The_A_Drain's forum posts

#1 Posted by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

@tobbrobb: Someone asked me exactly that the other day, in regards to Resident Evil. I didn't have an answer at the time but I'd lean more towards calling them non-linear simply because the openness of their level design exists for that purpose, even if the phrase doesn't do a particularly good job of explaining it, but you're right, they do need to be distinguished from open-world games, because they are very different.

And I completely agree, I'll take the purposefully designed structure of worlds like Resident Evil or Demon's Souls over huge sprawling but mostly empty and soulless cityscapes anyway.

#2 Edited by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

"Thanos is coming"

Ohhhhhhhh yes.

Also, I'm hearing a lot of people whining about 'saturating the market' but yo, see the ones you want to see and ignore the rest, it's not hard. And tbh, every style of film has it's turn, these things work in cycles like that, remember when CGI animated films absolutely dominated everything and you couldn't go a single month without two similar ones coming out? Yeah, that era of film basically stopped me going to the cinema, the Marvel stuff is bringing me back. So I am ALL for this long-term plan they have, even if I'll probably skip Inhumans and potentially Doctor Strange if it doesn't turn out well. I do like Doctor Strange but, we'll see. Really not a fan of Bendyderp Herpadink

The more of these films that come out, the more pissed off I am they don't have the license to use: The Skrull, Mutants/X-Men/Spiderman (cos Fox and Sony's offerings are garbage, not even Patrick Stewart or Ian McKellen can save x-men), Dr Doom, Galactus, etc. Because I would be all over Galactus or Doom in this universe, Fox can keep the rest of the Fantastic 4 though.

#3 Edited by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

A lot of Sabaton who I didn't know existed about a month ago, now I'm going to see them in December.

#4 Edited by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

Likewise I've never considered open-world a genre, it's just a feature. And one of my pet peeves in recent years has been the idea that it's an automatic positive, which is bonkers to me as I usually see open-world as a clear signifier that a game will have more (though not necessarily more variety) to see, but less to actually do (particularly in RPGs, it encourages boilerplate quest templates), and have a much higher chance of being very buggy as open-world is an incredibly difficult thing to implement well technically.

#5 Posted by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

How I feel like games haven't meaningfully evolved since like 2004. If anything we've taken a step backwards in terms of game design thanks to this all encompassing philosophy that embraces the idea that the player should never fail. As opposed to embracing the idea that it's OK to fail, and doing something with that. You can literally count on one hand the number of games that have done that. And outside of graphical advancements, I don't think we've really taken any major strides forward in recent years, we're still just chasing the coat-tails of film and television.

#6 Edited by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

Super Aleste (Space Megaforce in the states)


Cool Spot (7/11 Spot or something in the states)


Earthworm Jim

Magical Quest starring Mickey Mouse

Also, the SNES version of Doom is absolutely fine for the time, but if you do just want to play Doom and you aren't bothered about the collector element, don't bother with anything but the PC version. Also, afaik it didn't come with a red cart in Europe, incase you're in Europe and you want the red cart (mine is grey). Doom on SNES was easily the best overall console version in my opinion, at least at the time, better versions would hit the Playstation and etc much later.

#7 Edited by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

Nice to see an honest writeup of someones personal formative experiences , and it's nice to see people talk about periods of their lives they aren't super proud of but were able to move on from. Something I feel more people should be doing more often, learning from their experiences and growing as human beings.

I won't pretend for a second I've not been in that same place, that I've not insulted people over the kinds of games they like or the products they choose to buy, and as a teenager I would often try to justify that hatred by feeling that I was the more educated consumer, or that my position was the more reasonable or logical one. But in the end, the end result of that attitude (which was often arguing for days on end on various forums about whether Call of Duty was the ultimate 'casual' game or whether or not Zelda is an RPG or whatever other dumb shit) was non-compatible with some of my other growing ideologies and opinions. So I had to grow up a bit, I had to accept that I didn't like that part of myself and although I do still occasionally slip into bad habits from time to time I like to think that is an attitude I have largely discarded. I no longer need to feel superior to somebody else based on my game purchasing habits, or the topics I choose to argue about (at 16, I genuinely believed that by eschewing the 'console wars' for pitting particular games or franchises against each other, the broadened scope of games available to me without attachment to a particular box made more more of a 'real' gamer than those who favored one machine over another, how fucking ridiculous is that? What a snobby attitude)

If there's any positive takeaway from all the negativity, I hope that more and more people will have formative experiences like this, and begin to realize that there are other human beings out there who care just as much about this hobby as ourselves and wish only to share those experiences in a meaningful way. And I'd forgotten in all that angsty brooding, that the reason I felt like such an outcast in the first place was because I just wanted to share my love for videogames with everybody, somehow that got twisted into being a selfish attitude about this being 'my' thing and nobody can take it away from me. And I'm deeply ashamed of having let that happen, because I really do just want as many people as possible to be able to enjoy games and to talk about them freely and openly in any manner they like.

The really upsetting thing about this for me is that I was much less concerned about any general cultural issues we (and not just in games, but in tech and the wider social context of the internet in general) have when I thought that it was all just teenagers blowing off steam, which while some of the behavior on display wouldn't be acceptable or condoned would be at least partially understandable, we can empathize with that.

But I had a pretty nasty shock about 2 years ago when I started backing Kickstarter projects and then venturing into their forums to rub shoulders with fans of older games such as Wasteland. Only to find that (not all, I am not tarring a wide group of people with the same brush, but addressing a vocal minority) there were more than their fare share of selfish, reactionary, highly volatile individuals. I mean, we had 45yr old men saying things like "I'm not going to buy this game if it's not top-down 2D and mostly text-based" or "If this game has social features I will cancel my pledge and walk away", along with all the associated language and vitriol you'd associate with that teenage image. And that saddened me greatly. I'm only 26 and I looked up to people who were around playing games in the golden era of PC RPGs, I wished I could be a part of it and I felt so strongly about developers being given creative freedom to recapture those days that I donated everything I had at the time, $1000. Only to hear some truly disheartening things from some of those people.

Now, again, not to tar them all with the same brush there were a lot of reasonable and well-meaning people on those boards too, may of whom were joyous at the idea of getting a new Wasteland game. But the point I'm making is that's probably the moment that made me realize there are a lot of entrenched individuals out there who don't seem to care how they behave on the internet, which I think is a hugely damaging social problem that plagues every corner of what is, in my opinion, the greatest advancement in the history of human communication. It's in book, movies, music, food, sports, fashion, anything you care to think about there are (varying degrees of) people being nasty as heck to each other and I think that's something we're slowly starting to tackle, but because it's been a comfortable place for that kind of behavior for so long, it's going to be a long and bloody process.

#8 Edited by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

I have no idea what this is about, but, I genuinely really like Blue Stinger. It's hilariously bad, but, fudge it I enjoyed every second of it when it came out and again just a couple years ago.

#9 Posted by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

I enjoyed the shit out of Vampire Rain and Bullet Witch.

#10 Posted by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

$5 is pretty sweet, converted to GBP I pay more than that for a sandwhich with nothing else.

Do you normally spend $5 on lunch? Because if you don't I'd assume you can make your lunches cheaper than that, so the cost of doing this isn't really 0. But, it's still negligible, or if you do regularly spend $5 on lunch then yeah, it isn't costing you anything. I usually skip lunch because I'm too lazy to prep my own lunches for cheap, and can't justify spending £20-25/week in lunches. I'd much rather spend it on booze, all the cheaper on an empty stomach... I may have a problem.