Bg1 and 2, Dragon age, and mass effect famously had save imports, so “the only way” doesn’t check out.

The dark souls games are so far removed in time that the previous game is legend, so that’s an option.

For the tv show they also could have, as I said, just set it somewhere and somewhen else. They can have rumors about what’s happening in Vegas, but it’s 20 years ago and you’re in Chicago, so who knows what’s true.

So, yeah, they could’ve done something else and still made a TV show.

What made new Vegas interesting was that it’s not just another kitschy wasteland romp. It’s post-post-apocalypse, and it asks who rebuilds after.

My limited understanding is the TV show nuked the NCR so they could do more wasteland theme park, and not continue that train of thought. But also didn’t just set it somewhere else.

But admittedly I haven’t actually watched it.

But also, again, trying to make a TV show intersect with a video game with multiple endings is a foolish idea. You won’t make everyone happy, and it’s an entirely avoidable problem. They could’ve just set the show in a different part of the world that hasn’t had a game.

I found a pizza place near me that still has like 2010 prices. It’s like a large pie with 5 toppings for $20. Most places are more like $30 now, here (NYC)

I kind of refuse to watch Fallout. Partly because I read they fucked up the NCR. But also Amazon sucks , and Bethesda is kind of creatively bankrupt.

Spoiler for Shadowheart’s story

And for the main plot in act 3, with a certain bhaalspawn.

Annoying, but I get why they didn’t do like a save import from an ancient game.

Related, if they ever make another game in the franchise this show will probably be canon, so it’s not entirely ignorable.

Technically I don’t have to watch it. I don’t have to play any more games in the franchise either. But if I do want to play more games in the franchise, I’ll probably have to deal with the show.

Can we just not do this?

One, not every thing needs to be a whole franchise universe.

Two, the game had a lot of decisions players could make. Collapsing that into a single canon is going to be unsatisfying. It was annoying enough that bg3 made some big decisions about choices from bg2.

Related, if they ever make another game in the franchise this show will probably be canon, so it’s not entirely ignorable.

Three, it’s not even that interesting a setting. It’s pretty Standard Fantasy.

Oh, I thought the pearl jam was a jar full of jawbreakers at first. Pearl jam makes more sense with the bread.

Dark souls 1 nail bat was the shit, even though it’s just a piece of wood with some nails stuck in.

I saw a guy with a shirt once that said something like “street parking is theft” and I was really excited. Gave him two thumbs up and he was confused until he looked down at his shirt.

Yeah I don’t really like the model where it starts basic and hard, and each failure makes it a little easier.

Feels like it would be more interesting if you started with high stats, and each successful run you had to remove or lower something. Sure, you won with 200 health but can you win with 100? Hades kind of had this alongside the upgrades as you go.

I didn’t like dead cells or rogue legacy that much because it felt like I would’ve won if I had grinded more, and that’s not what I want.

I feel like games are usually a mix of execution challenges and numbers challenges. In a pure action game or other games without progression (eg: chess) you win or lose from your decisions and input. But in numbers games, you win or lose based on the stats. There’s really no way cloud from the start of the original ff7 can defeat disc 3 bosses. The numbers just aren’t there.

Some rogue-lites feel like they’re trying to be execution games but have a less clear numbers check on top. Doesn’t always work for me.

I do really like the traditional rogue like Crawl: Stone Soup, though. No meta game aside from the occasional player ghost.

The bit about avoidance might be insightful. Some people have anxiety about reading and writing, and the LLMs feel like they’re helping. But as this post says, they’re not. They’re making the anxiety worse in the long term.

Many people legitimately are bad at reading and writing. You’ll won’t find a ton of them here, on a platform that’s mostly text, but they’re out there. Struggling though life, probably embarrassed. An LLM that purports to let them skip uncomfortably engaging with text probably feels like a godsend. But it’s a trap. It’s a tarpit they’ll get stuck in and never develop skills of their own.

Is it like the other ones where it takes several hours until you start finding interesting guns and get cool powers?

“Unilateral” GMing is completely necessary to the style of play and opens up player creativity and engagement in the ways I discussed in other comments.

I don’t think a unilateral GM and the mother-may-I it implies are the only way to get player creativity and engagement.

They want to test themselves against an organic, immersive world where their actions have consequences, good or bad. You cannot get that experience from collaborative storytelling games,

Maybe?

Imagine a scene where the players are trying to jump from one roof top to another to escape pursuit. It’s a pretty long jump, and there aren’t explicit rules in this game for jumping distances. The GM says to roll the dice. On a good roll, they’ll make it. The dice come up Bad.

In one mode of play, the GM unilaterally decides what happens. Maybe you fall and get hurt. Maybe you land in a pile of trash. It’s all on them, and you have to accept it to keep playing. The actions have consequences.

In the mode I prefer, the player has more of a say. Maybe they suggest they succeed at a cost. They can offer “What if I make it across, but lose my backpack?” and the group can accept it, or say that’s not an appropriate cost. They can also fail, and offer up ideas for what that looks like. The group achieves consensus, and the story moves on. The actions have consequences here, too.

That first mode, where the GM just dictates what happens and you take it? I hate it. I want either clear rules we agreed to before-hand, or a seat at the table for deciding ambiguous outcomes.

We don’t have to play together. Many people want to immerse in their character and any sort of meta-game mechanics (like succeed-at-a-cost) ruin it for them. Some people love metal and some people love jazz. Neither’s better than the other.

I probably shouldn’t have posted in an OSR thread knowing I dislike the genre.

I don’t understand how my coworkers are using windows. Like, they routinely have issues where it randomly reboots or gets sluggish. And it’s just flat out unfit for software development, unless you’re targeting windows specific stuff. They can’t even run our code locally.

Maybe some of the problems are janky security stuff to try to lock it down

Many complaints against prostitution also apply to trading labor for money/shelter in general. People just have a stronger emotional response.

Emotional responses are rarely a good foundation for policy.

Prostitution should be legal with safety regulations. All labor should have protections, unions, and such, to protect them from being abused by the wealthy.

Some specific things would probably remain illegal or disallowed, in the same sense that you’re not allowed to work construction without safety gear. People can wear condoms as easily as hard hats and hi-viz vests.

Completely understandable to establish borders to keep certain people out who might mean you harm or who might disrupt the peace of your community.

I mean, keeping ice out because they genuinely are a threat is cool. But some people would use this logic to keep out black people, because they falsely believe black people will disrupt the peace or mean them harm.

I mean, terrible GMs will be terrible no matter what system they are running.

True, but I think osr games encourage unilateral GMing, which encourages terrible behavior.

The company’s CEO, Michael Kustermann, announced a new policy where customers order food and drink on their phones,

Michael Kustermann should be fired, his compensation clawed back, and he should be barred from ever holding another decision making role for the rest of his life.

Hand in hand with this is, as the above commenter mentions, “rulings over rules” which emphasizes the GM making decisions about how player actions play out in the world rather than looking for mechanics in a rulebook.

It’s kind of funny but I really like how Fate is open ended, but absolutely hate it in OSR games. I think because OSR games often feel unilateral and top down from the GM, and I don’t enjoy that. Reminds me of teenage games where the DM would be like “you’re crippled now because the orc hit your leg” just because they said so, and your only options are deal with it or quit.

I also never play in the “I am my character!” mode. I’m more of the writer’s room style where we’re writing a story together, so it doesn’t take me out of the scene to be like “what if my succeed-at-a-cost roll means I get the window open, but wake up every dog in the house?”.