It's not often this happens but the original is one of my favourite
games (only let down by the ending) which I've played through three
times. It's a puzzler mixed with some optional philosophy (yes you heard
that right). What it does well is that it slowly introduces new concepts
while not just telling you what to do. It feels a bit like Portal in
that respect. What I think it did better was that instead of sequential
levels it has a set of levels where each one contain a number of puzzles
that you can solve in any order. What that means is if you get stuck you
can go and try another puzzle and that may even give you some ideas
about the one you get stuck on.

One bit I hope they ditched is to unlock parts of the game you have to
collect shapes by solving puzzles. You then rotate these various shapes
to make a complete square. I really don't think it added anything to the
game at all besides mild annoyance.

So any games you're looking forward to?

On Fri, 4 Aug 2023 09:29:21 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

>So any games you're looking forward to?

It has been a very long time since I looked forward to anything new.

On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 1:29:25 AM UTC-7, JAB wrote:
> It's not often this happens but the original is one of my favourite
> games (only let down by the ending) which I've played through three
> times. It's a puzzler mixed with some optional philosophy (yes you heard
> that right). What it does well is that it slowly introduces new concepts
> while not just telling you what to do. It feels a bit like Portal in
> that respect. What I think it did better was that instead of sequential
> levels it has a set of levels where each one contain a number of puzzles
> that you can solve in any order. What that means is if you get stuck you
> can go and try another puzzle and that may even give you some ideas
> about the one you get stuck on.
>
> One bit I hope they ditched is to unlock parts of the game you have to
> collect shapes by solving puzzles. You then rotate these various shapes
> to make a complete square. I really don't think it added anything to the
> game at all besides mild annoyance.
>
> So any games you're looking forward to?

Earth Defense Force 6 - (already out in Japanese, but usually takes a year
for the English version.)
Armored Core 6 - Mech game by the makers of Elden Ring
Baldur's Gate 3 - unlike the originals is turn based and a different company.
Starfield - Skyrim-Fallout of space by Bethesda
Stalker 2 - FPS/RPG

DLCs for Elden Ring and Cyberpunk 2077

I'd say I'm cautiously looking forward to most of those and will wait for
reviews and/or sales. EDF6 and the 2 DLCs are the only ones I'll likely
buy at or near release.

- Justisaur

On Fri, 4 Aug 2023 09:29:21 +0100, JAB <noway@nochance.com> wrote:

>It's not often this happens but the original is one of my favourite
>games (only let down by the ending) which I've played through three
>times. It's a puzzler mixed with some optional philosophy (yes you heard
>that right). What it does well is that it slowly introduces new concepts
>while not just telling you what to do. It feels a bit like Portal in
>that respect. What I think it did better was that instead of sequential
>levels it has a set of levels where each one contain a number of puzzles
>that you can solve in any order. What that means is if you get stuck you
>can go and try another puzzle and that may even give you some ideas
>about the one you get stuck on.

I wasn't so sanguine about "The Talos Principle"

I personally found it sort of clumsy in its execution, but more
tellingly, by the time I got around to playing it, I was over
saturated with first-person puzzle-games. "Portal", "The Turing Test",
"The Witness", and more of the sort had burned me out on the genre.
"Talos" was just one more, and it didn't seem a particularly novel or
exciting variety. It's not that it was a bad game; it was fine. It
just didn't really stand out, and to this day I don't really have
clear memories of it.

(it's the one with the robot, right?)

Which isn't to say I'd argue against people playing it (apparently it
is on sale on Steam now, if you haven't yet tried it), just that the
gameplay was never a good fit for me, and because of my introduction
to the game, I don't have the same fondness for it that others might.

>So any games you're looking forward to?

For a variety of reasons: none.

Partly because I have such an immense backlog, I don't need any more
games (that wont' stop me from getting any new ones; I just don't NEED
them).

Partly because I know I won't be playing any "new" games until they
are months or years old. $70 USD for a video game? I don't think so.
Let me know when the game is down to the $10 range. So why get excited
now about a game that won't be played until years down the line?

Partly because I tend to insulate myself from the new-game hype
machine. This is mainly so I can experience a game with as little
prejudice as possible; I want the game to be new to me, and not
spoiled by months of dribbled clues and spoilers. But it does mean
that often I don't even KNOW what games are coming out until I bump
into them on the Steam store-page.

And partly because I just don't have much faith in the modern game
publishing industry. Too many modern games just aren't FUN anymore,
being saddled with pointlessly large worlds, live services and micro
transactions. There are the occasional gems, and I treasure these
discoveries, but it means that even when I DO learn about a new title,
I tend to be fairly pessimistic about it until I actually play the
game.

The closest I get to excitement about a game is when I hear that the
Truck Simulator series is releasing yet-another Map Expansion. Those
are instant buys for me, and I know I'll enjoy them. But I'll enjoy
them not necessarily for the content themselves but because those
expansions are just giving me more of what I like in the base game.
Which is to say, it is not so much that I am excited that "Oklahoma"
was just released for "American Truck Simulator" as I am that I now
have an excuse to play "American Truck Simulator" again. ;-)

On Friday, August 4, 2023 at 3:29:25 AM UTC-5, JAB wrote:
> It's not often this happens but the original is one of my favourite
> games (only let down by the ending) which I've played through three
> times. It's a puzzler mixed with some optional philosophy (yes you heard
> that right). What it does well is that it slowly introduces new concepts
> while not just telling you what to do. It feels a bit like Portal in
> that respect. What I think it did better was that instead of sequential
> levels it has a set of levels where each one contain a number of puzzles
> that you can solve in any order. What that means is if you get stuck you
> can go and try another puzzle and that may even give you some ideas
> about the one you get stuck on.
>
> One bit I hope they ditched is to unlock parts of the game you have to
> collect shapes by solving puzzles. You then rotate these various shapes
> to make a complete square. I really don't think it added anything to the
> game at all besides mild annoyance.
>
> So any games you're looking forward to?

I didn't like the shapes to make a complete square at first either, but as I progressed through other parts of the game I began to develop a knack for it. You can't really remove this aspect without throwing away the whole game.

I think the programmers were quite skilled. Talos Principle is visually better than many games, yet it stays cool and doesn't need the fan. Hopefully Talos Principle II will be equally endowed.

On 04/08/2023 15:31, Justisaur wrote:
> Baldur's Gate 3 - unlike the originals is turn based and a different company.

I'm still sitting on the fence about this even though the reviews are in
and are positive. I'm not sure that want I want from an RPG now is what
it will delivery especially given who the developers are. I'll probably
hold off a bit until it's in a half decent sale or try out the Steam
refund policy.

On 04/08/2023 23:32, Julian wrote:

> I didn't like the shapes to make a complete square at first either, but as I progressed through other parts of the game I began to develop a knack for it. You can't really remove this aspect without throwing away the whole game.
>

Personally I think you could just make it so it's collect the blocks and
when you have all of them it auto-completes. I just don't feel it adds
anything to the game.

Weird, here's another I just noticed. Shadow Gambit: The Cursed Crew.
This is from the developers of Shadow Tactics and Desperados 3 both of
which I really enjoyed. Looking at the trailer it's the same type of
game (stealth) in a Pirates trope setting with some magic. I'm glad that
they didn't go down the route I thought they would of a WWII setting as
the safer bet.

JAB <noway@nochance.com> writes:

> It's not often this happens but the original is one of my favourite
> games (only let down by the ending) which I've played through three
> times. It's a puzzler mixed with some optional philosophy (yes you
> heard that right). What it does well is that it slowly introduces new
> concepts while not just telling you what to do. It feels a bit like
> Portal in that respect. What I think it did better was that instead of
> sequential levels it has a set of levels where each one contain a
> number of puzzles that you can solve in any order. What that means is
> if you get stuck you can go and try another puzzle and that may even
> give you some ideas about the one you get stuck on.

Talos was fun and there certainly was no shortage of puzzles. I played
Portal with RTX recently and was baffled. Was Portal originally really
so short and easy? Except for the end where it was hard to see where you
could put a portal there was no challenge.

Maybe a little too much repetition in Talos since later on it was often
obvious what the solution was going to look like and then it was just a
matter of fiddling with the tools you had.

I remember being somewhat annoyed by some of the puzzles in Talos where
I was stuck for way too long. I think one particular trick was used only
once. It's so annoying when a puzzle is obvious except for one bit...

I didn't get anywhere with the harder star puzzles. Likewise the
"discussions" through the terminals. I had no idea what I was supposed
to say so I was just confused. I also seemed to miss some terminals
since I missed the back story for the most part.

> One bit I hope they ditched is to unlock parts of the game you have to
> collect shapes by solving puzzles. You then rotate these various
> shapes to make a complete square. I really don't think it added
> anything to the game at all besides mild annoyance.

These were Tetris shapes, no? I didn't much like those either,
especially as I sucked with them. I think looked for an online solver
but didn't find anything useful. Instead I got better pretty quick so I
didn't mind any more.

I'm looking forward to Starfield and maybe the Cyberpunk 2077 DLC.

On Sat, 05 Aug 2023 13:56:48 +0300, Anssi Saari
<anssi.saari@usenet.mail.kapsi.fi> wrote:
>JAB <noway@nochance.com> writes:

>Talos was fun and there certainly was no shortage of puzzles. I played
>Portal with RTX recently and was baffled. Was Portal originally really
>so short and easy?

Yes. Yes it was. Two thirds of the game felt like a tutorial for the
last third, with new mechanics very slowly dribbled out test-chamber
by test-chamber.

And a good part of the gameplay is little more than walking between
test chambers.

But it was never the GAMEPLAY that made "Portal" popular. It was the
characters, dialogue, setting and - to some degree - the neato-factor
of the portalling technology itself. That the gameplay was
(reasonably) fun was just a bonus.

But Valve took heed of some of the complaints and - while "Portal 2"
wasn't much longer or more difficult, they did add a side-campaign
(co-op mode) where the puzzles were more prominent... and made it
easier for modders to build new puzzle chambers.

But the original? You can finish it in a single sitting if you want.

On 05/08/2023 11:56, Anssi Saari wrote:
> JAB <noway@nochance.com> writes:
>
>> It's not often this happens but the original is one of my favourite
>> games (only let down by the ending) which I've played through three
>> times. It's a puzzler mixed with some optional philosophy (yes you
>> heard that right). What it does well is that it slowly introduces new
>> concepts while not just telling you what to do. It feels a bit like
>> Portal in that respect. What I think it did better was that instead of
>> sequential levels it has a set of levels where each one contain a
>> number of puzzles that you can solve in any order. What that means is
>> if you get stuck you can go and try another puzzle and that may even
>> give you some ideas about the one you get stuck on.
>
> Talos was fun and there certainly was no shortage of puzzles. I played
> Portal with RTX recently and was baffled. Was Portal originally really
> so short and easy? Except for the end where it was hard to see where you
> could put a portal there was no challenge.
>
> Maybe a little too much repetition in Talos since later on it was often
> obvious what the solution was going to look like and then it was just a
> matter of fiddling with the tools you had.
>
> I remember being somewhat annoyed by some of the puzzles in Talos where
> I was stuck for way too long. I think one particular trick was used only
> once. It's so annoying when a puzzle is obvious except for one bit...
>

I think Talos got it about right, for me at least, that it was
challenging enough to be fun but not so challenging that it was just
frustrating. I did get so struck on a couple of levels I had to look up
how to solve them and one of them I just thought, I didn't even realise
you could do that. Having to put a cube on one of the floating
'electric' orbs or something like that. One that I did relent and look
up was the finally climatic level. I tried it several times but then I
thought do I really want to die, start again, hope I can progress
slightly further until I finally reach the end.

Difficulty in general I think is relatively hard to balance in puzzle
style games. You want it to be challenging enough to make it fun but not
so challenging that players either spend all their time on YouTube or
just stop playing entirely. It's one of my biggest complaints about
point-and-click adventures. Some of them can be so obscure that you end
up just trying things not because you think they were work but just in
case they do.

> I didn't get anywhere with the harder star puzzles. Likewise the
> "discussions" through the terminals. I had no idea what I was supposed
> to say so I was just confused. I also seemed to miss some terminals
> since I missed the back story for the most part.
>

I rather liked the terminals as it delves into the question of if we are
just meat sacks what does it actually mean to be human. One I like is
that even if some people are open to a computer AI being self aware you
can replace computer with interconnected steam pipes, would that also be
self aware. If you really want to push the boat out you can make logic
gates out of venus fly traps.

>> One bit I hope they ditched is to unlock parts of the game you have to
>> collect shapes by solving puzzles. You then rotate these various
>> shapes to make a complete square. I really don't think it added
>> anything to the game at all besides mild annoyance.
>
> These were Tetris shapes, no? I didn't much like those either,
> especially as I sucked with them. I think looked for an online solver
> but didn't find anything useful. Instead I got better pretty quick so I
> didn't mind any more.
>
> I'm looking forward to Starfield and maybe the Cyberpunk 2077 DLC.

On Sunday, August 6, 2023 at 5:53:08 AM UTC-5, JAB wrote:
> On 05/08/2023 11:56, Anssi Saari wrote:
> > JAB <no...@nochance.com> writes:
> >
> >> It's not often this happens but the original is one of my favourite
> >> games (only let down by the ending) which I've played through three
> >> times. It's a puzzler mixed with some optional philosophy (yes you
> >> heard that right). What it does well is that it slowly introduces new
> >> concepts while not just telling you what to do. It feels a bit like
> >> Portal in that respect. What I think it did better was that instead of
> >> sequential levels it has a set of levels where each one contain a
> >> number of puzzles that you can solve in any order. What that means is
> >> if you get stuck you can go and try another puzzle and that may even
> >> give you some ideas about the one you get stuck on.
> >
> > Talos was fun and there certainly was no shortage of puzzles. I played
> > Portal with RTX recently and was baffled. Was Portal originally really
> > so short and easy? Except for the end where it was hard to see where you
> > could put a portal there was no challenge.
> >
> > Maybe a little too much repetition in Talos since later on it was often
> > obvious what the solution was going to look like and then it was just a
> > matter of fiddling with the tools you had.
> >
> > I remember being somewhat annoyed by some of the puzzles in Talos where
> > I was stuck for way too long. I think one particular trick was used only
> > once. It's so annoying when a puzzle is obvious except for one bit...
> >
> I think Talos got it about right, for me at least, that it was
> challenging enough to be fun but not so challenging that it was just
> frustrating. I did get so struck on a couple of levels I had to look up
> how to solve them and one of them I just thought, I didn't even realise
> you could do that. Having to put a cube on one of the floating
> 'electric' orbs or something like that. One that I did relent and look
> up was the finally climatic level. I tried it several times but then I
> thought do I really want to die, start again, hope I can progress
> slightly further until I finally reach the end.
>
> Difficulty in general I think is relatively hard to balance in puzzle
> style games. You want it to be challenging enough to make it fun but not
> so challenging that players either spend all their time on YouTube or
> just stop playing entirely. It's one of my biggest complaints about
> point-and-click adventures. Some of them can be so obscure that you end
> up just trying things not because you think they were work but just in
> case they do.
> > I didn't get anywhere with the harder star puzzles. Likewise the
> > "discussions" through the terminals. I had no idea what I was supposed
> > to say so I was just confused. I also seemed to miss some terminals
> > since I missed the back story for the most part.
> >
> I rather liked the terminals as it delves into the question of if we are
> just meat sacks what does it actually mean to be human. One I like is
> that even if some people are open to a computer AI being self aware you
> can replace computer with interconnected steam pipes, would that also be
> self aware. If you really want to push the boat out you can make logic
> gates out of venus fly traps.

It isn't really sanitary if you plan on using flies in the contraption. Do venus flytraps eat ladybugs?

On Sunday, August 6, 2023 at 1:36:37 PM UTC-7, Pr. Mandrake wrote:

> It isn't really sanitary if you plan on using flies in the contraption. Do venus flytraps eat ladybugs?

Flies are actually very sanitary. You have to feed the ladybugs aphids to grow them too, whereas
flies will eat any old garbage.

- Justisaur

On Saturday, August 5, 2023 at 2:33:42 AM UTC-7, JAB wrote:
> On 04/08/2023 15:31, Justisaur wrote:
> > Baldur's Gate 3 - unlike the originals is turn based and a different company.
> I'm still sitting on the fence about this even though the reviews are in
> and are positive. I'm not sure that want I want from an RPG now is what
> it will delivery especially given who the developers are. I'll probably
> hold off a bit until it's in a half decent sale or try out the Steam
> refund policy.

On Fri, 4 Aug 2023 09:29:21 +0100, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, JAB
wrote:

>It's not often this happens but the original is one of my favourite
>games (only let down by the ending) which I've played through three
>times. It's a puzzler mixed with some optional philosophy (yes you heard
>that right). What it does well is that it slowly introduces new concepts
>while not just telling you what to do. It feels a bit like Portal in
>that respect. What I think it did better was that instead of sequential
>levels it has a set of levels where each one contain a number of puzzles
>that you can solve in any order. What that means is if you get stuck you
>can go and try another puzzle and that may even give you some ideas
>about the one you get stuck on.
>
>One bit I hope they ditched is to unlock parts of the game you have to
>collect shapes by solving puzzles. You then rotate these various shapes
>to make a complete square. I really don't think it added anything to the
>game at all besides mild annoyance.
>
>So any games you're looking forward to?

That one, but not if they "improve" the experience by making the puzzles
as brutal as Gehenna. I enjoyed that one for a bit, after solving a few
of the difficult puzzles, but it just became a slog after a while that
made me want to look at a hint book. Never finished.

--
Zag

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

On Sat, 5 Aug 2023 10:33:37 +0100, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, JAB
wrote:

>On 04/08/2023 15:31, Justisaur wrote:
>> Baldur's Gate 3 - unlike the originals is turn based and a different company.
>
>I'm still sitting on the fence about this even though the reviews are in
>and are positive. I'm not sure that want I want from an RPG now is what
>it will delivery especially given who the developers are. I'll probably
>hold off a bit until it's in a half decent sale or try out the Steam
>refund policy.

Yeah. That one is "released," and then I heard about the the first hotfix
fixing a game-breaking savegame bug, among a bunch of other stuff.

So I'm waiting for the thing to *actually* be released instead of
arbitrarily being taken out of early access and into second beta (similar
to second breakfast). This will mean a few more patches.

--
Zag

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

On Saturday, August 5, 2023 at 2:33:42 AM UTC-7, JAB wrote:
> On 04/08/2023 15:31, Justisaur wrote:
> > Baldur's Gate 3 - unlike the originals is turn based and a different company.

> I'm still sitting on the fence about this even though the reviews are in
> and are positive. I'm not sure that want I want from an RPG now is what
> it will delivery especially given who the developers are. I'll probably
> hold off a bit until it's in a half decent sale or try out the Steam
> refund policy.

Yeah, the last turn based game I really enjoyed? No idea. Wasteland 2
was o.k. but not great to me. A few indy games that while I enjoyed
certainly didn't wow me and they were free to really cheap, and many
with even higher ratings that I couldn't get into (slay the spire for instance.)

I replayed FO2 for a bit in 2017, but even then it was 80% nostalgia, and
I wasn't really into that much anymore, and didn't finish it.

Oh wait, I just remembered the (real) nethack like game: Zorbus, that
was in 2021, which was amazing. Also duh, Dungeon Robber, which
I played probably more than anything but the top 10% of games I've
played and I think last played last year. O.k. there's still some love
of turn based in me, or is it just old D&D? And BG3 is new D&D,
which I don't have any love of.

With it's popularity and the price trajectory of NWN & NWN II I doubt
it'll be on sale at any significantly reduced price for more than 10
years. This is one I'd love a limited playable demo of to decide.
(searching up demo just gives 3 year old videos.)

I could swear I played Divinity Original Sin a little and didn't get into
it, but I'm not sure. It might have Been Divine Divinity? Larian's
old games are pretty pricy too. Divinity Original Sin - Enhanced Edition
is $40, historic low of $8 but again it's unlikely to hit that price anytime
soon as interest is up due to BG3. It looks like the original (non-enhanced)
is $15 curranty though.

DOSII is $45 and low of $15, but has a bunch of DLCs too.

- Justisaur

On Sun, 6 Aug 2023 11:53:04 +0100, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, JAB
wrote:

>I tried it several times but then I
>thought do I really want to die, start again, hope I can progress
>slightly further until I finally reach the end.

Yeah, do it again stupid (DIAS) gameplay is not for me anymore, or anyone
else without OCD/ADHD I think.

I've been avoiding the final boss battle in Metroid:Dread for months
because I know it will be a DIAS fest.

--
Zag

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

On 07/08/2023 18:51, Zaghadka wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Aug 2023 09:29:21 +0100, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, JAB
> wrote:
>
>> It's not often this happens but the original is one of my favourite
>> games (only let down by the ending) which I've played through three
>> times. It's a puzzler mixed with some optional philosophy (yes you heard
>> that right). What it does well is that it slowly introduces new concepts
>> while not just telling you what to do. It feels a bit like Portal in
>> that respect. What I think it did better was that instead of sequential
>> levels it has a set of levels where each one contain a number of puzzles
>> that you can solve in any order. What that means is if you get stuck you
>> can go and try another puzzle and that may even give you some ideas
>> about the one you get stuck on.
>>
>> One bit I hope they ditched is to unlock parts of the game you have to
>> collect shapes by solving puzzles. You then rotate these various shapes
>> to make a complete square. I really don't think it added anything to the
>> game at all besides mild annoyance.
>>
>> So any games you're looking forward to?
>
> That one, but not if they "improve" the experience by making the puzzles
> as brutal as Gehenna. I enjoyed that one for a bit, after solving a few
> of the difficult puzzles, but it just became a slog after a while that
> made me want to look at a hint book. Never finished.
>

Yep same here, I understand that the idea was here's more of the same
but harder. Unfortunately it felt like a lot the content was the
equivalent of the gold star puzzles in the original. Like you, it got to
the point where I just thought I'm not enjoying this.

On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 09:45:47 +0100, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, JAB
wrote:

>On 07/08/2023 18:51, Zaghadka wrote:
>> On Fri, 4 Aug 2023 09:29:21 +0100, in comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action, JAB
>> wrote:
>>
>>> It's not often this happens but the original is one of my favourite
>>> games (only let down by the ending) which I've played through three
>>> times. It's a puzzler mixed with some optional philosophy (yes you heard
>>> that right). What it does well is that it slowly introduces new concepts
>>> while not just telling you what to do. It feels a bit like Portal in
>>> that respect. What I think it did better was that instead of sequential
>>> levels it has a set of levels where each one contain a number of puzzles
>>> that you can solve in any order. What that means is if you get stuck you
>>> can go and try another puzzle and that may even give you some ideas
>>> about the one you get stuck on.
>>>
>>> One bit I hope they ditched is to unlock parts of the game you have to
>>> collect shapes by solving puzzles. You then rotate these various shapes
>>> to make a complete square. I really don't think it added anything to the
>>> game at all besides mild annoyance.
>>>
>>> So any games you're looking forward to?
>>
>> That one, but not if they "improve" the experience by making the puzzles
>> as brutal as Gehenna. I enjoyed that one for a bit, after solving a few
>> of the difficult puzzles, but it just became a slog after a while that
>> made me want to look at a hint book. Never finished.
>>
>
>Yep same here, I understand that the idea was here's more of the same
>but harder. Unfortunately it felt like a lot the content was the
>equivalent of the gold star puzzles in the original. Like you, it got to
>the point where I just thought I'm not enjoying this.

Yeah, I just broke down and spoiled the star puzzles in the original game
just to see the content, which was hillariously underwhelming. We're
talking about the "You are fags" for reaching a million points ending to
Guitar Hero in South Park hilarious.

Like I absolutely figured out the moon landing puzzle but could not make
the mechanics happen so went to spoilers. Same with the big jump puzzle.
Figured it out but was unsure of how to line myself up.

--
Zag

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