Do you come to the Cloud District very often?
this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2024
813 points (98.7% liked)
memes
10167 readers
2131 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I’m the Thane of Whiterun bitch, what do you think!?
Oh what am I saying. Of course you don't.
Talking a lot of shit for someone within FUS RO DAH distance...
With this character's death, the thread of prophecy is severed. Restore a saved game to restore the weave of fate, or persist in the doomed world you have created.
Harambe never forget
Sure would be cool if more games provided consequences for your actions as opposed to being protected through things like nigh-immortal npcs.
For sure. After I beat Morrowind, I was impressed to find out it's possible to kill any character and still beat the main quest if you know what you're doing. Hopefully as indie development continues to grow we'll start to see games inspired by it.
Project Tamriel and Tamriel Rebuilt will keep me busy in the meantime.
BG3 will let you kill or abandon main storyline NPCs, and the world can massively change because of your actions. It's pretty amazing tbh.
BG3 is also a one of a kind game, aside from DOS2 (I personally think BG3 is better).
Eh, I do think having some immortal NPCs is better design, as it clearly signals to the player "this person is important, stop fucking up".
I think it should be optional sometimes other times let low stakes games and actual choice games do their thing
Most of my Skyrim time is me wanting a low stakes adventure, galavanting across the holds and stabbing dudes and generally enjoying a low stress environment (in terms of consequence)
But sometimes I do wish I could have actual consequences and impact
Idr what game but I was happy my character could change the world but at the same time I was basically freaking out over “omg omg omg what I make the wrong choice or one o didn’t mean to”
It really depends on the player and like I said I don’t want every game to be devoid of meaningful choice but at the same time I don’t want to worry about stepping on the wrong blade of grass
Thank you for coming to my insane rambling
So this is why I began review bombing Dragons Dogma 2. I was doing a quest with an extremely unclear objective and I thought maybe killing a certain snarky NPC would progress it. So I carefully saved before attacking the npc. Killing the npc didn't work so I tried to reload my file, only to find the game autosaved the second I killed the npc. The game only allows two saves, one you kinda control that gets autosaved over A LOT, and one from when you last rested in an inn. Resting at an inn is somewhat expensive and just worse than camping overall, so I hadn't used an inn within the last 8 hours of play.
I distinctly got the vibe that it was designed that way on purpose. You can revive NPCs, but the item to do so is rare and limited unless you pay real money. A lot of the quests seem designed to encourage mistakes that will make you consider giving them more money in order to fix. Its like an MBA came by at the end and editted everything in game to make it as sleazy as possible. The saddest part is that if they took that aspect away and added some small bug fixes, it would legitimately be a 10/10 game.
Leaving a honest, negative review is not review bombing btw
I know, but it feels like review bombing when you type one out on every platform you can find in a few hours in a fit of rage and disappointment. I feel swindled to such an extent that Capcom is now equal to EA in my mind. I had bought at least one Capcom game a year for the last three decades and now they won't get another cent from me.
The game only allows two saves
What year is this? 1992?
Some games do it on purpose for certain design reasons. Think about how Pokemon games only let you have one save…
Let me play a single player game however the hell I want! I hate this nonsense so much.
the game only allows two saves
haha lmfao, what?
When loading the game you only get to choose between your last save which is constantly autosaved over and the autosave it takes when you use an inn. Using an inn is expensive and inferior to camping which gives major buffs and costs nothing. So basically you have to spend a decent portion of your game currency as the only way to have a reliable save point the game won't randomly overwrite.
Only one character per account too so don't even think about experimenting. Unless of course you don't mind paying real money to stock up on items that undo the consequences of experimenting.
I'm literally dying of laughter....! Why do people like this game?
The game has been out for only a few days. Many of us are learning the hard way why its bad. Because as I stated above, if you take out the sleazy greed mechanics and add a few bug fixes, the game is perfect. I was around 20 hours in when I realized the stupidity with saves and the expansive greed. Up until then, I would've told you its easily 2024 GOTY. It looks good, runs well on my ps5, the combat is both fun and diverse, the map is huge with very little empty space, the story is well written, and the pawn system is a creative way of making you feel like you're playing with others despite the game being single player.
Imagine if Baldurs Gate 3 was a free to play game rife with microtransactions, but it was built in such a way that it wasn't obvious until the second act. That's Dragons Dogma 2. Somewhere in that code is a real masterpiece of gaming, its just been killed by greed.
That's fair. It does sound pretty good, shame that they hook you in like that. Thanks for the summary!
I honestly can say I've never quicksaved to kill an NPC for slighting me.
Oh man lol. Whole villages have been murdered due to my pettiness!
And if it's dragons dogma 2, for a few sweet sweet fps.
Live a little :)
My rule of thumb is if there's no in-character reason to do something in a game, I won't do it. I have played psychopathic characters who will murder everyone at the slightest provocation, but I'll not reload after murdering while playing one of those. And on good-aligned or even just sane characters I won't murder NPCs just for being slightly annoying.
I've only done it with one NPC and I honestly don't know if there's even any consequences for murdering him either way:
Nah I kill him straight out every time lmao
I'm with you. I'm some big badass monster slayer, why would I care if a random villager doesn't kiss my feet as I walk through town?
It's less about having someone kiss your feet and more having someone realize that maybe insulting the big badass monster slayer who could pop your head like bubble wrap isn't such a good idea
What part of chopping someone's head off and rewinding time so it never happened, is the lesson? From my pov it just looks like self-gratification
edit: typo
I mean that's all it is is self gratification.
But it's not from not getting our feet kissed. We're not asking for people to suck us off whenever we walk in the room. Just don't try to pick a fight with the guy that just ripped a dragons heart out with his bare hands.
Plus it's a game. I'm not gonna be able to "teach" the walking code that is that npc. So the next best thing is quicksave, kill em, reload and move on feeling better about it.
the developer answer is just that if everyone treated you like an unstoppable short-tempered killer, the dialog and role-playing aspect of the game would be hampered. In a perfect world, todd howard would have programmed a reputation system in the game so you can scare and intimidate people if you wanted to, but it's good enough without it.
And I get and understand that. Like I said it's a game. Games need to be made in certain ways so that most of the people who play them enjoy them. Plus there are certain limitations on technology and whatnot.
But that's why we quicksave.
Good.
The chains of fate have been broken, and you must continue in this doomed world.
my Fallout: New Vegas install has so many saves where an NPC's face is just dead center in the frame
I quicksaved the fuck out of Fallout NV, kept crashing every corner...kept playing anyway.
Do you get to the Cloud District very often? What am I saying, of course you don't.
Conversely, failing to quick save us the bane of our existence.
Welp there I go visiting Turtle Pope again
Oh yeah. I’ve lost a lot of honor in rdr2 when someone deigns to say “hey, you killed a lot of people last time. Please leave.”
“WHAT WAS THAT YOU SONUFABITCH?!”
That doesn’t sound like snark, it sounds like he legitimately is terrified of you, and apparently for good reason.
Yeah, that was kinda the intention of the comment. Arthur and the gang are dangerous, when people say, “haven’t you caused enough trouble here? I think it’s best if you go,” it’s funny to overreact and get in a fight with them. Or maybe that’s just me
Kill and loot.