[Morgoth]

ForkassalOfTheInnerCircle, on 07 March 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

Civilization 5, just bought it off steam on sale. So far, it feels a bit shallow, to be honest.

I agree with that, but there are some pleasant aspects. I like the new battle system with the tiles, and the religion and culture system is pretty cool

[Lucifer's Heaven]

Messremb, on 07 March 2013 - 12:10 AM, said:

I've made the mistake of getting on EVE. Ye gods people are dicks.

It very much plays up the PvP aspect. And in-game scamming and shit is condoned by the creators. Essentially as long as you aren't exploiting a bug, it's fine by them.
This makes for some awesome stories, but does tend to invite dickish-ness.
Still, if you find some good friends to play with it can be a lot of fun

On a semi related note, I have been kinda enjoying DUST 514 Beta. The game is pretty good so far. Definitely not finished though (mostly I mean features not available yet, what is out runs damn well). The "kinda" is being forced to use a control for an FPS. Some people can be good with it, but I much prefer mouse and keyboard. Mostly in intense fights it sucks when I die and sit there thinking I could have probably won it with M&KB. And when we are only just losing, and I feel like I could have make a meaningful difference and possibly turned the tide.
PS3 does allow M&KB, but our lounge set up is really not conducive. Looking into possibilities.
I like a lot about the game so far though, it really feels like it's in the EVE universe.

[lastname]

Morgoth, on 07 March 2013 - 08:42 AM, said:

ForkassalOfTheInnerCircle, on 07 March 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

Civilization 5, just bought it off steam on sale. So far, it feels a bit shallow, to be honest.

I agree with that, but there are some pleasant aspects. I like the new battle system with the tiles, and the religion and culture system is pretty cool

Religion? Was that added in via an expansion pack or something? I bought the vanilla version a couple of years ago and I don't recall seeing much about religion.

Bought it, played a few times and canned it. I thought the game did some things well but some of the victory conditions were a complete chore to achieve.

[Morgoth]

lastname, on 08 March 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

Morgoth, on 07 March 2013 - 08:42 AM, said:

ForkassalOfTheInnerCircle, on 07 March 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

Civilization 5, just bought it off steam on sale. So far, it feels a bit shallow, to be honest.

I agree with that, but there are some pleasant aspects. I like the new battle system with the tiles, and the religion and culture system is pretty cool

Religion? Was that added in via an expansion pack or something? I bought the vanilla version a couple of years ago and I don't recall seeing much about religion.

Bought it, played a few times and canned it. I thought the game did some things well but some of the victory conditions were a complete chore to achieve.

Yeah I bought it with the expansion when the whole thing was on sale some days ago. Seeing how i was home sick I figured I needed something other than Crusader Kings II to entertain me.

I have no clue what's different from the vanilla version, but I can't for the life of me understand why they would have chosen to remove religion altogether. My impression is that CIV 5 suffers from that whole simplify and streamline fetish that game companies seem to suffer from these days. The lack of available information about my opposing civilizations is a real annoyance. I don't want the info simplified and presented through my retarded advisors. I want graphs, numbers, comparisons!

And why can't I trade technologies? Or, on monarch as a Korean the only way for the AI to compete would have to be through tech trading, but now I'm so far ahead technologically there's nothing they can do. Since they can't spread their tech around they all just go through the same motions and I remain about an age ahead.

Or what about map trading? Why is that not possible?

The game is fun for sure, but I had more fun playing civ 4 when that came out, and civ 4 was a complete game before the expansions. Mind you the expansions made the game even better, but still.

Anyways, it is satisfying playing as Korea, with the Messenger of the Gods pantheon bonus. My tech advantage is massive, even though it's on the fifth difficulty (Monarch?), though I can't say by how much since that info isn't available! Still, Mongolia declared war and my submarines made short work of their new frigates. My planes made land invasions impossible.

I quite like the city states, and have several in thrall which provides some much needed support of my massive empire. The first one I found was a military one, and those early soldiers certainly made defeating the Byzantines a lot easier. Those ships of theirs are ridiculous. Now I am more appreciative of the maritime cities, as the extra food is very welcome.

Also, I don't understand how it would be possible to retain a big civ without picking Commerce. 2+ in happiness for every luxury good shifted my happiness from -1 to +47.

I'm so dominant I'm not sure I can be bothered finishing the game to be honest.

So, clearly a fun game. But a step backwards from civ 4.

[Traveller]

Ni No Kuni.. If there wasn't enough to do already, I have just found a Casino in a graveyard, run by the Undead. It contains the game from the Temple of Trials, which is both addictive and infuriating, depending on how well you can control 2 people simultaneously.

The Frog temple was not huge or particularly difficult, but the story was good and it looks gorgeous.

Plus I got to use the levitate spell a lot, which lets you glide around like a ghost and doesn't trigger any traps. Oh, and the music you get when you kill a boss and acquire treasure is growing on me now, nearly as much as Zeldas ever did.

This post has been edited by Traveller: 08 March 2013 - 10:32 AM

[Tattersail_]

Morgoth, on 08 March 2013 - 08:40 AM, said:

lastname, on 08 March 2013 - 08:06 AM, said:

Morgoth, on 07 March 2013 - 08:42 AM, said:

ForkassalOfTheInnerCircle, on 07 March 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

Civilization 5, just bought it off steam on sale. So far, it feels a bit shallow, to be honest.

I agree with that, but there are some pleasant aspects. I like the new battle system with the tiles, and the religion and culture system is pretty cool

Religion? Was that added in via an expansion pack or something? I bought the vanilla version a couple of years ago and I don't recall seeing much about religion.

Bought it, played a few times and canned it. I thought the game did some things well but some of the victory conditions were a complete chore to achieve.

Yeah I bought it with the expansion when the whole thing was on sale some days ago. Seeing how i was home sick I figured I needed something other than Crusader Kings II to entertain me.

I have no clue what's different from the vanilla version, but I can't for the life of me understand why they would have chosen to remove religion altogether. My impression is that CIV 5 suffers from that whole simplify and streamline fetish that game companies seem to suffer from these days. The lack of available information about my opposing civilizations is a real annoyance. I don't want the info simplified and presented through my retarded advisors. I want graphs, numbers, comparisons!

And why can't I trade technologies? Or, on monarch as a Korean the only way for the AI to compete would have to be through tech trading, but now I'm so far ahead technologically there's nothing they can do. Since they can't spread their tech around they all just go through the same motions and I remain about an age ahead.

Or what about map trading? Why is that not possible?

The game is fun for sure, but I had more fun playing civ 4 when that came out, and civ 4 was a complete game before the expansions. Mind you the expansions made the game even better, but still.

Anyways, it is satisfying playing as Korea, with the Messenger of the Gods pantheon bonus. My tech advantage is massive, even though it's on the fifth difficulty (Monarch?), though I can't say by how much since that info isn't available! Still, Mongolia declared war and my submarines made short work of their new frigates. My planes made land invasions impossible.

I quite like the city states, and have several in thrall which provides some much needed support of my massive empire. The first one I found was a military one, and those early soldiers certainly made defeating the Byzantines a lot easier. Those ships of theirs are ridiculous. Now I am more appreciative of the maritime cities, as the extra food is very welcome.

Also, I don't understand how it would be possible to retain a big civ without picking Commerce. 2+ in happiness for every luxury good shifted my happiness from -1 to +47.

I'm so dominant I'm not sure I can be bothered finishing the game to be honest.

So, clearly a fun game. But a step backwards from civ 4.

I don't know which one I am playing at the moment, I was meant to check one night this week but I haven't played since Tuesday due to Badminton (Wednesday) and Zombies (Thursday). Tonight is Poker night with the Boys so tomorrow is the earliest I'll get to play again. It starts with building your city and what you want to build in it, worker, settler etc. Then you research a technology, now researching one leads to another. The starting track on the left hand side has about 6/8 selections. I am sure one of those is a Religious track,.

[Dolmen 2.0]

I bought Simcity 5, Have been playing it for a week or so. Apart from mandatory internet play I like the game dynamics. Simcity has always been more of a hobby than an actual goal oriented game but I love how objectives are subtly introduced. Once you've gone through the chore of setting an internet game up, or joining an existing one (good luck) the game seems to smoothly glide you into your initial stage of development. I have started with varied start-up budgets, probably dependant on city size? Not really sure. I had 100 000 gleaned from a large existing abandoned city, 50 000 from a fresh lot of the same size and 30 000 for a small lot I joined by accident. No matter what the case I find it much more worthwhile to eventualy handle two lots simultaneously. This feels a bit backwards but it makes for interesting play dynamics. If you manage to join a region with a team of players interested in pushing the region up the rankings things get pretty competitive...So yeah while very annoying, mandatory online play could be shifting an otherwise generic hobby into an engaging network game. Pretty hard thing for Maxis to own up to given the recent uproar about it but I can see the logic behind the decision.

I haven't played much MMorpgs but this feels like Maxis tried to borrow from that realm of engagement. There is an attitude to it that reminds me of how I would imagine a more structured version of Minecraft. whether that's a good or a bad thing, I don't really know as I didn't really get 'into' minecraft. Minecraft was pretty fun though, as is this game, much more entertaining than previous Simcity titles. If anyone is playing this, I'm keen to co-op. Those considering it should give it a try, particularly if you have inerest in the building, planning or development industry.

[Silencer]

Dolmen+, on 15 March 2013 - 05:27 AM, said:

I bought Simcity 5, Have been playing it for a week or so. Apart from mandatory internet play I like the game dynamics. Simcity has always been more of a hobby than an actual goal oriented game but I love how objectives are subtly introduced. Once you've gone through the chore of setting an internet game up, or joining an existing one (good luck) the game seems to smoothly glide you into your initial stage of development. I have started with varied start-up budgets, probably dependant on city size? Not really sure. I had 100 000 gleaned from a large existing abandoned city, 50 000 from a fresh lot of the same size and 30 000 for a small lot I joined by accident. No matter what the case I find it much more worthwhile to eventualy handle two lots simultaneously. This feels a bit backwards but it makes for interesting play dynamics. If you manage to join a region with a team of players interested in pushing the region up the rankings things get pretty competitive...So yeah while very annoying, mandatory online play could be shifting an otherwise generic hobby into an engaging network game. Pretty hard thing for Maxis to own up to given the recent uproar about it but I can see the logic behind the decision.

I haven't played much MMorpgs but this feels like Maxis tried to borrow from that realm of engagement. There is an attitude to it that reminds me of how I would imagine a more structured version of Minecraft. whether that's a good or a bad thing, I don't really know as I didn't really get 'into' minecraft. Minecraft was pretty fun though, as is this game, much more entertaining than previous Simcity titles. If anyone is playing this, I'm keen to co-op. Those considering it should give it a try, particularly if you have inerest in the building, planning or development industry.

I'd play. If it could be played offline. Unless your game is in fact an MMO, and is not a single-player game shoe-horned into compulsory always online to fight pirates but in reality just annoying the fuck out of your real consumers, with a few multiplayer aspects that are not integral to the basic game used as an excuse (if you even bother), the second you decided to force me to have an internet connection to play your game I became diametrically opposed to purchasing it.

[Dolmen 2.0]

Silencer, on 15 March 2013 - 05:39 AM, said:

Dolmen+, on 15 March 2013 - 05:27 AM, said:

I bought Simcity 5, Have been playing it for a week or so. Apart from mandatory internet play I like the game dynamics. Simcity has always been more of a hobby than an actual goal oriented game but I love how objectives are subtly introduced. Once you've gone through the chore of setting an internet game up, or joining an existing one (good luck) the game seems to smoothly glide you into your initial stage of development. I have started with varied start-up budgets, probably dependant on city size? Not really sure. I had 100 000 gleaned from a large existing abandoned city, 50 000 from a fresh lot of the same size and 30 000 for a small lot I joined by accident. No matter what the case I find it much more worthwhile to eventualy handle two lots simultaneously. This feels a bit backwards but it makes for interesting play dynamics. If you manage to join a region with a team of players interested in pushing the region up the rankings things get pretty competitive...So yeah while very annoying, mandatory online play could be shifting an otherwise generic hobby into an engaging network game. Pretty hard thing for Maxis to own up to given the recent uproar about it but I can see the logic behind the decision.

I haven't played much MMorpgs but this feels like Maxis tried to borrow from that realm of engagement. There is an attitude to it that reminds me of how I would imagine a more structured version of Minecraft. whether that's a good or a bad thing, I don't really know as I didn't really get 'into' minecraft. Minecraft was pretty fun though, as is this game, much more entertaining than previous Simcity titles. If anyone is playing this, I'm keen to co-op. Those considering it should give it a try, particularly if you have inerest in the building, planning or development industry.

I'd play. If it could be played offline. Unless your game is in fact an MMO, and is not a single-player game shoe-horned into compulsory always online to fight pirates but in reality just annoying the fuck out of your real consumers, with a few multiplayer aspects that are not integral to the basic game used as an excuse (if you even bother), the second you decided to force me to have an internet connection to play your game I became diametrically opposed to purchasing it.

That is the debate currently flocking the internets. Simcity doesn't have to be an online game. There is an interesting multicity dynamic, for example the game has a city specialization aspect. Specializations rely on other cities to succeed EG: If I am running a heavy ore refinery with super power plants I can outsource my extra energy to your cultural city allowing you to have little or no pollution and thus succeeding to draw in tourists, artists and high income societal member. This ofcourse can happen without a network between to cities I have made for myself but I think the goal here is to make the game social, thus relevant to the trend of the times.

This post has been edited by Dolmen+: 15 March 2013 - 06:21 AM

[Silencer]

Dolmen+, on 15 March 2013 - 06:20 AM, said:

Silencer, on 15 March 2013 - 05:39 AM, said:

Dolmen+, on 15 March 2013 - 05:27 AM, said:

I bought Simcity 5, Have been playing it for a week or so. Apart from mandatory internet play I like the game dynamics. Simcity has always been more of a hobby than an actual goal oriented game but I love how objectives are subtly introduced. Once you've gone through the chore of setting an internet game up, or joining an existing one (good luck) the game seems to smoothly glide you into your initial stage of development. I have started with varied start-up budgets, probably dependant on city size? Not really sure. I had 100 000 gleaned from a large existing abandoned city, 50 000 from a fresh lot of the same size and 30 000 for a small lot I joined by accident. No matter what the case I find it much more worthwhile to eventualy handle two lots simultaneously. This feels a bit backwards but it makes for interesting play dynamics. If you manage to join a region with a team of players interested in pushing the region up the rankings things get pretty competitive...So yeah while very annoying, mandatory online play could be shifting an otherwise generic hobby into an engaging network game. Pretty hard thing for Maxis to own up to given the recent uproar about it but I can see the logic behind the decision.

I haven't played much MMorpgs but this feels like Maxis tried to borrow from that realm of engagement. There is an attitude to it that reminds me of how I would imagine a more structured version of Minecraft. whether that's a good or a bad thing, I don't really know as I didn't really get 'into' minecraft. Minecraft was pretty fun though, as is this game, much more entertaining than previous Simcity titles. If anyone is playing this, I'm keen to co-op. Those considering it should give it a try, particularly if you have inerest in the building, planning or development industry.

I'd play. If it could be played offline. Unless your game is in fact an MMO, and is not a single-player game shoe-horned into compulsory always online to fight pirates but in reality just annoying the fuck out of your real consumers, with a few multiplayer aspects that are not integral to the basic game used as an excuse (if you even bother), the second you decided to force me to have an internet connection to play your game I became diametrically opposed to purchasing it.

That is the debate currently flocking the internets. Simcity doesn't have to be an online game. There is an interesting multicity dynamic, for example the game has a city specialization aspect. Specializations rely on other cities to succeed EG: If I am running a heavy ore refinery with super power plants I can outsource my extra energy to your cultural city allowing you to have little or no pollution and thus succeeding to draw in tourists, artists and high income societal member. This ofcourse can happen without a network between to cities I have made for myself but I think the goal here is to make the game social, thus relevant to the trend of the times.

Which would be great...if it were optional.

In the event my internet connection cuts out and I want to play Sim City, I can't. That is wrong as far as I'm concerned. It's a different case to say "we're trying to allow people to be more social and evolve the game to meet the current trends" than it is to say "Thou Shalt Play Sociably", and when what they *really* mean is "You are all filthy pirates and we will lock down our precious creative property so that you can't enjoy it unless we want you to! (And lolololol on you when we release Sim City 6 and force you to pay for it by shutting down the Sim City 5 servers! AHAHAHAHAH revenue, endless revenue! And no filthy pirates!" it just gets annoying and repulsive.

*ahem*

I was watching something recently (can't remember what) but it got brought up in a comments breakdown on a PBSIdeasChannel video as a response to the case for Minecraft being an excellent educational tool - namely that students (or more broadly, people) turn off when you TELL them to do something, whereas if you simply provide it they will pursue it freely and happily. I think this applies here. If you offer me online, I will play it. If you FORCE me online, I will not take kindly to it. It's simple, but it seems to be escaping a lot of companies.
That's ignoring the practical concerns and so forth but it's an interesting, relevant concept, I thought.

[Dolmen 2.0]

Silencer, on 15 March 2013 - 06:38 AM, said:

Dolmen+, on 15 March 2013 - 06:20 AM, said:

Silencer, on 15 March 2013 - 05:39 AM, said:

Dolmen+, on 15 March 2013 - 05:27 AM, said:

I bought Simcity 5, Have been playing it for a week or so. Apart from mandatory internet play I like the game dynamics. Simcity has always been more of a hobby than an actual goal oriented game but I love how objectives are subtly introduced. Once you've gone through the chore of setting an internet game up, or joining an existing one (good luck) the game seems to smoothly glide you into your initial stage of development. I have started with varied start-up budgets, probably dependant on city size? Not really sure. I had 100 000 gleaned from a large existing abandoned city, 50 000 from a fresh lot of the same size and 30 000 for a small lot I joined by accident. No matter what the case I find it much more worthwhile to eventualy handle two lots simultaneously. This feels a bit backwards but it makes for interesting play dynamics. If you manage to join a region with a team of players interested in pushing the region up the rankings things get pretty competitive...So yeah while very annoying, mandatory online play could be shifting an otherwise generic hobby into an engaging network game. Pretty hard thing for Maxis to own up to given the recent uproar about it but I can see the logic behind the decision.

I haven't played much MMorpgs but this feels like Maxis tried to borrow from that realm of engagement. There is an attitude to it that reminds me of how I would imagine a more structured version of Minecraft. whether that's a good or a bad thing, I don't really know as I didn't really get 'into' minecraft. Minecraft was pretty fun though, as is this game, much more entertaining than previous Simcity titles. If anyone is playing this, I'm keen to co-op. Those considering it should give it a try, particularly if you have inerest in the building, planning or development industry.

I'd play. If it could be played offline. Unless your game is in fact an MMO, and is not a single-player game shoe-horned into compulsory always online to fight pirates but in reality just annoying the fuck out of your real consumers, with a few multiplayer aspects that are not integral to the basic game used as an excuse (if you even bother), the second you decided to force me to have an internet connection to play your game I became diametrically opposed to purchasing it.

That is the debate currently flocking the internets. Simcity doesn't have to be an online game. There is an interesting multicity dynamic, for example the game has a city specialization aspect. Specializations rely on other cities to succeed EG: If I am running a heavy ore refinery with super power plants I can outsource my extra energy to your cultural city allowing you to have little or no pollution and thus succeeding to draw in tourists, artists and high income societal member. This ofcourse can happen without a network between to cities I have made for myself but I think the goal here is to make the game social, thus relevant to the trend of the times.

Which would be great...if it were optional.

In the event my internet connection cuts out and I want to play Sim City, I can't. That is wrong as far as I'm concerned. It's a different case to say "we're trying to allow people to be more social and evolve the game to meet the current trends" than it is to say "Thou Shalt Play Sociably", and when what they *really* mean is "You are all filthy pirates and we will lock down our precious creative property so that you can't enjoy it unless we want you to! (And lolololol on you when we release Sim City 6 and force you to pay for it by shutting down the Sim City 5 servers! AHAHAHAHAH revenue, endless revenue! And no filthy pirates!" it just gets annoying and repulsive.

*ahem*

I was watching something recently (can't remember what) but it got brought up in a comments breakdown on a PBSIdeasChannel video as a response to the case for Minecraft being an excellent educational tool - namely that students (or more broadly, people) turn off when you TELL them to do something, whereas if you simply provide it they will pursue it freely and happily. I think this applies here. If you offer me online, I will play it. If you FORCE me online, I will not take kindly to it. It's simple, but it seems to be escaping a lot of companies.
That's ignoring the practical concerns and so forth but it's an interesting, relevant concept, I thought.

I think Maxis went so far as to apologize and throw in a free game for what they term 'betraying your trust'

Heres the full article if you're interested.

http://www.ign.com/a...rs-free-ea-game

I think anti-piracy tactics are a corporate necessity but there are definately more customer friendly avenues available to them. Origin on its own is a major gatekeeper for most piracy patches. Sure there are ways around it but they border on excessive. Maxis should let EA play Gaurdian of the Gate and focus more on designing games with offline playability. Hopefully they do end up changing the game, or eventually releasing an offline patch. In my mind a screw up like this could kill interest in the entire franchise, or send the market over to competitors like Cities XL.

This post has been edited by Dolmen+: 15 March 2013 - 07:38 AM

[Morgoth]

So I've been trying Endless Space as it was on sale through Steam the other day. I've always loved the 4x genre, and especially the space versions (Imperium Galactica, Galactic civilizations, Masters of Orion and so on), so this game made me a little excited.

Now, perhaps I'm missing something but so far Endless Space seems absolutely soulless. I've explored outwards, settled some systems and found the other races. Now all the borders have been more or less finalized, the majority of systems are settled and all I have left is to bunker down and research, or go to war.

Systems have a varying amount of planets but in essence feel pretty bland. So does construction for that matter. The tech tree, though promising, seem in the end to simply provide improvements for the basic choices you had available almost from the start, and visually a freshly settled system looks identical to a well developed one.

I don't know. I have no interest continuing the game once the initial explore phase ended. And even that part was pretty bland. I've been thinking of what I would have done to make the game more enjoyable by my standards, but the changes would have made a completely different game.

[Silencer]

Dolmen+, on 15 March 2013 - 07:37 AM, said:

Silencer, on 15 March 2013 - 06:38 AM, said:

Dolmen+, on 15 March 2013 - 06:20 AM, said:

Silencer, on 15 March 2013 - 05:39 AM, said:

Dolmen+, on 15 March 2013 - 05:27 AM, said:

I bought Simcity 5, Have been playing it for a week or so. Apart from mandatory internet play I like the game dynamics. Simcity has always been more of a hobby than an actual goal oriented game but I love how objectives are subtly introduced. Once you've gone through the chore of setting an internet game up, or joining an existing one (good luck) the game seems to smoothly glide you into your initial stage of development. I have started with varied start-up budgets, probably dependant on city size? Not really sure. I had 100 000 gleaned from a large existing abandoned city, 50 000 from a fresh lot of the same size and 30 000 for a small lot I joined by accident. No matter what the case I find it much more worthwhile to eventualy handle two lots simultaneously. This feels a bit backwards but it makes for interesting play dynamics. If you manage to join a region with a team of players interested in pushing the region up the rankings things get pretty competitive...So yeah while very annoying, mandatory online play could be shifting an otherwise generic hobby into an engaging network game. Pretty hard thing for Maxis to own up to given the recent uproar about it but I can see the logic behind the decision.

I haven't played much MMorpgs but this feels like Maxis tried to borrow from that realm of engagement. There is an attitude to it that reminds me of how I would imagine a more structured version of Minecraft. whether that's a good or a bad thing, I don't really know as I didn't really get 'into' minecraft. Minecraft was pretty fun though, as is this game, much more entertaining than previous Simcity titles. If anyone is playing this, I'm keen to co-op. Those considering it should give it a try, particularly if you have inerest in the building, planning or development industry.

I'd play. If it could be played offline. Unless your game is in fact an MMO, and is not a single-player game shoe-horned into compulsory always online to fight pirates but in reality just annoying the fuck out of your real consumers, with a few multiplayer aspects that are not integral to the basic game used as an excuse (if you even bother), the second you decided to force me to have an internet connection to play your game I became diametrically opposed to purchasing it.

That is the debate currently flocking the internets. Simcity doesn't have to be an online game. There is an interesting multicity dynamic, for example the game has a city specialization aspect. Specializations rely on other cities to succeed EG: If I am running a heavy ore refinery with super power plants I can outsource my extra energy to your cultural city allowing you to have little or no pollution and thus succeeding to draw in tourists, artists and high income societal member. This ofcourse can happen without a network between to cities I have made for myself but I think the goal here is to make the game social, thus relevant to the trend of the times.

Which would be great...if it were optional.

In the event my internet connection cuts out and I want to play Sim City, I can't. That is wrong as far as I'm concerned. It's a different case to say "we're trying to allow people to be more social and evolve the game to meet the current trends" than it is to say "Thou Shalt Play Sociably", and when what they *really* mean is "You are all filthy pirates and we will lock down our precious creative property so that you can't enjoy it unless we want you to! (And lolololol on you when we release Sim City 6 and force you to pay for it by shutting down the Sim City 5 servers! AHAHAHAHAH revenue, endless revenue! And no filthy pirates!" it just gets annoying and repulsive.

*ahem*

I was watching something recently (can't remember what) but it got brought up in a comments breakdown on a PBSIdeasChannel video as a response to the case for Minecraft being an excellent educational tool - namely that students (or more broadly, people) turn off when you TELL them to do something, whereas if you simply provide it they will pursue it freely and happily. I think this applies here. If you offer me online, I will play it. If you FORCE me online, I will not take kindly to it. It's simple, but it seems to be escaping a lot of companies.
That's ignoring the practical concerns and so forth but it's an interesting, relevant concept, I thought.

I think Maxis went so far as to apologize and throw in a free game for what they term 'betraying your trust'

Heres the full article if you're interested.

http://www.ign.com/a...rs-free-ea-game

I think anti-piracy tactics are a corporate necessity but there are definately more customer friendly avenues available to them. Origin on its own is a major gatekeeper for most piracy patches. Sure there are ways around it but they border on excessive. Maxis should let EA play Gaurdian of the Gate and focus more on designing games with offline playability. Hopefully they do end up changing the game, or eventually releasing an offline patch. In my mind a screw up like this could kill interest in the entire franchise, or send the market over to competitors like Cities XL.

Yes, but Maxis/EA also said that they have no intention of making the game playable offline because it's "too hard", despite anonymous internal sources reportedly (the article is on GameInformer, fyi) saying it would actually be easy. Throwing a free game at customers is tantamount to attempting to pay people to shut up in the hopes that their game doesn't suffer and die from the bad public reaction.

The vast majority of DRM is easy for pirates to end-around. The always-online thing can even be spoofed, though *that* is, admittedly, much harder to do. The issue is that non-intrusive DRM is basically pointless (therefore: don't bother with it) and intrusive DRM makes the legitimate customer feel like they are being, or actually be, treated like pirates. Neither of those has much point, does it?
On the one hand, pirates still get to pirate your game. On the other, your customers hate you, and don't buy your game (or pirate it in spite, once that is achieved).

Now, from a financial point of view, neither of these positions actually make sense. If you take the deep breath and plunge into the horrifying concept of trusting your consumers to purchase your game legitimately, the vast majority of them will probably do so. The silly thing is, NOT doing that doesn't actually stop anyone from getting your game for free (see above) and therefore is pointless.


Basically: publishers be screwed, yo. But they should man up and be screwed in such a way that doesn't fuck over and/or just generally annoy the legitimate customer. It's not that hard, really.

Morgoth, on 15 March 2013 - 07:53 AM, said:

So I've been trying Endless Space as it was on sale through Steam the other day. I've always loved the 4x genre, and especially the space versions (Imperium Galactica, Galactic civilizations, Masters of Orion and so on), so this game made me a little excited.

Now, perhaps I'm missing something but so far Endless Space seems absolutely soulless. I've explored outwards, settled some systems and found the other races. Now all the borders have been more or less finalized, the majority of systems are settled and all I have left is to bunker down and research, or go to war.

Systems have a varying amount of planets but in essence feel pretty bland. So does construction for that matter. The tech tree, though promising, seem in the end to simply provide improvements for the basic choices you had available almost from the start, and visually a freshly settled system looks identical to a well developed one.

I don't know. I have no interest continuing the game once the initial explore phase ended. And even that part was pretty bland. I've been thinking of what I would have done to make the game more enjoyable by my standards, but the changes would have made a completely different game.

So, long story short, you'd rather be playing something else?

I do hate that feeling. "I'd change this, this and THIS and then this game would be AWE-...not this game any more." :S

[Morgoth]

Silencer, on 15 March 2013 - 09:58 AM, said:

Morgoth, on 15 March 2013 - 07:53 AM, said:

So I've been trying Endless Space as it was on sale through Steam the other day. I've always loved the 4x genre, and especially the space versions (Imperium Galactica, Galactic civilizations, Masters of Orion and so on), so this game made me a little excited.

Now, perhaps I'm missing something but so far Endless Space seems absolutely soulless. I've explored outwards, settled some systems and found the other races. Now all the borders have been more or less finalized, the majority of systems are settled and all I have left is to bunker down and research, or go to war.

Systems have a varying amount of planets but in essence feel pretty bland. So does construction for that matter. The tech tree, though promising, seem in the end to simply provide improvements for the basic choices you had available almost from the start, and visually a freshly settled system looks identical to a well developed one.

I don't know. I have no interest continuing the game once the initial explore phase ended. And even that part was pretty bland. I've been thinking of what I would have done to make the game more enjoyable by my standards, but the changes would have made a completely different game.

So, long story short, you'd rather be playing something else?

I do hate that feeling. "I'd change this, this and THIS and then this game would be AWE-...not this game any more." :S

Yeah. If Galactic Civilizations II was available for Mac I would have jumped at that to scratch the itch, but instead I just read a book.

It's a shame. I understand it's hard to make a 4x game that remains interesting from start to end, but they could at least have tried. It's like setting and general fluff was considered a pointless distraction to the creators, and that details, mystery, exploration, all these things were removed or toned down to fit in a bigger tech tree.

[Aptorian]

With my gaming PC out of commission I have been playing a ton of console games.

Crackdown: Really liked this game despite its simplicity. It felt like the sandbox collectible game in its rawest form. There was something quite interesting in seeing your character grow visibly stronger, faster, more durable, more skilled as you collected orbs from all over the place. Crackdown 2 has moved up on my "to play" list. Also makes the rumours of Saints Row 4 being like crackdown a lot more tantalising.

Dust: An Elysian Tale: I heard a lot of gushing praise for this game. I don't think it quite lived up to the hype surrounding the game but it is very impressive that most of this game was created by just one talented artist. Very engrossing character development in this one. I especially loved the flying squirrel cat creature, I am sure it most have gotten on some people's nerves but I quite liked it.

The Maw: Short and cool indie game. Basically you have an all consuming monster on a leash that you feed innocent wild life to. Or something like that. I was surprised at how likeable the maw and the protagonist was. Who ever made this game they managed to make me love those two characters with the minimal amount of effort.

The Sly Trilogy: It's strange, I'd never even heard of these games before I saw a quick look of Sly 4. And this surprises me because these games are damn good. I got the trilogy for free via PS+ and had sort of dismissed them as some cheap platformers that Sony were just giving away for free. They're ridiculously charming and, considering their age, extremely inovative and entertaining. Playing these games you instantly recognice where the inFamous games got their platforming from.

The third game also includes a pirate themed mission that is like playing a cartoon version of Assassin's Creed 3's naval missions. And this is something they built 8 years ago. As some side stuff! Oh man, if only they'd spun off a side story.

The Resistance Trilogy: I've finished the first two and am currently some 1/3 in to the third game. Good FPS games that show their age is how I would describe these games. Playing the first game was particularly interesting because you can see it heralds from the time when FPS games were beginning to change into what they are today. You can still see a lot of old ideas about what an FPS campaign should be like but things like rechargable health are sneaking into the game mechanics.

The third game seems like their magnom opus. Everything from the first two games are melting together to make a thoroughly enjoyable shooter. It feels like playing a more depressing and violent version of Half-life.

Dante's Inferno: This game is fuuucked up. Christian mythology vs God of War's gameplay. I actually have to admire the makers of this games balls. This game is loaded with ridiculously graphic and obscene scenario's that paint Christianity as bat shit insane. Which I guess it kind of is if you take Devine Comedy's "Hell" as gospel.

de Blob 2: I am surprised this game wasn't more popular when it was released. It's an extremely well designed and charming platformer with what I would descibe as a thoroughly unique art design. Also, somehow, this manages to have a more coherent and intelligent story than 90% of videogames out there. And it's all told via slapstick comedy.

Resident Evil: Operation Racoon City: Not as bad as what the reviews had let me to believe. Just utterly mediochre. It makes you kind of sad thinking of what the game could have been. Also kind of leaves you incredulous that Capcom would mismanage a piece of IP this badly. In the end I never finished the game because the last stage had a segment where no matter what I did I couldn't survive an endless wave of rampaging zombies. Shame.

Dead Rising 2: Began this game one afternoon, gave it a couple of hours and then promptly quit and deleted the game off my hard drive. What an utter mess of a game. Idiotic story. Unlikable characters. Clunky game mechanics. Poor fighting mechanics. A stupid upgrade system. Apparently you need to play, die and restart the game several times to get anything out of it. Do not want.'

Banjo Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts: I was listening to some old podcasts from 2008 and people were fawning over this game. I've been playing it off and on. I don't really like it, the controls are too awful for that, but it's hard to stop playing and not admire it for the sheer endless possibilities of the vehicle design. There's so much to do in that game and the ability to build and design what ever kind of vehicle you want out of parts you find around in the game is amazing. I don't understand why somebody else hasn't stolen this game mechanic yet. Or why they haven't made a Nuts and Bolts 2. This game mixed with Minecraft would make me a hermit.

This post has been edited by Aptorius: 25 March 2013 - 05:56 PM

[worry]

I've only played the first two (so far) but yeah the Sly Cooper games are awesome. So fun and very playful!

I'm playing Professor Layton and the Last Specter. Love these games, they seem to be getting moodier and moodier, which is nice.

[Kanubis]

Apt, I was similarly unimpressed with Dead Rising 2 and I generally love zombie killing games of any type.

[Defiance]

Dark Souls. Hearing you guys talk about it made me want to play. Running through it with a sorcerer for the first time ever. Been breezing through it, but I had to quit before I punched my TV. Made my first stupid mistake in Sen's Fortress which ended up costing me about 50k souls.

[Dolmen 2.0]

@defiance: Hitting dark souls up again myself, a buddy with 400 hrs on the game has been pushing me to keep at it, and he gave me a wealth of handy tips to deal with the depths, i'm off to brightown and I have to say I feel like an idiot wielding dual swords. Find myself switching to my dark knight blade more and more of late and these damn basilisks keep cursing me.

[Morgoth]

The Black Night Sword carried me all the way through Anor Londo with my original pyromancer.