• Welcome to the Angry Joe Show Army!

    Join our community of gamers passionate about our community and our hobby! Whether it's playing, discussing, or watching games, regardless of platform, genre, or location, we have a place for you, always!

  • PS4 Forum

    The AJSA Playstation 4 Division: Game Nights and More!

    The AJSA is on Playstation 4! Join us for weekly Game Nights with a selection of the best games the PS4 has to offer!

  • XBO Forum

    The AJSA Xbox One Division: We Got You Covered!

    The AJSA Xbox One Division is ready to connect with you on XBox Live with a ton of events for the best Xbox games!

  • News Archive

    The Best News from the Best Sites, Every Week.

    The AJSA News Collection Team is hard at work condensing a week's worth of news into one giant-sze digest for you to chew on and discuss! Links to source articles are always provided!

  • More Info

    The AJSA Expeditionary Force: Deploying to Play the Best PC Games!

    The elite vanguard of the AJSA, the Expeditionary Force (EF) chooses a new PC game every week! Join us for weekly events and help decide if the game has a future in the AJSA.

  • The Team

    Streaming Now: The AJSA Stream Team

    Joe can't stream every game, but our talented AJSA Stream Team covers a wide variety of games and personalities! Check them out, and show them some AJSA Love!

  • The Tube

    The AJSA Community YouTube Channel

    Featuring news, gameplay clips, and more from the community! The Community is a chance to showcase the best moments in AJSA Gaming!

Ranisel

Veteran
  • Content count

    200
  • Joined

  • Last visited


Reputation Activity

  1. skorgezagreat liked a post in a topic by Ranisel in will call of duty become the flash games of today....   
    Hey! That's really offensive, there ARE good flash games, and the "good" Call of Duty games are like Big Foot, people say they've seen one, but there's no tangible evidence to back it up.
    But, considering ActiVision is CoD's Publisher, I'd say that it would all fit perfectly in the Google Play store with the other "games" there.
  2. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by Crazycrab in Advice for a new rig   
    Yes, your system will boot and run those apps faster but it's not quite a straight forward as simply transferring the files over.  You'll have to do a fresh install of Windows through the BIOS (why the guy was mashing one of the F-keys in the video), but this is pretty straight forward especially if it's a brand new machine with nothing installed on it yet.  Ask me about it again at the time if you are struggling.
  3. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by Crazycrab in Advice for a new rig   
    Good choice!  Good price to, It's about £100 more in the UK!
     
     
    Well I got one more little tip for you, if you are going to install and SSD which totally agree you should go for an M.2 SSD.
     

     
    Some more expensive NVMe models (like the one shown) run of PCIe which is faster than SATA.   If understandably you don't want to spend a allot then a non-MVMe model will be just as fast and cost maybe only a fraction more than the equivalent 2.5" SATA model.  Most importantly of all is that you can install one of these things in your new Laptop without having to remove the existing HDD, here's a little video should showing you how (it's pretty straight forward).
     
     
    In my experience of Windows 10 you need about 100Gb to cover your OS, core applications, drivers and so on.  So go for a minimum of 120GB.
     
    HAPPY DAYS! Enjoy!
  4. Crazycrab liked a post in a topic by Ranisel in Advice for a new rig   
    Hey, just wanted to give a quick update, I've just ordered my laptop today and it's this one:
    https://www.jarcomputers.com/Lenovo-Legion-Y520-80WK008VBM_prod_NBLENOVO80WK008VBM.html?ref=prod
    Lenovo Legion Y520 with Core I5 7300HQ, GTX 1050 TI 4 GB VRAM and 8 GB DDR4 RAM
    Originally I wanted to spend about 750 euro which was the price for the laptop with GTX 1050 2 GB VRAM but for just 50 euro more I got the TI 4 GB VRAM version.
    The only thing that kinda annoys me is the lack of SSD, I just didn't want to spend more than 800 euro, but for the future a Kingston SSD 240GB which might be more than I need, is roughly 60 euro, and the laptop supports SSD of up to 518 or so GBs so I'll try and upgrade as soon as possible.
    Can't wait for it to arrive, been so long since my eyes have truly experienced a real master race machine Thanks again for your advice.
  5. RogueKnightKisuke93 liked a post in a topic by Ranisel in Bosses that Intimidate you.   
    This motherfucker is just... even his name sounds intimidating as fuck, Dettlaff... it sounds lik Death Laugh .
    He's a vampire but he ain't sparkling and garlic won't do you any good... especially when he enters second phase and he's like:

    And you can't even kill him, Silver can only damage him but he will regenerate, you need another higher vampire to finish him off. Which means confrontation is not advised.
    But honestly, what could he do to you to frighten you so much? Sure he can eat you alive, rip you apart or stab you with his nails and that's that, a painful death, there are worse things than that... and that is being tortured "till the stars expire".

    Gaunter O'Dimm, initials spell out GOD, not much is known about him in the Witcher universe, just that he's been around for thousands of years, each culture mentioning him. Someone who grants your wishes, always with a twist, then comes to collect... He can manipulate time, and there are no known ways to harm or kill him. His only weakness is his ego, he thinks nobody can outsmart him on his wordplay, and so his boss fight is basically navigating through a nightmare as you struggle to solve his riddle, and be betrayed.
    There's actually a song, or rather a lullaby you can overhear from children while playing the game, it's creepy as fuck: 
    "His smile fair as spring as towards him he draws you. His tongue sharp and silvery as he implores you. Your wishes he grants as he swears to adore you, gold , silver , jewels - he lays riches before you. Dues need be repaid, and he will come for you. All to reclaim, no smile to console you. He'll snare you in bonds, eyes glowing a'fire. To gore and torment you till the stars expire."
    And as if purposefully designed to crank the creep dile to 11, children are singing it:
    Chilling... but this is one of few games with such villains I enjoy so much. I'm usually not a fan of the whole "Gods are real, so is heaven and hell" like in Warcraft it's hinted and in Elder Scrolls with the Oblivion Plains but.. I don't know, I suppose given the Conjunction of the Spheres lore, there might be a whole world of psycho, allpowerful 4th dimension fucks like him but... I still liked the expansion.
    And lastly of course I wouldn't be able to forgive myself were I to skip World of Warcraft, that game has no shortage of intimidating Bosses like Nefarian, Ragnaros , Arthas and Illidan and many others but for me, it has to be Kael'Thas:
    Honestly I think this brings up a very good question, what's more important for a game... to have interesting, memorable characters playable or to have them as Bosses? Kael'Thas and Illidan specifically in my opinion fell victims to horrendous writing, as you see they are not villains, not in Warcraft III at least, at worst you can call them anti-heroes, but in The Burning Crusade you might as well paint twirly mustaches over their lips because they've completely went mad, both of them.
    Each took 180* on their original Character, but nonetheless the Boss fights are still the fondest memories of many Azerothian adventurers and so I ask myself whether this was the right decision? Because, if they were Allies to the player, they would be easily forgotten and would be largely irrelevant, they might have a cutscene or two in which they are awesome, but in-game they would just stand around, wait for the players to kill the Boss and then they would be credited with the good deed at the end.
    I have no doubt that the developers of days past in The Burning Crusade would have came up with other epic characters to battle in order to save the day but... I am skeptical whether they would look cooler than these guys.
    Anyway, this was a really interesting question to ask, thanks.
  6. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by RogueKnightKisuke93 in Bosses that Intimidate you.   
    Bosses are fun, bosses are cool, bosses can provide miserable memories just like school....
    Semi Caddy joke aside, bosses are pretty much the best to provide good lore/story and a decent challenge to us the players. You have good bosses that will stick with us for years to come, bosses that make us laugh and cringe due to their poor design, and you have bosses that intimidate the shit out of us regardless of skill. After beating the Ogress on Nioh (personally the spookiest boss in the game), I thought it would be interesting to create a topic about bosses that would intimidate us and why.
    I'll start this off with my "Holy Trinity":
    Mysterious Stranger (Kingdom Hearts: Birth by Sleep): Out of all the secret bosses in Kingdom Hearts, this one intimidated me the most. After completing the story, you have two little nightmares to deal with: Lingering Spirit Vanitas (aka the mother fucker who loves to steal your healing stuff), and the Mysterious Stranger who is a young Xemnas. If I had to describe this fight in a nutshell, I would say think of Sephiroth from KH1 on pure cocaine.  This guy.....This guy can 2 shot you no matter the level and defense. He leaves a very small window of opportunities to strike back, and to make matters worse, he clones himself into five/six nightmare fuels that terrify me every single time. To this day, I can't even beat him with or without the cheese.
    False King Allant (Demon's Souls): Let's go back to the day long before the annoying git guders existed. Throughout the game, we had very little information about this guy. We didn't know what he looks like nor the capabilities, but all we knew he had relations to that one knight whom I already forgot his name and was the one who made the entire world a mess. So after killing his son, we head up the elevator only to be greeted by one of the leading conductors to the pain train. When those organs to the main theme kicks in, he doesn't play around(Nor does he play forgivingly). He's agile, fast, and has a grapple attack that delevels your soul level by one (and it stacks). Not to mention he has shockwaves that can go through your shields, and let me tell you they hurt. Sure you can make him less intimidating just by cheesing it (use two thief rings, go through the door, hang back and empty all the arrows you own, and finish him off), but it's horrifying to fight him fair and square.
    I saved the best one for last...
    Feral Chaos (Final Fantasy Dissidia 012): This guy.....this thing haunts my subconscious and dreams more than all the bosses I fought combined (The Dancer from Dark Souls 3 was close, but not close enough). I will never forget that day when I stared up this game and I talked to that lying son of a bitch moogle: Cid. When he asked if I was good at this game, I felt pretty confident and said yes.....only for this game to throw me into a pit with a lv 1 Lightning against a lv 255 Feral Chaos. I shat myself when I saw that on the loading screen, and it took me 30 minutes...30 minutes to push X and I got desecrated by this monster. "Ok" so I thought "Maybe if I come back with stronger characters, I can take him on".....famous....last.....words. Sure God in Fire was a cool track (hell, it's one of my favorite boss tracks throughout Final Fantasy), but Cantata Mortis made the fight very intimidating along with his bullshit summon. It is possible to fight it without the cheese, if you have the mad skills of a professional (or a god) in order to achieve that. I lost so many times to the point where I gave up, came back with Kuja, went up to the very tippy top of the arena, and spammed Ultima like a madman. Not to mention the EX mode. It's fun as hell when you do it, but it's terrifying when the npc does it and comes after you like that truck from Sonic Adventure 2 (oh and those monstrous roars.....T_T).
     
    Are there any video game bosses that Intimidate you?
    Which boss or bosses intimidate you the most and why?
  7. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by Ghaleon in What upcoming 2017 games do you think will suck, or at least not be that good?   
    I don't mind collecting all the party members in 2, that's fine in of itself. But I wish that you kinda had some adventures together for more than just like 1 mission after. Getting back to where you left off shouldn't even take half the game, much less 90% of it.
  8. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by RogueKnightKisuke93 in What shows should I watch next?   
    Definitely. As for the 2016-2017 seasons, it's going to take some slight adjustments to get used to the animation (It's not the worst , but it's not the best....it's somewhere in the middle). Though for a current low-budget Berserk, I'll give them credit for making some of the most badass scenes from the manga come to life within those two seasons. What bugs me is that the majority of these "fans" waste most of their energy/time crying their eyes out rather than doing their homework and understanding why Berserk is made out this way. I get it, "Berserk deserves justice", but Madhouse is making a profit out of other animes (Especially some overhyped ones I won't name. Not to mention they are notoriously infamous for not providing second seasons to some good animes.), and I highly doubt 4C is coming back due to some of the backlash they received from the Golden Age Arc movies. Rant aside, Berserk is a definite must if you like dark Medieval tones.
  9. Cyborg-Rox liked a post in a topic by Ranisel in What shows should I watch next?   
    I think that's pretty similar to Samurai Jack and it has some really badass fight scenes, I haven't watched all of it only the lightsaber fights, but I have watched the 3D series and I loved it. I actually saw the 3D series as a kid and I feel lucky because I didn't grow up with a stupid, annoying, whiny cunt which Anakin is in the Prequel Star Wars movies, his portrayal is much better in the series and that's why he's my favorite Star Wars character. So I absolutely recommend it, also Ahsoka is an awesome character as well, and is tied to Anakin's... well downfall.
    I can't comment on Rebels which is the continuation.
    Absolutely, it's an amazing show.
    We never speak of that, that's not real, it's just a nightmare, that's what my therapist said!
    Watch Daredevil, season 1 is the best superhero series around, it has no competition, in fact the only possible flaw I can think of is Karen, if she had just disappeared after the beginning this would easily score 10 out of 10 with a 
    I also watched Iron Fist but it's nowhere near as good, the first few episodes are the very definition of boredum, Danny Rand is completely re-imagined and the effects are terrible. The fight scenes are nothing like Daredevil, oh fuck it, you know what just watch this little clip:
    If you like fightscenes like that, namely no jump cuts and 33 thousand irrelevant camera angle changes, absolutely gorgeous sounds and stunning choreography go for it, it's very good. Iron Fist? Well... not so much, the last few episodes really shook up the acting and actually became sort of interesting, but Daredevil is absolutely the best one around.
    Since you also like animated series I can wholeheartedly recommend Young Justice:  
    It has only two seasons, CN cancelled it because it wasn't selling enough toys or something.... but both seasons are absolutely fantastic in my opinion, it's something like Teen Titans.
    As for animes, I think Berserk is widely believed to be the very best of anime. If you're a fan of Dark Souls it might be fun to watch it, because Dark Souls borrows a lot from Berserk. I personally cannot stand watching anime, I dislike the artstyle but I've watched a bunch of videos explaining why it's so good and exactly what it inspired within Dark Souls. 
  10. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by Crazycrab in Advice for a new rig   
    To answer your question the reason why there is no M or MX on the model number is because it's the exact same GPU that you get in desktops.  Most GPU's have to be run at lower speed in laptops to minimise the power consumption and heat, hence the M.  The 1050 and 1050 Ti use such a small amount of power that it isn't necessary, in fact the desktop versions don't even have separate power connectors, they get all their juice from the PCI slots!
     
    The 2GB of VRAM might be an issue is some hungrier open world games like GTAV at 1080p.  I understand that there is a version of this laptop with a 1050 Ti which has 4Gb of VRAM which would solve that problem and that's the one I would go for as long as it doesn't push the price up to much.
     
    As it stands even the standard 1050 is pretty impressive, defiantly allot better than he 940M!  Even on a GPU intensive game like Rise of the Tomb Raider it manages to average more than 30.
     

     
  11. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by Shagger in Advice for a new rig   
    If it is at all possible, I would side with your freind and highly recommend a desktop over a laptop for gaming. That laptop is ok for gaming, but a long way from future proof. A typical tablet would furfill most of the protible benfits of a laptop and a desktop in your dorm room could do the rest. Your university requirements take priority, so that has to be your first concen when you choose. Moving a custom desktop or building one once you get there would be annoying, but only once. Not being happy with what you get as a computer will annoy you all the time.
  12. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by Crazycrab in Advice for a new rig   
    I looked up some benchmarks for the 940M in that laptop and I don't think it's got the kind of performance you are looking for:
     

     
    This isn't even at 1080p and most AAA games are hovering around mid 20's to mid 30's, and most of them are a couple of years old at this point.
     
    In your circumstances I recommend one of the following:
     
    1:  A proper gaming laptop, but set your sights a bit higher.  Something with a 950m minimal, 970m/1060m preferable.  Example
     
    2.  Get a cheaper laptop for your work and a console for your dorm.  Even the PS4 Pro or XBox Scorpio will be ALLOT cheaper than the equivalent PC or laptop.
     
    3.  Get a cheap ass notebook an assemble a Mini ITX build.  These cases are tiny so there won't be any issue with moving it around.  I just tried one on PCPartPicker and got a KabyLake I7, and GTX 1060 6GB model and a WiFi motherboard without making any compromises on cheap crap parts for under £1000.
     

     

    Just to give you and idea of the size
     
    Obviously you pricing and availability will be different where you are but this is just a general idea.
  13. Madfinnishgamer38 liked a post in a topic by Ranisel in Difficulty in Video Games   
    This is partly inspired from a comment exchange on Joe's Outlast II Review: ( Time Stamp: 09:43 )
    I think Joe's criticism is completely reasonable but a lot of people actually said stuff like "Well you're playing on the highest difficulty Joe, sheesh modern gamers are so spoiled, such filthy casuals, why play on the hardest difficulty and bitch that it's hard?"
    Now... obviously I took some liberties on what was actually said  and I'm paraphrasing even though the original conversation was lost somewhere between mountains of "Do more Angry Reviews" and "Del is fat" which are all *obviously* valid criticisms and have never been said before and thus need to be repeated, you can still see examples of what I mean:

    It's a relatively recent comment ( 1 week ago ) and has a decent amount of likes, which I will personally see as people who agree with his statement.
    Now with the proper context provided let me try and tackle this criticism, first of all can we all agree that unless the challenge provided by the difficulty is fair it suggests lazy, or bad design?
    Obviously you can make every game hard if you increase every NPC's health and damage tenfold but is that the best design we can muster for the difficulty, is it even good? Specifically in Outlast II that wouldn't make the game harder because, you can't fight back at all, it's run or hide, so how can we make that harder?
    Well I pointed out Thief:The Dark Project (Not the ReBoot )

    , which as the title suggests is a Stealth game, the difference between Normal and Expert isn't "Guards can now see you through walls and hear you even if you didn't make any sounds"
    The differences are much more appropriate, such as:
    Total amount of Gold you need to acquire in the Mission in order to proceed
    Total amount of Objectives you need to complete in order to proceed, for example on Normal you might find a note suggesting there's a valuable item somewhere around that's not essential or tied to the mission's purpose, and you can choose whether to pursue it as it is a side objective, but on Expert you NEED to do it, as it is counted as a main objective
    Total amount of Guards in the mission
    You cannot kill ANYONE, which is largely irrelevant as you literally cannot fight your way through the game, you know... because it's an actual Stealth game... but is an inconvenience admittedly 
    Placement of gems, pouches of gold and amount of gold are altered, patrols may be changed as to prevent easy and convenient routes... Let me provide an in-game example, notice how on anything less than Expert Basso the Boxman is not even mentioned!

    Now notice how none of those changes alter the AI but still make the game's missions harder and longer without creating any sort of "unfairness"? Isn't that objectively a better way to create difficulty? Since it doesn't make the enemies blind and deaf while also doesn't make them like Superman because they have X-Ray vision and super hearing? Doesn't it also cost less of the budget and is generally faster than fiddling with the AI? I suppose there's still a place for such a challenge in the form of handicap, but I think Thief's difficulty is handles much better than Outlast II.
    But one could argue that this method is not flawless, as the AI is still competent on all difficulties so even one guard may prove a challenge too great for someone new to the game or genre, there's always one solution though:

    But in all seriousness I'd counter by asking what being "good" at Stealth games really comes down to? Patience and map awareness, you observe the guard, you take a mental note of his path, wait for him to pass and sneak past successfully, being impatient is actually the source of the so called "bad at stealth" bullshit and people who are impatient are inherently not the targeted demographic of Stealth games, so the problem is non-existent.
    Now with the hiding covered *ba dum tss* we can move on to running, how can that be made harder? Well, that's fairly easy, there's a whole genre based around making running hard and convoluted, platforming:

     Outlast II's take is certainly not as good as it could be, I'm not sure if the confusion on where to run to is intended or not but it's unreasonable to deny it's effect on the difficulty "Oh no, I was seen and now I have to run for my life, oh shit this level is deliberately made like a maze so I don't really know where to run towards" that COULD be fun for a specific level, once or twice but not ALL GAME LONG for sure.
    Why would you frustrate the players like that? Especially when you keep in mind that an angry person is less likely to be scared by the game/movie/ETC, and so your Horror game fails, hard. Why would you create the illusion of open ended levels? I often criticize shitty FPS games like Call of Duty for the linear level design, a literal straight line with one turn along the way with some "enemy intel" and a dead end, but that would have been better for Outlast II, because that path you'll need to run through can have obstacles placed on it, and thus make timing important " Oh I pressed jump too soon/too late and I couldn't get past this branch, now I'm caught and dead... " 
    Anyway I actually wanted to cover more genres of games such as FPS so we could address "Bullet sponges" and such, but I feel this is already too long and most likely boring, but what do you think? Did Thief nail challenge despite being 19 years old? Or am I just overpraising workarounds due to the technical limitations developers had back then, and most importantly, why? Thanks for reading.
  14. argetlam350 liked a post in a topic by Ranisel in Difficulty in Video Games   
    But in Dark Souls 1 I have access to at least 3 zones in which I get destroyed, the ghost area in which you need the item to hit them, the skeletons at the very beginning and some gargoyle-dragon-ish things? And I kinda know what I'm doing, I've invested lots of hours in Dark Souls 2 and 3 (and some Bloodborne), but MY problem was that even though I dodge and block the monsters it still takes an absurdly long amount of time to kill just one, especially the gargoyle-like things. So is it really good? I would say not really in my opinion.
    However if they become available at the appropriate time, meaning when you don't need to spend 10 minutes to kill one, that would be good, yes, I don't remember having any of those issues in 2 and 3, maybe the combat was a bit slower back in 1 but I felt like almost every area I was in was the "wrong" one for my level.
    But I mean, what do I know? I enjoyed Dark Souls II so I'm a heathen >.> 
    You might like later installments in the series though, like I said I don't remember having so many "wrong" options in DS2/3 and Bloodborne and I genuinely feel like players who ignored the whole series missed a lot, I also thought the game is garbage when I first played DS2 and I thought this:
    was a decent video discussing why some players might feel like that.
  15. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by Kaz32 in The Witcher is getting a Netflix series. The novel that is.   
    https://www.kotaku.com.au/2017/05/the-witcher-is-getting-a-netflix-series/
     
    And interestingly, it will be made by the people who made the CGI trailer cutscenes for Witcher 3. These ones.
     
    No mention on whether this will be CGI heavy or live action though. I wish it's full CGI and be as epic as the trailer cutscenes, but we shall see what happens! Either way, I want the girls that plays Yennefer, Triss and Ciri to be perfect castings. And of course the entire Lodge of Sorceresses. 
     
    Since this will be based on the novel and not the games, that means the story will take place before the games. So we can treat the series as the prequel to the games. I'm interested to see where this is heading.
     
    One question remain about this series though: will it have SEX???
     
  16. Madfinnishgamer38 liked a post in a topic by Ranisel in What are your thoughts on Quake Champions?   
    What is "Quake's day"? Quake is fun and I for one would love to see a new Quake game, DOOM and Wolfenstein were revivals done well and thus I'm inclined to believe they can handle Quake as well, ID Software know what they are doing. (PS: Sorry Wolfenstein:The New Order is actually NOT developed by ID Software, it's actually from MachineGames) 
    Besides there's plenty of "New games" around, if you don't like the idea of a new Quake for some inexplicable reason don't play it.
    But again, with Halo,Overwatch and DOOM's Call of Duty-like Multiplayer I think Quake is exactly what people need right now, something to remind them what an ACTUAL ARENA SHOOTER is.
     
  17. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by Shagger in Difficulty in Video Games   
    And that brings me onto another reason I hate Deamon Souls. The grinding is infuriating!
     
    As im sure you know, one collects souls from enemies as a kind of currency to level up. If you die, you can go back to your body and reclaim half of them, die without claiming then, and you loose them all. Now that's fine in principle,  but in Demon Souls it doesn't work for a combination of reasons. Health power ups in that game are to rare and precious to actully use (making them boderline poinless), so the only other way to recover health is to leave the level and return to the hub. This is something you have to do anyway because you need to go here to spend your souls. However, this means starting the level all over again and this game is ridiculously tight fisted when it comes to leveling up, especially when you are forced to battle the lowest level enimes over and over. You move forward as far as you dare hoping to make it to one of those points to unlock the next area in one good clean run (useually failing to do so), chicken out, go back to the hub, spend souls for a few pixels towards the next level, go back in, rince and repeat. This turns an already frustrating game in an unbearably tedious and boring one as well. Fuck, I hate that game.
  18. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by Crazycrab in Difficulty in Video Games   
    As Ranisel pointed out I was talking specifically about Demon's Souls which GENUINELY is just linear corridors full of cheap death traps.  There are many that don't feel the same way and that's fine.  The latter games and most of the others that have since come out in the same style have put more of the focus on combat, blocking, evasion correct use of items and so on and thank fuck for that!  YOUR the one that needs to learn more respect pall, especially if you think me or anybody complaining about a game being cheap, grinding or repetitive like this is just the product of me being bitter because I suck at it.  I have an opinion that I expressed, it doesn't mean I'm appointing myself "supreme judge of what's challenging and fun", in fact I didn't say anything insulting or degenerating towards the fan base at all.
  19. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by Ghaleon in Difficulty in Video Games   
    I apologize, I actually enjoyed Demon's souls before dark souls so I kinda intermingle the two, so when I read Demon's souls, I just instinctually thought dark souls which is the 'popular' way of referring to the whole series, and though you were griping about the whole series. Personally I don't think demon's souls was as bad as you make it out to be (dark souls and Diablo 3 were the 2 and only games I day one midnight release got because I loved diablo, and dark...fuck... demon's souls sold me so much).
     
    I can respect if someone doesn't like the game, or the series, but to flat out say it's not a challenging game that is fun when it so clearly is a successful series. Yeah, I wont agree to it ever. Frankly I'm not convinced I have the wrong opinion even if yours is specific to demon's souls either, but I can't be certain either, so eh. I mean I have no interest in star wars, and it seems juvinille to me, but I wouldn't say it isn't entertaining, that it only panders to people who are still mentally in grade 2 or something.... not only wouldn't I say it, but I don't even think it.
     
    back to difficulty though, I think people misunderstood my point. You folks seem to be arguing that by having the 'cheap' difficulty adjustment systems, the other ones you guys prefer cannot exist. I specifically mentioned why not both. Honestly, I think game devs resort to the 'cheap' ones because they can't be bothered to implement the m ore work-intensive ones either because of budget, time, management, or maybe they just DGAF. But if they have the time to implement the 'better' options, why stop implementing the quick easy and 'cheap' one too when it's so easy and fast? Some people can enjoy it. I mean one example I can think of is Zelda and the minish cap. I really didn't enjoy it because it was *WAY* too easy, and one of the reasons why it was was because enemies hit like wet noodles... no joke, even bosses  would hit for like a QUARTER of a heart. I did an experiment, and I was able to slay many of the bosses making absolutely no effort whatsoever to dodge any of their attacks, but would just  stand in front of them swinging (after doing necessary things to expose their weak points or whatever...while not bothering to dodge attacks too btw), and alot of the time they were owned. I particularly thought that 2nd fire dragon boss thing was a cool concept, but the amount of damage it put out just plain was not enough.
     
    You  can argue what is good difficulty and what is bad all you like, but at the end of it, nobody has ever addressed why simply having the option available to the player to adjust it to their liking is bad.
  20. Crazycrab liked a post in a topic by Ranisel in Difficulty in Video Games   
    Hmm, now I'm not sure if I want to revisit the roots of Dark Souls  had no idea it was that bad back then!
    However even with what you pointed out in Demon's Souls, I think it's admirable that the game just did away with difficulty, at least as far as I know? I guess the philosophy there was... "Well if you're having trouble go farm up some Souls or Titanite to upgrade Stats or Weapon" which is pretty much grinding, which isn't too bad if the game has enjoyable combat.
    I completely agree!
  21. Crazycrab liked a post in a topic by Ranisel in Difficulty in Video Games   
    The problems is almost all of the difficulty modes are cheap number changing when it could be something better, for example... more monsters, or faster/respawning monster?Like in the original DOOM?
    Could you imagine if in DOOM instead of more demons to swarm you they simply made it so you needed to shoot them more times in order to kill them? That's bullshit, you need a big massacre leaving behind lots of bloody, mangled, bullet-ridden corpses. Sure it would take more time to do that, but it does the game a favor.
    But... that's not the player's fault that's a mistake that shouldn't have happened in the first place? At least not in Normal+ difficulty? I mean sorry but if the designers made such a build possible that's their own fault, that sort of thing by definition shouldn't happen in non-easy difficulties? 
     
    Well RPGs are a whole different story, every game genre has a different preferred ways to enhance difficulty, and just like Stealth games the approach of "more HP/DMG" doesn't really work, for RPGs I think the best difficulty levels should be based on immersion, for example in Witcher 3 Normal+ makes it so Mediating ( which you can do anywhere except around monsters ) doesn't heal you while previously it healed 100% of your health.
    Or maybe make it so your character actually needs to sleep? Needs to eat? That kind of thing.
    Because I think it should be up to the designers to decide how many times can you whack an enemy for it to die. Make that default and don't touch it through difficulty levels, because no one likes bullet sponges, at least not for regular enemies, cause honestly I felt like some Bosses in Witcher 3 could have had double or triple the health and I would have still enjoyed every moment of it.
    They didn't say Souls games as a whole are like that, just Demon Souls. Also no one is a supreme judge they just shared their opinion, but theyargued their points, pretty well I might add, dying in order to learn in a game which punishes dying isn't good design, not an enjoyable challenge, and by that I mean not for me, and clearly not for them. And let's be honest here, every Souls game has had a couple of bullshit deaths and every single one of them suffers from glitchy hitboxes, most of that isn't a problem since if you reach that spot again you get everything back, except in Dark Souls 2.
    How would you handle Stealth games with sliders? As a concept increasing enemy field of view and area in which they can hear you CAN be executed well and it allows for freedom, but that shouldn't be the main nor only difficulty adjustment. As for RPGs and shooters, sure you can include them there but I feel like the primary difficulty adjustments should be more than increases of Health,Damage or player Handicap. 
  22. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by Shagger in Difficulty in Video Games   
    Totally with you on Thief, that was a massively impressive game for its day as well in terms of AI.
     
    I Said on the topic about Joe's Outlast 2 review, but if what Joe says is accurate, then this is the kind if "difficulty" or "challenge" that is bullshit. Cryptic, trial and error bullshit. No skill, no spacial awareness, no strategy or reflexes, but enough patience to force yourself though the repeated, padded, cryptic bullshit that prays on your natural instincts until you make it through. Demon Souls is one of my least favourite games in the world for the same reasons.
     
    I do think difficulty is taken way to seriously sometimes. Alternative difficulty settings exist to give anyone the chance to enjoy the game the way they want. Just because a game has a difficulty setting you don't like (to hard or to easy), it doesn't hurt you! Play the game the way you want. Play on easier settings because you a want a less frustrating experience for the story and atmosphere, or turn it up to test yourself. Either way, don't complain about how others choose to experience a game, it's entitled and stupid.
  23. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by Crazycrab in Difficulty in Video Games   
    I completely agree.  For me their is a difference between difficulty and challenge, you make a game challenging and it naturally becomes more difficult but making a game more difficult doesn't automatically make it more challenging.  
     
    Stealth is my favourite style of play because I find challenge of using my wits and not getting spotted much satisfying more satisfying than charging in like Galahad.  I'd say that Thief: The Dark Project is the perfect example that offers an additional challenge in this style by offering additional objectives or by getting you to play a different way, like not killing anyone forcing you relay more on stealth like the developers intended.
     
    It feels cheap when games that just simply shuffle numbers like health or damage to re-balance the difficulty.  Sure it makes the game more difficult in that you'll die more often and it will take longer to beat but ultimately the actual gameplay experience is exactly the same so the challenge is the same.  For example in Metro: Last Light the Higher difficulty settings not only effect health and damage but you also get less resources like ammo forcing you to be more efficient and make every shot count.  In Call of Duty (I'm not intentionally picking on COD here, there is tons of games that do this) cranking up the difficulty will give you less health, more enemy's that do more damage but you ultimately play it the exact same way.
     
    The thing really drives me nuts though is games where you are forced to die and try again until you find the right solution through trial and error or just get lucky.  Like Demon's Souls where all your doing is repeating the same sections until you get to the next cheap ass death trap and then have to go back to the start and repeat it again.  It's difficult yes but to me that's a fucking insanity test and not a challenge and it's same story with Outlast II.
     
    On the opposite end of the spectrum you have something like Shadow of Mordor which (at least in my opinion) is way to easy and for all wrong reasons!  The AI is so dumb especially when it comes to stealth detection and hordes of enemies can easily be killed by using the same combat finishers over and over.  This is another situation where changing the difficulty does not effect the challenge because regardless of the difficulty setting the AI is still stupid and the same spamming tactics still kill everything almost instantly.
     
    I generally find that the harder difficulty settings are the more immersive and enjoyable way to play but if you just want to experience the story line then I don't judge any who plays on lesser difficulties.  My point that you can even on lower difficulty still get a good challenge without it feeling cheap.
  24. Ranisel liked a post in a topic by Ghaleon in Difficulty in Video Games   
    Alternative means of adjustable difficulty are always cool, but I think 'cheap number changing' is flat out  foolish to NOT utilize as well. If you don't like harder modes that only adjust numbers, protip: don't play them. Some people DO enjoy them. I don't know why armchair game designers have to trash something that's optional AND takes almost no time to develop to boot. Making new AI and readjusting the level design, that DOES take time, but slapping a *1.2 on things takes all of one minute.
    Sometimes having some extra hp on enemies actually changes the dynamic completely, because many times players get a build or something that allows them to 1 shot or 1 combo enemies, and it's not really a fight but just kind of a speedbumb as they cruise thru a stage, one that doesn't even fight, but just kinda makes them stop running and mash attack 1-3 times and proceed running with absolutely no regard for retaliation or whatever. But if they can survive that initial hit, then all of a sudden you have to worry about their attack range and speed and all that jazz.
    Honestly I think the people who complain about such mechanics are just bad and wont admit it to themselves. Take rpgs for example, you can say that having enmies with higher stats doesn't change how you play, it just needs more grinding. This is in fact the lazy way of thinking. Do you strive to beat content leveling/grinding as little as possible? If you fail at a boss or hard part, do you assume 'I need to grind more'? I ask this because I've seen hundreds if not thousands of times where players whine that a game needs grinding too much because they got game-over'd at a certain part and I find that th eir level is in fact much higher than needed or whatever. They just don't want to bother learning to better themselves or the mechanics, blame the game.
    Saying Souls isn't a challenge but a test in insanity is bullshit. I'm not saying this as a souls fanboy, but as a human telling another human, who the hell made you the supreme judge of what's challenging and fun and something maddening. Whenever you say things like that, it just makes it look like your patience and respectfulness is shit. I mean if you don't like it, that's fine, but to actually state that something is NOT what people say they like about it, and that it's actually ____.
     
    Anyway, back on difficulty. I've been asking for it for years, and I'm actually seeing a few games actually do it. But I would like to see difficulty be player-adjustable beyond easy/medium/hard... But have sliders for all of the variable stats, so that they can adjust it as they see fit to their own personal liking. Maybe they think the game is too easy but the enemies are also a bit bullet spongy, well they can up everything a bit and maybe nerf the enemy hp. Now I'm not saying the alternative means of difficulty that couldn't be adjusted by a simple slider need to go, no they're cool too. But honestly, why not both? don't say development time, adding sliders to variables is piss easy, trust me, I HAVE done programming. Yes it can't be done to some games as mods because they hard-coded numbers sometimes, I have no freakin' idea why game devs hardcode numbers in their games, seriously. Short sighted as hell. But provided they just take the decision to not do that from the start, it wont really increase development time.
  25. Madfinnishgamer38 liked a post in a topic by Ranisel in Difficulty in Video Games   
    This is partly inspired from a comment exchange on Joe's Outlast II Review: ( Time Stamp: 09:43 )
    I think Joe's criticism is completely reasonable but a lot of people actually said stuff like "Well you're playing on the highest difficulty Joe, sheesh modern gamers are so spoiled, such filthy casuals, why play on the hardest difficulty and bitch that it's hard?"
    Now... obviously I took some liberties on what was actually said  and I'm paraphrasing even though the original conversation was lost somewhere between mountains of "Do more Angry Reviews" and "Del is fat" which are all *obviously* valid criticisms and have never been said before and thus need to be repeated, you can still see examples of what I mean:

    It's a relatively recent comment ( 1 week ago ) and has a decent amount of likes, which I will personally see as people who agree with his statement.
    Now with the proper context provided let me try and tackle this criticism, first of all can we all agree that unless the challenge provided by the difficulty is fair it suggests lazy, or bad design?
    Obviously you can make every game hard if you increase every NPC's health and damage tenfold but is that the best design we can muster for the difficulty, is it even good? Specifically in Outlast II that wouldn't make the game harder because, you can't fight back at all, it's run or hide, so how can we make that harder?
    Well I pointed out Thief:The Dark Project (Not the ReBoot )

    , which as the title suggests is a Stealth game, the difference between Normal and Expert isn't "Guards can now see you through walls and hear you even if you didn't make any sounds"
    The differences are much more appropriate, such as:
    Total amount of Gold you need to acquire in the Mission in order to proceed
    Total amount of Objectives you need to complete in order to proceed, for example on Normal you might find a note suggesting there's a valuable item somewhere around that's not essential or tied to the mission's purpose, and you can choose whether to pursue it as it is a side objective, but on Expert you NEED to do it, as it is counted as a main objective
    Total amount of Guards in the mission
    You cannot kill ANYONE, which is largely irrelevant as you literally cannot fight your way through the game, you know... because it's an actual Stealth game... but is an inconvenience admittedly 
    Placement of gems, pouches of gold and amount of gold are altered, patrols may be changed as to prevent easy and convenient routes... Let me provide an in-game example, notice how on anything less than Expert Basso the Boxman is not even mentioned!

    Now notice how none of those changes alter the AI but still make the game's missions harder and longer without creating any sort of "unfairness"? Isn't that objectively a better way to create difficulty? Since it doesn't make the enemies blind and deaf while also doesn't make them like Superman because they have X-Ray vision and super hearing? Doesn't it also cost less of the budget and is generally faster than fiddling with the AI? I suppose there's still a place for such a challenge in the form of handicap, but I think Thief's difficulty is handles much better than Outlast II.
    But one could argue that this method is not flawless, as the AI is still competent on all difficulties so even one guard may prove a challenge too great for someone new to the game or genre, there's always one solution though:

    But in all seriousness I'd counter by asking what being "good" at Stealth games really comes down to? Patience and map awareness, you observe the guard, you take a mental note of his path, wait for him to pass and sneak past successfully, being impatient is actually the source of the so called "bad at stealth" bullshit and people who are impatient are inherently not the targeted demographic of Stealth games, so the problem is non-existent.
    Now with the hiding covered *ba dum tss* we can move on to running, how can that be made harder? Well, that's fairly easy, there's a whole genre based around making running hard and convoluted, platforming:

     Outlast II's take is certainly not as good as it could be, I'm not sure if the confusion on where to run to is intended or not but it's unreasonable to deny it's effect on the difficulty "Oh no, I was seen and now I have to run for my life, oh shit this level is deliberately made like a maze so I don't really know where to run towards" that COULD be fun for a specific level, once or twice but not ALL GAME LONG for sure.
    Why would you frustrate the players like that? Especially when you keep in mind that an angry person is less likely to be scared by the game/movie/ETC, and so your Horror game fails, hard. Why would you create the illusion of open ended levels? I often criticize shitty FPS games like Call of Duty for the linear level design, a literal straight line with one turn along the way with some "enemy intel" and a dead end, but that would have been better for Outlast II, because that path you'll need to run through can have obstacles placed on it, and thus make timing important " Oh I pressed jump too soon/too late and I couldn't get past this branch, now I'm caught and dead... " 
    Anyway I actually wanted to cover more genres of games such as FPS so we could address "Bullet sponges" and such, but I feel this is already too long and most likely boring, but what do you think? Did Thief nail challenge despite being 19 years old? Or am I just overpraising workarounds due to the technical limitations developers had back then, and most importantly, why? Thanks for reading.