i can’t believe they arrived at a burning building and instead of helping people talked about vampire survivors and then went to a second burning building and kept talking about vampire survivors and continued to not save people. very jerma
Jerma is like a maniac psycho. His psychoness is very much random "spur of the moment" stuff with 0 plans and 0 backup plans. Star on the other hand is like a master manipulator sociopath psycho. He *always* knows what he's doing and everything he does is in an elaborate setup for the master plan he's cooking up.
Please put the date when the footage was streamed back in the description. Even though I saw this one live, it really helps when you turn older vods into videos. Thanks and keep up the good work editors!
The "Arguing while the fire is burning" bit is so comical, even down to the part where jerma decides to actually go do his job, and accidentally walks towards the wrong house
Ster and Jerma arguing about Vampire Survivors and bathroom time while the building they were supposed to save crumbled right in front of them is actually peak comedy
Ster's rant about 'Vampire Survivors' makes sense. He likes rogue-LIKES. Not rogue-LITES. Rogue-like involves pure clears to your character and relies on your skill to go far in it. Rogue-lites rely on over-time progression and forces you to die and chip away power ups until you get to the point where you're overly powerful. And sometimes it doesn't feel satisfying for some folks if a game's progress winds up being it's shelf life in play time (as in, you 100% a rogue-lite and now everything is super easy, so they would go "well what's the point now").
ster has consistently proven that no game is fun to him unless he can optimize the gamplay out of it as much as possible lmao, I don't know of anyone who has takes as bad as him.
nah, I dont really think thats it. I actually feel the same way about Hades. Lemme try to explain a bit better. Its not about progress. I think he likes progress, and so do I. The problem is when content is kinda artificially gated by progress. Lets compare Binding of Isaac to Hades. Both are rogue-lites with heavy progression. Where they differ is that in Hades, you get upgrades to your base character. Those upgrades are so powerful that the game balance centers around them. They just exist on your character from the moment you start the run. And from what it felt like to me, the bosses you meet are kinda balanced with "when the average player gets here, they will have X amount of upgrades" and so if you are just good at the game and you get there without them, you feel like you had no chance to beat that boss, and you just need to play more runs to unlock stuff. Thats the time argument ster made. I remember I felt this heavily in Hades, that I had an awesome run going and I wiped to the first boss when I got to her for the first time. Few hours of runs later, I had a pretty garbage run, but I got to her and absolutely destroyed her simply because the upgrades I had made me powerful by themselves Compare that to Binding of Isaac.There is a fuckton of unlocks in that game BUT most of those are items you may find. A lot of those items are great, but are made rare to counter balance how broken they are. There are no unlocks that just straight up make Isaac start with +3 damage, +2 hearts, 10% crit chance and a chance to revive after dying (there are unlocks for characters that make them more powerful from the get go, but those are pretty few and far between, and you never feel like you NEED them to beat stronger bosses). Isaac can beat Monstro on the first floor just as efficiently if you have D6 unlocked or not. The great items you unlock probably make your runs as a whole easier, but its not like you need to unlock Echo Chamber, Mega Mush, Rock Bottom and Godhead before you fight Mother just because shes balanced around you having those unlocks I havent played Vampire Survivors, but I understood what he meant from the Hades analogy. Its not about unlocking stuff and progression. Its about the base power of you characters.
@@lainothefirst The term you're looking for is 'meta-progression', which is what Hades and Vampire Survivors uses. These are changes to your gameplay experience through your profile that are obtained via progressing through runs, as opposed to changes to your gameplay experience through your character alone. In VS, the game becomes so much easier as soon as you unlock an extra life. In BoI, you don't just start with a 1UP because of how long you've played for. To take the games Jerma brought up, Diablo and MMO's don't give you +100% damage dealt across all characters just because you've progressed to a certain point.
@@LardDude32 yeah. But I would count TBoI item unlockables as meta-progression as well. Just... not consistent as just "start with an extra life", if that makes sense?
I think what ster is arguing is that that's part of the gameplay loop, winning becomes an inevitability rather than a test of your skills, it's ingrained into the game. I think he's like a low skill floor, high skill ceiling type of guy, it's like Spelunky vs Hades. Winning in Spelunky is about getting better at the game whereas in Hades it usually boils down to getting more upgrades. You *can* finish Hades without any upgrades, but the game is designed around the progression of your characters stats and abilities. Which usually boils down to grinding for upgrades rather than playing the game to be better.
@@kingkuma4112 Fair enough as far as your personal preference goes. On that not however, I've played binding of Isaac, hades, vampire survivors, golden light, as well as some indie rogue likes, and they all factor in RNG in some form... Be it items, enemies, map layouts, they all get skewed and that's generally what makes replayablility so high for the genre. Suggesting that you want skill to be the sole determining factor makes it sound like your preferences align moreso with souls-like experiences, and there are plenty of games that fall under that tag that seem to be what you're describing.
@@MonkeGeorge I'm fine with some luck - I've got a crapload of hours in darkest dungeon and xcom, both of which have huge rng heavy elements- I just like there always to be a way to rig the scales, so to speak. I'm all for rng making a game harder, just that skill should be the factor that causes me to eventually die, otherwise it feels i just got screwed over. It being all skill is also kind of dull though, as then you reach a point where youre winning so easily it gets dull. It's a weird balancing act - though I do probably like less rng heavy roguelikes over ones with more of it.
@@kingkuma4112 Sorry but the whole skill over rng is negated by saying you like DD. I like DD and have 200+ but that game is not skill based is more like control the rng
I've had a waterproof cell phone case for a while. I will say, I'm now incapable of taking a shower without watching RU-vid or a show. Annoying habit, don't do it.
holy shit we got this vod up before SCORN. What the fuck is happening to the actual SCORN video? Is the channel secretly fighting a strike every time it gets uploaded before going public?
there was a 8 week war about who gets the scorn vod and it ended in a bloodbath, luckily I think we finally worked something out and it should be soon.
i can't believe ster also doesn't bring his phone into the bathroom. literally everyone around me has fecal matter on their phone and i'm the crazy one.
Spelunky is a good example of a modern game where the cross run progression is very minimal, pretty much just character skins and shortcuts that nobody uses, so it doesn't feel like it's begging for you to die just so you can go back to the base camp and buy extra revives or extended whip range or more starting bombs. The only thing gating your progress is your own experience (and luck, let's be fair).
Ster is thinking about rogue-lites, which help you progress further the more you play due to unlocking content, rogueLIKES usually don't have an out-of-run progression added to it. Hades is a roguelite due to getting stronger upgrades for future runs that are constantly activated, that being said i'm shocked he doesn't like Isaac, since it's a roguelike with story progression
He wasn't saying he didn't like Isaac, he used Isaac as an example of a good rogue like where if you took a certain element out it would be what he doesn't like
to be fair, he still has a point IMO. Jerma is extremely biased to gambling mechanics in general, it's honestly shocking to me he hasn't gotten roped up in a gacha game or something
If a game is at its most fun when everything is unlocked (which is the point of ALL of these unlockathon games where there's like 500 billion "challenges" and "achievements" aka a chores/grocery list) then why are you locking any of it behind progression to begin with. A game like that should always be at its most fun by the end. If it isn't then the game is literally not worth playing.
@@Paradox_Edge Instant gratification andies out here telling people it's not about the journey it's about the destination. My man, do you know how many game genres would be dropped if progression was completely abandoned? "Bro minecraft survival mode has no point, just go to creative and build a house out of diamond blocks" zero sense of achievement ass. "Wtf bro I hate how I have to level up in this multiplayer shooter to unlock more guns and abilities, wtf man gimme it all at immediately". "Bro who enjoys playing Rust, just get into a 1millionX server and build a fortress in 10 minutes smh" Y'all are clowns. Period.
@@MonkeGeorge I know that *many* (terrible, horrible no good) genres would be dropped, sure. Genres that prey upon the mentally weak and the completionists. Minecraft doesn't force you to die or complete boring-ass quests to let you mine diamonds, you can find an iron pick in a mineshaft and stumble across diamond 5 minutes into a playthrough if you're lucky enough (or use a seed). I will agree with the multiplayer shooter game. The progression in them are absolutely arbitrary and should not exist. Rust doesn't force you to die or complete boring-ass quests to allow you to build structures. It is entirely based on how resourceful you are as a person and how lucky you get with dickheads out to ruin your day by shooting you on sight and raiding your base. Who's the clown here. The idiot who hates most things because they're bad and filled to the brim with predatory trope shit or the idiot who can't make a decent analogy to save his life.
@@Paradox_Edge In the video Ster is complaining about games like Hades and Binding of Isaac, aka rogue-lites with built-in progression systems. Not whatever generic ubisoft game / JRPG that you have a hate boner for. Not a single person was talking about "achievement hunting" or "repetitive questing" which are obviously egregious practices that I didn't think we needed to rehash out of nowhere. I replied thinking you were talking about the same kind of games Ster was in the video, but clearly you branched off.
Love how Jerma just kept TOSSING people. I also love Jerma getting so mad over what Ster was saying about V.S and NGL with the way he described it, it sounded like he didn’t actually do the objectives
If you watch 2 games of vampire survivors then theres nothing to play. The fun is discovering combos but after that you can play the game in an excel spreadsheet
"time spent" is just progression;;;;;; you get more powerful in zelda bc u get better weapons and items like the bow, bombs, etc. I think he's insane, like I was losing my mind listening to ster rant
Ster is 100% objectively correct about Vampire Survivors but he’s so bad at explaining his logic. Hades doesnt really fit his narrative though. You can win VS by just starting runs 1000 times. No matter how many upgrades you have in Hades, you have to get better at the game to win.
This guy isn’t crazy to think there are better alternatives to vampire survivor , but this toilet discussion and his opinions about being alone with your thoughts is pure garbage. W Jeremy all the way.
