Mythologue

Everything Sony has been doing recently has been pushing me ever so slightly farther away from their products. I've been wearing my PS4 into dust until I can get ahold of a PS5, but if the future of PS is GaaS I think I'll just stick with Steam from now on.

@Col_McCafferty So what's great about it?

@Fenbops Jim Sterling was one of the first opinions I watched just because I didn't find myself much trusting anybody else. Others I trust have praised the game but I only ever seem to hear explanations as to why the game is bad, not to why the game is good. That is mostly why I was asking.

I'm very happy for Naughty Dog. Now let's just forget the sales for a moment. What is it that makes this game exceptional? I mean, what makes it worth it? Because from what I've heard (from actual journalists I trust, not the "get woke go broke" attention seekers who have quite evidently been shown to be wrong on more than just one occasion), the story is absolutely nothing special and the game is generally dull.

From what I can tell, I can't imagine this being a bad thing. Seems like the universe has run its course, and to be honest, this game never even needed to be made to begin with.

I do not care much for the petition, because I'm not buying for a while. From what I've heard from journalists and gamers that I actually trust, both the gameplay and story are mediocre. I've heard one state that they simply had no motivation to continue playing, pointing out poor plot choices and how the game now just inserts the zombies into the story without much thought, and it seems evident to me that it is not even comparable to the original.

Between that, the crunch, and Druckman vying for the spot of the next Randy Pitchford, I can't say I much respect this title or what it represents.

No, just got a Switch recently and besides that I had also been burning through the Dark Souls trilogy again. I'm also not sure that the original ever even needed a sequel to begin with. It kind of ended perfectly. That being said, I will buy it eventually, assuming we see something of at least a ten or fifteen pound price drop.

@ShadowWolf712 Feel free to enlighten me.

@JJ2 Sorry, this is a late reply.

I don't actually like the story of Days Gone all that much. In fact, I don't really like it at all. I understand a number of people really enjoyed it, which is fine, but I don't see anything beyond generic zombies or whatever (they're not technically zombies but let's be honest, they're zombies).

God of War told a more interesting story on a number of levels because it actually has some kind of story progression, something to learn or understand. Seeing the worlds and understanding how they connect, the mystery of missing species and the role that the characters have, not to mention the fact that it's bolstered by real life mythology. It doesn't matter that you saw the end boss at the beginning because a story isn't about twists. Actually, my favourite stories don't involve twists at all. Soma, for example, or The Last of Us. Twists are always predictable and ruin a story. I guess the end of God of War was a bit of a revelation and although I liked it, it was probably the most forgettable part of the entire game. So we agree there I suppose.

@naruball What about people who pay for PS+ for the games? How is it free? Also, online play did used to be free on the PS3 so what else were people paying for besides games each month?

I think the question lies in what is so necessary on the technical side that it will be fundamentally damaging to a core aspect of the game to turn it down a little? Like, do good graphics or draw distance or particle effects make a game? I'd suggest not so, for a couple reasons. Firstly, the best games that most of us have played have probably been good because of the gameplay. Who still plays Crash Bandicoot or GTA SA for example? Silent Hill? Are those games good graphically today? No, they're good because they're fun. Secondly, do people really only pick up games that look good? What about indie titles? Is Binding of Isaac some graphical or technical masterpiece? No, it's basically old Zelda, but it's still a damn good game, arguably the best rogue like around.

So I understand concerns about how they'll have to scale down the technical stuff, but I'd argue that unless in very specific circumstances it really doesn't matter anyway.

They're both generic shooters (one of them now infamous for poor business practices), but I haven't played a CoD game in probably about four or five years now and I wouldn't mind at least giving the campaign a try.

I suppose it's closer to the bullseye but still a way off.

It could be interesting, I'm always up for alternate history, but it's got a bunch of cliché ideas going by the premise alone:

Nuclear war
The nazis are winning actually
You are one of the few remaining survivors
Nuclear winter
Your choices affect the world around you
Psychological imagery

I don't care much for the setting or much of the aforementioned. All I need to see is gameplay, but I have a feeling this game is going to at best be a lukewarm title.

@Mitsui Well, maybe, but there are about a dozen ways you can achieve that effect. Purposely slowing the player down in a situation where the only input they give is to move forward or backward just doesn't sound fun to me. I also don't trust any big developers these days, so I'll believe it doesn't hide a loading screen when I can confirm it personally.

Do you know what's better than hiding load screens? Literal load screens. Seriously, just give me a fat HL2 loading bar. If people can see through it so transparently, I don't know why developers keep trying to misdirect.

With respect to the "squeeze", if that wasn't loading, I don't have a clue why it existed. Is doing these bits actually interesting to anybody?

Origins was a painful grind with poorly written and forgettable characters in side missions that you were essentially forced to take part in to grind your level so you could play the actually interesting main missions. It was a good game beside that (and the fact that it was trying way too hard to channel the success of The Witcher 3), but Assassin's Creed will always be Ubisoftified and sport the unnecessarily large worlds that have nothing in them besides boring filler (Ghost Recon Breakpoint is probably the best example of this).

I've skipped Odyssey because I wanted to try to complete Origins again first but I simply can't do it because it's so boring at times. Therefore, Odyssey might be pretty good, or it might suck, I really don't know. But if Valhalla shrinks the world to the point where the only content is engaging and worthwhile (I like to say, "build the world around the content, not the content around the world"), and rids itself of the tedious future and modern day sections, I think it'll be well worth it.

I also just want to see York in a game again.

@bighal Technically, it's not even "free", since it's probably the main reason anybody would pay for PS+ besides the fact that Sony (and Xbox) lock online play behind a pay wall for reasons I still don't understand beside incessant greed.

@Paranoimia I don't think I've played a single game that hasn't inferred a strong sociopolitical angle, minus simple arcade games and such.

A lot of the weight behind the game has diminished because of the leaks. Less so because the story is out there, more so because it's been so heavily criticised now. The worst part is that people who don't want the game spoiled can't look into what supposedly makes it poor, but I get the feeling that neither can they just go out and spend money on something that might not be to quality. It's not a good start for the game, but irrespective it will probably still sell like any ND game does.

@Netret0120 It's possible to give people AAA titles that recently released. They did that with Detroit, and Game Pass has been doing it for a while with the likes of The Outer Worlds, Crackdown 3 (the game sucks but that's beside the point) and I think also Wasteland 3, which isn't even released yet as far as I'm aware.

@M_abrahamse It's not free, guy. It's a subscription service.

@jdv95 It's not contradicting to not like two different sets of games. That is not a dichotomy. The problem is that people expect the world with PS+ and, to be honest, the games just generally aren't worth the subscription. Not these days anyway. It's also not especially controversial to say that this is a bad lineup, when even people on a PlayStation-dedicated news site can't even stomach pretending as though it's worth it.

@get2sammyb How about a Witcher franchise quiz? Or is that kinda out right now?

8 for 8. A couple were lucky guesses though.

The issue with PS+ is its tendency to only really ever encapsulate games that are outdated and sell poorly. They could do it in any number of ways but this seems to be the way they usually go. It's basically a bargain bin which you aren't even permanently buying from. That's probably why people are so intensely frustrated. It's just beginning to feel like a broken system.

Xbox had the avatar thing back in the mid to late phases of the 360. If you earned particular achievements, you'd unlock clothing and accessories for your avatar. The example that stands out most for me is Halo Reach and the different helmets you could win.

If PlayStation did something like this, and introduced maybe something like the imps from Dreams to customise based on achievements you earned, or maybe introduced a system in which you could earn titles like in Runescape and other games, I think that would be a pretty neat feature.

Unfortunately, it seems unlikely.

Meh. Even if it is true, that's a mediocre zombie survival RPG with a game everybody has already played. Might be worth Dark Souls...maybe. Toss the other one or mulligan for something better.

Out of my top ten favourite games of all time, I can count on close to none of them being large, sprawling open worlds. There's a lot you can do with an SSD and processing power to bypass traditional issues like procedural spooling for example, but I'd rather it was used more in smaller, dense and compact environments. I like to think developers will build around the events and points of interest, rather than creating a world first and then populating it after.

@JJ2

Very few large open world games offer as rich a narrative experience as more linear and compact titles. In fact, I can't personally name any open world games that have really ever had decent narratives. 99% of the time, it's a dichotomy, or to be more generous, a tradeoff. 1% of the time, you'll get titles like GTAV or RDR2, of course, but that only makes me wonder what those stories could have been like had they not been stretched thin by the polarising essence of generic open world staples.

@Eldritch Irrespective, if Sony keep ratcheting up the price of consoles, people are just going to turn to PC which is cheaper and far more future-proofed (not to mention that it naturally has an incredibly broad range of games and an unspoken "backwards compatability").

Granted the PS5 technology is impressive, but I can guarantee that they will be shooting themselves in the foot if they don't diligently consider the balance between cost and power.

There's nothing yet from the PS5 that will be an outstanding feat enough for myself to justify buying a £400 (or thereabouts) console from day one, so the limited supply doesn't feel like it'll affect me all that much. This might be the first console where I give it maybe six months to a year to see how the game library expands first.

Until then, I don't see much reason to abandon the PS4 or Xbox One, especially considering they'll likely still be supported even a year or two after the release (or start?) of the ninth generation.

Not to sound cynical, but there's almost nothing that this button will do that will have me interested. Unless it's some killer overhaul, I doubt anything will change my mind on that.

I still remember when gaming was about games.

@Matroska They might be a standard for recent gaming PCs but most people probably aren't just buying new computers these days. Half the point of PC gaming is that you can adjust it and improve upon it over time without having to shell out for a new one in its entirety. For serious PC gamers, it seems more likely that they'd have a shell that they work on and adjust over time and may have had those for upwards of ten years. Personally, I've had mine for about seven years. The question then becomes if people integrate SSDs or just stick with an old HDD. Some will, but I'm certain that a large amount also won't.

@Porco Considering my rapidly diminishing trust for Pitchford and his mediocre company, I'd have to agree.

Sure, but all of this is for nought when missing one key component. People seem to be obsessing over power to the point that they're forgetting what games consoles are all about, and the clue is in the name.

Wait, are the create button and light bar new features? Isn't that just the share button and a light bar that has been relocated from DS4?

@Constable_What I have to agree, it really is slow, especially when opening a Web browser or the PS store. I find the X1 UI marginally better, but it can still be excruciatingly slow at times (namely in Explorer, same as with the PS4). The store loads a lot faster though.

I'm hoping that they return to a minimal UI rather than keeping a bunch of gimmicks that serve no purpose. Improve gameplay functions like trophies, the rest can go.

A bit of a meh lineup. Some good games, some great games, but likely nothing most people haven't already got.

My guess is specs and development potential, but not much beyond that. I doubt this is going to be some massive reveal of anything we don't already have an idea about.