I don't get the hype behind Kingdoms of Amalur

[Vergil]

Surprised those aren't things they changed in the remaster.
Are you playing the remaster, @Vergil ? AFAIK it's a straight all around improvement with fixes for various problems.

Yea, I'm playing a completely legit copy of the remaster and not

Hidden Content

This board requires you to be registered and logged-in to view hidden content.

[Vergil]

I'm ******** there is a UI scaling mode option I completely missed somehow.
This is instantly much better. Wish I could keep the minimap bigger though.

► Show Spoiler

[Vergil]

Uh oh HQisters... I don't feel so good...

► Show Spoiler

Oh I wonder if this is going to affect the game balance at all.....

► Show Spoiler

[NezahualDoomer]

It's a pretty fun game, it feels like an offline MMO if MMO's had decent combat and decent quest lines instead of just fetch quests, the stealth is not "you just become invisible" like in lazy MMO's but actually has mechanics.

Pretty good music, ambience, it's not a master piece but I liked the game a lot, super chill fun experience, I wish it was a bit harder though, it becomes super easy once you start crafting your own gear.

[Vergil]

Now I really REALLY don't feel so good....

► Show Spoiler

[Vergil]

I'm really struggling to figure out what kinda character I want to play. I want to do a might/sorcery battlemage type set up since it's so far for games to allow that sort of thing but chakrams are very unique and have a moveset that seems pretty much universally better than the greatsword so pure sorcery seems like it might be the way to go. Honestly the thing that's really sending me over is that sorcery gets an ice themed blink spell and I want this character to use ice themed attacks. But I also wanted to do kind of an elf paladin type of guy who uses heavy armor and a sword alongside magic. I dunno, getting decision paralysis here.

[rusty_shackleford]

I'm really struggling to figure out what kinda character I want to play. I want to do a might/sorcery battlemage type set up since it's so far for games to allow that sort of thing but chakrams are very unique and have a moveset that seems pretty much universally better than the greatsword so pure sorcery seems like it might be the way to go. Honestly the thing that's really sending me over is that sorcery gets an ice themed blink spell and I want this character to use ice themed attacks. But I also wanted to do kind of an elf paladin type of guy who uses heavy armor and a sword alongside magic. I dunno, getting decision paralysis here.

Trust your gut

[Vergil]

I'm really struggling to figure out what kinda character I want to play. I want to do a might/sorcery battlemage type set up since it's so far for games to allow that sort of thing but chakrams are very unique and have a moveset that seems pretty much universally better than the greatsword so pure sorcery seems like it might be the way to go. Honestly the thing that's really sending me over is that sorcery gets an ice themed blink spell and I want this character to use ice themed attacks. But I also wanted to do kind of an elf paladin type of guy who uses heavy armor and a sword alongside magic. I dunno, getting decision paralysis here.

Trust your gut

You know better than anyone that my gut does not allows result in the best decision making

[rusty_shackleford]

I'm really struggling to figure out what kinda character I want to play. I want to do a might/sorcery battlemage type set up since it's so far for games to allow that sort of thing but chakrams are very unique and have a moveset that seems pretty much universally better than the greatsword so pure sorcery seems like it might be the way to go. Honestly the thing that's really sending me over is that sorcery gets an ice themed blink spell and I want this character to use ice themed attacks. But I also wanted to do kind of an elf paladin type of guy who uses heavy armor and a sword alongside magic. I dunno, getting decision paralysis here.

Trust your gut

You know better than anyone that my gut does not allows result in the best decision making

Improve your intuition skill

[Vergil]

Trust your gut

You know better than anyone that my gut does not allows result in the best decision making

Improve your intuition skill

No I just rely on party members who have higher intuition to pass skill checks now.

[Valter]

I'm really struggling to figure out what kinda character I want to play. I want to do a might/sorcery battlemage type set up since it's so far for games to allow that sort of thing but chakrams are very unique and have a moveset that seems pretty much universally better than the greatsword so pure sorcery seems like it might be the way to go. Honestly the thing that's really sending me over is that sorcery gets an ice themed blink spell and I want this character to use ice themed attacks. But I also wanted to do kind of an elf paladin type of guy who uses heavy armor and a sword alongside magic. I dunno, getting decision paralysis here.

Chakrams are pretty cool

[Vergil]

Oh God now it's giving me a quest to find obscure scripture that will help her subvert the clergy to allow female clergy to be ordained

► Show Spoiler

EDIT: Yea there's no branching paths or options during this quest. You just steal the book (you can't even read) and I guess she's just completely right and that's that.

[Vergil]

Now furries....

► Show Spoiler

[Tweed]

Could this game possibly be any more based?

[psychic_dream]

This feels relevant to the thread’s topic:

They certainly seem to have put a lot of passionate effort into creating this game and its vibrant fantasy world.
Unfortunately, the remaster ended up being a huge letdown, seeming more like a cash grab that relied on nostalgia to appeal to fans of the original

[Vergil]

Unfortunately, the remaster ended up being a huge letdown, seeming more like a cash grab that relied on nostalgia to appeal to fans of the original

To be fair it's an HD rerelease of a notorious flop from a dead franchise's only entry from a dead studio's only game. It's shocking it happened at all.

[Maledict]

You'll get the occasional mention of your race, but it doesn't play a significant role, IIRC.

There goes my interest in the game. No racism, no pay.

In all fairness, the game gives me lobotomised feel to it. Like it could've been something, but didn't quite reach it.

I would be open to giving them a fiver, but apparently they only go as low as a tenner. Pity. https://steamdb.info/app/1041720/

[stormvermin]

In all fairness, the game gives me lobotomised feel to it. Like it could've been something, but didn't quite reach it.

I've played through it a couple times and I bounce back and forth on whether or not it's been worth it. Disregarding the actual gameplay for a second, over time it's become apparent to me at least that a bunch of work went into fleshing out the world though it's unfortunately mostly very stupid. The game does an astonishingly bad job of delivering any kind of exposition; things that should be of massive interest to the player are glossed over with the same energy as an NPC asking for a dozen bandit armbands and at other times, it's hard to distinguish what's important information or not as the npcs all look the same with the same VAs and the same delivery. When it's all been boiled down, the world can be interesting but actually being able to cut through the weeds to get there is next to impossible on a single playthrough when the player has no idea what's really going on. Nothing has very much of a sense of permanence, very little changes in game despite the setting being embroiled in a genocidal conflict. It's also a very long game that really outstays its welcome.

[Atlantico]

Is Amalur the game where Elves are the bad guys ? I have a vague memory of that.

Yes. Corrupted elves.

Sounds and looks like Bioware lifted most of it was inspired by it in Inquisition.

[Maledict]

It's also a very long game that really outstays its welcome.

I feel like this is what kills the development of most games. They really can't fathom the idea of understanding and limiting own scope to deliver a quality experience. Project Managers on games are the worst and should get exorcised as the demons they are.

[Tangerine]

It's also a very long game that really outstays its welcome.

I feel like this is what kills the development of most games. They really can't fathom the idea of understanding and limiting own scope to deliver a quality experience. Project Managers on games are the worst and should get exorcised as the demons they are.

I only disagree because dedicated writers are the worst. Writer should be an "and" title, e.g. level designer AND writer.

Edit: The ******** title of "narrative designer" is the same thing.

[Maledict]

It's also a very long game that really outstays its welcome.

I feel like this is what kills the development of most games. They really can't fathom the idea of understanding and limiting own scope to deliver a quality experience. Project Managers on games are the worst and should get exorcised as the demons they are.

I only disagree because dedicated writers are the worst. Writer should be an "and" title, e.g. level designer AND writer.

Edit: The ******** title of "narrative designer" is the same thing.

Huge agree.

They should also stop doing remakes by outsourced groups. If you can't put together a group of original devs to update the title : let it rot instead of fondling the corpse.

[Norfleet]

It's also a very long game that really outstays its welcome.

I feel like this is what kills the development of most games. They really can't fathom the idea of understanding and limiting own scope to deliver a quality experience. Project Managers on games are the worst and should get exorcised as the demons they are.

It's very understandable, though. I mean, no one REALLY wants the game to just END (until they do). Going into it, we want the game to go on indefinitely.

This leaves us with several possible options:

1. A game with no defined end (other than losing). MUDs/MMOs/Builders/Endless Score Attack. The game has no ending at all. An online game has defined end. Dwarf Fortress just goes on indefinitely until you quit or you lose. PacMan just goes until you die or the game crashes from integer overflow. Tetris does not end, the difficulty just continues to increase until the game becomes impossible and you lose.

2. A game with a token ending that is not particularly difficult to achieve, but either the player is not expected to pursue it as a goal, or it does not meaningfully end play. Factorio, Ribaorld, Bethsoft games, are like this. You CAN achieve the ending, and it is not especially difficult to do so you can end the game at any time when it wears out its welcome, but the game does not actually expect you to do it or does not actually stop you from playing after you do.

3. A game with a hard defined ending that the player progresses inexorably towards. When you finally reach the right castle and rescue the Princess, the game is OVER. Games like this risk overstaying their welcome when the player has exhausted the pool of interesting content but the game still is holding completion over their heads. Alternatively, they can end too soon, where the player wants more game but the game is over. The latter can function as a sequel/expansion bait, but also serves as a source of reviews complaining the game is too short.

From what I've seen, games that draw the most attention on PC tend to favor approaches 1 or 2. You see this in the big hits like MMOs, Sims, Elder Scrolls, Mein Kraft, Ribaorld, etc. Console games are often more of type 3, but this can easily be explained by the fact that dirty console peasants are mouthbreathing ******* with attention spans worse than the unfairly maligned goldfish.

[Maledict]

It's very understandable, though. I mean, no one REALLY wants the game to just END (until they do). Going into it, we want the game to go on indefinitely.

I do. I love a satisfying ending. I hate when games overstay their welcome. I want a closure of the story ending. Games with no end are partially more of a new invention due to the shift of games to games as a live service meant to milk the player. Many people being hired in game dev now never played games prior to that era. Hell, many of them never played games.

[Norfleet]

I do. I love a satisfying ending. I hate when games overstay their welcome. I want a closure of the story ending.

But you hate the latter more than you crave the former, right? Because there's a whole host of games that just don't really HAVE an ending. or a story.

Games with no end are partially more of a new invention due to the shift of games to games as a live service meant to milk the player.

Codswallop. The very first vidya games had no ending at all. Games that END are a newfangled invention.

[Maledict]

I do. I love a satisfying ending. I hate when games overstay their welcome. I want a closure of the story ending.

But you hate the latter more than you crave the former, right? Because there's a whole host of games that just don't really HAVE an ending. or a story.

I hate games with no ending. I don't hate bad endings. I just don't love them. I'm very much not into sandboxes.

[Norfleet]

I hate games with no ending. I don't hate bad endings. I just don't love them. I'm very much not into sandboxes.

That's mostly a you-thing, it seems. It's not a taste shared in the wider market, where the top game is Mein Kraft, that is simply a sandbox that goes on until boredom with the possible addition of a symbolic ending (I've heard of it but not played that version so cannot attest to how much of an end it actually is).

[Maledict]

I hate games with no ending. I don't hate bad endings. I just don't love them. I'm very much not into sandboxes.

That's mostly a you-thing, it seems. It's not a taste shared in the wider market, where the top game is Mein Kraft, that is simply a sandbox that goes on until boredom with the possible addition of a symbolic ending (I've heard of it but not played that version so cannot attest to how much of an end it actually is).

I don't believe this is a taste-based preference. This is a general poverty based preference. The most popular games are also usually free to play. People can't afford to pay for games. I know - I've been there almost my entire life up until very recently where I broke and budgeted proper games into my life to preserve my sanity.

[Norfleet]

I don't believe this is a taste-based preference. This is a general poverty based preference. The most popular games are also usually free to play.

Well, this is taken from a list of best-SELLING games. That means free-to-play, which does not have sales, is excluded from the list.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

I much prefer games with definitive endings. The credits roll. You can put down the controller and walk away and think about your experience, and then uninstall and move on with your life. I also much prefer that a game end and leave me wishing that there was more, rather than game drag on and on before finally giving me an ending as a token for the slog I had to endure. Suikoden 1 vs 2. Suikoden 1 is a tight, heavy story that leaves you wanting more. Suikoden 2 is a 40 hour long meandering game that is a little hard to recommend because of how much time it wastes. And then once you are in the 100+ hour range it becomes severe.