Anabriated

joined 1 year ago
[–] Anabriated 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The fact that you didn't find it fun is totally valid. BG3 is a very opinionated game that gets a huge number of things right for its target audience - the people who really enjoy CRPGs, branching paths, and choice driven gameplay. It does sound like that you're really not into those things, so BG3 could never have been an excellent experience.

The games that you list are designed to be mostly linear experiences, so it was possible for the devs to make the core gameplay shine because they had time to really polish those systems and interactions. There was enough people and time to really tune RDR2's gunplay, the horse riding, the hunting and tracking, and make the world feel organic.

BG3's dev time was spent on tuning the combat encounters, tuning the class building options, and making sure the world (almost) always made sense. While baking in hundreds of stories about your companions, side characters, abusive store owners, and lost puppies. The game never holds your hand, only asks "here you are, this is what you've done, what do you do now?". The amount of effort put into respecting the moment to moment choices made by the player is staggering.

The complexity in these systems in BG3 left preeetty clear issues with things that would otherwise have time to be polished out of a game before release (animation jank, visual bugs, pathing, pausing). For me, they were more like bumps in a very scenic road. But I hear you when you come in expecting a shiny polished RPG but there's all these fourth wall breaking bits that kind of stall the whole show every like 5 minutes.

I think there's enough nuance here to have both sides of the coin be true - it's an absolute masterpiece for the players who enjoy the specific experience it offers, and it only makes sense to feel it's overrated when you're coming in expecting a cinematic or visceral experience.

[–] Anabriated 3 points 1 year ago

Stainless steel is not forgiving for delicate proteins, but it's not impossible. Oil coverage and temperature control will get you most of the way there. Being patient and waiting for the fish to release (without overcooking) is the tough part.

[–] Anabriated 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Stainless steel, flat-ish bottom, tall curved (wok-like) sides, all metal. Something like this mf: https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81O93YXWJ-L._AC_SL1500_.jpg

you can:

  • pan fry
  • stir fry
  • stew
  • throw it in the oven for roasts
  • soup in a pinch
  • use it on every kind of stove top

care:

  • minimal
  • steel wool and scraping is a-okay if it gets nasty!

downsides:

  • you'll never have a good time frying wet starches like noodles without some serious oil
  • your first 4 attempts at pan fried fish will inevitably result in destruction
  • fried eggs are gonna be tough

quirks:

  • heats and cools very quickly, so you'll have to break some habits if you ever expand your cookery collection with carbon steel or cast iron
[–] Anabriated 4 points 1 year ago

totally understandable, they're so close in controls, but so completely different in gameplay and pacing.

[–] Anabriated 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Ahh, for some folks, MOBAs are RTS games with the worst bits taken out!

[–] Anabriated 4 points 1 year ago

As soon as I saw it's locked at 30fps, it immediately killed any amount of interest I had in playing it. All the power to people who can stomach action games at what feels like a slide-deck input response.

[–] Anabriated 8 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I think Celeste is designed to be a super narrow experience - pure platforming. I found it pretty pleasant, but not what I'm generally looking to play. I personally don't think it's overhyped - the platforming design and movement is really very excellent. Having said that, not my cup of tea either.

[–] Anabriated 5 points 1 year ago

nooooo not minesweeper ;-;

[–] Anabriated 4 points 1 year ago

it's dark souls 2, so there must be 2 of everything!

[–] Anabriated 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

just kind of the nature of the genre for a lot of bands

I think I'm in agreement here, just a matter of phrasing it. It's very easy for a metal band to think they're stepping off genre in the albums they're making if they're a pioneer of some sort of subgenre (I think the most prominent example for me is Kamelot). So many of them end up making three or four mediocre albums that could have just been collapsed into one good one.

I also notice that some genres end up having really well defined 'tropes' that get established and then beat to death over a number of years. If you've ever listened to a band like Amaranthe, truly the Nickelback of power metal. They have like 5 albums and I can't tell which song is from where. Not to say that they're bad albums, or unlistenable, just kind of blurs together in a pleasant blob.

In comparison, Ghost really changed up their sound. They started off kind of like different Megadeth with a lot more theatrics (which is wild to think about), and now they're ABBA with distorted guitars... and more theatrics.

Pulling up something from punk(ish) land, Streetlight drops albums so rarely, and they're perfect shiny jewels every time. Not always totally fresh, but always putting a new twist on the last one.

[–] Anabriated 8 points 1 year ago (5 children)

A lot of metal acts tend to be scared of veering off from their niche subgenre, so they end up making albums that sounds like mashups of their earlier albums.

[–] Anabriated 9 points 1 year ago

They have one song and boy are they going to milk it

view more: next ›