I think, personally, its less about how hard or soft the sci-fi is and more about how fleshed out the sci and the fi is. Im a big fan of science coming into contact with the unexplained, in an Event Horizon or Doom 3 type of way. The audio logs and background stories of Doom 3 are fantastic and really makes the world feel real and fleshed out.
my husband slapped my butt so hard that my phone flew out of my hand, and hit the wall and shattered. he got me a new one, but we both laughed about it
Upon reflection, I think I actually agree with you as far as readability goes. I think it's just much less of an issue for me personally because Elden Ring gives you so many options and so much help when it comes to builds and boss fights.
And hey! Summoning is an important feature of the game, and it allows people with slower reflexes and less time like myself to enjoy the game! My husband did a Rune Level 1 challenge and made it to Elden Beast with his summons and his ashes of war. (He stopped at Elden Beast cuz he knew he could beat it given enough time, and just didnt like the fight enough to care.)
Dark Souls 3. I have 160 hours in Dark Souls 3, and I hated probably 90% of it. Its just such a boring slog, it's when Fromsoft imo jumped the shark with what i call, "flailing boss syndrome." So many bosses and enemies in DS3 just flail wildly with such little telegraph or strategy other than, roll away, and mash roll. Dodging should be a strategic maneuver that lets you avoid damage and change your position, but it really hasn't been that since Dark Souls 2.
DS3 is what started the whole dodge slop thing thats so prevalent in modern souls likes. Ironically, Bloodborne, which also has flailing boss syndrome, is one of my favorite games of all time, but the game is a lot more deliberate in its design around those kinds of bosses... minus a few.
I think DS3 is too Action, not enough RPG for me as a Souls game. Bloodborne is unique enough to be a separate category for me, and Elden Ring's weapon ashes really add a lot more flavor and gameplay, along with letting you really diversify your build more. Plus I think the bosses in Elden Ring are more readable, and block is actually something you can feasibly do. (Though I do think they need to decrease the dead angle that can hit you when blocking.)
I just despise Dark Souls 3 so much, all everyone talks about are the late game bosses, but dont mention the slog of areas you need to get through to get to any of the good bosses.
But is DS3 a bad game? probably not, its probably a me problem. DS2 set my expectations up in the sense that DS2 was completely different gameplay wise to DS1, where as DS3 felt like a more generic sequel to DS1 rather than expanding and making the game feel different or unique. DS3 was just DS1 but super fast and that's really it. I guess i just wanted something different.
I watched it, did not care for it. To dark, there were so many points i could not see what was happening, WAY to loud, actually hurt my ears, and, i just did not enjoy it as an experience. Actors are all fine, but there were times where the writing felt clunky or out of place ngl.
Imo, Metal Sonic. I think Shadow is enough of his own character with unique goals to not be a full rival status. Metal on the other hand... his life's purpose is to BE Sonic. And he will take every chance he can get to prove that.
I had an idea for a timeline where Sonic is MIA, and Metal Sonic, realizing this means he's the only Sonic in existence, becomes a hero to emulate the real Sonic, even turning against Eggman to fulfill his true purpose: Be Sonic. IDK, I would like to see more Metal Sonic stories that dive into his character and thoughts. Scrapnik Island was a great taste of that with Mecha Sonic!
Its an Armored Personnel Carrier and, in the 1960, was envisioned as a "battle taxi." It has thin armor, useful against shrapnel and small arms fire, and was intended to drop troops off close to the front line, then leave.
However, the concept of a battle taxi was quickly surpassed by the idea that a troop transport can provide fire support to its troops. Something like the Russian BTR-60 has a turret with two guns in it, a larger 14.5mm for destroying light armor and cover, and a smaller 7.62mm anti personell gun. So the BTR can provide some covering fire and extra firepower to the troops it delivers and the M113 can't. The M113 did not have a gun on it, it was literally JUST supposed to deliver troops and thats it. All it had was a hatch that could have a 12.7mm or a 7.62mm weapon on it, and thats it.
Later models of the M113 allowed more modifications like as a mortar vehicle or medical vehicle, one of the best things about the M113 is how easy it is to modify and maintain, since its essentially just a box on tracks.
Protection was decent for the time, it stopped small arms like AKMs and shrapnel from artillery, but it has a thin flat bottom, meaning that any sort of mine is going to obliterate that thing.
Nowadays, the M113 is mostly used as a training vehicle or held behind the front lines as a support vehicle. It still has it's uses, but its not exactly a good APC. (Mind you, the BTR-60 isn't exactly good either, it has wheels which cant traverse as much and are damaged easier, and suffers from a lack of protection just like the M113. But both these vehicles were revolutionary for the time.)
If I got any of this incorrect, please let me know, I'm simply an enthusiast for military equipment.
I think, personally, its less about how hard or soft the sci-fi is and more about how fleshed out the sci and the fi is. Im a big fan of science coming into contact with the unexplained, in an Event Horizon or Doom 3 type of way. The audio logs and background stories of Doom 3 are fantastic and really makes the world feel real and fleshed out.
my husband slapped my butt so hard that my phone flew out of my hand, and hit the wall and shattered. he got me a new one, but we both laughed about it
The Commander? In Terra Invicta??? idk how to run a secret society!
Aurora 4X if you are into very complex strategy games about building an interstellar empire.
Dalton is my pick for best, but I really liked Lazenby when he gets to be Bond.
so... his male followers are all fair game, yes?
I just wonder what Gannon's up to.
moths freakin rule, way better and cuter than butterflies
Upon reflection, I think I actually agree with you as far as readability goes. I think it's just much less of an issue for me personally because Elden Ring gives you so many options and so much help when it comes to builds and boss fights.
And hey! Summoning is an important feature of the game, and it allows people with slower reflexes and less time like myself to enjoy the game! My husband did a Rune Level 1 challenge and made it to Elden Beast with his summons and his ashes of war. (He stopped at Elden Beast cuz he knew he could beat it given enough time, and just didnt like the fight enough to care.)
I 100% agree, i can not stand the controls in Witcher 3. I've tried 3 separate times to get into it and it just feels so awful to play.
Dark Souls 3. I have 160 hours in Dark Souls 3, and I hated probably 90% of it. Its just such a boring slog, it's when Fromsoft imo jumped the shark with what i call, "flailing boss syndrome." So many bosses and enemies in DS3 just flail wildly with such little telegraph or strategy other than, roll away, and mash roll. Dodging should be a strategic maneuver that lets you avoid damage and change your position, but it really hasn't been that since Dark Souls 2.
DS3 is what started the whole dodge slop thing thats so prevalent in modern souls likes. Ironically, Bloodborne, which also has flailing boss syndrome, is one of my favorite games of all time, but the game is a lot more deliberate in its design around those kinds of bosses... minus a few.
I think DS3 is too Action, not enough RPG for me as a Souls game. Bloodborne is unique enough to be a separate category for me, and Elden Ring's weapon ashes really add a lot more flavor and gameplay, along with letting you really diversify your build more. Plus I think the bosses in Elden Ring are more readable, and block is actually something you can feasibly do. (Though I do think they need to decrease the dead angle that can hit you when blocking.)
I just despise Dark Souls 3 so much, all everyone talks about are the late game bosses, but dont mention the slog of areas you need to get through to get to any of the good bosses.
But is DS3 a bad game? probably not, its probably a me problem. DS2 set my expectations up in the sense that DS2 was completely different gameplay wise to DS1, where as DS3 felt like a more generic sequel to DS1 rather than expanding and making the game feel different or unique. DS3 was just DS1 but super fast and that's really it. I guess i just wanted something different.
ohhhh let me know when you do
i use godot! ive only ever made one game public on it, but its fun to use!
I watched it, did not care for it. To dark, there were so many points i could not see what was happening, WAY to loud, actually hurt my ears, and, i just did not enjoy it as an experience. Actors are all fine, but there were times where the writing felt clunky or out of place ngl.
bro i wish that were true lol
thank you! ^w^
Imo, Metal Sonic. I think Shadow is enough of his own character with unique goals to not be a full rival status. Metal on the other hand... his life's purpose is to BE Sonic. And he will take every chance he can get to prove that.
I had an idea for a timeline where Sonic is MIA, and Metal Sonic, realizing this means he's the only Sonic in existence, becomes a hero to emulate the real Sonic, even turning against Eggman to fulfill his true purpose: Be Sonic. IDK, I would like to see more Metal Sonic stories that dive into his character and thoughts. Scrapnik Island was a great taste of that with Mecha Sonic!
I went to FWA back in April, (or was it May, i can't remember,) and it was the safest i had almost ever felt in my life.
Its an Armored Personnel Carrier and, in the 1960, was envisioned as a "battle taxi." It has thin armor, useful against shrapnel and small arms fire, and was intended to drop troops off close to the front line, then leave.
However, the concept of a battle taxi was quickly surpassed by the idea that a troop transport can provide fire support to its troops. Something like the Russian BTR-60 has a turret with two guns in it, a larger 14.5mm for destroying light armor and cover, and a smaller 7.62mm anti personell gun. So the BTR can provide some covering fire and extra firepower to the troops it delivers and the M113 can't. The M113 did not have a gun on it, it was literally JUST supposed to deliver troops and thats it. All it had was a hatch that could have a 12.7mm or a 7.62mm weapon on it, and thats it.
Later models of the M113 allowed more modifications like as a mortar vehicle or medical vehicle, one of the best things about the M113 is how easy it is to modify and maintain, since its essentially just a box on tracks.
Protection was decent for the time, it stopped small arms like AKMs and shrapnel from artillery, but it has a thin flat bottom, meaning that any sort of mine is going to obliterate that thing.
Nowadays, the M113 is mostly used as a training vehicle or held behind the front lines as a support vehicle. It still has it's uses, but its not exactly a good APC. (Mind you, the BTR-60 isn't exactly good either, it has wheels which cant traverse as much and are damaged easier, and suffers from a lack of protection just like the M113. But both these vehicles were revolutionary for the time.)
If I got any of this incorrect, please let me know, I'm simply an enthusiast for military equipment.
that was quite a headline to be scrolling thru