sclpls

It's very good (but starting out can be potentially frustrating!)

Thanks for the response jonnycardboard, and welcome to the forums!

Nice! I just did a replay of Half Life 2 as well, and that is one of those games that is always fantastic to revisit every year or so. I'm sure I'll replay the episodes at some point as well although its hard for me not to be tempted to just jump into episode 2 since that has my favorite moments of Half Life.

I don't want to speak for Soren, but I see him in a position of limited choices. It's not like there are an abundance of strategy game developers to work for in the U.S. I recall on the Game Design Round Table podcast he specifically mentioned that he didn't want to go down the Kickstarter route that Jon Shafer did for reasons that I think are perfectly reasonable. He could go back to Firaxis probably, but that would mean he could only make the game he wanted to make if Firaxis had the resources to dedicate to it, and it got the thumbs up from 2K which sounds like a pretty dicey proposition. Meanwhile he has this deal with Stardock where he seems to have access to the capital needed to develop the game, and creative control of the project. The downside is that Brad Wardell is a miserable public figure. If I'm being honest if I was in Soren's position I would probably make the same choice. I don't even think it would be a difficult choice really.

In addition to manuals for PC games that were written as if from the game world, I distinctly recall (without unfortunately remembering any specific titles) certain sci-fi games would have installation screens that operated and were designed as if they were from the game universe. That technique is something of a lost art at this point in a post-Steam world.

Also isn't like L&O just kind of schlocky TV to begin with? I've never seen it, but I know its the sort of thing friends of mine in grad school would watch where after engaging in like super mentally stressful stuff all day they just wanted to watch something super dumb so they could switch off.

I see the words and yet they do not form ideas.

I think it's easy to overstate how detrimental an aggressive approach to an interview can be. It's not like this is the first time we've seen John Walker engage in a confrontational interview, and someone like John Stewart never appeared to be wanting for guests to interview. I have two main criticisms of Walker's approach, neither of which have to do with tone. 1. The use of the term "pathological". Using clinical phrases like that is something all laypeople should cut out of their vocabulary and leave to trained psychologists, etc. In addition to being needlessly insulting and confrontational from the get go, it risks adding to the stigma of mental illness. 2. There were points when Walker's criticisms got far too general which is why I think a lot of game developers in particular are reacting so negatively to this interview. They end up seeing themselves as included Walker's criticism of Molyneux, and that hardly seems fair. As far as the journalistic merits are concerned, I don't think there is some alternative interview with Molyneux where the reader comes away better informed. My impression of Molyneux is that he is a very calculating salesman that hasn't been in touch with the day to day aspect of game development for quite some time. I think the image of him as a wild-eyed idealistic game developer is part of what he is selling. But because of this I don't think there's any scenario where you actually get any useful information out of him. The real journalistic work happens when 22 Cans goes out of business and you secure interviews with people like that one Kickstarter backer who has been the harshest critic of Godus who they then brought on board to work on the game. You get people like that to start talking, and then you end up with some real journalistic work like when Rob Zacny published that piece on the demise of THQ. But all of that happens in the aftermath of a disaster unfortunately. I don't know where that leaves the Molyneux interview. Either you think the man deserves to get burned a bit or you don't. That's the part I'm ambivalent about because I'm not sure to what degree I believe shame as an emotion can be used as a stick for better behavior.

Oh I do actually want to talk about the scene with Ben Horne watching that old family film in a spoiler-y way.

I'd be interested in the take from some of the U.K. Thumbs. My vague impression is the U.K. has more of a tradition of really harsh interviews compared to the U.S. where we place a higher premium on decorum, and the act of shaming other people is frequently looked down upon. But maybe it reads the same, I'm really unsure on the matter.

Getting past stage 5 is my current goal.

I'll take the Idle Thumbs "I feel old" sentiment, and one up it. Prior to this episode I had never heard the term "selfie stick", and I have no idea what it is. So get off my lawn! Also I haven't made my way to the Molyneux discussion, but since Errol Morris got brought up its worth appreciating that Morris (and just to be clear I think he is incredible) gets away with amazing interview material he produces by exploiting the natural discomfort most people have when you put a camera in front of them. His technique of giving enough rope for people to hang themselves with wouldn't work against a trained politician or actor, but it is brutally effective when used to interview "ordinary people". I'm not at all confident that we should be regarding Morris' interview technique as ethically superior to Walker's. As for the RPS interview, I have a lot of mixed feelings about it that I'm still trying to unpack.

Denise is a great character although I think the show walks a really fine line between "is she the butt of jokes or is it the provincialism of Twin Peaks?" which I'll go ahead and call the Archie Bunker problem. There are a lot of new subplots introduced this episode. Some of them are fantastic, and some of them are the show at its absolute worst, but they are all only introduced in this episode so there isn't a whole lot to say about any of them. I think this episode is probably better than the prior one if only because there's less goofy lore stuff.

LostInTheMovies - yeah, I think that's probably the most charitable interpretation available that makes any sense. edit: For clarity's sake, I'm referring to LostInTheMovies' interpretation of Leland's knowledge of his actions.

Strategically letting a trademark lapse due to failure to show intent to use (because the game isn't out yet, and there hasn't been any advertisements to show off), and then following up with an amendment to refile is surely a sign that the game is still being worked on, but also still stuck in development hell.

My favorite moment in this episode was how disheveled Ben Horne was when Bobby met up with him. That was just a great interaction, and it made me excited about an upcoming subplot with Ben Horne that is probably my favorite of all Twin Peaks subplots. Otherwise another disappointing episode.

I hated this episode for reasons that have already been articulated in this thread, and on the podcast. However I do want to highlight an amazing moment, which is just when Donna is walking along the road in tears after her encounter with Leland. She does such a good job of capturing all those raw emotions women experience after receiving an unwanted and terrifying advance.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ This right here

Yeah, I'm sure it will as well! But I did want to post about my first unvarnished reaction since I figure that is hopefully useful feedback for Soren.

I'm sure the youtube tutorials are helpful, but I also don't think that should count as an adequate remedy to player confusion. I'm trying to assess the game as it exists. The panel on the 3MA episode for Planetary Annihilation criticized the game for directing players to youtube videos to teach people how to play, and I think that's absolutely fair. OTC is unlike any other RTS really, so I think extra hand holding is totally warranted. I'm fine with the game not showing me how to move the camera around (relieved, even), but it is really frustrating when I made some mistake in a build order (I should have grabbed an aluminum resource instead of another iron, for example), and only realizing minutes later that that was a fatal flaw. I can see the potential fun that exists in the game, but in my initial jump into the game that fun feels closed off and inaccessible, and that's a bummer.

That's fine, but I don't feel like the tutorial in its current state does a very good job of explaining anything. So far the tooltips have mostly been helpful, but trying to piece that all together to see the big picture is frustratingly difficult at the moment. As it currently stands, there is no way I feel comfortable just jumping into the multiplayer and playing strangers which is unfortunate for a game where it seems like multiplayer is the real heart of the game.

Man, maybe I am an idiot but I have been struggling just getting through the tutorial. I don't think the game really does much of a job of emphasizing the importance of claims, which are essentially a brutally hard cap on your supply. I've definitely screwed up the tutorial missions several times at this point due to managing claims poorly. Considering its importance I'm kind of shocked that it isn't displayed more prominently.

Man I felt knots tying up in my stomach reading that interview.

That whole discussion kind of reminded me of a post Graham Smith made on Rock, Paper, Shotgun where he said he didn't want to talk about Assassin's Creed anymore really because it has become the Michael Bolton of video games. It just isn't critically relevant anymore even if it is still a reliably commercially successful product. http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/08/14/assassins-creed-unity-2/

He has done a couple of guides for Storm Spirit. Here is a recent one: And yeah, great job Sean with this episode. Blitz is also one of my favorite people to watch stream. There's either hilarious shit happening with assholes, or he is dropping serious knowledge, or at a minimum he is playing good music. His stream is never a bad time.