>>741775876
>no Don't Starve

>bg2
THAC0 was always shit

>>741775876
Depends whether you are the one reading the wiki, or the one writing it.

Listen man I like noita but its 100% wiki slop outside of the 2-3 actually good puzzles.

>>741779534
I'm talking about games where you need the wiki open to even enjoy the game or figure out what to do next.

I don't mind the wiki in sandbox-like games. Terraria I look up a lot of stuff and any in-game implementation is going to be slower than a browser anyway, devs might as well not bother. At least as a PC player. It's fun that Terraria has so much random things going on and it's unreasonable to make the player find everything in a diagetic way, so wiki it is.
Can't say I've ever looked up much on games like factorio, hollow knight or monster hunter.

>>741775876
>looking up some information to help crunch numbers or find drop rates, etc
Fine.
>reading exactly what to do in order to beat the game like a walkthrough
Not fine. Or maybe fine for the people who are into that kind of thing, but it seems like a waste of time to me. I just wish less people would try telling me how great a game is only to admit they were basically following an instruction manual through the whole thing.

>>741775876
I have no idea what you're asking.

>>741782425
are games that require a wiki slop or kino

>>741780185
Someone still had to find all that out by playing the game like intended without looking up any wikis because those didn't even have any info yet. Also knows as the real gamers.
And no one is forcing you to look at wiki pages.

>>741782832
That is exactly the conflict I want to address. You could spend hours trying to figure out how to access the end portal on your own blind in Minecraft. But would that really be fun?
These games have so many systems that you either spoil the mystery and look it up, or you never engage with many of the games mechanics because you don't know they exist.
So which is worse?