search results matching tag: looting

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (75)     Sift Talk (4)     Blogs (14)     Comments (334)   

Facing the final boss after doing every single side-quest

MilkmanDan says...

I got interested in that question based on the Elder Scrolls series. Morrowind had a basically static world, Oblivion was basically entirely scaled to the player, and Skyrim is scaled to the player but within a min/max range.

To me, Morrowind was great because it could put appropriately powerful rewards in difficult (or just plain obscure) areas. Oblivion in particular was bad at making leveling feel like a treadmill because every time you leveled up as the player, pretty much every enemy would be that much more powerful also. Skyrim was better about that since an area would generally set its difficulty scale based on the first time you visited it, so you could leave and come back later if it was too tough, but it still felt a little off.

Another associated problem is how loot gets influenced by those leveled lists. In Skyrim, loot in containers and in the inventory of leveled enemies generally scales, but loot sitting out in the open in the game world generally doesn't. Which is really annoying, because all generic loot pretty much everywhere ends up being crappy low-level iron. God forbid there's some steel, elven, or dwarven gear in places where it would totally make sense to be (say, dwarven gear in dwarven ruins) that you might venture into before that gear becomes "level appropriate".


In a related issue, one beef that I have with general RPG mechanics is how they all feel the need to make you drastically more powerful at level 5 compared to level 1, and again at level 10 compared to level 5, and so on. By the time you're near the level cap, you're probably 100-1000 times as powerful as you were at level 1, which gives a good sense of accomplishment but just doesn't seem realistic, and leads to this problem with fixed difficulty or level scaling. Western RPGs (boiling back to pen and paper DnD rules) certainly aren't great about this, but JRPGs are completely ridiculous about it, which is pretty much why Final Fantasy 3(6) was the last one that I enjoyed. In my adulthood, I just can't handle them -- even going back and trying to play FF3 that I *loved* way back when.

I'd like to see more games where you get more skills, polish, and versatility as you progress, but overall you aren't more than 3-5 times as powerful at max level as you were at the beginning. Mount and Blade is one of the few games I can think of that comes close to that.

ChaosEngine said:

<knowingly geeky response to comedy bit>
It's actually a really interesting game design question.

There are basically two approaches here: enemies are either fixed level or scale with the player.

{snip}

The Untold History of EA's Long Pay-2-Win Love Affair

shagen454 says...

I think if you're going to have P2W - it should take place on a P2W server separate from those who are grinding the game. It's just one of the many reasons WoW isn't all that special anymore. Need a level 100 toon? Pay $30, get one instantly, on any sever ya like, you know with the people who put in 1000 hours of their real life.

I don't really care about loot boxes as long as they are cosmetic. In HOTS or Overwatch it's just like an added bonus, even though most of it is trash. Though, having loot boxes in HOTS is a little different than Overwatch which was an overrated/overpriced $60 game while HOTS (also made by Blizzard) is actually free to fucking play and even then I have most of the toons and never spent a cent and get plenty of loot boxes for free as well.

Keep this shit up though and the underground/indie devs are going to take over the gaming industry. Just like what happened with music, MTV not playing real music, the radio playing the same shit over and over again, major labels putting out garbage over and over again... and it eventually broke the mainstream music industry (thank fucking god).

Colbert To Trump: 'Doing Nothing Is Cowardice'

scheherazade says...

I don't think anyone suggests that civilian disarmament encourages tyranny, merely that civilian armament discourages tyranny.



In any case, there are a variety of applications that aren't "fighting hitler".

No country goes on forever without some domestic strife. Could be domestic war, could be economic collapse, could be the government scapegoating "your kind", could be a weather disaster, could be whatever.
In such an unlikely event, if you happen to be around at the time, you may wish to guard your family, food, fuel, etc.

Note that these events affect a LOT of people when they do happen (as in millions at a time).
Even though they are less frequent than a random shooting, the sheer quantity of people makes them significant.

Eg. The last Houston destruction by hurricane was in 1979 (38 years ago). That's not so infrequent, in a city of 2.3 million people (ish).
That's an upper bound of 60'000 people affected per year on average.
Either way, it's a lot of people that need to guard their homes from looters, etc.
Granted not everyone is on a destroyed street - but you see what I mean.

There have been plenty of disasters and riots in the last few decades where you wouldn't want to be caught helpless - just in case.

That's also a commentary on society. During the Fukushima disaster, nobody was looting or robbing, or whatever. Japan has a better behaved society.

-scheherazade

bcglorf said:

@newtboy and @scheherazade,

I think I may have come up with a shorter line of evidence for a well armed population being protection against tyranny.

Granted, a poorly armed population with strong arms control laws doesn't necessarily devolve into tyranny. We can all demonstrate this with counter examples like up here in Canada. However, can anyone name an oppressive dictatorship that had 2nd amendment level freedoms for every man and woman in their state? I can't think of a single example myself.

As I said before, that doesn't lead me to immediately declare zero restrictions on guns are thus worth any cost to forestall future tyranny. However, I have to acknowledge that the NRA style argument for protection against tyranny isn't entirely without merit.

That leads to my objections with declaring that it is objectively obvious that gun freedoms must morally be pulled back, while at the same time objectively obvious that idealogical/religious practice freedoms must not. We have ample examples of extremists gathering together to plot violence, mayhem and death on a grand scale and putting some extra lines in the sand of when that becomes unacceptable is no more obviously immoral than restricting gun ownership.

Arnold Schwarzenegger Has A Blunt Message For Nazis

Jinx says...

Re. slavery and sins of fathers

I don't think anybody is suggesting that white folks be held personally responsible for slavery, but you do need to accept that, in the main, whites start life with a headstart. We still profit from that history, and that is to say nothing of the racism that still exists today.

I'm not sure that Schwarzenegger really gained much from his father fighting on the losing side of a war. As far as I am aware he came to America almost penniless and somehow manufactured a career for himself. Like...maybe if his dad had got a load of looted art or something and then Arnie inherited that... idk.

Anyhoo, he's white, so he had that going for him.

bobknight33 said:

Thank you for clearing this up. The sins of our fathers are that of the father and not carried generationally.

With said Today Americans do not owe jack to ancestors of slaves.

American can just get along and move past BLM and all the white privilege bull shit that you and your leftest ilk are promoting.

Thank you very much... Don't for get to inform you leftest friends.

Recreating Game Of Thrones' Loot Train Attack

Game of Thrones: The Loot Train Attack (HBO)

Recreating Game Of Thrones' Loot Train Attack

ant (Member Profile)

Games that think more gameplay mechanics equals more fun

shagen454 says...

Agree. Can't stand all the superfluous fetch quests - at this point I'm even sick of inventory management. In games like Fallout, or Elder Scrolls, Witcher - these days I hardly even loot the corpses because I'm so sick of it after 25+ years.

One of the best games I've played recently was - What Remains of Edith Finch - a linear, "walking simulator" which implements innovative/interesting design solutions to drive the story forward, very detailed and very tightly designed - kind of on the opposite spectrum of open-world RPGs - but very awesome.

Rigging the Election - Video II: Mass Voter Fraud

bobknight33 says...

Obamacare was sold as THE ANSWER. IS HAS FAILED. It isn't the answer.

Clinton Foundation is so freaking great. Just ask the president of Haiti and its people how they got screwed by the Clinton Foundation. Its a scam for them to line their own political pockets.

To believe anything from a Clinton is utterly fullish. History is full of Clinton lies.

Democrats don't back down no matter what.

Loot at Clinton wiki leaks have her dead to right but she is not backing down. Attack the Russians but lets not looks at the emails just blame the Russian. Great miss direction and teh mainstream media goes right along with it.

look Hillary will will win by a land slide (not) and you can cream your pants.

You can pull any website and "look" at premiums but until you actually y go through the process you don't know the number,

heropsycho said:

Ohhhh, so you just reassert your point about Democrats never backing down, but Republicans do without any factual basis whatsoever! What a novel losing debate strategy!

Obamacare isn't perfect and needs to be fixed or replaced with something better. Not the Trumpian "something great" if it should be replaced, but something that is well thought out and addresses what Obamacare couldn't accomplish if the entire premise is systemically not going to work.

Did you see what I did there? I *gasp* recognize that sometimes things don't work! OMG! IT'S AMAZING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I also didn't say it's a "fucking disaster", because it isn't. If it were that, explain how the uninsured rate has dropped very significantly. It was never going to achieve 100% insurance rate. The only way that happens is with single payer.

Here's how stupid you are. You don't seem to understand that if Obamacare isn't the answer, you're just making single payer universal health care more likely to be enacted. The American people are not going to go back to being denied coverage because of a pre-existing condition. They're just not gonna. Obamacare is the least left policy you could possibly enact that would help control costs and decrease the number of people who are uninsured.

You can scream to the top of your lungs, but Obamacare was enacted to remedy real problems. I'm even sympathetic to the argument that those were real problems, but Obamacare isn't the answer, but if you're going to make that argument, you have to propose something that has historical precedent and rationale to solve those problems. And you simply don't have one.

So again, keep struggling in the quicksand until it swallows you whole, and single payer is enacted.

Your evidence about health insurance premiums is anecdotal, and quite frankly, you don't seem to understand that your numbers and description of what happened to her is absolutely ridiculous. You don't get on medicaid because your insurance premiums go up under Obamacare. You qualify for Medicaid because of a lack of income.

Secondly, the claim is absolutely ridiculous that her premiums went up that much. For data we have available, *subsidized* premiums for the lowest cost silver plans for data we have in the Obamacare exchanges was $257 a month for a single person.

http://kff.org/health-reform/issue-brief/analysis-of-2017-premium-changes-and-insurer-participation-in-the-affordable-care-acts-health-insurance-marke
tplaces/

If she qualifies for Medicaid, then surely she could go on a silver plan in the Obamacare exchanges and come out likely paying less. Oh, and, on top of that, she would EASILY qualify for federal subsidies if she qualified for medicaid.

Oh, and btw, without Obamacare, if health care companies decided to raise those premiums just to price gouge, what protection would she have? Not much. Obamacare insures that you can only take in so much that isn't spent on health care.

Your story is completely utterly full of crap on so many levels, it's clear you made it up.

I'm dismissing all your numbers are being unsubstantiated bullshit. Have premiums gone up? Sure have. Were they going up before Obamacare? Yep! There's a healthy debate about how much Obamacare is contributing to premium increases. Obamacare isn't perfect. I'm happy to discuss rationally what could be done to improve Obamacare, or another plausible alternative. But not with you, since you pull numbers out of your ass that easily are completely debunked.

BTW, FYI, Obamacare was not intended to lower premiums nor to completely eliminate the number of uninsured. It was to control costs in all forms and reduce the amount of uninsured, as well as reform the health care system to eliminate problems like being denied coverage because of pre-existing conditions, people having to declare bankruptcy due to medical bills, etc.

Some of its goals it succeeded in, and some not so much. That's a fair assessment at this point. Medical related bankruptcies have not declined. Being denied coverage due to a pre-existing condition has been eliminated. Premiums have gone up, but we simply don't have enough data to determine if they've slowed or accelerated since Obamacare was implemented. If you go by the immediate years after Obamacare was fully implemented, they slowed.

http://healthaffairs.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/Adler_Exhibit1.png

More recently, they've accelerated. It's important to note that health care costs are not solely determined by premiums alone. It's interesting you cherry picked premiums only to prove costs haven't been controlled because premiums are your best case to make that point. Copays, coinsurance, deductibles, prescription drugs, all those play a role. IE, if the average American pays more in premiums but less everywhere else, it's possible the net average is lower for total costs paid for health care.

These are complex topics that have no room for bringing in rose colored ideologically tinted lenses to force the outcome to be "a fucking disaster", where you'll bring in anecdotal evidence, some of which is completely utterly made up.

Just how far are you willing to make stuff up? Hillary Clinton, according to you, has never in the last 40 years done anything substantially positive.

REALLY?! Look, I understand not necessarily wanting her to be President. OK, fine. But that claim is absolutely ridiculous. Over $2 billion has been raised by the Clinton Foundation, and over 90% of that has gone to charitable work according to independent studies. Before you go down the path of "paid access", blah blah blah, even if that were true, the reality is $1.8 billion went to charitable works around the world through the Clinton Foundation Hillary Clinton helped to create and run.

That's not substantial?!?!

Dude, just stop. The only people who believe that BS are people within your bubble. You're not convincing anyone else who didn't already think Hillary Clinton personally killed Vince Foster. You're just making people like me think you're a complete loon.

No Man's Sky Expectations Vs. Reality

shagen454 says...

Yeah, exactly. There were tons of streams on Twitch of NMS before release. I should have said this in my statement, but before I thought it was just going to be an indie space exploration survival game - but it became clear from the streams - that this game consisted of a lot of grinding and was pretty repetitive. I wasn't sure if I would actually enjoy that, which is why I didn't pay for it First thing I noticed was the nerfed surface travel, you can't even crash and second thing I noticed was the retarded inventory system, third - mine, mine, mine, grind and not much variation. It WREAKS of consolitis (framerate at 30, on PC, attention to detail Sean, come on?!), but to their credit, playing the game with a controller is quite nice, so much better than the shitty PC controls they implemented. I still like it and am enjoying the surprising relaxation of the grind/exploration, so I will pay for it when it's $30 and is heavily patched & modded. $60.00 is absolutely ridiculous for this game, but hopefully they take that extra $30 they ripped off from people and put in some major work.

Overwatch is another game that I was pissed at having paid $60.00 for. But, since it's a Blizzard game I always know they will make it worth my while in the long-run and it's steadily been true of Overwatch. Blizzard really know how to support their games unlike any other developer. I enjoy OW much more now that the competitive mode came out, a new hero (a little underwhelming but still cool) added and pretty soon an awesome looking new map. The lucio-ball thing is cool that they added in, but don't care much for it. Still hate the loot, though....

Xaielao said:

I get it, hating on the game is super popular right now. I'm no fanboi, I certainly didn't pre-order the game (I only pre-order from a select few developers, those I know will put out great products, like CD Project Red). I'm quite enjoying the game. It's not the type of game you play on rails or with a strong linear narrative or that holds your hand through the experience. I'm on PC and have had not a single issue or crash. I have to put graphics at medium when they should be maxed out, but that shows the age of the engine and that it isn't as streamlined or polished as it could be.

Also the game 'does' have a story, it's just rather basic and while I'm not sure the game is worth $60 (I got it for $45 and think it's worth that) I look forward to future content and the fact that they've said 'no paid DLC' makes me happy as well.

When people ask me if I recommend the game, I tell them first that it's worth waiting for a price drop or the issues with AMD and top-end nVidia to be worked out. I use the analogy that it's like Early Access Starbound. Fun, with an open universe to explore, some interesting races and things to find and crafting but not a whole lot going on in it or directed content to experience. That's No Man's Sky, at $20-30 it's a great Early Access title. I'm glad that it sold very well as that will fund future development and hopefully we'll see new content and fan requested stuff soon.

And for the record I've seen equal numbers awesome wildlife as I've seen crazy shit like in this video lol. The craziest was on this cold, radiated world that was none-the-less flush with exotic life. There were these 1m tall blobs of jelly with elephant ears and like mice faces that bounced around like a bouncy ball all over the place. Hilarious!

Lambast it all you want but it's clearly still popular. Mid-day on a wednesday and it's #3 on steam with 70k users atm. And it's not like it wasn't super easy to find out what the gameplay was like in those 3 days it was on PS4 before PC. So anyone who still bought and is bitching about it is being hypocritical.

if blizzard were 100% honest with us

shagen454 says...

Whatever, Blizz gets so much hate non-stop. I just want to say that I own pretty much every game and expansion they've ever put out. But, to relegate it to their newest crop of games : their F2P games both rock, I've spent probably $200 on Hearthstone over time, and nothing on Heroes of the Storm and I play HoS all the time.

All of their expansions are always worth the loot. And the games themselves and their longevity is worth the money as well. They continue to support their games well after launch marketing has died down.

Just your everyday harassment, courtesy of the NYPD

GenjiKilpatrick says...

@JustSaying

I'm gonna be nice cause I don't have any experience with you or your opinions yet. And, to an extent, I agree..

Hopefully you can contribute something meaningful to videosift, considering all the great voices who've disappeared from this place.

It's just extremely frustrating that these two goofballs are haven't left yet.

And in fact, your premise is a topic that I definitely have been meaning to discuss.

There's a Prager "University" video that addresses that exact premise of sugarcoated vs blatant belligerent racist.

The video itself is flagrantly patronizing.

That being said we have all three types of racist on videosift currently:

Bobknight is your classic Neo-Con Racist.
- He hates blacks, gays, jews & liberals and makes no qualms about expressing how subhuman those groups are.

Trancecoach is your more politically-correct racist.
- Seems pretty open-minded and accepting, until you reach the middle or end of his comment.
Then it's all like "isn't it sad that all black people have no fathers and live in the ghetto."

Lantern is a special case.
- He'll be toned-down yet flagrant at times. Openly belligerent at others.
But it's always under the guise of "I can't be racist cause I don't FEEL like i'm racist"

He even used the classic "Well I CAN'T be racist cause my DAUGHTER married a BLACK/BIRACIAL guy! See, not racist"

Then will immediately say some heinously racist shit like he has in this thread. i.e.

"Of course I didn't bother reading the article for context or facts.
I'm a cop, I know how the 'Criminal Element' thinks.
Clearly those kids were dangerous.
If we had just heard the audio, we would have seen how those punks are no better than those looting rioting savages in Baltimore"

So no, JustSaiyan.. I would NOT prefer to have some idiot saying idiot things whenever I come back to check out the site.

At least Bill O'Reilly is smart enough to have a somewhat substantive discussion.

Lantern just says racist shit, then cowers behind the "i'm a good person because my job & family FORCE me into being around lesbians & colored people.. and I put up with that pretty well. so.. yeah.."

But yeah, I just hate people like Lantern cause he's too chicken shit to just say he thinks black people are inferior whenever I press him on it.

At least Bobknight will straight tell you gays are immoral sinful perverts or whatever. The old-fashion, honest, terrifying-murder-clown bigot he is.

Then again, Bobknight can't admit he's racist either.
So.. maybe that's just a core Conservative talking point now.

Just your everyday harassment, courtesy of the NYPD

GenjiKilpatrick says...

But I forgot, you're not racist cause you "don't blame ALL you problems on black people"

You just automatically jump to the conclusion that a group of young black highschooler, waiting to take the elevator up to there homes, are CLEARLY part of the "criminal element".

You just say shit like..

"Black people kill black people all the time, so why are those savages rioting now?"

Let me try that logic out..

"White bankers steal from & defraud other white people all the time, so why are you complaining about looting?

You white people never get up in arms about Bernie Maddoff or Jamie Diamond or Dick Cheney, so you have no right to complain"

Glad we can finally share some common ground assha- Lantern

Why can't white people stop the violence?

GenjiKilpatrick says...

Glad someone sifted this.

I was just about to post this so I could rip into @bobknight33's butthole.

*Ahem*

You see Bob, you're so focused on hating Liberals & Democrats you willfully ignore all these vicious white SAVAGES & THUGS.

Just look at those wild white beasts.
They're destroying property, acting like animals, and tearing apart THEIR OWN COMMUNITIES!

Just common thugs rioting and looting, committing white on white violence.

And for what? Because the didn't like some sporting event results?

How trivial and uneducated of them.

It's a shame, this is exactly why we can't make any progress as a country.

You know, this is precisely what the Conservative Agenda is promoting. White on White crime.

Repulicans, they can keep lining their pockets on Wall Street.

While the average single white mothers fight over the scraps.

~Fin~

See Bob, doesn't that sound like a shit argument? No?

Oh wait, I already know your answer to that. "It's the liberal agenda!" Right?

The Liberal-homosexual-illegal-alien-It-makes-me-uncomfortable-to-acknowledge-the-centuries-of-global-oppression-that-my-white-privilege-represents-so-I'l
l-just-blame-every-minority-for-the-problems-my-forefathers-created Agenda!

Right?!?!



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon