for buying a console.
Honestly I might pirate it instead and avoid the whole account thing all together lol.
-
What kind of specs do you need to run it smoothly? Does any of the online stuff work?
So I will be honest and say I have a beefy computer. Intel i9 13900k and a 4090. But I run it at 1440p at 60fps. I see people playing it on the steam deck but I haven't tried that myself.
