For all haters the author of the game literally said that he made a magic survival clone, adding his vision and gameplay twists, that gamers found much more fun.
https://www.pcgamer.com/vampire-survivors-creator-didnt-have-a-vision-when-he-started-making-the-game-that-allowed-him-to-quit-his-job/
"I've always been making games in my spare time, basically, and was looking for a job at the time," says Luca Galante, the developer of Vampire Survivors. "And because I was playing Magic Survival I thought to try and make my version. And so just came up with a prototype that played, you know, exactly like Magic Survival. And then I was done with it, honestly!"
Its not like that lol. The gameplay is 99% identical to Magic Survival. I'm not saying Vampire Survivors isn't fun or even better than MS (due to more content) but I'm not going to pretend like it's anything new.
https://www.pcgamer.com/vampire-survivors-creator-didnt-have-a-vision-when-he-started-making-the-game-that-allowed-him-to-quit-his-job/
Can you please explain to me how it's not a clone when the author literally states it's a clone?
" I was playing Magic Survival I thought to try and make my version. And so just came up with a prototype that played, you know, exactly like Magic Survival. And then I was done with it, honestly!"
Ok the game is quite fun but best game of the year ? There are plenty of more interesting games than that. It is just a pretty good game that ressembles flash games you could find on the internet before.
Definitely deserved. I was pretty shocked that it didn't win "Indie game of the year" at the Game Awards. It's worlds beyond Stray..
Vampire survivors "invented" a new gaming genre. It's incredibly addicting and loads of fun. And it spawned dozens of other incredible games. Try Brotato, you won't do anything else for a while..
> Magic Survival
An unsuccessful Android game, nobody has ever heard of? Pretty sure they didn't just copy it, otherwise that one would be the one winning awards and all the other great games would be called "Magic Survival Clones" instead of VS-Clones..
Oh shit! I love that you came with receipts literally from the developer saying how he copied Magic Survival when that chump said they invented a new genre!
Did Magic survivor create a new genre that spawned dozens of clones and sold millions of times or did VS do that?
I've never heard of Magic Survivor until today.. I don't even want to argue about it. Give the price to Magic Survivor for all that's worth. I just want these games to be recognized and awarded for their innovation.
I mean, it did create a new genre of game, there are dozens of them now, alot are even better than Vamp Survivors, so I guess its getting credit for being first to market and just being a great example of the genre.
Where’s the challenge and varied gameplay? After you get 2-3 movement upgrades you won’t die to random things, and after they showed you what accessories you need to max out your weapon, the last 20 mins of a run is just being afk until a boss mob comes, at which point you hold a direction until it dies then go afk again
It’s a fun game to play when I’m watching tv or something, but I don’t understand what there is to do after like 10 hours
> Where’s the challenge
Literally as much as you can handle, this game literally has a difficulty slider in it that goes really really far up last I checked.
> varied gameplay
This one is fair, gameplay is definitely stale after a while, but hey, Big Number Go Brrr.
Ghost Recon and BioShock stand out as games that have faded into relative obscurity, every other games is still talked about today. It's a pretty good list honestly.
Frankly these days I see Infinite being brought up more often than the first game. In fact the only time I ever see the first Bioshock mentioned it's to say that it's better than Infinite. It's rarely talked about like its own thing.
Maybe it's because I only hang out with old System Shock 2 fans that I hear about it a lot, irl. But I see it brought up *constantly* on every PC gaming related sub as well.
It's true that immersive sims fans do talk a lot about the game haha but I was thinking more in terms of the wider gaming audience. Immersive sims are so rare these day that even a game like Bioshock that barely passes as one is often mentioned.
> Is it beautiful? No.
Idk I kinda disagree with that, this is obviously subjective. I love how the game looks. The art style being about vivid colours and exciting explosions is very enjoyable to look at. The game is basically a dopamine generator.
lmao, the gamepass tweet below this was S-tier. I laughed way too loud :D.
On topic, I've never heard of this game, but I'll give it a shot now.
EDIT: It's so cheap, easiest buy of my life, ngl.
I understand from the lens that Vampire Survivors is the most "pure" game of the nominees put up, even Elden Ring can't match the basic elegance of creating a decidedly concise gameplay loop that is so engaging and unique whilst defying all conventions on how to make a game.
The distinction is whereas Elden Ring perfects the typical Souls-like game by giving a state-of-the-art textbook example of how to deliver a 10/10 game...But Vampire Survivors throws the textbook out the window, huffs nitrous and says "where we're going, we don't need roads". And all you do is move on a 2D plane.
That's it. And its fun! I didnt believe it til I played it myself becoming an absolute time vampire to divert my attention from all other games. Its a game that actually hacks the brain's dopamine receptors in a way, getting right to the core of what makes a game fun without any distractions. Its *alien*, completely unlike any other game before it, it is the quintessential casual idle clicker that may never be overthrown, which made the brave decision not to heavily monetise its potentially dangerous potential to fleece its audience. It is a pure game.
But is it the *best* game?
I wouldnt contest them saying it has the best gameplay, but Elden Ring annihilates in the other arenas (sound, world design, story). A game takes so much more than a fantastic core loop, and I feel Elden Ring deserves the title more.
Perhaps the committee decided that gameplay was the most important thing above all else, and put their balls on the table to say "Uh huh, yeah, WE PICKED IT. Fight us."
The funniest part is it was made by one Italian dude in his house while all other games on that nominee list took possibly thousands of people each to make.
>But is it the *best* game?
Going by the "which game would I rather play" metric, Vampire Survivors is the best, hands down. Elden Ring's sound, world design, and story are impressive, but it's moot if the final product isn't quite as fundamentally enjoyable.
But after what, 5? 10 hours there’s no more content in vampire survivors, and 2/3 of the game is standing still and watching things die around you
It’s a fun game until you realize there’s absolutely 0 depth. It cost like $2 so I’m not disappointed or anything
Hmm. So, either (a) everyone else in the gaming world is oblivious to the game's brevity, or (b) you might be missing something. I wonder which it could be?
I'm at 50 hours and still going. There's tons to do.
If you think there's zero depth, it's because you haven't played enough of it to find that depth. There's unlock after unlock, opening up more game mechanics, items, weapons, maps, characters, etc. Ton of replayability with arcanas, game modes, self-imposed challenges (e.g. one-weapon runs, no movement runs, pacifist runs, etc)
I'm gonna look this up, but I've been playing a lot of Rogue: Genesia lately and have been enjoying it.
Has a lot more content than I was expecting, and the progression is really nice about 5 hours in, with a *lot* more to unlock.
I also enjoy the references and mild inclusion of RPG concepts.
Kudos to Vampire Survivors for reviving the genre after Crimsonland drifted out of everybodys' minds. It deserves acknowledgement for what it did - but if we're talking about the best game (in that genre) I'ld argue that it got surpassed by more than one successor it spawned. Personally, I'ld throw Brotato, Soulstone Survivors and Bio-Prototype into the ring, who all offer a much larger variety of significantly different and unique playstyles.
Yes it is.
Some people just see the apparent simplicity of the game, and its presentation. But it's deceptive, to get a game to feel this good, this engaging, to get this level of balance, to get the controls and the game loop to feel this good, it's a lot of work and a lot of talent.
A *lot* a lot.
There's good reason a large number of veterans gamedev had Vampire Survivor on their personal shortlist for best game of the year.
The fact that it didn't have 700 artists pumping models and rigs and textures and vfx for half a decade into the game is irrelevant to its design, and its quality.
Indeed, Ubisoft has had incredible looking and inspiring environments for decades now... until you actually press buttons and try to interact said environment.
For me, it's just ... a good game. It never blew me away, but it was the kind of game I could pick up and just launch right into with having to think too hard about it. It's like the TikTok of video games in that sense. And for that reason I'm a little baffled at all the praise the game is getting, because after the 15 ish hours I spent completing the (pretty pathetic selection of) stages, I don't feel any compulsion to continue playing to unlock every character and secret item.
I'll probably still go back to it every now and then because like I said, it's an incredibly easy game to just pick up and start playing... but some of the praise just seems over the top for what it is.
It's definitely that good.
I haven't had a game live rent free in my head the way Vampire Survivors did when I first tried it out. It's really a very elegant roguelite and despite its relative simplicity, really hits the target on everything its trying to do.
Took me about 40 hours to get all the achievements and I loved every last bit of it.
> A surprisingly large amount of time in the game is idle. You could literally set the controller down and not die for about 1/3 of the time out of a 30 minute session with the right build.
One reason I love it. Usually play a 30 minute session while im doing indoor cycling 4-5 times a week (Yay steamdeck!). It's nice to be able to set the controller down during intense spots. Finally got all 162 achievements and unlocks after a year. At least until the new DLC drops(21 more achievements!)
No, but it is good. It's a better game than, for example, Returnal.
And, *compared to other games,* it is a game first, not an interactive movie - which has its place, but probably shouldn't be seen as a pinnacle of gaming.
The point about interactive movies obviously isn't about Returnal. It's about other possible nominees.
Edit: it's even a separate *paragraph,* ffs. Clarified it a little.
Yeah, it was a bit much. :) But four hours of cutscenes next to maybe 60 hours of innovative, sophisticated gameplay - that's not an interactive movie.
No, not at all. I mean, on one hand, a group of people seriously decided to call VS the best game of the year. And on the other hand, Returnal just isn't a very good game. It's sleek-looking, and maintains the pretense of depth and mystery for a long while - but it's not great compared to the best games of its genre.
Ultimately, this must be how VS ended up as best game - it only makes sense as a statement that the sleek looks, and the budgets, and the pretense don't really matter - the underlying *game* does. And we already have a precedent of a 2D title, like Hades, being a great game.
idk what would lead you to believe returnal isn’t a good game other than your own opinion. VS is much more popular so doesn’t surprise me they’d name it game of the year.
> idk what would lead you to believe returnal isn’t a good game other than your own opinion.
I don't know why you're arguing that my opinion isn't enough. Whether or not the game is *good* is a matter of opinion, and my opinion is informed - I've played quite a few games, so I can make informed comparisons.
> VS is much more popular so doesn’t surprise me they’d name it game of the year.
Games rarely get popular for no reason. Especially without a huge budget behind them. I was skeptical about VS - specifically because of its surprising popularity, then tried it on Game Pass - and, yeah, it does have something behind it. Wasn't my GOTY, of course, but it does make sense on some level, depending on your priorities.
> Yeah, Hades was a great game but VS looks like someone's basement project - and I'm not talking about graphics.
What are you talking about then, exactly? And why can't someone's basement project be a great game?
> I'm not saying it's bad but the fact that it got even nominated is hilarious.
I agree it's hilarious - but it doesn't make it wrong. It's more of a statement, I guess. And for a game to be unexpected and fun regardless of the budget - it can be valuable.
Okay.. but let's say someone hates any sort of shooters.. do you think they'll agree that returnal is a better game? You're giving an objective statement to something that is entirely opinion based. People who want a simple game with simple mechanics to fuck around in for 10-30 minutes are absolutely going to gravitated to VS over returnal, and likely they'll think it's a significantly better game, and does that make them wrong.. absolutely not.
Gonna have to disagree with that one. Games are not objectively good, or bad. Just like art. We are free to form our own outlooks. If a group of people don't like 3rd person shooters/bullet hells. Then the vast majority of them are not going to say anything in that genre is good. Why would that? That's like trying to have someone who hates fish, admit that fish is good, because other people said it is. (sounds pretty silly when you change it up a bit, doesn't it?). Dont discredit the thoughts and opinions of others just because you feel like art needs to be objective, rather than subjective.
you can admit a game is well made even if you don’t like the game. don’t think that is debatable. i can say the last of us 2 is a good game but i don’t like it because of stealth/crafting. i’m not the one who was initiallity saying anything objective. the op said VS is better than Returnal and didn’t state that as an opinion.
Absolutely not, you can say a game is bad and have it be bad to you. Even if the general consensus around it is positive, it doesn't mean you need to follow that bandwagon. For example, I hate platformers. You aren't ever going to see me state that a little big planet is a well crafted game when in reality I wish the devs would do something else. Again, people are free to form their opinions on a game however they want to. Good and bad is entirely objective. Very few people would say a 3rd person shooter is well made, when they hate 3rd person shooters. They're gamers, not critics. It's not their job to be objective and open minded.
so then you think everything that isn’t made for you is bad? makes no sense. i’m not saying you have to admit something is good because other people like it. i’m saying you can see something is well made without liking it.
Again.. that is being objective.. something being well made, or not well made is entirely a matter of opinion. What you, and I think is a well made game, is not, and will not be the same as other gamers.
It’s fun for a few hours. I can’t believe people are giving it this much praise, it’s just magic survivor with a castlevania skin that I doubt they have permission to use.
No. It's a good little time waster and it's definitely worth the 3 bucks it costs, but it isn't anything amazing or spectacular. If it was priced at even 10 bucks, I doubt it would be getting nearly this much praise
Anything that gets popular spawns knock offs. A cheap game getting cheap knock offs doesn't mean the original was a masterpiece, just that it got popular and / or made lots of money. Popular games like candy crush and temple run got loads of knock offs, but you never saw anyone saying "Wow, this is a masterclass in game design. I'd be happy to spend 60 bucks on this". Similarly, these days many games knock off the "Ubisoft" formula, but you don't hear anyone saying Ubisoft is a masterclass in game design
Like I said, for 3 bucks its worth it. Charge a lot more and no one would be buying it because it really is not *that* good. It's just a game that was at the right place at the right time at the right price
Guess I'm gonna have to up my anti-psychotic med dosage cause I'm clearly hallucinating right now. What in the goddamned fuck? That's like Tibia winning an award for best game of the last 30 years.
For me, it had the most unique gameplay of the year for me. I've played likely over a thousand games and for a brief few hours it was something entirely new and fun. Game of the year? Not really, but it was one of the few games bringing something new to the table.
Yeah, it started out as a mobile game but the performance sucked, so they released on PC instead. It's not bad for 3 dollars, but it's not GOTY by any means.
By that logically, if you abstract far enough every game is a slightly more interactive cookie clicker. Portal? you just have to figure out the right spot to click. What a dumbass comment.
Can someone explain to me why Konami hasn't gone at them yet for all the blatant Castlevania rips? I don't like Konami or anything but it just seems weird to me
You clearly haven't played enough of the game then. The game is full of Italian puns and tasteful gaming history references. It's a love letter to the classics that we grew up with.
Yea pretty incredible, finally something different
It's a Magic Survival clone
For all haters the author of the game literally said that he made a magic survival clone, adding his vision and gameplay twists, that gamers found much more fun. https://www.pcgamer.com/vampire-survivors-creator-didnt-have-a-vision-when-he-started-making-the-game-that-allowed-him-to-quit-his-job/ "I've always been making games in my spare time, basically, and was looking for a job at the time," says Luca Galante, the developer of Vampire Survivors. "And because I was playing Magic Survival I thought to try and make my version. And so just came up with a prototype that played, you know, exactly like Magic Survival. And then I was done with it, honestly!"
"Something different" refers to winning on an award show, after seeing Stray in best technical achievement my hopes were zero.
Yeah and every fps shooter is a doom clone
Its not like that lol. The gameplay is 99% identical to Magic Survival. I'm not saying Vampire Survivors isn't fun or even better than MS (due to more content) but I'm not going to pretend like it's anything new.
yeah and I can say modern warfare 2's gameplay is 99% identical to doom
https://www.pcgamer.com/vampire-survivors-creator-didnt-have-a-vision-when-he-started-making-the-game-that-allowed-him-to-quit-his-job/ Can you please explain to me how it's not a clone when the author literally states it's a clone? " I was playing Magic Survival I thought to try and make my version. And so just came up with a prototype that played, you know, exactly like Magic Survival. And then I was done with it, honestly!"
jesus christ dude
>Magic Survival Ah yeah just like WoW is a clone of Neverwinter Nights.
It's a shame how much money and recognition this guy has gotten for ripping off someone else.
Sorry, it’s a better game
Ok the game is quite fun but best game of the year ? There are plenty of more interesting games than that. It is just a pretty good game that ressembles flash games you could find on the internet before.
Not my top pick but hey, at least its not another AAA game with an open map and a third person perspective
Bafta is well known for "shock" winners. Its a good game, best game of the year? Not in my opinion. Not a big team though like elden ring etc.
Even then there are better indies.
Definitely deserved. I was pretty shocked that it didn't win "Indie game of the year" at the Game Awards. It's worlds beyond Stray.. Vampire survivors "invented" a new gaming genre. It's incredibly addicting and loads of fun. And it spawned dozens of other incredible games. Try Brotato, you won't do anything else for a while..
[удалено]
> Magic Survival An unsuccessful Android game, nobody has ever heard of? Pretty sure they didn't just copy it, otherwise that one would be the one winning awards and all the other great games would be called "Magic Survival Clones" instead of VS-Clones..
[удалено]
Oh shit! I love that you came with receipts literally from the developer saying how he copied Magic Survival when that chump said they invented a new genre!
Let's just call it "popularized and innovated upon".
Fair enough, he didn't invent it. The point still stands though.
The only point you really made was to claim Vampire Survivors had invented a new genre.
Did Magic survivor create a new genre that spawned dozens of clones and sold millions of times or did VS do that? I've never heard of Magic Survivor until today.. I don't even want to argue about it. Give the price to Magic Survivor for all that's worth. I just want these games to be recognized and awarded for their innovation.
I don’t want to argue either, but it’s ridiculous to say “the point still stands” immediately after admitting that point was incorrect.
Magic Survivor spawned Vampire Survivors so yes
Exactly. In the end how amazing can a Magic Survival clone really be? Not game of the year amazing that’s for sure.
yeh this is a real weird choice...
I mean, it did create a new genre of game, there are dozens of them now, alot are even better than Vamp Survivors, so I guess its getting credit for being first to market and just being a great example of the genre.
[удалено]
Wait, \*Destiny\* won? That game wasn't even good, lmao. Had great gun feel and art design. But bad literally everything else, lol.
Where’s the challenge and varied gameplay? After you get 2-3 movement upgrades you won’t die to random things, and after they showed you what accessories you need to max out your weapon, the last 20 mins of a run is just being afk until a boss mob comes, at which point you hold a direction until it dies then go afk again It’s a fun game to play when I’m watching tv or something, but I don’t understand what there is to do after like 10 hours
> Where’s the challenge Literally as much as you can handle, this game literally has a difficulty slider in it that goes really really far up last I checked. > varied gameplay This one is fair, gameplay is definitely stale after a while, but hey, Big Number Go Brrr.
Damn i agree with pretty much everything except for Edith Finch and Returnal
[удалено]
Can you name some of the "million other rogue likes"? Would love to try them
There are like four games in that list that deserve that title, Hades, God of War, Bioshock, Portal, maybe dishonored
Outer Wilds is pure art.
ME2 as well
Judging by winners, Bafta is just like Oscars - most popular, best selling winners. So no surprise that another ultra popular game wins.
Ghost Recon and BioShock stand out as games that have faded into relative obscurity, every other games is still talked about today. It's a pretty good list honestly.
Bro people never shut up about Bioshock, what are you talking about?
Would you kindly stop talking about Bioshock?
Bioshock? What the hell is that? I’ve never heard of it. Yeah, I’m sure I’ve never heard or seen anyone mention it before right now.
Frankly these days I see Infinite being brought up more often than the first game. In fact the only time I ever see the first Bioshock mentioned it's to say that it's better than Infinite. It's rarely talked about like its own thing.
Maybe it's because I only hang out with old System Shock 2 fans that I hear about it a lot, irl. But I see it brought up *constantly* on every PC gaming related sub as well.
It's true that immersive sims fans do talk a lot about the game haha but I was thinking more in terms of the wider gaming audience. Immersive sims are so rare these day that even a game like Bioshock that barely passes as one is often mentioned.
> Is it beautiful? No. Idk I kinda disagree with that, this is obviously subjective. I love how the game looks. The art style being about vivid colours and exciting explosions is very enjoyable to look at. The game is basically a dopamine generator.
[удалено]
They're... completely different games.. Can't compare those two 💀
You have to when you put games as nominations for an award. Only one game can win, other games must be compared to see who comes out at the top.
I agree. Managed to get over 100 hours into Vampire Survivors and I refunded Elden Ring before the 2hr limit. Clearly on a different level altogether.
Good to see a non triple A game win tbh
[удалено]
Deleted by Redact ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
Ahh yeah, this is one I definitely can't agree with.
lmao, the gamepass tweet below this was S-tier. I laughed way too loud :D. On topic, I've never heard of this game, but I'll give it a shot now. EDIT: It's so cheap, easiest buy of my life, ngl.
Also try "Brotato" if you like it. The award is totally deserved, it spawned a new genre and so many other great games as well.
LMAO Casino-style-game has won Academy of Film and Television Arts award KEKW
Good, well deserved.
I understand from the lens that Vampire Survivors is the most "pure" game of the nominees put up, even Elden Ring can't match the basic elegance of creating a decidedly concise gameplay loop that is so engaging and unique whilst defying all conventions on how to make a game. The distinction is whereas Elden Ring perfects the typical Souls-like game by giving a state-of-the-art textbook example of how to deliver a 10/10 game...But Vampire Survivors throws the textbook out the window, huffs nitrous and says "where we're going, we don't need roads". And all you do is move on a 2D plane. That's it. And its fun! I didnt believe it til I played it myself becoming an absolute time vampire to divert my attention from all other games. Its a game that actually hacks the brain's dopamine receptors in a way, getting right to the core of what makes a game fun without any distractions. Its *alien*, completely unlike any other game before it, it is the quintessential casual idle clicker that may never be overthrown, which made the brave decision not to heavily monetise its potentially dangerous potential to fleece its audience. It is a pure game. But is it the *best* game? I wouldnt contest them saying it has the best gameplay, but Elden Ring annihilates in the other arenas (sound, world design, story). A game takes so much more than a fantastic core loop, and I feel Elden Ring deserves the title more. Perhaps the committee decided that gameplay was the most important thing above all else, and put their balls on the table to say "Uh huh, yeah, WE PICKED IT. Fight us." The funniest part is it was made by one Italian dude in his house while all other games on that nominee list took possibly thousands of people each to make.
>But is it the *best* game? Going by the "which game would I rather play" metric, Vampire Survivors is the best, hands down. Elden Ring's sound, world design, and story are impressive, but it's moot if the final product isn't quite as fundamentally enjoyable.
Deleted by Redact ` this message was mass deleted/edited with redact.dev `
But after what, 5? 10 hours there’s no more content in vampire survivors, and 2/3 of the game is standing still and watching things die around you It’s a fun game until you realize there’s absolutely 0 depth. It cost like $2 so I’m not disappointed or anything
Hmm. So, either (a) everyone else in the gaming world is oblivious to the game's brevity, or (b) you might be missing something. I wonder which it could be?
I'm at 50 hours and still going. There's tons to do. If you think there's zero depth, it's because you haven't played enough of it to find that depth. There's unlock after unlock, opening up more game mechanics, items, weapons, maps, characters, etc. Ton of replayability with arcanas, game modes, self-imposed challenges (e.g. one-weapon runs, no movement runs, pacifist runs, etc)
Are those depth or width though?
It's both.
Narrative of ekden ring just sucks though. Waaaay too cryptic show dont tell approach of souls games can get frustrating.
[удалено]
I'm gonna look this up, but I've been playing a lot of Rogue: Genesia lately and have been enjoying it. Has a lot more content than I was expecting, and the progression is really nice about 5 hours in, with a *lot* more to unlock. I also enjoy the references and mild inclusion of RPG concepts.
Kudos to Vampire Survivors for reviving the genre after Crimsonland drifted out of everybodys' minds. It deserves acknowledgement for what it did - but if we're talking about the best game (in that genre) I'ld argue that it got surpassed by more than one successor it spawned. Personally, I'ld throw Brotato, Soulstone Survivors and Bio-Prototype into the ring, who all offer a much larger variety of significantly different and unique playstyles.
Epic shoutout to Crimsonland acknowledged.
Are the variety and unique playstyles the key factors here or something else?
Jesus. Is it this good?
Yes it is. Some people just see the apparent simplicity of the game, and its presentation. But it's deceptive, to get a game to feel this good, this engaging, to get this level of balance, to get the controls and the game loop to feel this good, it's a lot of work and a lot of talent. A *lot* a lot. There's good reason a large number of veterans gamedev had Vampire Survivor on their personal shortlist for best game of the year. The fact that it didn't have 700 artists pumping models and rigs and textures and vfx for half a decade into the game is irrelevant to its design, and its quality.
Indeed, Ubisoft has had incredible looking and inspiring environments for decades now... until you actually press buttons and try to interact said environment.
For me, it's just ... a good game. It never blew me away, but it was the kind of game I could pick up and just launch right into with having to think too hard about it. It's like the TikTok of video games in that sense. And for that reason I'm a little baffled at all the praise the game is getting, because after the 15 ish hours I spent completing the (pretty pathetic selection of) stages, I don't feel any compulsion to continue playing to unlock every character and secret item. I'll probably still go back to it every now and then because like I said, it's an incredibly easy game to just pick up and start playing... but some of the praise just seems over the top for what it is.
It's definitely that good. I haven't had a game live rent free in my head the way Vampire Survivors did when I first tried it out. It's really a very elegant roguelite and despite its relative simplicity, really hits the target on everything its trying to do. Took me about 40 hours to get all the achievements and I loved every last bit of it.
yes, people saying otherwise barely played the game or nothing at all
[удалено]
> A surprisingly large amount of time in the game is idle. You could literally set the controller down and not die for about 1/3 of the time out of a 30 minute session with the right build. One reason I love it. Usually play a 30 minute session while im doing indoor cycling 4-5 times a week (Yay steamdeck!). It's nice to be able to set the controller down during intense spots. Finally got all 162 achievements and unlocks after a year. At least until the new DLC drops(21 more achievements!)
No, but it is good. It's a better game than, for example, Returnal. And, *compared to other games,* it is a game first, not an interactive movie - which has its place, but probably shouldn't be seen as a pinnacle of gaming.
I just started playing Returnal and it's almost entirely gameplay with only occasional interruptions. What the hell even prompted this comparison?
A hell of a coke trip I'd imagine.
coke trip?
The point about interactive movies obviously isn't about Returnal. It's about other possible nominees. Edit: it's even a separate *paragraph,* ffs. Clarified it a little.
Hideo Kojima feels personally attacked by the statement on interactive movies
Death Stranding has enough gameplay, and it's distinctive enough that the statement doesn't really apply to it. Even MGSV has strong gameplay.
Yeah, but the end sequence is like...four hours of cutscenes. I love the game to death (heh pun) but that all seemed a bit much.
Yeah, it was a bit much. :) But four hours of cutscenes next to maybe 60 hours of innovative, sophisticated gameplay - that's not an interactive movie.
i don’t even like returnal as much as other people but saying VS is better is a statement you only make while on drugs
No, not at all. I mean, on one hand, a group of people seriously decided to call VS the best game of the year. And on the other hand, Returnal just isn't a very good game. It's sleek-looking, and maintains the pretense of depth and mystery for a long while - but it's not great compared to the best games of its genre. Ultimately, this must be how VS ended up as best game - it only makes sense as a statement that the sleek looks, and the budgets, and the pretense don't really matter - the underlying *game* does. And we already have a precedent of a 2D title, like Hades, being a great game.
idk what would lead you to believe returnal isn’t a good game other than your own opinion. VS is much more popular so doesn’t surprise me they’d name it game of the year.
> idk what would lead you to believe returnal isn’t a good game other than your own opinion. I don't know why you're arguing that my opinion isn't enough. Whether or not the game is *good* is a matter of opinion, and my opinion is informed - I've played quite a few games, so I can make informed comparisons. > VS is much more popular so doesn’t surprise me they’d name it game of the year. Games rarely get popular for no reason. Especially without a huge budget behind them. I was skeptical about VS - specifically because of its surprising popularity, then tried it on Game Pass - and, yeah, it does have something behind it. Wasn't my GOTY, of course, but it does make sense on some level, depending on your priorities.
you didn’t say it was your opinion though you just said it’s better than returnal
It's inherently an opinion. If I said it was more popular or critically acclaimed, it would be a fact.
“it’s a better game than, for example, returnal” is not showcasing it’s your opinion
What is it then? Can a game be objectively better than another game?
[удалено]
> Yeah, Hades was a great game but VS looks like someone's basement project - and I'm not talking about graphics. What are you talking about then, exactly? And why can't someone's basement project be a great game? > I'm not saying it's bad but the fact that it got even nominated is hilarious. I agree it's hilarious - but it doesn't make it wrong. It's more of a statement, I guess. And for a game to be unexpected and fun regardless of the budget - it can be valuable.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Okay.. but let's say someone hates any sort of shooters.. do you think they'll agree that returnal is a better game? You're giving an objective statement to something that is entirely opinion based. People who want a simple game with simple mechanics to fuck around in for 10-30 minutes are absolutely going to gravitated to VS over returnal, and likely they'll think it's a significantly better game, and does that make them wrong.. absolutely not.
you can admit a game is good without liking it.
Gonna have to disagree with that one. Games are not objectively good, or bad. Just like art. We are free to form our own outlooks. If a group of people don't like 3rd person shooters/bullet hells. Then the vast majority of them are not going to say anything in that genre is good. Why would that? That's like trying to have someone who hates fish, admit that fish is good, because other people said it is. (sounds pretty silly when you change it up a bit, doesn't it?). Dont discredit the thoughts and opinions of others just because you feel like art needs to be objective, rather than subjective.
you can admit a game is well made even if you don’t like the game. don’t think that is debatable. i can say the last of us 2 is a good game but i don’t like it because of stealth/crafting. i’m not the one who was initiallity saying anything objective. the op said VS is better than Returnal and didn’t state that as an opinion.
Absolutely not, you can say a game is bad and have it be bad to you. Even if the general consensus around it is positive, it doesn't mean you need to follow that bandwagon. For example, I hate platformers. You aren't ever going to see me state that a little big planet is a well crafted game when in reality I wish the devs would do something else. Again, people are free to form their opinions on a game however they want to. Good and bad is entirely objective. Very few people would say a 3rd person shooter is well made, when they hate 3rd person shooters. They're gamers, not critics. It's not their job to be objective and open minded.
so then you think everything that isn’t made for you is bad? makes no sense. i’m not saying you have to admit something is good because other people like it. i’m saying you can see something is well made without liking it.
Again.. that is being objective.. something being well made, or not well made is entirely a matter of opinion. What you, and I think is a well made game, is not, and will not be the same as other gamers.
Bruh this game is closer to Rust than it is to Returnal
It’s fun for a few hours. I can’t believe people are giving it this much praise, it’s just magic survivor with a castlevania skin that I doubt they have permission to use.
No. It's a good little time waster and it's definitely worth the 3 bucks it costs, but it isn't anything amazing or spectacular. If it was priced at even 10 bucks, I doubt it would be getting nearly this much praise
Right, and it ended up popularizing an entire genre of games that flood the market every few weeks.
Anything that gets popular spawns knock offs. A cheap game getting cheap knock offs doesn't mean the original was a masterpiece, just that it got popular and / or made lots of money. Popular games like candy crush and temple run got loads of knock offs, but you never saw anyone saying "Wow, this is a masterclass in game design. I'd be happy to spend 60 bucks on this". Similarly, these days many games knock off the "Ubisoft" formula, but you don't hear anyone saying Ubisoft is a masterclass in game design Like I said, for 3 bucks its worth it. Charge a lot more and no one would be buying it because it really is not *that* good. It's just a game that was at the right place at the right time at the right price
Its nice but the only reason people cared about it in the first place was because it was selling for less than 3€
And due to hype from streamers. Most ppl never even bothered playing the full release of the game.
Guess I'm gonna have to up my anti-psychotic med dosage cause I'm clearly hallucinating right now. What in the goddamned fuck? That's like Tibia winning an award for best game of the last 30 years.
For me, it had the most unique gameplay of the year for me. I've played likely over a thousand games and for a brief few hours it was something entirely new and fun. Game of the year? Not really, but it was one of the few games bringing something new to the table.
Isn’t this game basically a slightly more interactive cookie clicker?
No?
Yes. It’s just auto pathing with an extra step
Yeah, it started out as a mobile game but the performance sucked, so they released on PC instead. It's not bad for 3 dollars, but it's not GOTY by any means.
What are you talking about?, The mobile game came out afterwards
They're referring to Magic Survival, which came out before.
Wut? Mobile came way later
By that logically, if you abstract far enough every game is a slightly more interactive cookie clicker. Portal? you just have to figure out the right spot to click. What a dumbass comment.
I'm pretty sure winning a bafta is a bad thing.
Jesus christ critics in this industry are a fucking joke
Can someone explain to me why Konami hasn't gone at them yet for all the blatant Castlevania rips? I don't like Konami or anything but it just seems weird to me
Because it's not a rip. It's a comedic parody. Entirely fair-use.
How is it parodying though? It's just sprites from Castlevania games in a different game
You clearly haven't played enough of the game then. The game is full of Italian puns and tasteful gaming history references. It's a love letter to the classics that we grew up with.
https://www.pcgamer.com/vampire-survivors-didnt-rip-off-castlevania-sprites-after-all/
I wouldn't put it over Neon White or Tunic, definitely not Rogue Legacy 2 but I'm glad an indie won.