Not the original commentor, but i think they meant more narrative failure than mechanical failure.

Like “You failed to save person from burning house, and the failure changes how the story unfolds.” Not “You died to a boss and you need to try again.”

First example of narrative failure that came to mind is from Deus Ex: Human Revolution. There is objective where you need to protect a chrashed pilot from enemies, but if you fail the game does not fail and load previous save. The game goes on and characters death effects the dialogue and a certain story point later in the game.

In souls games, no matter how many times you die, the narrative does not change. Dying effects you only in mechanical sense, where you might loose some recources, but you will never lose them permanently, but there are narrative moments that you can fail. Like in bloodborne if you summon certain npc to your haven, he starts to murder other people you have brought there.

I really love the game desing behind this system. The game is on a timer, but instead of time going foward all the time, the quest “cost” time.

Way of the samurai games did this kind of trick back in the day. In those games the day was divided in to four parts, morning, noon, evening and night. Player had unlimited time to wander the game world, but once they did something big, the time would go foward and depending on what you did the story would go in to different direction. After 5 full days the game would come to a finale, but how you acted, effected who was alive and wich side of the final conflict you would be.

The game ending and story coming to a finale does not necessarily mean you win.

If the game is fun to play and one play trough does not take forever to finish, i can see my self playing the game multible times trough and trying to find the way to make everything end the way i want.

1. I don’t think we should try to re-introduce those games to new audiences

Well if we disagree on this deep fundamental level i dont think we can have real discussion about this, as my personal opinion is that stories i love should be made as easy as possible for people to reach. Like i would love people to read book Kalevala, but its written in old Finnish so i think its completelly fine for make the book more easily approachable for the masses by translating it to todays English, even if it looses a lot by turning the writing to prose.

2. A remake by definition I just want to say there is no real definition for remake.

if we spend resources on remakes (and sequels) then we are robbing the current generation from having their own formative experiences. I want to see new IPs come out that try new and different things and move the medium forward.

This goes more to the business end too. Its not zero sum game and making remakes dont mean companies stop making new games.

Like activision tasked Vicarious vision to make Crash remakes and because those did allright they were comfortable to let Toys for Bob make comoletelly new Crash game. The remake indruduced the Crash games to new audience. Without that push the new game would most definedly did worse than it did. (It was profitable, but not as much as investors wished).

Same with resident evils. Both remakes and new installations are being produced at the same time and they help to make the engine better everytime.

I must disagree.

Like while i can still fully enjoy old resident evil games, because i have nostalgia for the i fully understand why people who are born after they have been made would be put of by them.

By remaking those games they could indruduce the game to whole new audience who would never play the yanky outdated versions.

More extreme example. I would love to have modernised version of Betrayal at Krondor. It had good story. The core gameplay and world was great and there was intresting mechanics, but it was released 1993, so it by modern standards it looks like garbage and the ui is very unintuitive.

Most gamers now will never experience that story and those who do, will not get the same experience i got, because they will look everything in the game as a product of its time and the focus will be on the retro aspect, not on the game it self.

Oh i did not know we are adding new requirments to the conversation.

Well your comment does not count because you did not write it while standing on your hands. Bucko.

Isint “good game” little vague description? Are you the president what is good?

And the point is that there are thousands of games to choose from, but you bitch that there are only live service shit on the market.

Armored Core VI: Fires of Rubicon (2023) Remnant 2 (2023) Rise of the Ronin (2024) Hades II (2025) Pragmata (2026)

And i dont like Elden Ring or Nindendo, but those were all big releases.

I just find it funny when people complain about something and when given proof that they are not correct they start to move the goal post.

Ie. List that contains only small portion of recent non live service games --> “well i dont like some of them”

Lies of P (2023) Hi-Fi Rush (2023) Dead Space Remake (2023) Stellar Blade (2024) Senua’s Saga: Hellblade II (2024)

Yeah modern games all have live service elements and you cant find any good games!

Just ignore these: Baldur’s Gate 3 (2023) Marvel’s Spider-Man 2 (2023) Starfield (2023) Hogwarts Legacy (2023) Resident Evil 4 Remake (2023) The Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom (2023) Alan Wake 2 (2023) Black Myth: Wukong (2024) Dragon’s Dogma 2 (2024) Final Fantasy VII Rebirth (2024) Metaphor: ReFantazio (2024) Elden Ring: Shadow of the Erdtree (2024) Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 (2025) Hollow Knight: Silksong (2025) Indiana Jones and the Great Circle (2025) Donkey Kong Bananza (2025)

*Bypassed

Works until next patch and does not stop denuvo eating recources at the background. But yes you can download and play it, if you want.

I do agree with you that it makes games worse, but…

It does not do anything to prevent piracy beyond maybe a month depending on cracking scene interest.

The first months of the release are the most profitable time for games. Denuvo is not meant to be uncrackable. Its just meant to protect the release window. Thats why some studios remove it some time after the launch.

Its only a minor inconvenience to game cracking groups and pirates.

Even the most popular games take one to two week to crack. That is not just a minor inconvenience. It takes time and effort. Also updates ofter change things enough for the crack to stop working.

There are games where you watch how protagonist reacts to the world. (The Last of Us)

There are games where you decite how protagonist reacts to the world. (Mass Effect)

Thete are games where player reacts to the world (Zelda, Dark Souls, Valheim)

I feel like Crimson Desert is more of the last category.

deleted by creator

I would argue that main character being some what plank canvas is more a design thing than anything else.

Player is experiencing the world themself and its not filtered trough the protagonist morals.

Zelda games, especially Breath of the wild does things similary.

Yeah. I think you have some kind of frequency illusion situation going on.

Like many have pointed allready there has been many great single player games relased in few past years.

Care to give few examples of what games irk you?

Simple answer. Because they dont think about those things or care about them.

They run on pc sure. On the spesific spects computers they use. They need things like support for different resolution. Work arounds for the controller only features. If you want to make things like mouse control feel good, it needs lot of fiddling. Optimizing for million different hardware possibilities, error handling, launching, settings, key bindings and propably million other things i cant think right now.

Its not just flicking a switch.

Ukraine has been always one of the biggest wheat and fertilizer producers in the world.

Is Missouri part of international decition making? Does Missouri participate in UN summits? Does the governor of Missouri have voice in international treaties? Does it have embassy in other countries?

There are probably distinct provinces in Canada and China outperforming many countries, so why should they exist on a lower tier than a “country”, just because they were persuaded or “persuaded” to incorporate into something larger?

Because povinces dont decide foreign policies. Dont have militaries, cant make treaties.

I dont agree with this article at all. There are still as much intrest to longer single player games than before. Its just that the audience is wider now that 15-30 years ago.

Back in the 90’s and 00’s gaming at home had pretty high level of entry. PC side was just starting up and installing and trouple shooting games were much more cumbersome than now days. If you bought a console you basically committed to the games on that console. Thats why games were catered to much narrower audience. Those audiences are still there, but now that the bar for starting to play games is so much lower there is completelly new group of gamers on the market.

At the moment you are my favorite person and i hope your socks are never wet and your food always warms up evenly in the microwave.