Blader

I have a soft spot for Geoff Keighley because he gets paid to hype up shit, unlike a lot of you

The fact that it has been half a DECADE and Capcom have STILL not remade this game?!?

This is something you can truly internalize ONLY when you can see the appeal and reason for everything in gaming from things you like, to things you find digusting

A lot of you struggle with this and get stuck and cornered when defending things

The existence of a reason is not a good enough justification for a game element

Instagram reels instead of Tiktok is wild. Aunty vibes

Not just from a focus on storyline perspective

Hard to imagine a goofy silly gimmicky map like Barrels o fun in a post-Half Life world

Its also a bit strange how people who call out HL2 will often give 1 a pass (just because its a bit more gamey)

In retrospect that unskippable train ride arguably one shot gamey-ness in FPS which has just been for the worse when it comes to design

If anything, it probably makes a person who watches cut scenes normally feel stupid for not just clicking *SPEED* anytime there is a quiet moment in the cinematography

(Yay more sandboxification of games)

Fast forwarding of Cutscenes is kind of strange

I feel like the type of player that doesnt care (me) would just want to skip them all together

The type of player to care about cutscenes would just watch normally

0 Games of Value played
700 cables

Guy that sets up original retro hardware, CRT, and converters to then just scroll their phone without playing anything

Its the year 2029

you filter steam by the "beat 'em up" tag

All Diablo clones...

And that is not a good thing. If you have the power to enforce the rules (as video games can), then choose not to, you are not actually making use of the medium

Dont really see the point in playing board games alone. I can see doing things like shooting m 3s in Basketball alone, as its a game bound by the physics of real life

I am saying that video games do not need a social contract, thats my point, they enforce their systems automatically in the code

The core thing that makes video games different than real life games, is the ability to enforce rules and a different reality, through automatic systems

This is why the booklet and social agreement is inferior when it comes to video games

Also your Coop game thing does not apply, as that is in video games

As I mentioned, video games are different because they can automatically enforce their rules, real life games cannot, which is why they rely on the next best thing which is a social contract between players

Board games are both easier to make, and provide closer social proximity, with less resources having to be invested by parties involved

All of those are more rational reasons as to why you would make a board game, than the possibility of people breaking rules

In honesty, I think there is something more sinister contrarianism here, you are taking out some some resentment you have towards me

And I know that to be true, because I can literally see you liked Boghogs recent post on this exact topic, that is in full agreement with me.

This has been the argument, from the start, that no difficulty options forces more careful tuning without being able to offload the balance on the players agency

As for the tone, im not sure if you just lack the self awareness to notice you have dictated it from the start

The player cannot access the dip switches, therefore to the player there are no difficulty options -> Knowing that the developer must make sure the every single point in the dip is finely tuned, which usually resulted in dips making very little impact on the balance (because duh)

Do you have any proof to back up the first claim?

Also yes, that is my point, board games dont work alone because you do not have the social aspect to enforce the rules. Video games can bake their rules into the code itself to the point where the player has no other choice but to engage

If Board games could literally enforce their rules into the fabric of reality, but chose to use booklets, they would be bad yes.

Also, real life games, do not rely on the booklet, they rely on the social agreement you have with other players to follow the rules.

Yes

I feel like a lot of make-your-own-difficulty stuff is in part driven by devs being insecure about their own difficulty balancing. Cuz if you give players all these opt-out features, if a difficulty mode's poorly balanced then it's not on the devs, it's on the players for not using OP stuff

You are so busy trying to be condescending that you do not notice you are making arguments against yourself

Wow so they had to balance and be careful with the entire dip switch range because there was no possible way for the player to modify them if they were having a bad experience with a set? 🤯

Almost like not having the option to tell the player to just change the dips forced more tuning wow

So it seems like I am right

The Enviroment which forced to devs to make one encompassing difficulty ended up being more finely tuned on average

than the enviroment which delivered multiple and gave the choice to players

Enviroment is the biggest influence on form

The dip switches that

1. Were only accessible to owners
2. Were usually left on default
3. Rarely had as big of a difference as the most tame difficulty select in a console game

Surely you cannot be claiming those dip switches are the equivalent to easy-normal-hard?

This is also not true. The only generation where you could claim this is the NES and even there its shakey. Mega Man 2 has a hard mode