For those of us dumb enough to pay the Prime fee, there's a few more old
games to try: Starcraft Remastered, and several other indie titles. As
before, I had to check both Twitter under the crown menu for Starcraft, and
the prime gaming client for the others. Enjoy!!

rms

On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 13:26:45 -0600, "rms" <rsquiresMOO@MOOflashMOO.net>
wrote:

>For those of us dumb enough to pay the Prime fee, there's a few more old
>games to try: Starcraft Remastered, and several other indie titles. As
>before, I had to check both Twitter under the crown menu for Starcraft, and
>the prime gaming client for the others. Enjoy!!

Specifically, this month's games are:

- Starcraft Remastered (requires Battlenet account)
- Family Mysteries: Poisonous Promises (requires LegacyGames account)
- Zak McKracken and the Alien Mindbenders (requires AmazonApp)
- Beasts of Maravilla Island (requires AmazonApp)
- Recompile (requires AmazonApp)
- Scourgebringer (requires AmazonApp)

(also, the usual shitload of in-game content that I consistently
ignore. But I'm sure it thrills the kiddies.)

"Starcraft: Remastered" obviously needs no introduction. It's probably
the best way to play the game these days, but - not being a raging
Starcraft fan myself - I'm not that excited about it. If I really want
to play Starcraft, I'll just pull out my old CD-ROM. Anyway, it's an
Activision/Blizzard game and that company is on my shitlist, so I
won't be claiming this game. Even free, it's not worth it.

"Family Mysteries: Poisonous Promises" is obviously included only to
promote the "LegacyGames" service (since the game is also available on
Steam). It's a rather humdrum adventure game with uninteresting
characters, annoying mini-games and a general lack of polish. Given it
requires yet-another account, I'm going to skip out on this one too.

"Zak McKracken" is an old-school LucasArts adventure and - while it
has its moments - it's not one of their best efforts. It feels like an
odd mix of Sierra's "SpaceQuest" and "Dagger of Amon Ra", but with a
less interesting storyline and characters. I also recall the game is
absolutely rife with annoying mazes and labyrinths that do nothing but
pad out the game's run-time. As a historical relic, it's an
interesting developmental step towards LucasArts' later, better
adventure games, but as something to play? It's not worth your time
unless your a retro-adventure fanatic.

"Beasts of Maravilla Island" is a 3D adventure/platformer with very
stylized graphics and a family-friendly theme. The goal seems to be to
discover (e.g. photograph) a bunch of fantastical animals. It doesn't
seem to be a bad game, but it's neither does it make me want to play
it.

"Recompile" is another 3D/action-adventure, this one set inside a
virtual-reality cyberspace. Gameplay is more action oriented, with
lots of shooting enemy programs and difficult platforming. In terms of
setting, this one is more appealing to me, but its visuals and
gameplay do little to attract me, and its mixed reviews indicate
problematic gameplay.

Finally, "Scourgebringer", an action/platformer with a side-person
view and retro graphics. Fast paced and aggressively difficult (it's a
roguelike, of course), there's just nothing about this that appeals to
me. I'm sure many will love it but I'm not one of them.

Still, all-in-all, it's a nice mix of games from a variety of genres.
None of the games are must-have but their addition to my library (with
the obvious exceptions noted above) is generally welcome. It's not
really a collection to inspire somebody who doesn't have AmazonPrime
gaming to subscribe, but neither does it make you wonder why you
bother.

On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 13:26:45 -0600, "rms" <rsquiresMOO@MOOflashMOO.net>
wrote:

>For those of us dumb enough to pay the Prime fee, there's a few more old
>games to try: Starcraft Remastered, and several other indie titles. As
>before, I had to check both Twitter under the crown menu for Starcraft, and
>the prime gaming client for the others. Enjoy!!
>
>rms

*--

I am a prime member but I forget how it works when it comes to
anything else but shipping :-)

I just booted up Battlenet and updated Starcraft II. So maybe I
should try it for a few minutes. Okay, it is an RTS and there is no
such thing as a couple minutes of play time with them. I used to stay
up very late with Command and Conquer and others.

Do you think Remastered is going to be as good or look as good as 2?

-pw

On Mon, 01 Aug 2022 16:24:06 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

>"Zak McKracken" is an old-school LucasArts adventure and - while it
>has its moments - it's not one of their best efforts. It feels like an
>odd mix of Sierra's "SpaceQuest" and "Dagger of Amon Ra", but with a
>less interesting storyline and characters. I also recall the game is
>absolutely rife with annoying mazes and labyrinths that do nothing but
>pad out the game's run-time. As a historical relic, it's an
>interesting developmental step towards LucasArts' later, better
>adventure games, but as something to play? It's not worth your time
>unless your a retro-adventure fanatic.

I still own all of the original packaging for this one including the
hint book. I really enjoyed this game back in the day on the C64.

Unfortunately, the game has not aged very well. I agree with
everything you said here. Only for retro-adventure fanatics, LucasArts
fans, or people like me who played it back in the day and want to take
a trip down nostalgia lane.

On Mon, 01 Aug 2022 22:07:15 -0600, PW
<iamnotusingonewithAgent@notinuse.com> wrote:

>I am a prime member but I forget how it works when it comes to
>anything else but shipping :-)

Claiming the games is fairly easy if you are already an Amazon prime
gamer. If I remember correctly, all you have to do is go to
https://gaming.amazon.com , log-in with your Amazon account name and
password, and you're good.

USING the games can be a bit more involved. Prime Gaming has two sorts
of games; those they offer on their own service, and those that use a
third-party service like Steam or Battlenet.

With the former, you'll need to download their Amazon App client,
which you then use to download and play the game (I haven't checked
recently, but in the past you could download the game, copy the
directory to another folder (or computer!) and then launch it directly
without even having the Amazon app installed; it didn't use any DRM.
I'm not sure if this is still the case).

With games that use a third-party service, Amazon /sometimes/ provides
a serial number that can be used to claim the game, but more often
they want you to "link" your accounts (the better to collect all your
personal data, my dear!). Instructions are provided as needed, but it
usually just requires you to click a link and sign in with your
Steam/Origin/UPlay/GOG/whatever account info. Those games then show up
in the appropriate launcher. "StarCraft: Remastered" is one of the
latter.

If you /are/ paying for Amazon Prime (which I don't recommend because
the savings usually aren't worth it and the company is scum, even
though I hypocritically do it, so take that for what its worth),
there's really no reason not to claim the games each month. You're
paying for them, after all, and it's not like Amazon doesn't already
know everything about you...

On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 13:26:45 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, rms
wrote:

>For those of us dumb enough to pay the Prime fee, there's a few more old
>games to try: Starcraft Remastered, and several other indie titles. As
>before, I had to check both Twitter under the crown menu for Starcraft, and
>the prime gaming client for the others. Enjoy!!
>
>rms

Requires Battle.net account. Nope.

Thank you for the update though.

--
Zag

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

On Tue, 02 Aug 2022 13:16:42 -0500, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>On Mon, 1 Aug 2022 13:26:45 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, rms
>wrote:

>>For those of us dumb enough to pay the Prime fee, there's a few more old
>>games to try: Starcraft Remastered, and several other indie titles. As
>>before, I had to check both Twitter under the crown menu for Starcraft, and
>>the prime gaming client for the others. Enjoy!!

>Requires Battle.net account. Nope.

Out of curiousity, is your rejection because of it being
Activision/Blizzard, or because you don't want to bother with
yet-another-service (or, alternately, because you don't want to link
it with Amazon so they can suck down more data on you)? Or is there
some other reason?

I trend towards the former, but completely understand the latter too.

Speaking of everybody's favorite game publisher to hate: Activision's
financials indicate they aren't doing quite as well this year, having
just posted more than $600 million USD in revenue for the last quarter
of 2021. One /might/ argue this is a because of the end of Covid
lockdowns, except EA apparently made 20% more revenue in that same
period.

More critical folk might point out this drop in revenue just /may/
have something to do with Activision being too focused on
microtransactions and forgetting to release new games. Seriously,
other than Call of Duty Vanguard, the Tony Hawk remake, and Crash
Bandicoot games, what has Activision released in the past year?

On the other hand, the fact that Activision still posted a quarterly
revenue of $1.6 billion USD tells you just how profitable
microtransactions are.

On Tue, 02 Aug 2022 11:17:38 -0400, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Mon, 01 Aug 2022 22:07:15 -0600, PW
><iamnotusingonewithAgent@notinuse.com> wrote:
>
>>I am a prime member but I forget how it works when it comes to
>>anything else but shipping :-)
>
>Claiming the games is fairly easy if you are already an Amazon prime
>gamer. If I remember correctly, all you have to do is go to
>https://gaming.amazon.com , log-in with your Amazon account name and
>password, and you're good.
>
>USING the games can be a bit more involved. Prime Gaming has two sorts
>of games; those they offer on their own service, and those that use a
>third-party service like Steam or Battlenet.
>
>With the former, you'll need to download their Amazon App client,
>which you then use to download and play the game (I haven't checked
>recently, but in the past you could download the game, copy the
>directory to another folder (or computer!) and then launch it directly
>without even having the Amazon app installed; it didn't use any DRM.
>I'm not sure if this is still the case).
>
>With games that use a third-party service, Amazon /sometimes/ provides
>a serial number that can be used to claim the game, but more often
>they want you to "link" your accounts (the better to collect all your
>personal data, my dear!). Instructions are provided as needed, but it
>usually just requires you to click a link and sign in with your
>Steam/Origin/UPlay/GOG/whatever account info. Those games then show up
>in the appropriate launcher. "StarCraft: Remastered" is one of the
>latter.
>
>If you /are/ paying for Amazon Prime (which I don't recommend because
>the savings usually aren't worth it and the company is scum, even
>though I hypocritically do it, so take that for what its worth),
>there's really no reason not to claim the games each month. You're
>paying for them, after all, and it's not like Amazon doesn't already
>know everything about you...
>

*--

Totally agree with you about Amazon Spalls!

I remember someone else here told me how to do get the Amazon games
but that was a while ago.

-pw

On Tue, 02 Aug 2022 20:53:59 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

>>Requires Battle.net account. Nope.
>
>Out of curiousity, is your rejection because of it being
>Activision/Blizzard, or because you don't want to bother with
>yet-another-service (or, alternately, because you don't want to link
>it with Amazon so they can suck down more data on you)? Or is there
>some other reason?

Service fatigue. If I needed the service for more than the one game, I'd
reconsider. But if the service doesn't offer or isn't connected to at
least five games I want or have, I'm probably not going to sign up. I
don't really have much interest in Activision/Blizzard's contemporary
catalog.

I vaguely remember a distaste for what they did with Diablo III, too, but
can't remember exactly what. Was it always connected DRM for solo play?

Linking to Amazon, however, is fine if it gets me a freebie! Amazon can
have whatever ad data they want from me. :^D

--
Zag

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

That's a bit disappointing for me as normally there's one or two games
that I could imagine paying for but this month nothing. Oh well!

On 03/08/2022 05:40, Zaghadka wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Aug 2022 20:53:59 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
> Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
>>> Requires Battle.net account. Nope.
>>
>> Out of curiousity, is your rejection because of it being
>> Activision/Blizzard, or because you don't want to bother with
>> yet-another-service (or, alternately, because you don't want to link
>> it with Amazon so they can suck down more data on you)? Or is there
>> some other reason?
>
> Service fatigue. If I needed the service for more than the one game, I'd
> reconsider. But if the service doesn't offer or isn't connected to at
> least five games I want or have, I'm probably not going to sign up. I
> don't really have much interest in Activision/Blizzard's contemporary
> catalog.
>
> I vaguely remember a distaste for what they did with Diablo III, too, but
> can't remember exactly what. Was it always connected DRM for solo play?
>
> Linking to Amazon, however, is fine if it gets me a freebie! Amazon can
> have whatever ad data they want from me. :^D
>

I tend to agree, I just don't want to have yet another service to use
especially just to play a few games I think are no more than ok.

Of course it doesn't help who that service is run by.

On Tue, 02 Aug 2022 23:40:12 -0500, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>I vaguely remember a distaste for what they did with Diablo III, too, but
>can't remember exactly what. Was it always connected DRM for solo play?

Yes, and still is.

If not that, then maybe the real money auction house left a bad taste
in your mouth. It was that game's version of microtransactions.

On Wed, 03 Aug 2022 07:59:40 -0400, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, Mike
S. wrote:

>On Tue, 02 Aug 2022 23:40:12 -0500, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>I vaguely remember a distaste for what they did with Diablo III, too, but
>>can't remember exactly what. Was it always connected DRM for solo play?
>
>Yes, and still is.
>
>If not that, then maybe the real money auction house left a bad taste
>in your mouth. It was that game's version of microtransactions.

Yeah, I remember what a cluster___ the marketplace was now that you
mention it.

--
Zag

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

>Requires Battle.net account. Nope.

B.net has been around for years, and isn't going away anytime soon I'd
imagine

rms

On 8/2/2022 9:40 PM, Zaghadka wrote:
>
> Linking to Amazon, however, is fine if it gets me a freebie! Amazon can
> have whatever ad data they want from me. :^D
>
And people wonder why large corporations treat their customers badly.

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

On Wed, 3 Aug 2022 08:36:28 -0600, "rms" <rsquiresMOO@MOOflashMOO.net>
wrote:

> B.net has been around for years, and isn't going away anytime soon I'd
>imagine
>
>rms

Since Diablo 1 in 1996. I like several Blizzard titles so I am stuck
with it.

On Wednesday, August 3, 2022 at 4:59:43 AM UTC-7, Mike S. wrote:
> On Tue, 02 Aug 2022 23:40:12 -0500, Zaghadka <zagh...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
> >I vaguely remember a distaste for what they did with Diablo III, too, but
> >can't remember exactly what. Was it always connected DRM for solo play?
> Yes, and still is.
>
> If not that, then maybe the real money auction house left a bad taste
> in your mouth. It was that game's version of microtransactions.

The auction house had an in-game currency version which worked fine,
I never touched the real money one, nor ever saw a need. In my opinion
both 'issues' were far overblown and mostly non-issues.

I don't remember if there were maintenance windows, but any always on
games with maintenance windows inevitably conflicted with the short
windows I could play, so if that was so it would've annoyed me greatly.

IIRC the annoyance of the marketplace was that you couldn't trade with your
own other characters, so had to do it through a third party. Money was shared
though, so you could just accept that you'd be selling your really good gear
you found for another class, and buying something with that same class.

I missed the in-game currency marketplace after they killed the marketplace
altogether, as it made it far too difficult to do trades without it, and the
game was balanced more for trades as you got stuff for other classes,
so only 1/5th of gear was for yours. So I was actually more annoyed
when they caved to opinion. Though there's no reason they had to get
rid of the in-game currency market, but vocal fans were outraged about that,
saying it was better to meet and trade with others organically. Only it
wasn't.

- Justisaur

On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 12:26:51 PM UTC-7, rms wrote:
> For those of us dumb enough to pay the Prime fee, there's a few more old
> games to try: Starcraft Remastered, and several other indie titles. As
> before, I had to check both Twitter under the crown menu for Starcraft, and
> the prime gaming client for the others. Enjoy!!

Ahem, *I* don't pay for Prime... My wife does :)

But thanks for the reminder. I picked them all up except the Legacy Games one
as they make you go through too many hoops for a game I have no interest in.\

I did have to go through some verification with Blizzard and it said my account
was locked out. I had quit anything with them after playing Hearthstone a bit
and something happened where it reset my progress with it due to issues
I always seemed to have with my account with them. Who knows I might
play SC again, probably not though.

I couldn't get very far in SC II campaign, one of the early missions I just
couldn't figure out how to win, and wasn't all that into it, and rarely
if ever play those games against real people.

- Justisaur

On Wed, 3 Aug 2022 08:14:07 -0700 (PDT), Justisaur
<justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:

>I missed the in-game currency marketplace after they killed the marketplace
>altogether, as it made it far too difficult to do trades without it, and the
>game was balanced more for trades as you got stuff for other classes,
>so only 1/5th of gear was for yours. So I was actually more annoyed
>when they caved to opinion. Though there's no reason they had to get
>rid of the in-game currency market, but vocal fans were outraged about that,
>saying it was better to meet and trade with others organically. Only it
>wasn't.

I can't speak for or against the real money AH in Diablo 3 because I
bought the game long after it was gone. I have no experience with it.

But I have played MMOs with and without auction house systems and I
definitely prefer the ones WITH them. Trading, to use your word,
organically.. is a pain in the ass in comparison.

On 8/3/2022 9:52 AM, Justisaur wrote:
> On Monday, August 1, 2022 at 12:26:51 PM UTC-7, rms wrote:
>> For those of us dumb enough to pay the Prime fee, there's a few more old
>> games to try: Starcraft Remastered, and several other indie titles. As
>> before, I had to check both Twitter under the crown menu for Starcraft, and
>> the prime gaming client for the others. Enjoy!!
>
> Ahem, *I* don't pay for Prime... My wife does :)
>
> But thanks for the reminder. I picked them all up except the Legacy Games one
> as they make you go through too many hoops for a game I have no interest in.\
>
Don't forget to thank her for the presents.

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

On Wed, 3 Aug 2022 07:52:50 -0700, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Dimensional Traveler wrote:

>On 8/2/2022 9:40 PM, Zaghadka wrote:
>>
>> Linking to Amazon, however, is fine if it gets me a freebie! Amazon can
>> have whatever ad data they want from me. :^D
>>
>And people wonder why large corporations treat their customers badly.

I absolutely, 100% do not care what Amazon knows about my gaming library.
In fact, they'll wind up recommending games I might otherwise not have
noticed.

My medical history? No. My sex toy collection (not)? No.

What video games I have in connected libraries? Welcome Mr. Bezos!

Amazon clearly has no idea what's up with me anyway. One time they
actually recommended a dental bone spreading kit to me. They've finally
figured out that I like Nintendo Switch. Took them years.

Big data isn't as bad as you think.

--
Zag

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

On Wed, 3 Aug 2022 08:36:28 -0600, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, rms
wrote:

>>Requires Battle.net account. Nope.
>
> B.net has been around for years, and isn't going away anytime soon I'd
>imagine
>

https://news.microsoft.com/2022/01/18/microsoft-to-acquire-activision-blizzard-to-bring-the-joy-and-community-of-gaming-to-everyone-across-every-device/

Switching to Microsft accounts in 3... 2... 1.

I'm sure they'll keep it around for a while.

--
Zag

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

On 8/4/2022 11:18 AM, Zaghadka wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2022 07:52:50 -0700, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
> Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>
>> On 8/2/2022 9:40 PM, Zaghadka wrote:
>>>
>>> Linking to Amazon, however, is fine if it gets me a freebie! Amazon can
>>> have whatever ad data they want from me. :^D
>>>
>> And people wonder why large corporations treat their customers badly.
>
> I absolutely, 100% do not care what Amazon knows about my gaming library.
> In fact, they'll wind up recommending games I might otherwise not have
> noticed.
>
> My medical history? No. My sex toy collection (not)? No.
>
> What video games I have in connected libraries? Welcome Mr. Bezos!
>
> Amazon clearly has no idea what's up with me anyway. One time they
> actually recommended a dental bone spreading kit to me. They've finally
> figured out that I like Nintendo Switch. Took them years.
>
> Big data isn't as bad as you think.
>
Nope, its worse.

(From my own experience I know the data is there, somewhere. The issue
is there's so much "they" haven't quite figured out how to use it to
maximum advantage. Yet....)

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

On 04/08/2022 19:18, Zaghadka wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2022 07:52:50 -0700, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
> Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>
>> On 8/2/2022 9:40 PM, Zaghadka wrote:
>>>
>>> Linking to Amazon, however, is fine if it gets me a freebie! Amazon can
>>> have whatever ad data they want from me. :^D
>>>
>> And people wonder why large corporations treat their customers badly.
>
> I absolutely, 100% do not care what Amazon knows about my gaming library.
> In fact, they'll wind up recommending games I might otherwise not have
> noticed.
>
> My medical history? No. My sex toy collection (not)? No.
>
> What video games I have in connected libraries? Welcome Mr. Bezos!
>
> Amazon clearly has no idea what's up with me anyway. One time they
> actually recommended a dental bone spreading kit to me. They've finally
> figured out that I like Nintendo Switch. Took them years.
>
> Big data isn't as bad as you think.
>

I find most of the recommendations from Amazon they send as e-mails to
be frankly useless. Oh you just bought a mouse for a PC, maybe you want
to buy another one. That's not a smart algorithm. Then I have the
problem that my better half reads trash romantic fiction of the saucy
kind so my books that might interest you e-mails are, well interesting
to say the least.