What Are you Playing 7: Deadly Sims

[Form]

Looking back on Dragonfall and Hong Kong, I think they work because the developers just took functional systems and used them to prop up the themes and story of the trilogy. The combat is a functional X-COM clone, the dialogue checks are just thresholds, and character building is just a streamlined version of 3e. There's nothing really innovative or fexemplary except for the writing, which really does carry the games. The linearity itself is honestly a plus, I don't go into missions worried I haven't met the developer intended bumming about crafting tripwires quota. There's even the little touches of Shadowrun lore like one character being an elf poseur.

What I'm saying is that I really want Shadowrun Returns 4. Maybe I'll play Dead Man's Switch after this

Yeah, it really is the excellent writing and atmosphere that carry those games. I'm glad they didn't try to make the gameplay as complicated as X-COM and kept things relatively simple, because the last thing I want to do is constantly feel the need to save scum because my turn based tactical skills aren't good enough. It's the story that draws me in and keeps me going.

There are some excellent fan modules. I'd go so far as to say some of them are better than Dead Man's Switch. Antumbra chronicles or the caldecott caper are both in that category.

If I were to recommend the shadowrun games to new players, I'd recommend them to start with Dead Man's Switch because that's worst of the three and that way they won't feel like they're downgrading by moving on to the other games. By worst I do not mean that Dead Man's Switch is bad (it isn't!), but that the Dragonfall and Hong Kong are simply even better by a significant margin in my opinion. That's where the shadowrun games truly shine.

Also, I found it a little funny that when you break into computer systems in Shadowrun you often don't do so by engaging in Hollywood hacking, but because someone wrote down their password on a post-it somewhere. Or because a co-worker is trying to be helpful and just gives a password to someone else. Or because someone just used their birthday, or feels like password requirements don't apply to them or because someone didn't bother to reset a default password. No fancy technobabble, just some social engineering and bad password hygiene.

[Anonymouswizard]

Yeah, it really is the excellent writing and atmosphere that carry those games. I'm glad they didn't try to make the gameplay as complicated as X-COM and kept things relatively simple, because the last thing I want to do is constantly feel the need to save scum because my turn based tactical skills aren't good enough. It's the story that draws me in and keeps me going.

Honestly it can get to near X-COM levels, juggling a whole host of abilities and spells. But you don't have to engage in that, it's entirely viable to build up your combat skill to the point you've got 99% hit odds and use ordinary attacks. I played Dragonfall as an elf Street Sam with cybernetic legs and a fully automatic rifle, took down more enemies than the rest of the team combined. However I admit that unlike X-COM I ever felt like I was in the wrong bit of cover l.

The Matrix is another story. But rule one of Shadowrun is 'the Matrix causes gameplay problems'.

[QUOTE]If I were to recommend the shadowrun games to new players, I'd recommend them to start with Dead Man's Switch because that's worst of the three and that way they won't feel like they're downgrading by moving on to the other games. By worst I do not mean that Dead Man's Switch is bad (it isn't!), but that the Dragonfall and Hong Kong are simply even better by a significant margin in my opinion. That's where the shadowrun games truly shine.[QUOTE]

Honestly I think what Dead Man's Switch needs is a crew. On my first attempt I honestly thought that Coyote was going to be the first member of a proper team.

Also, I found it a little funny that when you break into computer systems in Shadowrun you often don't do so by engaging in Hollywood hacking, but because someone wrote down their password on a post-it somewhere. Or because a co-worker is trying to be helpful and just gives a password to someone else. Or because someone just used their birthday, or feels like password requirements don't apply to them or because someone didn't bother to reset a default password. No fancy technobabble, just some social engineering and bad password hygiene.

To be fair there's a good amount of Hollywood hacking, there's just also a lot of more grounded password scrounging. Honestly I wouldn't mind Shadowrun dropping the Matrix minigame entirely, for both tabletop and computer game versions.

Sadly the Matrix is probably too iconic.

[Cespenar]

Really, what all these hybrid strategy/tactics games need is a way to cut down on the number of battles per campaign. Maybe only let the player fight the ones with a leader/hero involved, or have some sort of sliding scale where as the size of armies increases, battles that involve very small forces are just auto-resolved automatically.

I agree, and although you can still do that in your own with auto-resolve in most games, actually taking away the option to manual in some cases may ironically help people. Because sometimes, even you don't want to manual, you look at the auto-resolve and go "man, I could do it without those losses" and play it yourself anyway (but with added irritation).

Taking away the option of manual-ing some battles may end up with less irritation for some people, I'd think.

I personally even sometimes do Close Defeat kinda auto-resolves in TW games if I can afford it. Those campaigns are way too long.

[Erloas]

I wouldn't say X-COMs tactical gameplay is especially complicated, it is just exceptionally brutal. One or two bad rolls is enough to get even a veteran character killed. And as you get later in the game it becomes harder and harder to train up replacements. So you are almost forced to save and reload regularly if you want to complete the game.

I did like that Shadowrun games were story driven rather than more open world. The games were long enough and I don't think they would have been improved by a lot more "side jobs."


I think the biggest issue with Dead Man Switch was that it was a smaller team because it was a kickstarter and "unproven" game design and the whole system had to be built for the first game, while the latter games got to focus on expanding and polishing gameplay and story. The games definitely improve with expanded support characters, but those characters take a lot more work to flesh them out, and I just don't think that was in the cards for the first game.

I think the matrix parts are vital to the setting, so much of the setting is based on that side of things that leaving it directly out of the games doesn't make any sense. But it does also break up gameplay. The concurrence of hacking and combat does put more urgency into both sides of it. I think there just needs to be more done to explain how/why things work the way they do in the matrix because we as players don't have much to go on as to what is going on.

[warty goblin]

I agree, and although you can still do that in your own with auto-resolve in most games, actually taking away the option to manual in some cases may ironically help people. Because sometimes, even you don't want to manual, you look at the auto-resolve and go "man, I could do it without those losses" and play it yourself anyway (but with added irritation).

Taking away the option of manual-ing some battles may end up with less irritation for some people, I'd think.

I personally even sometimes do Close Defeat kinda auto-resolves in TW games if I can afford it. Those campaigns are way too long.

Limiting the ability of the player to micro stuff is something I wish more strategy games would explore, just in general. A lot of focus lately has gone into better automation, which is great as far as it goes, but tends to leave you auditing the AI a lot, which is still just dull spreadsheet work. If my intervention has costs or limits beyond my tolerance for micro fiddling, I'm saved all of the tedium and my role shifts from omnipotent omniscient God being choosing not only strategy and research but who gets the AP ammunition or whatever into a finite entity interacting with independent agents. It's a lot more interesting.

This is I think the real genius behind Majesty's design. It's not just that paying heroes to do stuff is both on point and hilarious, it's that your gold supply is a mana bar for intervening in the simulation. Because of the way the economy works, you get most of your bounty back for quest flags, but it takes time, and the simulation is rich enough that it can also just get stolen by ratmen. So you have to weigh the opportunity cost of every action because you have a set amount of them in any given time period, and if you set up your kingdom well, they regenerate faster. This is entirely a matter of player skill too, there's no +5% to gold generation skill you research.

[zlefin]

Hearthstone had a neat update to battle grounds; there's now for a time quests you do in game to get buffs; at the 4th round you discover a quest, there's quite a mix of them. I'm not sure how much it shakes things up, but many of the buffs are quite significant, so it surely does have a fair bit of effect and adds some variety, as some rewards more heavily favor building certain mechanics. There's also a bunch of balance changes, a couple new heroes, some units added/removed/adjusted. They also added a reward line for playing like there is for regular hearthstone, it mostly has remotes and skins by the looks of it.


On path of exile; the developers tripled down on the problem changes. Or at least doubled down on insisting on the path. They toned down a few of the biggest problems they caused, but left the core problems very intact and significant. Peopl ehave largely accepted it by now, with many people leaving for awhile; iirc it shows the worst player retention any league has ever had; but not that much worse than their prior worst. So the forum drama is heavily fading cuz there's not much more to say.

[Anteros]

I agree, and although you can still do that in your own with auto-resolve in most games, actually taking away the option to manual in some cases may ironically help people. Because sometimes, even you don't want to manual, you look at the auto-resolve and go "man, I could do it without those losses" and play it yourself anyway (but with added irritation).

Taking away the option of manual-ing some battles may end up with less irritation for some people, I'd think.

I personally even sometimes do Close Defeat kinda auto-resolves in TW games if I can afford it. Those campaigns are way too long.

Only if they actually fix the auto resolve to not have you losing battles that you should easily win. Making me automatically lose fights I should easily win is certainly not going to lead to less player frustration. Honestly, a lot of it could be resolved fairly simply. Does the player regularly struggle with battles? Give them less favorable auto resolve results. Does the player dominate? More favorable. Easy peasy and also fair. Or at least consistent.

I think the matrix parts are vital to the setting, so much of the setting is based on that side of things that leaving it directly out of the games doesn't make any sense. But it does also break up gameplay. The concurrence of hacking and combat does put more urgency into both sides of it. I think there just needs to be more done to explain how/why things work the way they do in the matrix because we as players don't have much to go on as to what is going on.

My biggest issue with the matrix parts is feeling like you're basically obligated to bring the team's token decker on every mission. Even if you don't like Isabela, you're bringing her or missing out on a ton of content unless your main happens to be a Decker. No other class has a similar amount of content gated behind bringing them.

[Resileaf]

And it is done, the Tyranny of King Washington has been completed, though a little clutch, on August 31st. I was pretty surprised at the difficulty spike, they really made the entire thing as unfriendly as possible. It was an interesting experience, to be sure. I could do all the extras to 100% it before it's gone... But eh, **** it, I'm done with this series for the foreseeable future.

Gotta say though, final boss battles are very much a weakness of this series. I think only Cesare felt suitably like a battle was being fought rather than just going through the motions of using whatever ability was required.

After an entire month and more of binging, I can finally go back to playing Total War Rome II and Jade Empire.

[Grey Watcher]

I've gotten into Songs of Conquest (currently in pre-release). The first campaign was fun. The second... major difficulty spike. Scenario 1 was OK and 2 was fine once I figured out how to approach it properly. Scenario 3? Yeouch. I'm not sure if you're meant to ignore the AI altogether, but some guides talk about beating her by rushing and, well, they have different definitions of rush than I do. I've heard they're working on implementing an easy difficulty, and if this scenario is emblematic of what's to come, I think I need it.

Still, I am enjoying it over all. The magic system is surprisingly fun. Creates a good ebb-and-flow kind of feeling.

[AlanBruce]

I recently purchased the newest DLC for Dead by Daylight, Project W, which includes Resident Evil characters. As the new killer, Albert Wesker.

Sadly, his gameplay is incredibly bug ridden. On the PTB, Wesker was a god- dashing at fast speeds. Lunging with his tendril and grabbing survivors from afar… he showed promise.

And then the developers decided to cut his hitbox by 50%, which makes his lunge attack a pain to use, since chances are you’ll hit an object in the terrain, instead of a survivor.

On the plus side, they did release franchise belles Ada & Rebecca as survivors, with interesting and fun new perks.

[Anonymouswizard]

Well I've run the runs, had every conversation I can find, spent the Karma, avoided anything that looked like a dragon, and now I'm on the final mission.

Hopefully I can get through this with Raymond in one piece.

[The Hellbug]

My biggest issue with the matrix parts is feeling like you're basically obligated to bring the team's token decker on every mission. Even if you don't like Isabela, you're bringing her or missing out on a ton of content unless your main happens to be a Decker. No other class has a similar amount of content gated behind bringing them.

Definitely a complaint I have as well--add to that that the Matrix sections don't feel particularly strategic or fun. That said, I though Hong Kong was better about this than Dragonfall. I rotated through the party much more in it than it's predecessor and I didn't ever really feel hamstringed by lacking Is0bel when she was left at home. In Dragonfall, Blitz felt like an absolute necessity, but maybe I would have been able to live without if I had just left him at home more often. Who knows?

[Cespenar]

This is I think the real genius behind Majesty's design. It's not just that paying heroes to do stuff is both on point and hilarious, it's that your gold supply is a mana bar for intervening in the simulation. Because of the way the economy works, you get most of your bounty back for quest flags, but it takes time, and the simulation is rich enough that it can also just get stolen by ratmen. So you have to weigh the opportunity cost of every action because you have a set amount of them in any given time period, and if you set up your kingdom well, they regenerate faster. This is entirely a matter of player skill too, there's no +5% to gold generation skill you research.

Majesty is a masterclass in economy design in games, IMO, but sadly it's long since forgotten.

Only if they actually fix the auto resolve to not have you losing battles that you should easily win. Making me automatically lose fights I should easily win is certainly not going to lead to less player frustration. Honestly, a lot of it could be resolved fairly simply. Does the player regularly struggle with battles? Give them less favorable auto resolve results. Does the player dominate? More favorable. Easy peasy and also fair. Or at least consistent.

Sure, that's every designer's wish, but when players find AI loopholes and abuses and take them as the norm for game difficulty, then the autoresolve system sometimes gets the wrong end of the stick in the blame game, IMO.

[Erloas]

Needing to have someone that can hack in Shadowrun doesn't seem like a problem so much as an expectation of the genre.
It's not even just a Shadowrun expectation, I can't think of any story of these sorts of jobs where the team doesn't have a hacker.

[Anonymouswizard]

Needing to have someone that can hack in Shadowrun doesn't seem like a problem so much as an expectation of the genre.
It's not even just a Shadowrun expectation, I can't think of any story of these sorts of jobs where the team doesn't have a hacker.

It's not so much as needing a hacker as the fact there's an entire cyberspace minigame for hacking which is not exactly great. Especially as there's other situations where you just use a software exploit if you meet the Decking requirement.

It also has the issue I've seen in several other RPGs of 'never take this one character out of the party'. Normally it's the healer, in Shadowrun it's whoever the designated decker is. Hong Kong especially suffers because money is a lot tighter than the previous two campaigns, without that couple of thousand of nuyen from paydata you'll be a gear upgrade behind.

[warty goblin]

Majesty is a masterclass in economy design in games, IMO, but sadly it's long since forgotten.

One of the things that most strikes me about Majesty is how it isn't super-centered on the player. It really is built around a concept of a dynamic, persistent and living simulation you can intervene in, which is just something you don't see all that much anymore. It's a pity, because as a game design, it offers an entire different set of ways to expand and vary the player experience, compared to the persistent player upgrade route the industry has at this point adopted hook, line, and sinker.

[Rodin]

My adventures in the Elden Ring randomizer continue!

I finally knocked out Malenia by getting a couple tiers higher on my weapons and swapping over to the Godslayer Greatsword. The weapon art on that sword is a giant flaming slash which absolutely wrecks her. Stormveil Castle was a doddle after that.

Rennala had retired to Carian Manor, and was conveniently holding the Glinstone Academy Key. Most appropriate randomization yet!

The next wall was the Red Wolf of Radagon room. It's not a big room to start with. It's an absolutely tiny room when you've got Radahn in there. I could get him into his second phase, but then comes the question:

How do you dodge a meteor that comes through the wall 5 feet away from you?

I found the solution - a Cracked Tear I didn't even know existed that heals all elemental damage for a few seconds. Chug that and you're immune to the fireball.

Rennala's room is guarded by Morgott. I tried him a couple times and just...no. He's not sufficiently nerfed by the scaling, and if it was only him I'd have a slim chance. But there's a second boss hidden behind him, and the options are almost universally bad.

The cave behind the Great Lift is guarded by Commander Niall, and I'm not even able to take his backup dancers. I think it's finally time to venture into Caelid, because I am being gated unbelievably hard by the level of my weapons at the moment. Rank 4 weaponry just isn't cutting it against all these lategame bosses.

[Anteros]

Needing to have someone that can hack in Shadowrun doesn't seem like a problem so much as an expectation of the genre.
It's not even just a Shadowrun expectation, I can't think of any story of these sorts of jobs where the team doesn't have a hacker.

It's not needing a hacker that's the problem. It's being forced to bring a certain character on every mission even if you don't like them. If they had more character variety or let you customize your own team it would be fine.

Sure, that's every designer's wish, but when players find AI loopholes and abuses and take them as the norm for game difficulty, then the autoresolve system sometimes gets the wrong end of the stick in the blame game, IMO.

There's a real big middle ground between finding loopholes to abuse the ai and the brain dead ai that totalwar uses. Like, the size of the pacific. {Scrubbed} No one is asking for a perfect ai that can adapt to any situation. I'm asking for bare minimum competency. If I'm playing a game on legendary difficulty it shouldn't be using worse tactics than a 5 year old child.

[Quizatzhaderac]

Playing dragon quest builders one.

For the most part I like it and find it strikes a nice balance between the open world style "do whatever you want, I don't care" and the traditional JRPG style "do A, B, C, and D in that order. in this manner."

My biggest complaint is that you lose some But not all) recipes between chapters. I get that these are non-essential recipies and it's likely the dev's goal to force you to do thing new ways, but it feels arbitrary.

There's a real big middle ground between finding loopholes to abuse the ai and the brain dead ai that totalwar uses.

I don't really know first hand, but I'm of the understanding that high level play in total war is largely defined by bugs/incomplete features.

Like, if they designed a fancy AI to use a checkerboard formation, then implemented the ability to order your units to properly maneuver through a gap, then the checkerboard tactics would be useless and so would that fancy AI.

However, I think you're right, in-so-far as they shouldn't claim to have such high level difficulties if they can't make a better AI.

[Cespenar]

One of the things that most strikes me about Majesty is how it isn't super-centered on the player. It really is built around a concept of a dynamic, persistent and living simulation you can intervene in, which is just something you don't see all that much anymore. It's a pity, because as a game design, it offers an entire different set of ways to expand and vary the player experience, compared to the persistent player upgrade route the industry has at this point adopted hook, line, and sinker.

Very true. I mean, obviously, player upgrades lead to quicker gratification leads to better sales (statistically), or something, but you'd expect at least a few stragglers to try to copy Majesty.

There's a real big middle ground between finding loopholes to abuse the ai and the brain dead ai that totalwar uses. Like, the size of the pacific. {Scrub the post, scrub the quote} No one is asking for a perfect ai that can adapt to any situation. I'm asking for bare minimum competency. If I'm playing a game on legendary difficulty it shouldn't be using worse tactics than a 5 year old child.

Eh. I don't recall the AI intricacies of which you speak, so I'm not gonna poke further. Though I suspect legendary difficulty wouldn't really change the AI, as in 99% of the games out there.

[Anonymouswizard]

Moved onto Shadows of Hong Kong after getting the good ending. Honestly the game needed an epilogue, because the entire 'losing your SINs' plotline from early on needed some closure.

Also considering what character I'll use for a Deaf Man's Switch run. I'm planning on going troll, but I'm not sure if I want to go Street Sam or Adept. I'll be using melee either way because trolls do not get Quickness, but both are tempting options

[tonberrian]

Moved onto Shadows of Hong Kong after getting the good ending. Honestly the game needed an epilogue, because the entire 'losing your SINs' plotline from early on needed some closure.

Also considering what character I'll use for a Deaf Man's Switch run. I'm planning on going troll, but I'm not sure if I want to go Street Sam or Adept. I'll be using melee either way because trolls do not get Quickness, but both are tempting options

Unfortunately Dead Man's Switch has an extended section where you have to use guns. It really hosed down my decker/rigger build there.

[Anonymouswizard]

Unfortunately Dead Man's Switch has an extended section where you have to use guns. It really hosed down my decker/rigger build there.

That sucks. I mean trolls can do okay with guns, but it still sucks. As a race they're just dedicated to being CQC monsters with potential mage or adept powers.

Plus decker/rigger is one of the logical builds in the game, alongside the mystic adept combination (although I believe you end up hurting for spellbook space). It sucks that the first campaign isn't friendly to all character types.

I'll check the wiki and see which skill has the gun with the biggest strength requirement. I know in Dragonfall and Hong Kong they're rifles, but maybe in Dead Man's Switch there's a big ****off shotgun or something.

[Erloas]

Some things might change if you're playing the newer version of it. There are a lot of the cool things that I just don't think they had in the original game because they just didn't have the scope for it. But I know they added a Dead Man's Switch campaign in one of the latter games with the new engine. I don't know if they changed availability of things when they made that version though, and I'm not sure which version you're playing.

I don't remember the start of the game being all that difficult though, so I imagine any class will get through the start just fine, you just won't see all of your options until you get a bit farther into the game, rather than having them right out of the gate.

[Anteros]

Pretty sure there's a modded version of Dead Man's Switch that's supposed to expand on it and fix some of the major issues. I can't personally attest to the quality though.

[Anonymouswizard]

Some things might change if you're playing the newer version of it. There are a lot of the cool things that I just don't think they had in the original game because they just didn't have the scope for it. But I know they added a Dead Man's Switch campaign in one of the latter games with the new engine. I don't know if they changed availability of things when they made that version though, and I'm not sure which version you're playing.

I don't remember the start of the game being all that difficult though, so I imagine any class will get through the start just fine, you just won't see all of your options until you get a bit farther into the game, rather than having them right out of the gate.

I own all three games, but I'll probably play the newer version. Dragonfall really improved the armour mechanics.

Anyway, did the River's Den run, and I thought I'd have a bit of fun and splash 5000 nuyen on a Vindicator to equip Duncan with. Sadly his hit rate drops in half while using it, which combined with it's 2AP reload means it's just not worth using over his rifle. It's a massive shame.

[Anteros]

Duncan just makes a really poor street sam in general. Sub par stats and lack of the most important body modifications. Most of the companions are pretty poorly optimized though, but it's especially glaring with the sams if you've played as one with your MC before.

[Rodin]

Pretty sure there's a modded version of Dead Man's Switch that's supposed to expand on it and fix some of the major issues. I can't personally attest to the quality though.

I played some of the modded version. They did a good job moving it into the new engine and restoring cut content. I should go back and finish (or maybe restart) that playthrough.

Elden Ring Rando has taken me a while, but I'm finally reaching the "I am OP" phase that every Rando run hits. A lucky run of smithing stones got my weapon nearly maxed out so I should be able to take on just about anything now.

With that in mind I went into the Radahn fight expecting a nice easy battle. Out of the remaining bosses, anyone but Elden Beast would be a piece of cake with a ceaseless wave of NPCs to summon. I got Mogh, and was delighted. I watch a lot of AI vs AI boss battles, and Mogh is a chump. I've never struggled with him in a real playthrough either, which is kind of sad considering he's supposed to be the same tier as Malenia.

That dude kicked my ass. He kicked Blaidd's ass, Alexander's ass, Tragoth's...he flattened everybody. You only ever fight him in small arenas so it's not obvious, but he is pretty speedy when he wants to be and his second phase gives him wings that he makes good use of. I finally managed to dogpile him with all the NPCs but to do so I had to tank and bait his attacks the entire fight to keep my team safe.

Mogh still isn't a patch on Malenia, but I've got a lot more respect for the guy than I used to. It's not his fault his stats can't keep up with endgame OPness.

[Anonymouswizard]

Duncan just makes a really poor street sam in general. Sub par stats and lack of the most important body modifications. Most of the companions are pretty poorly optimized though, but it's especially glaring with the sams if you've played as one with your MC before.

Oh yeah. I really get the feeling that you're intended to go Street Sam on the PC, both Duncan and Eiger feel like they're supposed to be support rather than your main damage dealer. Glory and Gaichu feel better, but also partially there to show you that yes, melee is viable for non-adepts.

Although giving Duncan the Panther Assault Cannon works wonders.

Is0bel also has significant issues, but that's mainly her mid-range deck coming along so late I didn't notice the upgrade. And everybody's a point or two behind where they should be in skills..

So I'll likely go with a shotgun troll build when I start DMS. I'll cap out at 8 but that leaves some extra Karma for MOAR BODY.

[Anteros]

I haven't tried on on Dead Man's Switch. I know Sam REALLY shines in Hong Kong due to how overpowered some of the modifications are.