Well, I guess we're officially in 2023 now. Somehow I thought - when I
was younger - the future would be shinier. But at least we got cool
video games.

Anyway, let's do this thing.

My Five-Second Long Summary
---------------------------------------
* Quake Enhanced (new?)
* Doom Eternal - Ancient Gods pt 1 & 2 (new)
* Comanche (2021) (new)
* The Hunter: Call of the Wild - New England Mountains (newish)
* Mechwarrior 5 Mercenaries (replay)
* Crusader: No Remorse (replay)

My Hours-Long Summaries
---------------------------------------

* Quake Enhanced (new)
Lipstick on a pig. That was the phrase that kept circling my brain as
I played "Quake Enhanced", the updated version of the venerable
shooter released a year ago (but only finally available on GOG). A
phrase which is, I admit, rather unfair to Quake. I may not be the
biggest fan of the game - I was on Team Nukem in the mid 90s,
preferring games with a bit more context and character - but I
admired Quake for its technology and influence on the industry. A
'pig' Quake certainly was not.

But Quake Enhanced certainly is unnecessary lipstick. Largely a visual
upgrade, it all feels rather pointless. While the lighting, textures
and models have been improved, it's still very obviously a game of the
'90s; it isn't a complete revamp. If the 30-year old visuals were what
kept you from playing this game, I doubt an upgrade to 25-year old
graphics are going to bring you back. I can't even admire the update
for its technical prowess -- "Ooh, lookit what they made the idTech-1
engine do!" -- since "Quake Enhanced" isn't using /any/ idTech engine,
instead having been translated to the proprietary Kex Engine developed
by Nightdive Studios.

The gameplay remains largely the same, though. Well, the movement does
feel a lot more 'slippery' than I remember, which made some of the
platforming a lot more tricky than it should have been. But it's still
the fast-paced arena-shooter of yore we all remember. That's good if
you like that sort of thing (I'm lukewarm on it), but did we really
need a half-assed enhancement just to revisit it? QE also features an
entirely new episode ("The Dimension of the Machine") which adds some
much needed new textures to the game and has some impressive (for
Quake) architecture, but its pacing and hub-based level design feel
more akin to slower FPS games than the archetypical Id shooter.

So in the end, the whole thing felt gratuitous. "Quake Enhanced"
wasn't really bringing anything new to the table - certainly not when
compared to what the various sourceports and modders had been offering
for free for decades. It wasn't even using a Carmack-designed engine.
It felt more like an opportunity for Bethesda/Microsoft to line their
wallets by reissuing a 30 year old game. Lipstick on a pig.

* Doom Eternal Ancient Gods pt 1 & 2 (new)
Like the original "Doom 2", "Doom Eternal" took the ideas of its
predecessor and played around with it. The core gameplay mechanics
remained the same in both games, but both "Doom 2" and "Doom Eternal"
felt a lot more experimental with their level designs and monsters.
With "Doom 2", the technology just wasn't up to some of the ideas the
developers wanted to implement, leading to a lot of levels that felt
gimmicky, and with way too much platforming. "Doom Eternal" felt
better balanced, and was overall a much better sequel.

"The Ancient Gods" DLC, on the other hand, feels like "Doom 2" to
"Doom Eternal"; a continuation of an idea implemented with poorly
polished levels. None of the levels are bad (with one notable
exception at the end) but neither are they particularly good. The maps
are often retreads of ideas already explored in the main game, and in
fact the overwhelming feeling I had while playing was that the maps
were the rejects that were culled out while finalizing "Doom Eternal".

Overall the new maps tended to be smaller, with less intense combat
and an increased emphasis on between-battle platforming. There were
fewer areas to explore, and the maps were almost (but not entirely)
devoid of secrets. The fights themselves felt less reliant on the
'push forward' mechanic that made "Doom (2016)" and "Doom Eternal" so
novel; too often the winning strategy seemed to be to fall back and
circle strafe the fight, picking off the stragglers and only rushing
forward for quick rearms. There was much less emphasis on 3D
maneuvering during fights too.

The storyline - which, amusingly, was always the part that interested
me most in these new games - was less enthralling too. Doomguy, having
blunted the demon invasion, goes off to kill the 'king demon' and end
the threat of Hell once and for all. Unfortunately, the Biggest Bad
turns out to be (ROT13 minor spoiler) n zveebe-Rnegu irefvba bs
Qbbzthl uvzfrys, which greatly negates the feeling of threat. After
facing off (and winning!) against a thousand-foot tall Titan at the
end of "Doom Eternal", this new foe feels almost inconsequential.

The big end-game boss-fight is also possibly one of the most annoying
I've played in a long time. Because the big evil is invulnerable
/except/ when he makes one specific attack, and because you can only
stun him with a very specific - and randomly dropped - type of ammo, a
good deal of time is spent dodging attacks and waiting for your foe to
leave himself vulnerable. The fact that any damage he inflicts on
/you/ automatically heals /him/ doesn't help, nor does the fact that
you need to 'kill' him in six nearly-identical fights. It's an
extremely drawn out and tedious battle that probably accounted for a
quarter of the run-time of the second DLC. The reward for your victory
is - despite a very late plot-twist at the end - very unfulfilling
too. If I ever play "Ancient Gods" again, it will only be until I
reach that final fight. It's just not worth doing it a second time.

Overall, the experience was fairly disappointing; the whole package
felt lackluster and without the refined gameplay that made "Eternal"
so memorable.

* Comanche (2021) (new)
The 2010 "Medal of Honor" (that's the Modern Warfare clone, not the
original set in World War 2) was an utterly forgettable game, except
for one part. That bit was when you got to fly around the Pamir
mountains in an Apache helicopter and 'blow shit up'. Between the
impressive (for the time) graphics and the easy flight model, it was
surprisingly fun, and - on playing that section of the game - I
wondered why nobody had made a helicopter sim with comparative visuals
and arcade action; it couldn't help but be great, right? But the 2021
reboot of "Comanche" is proof that combination doesn't necessarily
result in a good game.

The original Comanche, released way back in '92, was a groundbreaking
game. Not only did it introduce the gaming world to voxels (allowing
realistic - if blocky - rolling terrain to flight sims for the first
time ever), but it was a fun mix of arcade action and realistic
simulation. It really was all in a class to itself, and it almost
single-handedly elevated Novalogic, the game's developer, into
becoming a top-tier publisher.

Ashborne Games, the new developers of the license, are nowhere near as
skilled. The graphics engine offers some acceptable visuals (although
not as groundbreakingly advanced as the original) but that's about the
extent of the game's positives. Everything else about this game is
disappointing: from its flight model, its arcade-action, its map
layout, its story, its voice-acting... everything.

Its missions are aggravating; the game can't seem to decide if it
wants to be a run-n-gun game like an FPS, or a more serious simulator.
On the one hand, your helo can take an outrageous amount of damage
(and there are magical "nano-pads" which heal you up if you land on
them), as well as ridiculous amounts of enemies to gun down. On the
other hand, the floaty movement is more reminiscent of actual (if
greatly simplified) helicopter flight, you have a very limited amount
of ordnance with which to complete your missions, and your chances of
hitting your target is pretty low compared to a regular FPS. But the
end result is that whether you want an arcade shooter or a simulation,
you're going to be disappointed by what "Comanche" provides.

But even if the flying were acceptable, too much of the game is
interrupted by having to navigate a tiny drone through building
interiors. In this regard the game resembles "Descent" somewhat -
minus the intense action - but it feels greatly out of place compared
to the rest of the game. It's as if the developers worried that the
game wasn't /enough/ like an FPS so they forced in some (poorly
designed) corridor-shooter mechanics.

It's rare that I say this - I always try to see the good side of any
game - but "Comanche" is just awful. It's not fun to play, it's not
exciting to look at, it has an awful story and setting... it's bad.
Primitive as the older games may be, I can still eke some enjoyment
out of them. This game, though? It's crap.

On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:22:49 AM UTC-8, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> * Comanche (2021) (new)

I keep having nostalgia for Gunship 2000, but I'm 90% sure if I tried
to play it now, I'd get frustrated and quickly drop it. I feel like I'd
love a more modern arcady helicopter game, but my brain says,
no, it's probably be too annoying. There are helicopters in EDF,
but the controls are horrid and they have no health, there is one
rather difficult mission for one of the characters I did finally get
past by using one, but that's 1 out of 120.

> * Crusader: No Remorse (replay)

I can't remember if I actually played the whole thing, or just the demo,
but I do remember it fondly. I had almost bought it on GoG recently,
but the reviews mentioning the same issues you do of clunky controls
and pixel perfect platforming were red flags that helped me decide
not to.

> Six games in one month; while that's a shadow of what I've played in
> my heyday, it's a good deal more than I've been playing recently, so I
> think that's a great start to the year.

I've only got 2. I've been in a bit of a funk last month. The constant
rain and flood worries, and winter doldrums hit hard. I seem to
be feeling a bit better today at least.

>
> How 'bout you? What have you been playing... IN JANUARY 2023?

The short:
1. Witcher III
2. Dark Souls Remastered

* Witcher III - It didn't really click with me immediately, and I just quit
when I got to the first tavern. It seemed fine though, and I need to give
it another try when I'm more in the mood.

* Dark Souls Remastered - I decided to give it a go since there's a
'return to lordan' (dark souls remastered) community event from
Jan 6-20th. I joined a week late so didn't really have enough time to
finish it, it was glorious helping tons of others people defeat harder
bosses, but it was still slow compared to when I played Prepare
to Die edition ages ago, and it's been dropping off much more as
I continued to play after.

I managed to get myself banned too. I was using cheat engine
because I didn't want to farm humanity (a resource in the game)
and the anti-cheat picked that up. I was able to create a new
account and use that and obviously not cheat with that, but the
achievements don't show up on my account of course. I was
thinking of trying to go for 100% again, but I'd prefer to do it on my
main account.

When I tried it last it felt really janky and ugly, but probably because
I had some distance from Elden Ring it felt fine. It's improved from
PtD edition with full directional control (8 way in PtD,) and has
the ability to use a number of items all at once if you want. Visuals
looked fine this time too. Obviously the anti-cheat is much improved.

I still don't like the excessive amount of drops and third person
platforming, but even that's been improved quite a bit. I don't like
the farming either, but it doesn't feel as bad as I remember after
actually getting into it. I don't like that the majority of bosses
have some gimmick to them, and all the having to cut tails
off to get weapons. But even with all that I still enjoy the game.

I'm currently torn if I want to play through with my current sorcerer
on my account without other players to get achievements or wait
until the next event for it on my 2nd account, which I assume is
going to be a year from now. The next event is Feb 27th - March
13th for Dark Souls 2, which I plan on joining to try to get to and
through the DLCs at long last, and I could get a jump on that.

PS Dungeon Robber/Javascript. I'm still running my PbP
game, but I had some issues with my wrist/finger hurting
I think from using the scroll wheel a lot, and had to slow
way down. Still, the game has 4k posts on it, which is
outrageous for a PbP game in this short a time in my experience.

The Javascript I haven't done anything with since early on
as I was just trying to make a random table to spit out some
results instead of using a spreadsheet*, but ran into issues
getting that to work with nested tables, and didn't find a
fix, and gave up on it for the moment. I'm starting to think
it's just an utterly garbage mish-mash of a language, and
may go back to trying Python, but JavaScript is a lot more
accessible since it runs directly in a browser. Either that
or try one of the game making frameworks, but that
probably won't teach me anything useful for the possibility
of employment.

* I'd never done nested random tables in a spreadsheet, but
after the attempt at programming I figured out how to do them
in the spreadsheet, and it was pretty easy, so I did at least
learn something from my attempts, even if it wasn't in
programming.

- Justisaur

I briefly played SCARLET NEXUS' free weekend. Too many cutscenes and not
a fan of animes. Otherwise, not bad. No time to play again. :(

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

> Well, I guess we're officially in 2023 now. Somehow I thought - when I
> was younger - the future would be shinier. But at least we got cool
> video games.

> Anyway, let's do this thing.

> My Five-Second Long Summary
> ---------------------------------------
> * Quake Enhanced (new?)
> * Doom Eternal - Ancient Gods pt 1 & 2 (new)
> * Comanche (2021) (new)
> * The Hunter: Call of the Wild - New England Mountains (newish)
> * Mechwarrior 5 Mercenaries (replay)
> * Crusader: No Remorse (replay)

> My Hours-Long Summaries
> ---------------------------------------

> * Quake Enhanced (new)
> Lipstick on a pig. That was the phrase that kept circling my brain as
> I played "Quake Enhanced", the updated version of the venerable
> shooter released a year ago (but only finally available on GOG). A
> phrase which is, I admit, rather unfair to Quake. I may not be the
> biggest fan of the game - I was on Team Nukem in the mid 90s,
> preferring games with a bit more context and character - but I
> admired Quake for its technology and influence on the industry. A
> 'pig' Quake certainly was not.

> But Quake Enhanced certainly is unnecessary lipstick. Largely a visual
> upgrade, it all feels rather pointless. While the lighting, textures
> and models have been improved, it's still very obviously a game of the
> '90s; it isn't a complete revamp. If the 30-year old visuals were what
> kept you from playing this game, I doubt an upgrade to 25-year old
> graphics are going to bring you back. I can't even admire the update
> for its technical prowess -- "Ooh, lookit what they made the idTech-1
> engine do!" -- since "Quake Enhanced" isn't using /any/ idTech engine,
> instead having been translated to the proprietary Kex Engine developed
> by Nightdive Studios.

> The gameplay remains largely the same, though. Well, the movement does
> feel a lot more 'slippery' than I remember, which made some of the
> platforming a lot more tricky than it should have been. But it's still
> the fast-paced arena-shooter of yore we all remember. That's good if
> you like that sort of thing (I'm lukewarm on it), but did we really
> need a half-assed enhancement just to revisit it? QE also features an
> entirely new episode ("The Dimension of the Machine") which adds some
> much needed new textures to the game and has some impressive (for
> Quake) architecture, but its pacing and hub-based level design feel
> more akin to slower FPS games than the archetypical Id shooter.

> So in the end, the whole thing felt gratuitous. "Quake Enhanced"
> wasn't really bringing anything new to the table - certainly not when
> compared to what the various sourceports and modders had been offering
> for free for decades. It wasn't even using a Carmack-designed engine.
> It felt more like an opportunity for Bethesda/Microsoft to line their
> wallets by reissuing a 30 year old game. Lipstick on a pig.

> * Doom Eternal Ancient Gods pt 1 & 2 (new)
> Like the original "Doom 2", "Doom Eternal" took the ideas of its
> predecessor and played around with it. The core gameplay mechanics
> remained the same in both games, but both "Doom 2" and "Doom Eternal"
> felt a lot more experimental with their level designs and monsters.
> With "Doom 2", the technology just wasn't up to some of the ideas the
> developers wanted to implement, leading to a lot of levels that felt
> gimmicky, and with way too much platforming. "Doom Eternal" felt
> better balanced, and was overall a much better sequel.

> "The Ancient Gods" DLC, on the other hand, feels like "Doom 2" to
> "Doom Eternal"; a continuation of an idea implemented with poorly
> polished levels. None of the levels are bad (with one notable
> exception at the end) but neither are they particularly good. The maps
> are often retreads of ideas already explored in the main game, and in
> fact the overwhelming feeling I had while playing was that the maps
> were the rejects that were culled out while finalizing "Doom Eternal".

> Overall the new maps tended to be smaller, with less intense combat
> and an increased emphasis on between-battle platforming. There were
> fewer areas to explore, and the maps were almost (but not entirely)
> devoid of secrets. The fights themselves felt less reliant on the
> 'push forward' mechanic that made "Doom (2016)" and "Doom Eternal" so
> novel; too often the winning strategy seemed to be to fall back and
> circle strafe the fight, picking off the stragglers and only rushing
> forward for quick rearms. There was much less emphasis on 3D
> maneuvering during fights too.

> The storyline - which, amusingly, was always the part that interested
> me most in these new games - was less enthralling too. Doomguy, having
> blunted the demon invasion, goes off to kill the 'king demon' and end
> the threat of Hell once and for all. Unfortunately, the Biggest Bad
> turns out to be (ROT13 minor spoiler) n zveebe-Rnegu irefvba bs
> Qbbzthl uvzfrys, which greatly negates the feeling of threat. After
> facing off (and winning!) against a thousand-foot tall Titan at the
> end of "Doom Eternal", this new foe feels almost inconsequential.

> The big end-game boss-fight is also possibly one of the most annoying
> I've played in a long time. Because the big evil is invulnerable
> /except/ when he makes one specific attack, and because you can only
> stun him with a very specific - and randomly dropped - type of ammo, a
> good deal of time is spent dodging attacks and waiting for your foe to
> leave himself vulnerable. The fact that any damage he inflicts on
> /you/ automatically heals /him/ doesn't help, nor does the fact that
> you need to 'kill' him in six nearly-identical fights. It's an
> extremely drawn out and tedious battle that probably accounted for a
> quarter of the run-time of the second DLC. The reward for your victory
> is - despite a very late plot-twist at the end - very unfulfilling
> too. If I ever play "Ancient Gods" again, it will only be until I
> reach that final fight. It's just not worth doing it a second time.

> Overall, the experience was fairly disappointing; the whole package
> felt lackluster and without the refined gameplay that made "Eternal"
> so memorable.

> * Comanche (2021) (new)
> The 2010 "Medal of Honor" (that's the Modern Warfare clone, not the
> original set in World War 2) was an utterly forgettable game, except
> for one part. That bit was when you got to fly around the Pamir
> mountains in an Apache helicopter and 'blow shit up'. Between the
> impressive (for the time) graphics and the easy flight model, it was
> surprisingly fun, and - on playing that section of the game - I
> wondered why nobody had made a helicopter sim with comparative visuals
> and arcade action; it couldn't help but be great, right? But the 2021
> reboot of "Comanche" is proof that combination doesn't necessarily
> result in a good game.

> The original Comanche, released way back in '92, was a groundbreaking
> game. Not only did it introduce the gaming world to voxels (allowing
> realistic - if blocky - rolling terrain to flight sims for the first
> time ever), but it was a fun mix of arcade action and realistic
> simulation. It really was all in a class to itself, and it almost
> single-handedly elevated Novalogic, the game's developer, into
> becoming a top-tier publisher.

> Ashborne Games, the new developers of the license, are nowhere near as
> skilled. The graphics engine offers some acceptable visuals (although
> not as groundbreakingly advanced as the original) but that's about the
> extent of the game's positives. Everything else about this game is
> disappointing: from its flight model, its arcade-action, its map
> layout, its story, its voice-acting... everything.

> Its missions are aggravating; the game can't seem to decide if it
> wants to be a run-n-gun game like an FPS, or a more serious simulator.
> On the one hand, your helo can take an outrageous amount of damage
> (and there are magical "nano-pads" which heal you up if you land on
> them), as well as ridiculous amounts of enemies to gun down. On the
> other hand, the floaty movement is more reminiscent of actual (if
> greatly simplified) helicopter flight, you have a very limited amount
> of ordnance with which to complete your missions, and your chances of
> hitting your target is pretty low compared to a regular FPS. But the
> end result is that whether you want an arcade shooter or a simulation,
> you're going to be disappointed by what "Comanche" provides.

On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 11:45:37 AM UTC-8, Ant wrote:
> I briefly played SCARLET NEXUS' free weekend. Too many cutscenes and not
> a fan of animes. Otherwise, not bad. No time to play again. :(
> Spalls Hurgenson <spallsh...@gmail.com> wrote:

That was tempting, but I was in the throws of my Dark Souls addiction, and the
reviews were not real good... cutscenes were on of the issues mentioned.
The other was the game takes a left turn into garbage in the 2nd half.

I can't seem to get into the anime games either, so that lowers it a bit in
my mind too. I like watching most anime, so I'm not sure what it is about
the games?

- Justisaur

On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 11:39:50 -0800 (PST), Justisaur
<justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Wednesday, February 1, 2023 at 9:22:49 AM UTC-8, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
>> * Comanche (2021) (new)
>
>I keep having nostalgia for Gunship 2000, but I'm 90% sure if I tried
>to play it now, I'd get frustrated and quickly drop it. I feel like I'd
>love a more modern arcady helicopter game, but my brain says,
>no, it's probably be too annoying. There are helicopters in EDF,
>but the controls are horrid and they have no health, there is one
>rather difficult mission for one of the characters I did finally get
>past by using one, but that's 1 out of 120.

I felt the same as you, which is why I thought I'd enjoy "Comanche";
the series has always tilted more towards arcade action than
simulation (the original let you carry dozens of missiles and endure
multiple missile strikes); it was only a 'simulation' in the most
vague interpretations of the word. The early games are still
surprisingly fun to play, if only in short bursts (they're fairly
shallow, and the missions differ largely only in how many enemies they
throw at you).

It's modern incarnation is similar in mechanics, but its flight model
is extremely unsatisfying and its drone side-missions feel incredibly
out of place; they're dull slogs through unexciting, repetitive grey
corridors. The original at least had fast paced arcade action; the AI
was idiotic but it was fun to pop tanks and Hokums from afar in what
was - for its time - rather spectacular graphical pyrotechnics. This
reboot lacks all the fun and excitement; it's a third-tier FPS with
floaty 'helicopter' movement.

TL;DR: You might still get a kick out of helicopter action/sim... but
Comanche 2021 isn't going to be the game to do it for yo.

>> * Crusader: No Remorse (replay)
>I can't remember if I actually played the whole thing, or just the demo,
>but I do remember it fondly. I had almost bought it on GoG recently,
>but the reviews mentioning the same issues you do of clunky controls
>and pixel perfect platforming were red flags that helped me decide
>not to.

There's actually only a limited amount of platforming; I think the
number of times I /had/ to jump to finish a level could be counted on
the fingers of one hand. Rolling was a bit more necessary - either to
dodge enemy fire or get beneath low obstacles - but for most of the
game that feature could be ignored too (especially on lesser
difficulty levels). Even aiming wasn't that bad; you can only move in
the 8 cardinal directions, but you can spin about 360 degrees. A lack
of a clarity as to which direction you were facing often resulted in
some wasted ammo, but resupplies were so frequent that was rarely a
problem.

But movement? That was a pain. Obstacles meant you could often only
move past them in one direction (let's say "east" in this example").
If you faced 'east" and moved forward, no problem. But face any other
direction, and your character simply won't move. He wouldn't slowly
glide eastward, rubbing his backside against the obstacles until he
clear them; he'd just lock in place. And because the level design was
so cluttered - a result of putting the appearance of the place above
its actual playability - this sort of thing happened a lot.

It was more an aggravating annoyance than a game-killer, but it spoke
to the lack of polish - this time caused by how ahead-of-the-curve the
game was rather than a lack of skill or care - but it makes the game
harder to recommend to modern audiences. Back in '95, that sort of
thing was forgivable because so much about the rest of the game was
extraordinary. But now that the industry has caught up (and surpassed)
"Crusader: No Regret", it's really hard for modern gamers to see its
appeal.

>1. Witcher III

>* Witcher III - It didn't really click with me immediately, and I just quit
>when I got to the first tavern. It seemed fine though, and I need to give
>it another try when I'm more in the mood.

I love "Witcher 3" but totally get that feeling. It doesn't help that
it's introduction - the initial tutorial in the castle and the starter
map - is probably the least enticing part of the game.

(Hint for if you ever give the game another chance: you can come back
to the starter map later on, so don't feel obligated to try and finish
all the quests in the beginning).

That first part lacks a lot of the entertaining characters and more
meaningful subquests that make people remember "Witcher 3" so fondly.

But even besides all that, "The Witcher 3" is such an immense game
that it can feel overwhelming, especially at the start. It rewards the
effort of perservering but it can be a difficult game to get into (I
played the game en toto about a year ago, but I'd made numerous
attempts to replay it prior to that, having gotten about as far as you
did before fleeing in desperation at the size of the task ahead of
me).

So, yeah; don't feel bad about leaving the "Witcher 3" behind. Once
you get into it, it probably will consume your life for a while, and
its understandable if you want to delay that until your ready for that
sort of commitment. Just don't give up on it altogether, because -
assuming you enjoy that sort of game - I think you'll really like it
once you make that plunge.

(although it can be a bit dark and dour at times, so if you are - as
you said - caught up in the winter doldrums, maybe wait until your
heart is a bit lighter before starting. ;-)

On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 11:56:58 -0800 (PST), Justisaur
<justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:

>I can't seem to get into the anime games either, so that lowers it a bit in
>my mind too. I like watching most anime, so I'm not sure what it is about
>the games?

Perhaps you are like me and have a problem with the odd conflux of
hyper-detailed realistic art and worlds with the often surreal
characters and situations (what I somewhat prejudiciously refer to as
'Japanese Weird', because it occurs most often in games from Japan)?
Its one thing to watch it on TV or film, but I have a hard time
engaging with it if I'm personally immersed in the world.

On 2/1/2023 9:22 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
> Well, I guess we're officially in 2023 now. Somehow I thought - when I
> was younger - the future would be shinier. But at least we got cool
> video games.
>
> Anyway, let's do this thing.
>
>
> My Five-Second Long Summary
> ---------------------------------------
Stardew Valley.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

>How 'bout you? What have you been playing... IN JANUARY 2023?

The Witcher 3
I have umpteen hours in this already, just wandering the countryside to all
the '?' marks, fighting monstars & collecting herbs. No doubt I could've
finished the game already, but as is am not even 20%. It's just so pretty,
and the sidequests are well-written, with unique voiced cutscenes and
dialogue -- how can I skip them?

rms

On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 13:29:12 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
<dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:

>Stardew Valley.

Wow. How do you manage to squeeze an entire month's worth of
video-games into just two words? I've never been able to do that. ;-)

On 2/2/2023 7:35 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 13:29:12 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>> Stardew Valley.
>
> Wow. How do you manage to squeeze an entire month's worth of
> video-games into just two words? I've never been able to do that. ;-)
>
Knowing no one will read or comment on it helps.

--
I've done good in this world. Now I'm tired and just want to be a cranky
dirty old man.

>Stardew Valley.

Games like this or I guess minecraft? that have you create your own
environment I just look at and think I could never do that. I've always
enjoyed being given a gameworld others have created and being surprised by
what is presented, basically interactive movies.

rms

On 02/02/2023 14:52, rms wrote:
>> How 'bout you? What have you been playing... IN JANUARY 2023?
>
>   The Witcher 3
> I have umpteen hours in this already, just wandering the countryside to
> all the '?' marks, fighting monstars & collecting herbs.  No doubt I
> could've finished the game already, but as is am not even 20%.  It's
> just so pretty, and the sidequests are well-written, with unique voiced
> cutscenes and dialogue -- how can I skip them?
>

Did you play the original as I did like that but the second one I just
didn't get into although I was never sure entirely why even taking into
account it was no longer a new IP to me?

Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> writes:

> * Crusader: No Remorse (replay)

Oh, I do remember this fondly. MOD-style soundtrack too. I even tried
the GoG version at some point but not really willing to subject myself
to this level of clunkiness. Or I don't know, maybe I should give it a
try.

I remember at least some reviewer back when made a big deal out of the
gruesome deaths you inflict on the enemies and civilians alike. Blood
pools under corpses riddled with bullets. Plasma vaporizes them
outright. Rockets set them on fire so they run around screaming and
would then fall down and burn into a pile of ash. Over the top and very
comic-booky or Spy-vs-Spy like gore in other words. Were you completely
unmoved by this silliness? I remember you could even remote control
little spider bombs right into your enemies.

In fact, as I recall, the more powerful weapons in the game weren't that
good since you needed money to buy supplies between missions and lots
(some?) of that came from enemy corpses. But if you vaporized your
enemies, the money disappeared too.

I think the sequel No Regret did something about the money and the
civvies, maybe it was seen as a little offensive that you could murder
armed enemies and unarmed civilians as much as you liked... This was a
little before GTA and Carmageddon, after all.

>Did you play the original as I did like that but the second one I just
>didn't get into although I was never sure entirely why even taking into
>account it was no longer a new IP to me?

That's exactly what happened. The first game was tense and amazing (that
ending cinematic, omg), the second game didn't make much sense (and it still
doesn't) so I rushed through it. But in this 3rd Witcher game, the magic is
back. Every little sidequest has some unique dialogue or aspect to it,
cutscenes fully voice-acted and mocap'd, facial animations are realistic and
pleasing, the architecture and surroundings complex and varied, the sounds
and incidental conversations as you wander around a city believeable, the
combat interesting enough if you mix up movement, potions, oils, signs,
bombs, parrying etc, and with a new videocard it all just looks outstanding.

rms

On Fri, 3 Feb 2023 08:42:32 -0700, "rms" <rsquiresMOO@MOOflashMOO.net>
wrote:

>>Did you play the original as I did like that but the second one I just
>>didn't get into although I was never sure entirely why even taking into
>>account it was no longer a new IP to me?
>
> That's exactly what happened. The first game was tense and amazing (that
>ending cinematic, omg), the second game didn't make much sense (and it still
>doesn't) so I rushed through it. But in this 3rd Witcher game, the magic is
>back. Every little sidequest has some unique dialogue or aspect to it,
>cutscenes fully voice-acted and mocap'd, facial animations are realistic and
>pleasing, the architecture and surroundings complex and varied, the sounds
>and incidental conversations as you wander around a city believeable, the
>combat interesting enough if you mix up movement, potions, oils, signs,
>bombs, parrying etc, and with a new videocard it all just looks outstanding.

The second game was much more tied to its narrative, to the point that
it shoved you from map to map as the story - not the player -
demanded. Each region was smaller too. Witcher 1 and Witcher 3 felt
much more open-world in comparison.

Witcher 2 also had a problem in that it immersed you immediately into
the politics of the setting, having to make decisions about which
factions to favor right from the start. And since it had been years
since I'd played Witcher 1 (or read the books), I had only the barest
of clues as who everybody was or what they stood for, and almost no
personal feelings about any of them. Add into that the Witcher
franchise's usual grey-on-grey morality it was really hard for me to
get into the game because I had no idea whether my choices were the
'right' ones.

Both the Witcher 1 and 3 greatly improved on this. The main plot was
not focused on the politics. Instead, the politics impacted the
primary quest. Both games also started a lot slower giving you an
opportunity to learn who the various factions were before making
alliances.

Simply put, Witcher 2 suffered from bad plotting. It had some
interesting mechanics, situations, characters, writing and set-pieces
but it on-boarded players very poorly, didn't provide the same freedom
as the first (and third game) and generally was too involved with its
own story rather than letting the players create their own.

On Fri, 03 Feb 2023 13:42:05 +0200, Anssi Saari <as@sci.fi> wrote:
>Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> writes:

>> * Crusader: No Remorse (replay)

>Oh, I do remember this fondly. MOD-style soundtrack too. I even tried
>the GoG version at some point but not really willing to subject myself
>to this level of clunkiness. Or I don't know, maybe I should give it a
>try.

>I remember at least some reviewer back when made a big deal out of the
>gruesome deaths you inflict on the enemies and civilians alike. Blood
>pools under corpses riddled with bullets. Plasma vaporizes them
>outright. Rockets set them on fire so they run around screaming and
>would then fall down and burn into a pile of ash. Over the top and very
>comic-booky or Spy-vs-Spy like gore in other words. Were you completely
>unmoved by this silliness? I remember you could even remote control
>little spider bombs right into your enemies.

Oh, no. The combat is delightful. The weapons are so wonderfully over
the top (there's a rifle that shoots five rockets at once in
wonderfully arc of destruction) and the effects - from the hideous
deaths to the props and doors exploding - were delightful eye-candy.
Like I said, "Crusader" was extremely well-regarded in its time, and
for good reason. It was a solid, enjoyable game.

(although the death animations always brought to mind "Syndicate",
which did that sort of thing first ;-)

But today, that sort of excess is so common as to be unnotable, and
the game's flaws - most prominently its clunky controls - diminish a
lot of the joy you might get from everything else.

A lot of older games ("Pac-Man", "Loderunner", "Half Life", "Falcon
3.0",etc.) , you can go back and play them and - if you forgive the
aging graphics and technology-limited feature-set - still see why
they were so revered. But "Crusader" is a much harder sell. It sits
right on the crux of old-school and modern, where its sins can't be
forgiven because 'that's the best they could do back then' when
everything else about the game showed off how good it could have been.

I loved "Crusader: No Remorse" when it was new and I absolutely
believe it deserved all the praise it received back then. But playing
it today? It was a struggle.

On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 12:22:33 -0500, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

>
>Well, I guess we're officially in 2023 now. Somehow I thought - when I
>was younger - the future would be shinier. But at least we got cool
>video games.
>
>Anyway, let's do this thing.
>
My life is consumed by Return to Monkey Island. At once, I hated the art
style, but now my eyes have basically gone blind to the affront.

IOW: It got better. Or less worse. Whatever.

Game is pretty easy so far, excepting one really obnoxious puzzle for
getting the eyepatch disguise to work which basically left you hanging
without a clue and had a pretty dumb, but not entirely irrational,
solution. Just super obscure. I assume this happened because I chose
"hard mode."

On Act IV rn. The story and humor are spot on. There are regularly
occuring trivia cards and achievements. It's fun.

+1, would recommend.

--
Zag

No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten

On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 08:37:49 -0800, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Dimensional Traveler wrote:

>On 2/2/2023 7:35 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 13:29:12 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
>> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Stardew Valley.
>>
>> Wow. How do you manage to squeeze an entire month's worth of
>> video-games into just two words? I've never been able to do that. ;-)
>>
>Knowing no one will read or comment on it helps.

Well, bad assumption there. Response-wise, that is. You must be new here.

--
Zag

No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten

On Fri, 03 Feb 2023 13:52:08 -0600, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Thu, 2 Feb 2023 08:37:49 -0800, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>Dimensional Traveler wrote:
>
>>On 2/2/2023 7:35 AM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>> On Wed, 1 Feb 2023 13:29:12 -0800, Dimensional Traveler
>>> <dtravel@sonic.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Stardew Valley.
>>>
>>> Wow. How do you manage to squeeze an entire month's worth of
>>> video-games into just two words? I've never been able to do that. ;-)
>>>
>>Knowing no one will read or comment on it helps.
>
>Well, bad assumption there. Response-wise, that is. You must be new here.

I just assume nobody will read my stuff but write it anyway. That way,
in the odd instances when people DO actually parse my novel-length
comments, I get a brief moment of joy that I otherwise would miss out
on ;-)

(mathematically speaking, lowered expectations are key to life-long
happiness ;-)

On Fri, 03 Feb 2023 13:47:58 -0600, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>My life is consumed by Return to Monkey Island. At once, I hated the art
>style, but now my eyes have basically gone blind to the affront.

>+1, would recommend.

Huh. That's disappointing. I was hoping for an 'oh god stay away'
because that would make things so much easier for me. The art style is
attrocious, and while - as you point out - eventually you get enured
to its horribleness, I can't help but imagine how much better it would
be with visuals that don't make me want to claw out my own eyes.

But then, I was never the biggest fans of the Monkey Island franchise.
I enjoyed them, but - at least thematically - preferred Sierra's
games... although the lack of frequent deaths was a point in favor of
LucasArts games. Still, I probably enjoyed almost all of the other
LucasArts adventure games more; "Loom", "Sam and Max", "Day of the
Tentacle", "Full Throttle", etc. The first "Monkey Island" in
particular I felt was weak; aside from its premise, it was the least
humorous of the bunch and with the most nonsensical puzzles (MI3 was
pretty good though; Murray the Skull steals the show).

So I only felt a partial draw towards the new game - mostly due to
nostalgia - and the art style was a significant drawback. Nonetheless,
I am still a fan of the gameplay of those classic games, and you seem
to indicate it nails that pretty well.

So rather than being able to ignore the game, I actually have to
consider getting it.

On Fri, 03 Feb 2023 15:50:38 -0500, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

>So rather than being able to ignore the game, I actually have to
>consider getting it.

Is that even a consideration? Now, playing it, that's a consideration.

--
Zag

No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten

On 03/02/2023 15:42, rms wrote:
>> Did you play the original as I did like that but the second one I just
>> didn't get into although I was never sure entirely why even taking
>> into account it was no longer a new IP to me?
>
>   That's exactly what happened.  The first game was tense and amazing
> (that ending cinematic, omg), the second game didn't make much sense
> (and it still doesn't) so I rushed through it.  But in this 3rd Witcher
> game, the magic is back.  Every little sidequest has some unique
> dialogue or aspect to it, cutscenes fully voice-acted and mocap'd,
> facial animations are realistic and pleasing, the architecture and
> surroundings complex and varied, the sounds and incidental conversations
> as you wander around a city believeable, the combat interesting enough
> if you mix up movement, potions, oils, signs, bombs, parrying etc, and
> with a new videocard it all just looks outstanding.
>

Good to know and I'll pick it up next time it's on Steam at a good price.

On Fri, 03 Feb 2023 15:50:38 -0500, Spalls Hurgenson
<spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:

>Huh. That's disappointing. I was hoping for an 'oh god stay away'
>because that would make things so much easier for me. The art style is
>attrocious,

I don't get the dislike of this game's graphics. It was the third
game, with its cartoon graphics, that I thought was bad. I hated the
way Guybrush looked. That tall skinny look turned me off completely to
the game.

On Fri, 03 Feb 2023 13:47:58 -0600, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 12:22:33 -0500, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>
>>
>>Well, I guess we're officially in 2023 now. Somehow I thought - when I
>>was younger - the future would be shinier. But at least we got cool
>>video games.
>>
>>Anyway, let's do this thing.
>>
>My life is consumed by Return to Monkey Island. At once, I hated the art
>style, but now my eyes have basically gone blind to the affront.
>
>IOW: It got better. Or less worse. Whatever.
>
>Game is pretty easy so far, excepting one really obnoxious puzzle for
>getting the eyepatch disguise to work which basically left you hanging
>without a clue and had a pretty dumb, but not entirely irrational,
>solution. Just super obscure. I assume this happened because I chose
>"hard mode."
>
>On Act IV rn. The story and humor are spot on. There are regularly
>occuring trivia cards and achievements. It's fun.
>
>+1, would recommend.

*---

I stopped playing it because of the "vector" artwork. Not sure if I
can get used to it.

-pw

On Sat, 04 Feb 2023 21:44:33 -0700, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, PW
wrote:

>On Fri, 03 Feb 2023 13:47:58 -0600, Zaghadka <zaghadka@hotmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 01 Feb 2023 12:22:33 -0500, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action,
>>Spalls Hurgenson wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>Well, I guess we're officially in 2023 now. Somehow I thought - when I
>>>was younger - the future would be shinier. But at least we got cool
>>>video games.
>>>
>>>Anyway, let's do this thing.
>>>
>>My life is consumed by Return to Monkey Island. At once, I hated the art
>>style, but now my eyes have basically gone blind to the affront.
>>
>>IOW: It got better. Or less worse. Whatever.
>>
>>Game is pretty easy so far, excepting one really obnoxious puzzle for
>>getting the eyepatch disguise to work which basically left you hanging
>>without a clue and had a pretty dumb, but not entirely irrational,
>>solution. Just super obscure. I assume this happened because I chose
>>"hard mode."
>>
>>On Act IV rn. The story and humor are spot on. There are regularly
>>occuring trivia cards and achievements. It's fun.
>>
>>+1, would recommend.
>
>*---
>
>I stopped playing it because of the "vector" artwork. Not sure if I
>can get used to it.
>

Yeah, it's pretty bad. I'm in it for the humor and story, so I just
switched that part of my brain off.

I'm sure there's some nagging, unconscious struggle going on underneath
the surface that will require therapy. ;^)

--
Zag

No one ever said on their deathbed, 'Gee, I wish I had
spent more time alone with my computer.' ~Dan(i) Bunten