Babysitting The Survivor (The Jimquisition)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- / jimquisition
www.thejimquisi...
sharkrobot.com/...
You are feeling thirsty. You are feeling hungry. You are feeling tired.
You are bleeding. You are infected. You are dead.
Welcome to survival games - the neediest, clingiest, increasingly dreariest games in town.
I've said it before, I'll say it again; the human body can last 4 days without water, two weeks without sleep and longer without food. Yeah, there are negative effects to going a day or so without each, but you will NOT keel over and die after 20 minutes without them. These games need to have increasingly negative consequences to going without any of those things but not just killing you after 20 minutes.
+
The irony being that (as far as I can remember, it's been a while) the people who made immersion mods for games like Skyrim got/get it more right.
And even with time being accelerated in games it's still usually akin to forgetting to eat breakfast and then dying by midday.
I guess there's the excuse that running around carrying all this loot and fighting guys is tiring work so you'd need more sustenance but.... still.
That's true but when you're playing a game you don't play it for 72 hours + straight usually. So having a survival mechanic where you need to find food once every like 10 hours of gameplay seems totally pointless. There's a middle line somewhere and most games are FAR too lenient.
+
I thought this game was supposed to be a stealth fest about blending into the happy people? Remaining incognito? Where the fuck did all of that go?
Well that just about kills all interest I had in this game.
there's a story mode that hasn't been introduced yet, maybe they'll add it in later
Blending in is how you get a lot of the resources you need to survive.
Its early access ignore the game and pretend it isn't out yet, from my experience thats ALWAYS the best choice for EA Games.... Early access is EA it all makes sense now.
I was hoping for a bait-and-switch criticism of capitalism using a Red Scare mid century modern aesthetic, including a deconstruction of the pathologizing of dissent.
If only Konami would have known that blacklisting Jim would lead to him being their most well-known spokesperson.
Also, firing the guy who made their best-selling game series, which was also one of the best-selling game series of all time, was such an ace move. Visionary businessmanning there by Konami's bigwigs. And then they flop with their shitty, sleazy, IP-raping pachinko machines too. So in summary, they're really earning their hashtag!
Why is We Happy Few is a survival game? I get a "sanity" meter and maybe HP, but hunger and sleep? They've got an amazing idea that works well in a branching story, with non-combat based gameplay, but a fucking crafting system?
The hunger system is a carrot to enter the city where all the safe food and water is.
Sleep I guess is fine but it's very distracting.
That is a bit like asking why don't starve is a survival game, the entire point from the start was to make a survival game why would they cut that out now?
Jeremiah B In Don't Starve, the point is not to starve. This naturally means that you should have to balance survival resources. In WHF, the point is to escape a dystopian society without being discovered as a defector. Nothing about that really screams "hunger meter."
As for cutting out survival elements, my point is that WHF shouldn't have been a survival game in the first place. They came up with an incredible idea for a setting and plot, and then waisted it on doing what the market was over saturated with 3 years ago. They COULD have taken the idea and made something similar to Heavy Rain where decisions were the main driving force of the game and the story branched out naturally.
It also wasn't shown as a survival game which pissed a lot of people off
DJMouthwash In we happy few the point is to survive for long periods of time in a dystopian utopia The story is just window dressing, it always has been. With out basic needs there is no reason for you to go out and take chances and a game about surviving where you can just hide in a closet forever is not engaging.
It seems like a lot of people made a lot of assumptions about the game without actually looking in to anything about what type of game was meant to be and are now mad that the game works exactly how they always said it would.
I liked the way Fallout: New Vegas did this. Durability dictates damage, but doesn't cause the weapon to break when it's low.
Durability does cause weapons to break in New Vegas. However, it generally takes a few in-game weeks for them to break completely, so it's not annoying. In my opinion, the jury-rigging perk (the one that lets you repair any weapon with any roughly similar weapon e.g. repairing a suit of power armor with parts from a regular metal armor) is the thing that lmakes the weapon durability system in NV not only not-terrible, but also legitimately fun and rewarding, because it turns it into a game mechanic you can use to your advantage. It feels legitimately satisfying to take a bunch of nearly-worthless low condition weapons and turn them into a single perfect condition weapon you can sell for thousands of caps. It not only makes the weapom condition worth it, it also solves the problem of lower-level loot becoming useless in the late-game, since even the shittiest, lowest-condition weapons are worth looting if you can use them to repair your better equipment.
I was super thrilled when I found out that you can merge weapons for their condition.
There's also a specific threshold of durability where once it goes lower than that, the damage or defense will decrease, instead of immediate consequences once the equipment isn't at 100%.
What I like about NV's survival aspects is they're OPTIONAL. I HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE having this shit forced down my throat, as I don't much enjoy it. I find it tedious when I have biological needs in a game, breaks immersion forces me to carry things that don't serve any other purpose other than getting popups to go away.
@@TestECull yeah, agreed. and thing is i only play fallout nv on survival mode, but if i hadnt had the default option to do a normal run FIRST while i figured out the bugs and what a fallout game was in general, i would've dropped it no question.
Here's an idea. The moment a developer is accepting money for a game and providing a functioning piece of software, that game is "launched" and open to review.
But then not everyone is gonna agree on the what they define as 'functioning' for a game.
KeyeGamer You launch it and something happens. Anything. If I launch the game and all that happens is I get a picture of something like goatse then my computer reboots and when it comes back on my entire OS is wiped, that still counts as launched if I paid money. And I'd expect it to be reviewed with the widespread asshole and OS wipe in mind.
To springboard off of that:
Launch: Distribute to the public for sale
Release: Send out the game as a "finished version"
By that logic, Batman Arkham Knight is still awaiting its PC release.
Functioning or not, you take money and you're open to criticism. I consider that to be 'launched'. You aren't taking money and it's beta.
Charles Morton They took money, then gave you software that did something. Therefore launched. What's the problem?
"That's how you do it , Prosyndicate.
I still haven't forgotten about Pogs for Boglins!
#NeverForget
Dude, the bigger scam: Jim owns the TheJimquisition website. He's directly involved and behind the content of it, and never disclosed any of it.
+Sapphire Crook what has the world come to?
Wow. Pogs for Boglins, now THIS! I'm contacting a lawyer right this minute!
+Sapphire Crook WHAT? I'VE BEEN BETRAYED
Resident Evil 3 is the greatest and also most underrated survival game of all time.
Objective: Get the hell out of the city, aka survive.
Length: Can be finished in under one hour or take as long as 8 hours.
Gameplay
- Hard difficulty.
- Very, very rudimentary crafting mechanics; you make ammo and herb mixes, requiring only two easily identifiable items and a tool. You can also make a gun with two parts.
- No meters for hunger, thirst, fatigue (the game takes place over the course of a night).
- Randomized events keep the tension up.
- A seemingly unstoppable main antagonist who destroys established game logic.
- The PS1 version of the game is almost perfect in terms of programming.
- Endlessly replayable with items earned in a bonus game you unlock after finishing the main game one time.
Presentation
- Genuinely haunting atmosphere enhanced by outstanding music and vividly rendered environments despite graphical limitations.
- Great looking CGI cutscenes, can be skipped, which have a taught and succinct style.
Story
- Conveyed through a handful of cutscenes and files. No annoying audio logs.
- Hammy action/ horror tone that takes itself just seriously enough to still be legitimately scary and not self deprecating.
My two cents.
Nemesis is still the most horrifying enemy ever in the resident evil series and also in video games in general
The dude broke the one rule enemies never did in old resident evil games
HE WENT THROUGH DOORS!
I agree with you that RE3 is underrated, but I don't think it is greatest survival horror game of all time in my opinion, that title easily goes to REmake or Silent Hill 2
+
Ivan Avendano
Silent Hill 2 is an incredible game, just as everyone says, but I would consider it a better example of psychological horror. Survival may or may not even be James's objective, depending on which ending you receive; James literally travels to the town to take his own life in the In Water ending.
I don't see how it's underrated, RE2 was way better and memorable. Sure, Nemesis himself is a pretty memorable monster, but the gameplay attached to him... basicly just doesn't work. First, he is WAY more powerful than what it should and is incredibly hard to kill and unforgiving (especially with the tank controls). The game balances this out by giving you lots of ammo. Although Nemesis going through doors was neat and must have shit the pants of the early players of the game, he basicly only chases you for like 3 rooms before giving up, and because of that I didn't felt any motivation to fight him, due to him being OP. So I just always escaped from him. And because of this system, you can now always escape nemesis while having tons of weapons and ammo, literally a fucking arsenal in your pocket, which made every other enemy look like shit and killed most of the sense of horror from the game. After this, Nemesis became more an annoyance than a true horror. I don't think the game is bad, I certantly wnjoyed the hell out of it but I don't think it is underrated. But we all can have different opinions.
I feel like Jim usually complains about things because he loves them and wants to see them improve. Except maybe for Konami. Cause really who could love those guys anymore?
I like the way Subnautica handles it. Early on, your focus is largely on basic survival stuff, as fits the concept, but you can soon reach a point where 'survival' is all about planning. a Water Filtration system sorts out Water pretty handily, kicking water out at the rate your character needs it (which is frequent, but not painfully so), and maybe actually a little bit faster. You have the tools available, or can make the tools available via the findable blueprints to make 'survival' easy. I wanna say I had basic animal survival 'solved' by the 10 hour mark. Still die to predators every so often, but that's the challenge. From there, 'progress' is largely about finding new ways to solve the remaining problems. After about 16 hours, I have an answer for all issues. The game IS early Access, and they are promising story updates, but, as it stands right now, the game is all about exploring, and even the smallest bit of pre-planning puts me in a good place to be able to explore for multiple in game days without having to suddenly abandon whatever I'm doing to gather food and water.
How come in most survival games, your protagonist needs to eat but never needs to poop?
devs dont wanna go near that shit
^^Ha
The ARK devs did at least~
'The Ship' actually had a toilet mechanic. I'd be trying to kill someone and the game would be yelling at me that I needed to find a toilet. FINE, but I went 5 minutes ago! Must have been some weird dysentery-type disease on that ship, because everyone needed to go to the bog CONSTANTLY. I could never actually kill anyone cos I was too busy starving, fainting from exhaustion or needing a slash to do anything. I didn't mind the idea of managing needs, but they were SO demanding, all other gameplay was neglected in favour of that. Talk about frustrating.
because that would demand more than two lines of code
You take a shit automatically in Ark survival evolved.
Metal Gear Solid V didn't sold 49m, not even close, those are the sales of the entire franchise.
Yeah, misspoke. Added an annotation. Sorry 'bout that.
SAVAGE!
Jim Sterling No problem, great episode as usual.
The word "Savage" is officially dead if this is all it takes to be called one.
**Guy makes very mild comment poking fun at something**..."OMG FUCKING SAVAGE REKT ECKS DEE"
+Michael Bennett HURRRRRR HE JUST GOT PWNED DUDE AMIRITE?!?!?!?!?!?!?
The trouble with survival meters is that devs spend all the time programming, so they figure the must use them. Like a kid who finds a cool power saw and just goes looking for things to saw.
Suddenly your character is hungry every five minutes or else what the hell did we add hunger in for? The human body can go a week without food before dying, several if you have fat stores. You can go a few days without sleep or water. But in these games, they feel like they're not getting the most use out of the survival functions unless they're beating you to death with it.
kevnar 3 weeks without food, 3 days without water, 3 minutes without air, sleep deprivation damage varies depending on the person with the average being 7-12-ish days.
but no, make me hungry every 5 minutes, that's realistic.
You can last several months without food. It's called water-fasting.
Survival games suffer from heavy time compression issues.
Thats why your allways hungery and thristy every few minutes.
Lots of them make their day/night cycles last ~30min or so. Meaning the survival game has a world that moves in the neighbourhood of 48x faster than the real world.
So several game world hours before you get hungery when translated into irl time is a few minutes.
I mean you can have Hunger but...make it different.. maybe add some Boni to your Charakter if hes Wellfed or something like that. And if you dont eat für a LOOOONG time you get some penalties.. idk.. It would actually be interessting then..
"A spear that can maybe kill two enemies before it snaps". That's basically Breath of the Wild.
Yes. I mean - they just have to ad an Blacksmith o.o To reforge/repair broken/ redblinking Weapons. Maybe add some benefits onto one like... use a Diamon to give the newly repared weapon Dura/Dura+ or shit like that.
That would be so neat, if they dont want to get rid of it.
Kyle Fortesque Nah, you could kill fifty enemies before the sword snaps. That’s not to say that the degradation of the weapon isn’t too quick, but it ain’t no contest as to whether it’s worse than a typical survival game; most survival games are worse about it.
Society collapsed in The Last of Us not because of the zombie plague, but because mankind switched to using shitty steel in their pipes and tools. Everything breaks if you do so much as breathe on it
100% Fact. and it ruined the entire fucking game. but can you imagine how amazing that game would have been had they not pulled that shit. i get pissed every time i think about that.
Don't Starve is still one of the few good survival games
These survival games, in their pursuit of "realistic" needs, forget how unrealistically they depict those needs. I don't need through a menu while fighting off rabid dogs to take a sip, if I'm out hiking or whatever I just drink from my water bottle without breaking stride. It hardly requires any more conscious thought than walking, so games that demand I navigate through my inventory to use some consumable to eat, drink, or whatever are essentially creating the survival equivalent of QWOP. If drinking and eating is a need, then their consumption must be automatic. Treat it like a reflex, you don't need to tell your character to eat that chocolate bar you've got in your pocket any more than you need to tell your character how to move their jaw when they're talking.
A good example in other games of a limited resource that you must constantly replenish to survive is ammo. Notice how using ammo isn't an awful experience? You don't have to go into a menu to use ammo, it's just passively used while you're fighting. You don't need to drop what you're doing to find ammo, instead you simply collect every bit of ammo you can and look everywhere for them, changing up your weapons as scarcity demands. It works because you can carry an unrealistic amount of ammo, it's abstracted away how you're carrying all this stuff. If you really needed all that ammo, you'd probably have a shopping cart you'd drag around with your or something, but we don't need to actually depict the shopping cart of ammo.
The same would work just fine for food and water. Let the player stockpile them to the point where they're never actively trying to manage their use, but make them limited enough that the player never passes up an opportunity to top off. Then there's no meters for 99% of gameplay, instead there's just a little counter showing how much water and how many calories of food we've got left like they're ammo counters. So long the player scavenges as they do other objectives, their hunger and thirst and simply problems at the back of their mind rather than foreground attention-stealers.
The other issue is time. I can go two whole days without noticing I haven't had a glass of water, even when I'm doing backbreaking work I might only eat a single meal that day. I'm not suddenly taking a shitload of penalties or missing out on bonuses because I didn't spend entire day chewing on something. If I eat one decently sized meal, I'm going to be fine for hours and hours, and if I don't eat at all in a day the worst that's going to happen is that I'll be hungry the next. I am in no danger of dying, I'm not unable to run, I am essentially still able to function at 100% capacity. My body is capable of storing water and fat and using that up as it needs to, I am not constantly eating and then shitting it out a few minutes later.
I understand that for a game that will likely only be played 40 or so hours, it's not a good idea to only make the player need to eat once the entire time. Game days need to be shorter than real days because we simply don't spend as much time playing as we do living in real life, if we used a 1:1 clock then we might as well not even track stuff like hunger, NPC schedules, or anything time-sensitive because the entire game would take place within the span of a single day. But developers have to realize that these short game days are inherently unrealistic, we're still moving and interacting with stuff using our 24 hour minds, we aren't zipping across the game world like Sonic and thinking 12 times faster than we normally would.
And fuck survival in roguelikes. Nobody ever accidentally starved to death while hiking with food in their backpack because they simply forgot that they need to eat. ToME does away with that nonsense and it's brilliant for it.
Skyrim mods got this right often by having a hotkey to eat. It means you consciously have to think (I'm hungry/thirsty) then you hit a button and move on. That and being able to go days in game ignoring hunger and thirst assuming I'm willing to be weaker due to lowered health and stamina and lower recovery, yeah not bad. Sure I'm taking time to supply myself but normally I'm just tapping alt+z/x when I need the stuff.
Eating, sleeping, and drinking are secondary activities in my day.
There's even a better example of your formula, Fallout:New Vegas's Hardcore mode. It haves meters of Hunger/Thirst/Sleep but they are all hidden away in a Pip-Boy (Kind of a Menu). You just collect resources throughout the game by the reflex. After some time you get a small sign on your HUD showing if you have any of aforementioned problems and you just drink, eat or go find somewhere to sleep (You can later on find a sleeping bag which will let you sleep wherever you want).
If you don't have any resources you get some negative effect (not very game-breaking), if you don't find any resources it goes to the second phase and you get more negative effects. If you don't find any still you reach the third phase with stronger negative effects and after that you die. To die, you must not drink, sleep, eat about half of your travels. It's very difficult to actually starve to death if you're not willing that. There're also some mods like J.E. Sawyer mod which makes all of those phases come faster and make it an actual surviving game. Still, gameplay mechanics stay the same so you don't get constantly oppressed by the need of survival.
Yes, and it takes a couple days to die of thirst, longer for food and fatigue.
I actually wouldn't mind in an action survival game with heavy gunplay if each mag had a bullet counter, and reloading them took time. In the real world, guns are powerful ways to level the field, because anyone can learn to use them. Insodoing they learn to take on threats that would be nearly impossible with a knife. But the trade here is it takes time and preparation to do so. It's why soldiers work in teams and why the rich don't want you to have the same guns as their police servants
Sometimes I think devs get torn between wanting to make an arcade game and a simulator, the latter being popular right now. Hard simulation is a niche genre, though, so they end up compromising in ways that produce a mess of systems that only make sense as an abstraction, not as a simulator
Hey hey hey, if I didn't take a sip every 2 hours irl I would surely die, so I do expect characters in games to be the same way, anything less would be way too unrealistic for me.
It's good you've mentioned survival horror (and, in a way, this covers the survival action too), cause I like how Deadly Premonition handled the "eat, sleep, clean up" element to be important enough so you care about it and get into your character, but never ever became a problem, a thing that nags at you and prevents you from enjoying the game.
+
+
Don't forget that if you unlock the fast travel, you make eating and sleeping pointless cause the meters won't go down as you're not faffing about in the city.
Yeh, I especially liked how Deadly Premonition handled it's hunger system.
The Pickles You were the lifesaver, The Pickles. Not as delicious as Thomas' Biscuit, but never failing and crispy, like a crisp spring morning.
Not to mention Konami actually DID say they were aggressively pursuing mobile games, and placing mobile games as their primary platform, thereby ditching more traditional games. They actually did say that. www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2015/05/14/konamis-mobile-games-are-the-future-statement-reads-like-a-parody/#18a028c86a4c
2 words come to mind
"Fuck Konami"
Really? Only one comes to me.
FucKonami.
Konami is the worst
"Here's a TV that looks like an apple."
Gets me every time.
I think Subnautica is a pretty awesome game. It's one of the only game that comes to mind that is based around underwater survival. Well, you can go on land obviously but a world initially built under the ocean and surviving in said ocean??
Oh, and the creatures and fauna that populate the sea are awesome. That's also a plus. Unique creatures, be they allies or enemies, make a survival game interesting.
That game is gorgeous. It made me so sick though! I would have loved to see what the later levels have in store.
+Chaos inc. - Yeah, Subnautica did survival relatively well.^^ I also have fond memories of this ancient game called Robinson's Requiem (less so of its sequel), which I got on GoG some years ago. It had these weird 3D environments made of large sprite bricks in sort of a voxel-like array... but in 3D, so if you squinted a bit, you'd swear it was just a plain 3D environment, and once you got used to it it didn't look all that bad. Well, I thought, anyway. The sequel, which used very early polygon graphics, looked like butt, though... again, to me, at least.
More to the point, it seemed to strike a good balance with the survival elements; you start off with very little, but a bit of exploration and you've got a medkit chock full of various supplies, a knife, a one liter water bottle, and have died of eating an alien pear or some water you didn't boil or chemically disinfect first. From there you gradually explore more, meet other survivors who generally try to murder you, take the things off their bodies and progress toward making your way off the planet on which you're marooned. A few places you kind of really need a walkthrough, but the overall experience apart from that was, to me, remarkably gripping and immersive. Sitting by a camp fire, listening to your character shivering and sneezing from cold and illness, hoping he'll get better rather than die... keeping an eye on your hunger and thirst. Making stuff out of whatever's available. It did a lot of these things right, I feel, where games these days tend to either make the player character's needs too distractingly constant - like in Jim's example here - or so slow that they're barely noticeable, like the hunger and thirst in Fallout 4's shitty survival mode, which is for some reason welded to its Extremely, Inadvisably Hard, And Don't You Dare Save Manually difficulty setting. Robinson's Requiem could be plenty unforgiving, but at least it didn't mess with your saves, and it did tend to give you a fair chance at surviving its various dangers.^^
MGS 5 definetly showed me that sometimes a scripted linear game feels better then an open world game. I just wish that We Happy Few went a more linear route.
Yea i think the theme really fits for a great story based linear game
I can see it working really well going into a bioshock infinite route that spends a good amount of time outside of combat building the world and letting you explore while also spending a good amount in combat.
+Not So Melancholy Does that mean you prefer mgsv with its drab boring open world? Or you would have prefered it to be like the previous games?
+Gandalf The grey I prefered the old games open approach to very detailed linear levels rather than Vs empty totally open world.
I wouldn't call MGS5 a linear game, it's pretty big. Bioshock Infinite is kinda linear. CoD and Battlefield are truly linear.
STALKER CoP did it right. A few things (Sleep and Food) are on timers. Long timers. Extremely dangerous environment though, which makes the actual threats and challenges that are faced to be hard.
Some bleeding that can (if light) pass alone. Some special medicinal and food that can help deal with environments. Money as a universal aspect that can be gotten from many sources... and ammo as a secondary deterrent from more direct, not environmental challenges.
Add in a FAST to USE UI (I dont care for aesthetics, I want speed and decisiveness) and you have a great blend for a survival game. Also the A-Life, something NO game has ever even come close to replicating... and it is actually unpredictable despite the carefully designed and not generated levels.
*****
Yup. And the Klondike Gold Rush.
S.T.A.L.K.E.R. CoP with the Misery mod is better than any survival game I've played. The atmosphere is just perfect, which is something I can't say for most survival games on steam. A lot of them are multiplayer which ruins atmosphere instantly.
Nothing quite like feeling like the lone survivor, scavenging for some rotten dog food in tins, only to be smeared by a sniper, who then proceeds to teabag you while swearing at you in a high pitched 13 year old boy voice and calling your mum dirty names.
Such realism. :D
Comparing games to the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. franchise is cheating though because that series is perfect and aspiring to be half as phenomenal as they are is an errand reserved only for the most uniquely talented of developers.
Yep. Call of Pripyat especially really tapped into that "it's getting dark, I only have one clip left, I'm hungry and I am a long way from base" vibe that makes for such a compelling experience. As much as I am enjoying survival mode in Fallout 4, CoP remains the gold standard in my opinion.
haha the weapons breaking, I forgot for a moment that this review was before breath of the wild
Stedman75 HE WARNED THEM
they did not heed the lords warning..
Good Lord no, BOTW weapon mechanics should be kept THERE, because it sucks
What drives me crazy is when you find a weapon that should have virtually no chance of breaking, especially from bashing in zombie heads, and it has almost the same durability as any other weapon. A broom handle isn't going to be all that durable. I understand that. But a crowbar? FFS, how the hell is a crowbar going to break after hitting a few zombies in the head with it? It's the same with something like an aluminum baseball bat or a steel pipe. These things will not break under conditions they are used for in the game.
Balthazzarr crowbar is by far the worst, because unlike a pipe or aluminum bat, a crowbar is a length of solid iron or steel. it's not hollow, it doesn't have potential fracture points, rust and decay doesn't weaken it's internal structure. it's no different to me beating you with a solid iron rod, because that's what it is.
+Balthazarr - Yeah, stuff like that bothered me in, say, Dying Light. Wooden tools repurposed as weapons, yeah, they might break after a few hard swings. But a solid iron crowbar? Not unless you're superman, using it to hit... well, another superman.
Hazukichan X I don't consider crowbars breaking actually breaking. Crowbars aren't weapons. They are really terribly weighted if they are to be used for that. Crowbars are tools. They are used to break in and out of things, open boxes, potentially force locks, etcetera. I consider a "broken" crowbar as a crowbar that has been bent to the point that it can no longer be used as a tool. Again, it is not going to work well as a weapon. It is not weighted for that. A baseball bat will hit much harder.
+HertzyandEunice - I agree with your point here, but my own point was not that crowbars would make great weapons - I'm sure they wouldn't, compared to a dedicated thing like a sword, axe or club - but that they, like many modern iron or steel tools, would at least be very durable compared to something like a fallen tree branch or a wooden rake. If it bends, turn it around and swing that way for a while. I can't imagine it bending very far per blow, so with a bit of management it shouldn't get too warped. It might not be ideal, but again, beats a piece of wood (unless it's solid, treated hardwood carved into a bat or similar, perhaps, that might be closer in durability).
Oh I'm picking up what you're putting down. I'm just saying that crowbars are relatively specific in how they are shaped due to what they are used for. And because they are not weighted to be a weapon, they strike with far less force and therefore deal less damage, requiring more strikes to down things. As a side effect, you end up bending them way out of shape. Because you have to hit a zambo 10 times to actually kill one.
I really hate to say that I wish We Happy Few was more like Bioshock. More linear and story-driven.
And actually, Bioshock had a fair bit of exploration in it as well. You had the absolute freedom to revisit past levels and pick up stuff you missed
Great Miller reference!
Loved it fuckin out of now where thou like an RKO
is there a back story to that Simon Miller reference that I didn't understand?
It was amazing! Had me crying like an anime fan on prom night :P
David Mechaly He makes videos saying Nintendo games are for babies and in the first one he did (Splatoon) he said "like this one" and pointed to a picture of a baby or Reggie.
I saw the video. It CLEARLY is satire. Babies will be babies I guess.
I remember when Yahtzee and Gabe played ARK: Survival Evolved, and also commented that their character was essentially a massive baby.
The last thing i want to see is Jim Sterling screwing something. No offense man your just not my type.
That's fine. I do surprisingly well so I'm not gonna lose sleep over it.
Dang Sterling, I'd pay good money to see you screw something. You're video game journalism's number one sex symbol.
But...isn't fucking a good thing?
+Jim Sterling well, that explains the hernia
*you're
It's great to see this after Zelda BOTW. Funny to see just how many people agreed with and lauded Jim's complaints when it was indie games. But when Nintendo did it, very much making the same mistakes with breakable weapons, they were all up in arms. Reminds me of the people that hated microtransactions until Blizzard did it with Overwatch. Just goes to show how much brand loyalty clouds people's vision.
"Up in arms" means that people hated it, not the other way around.
I'm a huge Zelda fanboy, and I actually hated the weapon system for the first couple days or so. But it quickly grew on me and I came realize that the game literally gives you more weapons than you can carry and there's no reason to hoard most of them.
It got WAY more fun when I just accepted that weapons are gonna break a lot and rolled with the punches.
Yeah but why dont they just...not break. In essence what you’re saying is the durability is pointless and adds nothing.
This comment is pretty old but I'd just like to give the lowdown on exactly why weapon durability exists in BotW:
*BotW lets you go literally anywhere the instant you get off the Great Plateau, which also means you can go to Hyrule Castle and acquire endgame weaponry at any time. While you are still rewarded for going to Hyrule Castle, weapon durability means you can't just get a set of Royal weapons and then use that for the entire game.*
@@darthvaderreviews6926 Honestly I was gonna say something along the same lines. I understand that some people don't like botw's weapon system, I'm not judging them for that, but the reason I don't personally have a problem with it is that unlike in this issue with survival games, you never have to go basically anywhere other than where you were already going in order to restock on weapons. That is honestly my reason and I feel like brushing someone who likes it off as just being a fanboy, is on the same level as brushing someone who doesn't like them off as being a 'hater'
You would think any time a game wants to do survival and the main character is a human, this wouldn't be all that complicated. I mean, you can survive a couple days without water. You can survive weeks without food. Even just making it so once a day you need to eat or drink something would be fine... the idea you can just die of thirst because you haven't had a drink for a couple hours sounds like something bottled water companies want to push.
The problem with that mechanic is that the hunger and thirst meters would be almost meaningless. A game that did a hunger meter more "realistically" so to speak, was STALKER. You could explore the zone, kill bandits and whatnot and only after real life hours you'd go hungry, but a single bread or sausage was more than enough to feed your character for an entire day. It was a very forgettable mechanic, because of how long it'd take for you to go hungry. It didn't impact the game in any way when I was playing. Whether you'd remove it or not, it wouldn't make a difference and that's a huge problem.
Hunger and thirst meters are very thin lines and very easy to screw up. A game that employs realistic mechanics does not make it interesting or fun, but making the character cry out for food every 5 minutes is also idiotic.
Woah, Jim, it's so long!
+Philly Cheese No, you aren't.
Impressive girth too.
+Philly Cheese that could be why Jim's so hot.
+QVear you have created the most amazing image of our saviour in my mind
the video is as well :D
Honestly when i saw We Happy few i expected the game to be a liter lower budget version of Bioshock.
But when i found out its a survival game i lost most interest.
Exactly this. Perhaps it's because I wasn't following it super closely, but the E3 presentations gave me the impression that it was more narrative and world driven in the vein of Bioshock.
Knowing that it's yet another "run around for no reason to fill your whatever bars" type of game made me immediately lose interest. They had a really good and interesting theme, there's no way I'll believe they'll make good use of it when they obviously just went with the "currently populair genre" instead of trying to make the most of its strong narrative potential.
The Woebegone Trail.
I had seen some alpha gameplay by youtubers before I saw the E3 clip so I knew what the game was in a way but I hadn't known about the story part they showed at E3 so I thought it was something else. Been wondering since what the general public gamers would think when they realised it was a survival game and not a bioshockesque story.
I played it for half an hour and got a refund as soon as I discovered that the main bulk of the gameplay if looking for food and water. I have at least 3 other survival games in my steam library that are exactly that and do it much better.
same
BORN DIFFERENT
No! We are all born the same, from blood and pain! Can't you feel THE EDGE?!
BORN INNOCENT
+JFairy BORN PERFECT
+guy1853 I'M NOT LIKE YOU
BORN BETTER
This is why I"m not excited for No Man's Sky also, btw. I have a feeling it's just going to be like all these games without the hunger/sleep/thirst gauges.
These games are always SOOO boring. It's like those stupid "Boom Beach" style mobile games where you do the same shit over again to do the same thing over again...just bigger the next time. So dull.
My current prediction for it is that it will be a walking simulator (+ Minecraft's building) with rudimentary space sim grafted onto it.
No Man's Sky seems pretty decent actually. Haven't been following it that closely (Don't own a PS4) but it seems like a 3d Starbound.
Its going to be on PC on the 9th or 12th also. Ill see what people say. I enjoy starbound but have it so that hunger is off, i also use admin command and lvled up my stuff because I don't want just sit around doing mining for hours. I enjoy the exploration and building.
NO IT'S GONNA BE GREAT STFU THERE'S ABSOLOUTLY NO WAY IT CAN'T BE GOOD
Ugh. The only survival game you ever need is Dwarf Fortress.
Which *still* hasn't been topped.
it seems fun but theres just too much of a learning curve for me
Camaxtli takes offense to that.
+Sa lt Agreed.
In what other game can you throw a cougar off a tower and then dig into hell? Nothing!
+Ash Davis Dwarf fortress is very playable. Complex as all fuck and less inviting than Satan's asshole filled with fire ants but playable by definition.
Hey Jim
which Jason Voorhees figure is that?
It looks like the perfect size to add to my collection
That's the Revoltech one.
Jim Sterling Thanks for telling!
I'm going to look into it as soon I can
Revoltech stuff is pretty great.
That's actually surprising. I would have bet anything that it was NECA Part 3 figure.
That's from part 3 isn't it? He looks like Jason from Friday The 13th part 3... I can tell by the size of Jason's... Neck! :P
I've also only just noticed how similar "We Happy Few" looks like "Sir, you are being Hunted" now...
Starting beef with Miller, what a dangerous path you travel
I already blew him up in an episode of The Miller Report. He and I have unfinished business.
a Jimquisition video is the last place I ever expected to see Simon Miller. Why? *Slaps head* here's why!
YES! Thank you for addressing this meter problem. I'm rarely playing survival-anything, but when I do it ends up the same way every time. With me asking "did none of the devs or designers ever went on a hike?!". Seriously, typical player's avatar in these games metabolizes like a fucking jet engine, drink twice their body mass and get staph infection with ease and severity of someone who got his bone marrow completely obliterated by radiation.
Thank you once more Jim, and to give a bit of a message to the devs: unless you make a game about breaking out from a cancer ward, you can reduce the rate of change on most of your meters by at least an order of magnitude.
it tickles me to think the list of issues you have with the whole eating and sleeping (all valid) would be something an alien would tell his race about human life in genera, "so they have to do this thing call eating right? then right after that they need to do a sleep thing and then eat as soon as they get up again, its madness". Just a little thought i had that made me smile :)
So video game developers are aliens?
There's a short story about that, with aliens flabbergasted that we are made of meat. Apparently, all the cool aliens are made of gas or crystals. Imagine their horror when beholding us pulping plant matter with dull bone protrusions in our fleshy maws, only to digest part of it and return the rest as a disgusting pile not even we can stand to be around.
Any time we don't spend earning money to fuel our meat machine bodies and, we either defecate the remains of same or procreate to make more meatlings.
It's just a mess.
Daily reminder that blaunched is a word that exist.
You should ask the makers of We Happy Few to have a depression or an Insanity (or just sanity) meter. _That'd_ make the game more interesting, and it could be even more of a horror game where sleeping causes horrible nightmares and sudden scary visions.
I freaking love survival games, but the balance is REALLY important. One of my favourite series is Lost in Blue (DS). I love the way they handle the meters; the main meter moves up and down fairly frequently, but it feeds into a larger pool that represents your overall health. For example it's fine to not sleep for a night or two; your sleep meter will run out completely, but you won't die, it just means the next day you will be more fatigued, and it can take a few days to slowly replenish that overall health. It was a really great, and far more realistic way of handling player health.
The issue of constantly having to deal with diminishing meters makes me think of The Sims. Now _there_ was a game where you were constantly babysitting the characters.
....The ghost of David Boreanz...? Extreme Dinosaurs in bunny suits...?....
....Wha....?
I'm as confused as you are.
Idk why any of that stuff happened, but I sure was laughing. Also I just realized that both of the show's David Boreannez is known for involve dead things
Shrimp?
prawns have become a symbol of rejection, outright
rebellion, a counter to whatever BS the game companies present each and
every week
A 20 minute episode. Jim, are you dying?
The fuckonami section is actually his will
Survival games have a strange issue regarding time passage. For the sake of "difficulty" most survival games' day/night cycles are far faster than the real world. Yet the actual time that passes for your character is the same as a normal person. Thus what constitutes 20 minutes of game time is equivalent to 24 hours in real time. Coupled with the normal speed you move in these games, you can end up with a character that relatively speaking is moving 50+ times slower than in real life. For example, if I get a bit peckish I can walk over to the shop and get a sandwich. In a survival game that walk time wise would probably constitute 50% of your hunger meter.
Exactly. A lot of those problems would be fixed if there was a more realistic passage of time. Make a day last an hour or so, make the characters a somewhat more resistant to those needs than the average human being. Problem solved.
Just stop quibbling and make a 24-hour in-game day. People might finish it earlier than that? So what?! If it's good enough to get them to replay it, and if starts at a random time of day each time, they'll see all of it over several playthroughs anyway.
Yeah shit's ridiculous XD
Like, in Skyrim, a day takes 24 minutes.
So, literally, if I spend 10 minutes in town selling stuff, I spend TEN FUCKING HOURS of game time in town.
Having lunch and talking to people. Jesus fuck XD
We Happy Few has been launched. If you accept money for the product, it's been launched. It doesn't matter what the version number is, if you accept money for it, it's launched.
Suddenly "Raw Danger/Disaster Report/SOS The Final Escape" came to mind. Anyone? "The game deals with the characters' survival and escape from the slow collapse of an artificial island. While dodging falling buildings and debris from periodic earthquakes, the player must find a way off the island."
It was clunky and died off due to being somewhat hard to market after earthquakes and tsunamis, but by god it was a splendid idea and I really enjoyed it.
8:15 Jim predicted Breath of the Wild's bullshit
no man sky is a great example of 'random' procedural generation becoming boring in its strict randomness
And then there is Dwarf Fortress that takes the concept of randomly generated systems to a whole new level. Minecraft biome generation tries to do a fraction of it, to no avail, of course. There are different ways to do random.
Pathologic 2, as amazing of an experience it is, took this video as a challenge
You’re right but I also just tend to assume that the healers in patho 1 and 2 have so much shit going on their bodies have just kind of given up.
That being said, as someone who isn’t usually super into survival games I loved both Pathologic games to death, which I figure is partially because the difficulty of the game was something I knew beforehand and not just thrown at my feet
It's not that hard to come up with alternative survival mechanics, rather than just sticking with the established mold for survival games.
You could just eat and drink automatically at regular intervals, if you have the appropriate items in your inventory - that way, the survival element is still there, by having you manually locate and carry the various resources - but you don't have to stop what you're doing all the time to actively use them.
Another idea is to have the food/drink notification pop up at *specific* places or points in the story, like when you return to your home/base or when you've reached a certain stage of the main questline.
A third option would be to combine all the food/drink/sleep requirements, and just refill the meter whenever you rest in a safe location.
I once played a game with an intriguing survival system. It had a variety of need meters that were relatively easy to maintain, despite how quickly they decayed. Basic survival was easy, but doing well at it came with benefits that directly correlated with your ability to progress towards your goals. As an example, taking the time and effort to learn and make really good food netted significant bonuses that were beneficial in progressing other activities. Those other activities netted you more resources, bonuses or streamlined tasks in other ways, making a game full of variety, synergy, planning and tangible progression.
That game was The Sims 3. Survival game makers, if a suburban middle-class consumer simulator has more compelling survival mechanics than your game about survival, it's time to step it up.
It would be cool to see a survival game about the first settlers of the new world. Or one about colonizing an alien planet full dangerous creatures and spectacular landscapes. These idea could also allow for good stories.
The second I learned that "We Happy Few" had some pretty heavy surival mechanics, I lost all interest. It seems like a cool universe but survival games are just tedious to me.
PREACH! This is exactly why I stopped playing The Ship. I LOVED the idea. That was an assassination game, where crazy millionaire makes everyone on an arc deco ship kill each other to win a fuckload of money or die. I spent WAY more time starving to death or looking for the bog to wee than planning murders. I was so disappointed. I LOVED the premise. I LOVED the setting. But the constant need to drink, eat etc every few minutes was dopey as hell. Let me do the mission,dammit!!!!
I knew We Happy Few was a survival game, but I think they made a bad choice doing that. I don't give fuck about inventory management in that world- the story was so good & you have me rummaging for rotten breead??? I want to find out WHY they take the drug, I wanna meet the man behind the curtain,I wanna know WHY they cn't bear reality. I suspect the ONLY reason they chose that format was to avoid the comparison to Bioshock. Who CARES if it took inspiration from that game? It wasn't a copy & had enough original ideas to stand on its own. The procedural/permadeath thing makes me wonder what's the fucking point if I never get to find out WHY I live in a world like this. This makes me madder than crappy games- it was a beautiful premise ruined by dull-as-dishwater gameplay. I'm hoping they scrap the whole procedural thing and turn it into a narrative-focused game.
Maybe instead of having lack of sleep, water, or food simply drain a health bar, devs should play around with creative effects for those things to have on the player character. Lack of sleep makes your melee swings slower or even miss occasionally, hunger could make you run slower or have your health bar regen (if that game has regenerating health) slower. I'm not into sleep, thirst, and food meters, but that may be more because of the ways they've been used so far.
Oooh, what if hunger (the food bar becoming fully depleted) made your character irritable and impatient, and therefore unable to speak on good terms with NPCs or sneak effectively (not unable to sneak outright, but more detectable by enemies). This all depends on the type of survival game, but giving hunger and thirst a reason for existing outside of maintaining your health could make them worth having.
That's what they do. Have you even played the game?
this is also the reason i stopped playing don't starve together. it got too stressful always managing health, hunger, and sanity. it always felt like i needed to eat but it was never enough. i would have to sleep, to get sanity back (which has always been a stupid idea for a meter) but then i would lose all that hunger back. it's like there's always punishment for what you are trying to do and it prevents you from enjoying yourself with everything else. if you enjoy don't starve, then go on and enjoy it, i just feel like the game would be much better if it were more reasonable with it's "surviving"
+Lucas Tigy Play the single player, DS is not DS if you are not alone with a deerclops ripping your camp apart making you to the night monster. Also sanity is the less aggravating of the 3 bars, don't play Wolfgang( think that's his name), wear a hat and you will rarely worry about it, food is much more problematic on the early days.( do not take walks in the night if not starving, also.)
About 'The Ship'. Maybe its cos I played with friends and we were on voice chat, but I never thought the food and health thing got in the way that much. Maybe it was cos even when walking around to get food or to the toilet or something, I was still talking to the people i'm hunting or getting hunted by, and I think it was fairly rare for someone to die of hunger rather than getting hit by a blunderbuss or something.
9:40 Actually, Minecraft's been doing that for ages. I use them all the time whenever I'm in the mood for a survival game. I usually play on hardcore mode for the suspense, but I make resources more common so that I can progress quicker. For example, I can now find diamonds in caves instead of needing to spend hours tunneling around bedrock to get them. Now I can mine obsidian and progress to the Nether, where I can have more adventures. Also, actually having a purpose, a chance to find treasure, while cave-diving makes the experience SO much better.
Yep, I totally agree. Survival used to be a gameplay element, rarely a genre of its own. And when it was, there were a lot of other survival aspects than sleep/hunger/thirst, for example in the game Deus (not Deus Ex, just Deus) surviving was a complex thing. But most survival games were survival horror, which actually meant proper action-adventure games with a little bit of grinding for amunition and health. It was a happy medium from the start. Since Minecraft, devs seem to think that survival alone makes a whole game, but even Minecraft had a veeeery complex mining and building system.
I also agree with the random generation thing. The best games that used this system weren't that much random. For example Spelunky has a lot of patterns that come up regularly, despite all the surprises that may still occur anytime. If you want your game to look totally random, you still have to build a lot "behind" for it to work.
For what it's worth, Fallout 4 is the only survival game I've had fun with. The survival elements just felt like they added to the game instead of becoming the central focus.
...In fact, Fallout 4 only become enjoyable once I started playing it as such. It finally made the game actually worth playing. Before the survival update it was a horrible Fallout game and a good, albeit generic post-cataclysm craft 'em up shooter. After, it turned into a pretty damn good single-player survival game.
13:43
I will answer that question with this:
I'm hot cuz I am
You ain't, cuz you not
This is why, this is why, this is why I'm hot
I hated the song, love but loved the reference. Well met!
Fallout new Vegas is the only game I can think of with a good survival system. It's in the background but the game reminds you when you need to eat drink or sleep so it doesn't get in the way
I considered that more of an annoyance then being great as it wasnt a challenge to fast travel to a town to get more stuff to fill bars with
I've liked the majority of survival games I played.
I'm currently playing fallout new Vegas on survival difficulty and I have to say the water and food meters are annoying as hell, they fill up too fast (granted you are in the desert so ill give some leeway)
BS. NV hardcore mode made the game more annoying to play then anything else.
Until you learn how to make gecko kebabs, and it becomes rather trivial (aside from ammo having weight. That shit is terrible).
A man, a reviewer who can be critical of a game he was paid to be in, a game he was in.
This is the sign of a trustworthy reviewer. The best sign there can be. I didn't think Jim could get any more trustworthy, but wow.
Thank God for him!
One survival game that has all these elements that I really like is The Long Dark (I'm speaking of the sandbox mode here mostly but the story is also fine). You have hunger, thirst, sleep and temperature as meters but they feel pretty realistic so they're not constantly badgering you, you have some time to plan ahead and create stashes of supplies. Tools and weapons wear down but things like whetstones, tool kits, sewing kits and gun cleaning kits means nothing is ever going to break on you with out ample time to fix it.
The maps aren't procedurally generated but loot is and since scavenging non perishables can only last you so long you're encouraged to go out and explore the stellar landmarks and interconnected maps. You can also hunt and fish to create your own sustainable supply of food as well and since you can get water by melting snow obtaining water is never a stressful endeavor.
I've played the game a lot and since the maps are static I've memorized them pretty well but there's still tension there, "can I get from point A to point B before a blizzard hits?" "Will there be hostile wildlife?" "Do I have JUST enough energy to climb this rope or should I drink some caffeine and deal with the crash later?" There's this feeling of always pushing yourself but never feeling punished by the things it asks you take into account. (also there's lovely mods that can help you customize everything Don't Starve style)
Game Devs should use real life calories and have it be you eat every 4 to 6 hours real time.
Only problem there is that you run the risk of trivializing the system as a whole. If the needs are spread out too wide, then there's hardly a reason for them to exist in the first place. If you make them too short, then they distract you from the game itself. Its a pretty tight line to walk if you want to have those mechanics be worthwhile without tying them to more complex systems.
Long Dark does it that way.
Then everything needs to happen in real time and there are very few people who want to play games like that.
***** 2 words Long Dark
Alexander Demkin The Long Dark gets away with it by having the game skip ahead to when you have finished the task and even has a forage function where you just tell the game that you want to forage X for Y hours and it tells you the result instead of having to actually preform the task. So you still can't play the game for days of real time without having to deal with your hunger and you are not actually waiting 30 minute for a basic task to complete
+Jim Sterling I don't know if anyone else has this issue but when I try to watch your videos it takes FOREVER for them to load, but if I go click on any other video, it loads faster than I can thank god for you. any idea why that might be or has anyone else had that issue?
I had issues with this video doing that in Chrome yesterday. Unfortunately there's no answer. It's just RUclips being the shitshow it always is.
+Jim Sterling I'm having the same issue, those pesky technocrats trying to keep me from experiencing your glory
+Jim Sterling Just recently started having the same issue, tried in both Chrome and
Firefox with no luck. Only seems to be effecting this channel, when I go
to any other channel it loads normally. It's basically unwatchable now
because it never loads fully :/
That's because true greatness of Sterling can only be experienced after much anticipation and meditation. You need to truly understand what it means to thank god for him.
+Jim Sterling I had this happen also. I tried opening this video in 3 browsers (Opera/Chrome/Firefox) and a tablet yesterday (propriety Chrome clone) because it confused me so much as to why this one particular video wouldn't load. Sounds like a random bug on YT's end. Never had it happen before and I've used YT for years.
7:13 SIMON MILLER OMG WHATCULTURE YEEEAAAAH
VideogamerTV...
You Jabroni!
Saying you love Simon Miller from WhatCulture is like saying you love the actor Micheal Jackson from Men In Black 2.
I think you're missing the point here, Jim called him a baby. If I was Jim I'd watch my back for Ryberg the rocks(& millers) cousin.
It may be a game that has been around for a very long time, but I think that the finest example of a "Survival" game is still UnReal World. It's survival elements lend itself perfectly to the sandbox gameplay that many of the original games in the genre envisioned, there's a lot of freedom in how to accomplish your goals, the hunger/thirst meters are very reasonable, its turn-based nature make for a well-paced game, etc. But it does one thing so much better than a game like WHF: the survival needs drive the actual gameplay forward, as opposed to stopping you from actually accomplishing things.
saw the credits roll with five minutes left... I'm ready to hit the lever!
Jim you didn't even mention about about MGS 3 Snake Eater remastered on the Fox Engine for Pachinko machines?
I talked about the MGS3 pachinko machine in a FucKonami New segment weeks back.
+Jim Sterling ah, I wasn't aware of that
Would it be possible to see a Bluray release of the entire Fuck Konami season, with trailers, commentary, and a collectors edition that includes packet of pachinko balls?
Michael Cortez wait what?
+Nutritious Bag Circles You are doing a great job.Keep up the good work
You forgot to talk about temperature control in survival games! It's completely BS! It means I have to take off all of my clothes and sit in water/drink water, wasting half of my day managing it on and off when I need to be sprinting around my base finishing it up or finding resources.
I want to keep my armor on! Not have to leave it off and THEN put it on mid-battle and hope I'm not backstabbed because of it.
In The Long Dark temperature control is vital. BUT if something is going to weigh you the hell down then THAT becomes a consideration.
I would normally comment on the video's main content here but:
ART ATTACK!
Neil Buchanan is in a hard rock band. True facts.
I'm currently playing a game at the time of this post that other games with survival elements could take some notes on, Dark Cloud. It's a decent game for the PS2 by Level-5, the same people behind the Ni No Kuni games. While it doesn't have a hunger meter (food is only used to restore health), it does have a water meter and weapons do break after some time of use. However here's the thing, water doesn't heavily decrease overtime unless if it's on a certain stage known as a "limited zone" (and even then some of them have areas where you can instantly restore your thirst.)
Also you can upgrade your weapons with attachments so they can become stronger and last longer. Once a weapon reached +5, you can status break your weapon and turn it into an attachment to put on another weapon, thus giving it the stats the previous weapon had. As soon as I recalled this feature (this isn't my first playthrough), I immediately thought to myself "...How come Breath of the Wild doesn't have something like this?!"
This game is a decent example of a dungeon crawler where it's more about planning ahead (with some luck now and then, but it's mostly planning), and see how much you're ready to take on the trials ahead of you. I wouldn't call it a flawless example, but it is a step in the right direction.
Dark Cloud 1 and 2 are fantastic games that fans have been clamoring for a revival of since the third one got turned into Rogue Galaxy (also a good game, but with no town building) - you can see certain elements of the weapon upgrading mechanics in the Souls series, but as far as I know the Status Break and Synthsphere mechanics (or equivalents) are unique.
Rob from Playstation Access brings these games up occasionally, but sadly it appears that AAA gaming has left any spiritual sequels by the roadside, which is a shame - building up different weapon variants has a very Pokemon-style feeling of care and attention that could easily augment even the most lacklustre of dungeon crawlers.
Not that Dark cloud was substandard, mind you - there was clearly a lot of love poured into every aspect of that game.
God bless you Jim. You truly are the hero we deserve on RUclips.
do people who play pachinko care about video game titles?
I doubt they do. If I was a gambler, I wouldn't care what character is on a machine as long as it functions properly.
No they're gamblers they just care about winning money. Putting these characters and whatnot into the machines hits 1. The nostalgia factor and 2. It's a game now!! You get to play a game AND win money!!
#FucKonami
Only insofar as they might recognize the name or visual elements and might want to play it because of that. Some might play it because they're fans of the brand, but that's a very small minority. Young people aren't the main audience for pachinko.
It has to do more with creating variety than any one franchise mattering to Pachinko or Slot Machine players, Its to try to subtly coax players to spend more money.
The thinking goes something like this. You have a Pachinko hall, it has one type of Pachinko machine in it. A player might only spend $100 at that machine before getting bored, realizing they aren't winning and go home. If you have two types of machines, a player might spend $70, get bored but see the other machine and spend another $70 at that machine. The net expenditure is $140 vs $100. It also helps to generate repeat business because the gambler is seeing something new, even if its essentially just a new video loop playing in a differently painted cabinet.
Of course there's some who do, and some bleed-through between Pachinko players and various other subcultures. That's why there's all these Pachinko machines based on things like manga, anime, games, movies, or various kinds of other content, often in elaborate ways. Pachinko machines aren't these rare things you only see in casinos or something, there's a lot of Pachinko parlors and all sorts of people go to them. They're really common.
That said though, it is basically to get or hold attention...should a pachinko player maybe share an interest in the theme of a particular machine, but obviously its taking a gamble on there being a a sizable group of pachinko regulars also being say...Metal Gear fans (or at least having some passing interest enough to try it once.) which is obviously not a 100% certain success.
Come on, man. Do I have to watch in 720p? My computer can barely buffer this.
Edit: Nevermind. Just refreshed.
Incoming wall of text. Don't worry, there's a TL;DR at the bottom.
There's only been two games I've played that had good survival mechanics. You mention Rust, Ark, and Don't Starve, none of which I've played, but Minecraft has pretty decent hunger system too. Depending on the way you move around, you can go a long time without food, but even so food is fairly easy to acquire, so it isn't much of a problem, you just need to plan ahead. The other one is Skyrim, obviously with mods because Vanilla Skyrim does not have survival mechanics. Specifically, I used 'realistic needs and diseases' as well as 'Frostfall.' Both of these mods had a lot in common with what you are saying about Don't Starve, that being how much you can customize the experience, though to a lesser degree.
With 'Realistic Needs,' I could control how long I could go without having to eat food, drink water, or take a nap. I left eating and drinking on the default, because they actually depleted at a reasonable rate. You could go a few days without eating, though you would begin to experience debuffs and eventually die if you go too long, and the same goes for the need for water and sleep. There wasn't much urgency in collecting what it is you need, because you wouldn't insta-die any time soon. Plus, it was easy to manage carrying around the resources you need. You could kill a single bear and, after cooking the meat, you would have enough food to last you weeks in-game, unless you toggle on the mechanic that causes food to spoil if you don't eat it soon enough, which you could also adjust to make things to either last a long time or spoil within about a day. Water was easy, you only needed to carry around a few bottles and could refill them by pressing a button while standing in a stream, though there was a small chance you could get a disease from doing this. However, you could find a campfire (or make one, if you had Frostfall), and then boil the water so that it is safe. Or if you're in town, you can talk to the inkeeper and they can refill all your empty water bottles for like 10 gold. The only meter I slowed the depletion of was the sleep meter. If my character started getting hungry, it was easy enough to open my inventory and eat food or drink water, but if I found myself in need of sleep, I would have to stop what I'm doing, find a bed or set up a campsite, and then sleep. Then after I wake up I'd have to eat and drink some more, which I think isn't unreasonable, but having to go through this process every in-game day was annoying. At first I toggled it off altogether, but later I set it to half of its normal depletion rate so I'd only have to sleep every other day to avoid debuffs, which wasn't too often. The diseases were handled well, too. They wouldn't kill you, and in fact would hardly be noticeable at first. You would just slowly get more and more debuffs the longer they went untreated. Potions of cure disease aren't that hard to craft or purchase though, so there was only one occasion early in a game when a disease was actually causing problems for me, and even then that was only because I didn't want to just fast travel to my destination and buy a potion.
Then there's 'Frostfall,' which is technically two mods now, I think, with 'Campsite' or whatever the camping mod is that's made by the same person as a companion for it. When in cold weather, I'd have to worry about freezing to death, but on top of simply being able to adjust the rate at which the cold sets in, I could further slow the rate by wearing warmer clothing or armor, carrying a torch, etc. I couldn't just jump into freezing water, because that would make me freeze up very, very fast. But if you play your cards right (that is, actually plan ahead), it wasn't hard to not freeze to death. I rarely had to set up camp more than once when traveling long distances through cold areas, but even that wasn't *entirely* necessary because there are spells that increase your warmth and can dry you off if you get drenched from a swim or from rain. Like with Realistic Needs, coldness was not a meter that would not affect me until I eventually would experience a critical existence failure as soon as it filled up, I would again experience debuffs. My movement speed would start slowing down, stamina would regenerate slower (I think, it's been a while), as well as a few other things that made it less of a chore to maintain, because it provided an experience of actually battling the elements rather than "whelp, better set up a campfire before I just randomly die." I also quite liked the options that prevented you from growing colder during combat or dialogue, which further made it feel like less of a chore.
TL;DR, essentially there's 2 things that make survival aspects fun. The first is that you can go a long time without dying from the lack of a resource, with debuffs at certain thresholds to help encourage that survival, and the second is customization.
I really liked how Stranded dealt with this. You have a hunger, sleep and thirst meter and during every day they empty slowly, but usually only once per day. One day is roughly 10 minutes length. That way you have plenty of time focusing on things, while only needing to eat once.
Miasmata is an imperfect game but it's another great example of original survival and exploration, based around orienteering, and with only a single terrifying enemy you need to hide from rather than a horde of zombies.
I love, LOVE seeing Konami fall on its arse.
They tore their creative team down to the ground, put everything into a national niche instead of a massed international market, and honestly thought it would work out for them.
They need how many years to work on a Triple A game? What do they actually have in development?
They've choked.
They have Yu-Gi-Oh as a baseline, they have a large share of a small market in their pachinko machines, and NOTHING to show in the industry that directly competes with big screen movies.
Morons.
I was so disappointed with We Happy Few, I was hoping for something along the lines of Amnesia/Aliens/Outlast dystopian horror with heavy focus on narrative but man it being another typical survival game was truly disappointing.
I dont think you have played the game...
Is it me or am I thinking of BotW with this argument
Not just you. Jim's nothing if not consistent, though - he complained about it in botw in a recent video. I honestly wish there were a few more unbreakable items myself (like I feel like the post-dungeon items should be permanents) but to be honest I kind of like the idea of weighing my options a touch and working around things. 99% of the time devs do it badly but the zelda team has a talent for doing really bad things well enough to be somewhere between ~meh and pretty interesting.
I like food and thirst management in Subnautica, it's one of the main early game challenges to overcome, specifically when you have no idea what you're doing. Once you're able to make a water purifier and get some farms going you have a constant supply of food and water, but you have to get there first.
This is why I've always said survival elements in games need to be a secondary concern, something that you have to contend with while concerning yourself primarily with the meat of the game, and NOT THE MEAT OF THE GAME. Skyrim, for example, is hugely improved by the addition of survival elements, because they add another (honestly necessary in my opinion) aspect to an already robust adventure rather than simply making the adventure about surviving.
That's why when I see survival games on Steam, I don't even give them a second glance unless they say, in some form or another, "Survive while you ."
What are you wearing, "Ben from Reddit?"
"Uh, the blood-stained clothes of former Konami employees?"
Moxie Crimefighter ...
She sounds hideous.
+Dusty Chan Well uh... she's a Reddit user...
*applause*
At 7:06 why did you use a picture of that Simon Miller guy from WhatCulture? Was it just a random joke or is there some depth to it?
He did a couple videos on why Nintendo games are for babies, often ending his argument with "Like this one" while showing a baby picture.
+Jim Sterling you excited for the new Zelda game?
Miller only like real games, about real men, with real guns, about a real war......like dark souls.
+Jim Sterling Thanks for the explanation, p.s big fan of your work, thanks for the great content
soooooo... i take it he wasnt too thrilled over the new zelda then...
He liked it, but thought the weapon degradation held the gamer back a lot. He ultimately gave it a 7/10 and the Zelda fanboys threw a kenipshit.
Even though a 7/10 is a decent score.
I found out that New Vegas becomes a pretty great survival game on very hard hardcore mode if you install the realistic wasteland lighting mod, turn off the non-diegetic sound and give yourself two restrictions: no fast travel, no distance running. The nights are pitch black, which makes travel almost impossible without cateye. And it takes at least a whole in game day to move from one settlement to another, so you'll find yourself preparing for long journeys by gathering food and water; setting out at dawn after a good night's sleep. You spend so much time on the road that you end up eating a lot more food and than you'd need to if you fast traveled. Suddenly survival is an important skill. You're stopping to pick plants and looting gecko corpses for meat to cook. You're stealing from people's homes because you're a antisocial wild man with 1 charisma and 7 barter, and can't afford to purchase supplies.You mind your own business because healing drains your food and medicine.
Since it didn't come up, I think Minecraft is another game that does survival pretty well, and I'm surprised more developers don't take more ideas from it, considering it was probably a big reason the survival/crafting mechanic thing got so popular in the past few years.
Actually surviving, avoiding monsters, and getting food in Minecraft are all pretty easy and can be achieved early on. The game's only challenges come from things they do after they learn to feed themselves.
kudos for dissing a game you're connected with. is it enough to restore trust after the Pogs For Boglins debacle tho?
Wait did I miss it, I didnt see any random clips in this episode? Are you no longer getting bullshit DMC take down notices?
I get 'em plenty, I just knew this week that the games I'd be talking about weren't prone to ContentID matches. You start to get pretty good at predicting what videos get claimed once you've dealt with ContentID enough times.
+Jim Sterling So what are your thoughts about the No Man's Sky leak? Real? Or Sony getting free press?
Hey Jim, Im a Huge fan, so Im starting a RUclips channel myself but the more I hear and see the DMC take downs falsely put on channels even for their own IP I get really worried Im gonna end up wasting my time. Is there any advice you could offer or where you can point me for learning how to deal with it, is it even possible at this point to monetize my work or should I really just look at patreon? My channel when I finally start is going to be a sort of review / my perspective on certain issues somewhat like your show or MovieBOB. I would really appreciate any advice you have.
+Jim Sterling I love your show jim keep up the good work!
I find it a fucking disgrace, on the part of RUclips mind you, that your ability to predict this bullshit is even a thing! Other RUclipsrs should hire you as a ContentID Consultant.
So survival horror games have gone the way of the Sims then as far as keeping motives high?
Nick9572 the sims have regularly made the meters less hard with every game
I think the a simple change to the 'sleep-need' meter is to allow it to fill up completely results only in your stamina bar being cut in half. But in-game if you go 48 hours+ without sleep, the sleep-need meter should turn BLACK or blood RED to warn you that you are on the verge of passing out. This sort of leeway can be applied to all of the meters except health giving you wiggle room to ignore it for even a whole in-game day if necessary.
Also they should program it so that the sleep meter CANT fill up in less than 18 hours in-game time. Honestly, an adult should not need 2 naps a day unless your 75+
The way I view it is that you want the player making choices, not doing chores. Deciding whether to go hungry and be weakened or risk a food run, for example. Or deciding whether to spend time stockpiling food so that you don't have to worry about, but that requiring a time investment and a risk the food will be stolen, infected, or rats will get it, or not stockpiling and having to make sure that you gather enough food every day to survive. In my view, that is what survival should be about. Making interesting strategic choices.
is it true? does jim reply if you are early? jim reply please
I refuse to reply.
+Jim Sterling wait what.
mind. bloooown.
its always best to come eaily
jim just created the youtube paradox.
lets put it this way, would Skyrim or The Witcher 3 be as good if they had three fucking annoying bars that needed refilling?... NO they would have been boring tasks!
That is only your opinion really. Fallout New Vegas was much BETTER if you played in hardcore mode having to sleep, eat and drink. Why? Because it gave a purpose to having a base where you could store stuff and sleep in safety. The difference is that surviving was not the goal but the means to reach the goal. These survival games are the other way around.
I disagree, simply down to the fact people enjoy different things. While I think Witcher wouldn't have been fun with those elements, I found Skyrim to be actually entertaining with Frostfall and Hunger mods installed.
I think the point being made here is that if your game is nothing but these elements, it isn't fun. Skyrim and Witcher 3 I would argue are bad examples because they have other things going for them, be it story, combat (less so in Skyrim's case because combat in that game is lame imo.), or any other part of the game. Even had these features been in the base game they wouldn't be the core part of the game like it is with most of the examples shown in the video.
Agreed, The Fallouts (and skyrim) have the benefit of the survival elements being optional though and not core to the actual gameplay like a lot of these hackjob survival simulators. I've been roped into buying Ark, Dayz Standalone, Miscreated by my mates telling me how good they are and I've regretted every purchase every time. I should've learned after Dayz :(
Most mods in Skyrim adding hunger and such hardly demand more than passing attention and the rare tap of a hot key. They don't get boring because they are a small background task that you occasionally give more than passing attention. They introduce a challenge such as balancing inventory space between food, drink, potions, weapons and armour, and loot. Mostly I hardly notice they exist because it's a tap of a hotkey, and even then I can also just set it to be fully automatic. And even if ignored you can, while being weakened more and more greatly, live days without food or drink or sleep.
Even then Skyrim and The Witcher 3 have well designed mechanics to work around. The added mechanics of hunger, thirst, and sleep would hardly have been a central feature, more of something you handle in passing
Reallly didn't like the item condition in Witcher 3. Just a pointless pain in the neck in my opinion.
I absolutely agree. It was a routine, you buy a lot of spare repair kits and then just use it when necessary.
I don't see how a degradation system improves anything in a video game, especially in RPGs. Such systems have always been trivial and never added much to the game save for being a hassle. And when it isn't a hassle, its simply a useless mechanic with nothing engaging about it. Find someone to repair it or get a repair hammer, repair kit, whatever have you and be on your way in five seconds.
I sometimes find it fitting depending on the setting of a game (i.e. Fallout, though it was removed in Fallout 4 because of how poorly designed it was in FO3/NV), but again, why have such a trivial mechanic in the first place?
Van Bur3n: You have spoken the truth.
It does in that you have more things on which you have to spend in-game money, so that the economic system is, more or less, balanced.
Garrett Page play a bit further in the game. The later items are pretty durable. I just repair them when i sell items.
solution: replace death with nonlethal disabilities that scale with specific meters. Like slower walking, lowered stamina, getting noticed faster, lesser fighting capabilities etc. Add that with extra bonus when you properly replentish a meter (increased speed, increased stamina etc.)
(obviously along with slowing the meter depletion down)
when i go about my day, sure, i take a few glasses of water, eat when i'm hungry and sleep every night, but a day is pretty long and there's plenty of time to do stuff and even if i go about ignoring these needs for a while i'm not going to die. that's what they need to realize: that there's really no constant rush to get to the next food source in our daily lives, even if they weren't so comfy in our modern world. actual survival only makes eating and drinking and sleeping a problem when it takes about an actual day to find any food or drinkable water and sleep is not a problem of sleeping every few minutes but finding or creating a suitable environment for sleep, which to the really tired can mean just finding a dry patch of floor with nothing else there. that's what they need to understand, that survival is planning a trip, building a sustainable environment, hunting for the food that you'll need in a day... even if our stomach is empty and our lips are falling of due to thirst we can still go on living for quite some time. if they'd balance things out to mirror our real life capabilities of lingering on then there would be a nice game there.