np NP Wednesday, Oct 23, 2019

[hkmaly 490]

http://egscomics.com/egsnp/parable-024

... from zero to maxed out every 5 minutes ... I see she didn't wanted to leave anything to chance. How long did she needs to go from zero to maxed out MONEY?

Also, cosmetic might be interesting, but she wanted to buy the experience boosters didn't she?

[Pharaoh RutinTutin 1,586]

A dealer in "potions" giving free samples?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pIzRGHuJt_I

 

[ChronosCat 155]

DLC? Bah! I remember when you bought a game once and it never changed. No patches, no expansions, no nothing -- and we were happy with it! Well, except for when the game shipped with a game-breaking bug... Or they released a new version of the game and you had to pay full price if you wanted the new features despite it being essentially the same game as the one you already had...

Okay, so DLC and downloadable updates aren't all bad. However, I do still prefer it when I can get the complete and final version right off the bat, no assembly or additional purchases required...

[hkmaly 490]

5 hours ago, ChronosCat said:

DLC? Bah! I remember when you bought a game once and it never changed. No patches, no expansions, no nothing -- and we were happy with it! Well, except for when the game shipped with a game-breaking bug... Or they released a new version of the game and you had to pay full price if you wanted the new features despite it being essentially the same game as the one you already had...

Okay, so DLC and downloadable updates aren't all bad. However, I do still prefer it when I can get the complete and final version right off the bat, no assembly or additional purchases required...

DLCs are still better than server-based games which completely stops working when the server is turned off ... or upgraded ...

[Scotty 1,061]

3 hours ago, hkmaly said:

DLCs are still better than server-based games which completely stops working when the server is turned off ... or upgraded ...

Or games that are single player but won't let you play offline because they insist that they must store achievements online.

Though these are more DRM related than DLC, like "If I can't connect to the publisher's servers, I can't confirm that you actually purchased me!"

[hkmaly 490]

14 hours ago, Scotty said:

On 10/24/2019 at 1:49 AM, hkmaly said:

DLCs are still better than server-based games which completely stops working when the server is turned off ... or upgraded ...

Or games that are single player but won't let you play offline because they insist that they must store achievements online.

Though these are more DRM related than DLC, like "If I can't connect to the publisher's servers, I can't confirm that you actually purchased me!"

"Or"? Those WILL stop working when the server is turned off or upgraded.

[Scotty 1,061]

46 minutes ago, hkmaly said:

"Or"? Those WILL stop working when the server is turned off or upgraded.

I probably misread what you said as something different.

[ChronosCat 155]

On 10/23/2019 at 7:49 PM, hkmaly said:

DLCs are still better than server-based games which completely stops working when the server is turned off ... or upgraded ...

On 10/24/2019 at 5:50 AM, Scotty said:

Or games that are single player but won't let you play offline because they insist that they must store achievements online.

Though these are more DRM related than DLC, like "If I can't connect to the publisher's servers, I can't confirm that you actually purchased me!"

I haven't actually played any games like that (these days most of the games I play are by small indie developers and/or on older consoles), though I have heard of them, and agree they're far worse. (I actually passed up Diablo III and one of the Sim City games because they required an always-on internet connection and I didn't have that at the time.)

Another recent video game trend I despise, one I refuse to participate in on principle, is the "freemium"/"pay-to-win" style game. I can tolerate buying bonus levels and characters and the like when they feel like significant new content added to an already fun game, but I cannot tolerate paying real money for in-game consumables or other content of little long-term value, and if the game isn't fun without paying for extra stuff, I'm not going to play the game at all.

[Scotty 1,061]

Just now, ChronosCat said:

(I actually passed up Diablo III and one of the Sim City games because they required an always-on internet connection and I didn't have that at the time.)

Diablo 3 tried to incorporate MMO features like clans, a marketplace, and special events. but in it's defense, Diablo 2 was such that players had created clans and a third party market for selling gear, and it had ladder events as well, it wasn't surprising that Blizzard would see that and want to incorporate those as core features of D3, especially the marketplace because there were some sites that claimed you could buy/sell D2 gear for real money but they were scams.

Sim City is a sore spot for me cus I had bought it without knowing how limited it would be. it practically forced multiplayer and the land available was small compared to Sim City 4, I know they made some changes at one point, but honestly, I haven't looked at it since shortly after it's release.

[hkmaly 490]

3 hours ago, Scotty said:

Sim City is a sore spot for me cus I had bought it without knowing how limited it would be. it practically forced multiplayer and the land available was small compared to Sim City 4, I know they made some changes at one point, but honestly, I haven't looked at it since shortly after it's release.

... I didn't looked at Sim City since 2000 (the game, although I'm not sure about the year) ... did I missed something?

8 hours ago, ChronosCat said:

Another recent video game trend I despise, one I refuse to participate in on principle, is the "freemium"/"pay-to-win" style game. I can tolerate buying bonus levels and characters and the like when they feel like significant new content added to an already fun game, but I cannot tolerate paying real money for in-game consumables or other content of little long-term value, and if the game isn't fun without paying for extra stuff, I'm not going to play the game at all.

I play surprising number of those since I bought an android game console - well, the shop claimed it's phone but it's too big for one.

There are three types of content you can buy in game: first, "costumes"/"fashion items" - stuff which is totally or mostly useless except bragging you have it. I'm totally ok with this one, although I would never buy it. Second, permanent bonuses: some of those may be "pay to win", meaning it's a "bonus" whose lack make the game unplayable on later levels or unwinnable, but if it's reasonable one-time price I see it as "the game without bonus is a demo and with it it's full game" ... and I actually bough few of those. Third, consumables. Well, being consumables, those really can't have so small price it would be reasonable, and game which requires you buying them repeatedly is true pay-to-win and not worth playing. Special case of those is if you pay for CHANCE to get something ... which should be against the hazard gaming laws and in some cases it probably is.

However, surprising number of games with microtransactions can be played without ever paying ... if you don't mind you only play like 15 minutes per day to spend the free actions and then wait for next day to refresh. I don't mind. I actually take it as advantage, as I don't have that much time for games ...

[Scotty 1,061]

Just now, hkmaly said:

... I didn't looked at Sim City since 2000 (the game, although I'm not sure about the year) ... did I missed something?

Sim City 4 is probably regarded as the best city building experience, IIRC you could import real maps into it to build on (the best are topographic maps otherwise you'd likely end up with a flat land) and the maps can be used to form a 100x100km region in which you can break up into 1x1, 2x2 or 4x4km cities, (compared to SC2K in which you'd make your city and there'd be 4 neighbours). The Rush Hour expansion also added the ability to take control of vehicles to run missions, like taking a medical transport helicopter to fly a patient to a hospital, maneuvering a firetruck of police car through traffic to get to a fire or chase down criminals, or as a twist, be the criminal trying to get out of town before the cops catch you.

When Sim City (Online) came out it was almost like playing Sim City 2000 but with updated graphics and only and each city was like 2x2k and you were limited to the maps that Maxis made available. and then there was the multiplayer aspect which had each player setting up trade deals  and such and then the players could cooperate in building a great work that would give bonuses to all cities. the concept was interesting but many were disappointed that there wasn't a option to play by yourself because of the fact that if you wanted to make money you have to make deals with neighbours, and if you're alone, that's not possible, heck even if you were playing with others, you're usually stuck waiting for them to log in and accept any deals you try to make. At least with SC4 the game would simulate your neighbours and both ask for and accept deals.

[ChronosCat 155]

17 hours ago, hkmaly said:

However, surprising number of games with microtransactions can be played without ever paying ... if you don't mind you only play like 15 minutes per day to spend the free actions and then wait for next day to refresh. I don't mind. I actually take it as advantage, as I don't have that much time for games ...

There was a Pokemon-themed puzzle game on 3DS like that which I played a bit of (without ever paying anything), but it got frustrating how just when I was really getting into the game I'd need to take a break. Also, I don't like to turn on a gaming system just to play something for a few minutes, so unless I feel like playing a little bit of that puzzle game then switching to something else (or vice versa), it just isn't convenient for me to play. (I might feel differently if it was on something that I had on most of the time, like a phone... But then again I never fire up any games on my computer to play for just a few minutes, so maybe playing games for a few minutes at a time just doesn't appeal to me.)

[hkmaly 490]

10 hours ago, ChronosCat said:

On 10/26/2019 at 0:18 AM, hkmaly said:

However, surprising number of games with microtransactions can be played without ever paying ... if you don't mind you only play like 15 minutes per day to spend the free actions and then wait for next day to refresh. I don't mind. I actually take it as advantage, as I don't have that much time for games ...

There was a Pokemon-themed puzzle game on 3DS like that which I played a bit of (without ever paying anything), but it got frustrating how just when I was really getting into the game I'd need to take a break. Also, I don't like to turn on a gaming system just to play something for a few minutes, so unless I feel like playing a little bit of that puzzle game then switching to something else (or vice versa), it just isn't convenient for me to play. (I might feel differently if it was on something that I had on most of the time, like a phone... But then again I never fire up any games on my computer to play for just a few minutes, so maybe playing games for a few minutes at a time just doesn't appeal to me.)

Well, it's not for everyone. (And finding out it's not for you can be costly experience if you try to actually pay for the game to move faster ...)