Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
If you have an email ending in @hotmail.com, @live.com or @outlook.com (or any other Microsoft-related domain), please consider changing it to another email provider; Microsoft decided to instantly block the server's IP, so emails can't be sent to these addresses.
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
If you use an @yahoo.com email or any related Yahoo services, they have blocked us also due to "user complaints"
-UE
Comments
A game's gameplay can be deep without being needlessly complex, he is saying.
I'm curious as to how do you define depth. I have an idea, but I'm not entirely sure.
ETA: Ah, I see.
Dark Souls has deep gameplay with little complexity, for another example. It is simple, yet deep.
Oooo.
Shame it's 3DS exclusive.
I don't really think depth (as INUH defines it) is all that important in games. It could increase a game's replay value I guess, but considering how many games aren't even good enough to be worth playing through once, there are definitely higher priorities. More importantly though, the more options the game gives me, the more I end up feeling like I'm missing out on part of the game no matter what I do.
But... FFX's battle system has all of the good things about the ATB system with none of the ridiculously stupid parts (no clear indication of turn order, having to wait for someone to get their turn, menu navigation in real time).
So, I now have a PS3 and Dark Souls. Any advice to keep me dying horribly as soon as I start playing?
Don't choose the Master Key as your gift at the start of the game. A lot of people will recommend that, and it's understandable why (it's the only good choice), but it basically allows you to do a shitton of sequence breaking at the start of the game. Since this is your first time playing it, you should be doing everything as intended since it'll be more fun that way, so pick... anything else, really (also note that the Tiny Being's Ring doesn't actually do what it says, by the way).
As for stuff that's actually helpful, um... I dunno. >.> I can't actually think of good early-game advice right now. If you ever get stuck on anything in particular though, I can help.
Oh! I know! Vitality and Endurance are probably the most important stats for a new player. You'll want to get them both to at least 20 or so fairly early on. You don't really need to raise your strength and dexterity past the requirement for eqiupping whatever weapon/shield you want to use, at least not at the start. Never put any points into resistance.
Also, and this isn't very useful but it's something the game fails to tell you... if you're on a ladder you can it R1 or R2 to attack enemies above/below you on the ladder to knock them off. Also you can hit the roll button to slide down the ladder quickly.
Bought Bastion today.
The Breaker's Bow and the War Machete are my two favourite weapons, hands-down. The War Machete is ridiculously fast, which easily makes up for its low power, and I applied two DoT effects to it. The Breaker's Bow is slower than the War Machete, but it has a lot of raw power, and it doesn't force me to reload.
I am loving the everloving shit out of this game. INUH, why didn't you ever recommend this game :<
>I don't really think depth (as INUH defines it) is all that important in games. It could increase a game's replay value I guess, but considering how many games aren't even good enough to be worth playing through once, there are definitely higher priorities
A game with no depth isn't good enough to be worth playing once. It's not about replaying but about feeling like your actions are in some way related to what's going on.
For example, in the Final Fantasy games I've played, losing a fight doesn't mean you need to try a different strategy. It either means the boss selected its most powerful attack twice in a row or that you haven't spent enough time grinding.
Meanwhile, in a Deus Ex game, dying means that you should maybe find a different angle of approach, or better hiding spot, or perhaps try a different weapon or something like that.
Some games can be worth playing despite terrible mechanics (Persona is an example, though it has a tiny bit of depth) but they need something special and even then, they could be vastly improved.
>INUH, why didn't you ever recommend this game .
I did. Loudly and repeatedly to anyone who would listen.
Yes, I know you did. Why else would I have even said that. :V
But seriously, it has some really neat things. Like, when you go into dreams and flashbacks and stuff, you don't get EXP and Land Pieces. Clever (and slightly annoying but whatever)
Shut up, I just woke up >.>
You haven't even seen the best part. It contains one of the top three or four best moments in Videogame storytelling.
I'm not very far in. I only just got up to the part where that guy blew up the Bastion.
You're just under halfway through. It's not a very long game.
nooooooo that's lame i only played for an hour and a half
That's not really true. If you're playing a game like Guitar Hero (for example), there's clearly only really one way to do anything in the game. I mean, the whole point is that it tells you exactly what to do. The fun comes from the fact that it is difficult to do that thing (or at least to do it well) and then from getting better at the game so that you can do that thing.
As for Bastion, I played the demo and found the narration insufferable and decided I would never ever play that game again.
Man, Dyre, you are just the most pickiest dude ever.
True. Casual execution challenges can get a pass.
^^ The fact that Bastion's gameplay is just a mediocre Gauntlet clone also didn't really do much to win me over. If that's what you're referring to.
I am not exactly spending a whole lot of time at the Proving Grounds or anything, I guess. Just progressing through the story.
I guess?
I've been too busy to play Skullgirls, and am now deathly afraid of getting annihilated by the online for being so rusty.
Menu navigation in real time is stupid.
Unfortunately, it's easy to use as an interface, and there haven't been that many variations. There's the Tales/SNSS fighting-game style approach, and there's the slight improvement that the Lufia series does (hold directional pad to choose between fight/magic/item/defend).
Are there otehr ways Id on't know of?
...actually, come to think of it, JRPGs have historically been on consoles.
What if we put them on computers?
You know how you can type out a spell's name to cast it in the freeware metroidvania platformer La-Mulana?
How about doing that for a JRPG? Moving your character into place and then rushing to type out the spell's name quickly enough?
IMO, mixing turn-based and real-time is one of the worst game design ideas that ever caught on.
I always loved how Cloud in FFVII would try to look all tough by saying he'd rather play on the highest speed setting on active for the ATB. That can never replace true twitch gameplay, Cloud/Square.
I think the better argument for it having no depth is that you rarely need a strategy other than "deal as much damage as quickly as possible in order to kill the enemy off before it kills me". Every battle is a damage race, and (in part because it's rare for the enemy to have a healing, let alone regeneration) there's very little strategizing other than "how do I hit things as hard and efficiently as possible". Even when there are puzzle bosses, they're usually very gimmicky and can be easily defeated once you've discovered their trick.
Not just casual; I think this applies to execution challenges in general. I'd say that IWBTG is, like GH, an execution challenge, just of a different format and for a different audience.
Why?
Would it be better if we let separate players control each character? Or what if we give the player a breather moment before each character's turn?
I would argue that IWBTG is less of a well-designed game and more of a game designed so deliberately badly that it's somehow ironically awesome.
Well, yeah, that's what results in the situation I was describing.
It's not well-designed, but I was just giving it as an example of a non-casual execution challenge.
Also, i edited my previous post.