Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Submissions have to be related to games
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No excessive self-promotion
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
My hot take: VR is an amazing technology, but it's no good for games - at least not the best majority of games we originally developed for flat screens.
We need to create entirely new styles of entertainment to fully use this medium, instead of modding existing titles or bolting on VR modes.
I think that it's good for flight sims.
Hardcore flightsimmers were putting together multi-monitor setups to do their thing well before VR goggles were around. They already had a bazillion controls, and trying to also handle head movement with the hands was a pain.
I didn't really get into Elite: Dangerous as a game, but when I did play it, I did appreciate how the aim was to create a really spectacular, immersive experience surrounding someome sitting in a chair, how the aim was probably the VR experience.
Do yourself the favor and play a racing sim with vr and a wheel. Its crazy how immerser you get, that does not work as well on flat screens.
Here's a super hot take. The N64 is not a bad controller. It's especially good for first person shooters.
Its ok to be a newbie but if you aren't at least going to give a good faith effort to try and win, don't play team based PVP games. Go play a single player game.
After the first Halo came out, every damn game was a FPS. I don't mind FPS games, but it's not all I ever want to play.
It was around then I was basically forced to start playing more indie games, and now I play them almost exclusively. The AAA space is just 3 games in a trenchcoat (and I've already played those 3).
Games where there's no way to tell how to beat a level without encountering each of the surprise traps and then trying again are not "difficult". They are an entirely different category much closer to "tedious".
If Owlcat games was able to make 2 Pathfinder video games with Real-Time with pause gameplay, Larian Studios has no excuse for not doing for BG3 (and DOS2)
Most audio in video games is irrelevant at best and irritating at worst (especially for retro games). I listen to podcasts over 95% of the games I play and don't feel like I'm missing much. In fact, the multitasking aspect of it makes it feel like a more efficient use of time than just keeping the game audio on.
There are exceptions to this when I know there's important audio cues in gameplay. Admittedly, I don't care much at all for narratives in games either, so i know I'm probably in the minority with this take.
I'm ok with the 4 possible endings in ME3. Considering EA was running the show I am shocked we got that many choices.
Console support ruins games that otherwise could have been truly amazing games because they need to be watered down to support controller-based gameplay and weaker specs (see: Cyberpunk 2077).
Overall, static games with carefully crafted experiences are better than any roguelike.
Final Fantasy X has the best combat in the series, but gets hate because of the voice acting. If it didn’t have voice over it would be considered one of the best FF games
Sony exclusives are anti consumer, and Naughty Dog games are more just cinematics then game.
If your game has constant Chromatic Aberration, I respect you less as designer. I don't understand how you have a job making games look good, and then ruin it with CA. And if I have to rate those games, CA is an automatic full point out of 10 reduction.
If it's a temporary effect during dreams or drug sequences, sure, that's okay. I don't like it but I get it. But during normal gameplay, absolutely not. It makes my eyes water and makes the game look just plain worse.
And it's everywhere. I just want this trend to end, please.
Mine? Mystic Quest was fine. It was a fine game. Was it amazing? No. Easy as heck but the charm and personality of the game is just so great. The music slaps, the world is fun even if it is restricted to linear paths. People treat it like it's the most brazen insult to JRPGs. It's just not true. It's a perfectly average game that is a fun beat-it-in-a-day game.
We don't need a new switch or any stronger gaming hardware at all. There are games 10 or maybe even 20 years old at this point who nail realism. Once I'm in the flow of the game, I wouldn't rate e.g., Dark Souls 1 visuals below Eldenring despite their ~10 year gap. So I'd prefer not spending on a new console every so often.
More recently, I couldn't tell you the difference between a PS4 and a PS5 release without a side-by-side comparison. Maybe in loading times, but a PS4 with an SSD would have done the job. Once again, I won't spend on a PS5 for as long as possible.
Lastly, without this focus on graphics, development time and cost probably wouldn't be so ridicolulous as it is today.
Nintendo needs to release old-school versions of Mario, Zelda, and Metroid again, maybe hiring out an indie developer like Sega did for Sonic.
RE 4 on wii is the only reason I could play the game. Played it on playstation 2, couldn't even get pass the first village. But the wiimote control is a game changer. It makes it soo easy to aim.