What Are You Playing Right Now, Part 2: Daggerfall

[Zevox]

Devil May Cry 2 isn't that bad. It's very bare bones and only an okay game at best, but it at least understood the themes better than DmCDMC did. Having gone back and replayed it it's nowhere near as good as the rest of the series, and the story is basically ignored for good reasons, but it's still competently put together and some things (Majin Form, [/i]Rebellion[/i]*) managed to make reappearances later on the series. It's just not worth playing over any other game in the series.

Although on the topic of DmC I enjoyed Vergil's Downfall, the combat is much better and I feel like the developers stumbled across a more interesting idea for a story. I wouldn't have cared if Ninja Theory had followed that up. But the core game is bad.

Anyway, I need to hey a PC that can ruin DMC5.

* I think it appears in the opening cutscene of the first game, but this is where it became Dante's sword.

Eh, DMC2's gameplay breaks pretty bad once you realize that the guns (Ebony & Ivory and the SMGs) are the best weapons in the game, and you can basically beat everything easy just by holding down their fire button and dodging when necessary. Turn on Devil Trigger when you've got the bar and watch health bars melt from how crazy rapid-fire and high-damage they become. And some of the bosses active encourage that, or force it in the case of one boss that's basically three floating faces in a void. Makes the game pretty dull - and that's on top of it already having very dull writing aside from Dante's only one-liner near the end. Yeah, Rebellion debuted there, but it didn't become Dante's classic sword because of DMC2, but rather because they carried it over into DMC3. Hell, in DMC2 Rebellion is completely interchangeable with the other two swords you find.

As for Majin Form, no, that never appears again? I guess you could maybe say it was the inspiration for some of what they do with Sin Devil Trigger, but they're clearly not the same thing. And it's not even like the flight part, which was probably its coolest feature, was new, since you got that off Alastor's Devil Trigger in DMC1. Okay, it could only hover and not ascend or descend, but still.

As for DmC, I never played Vergil's Downfall. I borrowed the game from a friend and played through it a couple of times, but never got the DLC. Didn't want to give Capcom money for it (hence borrowing it from a friend). And to be fair, it's not bad - it's just not what I want out of Devil May Cry. Still a much better game than DMC2 though.

[Cozzer]

Don't know much about the previous DMC entries, but I got to the first Dante mission and man, this character is so much better than the other two, it's just unfair. V has is peculiar style going on for him, which is a nice way to keep things varied, but sorry, Nero, you're just "Dante but less". Which is kind of acknowledged in the story by both characters, and the source of Nero's inferiority complex, so at least there's story and gameplay integration here. Well, even the stages where you have to use Nero are more than fun enough to make me want to play them, so no complaining here. And maybe he'll get some badass new mechanic later to keep up, at least partly, with Dante's variety. V could definitely use another summoned creature sooner or later, too.

Also I'm finally sort of starting to understand the plot. The big bad's identity is still a secret, but at least now I know I'm supposed to be wondering who the guy is. Same thing for V and whatever his deal is.

[Anonymouswizard]

Don't know much about the previous DMC entries, but I got to the first Dante mission and man, this character is so much better than the other two, it's just unfair. V has is peculiar style going on for him, which is a nice way to keep things varied, but sorry, Nero, you're just "Dante but less". Which is kind of acknowledged in the story by both characters, and the source of Nero's inferiority complex, so at least there's story and gameplay integration here. Well, even the stages where you have to use Nero are more than fun enough to make me want to play them, so no complaining here. And maybe he'll get some badass new mechanic later to keep up, at least partly, with Dante's variety. V could definitely use another summoned creature sooner or later, too.

Also I'm finally sort of starting to understand the plot. The big bad's identity is still a secret, but at least now I know I'm supposed to be wondering who the guy is. Same thing for V and whatever his deal is.

Nero suffers a lot from playing like DMC1 Dante, but faster and with a few tricks in exchange for not having gauntlet weapon. Very fun to use tricks, pulling off a Max-ACT before using High Time is amazing, but limited compared to Dante's additional weapons and four Styles. What Nero needed was more variety in this Devil Bringer moveset, not the ability to swap out a single move.

[Zevox]

Don't know much about the previous DMC entries, but I got to the first Dante mission and man, this character is so much better than the other two, it's just unfair. V has is peculiar style going on for him, which is a nice way to keep things varied, but sorry, Nero, you're just "Dante but less". Which is kind of acknowledged in the story by both characters, and the source of Nero's inferiority complex, so at least there's story and gameplay integration here. Well, even the stages where you have to use Nero are more than fun enough to make me want to play them, so no complaining here. And maybe he'll get some badass new mechanic later to keep up, at least partly, with Dante's variety. V could definitely use another summoned creature sooner or later, too.

Also I'm finally sort of starting to understand the plot. The big bad's identity is still a secret, but at least now I know I'm supposed to be wondering who the guy is. Same thing for V and whatever his deal is.

Boy, if you think Nero has less variety than Dante on his first mission, wait until you see Dante's other weapons. My personal favorite is actually the last one he acquires, personally.

Though I disagree that he's all just lesser Dante in DMC5. His sword-revving mechanic is a fun variation, and his special arms offer fun variety - it's just frustrating that the most cool thing they can each do destroys them, and you have no way to cycle them beyond destroying them, nor to choose what the next one you will equip is. Also, Nero's sword Red Queen does just have a greater variety of moves available to it than Dante's swords (though admittedly there's a caveat there that I won't bring in for spoiler reasons), so having only that for a weapon isn't that bad for him. And, well, he does get one new mechanic later, though late enough that you really only get to use it much if you play through the game a second time (or do Bloody Palace), and that's all I'll say there.

V's the one that disappoints me, personally. I always just found his play style awkward and kind of dull compared to Dante and Nero's, since he's just sitting back and letting his pets do everything, but isn't in full control of their movement. Fortunately he has only a couple of levels where you're forced to use him, so just not picking him for the levels where you get a choice minimizes how much you're stuck with him.

[AlanBruce]

Decided to play RE Remake remastered on the PS4 again after a very long time. Get back into the Spencer Mansion and those tank controls and fixed camera angles.

I have to admit, it has aged well. The lighting is on point, as is the amazing attention to detail in every single room. But of course, upon looking at any trophies I may have missed, I chanced upon one I had forgotten:

“CQC FTW” : Finish the game using only your knife (no lighter, Defensive Items, and stomping zombie heads).

Of note, the knife in this game is not even remotely as OP as in later games in the series- the game expects you to drop it in a box as soon as you find one, well aware of its uselessness...

But here we are, slicing and dicing, but mostly dodging and running.

[Razade]

Been replaying Okami, since it has a slick HD remake and its on the Switch. The option to turn the voices off is wonderful and the HD bit is nice. I loved it the first time I played it and I still really enjoy it. I remember the brush mechanics being a bit fiddley and that still holds true but there's something glorious in pausing the fight and just going ham on some low level mooks and exhausting your ink jars in one go is just as fun as it used to be.

I do remember hitting a wall later in the game, just about the time they send you to Hokkaido so we'll see if that holds true again.

[Anonymouswizard]

So just completed the first half of Dirge in Jade Empire, and yeah I'd forgotten just how linear the game gets. I get the feeling that Dirge was meant to be another Tien's Landing or Imperial City, a hub with a bunch of side quests and a multistage main quest. I mean, the way it is in the game isn't bad, but I'm suspecting that there was a Bioware Magic period at the end of development. Especially the Imperial Palace level just before it, it just feels like a short boy of padding between the opening and the boss fight without any of the dialogue and revelations that makes Dirge work.

[Haruspex_Pariah]

Got my hands on Civilization V (old laptop, so I can't run the latest games) and I understand what "one more turn" feels like now. As in, literally up to 3 in the morning! That's not good, but it speaks to how drawn into it I was.

When I run a new game for the first time I like to do so without referring to wikis and such so I can explore things for myself and see how good the in-game resources are. Not such a great idea for a game like this, and I gave up on the idea quickly.

I tried to be friends with everyone, even the little city-states who give me random quests, but then Genghis Khan, who is also my friend, started attacking them and I had no idea what to do about it. And then Genghis Khan invited me to go declare war on the Zulus, and I wasn't sure if he would stop being friends with me if I said no so I lost a bunch of troops trying to take their main city. Eventually sued for peace, while Genghis was still at war with them. The peace treaty then ran out, but I was no longer at war anyway and now I'm back to being friendly/neutral with everyone.

Genghis Khan then established the world council thing, in which I actually have more voting power for some reason. I tried to propose something that would offend the least amount of people (some cultural or science thing?); Genghis proposed a World Religion, the one that I made and then spread just for fun.

And then I realized I had to go to work in the morning.

[factotum]

I might almost have suggested that Civ4 would be a better option than Civ5 for an old machine--I would argue it's probably the best one in the series, even if it still has the rather awkward square grid rather than the more natural hex one Civ5 introduced.

[Haruspex_Pariah]

So it seems that I can gift units to city states without aggravating the civ that’s currently at war with them. Problem is that there seems to be a three turn cooldown for gifting units and Genghis Khan brings a lot of units when declaring war. I might even consider gifting units during times of peace, so at least there’s a margin for error. City states have minimal armies, but the cities themselves are hard to crack.

[warty goblin]

I might almost have suggested that Civ4 would be a better option than Civ5 for an old machine--I would argue it's probably the best one in the series, even if it still has the rather awkward square grid rather than the more natural hex one Civ5 introduced.

Personally I'll happily put up with square grids if it gets me away from the global happiness system and the vortex of AI incompetence that is 1 unit per tile.

[halfeye]

I'm getting annoyed by the Witcher, there seems to be a system in play that stops you moving if you're being attacked.

[Sermil]

I might almost have suggested that Civ4 would be a better option than Civ5 for an old machine--I would argue it's probably the best one in the series, even if it still has the rather awkward square grid rather than the more natural hex one Civ5 introduced.

I went back and played a game of Civ4 recently, actually, and it's not just the square tiles -- there were a lot of quality-of-life improvements between 4 and 5. The biggest is that you still have to respond to a lot of notifications at the beginning of the turn, in a way that's pretty overwhelming. It's particularly frustrating when you saw something happening during the AI's turn that you want to react to, but you have to hold it in your memory while deciding what to research next and what 6 cities are going to build next.

The AI got better on 5, but I agree it was never as good as on 4 -- but the UI was much better on 5.

[Haruspex_Pariah]

Range seems a bit weird in some cases. I’ve had cases where archers can shoot with one hex in between them and their target, and cases where they had to be in the next hex, like melee.

[DodgerH2O]

Range seems a bit weird in some cases. I’ve had cases where archers can shoot with one hex in between them and their target, and cases where they had to be in the next hex, like melee.

Terrain affects the range, I think it works that the unit needs sight to the target. Forest/jungle reduces sight range so also reduces archer range. Indirect fire units like artillery can use the sight of other units and cities but not archers IIRC.

[Haruspex_Pariah]

Terrain affects the range, I think it works that the unit needs sight to the target. Forest/jungle reduces sight range so also reduces archer range. Indirect fire units like artillery can use the sight of other units and cities but not archers IIRC.

Well that explains it. Early on there’s forest and jungle all over the place.

Also I ran into the most troll-positioned city state in my second game. Impassable mountains on two sides and water on three. Whichever unit I sent up the one passable hex got chewed up and ranged attacks from land were blocked from almost all sides. Had to tech up so I could bombard the damn thing from sea. The early melee ships had similar line of effect issues and would have gotten wrecked if I tried.

[Kaptin Keen]

.. the square tiles ..

Wait - it had square tiles?

That makes me wonder whether they'd heard of hexes, and decided they didn't want anything to do with that - or if they were simply completely unaware of the concept. I can't work out which is worse.

I imagine a staff meeting between 4 and 5, and some out-of-breath young coder bursts in, all excited, and exclaims: I've just realised something!! Guy - we can make the tiles hexagonal.

And everyone else is like: What? No! Pfft. How would that even .. wait, maybe that could be a thing.

[factotum]

Wait - it had square tiles?

Every version of the game prior to 5 had square tiles. You've got to bear in mind that the very first version of Civ came out in 1991 and I'm assuming it was coded with square tiles because it was just easier that way (although it's worth noting that the first Battle Isle game came out in 1991 as well, and that was hex-based).

[veti]

Wait - it had square tiles?.

Early Civs had squares, yes. It's not that anyone was "unaware" of hexes, but squares are just easier to work with. It's basically a board game, and everyone is accustomed to boards with squares.

Most importantly, it keeps the graphics simple. That was a major consideration when designing a game to run at 640 x 480 pixels, monochrome.

[Kaptin Keen]

Every version of the game prior to 5 had square tiles. You've got to bear in mind that the very first version of Civ came out in 1991 and I'm assuming it was coded with square tiles because it was just easier that way (although it's worth noting that the first Battle Isle game came out in 1991 as well, and that was hex-based).

That's sort of the point. It's stuck with square tiles all the way up until today, despite everyone else (that I know of) using hexes since time out of memory. King's Bounty had hexes, in 1990. And I seem to recall there was an even earlier game of the same sort, but I forget the name.

So while everyone else moved on, the Civ guys stuck with squares to 30 years, for no apparent reason. In the meantime, people have grown up, had children, and those children are almost out of school.

[GloatingSwine]

That's sort of the point. It's stuck with square tiles all the way up until today, despite everyone else (that I know of) using hexes since time out of memory. King's Bounty had hexes, in 1990. And I seem to recall there was an even earlier game of the same sort, but I forget the name.

Well, no. No it hasn't because they switched to hexes in Civ 5 nearly 10 years ago.

Also, hexes aren't objectively "better" or "more advanced" than squares, they just remove the sticky problem of what to do with diagonals.

[factotum]

Also, when you say King's Bounty had hex tiles, this is true--but only in the tactical battle screen, which was not terribly large. Civ's map is far, far bigger and so would have different constraints.

[Kaptin Keen]

Well, no. No it hasn't because they switched to hexes in Civ 5 nearly 10 years ago.

Also, hexes aren't objectively "better" or "more advanced" than squares, they just remove the sticky problem of what to do with diagonals.

More sides = more advanced. And diagonals are a real thing, not something villains made up to falsely accuse squares. And since they (eventually, after very many years) did switch, someone must have thought they were objectively better.

Also - you do realise it's a joke, right? I have precisely zero investment in the age-old hexes vs squares debacle.

[Cazero]

More sides = more advanced.

Then squares were more advanced, because the diagonals were treated as 4 extra sides, bringing it to 8 against the measly 6 of hexagonal grids.

And to actually contribute something, Atlas Reactor combined real 3D distance calculations with a square grid system. Because pixel-perfecting your shooting position every turn would be painfully difficult, take too much time, and create a gatekeeper based on the stupidest skill of all videogames. Also players were already busy enough making their bullets ricochet pixel-perfectly on walls.

[Kaptin Keen]

Then squares were more advanced, because the diagonals were treated as 4 extra sides, bringing it to 8 against the measly 6 of hexagonal grids.

And to actually contribute something, Atlas Reactor combined real 3D distance calculations with a square grid system. Because pixel-perfecting your shooting position every turn would be painfully difficult, take too much time, and create a gatekeeper based on the stupidest skill of all videogames. Also players were already busy enough making their bullets ricochet pixel-perfectly on walls.

Using a silly workaround to solve a problem that could have been solved by just using hexes as god intended ... well, ok, it does increase complexity and thus make it more advanced, but I refuse to award points for it :p

Atlas Reactor sounds silly. I've never seen it, I should .. go google. I will.

[Cespenar]

I think "gaming" must have known about hex maps as early as AD&D 1st ed, with overland maps (if not earlier). Though on computers, I'd expect the programming would be smoother with square grids, what with the ease of using matrices and tensors.

Though another thing to consider is that hexes aren't that much advanced over squares as well. You still have to zig-zag for horizontal movement.

All that said, I couldn't care less about either one's supremacy over the other.

[Cazero]

Atlas Reactor sounds silly. I've never seen it, I should .. go google. I will.

Best PvP game I ever played. And I loathe PvP.
Use a simultaneous turn system that I've never seen anywhere else. Filled with ham and assuming it. Poster boy Lockwood is the perfect mix of sass, skill and comedic failures.
The trailer technicaly doesn't show gameplay, but unlike most trailers that flat-out lie to you, you can actualy see what the game feels like in it.
Discontinued last summer

[deuterio12]

Finally catching up with Octopath Traveler, and although it feels kinda repetitive at times, still manages to pleasantly surprise me now and then.

Like there's this formula of:
1-Reach town with an objective for a character.
2-Find obstacle towards the character's objective.
3-Use special abilities of the character and murder stuff to remove obstacle.
4-Complete objective, get new objective for another town for that character.

But then there was this moment when one of the character reaches the next town, walk to the plot point and just completes the objective right away with no fuss, no tuss. No unexpected problems, no need to do anybody any favors, no fetch quests, no need to prove they're worthy, everything goes extra smoothly and we're ready to go to the next town.

Then the character spots a bunch of completely unrelated kids that lost something and goes out of their way to help them because of course there needs to be an excuse to use the special abilities and end up murdering some stuff .

Using a silly workaround to solve a problem that could have been solved by just using hexes as god intended ... well, ok, it does increase complexity and thus make it more advanced, but I refuse to award points for it :p

Ahem, advanced is not the same thing as complex. Actually a lot of advances in human history consist on finding new ways to do complex things in simpler ways.

Also true story, there's this game in kickstarter hell, Unsung Heroes, that promised to be final fantasy tactics spiritual successor with hexes triangles (basically hexes by any other name), but after years the devs went "yeah, hexes triangles are more complex, but that's not actually a good thing for a tactical game when it's really important that the player can gauge exact distances at a glance, so we're gonna do this with squares".

[Balmas]

I don't know whether it fully qualifies as "playing," per se, but I've been spending a few weeks rebuilding my New Vegas modded installation for the Gabriel Let's Play. An improperly archived folder meant that while I didn't lose any of the saves, I have to rebuild everything else. It's been a chance to do some spring-cleaning and mod updating, so it's a bit frustrating but ultimately beneficial.

[Kaptin Keen]

Ahem, advanced is not the same thing as complex. Actually a lot of advances in human history consist on finding new ways to do complex things in simpler ways.

Also true story, there's this game in kickstarter hell, Unsung Heroes, that promised to be final fantasy tactics spiritual successor with hexes triangles (basically hexes by any other name), but after years the devs went "yeah, hexes triangles are more complex, but that's not actually a good thing for a tactical game when it's really important that the player can gauge exact distances at a glance, so we're gonna do this with squares".

Well - while this is all true, many advanced things happen to be quite complex, and when advances make things simpler, they usually do so by hiding the complexity in clever ways. It's still there, if you check the stuffing.

And I don't think the fact that some game decided to go from hexes to squares disproves anything. Chess is a real game, and uses squares, and that doesn't mean that hexes aren't better.

Also, please note that I don't really pursue this discussion for anything other than entertainment value.