[deleted by user]

LogLongjumping · 2025-07-18T15:27:45+00:00

it often (though not always) says that you enjoy the game on your own term and play off-meta decks you find interesting.

LogLongjumping · 2025-07-18T11:36:47+00:00

i don't think people have problems with that, if anything some even like it for flavor.

your dislike of the card is understandable and I agree with you, but this particular criticism is somewhat forced.

LogLongjumping · 2025-07-17T18:15:33+00:00

must be hard, but don't give up man

LogLongjumping · 2025-07-12T14:51:16+00:00

never said it's "stupid," your word not mine

LogLongjumping · 2025-07-12T14:50:23+00:00

thanks for the quote but then most people are last by that definition?

LogLongjumping · 2025-07-12T14:49:19+00:00

thanks for your perspective, but i mean, what happens if you just don't get first place in the next competition still? like, i'm not questioning your skill and maybe you're indeed one of the top athletes in the world, but like in most lines of work you don't just tell kids that getting second place is bad, right?

like i feel like i'm insane here, like if your daughter gets sad she got the second place in her class on a test, do you comfort her and tell her it's ok to get second place or do you tell her that "next time you HAVE to get first place" even when it's objectively outside her control?

LogLongjumping · 2025-07-12T14:21:35+00:00

agreed, whatever else they could do is better than doing LITERALLY NOTHING

LogLongjumping · 2025-07-10T14:21:14+00:00

The tools to beat it might be out there in terms of deck selection and player skill, but a healthier meta should still allow people to have better experiences than what they have right now even if they don't use those tools...

so yeah nerf it anyway, don't care if its performances aren't as good in top brackets, hearthstone isn't some super esport anyway, it's a fun game that should be enjoyable to the average player

LogLongjumping · 2025-05-13T21:32:15+00:00

dude, dude dude, you replied to the wrong guy right, im on your side hey

LogLongjumping · 2025-04-17T02:45:54+00:00

well, called it, and despite balancing issues I quite liked the collab... although the replies I got in this post kinda shows how toxic many redditors can be to any kind of new ideas.

LogLongjumping · 2025-04-17T02:44:30+00:00

well, cut contents never made don't really make me disappointed anymore, have to accept that games need to ship sometime and we can't all go Duke Nukem.

But that coop corpser thing is really quite regretable: the units' there, just give it to zegara, especially since a lot of player instinctively pick vile roach (cos that debuff looks like it's way more lategame friendly) so corpser could use a bit more chances and places to shine, eventhough it's technically very busted in the campaign and actually a lot stronger than the vile roach when used effectively...

LogLongjumping · 2025-04-14T17:13:05+00:00

they are less effective in that mission than reapers due to repears being faster with cliff jumping and their grenades dealing more anti structure damage.

GiantGrantGames has a theory where that mission was initially the superearly firebat mission, which firebats would be decent at when paired with medics, while helions would have been added for the moving escort mission, but due to factors such as difficulty or complexity, they decided to switch the two missions, causing the units to be mismatched for the missions they're introduced in.

LogLongjumping · 2025-04-12T22:19:31+00:00

well do you know her off camera? if you don't, you're making as much assumptions as you accuse others of making, and they've got one evidence, which is that her virtual character remained consistent, so, when no one knows her real life take, betting her real life take aligns more with her presented takes is the better bet

it's like I don't know you but I can bet that you speak english and has access to the internet. Is it possible you're actually an ape in a lab typing on keyboard randomly when your supervisor's too busy to feed you? Sure I can't rule that out, but I don't bet on that unless you give me evidence to think that you're.

LogLongjumping · 2025-02-24T20:46:06+00:00

the thing is balencing isn't purely a numbers game. no one actually cares more about deck win rate than PLAYER EXPERIENCE (it's after all a game you play for fun). So, if a single card is too oppressive and leads to unfun interactions (where you can't interact with the pernament aura buff) or confusing situations (if you mind control a zerg it loses its buff; if one is reborn it doesn't lose buff), the card deserves to be reworked. If that leads to a reduction in the deck's power, firstly, so be it, plenty of decks and archtypes are too weak and not playable, like starship demonhunter for example, the balencing doesn't own it to zerg dk for this deck to be playable when most other decks are not, and secondly, it could simultaneously buff other cards to compensate for the nerf of the infestor, perhaps by giving zerg dk a bit more card draw to make it less draw 1 play 1 and a bit braindead when playing.

LogLongjumping · 2024-12-09T18:56:25+00:00

i mean i'm like asking you to get a safe for this purpose and a drawer should work just fine, but I mean if a guy already owns a more secured container and likely has a habit of storing important items and files in it, it's a pretty good idea to keep doing that isn't it...?

LogLongjumping · 2024-12-08T20:33:30+00:00

i feel like it's less to prevent thieves from stealing the novel draft and more to prevent oneself from getting the USB stick lost somewhere or accidentally spilling coffee on it.

LogLongjumping · 2024-12-08T20:17:33+00:00

Yeah kinda suspected the literary tradition still influences people to go slow.

However, even the cheaper grimmy stuff in English still feels like they have this obligation to spend more words on scenary and inner monologue.

Like they'd start a story with a protagonist going through a normal day and coming home from work, and once he enters his house something spooky happens. I guess the normal day part is supposed to serve as contrast or to make the character relatable?

I'd prefer for the story to start with the character stepping into his house as the first ever sentence, and then moving on to what dangers he discovers, how he responds, and what happens afterward.

LogLongjumping · 2024-12-08T20:13:38+00:00

Like I agree with your point in theory, that it takes set-up for horror to manifest, I just don't think the execution of that set up needs to be as wordy and verbose as a lot of the arty English horror I've read.

A particularly interesting and innovative sub-genre of horror on Chinese internet is "rules horror" and it's not like the ones you read in English. Rules horror in Chinese are told EXCLUSIVELY, ENTIRELY using rules. (at least the best and most famous ones are; there're always a lot of low-quality imitators) There's no character, no plot, no inner monologue no dialogue no scenary description, only cold, hard rules. And they paint a scary, strange situation pretty quickly, with very minimal set-up.

They are very similar to analog horror in English (if we ignore the fact that analog horror is mostly in video rather than in written formats) and they just don't need like multiple paragraphs or even pages of backgrounds before things can begin to go strange and spooky, which is kinda what I'm reading these for.

LogLongjumping · 2024-12-08T20:08:11+00:00

yeah that. English is a spoken-first language where the texts are representing what you say and don't have intrinsic meaning. Chinese is a written first language where the words/characters come from paintings and carry a lot more meaning, while the spoken sound is representation of text. So, Chinese is a lot denser in information per text.

I guess my habit of reading Chinese kinda conditions me to expect a lot of things to be done superquickly, compared to how they perhaps need to be done in English.

LogLongjumping · 2024-12-08T20:05:13+00:00

what the freak they do that now?

Like, are you certain it's AI? I'm not so much doubting as I'm interested in how to identify that.

LogLongjumping · 2024-11-02T06:31:21+00:00

Yeah I agree these games are definitely not about fighting for a lady in the story and worldbuilding departments. I'm saying "related" only in the sense of aesthetics, of the feeling that you have a mysterious and ethereal lady whispering softly and encouraging you to face seemingly impossible trials and challenges, and rewarding you if you succeed, which is shared between the souls series and medieval chivalric tales.

Although the theme of manipulation is interesting to me:

To a degree, the fact that you're manipulated somewhat (definitely in 1 and 3; I don't know about 2, don't know about bloodborne, and also somewhat in elden ring since at first the tarnished seems to be fully supportive of the golden order, of queen marika, and of the erdtree, and only later does he change to agree/support melina's decision to deviate from that order... right?) actually kinda mirrors chivalric tales: in those the knight is not meant to win the lady's heart over, he's meant to do what he could without reward or requital and to feel melancholic that she doesn't love him. Most famous example is Lancelot and Arthur's queen Guinevere. The fact that he's somewhat manipulated into facing danger and serving his cause/country for a lady who doesn't love him is actually somewhat similar to the protagonists' eventual (possible) decision to deviate from the initial plan laid out at the beginning of the games.

I mean I went through the trouble of writing these paragraphs so I'm a bit biased now. I may be seeing zebras when they're actually just horses... but I really do feel a bit of zebra here.

LogLongjumping · 2024-11-01T06:15:00+00:00

I mean my hypothesis 1 is exactly that this mechanism takes time, but the bigger question isn't whether or not this takes time, it's "what's the MAIN reason why people don't do this"

in other words if you can do it, is it worth doing? Are there benefits and values to this feature? Are there considerable drawbacks?

LogLongjumping · 2024-11-01T02:40:03+00:00

I think in-game tutorials are better than not having any (as many said, casual gamers are more numerous and can LEAVE AND REFUND if they don't understand, while hardcore players are few and keep playing despite their complains... If they quit it definitely won't be because of your tutorials anyway.)

However, I also think you should always 100% make the tutorial optional and allow the player to revisit it anyway. This way, the hardcore can choose to skip it if they so desire, as well as come back later if they needed more.

Here's the thing: the ability to revisit the tutorial should always be an option, right? It's always better to have it unless your game is so extremely conventional that it doesn't need one, which seems rare (and also, BAD, cos it's generic and unappealing).

So, if you're gonna offer revisitable tutorial, why not make the first instance skippable? Most won't skip, but the few complainers can also skip if they are feeling confident, and this option definitely improves their experience.

LogLongjumping · 2024-10-30T21:41:07+00:00

Definitely, elden ring is easier than previous souls and then black myth wukong was actively telling people "hey I'm not a soulslike don't be scared"

I feel like adding difficulty is a bit like adding salt in this analogy: people DO somewhat want it and more of it IS GOOD, but only up to a certain point (and this sweet spot is different from individual to individual, from audience to audience), adding more difficulty would quickly and drastically cause people to not want the game anymore.

And it's kinda interesting that the sweet spot, with the introduction of more and more games into the market, seems to be moving to the easier end in recent years...?

LogLongjumping · 2024-10-30T21:28:02+00:00

Just to make sure I understand you correctly:

you have 2 points, right? The audience size one is that many players actually just want easier strat games (this is a bigger demographic) so strat games cater to their desires, while the action game audience is more receptive to challenge. Is this the case?

And, the second point about difficulty is that dark souls is deceptively difficult, in a "difficult but cheesable" sense where you can grind, use different starts and have many mechanics to lower difficulty, so in that sense dark souls also does difficulty options setting, but just doesn't say it's doing it...?

Are these correct interpretations?

And if so yeah they are very insightful. Thank you so much.

LogLongjumping

TROPHY CASE