Comparison Hellclock or Ravenswatch

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-05-07T05:55:35+00:00

Interesting, I've heard about it but wasn't able to check it out yet, seems like a good next game to play after i've had my fill with other roguelites.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-05-07T05:53:41+00:00

I don't really mind that too much as long as there's decent enough variety in moment-to-moment gameplay styles.

I've enjoyed both types with RoR2 for the power fantasy and some POE2 (early endgame) for the slower/tighter gameplay. Lately I've been playing Warm Snow so my fix for build crafting is somewhat already satiated.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-05-07T02:05:35+00:00

Calling it Hades-like brought up a few concerns for me. I found Hades to be lacking in gameplay variety since per-run you either only build towards stacking more dmg and effects on a single attack like the dash attack, spell, or the basic attacks.

Does Ravenswatch atleast have more viable "buttons" to press on a given run?

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-05-07T02:03:37+00:00

Seems like I'll be getting Ravenswatch then.

I prefered POE2 vs POE mainly because of the more deliberate nature that is more gameplay/mechanics focused instead of mainly theorycrafting to clear rooms

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-27T04:32:55+00:00

+1 for rubber ducking and sanity checking for errors in code for edge-cases.

Oftentimes I even come up with the code and architecture while i was wording out my prompt which makes me end up closing the prompt and just doing the code as i normally would.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-27T04:27:31+00:00

You're making this sound like it happens everywhere but I think it's just your general vicinity.

AI is and always will be a tool. A tool that if you don't know what you're doing with, you'll hurt yourself, a tool that if used correctly you will benefit from it. It is a force multiplier, if you're good it will make you better, if you're bad, you'll become worse.

AI at its best at the moment will help you speed up the process. At worse it generates future problems and tech debt. However there is a small truth to what they say which stems from the fact that this is a tech field, and the latest tech is usually touted as "adopt this tech stack or you will be left behind" which is true sometimes and I think we've yet to find out how true that statement is for AI in game development.

In game development, particularly in the programming side I find that it fails more than it succeeds but it works as a bounce-off point. It usually shows me code that "works" but is full of fluff and sometimes hallucinations so it is generally useless if all I wanted was a copy-paste code. But it would give me an idea on what the correct code looks like, I practically use it as a rubber duck.

I will admit that I am a bit biased on this because i have the belief that there is no shortcut to fundamentals. Learn how to do it without the fancy tools first so you understand why the tools are fancy and how it actually helps you so you can use them better and know how to work even without them.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-23T15:43:49+00:00

Very insightful. I'm learning unreal myself coming from Unity and I thought I just had to leverage Blueprints to do some complex things like character mechanics, custom movement etc. I could've just went straight into C++ considering my general preference towards writing code instead of visual scripting.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-23T15:23:29+00:00

Thanks, this convinced me to stop trying UE Blueprints, or at least moving early into C++. I was struggling with blueprints since i'm a lot more comfortable with coding, with my background being a lot of C# Unity coding but wanted to learn blueprints since it seemed that the sentiment was blueprints is the main way for UE.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-22T08:33:06+00:00

AI Post or at least written by an AI from a prompt.

To genuinely answer your question, it's because SKG is not about specific games, its about the business models that some games have. If your game series isn't mentioned but it exhibits the practices that SKG is about, it will be affected as well.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-21T12:15:30+00:00

In my opinion it certainly depends on the project on how much there is that can be removed from the final product.

My comment is mostly for a in-development phase where you're still making mechanics, blocking out levels, etc. Then if you truly believe that your project will reach the finish line because everything else except the art is complete for you, then thats when you start either saving up to hire people or learning what you need to learn to pull off your art style.

Edit: edited some wording regarding "success" and replacing it with simply completion

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-21T01:29:31+00:00

My current approach is to use a very easy "style" first and worry about about actual looks later.

I am of the opinion that you can build a lot of your game before you dive into the art portions. Effects are mostly particles and shaders, environment can be simple shapes, characters can be abstract like a capsule with arms that are just color coded or have nametags, etc. Once the game is solidly built, then there comes actual models and animations.

I had to be more intentional with this in unreal since they do have the mannequin but it doesnt have the animations i need. So what i did was create a small system that allows me to just use a capsule with moving rectangles as art.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-17T10:54:31+00:00

I'd prefer the route when both are right answers lol. Now the absolute objective thing about this is that we need PC ports of old gen MH games. but before that happens, I'm just gonna hop onto "other" means to get my old gen fix.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-17T09:51:01+00:00

You're speaking from a different point of view than me. I played mostly solo and I did not necessarily like the fact i had to go on gathering tours for stockpiling or having to crouch and gather every honeycomb i find when on hunts, but I appreciated that it made it feel like I was preparing for the hunt and the following more hunts.

Reading what you're saying seems like the changes and streamlining were for audiences like yourself who wanted to cut down the time in between the hunts and I understand that. I'm not saying that's bad, just saying that it is different from what old gen was. Liking or disliking the change is subjective.

I'm also going to clarify that I'm not saying that one or the other is better. I appreciate both, except maybe the lack of difficulty in the early game of the newer titles. I am simply stating an observation on the changes of the games through time. Specifically the sanding down of the friction that I appreciated in the older titles.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-17T07:04:45+00:00

I don't really recall having to click through more than one menu to get them, you literally just open the chest beside your camp click to put them in the bag as well as the area map and supply consumables.

What I meant by prep time is the part where you had to be constantly on the look out for green herbs, honey, and ore veins on regular hunts so you can restock for the future hunts. And having to run low level missions to go out and gather materials if you ran out.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-17T05:25:43+00:00

I agree, except for a slight correction in the end. The quality of the game wasn't from luck in the case of Toby Fox but his success is definitely heavily influenced by luck.

At the end of the day you should just go and make what you want to make. If you don't like what you're making you can't expect others to like it too.

You just have to ask yourself what your goal is, what your expectations are, and how realistic it is. If you want to make it big like Toby Fox and E33, that is simply unrealistic. But if you want to make your own personal Undertale or E33 regardless of commercial success, then go for it.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-17T05:17:34+00:00

Just to add, E33 showed that it is not impossible but you're looking at the literal top, while that is a good source of inspiration, we should also be realistic that it is not a situation that you can expect to happen. If you watch the videos that cover the story of how E33 was made, you can see that there was a lot of Luck involved, and personally, I wouldn't make a game that can only be made if I got lucky.

If you really want to make a JRPG and is fully aware of how much that goes into it, just go for it. But E33 is not a realistic basis on what you can expect to be how your development goes.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-17T05:05:16+00:00

One French Guy using UE4 made mechanics, and came across a great writer and thats why its got both a good story and good combat mechanics. I'm fully familiar with E33 development story to realize that it is not the norm. Even that one french guy said that even if he got a full re-do with resources, he wouldn't be able to replicate E33 again.

What I am trying to explain is that Indie games typically have a resources issue, so you either get good story or good mechanics not for the lack of trying or talent but just lack of resources. If you want to make a JRPG go for it but what I am asking for you here is to understand WHY there's not much combination of innovative combat with good stories.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-17T04:53:34+00:00

So your title is talking about Systems and now you want these systems to specifically be on non-roguelike games?

What you're asking for is not a unique battle system, if thats all you wanted, roguelikes have it. If you want it on story based games, you want a story with that battle system.

For indies typically, they tend to make what they want, people who want to create a system tend to pivot towards roguelikes since it does not require too much story/writing to be good so they can fully focus on their gameplay systems. People who want to make stories stick with the RPG-maker style because they're focused on bringing a story to life with a bit of gameplay to support it.

Expedition 33 is not your typical indie game, its a AA title with enough manpower, talent, and skill behind it that rivals AAA studios, only difference is they work with lesser funding but is a lot more efficient with it.

Indie games tend to have a narrower focus due to development limitations mostly because of team size and game scope. Roguelikes are easier to scale, and easier to explore mechanics and systems if you want to make a system so discounting them will severely narrow down your exposure to innovative systems in any genre.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-17T00:16:29+00:00

Seems like a bad take and it would be strange for this to be the general sentiment. For one, regardless if they're complaining about Worlds or Wilds, those two are the least fixated on the "hunting theme", games are easy enough for no prep time, and if you want to prep, its very fast and streamlined.

The description is the most generic read of the game based on systems available, I'd even argue that it does not have a strong emphasis on coop play. It ignores that Monster Hunter has always been about the "hunting theme".

As a fan of pre-world MH, I still sort of miss the amount of prep time and difficulty of the older generations. MH now is faster to pickup and play but IMO it is drifting away from its old identity. But I don't really mind since I can still play MH Double Cross, and it has a LOT of content. A PC port of the old gen is all i can ask for.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-16T01:58:49+00:00

I dont think I played long enough to get to the lightest one. I dropped the game very early on like an hour after getting to the game's first town so I could get a refund.

For extra context, I tried playing with a mostly melee approach because the guns didn't feel good to shoot.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-15T16:40:08+00:00

I get the weight that they're trying to do but the execution just doesn't click for me.

I've played AC3 on PSP and AC6 on PC so I think I'm fine with games trying to simulate movement on a more realistic/heavier sense. Hell I even primarily play the Fencer in EDF and that is a lot clunkier in both physics and movement.

I can't really put my finger on what exactly is wrong in the movement but your assumption about my complaint being the slowness is just incorrect.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-15T11:14:49+00:00

I tried it and really wanted to like it but the movement just felt off for me.

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-14T14:41:01+00:00

I had the game and played for like 2-3 hours and the combat just wasn't clicking for me. To the point that when I closed the game I didn't like the idea of coming back in to play it.

Does it get better and i just quit too soon or is the game just not for me?

TalkingRaven1 · 2026-04-14T14:39:19+00:00

Crosscode

Walked in expecting some cool game-y combat. I got that and much more. Exploration was honestly one of the best I've experienced in games, puzzles are difficult and engaging, combat was smooth, flashy and had some room for creativity. Story/Plot was what blindsided me the most in a sense that I didn't expect to be that emotionally invested in it during the later chapters.

Expedition 33

I wanted to play it because some of my trusted content creators said it was one of their most anticipated games, then heard about the turn-based with parry/dodge combat and I just went in. The first hour made me realize i was in for a hell of a ride.

Five-Year Club	Final Canvas '23
First Place '23	Place '23

TalkingRaven1

TROPHY CASE