I only ever see this game pop up once every quarter or so when a randomly popular character gets added. I see nothing about it otherwise, anywhere.
Meanwhile, I can't scroll through enthusiast websites anywhere on the web without being hit for ads for countless mobile cash grabs and huge game releases. Hell, I see more ads for games that get expansions/DLC than I do for stuff like this.
The fact they thought they could launch a multiplayer game from an unproven developer with a new IP without any serious amounts of player testing and feedback??
Concord could have been "the new Sony" by showing up on the market as another early access title that looks to grow and learn and deliver on what fans want. Soooooo many multiplayer games do this nowadays. Why does Sony think it's better than what is proving to be successful for many competitors already in-market?
Wait. An unproven developer with a brand new IP building a paid multiplayer-only title in a crowded market dominated by F2P titles should have performed alpha and beta testing? What incredible insight.
The fact they still need to learn this is all you need to know about how well Sony's live service development process is going and their hubris.
The best parts of AC are the historic parts. Always have been. No one needs the narrative to be as directly connected as Ubisoft thinks. Just throw us into wildly different and interesting points in history and have us play as someone who was there, performing Assassin Guild (or whatever) stuff in the background. Explain weird historical anomalies and events as Assassin-influenced, then move on to the next time period. No one needs the stuff so directly connected and we DEFINITELY don't need it tied to the modern day UNLESS the overarching setting is more modern.
@NEStalgia Yeah, instead you'd throw quarters into the same machine over and over to play the same game over and over in hopes you could put three letters on a scoreboard that could easily get wiped if the power went out or the cabinet was reset.
A much more sensible use of one's money, surely.
Let's not act like playing videogames has ever been anything but dumb if you really think about it. It's all for fun and entertainment. Let people enjoy the stuff they enjoy, eh?
Two of my most anticipated upcoming titles. I reeeeally hope MSFT launches PD on PS5. PD is my favorite (and most played) N64 title of all time. I HATED the Xbox 360 sequel. So I'm really hoping this new one can nail what it's going for.
When has Ubisoft (or any dev, for that matter) admitted to launching their game in a horrid state? Do these companies admit they're about to lay an egg? (CDPR didn't warn anyone about Cyberpunk. Sony called Concord the future of Playstation.)
It doesn't matter what Ubisoft SAYS. It matters what they DO. And what they've been doing for years is releasing titles under-cooked and laden with horrible mtx and poorly implemented (and often broken) gameplay systems that got old half a generation ago.
I'll be utterly shocked if Shadows is even CLOSE to as good as Ghost of Tsushima, let alone the sequel coming around the corner. Ubisoft got left in the dust with this one. They desperately need to embolden actual creators to refresh their titles.
Their designs have become rote and stale and their competitors are taking their designs and improving upon them while they just cut and paste different aspects to try and create something "new" and "compelling" when all it really ends up being is a mishmash of well-trodden ideas without a cohesive vision.
I'm not the biggest AC fan, but I keep my eye on the series because they sometimes do manage to knock one out of the park with regard to how it piques my interests (Origins and Odyssey were awesome imo). Shadows couldn't be further off my radar if it tried. I don't even fully hate Ubisoft. Farcry and Division are some of my favorite shooters of all time. I've put loads of hours into them and even Siege. Hell, Ghost Recon Wildlands was a friggin' BLAST to play with my buddies. There's just no spark in Ubisoft games anymore. You buy one and you can bet your ass you've seen every single gameplay mechanic and system before in an older Ubisoft game (or a competitor's title), but with odd changes for no reason. They design by copy and pasting ideas. Just reshuffling what's been done before. They haven't innovated (or recognized their own innovation) in YEARS. And their reputation shows it.
Hulst is the one who pushed for these investments and now he fires hundreds of people while releasing "statements" and sitting safely at the top.
Dude is the one who needs to be let go. Guy has no clue what he's doing at the level he's at. He's actively harming Sony as a brand/force within the market.
I don't see why Sony would harbor such a broad collection of IP and collect such a stable of development houses to then limit each of them to one, maybe two, games a generation. And generally keep them limited to a single IP, as well.
Let passionate teams pick and choose whatever they want from the collection. And license the IP out to 3rd parties who can work closely with Sony the way Nintendo does it.
Create those sorts of relationships and that strategy and it'd broaden the output quite a bit and deliver some bangers and reignite interest in various titles that otherwise don't see the light of day.
They seem to be SUPREMELY selective in recent years and it's like they would rather throw development costs to the wind and eating the costs instead of putting something out there that they don't think will set the world on fire. And while that's admirable, it's also not sustainable. It's okay to have some B tier releases every now and then that can turn a profit, even if they're not all-timers.
I agree, to a point. That is very true in the AAA space, but I think there's a load of creativity just a "tier" of quality or 2 below that space.
I vote with my wallet and avoid most AAA boondoggles these days. Or at least wait until they're at a reasonable asking price.
I usually have a lot more fun with games in the $20 space than I do with those that are $60 and above. It's a matter of perception as a consumer. I won't feel (as) cheated if I have a bad time playing a $20 game from a smaller studio. But if I'm paying $70+, I expect top dollar performance and experience. Very few games deliver that, so I just wait and get 'em cheap, if at all.
@Northern_munkey Seriously. Patience has been the key to success as a gaming consumer for well over 2 generations. Whether you think $60-70 is "too high" or not doesn't matter if you are frugal. It literally pays to wait. Has for ages.
People currently pay top dollar for the worst version of a game 99% of the time. Most games are tricking you into be a paying (not paid!) beta tester as they release with bugs and balance issues, and only fix them weeks or months down the line, if at all. Sometimes that process can even take years or worse, it never comes.
By the time a game truly becomes stable and smoothed out, they can normally be had for 33%+ off the original price. Often times much more.
As a dude with a family and a job, I have no clout to chase. I have no reason to jump in day one (let alone day -3). I wait patiently and play games slightly behind the times and I love it. I save money, I get smoother experiences overall, and it helps me wade through the BS games that weren't going to be worth my time anyhow. (It also lets me play games completely straight through because I can get GOTY or all-in-one editions and not have to jump back into old games after long stretches between DLC drops.)
Plus, it affords me the chance to play a wider selection of titles, because my money stretches further. I'm also willing to take more chances when the purchase price is down to the $20 range. I rarely need to think about the value I get because I'm rarely being suckered into spending multiple times that on something that ends up not being fun for me.
I'm pretty sure I have only paid full price, upfront for 2 titles all generation, but they were long term purchases I KNEW I'd get my value from (Remnant 2 and Diablo 4 - no regrets, those games are my JAM). Otherwise... why bother, ya know?
I tried it at launch for a while (because free) and it simply didn't feel good to play. They had years of development and betas and feedback and still launched a shooter with egregious netcode and hit registration issues.
If you can't compete with THE single most important aspect of a multiplayer title, why even bother? Nothing else was nearly good enough to overshadow those fundamental flaws.
I always loved the art style of this game, but didn't want to commit to an MMO. I'm happy to see it converted to single player (and co-op friendly) ARPG experience.
I've got a lot on my plate at the moment, but this is officially on my radar.
@MrPeanutbutterz Yeah. It's a different mentality. And the design philosophy is purposeful. It serves a specific point/mindset.
That arcade philosophy is why I love a ton of rogue likes. I see them as the bridge between classic "one more round" arcade experiences and modern "have to build up and progress" RPGs. My tastes land right there in that sweet spot.
Hardest part about Kill Knight is going to be which platform I snag it for. I can see wanting it on the go on my Switch, but I'd also love it on my PC where I can take a break from work and bust out a run. Decisions, decisions...
I got this free on PC (thanks, Epic) and look forward to giving it an hour or two like I gave Gotham Knights before realizing it was utterly awful and barely worth the download.
WB will be lucky if Rocksteady can ever recover the lost good will with the Arkham IP. They've absolutely slaughtered it.
Maybe what they need is a game in the same style or with the same mechanics, but with a tweak to the story or something. Not totally devoid of Batman, but more like Batman Beyond or an adaptation of a specific storyline like Long Halloween.
No clue. But I hope they can get it together. The Arkham gameplay is still top notch in my book.
Some consulting agency is going to get paid millions of dollars to write a report with the most straightforward information you can imagine and present it to the clueless Microsoft brass.
@KeanuReaves This here. This is what makes the greats... great.
I have gotten back into Remnant 2 and that is a game with rich mechanics, solid gameplay, and so many moving pieces behind the scenes. You can effectively play the game "casually" and have a great time, no question. Play with whatever you come across. OR you can go REALLY deep into its systems to extract specific, targeted items and mechanics and surprises. It's an absolute all-timer for me. The joy per hour (or maybe joy/satisfaction for effort) quotient is so friggin' high.
The base game was already my GotY 2023. But even just its first DLC (only just finished it) is raising the overall package to top tier of the generation for me because of its depth, surprises, and rock solid gameplay.
More developers need to take heed of what Gunfire Games is doing. They are sleeping giants of creativity and design.
As long as it plays more like Zero Dawn than Forbidden West, I'll at least keep an eye on it.
The biggest thing that worries me, though, is the longstanding evidence/rumors that this will change up the art style and lean into some sort of anime-inspired design.
Despite what flaws I think the gameplay is riddled with after Forbidden West, the art direction is NOT one of them. I think the aesthetic is still one of the best out there. And Decima as an engine can be breathtaking. So I just don't get why they'd (seemingly) abandon that for some sort of cartoon or anime-stylized look.
If that is where they land, then that would probably be the biggest thing to kill my interest. The early footage did NOT look good to me.
They went really hard into that singular body type design for the robots. I'm not really a fan of playing as a mechanical jelly bean. Looks goofy as hell.
I mean... this is pretty emblematic of Ubisoft's deeper problem: it took them until a tepid response to a Star Wars game in the year of our lord 2024 to realize releasing janky ass games loaded with problems is not a path to financial success.
Ubisoft games have been riddled with poorly thought out systems and engine jank and glitches and copy paste design for yeeeeeeeeears. But it finally caught up to them.
They were never going to fix things when people still plopped down money for their *****. And sure enough, they didn't at any broad level. But the market got wise to it and NOW they want to act like they're doing the right thing for the players. But their history shows they've never really embraced that mentality at all.
This is purely to stave off what they knew would be considerable criticism of a game they NEED to be successful. That's it. They're giving away expansions because no one was pre-ordering Shadows and no one was paying even more for the season pass. Not at the numbers they expected or needed. This isn't in good faith.
I think the problems at Ubisoft run far deeper than the rampant sexual assault allegations. That surely wasn't helping, but the bigger problem is management. That's apparent. They've had years to course correct but what have we really seen since? Immortals (undersold), Farcry 6 (awful step backwards in design and a tepid response to its release), an Avatar game that is copy paste Farcry Primal (undersold expectations), a Prince of Persia remake (delayed indefinitely due to jank), Skull & Bones (horrendously undersold expectations after years of turmoil), a solid "classic" PoP (well-received but undersold), a "back to basics" AC Mirage (undersold), a Division spinoff that got canned before it ever released, XDefiant (great launch, DEEP design problems they never addressed during years of betas and now its player numbers are cratering), Outlaws (undersold), and this... probably even more I can't think of.
I can't name a single Ubisoft game that far exceeded expectations since their scandals broke. AC Valhalla probably? But even that isn't the most beloved by the broader AC fandom because it was considered heavily bloated (after multiple titles that were also considered heavily bloated).
Their issues run DEEP and they are still present. That's abundantly clear to anyone paying attention.
@dark_knightmare2 Funny. I didn't mention the combat as being the problem. Concerned someone has a different opinion than you? You hafta white knight for a videogame now?
If this is going to primarily be about expansions/remakes/and PS5 Pro upgrades, it'll have people wishing for the one where they showed Concord gameplay.
I heard Banishers was solid, but I haven't gotten to it. It's a competitive market. If they can't break through with advertising, they need to do better with things like pricing. The booming PC market proves there's plenty of space for A-AA titles, but they have to be rpiced appropriately. I feel like their games aren't and it costs them (literally).
Make it a true jack of all trades: allow the handheld to play dedicated titles that get the requisite compatibility patches (or are from older generations), but then have built-in Portal-like streaming functionality for games that are too advanced for that. Let users have the best of both worlds!
I want this game to succeed AND be fun. I'm no Bungie apologist. It doesn't come from that.
I just think the extraction shooter genre is one that could take off on consoles in a way no game really has. And I think it's a smart differentiator in the market, something Concord definitely lacked.
I also just love the aesthetic. I think we deserve visually interesting games and this could be one of them. I adored the teaser and hope that look carries through to release.
As someone who never played a DA game, I thought DAI was bloated and boring.
I played a rogue/archer expecting TPS controls because of their pedigree with ME's shooting mechanics. The fact you don't actually control your shooting, as an archer, made me switch to playing a melee ally at the beginning just so felt like I had control.
Annoyed me to no end and I regret spending the time on it.
@Oz_Who_Dat_Dare As someone who absolutely adores HZD, I rushed through HFW last year and then just finished Burning Shores (because I bought it and figured I may as well see where the story goes/went), I cannot fathom for the life of me what people see in HFW that makes it better than HZD. The downgrades are numerous.
I still hold HZD up as the second best "Ubisoft-style" open world game behind only Ghost of Tsushima. It was clear, lean (by open world game design standards) and fun af.
HFW took all that and threw it out the window and padded the playtime with aimless busywork, horrendously boring loot grinding, and absolutely atrociously aggravating combat. Not to mention, it has some of the jankiest controls in all of modern gaming. Aloy turns like a tank and gets caught on countless pieces of environment constantly AND the climbing is so awfully designed I almost stopped playing it before I got to the "full" world. Anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves.
I'm glad I played it. At least I have an informed opinion on the title, and now I can wait to see how H3 stacks up. If it leans more towards 2's design, I'll just skip it and pour one out for one of the most promising, but poorly implemented evolutions of an IP I've ever personally witnessed.
The more people that play this so Guerilla designs the next one more like Zero Dawn and far less like Forbidden West, the better. HFW was a gotdamm slog. The fact this series went from one of the most streamlined, satisfying open world action games to one of the most boring and bloated messes in only one iteration is a travesty of game design.
@knowles2 That's not at all what they did with Firewalk. Dumping $100-300mm into an unproven dev is not at all what I am suggesting.
The part of my comment about wanting to instantly go from zero to a massve hit the market may not even want is explicitly referring to their expectations/strategy for Concord.
Whether you like Bungie/Destiny or not, I always come back to, "And how much could Sony have spent on other studios INSTEAD of Bungie, and thus controlled far more IP and had a far broader range of talent and expertise under its umbrella?"
You can't tell me Bungie is an outright better, more creative, more capable development house than the likes of numerous other shuttered or acquired studios combined (Crustal Dynamics, Japan Studio, the list goes on).
If Sony wants a live service hit, the best bet is to let smaller teams cook and create unique experiences that can grow into hits, the same way PUBG and Fortnite and R6 Siege and Rocket League did. None of those games set out to set the world on fire. But over their lifespans, they catered to players, built strong fundamentals, and built large followings. Sony (and many other companies) seem to want to go from nothing to massive smash hit immediately and don't realize that's the hardest, most expensive way to become a hit. You can't run a business by way of playing the lottery.
What they need to learn from Helldivers 2 (despite its tumultuous reputation since release) is that a small team with great ideas can result in outsized performance much more easily than putting an entire single player-focused studio on a multiplayer game just because of an IP (see: Naughty Dog). Go after those HD2-like hits. Get a bigger ROI and build your broader experience in delivering said hits over time. Nurture creativity and original thinking. Let them evolve into a bigger live service game WHEN THE MARKET TELLS YOU THEY WANT IT. But don't go spending hundreds of millions out the gate on something that isn't proven (Concord) or that misaligns with the given talent (again, ND).
Comments 1,360
Re: MultiVersus Underperforms, Another $100 Million Blow for Warner Bros
Here's a wild strategy: try advertising it?
I only ever see this game pop up once every quarter or so when a randomly popular character gets added. I see nothing about it otherwise, anywhere.
Meanwhile, I can't scroll through enthusiast websites anywhere on the web without being hit for ads for countless mobile cash grabs and huge game releases. Hell, I see more ads for games that get expansions/DLC than I do for stuff like this.
Re: Sony Comments on Concord Disaster, Says Game Should Have Been Tested Earlier
@ThomasHL Exactly this.
The fact they thought they could launch a multiplayer game from an unproven developer with a new IP without any serious amounts of player testing and feedback??
Concord could have been "the new Sony" by showing up on the market as another early access title that looks to grow and learn and deliver on what fans want. Soooooo many multiplayer games do this nowadays. Why does Sony think it's better than what is proving to be successful for many competitors already in-market?
Re: Sony Comments on Concord Disaster, Says Game Should Have Been Tested Earlier
Wait. An unproven developer with a brand new IP building a paid multiplayer-only title in a crowded market dominated by F2P titles should have performed alpha and beta testing? What incredible insight.
The fact they still need to learn this is all you need to know about how well Sony's live service development process is going and their hubris.
Re: Assassin's Creed Shadows Lays the Foundation for a New Modern-Day Narrative
The best parts of AC are the historic parts. Always have been. No one needs the narrative to be as directly connected as Ubisoft thinks. Just throw us into wildly different and interesting points in history and have us play as someone who was there, performing Assassin Guild (or whatever) stuff in the background. Explain weird historical anomalies and events as Assassin-influenced, then move on to the next time period. No one needs the stuff so directly connected and we DEFINITELY don't need it tied to the modern day UNLESS the overarching setting is more modern.
Re: Fortnite's About to Make a Fortune by Flogging Freakin' Footwear
@NEStalgia Yeah, instead you'd throw quarters into the same machine over and over to play the same game over and over in hopes you could put three letters on a scoreboard that could easily get wiped if the power went out or the cabinet was reset.
A much more sensible use of one's money, surely.
Let's not act like playing videogames has ever been anything but dumb if you really think about it. It's all for fun and entertainment. Let people enjoy the stuff they enjoy, eh?
Re: Wolverine PS5 Lead Dev Leaves for Xbox's Perfect Dark Team
Two of my most anticipated upcoming titles. I reeeeally hope MSFT launches PD on PS5. PD is my favorite (and most played) N64 title of all time. I HATED the Xbox 360 sequel. So I'm really hoping this new one can nail what it's going for.
Re: Ubisoft Confident Assassin's Creed Shadows Will Make February Launch
When has Ubisoft (or any dev, for that matter) admitted to launching their game in a horrid state? Do these companies admit they're about to lay an egg? (CDPR didn't warn anyone about Cyberpunk. Sony called Concord the future of Playstation.)
It doesn't matter what Ubisoft SAYS. It matters what they DO. And what they've been doing for years is releasing titles under-cooked and laden with horrible mtx and poorly implemented (and often broken) gameplay systems that got old half a generation ago.
I'll be utterly shocked if Shadows is even CLOSE to as good as Ghost of Tsushima, let alone the sequel coming around the corner. Ubisoft got left in the dust with this one. They desperately need to embolden actual creators to refresh their titles.
Their designs have become rote and stale and their competitors are taking their designs and improving upon them while they just cut and paste different aspects to try and create something "new" and "compelling" when all it really ends up being is a mishmash of well-trodden ideas without a cohesive vision.
I'm not the biggest AC fan, but I keep my eye on the series because they sometimes do manage to knock one out of the park with regard to how it piques my interests (Origins and Odyssey were awesome imo). Shadows couldn't be further off my radar if it tried. I don't even fully hate Ubisoft. Farcry and Division are some of my favorite shooters of all time. I've put loads of hours into them and even Siege. Hell, Ghost Recon Wildlands was a friggin' BLAST to play with my buddies. There's just no spark in Ubisoft games anymore. You buy one and you can bet your ass you've seen every single gameplay mechanic and system before in an older Ubisoft game (or a competitor's title), but with odd changes for no reason. They design by copy and pasting ideas. Just reshuffling what's been done before. They haven't innovated (or recognized their own innovation) in YEARS. And their reputation shows it.
Re: PS5, PC Flop Concord Never Returning, Studio Closed Down
Hulst is the one who pushed for these investments and now he fires hundreds of people while releasing "statements" and sitting safely at the top.
Dude is the one who needs to be let go. Guy has no clue what he's doing at the level he's at. He's actively harming Sony as a brand/force within the market.
Re: Microsoft CEO Says More Xbox Games Will Come to PS5, Hours After Rumours Said Porting Project Was Paused
Keep your Gears and Halo. Give me State of Decay, Avowed, and Perfect Dark and I'll be ecstatic.
Re: Star Wars Outlaws Slips PS5 Screen Tearing Bug into Latest Patch
Remember, folks, it was the market's fault for this not selling as well as they expected.
Re: Stealth Issues Still the Focus of Star Wars Outlaws PS5 Patches
@freddquadros It happened all the time to me in AC Origins. And it plagued The Division 1+2.
Re: Stealth Issues Still the Focus of Star Wars Outlaws PS5 Patches
@freddquadros Notifications firing for old information has plagued Ubisoft titles for well over a decade.
Re: Random: Killzone Superfans Want to License the IP from Sony
I don't see why Sony would harbor such a broad collection of IP and collect such a stable of development houses to then limit each of them to one, maybe two, games a generation. And generally keep them limited to a single IP, as well.
Let passionate teams pick and choose whatever they want from the collection. And license the IP out to 3rd parties who can work closely with Sony the way Nintendo does it.
Create those sorts of relationships and that strategy and it'd broaden the output quite a bit and deliver some bangers and reignite interest in various titles that otherwise don't see the light of day.
They seem to be SUPREMELY selective in recent years and it's like they would rather throw development costs to the wind and eating the costs instead of putting something out there that they don't think will set the world on fire. And while that's admirable, it's also not sustainable. It's okay to have some B tier releases every now and then that can turn a profit, even if they're not all-timers.
Re: Ex-PlayStation Exec Shawn Layden Says There's Been a 'Collapse' in Gaming Creativity
I agree, to a point. That is very true in the AAA space, but I think there's a load of creativity just a "tier" of quality or 2 below that space.
I vote with my wallet and avoid most AAA boondoggles these days. Or at least wait until they're at a reasonable asking price.
I usually have a lot more fun with games in the $20 space than I do with those that are $60 and above. It's a matter of perception as a consumer. I won't feel (as) cheated if I have a bad time playing a $20 game from a smaller studio. But if I'm paying $70+, I expect top dollar performance and experience. Very few games deliver that, so I just wait and get 'em cheap, if at all.
Re: Opinion: The Price of Playing PS5 Games Day One Is Getting Higher and Higher
@Northern_munkey Seriously. Patience has been the key to success as a gaming consumer for well over 2 generations. Whether you think $60-70 is "too high" or not doesn't matter if you are frugal. It literally pays to wait. Has for ages.
People currently pay top dollar for the worst version of a game 99% of the time. Most games are tricking you into be a paying (not paid!) beta tester as they release with bugs and balance issues, and only fix them weeks or months down the line, if at all. Sometimes that process can even take years or worse, it never comes.
By the time a game truly becomes stable and smoothed out, they can normally be had for 33%+ off the original price. Often times much more.
As a dude with a family and a job, I have no clout to chase. I have no reason to jump in day one (let alone day -3). I wait patiently and play games slightly behind the times and I love it. I save money, I get smoother experiences overall, and it helps me wade through the BS games that weren't going to be worth my time anyhow. (It also lets me play games completely straight through because I can get GOTY or all-in-one editions and not have to jump back into old games after long stretches between DLC drops.)
Plus, it affords me the chance to play a wider selection of titles, because my money stretches further. I'm also willing to take more chances when the purchase price is down to the $20 range. I rarely need to think about the value I get because I'm rarely being suckered into spending multiple times that on something that ends up not being fun for me.
I'm pretty sure I have only paid full price, upfront for 2 titles all generation, but they were long term purchases I KNEW I'd get my value from (Remnant 2 and Diablo 4 - no regrets, those games are my JAM). Otherwise... why bother, ya know?
Re: We Did a Double Take at NBA 2K25's New PS5 DLC
That's a $10 arcade game purchase in a heartbeat for me and my buddies. That is nowhere close to a "full price game purchase + DLC add-on" purchase.
Seems supremely dumb to design something like that and then willingly kneecap its potential market/playerbase.
Re: Opinion: The Price of Playing PS5 Games Day One Is Getting Higher and Higher
This has been discussed in enthusiast circles, on numerous blogs, for literal years. This is not a new take nor point.
Just because PS doesn't discuss it doesn't mean no one talks about it.
Re: Repeated Reports of XDefiant PS5's Death Greatly Exaggerated, Says Dev
I tried it at launch for a while (because free) and it simply didn't feel good to play. They had years of development and betas and feedback and still launched a shooter with egregious netcode and hit registration issues.
If you can't compete with THE single most important aspect of a multiplayer title, why even bother? Nothing else was nearly good enough to overshadow those fundamental flaws.
Re: Huge Action RPG Wayfinder Has Been Completely Reworked Ahead of Full 1.0 Release on PS5 Next Week
I always loved the art style of this game, but didn't want to commit to an MMO. I'm happy to see it converted to single player (and co-op friendly) ARPG experience.
I've got a lot on my plate at the moment, but this is officially on my radar.
Re: Over 2,800 PS5, PS4 Games Score Discounts of Up to 90% Off
@gollumb82 I have a physical copy of Kena I'm trying to sell...
Re: Mini Review: Kill Knight (PS5) - An Unrelenting Arcade Nightmare
@MrPeanutbutterz Yeah. It's a different mentality. And the design philosophy is purposeful. It serves a specific point/mindset.
That arcade philosophy is why I love a ton of rogue likes. I see them as the bridge between classic "one more round" arcade experiences and modern "have to build up and progress" RPGs. My tastes land right there in that sweet spot.
Hardest part about Kill Knight is going to be which platform I snag it for. I can see wanting it on the go on my Switch, but I'd also love it on my PC where I can take a break from work and bust out a run. Decisions, decisions...
Re: Mini Review: Kill Knight (PS5) - An Unrelenting Arcade Nightmare
I love when arcade games get called repetitive.
Oh, the levels are the same thing every time and your actions are limited and repetitive? Yeah. That's the point.
What would a modern review of OG classics Pac-man or Centipede or Asteroids look like with that modern mentality?
Re: Until Dawn Is One of Sony's Worst Performing PC Ports to Date
$60 for a 9 year old game. Who could have possibly thought this wouldn't sell well?? Hmm...
Re: Crickets as Suicide Squad Endures Another Muted Launch
I got this free on PC (thanks, Epic) and look forward to giving it an hour or two like I gave Gotham Knights before realizing it was utterly awful and barely worth the download.
WB will be lucky if Rocksteady can ever recover the lost good will with the Arkham IP. They've absolutely slaughtered it.
Maybe what they need is a game in the same style or with the same mechanics, but with a tweak to the story or something. Not totally devoid of Batman, but more like Batman Beyond or an adaptation of a specific storyline like Long Halloween.
No clue. But I hope they can get it together. The Arkham gameplay is still top notch in my book.
Re: Assassin's Creed Shadows Reportedly Has a Co-Op Game Mode in Development
Ah, yes! That would be the type of innovative gameplay we can expect from Ubisoft these days: co-op.
Re: Microsoft Is Investigating Why Devs Are Prioritising PS5 Over Xbox
Some consulting agency is going to get paid millions of dollars to write a report with the most straightforward information you can imagine and present it to the clueless Microsoft brass.
Re: Lords of the Fallen PS5 Sequel Prioritising 'Elevated Production Values', More 'Commercial' Art Style
@KeanuReaves This here. This is what makes the greats... great.
I have gotten back into Remnant 2 and that is a game with rich mechanics, solid gameplay, and so many moving pieces behind the scenes. You can effectively play the game "casually" and have a great time, no question. Play with whatever you come across. OR you can go REALLY deep into its systems to extract specific, targeted items and mechanics and surprises. It's an absolute all-timer for me. The joy per hour (or maybe joy/satisfaction for effort) quotient is so friggin' high.
The base game was already my GotY 2023. But even just its first DLC (only just finished it) is raising the overall package to top tier of the generation for me because of its depth, surprises, and rock solid gameplay.
More developers need to take heed of what Gunfire Games is doing. They are sleeping giants of creativity and design.
Re: Explore Hell Is Us PS5 in Extensive Developer-Led Gameplay Trailer
This is giving me Returnal/Control/The Surge vibes. And I am here for it.
Re: PS5 Firmware Update Annoys with Unwanted Deluge of Ads, News Feed
This is atrocious and Sony should be ashamed of themselves. This is going to annoy the ever living ***** out of me.
Re: Sony's Live Service Push 'No Joke', A Lot of People Working on Horizon Online
As long as it plays more like Zero Dawn than Forbidden West, I'll at least keep an eye on it.
The biggest thing that worries me, though, is the longstanding evidence/rumors that this will change up the art style and lean into some sort of anime-inspired design.
Despite what flaws I think the gameplay is riddled with after Forbidden West, the art direction is NOT one of them. I think the aesthetic is still one of the best out there. And Decima as an engine can be breathtaking. So I just don't get why they'd (seemingly) abandon that for some sort of cartoon or anime-stylized look.
If that is where they land, then that would probably be the biggest thing to kill my interest. The early footage did NOT look good to me.
Re: Underperforming XDefiant Pours More Misery on Embattled Publisher Ubisoft
Anyone who has played Siege knows full well that Ubisoft's skin designs are atrocious and rarely worth money.
Re: Random: Xbox Boss Complains About X Button After Being Handed PS5 Pad
Says the guy whose company had at least 2 standard placements for X before they built a controller and they chose neither.
Re: Notorious Gambler Lando Calrissian Playing for Keeps in Star Wars Outlaws DLC
Has Ubisoft tried polishing and improving games before they release to tepid sales? Maybe they should give THAT a try some time.
Re: Bandai Namco's Big Cross-Media Bet Synduality Kickstarts PS5's 2025
They went really hard into that singular body type design for the robots. I'm not really a fan of playing as a mechanical jelly bean. Looks goofy as hell.
Re: Ubisoft 'Fully Mobilised' After Soft Star Wars Outlaws PS5 Sales
They should have tried designing a better game.
Re: Assassin's Creed Shadows Delayed on PS5 Until 14th February
I mean... this is pretty emblematic of Ubisoft's deeper problem: it took them until a tepid response to a Star Wars game in the year of our lord 2024 to realize releasing janky ass games loaded with problems is not a path to financial success.
Ubisoft games have been riddled with poorly thought out systems and engine jank and glitches and copy paste design for yeeeeeeeeears. But it finally caught up to them.
They were never going to fix things when people still plopped down money for their *****. And sure enough, they didn't at any broad level. But the market got wise to it and NOW they want to act like they're doing the right thing for the players. But their history shows they've never really embraced that mentality at all.
This is purely to stave off what they knew would be considerable criticism of a game they NEED to be successful. That's it. They're giving away expansions because no one was pre-ordering Shadows and no one was paying even more for the season pass. Not at the numbers they expected or needed. This isn't in good faith.
I think the problems at Ubisoft run far deeper than the rampant sexual assault allegations. That surely wasn't helping, but the bigger problem is management. That's apparent. They've had years to course correct but what have we really seen since? Immortals (undersold), Farcry 6 (awful step backwards in design and a tepid response to its release), an Avatar game that is copy paste Farcry Primal (undersold expectations), a Prince of Persia remake (delayed indefinitely due to jank), Skull & Bones (horrendously undersold expectations after years of turmoil), a solid "classic" PoP (well-received but undersold), a "back to basics" AC Mirage (undersold), a Division spinoff that got canned before it ever released, XDefiant (great launch, DEEP design problems they never addressed during years of betas and now its player numbers are cratering), Outlaws (undersold), and this... probably even more I can't think of.
I can't name a single Ubisoft game that far exceeded expectations since their scandals broke. AC Valhalla probably? But even that isn't the most beloved by the broader AC fandom because it was considered heavily bloated (after multiple titles that were also considered heavily bloated).
Their issues run DEEP and they are still present. That's abundantly clear to anyone paying attention.
Re: Horizon Zero Dawn Remastered PS5 Is Official, Out 31st October with $10 PS4 to PS5 Upgrade
@dark_knightmare2 Funny. I didn't mention the combat as being the problem. Concerned someone has a different opinion than you? You hafta white knight for a videogame now?
Re: Horizon Zero Dawn Remastered PS5 Is Official, Out 31st October with $10 PS4 to PS5 Upgrade
As long as they didn't tweak the gameplay to play like Forbidden West. I still can't believe what a downgrade that sequel was.
Re: Poll: What Did You Think of Sony's State of Play for September 2024?
Hell is Us, Archeage Chronicles, and a GoT sequel?? That was solid af for my interests.
Re: Ghost of Yotei Is the Ghost of Tsushima Sequel We Needed, Slashing to PS5 in 2025
What a mic drop.
Re: Sony Appears to Leak Many Games from State of Play
If this is going to primarily be about expansions/remakes/and PS5 Pro upgrades, it'll have people wishing for the one where they showed Concord gameplay.
Re: Don't Nod 'Disappointed' by Banishers: Ghosts of New Eden, Jusant Sales
I heard Banishers was solid, but I haven't gotten to it. It's a competitive market. If they can't break through with advertising, they need to do better with things like pricing. The booming PC market proves there's plenty of space for A-AA titles, but they have to be rpiced appropriately. I feel like their games aren't and it costs them (literally).
Re: Rumour: PS6 Could Span a Console and Handheld Device
Make it a true jack of all trades: allow the handheld to play dedicated titles that get the requisite compatibility patches (or are from older generations), but then have built-in Portal-like streaming functionality for games that are too advanced for that. Let users have the best of both worlds!
I'd be all over that.
Re: Jaw-Dropping 30th Anniversary PS5 Pro Console and Accessories Will Bankrupt You
I legitimately need a new controller... but I'm sure the markup on these will be unreasonable.
Re: Fresh Marathon Details Cover Heroes, Pricing, and Bungie's Silence
I want this game to succeed AND be fun. I'm no Bungie apologist. It doesn't come from that.
I just think the extraction shooter genre is one that could take off on consoles in a way no game really has. And I think it's a smart differentiator in the market, something Concord definitely lacked.
I also just love the aesthetic. I think we deserve visually interesting games and this could be one of them. I adored the teaser and hope that look carries through to release.
Re: Dragon Age: Inquisition Massively Oversold Projections, Remains BioWare's Biggest Game
As someone who never played a DA game, I thought DAI was bloated and boring.
I played a rogue/archer expecting TPS controls because of their pedigree with ME's shooting mechanics. The fact you don't actually control your shooting, as an archer, made me switch to playing a melee ally at the beginning just so felt like I had control.
Annoyed me to no end and I regret spending the time on it.
Re: Horizon Zero Dawn's PS5, PC Remaster Is Very Much the Real Deal
@Oz_Who_Dat_Dare As someone who absolutely adores HZD, I rushed through HFW last year and then just finished Burning Shores (because I bought it and figured I may as well see where the story goes/went), I cannot fathom for the life of me what people see in HFW that makes it better than HZD. The downgrades are numerous.
I still hold HZD up as the second best "Ubisoft-style" open world game behind only Ghost of Tsushima. It was clear, lean (by open world game design standards) and fun af.
HFW took all that and threw it out the window and padded the playtime with aimless busywork, horrendously boring loot grinding, and absolutely atrociously aggravating combat. Not to mention, it has some of the jankiest controls in all of modern gaming. Aloy turns like a tank and gets caught on countless pieces of environment constantly AND the climbing is so awfully designed I almost stopped playing it before I got to the "full" world. Anyone who says otherwise is kidding themselves.
I'm glad I played it. At least I have an informed opinion on the title, and now I can wait to see how H3 stacks up. If it leans more towards 2's design, I'll just skip it and pour one out for one of the most promising, but poorly implemented evolutions of an IP I've ever personally witnessed.
Re: Horizon Zero Dawn's PS5, PC Remaster Is Very Much the Real Deal
The more people that play this so Guerilla designs the next one more like Zero Dawn and far less like Forbidden West, the better. HFW was a gotdamm slog. The fact this series went from one of the most streamlined, satisfying open world action games to one of the most boring and bloated messes in only one iteration is a travesty of game design.
Re: Sony Pulled Bungie's Head Out of Its Ass, and an Ex-Lawyer Reckons That Was a Good Thing
@knowles2 That's not at all what they did with Firewalk. Dumping $100-300mm into an unproven dev is not at all what I am suggesting.
The part of my comment about wanting to instantly go from zero to a massve hit the market may not even want is explicitly referring to their expectations/strategy for Concord.
Re: Sony Pulled Bungie's Head Out of Its Ass, and an Ex-Lawyer Reckons That Was a Good Thing
Whether you like Bungie/Destiny or not, I always come back to, "And how much could Sony have spent on other studios INSTEAD of Bungie, and thus controlled far more IP and had a far broader range of talent and expertise under its umbrella?"
You can't tell me Bungie is an outright better, more creative, more capable development house than the likes of numerous other shuttered or acquired studios combined (Crustal Dynamics, Japan Studio, the list goes on).
If Sony wants a live service hit, the best bet is to let smaller teams cook and create unique experiences that can grow into hits, the same way PUBG and Fortnite and R6 Siege and Rocket League did. None of those games set out to set the world on fire. But over their lifespans, they catered to players, built strong fundamentals, and built large followings. Sony (and many other companies) seem to want to go from nothing to massive smash hit immediately and don't realize that's the hardest, most expensive way to become a hit. You can't run a business by way of playing the lottery.
What they need to learn from Helldivers 2 (despite its tumultuous reputation since release) is that a small team with great ideas can result in outsized performance much more easily than putting an entire single player-focused studio on a multiplayer game just because of an IP (see: Naughty Dog). Go after those HD2-like hits. Get a bigger ROI and build your broader experience in delivering said hits over time. Nurture creativity and original thinking. Let them evolve into a bigger live service game WHEN THE MARKET TELLS YOU THEY WANT IT. But don't go spending hundreds of millions out the gate on something that isn't proven (Concord) or that misaligns with the given talent (again, ND).