Games

36994 readers

999 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

Submissions have to be related to games
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
No excessive self-promotion
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here and here.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

211

What are some old games that are hard to revisit, because a more modern and superior version exists? (kbin.melroy.org)

submitted 3 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

176 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I tried playing Harvest Moon on the SNES today and having played Stardew Valley for hours, I thought I'd try and see how tolerable the original Harvest Moon was in comparison. I know and understand it is unfair because there's a 20 year gap between Harvest Moon and Stardew Valley, while also discrediting Harvest Moon's later entries since there's more than one.

Harvest Moon to me is a bit hard to revisit. Having to get used to only carrying two tools at the same time, your farm doesn't seem as big, you don't have a way to know that you're tired as readily, you just have to watch for the signs and the village you visit doesn't seem as characteristic. It's a basic farming sim, it has to start somewhere.

But Stardew Valley does so many things that it is easier to revisit.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 17 points 3 days ago (16 children)

The original Neverwinter Nights after Baldur's Gate 3.

NWN was fantastic for it's time, loved the DM mode and online mods, but the clunky movement and walls of text without voiceovers just can't compare.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

I'm trying to see some stuff in BG1 and 2 that I missed as I take another lap through the entire series, and I remember BG1 being a fairly easy, straight-forward game, but now that I'm replaying it, I remember that's only the tail end of the game. Early in the game, when you're stuck at level 1 for hours, lots of attacks just one-shot you, and it takes so long to get level 2. In Baldur's Gate 3, you're barely out of the tutorial area before you get level 2, so you just don't have that problem with low HP.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I think BG3 also does max HP for 5e classws which is higher than the edition(s) used for 1 & 2. Did 1 & 2 use random HP for first level as well?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I don't have an encyclopedic knowledge of 2e, but I think first level HP might be set in stone by class, and the Enhanced Editions of BG1 and 2 give you a max HP per level option, which doesn't really help at level 1. Dynaheir keeps getting smoked with her mere 6HP, and she can't get to level 2 fast enough.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago

Yeah, 2nd edition d&d was far, far more brutal than 5e.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

If you’re revisiting BG1 via the Enhanced Edition it’s actually been changed a lot from the original game. One of the biggest differences is that summoning spells don’t scale in the number of minions you get the way they did in the original. I remember summoning great big walls of skeletons with Animate Dead and just having my entire party pelt the enemy with slings and arrows from relative safety. Can’t do that anymore!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago

Pelting the enemy with slings and arrows still works, but now and then they'll still target me at range and land a hit. I don't have a summoner in my party either, so I doubt I'd see a difference, especially at level 1.

load more comments (13 replies)