m76

The only story driven game where this worked was the original Half Life. And games that have no dialogue period like doom or unreal. The only valid reason to make a silent protagonist in a story driven game is if the character is actually mute. Having lines that are not voiced is somewhat better, but still feels weird to me when only the NPCs are voiced. It's not a game breaking issue, but I prefer fully voiced characters.

The code that controlled NPCs in games has been called AI since the first games. But in reality for the most time that code had very little or nothing in common with what computer science calls artificial intelligence. NPC "AI" in games work based on a predetermined set of parameters and triggers, there is no actual intelligent thinking involved. On the other hand making NPCs actually intelligent, doesn't necessarily mean a better gaming experience. We do not want a carbon copy of reality in our games, we want an isolated haven where the rules of engagement are clear. Intelligent enemy AI would make the games way too frustrating and unpredictable. Preventing the game from fulfilling it's purpose as escapism.

I've stopped playing favorites a long time ago, there were so many personnel changes and restructuring at every studio that even the most trusted ones are prone to disappoint. Like Polyphony with Gran Turismo 7. I like Teyon at the moment for their no-nonsense approach, their games while don't seem ground breaking clearly made with the right mindset, showing respect to the material they are working with. Their Terminator game was really on point, and their upcoming Robocop game seems equally good. My least favorite developer is anybody doing play to earn and NFT games.

I learned that I don't like MMOs.

In my eyes GTA doesn't have a very good track record, or I'd rather say Rockstar games in general, is very hit and miss with the player characters. More often than not they are unlikable and unrelatable to me. So I'm more worried about getting a character again that I'd rather see get rekt than succeed.

The only game where QTEs actually made sense to me was Mercenaries II, which is a very underrated game. For the sake of simplicity I'll say it is a GTA clone but it is so much more than that. Anyway you can carjack enemies in it. And to successfully carjack you need to complete a QTE. And the complexity and length of the QTE is dependent on how powerful the vehicle you are trying to take over is. Regular civilian vehicles are the easiest and military vehicles get progressively harder, with the tank and the helicopter being the hardest. But I still hate QTEs and I suck at them. Even in this game the only way I could do them is by memorizing the sequences.

Wasn't this kind of an open secret already? People have been asking for it since San Andreas.

The first such title is Dragon Age Origins Awakenings. OK, this is from before the time of DLCs as this is an actual physical expansion pack. I think the maps and the story and the characters are all much better in this than the original game, which had a ton of long boring story segments and repetitive encounters. Mass Effect 3 - The Citadel is also a good mention, it is a good DLC with tons of feelgood and fanservice content, that if only momentarily can distract you from the obvious shortcomings of the game, and how it failed to give a satisfactory ending to the story. For the same game Leviathan DLC is also a good one, it is more like an investigation story, going after clues and learning intriguing things, even if ultimately it raises more questions than it answers. Defense Grid The Awakening - You Monster The base game is already one of my favorites but this DLC puts an extra spin on it, by incorporating Glados from Portal as the villain.

I know virtually nothing about him, I never watched any of his content or streams. And I only learned of his existence when he had a cameo appearance in a south park episode in 2014 around the release of Dragon Age Inquisition.

According to the latest statistics I could find 60% of people in Africa are not literate. So I think that question should be asked first before we ask why is there no AAA game development in Africa. And it wasn't me who generalized Africa, the question was put that way. If it was why is there no AAA game developer in Egypt, Morocco, or South Africa, that might be a more nuanced discussion as those are more developed countries, with significant foreign investments. But then again, I'm not aware of any AAA dev in Oceania either since Team Bondi went defunct.

The documentary I linked is just an example, not supposed to be an all encompassing look at the whole continent. I specifically mentioned "series" not just this one piece, but I did not want to link all episodes pertaining to Africa individually. Most of Africa is in a similar state. I do not know what is the benefit of denying uncomfortable truths, apart from making yourself more comfortable about it. Yes, in some pockets there might well be economic growth in Africa, but that is like pretending one blossom in a field of weed is a rose garden. So yeah, I think asking questions like why isn't Africa big on AAA game development betrays an ignorance of the socio-economic realities of Africa, either wilful or genuine. Recent economic growth is not enough for AAA development to start. It needs a pool of talented people, which requires the long term existence of a good education system that can produce digital artists and programmers well enough educated to work in the AAA industry. Then you need political stability to drive business, which is scarce even in the more developed parts.

Because most of Africa barely has access to drinking water and food. You should watch a few documentaries on daily life in some African countries, and then you won't be asking this question. I especially recommend this series:

To relax and forget real world problems and issues. This is exactly why I don't think games should try to reflect or incorporate aspects of the real world, unless they are historic period pieces, or are set in the current day real world. Making a game 100% subservient to current zeitgeist will make them look extremely dated and cringe quickly, even if they are praised in the moment, they'll never be timeless classics. That's exactly the point of timeless classics, that they were equally relatable 30 years ago as they are now. Nothing that is made with emphasis on current day issues will be relatable in 5 years, let alone 30 years.

Really? It comes across as extremely cringe and tryhard to me, and completely unfunny.

Trans Am Racing 68-72 Star Wars 1313 Squadron 42 - At this point I'm pretty certain it will never be made.

Well, I guess a spoiler warning is necessary even if I don't spoil actual plot points. I hate negative outcomes, and tragedies, if a game doesn't have a happy ending I can't and I won't play them again. That doesn't mean there can't be some ambiguity in the ending, but if it's overwhelmingly negative and especially if you fail to achieve the main goal of the game, then I cannot bear to struggle through the game again, knowing that the outcome is what it is. I don't like needless suffering either, too much of that can also make me dread to come back to a game. These are the games that I can't g et myself to replay, even though I absolutely loved them: Beyond: Two Souls Cyberpunk 2077 Detroit Become Human Max Payne 2 The Last of Us Part 2

I don't, I actually don't like playing games at night. Outside of brand new games I'm extremely excited for and enjoy, I rarely play beyond 9 pm. My ideal game time is on weekend mornings and holidays.

By the time I finish a game I had my fill for a while, so I don't miss them right away. Sure there are games I wish were longer, but that has nothing to do with re-playing them.

I think it is because it's just a job for them. Imagine learning to be a journalist, and when you finally graduate, who is going to hire you with no experience and no credentials? You certainly aren't going to a big name publication. No your options are very limited, so you decide to go to gaming website. Playing videogames for money can't be that bad right? When I was growing up writers at gaming magazines were passionate gamers one and all. Nowadays it seems like not many do it out passion. On the other hand many people seem to be talking about mastering games. I don't think you need to master a game to write about it. Most actual players never master games. I certainly don't, even the games I absolutely love and play a ton. I play them to have fun, not to learn every trick and exploit in them. So I wouldn't expect that from reviewers either. It is unfeasible, the access media gets the games maybe one or two weeks before launch, that's all the time they have to play the game and write the article, you can't fit much mastering in that. There are a few reviewers, who don't give a damn about finishing their review by the game's release date, but they are usually the ones who already have a loyal audience, and don't need to ride the launch buzz to get clicks.

It would be freaking hell living the rest of my life without videogames. But at $1 billion I might be able to substitute that by real life thrills. But for $10 million? I buy a home and 5 sports cars, and I'm broke. But if I have $1 billion I could rent a race track every weekend and just play gran turismo in real life.

if they make you forget video games then you aren't giving up anything. There is no sacrifice on your part. Assuming that was possible, unfortunately memory doesn't work that way, you can't just pick and choose memories to remove.

I don't even know what is my favorite game, good luck to them figuring it out. I'd take the money any day. Even for a tenth I'd give up one game from my library, whichever it may be. Now if the question was would I give up video games entirely, the answer would be hell no. Not even for $10 million. Maybe I'd budge at $1 billion.

Is it just me or Street Fighter 6 actually looks worse than SFV?

Yeah save points are a good addition to suspense in games. You can not interact with them when you are in a fight, so it can't be exploited like in many other checkpoint based games. Beiing able to save at will is good for many games, but it can also lead to recklessness. If you are not worried about failing at all, because you save at every corner that kind of takes away the suspense. Which in turn reduces immersion.

Deus Ex - The game has so many alternative approaches on how you can complete certain missions, and so many references that I think it is impossible to notice everything even in several playthroughs. Oblivion / Skyrim - There is just so much content that I just never did everything in them, there is always one more sidequest that I didn't explore yet.