Diablo II Battle Chest: $19.99 on Amazon. That game came out in 2000.

I will openly admit, a tear came to my eye.

Just voted. This will be cool.

BR! You are right! Don't let Borderlands loot lottery take the Cheeries again!

I'm just being pithy. I really disliked Borderlands 1 but I haven't played the 2nd. I think the loot system in the first one is total bunko and the quests were boring, but the skill trees were pretty good.

I agree with BR. The Walking Dead for GotY!

Though I must say, I'm surprised Mass Effect 3 isn't on the list. For all the criticism about the ending, it is still a really solid game.

My basic issue with Diablo style loot systems is this:

It speaks of shitty design to me. By stimulating the casino/gambling bit of the gamer mind and playing on our desire to watch numbers go up, you avoid actually designing your game. Item drops can be powerful rewards for exploration or, in the best of cases, they can recontextualize the rest of the game.

Consider doing a side quest to get a powerful weapon in an RPG. You're rewarded for going out of your way and seeing more of the game. The developers choose how powerful it should be comeasurate with the difficulty of the quest and can tie it in thematically. I'm on board.

Consider finding a new item in Super Metroid. When you get a new item, you reconsider every area you've already been to because you have a new mode of traversal or ability. That game is very well designed.

And then think about finding a random, more powerful bit of armor in something like Torchlight 2 (which I really liked, btw). Even rare loot is usually not a huge jump in effectiveness and even when it is, it's gated by level requirements. So the pleasure you get is that of watching numbers go up and very rarely of a new ability, like a status effect of some sort. Those status effects are usually already available, without the numbers going up, from shops and the like.

The rare loot you get is barely more empowering than the loot you already had. You're just trading a viable strategy for a very slightly more viable one, with higher numbers, brighter colors and cooler names. Very little actually changes. The fact that it's random means it more or less happens continuously throughout the game. Rare loot is not rare. Playing Torchlight 2, I was finding rare and magical loot constantly. On a given run, I'd find 2 or 3 unique pieces of equipment. When I would find something really exciting, level limits and class restrictions undermine the very thrill that they're hoping to create. Because of this, the effect is a constant marginal increase in your character efficacy, that isn't tied to your actions. That's Progressquest. If you're going to be random, have the courage to be random. Then, at least, it's like a slot machine and you feel like you can really hit the jackpot.

It's also annoying to constantly have to be picking up trash items to sell as the games basic economy. Specifically with Diablo (haven't played 3, just 1 and 2), the rhythms of the game are set by trips to and from the market. It's a game about selling junk you find on the floor. Sometimes you get a nice bit of equipment that is VERY rarely a big jump up, but it's not because of your performance or for exploration or for anything you actually DID.

Again, I'm basing all of my experience on Diablo 1 and 2, Torchlight 1 and 2 and Borderlands 1. It's possible Borderlands 2 is different. Does it have stat/class/level requirements to undercut you when you win the figurative slot machine? That shit drives me bonkers.

I also like a lot of these games, but it's in spite of the loot side. What these games do really well, I think, are skill trees. I love character customization, I just don't want to pick up a whole lot of Shoulders of the North which grant +.03 frost resistance along the way.

Also, random dungeons generally don't seem to add much. It's sort of neat that it's different every time but are the layouts ever considered? Designed? Neat? Most of the time in those games, there are a lot of dead ends with pottery in them.

It's not that I'm against randomization. Consider something like Binding of Isaac where each item you get is random. The difference is there are few, if any, insignificant upgrades. Each item is a meaningful improvement or, even better, drastically changes the way you play the game. Diablo-likes are literal seas of meaningless upgrades.

I'll be interested to hear if it holds up for you because it didn't for me. The combat is too MMO-y in all respects. Both in managing power recharges and agro. There are also some BLAND quests and dungeons later. This game disappointed me more than any game I can think of in the last ten years.

It might just work for you. It's a popular game and I'm decidedly pretty old school with my western RPGs. But I was promised a spiritual successor to Baldur's Gate and this is not it.

I liked it, but I ran into the same issue I have with most RPS's: I start over like 15 times and never get more than half-way through. I just keep thinking: I should have made the other choice.

While i'ts not quite the same thing, I kind of like the Rogue Likes where everyone dies. Ya, you made the wrong choice and suffered the consequences, but... eh... that's the point. In games like DAO, it makes me feel like I made some mistake, and I constantly feel like I should re-start and fix it.

Games like that I have to play with a walk-through so that I can make sure I make zero mistakes. After a while, it just starts begin no-fun.

It's not just dying either: situations where there are items that you can't get later in the game give me just as much anxiety. I've sat there with checklists, running through each tiny pickup before moving on to the next area.

@Whiteboy, I'm not really into either of those games, but for different reasons. FF12 has this license board issue that i plan on writing about on here soon where it makes all of your characters the same. KOTOR I just couldn't get into because I'm not really into Star Wars (yup). The combat wasn't particularly what I didn't like about those titles.

With DA:O, I was looking forward to it SO hard and the combat in Baldur's Gate is SO good. I think that was more the issue.

It's the level up system. The problem was that abilities were locked by two factors: if you had the license for them (read: you unlocked them in your skill tree) AND if you bought them. Since there's an escalating progression of gear/spells/abilities as you go from city to city, you're encouraged to spend points on what's available. If you insist on specializing your characters, you're going to have tons of XP just sitting around, doing nothing until you get to the town where you can "buy" the ability you want. They should have picked one or the other. It was frustrating as hell.

I liked the license board. I thought it had a good mix of customization and natural aptitude. Depending on where the character started, there was an obvious progression, but if you were willing to put in the work, you could make anyone do anything you wanted.

But you were limited by what was available. So, if I want to make a white mage, I can buy cure in the first town. Between town 1 and town 2, I have tons of unused license points (or whatever they called them) so it incentivizes teaching the white mage fire because I have all these points and it's the only game in town. Same with equipment and other class abilities. Same thing with my black mage. It's not like you need to save those points. They give you plenty to work with.

Now, imagine it worked more like FF10. You didn't buy magic, you just unlocked it. So if you had a bunch of leftover points, you could throw someone down the white mage path and actually advance.

OR it could be like FF1 and you just have new equipment available when you enter a town. You just buy spells and your progression is limited by your progress in the game. I suppose you can just pretend it works like that in FF12 but it's inelegant that way. I played through 2/3 of that game and by the time I quit, each character knew each magic spell and ability available by that point because there was no reason not to.

I got through the magic tower, the wood elves thing and one other one, I think. All of them except the Dwarf one, which was where I gave up.

Oh, the DLC with the golem, is the other thing I did. I like the golem, for the record. I like all the characters in DA:O.

That was weird. That was meant to be another post. I did the mage tower, the wood elves, one other thing and got stuck half way through the dwarves, in addition to the above.

Isaac, Indie Game the Movie and Legend of Grimrock are all great. Dungeon Defenders is sort of fun. Well worth it, regardless.

Wrath of the Lamb is great but it does make the game harder. Gotta man up, Dodson!

The way you advance in Isaac is unlocking characters and knowledge. Work on getting 4 health upgrades in one playthrough to unlock a character that is sort of a beginner mode. Then work on getting 70 cents in one play through to unlock another easy mode character.

During break I'm going to try to record some LPs or guides for Isaac. I figure I should use my 300 hours for something.

Don't use the wiki! It's much more fun to experiment.

Roll with Maggie for a while and try to unlock Cain. He's the next tier. All other characters are actually much more difficult and are akin to challenge modes.

The Tick is only a problem if you're going for the Chest, which is waaaay in your future. Until then, it life drains each boss when you meet them so it's not too bad!

Pawn's Adventure

The Walking Dead is the only game on here that changed how I think of games. A lot has already been said about the narrative which is the focus and is top notch. But not enough has been said about the play.

TWD has the best "false gameplay" of any game I've ever played. The gameplay is almost entirely quick decisions and mild puzzles and the decisions are the draw. Not only do they have real consequence and do they masterfully manipulate tension by having timers, they are sometimes false. Sometimes, what you say doesn't matter. Sometimes, it doesn't matter how quick you are. Sometimes, the things you say have the opposite of the intended effect. Just like in life.

Further, there are some actual quick time events. Sometimes these are just button tap fests, but I want to talk about a very specific one that is very SPOILERY. So please STOP READING IF YOU HAVEN'T PLAYED IT BECAUSE I'M GOING TO SPOIL SOMETHING.


















Seriously, spoilers.








Near the end, when you're strangling the guy in the hotel, you're prompted to slam on the Q button to do so. The prompt disappears. If you stop slamming Q at this point, he gets the upper hand and you're forced to take care of him another way. However, if you're like me, you're so emotionally invested in this character and what he's done and in protecting Clementine, you just keep slamming on the Q button as if you are actually choking the life out of someone. If you can't stop pressing the button until he's no longer a thread, he dies. DESPITE THE FACT THAT THE GAME ISN'T TELLING YOU TO. That moment alone makes this my game of the year. The fact that I cared enough to transcend mechanics and actual "game" signaled to me that this would be a game I'd never forget.

Runner up: Dishonored. Dishonored is a stealth game where it's fun to get caught. Think about that for a moment.

Spec Ops: The Line.