The_A_Drain's forum posts

#1 Edited by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

Crowbar or Machete. That Katana you bought at the anime convention probably has "Replica" written on the side.

A crowbar is a fantastic idea. Heavy, not at a disadvantage in tight spaces, and can even help you out of tight spaces as well as being a fantastic tool to have outside of combat.

#2 Edited by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

People seem to like suggesting knives, and I even heard a reasonably good justification for using a cutlass once. But, I think knives rely too heavily on the idea of the thing you're attacking feeling pain. Zombies generally don't do that. And a cut isn't going to stop them.

You'd have to be pretty huge to be lopping arms/heads off with a machete, plus you'd have to have a fair bit of room to be swinging those things around to do such a thing, too (partially why the cutlass suggestion was convincing) but personally, I'd go for something that isn't even a weapon. I'd want a riot shield because it's something you can quite safely use to both shield yourself from grab attempts AND knock the enemy down with, it would give you a lot of resilience and versatility in very tight spaces. And yet not be entirely useless in wide open space either. If I were forced to go for a weapon, it would be something I could use to knock zombies down with, such as a baseball bat.

I just don't think the first thing I'd go to versus an enemy that doesn't feel pain would be a knife. You can sever tendons and etc I guess making them unable to walk/grab, or you could brute force it and lop them off if you go the machete route, but I wouldn't have the skill or strength to do either, whereas a riot shield would give me versatility and time to think about my escape options.

Or something that would have useful survival applications in addition to making a good weapon, such as a handaxe. An indispensable survival tool as well as making both a good cutting and blunt weapon.

#3 Edited by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

Currently Wasteland 2 because I gave up on Evil Within, not going to start bashing on it but I really didn't get on with it AT ALL. I wasn't going to commit myself to a lengthy RPG because right now I only have about 2-4 hours a week to game due to being so busy, but it's the only game I've been enjoying enough to want to finish. I did play Gunpoint over the weekend though actually, that was a really fun short little puzzler.

I'm also playing whatever handheldy stuff during my commute, I tried to pick a lengthy JRPG so I wouldn't have to play action games etc in the back of a car, so I picked Grandia but it's not going so well because I've already gotten 2/3rds through that game about 4 times before becoming distracted and abandoning it, so the opening segments are a huge slog. I ended up randomly picking my copy of Pokemon X back up, so I'm playing that right now I guess.

I kinda also want to get the rest of the endings in The Stanley Parable, as I got about half of them last week when I was off sick, I loved it but with such severe time limitations I might just watch them on YouTube.

Really hoping my holiday hours for christmas get approved because I want to sink my teeth into Dark Souls 2 finally.

#4 Posted by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

I think this is a pretty sweet thread, regardless the extent to which I agree/disagree with some of the highly varied opinions that have been shared. This is the manner in which I would really like more people to be able to discuss these kinds of topics, and I think it's incredibly important to be able to do so, rather than just attempting to sweep this stuff under the rug or pretend that it's a non-issue.

I'm undergoing something of a shift in opinions, the last year or so I've begun to really look more deeply into this kinda stuff as more and more of these issues surface, particularly loudly on the internet due to the megaphone effect sites like Twitter have that blast potentially less significant events into the feeds of hundreds of thousands of people whom all feel the need to share an opinion on it. And that's neither negative nor positive in my opinion, that's something that the internet does and something I feel should be taken into account when formulating a response to a particular topic.

A year or so ago, I'd have said "grow thicker skin" or "it's just the internet, don't take it seriously" and fully stood behind those statements, but nowadays I'm starting to feel less and less comfortable with that stance. I mean, I've had brief, small-scale experiences with internet harassment and whatnot, and I've shrugged them all off but I won't pretend for a moment that receiving 50 negative messages and a handful of more personal private threats doesn't affect you mentally. I can't imagine what 50,000 negative tweets suddenly pouring into your feed would do to a person. You can drive yourself insane trying to deal with something like that. So I have perhaps more sympathy for people undergoing such a thing than I'd have had a couple years ago, particularly as I believe that the internet should be a relatively safe place for everyone (I use the term relatively because I believe there should also not be a zero-tolerance policy on trolling, trolling to me is the internets version of British Sarcasm, not everybody gets it and it can be incredibly funny) to share experiences and opinions, without fear.

That sounds hyperbolic sure, I mean as a lot of people say, there are more 'real' problems out there, more immediate and tangible impacts on peoples lives, severe oppression of women and LGBT people over a huge area of the globe, for example. There are religious wars happening, people are attempting genocide, etc even in 2014. And that stuff is unlikely to go away anytime soon.

The more I read about that stuff the less I feel that people should consider things on the internet to be 'not real', when you look at the wider social and economic context the internet is a part of nowadays, it's pretty much impossible to get by in a first-world country without internet access, even essentials like paying your household bills are becoming more and more difficult to do without internet access.

But even beyond that, even when considered as a luxury, it's hard to deny that the internet is one of (if not the) most important advancements in the history of human communication. And if I were to say "oh if you can't take some trolling you should get off the internet", I'm essentially saying that people should shy away from one of the most important communication tools we have as a society and instead give it up to a small, but incredibly loud and entrenched group of people. That just feels wrong to me nowadays, maybe back when there wasn't too much to do on the internet besides talk about games and watch porn, but nowadays it's pretty much an essential component of modern life. And these problems aren't restricted to any one particular area of subculture, any place on the internet where you can interact with another human being, this stuff happens. Particular areas might be louder than others due to either being the battleground of the hour or having a bigger history of being part of the internet (tech in general, for example, not just games), and the more I learn about these issues through these kinds of amicable discussions the more I feel like this isn't just an internet problem, and it's not something everybody can escape from just by shutting off the internet. It's a wider social issue that is part of modern society and should be addressed as such, I used to cast it off as being 'just the internet' because that was easy and it meant I didn't have to think about it much. Which is why I feel people should speak up, and why I feel there's value in stating something that a lot of people feel is a given such as "I don't condone violent threats". Not to stray into the territory of accusing people who don't want to be involved of being 'tacit supporters', I feel that's too negative and aggressive a way of phrasing my feelings, but I do feel that the simple act of showing that support makes things that little bit more bearable for those affected and that little bit harder for those trying to silence dissenting opinion with threatening behavior and negativity.

So, while I do agree to an extent that there are bigger and more pressing problems in the world, I don't agree that the biggest problems should stop people from talking about the smaller problems, because I feel like the more of the smaller problems we solve and the better we become as a society then the more well-equipped we'll be to help others. So yeah, you can say that women being raped and murders daily in the congo is more pressing an issue than, say a minor difference in payscale, but they are both still problems and we can work towards solving the ones that are within reach.

Or not solving them, if you don't think they are problems, but discussing them is very important no matter what your opinion. Shying away from meaningful discussion just leads to those issues festering and is more likely to provoke a hostile response when something boils over and people don't want to shy away from talking about it anymore because they are angry.

It doesn't help that a lot of people attempt to have these discussions with a 140 character restriction, and that'st just completely impossible. It's so much easier to say something horrible in 140 characters, or to make a blanket statement than it is to have any kind of nuanced discussion. There's simply no room to clarify or elaborate on twitter, you are basically reduced to making statement X, getting shouted at, apologizing for generalization Y, and then repeating the whole cycle.

This is a long rambling post, but there's so much to talk about, and so many of the issues involved branch out into so many different overlapping areas (haven't even touched on how I feel the 'games are art!' and 'politics/gender issues should stay out of games!' movements are non-compatible). The whole concept of 'sides' kinda frustrates me, as if there can be only 2 sides to such a highly complex discussion.

#5 Posted by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

Totally depends on the content for me, for modern stuff I much prefer Patrick's content such as the Worth Reading and although I've only recently discovered it, Bombin in the AM, because I find modern games, frankly, fucking boring. We're in a real era of high-budget stagnation right now in my opinion, so as someone passionate about the industry and the medium right now moreso than actual videogames themseles, I prefer that kind of discussion content that looks at social issues, new/interesting ideas/mechanics I might have missed (such as Shadow of Mordor's Nemesis system, which I'd have missed completely if Patrick hadn't talked about it) and so on. I still find the GB crew entertaining, so I'll dip into quick looks and stuff from time to time, but mostly, game-focused content for modern games bores the shit outta me because I've been incredibly disillusioned with modern high-budget gaming for a long long time. Indie stuff I'll tend to look at more.

But retro content? I'm ALL over that shit. Because most of it is Jeff, and most of the retro stuff Jeff is into is stuff that I have not seen, a lot of the 80's arcade stuff for example (I'm only 26, so even though I've always been into games/movies/etc that came out while I was either very young or even before I was born, my knowledge base for stuff of that era is tiny) so I love watching that stuff because I almost always see a game I've never seen before.

But yeah, I do like to keep up to date with modern news, so I will look in on stuff, but mostly I'm all about the retro content, because a history lesson from Jeff will always beat loading up the entire 80's back catalogue in MAME, pressing 'random' and going "What the hell is this?" then closing it again.

#6 Posted by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

I'm not really sure what you're suggesting? If you're suggesting that multiple unrelated franchises suddenly become part of the same universe then heck no.

You're forgetting the fact that The Avengers existed as a team some 30+ years before these movies, they didn't just randomly choose a bunch of characters and go "Yeah these'll work".

Also, the movie franchises are touching dangerously close to their comic book 'model', which is specifically what put me off Marvel's comics in the first place. They are utterly incomprehensible unless you read almost all of them every month, at an absurd cost.

#7 Edited by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

For non-arcadey stuff all I can think of is Silent Hunter, the submarine simulation, and afaik the most recent one is 2010's Silent Hunter 5.

Other than that all I can think of is stuff like Battlestations: Midway and World War 2 Online, or stuff like you've mentioned, Empire Total War is I believe the first one that had significant naval combat content.

Pretty niche market I guess, even more niche than the realistic combat simulation stuff like Arma. Kinda reminds me of stuff like B17: Flying Fortress - The Mighty 8th. Must take a lot of effort to make a game like that but the market must be so so small. Shame for fans of that kinda thing.

Also, this is more than likely not even close to what you're looking for, but I never miss a chance to namedrop Overboard! for PS1. really fun puzzler.

#8 Posted by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

I'm 27 years old. I still don't understand how people find time to go into a bathroom to take a dump and take long enough to either play a game or read some of a book/newspaper. I'm in and out in about a minute tops.

Swap out 27 for 26 and a minute for 5 and ditto.

#9 Posted by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

@kaos_cracker: In fairness, if I actually separated games I want to play versus games I own because 'collection!' it's probably closer to 3 or 4 hundred games. Many of those games I'm probably never going to play in reality.

But yeah, I still have an insane backlog. I just kinda want to experience everything y'know? There's just not enough time haha.

I keep meaning to go back to Dark Souls 2 but, I played the first 45 minutes and something instantly felt off about it, right away it felt more hand-holdy, there were expositional cut-scenes, etc. I noped right back to Demon's Souls and stayed there for a while. But I do need to give it it's fair chance sometime soon.

#10 Posted by The_A_Drain (4073 posts) -

It's so vast I barely even know where to begin, I also have difficulty making decisions in the first place which doesn't help but hey ho.

I've got something like 1800 games in my backlog, but played Gunpoint through today, fantastic little game and well worth anyone's time. I've also been tackling an hour or so at a time of Wasteland 2 and Grandia. I'm planning on attempting to get through some of 2013/early 2014's best games because the past 18 months or so I've either been playing retro games or just not really playing games at all. So I've got all sorts to look at, like Dark Souls 2, Metro Last Light, Dead Rising 3, Antechamber, Walking Dead Season 2, Republique, I've gotta finish Stick of Truth, Divinity Original Sin, Year Walk, Stein's Gate, Device 6, Fez, Octodad: Dadliest Catch, Mario Kart 8, The Samaritan Paradox, The Blackwell Epiphany, Valiant Hearts, I've gotta finish Legend of Grimrock.

Ugh. Just so many games. Hard to believe with such a huge breadth of games available to us that it's literally impossible to play them all that there are people out there who think games don't have room to be diverse -_-