is the ability to make OP spells a good thing inherently? that feels like you just *like* being able to make overpowered spells

It's more profit > creativity now

@𝖃𝖆𝖛𝖎𝖊𝖗 Well, not really. Morrowind did other things that were good

your actions had consequences

there were different factions

that were mutually exclusive

it was harder

more spell diversity and spell customization is a good thing imo

You could sabatoge the main quest

Some games be absolute bangers though.

Yall play witcher 3?

@Memovita Yes

In terms of combat way better than the previous 2.

But the Witcher III is an anomaly

in the games industry nowadays

like, custom spells is an awesome concept that i wish was in skyrim

Cannot wait for cyberpunk.

@𝖃𝖆𝖛𝖎𝖊𝖗 https://youtu.be/rZ2SCc6XPHM

Custom spells wouldve been nice.

Check this out

its amazing

Witcher 3 is great

I think Bethesda itself is problematic because they know if they dont add a certain idea the community probably will.

The issue and saving grace is the passion of the mudding community.

modding*

Bethesda's just plain lazy

Bethesda is a different company now

the Bethesda of Daggerfall and Morrowind is dead

Corrupted by their own success

and nowadays, even casuals recognize this

FO4 sucked

Yeah. Fallout 76 was a burning piece of shit.

Skyrim was ovverated

FO4 was alright in my opinion.

Skyrim is their greatest accomplishment, yet they refuse to move on

Oblivion felt bigger

You could kill the fucking Emperor and still side with the Imperials

I sank 2000 hours into skyrim.

combat was kinda arse but it felt more fun

It was more visceral in a way

Daggerfall was the most complex Computer RPG ever

bar none

6 endings

city sieges

60000 square mile world

multiple factions

D&D character customization

Massive dungeons

regional law enforcement

If y'all want a good RPG with good sword fighting mechanics, then I reccomend Kingdon Come: Deliverance

@Florida Man I have that

I sunk 50 hours into it

Yeah, it's good

I immediately hated Bethesda after playing Fallout New Vegas

Was that Bethesda?

I thought it was obsidian or something.

did you hear how they fucked over the NV devs?

Yes

Obsidian entertainment.

the fact that this buggy game with 18 months of development with most of it being unfinished was better than any Bethesda game since Morrowind infuriated me

Bethesda owns Fallout
and licensed it to Obsidian for NV

Hey, New Vegas was great

the guys that worked on NV were essentially the FO1/2 devs

Yall play outer worlds?

I thought it wasn't that good

Have any of you played Kotor I and 2?

I got it, but It didnt work properly with my ultrawide.

Knights of the Old Republic II is a masterpiece

I think Outer Worlds was also overhyped

I heard kotor was really good.

@Memovita It is

they pitched it as "FONV but in space"

and its worth playing

The only star wars game I played was the fallen order.

It felt kinda bare bones, still enjoyed it.

Kotor II is so good they even have an in story explanation for why you level up

Most of the companions are extremely well written

Atton

Mira

Bao Dur

Handmaiden

HK-47

Kreia

and Canderous

I just need

*j'zargo*

Other example of the games becoming more simole, is by simply comparing GTA4 with GTA5; or the physics of Far Cry 2 to other Far Cry games in the series. It doesn't mean it's more good because is more complex, but it adds a lot more dynanism to enrich the experience that latter games don't want to include for some reason.

Everytime my fun jammed I wanted to throw my controller at the screen.

gun*

I dont know. When I reflect on a game its value is like the whole package. I dont necessarily look only at the complexity. Like one of the reasons I liked FC3 more was the setting.

https://youtu.be/PjuYsahZrPI

Can yall recommend something modern? I feel like I've played most triple AAA games. Would love to find an rpg adventure type game. I tried dragon quest Xi but I dont like turn based.

Have you played/heard of Underrail?

Nope.

Well, it is a pretty good modern rpg game. It reminds me a lot of Fallot tbh.

Isometric huh?

Yep.

I might check it out but unlikely.

Thanks for the recommendation though!

Oh yeah, there is also Mechanicus if you want to check. Very good Warhammer 40 theme game.

But I would like to say that simpler games aren't bad, but most of the time they can be massively improved to the core by adding complex mechanics. For example, Minecraft is a very simple game that relies on the creativity of it's users; but the problem is that it lacks any dynamism. There is a lot of things you can build, but most of them don't have any kind of function withing their own world besides the one you make.

To make reference
https://youtu.be/mFf320v7Lrk

Gaymes becoming more simplified because of how many kids play

Parents don’t like spending time with their kids so they throw an xbox in their face

Nintendo mentioned something about why they simplify games.
They said that kids tend to be more distracted by smartphones and stuff.

edgy

@everyone Daily Question 🔖

- Is cereal a type of soup, why or why not?

Nope

Unless you put cereal in water

Who tf doesn't put cereal in water

yes. because all soups need a good base and as we all know milk is based

It's no soup but it's disgusting either way.

no

No, cereal can be eaten dry. Its a lil more odd to eat dry noodles or seasoning.

With milk yes

It is a cold soup

cereal is not a soup

who cooks a soup with milk

It's not a soup unless you add water.

No, unless you have the type of cereal that gets all goopy and bleeds into the milk like cocoa puffs or something. If the milk becomes chocolatey then it's a soup. That's because a soup has a liquid part and a solid part, and the liquid part is infused with *flavor* from the solid part. That's usually done with boiling

it does not matter

No water means no soup

What does it mean for soup?

What exactly considered a soup

Cereal is soup and Epstein didn't kill himself

True

But cereal is basically granola and milk together

@ass Broth

yes

Saying the question "Is cereal a soup?" sounds like saying "Is water wet?"

Water is wet

Cereal isnt a soup

I hate black people

KFC is underrated

Fuck you popeyes is better

True

but respect the og

not strongly with it

but

I'll admit it, KFC was good

But it just cant compete anymore

So y’all never tried Hart’s Chicken?

What's Hart's Chicken?

cereal is with mil

k

soup is with water

@everyone Daily Question 🔖
There were multiple examples of basic steam engines from the Roman Empire. More often than not they were for nothing more than a party trick. If someone decided to put that engine on a wheel or a mill, how would Rome change?

Rome died because of faggots

The industrial revolution would happen obv

Kek

Rome wouldve fallen even faster

I don't think their engines were strong enough for anything major

Wouldn't because slavery prevented the necessary economic pressures that lead to industrialisation

Send pfp rico

Joe, they would've steamrolled right through Scotland.

Large plantations lead to significant stakeholders in cheap human labour not expensive high investment labour saving devices.

Same as the American south

The engine that the Romans would have wouldn't be strong enough for anything drastic

what about in the roman cities?

Also they didn't have good enough metallurgy to do a proper industrialisation

they could have devolped better metallurgy

The urban patricians had plantations

They could have

But didn't

Possibly

the demand created by a steam engine would have driven better metalurgy

Not really

Steam locomotives+road

farming advances would be necessary?

It requires a significant investment from the medium to large stakeholders to do industrialisation, you could still have artisanal high quality metallurgy, they did in the high medeival ages

@Asdrubal =choo choo train

Sure, but the initial investment would never be fielded

Needs to be profitable every step of the way or for someone with enough power to force it through to a seen profitable end

@Joe The Communist yes, train go choo choo

whee

Rome didn't have a seen profitable end and slavery prevented it being profitable short term

but a steam engine would have made up some of the work

Idk it would change that much.

"Why didnt they put slaves in the factories?" They did lmao

Industrial revolution was a lot more things than steam machines.

and it could spur more interest in making shit

Theoretically yes

But you could get a steam engine

Or you could get 10 more slaves

And guarantee a profit

steam engines dont revolt

And once you have the steam engine you've developed its limited in use

Slaves rarely revolted either

10 slaves

A large enough slave revolt would do it

or 3 slaves+steam engine

Not really, you lose out on 10 slaves and get a single use steam engine

It'd take much much much variation to produce the industrial possibilities we know of

Probably bigger cities assuming they wont develop steam traina

Trains

Needs way more investment

They'd develop trains

That could save the empire

Same with long distance rapid communication

If they develop trains then the empire would be bigger and more unified

And centralised industrial weapon production

if rome began to industrialize the working class would begin to hold factory jobs while the slaves worked the countryside

Yes

With who's money?

in our timeline the agricultural innovation came first

but for rome

Every wealthy person in Rome had money in plantations or political ambitions

in our situation

Grand urban improvement projects were populist projects to gain political power

would devolp steam first

Cheapening labour is the opposite of populism

urban improvemnt+ jobs

Steam engine takes away jobs short term

That's the point

It's a labour saving device

Means less labour

it would very fast create factory jobs

It'd require basically a long reigning Ceasar to have a weird fascination with steam engines and metallurgy

No it wouldn't

And before it did that it'd unemploy thousands

they could replace slav labor jobs but that would not be profitable

Yes

unless the plebs rallied to remove slavery so they could have farming jobd

That'd be put down

The patricians would never tolerate it

And would tell the plebs that the slaves will take the pleb jobs

Also job shortages weren't a massive problem in Rome till near the end

so it would just hasten the collaspe of rome

holy shit

There's no plausible way for Rome to do it unless a time traveller came from the future and became Ceasar

ik exactly what caused Rome to fal

And just pushed industrialisation for 20 years

Heron of Alexandria

the steam engine came into be

if that rich dude put the engine on a wheel

Steam engine was never in wide use during Roman Empire

then something would habe happened

IF

Wait, weren't water and air mills used extensively until the Middle Ages?

Putting a steam engine in a mill would not be that huge of a possibility, contrary to wheels.

Rome would need an easier way to create metal parts before steam could be common

^^ this

^^^

going back to the question, I think Rome would expand until it hit natural borders or some other big empire.
Maybe some other groups would copy the steam engine like China.

Augustus wanted to expand the Empire northwise, civilize the German barbarians, and leave the borders at Rhine and Danube.

But he failed, because that was too much of a task, even for him.

That's a weird question because there was no reason for Rome to use labor-saving devices like the steam engine, because they could just have tons of slaves. And it's not because of the institution of slavery that the steam engine could not be implemented; rather the institution of slavery existed because the technologies needed to use these devices in a productive manner did not exist. The steam engine was reinvented in 1700 AD, but it was not put into use until 100 or 150 or so years after that, at which point technology had advanced sufficiently.

^this
I think there were various societies that invented them but slavery was cheaper.
Due to the funny trinket thing they never came up with idea to build stuff like steam vehicles like steam ships or steam cars.

@everyone Daily Question 🔖
What ultimately lead to the Roman Empire’s downfall?

Ok

So