• 1 Post
  • 177 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 12th, 2023

help-circle










  • scutiger@lemmy.worldtoGaming@lemmy.worldThank me later
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    19 days ago

    And part of the PS2’s success was the built-in DVD player which was cheaper than non-console DVD players at the time. So if you were going to buy a DVD player anyway, you were better off buying a PS2, saving some money and getting a console at the same time.




  • That’s pretty tame, IMO. I feel like Souls bosses like the Leechmonger or the Gaping Dragon, are originally much more grotesque than the changes made to the Vanguard demon. Even the Asylum Demon in Dark Souls is based on the Vanguard demon and seems more unsettling than that.

    I feel like this guy works out at least. It’s the tutorial boss that you’re expected to die to. By the time you meet him, you’ve been playing the game for about 10 minutes, you probably haven’t really got a feel for the controls or how to fight a boss, and he shows up to scare you, and you die to him, most likely in about 5 seconds. The original stony version does the job, and so does this one IMO. You fight another one later on in the game as a slightly-stronger-than-average enemy, but by then you’re equipped to handle him, and it’s a pretty quick battle again.

    I know I’m not someone who cares that strongly about the integrity of the original vision, but I feel like given the 15 years between the original and the remake, even if Fromsoft themselves had remade it, we would probably be seeing similar changes.



  • there were definitely some “enhancements” that didn’t exactly match the authorial intent of the original.

    Like what? I haven’t and probably never will play the remaster, but my understanding was that it was meant to be as close to the original as possible only with nicer graphics. I read that they were even trying to match the timings of combat exactly.




  • I run GrapheneOS, so I can more explicitly set permissions and scopes, but the app won’t run without all the permissions enabled, so I won’t use it.

    The only thing the app can do that the website can’t is deposit checks with a picture, and considering how rarely I use checks, it’s not something I need an app for.


  • I agree. We have mobile web sites for just about everything. Apps should really only be for when the requirements are too complex for a website. Webapps are probably convenient alternative for most apps.

    Hell, I can do my banking on the mobile site, so why do I need to install an app and share my phone’s contacts and precise location? Why does it need to access my phone’s storage and sensors and ability to make calls?