OpenStars

I don’t even have Steam installed on my computer, but maybe I should do that just to check this out, thanks for sharing!:-)

FF5-like job system, on steroids - woot!:-P video review.

Thank you for the suggestion! I tend to like more adventure types, like Breath of Fire or even Zelda, more than war-themed ones (although I made an exception for Destiny of an Emperor b/c it’s based on real historical events, even if loosely), but I see where this game was done REALLY well, so a very solid thought!:-)

I see why you mentioned it: the intention behind it does seem exactly like the Lufia series, really putting in the time to tinker and make it RIGHT, like it tries to go beyond a mere “game” for enjoyment, possibly crossing over into a master of its CRAFT (whether it actually reached that lofty ideal seems highly debatable, but in any case the attempt alone is worthy of some respect imho).

I am just leaving this out there if anyone wants to learn more: Suikoden II - The Best RPG You Never Played.

Except those last few levels, virtually impossible on impossible mode with the free-tier heroes:-(. I tend to like the original and Frontiers much better, though ironically Origins was one of the most “balanced” of them all, and that was neat to experience as well:-).

e.g. archer towers should shoot singly, fast, and at high range, while barracks hold the line and are focused more on defense, right? Nope, the former do AoE magic bombs instead, while the latter shoots arrows into the sky. And artillery should focus on offense and hit AoE in as wide an area as possible, right? Nope, there are tanky bears and the shots hit only a narrow space. I’m cherry-picking these examples, but you get the idea - every tower does stuff that overlaps with what you would think other tower types might do instead, which makes for some fun thinking to deal with the foes.:-D

I absolutely loved it. I wanted to try each of the Dragon Quest series and started from the 1st (single-player), then 2nd (three dedicated characters), and 3rd (party-based with classes), and watched like the development of how they handled keys (single-usage & type, up to dedicated & multiple types), and inventory slots (to shift something you have to give it to someone else, or else everything below it to someone else and then back again), and so on. 4 was the culmination peak of it all before moving to a different console iirc in 5, with such an enormous storyline moving over several chapters each with entirely different characters, until they start merging later on. The auto-battle feature was truly horrific and you may want to read a guide or else you can get stuck in the final battle, like I am talking full-on idiocy i.e. casting insta-death spells at the final boss, entirely uselessly. For someone who likes grinding and story though - and why would you play an “older” JRPG like that if you do not!?:-P - it is a fantastic game. Poor graphics, especially by today’s standards, but a fascinating into the past when it must have all been so “new”. On the other hand, everything I am saying here is in regards to the NES game, so if you are playing a re-release somewhere, a lot of that could have been improved.

If not, other alternatives to get a feel for JRPGs without needing to grind as much are Chrono Trigger (very short game, heavy story, very easy progression that makes grinding entirely optional, one of if not THE best game of all time in fact! bad gfx but think of it as a “choice” as in comic book style and it makes it more bearable, plus it’s even true b/c they were really bad even for its day), or Dragon Warrior/Quest 7. Another thought that does require a bit of grinding but is still old are the Lufia series.

Tbf, he lunges at everyone with a knife:-P.

Swordchucks! (Equally as deadly to the wielder + all nearby allies as the target - from an old webcomic that I loved:-P)

Thank you for the link. I understand somewhat what you mean about security, but also I get the other side too - security for who, and for what purpose? Google seems to have decided that it wants security to deliver ads to your browser, and also to track you everywhere you go (while offering no paid options to surf the internet without ads or tracking afaik?). This may fall under the umbrella of “security”, but not for the sake of the users, whose traffic is being monetized, and the only option is to go over to some other browser like Firefox, which now, conveniently for Google, seems to be doing the same? Or at least could, if anyone could spoof the service and pretending to be Firefox, ask for security adons to be disabled? Maybe I’m simply too jaded to easily trust anymore:-P.

It’s not like Google would ever take over anything - like let’s say oh I dunno, Android - and kill it from the inside. Remember how it said that its motto is don’t be evil? Oh wait…

Firefox’s answer, at the bottom of the article, smells like pure BS to me. Disabling an extension with something like a full browser-modal pop-up to warn users of the possibility of an untrustworthy Extension? Sure, fine, whatever, and maybe make that warning capable to be disabled by default, but why make the decision for us - silently - that Extensions are not to be trusted? Do we trust the website that asks if we pwetty please should allow the showing of ads, or maybe the malware provider that please should just disable all security Extensions and allow their malicious code to run, if you would be so kind?

I can think of one use for this: to disable malware to substitute clicking on a link to install your Extension of choice with one of their choice instead - although isn’t the Extensions store already treated specially by default anyway?

Otherwise, I don’t favor taking control away from the users. Especially if users cannot disable this new “feature”. There is far too much potential for misuse of this.

Which will fragment the Chrome & Chromium-alternative market further, if people cannot trust Firefox anymore.

Which will slow development of alternatives to Chrome.

Which only benefits Google.