Akun

I don't like short games. I don't hate them, but I usually find more value in longer RPGs that can last me for days, if not weeks. I want to go on a journey when I play an RPG, a journey that will leave me with a memorable experience like I've taken a vacation somewhere else. Usually, that kind of experience should lasts weeks. I think even with non-RPGs like simulation games, I'll say the same as well. I want a game to engage me for a long while, and simulation games in particular should keep me hooked on the simulation so that I could feel compelled to keep managing or building whatever it is that's being simulated. Replay value and stuff.

Detroit: Become Human. I played it a lot on my PS4 long before it was ported to the PC. Probably my third favorite video game of all time, right after Mass Effect 2 and 3. I've said enough about this game on this forum that it's becoming repetitive, but I can't get over how it's like a throwback to classic CRPGs and adventure books where your choices lead to dozens of outcomes (my favorite of these books being Give Yourself Goosebumps, many of which I've read). David Cage's politics aside, I greatly enjoyed the gameplay design.

All the Saw sequels. Morbid puzzle games. I've never played the Saw games, but from what little I've seen, I don't think they ever live up to the potential of being a survival puzzle game.

Changed my mind on replaying the Dragon Age trilogy because of a number of reasons. Much as I love Dragon Age: Origins, it didn't date that well in terms of graphics and gameplay. Really doesn't help that many NPCs look the same or dress the same way with limited range of hairstyles. This is a minor gripe at best though, particularly the dated gameplay, because I still enjoy the "pause and plan out your moves" gameplay of Origins, even if many finds it to be cumbersome. I'm a patient gamer like that who likes my games relaxing and slow-paced. A bigger reason I might refrain from replaying Origins is the difficulty spikes and how sluggish the pacing of the story/gameplay can feel because of such difficulty. It's not exactly a game you could finish under a week. It's an RPG you have to devote your time to, not to mention the time you would spend modding it. And boy, does this game need mods... Dragon Age 2 is when it starts to become harder to care about the trilogy, because goddamn is it forgettable. I've read that people found characters in DA2 to be more memorable than Origins whereas it's the opposite for me, so I guess it's subjective to taste, like all things entertainment. To be fair, I had a better judgment of DA2 when I replayed it several years ago. I particularly liked my female Hawke even though I'm a guy because the voice actress did a pretty decent job of making her badass (she's still no Jennifer Hale/Femshep, but Femshep's hard to top). I must admit that I kinda like my Asian female Hawke's custom design as well since she's kinda attractive. It's just a shame that I couldn't recreate her in Inquisition (a sequel where the import option would've been really helpful). But still, even with my positive reassessment of the game, when I revisit the list of companions you'll meet from the Dragon Age wiki, I just feel like I couldn't really remember anything interesting about them, except maybe Isabela, and even that's a stretch because she feels like an archetypal pirate queen. In fact, most of the NPCs/companions are extreme archetypes that have pretty extremist views from what little I could remember... especially Anders, the guy that pulled the dick move near the end of DA2 that triggered an entire war - THAT I remembered clearly because of how big of a goof-up it was. But maybe I'm remembering the other characters' personalities wrong (pretty sure I got Anders right) and they're more interesting than I gave them credit for, so whatever. Varric is the exception, of course. Everybody loves Varric. I find him to be lukewarm at best though to be honest. I don't see what all the hype about him is about except that he's a pretty chill wingman. But he's no Garrus Vakarian in terms of broship (Garrus has better lines too). The rushed production of Dragon Age 2 really didn't help convince me to replay the game. Rushed writing and rushed character development, which explains why the characters feel paper-thin. DA2 was damaged by EA and no amount of retrospective's gonna fix that. Then comes Dragon Age: Inquisition, the real reason I wanted to replay the trilogy for the sake of completion. I remember that there's a lot of politics surrounding the game back in the day, most of which I tuned out of for the most part in spite of being more pro-liberal back then. The reason I dropped it was for a non-political reason though. I think it's because I tried to complete the side quests for Hinterlands and got bored; I've only recently learned that it's a bad idea. But yes, part of the reason I feel reluctant to return to Inquisition is for a rather shallow reason: the romantic interests are just kinda bland-looking. In a roleplaying game, I'm not usually trying to simulate real life. In real life, I wouldn't usually judge whom I want to date or form a meaningful relationship for life by their appearances. However, in a roleplaying game where I'm trying to enjoy myself through a piece of entertainment... yeah, I'm gonna indulge myself a little in being shallow (especially when I don't mix what I do in real life or treat real people with how I view entertainment/fantasies/fictional characters), and an unengaging piece of entertainment for the sake of "realism" just doesn't hook me. Sorry. I need my entertainment to be interesting first, and then maybe realistic second. This is part of the "politics" I mentioned earlier, and I really don't want to get into this because I hate politics (and just arguing in general), but it's hard to express why I feel disinterested in Inquisition without getting this information about my views out of the way. I might've returned to the game if Vivienne's romanceable though. Too bad she's not, because she's fine. But still, the fact that I base my interest of the game on whom I could date reminds me just how little investment I have in Dragon Age's saga and lore, probably because the DA team at Bioware has little investment in my journey and adventure by not continuing the Hero of Ferelden's adventures from Origins, switching to a new protagonist each game. I find that hard to invest into because I have to learn to immerse myself in a new protagonist each game in this "trilogy" instead of going on one big epic journey spanning three games... like the Mass Effect trilogy, a trilogy which I had no problems replaying many times over. From a roleplaying point of view, it just feels tedious playing what feels like three separate adventures as three different individuals in the Dragon Age trilogy. When I set out on an adventure for a roleplaying experience, I'd only stick to one protagonist at a time, not three. By the way, this is the reason why I got bored playing Mass Effect: Andromeda. I had to learn to get attached to Ryder the protagonist the same way I had to learn to get into the role of Shepard when I first played Mass Effect 1. Speaking of roleplaying, this is a far bigger reason why Inquisition has disinterested me. While trying to convince myself earlier that there's still merit to roleplaying the Inquisitor in a unique and perhaps nuanced way... I learned that the Inquisitor's morality is pretty shallow compared to the protagonist of Origins and even DA2... as in there's a lack of "evil" options you can do in Inquisition. Let me explain why these options can make a roleplay feel nuanced instead of just "cartoonishly evil." The option to perform a monstrous act like sacrificing a child for the sake of a country... means you could also choose to NOT perform such a monstrous option. There's a choice there, and it feels meaningful when you choose not to act on such a heinous act "for the greater good." But when such options don't exist in the first place, your morality exists in a vapid vacuum that's all-good and moral without any room for corruption or ruthlessness. Your "good" and "kind" acts feel empty and meaningless because there aren't any pragmatic/ruthless choices to reflect your idealistic/pacifistic ones. THAT is a big reason why I feel reluctant to play Inquisition: the lack of depth in its roleplaying. In Origins, the roleplay was amazing because not only could you be a Warden from multiple races (with special quests/dialogue that acknowledge your race/origin), you were also capable of playing around with the protagonist's personality in terms of the ruthless sacrifices they'll make in order to "save the world." That's the beauty of Origins as a medieval fantasy RPG - it forced you to make the hard choices to "save the day." Inquisition, from what I've read, removed that nuance. Honestly, it's not just Inquisition either. I just couldn't find many RPGs these days where the "RP" is an essential part of the story/gameplay... except for maybe The Witcher games (though I have entirely different reasons why I find those games hard to get into that I've explained elsewhere before). It's like, it's in the name, a "roleplaying game," not just "customize your stat points" game. I feel like a lot of people conflate "roleplaying" with customizing a build to your liking rather than the plot-related choices you make in the story, which is fine, I suppose, but since I'm someone who's always more interested in storytelling than gameplay, I find it difficult to enjoy RPGs anymore. Anyway, that's my lengthy take on why I feel reluctant to replay a trilogy that includes one of my favorite video games of all time (DAO). I don't know why I wrote so much just to explain why I'm disinterested in replaying it... but I feel like it's probably just my own way of trying to convince myself that I'm right, but secretly waiting for someone to correct me or something (then maybe convincing me to replay it). lol I have insecurity issues and have trouble being confident in my own views... Sigh. Anyway, maybe it's for the best. I've been on a video game binge ever since I first picked up those SMT games, then the binge continued with Two Point Campus, and it just kept continuing into trying to occupy my leisure/free time with video games instead of something more meaningful. So maybe me getting bored with these games might be a good wakeup call of sorts, forcing me to move on to something else. On the other hand, maybe it's a good time to pick up the Witcher games... Annnd here we go again. lol

Been away from this forum for a while because I've been busy immersing myself in replaying a few games recently, namely My Time in Portia and Detroit: Become Human. DBH, I've already described in one of my last posts what my problem with that game was and why I never completed it to 100% completion (cloud save issue), so this is my attempt to try and complete the game again. As for Portia, I never got to complete that either because I just got bored. It really didn't help that I played it at a time when it was in Early Access mode, I think, so the bugs and incomplete plot just made me forget about the game. Now that I've picked up Portia again, I did finally complete the main plot, but the post-game content was a bit hard to get through, because I found myself sleeping in the game early just to get to the next day so that I could continue the mission plotlines. I got bored very easily during post-game because I've done all the hard work, beaten Higgins and completed the main plot, so I didn't feel as strong of a motivation to keep working on my farm layout design, especially on a game as old as this where showcasing my farm layout designs would feel kinda silly. Like, who would even care or who would I even show all the hard work I've put into designing the Portia farm in 2022? It's just one of those traits about simulation games I couldn't get into, the whole "designing your home/farm" gameplay that doesn't feel engaging for me. I liked the plot-related elements of Portia more than the actual farming or crafting elements, so when the plot was largely over in post-game, my motivation dropped and I'm probably gonna abandon it again (I stopped at the part where they were attacked by Logan the bandit, presumably a set-up for their next game, My Time in Sandrock). I might try My Time at Sandrock again though once it's completed and out of the Early Access stage because I don't want to lose motivation again once I get through all the plot elements that they've developed so far in EA; I'd rather play a completed game through and through. In the meantime though, the next game I'm thinking of replaying to its completion is the Dragon Age trilogy, which I dropped at Inquisition. People kept saying Inquisition is really good, so I might give the trilogy another shot once again.

It was Insomniac's Spider-Man that really pushed me to buy my first Playstation, the PS4, especially when I'm such a Spider-nut. I even bought the red Spider-Man skin version of the console (before I eventually sold it for cash). And now I own a PS5.

I used Letterboxd extensively, even writing several in-depth reviews in the past: https://letterboxd.com/Kendritch/ That's a long time ago though. Nowadays, I just stick to one or two paragraphs of witty jokes because I'm too lazy.

Mickey might have been a whack-job, but he was on point about The Godfather: Part 2. Probably one of the movie sequels that doesn't suck. I'll also add on a few entries to the list: Spider-Man 2 Toy Story 2 Captain America: The Winter Soldier The Dark Knight The Avengers: Infinity War (technically a triquel that doesn't suck) The Empire Strikes Back and The Two Towers don't really count in Randy's book in Scream 2 because he said they were part of a "planned trilogy," meaning filmed back-to-back instead of being separate productions/movies Logan (more like a requel, but still kinda counts) X-Men 2 for original X-trilogy or Days of Future Past for reboot trilogy Evil Dead II

Well, I'm not some hardcore Nintendo fan (and not a supporter of digital media over the physical kind), so it's no surprise I don't pay attention to the eshop. Besides, you were the one who called me out. The burden of proof lies with you since you were the accuser.

Exactly. Nintendo's exclusivity with their products means that they mostly cater to a a certain type of audience (particularly the family-unit who doesn't care for mature content), as much as they try to pretend they could do otherwise with these cheap budget ports.

True, but my point was that it's not their main product. Games like Doom (2016) don't count because they're third-party ports, and even then, that's not a great reason to pick it up because of how shitty the ports' performance are on the Switch, which can only handle mid-quality Mario-style "3D" graphics. Also, if you're going to go out of your way to make a post and correct me, it really helps when you list examples as evidence backing your point. Just saying.

Replaying Detroit: Become Human from scratch. There was a problem with Steam's cloud save and my saves got corrupted, so I'm forced to turn off cloud save to play from the start to unlock everything all over again. Ah well. It's a good thing I haven't played the game for a long time though, so it doesn't feel repetitive. The plot is still entertaining, and it still feels like an epic Hollywood sci-fi blockbuster, so that's engaging.

As someone who didn't have the money to afford a Playstation in the past (even though I own a PS5 now), I can't say I'm displeased at all about this decision. I don't care if it hurts Sony in the future because my life doesn't revolve around billion dollar companies that have nothing to do with me, but if it means more PC users get to play PS games they don't have access to because they couldn't acquire a Playstation for whatever reasons, then all the better IMO. Universal access for all gamers for all games. I hate exclusivity, so I have nothing but love for ports, not just PC ports.

What's not to understand? It's an inherently flawed and biased system that guarantees quality support to privileged and entitled members only. And what you're saying is that anyone who doesn't put hundreds of hours into their PS games should just suck it up and put up with shitty customer service if there are bugs and issues? I'm sorry, but that's insulting.

Aren't COD games basically terrible these days? Making them exclusives isn't exactly going to increase profit.

I guess it's that feeling of ownership. It does make more sense if it's a brand new console you'd prefer to buy because a used console could have a number of problems, but with games, I do agree that there aren't a lot of reasons not to buy used games for a cheaper price... except for, again, that feeling of ownership. I remember going out of my way to buy many physical games from the local game shops, including Fire Emblem games for the Switch, and buying used copies of the games just didn't come to mind because the whole reason I buy physical games in the first place is to have it displayed on my shelf as an expression of my identity and the kind of games I play, sort of like decorating your home in accordance to what kind of person you want to present yourself as. Buying used games does kinda defeat that purpose because it wouldn't be something I get to maintain and clean and ensure that the box is scratch-free as a decorative display item the same way I wouldn't buy a scratched vase for display.

It's also kinda annoying how games are getting more expensive over the years. I remember when the most I had to pay for a game was maybe $59.99. I guess this is inflation in effect, but I'm not economics expert. I agree. It's literally been proven on YouTube by SomeOrdinaryGamers, at least with Playstation games, that the physical copy of a game could have two different prices (or more) depending on which outlet or which country's version of Amazon you're browsing, so there's really no reason why I would pay more for the same game, especially if I don't use Switch that often in the first place. It's like they're charging high prices for people who only own the Switch and nothing else just to take advantage of that, except that I don't know that many people who only owns one console, and even if they do, I wouldn't imagine the Switch users to be loyal Skyrim fans considering the franchise's origin on the PC (or The Elder Scrolls: Arena on the MS-DOS if you want to get technical). It's like porting Diablo 2 to the Switch and charging it for $70. As I've said before, considering their exclusives like Mario, Zelda, Pokémon, and maybe Xenoblade Chronicles, the Switch has always felt like a family demographic console, not something gamers like TES fans would be passionate about purchasing. It just seems like a mismatch of demographics. I get that the Switch has tried to tap into the more mature audiences with their Doom (2016) port, but look how well that turned out with its performance issues. The Switch and Nintendo just can't cut it outside of their established demographics.

Yeah, that's good advice, and it's also how I ended up in this forum. I had some problems with NintendoLife forum (in regards to free speech and my criticisms of mainstream media I won't get into here), so I left because I got tired of it and just wanted a fresh start somewhere else. It's also why I try to keep my more controversial views to myself this time (with varying success) because I just want a nice relaxing place to discuss unimportant video game topics.

The handheld feature is the big sell, because the only other big titles exclusive on the console AFAIK are your typical Mario, Zelda and Pokémon (and let's not forget Xenoblade Chronicles 3), of which the first two I didn't grow up with. But if you're a big supporter of those franchises, that might be a great reason for you to pick it up, plus the fact that the Switch often receive many third party JRPGs like Kingdom Hearts and (coming soon) Persona 5 Royal. Again, those games are available on other consoles, so it's not the big sell here, but they're nice bonuses added on with the Switch exclusives I mentioned above. There's also no way Nintendo will ever port their games, so that's another big reason why you'd buy it. It's more of a family unit with family-friendly exclusives rather than something like the PS4 or even the XBox which have more mature content on their games.

Yeah, it is scummy. As someone who lives in a country where good and professional customer service was repetitively hammered into my head by my superiors, I'm someone who's very uptight about professionalism in customer service. We paid good money for your products, and while I'm not an expert on this, I just have a feeling that amount of money might not just be the exact cost of what the games' are worth, but might have included additional charges for miscellaneous services like the platform you're playing it on (Steam), or how some games are priced at a higher cost in some countries than others. Those additional charges - again, not an expert - probably included our right not to be treated like crap when your products aren't working either, meaning customer service charges.

Well, I doubt Phil is Microsoft, as in he might not have been responsible for what the shareholders decide in terms of buying studios. Usually, backroom politics come into play when it comes to business decisions like that, and a lot of people tend to forget that being the head of the company (or CEO even) doesn't mean you get a say in everything.

This sounds like a cool idea. I usually have a hard time mediating because I couldn't concentrate with even the softest background noise and other distractions, and closing my eyes just makes me sleepy, so a VR environment with my headphones on might do the trick.

Marvel Heroes 2016 was free when it was still around, which was one of the reasons it was one of the best superhero games for me because, for a free game, it had a decent storyline and decent gameplay. It had a few problems, especially in regards to people stealing your kills and you have to wait for the drops to spawn again, but that's to be expected from a free online game. The only thing that I paid for was the costumes, and they were amazingly designed because of the different famous voice actors hired for each costume, with my favorite being Christopher Daniel Barnes reprising his role as the Symbiote Spider-Man from the '90s cartoon. I also remember playing Marvel Future Revolution for a while during its initial release, but got bored quickly and forgot about it. I've also played Uno Online on CrazyGames.com, which is a decent time-killer and very addictive, but I feel like most of the opponents were bots... Tried my hands on Pokémon Showdown and Pokémon: Trading Card Game Online. The former is just not for me because you really need to be an expert on Pokémon moves to win. The latter, I've played it for about a few years at least. It's very addictive, especially because of the theme decks and how you could just use them to win matches easily in Theme Matches. It's a shame that they haven't bothered to release new theme decks for a long time now. I might download it again if there's ever a new deck in the future.

Welcome. Always nice to see a writer around. Hope you enjoy interacting with the forum and I'll see you around. 🙂

How long have you been part of the forum? Are you the creator or involved with its creation?