True Gaming How good (or bad?) was 2017 for gaming? |
- How good (or bad?) was 2017 for gaming?
- Intelligence as a Stat Downplayed?
- Games where you can see other Levels
- Multiplayer Civilization Games
- Strategy games with units possessing (semi-)randomly-varying stats?
- Working on a Metroidvania Game Concept; input is appreciated ;)
- Should I Own Both Xbox One And PS4?
- Who should buy Konami?
How good (or bad?) was 2017 for gaming? Posted: 22 Dec 2017 11:03 AM PST In my opinion, I haven't seen a year this good since 2013 (maybe even 2011). I think 2011 was one of the better years for gaming ever. So many great games came out that year. And man, this year was fantastic. Yes, like every year, there were rough edges (definitely not talking about microtransactions). But, other than some of the nonsense that happened, we had a great year. This was Nintendo's year and I used to not like Nintendo for a little while but man, they won me back over with the Switch. I'm getting one this Christmas and I can't wait to play on it. What are your thoughts? Is 2017 one of the best years in gaming? One of the worst? Just okay? [link] [comments] |
Intelligence as a Stat Downplayed? Posted: 21 Dec 2017 08:55 PM PST Intelligence is pivotal for any pursuit and can have a huge role in strength, dexterity, or any skill. Sure you can have brute strength or intuitive movement, but those things can also be achieved to a degree through intelligence and proper awareness. Higher intelligence can also increase rate of understanding and result in better training, leading to faster growth. So why is it always segregated off and reserved for mages and mana? Or in some cases, these qualities are hinted at, but then why have we not seen a system built around intelligence? [link] [comments] |
Games where you can see other Levels Posted: 22 Dec 2017 03:42 PM PST Since we're diving headfirst into huge open worlds with a "go-anywhere" mentality, I'd like to start a discussion on older games limited by hardware. Before gigantic open worlds, some games would decorate their skyboxes or horizons with simplified and distant sketches of other areas the player can go to. This created an awesome sense of connectivity and was good for building a believable world. The best example that comes to mind is Super Mario Sunshine. Being able to see the Pinna Ferris Wheel off in the distance could remind you of your accomplishments there, or overlooking most of the island from the top of Pianta Village would draw your scope way out. I loved the island vacation setting.
[link] [comments] |
Multiplayer Civilization Games Posted: 22 Dec 2017 03:40 PM PST Is there any multiplayer sandbox game that has a realistic civilization simulation? Like a user based economy, selling goods and services, governmental systems; a game where a group of people will thrive while a single person will fail? Too many games claim to have an 'economy' but allow one person to perform all the needed actions, but I want to find one where you can only be successful in only one or two areas, such as hunting, fishing, and farming, or mining and basic crafting. Would this be too hard to implement? Is there any game out there that fits this bill? (doesn't have to be like rust level sandbox, mainly just the economy and multiplayer part). [link] [comments] |
Strategy games with units possessing (semi-)randomly-varying stats? Posted: 22 Dec 2017 03:12 PM PST I could have sworn I played a game where a class of notable units had statlines which varied semi-randomly -- e.g., one might have a little more armor, another more attack, a third be weaker altogether, etc. This made it worthwhile to spend these units wisely, and might get one rather attached to a few especially good ones... but I can't remember if this is even a real memory, heh. This mechanic is present in a lot of "X-COM-likes", but I can't actually think of any strategy games with a similar concept. Anyone know of any? Is this even a good mechanic for the genre, anyway? [link] [comments] |
Working on a Metroidvania Game Concept; input is appreciated ;) Posted: 22 Dec 2017 02:15 PM PST Hey, All. So as a creative project I'm working on a rough game concept with mechanics similar to Paper Mario and Child of Light, but with a narrative heavily inspired by Nier and Drakengard (...and Demon's Souls ...) Ideally I'd be going for a open world 2D side scroller (or top down) with a mixture of RTS and TBS elements in combat. But what I'm thinking about is How I want the payer to explore the world: either alone or with companions. So here's some of the systems that I'm thinking of: -Single player with no companions, exploring the vast and crushing world with only a few friendly faces along the way, but all on your own. This would eliminate the turn base and open it up to more of an RTS platformig system. -Single player with AI companions that can be ordered to attack certain enemies, but don't get damaged by your attacks. Also able to keep with the RTS elements while still having company that can be used as an exploration and combat mechanic for interacting with the game world. Lastly this is the option I've been putting the most thought in to, which does use some TBS elements in combat , but with a real time turn system: In the tutorial level of the game, there would be an option of either going through the game single player or multiplayer. For this version, any Party members you choose (if you want any) are permanent and remain with you throughout the game. You'd have the option to choose from nine, but can only take up to three with you. Additionally, You have three potential keys to free party members, but those keys can also be used to unlock rooms in the tutorial that will grant you up to three items for extra power to level you significantly in the early parts of the game. However, if you do decide you'd like some company but would also want extra power for yourself, you're not limited to an either or; you could take on a party member or two and still acquire one or two of the power boosts. Anyway, from a development standpoint, which do you guys think would be the most interesting to see or experience? Any input you'd have on the matter would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. [link] [comments] |
Should I Own Both Xbox One And PS4? Posted: 21 Dec 2017 10:37 PM PST So boxing day sales are coming up and I've been thinking about purchasing an Xbox One. I already own a PS4 and having been mostly only been using playstation consoles all my life, with an exception for the Xbox 360. Most of my friends play Xbox, but I would also like to stick to my roots as a playstation player. Should I go ahead and buy the Xbox One, whilst maintaining a subscription to both Xbox Live and Playstation Plus? Should I make the switch from Playstation to Xbox? Or should I pass on the Xbox One altogether? Any input is greatly appreciated. [link] [comments] |
Posted: 21 Dec 2017 03:54 PM PST This is a question I have asked myself several times since Konami announced they were stepping back from AAA game development (sure they still have Metal Gear Survive) and focusing more on their gambling machines. So in all hypothetical scenarios who would you like to see buy the ownership of Konami's gaming IPs (I know Konami itself will continue to exist but in this scenario another company buys their video game IPs from them). From Castlevania, Silent Hill, to Metal Gear, Contra, PES, Suikoden and more, who should add these games to their portfolios and handle them with care? [link] [comments] |
You are subscribed to email updates from For those who like talking about games as much as playing them.. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States |
Post a Comment