Boring answer, but I play on the PC exclusively. When I’m not playing, I’m usually already using the PC for other stuff, so it’s a faster switch than jumping to some other device. I thought about getting a Steam Deck for a while, but I gravitate so much towards the PC that I think I’d probably put it down after a while.

There’s usually “routine” games I’ll play during the week when I have little time - which are usually games that are unlikely to receive any big updates - and I’ll leave new games to moments when I know I can sit down for a long while without worries.

The PC I use for gaming is practically only a gaming box, though. I don’t tinker with it nearly as much as I used to. And I’ve started using a controller more, when that’s an option.

I’d say yes, not necessarily because of the story ties, but because there’s progression in the gameplay itself. So playing the second one after the first one will feel like an upgrade in gameplay. Whereas if you decide to play this one right now and at the end you’re left wanting for more, going back to the first one might feel like a slight downgrade (even though I love it as well).

I recently played Metro Exodus and I felt like it was a drag at the beginning of the game instead. It was one of the few times in my life in which 1 hour into the game I was so bored I was googling whether the game would eventually get going and become fun. The story “twist” at the beginning felt extremely rushed and out of nowhere and it sort of put me off. But as the game got going I got very into it and I was the one “dragging” it by doing every secondary objective.

I’ve been playing Cities Skylines a lot - got pulled back in with all the talk about the new one - and also Going Under.

Going Under is one of those games I bought a while ago because it seemed fun, played for a bit, got my ass kicked more than what I was used to with roguelites and stopped for a while. I started playing it again recently and think it finally made sense to me. Looking back, I probably wasn’t paying much attention to the game the first time I tried it because I didn’t understand there was an indication for weapon damage on different weapons - which made weapon choice feel random - and I also didn’t understand how the mentor system worked - which is a big part of the strategy of the game. I’ve been having a lot of fun with it now, though.

I tried to play the original System Shock two/three years ago but gave up at a stage that felt very close to the end. I basically had a save at a weird spot, when I was low on ammo and anything else useful, right between two complicated rooms. I reloaded a ton of times and always died trying to go forwards or backwards before giving up.

Anyway, would you recommend System Shock Remaster for someone who likely almost completed the original one, gave up, but still liked it overall? Or is there something shockingly different about the original’s ending I’ll be missing?

I typically only buy games on discount some years after they’ve launched. I’ll sometimes make an exception for indie games that come out which seem like exactly my kind of game. And I made an exception for Battlebit as well - I bought it immediately after I saw the first person playing it because it seemed like ultra fun, and I’ve probably already played more of it than all Battlefield games combined over the years.

Maybe I’m just following the wrong communities, but every time a new AAA game has a horrible launch I see the same discourse over and over of how gaming isn’t what it used to be, all games suck nowadays, etc etc.

My true hot take is that despite all the moaning in gaming communities about the death of gaming, we’re in pretty much the golden age of gaming. There’s so many good games constantly coming out that I haven’t been able to play nearly as much of them as I’d like to and my backlog keeps growing.

Sometimes I’ll notice that I keep postponing some indie game that I put on my list because it looked like a lot of fun over some newer indie and realize that I’ll maybe never end up reaching that far down in my backlog that I’ll actually play it.

I guess you can spend a lot of money if you buy them on release, but I personally never do. And both their games and the DLCs pack are always on some sale. I’m pretty sure I bought Stellaris for like 10 euros and eventually bought a bunch of its DLC in some DLC pack for another 10 euros. The same for Cities Skylines basically. 20 euros for the amount of fun I took out of those games is hardly a lot.

That isn’t a hot take though, everyone and their mother makes jokes about how many DLC there is for Paradox Interactive games.

Here’s the real hot take -> I don’t mind the amount of DLC on Paradox Interactive games. Every game of their I’ve played was really good on its own, and I only buy any DLC after I’ve poured tens of hours into the main game, usually not because I feel like anything was lacking from the main game, but just because I want an excuse to keep playing it. So for all I care, they can keep making all the DLC they want if the base games keep being this good.