thestalkinghead

i really like ship customisation, i like it in galactic civilisation 2, but wish the design of the ship had a bigger impact than just simple math, like if they combined galactic civilisation with battleships forever (http://www.wyrdysm.com/games.php) that would be my perfect idea of ship customisation because phisics comes into play, so where you place your shields and weapons actually has an effect on the battle that isn't just simply weapons+4, sort of a bit like gratuatus space battles

i just had a thought that i would be proud to beat Obama at things (because he is cool) but i would be embarrassed to be beaten at anything by David Cameron and feel no sense of accomplishment by beating him (because he is a posh privileged baby noob) so when you guys are finished with Obama can we have him as prime minister, we don't care about birth certificates (we aren't paranoid that the british will take our country with political power because we are british) so he could eventually become prime minister

i don't use wasd, never have, so i always have to change the controls but the camera doesn't work properly either, seriously i thought psychonauts had some bad issues because it assumed you used a controller but psychonauts is perfect compared to brutal legend. message for all developers "DON'T ASSUME I USE A WASD AND DON'T ASSUME I USE A CONTROLLER FOR THE PC"

OMG brutal legend for PC is a perfect example of a BAD port, don't sell a game on the PC if it is totally broken, i can't set the controls properly eg. i set lock on to "RCTRL" but only left CTRL will work it's same with shift, it may have been a bug but the cursor was always on the screen, the radial menu is a fucking disaster you have to move the mouse around randomly until by chance it lands where you want, the solo mini game just kept failing even when i pressed the correct controls i eventually get it to work by luck, the camera movement doesn't move with the mouse it only moves when you get the mouse the the edge of the screen or some weird laggy response, the whole thing is broken, it may be better if i used an XBOX 360 controller but guess what i am playing on the pc so i use a mouse and keyboard. seriously if you want to know what a bad port is play Brutal Legend on the PC and if you get further than a weird worm thing trying to smash you while you endlessly drive a car around in circles with an impossibly bad camera without quitting this piece of shit you are an idiot because it sucks

if i find collectibles naturally by playing i will pick them up but other than that I'm not too bothered about getting them all unless it actually has some in game effect

i played candy box through most of this podcast, i think the interesting/addictive thing about this game is the enjoyment i get from figuring out the most efficient way of doing things, eg is it more efficient to eat the candy and do quests or spend the candy on weapons or spending it on lollipops and planting them so i can give them to the sorceress, being efficient is something i like to do in most games and that includes an FPS game where i decide what order and with what weapon killing the bad guys is the most efficient, being efficient is fun in a weird way also i am pretty sure that imagination is the only thing to go beyond the limits of our universe, but apparently "wrong" also on the Xcom iron man mode thing, i just don't like to play games in that way, saving and loading is part of the reason i love games, i like to play game in a way that is a bit like the film "Next" with nicolas cage, i like to try things out and if they fail i load the game until i do something that works then i continue on with the game, so if there was a video of my gameplay it would be the cut version without the mistakes, i sort of apply this weird logic to action films where i kind of believe that the spectacular thing people do in these films are actually just the best version and the times they failed have been cut out

who here has ever bought a game based on a metacritic score? i never have, a number means nothing to me and i generally disagree with it anyway

one or two games does not make an entire console worth it, if there were only one or two games on the market worth playing it may be worth it, but there are literally thousands of games that are just as good as any exclusive nintendo may have. to me buying a games system is an investment, meaning that the initial cost of that system should mean nothing compared to the amount of entertainment/use you will eventually get out of it, so buying just one or two games for that system makes the initial cost a large barrier, that is why the PC always wins, there are thousand of good free games for the PC let alone one you have to buy, and no only that i am using my PC right now to type this and i use it to browse the internet, to draw pictures, to make videos and basically everything else that isn't a physical activity, so that is what consoles have to compete with to get me interested in them, my life isn't any worse for not playing Xenoblade but spending money on something that isn't worth it does make my life worse (seriously i hate the idea of wasting money) so it isn't cynical to make a cost/benefit judgement it is just sensible

as mentioned hitman: blood money has a great parade, and at the time that amount AI in one place all fully interactable was really impressive, i tried killing every single person once and it seemed impossible

well sorry guys i was in an asshole mood, i wouldn't want to play a game the way you were playing it, it is way too stressful (i would be setting alarms and staying awake for way too long so i didn't miss anything) and i guess it was only a matter of time before ruthlessness crossed the line (even if that line isn't specifically breaking the rules) maybe a non-anonymous game would be less ruthless and more light hearted but i guess it will be awhile before you guys start another game like this

LOL i bet if you found out who the AFK guy was and had the same idea it would have been a legit tactic, but i guess it was just admin abuse?

i had a look at a few videos of Xenoblade and it does look awesome, like someone made a good final fantasy game again and i guess i could probably get a wii for cheap but why would i pay 300 dollars for a game? as i said i am budget orientated i just can afford every console and when one is clearly the worst it is obviously the one i would buy last, i am probably going a bit over the top with my criticism of nintendo to emphasize my point, and i basically only bought an XBOX 360 because of the dire situation PC gaming was in a the time, but now none of the next get appeal to me because they are either just PC's without any possibility of an upgrade (XBOX/PS) or some weird gimmicky toy that from a company that advertises themselves by thinking it was a good idea to proclaim the people that use their product aren't "gamers" and therefore insulting their core audience and adding fuel to my fire

sounds like someone just got butt hurt by a devastating move and they all decided that this kind of stress and deception isn't good for a workplace i would say that GTA IV got too serious for itself, i was disappointed that there weren't jetpacks and stuff like that i think san andreas and vice city matched the tone of the game better than GTA IV, you can't have a serious game if at any point you can get in a car chase with tanks, swat vans and helicopters then rocket launcher them all to death then walk into your house and sleep or repaint your car and they totally forget about it. kerbals design works because it doesn't feel as bad to strand or kill a kerbal in space, i feel l like they live for space travel so a space death would be kerbarable (made up word kerbal+honorable and is googlewhack)

"first day of may twenty thirtay" sounds like you are 17 years off, save that for you kids, I'm sure they won't appreciate it

i would say the perfect large publisher "beta" model would be team fortress 2 for me, i got it with the orange box so technically i bought it for a cheaper price and it was heavily developed near the early release then once it was polished and basically done it was turned into a free play game that is still updated, if every large publisher followed that model that would be perfect, and as for indie developers minecraft is the perfect model, it did get a final release (everyone knew that ) but is still updated

yeah that is weird, they could have basically re-released the XBOX 360 with a nintendo box and it would have been better and that thing is 8 years old (i realise that is technically wrong but not by much)

i couldn't judge the quality of a LoL/DOTA type game because i have only played LoL a bit and i just don't understand how people can get so worked up about the game i have seen my friend play with him ending many matches screaming at his screen saying his team was bad (which i always assume that means the person saying it was bad because it is a team game) anyway i guess it just isn't my type of game (maybe a single player version would be better) so i couldn't separate faults with the game from faults with the genre, so i think you need to be familiar with the genre or at least familiar with similar mechanics to be able to actually contribute anything useful other than "this game sucks" or "wow this is new and interesting"

don't apologise it's cool, i was in a make a statement and wait for a response mood, so my bad plus i play loads of casual games so it isn't actually the existence of "casual" games on the nintendo that made me lose interest in it, it is just that it is the only type of game they make and if they have any "hardcore games" (actually i totally want monster hunter and that may qualify as hardcore) they would be better on any other console or PC

yeah you're right i was being a bit inflammatory but i am just trying to use the native vocabulary, but seriously nintendo haven't really done anything new in years, people say that mario galaxy was brilliant but how long did it take for them to change mario into something with a bit of originality? (i can't be bothered to research that but it is basically rhetorical) to me nintendo is the "my first video game" company they may be polished and well made but they are all basic and child orientated. I am a very budget orientated gamer and nintendo haven't broken they "buy the console" threshold of being worth the money in years and really handheld games are such a compromise most of the time to me that they aren't worth buying, the DS or 3DS have been the most tempting of handheld consoles to me but have never broken the threshold. it is hard to define hard core games but basically nintendo has none (that i can think of), maybe i would say that the more complex and hard to learn it is the more it is a hard core game, perhaps a good approximation would be that snakes and ladders=casual chess=hard core so what i am saying is that nintendo games are like snakes and ladders (or shoots and ladders i think in america)

i bought don't starve early and i had a lot of problems with it, but the fact that it was beta made me hopeful these things would be fixed, plus i went onto the forums and expressed what i didn't like about it and it seems to me that a lot of my concerns were fixed, i would say it is because i have a lot of experience playing all kinds of games that gave be the ability to see where it was going rather than just take it as it is, but i would say that don't starve is the type of game that works with early access because it is procedurally generated, so no specific story. and guess what, some people like to be helpful to developers, not everybody wants fundamental flaws in final release of the game, some people would like to tell developers where they are going wrong so that the game gets better

i think the biggest difference between multiplayer and single player in an RTS is that in a multiplayer you are forced to try and be 100% efficient while min/maxing all opportunities, whereas a single player is more a test of creativity and just an opportunity to try new things like winning with only air units or just using the cheapest unit etc. i don't want to have to play a particular way else i will definitely lose, i don't want to have to learn specific build orders and counter build orders to even have a chance that the match will last more than 10 minutes, i just want to play and win the way i feel like winning at that particular time and that is why i don't play multiplayer, because it seems to me that while playing a multiplayer rts game having fun is at the end of the priority list while min/maxing and efficiency is the biggest priority, obviously playing single player requires a certain amount of efficiency and it is boring to totally overwhelm the AI without even trying but AI just gives you more room for variety

nintendo is for babies that haven't been playing the same nintendo games for the last 20 years, and finally the game baby market is not nintendo any more, it's the smart phone or tablet and that is why nintendo will either have to finally start to make some hard core games or just die from the oversaturation of baby games on the tablet/smartphone market

if games advertising gets too annoying i would pirate the game and get the version without adverts, the PC is the great equaliser when it comes to corporate madness, i wouldn't mind the way TV shows and music videos get funded by advertising eg. product/logo placement and quick 10 second adverts (loading screens) it would just be the in your face annoying advertisement i would hate. also it is weird that you only recently heard of kerbal, i guess it is just one of those things about indie games some good one are just gonna slip through the gaps. also i think if a game is only good if played with friends (not random people) it is not a good game, but i am not a social gamer so i don't really value other people playing my game unless they are just replacements for poor AI like in most good multiplayer games

i generally like AI in an RTS if it sort of acts like a tower defence game, as in they build a base just like you and occasionally send waves of attacks at you with increasing difficulty and if you don't keep up or aren't able to hinder their progression at all by damaging their base you loose, i am what you might call a turtle player of RTS games i like base building and defence building, so i guess that is why i like tower defence games because they are a more refined version of an RTS gameplay that i like to play and hexgrid OMG i have been trying to remember the name of Metal fatigue for years since i played a demo and forgot about it, you wouldn't believe the amount of times i have tried to search for "RTS, robot, multilevel" etc. on google to find out what that game was called, thank you for reminding me, i will have to get a version somewhere now

i guess it depends on how much if feels like a tutorial but if i'm like 5 missions into the game and it still feels like a tutorial i would just skip the campaign and play skirmishes so i can actually play the full game