verysoft @ verysoft @kbin.social

Posts

0

Comments

453

Joined

2 yr. ago

Mmm yeah, The Berlin Interpretation is way too specific, things like the graphics/grid etc. If some game fits more than half the factors, perhaps that should be considered 'like' enough? But I do understand why people can get anal about some games being categorised as Roguelike when they are infact not very similar at all.

I think it boils down to genre being misused in general, there's games with large open spaces called Open World, when they are not really, games that are called MMO when they are not. RPG games that are not actually RPG etc etc etc. Rogue fans just made a bigger deal out of it.

It's fine if a game is categorised more specifically, the problem is people getting upset that something is a Roguelite and not a Roguelike.
It doesn't matter, no genre is better than the other, your game isn't by default worse because it's a Roguelite and isn't by default better because it's a Roguelike, it's just a genre definition to help people find similar games.

I get that some might think they are too similar, but in that case we should just keep Roguelike and then define Roguelite games in a different way. At the moment a problem is games that have the 'run' gameplay, but nothing else like Rogue and then call themselves Roguelikes, but that's like having a bonfire checkpoint system in a visual novel and calling it Soulslike.

Hades would be considered Roguelite, doesnt mean its a bad game, its great.

I agree with you, I hate gambling. It has ruined many lives.

But that doesn't mean I cannot discuss the shit as it exists.

That shouldn't be too hard to understand. I won't engage with this further. Have a good one.

I'm not defending anyone, I'd rather you pay for your game and that is it, how it used to be before the 2010s rolled around. I despise micro/macrotransactions, battle passes, the cosmetic trend, FOMO content, I could rant about it all day and how fucked it is.

I was just picking my best of the worst. I see you don't understand how CS skins work, so I'll try to explain.

• Anyone can design a skin for a weapon and put this on the Steam Workshop.
• People then vote on their favourite skins, eventually Valve make a new case and look through skins to add them to the case,
• Everytime a key for that case is bought the creators get a cut.
• Everytime a creators skin is bought/sold between players, they get a cut.
• I can open the case with a key and hope I get a skin I want. Gambling.
• I can buy the exact skin I want directly off the Steam Market... and be done with it
• I can trade other players for an exact skin I want.
• I can sell that skin again on the Steam Market (Valve gets 15% cut, of which some goes to skin creator as prev. mentioned).
• I can trade that skin to friends/other players, for free or for something they own.

So I get a lot more freedom with my new cosmetic item vs another game:

• Skin made in-house.
• Buy skin from store.
• Maybe I can refund if they have the option, if they do it's usually limited.
  Or
• Buy loot box
• I now have skin I cannot trade, sell or do anything with but use.

So yeah, I think Valve have the best of the worst predatory cosmetic systems out there. That's not defending the practice, I'd MUCH rather the whole cosmetic trend fucked off along with the microtransactions and online systems in singleplayer games and the list could go on...

(Edit: Lmao at you editing and putting 'for 50 cent' in there)

Maybe try looking for some Keychron boards on ebay? They should be around that price used and a lot of them are wireless too.

What's new and advanced about this? Hasn't it all already existed in some form? It's just been Apple-ified, no? It's just a VR headset, an actual AR headset is something like HoloLens.

Beyond the tech, who is even the target audience for this? I only see it as a gimmick, one for just Apple geeks to buy. One of the reasons 3DTV's failed is because nobody wanted to wear the glasses, so why would anyone want to strap this to their face just to do something they already do or could do on their TV/computer/phone?

You can already pretty much do everything this can with an existing VR headset in one way or another, for a lot cheaper.
It's a bizzare product.

Yeah, the reason why they make so much is because the skins have actual value, they also get 15% on any sale made through their community market. I fucking hate lootboxes, but I also hate skins costing as much as a game. MTX (micro or macro) are always going to be shit, until regulations catch up to all the predatory bullshit we are going to be stuck with one system or another and I'd rather take CS's.
I mean I made a profit, if I sold up right now.

I have, it's dry. It's a 'as wide as an ocean, as deep as a puddle' kind of game.
The devs couldn't even finish their previous game, it's sketchy.

That game is an asset flip for sure. Just another AI scam game, of which we will see thousands and thousands of in the coming years. Developers history is just red flags all over.

Well, the whole point of a 'man hose' is for reproductive purposes, but maybe you haven't figured that out yet.

Even when they get a new user on Linux, they still then scrutinise their choice of distribution, if not that then their IDE. There's no winning and it's off-putting for people considering the jump.

Nintendo actually try something new with their consoles too, so that's at least good.
Everyone should be moving to PC though, you actually have freedom there. I think Steam machines would do pretty good if they came out now.

It was tongue in cheek. But it does make sense a European chain would bring that over to the US.

Yes. Yes. Yes. The whale comment pisses me off, it might have been true initially, but these days all the average consumers spend money on this trash.

The only reason anyone wants to sell consoles is to get you locked in that ecosystem and sell you games. They don't make a profit on the hardware, Xbox game pass is their headstart into purely game sales, well a subscription and cloud service that everyone is trying to jump on right now.

Would be missing out on too much revenue, they all come back to Steam every time they try their own stores (which MS did already).

I want to adjust my app volume and be done with it, I dont want to adjust my master volume everytime. Besides if I turn down my master volume, now my music is quieter, I have to adjust that, people I am talking to are quieter and I have to adjust that.

In my setup I have a volume knob for each of these on a macropad, but I just turn down the desktop audio knob when starting a new game up, then reset the volume back after I adjust the in-game setting. So I personally have worked around it, but 99.9% of people wont have this so they have to use the OS volume control, which makes this a bigger annoyance.

If apps just didnt start at 100% it wouldnt be an issue, too quiet for some or too loud for some is better than max volume for everyone, which is guaranteed to ear rape some people.