(Double-check the date in the topic? Check.)

I really shouldn't be able to notice the difference in a single-day,
but having 29 days in February really feels longer than a mere 28. I
mean, it /is/ longer but you wouldn't expect the month to feel so much
more robust just because of the addition of 24 hours. But everything
feels less rushed because its' there. There's not that sense of 'wait,
the month is over already?' that I usually get from February. It's
probably just me.

Wait, what were we talking about? Oh yeah, what games we played in
February. Let's get to that, then.

The List, It Is Already Done
---------------------------------------
* The Callisto Protocol
* Superliminal
* Star Wars: Jedi Survivor
* Star Wars: Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight

It Keeps Going and Going and Going...
---------------------------------------

* The Callisto Protocol
You know that meme?
"Mom! Buy me Frosties!"
"Now, kiddo, we have Frosties at home!"
At home: store brand frosted-flake cereal.
The Callisto Protocol is the store-brand version of "Dead Space".

That might be selling "The Callisto Protocol" a bit short, though. The
implication of the meme is that the 'at home' version is an extremely
sub-par version of the desired product: the store brand compared to
the name brand, a 'Romex' watch compared to a Rolex. And, in the case
of "The Callisto Protocol", that's only half true. It's a very, /very/
obvious clone of "Dead Space", but sub-par? No; not in the least.
Which isn't to say "The Callisto Protocol" is as good as "Dead Space"
because, in all honesty, it's not. But it's still a very good game.
It's just not /as good/.

The comparison between the two is one between a good title and a great
title. "Dead Space" is undoubtedly great; it's spawned sequels - and
remakes, and comics, and novels, and even movies! - for a reason. It
has extremely tight and satisfying gameplay, terrific atmosphere, a
convincing setting and excellent pacing. It's a masterful example of
how to write a horror game, with a good mix of suspense, terror and
action. "The Callisto Protocol" comes close - darn close - but never
quite matches it.

It's littlest, subtlest things. It's how the levels are so extremely
linear, for instance. Because you're given so little opportunity to
determine your own path, the game feels too much like a funhouse ride;
you can spot the scares before they jump out at you. It's how the game
relies just /a bit/ too heavily on monsters that attack you before you
can react, forcing you into a quicktime event to escape. Once or twice
is fine ("Dead Space" used the mechanic too) but "The Callisto
Protocol" doesn't /quite/ have the necessary moderation. It's the
weapons that never really stand out, even from one another. Picking up
a new boomstick should be exciting, but all "The Callisto Protocol"
weapons are unimaginative and undifferentiated.

But mostly, "The Callisto Protocol" falls behind because it /is/ such
an obvious clone. If you've ever played "Dead Space" before (or even
similar games in the genre), you'll find little new with this one.
Horror works best when it shocks and surprises, and "The Callisto
Protocol's" reliance on tropes - and especially "Dead Space" tropes -
steals a lot of its thunder.

That said, the game is well made. The combat is fun, the visuals are
impressive and the action is reasonably paced. It's not quite got the
same atmosphere as "Dead Space" - it's weaker story and flatter
characters makes it harder to immerse yourself in the world - but if
you can forgive a bit of ham in your horror sandwich, it's fine. There
are a lot worse horror games out there, up to and including "Resident
Evil". I'd put "The Callisto Protocol" ahead of the lot of them.

I'm not upset that I grabbed this game over the "Dead Space" remake.
Even as much of a clone as it is, I prefer playing a new game rather
than a remake. And "The Callisto Project" is a fine game. It's just
not quite as good as "Dead Space".

* Superliminal
"Superliminal" is what I would call a 'gimmick game'. It's a game
wrapped around exploring a really neat idea, but beyond that initial
concept there's really not much too it. A lot of 'first-person
puzzlers' - or 'Portal-clones', as they're sometimes unfairly called -
fall into this trap. The problem with these gimmick games is that -
because they're so mono-focused on their one idea, they overuse it
until the game's 'gimmick' loses it sense of wonder and novelty, and
there's little else in the game to fall back upon.

Admittedly, "Superliminal's" 'gimmick' is clever than most, and they
explore it in a number of ways. The way you perceive things has actual
effects on the reality of the world; the game uses perspective, depth
perception, and darkness to trick you in lots of inventive ways. Is
that object tiny because it's far away or because it's actually small?
In this game, it's both. Is that a shadow on the ground or a dark pit?
Yes. Is that a picture on the wall or a 3D object? Depending on where
you're standing, it's one or the other. Manipulating how you perceive
things is the key to puzzling your way through the game, and it's fun
seeing how they developers mess around with a player's expectations.

But once you get past the novelty of it all, there's very little to
this game. It's puzzles are ridiculously easy once you understand the
basics. The game is incredibly short; you can finish it in a single
hour. There's very little world building, no real characters, and the
messaging is trite. Not to mention, the whole point of the game is to
"reshape your perceptions" so you can "think outside the box"...
except you can't do anything EXCEPT for what is intended by the
developers. You'll NEVER be outside the box in this game.

The end result is that "Superliminal" feels very much like a
tech-demo. It's got terrific ideas, but not enough content to make it
an easy recommendation for anyone to play, much less pay for. Were it
a bit more fleshed out, this would be an awesome experience, but right
now it's a bit shallow for my taste.

* Star Wars: Jedi Survivor
This is another of those games that's hard for me to rate.

"Survivor" is, arguably, a better game in almost every regard than its
predecessor, "Fallen Order". It's got superior production values, a
larger game world, a more mature story, and more intricate mechanics.
It's got more enemies and more things to do overall. It's not without
its flaws but overall "Survivor" is the more polished game.

So why don't I like it as much?

Maybe it's the fact that its story seems sort of pointless; it's a
tale answering a question that didn't really need to be asked. "Fallen
Order" told an interesting tale of a lost Jedi trainee trying to find
his place in the New Order (a.k.a the evil Galactic Empire). For all
its space-fantasy bombast and operatic ridiculousness, it was a
relatable tale; who am I now that my guardians (whether they are elder
Jedi or parents) have left me in the wild and dangerous world?
"Survivor's" quest was more mundane, seemingly intended to answer a
question of canon: if Luke Skywalker was the last Jedi, what happened
to all the other Jedi survivors (answer: the game's hero, Cal Kestis,
found them a bolt-hole beyond the reach of the Empire). It's an
interesting quest, but lacks the impact of the original.

It could be the overly-large open world, too. "Fallen Order" also had
fairly large maps to explore, but most of the maps were dedicated to
the main quest, and you'd visit most areas simply by playing through
the main campaign. "Survivor's" worlds are much, much less linear, and
have a good number of side-quests and hidden-treasures to unearth.
This gives the player a lot more to do, but absolutely destroys the
pacing of the story. So much time is wasted searching for plants, or
'Force echoes' or solving puzzle-like challenge rooms... or simply
running through regions previously explored to get to the new bits.

It could be the sometimes lackluster game design. There were a number
of times when the solution to the problem wasn't as obvious as it
could be; an interactable object hidden up on the ceiling that only
became usable if you were /just/ at the right distance, or a climbable
wall that wasn't obviously climbable. Some of the new combat skills
felt a bit pointless, added more to increase the skill-count than for
any real utility. A lot of the new things-to-do (locating fish for
your base's fishtank, or seeds for the rooftop garden) seemed
unnecessary grind that offered no real benefit except to increment the
completion percentage.

On 3/1/2024 7:25 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
....
> * Star Wars: Jedi Survivor
....
> "Survivor's" worlds are much, much less linear, and
> have a good number of side-quests and hidden-treasures to unearth.
> This gives the player a lot more to do, but absolutely destroys the
> pacing of the story. So much time is wasted searching for plants, or
> 'Force echoes' or solving puzzle-like challenge rooms... or simply
> running through regions previously explored to get to the new bits.

Ugh, I just barely tolerated Fallen Order, I've no desire to play this
one with that kind of make-work.

It's strange as a big SW & ST cinema fan, I have little desire to play
most of the games associated with either.

....
> * Star Wars: Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight
....

I can never remember which of these it was I really liked. Might've
been Jedi Acadamy? Or maybe both this and Academy? I'm not sure I
liked either enough to go back for a basic remaster.

> What Have You Been Playing... in FEBRUARY 2024?
An awful lot. The mood struck me to start writing it up yesterday.

----- Longer Play -----

**** Spiderman: Miles Morales - finished
*** God of War (2018) - finished
*** God of War 3 - finished
*** Neir Replicant
*** 20 Minutes Till Dawn
**** Saint's Row (2022)

----- Flipped -----

** Doki Doki Literature Club - finished
* Super Meat Boy Forever
** Kingdom Hearts
*** Gigabash
** Humanity
* Metal Hellsinger
** Caveblazers
0 Lost Castle
** Sail Forth
** Rastan

----- The Too Long Reviews -----

**** Spiderman: Miles Morales
Combat is a bit too fast paced for me, but I really like the game, and I
managed to muddle through the combat and finish it. The boss fights
seems to be insanely long and wore on me a lot. I really liked just
swinging through town finding low level criminals to beat up on, however
even those level with you and always gave me a good challenge. Strong
recommend for it.

*** God of War (2018)
I finished it. I left NG+ and a number of side quests undone, mostly
the challenge arena and half the Valkaries. Good game, great
cut-scenes, but a bit much puzzles and far too much climbing. It goes
in the recommend pile, just barely.

I started having a burning chest while playing it and thought I really
need to cut back, it took me awhile but I finally figured out my asthma
had come back with a vengeance, it's been near on 10 years since I've
had any attacks. Something bad in the air I guess? Woke up at 3am
today because of it.

*** God of War 3.
I actually started GoW 2, but realized rather quickly I'd played it.
GoW 3 is visually much better looking, but oviously much less so than
GoW 2018. I did finish it. I was surprised it actually had about as
much puzzles and climbing (and guided falling which I hated) as GoW'18.
It was a bit faster paced, and I liked the combat maybe slightly better.
I didn't like that I missed some of the health upgrades which seemed
like it made the game much harder. The cut-scenes/story was horrendous
in comparison, but o.k. for what it was. Much much shorter than the new
GoW. I still recommend it.

*** Neir Replicant
What is this game? It reminds me a little of an early Zelda: Breath of
the Wild, being 14 years old, it rather impressed me. So Japanese
adventure game I guess? It has some puzzles, most of them were fairly
easy, but there was one that was a bit obtuse I had to look up. A good
bit of very easy combat playing on normal, I really should have upped
the difficulty. It was kind of nice having a more relaxing play through
though. I didn't finish it before my PS+ sub ran out again, and didn't
feel a need to go one more month to finish it.

I am interested in possibly trying the other Neir games, and of course I
remember Drakenguard which Neir is an offshoot of. I only played on a
demo game in a game store, for having the only game where you actually
fought on and used a dragon in flight. Apparently that game is really
hard to get ahold of, and doesn't appear on PS+ catalog. I'd probably
buy this one and play it again on PC if it ever showed up cheap, like $5.

**** Saint's Row (2022)
Have I mentioned I hate the same franchise with the same name? Both
this and God of War (2018) too confusing and a horrible trend. I know,
marketing not the game itself. Anyway, Saint's Row was a freebie on
Epic. I've played it about 20 hours. It started out just o.k. but it's
been growing on me. It's sort of more ethnically diverse "Friends" as a
crime empire. The ethnically diverse actually works in this case. Some
of the new mechanics seemed a bit clunky at first - take-downs, skills,
perks, weapon upgrades etc. but I've grown to enjoy them. I've been
enjoying the side missions and combat as well, it reminds me slightly of
GTA SA gang wars in that respect. There's been a few funny moments, but
mostly they try a bit too hard. It's not as over the top as SR IV,
which you would think would please fans. It does just seems kind of
samey to older (not IV) SR games, which is good. I actually like it
better than GTA IV or V so far. I'd call it a light game, good for
blowing off some steam without too much thought. I'm not sure why it's
so badly reviewed on Steam, I read a few of the bad reviews and they
didn't strike me as true or really having anything to do with the game,
the only one that did minorly was that it's just another GTA type game,
yet Ubisoft gets away with that endlessly and much closer in play
without the ultra low rating. *shrug*

*** 20 Minutes Till Dawn
Bullet Heaven free Epic game. This is way better than I was expecting
for a freebie, and I'd recommend for anyone who liked Vampire Survivors
It's a bit quicker to make early progress than VS which is nice, but it
doesn't look as involved later (VS gets way too involved, ending in AFK
play which I wasn't interested in.) I played a lot of it when I first
tried it, but needed a break as it was getting pretty hectic on the 2nd
map, definately will come back to it. I'm not sure I like the near
monochromatic asthetic which makes it hard to distinguish foes, that's
my only real complaint.

** Doki Doki Literature Club
Well, it was free on Epic. It's not bad for a Japanese teen dark
romance interactive novel I guess (having never played one before.) It
was 95% reading with only a short bit of choices. Didn't care for the
ending I got, I felt like the game was steering me toward a particular
path, but I'm not succumbing to the emotional blackmail that entails, so
I stuck with my guns and accepted the ending I got, which I saw coming
a mile away. That ending was about 2-3 hours of game, so not a lot.
Glad I didn't pay for it. *shrug*. I was unsure if this should go in
flipped or not, but the play even though I finished was so short, I did.
I'd definitely consider other interactive novels that would be more to
my taste like fantasy or sci-fi, maybe even horror, but romance/tragedy
not so much.

* Super Meat Boy Forever
Free on Epic. I gave it a solid try and got probably 6 or 7 levels in,
but repeatedly trying to get (near?) pixel perfect platforming was never
particularly enjoyable to me. I did like the 'multiplay history' where
it did a recap of the level showing some portion of the deaths you had
following along as different sprites with the one you made it through
with.

** Kingdom Hearts
(version 1.5 whatever that means) I'd never played a KH game before and
since it was free to try and so many seem to love them, I gave the first
one a bit of a try. It just felt too kid oriented for me including the
combat and especially the cut scene dialog. Running into Goofy and
Donald Duck while I was expecting to, was pretty much the last straw
that took me out of any sense suspension of disbelief.

*** Gigabash
I remembered shortly after starting this that we got it for free from
Epic, but I still had time on PS+ for other games so put it down, but
the 3 levels I got through was pretty cool destroying buildings and
fighting the army and other kaiju, so it's on my short list of things to
get to again outside of PS+

** Humanity
Essentially a lemmings game in 3d with some sort of guiding spirits to
the afterlife or something theme. I liked the theme but being 100%
puzzles was not interesting to me.

** Metal Hellsinger
A rhythm FPS game. Sounded cool, and since I did so well on "Crypt of
the Necrodancer", I gave it a try. I could not get the rhythm down to
any thing better than slightly better than random, so I gave up on that
rather quickly. I wonder how much that was running it through Streaming
PS+ though. It seemed a little complicated for the different actions to
take too so I doubt I'd like it even if was input lag.

** Caveblazers
Free game on Gog. 8-bit roguelite platformer. It's not bad, but a
little clunky, and progress was a bit slow. One of the big things I
noticed was it can be played multiplayer locally, which is very unusual
for such a platformer. If either of my kids wanted to play it, that may
have bumped it up considerably.

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote at 15:25 this Friday (GMT):
>
> (Double-check the date in the topic? Check.)
>
> I really shouldn't be able to notice the difference in a single-day,
> but having 29 days in February really feels longer than a mere 28. I
> mean, it /is/ longer but you wouldn't expect the month to feel so much
> more robust just because of the addition of 24 hours. But everything
> feels less rushed because its' there. There's not that sense of 'wait,
> the month is over already?' that I usually get from February. It's
> probably just me.
>
> Wait, what were we talking about? Oh yeah, what games we played in
> February. Let's get to that, then.
>
>
>
> The List, It Is Already Done
> ---------------------------------------
> * The Callisto Protocol
> * Superliminal
> * Star Wars: Jedi Survivor
> * Star Wars: Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight
>
>
> It Keeps Going and Going and Going...
> ---------------------------------------
>
> * The Callisto Protocol
> You know that meme?
> "Mom! Buy me Frosties!"
> "Now, kiddo, we have Frosties at home!"
> At home: store brand frosted-flake cereal.
> The Callisto Protocol is the store-brand version of "Dead Space".
>
> That might be selling "The Callisto Protocol" a bit short, though. The
> implication of the meme is that the 'at home' version is an extremely
> sub-par version of the desired product: the store brand compared to
> the name brand, a 'Romex' watch compared to a Rolex. And, in the case
> of "The Callisto Protocol", that's only half true. It's a very, /very/
> obvious clone of "Dead Space", but sub-par? No; not in the least.
> Which isn't to say "The Callisto Protocol" is as good as "Dead Space"
> because, in all honesty, it's not. But it's still a very good game.
> It's just not /as good/.
>
> The comparison between the two is one between a good title and a great
> title. "Dead Space" is undoubtedly great; it's spawned sequels - and
> remakes, and comics, and novels, and even movies! - for a reason. It
> has extremely tight and satisfying gameplay, terrific atmosphere, a
> convincing setting and excellent pacing. It's a masterful example of
> how to write a horror game, with a good mix of suspense, terror and
> action. "The Callisto Protocol" comes close - darn close - but never
> quite matches it.
>
> It's littlest, subtlest things. It's how the levels are so extremely
> linear, for instance. Because you're given so little opportunity to
> determine your own path, the game feels too much like a funhouse ride;
> you can spot the scares before they jump out at you. It's how the game
> relies just /a bit/ too heavily on monsters that attack you before you
> can react, forcing you into a quicktime event to escape. Once or twice
> is fine ("Dead Space" used the mechanic too) but "The Callisto
> Protocol" doesn't /quite/ have the necessary moderation. It's the
> weapons that never really stand out, even from one another. Picking up
> a new boomstick should be exciting, but all "The Callisto Protocol"
> weapons are unimaginative and undifferentiated.
>
> But mostly, "The Callisto Protocol" falls behind because it /is/ such
> an obvious clone. If you've ever played "Dead Space" before (or even
> similar games in the genre), you'll find little new with this one.
> Horror works best when it shocks and surprises, and "The Callisto
> Protocol's" reliance on tropes - and especially "Dead Space" tropes -
> steals a lot of its thunder.
>
> That said, the game is well made. The combat is fun, the visuals are
> impressive and the action is reasonably paced. It's not quite got the
> same atmosphere as "Dead Space" - it's weaker story and flatter
> characters makes it harder to immerse yourself in the world - but if
> you can forgive a bit of ham in your horror sandwich, it's fine. There
> are a lot worse horror games out there, up to and including "Resident
> Evil". I'd put "The Callisto Protocol" ahead of the lot of them.
>
> I'm not upset that I grabbed this game over the "Dead Space" remake.
> Even as much of a clone as it is, I prefer playing a new game rather
> than a remake. And "The Callisto Project" is a fine game. It's just
> not quite as good as "Dead Space".
>
>
>
> * Superliminal
> "Superliminal" is what I would call a 'gimmick game'. It's a game
> wrapped around exploring a really neat idea, but beyond that initial
> concept there's really not much too it. A lot of 'first-person
> puzzlers' - or 'Portal-clones', as they're sometimes unfairly called -
> fall into this trap. The problem with these gimmick games is that -
> because they're so mono-focused on their one idea, they overuse it
> until the game's 'gimmick' loses it sense of wonder and novelty, and
> there's little else in the game to fall back upon.
>
> Admittedly, "Superliminal's" 'gimmick' is clever than most, and they
> explore it in a number of ways. The way you perceive things has actual
> effects on the reality of the world; the game uses perspective, depth
> perception, and darkness to trick you in lots of inventive ways. Is
> that object tiny because it's far away or because it's actually small?
> In this game, it's both. Is that a shadow on the ground or a dark pit?
> Yes. Is that a picture on the wall or a 3D object? Depending on where
> you're standing, it's one or the other. Manipulating how you perceive
> things is the key to puzzling your way through the game, and it's fun
> seeing how they developers mess around with a player's expectations.
>
> But once you get past the novelty of it all, there's very little to
> this game. It's puzzles are ridiculously easy once you understand the
> basics. The game is incredibly short; you can finish it in a single
> hour. There's very little world building, no real characters, and the
> messaging is trite. Not to mention, the whole point of the game is to
> "reshape your perceptions" so you can "think outside the box"...
> except you can't do anything EXCEPT for what is intended by the
> developers. You'll NEVER be outside the box in this game.
>
> The end result is that "Superliminal" feels very much like a
> tech-demo. It's got terrific ideas, but not enough content to make it
> an easy recommendation for anyone to play, much less pay for. Were it
> a bit more fleshed out, this would be an awesome experience, but right
> now it's a bit shallow for my taste.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> * Star Wars: Jedi Survivor
> This is another of those games that's hard for me to rate.
>
> "Survivor" is, arguably, a better game in almost every regard than its
> predecessor, "Fallen Order". It's got superior production values, a
> larger game world, a more mature story, and more intricate mechanics.
> It's got more enemies and more things to do overall. It's not without
> its flaws but overall "Survivor" is the more polished game.
>
> So why don't I like it as much?
>
> Maybe it's the fact that its story seems sort of pointless; it's a
> tale answering a question that didn't really need to be asked. "Fallen
> Order" told an interesting tale of a lost Jedi trainee trying to find
> his place in the New Order (a.k.a the evil Galactic Empire). For all
> its space-fantasy bombast and operatic ridiculousness, it was a
> relatable tale; who am I now that my guardians (whether they are elder
> Jedi or parents) have left me in the wild and dangerous world?
> "Survivor's" quest was more mundane, seemingly intended to answer a
> question of canon: if Luke Skywalker was the last Jedi, what happened
> to all the other Jedi survivors (answer: the game's hero, Cal Kestis,
> found them a bolt-hole beyond the reach of the Empire). It's an
> interesting quest, but lacks the impact of the original.
>
> It could be the overly-large open world, too. "Fallen Order" also had
> fairly large maps to explore, but most of the maps were dedicated to
> the main quest, and you'd visit most areas simply by playing through
> the main campaign. "Survivor's" worlds are much, much less linear, and
> have a good number of side-quests and hidden-treasures to unearth.
> This gives the player a lot more to do, but absolutely destroys the
> pacing of the story. So much time is wasted searching for plants, or
> 'Force echoes' or solving puzzle-like challenge rooms... or simply
> running through regions previously explored to get to the new bits.
>
> It could be the sometimes lackluster game design. There were a number
> of times when the solution to the problem wasn't as obvious as it
> could be; an interactable object hidden up on the ceiling that only
> became usable if you were /just/ at the right distance, or a climbable
> wall that wasn't obviously climbable. Some of the new combat skills
> felt a bit pointless, added more to increase the skill-count than for
> any real utility. A lot of the new things-to-do (locating fish for
> your base's fishtank, or seeds for the rooftop garden) seemed
> unnecessary grind that offered no real benefit except to increment the
> completion percentage.
>
> There were a few minor technical snafus too. The fact that the game
> had to recompile its shaders on every startup seemed wasteful. There
> were a couple bugs and crashes too. It all felt a bit sloppy and
> unfinished.
>
> "Survivor" is a good game; do not mistake these issues for serious
> flaws. If you liked the original game of the series, you will almost
> certainly enjoy this one. But for whatever reason, I'm just not sure
> that you'll like it MORE.
>
>
>
>
> * Star Wars: Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight
> I guess I'm in a Star Warsy mood this month.
>
> Of course, the real reason I installed this was to check out the "Jedi
> Knight Remastered" https://www.moddb.com/mods/jedi-knight-remastered
> mod I mentioned earlier this month. And... it's fine. It does what it
> advertised, improving many of the models, upscaling the textures, and
> working magic with the original game's old, creaky lighting model. The
> Stormtroopers are now recognizably Stormtroopers, and not some
> nightmarish amalgamation of triangles that - if you squint and hope -
> sort of resemble a Stormtrooper. The rest of the game itself remains
> the same. Which is both its strength and undoing.
>
> "Jedi Knight" is oh-so-very-much a game released in 1997. Caught in
> that turbulent period between the release of "Quake" and the release
> of "Half Life", it shares qualities of both games and is a satisfying
> clone of neither.
>
> Its "Quake" lineage (in style, not engine) are obvious. There was, at
> the time, an impetus to push FPS games out of the narrow corridors and
> abstract locations of Doom into ever-larger, ever-more detailed maps.
> The desire for scale overcame almost every other consideration,
> including whether all this added space actually added to the FUN of
> the game. "Jedi Knight's" maps are impressively large, especially for
> a game released in 1997, but they're often tedious to traverse, with
> gigantic rooms that are often devoid of all but a handful of enemies.
> The remastered mod helps with this a bit; it was a lot worse in 1997,
> when the tiny textures made everything muddy and grey. There's also a
> lot of back-n-forth across areas previously visited; a reminder of the
> mazelike design that was common to games of that era. Oh, and let's
> not forget the ever-present hunt for the colored keycards necessary to
> progress to the next area of the map. Yes, this is very much a game
> born in an era when Quake was still held up as the king of FPS games.
>
> But you can also see the inklings of "Half Life" peeking through.
> There are random NPCs sprinkled throughout. Many of the maps have a
> visibly recognizable purpose in the game-world, even if the technology
> wasn't quite up to the 'environmental storytelling' that "Half Life"
> would later perfect. Story progression was still limited to cutscenes,
> other than a few comments made by the characters. But, oh, what
> terrific cutscenes! Live-action Star Wars, two years before "The
> Phantom Menace" released; it was an oasis in a drought of all things
> Star Wars! Jason Court does a wonderful job of portraying the hero
> Kyle Katarn, and Christopher Neame hams it up as villain Jerec.
>
> You can also see the lineage of the original "Dark Forces" game too,
> which spiced up the original "Doom" formula with a variety of puzzles.
> 'More is better' seemed to be the watchword during "Jedi Knight's"
> development, and while some of the puzzles were interesting and
> well-integrated into the world, a good number unnecessarily dragged
> down the gameplay and ruined the pacing. I could have done with less
> puzzles... but I get why they were there. They were part of the
> franchise's genetics from the start.
>
> I could have done with a lot less of the platforming too. "Jedi
> Knight's" weird jump mechanics meant you'd often bounce off objects if
> you didn't completely clear them with your leap, which made some jumps
> a lot harder than they should have been. I personally found the
> lightsaber combat to be more aggravating than fun, too... although
> having just come from playing "Jedi: Survivor" (which had excellent
> lightsaber combat) that is probably to be expected. When I could, I
> stuck with guns; "Jedi Knight" is a lot better as a Star Wars shooter
> than a sword-fighting game.
>
> I honestly can't say if I actually enjoyed playing "Jedi Knight". It
> was entrancing to revisit and analyze the title as a snapshot of
> gaming trends of the late 90s. The cutscenes were quite enjoyable. I
> was impressed by how much improved the visuals were thanks to the
> Remaster mod. But the gameplay? I struggled to keep playing the game
> at times. It's got neither the smooth style of earlier FPS
> 'Doom-clones' nor the well-paced design of later 'Half-Life alikes'.
> It's the awkward teenage years of the franchise; not quite lovable yet
> sharing qualities we loved from when it was younger and showing signs
> of becoming something great. Fun? Not really. But definitely
> interesting.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------
>
> And that's it for me. February may be a short month, but my lists
> never are! And you?
>
> What Have You Been Playing... in FEBRUARY 2024?

>What Have You Been Playing... in FEBRUARY 2024?

Just Lies of P! I'd be done by now, but one of the last boss battles,
The Nameless Puppet, has stymied me for a week now. I've come to the
conclusion that the game *really* wants me to use the Block/Parry mechanic
for this fight, and that a different weapon than I've been using would be a
better choice. For a dark souls-like I'm ok with this, including grinding,
or 'farming' for souls to level up, which I've been doing the last few
sessions. I'll list a couple videos that seem useful to me for learning
this boss's moveset & a good farming spot, just to illustrate the gameplay:
boss fight https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgCtfmSsyTc
farming https://youtu.be/DEe_cZlUq74

I do like Lies of P, whether you would really depends on your taste for dark
souls gameplay, as bosses in particular can be frustrating and difficult,
taking many attempts. I'll be installing Homeworld 1 after finishing this

rms

>"The Callisto Project" is a fine game.

Good news! I hope to get to it soon!

rms

On 3/1/2024 11:05 AM, rms wrote:
>> What Have You Been Playing... in FEBRUARY 2024?
>
>   Just Lies of P!  I'd be done by now, but one of the last boss
> battles, The Nameless Puppet, has stymied me for a week now.  I've come
> to the conclusion that the game *really* wants me to use the Block/Parry
> mechanic for this fight, and that a different weapon than I've been
> using would be a better choice.  For a dark souls-like I'm ok with this,
> including grinding, or 'farming' for souls to level up, which I've been
> doing the last few sessions.  I'll list a couple videos that seem useful
> to me for learning this boss's moveset & a good farming spot, just to
> illustrate the gameplay:
> boss fight https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgCtfmSsyTc
> farming https://youtu.be/DEe_cZlUq74

At least there's blocking unlike Bloodborne. I'm good at blocking. The
aesthetic in those two vids looks better than the first boss battle I
saw before too. Both plusses compared to Bloodborne.

There doesn't seem to be magic in Lies of P, There's not exactly magic
in BB either and I really felt the lack of a spellcaster class. If you
count Alchemist as one they're pretty non-magical other than doing
better with weapons that have elements on them (which isn't particularly
special, the weapons you can't use elements on feel better to me.) in
the early to mid-game and I never got further than that with them. I'm
still tempted to go back and try alchemist some more, but the ER DLC is
supposed to be out next month and I've had all the Souls/Twitch play I
can stand and am enjoying some more casual games until then.

Lies of P is on my watch list, if it gets low enough in price, I'll
probably buy it and give it a try.

> I do like Lies of P, whether you would really depends on your taste for
> dark souls gameplay, as bosses in particular can be frustrating and
> difficult, taking many attempts.  I'll be installing Homeworld 1 after
> finishing this

I am wondering how it feels in speed of reactions required? ER was a
little on the fast side, but I found workarounds, where DS3 was just
right for me (except DLC bosses) everything pre DS3 was actually a
little slow (except for Kalameet in DS1 DLC)

(The GoW and S:MM were all considerably too fast/frenetic for my comfort
level.)

--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'

On 3/1/2024 11:05 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>
> Mostly Stardew Valley and emulated games on my modded 3ds

*high fives Candycane* You looking forward to the 1.6 release? :)

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

>I am wondering how it feels in speed of reactions required? ER was a
>little on the fast side,

I'd say its reasonable in most situations as you only face 2 or 3 foes at
once, and the blocking mechanic provides breathing room, as well as a health
recovery mechanic (by attacking soon after a block), and the 'perfect parry'
window seems much larger than in ER to me. There are various parrying
upgrades as well. And yeah, no magic, just status effects with coatings or
throwables

rms

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote at 20:16 this Friday (GMT):
> On 3/1/2024 11:05 AM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>
>> Mostly Stardew Valley and emulated games on my modded 3ds
>
> *high fives Candycane* You looking forward to the 1.6 release? :)

Thanks. And yeah, 1.6 looks really fun.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

Resumed my Diablo 4 and Duo Lingo's math finally. Now, I'm busy again! :(

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

> (Double-check the date in the topic? Check.)

> I really shouldn't be able to notice the difference in a single-day,
> but having 29 days in February really feels longer than a mere 28. I
> mean, it /is/ longer but you wouldn't expect the month to feel so much
> more robust just because of the addition of 24 hours. But everything
> feels less rushed because its' there. There's not that sense of 'wait,
> the month is over already?' that I usually get from February. It's
> probably just me.

> Wait, what were we talking about? Oh yeah, what games we played in
> February. Let's get to that, then.
....
> And that's it for me. February may be a short month, but my lists
> never are! And you?

> What Have You Been Playing... in FEBRUARY 2024?

--
"In those days John the Baptist came ... saying, 'Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is near.'" --Matthew 3:1-2. Slammy colony Friday.
Note: A fixed width font (Courier, Monospace, etc.) is required to see this signature correctly.
/\___/\ Ant(Dude) @ http://aqfl.net & http://antfarm.home.dhs.org.
/ /\ /\ \ Please nuke ANT if replying by e-mail.
| |o o| |
\ _ /
( )

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> writes:

> What Have You Been Playing... in FEBRUARY 2024?

* Horizon Forbidden West

Playstation game, four or five. I have neither so I’m playing this
streaming on my PC via PS Plus. I think I’ll make another post about
that.

I liked the predecessor (Horizon Zero Dawn) a lot but story wise, that
game’s an intro. Some of the major players in the world were introduced
and an apocalypse averted but huge questions remained. In fact it felt a
little like the first Mass Effect game.

On to the next game then. I’ve played maybe 20 hours, it took about 15
hours of intro and starter area to get into the titular Forbidden West.

Exploring, inspecting things, discovering some hidden gems,
figuratively and actually. Side missions, main missions, collecting
stuff for crafting upgrades. So much the same as the previous game but
there’s way more of it. More enemies, more weapons, more skills, more
everything it seems. Story is the main thing for me and I expect I’ll
get some answers at least for some of the major questions the first
game left open.

Fighting the basic bots seems a little harder than it used to be,
seems like I can get killed pretty easily if I don’t pay
attention. Kinda follows from the situation that they have cannons now
and aren’t afraid of using them from range. It seems like in the
previous game they weren’t quite so hot on the trigger and the cannons
seemed to be there so you could rip them off and whale on the bots a
little for a change.

For now it seems easier to dodge their melee attacks at close
range. Especially since I’m aiming my bow with a wobbly analog stick
now.

After I reached the titular Forbidden West, I’m a little
discouraged. The whole map is open now, it’s full of stuff to visit and
quests to complete. Main plot hasn't even really started yet. Also this
is an action game with plot and stats. So sure, you can approach a
murder mission any way you like but it’s still a murder mission and
there’s no place for anything else. Skill trees are six now but they are
all about combat. I wish it were a little more RPG, especially as I
don’t much like the combat. Well, the first game was praised for that so
of course they put more of it in.

Anyways, I expect a few dozen hours of enjoyable play out of this.

* Borderlands 3

Well, with Valentine’s day in February I thought it’d be fun to play
the "Broken Hearts Day" event. Enemies are supposed to spawn some
hearts and once you shoot those, they get killed horribly or you get a
buff. Unfortunately, the hearts didn’t spawn much. I went on a rampage
in Lectra City and elsewhere but got maybe five hearts. You get a
legendary rifle for 100 hearts broken and an SMG for somewhat less but
this seemed like it’d take a while.

Also, BL3 is crashy now, with some kind of memory error every now and
again. Didn’t look like my RAM was full in the task manager though. Or
is it an omen, a chance to let the upgrade faery out of its box? I think
I’ve had 16 GB RAM in my gaming desktop since the decade before last and
popping in another 16 GB doesn't even cost much...

On Fri, 01 Mar 2024 10:25:50 -0500, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

>---------------------------------------
>
>And that's it for me. February may be a short month, but my lists
>never are! And you?
>
>What Have You Been Playing... in FEBRUARY 2024?
>
>
Talos Principle II
``````````````````
I finished TP2. Interestingly, I got *an* ending, but I think the endings
are pretty much "here are the consequences of your choices." I'm not sure
there's a good ending or a bad ending. There's the ending you choose. It
was extemely open-ended: A "you did *this*, good luck with that." It is
possible that the ending I got was this way because the writers bit off
more than they could chew.

If I want to consider what I choose "the good ending"* then I got the
good ending. I solved every puzzle. I saved everyone I could. I restored
mankind. I encouraged exploration and growth. I pissed off a bunch of
theocrats. I love pissing off theocrats, so win.

The puzzles ranged from amusing to satisfying, with several very
rewarding "aha!" moments. The last "gold" puzzle** was disappointingly
easy. Otherwise, a very satisfying bunch of puzzles, an engaging story,
and an ending that leaves more questions than provides answers.

The graphics are nothing short of stunning. Very imaginative settings
too. I actually stopped to enter "photography mode" at points.

So nice game. I enjoyed it a lot. If you don't like the laser beam
puzzles in Talos, I don't recommend it. There are other puzzle elements,
but like the first game, it leans heavily on sometimes mind-bending webs
of non-intersecting beams. Lotta beam puzzles.

Now I have to go and try out the other endings. Some of them may require
me going back and making a key decision another way. That would require a
full replay, as there is only a checkpoint save. I might do that, I might
not.

--
Zag

No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten

* Which is likely because it's a question about personal philosophical
belief and your level of secular humanist faith

** Gold puzzles are the highest difficulty level of puzzle and many are
similar to the extreme difficulty level of the DLC "Road To Gehenna."

>> Just Lies of P! I'd be done by now, but one of the last boss battles,
>> The Nameless Puppet, has stymied me for a week now. I've come to the
>> conclusion that the game *really* wants me to use the Block/Parry
>> mechanic for this fight, and that a different weapon than I've been using
>> would be a better choice.

>At least there's blocking unlike Bloodborne. I'm good at blocking.

Sure enough, as soon as I'd switched weapons to one with a stronger
physical attack, blocking a bit more, and even scoring a perfect parry, I
beat him after a few tries and finished the game. I started a NG+ game
immediately afterwards and can see right away I'd get more insight into the
plot by continuing (also the post-credits scene hints at dlc or even a
sequel) but....sigh, so many other titles to play.

I'll keep it installed, and look at exporting the savefiles from the
Gamepass install to steam if I end up buying it there, that appears to be
possible. Will also read the original Pinocchio fairy tale, and watch del
Toro's movie; that I'm still interested in seeing more means I enjoyed Lies
of P :)

rms

On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 07:51:57 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
wrote:

>On 3/1/2024 7:25 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>...
>> * Star Wars: Jedi Survivor

>Ugh, I just barely tolerated Fallen Order, I've no desire to play this
>one with that kind of make-work.

Yeah, if you didn't like the original I can't see the sequel
convincing you otherwise. It's a good game, but tastes differ.

>It's strange as a big SW & ST cinema fan, I have little desire to play
>most of the games associated with either.

I enjoy them mostly for how the expand the world. Often they do it
better than the official media. And it's always fun when you see stuff
first introduced in alternate media (video games or tabletop RPGs)
work their way up to the 'canon' stuff.

>> * Star Wars: Dark Forces II: Jedi Knight

>I can never remember which of these it was I really liked. Might've
>been Jedi Acadamy? Or maybe both this and Academy? I'm not sure I
>liked either enough to go back for a basic remaster.

Of the series, the original ("Dark Forces") and the third game ("Jedi
Outcast" were probably the games I enjoyed most. The second game came
out before technology (and gaming trends) had caught up with its
aspirations, and the fourth game ("Academy") was too melee-focused and
lacked interesting-enough story and characters to entertain me.

>> What Have You Been Playing... in FEBRUARY 2024?
>An awful lot. The mood struck me to start writing it up yesterday.

I'm starting to feel jealous by how many games you've played. Reminds
me of my younger days. ;-)

>
>*** God of War (2018)
>I finished it. I left NG+ and a number of side quests undone, mostly
>the challenge arena and half the Valkaries. Good game, great
>cut-scenes, but a bit much puzzles and far too much climbing. It goes
>in the recommend pile, just barely.

Yeah, as much as I enjoyed the game myself, I think the game would
have been a lot stronger if publishers weren't so caught up in the
idea that every game has to be a 60-hour long experience. A lot of the
puzzling and side-quests felt like unnecessary filler. I prefer a
better paced, more streamlined experience. Quality, not quantity.

>*** God of War 3.
>I actually started GoW 2, but realized rather quickly I'd played it.
>GoW 3 is visually much better looking, but oviously much less so than
>GoW 2018. I did finish it. I was surprised it actually had about as
>much puzzles and climbing (and guided falling which I hated) as GoW'18.
>It was a bit faster paced, and I liked the combat maybe slightly better.
> I didn't like that I missed some of the health upgrades which seemed
>like it made the game much harder. The cut-scenes/story was horrendous
>in comparison, but o.k. for what it was. Much much shorter than the new
>GoW. I still recommend it.

My only real issue with GOW3 is how repetitive it started feeling. Of
course, it didn't help that I had played GOW1 & 2 prior to jumping
into the third game. Still, there was a distinct mustiness to the
gameplay by the time I got around to the third. I'm glad the
developers took an extended break from the franchise and then breathed
new life into the series in 2018.

>*** Neir Replicant
NieR Replicant suffers from what I (probably applying unfair national
stereotypes) "Japanese weird". Its a game with solid gameplay, and
mostly strong storytelling, characters and writing... but at times it
just veers off into such oddbeat concepts that I really have a hard
time enjoying the media.

I guess I just like my tropes too much to be happy when games so
blatantly ignore them to go off and do their own thing? I dunno.

>
>**** Saint's Row (2022)
I didn't play much of SR2K2 but the bit I saw made it feel... what, I
don't know... pointless? It was a game without any real message of its
own; a pale copy of both of GTA and its own earlier incarnations. Not
a bad game, but it didn't seem to offer anything I hadn't seen
elsewhere already, and hardly worth the time to continue playing.

Not to mention the whole 'gang life' conceit has never appealed to me.

>** Kingdom Hearts
Wait... is Kingdom Hearts on PC now? Or have you been cheating on the
PC platform? ;-)

On Sat, 02 Mar 2024 11:03:02 +0200, Anssi Saari
<anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> wrote:

>Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> What Have You Been Playing... in FEBRUARY 2024?
>
>* Horizon Forbidden West

I still have to finish playing "Horizon: Zero Dawn". I started it on
(a friend's) Playstation but didn't get much beyond the first region.
I acquired it some time back on PC and it's been on my 'to-play' list
for a while... but I keep getting distracted.

I'm easily distract.... ooh, a squirrel!

I resume my prior game save for Far Cry 5, I had never completed the
main story.

I remember when it first came out being somewhat disappointed that the
world didn't draw me in more than it did. The premise seemed
interesting enough on paper, but in the end there was nothing really
about the vibe or atmosphere the game created to make it feel any
different than any other open world shooter.

But all these years later, it actually holds up pretty well compared
to the never ending stream of disappointments over the last few years.
I guess in 2018 my expectations for games were higher... the bar has
been lowered by most of the crap that's come out since then, so now
this game is somehow more enjoyable.

I did enjoy Far Cry 6 and finished the main quest line.. and
occasionally fire it up for one of the many side missions I ignored
during my playthrough. So I should probably make an effort to get FC5
into the same state.

Folks can say what they will about the FC series... yeah, its
predictable and yes I wish they would find a way to not build x ray
vision into the experience... but the FC series can still be a good
time.

About multiplayer, FC6 did not have MP... so I have been dablling in
FC5 "arcade".. it is worthwhile, if nothing else for the variety of
the maps. It's nothing like the multiplayer masterpiece FC2 was, but
there is fun to be had there and debatably infinite replayability if
you're into MP shooters.

On 3/2/2024 10:03 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Mar 2024 11:03:02 +0200, Anssi Saari
> <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> wrote:
>
>> Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> What Have You Been Playing... in FEBRUARY 2024?
>>
>> * Horizon Forbidden West
>
> I still have to finish playing "Horizon: Zero Dawn". I started it on
> (a friend's) Playstation but didn't get much beyond the first region.
> I acquired it some time back on PC and it's been on my 'to-play' list
> for a while... but I keep getting distracted.
>
> I'm easily distract.... ooh, a squirrel!
>
Does the squirrel have a free game?!

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

On 02/03/2024 17:17, Zaghadka wrote:
> Talos Principle II
> ``````````````````
> I finished TP2. Interestingly, I got*an* ending, but I think the endings
> are pretty much "here are the consequences of your choices." I'm not sure
> there's a good ending or a bad ending. There's the ending you choose. It
> was extemely open-ended: A "you did*this*, good luck with that." It is
> possible that the ending I got was this way because the writers bit off
> more than they could chew.

Glad you enjoyed it but although I'm still playing it, it hasn't quite
grabbed me in the way the TP1 did. Not entirely sure why as I still
think TP1 is a PC classic and I've played it through three times, well
only once to the actual end and the second two times I thought that I
really can't be bothered to go complete the timed end level.

On Sat, 02 Mar 2024 17:03:27 -0500, Rin Stowleigh
<rstowleigh@x-nospam-x.com> wrote:

>
>I resume my prior game save for Far Cry 5, I had never completed the
>main story.
>
>I remember when it first came out being somewhat disappointed that the
>world didn't draw me in more than it did. The premise seemed
>interesting enough on paper, but in the end there was nothing really
>about the vibe or atmosphere the game created to make it feel any
>different than any other open world shooter.
>
>But all these years later, it actually holds up pretty well compared
>to the never ending stream of disappointments over the last few years.
>I guess in 2018 my expectations for games were higher... the bar has
>been lowered by most of the crap that's come out since then, so now
>this game is somehow more enjoyable.

I quite enjoyed FarCry 5 for its locale. It was fun to wander through
the wilderness and towns. I actually have some fond memories of
tramping through the woods, gawking at the pretty trees, chasing after
deer. In many ways, it was one of the nicest games of the series.

>
>Folks can say what they will about the FC series... yeah, its
>predictable and yes I wish they would find a way to not build x ray
>vision into the experience... but the FC series can still be a good
>time.

The FarCry series - and Ubisoft games in general - usually have a
fairly robust and enjoyable game-loop. I don't think anyone really
complains about that. You start one of their games, and it's really
easy to get lost in their worlds, doing mission after mission. The
gunplay is exciting, there's a lot of stuff to discover, and the
worlds are vibrant and beautiful.

I think the biggest complaint people have about their games is that
they are all too similar to one another; that if you've played "FarCry
3" then you've played "FarCry 4, 5 and 6" too... and pretty much
"Watch Dogs" and "Assassins Creed" too. Personally, I also take issue
with the writing (the story, characters and dialogue) too, since
they're rarely worth bothering with.

FarCry games are like fast-food; you know they aren't very good but
they're quick and easy, they don't take much personal investment to
enjoy, and whichever one you pick you can be sure what the game will
be like. It won't be good, it won't be fulfilling, but it'll help pass
the time until someething better comes along.

On Sat, 02 Mar 2024 11:17:20 -0600, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Fri, 01 Mar 2024 10:25:50 -0500, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
>>---------------------------------------
>>
>>And that's it for me. February may be a short month, but my lists
>>never are! And you?
>>
>>What Have You Been Playing... in FEBRUARY 2024?
>>
>>
>Talos Principle II
>``````````````````

TIL that the Talos Principle games were developed by Croteam. Croteam!
The Serious Sam guys! The same guys that had you shotgunning hundreds
of headless dudes with old-timey fusebombs in place of hands crafted
the slow-paced head-scratcher "Talos Principle". That absolutely blew
my mind.

The biggest problem I have with Talos Principle (I haven't played TP2
yet) is that I have a hard time differentiating it from all the other
look-alike puzzle games. I remember playing it. I just have a hard to
remembering anything specific about the game (it was the one where
you're a robot, right?). There's a whole bunch of similar titles
("Turing Test", "Witness", even "Observation") and they all sort of
blend together. They all have this too-serious sci-fi
pseudo-philisophical gravitas that is counterbalanced by the absolute
nonsense of having to do nonsensical puzzles to progress.

I'm not really a fan of the genre, you probably can tell.

It's not that I think they're necessarily bad games - it's more a
matter of differeing tastes - but I do wish they showed more variety
in styles.

It would probably help, too, if I didn't play so many of these games
that I can so easily see all their similarities. ;-P

On Sun, 03 Mar 2024 18:42:51 -0500, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

>The FarCry series - and Ubisoft games in general - usually have a
>fairly robust and enjoyable game-loop. I don't think anyone really
>complains about that. You start one of their games, and it's really
>easy to get lost in their worlds, doing mission after mission. The
>gunplay is exciting, there's a lot of stuff to discover, and the
>worlds are vibrant and beautiful.
>
>I think the biggest complaint people have about their games is that
>they are all too similar to one another; that if you've played "FarCry
>3" then you've played "FarCry 4, 5 and 6" too... and pretty much
>"Watch Dogs" and "Assassins Creed" too. Personally, I also take issue
>with the writing (the story, characters and dialogue) too, since
>they're rarely worth bothering with.
>
>FarCry games are like fast-food; you know they aren't very good but
>they're quick and easy, they don't take much personal investment to
>enjoy, and whichever one you pick you can be sure what the game will
>be like. It won't be good, it won't be fulfilling, but it'll help pass
>the time until someething better comes along.

And sometimes knowing approximately what you're going to get, with
appropriate variation applied to it, is a good thing.

It probably gets taken too far in games. Once a gaming "engine" is
developed or a studio feels they have a "winning formula" in place,
the focus then drifts away from the actual mechanics of gameply and
more toward "content creation"... focus on character dialog, cutscene
animations, and other things which I understand are important to some,
were never really part of what made games appealing in the first
place. When video gaming first emerged, it was all about the hand-eye
coordination challenges presented to the player. But as it evolved, a
sort of hollywood-like douche-factor seemed to take over where the
emphasis was on story and character development (something MUCH better
done in film and should have been left there), and a departure from
what made games fun in the first place.

As kudos to the FC series, they still seem to recognize that a lot
folks couldn't give FuckAll(tm) about the story.... how does it play?
And they do reasonably well at that side of things.

In order for gaming to get back on track in general, there needs to be
a focus on the interactivity and mechanics of gameplay and the
suspension of disbelief... yes a lot of the time that's going to
involve shooting something (whether human opponents or aliens etc.) a
and any political hurdles to that are probably not going to help
matters.

The way woke politics is headed in gaming currently, someone somewhere
is going to try to ban "aggression in gaming". This means that any
game which allows anything other than calm negotiation out of a
hotspot will be illegal to publish at the rate things are going.. It's
already happening now as politics has creeped into, and impacted
funding investments in game development, making sure than treatment of
political agendas doesn't create unwanted media attention.....and of
course that impacts the titles we will be able to actually play.
"Inclusion" elements have been prioritized over fun factor, which is
not a good idea because games need to be fun to succeed.

I want headshots and measurable metrics for my performance, or I spend
my gaming dollar elsewhere (including non-gaming hobbies like music
production) :) To underline how much I really mean that, I spent over
$10k on music hardware gear last year, yet have not upgraded my gaming
PC or even cared to do so since late 2018. And why would I? Has
there been a game released in the last 5 years that I care about that
would actually benefit from something greater than a i9-9900 and
RTX2080? Not at 1080p, to my knowledge. And playing at higher
resolutions in MP shooters just means a smaller opponent head to aim
at, so that in itself isn't a benefit.

While I would love nothing more to believe that I've just gotten old
and cranky that things are no longer as I remember them, when I watch
YT, I see a lot of the current targeted gaming demographic saying the
same thing I am.. recognizing the fun factor of older games,
exhausted with newer titles, etc. I'd love to see it get turned
around and I'm sure there will be the occasional gem emerge, but I'm
not holding my breath.

On 3/2/2024 10:00 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 07:51:57 -0800, Justisaur <justisaur@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On 3/1/2024 7:25 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

>
>> ** Kingdom Hearts
> Wait... is Kingdom Hearts on PC now? Or have you been cheating on the
> PC platform? ;-)

No... and Yes. Playing it on PS+ Premium Streaming with the app on the
PC, along with most of the games the past 4 months I've played.

--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'

Dimensional Traveler <dtravel@sonic.net> writes:

> On 3/2/2024 10:03 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>> On Sat, 02 Mar 2024 11:03:02 +0200, Anssi Saari
>> <anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> wrote:
>>
>>> Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> What Have You Been Playing... in FEBRUARY 2024?
>>>
>>> * Horizon Forbidden West
>> I still have to finish playing "Horizon: Zero Dawn". I started it on
>> (a friend's) Playstation but didn't get much beyond the first region.
>> I acquired it some time back on PC and it's been on my 'to-play' list
>> for a while... but I keep getting distracted.
>> I'm easily distract.... ooh, a squirrel!
>>
> Does the squirrel have a free game?!

Well, you can hunt squirrels in game at least.

On 03/03/2024 23:42, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> The FarCry series - and Ubisoft games in general - usually have a
> fairly robust and enjoyable game-loop. I don't think anyone really
> complains about that. You start one of their games, and it's really
> easy to get lost in their worlds, doing mission after mission. The
> gunplay is exciting, there's a lot of stuff to discover, and the
> worlds are vibrant and beautiful.
>
> I think the biggest complaint people have about their games is that
> they are all too similar to one another; that if you've played "FarCry
> 3" then you've played "FarCry 4, 5 and 6" too... and pretty much
> "Watch Dogs" and "Assassins Creed" too. Personally, I also take issue
> with the writing (the story, characters and dialogue) too, since
> they're rarely worth bothering with.
>

I'll leave FC:1 out of the equation as it's just quite a different game
and move onto the others I've played. FC:2, I found the whole experience
pretty meh as both the environment and combat I quickly came repetitive
to me. Go here, shot the bad guys (who will basically stand in front of
you waiting to die) and then rinse and repeat. FC:3 felt better in that
respect but the story was just awful and off the top of my head I can't
think of protagonist that I've found more irritating. It's hard to enjoy
a game where you cheer when you character dies.

Some thing I think that HL:1/2, and to a lesser extent, FC:1 did well is
they provided a range of environments to keep my interest up. Thinking
back to HL:2 each level almost felt like you were playing a different FPS.

Overall though I agree, they just seem to recycle the same formula again
and again. Unfortunately that seems the norm for much of triple-A gaming
now.

> FarCry games are like fast-food; you know they aren't very good but
> they're quick and easy, they don't take much personal investment to
> enjoy, and whichever one you pick you can be sure what the game will
> be like. It won't be good, it won't be fulfilling, but it'll help pass
> the time until someething better comes along.

I can't say I'm a fan of fast food chains* but as you say you know what
you're getting (neither pleasant or unpleasant, well Subway is the
latter) but the only time I go to one is when we are out and about
(mostly a long drinking session) and it's just convenient when you get
to the stage of must have some food. The difference is Burger King don't
charge £50 for a meal.

*KFC is an exception to this as it's the one chain that we do occasional
think we fancy some tonight, bargain bucket here we come.

On Mon, 4 Mar 2024 10:03:11 +0000, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

>On 03/03/2024 23:42, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>> The FarCry series - and Ubisoft games in general - usually have a
>> fairly robust and enjoyable game-loop. I don't think anyone really
>> complains about that. You start one of their games, and it's really
>> easy to get lost in their worlds, doing mission after mission. The
>> gunplay is exciting, there's a lot of stuff to discover, and the
>> worlds are vibrant and beautiful.
>>
>> I think the biggest complaint people have about their games is that
>> they are all too similar to one another; that if you've played "FarCry
>> 3" then you've played "FarCry 4, 5 and 6" too... and pretty much
>> "Watch Dogs" and "Assassins Creed" too. Personally, I also take issue
>> with the writing (the story, characters and dialogue) too, since
>> they're rarely worth bothering with.
>>
>
>I'll leave FC:1 out of the equation as it's just quite a different game
>and move onto the others I've played. FC:2, I found the whole experience
>pretty meh as both the environment and combat I quickly came repetitive
>to me. Go here, shot the bad guys (who will basically stand in front of
>you waiting to die) and then rinse and repeat. FC:3 felt better in that
>respect but the story was just awful and off the top of my head I can't
>think of protagonist that I've found more irritating. It's hard to enjoy
>a game where you cheer when you character dies.

In some ways, I consider "FarCry 2" to be the best of the series,
because its gun-play is so superb. But I can understand your 'meh'
opinion of the game because a lot of the stuff /outside/ the combat is
dated and/or mediocre. Stuff like the constantly respawning enemies,
the pointless factions, the weapons that break too quickly, etc. etc.
Even the story is a bit tiresome.

But man, once the bullets started whizzing by the game really shone.
It had a grounded reality to it that made it stand out amongst its
peers.

I completely agree with you about FarCry 3's writing and characters.
It wasn't just the protagonist, though; evil villain Vaas was too
over-the-top to take seriously. Ubisoft has a real problem when it
comes to writing engaging stories or characters, and too often goes
with cartoony stereotypes and situations. They have excellent artists
and game-play designers; I wish they'd step up in the writing
department.