Joke's on you, many of us DMs come to the table with our drinking problems pre-installed.

The only mainstream game that comes close to the level of interaction in TTRPGs is Divinity Original Sin 2 and Baldur's Gate 3. I will forever stand by that.

@@utisti4976 Pathfinder Wrath of the Righteous is also kind of open.

Here's the thing, though: you still can't do anything. Every TTRPG has rules and templates for you to use, there's still a structure applied, you don't just sit on the table and start rambling random shit out of your mouth.

DM: "congratulations you saved the ship! The big scary mercenary leader lady comes to give you your reward" A player: "I try to sedate her" Dm: O.o *rolls* "you fail and get shot on the spot by her armed guard" (Thank god my friend group does one-shot sessions, because we don't have to worry about consequences)

I think "do anything" is a bad fit for a sandbox type game, but it's a perfect ideal for an RPG. That's essentially what TTRPG is.

@@amaryllis0 true, and a mechanically strict system with a large database of options also makes me think of noita or terraria

@@amaryllis0 Well except of course in a TTRPG you only get to do whatever the person running the campaign lets you do. It's only 'ideal' if you're dead-set on ruining everyone else's fun to make your own ambitions come true. Which is why the concept of the 1-person Do Anything game is so appealing, it's all the wish fulfillment without all the broken friendships.

'But a game in which the player can do anything is a game that focuses on nothing' - Some video game review guy

​​@@amaryllis0 Wasn't there that comedy skit where one of the "party members" refuses to go stop the lich & save the world and instead was just flirting with a waitress in a tavern. Which just kills the pace for everyone else and dooms them to fail.

Yeah, it's what makes the film special, it's all about finding the one thing that matters to you instead of worrying about what could've been.

I'm so glad they did a theater re-release. My first attempt to watch it on a plane was... unsuccessful.

Okay, glad it wasn’t just me. Love the video and insight, 100%. But I reread that title so many times I thought I was going mad until I finally had full context.

It was a real cool plot twist I think, better than most AAA shit coming out.

When I saw the title, I didn't connect it to "Everything, Everywhere at Once" at all. I assumed Yahtzee was going to take a hypothetical look at what could potentially be happening at an E3 or similar event in the future. A nice "Future of the Industry" video. I'd have liked that, but I love this too!

Man was so amazing he could see into the future and predict the industry

I'll assume you paraphrased that.

“I fear not the man who made 10,000 shitty shitty openworlds. I fear the man who’s made one shitty open world and sold it 10,000 times” - Todd Howard

I don't think that means what you think it means.

Bruce was true gamer.

Yep, idea guys get into this industry and think they can solve problems other people have already solved or don't need to solve.

Ghost Recon: Wildlands was my personal open world fix. That and Warframe but the "structure" in a Warframe open world isn't easy to see until you know the mechanics.

Agreed. The Ubisoft style Jiminy Cockthroat model was fun for a while when it was new, but it quickly got stale. I've finally gotten around to playing the Dishonored games lately, and while not without their flaws, HOLY SHIT was it refreshing to play something well-structured. An insanely fun core gameplay loop, a broadly linear series of levels that individually are fairly open and contain things that actually contribute meaningfully to that core gameplay loop to make them worth exploring, and all layered with (and this was more true of the second game) an actually paced story with a narrative I could follow, background narrative well-conveyed through environment design, and even one or two characters I actually liked. Fucking wild how actually crafting an even marginally refined experience yields a better game than all but a tiny handful of the huge open world sandbox games I've ever played.

I think Minecraft was successful because the survival gameplay gave the game juuust enough structure to feel like an actual game instead of an aimless sandbox. "Build anything" wouldn't be as compelling if there wasn't the threat of monsters.

@@pokemnfan1 Disagree, as there are people who devote themselves to the pursuit of building and design (and sometimes coding,) who never step foot into the survival aspect of the game

There is a reason for "the Dad Game", such as ETS2 or Farming Simulator 22, or Elite Dangerous (solo), etc., there may be an optimal method to complete, but there isn't any real losing game here, just variations of how to continue. They are often open worlds for that reason, and often without structure, because structure can lead easily to a lose scenario.

After watching the video and reading some of the comments here, I think this is probably some sort of dreamer vs. craftsman sorta thing. The dreamer, usually an individual not yet versed in the process of developing games, is all about ambition, all about the potential that evaded all the other games. They're full of ideas, not realizing they haven't taken into account why those games haven't been made yet. Reality hasn't slapped them in the face enough to make them realize they're way over their head. The craftsman, however, has experienced successes and failures, and as such, has a proper idea of what their limits are. They're all about feasibility, scope and planning. These guys may not promise you the moon and the stars, but their ideas have an undeniable tangibility to them, either because it's something they've shown to have done before, or they just know how to explain their stuff without using grandiose language. Writing this, I just remembered watching a comedy skit where multiple executives in a room are talking about impossible projects using impressive words and superlatives in an attempt to flaunt their wealth and vocabulary at each other, meanwhile the only actual expert in the room is panicking and declining the propositions as he's trying to reel them all back in. I think kickstarter hype is a lot like that.

I agree that most groups won’t be able to form. It usually takes a very dedicated DM to bring new players up to speed, and then keep them engaged with concepts that interest them.

If the stars do align though, it's pretty great. DMing can be stressful and difficult sometimes, but once I started running games, I never wanted to go back to being a player. Really, it's kind of hard to believe that DM is usually the job that's hard to fill. But regardless, the right combination of players is indeed absolutely vital, and on that note I'm definitely glad I somehow stumbled into a group in sync with the adventures I wanted to create. The right players for the DM are just as important as the right DM for the players.

also doesn't help for playing solo.

with a touch of Callum Upton

Anyone who likes JSH might enjoy WickedWiz too.

KiraTV

@@chocohex5395 and KiraTV

that’s a pretty great comparison. every time a new game comes out promising you can “do anything”, it’s like a new relationship. the possibilities are endless. the healthy people eventually recognize that feeling as infatuation and settle into what is rather than what could be. the unhealthy ones jump hopelessly from paramour to paramour, never realizing that anyone can be anything, but everyone has to be something eventually.

That's an incredibly stupid analogy, which makes me think you do buy into the hype for these games.

@@TaeyxBlack The thing is, we can enjoy these games that try to be everything for everyone all the time, but we don't form good long-term relationships with these games. Those fires burn hot and die fast, and if that's what you want then great. We only form long-lasting relationships for games, and people, that have distinct personalities and present themselves as possessing a genuine and authentic character. People can look past appearances if character is being displayed.

@@CJusticeHappen21 yea and authentic character is hard to come by when it's "design by committee". the fruits of those sorts of organizations are often more timid. they give you the blank sheet because to actually give an opinion or perspective puts you in the vulnerable position of not having that perspective being validated or liked (read: the customers don't buy your product).

@@TaeyxBlack Same with people. If you base your personality off of what a lot of people say is good, then you'll appeal to a lot of folks but you won't engage with them personally.

Been there many times. Also happens a lot when it comes to animation, everyone wants to be a writer, never the animator.

And divinity original sin 2 with its GM mode

And... life.

@@draketheduelist life is too pay to win for most gamers desires of instant gratification

Small issue with them: you have to talk to other people to do it

The other issue, as an often DM, is that it takes an incredible amount of effort to create from scratch. Turns out anticipating ‘everything’ is very hard for a single person to do, even in the theatre of the mind, let alone with the need to actually build, design and animate a thing.

These days I get my groceries mostly by making a list on an app that employees fill in-store, then drive over and have them load my car. The ability to virtually shop in a grocery store might be appealing if it were the only alternative to shopping in person.

You can beat Scribblenauts by summoning Cthulhu at almost every single challenge.

Is that why people still buy jimminy cockthroat games?

It's a poison with addictive qualities. It feels good to be excited about something.

@@rahcollier7006 and hurts twice as much to be disappointed

@@rahcollier7006 “Hype is just one letter off from hope”

it's hype or existential dread pick your poison

⁠@@horstherbert35that’s a false dichotomy. What about cautious optimism? Or my go to, indifference. If something’s genuinely good, then it’ll still be talked about and praised even years later. Combine that with all the shit major game publishers pull, and there’s literally no benefit to buying games when they’re brand new other than FOMO, which I don’t care about. Exercising even just a little patience can let you see a game’s actual quality, while buying something brand new is just an unnecessary gamble that could go either way.

You can interact with it however you want, provided what you want is to either whack something with a stick or run away from said thing.

I love VR but there is no way what Facebook wants will ever be popular. Vr is only used for gaming and certain jobs and that’s probably all it will be used for

I mean, some version of it may, but there's a reason all the reasonably successful immersive 3D worlds (vr or otherwise) have been games, and not real world simulations. You need a reason for that VR world to exist, and for you to engage with it, and standing around talking, having a meeting, or shopping are not things you need a VR world for. You can do all those things far easier in RL, or other digital formats. Fighting dragons however, is much more their speed.

The funniest part of Ready Player One to me is how, with all the cameos on it, the ones that show up all across the film are characters from Battleborn and the game was dead before the film even came out.

The problem is someone other than Mojang/Microsoft wants to make the same amount of money.

Also Roblox

still not exactly do anything. Main gameplay loops built in the game are mining, crafting, building, exploring, and fighting. Those are the gameplay loops, and they are intertwined pretty well. There are no bloated "manage a kingdom" or "marry a villager" mechanics "do anything" games seem to love showing off. Mods and your imagination don't count.

Can you move to Israel and set up a bus network for penguins in Minecraft?

@@CornishCreamtea07 regards will say "of course we can, with mods", which misses the point of the video

And if any movie deserved that title it's that one. On your first watch, you could reasonably expect anything to happen

@SloppyDetective why don't you just watch it instead of depending on people on the internet to tell you what to think of it then?

Not really that great

​@SloppyDetective Never said I was a fan. Just find it strange you're giving your opinion without watching it.

@SloppyDetective If your bar for Rick and Morty style fans is "Telling you to watch a thing before judging it" you're gonna find them everywhere.

Absolutely. Another problem of the "generic" system is that, once you find a couple you like, that's kind of it. You just use those and don't need more. FATE or Cypher or Savage Worlds could run pretty much anything I'd ever need a generic system to run, so why would I want another one? Make something specific instead!

I was around when it came out, and it was overhyped to hell and back. And that's the problem. When something fails to live up to expectations, especially the expectations the developers themselves set for the masses to hype over, then any game that falls short of it is going to be heavily bashed. I don't even remember what we were expecting, and i never ended up playing it, but even now, hearing the title makes me winge.

Of course, being an outsider of the promises will do that. That said, all those ideas and cut content we eventually see from Spore archives really hurt. It was going to be real complex before it got simplified to heck. Especially since we pretty much lost the fish stage which should had added one of the many aspects to the game/life loop we didn't get in the end. And I did enjoy the game even post hype, but I do know somethings feels missing.

Spore was the first and only time I ever pre-ordered a game. The marketing and articles written about that game made it seem like some grand simulation of life and the universe itself. Once everyone and myself got my hands on it, it became immediately clear that it was just 5 different okay games taped together with a (admittedly really good) character creator. Also the last "game" of the 5 was the worst but also took up 90% of your playtime.

So was Fable tbh, it was an okay game for 2003 if you're a kid with no expectations (like me). Hell, it completely blew my socks off when I first played it at like 8 years old: "you mean I can equip these boots? And they show up on my character mid-game?? Woahh"

Yeah, that's what hype will do for you. I made it a point to not expose myself to anything Cyberpunk '77 related before it came out and as a result I came away from the game underwhelmed but satisfied. Was quite a surreal feeling when I then watched a video detailing all the cut content and broken promises. Perspective truly is a magical thing.

if AI game development is anything like AI art, AI games will consist of shoddily written Dark Souls clones full of racial slurs and characters with fucked up eyes and hands. which for some will be the perfect game, but regardless.

@@boarfaceswinejaw4516 I feel like you haven't looked at AI art recently. It's gotten vastly better in just a few months. If it progresses like it has been, AI art will be the new norm. AI game development will follow a similar path. No doubt it will take longer, but it can progress all the same.

@@orbbb24 "AI art will be the new norm" just like NFTs.

@@boarfaceswinejaw4516 GJ intentionally dropping the important part of my sentence and intentionally misquoting me. Let's try again. "If it progresses like it has been, AI art will be the new norm." Doesn't sound so silly with full context. Go bag ice.

@@orbbb24 joy. I love soulless creations that are products of taking other peoples work without permission. I love the risk that artists will become increasingly obsolete because people think a machine can do the job just as well as an actual person.

Sat bomb Chico ALWAYS SAT BOMB CHICO

@@williamwhitehouse8741 Ain't that the truth.

That's human nature though, no? Humans crave novelty. Nothing lasts forever and it would be silly to pretend otherwise. A game doesn't need to last thousands of hours to be a satisfying experience.

Out comes elden ring with avg player clocking 200+hrs. You can see why ER's success pissed off so many devs. Having a core engaging loop is still the most important thing. Recent successful games like hi fi rush ovef open world blockbusters like Harry Potter proves the point

Even EVE knows its limits though - despite the cool player-driven economy it's still one based around a fairly constrained number of interlocking systems (the aforementioned mine, trade, build, fight, etc). Turns out you can get a lot of complexity from that! But it still took a fairly large team of experienced developers a long time to accomplish. Also, the impressively functional player-driven economy is very impressive and interesting, but it comes at a very obvious cost to the core gameplay loops, which are much less fun (subjectively, according to most) than games which don't have to care about balancing an intricate economy on top of 'is this part fun?'. The game is mainly worth playing for people who find economics and diplomacy fun in themselves - people who just want to mine and build are better off playing minecraft.

Hell I think games like team fortress 2 is a FPS version of "Do anything" with the mods and communities.

yes and there's a reason why eve online's playerbase is almost exclusively american gen X whales with more money than braincells

Except you can only truly do anything _inside_ of the game's boundaries. That's what Yahtzee meant with the fundamental misunderstanding bit, from what I could tell. There are no games where you can truly do anything (start a bus service in isreal for penguins) because that's not how games work.

Seems he warmed up on Celeste

Pretty odd, since that game wasn't that good

@@jimmyjohnjoejr To each his own.

Isn't that game mostly used for sex rp

@@sgtmarcusharris4260 "Now"? Like I said, basically a recreation of the internet.