this post was submitted on 16 Jan 2025
404 points (98.1% liked)

Games

17206 readers
791 users here now

Video game news oriented community. No NanoUFO is not a bot :)

Posts.

  1. News oriented content (general reviews, previews or retrospectives allowed).
  2. Broad discussion posts (preferably not only about a specific game).
  3. No humor/memes etc..
  4. No affiliate links
  5. No advertising.
  6. No clickbait, editorialized, sensational titles. State the game in question in the title. No all caps.
  7. No self promotion.
  8. No duplicate posts, newer post will be deleted unless there is more discussion in one of the posts.
  9. No politics.

Comments.

  1. No personal attacks.
  2. Obey instance rules.
  3. No low effort comments(one or two words, emoji etc..)
  4. Please use spoiler tags for spoilers.

My goal is just to have a community where people can go and see what new game news is out for the day and comment on it.

Other communities:

Beehaw.org gaming

Lemmy.ml gaming

lemmy.ca pcgaming

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (13 children)

Yeah, I guess, but as long as the challenge is still achievable I can dig a large field.

It's easier to place and organize finished assets than to create new ones, though, so after a while a lot of it starts to feel copy-pasted. I'm sure that noticeable lack of effort will only be exasperated by modern automation.

load more comments (13 replies)
[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 6 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Huge game worlds were awesome back when it was challeng to make them. People have proved they can be done. Now it needs balance.

[–] PanArab@lemm.ee 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I do care about finishing games but not completing them. I will play the main story and some of the side quests. I am happy with games being 20-100 hours long.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tiredofsametab@fedia.io 5 points 1 week ago

I'll take it if it's well done. I'm fine with it also not being done all at once (think expansions in MMOs). However, I'd rather the game be smaller (and priced appropriately) if quality will suffer.

[–] Iheartcheese@lemmy.world 4 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I wouldn't mind a much bigger world. If it's actually populated. There needs to be shit to do. Reward me for going off the path.

[–] AdrianTheFrog@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

8x the size of the world either means 1/8 the original handcrafted stuff per area or 8x the development time and cost, there's no way you can get around this

[–] JokeDeity@lemm.ee 4 points 1 week ago

I actually might like a game that big... If it were actually a game that big. Starfield is a perfect example of pointlessly big but full of nothing. A game with the depth and complexity of some of the best cities in Bethesda games but EVERYWHERE instead of just a few select cities with barren wastes in between like a real world has might be incredible and be the last game I play for the rest of my life.

But that's not currently possible and all we can do right now is the fake BS where everything is empty but the map is BIG.

[–] fckreddit@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago

Honestly, I love open worlds that are meaningful, rather than just big for the sake of being big. Yakuza games have very small world, but they dense as hell. They are filled with wacky side quests and many distractions.

[–] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

Counterpoint. Mordor II.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›