Well I wouldn't jump to that conclusion if there weren't so many games with half-baked, barely there game mechanics that seem to exist only to deliver the story. If the goal is to elevate gaming by making the writing better, why make the actual game part worse?
0
Options
Werewolf2000adSuckers, I know exactly what went wrong.Registered Userregular
There's a particular vignette in What Remains of Edith Finch that I think is the silver bullet to the argument that "games with good writing can just be films and achieve the same impact".
Hell, I'd say pretty much all of Edith Finch is evidence against that argument.
Well I wouldn't jump to that conclusion if there weren't so many games with half-baked, barely there game mechanics that seem to exist only to deliver the story. If the goal is to elevate gaming by making the writing better, why make the actual game part worse?
Why are they "worse?" For what it wants to be, Donut County's mechanics are perfect. So are those for Oxenfree, and Gone Home, etc. etc. Having more complicated mechanics would just get in the way of what they're trying to be.
Honestly, there's nothing wrong with playing games with easy, simple mechanics. I say that as someone currently trying to beat Smash Bros. Ultimate's classic mode on the highest difficulty.
Yeah it is a very different experience from an animated feature. You get to choose where to go and who to talk to next. You'll probably miss a lot of mundane but interesting conversations. Ones that might've been cut for time from an animation due to their non-critical nature. And you get to choose how to reply to tons of conversations, and play various minigames. There's so much about games like that which necessitate being a game.
A lot of people have made a (somewhat valid) criticism of Hideo Kojima, that he clearly wanted to direct movies, but had to "settle" for games, and often made the game part suit the interests of the movie part, even if it was detrimental to the game. I do think there are a lot of creators turning to games because of the (somewhat valid) view that there is a lower bar for writing. In the end, it results in games where they clearly care more about the narrative than any other aspect, and the bare minimum of interactivity is shoehorned in. I have "played" and enjoyed some games that are like that, but I've never really felt like the (limited) interactive elements ever really enhanced it. It felt like they were working backwards, like "What can we do to make this story into a game? Add some dialog choices? Make the player walk around between conversations?"
I have not seen any evidence of any creator saying "I really wanted to make movies but I am forced to make video games instead." Instead what I keep seeing is things along the lines of "I love video games, and would like to help elevate them and give them storylines and cutscenes as good as film." It's important not to confuse the two. Someone wanting to make a game more filmic doesn't at heart want to make movies instead, any more than a person who wants to make games more literary wants to write novels instead. Making a well-written game is magnitudes more difficult and expensive than writing a book. Both of those people still chose to make a game. It's presumptuous to put words in their mouth about what they really wanted to do before "settling" on gaming.
And people who really want to make movies can just...make movies. Yeah it can be expensive but you start at the microbudget level and work your way up. It's actually not that difficult to find a distributor and start getting your name out there, like how so many now-famous directors started out.
Games that seem like a movie and have minimal interactivity are just examples of people pushing the medium in extreme directions and being experimental, like has happened in all entertainment mediums. Make it more like a film, more like a book, more like an interactive art piece you'd frame and put on the wall, more like a board game, more like a music tool.
I'm not going to accuse the creators of Electroplankton of ulterior motives of wanting to make a synthesizer but failing to be competitive in that area and resorting to making a video game even though they clearly didn't want to.
One of my favorite books is Masters of Doom. And one of the most interesting parts of is all the different directions that game got pulled in by different people. I'm probably going to mangle the details. But Tom Hall was all in on the story telling, and kept pushing for more story than anyone else wanted to put in. John Carmack was the much storied engineer prodigy who kept pushing what the engine was capable of to no complaints near as I remember. Adrian Carmack just wanted to make dark and edgy artwork. And John Romero was broadly the gameplay guy, obsessed with making it faster and more compelling.
I think all those people were absolutely vital. And I think all their competing interest in the project were absolutely vital. But I see a game like, say, Firewatch, and it's clearly lacking a John Carmack or John Romero type. It just has a story teller and an artist who know how to use Unity.
I mean, seriously, compare this article about Firewatch's development with this article about Doom's. Firewatch's is all art, casting voice actors, cut features. Doom's is all technological exploration and ruthlessly refining the gameplay. It's unclear what gameplay considerations Firewatch even wrestled with, but it's obvious they were going out of their way to avoid anything too technical.
Now I don't know that the guys who made Firewatch don't actually want to be making games. But they certainly don't seem overly concerned with the "game" aspect of them. They mostly take the medium as a way to tell loosely interactive scripted stories. To inhabit the play they've written for you. Get to your mark, say your line, scene. Isn't the set pretty? Look who we've cast for you, don't you sound attractive?
Those people are important. Doom wouldn't have been Doom without Tom Hall pushing for story, and Adrian Carmack pushing the presentation. But they also aren't making the most of what games can be either without a John Carmack or a John Romero able to handle the technical and ludic challenges.
Well I wouldn't jump to that conclusion if there weren't so many games with half-baked, barely there game mechanics that seem to exist only to deliver the story. If the goal is to elevate gaming by making the writing better, why make the actual game part worse?
Worse for who, though?
There are people who swear turn based battle systems are antiquated and outdated, like black and white films. As if it's a programming or engine limitation rather than an intentional choice. Some people like having time to think before every decision, and some people like the look of black and white films. And creators still play with both of those concepts, not in equal amounts obviously.
There are people who sincerely argue that non-real-time games are poor design, straight up. And that's laughable.
And I see that as similar to arguing that long cutscenes with small amounts of interactivity aren't good games either. It's not a universal truth. I've liked some of those games more than ones that profess to be some bastion of pure gameplay.
I think all those people were absolutely vital. And I think all their competing interest in the project were absolutely vital. But I see a game like, say, Firewatch, and it's clearly lacking a John Carmack or John Romero type. It just has a story teller and an artist who know how to use Unity.
Yeah but you'll also find plenty of people in the world who would argue Firewatch is a better game than Doom. Who would play both and say "hmm I prefer Firewatch." For whatever reason. I might even be one of those people, I haven't played either of them but I was never interested in first person shooters that much, and I love good stories.
And the people who would prefer Firewatch aren't stupid or wrong, either. The success of so many of that type of game shows that people are demanding it and are happy with that level of gameplay, and means more creators who want to make that sort of game are welcome to.
You misunderstand. I'm not saying "Firewatch should be Doom. Doom is better than Firewatch." I'm saying "Imagine how much better Firewatch would be at being Firewatch if they had an actual programmer who could solve difficult problems, and an actual gameplay guy making sure it was fun and had a good story?"
I've been watching a lot of Red Letter Media, and one of the recent "Best of the Worst" had a movie that had nothing but static shots. They said it was trying to be Evil Dead, but without any of the camera work.
That's how I feel about Firewatch and games like it. I'm not saying they shouldn't do what they do. But maybe make full use of the medium? Hire a fucking cameraman for god's sake.
Well I wouldn't jump to that conclusion if there weren't so many games with half-baked, barely there game mechanics that seem to exist only to deliver the story. If the goal is to elevate gaming by making the writing better, why make the actual game part worse?
Why are they "worse?" For what it wants to be, Donut County's mechanics are perfect. So are those for Oxenfree, and Gone Home, etc. etc. Having more complicated mechanics would just get in the way of what they're trying to be.
Honestly, there's nothing wrong with playing games with easy, simple mechanics. I say that as someone currently trying to beat Smash Bros. Ultimate's classic mode on the highest difficulty.
Again, I'm not saying every game needs to be difficult and complex. But we have so many games like Journey that are basically "walk forward and watch the pretty" and games where the only "gameplay" is essentially dialog choices. I just don't understand the point of a game without any actual game in it.
The only good part of Oxenfree was the non- interactive part. I'd rather watch it on YouTube.
Well I wouldn't jump to that conclusion if there weren't so many games with half-baked, barely there game mechanics that seem to exist only to deliver the story. If the goal is to elevate gaming by making the writing better, why make the actual game part worse?
Why are they "worse?" For what it wants to be, Donut County's mechanics are perfect. So are those for Oxenfree, and Gone Home, etc. etc. Having more complicated mechanics would just get in the way of what they're trying to be.
Honestly, there's nothing wrong with playing games with easy, simple mechanics. I say that as someone currently trying to beat Smash Bros. Ultimate's classic mode on the highest difficulty.
Again, I'm not saying every game needs to be difficult and complex. But we have so many games like Journey that are basically "walk forward and watch the pretty" and games where the only "gameplay" is essentially dialog choices. I just don't understand the point of a game without any actual game in it.
The only good part of Oxenfree was the non- interactive part. I'd rather watch it on YouTube.
It's experimenting with the medium. A game where you only walk forward is like a movie with no dialogue, intentionally. Or a movie that's impossible-to-follow symbolism.
You could say the interesting thing with games is that every game is well-distributed now, so you actually get confronted with weird and experimental, unlike how most people have never heard of Alejandro Jodorowsky. The Holy Mountain wasn't released on PS4 for everyone to say "what is this bullshit."
Well I wouldn't jump to that conclusion if there weren't so many games with half-baked, barely there game mechanics that seem to exist only to deliver the story. If the goal is to elevate gaming by making the writing better, why make the actual game part worse?
Why are they "worse?" For what it wants to be, Donut County's mechanics are perfect. So are those for Oxenfree, and Gone Home, etc. etc. Having more complicated mechanics would just get in the way of what they're trying to be.
Honestly, there's nothing wrong with playing games with easy, simple mechanics. I say that as someone currently trying to beat Smash Bros. Ultimate's classic mode on the highest difficulty.
Again, I'm not saying every game needs to be difficult and complex. But we have so many games like Journey that are basically "walk forward and watch the pretty" and games where the only "gameplay" is essentially dialog choices. I just don't understand the point of a game without any actual game in it.
The only good part of Oxenfree was the non- interactive part. I'd rather watch it on YouTube.
The point is the narrative experience, the emotions, the feeling it imparts upon the player, which is something that couldn't be replicated in a YouTube video. In the case of Journey, you wouldn't have the curiosity of exploring the world, the unexpected togetherness that comes with running into another player. If you added anything else to Journey, you'd ruin it.
I mean, it's fine if it's not your cup of tea, but plenty of people love these games.
I feel like we have enough meat in this discussion to move it to a separate thread since it's barely relevant to the Switch! I don't mean that negatively I'd just prefer if we spawned this conversation out in the open and take more insights from other users on it.
Well I wouldn't jump to that conclusion if there weren't so many games with half-baked, barely there game mechanics that seem to exist only to deliver the story. If the goal is to elevate gaming by making the writing better, why make the actual game part worse?
Why are they "worse?" For what it wants to be, Donut County's mechanics are perfect. So are those for Oxenfree, and Gone Home, etc. etc. Having more complicated mechanics would just get in the way of what they're trying to be.
Honestly, there's nothing wrong with playing games with easy, simple mechanics. I say that as someone currently trying to beat Smash Bros. Ultimate's classic mode on the highest difficulty.
Again, I'm not saying every game needs to be difficult and complex. But we have so many games like Journey that are basically "walk forward and watch the pretty" and games where the only "gameplay" is essentially dialog choices. I just don't understand the point of a game without any actual game in it.
The only good part of Oxenfree was the non- interactive part. I'd rather watch it on YouTube.
The thing is, you don't have to understand it. I don't understand why anyone would play a racing game, myself, but I don't go around trying to imply racing games are bad, cause I believe people when they tell me they are getting things from them that I'm not.
So, here, I'm just asking that you believe me when I say, a lot of these games that you don't understand are very important to me and I get things from them that no movie could ever give. I try to think of how you could get half of what Undertale made me think about into a movie and I just can't imagine how one would even start with that. That's a work that could never, well, work as anything other than a videogame.
Due to holidays and taking a day off for my birthday, I'm only working 3 days over the next 11 days.
Time to get wild and throw down with a helluva lot of games. Have to make sure I don't just play my usual games-as-a-service stuff and Smash Ultimate for 11 days. Hoping to dive into a ton of Switch indies, maybe some shorter experiences that I can actually finish, along with some big-ticket PS4 stuff. OOOOOHHH IS IT QUITTIN' TIME YET
I'm trying to set up my kids Switch with accounts to have it all ready to go on Christmas.
I've created kid accounts for them under my nintendo account.
I'm a bit confused as to what I need to do on the new console though.
Do I link my personal account, and then the kids accounts? Do I need to link my account at all since their accounts are under mine?
And on the nintendo help site, their explanation of what additional consoles on your account have access to makes no sense and is specifically contradictory.
First is says this:
You can play digital games that you've purchased with your Nintendo Account on any Nintendo Switch console.
then it immediately says:
Once you've registered a primary console, your digital purchases can be played by anyone that uses the primary console. Other players will not be able to access your digital games on a non-primary console.
:rotate:
My own console is already the "primary" one, I understand that. If I put my account on this new one it will just be an additional one.
But will my digital games be playable or not, on the new console? If I go into the primary account topic it talks about games on the additional consoles having to have a constant internet for checks or the games will be paused until it can check. Which I understand, but also contradicts "Other players will not be able to access...".
Is it saying that, if my kids are logged into their account on the second console, even though they're part of the family account and under me, they won't have any access to any games I personally own digitally? So they'd have to be on my account on the second console to access them, and even then only with a constant connection?
If that's it, I get it. I think it is silly, and defeats the purpose of a family account, but ok. But am I missing something?
Oh, I guess more importantly, their console came with mario kart. Do i register the code on my account, or one of their accounts?
If I put it on one of their accounts, do their accounts share the "primary console" designation as my account, or will theirs be this new console. I.E. if I put it on my daughters account, and assuming this new console is set as her "primary", will the game be accessable by my sons account also, on the same console, since it is their primary?
EDIT: nevermind on the question that was here about physical games, the faq answered that.
EDIT2: So I think the best thing would be (based on my understanding of the account stuff) to put the MK8 code on one of the kids accounts, so that it's "primary" on that console, so any of our accounts can play it there, and I don't really care either way on my main console, but there would be no shenanigans of dealing with my personal account for them on the new Switch.
I think I'm even getting confused with what you're saying. I don't think there is a "family account?"
I think you're talking about two different things here:
- A Nintendo account, which is on the Switch console and has ownership of games
- The Nintendo online plan, which can be attached to individual Nintendo accounts and is literally just for enabling access to online services and has nothing to do with ownership of games
I don't think Nintendo accounts are parent or child designated. They are a name, avatar, associated save data, and game ownership.
The online plan can be child-designated which can be used to limit things with parental controls.
You can play digital games that you've purchased with your Nintendo Account on any Nintendo Switch console.
then it immediately says:
Once you've registered a primary console, your digital purchases can be played by anyone that uses the primary console. Other players will not be able to access your digital games on a non-primary console.
:rotate:
With clarifications:
You can play digital games that you've purchased with your Nintendo Account on any Nintendo Switch console [when you log in on that console with your Nintendo Account, and with regular internet checks to confirm ownership if it's not your primary].
Once you've registered a primary console, your digital purchases can be played by anyone that uses the primary console [under their Nintendo Account or your own]. Other players will not be able to access your digital games on a non-primary console [unless they log in on that console as you, which is like, a security risk?].
I think what I would recommend for your situation is this:
- New Switch is the kids' Switch. Accounts on it are parent and son and daughter. Designate it as your primary Switch and buy all games as YOU, including the MK8 code, and everyone on that Switch will be able to play them. You and both kids.
- Second Switch is your own Switch and only has you on it as a user. It's ok that it's not your primary, because the fact that you log into it as YOU means that you can still play all the games, though it will require internet access.
- Parent and son and daughter accounts are all added to the Nintendo Online family plan, which you manage at my.nintendo.com, and set the two kids as child accounts so they can't do any shenanigans.
The only reason you would not want to do this is if you plan on buying some digital games that are adult in nature that you would not want the kids to be able to play, or if you play a lot on the bus or places without internet. In that case, then yes, the plan you mentioned would work too. In a pinch if you wanted to play a game that is owned by one of their accounts, you could add them to your system and just log in as them. You're the parent, you can do what you want!!!
Thanks, yeah it probably didn't make a lot of sense; but I blame that on their faq and such not making a lot of sense.
I think I will leave my own switch as primary, but leave my account on the new one.
I just tried with DQB and it lets me download/play it fine if I choose my account, but not the kids. Since there doesn't seem to be any home screen/power on password requirements, it means that I will only put games on my personal account, onto that console, if I know I'm 100% fine with the kids playing it (DQB for instance).
I don't want to deal with online requirements on my personal switch, and eshop is password protected (plus I've got their accounts locked down for eshop purchases) so I'm not worried about them buying anything or downloading anything I don't approve.
I think none of it was as complicated as I was worried about, but I just didn't want to mess it up.
I will definitely be buying things that I want them to play (and me occasionally) as physical copies, though; to straight up avoid all of the rights nonsense.
I've been testing out my Switch Pro Controller as the lord intended, by using it on my PC.
Having the DPad be on the inner part of the controller rather than the outer part takes some getting used to. I forgot that the GameCube was also like this.
My problem with it is worse time per dollar value than a movie lol
I'm half kidding, I think I paid 30 dollars for 2 hour Gorogoa.
But I'm not kidding though.
I paid $10 to see Aquaman and that was 2 hours of my life I'll never get back. Sometimes you just roll the dice on entertainment.
Hey now, Aquaman was easily the best DCEU movie.
Granted, maybe not a high bar to reach I suppose.
I disagree! Wonder Woman was a way better movie. I think I enjoyed Justice League more too. Ironically I'm not into CGI filled movies... But I love video games.
Christmas disaster! Left joycon no longer lights the little LEDs and SL and SR won’t work. As those are the buttons you press to ‘activate’ the controller, that means it’s useless for single joycon play and 4p family Mario Party is a bust.
Over a year old and Google suggests repair costs are in the range where I might as well just buy a new set.
Christmas disaster! Left joycon no longer lights the little LEDs and SL and SR won’t work. As those are the buttons you press to ‘activate’ the controller, that means it’s useless for single joycon play and 4p family Mario Party is a bust.
Over a year old and Google suggests repair costs are in the range where I might as well just buy a new set.
Very much humph!
Try holding the sync button for a good 5 seconds.
It's really weird. Almost everybody I know has experienced the "joycon is completely dead and unresponsive to anything" once. And only once, never again. Holding down the sync button usually works for most people.
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
It may just think that it's directly connected to the Switch, try cleaning the contacts there with rubbing alcohol or whatever, connect and disconnect a few times and see if the display indicates it is removed when you do so.
I was JUST thinking about this game (mostly because I've been marathoning the DQ series). I really hope they go all out on this version (orchestrated soundtrack, that retro stuff in the 3DS version). Also hope it comes out in the west before too long.
Edit: Sounds like there's going to be some announcements about it on New Years. Can't wait!
It may just think that it's directly connected to the Switch, try cleaning the contacts there with rubbing alcohol or whatever, connect and disconnect a few times and see if the display indicates it is removed when you do so.
A solid theory, but sadly no dice. Google finds a good number of people with the same issue as there’s apparently a connection that can come loose. The loss of LEDs and those particular buttons is quite distinctive.
It may just think that it's directly connected to the Switch, try cleaning the contacts there with rubbing alcohol or whatever, connect and disconnect a few times and see if the display indicates it is removed when you do so.
A solid theory, but sadly no dice. Google finds a good number of people with the same issue as there’s apparently a connection that can come loose. The loss of LEDs and those particular buttons is quite distinctive.
So the LED's don't light up, the SL/SR buttons don't work... but otherwise everything else about the controller works and is responsive?
That's a new one. I wonder if a ribbon cable came loose or something. If you got nothing else to lose (and the proper screwdriver mind you), it couldn't hurt to open the thing up while following a teardown video and seeing if everything is in place.
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
Hmm. I just downloaded the extra games for the SNK Anniversary Collection. Boy this game is prone to crashing, even after the updates. Anyone else experiencing this?
So are third-party docks still a dicey investment?
I’m traveling with my Switch a bit more, and feeling lazy. So I really want a set of travel gear so all I have to do is toss my Switch in a case with a secondary dock, ac adapter, and hdmi cable all ready in my bag. So there is no longer a chore of unplugging and replugging everything when I get home.
At 90 bucks the official dock is hideously overpriced, but after the nyko scare, I’m hesitant to buy third-party. That Insignia dock at under half the price is mighty tempting though. It’s almost another Switch game in savings!
So I spun up Labyrinth of Refrain today, and woah boy.
Ok, straight up, it's scratched that itch I've had since I beat Wizardry VI a while ago. That super crunchy, and yet still weirdly accessible grider gameplay. I mean, I'm only 3 levels in so far, but it has ample "Fuck you" and "Fuck the game" mechanics in equal measure. Every labor it throws at you has a relief. So I'm digging it. I'm really digging it. Elminage Gothic was recommended to me when I was jonsing for a "modern" Wizardry game. Etrian Odyssey too. But this hits that very particular spot better than any of those.
Then again, I barely got even a level into Elminage Gothic, and I've never beaten an Etrian Odyssey, although I got pretty close to beating the first one before burning out.
But, if you are the sort of person to ever unironically utter the word "problematic", this is probably not for you. So just save yourself the discomfort, and save the people around you having to hear you complain.
Although it does strike me as somewhat amusing that it scratches that Wizardry VI itch, since reading the CRPG Addict's entries on it, he caused a minor kerfuffle complaining about all the 80's Heavy Metal-esque casual titilation in that game.
So yeah, if you like Wizardry, and you don't mind politically incorrect gender relations handled without any sensitivity what so ever. fucking get this game.
It's an audience so small frankly I'm shocked it got localized. But glad it did all the same.
Posts
Hell, I'd say pretty much all of Edith Finch is evidence against that argument.
EVERYBODY WANTS TO SIT IN THE BIG CHAIR, MEG!
Why are they "worse?" For what it wants to be, Donut County's mechanics are perfect. So are those for Oxenfree, and Gone Home, etc. etc. Having more complicated mechanics would just get in the way of what they're trying to be.
Honestly, there's nothing wrong with playing games with easy, simple mechanics. I say that as someone currently trying to beat Smash Bros. Ultimate's classic mode on the highest difficulty.
One of my favorite books is Masters of Doom. And one of the most interesting parts of is all the different directions that game got pulled in by different people. I'm probably going to mangle the details. But Tom Hall was all in on the story telling, and kept pushing for more story than anyone else wanted to put in. John Carmack was the much storied engineer prodigy who kept pushing what the engine was capable of to no complaints near as I remember. Adrian Carmack just wanted to make dark and edgy artwork. And John Romero was broadly the gameplay guy, obsessed with making it faster and more compelling.
I think all those people were absolutely vital. And I think all their competing interest in the project were absolutely vital. But I see a game like, say, Firewatch, and it's clearly lacking a John Carmack or John Romero type. It just has a story teller and an artist who know how to use Unity.
I mean, seriously, compare this article about Firewatch's development with this article about Doom's. Firewatch's is all art, casting voice actors, cut features. Doom's is all technological exploration and ruthlessly refining the gameplay. It's unclear what gameplay considerations Firewatch even wrestled with, but it's obvious they were going out of their way to avoid anything too technical.
Now I don't know that the guys who made Firewatch don't actually want to be making games. But they certainly don't seem overly concerned with the "game" aspect of them. They mostly take the medium as a way to tell loosely interactive scripted stories. To inhabit the play they've written for you. Get to your mark, say your line, scene. Isn't the set pretty? Look who we've cast for you, don't you sound attractive?
Those people are important. Doom wouldn't have been Doom without Tom Hall pushing for story, and Adrian Carmack pushing the presentation. But they also aren't making the most of what games can be either without a John Carmack or a John Romero able to handle the technical and ludic challenges.
Worse for who, though?
There are people who swear turn based battle systems are antiquated and outdated, like black and white films. As if it's a programming or engine limitation rather than an intentional choice. Some people like having time to think before every decision, and some people like the look of black and white films. And creators still play with both of those concepts, not in equal amounts obviously.
There are people who sincerely argue that non-real-time games are poor design, straight up. And that's laughable.
And I see that as similar to arguing that long cutscenes with small amounts of interactivity aren't good games either. It's not a universal truth. I've liked some of those games more than ones that profess to be some bastion of pure gameplay.
Yeah but you'll also find plenty of people in the world who would argue Firewatch is a better game than Doom. Who would play both and say "hmm I prefer Firewatch." For whatever reason. I might even be one of those people, I haven't played either of them but I was never interested in first person shooters that much, and I love good stories.
And the people who would prefer Firewatch aren't stupid or wrong, either. The success of so many of that type of game shows that people are demanding it and are happy with that level of gameplay, and means more creators who want to make that sort of game are welcome to.
I've been watching a lot of Red Letter Media, and one of the recent "Best of the Worst" had a movie that had nothing but static shots. They said it was trying to be Evil Dead, but without any of the camera work.
That's how I feel about Firewatch and games like it. I'm not saying they shouldn't do what they do. But maybe make full use of the medium? Hire a fucking cameraman for god's sake.
Again, I'm not saying every game needs to be difficult and complex. But we have so many games like Journey that are basically "walk forward and watch the pretty" and games where the only "gameplay" is essentially dialog choices. I just don't understand the point of a game without any actual game in it.
The only good part of Oxenfree was the non- interactive part. I'd rather watch it on YouTube.
It's experimenting with the medium. A game where you only walk forward is like a movie with no dialogue, intentionally. Or a movie that's impossible-to-follow symbolism.
You could say the interesting thing with games is that every game is well-distributed now, so you actually get confronted with weird and experimental, unlike how most people have never heard of Alejandro Jodorowsky. The Holy Mountain wasn't released on PS4 for everyone to say "what is this bullshit."
The point is the narrative experience, the emotions, the feeling it imparts upon the player, which is something that couldn't be replicated in a YouTube video. In the case of Journey, you wouldn't have the curiosity of exploring the world, the unexpected togetherness that comes with running into another player. If you added anything else to Journey, you'd ruin it.
I mean, it's fine if it's not your cup of tea, but plenty of people love these games.
The thing is, you don't have to understand it. I don't understand why anyone would play a racing game, myself, but I don't go around trying to imply racing games are bad, cause I believe people when they tell me they are getting things from them that I'm not.
So, here, I'm just asking that you believe me when I say, a lot of these games that you don't understand are very important to me and I get things from them that no movie could ever give. I try to think of how you could get half of what Undertale made me think about into a movie and I just can't imagine how one would even start with that. That's a work that could never, well, work as anything other than a videogame.
I have fun moving the whole around the level in Donut County. In a childish glee.
It's not bad, it's just not everyone's cup of tea. No one has to like it, still not bad, though.
I'm half kidding, I think I paid 30 dollars for 2 hour Gorogoa.
But I'm not kidding though.
I paid $10 to see Aquaman and that was 2 hours of my life I'll never get back. Sometimes you just roll the dice on entertainment.
Time to get wild and throw down with a helluva lot of games. Have to make sure I don't just play my usual games-as-a-service stuff and Smash Ultimate for 11 days. Hoping to dive into a ton of Switch indies, maybe some shorter experiences that I can actually finish, along with some big-ticket PS4 stuff. OOOOOHHH IS IT QUITTIN' TIME YET
I've created kid accounts for them under my nintendo account.
I'm a bit confused as to what I need to do on the new console though.
Do I link my personal account, and then the kids accounts? Do I need to link my account at all since their accounts are under mine?
And on the nintendo help site, their explanation of what additional consoles on your account have access to makes no sense and is specifically contradictory.
First is says this:
then it immediately says:
:rotate:
My own console is already the "primary" one, I understand that. If I put my account on this new one it will just be an additional one.
But will my digital games be playable or not, on the new console? If I go into the primary account topic it talks about games on the additional consoles having to have a constant internet for checks or the games will be paused until it can check. Which I understand, but also contradicts "Other players will not be able to access...".
Is it saying that, if my kids are logged into their account on the second console, even though they're part of the family account and under me, they won't have any access to any games I personally own digitally? So they'd have to be on my account on the second console to access them, and even then only with a constant connection?
If that's it, I get it. I think it is silly, and defeats the purpose of a family account, but ok. But am I missing something?
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
If I put it on one of their accounts, do their accounts share the "primary console" designation as my account, or will theirs be this new console. I.E. if I put it on my daughters account, and assuming this new console is set as her "primary", will the game be accessable by my sons account also, on the same console, since it is their primary?
EDIT: nevermind on the question that was here about physical games, the faq answered that.
EDIT2: So I think the best thing would be (based on my understanding of the account stuff) to put the MK8 code on one of the kids accounts, so that it's "primary" on that console, so any of our accounts can play it there, and I don't really care either way on my main console, but there would be no shenanigans of dealing with my personal account for them on the new Switch.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
Hey now, Aquaman was easily the best DCEU movie.
Granted, maybe not a high bar to reach I suppose.
I think you're talking about two different things here:
- A Nintendo account, which is on the Switch console and has ownership of games
- The Nintendo online plan, which can be attached to individual Nintendo accounts and is literally just for enabling access to online services and has nothing to do with ownership of games
I don't think Nintendo accounts are parent or child designated. They are a name, avatar, associated save data, and game ownership.
The online plan can be child-designated which can be used to limit things with parental controls.
With clarifications:
I think what I would recommend for your situation is this:
- New Switch is the kids' Switch. Accounts on it are parent and son and daughter. Designate it as your primary Switch and buy all games as YOU, including the MK8 code, and everyone on that Switch will be able to play them. You and both kids.
- Second Switch is your own Switch and only has you on it as a user. It's ok that it's not your primary, because the fact that you log into it as YOU means that you can still play all the games, though it will require internet access.
- Parent and son and daughter accounts are all added to the Nintendo Online family plan, which you manage at my.nintendo.com, and set the two kids as child accounts so they can't do any shenanigans.
The only reason you would not want to do this is if you plan on buying some digital games that are adult in nature that you would not want the kids to be able to play, or if you play a lot on the bus or places without internet. In that case, then yes, the plan you mentioned would work too. In a pinch if you wanted to play a game that is owned by one of their accounts, you could add them to your system and just log in as them. You're the parent, you can do what you want!!!
I think I will leave my own switch as primary, but leave my account on the new one.
I just tried with DQB and it lets me download/play it fine if I choose my account, but not the kids. Since there doesn't seem to be any home screen/power on password requirements, it means that I will only put games on my personal account, onto that console, if I know I'm 100% fine with the kids playing it (DQB for instance).
I don't want to deal with online requirements on my personal switch, and eshop is password protected (plus I've got their accounts locked down for eshop purchases) so I'm not worried about them buying anything or downloading anything I don't approve.
I think none of it was as complicated as I was worried about, but I just didn't want to mess it up.
I will definitely be buying things that I want them to play (and me occasionally) as physical copies, though; to straight up avoid all of the rights nonsense.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
Is it easy/possible to use joycons from one switch with another?
I.E. if we want to play 4 player MK8, can I just pop my joycons off and pair with the other Switch for a bit, then reattach them to mine?
Or is it more involved than that? Heck, or can you even play like that?
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
Yes it is easy and plays out exactly as you describe
Resident 8bitdo expert.
Resident hybrid/flap cover expert.
Origin: Galedrid - Nintendo: Galedrid/3222-6858-1045
Blizzard: Galedrid#1367 - FFXIV: Galedrid Kingshand
PSN / Xbox / NNID: Fodder185
Having the DPad be on the inner part of the controller rather than the outer part takes some getting used to. I forgot that the GameCube was also like this.
3DS Friend Code: 2165-6448-8348 www.Twitch.TV/cooljammer00
Battle.Net: JohnDarc#1203 Origin/UPlay: CoolJammer00
Switch (JeffConser): SW-3353-5433-5137 Wii U: Skeldare - 3DS: 1848-1663-9345
PM Me if you add me!
I disagree! Wonder Woman was a way better movie. I think I enjoyed Justice League more too. Ironically I'm not into CGI filled movies... But I love video games.
Over a year old and Google suggests repair costs are in the range where I might as well just buy a new set.
Very much humph!
Try holding the sync button for a good 5 seconds.
It's really weird. Almost everybody I know has experienced the "joycon is completely dead and unresponsive to anything" once. And only once, never again. Holding down the sync button usually works for most people.
It may just think that it's directly connected to the Switch, try cleaning the contacts there with rubbing alcohol or whatever, connect and disconnect a few times and see if the display indicates it is removed when you do so.
I was JUST thinking about this game (mostly because I've been marathoning the DQ series). I really hope they go all out on this version (orchestrated soundtrack, that retro stuff in the 3DS version). Also hope it comes out in the west before too long.
Edit: Sounds like there's going to be some announcements about it on New Years. Can't wait!
Steam: pazython
A solid theory, but sadly no dice. Google finds a good number of people with the same issue as there’s apparently a connection that can come loose. The loss of LEDs and those particular buttons is quite distinctive.
So the LED's don't light up, the SL/SR buttons don't work... but otherwise everything else about the controller works and is responsive?
That's a new one. I wonder if a ribbon cable came loose or something. If you got nothing else to lose (and the proper screwdriver mind you), it couldn't hurt to open the thing up while following a teardown video and seeing if everything is in place.
Not sure I’ll play anymore, but that was a good 90+ hours. Diablo III is pretty fantastic.
I’m traveling with my Switch a bit more, and feeling lazy. So I really want a set of travel gear so all I have to do is toss my Switch in a case with a secondary dock, ac adapter, and hdmi cable all ready in my bag. So there is no longer a chore of unplugging and replugging everything when I get home.
At 90 bucks the official dock is hideously overpriced, but after the nyko scare, I’m hesitant to buy third-party. That Insignia dock at under half the price is mighty tempting though. It’s almost another Switch game in savings!
Ok, straight up, it's scratched that itch I've had since I beat Wizardry VI a while ago. That super crunchy, and yet still weirdly accessible grider gameplay. I mean, I'm only 3 levels in so far, but it has ample "Fuck you" and "Fuck the game" mechanics in equal measure. Every labor it throws at you has a relief. So I'm digging it. I'm really digging it. Elminage Gothic was recommended to me when I was jonsing for a "modern" Wizardry game. Etrian Odyssey too. But this hits that very particular spot better than any of those.
Then again, I barely got even a level into Elminage Gothic, and I've never beaten an Etrian Odyssey, although I got pretty close to beating the first one before burning out.
But, if you are the sort of person to ever unironically utter the word "problematic", this is probably not for you. So just save yourself the discomfort, and save the people around you having to hear you complain.
Although it does strike me as somewhat amusing that it scratches that Wizardry VI itch, since reading the CRPG Addict's entries on it, he caused a minor kerfuffle complaining about all the 80's Heavy Metal-esque casual titilation in that game.
So yeah, if you like Wizardry, and you don't mind politically incorrect gender relations handled without any sensitivity what so ever. fucking get this game.
It's an audience so small frankly I'm shocked it got localized. But glad it did all the same.