• 0 Posts
  • 98 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: July 2nd, 2023

help-circle
  • I’m on the side that a remaster of a PS4 gen game dumb, but HZD was always the butt of the joke in regard to those awful generic bobblehead animations during every single dialog. It was laughably bad. With the reveal trailer, it does make a pretty big difference. Everything else? Not so much.

    If this had been a PC game all along, these animation overhaul would have been a patch of the original game, but since the trailer insists that they re-recorded all motion captures for the dialogs of the whole game, they get to sell it full price again.


  • Most of the story beats are still there. Most of the emotions from the OG are still there - except one thing. I’ll try to avoid spoilers but if you’ve played OG and remake, you should know.

    The major change in the story itself is the continuation of something you saw at the very tail end of the first Remake, that probably made you go WTF, the meta-narrative you’re suspicious about. It might be a concept you don’t really like because it sounds like it’ll break the story, but it actually doesn’t concretely change anything until the end. The places, the events, the world, the mission are still the same. The most critical change that caused a lot of noise is a big cliffhanger that will only be resolved in the final game, when it was expected to be a big emotional hit now. It’s very clear that this is a trilogy, and expecting this game to end the same way as the OG caused a lot of distress. People who loved the OG for one specific reason or another might feel robbed by the way this game is pretending to change things, but actually doesn’t, but actually maybe yes - and you’ll only get the resolution in the last game. If that means something to you, maybe you should wait for the trilogy to be completed and treat it as a single game, because this part 2 is only half of the game you liked back then, and it might not have what made you love it - yet.

    One big change in storytelling is what it focuses on: it gets much more into the psychology of Cloud, Tifa, Aerith, Barret, about mental health, trauma, and their relationships (in the same way they massively developped the Avalanche trio in Remake). Basically, they’re making everyone real human beings with a history and interactions. Now you understand from the inside of their head why they do or don’t do this or that. It also adds focus on some aspects and perspectives that only developed in the Crisis Core prequel and were not a thing in the OG. It’s a massive improvement on storytelling and world building (the world now has a history of geopolitics scattered everywhere in every side quests), but it looks like a lot of fans of the OG who expected things to go a certain way get hung up and slowed down by all the new details, and it feels like fluff or a change they don’t like. You clearly feel the stretch from one 50 hour long turn-based RPG into 3 action RPG that last 50 (remake) + 120 (rebirth) + 1?? (part 3) hours, and it’s a lot, and you might not like it.

    It absolutely has tons of gaming content to enjoy, both in the characters and the absolute shitload of things and side quests and mini-games to do absolutely everywhere for a 120 hours playthrough and you don’t even see the time pass, but it might not be exactly what you felt in the OG. It’s a new perspective. I’ve seen among various streamers that the people who were the most confused by the ending are often the harder fans of the OG, and new fans see the details and hidden explanations that OG fans miss because they think they know what’s going on - and get blue-balled on what they came here for.

    And then Sephiroth changes. We still don’t know if they’re whitewashing him by giving him a sad backstory and a big personal mission (the gacha game Ever Crisis that’s still ongoing is developing his time as a young SOLDIER) or if they’re making him an even worse guy, and so far it has the potential to ruin the character. We have to wait until it’s all resolved.



  • That was a little ambiguous, because he said that after London was the major city that voted against Brexit, he was saying it was more foreign (European) than English. Schroedinger’s asshole type of comment.

    Also he said that because he was pro Brexit (which is already not good), so it might not have been about skin color at all, just international European culture.

    He did get caught in the Rowling shitshow, early on when he started saying “I just hope (trans people) are treated kindly” but slowly admitted that he only had surface knowledge and let it slip that he thought the whole trans thing was an act or a choice. I don’t think he was malicious or aggressive about it, but he was called out on propagating transphobic messages.

    And he spoke up against cancel culture.

    It’s possible that he doesn’t understand that even if he doesn’t mean bad things, he’s letting bad propaganda slip out and repeating a language that hurts easily targeted people without understanding the scope. But he doesn’t seem very willing to learn quickly about it.

    I haven’t heard anything recent if he changed his mind or double down about any of this.


  • Sales expectations here don’t mean “we think this game is so good it will move x million units,” that thinking doesn’t exist anymore. It starts from the money they put in it, and they deduce “we’ll need to sell x million copies to get the money back with the profit we want.” There have been a few interviews specifically about these two games saying that.

    It’s the same old idea that AAA products (movies, games, same excuse) cost more to make than they bring money back - although we never know exactly how much of that is actually “investors expect an x% return by week y” where x is just too high and y too short and they never want to think longer term, and we never know how far an investment actually goes. Especially in the case of the Remake trilogy where keeping the same engine and world is supposed to drastically reduce the cost of the last game compared to if they had started a new game from scratch with the same content - except part 3 is unlikely to sell more than part 2 given that it’s a sequel.

    At any rate, we all know it’s true that development time and costs keep going up exponentially, and no one likes it (and yet everyone wants 4k 60fps somehow).





  • I was gonna say “worth it” but

    “The Thorin population spent 50,000 years without exchanging genes with other Neanderthal populations,” Ludovic Slimak, a study co-author archeologist from France’s Université Toulouse Paul Sabatier who first discovered Thorin, said in a statement. “We thus have 50 millennia during which two Neanderthal populations, living about 10 days’ walk from each other, coexisted while completely ignoring each other. This would be unimaginable for a Sapiens and reveals that Neanderthals must have biologically conceived our world very differently from us Sapiens.”

    That’s actually quite interesting for the “how come there was no other civilization in the many tens of thousands of years that humans existed before our civilization that’s barely 6000 years old” crowd.

    Maybe that was their take on the “dark forest” hypothesis.


  • Oh Luke was definitely asking her about their birth mother, knowing that it was the same woman. The question here is that Leia didn’t know what he was talking about. Since she gives him an answer about someone who died when Leia was young, maybe she’s just thinking that Bail remarried later.

    Before the prequel trilogy came out, it could have been their birth mother she was talking about, and she just didn’t know that Luke was her brother; but after ep 3 came out, and we see Padme die, we have to assume Leia was adopted by the Organas, but Bail’s wife died when Leia was young and he later remarried, and Leia is thinking about that woman after Padme and before Bail’s new wife, thinking that she is her real mom.

    And yeah, it’s completely possible that Lucas originally intended for Padme to be the one Leia was talking about, but the point is, the movies don’t actually specify if she meant Padme or the middle wife, so it can still be explained.


  • That detail wasn’t in any of the movies so the line in ep 6 still makes sense the way you thought. I’m pretty sure anyone would assume that’s what she meant, since we never hear that she knew she was adopted. Whoever made Bail’s wife die in the explosion of Alderaan is the one who messed up, or Lucas ignored that addition when making episode I.








  • “La stabilité” voulue par le président, c’est “la capacité pour un gouvernement à ne pas tomber à la première motion de censure déposée”, insiste-t-on à l’Élysée.

    La stabilité pour ne pas tomber à la première motion de censure quand le parti présidentiel a pas de majorité absolue ? Elle est assurée quand le président nomme un premier ministre hors de son parti et dit à son parti de ne pas voter contre son choix. Rien de plus évident.

    Par exemple si il choisi à l’extrême droite et dit à son parti de se taire, aucune motion de censure ne passera, parce que son camp + le RN font plus de 50%. C’est super simple et c’est comme ça que c’est censé marcher quand il y a pas de majorité. Aucune justification à prétendre que c’est pas stable.

    Le calcul est identique s’il choisi à gauche, car il a toujours la majorité. Sauf que ça n’arrivera pas, il sait qu’il peut dire à son parti de ne pas voter contre et que ça suffira, mais il le fera pas. Il préfère prétendre que la gauche est instable.

    S’il choisi dans son camp parmi les ex PS en prétendant que le PS acceptera, il s’en fout parce que le RN ne soutiendra pas de motion de censure donc ça passera même sans la gauche. Donc on sait déjà ce qu’il entend par stabilité même s’il peut la créer comme il veut sa stabilité.

    Le seul risque qu’il court c’est de convaincre le RN de ne rien faire. Si le RN dit non, il sera forcé de prendre à gauche (et encore, en supposant qu’il ne vire pas RN), mais le RN ne dira pas non.