True Gaming Has anyone else had this experience of playing through a game, but not remembering a damn thing about it? |
- Has anyone else had this experience of playing through a game, but not remembering a damn thing about it?
- An argument on not to trust the "random" programming behind "lootboxes" and how easily manipulated they can be.
- Do you guys still buy new games even if you have a huge backlog?
- Why framerate and frametime don't match (during frametime spikes)?
- Games with slow charging but super strong moves? ALA Dragons Dogma.
- I don't understand what happened to the Crysis series
| Posted: 29 Nov 2017 05:20 AM PST I was listening to a podcast yesterday where they were talking about rumors of a new Devil May Cry game, and it got me thinking about when I played through DMC3. I beat that game, but I honestly cannot remember a damn thing about it. I vaguely remember an opening scene in some sort of bar with pizza, and I vaguely remember a final fight in some kinda river, but the entire game is just a blur. I honestly can't even remember if it was fun or not. I remember plenty about other games I played at the time, like Mario Sunshine or Metal Gear Solid 3. DMC3 is the only game I've had this experience with. [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 29 Nov 2017 07:03 AM PST This is something I never see talked about in these thread. People keep talking about the predatory nature of Microtransactions and Lootboxes. I think the real issue here is that no one truely knows if these are even 'random'. The Age of Data Mining Triple A companies have a LOT of resources at their disposable. We live in an age where everything you do on the internet is logged in someway. Facebook, Google, Apple, Blizzard, EA, etc. Are collecting data constantly when you are playing their games. All this information is stored in Databases and linked to your account. Blizzard can adjust drop-rates of items in Diablo 3 without applying a hotfix because everything is server side. They know the statistics on every spell being used. They know the statistics on how many of each class is being played, etc. all this info is being logged and analyzed by these companies. They know the statistics of what cards are being used the most, etc. Pick a game, pick an important aspect of an online game and its probable that they are logging the information about it, its almost naive to think these companies aren't when they have the resources at their disposal. The programming behind these 'random' lootboxes or creates is laughably easy to manipulate. They can cross-reference the opening of these boxes with all the information logged about your account. This is real and this is happening.
Hearthstone checks for duplicate legendaries. That is not what I would consider 'random'. Hearthstone has a pity timer This is the most blatant example with proof. They are monitoring exactly what is being opened and exactly what you get to make sure you get certain cards to not allow you to get a sense of discouragement. TF2 controls their item drop system Based on playing time. Destiny 2 just got hit for XP tampering Based on playing time. This actually came out after I started collecting examples. Online Poker had a backdoor to 'see' other peoples cards There is a reason online-gambling is illegal. Its incredibly hard to monitor. My point is, these 'random' elements that games are trying to throw at us now-a-days. Are anything but random. Something isn't 'random' when there are variables controlling what and when you get items. Why anyone trust any game with a 'random' element in the age of computers is stupid. These aren't card packs in stores where companies have no idea who is buying the packs. This is a reality where companies know a lot about who is buying the packs. It's almost impossible to prove any manipulation unless you have a large number of people providing data-sets. TL;DR - You should go into any game with a lootbox/crate system with knowledge that you are probably being manipulated. [link] [comments]  |
| Do you guys still buy new games even if you have a huge backlog? Posted: 29 Nov 2017 12:22 PM PST I'd been all caught up with switch games since launch, but now I'm about to buy xenoblade 2 when I still haven't finished doom, skyrim, resident evil 1 and 2, and not to mention a ridiculous amount of eshop titles. I'm starting to feel a little ridiculous. How do you guys handle your buying/playig habits? [link] [comments]  |
| Why framerate and frametime don't match (during frametime spikes)? Posted: 29 Nov 2017 02:08 PM PST Occasionally, with some game titles (especially those named early access, that are not yet well optimized) I suffer from the gameplay that is not smooth. Sometimes it has nothing to do with the client-server network lag, but it's all about local graphics rendering, namely frametime (not to be confused with the framerate/FPS). Sometimes it's all about frametime spikes. In theory, frametime is just the inverse of the framerate/FPS, thus:
My question then is - while monitoring FPS along with the frametime (e.g. with MSI Afterburner)...
E.g. [here] is one of my Playerunknown's Battlegrounds logs graph that shows frametime spikes (for that split second of such stutter, game becomes jittery), although FPS remains at it's standard level, as if there where no stuttering at all. Is it because FPS & frametime monitoring tools use different GPU/DirectX/OpenGL APIs to calculate those values, or calculate them at the different stages of rendering pipeline? [link] [comments]  |
| Games with slow charging but super strong moves? ALA Dragons Dogma. Posted: 29 Nov 2017 06:22 AM PST Are there any other games apart from Dragons Dogma that let me charge an attack REALLY goddamn slowly, but allow it to do an absolutely absurd amount of damage if it connects? Preferable games on PC without the same type of underpowered character like the Warrior from DD, but I'll take what I can get. Here's an example of what I'm talking about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2afH5wYR4BY Thanks. [link] [comments]  |
| I don't understand what happened to the Crysis series Posted: 29 Nov 2017 08:54 AM PST If you look that the first game in the series, you see a game with a nice, simple storyline that has a superb build-up and a great final act / conclusion. The expansion does what it should: it expands on the storyline, without altering the feel too much. The first game was a standard tactical shooter turned into a sci-fi shooter, with the expansion adding some drama to it. I was a great fan of both games, and I hold up Crysis to be one of the best FPS games I've ever played. It has everything a PC FPS gamer would want: good controls, AI, vehicles, setting, etc. Then Crysis 2 came out and it was a completely different game. I understand that making a console game meant having to change a lot of things, including how the controls and the suit functioned, map design, even map location, the list goes on. What I don't understand is the gigantic switch of tone in the storyline. To be honest, I've only played both 2 and 3 to maybe halfway, but I've read and watched the plot/cutscenes online. Crysis 1 is a realistic shooter in the nearby future. It sets up a lot of things and has a lot of unsolved plotlines for the sequels to dwelve into: What happened with the ever-so-important no-self-destruct alien exosuit? What happend with Prophet, Psycho, Nomad and the archeologist girl after they went back to the island? The suit had the origin-story of being a standard, but expensive U.S.A. military product. Crysis 2 flipped everything on it's head. Every single one of the past cast was gone. Prophet was killed in the first cutscene, the protagonist was changed without every really mentioning the previous one, the backstory of the suit was changed, the aliens were changed, the list goes on. I understand they wanted to make a stand-alone sequel. Since console-players couldn't play the original one (neither most of the PC players of that time) they did not want to built on the knowledge of the previous games. But they could've went with either:
Instead, they made an officially sequel game, which had very little to do with the original. I see this happening when the game switches studios or publishers, but in this case, that did not occur. Pretty much the same people made Crysis 1 and 2. Then Crysis 3 came out, which was still much closer to 2, than 1. I also don't understand the point of killing then resurrecting Prophet. I get that they've tried to make a Jesus-parallel, but what is the point of killing a character at the very first scene, then act as he didn't die in the middle of the story, then resurrect him in the end? Nothing. Don't get me wrong people, I am not bitching about a somewhat older game-series, I am just confused. When I see a bad movie or a bad sequel, I still see the good ideas behind the bad implementation. I can see what Lucas tried to achieve with the prequel Star Wars trilogy for example. I just don't get WHY Crytek went this way with this series. Did they fear the game will look like a Call of Duty clone? [link] [comments]  |
Post a Comment