RIP Piranha Bytes. As janky as their games were they had a lot of charm and cool about them. So for their next game or whatever else unfortunate state of them.
Surprised that some AAs just don't have a publisher wanting to support them, why? Too ambitious? Too costly? No interest because they don't make trending safe games yet we see some European publishers just having awkward games repackaging being dodgey, as if I don't notice for some games physical Switch carts and Definitive editions but reselling them as digital codes.
Or whatever other reasons there are? Very unfortunate. Hope Piranha Bytes staff do well from this, forming new studios or finding other jobs. They will be remembered for sure.
The publisher also owning their IPs sigh, not surprised there either.
Fair I guess. The game does a fair job telling what it needs to. Even the Monster Hunter animated movie was better than the live action.
To make the CGI for the dinosaurs or just the story work or whatever of casting or whatever TV show staff had in mind and make it THEIR own besides Sony/Guerilla staff guiding things I guess.
It's story is a good part of the games but yeah translating that world to TV I don't know it's a challenge but would have been impressive.
I think they just need the right people to make it happen just like Uncharted movie took years (even lined up after 4/Lost Legacy but PS5 versions came to work with them and yes Uncharted is bigger/been around long then Horizon but even still something has to be going on with Sony or others or whatever the TV staff think which seeing some gaming movies some are just weird half the ideas or execution they are going for when the games already present fair movie/tv like aspects already just with gameplay added.
Sure I don't care for that but I won't deny how well they do convert that or fit the movie/TV series inspirational details to a degree even I don't think some are that good but at the same time it's also the game part holding it's part then the other and I don't care for game stories usually anyways) when I mean if Treasure Buddies or others can come out why? Or was it the back and forth was the challenge of TV production staff and Sony/the devs thoughts on the execution? Anything is possible.
I don't care for the IP (know people that do) that much the gameplay bored me but it doesn't mean the IP isn't strong in some ways.
20. Suikoden I & II HD Remaster: Gate Rune and Dunan Unification Wars (cool to have but not enough I know about them, not sure if care, may depends on the combat/general design, not a turn based/real time RPG person with typical RPG quests)
19. Ys X: Nordics (cool I guess, 9 was fine, not of interest to me)
18. Dragon Ball: Sparking! Zero (not an IP I care for)
17. Sonic X Shadow Generations (bought the original for cheap, feels weird to play, it's ok)
16. EA Sports College Football 25 (skip)
15. Visions of Mana (cool, not for me)
14. Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 (skip haven't cared for COD since BO3 co-op or better ideas in the past, got the older WW2 entries to play instead)
13. Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 (cool but not for me)
12. Life Is Strange: Double Exposure (cool but not for me)
11. Dragon Quest 3 HD-2D Remake (cool but not for me)
10. The Plucky Squire (cool, not sure about it yet but good presence of ideas from what I remember)
9. Warhammer 40k: Space Marine 2 (wanting a decent not Indie/AAA historical shooter and a GOOD fantasy one yes please I care about this game, Aveum flopped even if was a fair game. I want Space Marine to succeed, will play the first one again as got stuck but really want to like it)
8. LEGO Horizon Adventures (could be cool, not interested, I like the idea of Horizon but never the gameplay, also sick of Lego games, also to me I'd rather Astro or others succeed then Sony allowing things like this because they can't get Ratchet/Sackboy to sell)
7. Metaphor: ReFantazio (cool but not my thing)
6. Dragon Age: The Veilguard (I appreciate the series but just can't get into them. I am on the sidelines cheering people on into it though I respect the series a lot and Bioware's survival)
5. Silent Hill 2 (cool but not my thing, I can stomach other horror games not this)
4. Assassin's Creed Shadows (not my thing)
3. Black Myth: Wukong (it's cool but not my thing)
2. Star Wars Outlaws (cool but not my thing)
1. Astro Bot (good to see, since the prior articles not surprised it deserves some high support I just never know it's THIS high of support).
To me Gori Cuddly Carnage, Steam World Heist 2, Akimbot or Space Marine 2 are more my thing this year, beside Astro of course, everything else is older years 9th gen or retro for older systems.
Playing Mario Rabbids (random pickup and halfway through it been binging it but taken a few days break) or Forza Motorsport 2 (again) right now.
It better have crazy missions or else just crazy driving isn't that exciting at least not these days. I appreciate arcade games or arcadey games with less arcade time limit/other differences.
Solo for me. MP pass.
It being realistic sure I mean the originals went for a more silly but stylised look I think or 'as realistic as could get for the time during Dreamcast, GameCube or PSP' but either way sure. Arcadey fun with realism isn't that bad.
Yes I have never played the series but have other Sega IPs (especially been curious for their other racing series to come back with fake cars not just Crazy Taxi), yes I don't know a lot about it other than the many entries or some clones or bits about Smashing Drive and it's cool GBA port.
I'm interested though and I've played other arcade racers but yes no Simpsons Road Rage or Crazy Taxi at all.
I am VERY open world picky with anything driving/racing or action adventure games. The movesets or the missions need to be compelling or that world isn't worth my time no matter the IP. There is a reason I found Spiderman (other than lab puzzles, laser, radar, ground pound missions or task master) boring & Gravity Rush/Sunset Overdrive/Infamous Second Son more compelling is movesets & missions design.
If the missions aren't 'good' and take advantage of the craziness or the world/character's capabilities and just some generic human, some generic car driving experience & isn't as good as Burnout Paradise (even then I didn't like Paradise but appreciate what it tried to do and the stunts/takedowns/races & more. I got lost/hated the open world roads of driving on that map over time & AI just being not fun or stunt point counts too high and struggling to find places to do any without the lower amounts being harsher with repeated stunts) translated Burnout well to open world then I'm just not interested, missions matter to me and the physics.
Same way events restrictions or event TYPES as in drift, touge (not been in games in years), hillclimbs, race, time trial, cones, soccer, potato, bomb (GT Club PSP for example soccer to bomb), stylish driving related (Project Gotham Racing), gates/barriers (or rings to drive through) to break for points (WRC 3 or Project Cars 3) or any others (different parts of the track to trigger things like Drive Club or say Blur/Split Second even besides the kart racer action elements but the objectives) matter to me in circuit racers & if the events suck I am not interested.
I mean stylish driving makes sense for different fares them just destination. Even Test Drive Unlimited 2 (not Solar Crown) has that with being careful to survive and keep the money amount high enough to reward yourself on the Point A-B.
So more objectives for different customer fares would make sense for Crazy Taxi then just 'go to this restaurant, mall/shopping centre'. As fair of the simplicity and arcade fun of the originals. IF that's what they are going for/modernisation.
Also online with nothing fun to do is just silly to justify a product.
Besides just the originals in the game (Like Yakuza has arcade cabinets to play some other Sega games).
Simple as that. It's more than just car licenses it's game design that matters to use such vehicles to make things more exciting on the track or on the streets/fields and worth playing.
I miss The Club/PGR type arcade style modernisation then just the many trends we see nowadays.
Is unfortunate for what they prepped even though we already knew this, that and Bend hasn't had a trilogy in years but at the same time regardless to me whether a sequel or a new IP if it's just as much a cinematic IP with less compelling gameplay I'm still not interested in it.
Is unfortunate but didn't have high expectations either. Whelp PS2/PS3 still works so good there for the future.
Then again what gets offered. I don't assume Capcom will offer Under the Skin for them at all. Who knows what will be offered really, and the time and care better uploads to the service either and updates as they go/news to gain hype.
I was surprised Push Square put the PC/Android emulator options at all, but at also not wrong either, at the same time it is what audiences would compare that are deep into games or were already doing is original hardware or fan emulators and brave journalists willing to say whatever the case other than say archive type news sources like Time Extension part of this group of new sites.
I mean no one wanted to compare Mario 3D Allstars to fan emulators because getting on company good sides or to the originals when fans will go yeah nah better options even besides mods/PC port.
@Flaming_Kaiser It has it's ergonomic differences but I mean it's people's fault for not knowing Impulse Triggers (rumble triggers of sorts) existed before HD Rumble and Haptics on the Xbox One controller since 2013 launch model controllers even if in so few games use it that I can tell (I own what 30 or so 1st/3rd party games for it then my 100+ PS4 library and that's my largest console library) same as the few that use the Touchpad as a touchpad for gestures or half buttons (4 quadrants on Vita) then a big Select button. Or scaling the vibration levels I came across in Azure Gunvolt collection for PS4, other games may do that I don't know. Besides the few that use gyro as well.
It wasn't just design changes again for the Xbox One controller, it did have a hardware feature upgrade just no one paid attention when they did it because of the start of the Xbox One launch people talked about more.
It works fine in Gears gun reload minigame to time it or Forza/Project Cars 3 for accel/brake guidance. Those are the only games I have experienced it in so far.
Other than that if the gyro in the next console controller happens sure it will be inline with Sony/Nintendo but otherwise it's still fairly caught up more than people realise but yes not as much as the other two because of lacking motion controls or as much vibration/haptics as the Dualsense or HD Rumble offer.
But to say it's the 'same' controller is inaccurate. For people that skipped the console I don't blame people but just saying as when playing multiplatform then 1 platform as all can afford or all of interest (makes sense) just jumping in the more I've experienced collecting for all 3 platforms to inform/point out politely.
Among Us is well known or free or whatever cheap price. Any other Indie is more worth putting for the money. It's a fair game but I mean something different would be better.
Borderlands 3 people know if they want it or not and if getting around to it now by all means, even besides the eh writing it's fair gameplay improvements but prefer Tiny Tina.
Sports, it being Hockey aside even if it were EA FC or Madden or Golf or Boxing/Wrestling or whatever it's so low value or quality till the next one when if Sony REALLY tried they'd offer one of the arcade/fantasy ones by Indies as a better offer then the EA sim ones are these days
That or a party game or something else should have been offered but nope Sony and the casual crowd offering this month.
They are desperate and can't find any other offerings this month quite surprising, even a VR game is more worth it then Among Us or sim sports, what they have cycled through or other games haven't gone down in value/worth offering yet according to other publishers it seems. Hmm.
I don't even sub but I know people that do I just look out of curiosity.
It's called get another studio to do it instead of Insomniac let alone they also can't VR because Sony doesn't want it (waste of their skills) and Marvel is all they are good for anymore apparently.
Why is giving it to another studio such hassle for Sony I don't get it. They didn't remaster the Ratchet games Idol Minds did or Mass Media for the Vita port. Or Idol Minds for Deadlocked port as well. Do they not do that anymore with other studios to make deals and hand over the source code/assets? Do they really want to do it themselves?
Cost makes total sense even besides finding a studio that can to it, but if they want to do it themselves why do that to themselves?
I get other studios are busy too but find one that can if possible. It's on Xbox One and PC as it is, is a PS5 port that difficult or other studios to ask to port are too busy/would take too long to find one at all?
I don't care either way I own it happily on Xbox One but for those that didn't experience it why is it that much trouble for them to port it is the cost too high that sounds more fair then 'were busy'.
Then again they made a garbage Ratchet 1 remake, Spiderman 2018 just wasn't my kind of open world anyway compared to Sunset Overdrive's design being more appealing and minigame playground fun in comparison besides all the similar Ratchet or Resistance 3 elements.
Rift Apart was the safest game they have ever made and was a disappointment to me at least.
To me besides Sunset Overdrive their last game I actually cared for beside Song of the Deep as an ok other project (and not played their VR titles) was Ratchet Crack in Time or Nexus. The last time they actually did anything dramatically different too then safe games and really eh ones since
(Sunset Overdrive does enough to make me WANT to play an open world because of the weapon leveling of Ratchet, tower defence then boring outposts of Spider-man (only cared for the lab puzzles and ground pound, radar and laser side missions, or task master ones, otherwise found the game incredibly boring and a fair story, but gameplay wise was very boring, up to last 3 villains fight, don't care to beat it)
and other games part of generic open world formats, and just better humour then I expected like Journey to the Savage Planet or others will fair humour as I first hated it for that then replayed it and loved it for the gameplay, while having actually fun environments and fun minigame like platforming side missions besides typical side missions).
Sunset Overdrive, ReCore and Rare Replay are the reasons I even keep an Xbox One around besides back compatibility, good media viewing menus for disks (apps for Soundcloud/CDs/Blu-rays to have as Sony has Spotify/DVD and Blu-ray but no CD or expansion app support which is fair) and the trashy Forza Motorsport 5-7. Most things on Xbox One for me are optional.
Even when I don't like a lot on PS4 either. Only a handful of games, may be my biggest library still don't like the PS4 games, but do the PS4 menu/folders over Xbox One oh that OS sucks.
Yeah because Titanfall 1 or Anthem as a story/multiplayer combo was a good idea. They were at the time cool and new (and Anthem ended up that way because Bioware + EA multiplayer demands) but not nowadays too risky and most people want the in and out fun not a story.
The reason people play multiplayer is for the gameplay and to get what they want out of it.
If you want a multiplayer story shooter do a Strange Brigade or something else more suited to it, a more co-op story game not a competitive story game with whatever factions and nonsense. Even Planetside 2 doesn't do that I think.
Not Overwatch [cutscenes sure but not during the main game]/Destiny Crucible (than the regular game) I assume but also make that not work too well either in HOW they go about it of maps.
As far as the footage showed in the State of Play at least. I have no idea how it will actually be but it looks like a typical multiplayer with story talking over and that's not a good idea because who can follow it or cares.
I think they are wasting their time. There is trend following and putting a spin on things, but making that spin worth something is why I get disappointed in the game's industry doing stuff like this is because I think it's the wrong way to put a spin on things compared to other more viable ways instead.
Then again Foamstars had 2 modes and a buisness model. I had more ideas then it's base had so it shows they cared for money and not a good gameplay model because they didn't care. Neither did Diofield either with an eh story and the gameplay was pathetic when 2018's Valkyria Chronicles 4 has more depth even for it having less depth then 2010's original game in some areas.
Same as why Lucid wasted their time with Destruction Allstars and forget most people don't care for vehicle based games or vehicles that's why the racing genre and vehicular combat genre aren't doing well is the creativity is dead for them.
Making it 'modern' doesn't save it if the appeal of it's core isn't there for their intended target audience and an audience that would be fine with those types of games aren't compelled either because it's so disappointing.
Among us seriously it's free do they need subs to PS+ that bad and go whelp young people or other trend focused adults join.
Borderlands 3 is fair but I think something else could be there.
Sports because why?They are worth nothing over time and most already bought it or will later so why even if benefits.
Sony is lazy to pick something else. They make their audience target clear here this month the Idiots.
I think a tactics game or arcade racer or something party or puzzle would do for variety. Not expecting a visual novel after all to slip in.
I buy only old arcade or racing annual nowadays because Sims suck this gen. Any arcade racer would be good to offer anti grav or kart racer or otherwise Indie ones.
But even an arcade fantasy sports game is better than major sports series.
Give people those.
I don't sub but an indie or other AAA would do but these, pass. I got Borderlands 3 already.
@thefourfoldroot1 I wondered that too at times in the trailer what recycling was done, sometimes it's fine but other times and how much they do I do question it and would prefer more effort in new environments or bosses/stages to them or enemy types that aren't reskins, recycled animations or stages either.
With the many AAs of PS2 I've played or others I see recycling aspects sometimes I can give it a pass but in others I can't and AAA or not some things need enough distinction texture recycling or other assets/level design, minigames, movesets, etc.
That or reusing areas saying 'there is a mission here' and me just facepalming going great we really need more than that recycling extent in some games. Backtracking I don't mind but story wise later or keeping a key moment again is just not good design and can devalue the experience. Let alone a remade level being worse than the original either even if recontextualised what's happening in it and some parts being cut down and less exciting even if to show time has past or a different region of the same labelled area or a few parts crossover.
@nomither6 Agreed, many of us love it but the average person or people very dedicated to what they like of even besides sports/COD/trending games many would treat Astro as a kids game and ignore it while many of us would be like yes please an experience like it or like older eras.
@Max_the_German It's very much a sign of possibilities but industry changing nope as much as we wish it would it won't change anything.
Even ones that have or could didn't change anything either for other genres or studios success to prove things. The state of things will still keep happening but stories and teams showing it's possible will still be proving what could and can happen.
@Archius9 Would be nice but I think it's good enough for it being focused as it is for one player at the moment. Maybe a two player update. Maybe a two player game later.
But yeah co-op platformers besides Sackboy or It Takes Two or others yeah not that common these days. More common in the older era or other genres a co-op campaign mode and sigh online then offline co-op more so. That and being more than just a Mario game with a cursor too.
Great to hear just like the past, fewer devs, more controlled management and engagement from staff, smaller game in this case then a Song of the Deep type Spyro scale team for a Metroidvania AAA or however much for Pentiment.
The rare moments we see it happen are always nice to see to fill in gaps or just sometimes in my case are the console buying type games then the other bigger titles but it varies for each person.
Hardcore sales I can't wait for it to do well, for more than that for casual families/kids I don't know but maybe. But for hardcore players and their families I can't wait for this to sell well or others that still love a good platformer or good family friendly game and enjoying their inter child gaming experience again years later.
Let alone COD PS3 era at 200 and fair ideas at the time whatever the case of management Activision had to 300+ employees and many studios than just the 2 doing their thing prior and worse results as well. Then again EA treating NFS or others to milk was just as bad let alone other studio deaths of the 90s/00s they offered.
Says a lot really. It's not just because it's a platformer and may not require much (I mean many games of Spyro Reignited, Ratchet, Sonic all require a fair bit for sure with the right effort put in of personality, polish and ideas in mind) it's that they had the better effort put into the game, regardless of artstyle, good attention to detail the many PlayStation references or Astro related world elements that are charming.
They made it in a shorter time and it shows with many signs in the trailers and in articles like this with how they manage their business and budget correctly and control things much better no matter their skills and coordination.
Something many studios and publishers could take notes from cough cough.
Seeing as many in my own country for just swap meets or certain retailers too regardless of the state of GAME or CEX or others in the UK it's sad to see how much things are changing around the world of physical. Some of us will keep going but if only collectors I am not sure. The physical experience is just so good to find gems or any major games I want. Not digital only. I don't find it convenient at all let alone appealing. I get more enthusiasm for physical. Sure the drive/bus trip there but otherwise that's nothing compared to the experience of going there all the time.
A digital store/app isn't as fun as exploring what I want when most of these digital options the searching sucks, you don't always find anything that great even if more are digital and besides the constant advertising compared to physical when you can ignore most of it anyway let alone better prices physical then very much still waiting a while to be good enough discounts on digital. Physical any day even for how bad the prices are then USD prices I have to deal with.
Well more AU/EU to keep looking forward to of physical releases for how long left it has I guess. Not collectors edition only releases I don't want that future because of how I shop.
Then again if we see more digital code physical then those companies can get what's coming to them no purchase. They choose to not handle the multiplayer download or the Japanese audio or enough balancing of game bundles. That's on them for being lazy not for me to accept their laziness.
There is a reason I only bought Drawn to Life physical digital code on Switch, I wasn't getting it on mobile or PC. Major IPs I couldn't care less niche games sure I want that physical because of how particular and unique case of release they are over a digital purchase. I wasn't buying Gear Club Unlimited 2 that way I got the definitive edition all on one card and the standard edition with the Porsche DLC code and never used that code at all. Codes like that I don't mind for DLC or themes. Otherwise pass. Bundling 3 games and 1 on the card or part of pass.
Also Spyro reignited 1st on the disk Activision can get stuffed for that.
Any other old games wanting digital codes because they think they won't sell with a cart that's on them.
Because I play all genres or platformers that had enough of all genres I got used to many others making it easier. I make the effort to dive in and understand them no matter how awkward or foreign many like hack n slashes/tactics are my new favourite genres.
Like when I find a new music genre/style I try to understand it, I find the ones I like and get a sense of the artist or the genre.
Depends/kind of depends on the challenge/what the game offers, what era of gaming it is as well, what genre expectations or the studio's typical games are like of challenge or just some parts are just awkward as many PS1-3 titles can vary.
PS2/PS1/PSP I don't mind the experimental & awkward design because they don't always have difficulty settings, with current ones (certain PS3/Vita but obviously PS4/5 era (PS4 for me) as usually pretty typical of easy these days but some exceptions come up such as some racing or souls (or Indies mimicking old gen design or overlooking aspects and sometimes problems that should be solved not replicated that much of inspiration besides their good old school core design), the level/game design as awkward was more exciting and fair of trying to refine itself.
Nowadays the difficulty to me I just put it low or if it's pro level like Ride 4 or MotoGP16/assuming others are too hard on very easy (the rally/dirt bike opponents are easy, the MotoGP riders AI is way too hard that's how I know because that game has those 3 types of gameplay and I enjoy the Ride series it was easy to work out the differences), many of Ride 3 and older were fine I'm buying up the PS3/360 era ones currently and are easy.
Some of GT Sport's F1 or endurance races sucked but the rest was fairly balanced of AI or time trial goal times. So if 90% was playable that's fine by me. But still sucks as when GT3-6 has different AI/time trials I find them still playable other than the S-6 GT6 license test being too hard for me to even Bronze not Gold like other players say of it being challenging. XD
Not just AI/pitting & easy in GT3 & 4 besides GT5 and 6 having awful tire physics even worse I find then the Forza Motorsport 2 or 3 & 4 era feel of cars for mid game events. Or endurance in those games in GT Sport to me those events (2 F1 style and what 4 endurance so 6 all up and varied of races and regardless of cars from a Porsche Race Car to others made no differences of One Make not otherwise) were just unplayable from the starting line.
Soulslike don't interest me. For those that want them that's totally fine I respect niches for sure I like many niches continuing on in their own way. But the challenge is ok I just get lazy or bored with the way they want to offer the challenge/combat so in a way it is on me with the stamina and enemy patterns.
Ninja Gaiden 2 was hard too of enemy patterns and laziness to deal with the first boss in level 2 of that game but most other hack n slash/character action games are still playable enough for me besides their difficulty on Normal, anything higher and I can't do it. Darksiders 2 highest difficulty run was ok but I got sick of doing that, beat the game on Normal anyway. I no interest in difficulty trophies, never play on Hard+ (doing well with Valkyrie Elysium as started the demo on hard & gotten through it well, Wanted Dead on Normal kicks my butt so I have to start it again) and to me if the Normal mode is too hard that's a sign.
To me I play enough of PS2/3/4 era titles and current gen on PS4 (equivalents on Nintendo and Xbox) to get an idea how difficulty, design in the games/studio or genres are these days. PS1/PSP control schemes don't bother me either.
Depends on the game, the era, the extent they are aiming for of eh QTE I sometimes can pass. Other times just odd segments, odd movesets that while fun are still better than boring current gen.
This rumour will keep going. When is Vita support going to PS5 even? Never likely sigh Is the PS5 capable yes, will they because moving it to PS6 or otherwise complexities with games/the emulation. I don't think they want to. They won't contact the RSPCS3 team either. That team does amazing amounts of effort with the project but they are the only ones willing, other platforms people want to make emulators for instead & major companies can replicate with ease.
As good as PS3 is if Sega cared about Binary Domain (I enjoy it too as buying up many shooters from 7th gen PS3/360/Wii) as much as many of us do they would have ported it. Same with many of the major third parties shooters east or west instead of the handful we saw in PS4 and have PS5.
Sony does make more money from games they can remaster/remake. Most of the IPs they cared or can went to PS4 or PS5 already. PS2/PSP/PS1 they treat like Nintendo does NES/SNES/N64 regardless of the prices they are old enough for nostalgia & regardless of price value. Complexity like Saturn and interest is clear.
Gamecube as remasters then emulation while Wii U well it had a Wii inside it so it wasn't that hard to do while GameCube they didn't want to scale it. Same with GBA the Ambassador program on 3DS they didn't want to emulate it on the chips just do virtualisation (Win XP fake using the same hardware & booting the OS to simulating it not hardware that's more powerful to pretend to be weaker hardware) instead.
Has the nostalgia for PS3/360/Wii happened yet? As PS2/Xbox/GameCube/Dreamcast has? I don't even care about nostalgia I just pick up what seems interesting to me regardless of price and wait it out if too high.
If people want CIB that's on you but I don't seek them & still end up with the CIB manual, disk & maybe no advertising, all of it, or just the disk/artwork/after market case. I'm happy I care more about the disk then I do CIB and that's why people complain about the price, who reads the manual. If the disk works then sure.
But not everything is going to be scratch free. Anybody wanting that wants the same quality of a fresh disk but that's not how things go and that's unrealistic. I had Wolfenstein 2009 not work, eh The Darkness 2 1st level that's it, but for the most part PS3 lasts well, not working was usually PS2 or 360.
My results have been pretty good so far can't say for others and where they shop & the differences. Then again I had no issues with EB games when they still offered PS3/360/Wii U/DS in 2017-2020 cut off and now just 3DS, Switch, PS4/Xbox One/PS5/Series only now.
Those left behind IPs they don't care about so why bother buy a PS3/360/Wii instead. I know having a Wii makes it possible to do what major third parties won't of games to Switch or even PC/VR of any kind either. Let alone their own subscription services on PC/PS4/Xbox One and PS5/Series.
The PS3 era titles studios that want to support already offer with streaming even if streaming is limited to Premium and not available for Deluxe tier regions/countries.
Get a PS3 they aren't that hard to get at least where I shop they haven't been that pricey, can't say for other regions/countries the games from 2017+ and Super Slim I got 2023 have been cheap enough to go by. Not always ebay/Price charting or other sources.
I love ambitious things yet audiences don't or it's too expensive for any tech to do anything new or evolve let alone games to offer when Devs won't bother either. Experimentation is dead of PS2 era. PS3 safeness and the design we have seen for PS4/5 gen of hardware and game design has taken a dive. So hardware like this won't be pushed unless it's cheap or has an application of us in or outside gaming.
Not surprised Nintendo hasn't bothered they know it won't take offer yet and yet even besides that I'm sick of phones or anything taking 10+ years to do anything because of prices or audiences being so slow to adopt it. Companies can't make anything anymore that's ambitious. It's why phones also suck.
Social convenience or Miiverse/Xbox social features but anything actually exciting nope goodbye any of those moments. I blame audiences. Not just companies with sometimes awkward approaches or ad garbage forcing down our throats.
Responding to quote with deeper details on Gameranx or others articles that Push Square, VGChartz and others don't dive further into.
Better ideas of Master System 3D with arcade games with 3D like aspects aka making it more than just racing and shoot em ups as NES/Famicom did. That person is saying the same as NES 3D so I find it a load of garbage.
Yes 3D and VR are different but same point can be made. If Sega got Genesis VR or Atari Jaguar VR besides Nintendo Virtual Boy or the Vectrex also had it's limits too of Vectors besides time it came out may have gotten it with effort yet we hear excuses from VR Devs being just as unimaginative or ambitious with the tech or saying it can't be done what of safe games, safe camera or other design work around that then.
Just state the truth they can't be bothered and want other things and aren't creative enough to do it because games are as generic as they are and these same people making the same mistakes in VR and under ambitious. They just don't care to find a solution not just sales.
Only works in first person uh not every VR game that's good is a racing or cockpit style game they are third person cameras. Better developers right harder. It's how we got third person in the first place. Sigh. Any idiot knows they can put a camera in third person games as such and have the character move around so the player is a camera not the lack of 1st person with less of the character model. We don't need everything for VR to be overly immersive just because they don't have the skill, imagination or brain power to devise such solutions and only see what they want or THINK audiences will accept or only think on basic real terms, it's a video game think outside the box you idiots. It's software, many things can be worked around if they think hard enough no matter how cryptic or archaic. It took how long for analogue sticks to get used to, same with motion/rumble handhelds or consoles. Same with 3D TV or 3D cameras or backgrounds with 2D games. Also good examples of many things tried but nowadays people are too stupid and think real logic when making games and I'm like but movies/tv series have dramatised or romantised worlds no problem and it still works. How can games not be treated the same way? It's it's own world with it's own rules to create not recreating the real ones because they can't think outside the box. Idiots with no creativity or no effort to try hard enough.
When they adapt and put effort into many other solutions if they tried hard enough in their games. I get even SNES or PS2 eras had awkward things about them but they also had a lot of good mix in with the awkward not just oh we4 only do that same we have seen 8th gen be is boring movesets so standardised and boring I went back to old gen because the experimental touches don't actually bother me and because what was tried is gone because the studios went too realistic and too brain dead to try and find GAMEY solutions not real solutions. I swear some people aren't creative enough to go beyond to find a solution and it annoys me a lot.
They work well enough if approached the right way like Astro or Moss. Any idiot with a brain can find the solutions. The same way making sure the arms for core mechanics translate well instead of over using the hardware for bad motion controls when they worked fine in the past but they go oh we can do more yet bad Wii motion comes in when good ones with better balance can make VR games possible. Stop the whole pull to reload or pull off back a weapon and the tracking being garbage. Just keep it simple. How hard is that. Idiots over engineering software solutions to things I swear.
Insomniac having VR experience what a waste they weren't used for it and instead Marvel games. Why?
Even then London or others why not?
If they can offer Dioramas or better third person cameras almost like walking a dog of floating and not having to be human just any sort of objects/other being or just a camera or other things for how a camera can act and can't perform it they are useless.
If their tools suck why not just make their own or make plugins on existing ones. Make tweaks where it counts. Actually think about the situations the player is in, ignore reality and actually think while avoiding the nausea and still make it safe not overly crazy. Not everything has to be REAL. People get nausea from just awkward lighting or set pieces outside of VR, as if that wasn't obvious in other games of old.
They can add VR modes they are lazy. Third person games can work as if Astro, Tethered or Townmen VR which has bad controls but is a city builder those 2 games besides Astro being a platformer making the camera a focus with the platforming then why are these idiots saying third person can't work.
Make the view of the camera/screen and view of the world if like i've seen how Minecraft of view to load besides the actual generation (but not visually in view because of detail and the depth of that vision and interaction the player will do that the game can't predict till the player moves or interacts) or some others may do it work well enough. Stop with garbage visuals pushing of the hardware and make the camera work to view things well, avoid nausea and have good enough mechanics not realism level nonsense no one asked for because they aren't creative enough to think outside the box. I've played many experimental, shovelware or reasonable that still get the job done. Why can't they do it. That's from current gen and old gens but mostly old gens when we had better experimentation regardless of sales.
The history learned from GDC Wii/Move is just not in their minds because they are stupid. Gaming even in the experimental field is dead because they can't think things up better for how to go nuts and branch out of design at all, treat it as new, actually think about what to problem, solve and play in the worlds without realistic rules at first because nowadays real rules make things as boring as they are not just for oh nausea level crazy either, have eh budgets because of the risk and yet we get bad games and bad experimental ones because things are too safe nowadays. What a sad state of the world. Imagination in gaming is dead for some studios or people. Some studios can still pull it offer but others just can't. They can code/animate probably well enough of skilled or not but they don't have creativity at all and it's like how did you even get here.
It's like with eh stories, too much family/emotional garbage to get some pathetic reaction out of a player/viewer when I came for a video game. Give me a video game not some garbage fan fiction wannabe movie trash.
I think while the pricing was high for console standards not other VR standards as many are higher priced then PSVR2 but not as cheap as others more underpowered headsets. It's a submarket but the efforts made in it haven't been very good either.
Prices or games, the ambition like Remote Play was it taking 10+ years is just annoying to me we have to wait that long or another attempt like 3D 3 times in movies and gaming. Or still given up.
They couldn't be as cheap as Move/Eye Toy because of the complexity VR offers and in comparison to PC VR with different options, the portable or PC cable of Meta's headsets and more the range of VR shows when people want particular IPs or support that appeals, the price is lower then others but not for console audiences or just the PS5 price in parts of the world and only certain stores discounts of the console I don't know about the headset.
if we had VR applications sure it may go the way of Kinect and reused use cases, I mean HoloLens or others fit for business only use cases well. Kinect got used well in other ways then gaming.
If we got more VR modes or smaller games even then sure but if very few were offered, ports were offered of course I'm aware of that, the adaptor for PS5 was there of PSVR1, the tech had to evolve to what the others did not stay as the light tracking of PSVR1 forever it couldn't. Sure they could try to make PSVR1 work on PS5 games but it was tied to PS4 for a reason not just to upgrade but the APIs and tech I assume very heavily.
Control schemes weren't better pushed too far and too Wii 2006 bad again of look realism but are too clunky and over compensating then balance of buttons/motion uses then the learning done by Wii 2009 of some games back then. Some Wii/Move games made it easy to understand VR besides the differences and see how far devs are incorrectly pushing the tech. Pushing immersion, people just treating it as a party trick with some experience games anyway. The nausea and people not getting used to it which I'm surprised is that hard to convince.
But Indies were struggling then yeah its unfortunate. They didn't want to contribute third parties and when it was Meta they went nah not good enough sales what do they expect mobile phone sales numbers the idiots have high expectations of sales. Vita got more games in it's 3-4 1st party contribution besides the Japanese third parties doing a great job besides Indies offerings for 10 years.
But VR is very different so not surprised. It's unfortunate but audiences to me also have been the issue I find for just games in general I find many I'm excited for flop. Partly it's because I seek other things in games but makes it hard to support something if full price or little support makes no difference with 1 person.
Well if major third parties don't care aka like Vita the right idiots without mobile as an excuse this time.
Own but worry & PC use. Google like effort, high sales in era of generic audiences/bad 3rd parties. 10+ years for a worse then Vita remote play also a joke & then audiences jump on, sigh players.
So much for Sky Dance/others at State of Play. Ubisoft & Red Steel 2 VR where is it you cowards. Brief VR modes in games even? Sigh.
Indies struggling with PSVR2, small marketing, Sony wants to push experiences & tech yet barely cares. Vita was a great platform they just don't try & expect dumb western third parties care.
They expect niches to be big when they can't. Sad no smaller games, eh efforts with hardware but don't support. PC VR sure, their fault & devs not putting the effort in, audiences not buying it with unrealistic price/quality expectations.
Also garbage control schemes (they ignore their GDC/past history and start from scratch it's infuriating the idiots , newcomers or veterans to VR/motion , No Man's Sky backtracking it's control scheme is a joke,
If GT7 wasn't a garbage campaign I'd do the same thing I did with GT5 & 6 replay them in 3D. Got new batteries for the glasses and the 3D TV hooked up still.
Horizon was ok not great just Robinson the journey with some tweaks.
Star Wars had bad reload animations & connections for motion pushing the tech too far and going immersion when I know how far the tech for motion has gone or the Devs brains not far of intelligent design to suit it idiots.
Cosmic Smash is cool but a Dreamcast IP reworked in a good way, yet most don't know about it or care. I found out about it the day before the VR version. I think VR improves it a lot.
RE8 & GT7 aren't enough and some people are very eh on old games, or content handling let alone whatever else Vita/Wii U were too soon but VR/Switch weren't but not many wanted to contribute to VR this time forget hardware of Devs and publishers won't bother or audiences.
I can pick out many Wii U eshop games let alone future ideas for ifhr hardware &vaudiences couldn't care less because who wants out of the box or small fun or hardware craziness a small audience.
Most people are typical, boring & Devs are safe at this point, some staff aren't capable yet, others don't have time, meetings go however they end up, publishers want what they want/execs. The gaming industry is trash.
Baby steps to setting/game design branching out has been slow, those games flop due to audiences sucking due to other priorities. Whelp $20 support from me not $100 or $70.
This is why I go retro but try to support new ideas when I can or think up different ideas audiences won't, Devs won't push them their too business model & safe IPs or design of garbage worlds eh themes with game design the point of the medium is dying when that's what makes it good, stand out, the worlds/business models better fun).
If Wii/Move had more motion & button balance when VR wants to be real aka Wii 2006 bad again when too soon. I'm sick of this realism like control scheme garbage when the tech isn't there yet nor FUN. Visuals yet video game clunkiness.
Developers or audiences feel like boring adults, oh forget imagination, putting actual effort in to games kiddo time to be boring, especially so with game design these days. Even experimental platforms like VR boring prioritising, they found a way.
Maybe heard of it but barely know anything about it. Hope it does well not really fussed.
To me it seems like Onimusha but not the same problems Exorpimal has, something else then what people want and also better design of the past too likely.
They can try new but want to without the good attributes and those licenses or expectations why do they waste players time?
Too many blend together, it doesn't have the same exciting appeal of other niche Capcom IPs and I barely care for their big IPs. Tried a few and they are ok not really my thing.
@Callmegil The Capcom poll results (gameplay, then characters looking appealing, story, graphics and others underneath) say one thing (and people that are in the know about games) and the actions/other results we don't see from other companies audiences and what games they value more in the ways they value them is telling of those that vocally or act on gameplay, characters, story, visuals and just value for money no matter how trash the content is (may be different in their eyes or just the safe range of games they play let alone the 8/10+ logic as well and 7/10 and below treatment is just sad).
Give me a AA that tries then an 8/10 AAA that priorities other things to get that score.
Or just singleplayer/multiplayer and judge all games as the same when not all are an open world or RPGs or multiplayer skin grinding shooters but they want their money's worth even if a series is consistent of hour count for those games or the genre and people skip the differences and different content handling but people see it differently. It says a lot really about people's priorities.
Let alone looks AAA is AA or Indie and because visuals look good and don't understand the budget/staff size or skill they judge it unfairly as well. Says a lot. Then again some gamers don't always understand the details of what goes into development and why meetings, why things get cut, what we look at in prototypes and so on just what they seek in a game, it coming out, as fast as possible and moving on anyways rather than those that savior it, analyse it and respect it.
I do treat differently games & genres, studios quality/budget (respectfully do my research or go in blind but still go oh this many staff or first game or what I may seek).
"hours don't = the same for each game" as that's just not suitable. If people play only open worlds, RPGs/multiplayer shooters/sports/racing for their hour counts & don't care about the quality in some ways that's on them.
Previous year's games prices change, if people don't see them & have fewer games they seek out while many of us have plenty to play from any year. Having the latest.
People that want the value in the quality, no padding are very different to those wanting anything to last. They notice the Indies, know quality, notice budgets/staff count/vision, hour count, quality content, familiar/different stand out game design. Context while also an audience that watches the prices and discounts. While also not being the types to want a 100 hour game or a bad reputation game for $1 or something unreasonable because that's also a blown out of proportion logic as silly & exaggerated.
I don't find 20+ hours games fun the padding is noticeable of the open world missions as many tropes and design are clear by this point even if first time, 100th time or footage browsing to understand them or the linear but still lengthy grind or a good balance of enemies, combat, exploration (if paths or not for secrets or just simple ammo/collectibles of other worth) puzzles.
Linear games going for of story or the gameplay being so basic which many safe these days, 8th gen is why I went backwards/collected more or as strict of current gen as it is because the gameplay isn't satisfying, the movesets aren't appealing & story is pushed yet not entertaining (varies from game to game).
Foamstars were so easy to nitpick and offer modes (multiplayer example even if didn't play it observed) but they wanted business model over game design to justify it (then again many Square published games from 2022 didn't impress me either Diofield was worse than Valkyria Chronicles 4 a 2018 game in depth & priorities of gameplay/story).
Biomutant to me I went what's with the movesets for the animals being less exciting then an N64 game, where is the moveset depth of digging, swimming or flight or something else. They have gas immunity but no ability depth. They think their setting and typical dungeons is enough, it's not. The world design and visual spectacle isn't enough.
Spiderman to me was just puzzles and 3 side missions the rest was just formulaic open world design I found boring besides the passable story. Why because Sunset Overdrive had a more playground open world design and tower defense then outposts. To me they went backwards.
Racing games have long lengths, certain ones yet the events are boring, cars use cases aren't existing & we get updates that aren't worth it because what you do with the cars isn't fun. Just offering characters isn't fun. Progression sucks, sell us the same cars and yet the tracks/event types or restrictions to offer good progression isn't offered.
Lasting two weeks/a month is fair if people want a lengthy open world game, but I think some people binge a game too much/have the same values, not all are RPGs?
Not all singleplayer games have to match multiplayer hours either. Money value/quality/entertainment lasting, multiplayer/solo audience and how people treat games.
@get2sammyb Some people want their value for money and that's fair. Some of us just want the quality not the quantity and padding but it depends on the purpose and the person. No game can be that much quality & last a year because not viable.
Small audiences aren't much sales but over time they are? Sandbox/Vib Ribbon music to level/level editors in games are infinitely replayable. Selling GPUs/marketing terms.
Not everyone wants a 8-15 minute song & complains most are 3 minutes commonly? They want value in the song don't they? I enjoy some 8 minute songs. Games they value it differently. Ratchet was consistent 10-12 hours yet gets judged similarly by other audiences yet not by us that usually know they were that long but the content handling is different not 18 planets or similar level of bonus content skill points and other things but fewer levels but length/other aspects were offered instead. Different perception of us 20-50+ year olds yet my perception is the same as when I was kid not changed like others.
Seen the videos on worse graphics & make if shorter games. I agree with them to a degree. Sure I'm buying up old games so the prices differ a lot & the demand for them differs but I understand the then, now, & have a better perspective of current/prior. I judge games, I think of ideas for why some games could use some when they lack because other priorities.
Yeah I do buy games at $28 AUD 1 year later wait (vary of $80 on Switch to $100-120 PS5/Series & I buy PS4/Xbox One & older not 9th gen consoles), sometimes bit more, sometimes bit less, varies. $50 USB games in 7th gen & for solo campaigns less then 20 hours for some games yet 8th gen+ people want more hours? Money, time & things in the world happening makes sense. Besides the yes certain N64 games were just as expensive as games today.
So people that were fine with small hour counts in singleplayer games (fair hours in multiplayer as progression design took off, I assume player's expectations are too high in some cases), understood the quality and effort put in and with less games of some budgets as studios get cut and staff move into other studios or form new ones or whatever and many Indies games of some good ideas, some nostalgic & overly rip off safe vary. But while more games come out many of a certain quality haven't yet people want more hours? Strange.
I get something lasting a long time due to the situations in the world (or other countries currency value/consoles pricing) but do they really want anything no matter how trashy to still be a 3 hour movie let alone a 100 hour game? Do they watch for quality at all? Depends what they value of course in dialogue/visuals & for me gameplay wise most of them don't meet that.
Do they have to have everything new and now/FOMO. When they can wait for a discount, can play it next year even (waited, played retro, played year prior too), not have a warped so cheap it's dirt cheap mentality either and have to experience it? Having 1 game counts, how many want probably 10 to be a thing this year to call it a good year. Or do for a console purchase. or things to look up in some areas.
But at the same time if I know a game is short it varies, if I know what type of content in what series or new game it is & I think the balance of content is worth it. Sure 60 hour tactics games (know the series), or flops Balan/Aveum, etc. that 1 sale wouldn't save them anyways.
Looks good for once. Most Indies I go eh what sets this apart, not a lot, eh movesets, eh level design, heavily inspired so don't stand out. This at least looks good enough. Other than seeing Skully recently.
Most Indie platformers look boring. This having some drill uses not in the same way as Drilldozer is fine. It has very Rayman Origins/Legends looking gameplay/animations mixed with something else so a bit of comparison but still good enough to be it's own thing FINALLY.
It looks interesting for once with it's moveset which many fail at being good or exciting enough to want to play and fair level design/artstyle from other videos I looked at.
Takes some devs to actually try not be lazy and tracing similar of the attempts that make me disappointed like AAA, tracing the blueprint, not trying hard enough to make a good art piece they can if they wanted to.
I do wonder about this. Success to follow up on sure but it was very close to Uncharted 4 with references to the others. So are we getting something new which would be interesting with something different then something of reference all the time? Similar to the others of Lost Legacy or the older ones? I do wonder about that.
Actors people can't wait to see, IP brand power, loyal fans of the actors/games/adventure film easy to get an audience if done well and whatever aside this film could go either way. But I mean if it's safe enough or odd enough in how they handle it sure.
That aside nice colour for the movies or others on the blue there. Really surprised me.
@Meowmixes98 They are but they still have western staff (lack of a better term) as well (they likely live there so are residents of Japan or just for the work periods). It's not uncommon.
Not all people that go to Japan are tourists, translators/coordinate things to the rest of the world (other regions of the business) type staff or Japanese Vloggers or something else. There are some that do work and live there.
Just reading sponge, was enough for me to go oh they know what they have in mind. The fun, playable and just creativity of the world to play in. Making each power up/ability/moveset count something I find a lot of games lack because the focus is elsewhere. Having abilities, varied ones, uses for them or just pacing of them as well.
Comparing this to Splatoon 2 just being reminded of the simplicity of the mechanics but the levels with the sponge or other platforms (thin, interactive of elevators, the weapons having a good mix of grappling, and the core mechanics in fun ways) and 'how' they used the weapons. Platforming with the core not just oh we have jumping and we have enemies it's like nah give me more of this puzzle platforming with the weapons. If Portal and platformers can do it why not. The singleplayer is a side project from the main multiplayer but I was still impressed. Simple story but the gameplay counted. Something Sackboy kind of does and Ratchet the gameplay disappointed and the story is the focus when I'm a gameplay first for that series so eh.
Astro is great to see is doing what PlayStation used to have of good mix of gameplay and what Nintendo has with it's genre variety or certain platformers done a fair job of wild ideas or a core but still good simplicity and how it paces things. Something other games do but some of their cores drag on and some enemy types/weapons mixed in or stats or whatever and level design (especially graphics and holiday destinations and how they utilise the world and what NPCs do and what boring missions they offer when sometimes I just want to use abilities and collect nonsense in a platformer not some deep or superficial thing I don't want to help NPCs and do favours for them sometimes a minigame not some boring situations of dialogue exchange and boring scenarios so mundane they aren't fun or the writing is too serious and not engaging) haven't made me care for 8th+ gen a lot it's just too much of the same in many games besides my genre branching out. How to make it 'too accessible' well make it fun writing and gameplay to be accessible but not always dialogue focused. I'd rather drive a car in fun events not just drive a car. I'd rather play a character then listen to the boring characters.
The cameos are fine but I don't need the fan service/references to care just solid ideas is enough and they are offering that which is good. Even if they are nice nods. Much better than telling me and emotionally wasting my time with dialogue to about it. Besides just visually humour.
The way they present the bots is excellent. They did just go oh from Firesprite's Playroom we just had these bots that I guess were like Sackbots from LBP2 or Ape Escape Monkeys or something (me assuming) like that similar and just were easy to animate with different situations to fit into quickly that's fun I guess when they went about it after the tech demo app success of the Playroom VR Rescue Mission short level. It makes sense he is easy to draw and may or may not be comparable to Tearaway I guess with the paper craft?
Either way the simplicity and limitations to be expressive then overly detailed and more to it is a good thing to see in some games it doesn't take away from it. But I can see why they just played around with things and eventually went with a platformer (they always lend themselves to a level of creativity to make the most of things I think the enemies are obstacles and you keep moving and the jumping/abilities offers a lot which is why I like the genre so much it's so filled with personality in gameplay and worlds and good pacing and also makes me understand other genres differences). Just more to explore i guess the creativity that way besides just that 1 minigame was praised in the Playroom VR app?
I mean sometimes you need a silly side to present these serious IPs why not. Ah Vib Ribbon a classic.
I love when devs just have that sort of experimentation or concepts. Triggers or not. What platforms, what characters do in the world, the world complimenting that visually or interactively it's just great to see.
Not all this wow look at the real life like looking world and drama and this and that. Just fun mechanics, fun worlds video games can offer of physics (I hope the character weight/jump height or other aspects isn't an issue I always find that to be the case in modern games and it annoys me even if Astro did usually seem to be good there).
Not a fan but am interested on behalf of others. I see the appeal, I know enough about the series and dipped into Origins/Inquisition.
I think it's going in some fair directions. Tactics I mean some handle it better than others most care about action. The story telling is great, the worlds are clear of Dragon Age.
The art is like many things odd at first but when realise oh that's how they modernised or presented it and Dragon Age or the lighting mostly it does look good. Just the right angles of the environment/characters.
For a family friendly audience I think it makes sense. It's just very unexpected to go to Switch besides just the for kids/families sales the Switch has of audiences besides many of us adults seeking other games or factors of the Switch. I think the game on Switch is fair to have for sure. If they want to broaden things they will be PC or Nintendo makes sense. That or because Xbox they know sales might not be much? Not just competition and seeing Nintendo as less of competition because they mostly do their own thing and the sales of Switch are worth it to them.
This game has always been a because Horizon is very particular of it's appeal yet also Lego fits the mature but more well handled approach. To me it's just a introduction through something else to the other. But for Switch audience also then just PS5 then playing the other games on PS5 or because those audiences didn't play it (not just because Horizon isn't on Switch). It's an introduction game and fans may dip into it as well. It's understandable but eh. To me Horizon's world/story was good the gameplay bored me how it was done. A Lego skin/structure isn't doing to do much I find but for other people it may. The Lego feel here is different but who knows how it actually turns out. The Lego game elements Travelers Tales offered at least did a fair job of their own humour/feel besides the movie licenses/other Lego sets to make games from. Depends how this one goes about things.
As much as people are on PS4 I mean the few with a Switch/Xbox or PC or playing other games. I can see the reason for the moving people on to modern platforms and that's fair. To me I mean to Disagea 7 was on Switch so I got it there. Demo for PS4 was there but no physical PS4 I saw. So focusing on current gen is fine. Some Xbox resources is a fair amount of effort for sure or audience being clear as far as data then data of the personality of people on Xbox and other platforms that no matter their age will play something fun and family friendly that data can't be made clear of by age alone.
Whether fits the Horizon Zero Dawn remake rumours who knows. The multiplayer game though even no clue there either.
The game itself may be great but to me the Switch aspect is fair, the brand part is what scares me to go welp there goes creativity because brand matters more. Sigh if Astro flops I'm going to be sad but not surprised the market disappoints me every day as it is yet I go my own modern or retro gaming path. At least enough Hardcore will pick it up then other IPs no matter what form people gravitate towards.
I'd agree actually. The footage alone made me go wait they have many different bits of gadgets/gear. YES. The pacing and the gear alone makes me go oh this game is perfect. The past Astro games have shown a lot of greatness and this furthers it in the right ways. This is a game we need to succeed. Or else as fair as Lego Horizon is I think it also makes the market even more clear.
I mean to me Splatoon 2's campaign had a good use of little but well spread use of the weapons for puzzle platforming besides the core moveset. Yet Foamstars while multiplayer had 2 modes and a business model, yet lacking modes I have posted at least 10+ times already they could have done but didn't. Mechanical depth matters if your maps/story aren't good enough. Yet messaging stories I don't care about (or care less about because the game is boring to play) and basic moves rule modern gaming and it bores me to death.
The technique/structure I see gets muddled or dumbed down while Astro is full of personality in it's worlds and it's mechanics, HOW HARD IS THAT GAME DEVELOPERs stop pushing eh worlds/story and offer personality or mechanical depth.
It screams Japan thinking about how to approach this game well which is awesome. Western teams can but they have different goals in mind and while some are good, some lack in ways to compel me. It varies from game to game.
To me Ratchet is a story 3rd person shooter it's gadgets in Rift Apart were ok but not exciting, it's why I found the gameplay other than Blizar to be so boring and I quit playing. Watch Useless Podcast old Ratchet devs play it and others play it and I still found it boring.
Sackboy does a fair job but it isn't the same.
Astrobot feels like what I want out of an old school game but modern the colour is well presented per region, personality in levels is excellent to set the scene but the platforming while not much is varied of sliding, swinging, the gloves to box boss fights, the grapple is fair.
Give me mechanics over plot sometimes. It's why I'll play a puzzle game over some story. I can test my brain, my memory of past puzzles in games and I get that 3D obstacle course puzzle fix. Not match 3 or falling blocks I'm not into those. Some flash game formats I don't mind but many on PSP of Crush (aka Super Paper Mario mechanic on PSP and released before that came out on Wii), Cube, Exit, Mercury, Practical Intelligence Quotient 1 & 2 as examples. I mean Devil Dice on PS1/Bombastic I think the PS2 entry is called.
Spyro is fine but to me the game became more about minigames/open world playground logic that is fun while most modern open worlds are boring. I prefer Spyro 1 because it's an obstacle course of secrets and main levels. Even the side areas cut in the prototypes as simple as they are I was like WHOA that's cool sad they cut it. More than I was Elora's dialogue cut in Spyro 2 for the level openings to set the scene.
Technique/structure appeals to me more.
It's why Gravity Rush, Sunset Overdrive or Infamous Second Son's side missions appealed to me more and are my favourites the playground approach not the holiday destination and generic character RPG quests approach.
It's what I want to see that many Indie platformers suffer from. Being a Mario/Sonic/Spyro/Crash/Banjo clone but only on the surface. Clive and Wrench is simple. The moveset isn't as good as Banjo of varied things the characters gain of moves. Yet it has many inspirations and the first level is clear on the bookshelf title spoofs but the game itself is very boring because the level design is fine but the context/structure is very boring. There isn't much to keep me excited. Other games have theirs but to me platforming/racing Indies suck. Some do stand out but many suck. Heck seeing Hades clones was just sad to me. They have some differences but not enough. Gaming is too close copy cat these days.
5-6th gen things were new but even then the competition had mechanical depth. The left behinds still are fresh to this day. Even those in racing rewind systems dumbed theirs down to what it is today yet the introductionary game (that I know of) had more depth than just that to that system and other systems. Sigh.
It's why I look back at older games, what's fresh or good today even if clunky in other areas. Why it's easy to see what possibilities from some basis are still able to be expanded but aren't explored.
Nowadays it's gone and TOO close of competition it's boring because they aren't really good competition. They can be or feel fan game close AAA or Indies depending where you look. Some stick out others don't. Palworld is inspired by popular things, succeeds. No Man's Sky or Nightinggale good approaches by veterans. Nightinggale might as well not exist. It's a great game that to me the Minecraft Mystcraft book/card use is amazing but that's the thing stand out feature. Most people would have never heard of it. Veterans can go that way of new space, new ideas, or keep to what they were doing like a Yooka/Judas/Bloodstained/Splitterhead and may do well.
Many others feel similar very not exciting in the movesets with like 1 move. I get that from 7th gen shooters, 1 cool mechanic and I ignore the story/setting/level design because they are so generic.
Clone Wars is all I care about here. Sly is cool, Tomb Raider is cool but I am happy with my PS3 collections instead of those. Clone Wars has been something I want to find but haven't yet a copy.
Prices seem fair for the emulation effort and whatever they go for nowadays. Anyone that expects cheap on the second hand market I mean it's the second hand market not the regular market prices that should be obvious of the wild prices and not as much cheapness because they are still well known games not niche ones I pick up for cheap. So these first market prices are interesting for emulation that 'varies' and whatever the rights holders think it's worth. Some of these seem like NEW copy prices then Complete in Box worth or pre-owned at lower. At least for checking Tomb Raider Legends PS2, brief look at Sly/Clone Wars pricing.
Granted some I get for $5 at one store others more second hand wild prices of demand. But different stores priorities of other products too.
South of the Midnight looks great so hopefully we can see the balance of games not just live service expected money of flow they expect. I mean buying many studios, cutting some off makes sense. But some people need a good singleplayer game to justify trying Gamepass or caring about an Xbox.
it's clear with buying too many what needs to be maintained/cut off it's a lot to balance of a business I get that but they variety needs to be there of audience appeal to GET people to want to join the service, end it, come back later or see whatever else and move on. If they want that 'one game' it has to be more than live services. It has to be that one game people want to join and move on from and in a good way to recommend to others to play it. Which has been a challenge depending on what the game offers and who steps in to say this would work better to appeal to that audience more or try something different and appeal to them still or another audience.
I expanded genres over time but I still look for aspects in the genres I used to play and do in retro games but don't touch the genre in modern eras because of what they have done with them of the gameplay ideas or worlds lacking aspects I care for. Not because old games did it it's just the ideas were more varied. Not the 10th grappling hook or the 10th Mario/banjo clone, 10th licenses pushed then good event/mode ideas in racing games or other things then just car branding but just something different and compelling just a little bit.
They want users/time spent and money but forget singleplayer games get moved on in that audience no matter the DLC or the updates they move on if they only care about the story. But if looked back on fondly they also have people go back.
There is new people all the time they aren't all multiplayer audiences they want more money coming in but leave the games on the service which is good (as long as they last/don't drop them due to digital future) but not for the studios.
Pushing hardware is fine but I mean that cost how much let alone the hard drive increases that are nice but even still these studios, other factors and 3 more console variations having many moments where money wasn't good for sales of their games yet they get cut off. They need variety.
They have it but the quality and appeal isn't the best because while yes Sony 1st party has always been all over the place I think the audiences are very different. I mean also OG Xbox/360 I care about that type of variety then the game design in Xbox One/Series era here the gameplay isn't for me so I don't care for many if any of those IPs other than collecting what I find.
Looked good to me. The gameplay was a surprise, the world seems fine for an introduction area, the trailer just was what it was.
They do keep pushing the Mass Effect direction sometimes and that always seemed odd to me. Sales are what they are, audience voices are another. Mass Effect was fine but some seek the RPG and differences in Dragon Age (as far as I hear) then Mass Effect being well a shooter, the changes of the emails or loyalty missions or story and worlds and other factors of Dragon Age and Mass Effect are very different yet leaning into Mass Effect more always seemed odd.
The classes/structure and Mass Effect comparison wasn't sure for hubs or the decisions or the 'get the crew' type story telling Mass Effect 2 & 3 have then how Dragon Age did things it's way very well.
I think it's doing a fair thing for the series. The tactical I mean I get the action direction over how others did it in the past. Tactical needs to be better to be usable. The action approach seems fair I think for the series at this point it could be different but I think it still fits.
I don't mind Tactical options but most aren't great and even then most devs don't offer it in a great way. I mean Ratchet 1 had variety but no one knew you could mix the Mine Glove and Taunter it wasn't very clear. Very physics or two weapon using it just didn't work. I never hated the idea it's just they didn't do it well. Like saw a puzzle game would or multiple characters or other coordinating. I mean RPGs could handle effects differently to be 'IN THE WORLD' of physical assets not just effects of the ice, poison, fire, electricity, why not have it effect the world not just enemies. Offer lava to have in the world as a physical assets even if brief or control it. But that takes more time, the game is slower but I mean it's more impressive then just effects on screen all the time. That or element combining to weigh down (not physically but could) the player in a way. Other setups make sense. To me just effects is very overdone but it won't happen what I think it's too particular of design and too time consuming.
So in Mass Effect/Dragon Age the attacks or healing or otherwise to pause and select is fine or however different it is this time is fine but most times don't see a need to use it as much if their attacks/support moves don't do much.
Let alone tactical in other games other than turn based ones focus on that. So playing tactics games I sometimes use support but most enemies vary so much per level or region I barely use the support moves so I never find a need for them as the effects to hinder don't do enough to justify them if strong enough and just grind or use other level design options (like geo panel in Disgaea).
It's something Star Wars hasn't done before and still gives off 1313 vibes not a lot but still. It takes the loading approach of space travel from No Man's Sky regions/sectors for planets so that's good then Starfield being too much loading. If the things to do vary then sure but yes there is a reason I care about playgrounds not theme park/holiday destination open worlds. Meaning I don't buy many because their movesets or missions are so boring.
But a Uncharted GA/Vita comparison. What does that even mean. It's a good game. I never had issues with prequels, spinoffs or using the gimmicks of the handheld. It wasn't fluff. I get the Ubisoft formula or tech demo or whatever other logic that's a bit much but that's why I seek gameplay not personality/roleplaying/world/graphics/story I only do as a secondary or Spec Ops The Line because it's themes were a fair justification because it's gameplay was fine but it's got ok points of arcade entertainment than real. Most if not all video game stories do things.... I don't care for them.
That and I guess while not into minigame/mission based platformers it does come from that side for me. Which is why open worlds don't appeal to me a lot, hubs sure but hub sized levels in platformers to hub/open world games it's like what am I actually getting excited about. Typical setpieces, not as fun platforming or level design that varied because it's so walkable not fun verticality or events taken place because we HAVE to have NPCs and have to have straightforward environments.
To me Fenix Rising made it clear to me besides their other open worlds i don't play (only care for their linear older games Rayman, Prince of Persia, their older shooters or hub based ones of Red Steel 2) compared to a Jak 2/3, Infamous Second Son, Gravity Rush, Sunset Overdrive is how they do the open world missions/side content balance and the movesets or vehicles.
I mean I'm not interested in this game but if people want a SW GTA then who expects that level of interactivity. I mean if were talking any weapons dropped or just places to go, or be whatever SW alien (so maybe even Renegade Squadron customisation) or other things I mean they can put many things in games but who knows. I mean Skull and Bones we all know that the devs wanted authenticity yet the devs too interested in their world to remember people wanted a game. There is trying to differentiate it and getting to into their own project and what they like as fans of the ships/period they are going for of setting.
Gameplay suffers when not focused on yet we see it a lot in games. My mindset on gameplay is very strict but I mean with how boring games are these days of personality/roleplaying or just not enough level design or tricks it's all just RPG like in the boring combat or level design sense it's why I find so many games boring. So 'outdated' or 'modern' design happens but the modern design is so lacking interactivity I get bored.
I want to 'play' in the world, not feel like someone passing through for the sake of it because they string things but it isn't fun. Linear made me appreciate how balanced they are. Open worlds have more gaps of travelling yet also a lot of things to do but I don't find any of those stops 'FUN' as say puzzles, boring structures, eh combat encounters and boring quests of talking and RPG level benefits. Forget spraying walls in Infamous or other minigame style missions just boring adventure style missions I don't even remember the dialogue because the characters are boring and doing it because have to or because it's there. I don't want to do things for characters and the reward of gear is boring versus gear of interacting with the world to do a puzzle (platforming logic for me) not always combat with more stats that are slowly growing that's not exciting to me.
I get the Watch Dogs Legion comparisons but at the same time even if the characters or world wasn't much at least the idea was cool even if so 'open' it wasn't strict enough of using characters as I think it could have. Heck GTA5 has the personality but I just don't get the controls. I've had more fun with other games with crime themes due to the gameplay. I don't care about the satire/world of GTA never appealed to me.
Then again when people want cinematic games we get basic movesets, formulaic animations and typical AI. It's why Unrecord was so impressive of more fluent animations even if hard to make out how accurate it was.
I don't expect that to happen this gen at all AI/animations being less typical. Give me a robot enemy that loses or gains abilities from others in a hive network way or copies your moves more than just a Dark Link or the going back against you of Pitfall the Lost Expedition when they use your gear and your an animal spirit.
But when Indies disappoint with movesets (depends where you look in some genres, some just focus on world/the hits of the past then actually good ideas, others do amazing jobs with playing off the old or their new ideas entirely, it varies, Platformer/racing Indies suck but puzzle, metroidvania/roguelikes have had some good ideas).
AAA do and games I didn't care about do I mean what else am I to expect. I think this game will be fine but what do people want.
I get the Ubisoft business model yes, but the gameplay I mean I notice the little things.
Even Rise of the Ronin the little details I noticed in gameplay/menus or scenarios I thought were cool but no one talks about them. They stood out to me besides the story and decisions to make/scenario. Minor but still something.
(the problem I find is so many devs want the worlds/dialogue and the roleplaying to be the factor but the gameplay isn't exciting me at all it's why I seek out 20 year old games and compare to modern is what has or hasn't been done, what would be fresh again, what ideas I see with an experimental mindset which is why my Foamstars/Biomutant thoughts of lacking ideas or the dumbed down Kitty in the Big City of wow cuteness over gameplay depth) but I still didn't want to play it. They aren't my type of game. But because I have someone that does play these types of games I get a sense of what is going on in them with each of the details in them as a gameplay person not a world/characters story first type. If the movesets and level design are good I care but otherwise the world is secondary to me of personality.
I don't get the appeal at all. It looks fine, I still don't get it.
They aren't my type of game usually (I do like to still look at other games just encase to know what's out there) but at the same time other than Atlus fans having it good I mean good for them. Shrugs. I enjoyed Catherine so I understand their quality but their others games weren't my thing.
@Oh_fiddlesticks Agreed. Mass Effect got the treatment. Got a friend who has been waiting for a remaster. Already binged the series and DLCs years ago and wants them so they don't have to keep the 360 around.
@pharos_haven It is how they go about it and WHAT they do offer of genre, worlds, camera angle, less story focused or otherwise but yes.
I think Concord has a place but it's how they do it. How distinctive of multiplayer ideas it is. As if Rocker Arena (forget if it did well). But I guess audiences don't care and some high end staff don't get games well enough either such as Suicide Squad. Make something like this and that logic that don't understand games and don't even play the reference just what they see. XD
I think some PS3 era SP/MP could be cool but is a lot of work and why we see separate ones but combo ones have less to fail on as if the solo mode works it still is enough of a success/some more sales then the limited of both separate audiences.
I'm fine with Sony branching out, but I haven't care for much they make anyway these days so to me I just look at what they offer like I do researching any games I don't care about but just understanding them, caring about the industry rather than a 'how dare they not cater to me' some people give off. XD
I mean to me racing games make it clear to me they want to sell their licenses that offer decent modes/event types so why should I play some of them if the progression/mechanics are dull. I don't buy those games for the cars/teams. They can be a factor but they need more than that annual ones or non-annual or just dirt bikes/rally/etc that's a easy distinction of things.
That and even if many of us aren't the target audience. I myself am not either. I think it's how 'directly' they try to compete. That's the first thing that puts me off games even nostalgia marketing Indies with too close of a product. I'm just going to be like why even bother, offer at least something a bit distinctive in there.
Sony can seek story driven and multiplayer (or other offerings as well that they haven't which I can see why people want Astro or to prove a point too, I'm all for an Astro game) but it's how they go about it. I'm playing neither but it doesn't mean some of us don't have perspective or still look at what every side is doing.
I had some many ideas for Foamstars during it's period yet it lacked content. Was it so hard to offer a surfboard mode (not just a move), a Foam reversal option to remove the foam covering the map, traps, chemical or other foam combinations via power ups or just obstacles on the map. That was off the top of my head back then and still now. Same as animal traits for Biomutant to make navigation more fun, it sets up the start of the game to be more fun then wait until the vehicle missions, use swimming then a jet ski access later. Dig, flight, etc. Something literally 5th platformers gave me inspiration of, not even because they offered them moves it's just experimental design, making me think of such things. I mean if Splatoon has a solid ink to platform, reload and shoot, with 2 offering gun grappling and other things and was the best puzzle platformer with guns for a solo campaign I'd played in 2024 a 2017 game then just too much combat other games offer there is a reason why I was so surprised to go wow this offered something I was seeking. "HOW THEY GO ABOUT IT', WHAT THEY OFFER point.
Like we can easily break down the horror, open world, RPG or any other gameplay factors they all have, besides the cinematic story and third person camera and all that. But enough distinction I find is what some games lack. How direct they are of competition that why else would I care to play it let alone free to play or buy it cheap later.
I bought the Square published games that didn't sell well because they had genres I was interested in (I would usually care about such games in old gens to see what those left behind IPs were anyway). I saw some cool hack n slash, tactics games with fair worlds, I saw some lack depth and focus on other elements too much and suffer in quality, I still had a fair time with them, they varied of sometimes other publishers, in some games case themselves. The polish or marketing or cheap price I paid but still the 'new' price. But I'm not most people either in my gameplay focused purchases when people seek other aspects and that's totally fine. So many flops are games I really cared about and I still bought regardless of failing because they still interested, whether my purchase helped or not (Balan, Aveum as examples). I mean sure other shooters exist but to me Aveum compared to a SWAT or Atomic Heart or old age war setting was nice to see a magic shooter regardless of the 720p, the loot system and everything else even as a gameplay first type the setting/feel was good enough for me.
With just 'complaining' it's too much noise. With better responses than 'this is bad', 'this is good', the 'we want more of this for them to try, or revive or another solution' is what some people will say but finding them and also taking them seriously is another thing entirely.
Problem is they end up as long comments or only touch on certain details. Or if Youtube videos may or may not cover the topics well enough depending on the depth the creator points at such details, comparisons or just general.
Also as a hardcore audience (Push, Twitter, Reddit, etc.) our voices are very different across many platforms or our mentality if we use all platforms as well or broaden our game design/genre interests but still look at what is being done in the industry, versus the mainstream.
$40 is a fair price but I mean did they learn nothing from Destruction Allstars? I mean I know it's a different audience and appeal for that game and well vehicle games have a smaller audience and most people don't care for them but I mean $40 when their competitors are free to play.
Sony are just wasting their time. They clearly forget who they are marketing to and why their competitors are free to play and $40 plus the rest, oh sorry free to play change in the next month, they clearly don't know that their audience knows what access they seek.
Then again Foamstars lacked depth that made me laugh and come up with my own ideas. This will try to compete, others in the space will still exist, this will die in a few months. They change the price. It maybe has a chance but too little too late. Unless it has a good feel or good maps or content drops who cares honestly. XD I'm not a multiplayer person but it's not hard to read the room about multiplayer and handling it well if even my singleplayer 'this could benefit from this' or seeing what ideas multiplayer have over the years can contribute of worth content.
I mean if I see skating games or platforming or shooters and go this for moveset or level design or otherwise makes for good content then why wouldn't it be good in multiplayer games when how you play matters then some story trailer or a story multiplayer game approach.
If still true oh no Ratchet and Sackboy or Astro sell to smaller audiences. If it's a unique game sure, if it's a retelling of the 2017 game it's a joke product. I only cared about the story and even then I got so bored I quit the first game. 20 hours in. half way through the game as most things I understood about the game I didn't find fun enough.
I have no issue with games varying, or many cartoony, family friendly games. But pushing an IP this far is just annoying. Like I said, oh no our other IPs that fit that type didn't sell well. Well that's the audience problem (mainstream more than gamers) and the studio problem. I mean I haven't bought Sackboy, it's an OK Mario 3D World game, I will buy it eventually but it's too expensive. WipEout Rush I wouldn't support a worse B Spec/idle game experience. Give us a better manager game or WipEout game then I'd play it. They could have ported 2048 but no. They did to Omega Collection and changed music and things what other excuses can they make.
I did buy Ratchet (half and half contributed so less disappointment in the purchase) and it was trash and didn't succeed on what Crack in Time offered yet this game wants me to have a mentor multiverse story with trash ToD remade levels then ToD's better designed levels.
ToD/Crack elements in it yet it can't even do that right because Insomniac are lazy or their ideas have changed and weren't appealing at all. I get the budget and lacking sales but even still. They made a safe game and it still sold badly. No wonder Ratchets got shorter they put too much into other areas or change their minds too often or can't achieve what expectations they COULD offer of tech yet the PS3 game from 2009 on an HDD is more impressive and DOESN'T have marketing that's BS or are Marvel game forced future.
I get it Sony but seriously. XD Come on. A tv series is fair, merch sure but a Lego tie in and a Lego game because big IP that's teen rated yet also is Immortals Fenix Rising and that doesn't need a Lego game to lower it's themes or art style or light hearted writing. Age ratings don't count sure but it makes a point of how particular some things scale and HOW to present it to people. Even then with Immortals I'm finding it 'fine' but some 'do the story first' do halt the fun factor.
I mean it's not like many young girls didn't play Horizon let alone other people. We don't need this.
Comments 698
Re: Apex Legends Demands More Cash in New, Dodgy Battle Pass Strategy
They cut support for mobile MTX last year or however prior that was so got to make that money somehow again I guess?
Not fussed as don't play it but not surprised either with state of EA or any others either.
Re: German Dev Piranha Bytes Latest Studio to Close Under Embracer
RIP Piranha Bytes. As janky as their games were they had a lot of charm and cool about them. So for their next game or whatever else unfortunate state of them.
Surprised that some AAs just don't have a publisher wanting to support them, why? Too ambitious? Too costly? No interest because they don't make trending safe games yet we see some European publishers just having awkward games repackaging being dodgey, as if I don't notice for some games physical Switch carts and Definitive editions but reselling them as digital codes.
Or whatever other reasons there are? Very unfortunate. Hope Piranha Bytes staff do well from this, forming new studios or finding other jobs. They will be remembered for sure.
The publisher also owning their IPs sigh, not surprised there either.
I assume Gothic remaster happened?
Re: Netflix's Horizon Zero Dawn TV Show Reportedly on Ice
Fair I guess. The game does a fair job telling what it needs to. Even the Monster Hunter animated movie was better than the live action.
To make the CGI for the dinosaurs or just the story work or whatever of casting or whatever TV show staff had in mind and make it THEIR own besides Sony/Guerilla staff guiding things I guess.
It's story is a good part of the games but yeah translating that world to TV I don't know it's a challenge but would have been impressive.
I think they just need the right people to make it happen just like Uncharted movie took years (even lined up after 4/Lost Legacy but PS5 versions came to work with them and yes Uncharted is bigger/been around long then Horizon but even still something has to be going on with Sony or others or whatever the TV staff think which seeing some gaming movies some are just weird half the ideas or execution they are going for when the games already present fair movie/tv like aspects already just with gameplay added.
Sure I don't care for that but I won't deny how well they do convert that or fit the movie/TV series inspirational details to a degree even I don't think some are that good but at the same time it's also the game part holding it's part then the other and I don't care for game stories usually anyways) when I mean if Treasure Buddies or others can come out why? Or was it the back and forth was the challenge of TV production staff and Sony/the devs thoughts on the execution? Anything is possible.
I don't care for the IP (know people that do) that much the gameplay bored me but it doesn't mean the IP isn't strong in some ways.
Re: Feature: Push Square Readers' 20 Most Anticipated PS5 Games for the Second Half of 2024
20. Suikoden I & II HD Remaster: Gate Rune and Dunan Unification Wars (cool to have but not enough I know about them, not sure if care, may depends on the combat/general design, not a turn based/real time RPG person with typical RPG quests)
19. Ys X: Nordics (cool I guess, 9 was fine, not of interest to me)
18. Dragon Ball: Sparking! Zero (not an IP I care for)
17. Sonic X Shadow Generations (bought the original for cheap, feels weird to play, it's ok)
16. EA Sports College Football 25 (skip)
15. Visions of Mana (cool, not for me)
14. Call of Duty: Black Ops 6 (skip haven't cared for COD since BO3 co-op or better ideas in the past, got the older WW2 entries to play instead)
13. Kingdom Come: Deliverance 2 (cool but not for me)
12. Life Is Strange: Double Exposure (cool but not for me)
11. Dragon Quest 3 HD-2D Remake (cool but not for me)
10. The Plucky Squire (cool, not sure about it yet but good presence of ideas from what I remember)
9. Warhammer 40k: Space Marine 2 (wanting a decent not Indie/AAA historical shooter and a GOOD fantasy one yes please I care about this game, Aveum flopped even if was a fair game. I want Space Marine to succeed, will play the first one again as got stuck but really want to like it)
8. LEGO Horizon Adventures (could be cool, not interested, I like the idea of Horizon but never the gameplay, also sick of Lego games, also to me I'd rather Astro or others succeed then Sony allowing things like this because they can't get Ratchet/Sackboy to sell)
7. Metaphor: ReFantazio (cool but not my thing)
6. Dragon Age: The Veilguard (I appreciate the series but just can't get into them. I am on the sidelines cheering people on into it though I respect the series a lot and Bioware's survival)
5. Silent Hill 2 (cool but not my thing, I can stomach other horror games not this)
4. Assassin's Creed Shadows (not my thing)
3. Black Myth: Wukong (it's cool but not my thing)
2. Star Wars Outlaws (cool but not my thing)
1. Astro Bot (good to see, since the prior articles not surprised it deserves some high support I just never know it's THIS high of support).
To me Gori Cuddly Carnage, Steam World Heist 2, Akimbot or Space Marine 2 are more my thing this year, beside Astro of course, everything else is older years 9th gen or retro for older systems.
Playing Mario Rabbids (random pickup and halfway through it been binging it but taken a few days break) or Forza Motorsport 2 (again) right now.
Re: SEGA's New Crazy Taxi Game Is Open World and Multiplayer
It better have crazy missions or else just crazy driving isn't that exciting at least not these days. I appreciate arcade games or arcadey games with less arcade time limit/other differences.
Solo for me. MP pass.
It being realistic sure I mean the originals went for a more silly but stylised look I think or 'as realistic as could get for the time during Dreamcast, GameCube or PSP' but either way sure. Arcadey fun with realism isn't that bad.
Yes I have never played the series but have other Sega IPs (especially been curious for their other racing series to come back with fake cars not just Crazy Taxi), yes I don't know a lot about it other than the many entries or some clones or bits about Smashing Drive and it's cool GBA port.
I'm interested though and I've played other arcade racers but yes no Simpsons Road Rage or Crazy Taxi at all.
I am VERY open world picky with anything driving/racing or action adventure games. The movesets or the missions need to be compelling or that world isn't worth my time no matter the IP. There is a reason I found Spiderman (other than lab puzzles, laser, radar, ground pound missions or task master) boring & Gravity Rush/Sunset Overdrive/Infamous Second Son more compelling is movesets & missions design.
If the missions aren't 'good' and take advantage of the craziness or the world/character's capabilities and just some generic human, some generic car driving experience & isn't as good as Burnout Paradise (even then I didn't like Paradise but appreciate what it tried to do and the stunts/takedowns/races & more. I got lost/hated the open world roads of driving on that map over time & AI just being not fun or stunt point counts too high and struggling to find places to do any without the lower amounts being harsher with repeated stunts) translated Burnout well to open world then I'm just not interested, missions matter to me and the physics.
Same way events restrictions or event TYPES as in drift, touge (not been in games in years), hillclimbs, race, time trial, cones, soccer, potato, bomb (GT Club PSP for example soccer to bomb), stylish driving related (Project Gotham Racing), gates/barriers (or rings to drive through) to break for points (WRC 3 or Project Cars 3) or any others (different parts of the track to trigger things like Drive Club or say Blur/Split Second even besides the kart racer action elements but the objectives) matter to me in circuit racers & if the events suck I am not interested.
I mean stylish driving makes sense for different fares them just destination. Even Test Drive Unlimited 2 (not Solar Crown) has that with being careful to survive and keep the money amount high enough to reward yourself on the Point A-B.
So more objectives for different customer fares would make sense for Crazy Taxi then just 'go to this restaurant, mall/shopping centre'. As fair of the simplicity and arcade fun of the originals. IF that's what they are going for/modernisation.
Also online with nothing fun to do is just silly to justify a product.
Besides just the originals in the game (Like Yakuza has arcade cabinets to play some other Sega games).
Simple as that. It's more than just car licenses it's game design that matters to use such vehicles to make things more exciting on the track or on the streets/fields and worth playing.
I miss The Club/PGR type arcade style modernisation then just the many trends we see nowadays.
Re: Days Gone Team Apologises for 'False Hope' of PS5 Sequel After Misleading Headlines, Comments
Is unfortunate for what they prepped even though we already knew this, that and Bend hasn't had a trilogy in years but at the same time regardless to me whether a sequel or a new IP if it's just as much a cinematic IP with less compelling gameplay I'm still not interested in it.
Re: PS5, PS4's New PS2 Emulator Fails to Pass Tech Test
Is unfortunate but didn't have high expectations either. Whelp PS2/PS3 still works so good there for the future.
Then again what gets offered. I don't assume Capcom will offer Under the Skin for them at all. Who knows what will be offered really, and the time and care better uploads to the service either and updates as they go/news to gain hype.
I was surprised Push Square put the PC/Android emulator options at all, but at also not wrong either, at the same time it is what audiences would compare that are deep into games or were already doing is original hardware or fan emulators and brave journalists willing to say whatever the case other than say archive type news sources like Time Extension part of this group of new sites.
I mean no one wanted to compare Mario 3D Allstars to fan emulators because getting on company good sides or to the originals when fans will go yeah nah better options even besides mods/PC port.
Re: PS5, PS4's New PS2 Emulator Fails to Pass Tech Test
@Flaming_Kaiser It has it's ergonomic differences but I mean it's people's fault for not knowing Impulse Triggers (rumble triggers of sorts) existed before HD Rumble and Haptics on the Xbox One controller since 2013 launch model controllers even if in so few games use it that I can tell (I own what 30 or so 1st/3rd party games for it then my 100+ PS4 library and that's my largest console library) same as the few that use the Touchpad as a touchpad for gestures or half buttons (4 quadrants on Vita) then a big Select button. Or scaling the vibration levels I came across in Azure Gunvolt collection for PS4, other games may do that I don't know. Besides the few that use gyro as well.
It wasn't just design changes again for the Xbox One controller, it did have a hardware feature upgrade just no one paid attention when they did it because of the start of the Xbox One launch people talked about more.
It works fine in Gears gun reload minigame to time it or Forza/Project Cars 3 for accel/brake guidance. Those are the only games I have experienced it in so far.
Other than that if the gyro in the next console controller happens sure it will be inline with Sony/Nintendo but otherwise it's still fairly caught up more than people realise but yes not as much as the other two because of lacking motion controls or as much vibration/haptics as the Dualsense or HD Rumble offer.
But to say it's the 'same' controller is inaccurate. For people that skipped the console I don't blame people but just saying as when playing multiplatform then 1 platform as all can afford or all of interest (makes sense) just jumping in the more I've experienced collecting for all 3 platforms to inform/point out politely.
Re: Poll: Are You Happy with Your PS Plus Essential Games for July 2024?
Among Us is well known or free or whatever cheap price. Any other Indie is more worth putting for the money. It's a fair game but I mean something different would be better.
Borderlands 3 people know if they want it or not and if getting around to it now by all means, even besides the eh writing it's fair gameplay improvements but prefer Tiny Tina.
Sports, it being Hockey aside even if it were EA FC or Madden or Golf or Boxing/Wrestling or whatever it's so low value or quality till the next one when if Sony REALLY tried they'd offer one of the arcade/fantasy ones by Indies as a better offer then the EA sim ones are these days
That or a party game or something else should have been offered but nope Sony and the casual crowd offering this month.
They are desperate and can't find any other offerings this month quite surprising, even a VR game is more worth it then Among Us or sim sports, what they have cycled through or other games haven't gone down in value/worth offering yet according to other publishers it seems. Hmm.
I don't even sub but I know people that do I just look out of curiosity.
Re: Sunset Overdrive PS5 Port Not Happening, Insomniac's Too 'Busy'
It's called get another studio to do it instead of Insomniac let alone they also can't VR because Sony doesn't want it (waste of their skills) and Marvel is all they are good for anymore apparently.
Why is giving it to another studio such hassle for Sony I don't get it. They didn't remaster the Ratchet games Idol Minds did or Mass Media for the Vita port. Or Idol Minds for Deadlocked port as well. Do they not do that anymore with other studios to make deals and hand over the source code/assets? Do they really want to do it themselves?
Cost makes total sense even besides finding a studio that can to it, but if they want to do it themselves why do that to themselves?
I get other studios are busy too but find one that can if possible. It's on Xbox One and PC as it is, is a PS5 port that difficult or other studios to ask to port are too busy/would take too long to find one at all?
I don't care either way I own it happily on Xbox One but for those that didn't experience it why is it that much trouble for them to port it is the cost too high that sounds more fair then 'were busy'.
Then again they made a garbage Ratchet 1 remake, Spiderman 2018 just wasn't my kind of open world anyway compared to Sunset Overdrive's design being more appealing and minigame playground fun in comparison besides all the similar Ratchet or Resistance 3 elements.
Rift Apart was the safest game they have ever made and was a disappointment to me at least.
To me besides Sunset Overdrive their last game I actually cared for beside Song of the Deep as an ok other project (and not played their VR titles) was Ratchet Crack in Time or Nexus. The last time they actually did anything dramatically different too then safe games and really eh ones since
(Sunset Overdrive does enough to make me WANT to play an open world because of the weapon leveling of Ratchet, tower defence then boring outposts of Spider-man (only cared for the lab puzzles and ground pound, radar and laser side missions, or task master ones, otherwise found the game incredibly boring and a fair story, but gameplay wise was very boring, up to last 3 villains fight, don't care to beat it)
and other games part of generic open world formats, and just better humour then I expected like Journey to the Savage Planet or others will fair humour as I first hated it for that then replayed it and loved it for the gameplay, while having actually fun environments and fun minigame like platforming side missions besides typical side missions).
Sunset Overdrive, ReCore and Rare Replay are the reasons I even keep an Xbox One around besides back compatibility, good media viewing menus for disks (apps for Soundcloud/CDs/Blu-rays to have as Sony has Spotify/DVD and Blu-ray but no CD or expansion app support which is fair) and the trashy Forza Motorsport 5-7. Most things on Xbox One for me are optional.
Even when I don't like a lot on PS4 either. Only a handful of games, may be my biggest library still don't like the PS4 games, but do the PS4 menu/folders over Xbox One oh that OS sucks.
Re: Round Up: Concord PS5 Previews Seem Torn on Sony's New Shooter
Yeah because Titanfall 1 or Anthem as a story/multiplayer combo was a good idea. They were at the time cool and new (and Anthem ended up that way because Bioware + EA multiplayer demands) but not nowadays too risky and most people want the in and out fun not a story.
The reason people play multiplayer is for the gameplay and to get what they want out of it.
If you want a multiplayer story shooter do a Strange Brigade or something else more suited to it, a more co-op story game not a competitive story game with whatever factions and nonsense. Even Planetside 2 doesn't do that I think.
Not Overwatch [cutscenes sure but not during the main game]/Destiny Crucible (than the regular game) I assume but also make that not work too well either in HOW they go about it of maps.
As far as the footage showed in the State of Play at least. I have no idea how it will actually be but it looks like a typical multiplayer with story talking over and that's not a good idea because who can follow it or cares.
I think they are wasting their time. There is trend following and putting a spin on things, but making that spin worth something is why I get disappointed in the game's industry doing stuff like this is because I think it's the wrong way to put a spin on things compared to other more viable ways instead.
Then again Foamstars had 2 modes and a buisness model. I had more ideas then it's base had so it shows they cared for money and not a good gameplay model because they didn't care. Neither did Diofield either with an eh story and the gameplay was pathetic when 2018's Valkyria Chronicles 4 has more depth even for it having less depth then 2010's original game in some areas.
Same as why Lucid wasted their time with Destruction Allstars and forget most people don't care for vehicle based games or vehicles that's why the racing genre and vehicular combat genre aren't doing well is the creativity is dead for them.
Making it 'modern' doesn't save it if the appeal of it's core isn't there for their intended target audience and an audience that would be fine with those types of games aren't compelled either because it's so disappointing.
Re: PS Plus Essential Games for July 2024 Announced
Among us seriously it's free do they need subs to PS+ that bad and go whelp young people or other trend focused adults join.
Borderlands 3 is fair but I think something else could be there.
Sports because why?They are worth nothing over time and most already bought it or will later so why even if benefits.
Sony is lazy to pick something else. They make their audience target clear here this month the Idiots.
I think a tactics game or arcade racer or something party or puzzle would do for variety. Not expecting a visual novel after all to slip in.
I buy only old arcade or racing annual nowadays because Sims suck this gen. Any arcade racer would be good to offer anti grav or kart racer or otherwise Indie ones.
But even an arcade fantasy sports game is better than major sports series.
Give people those.
I don't sub but an indie or other AAA would do but these, pass. I got Borderlands 3 already.
Re: Shadowy Puzzle Platformer Schim Enters the Spotlight in July on PS5, PS4
Seems interesting compared to most out there.
Re: Astro Bot PS5 Took 60 Developers Around Three Years to Make
@thefourfoldroot1 I wondered that too at times in the trailer what recycling was done, sometimes it's fine but other times and how much they do I do question it and would prefer more effort in new environments or bosses/stages to them or enemy types that aren't reskins, recycled animations or stages either.
With the many AAs of PS2 I've played or others I see recycling aspects sometimes I can give it a pass but in others I can't and AAA or not some things need enough distinction texture recycling or other assets/level design, minigames, movesets, etc.
That or reusing areas saying 'there is a mission here' and me just facepalming going great we really need more than that recycling extent in some games. Backtracking I don't mind but story wise later or keeping a key moment again is just not good design and can devalue the experience. Let alone a remade level being worse than the original either even if recontextualised what's happening in it and some parts being cut down and less exciting even if to show time has past or a different region of the same labelled area or a few parts crossover.
Re: Astro Bot PS5 Took 60 Developers Around Three Years to Make
@nomither6 Agreed, many of us love it but the average person or people very dedicated to what they like of even besides sports/COD/trending games many would treat Astro as a kids game and ignore it while many of us would be like yes please an experience like it or like older eras.
Re: Astro Bot PS5 Took 60 Developers Around Three Years to Make
@Max_the_German It's very much a sign of possibilities but industry changing nope as much as we wish it would it won't change anything.
Even ones that have or could didn't change anything either for other genres or studios success to prove things. The state of things will still keep happening but stories and teams showing it's possible will still be proving what could and can happen.
Re: Astro Bot PS5 Took 60 Developers Around Three Years to Make
@Archius9 Would be nice but I think it's good enough for it being focused as it is for one player at the moment. Maybe a two player update. Maybe a two player game later.
But yeah co-op platformers besides Sackboy or It Takes Two or others yeah not that common these days. More common in the older era or other genres a co-op campaign mode and sigh online then offline co-op more so. That and being more than just a Mario game with a cursor too.
Re: Astro Bot PS5 Took 60 Developers Around Three Years to Make
Great to hear just like the past, fewer devs, more controlled management and engagement from staff, smaller game in this case then a Song of the Deep type Spyro scale team for a Metroidvania AAA or however much for Pentiment.
The rare moments we see it happen are always nice to see to fill in gaps or just sometimes in my case are the console buying type games then the other bigger titles but it varies for each person.
Hardcore sales I can't wait for it to do well, for more than that for casual families/kids I don't know but maybe. But for hardcore players and their families I can't wait for this to sell well or others that still love a good platformer or good family friendly game and enjoying their inter child gaming experience again years later.
Let alone COD PS3 era at 200 and fair ideas at the time whatever the case of management Activision had to 300+ employees and many studios than just the 2 doing their thing prior and worse results as well. Then again EA treating NFS or others to milk was just as bad let alone other studio deaths of the 90s/00s they offered.
Says a lot really. It's not just because it's a platformer and may not require much (I mean many games of Spyro Reignited, Ratchet, Sonic all require a fair bit for sure with the right effort put in of personality, polish and ideas in mind) it's that they had the better effort put into the game, regardless of artstyle, good attention to detail the many PlayStation references or Astro related world elements that are charming.
They made it in a shorter time and it shows with many signs in the trailers and in articles like this with how they manage their business and budget correctly and control things much better no matter their skills and coordination.
Something many studios and publishers could take notes from cough cough.
Re: UK Video Game Retailer GAME Will Reportedly Stop Stocking Video Games
Seeing as many in my own country for just swap meets or certain retailers too regardless of the state of GAME or CEX or others in the UK it's sad to see how much things are changing around the world of physical. Some of us will keep going but if only collectors I am not sure. The physical experience is just so good to find gems or any major games I want. Not digital only. I don't find it convenient at all let alone appealing. I get more enthusiasm for physical. Sure the drive/bus trip there but otherwise that's nothing compared to the experience of going there all the time.
A digital store/app isn't as fun as exploring what I want when most of these digital options the searching sucks, you don't always find anything that great even if more are digital and besides the constant advertising compared to physical when you can ignore most of it anyway let alone better prices physical then very much still waiting a while to be good enough discounts on digital. Physical any day even for how bad the prices are then USD prices I have to deal with.
Well more AU/EU to keep looking forward to of physical releases for how long left it has I guess. Not collectors edition only releases I don't want that future because of how I shop.
Then again if we see more digital code physical then those companies can get what's coming to them no purchase. They choose to not handle the multiplayer download or the Japanese audio or enough balancing of game bundles. That's on them for being lazy not for me to accept their laziness.
There is a reason I only bought Drawn to Life physical digital code on Switch, I wasn't getting it on mobile or PC. Major IPs I couldn't care less niche games sure I want that physical because of how particular and unique case of release they are over a digital purchase. I wasn't buying Gear Club Unlimited 2 that way I got the definitive edition all on one card and the standard edition with the Porsche DLC code and never used that code at all. Codes like that I don't mind for DLC or themes. Otherwise pass. Bundling 3 games and 1 on the card or part of pass.
Also Spyro reignited 1st on the disk Activision can get stuffed for that.
Any other old games wanting digital codes because they think they won't sell with a cart that's on them.
Re: Poll: Can a Game's Brutal Difficulty Put You Off Playing It?
Because I play all genres or platformers that had enough of all genres I got used to many others making it easier. I make the effort to dive in and understand them no matter how awkward or foreign many like hack n slashes/tactics are my new favourite genres.
Like when I find a new music genre/style I try to understand it, I find the ones I like and get a sense of the artist or the genre.
Re: Poll: Can a Game's Brutal Difficulty Put You Off Playing It?
Depends/kind of depends on the challenge/what the game offers, what era of gaming it is as well, what genre expectations or the studio's typical games are like of challenge or just some parts are just awkward as many PS1-3 titles can vary.
PS2/PS1/PSP I don't mind the experimental & awkward design because they don't always have difficulty settings, with current ones (certain PS3/Vita but obviously PS4/5 era (PS4 for me) as usually pretty typical of easy these days but some exceptions come up such as some racing or souls (or Indies mimicking old gen design or overlooking aspects and sometimes problems that should be solved not replicated that much of inspiration besides their good old school core design), the level/game design as awkward was more exciting and fair of trying to refine itself.
Nowadays the difficulty to me I just put it low or if it's pro level like Ride 4 or MotoGP16/assuming others are too hard on very easy (the rally/dirt bike opponents are easy, the MotoGP riders AI is way too hard that's how I know because that game has those 3 types of gameplay and I enjoy the Ride series it was easy to work out the differences), many of Ride 3 and older were fine I'm buying up the PS3/360 era ones currently and are easy.
Some of GT Sport's F1 or endurance races sucked but the rest was fairly balanced of AI or time trial goal times. So if 90% was playable that's fine by me. But still sucks as when GT3-6 has different AI/time trials I find them still playable other than the S-6 GT6 license test being too hard for me to even Bronze not Gold like other players say of it being challenging. XD
Not just AI/pitting & easy in GT3 & 4 besides GT5 and 6 having awful tire physics even worse I find then the Forza Motorsport 2 or 3 & 4 era feel of cars for mid game events. Or endurance in those games in GT Sport to me those events (2 F1 style and what 4 endurance so 6 all up and varied of races and regardless of cars from a Porsche Race Car to others made no differences of One Make not otherwise) were just unplayable from the starting line.
Soulslike don't interest me. For those that want them that's totally fine I respect niches for sure I like many niches continuing on in their own way. But the challenge is ok I just get lazy or bored with the way they want to offer the challenge/combat so in a way it is on me with the stamina and enemy patterns.
Ninja Gaiden 2 was hard too of enemy patterns and laziness to deal with the first boss in level 2 of that game but most other hack n slash/character action games are still playable enough for me besides their difficulty on Normal, anything higher and I can't do it. Darksiders 2 highest difficulty run was ok but I got sick of doing that, beat the game on Normal anyway. I no interest in difficulty trophies, never play on Hard+ (doing well with Valkyrie Elysium as started the demo on hard & gotten through it well, Wanted Dead on Normal kicks my butt so I have to start it again) and to me if the Normal mode is too hard that's a sign.
To me I play enough of PS2/3/4 era titles and current gen on PS4 (equivalents on Nintendo and Xbox) to get an idea how difficulty, design in the games/studio or genres are these days. PS1/PSP control schemes don't bother me either.
Depends on the game, the era, the extent they are aiming for of eh QTE I sometimes can pass. Other times just odd segments, odd movesets that while fun are still better than boring current gen.
Re: Rumour: Sony's Still Working on PS3 Emulation for PS5
This rumour will keep going. When is Vita support going to PS5 even? Never likely sigh Is the PS5 capable yes, will they because moving it to PS6 or otherwise complexities with games/the emulation. I don't think they want to. They won't contact the RSPCS3 team either. That team does amazing amounts of effort with the project but they are the only ones willing, other platforms people want to make emulators for instead & major companies can replicate with ease.
As good as PS3 is if Sega cared about Binary Domain (I enjoy it too as buying up many shooters from 7th gen PS3/360/Wii) as much as many of us do they would have ported it. Same with many of the major third parties shooters east or west instead of the handful we saw in PS4 and have PS5.
Sony does make more money from games they can remaster/remake. Most of the IPs they cared or can went to PS4 or PS5 already. PS2/PSP/PS1 they treat like Nintendo does NES/SNES/N64 regardless of the prices they are old enough for nostalgia & regardless of price value. Complexity like Saturn and interest is clear.
Gamecube as remasters then emulation while Wii U well it had a Wii inside it so it wasn't that hard to do while GameCube they didn't want to scale it. Same with GBA the Ambassador program on 3DS they didn't want to emulate it on the chips just do virtualisation (Win XP fake using the same hardware & booting the OS to simulating it not hardware that's more powerful to pretend to be weaker hardware) instead.
Has the nostalgia for PS3/360/Wii happened yet? As PS2/Xbox/GameCube/Dreamcast has? I don't even care about nostalgia I just pick up what seems interesting to me regardless of price and wait it out if too high.
If people want CIB that's on you but I don't seek them & still end up with the CIB manual, disk & maybe no advertising, all of it, or just the disk/artwork/after market case. I'm happy I care more about the disk then I do CIB and that's why people complain about the price, who reads the manual. If the disk works then sure.
But not everything is going to be scratch free. Anybody wanting that wants the same quality of a fresh disk but that's not how things go and that's unrealistic. I had Wolfenstein 2009 not work, eh The Darkness 2 1st level that's it, but for the most part PS3 lasts well, not working was usually PS2 or 360.
My results have been pretty good so far can't say for others and where they shop & the differences. Then again I had no issues with EB games when they still offered PS3/360/Wii U/DS in 2017-2020 cut off and now just 3DS, Switch, PS4/Xbox One/PS5/Series only now.
Those left behind IPs they don't care about so why bother buy a PS3/360/Wii instead. I know having a Wii makes it possible to do what major third parties won't of games to Switch or even PC/VR of any kind either. Let alone their own subscription services on PC/PS4/Xbox One and PS5/Series.
The PS3 era titles studios that want to support already offer with streaming even if streaming is limited to Premium and not available for Deluxe tier regions/countries.
Get a PS3 they aren't that hard to get at least where I shop they haven't been that pricey, can't say for other regions/countries the games from 2017+ and Super Slim I got 2023 have been cheap enough to go by. Not always ebay/Price charting or other sources.
Re: Sony Is Allegedly Pulling PSVR2 Funding, Report Claims
I love ambitious things yet audiences don't or it's too expensive for any tech to do anything new or evolve let alone games to offer when Devs won't bother either. Experimentation is dead of PS2 era. PS3 safeness and the design we have seen for PS4/5 gen of hardware and game design has taken a dive. So hardware like this won't be pushed unless it's cheap or has an application of us in or outside gaming.
Not surprised Nintendo hasn't bothered they know it won't take offer yet and yet even besides that I'm sick of phones or anything taking 10+ years to do anything because of prices or audiences being so slow to adopt it. Companies can't make anything anymore that's ambitious. It's why phones also suck.
Social convenience or Miiverse/Xbox social features but anything actually exciting nope goodbye any of those moments. I blame audiences. Not just companies with sometimes awkward approaches or ad garbage forcing down our throats.
Responding to quote with deeper details on Gameranx or others articles that Push Square, VGChartz and others don't dive further into.
Better ideas of Master System 3D with arcade games with 3D like aspects aka making it more than just racing and shoot em ups as NES/Famicom did. That person is saying the same as NES 3D so I find it a load of garbage.
Yes 3D and VR are different but same point can be made. If Sega got Genesis VR or Atari Jaguar VR besides Nintendo Virtual Boy or the Vectrex also had it's limits too of Vectors besides time it came out may have gotten it with effort yet we hear excuses from VR Devs being just as unimaginative or ambitious with the tech or saying it can't be done what of safe games, safe camera or other design work around that then.
Just state the truth they can't be bothered and want other things and aren't creative enough to do it because games are as generic as they are and these same people making the same mistakes in VR and under ambitious. They just don't care to find a solution not just sales.
Re: Sony Is Allegedly Pulling PSVR2 Funding, Report Claims
Only works in first person uh not every VR game that's good is a racing or cockpit style game they are third person cameras. Better developers right harder. It's how we got third person in the first place. Sigh. Any idiot knows they can put a camera in third person games as such and have the character move around so the player is a camera not the lack of 1st person with less of the character model. We don't need everything for VR to be overly immersive just because they don't have the skill, imagination or brain power to devise such solutions and only see what they want or THINK audiences will accept or only think on basic real terms, it's a video game think outside the box you idiots. It's software, many things can be worked around if they think hard enough no matter how cryptic or archaic. It took how long for analogue sticks to get used to, same with motion/rumble handhelds or consoles. Same with 3D TV or 3D cameras or backgrounds with 2D games. Also good examples of many things tried but nowadays people are too stupid and think real logic when making games and I'm like but movies/tv series have dramatised or romantised worlds no problem and it still works. How can games not be treated the same way? It's it's own world with it's own rules to create not recreating the real ones because they can't think outside the box. Idiots with no creativity or no effort to try hard enough.
When they adapt and put effort into many other solutions if they tried hard enough in their games. I get even SNES or PS2 eras had awkward things about them but they also had a lot of good mix in with the awkward not just oh we4 only do that same we have seen 8th gen be is boring movesets so standardised and boring I went back to old gen because the experimental touches don't actually bother me and because what was tried is gone because the studios went too realistic and too brain dead to try and find GAMEY solutions not real solutions. I swear some people aren't creative enough to go beyond to find a solution and it annoys me a lot.
They work well enough if approached the right way like Astro or Moss. Any idiot with a brain can find the solutions. The same way making sure the arms for core mechanics translate well instead of over using the hardware for bad motion controls when they worked fine in the past but they go oh we can do more yet bad Wii motion comes in when good ones with better balance can make VR games possible. Stop the whole pull to reload or pull off back a weapon and the tracking being garbage. Just keep it simple. How hard is that. Idiots over engineering software solutions to things I swear.
Re: Sony Is Allegedly Pulling PSVR2 Funding, Report Claims
The other sources I've seen with more details are a joke. Tangent
https://gameranx.com/updates/id/501928/article/rumor-sony-making-deep-cuts-to-funding-for-psvr-2-games/ (the additions here are great to just show how lacking of execution they are besides budgets and reference or experimentation)
Insomniac having VR experience what a waste they weren't used for it and instead Marvel games. Why?
Even then London or others why not?
If they can offer Dioramas or better third person cameras almost like walking a dog of floating and not having to be human just any sort of objects/other being or just a camera or other things for how a camera can act and can't perform it they are useless.
If their tools suck why not just make their own or make plugins on existing ones. Make tweaks where it counts. Actually think about the situations the player is in, ignore reality and actually think while avoiding the nausea and still make it safe not overly crazy. Not everything has to be REAL. People get nausea from just awkward lighting or set pieces outside of VR, as if that wasn't obvious in other games of old.
They can add VR modes they are lazy. Third person games can work as if Astro, Tethered or Townmen VR which has bad controls but is a city builder those 2 games besides Astro being a platformer making the camera a focus with the platforming then why are these idiots saying third person can't work.
Make the view of the camera/screen and view of the world if like i've seen how Minecraft of view to load besides the actual generation (but not visually in view because of detail and the depth of that vision and interaction the player will do that the game can't predict till the player moves or interacts) or some others may do it work well enough. Stop with garbage visuals pushing of the hardware and make the camera work to view things well, avoid nausea and have good enough mechanics not realism level nonsense no one asked for because they aren't creative enough to think outside the box. I've played many experimental, shovelware or reasonable that still get the job done. Why can't they do it. That's from current gen and old gens but mostly old gens when we had better experimentation regardless of sales.
The history learned from GDC Wii/Move is just not in their minds because they are stupid. Gaming even in the experimental field is dead because they can't think things up better for how to go nuts and branch out of design at all, treat it as new, actually think about what to problem, solve and play in the worlds without realistic rules at first because nowadays real rules make things as boring as they are not just for oh nausea level crazy either, have eh budgets because of the risk and yet we get bad games and bad experimental ones because things are too safe nowadays. What a sad state of the world. Imagination in gaming is dead for some studios or people. Some studios can still pull it offer but others just can't. They can code/animate probably well enough of skilled or not but they don't have creativity at all and it's like how did you even get here.
It's like with eh stories, too much family/emotional garbage to get some pathetic reaction out of a player/viewer when I came for a video game. Give me a video game not some garbage fan fiction wannabe movie trash.
Re: Sony Is Allegedly Pulling PSVR2 Funding, Report Claims
I think while the pricing was high for console standards not other VR standards as many are higher priced then PSVR2 but not as cheap as others more underpowered headsets. It's a submarket but the efforts made in it haven't been very good either.
Prices or games, the ambition like Remote Play was it taking 10+ years is just annoying to me we have to wait that long or another attempt like 3D 3 times in movies and gaming. Or still given up.
They couldn't be as cheap as Move/Eye Toy because of the complexity VR offers and in comparison to PC VR with different options, the portable or PC cable of Meta's headsets and more the range of VR shows when people want particular IPs or support that appeals, the price is lower then others but not for console audiences or just the PS5 price in parts of the world and only certain stores discounts of the console I don't know about the headset.
if we had VR applications sure it may go the way of Kinect and reused use cases, I mean HoloLens or others fit for business only use cases well. Kinect got used well in other ways then gaming.
If we got more VR modes or smaller games even then sure but if very few were offered, ports were offered of course I'm aware of that, the adaptor for PS5 was there of PSVR1, the tech had to evolve to what the others did not stay as the light tracking of PSVR1 forever it couldn't. Sure they could try to make PSVR1 work on PS5 games but it was tied to PS4 for a reason not just to upgrade but the APIs and tech I assume very heavily.
Control schemes weren't better pushed too far and too Wii 2006 bad again of look realism but are too clunky and over compensating then balance of buttons/motion uses then the learning done by Wii 2009 of some games back then. Some Wii/Move games made it easy to understand VR besides the differences and see how far devs are incorrectly pushing the tech. Pushing immersion, people just treating it as a party trick with some experience games anyway. The nausea and people not getting used to it which I'm surprised is that hard to convince.
But Indies were struggling then yeah its unfortunate. They didn't want to contribute third parties and when it was Meta they went nah not good enough sales what do they expect mobile phone sales numbers the idiots have high expectations of sales. Vita got more games in it's 3-4 1st party contribution besides the Japanese third parties doing a great job besides Indies offerings for 10 years.
But VR is very different so not surprised. It's unfortunate but audiences to me also have been the issue I find for just games in general I find many I'm excited for flop. Partly it's because I seek other things in games but makes it hard to support something if full price or little support makes no difference with 1 person.
Re: Sony Is Allegedly Pulling PSVR2 Funding, Report Claims
Well if major third parties don't care aka like Vita the right idiots without mobile as an excuse this time.
Own but worry & PC use. Google like effort, high sales in era of generic audiences/bad 3rd parties. 10+ years for a worse then Vita remote play also a joke & then audiences jump on, sigh players.
So much for Sky Dance/others at State of Play. Ubisoft & Red Steel 2 VR where is it you cowards. Brief VR modes in games even? Sigh.
Indies struggling with PSVR2, small marketing, Sony wants to push experiences & tech yet barely cares. Vita was a great platform they just don't try & expect dumb western third parties care.
They expect niches to be big when they can't. Sad no smaller games, eh efforts with hardware but don't support. PC VR sure, their fault & devs not putting the effort in, audiences not buying it with unrealistic price/quality expectations.
Also garbage control schemes (they ignore their GDC/past history and start from scratch it's infuriating the idiots , newcomers or veterans to VR/motion , No Man's Sky backtracking it's control scheme is a joke,
If GT7 wasn't a garbage campaign I'd do the same thing I did with GT5 & 6 replay them in 3D. Got new batteries for the glasses and the 3D TV hooked up still.
Horizon was ok not great just Robinson the journey with some tweaks.
Star Wars had bad reload animations & connections for motion pushing the tech too far and going immersion when I know how far the tech for motion has gone or the Devs brains not far of intelligent design to suit it idiots.
Cosmic Smash is cool but a Dreamcast IP reworked in a good way, yet most don't know about it or care. I found out about it the day before the VR version. I think VR improves it a lot.
RE8 & GT7 aren't enough and some people are very eh on old games, or content handling let alone whatever else Vita/Wii U were too soon but VR/Switch weren't but not many wanted to contribute to VR this time forget hardware of Devs and publishers won't bother or audiences.
I can pick out many Wii U eshop games let alone future ideas for ifhr hardware &vaudiences couldn't care less because who wants out of the box or small fun or hardware craziness a small audience.
Most people are typical, boring & Devs are safe at this point, some staff aren't capable yet, others don't have time, meetings go however they end up, publishers want what they want/execs. The gaming industry is trash.
Baby steps to setting/game design branching out has been slow, those games flop due to audiences sucking due to other priorities. Whelp $20 support from me not $100 or $70.
This is why I go retro but try to support new ideas when I can or think up different ideas audiences won't, Devs won't push them their too business model & safe IPs or design of garbage worlds eh themes with game design the point of the medium is dying when that's what makes it good, stand out, the worlds/business models better fun).
If Wii/Move had more motion & button balance when VR wants to be real aka Wii 2006 bad again when too soon. I'm sick of this realism like control scheme garbage when the tech isn't there yet nor FUN. Visuals yet video game clunkiness.
Developers or audiences feel like boring adults, oh forget imagination, putting actual effort in to games kiddo time to be boring, especially so with game design these days. Even experimental platforms like VR boring prioritising, they found a way.
The future of gaming is bad.
Re: Round Up: We're All Sleeping on Capcom's Kunitsu-Gami, as Super Positive Previews Drop
Maybe heard of it but barely know anything about it. Hope it does well not really fussed.
To me it seems like Onimusha but not the same problems Exorpimal has, something else then what people want and also better design of the past too likely.
They can try new but want to without the good attributes and those licenses or expectations why do they waste players time?
Too many blend together, it doesn't have the same exciting appeal of other niche Capcom IPs and I barely care for their big IPs. Tried a few and they are ok not really my thing.
Re: Ex-Sony Boss Shawn Layden Explains How to Make Games Faster, Cheaper
@Callmegil The Capcom poll results (gameplay, then characters looking appealing, story, graphics and others underneath) say one thing (and people that are in the know about games) and the actions/other results we don't see from other companies audiences and what games they value more in the ways they value them is telling of those that vocally or act on gameplay, characters, story, visuals and just value for money no matter how trash the content is (may be different in their eyes or just the safe range of games they play let alone the 8/10+ logic as well and 7/10 and below treatment is just sad).
Give me a AA that tries then an 8/10 AAA that priorities other things to get that score.
Or just singleplayer/multiplayer and judge all games as the same when not all are an open world or RPGs or multiplayer skin grinding shooters but they want their money's worth even if a series is consistent of hour count for those games or the genre and people skip the differences and different content handling but people see it differently. It says a lot really about people's priorities.
Let alone looks AAA is AA or Indie and because visuals look good and don't understand the budget/staff size or skill they judge it unfairly as well. Says a lot. Then again some gamers don't always understand the details of what goes into development and why meetings, why things get cut, what we look at in prototypes and so on just what they seek in a game, it coming out, as fast as possible and moving on anyways rather than those that savior it, analyse it and respect it.
Re: Ex-Sony Boss Shawn Layden Explains How to Make Games Faster, Cheaper
@get2sammyb Part 2
I do treat differently games & genres, studios quality/budget (respectfully do my research or go in blind but still go oh this many staff or first game or what I may seek).
"hours don't = the same for each game" as that's just not suitable. If people play only open worlds, RPGs/multiplayer shooters/sports/racing for their hour counts & don't care about the quality in some ways that's on them.
Previous year's games prices change, if people don't see them & have fewer games they seek out while many of us have plenty to play from any year. Having the latest.
People that want the value in the quality, no padding are very different to those wanting anything to last. They notice the Indies, know quality, notice budgets/staff count/vision, hour count, quality content, familiar/different stand out game design. Context while also an audience that watches the prices and discounts. While also not being the types to want a 100 hour game or a bad reputation game for $1 or something unreasonable because that's also a blown out of proportion logic as silly & exaggerated.
I don't find 20+ hours games fun the padding is noticeable of the open world missions as many tropes and design are clear by this point even if first time, 100th time or footage browsing to understand them or the linear but still lengthy grind or a good balance of enemies, combat, exploration (if paths or not for secrets or just simple ammo/collectibles of other worth) puzzles.
Linear games going for of story or the gameplay being so basic which many safe these days, 8th gen is why I went backwards/collected more or as strict of current gen as it is because the gameplay isn't satisfying, the movesets aren't appealing & story is pushed yet not entertaining (varies from game to game).
Foamstars were so easy to nitpick and offer modes (multiplayer example even if didn't play it observed) but they wanted business model over game design to justify it (then again many Square published games from 2022 didn't impress me either Diofield was worse than Valkyria Chronicles 4 a 2018 game in depth & priorities of gameplay/story).
Biomutant to me I went what's with the movesets for the animals being less exciting then an N64 game, where is the moveset depth of digging, swimming or flight or something else. They have gas immunity but no ability depth. They think their setting and typical dungeons is enough, it's not. The world design and visual spectacle isn't enough.
Spiderman to me was just puzzles and 3 side missions the rest was just formulaic open world design I found boring besides the passable story. Why because Sunset Overdrive had a more playground open world design and tower defense then outposts. To me they went backwards.
Racing games have long lengths, certain ones yet the events are boring, cars use cases aren't existing & we get updates that aren't worth it because what you do with the cars isn't fun. Just offering characters isn't fun. Progression sucks, sell us the same cars and yet the tracks/event types or restrictions to offer good progression isn't offered.
Lasting two weeks/a month is fair if people want a lengthy open world game, but I think some people binge a game too much/have the same values, not all are RPGs?
Not all singleplayer games have to match multiplayer hours either. Money value/quality/entertainment lasting, multiplayer/solo audience and how people treat games.
Re: Ex-Sony Boss Shawn Layden Explains How to Make Games Faster, Cheaper
@get2sammyb Some people want their value for money and that's fair. Some of us just want the quality not the quantity and padding but it depends on the purpose and the person. No game can be that much quality & last a year because not viable.
Small audiences aren't much sales but over time they are? Sandbox/Vib Ribbon music to level/level editors in games are infinitely replayable. Selling GPUs/marketing terms.
Not everyone wants a 8-15 minute song & complains most are 3 minutes commonly? They want value in the song don't they? I enjoy some 8 minute songs. Games they value it differently. Ratchet was consistent 10-12 hours yet gets judged similarly by other audiences yet not by us that usually know they were that long but the content handling is different not 18 planets or similar level of bonus content skill points and other things but fewer levels but length/other aspects were offered instead. Different perception of us 20-50+ year olds yet my perception is the same as when I was kid not changed like others.
Seen the videos on worse graphics & make if shorter games. I agree with them to a degree. Sure I'm buying up old games so the prices differ a lot & the demand for them differs but I understand the then, now, & have a better perspective of current/prior. I judge games, I think of ideas for why some games could use some when they lack because other priorities.
Yeah I do buy games at $28 AUD 1 year later wait (vary of $80 on Switch to $100-120 PS5/Series & I buy PS4/Xbox One & older not 9th gen consoles), sometimes bit more, sometimes bit less, varies. $50 USB games in 7th gen & for solo campaigns less then 20 hours for some games yet 8th gen+ people want more hours? Money, time & things in the world happening makes sense. Besides the yes certain N64 games were just as expensive as games today.
So people that were fine with small hour counts in singleplayer games (fair hours in multiplayer as progression design took off, I assume player's expectations are too high in some cases), understood the quality and effort put in and with less games of some budgets as studios get cut and staff move into other studios or form new ones or whatever and many Indies games of some good ideas, some nostalgic & overly rip off safe vary. But while more games come out many of a certain quality haven't yet people want more hours? Strange.
I get something lasting a long time due to the situations in the world (or other countries currency value/consoles pricing) but do they really want anything no matter how trashy to still be a 3 hour movie let alone a 100 hour game? Do they watch for quality at all? Depends what they value of course in dialogue/visuals & for me gameplay wise most of them don't meet that.
Do they have to have everything new and now/FOMO. When they can wait for a discount, can play it next year even (waited, played retro, played year prior too), not have a warped so cheap it's dirt cheap mentality either and have to experience it? Having 1 game counts, how many want probably 10 to be a thing this year to call it a good year. Or do for a console purchase. or things to look up in some areas.
But at the same time if I know a game is short it varies, if I know what type of content in what series or new game it is & I think the balance of content is worth it. Sure 60 hour tactics games (know the series), or flops Balan/Aveum, etc. that 1 sale wouldn't save them anyways.
Re: PSVR2 Puzzler Infinite Inside Blends AR and VR on 12th July
Many puzzle games seem to really be going for it and always impressing me. It's great to see.
Re: Indie Gem Pepper Grinder Confirmed for PS5 and PS4, Out in August
Looks good for once. Most Indies I go eh what sets this apart, not a lot, eh movesets, eh level design, heavily inspired so don't stand out. This at least looks good enough. Other than seeing Skully recently.
Most Indie platformers look boring. This having some drill uses not in the same way as Drilldozer is fine. It has very Rayman Origins/Legends looking gameplay/animations mixed with something else so a bit of comparison but still good enough to be it's own thing FINALLY.
It looks interesting for once with it's moveset which many fail at being good or exciting enough to want to play and fair level design/artstyle from other videos I looked at.
Takes some devs to actually try not be lazy and tracing similar of the attempts that make me disappointed like AAA, tracing the blueprint, not trying hard enough to make a good art piece they can if they wanted to.
Re: Cancelled Over 10 Years Ago, PS2-Era Action Game Captain Blood Returns on PS5, PS4
Looks interesting I'm up for it.
Re: As If There Was Any Doubt, a Sequel to the Uncharted Movie Has Been Confirmed
I do wonder about this. Success to follow up on sure but it was very close to Uncharted 4 with references to the others. So are we getting something new which would be interesting with something different then something of reference all the time? Similar to the others of Lost Legacy or the older ones? I do wonder about that.
Actors people can't wait to see, IP brand power, loyal fans of the actors/games/adventure film easy to get an audience if done well and whatever aside this film could go either way. But I mean if it's safe enough or odd enough in how they handle it sure.
That aside nice colour for the movies or others on the blue there. Really surprised me.
Re: Interview: The Making of Astro Bot, the PS5's Next Great Exclusive
@Meowmixes98 They are but they still have western staff (lack of a better term) as well (they likely live there so are residents of Japan or just for the work periods). It's not uncommon.
Not all people that go to Japan are tourists, translators/coordinate things to the rest of the world (other regions of the business) type staff or Japanese Vloggers or something else. There are some that do work and live there.
Re: Interview: The Making of Astro Bot, the PS5's Next Great Exclusive
Just reading sponge, was enough for me to go oh they know what they have in mind. The fun, playable and just creativity of the world to play in. Making each power up/ability/moveset count something I find a lot of games lack because the focus is elsewhere. Having abilities, varied ones, uses for them or just pacing of them as well.
Comparing this to Splatoon 2 just being reminded of the simplicity of the mechanics but the levels with the sponge or other platforms (thin, interactive of elevators, the weapons having a good mix of grappling, and the core mechanics in fun ways) and 'how' they used the weapons. Platforming with the core not just oh we have jumping and we have enemies it's like nah give me more of this puzzle platforming with the weapons. If Portal and platformers can do it why not. The singleplayer is a side project from the main multiplayer but I was still impressed. Simple story but the gameplay counted. Something Sackboy kind of does and Ratchet the gameplay disappointed and the story is the focus when I'm a gameplay first for that series so eh.
Astro is great to see is doing what PlayStation used to have of good mix of gameplay and what Nintendo has with it's genre variety or certain platformers done a fair job of wild ideas or a core but still good simplicity and how it paces things. Something other games do but some of their cores drag on and some enemy types/weapons mixed in or stats or whatever and level design (especially graphics and holiday destinations and how they utilise the world and what NPCs do and what boring missions they offer when sometimes I just want to use abilities and collect nonsense in a platformer not some deep or superficial thing I don't want to help NPCs and do favours for them sometimes a minigame not some boring situations of dialogue exchange and boring scenarios so mundane they aren't fun or the writing is too serious and not engaging) haven't made me care for 8th+ gen a lot it's just too much of the same in many games besides my genre branching out. How to make it 'too accessible' well make it fun writing and gameplay to be accessible but not always dialogue focused. I'd rather drive a car in fun events not just drive a car. I'd rather play a character then listen to the boring characters.
The cameos are fine but I don't need the fan service/references to care just solid ideas is enough and they are offering that which is good. Even if they are nice nods. Much better than telling me and emotionally wasting my time with dialogue to about it. Besides just visually humour.
The way they present the bots is excellent. They did just go oh from Firesprite's Playroom we just had these bots that I guess were like Sackbots from LBP2 or Ape Escape Monkeys or something (me assuming) like that similar and just were easy to animate with different situations to fit into quickly that's fun I guess when they went about it after the tech demo app success of the Playroom VR Rescue Mission short level. It makes sense he is easy to draw and may or may not be comparable to Tearaway I guess with the paper craft?
Either way the simplicity and limitations to be expressive then overly detailed and more to it is a good thing to see in some games it doesn't take away from it. But I can see why they just played around with things and eventually went with a platformer (they always lend themselves to a level of creativity to make the most of things I think the enemies are obstacles and you keep moving and the jumping/abilities offers a lot which is why I like the genre so much it's so filled with personality in gameplay and worlds and good pacing and also makes me understand other genres differences). Just more to explore i guess the creativity that way besides just that 1 minigame was praised in the Playroom VR app?
I mean sometimes you need a silly side to present these serious IPs why not. Ah Vib Ribbon a classic.
I love when devs just have that sort of experimentation or concepts. Triggers or not. What platforms, what characters do in the world, the world complimenting that visually or interactively it's just great to see.
Not all this wow look at the real life like looking world and drama and this and that. Just fun mechanics, fun worlds video games can offer of physics (I hope the character weight/jump height or other aspects isn't an issue I always find that to be the case in modern games and it annoys me even if Astro did usually seem to be good there).
Re: Poll: So, What Are Your Thoughts on Dragon Age: The Veilguard?
Not a fan but am interested on behalf of others. I see the appeal, I know enough about the series and dipped into Origins/Inquisition.
I think it's going in some fair directions. Tactics I mean some handle it better than others most care about action. The story telling is great, the worlds are clear of Dragon Age.
The art is like many things odd at first but when realise oh that's how they modernised or presented it and Dragon Age or the lighting mostly it does look good. Just the right angles of the environment/characters.
Re: LEGO Horizon Adventures Is on Nintendo Switch Because It's a Game 'For Everyone'
For a family friendly audience I think it makes sense. It's just very unexpected to go to Switch besides just the for kids/families sales the Switch has of audiences besides many of us adults seeking other games or factors of the Switch. I think the game on Switch is fair to have for sure. If they want to broaden things they will be PC or Nintendo makes sense. That or because Xbox they know sales might not be much? Not just competition and seeing Nintendo as less of competition because they mostly do their own thing and the sales of Switch are worth it to them.
This game has always been a because Horizon is very particular of it's appeal yet also Lego fits the mature but more well handled approach. To me it's just a introduction through something else to the other. But for Switch audience also then just PS5 then playing the other games on PS5 or because those audiences didn't play it (not just because Horizon isn't on Switch). It's an introduction game and fans may dip into it as well. It's understandable but eh. To me Horizon's world/story was good the gameplay bored me how it was done. A Lego skin/structure isn't doing to do much I find but for other people it may. The Lego feel here is different but who knows how it actually turns out. The Lego game elements Travelers Tales offered at least did a fair job of their own humour/feel besides the movie licenses/other Lego sets to make games from. Depends how this one goes about things.
As much as people are on PS4 I mean the few with a Switch/Xbox or PC or playing other games. I can see the reason for the moving people on to modern platforms and that's fair. To me I mean to Disagea 7 was on Switch so I got it there. Demo for PS4 was there but no physical PS4 I saw. So focusing on current gen is fine. Some Xbox resources is a fair amount of effort for sure or audience being clear as far as data then data of the personality of people on Xbox and other platforms that no matter their age will play something fun and family friendly that data can't be made clear of by age alone.
Whether fits the Horizon Zero Dawn remake rumours who knows. The multiplayer game though even no clue there either.
The game itself may be great but to me the Switch aspect is fair, the brand part is what scares me to go welp there goes creativity because brand matters more. Sigh if Astro flops I'm going to be sad but not surprised the market disappoints me every day as it is yet I go my own modern or retro gaming path. At least enough Hardcore will pick it up then other IPs no matter what form people gravitate towards.
Re: Preview: Astro Bot on PS5 Could Be the Best 3D Platformer This Side of Nintendo
I'd agree actually. The footage alone made me go wait they have many different bits of gadgets/gear. YES. The pacing and the gear alone makes me go oh this game is perfect. The past Astro games have shown a lot of greatness and this furthers it in the right ways. This is a game we need to succeed. Or else as fair as Lego Horizon is I think it also makes the market even more clear.
I mean to me Splatoon 2's campaign had a good use of little but well spread use of the weapons for puzzle platforming besides the core moveset. Yet Foamstars while multiplayer had 2 modes and a business model, yet lacking modes I have posted at least 10+ times already they could have done but didn't. Mechanical depth matters if your maps/story aren't good enough. Yet messaging stories I don't care about (or care less about because the game is boring to play) and basic moves rule modern gaming and it bores me to death.
The technique/structure I see gets muddled or dumbed down while Astro is full of personality in it's worlds and it's mechanics, HOW HARD IS THAT GAME DEVELOPERs stop pushing eh worlds/story and offer personality or mechanical depth.
It screams Japan thinking about how to approach this game well which is awesome. Western teams can but they have different goals in mind and while some are good, some lack in ways to compel me. It varies from game to game.
To me Ratchet is a story 3rd person shooter it's gadgets in Rift Apart were ok but not exciting, it's why I found the gameplay other than Blizar to be so boring and I quit playing. Watch Useless Podcast old Ratchet devs play it and others play it and I still found it boring.
Sackboy does a fair job but it isn't the same.
Astrobot feels like what I want out of an old school game but modern the colour is well presented per region, personality in levels is excellent to set the scene but the platforming while not much is varied of sliding, swinging, the gloves to box boss fights, the grapple is fair.
Give me mechanics over plot sometimes. It's why I'll play a puzzle game over some story. I can test my brain, my memory of past puzzles in games and I get that 3D obstacle course puzzle fix. Not match 3 or falling blocks I'm not into those. Some flash game formats I don't mind but many on PSP of Crush (aka Super Paper Mario mechanic on PSP and released before that came out on Wii), Cube, Exit, Mercury, Practical Intelligence Quotient 1 & 2 as examples. I mean Devil Dice on PS1/Bombastic I think the PS2 entry is called.
Spyro is fine but to me the game became more about minigames/open world playground logic that is fun while most modern open worlds are boring. I prefer Spyro 1 because it's an obstacle course of secrets and main levels. Even the side areas cut in the prototypes as simple as they are I was like WHOA that's cool sad they cut it. More than I was Elora's dialogue cut in Spyro 2 for the level openings to set the scene.
Technique/structure appeals to me more.
It's why Gravity Rush, Sunset Overdrive or Infamous Second Son's side missions appealed to me more and are my favourites the playground approach not the holiday destination and generic character RPG quests approach.
It's what I want to see that many Indie platformers suffer from. Being a Mario/Sonic/Spyro/Crash/Banjo clone but only on the surface. Clive and Wrench is simple. The moveset isn't as good as Banjo of varied things the characters gain of moves. Yet it has many inspirations and the first level is clear on the bookshelf title spoofs but the game itself is very boring because the level design is fine but the context/structure is very boring. There isn't much to keep me excited. Other games have theirs but to me platforming/racing Indies suck. Some do stand out but many suck. Heck seeing Hades clones was just sad to me. They have some differences but not enough. Gaming is too close copy cat these days.
5-6th gen things were new but even then the competition had mechanical depth. The left behinds still are fresh to this day. Even those in racing rewind systems dumbed theirs down to what it is today yet the introductionary game (that I know of) had more depth than just that to that system and other systems. Sigh.
It's why I look back at older games, what's fresh or good today even if clunky in other areas. Why it's easy to see what possibilities from some basis are still able to be expanded but aren't explored.
Nowadays it's gone and TOO close of competition it's boring because they aren't really good competition. They can be or feel fan game close AAA or Indies depending where you look. Some stick out others don't. Palworld is inspired by popular things, succeeds. No Man's Sky or Nightinggale good approaches by veterans. Nightinggale might as well not exist. It's a great game that to me the Minecraft Mystcraft book/card use is amazing but that's the thing stand out feature. Most people would have never heard of it. Veterans can go that way of new space, new ideas, or keep to what they were doing like a Yooka/Judas/Bloodstained/Splitterhead and may do well.
Many others feel similar very not exciting in the movesets with like 1 move. I get that from 7th gen shooters, 1 cool mechanic and I ignore the story/setting/level design because they are so generic.
Re: Three New PS2 Games Now Available on PS5, PS4 with PS Plus Premium
Clone Wars is all I care about here. Sly is cool, Tomb Raider is cool but I am happy with my PS3 collections instead of those. Clone Wars has been something I want to find but haven't yet a copy.
Prices seem fair for the emulation effort and whatever they go for nowadays. Anyone that expects cheap on the second hand market I mean it's the second hand market not the regular market prices that should be obvious of the wild prices and not as much cheapness because they are still well known games not niche ones I pick up for cheap. So these first market prices are interesting for emulation that 'varies' and whatever the rights holders think it's worth. Some of these seem like NEW copy prices then Complete in Box worth or pre-owned at lower. At least for checking Tomb Raider Legends PS2, brief look at Sly/Clone Wars pricing.
Granted some I get for $5 at one store others more second hand wild prices of demand. But different stores priorities of other products too.
Re: Xbox Explains Why It Shuttered Beloved Hi-Fi Rush Developer
South of the Midnight looks great so hopefully we can see the balance of games not just live service expected money of flow they expect. I mean buying many studios, cutting some off makes sense. But some people need a good singleplayer game to justify trying Gamepass or caring about an Xbox.
it's clear with buying too many what needs to be maintained/cut off it's a lot to balance of a business I get that but they variety needs to be there of audience appeal to GET people to want to join the service, end it, come back later or see whatever else and move on. If they want that 'one game' it has to be more than live services. It has to be that one game people want to join and move on from and in a good way to recommend to others to play it. Which has been a challenge depending on what the game offers and who steps in to say this would work better to appeal to that audience more or try something different and appeal to them still or another audience.
I expanded genres over time but I still look for aspects in the genres I used to play and do in retro games but don't touch the genre in modern eras because of what they have done with them of the gameplay ideas or worlds lacking aspects I care for. Not because old games did it it's just the ideas were more varied. Not the 10th grappling hook or the 10th Mario/banjo clone, 10th licenses pushed then good event/mode ideas in racing games or other things then just car branding but just something different and compelling just a little bit.
They want users/time spent and money but forget singleplayer games get moved on in that audience no matter the DLC or the updates they move on if they only care about the story. But if looked back on fondly they also have people go back.
There is new people all the time they aren't all multiplayer audiences they want more money coming in but leave the games on the service which is good (as long as they last/don't drop them due to digital future) but not for the studios.
Pushing hardware is fine but I mean that cost how much let alone the hard drive increases that are nice but even still these studios, other factors and 3 more console variations having many moments where money wasn't good for sales of their games yet they get cut off. They need variety.
They have it but the quality and appeal isn't the best because while yes Sony 1st party has always been all over the place I think the audiences are very different. I mean also OG Xbox/360 I care about that type of variety then the game design in Xbox One/Series era here the gameplay isn't for me so I don't care for many if any of those IPs other than collecting what I find.
Re: Dragon Age: The Veilguard Is Very 'Mission-Based', Not Unlike Mass Effect
Looked good to me. The gameplay was a surprise, the world seems fine for an introduction area, the trailer just was what it was.
They do keep pushing the Mass Effect direction sometimes and that always seemed odd to me. Sales are what they are, audience voices are another. Mass Effect was fine but some seek the RPG and differences in Dragon Age (as far as I hear) then Mass Effect being well a shooter, the changes of the emails or loyalty missions or story and worlds and other factors of Dragon Age and Mass Effect are very different yet leaning into Mass Effect more always seemed odd.
The classes/structure and Mass Effect comparison wasn't sure for hubs or the decisions or the 'get the crew' type story telling Mass Effect 2 & 3 have then how Dragon Age did things it's way very well.
I think it's doing a fair thing for the series. The tactical I mean I get the action direction over how others did it in the past. Tactical needs to be better to be usable. The action approach seems fair I think for the series at this point it could be different but I think it still fits.
I don't mind Tactical options but most aren't great and even then most devs don't offer it in a great way. I mean Ratchet 1 had variety but no one knew you could mix the Mine Glove and Taunter it wasn't very clear. Very physics or two weapon using it just didn't work. I never hated the idea it's just they didn't do it well. Like saw a puzzle game would or multiple characters or other coordinating. I mean RPGs could handle effects differently to be 'IN THE WORLD' of physical assets not just effects of the ice, poison, fire, electricity, why not have it effect the world not just enemies. Offer lava to have in the world as a physical assets even if brief or control it. But that takes more time, the game is slower but I mean it's more impressive then just effects on screen all the time. That or element combining to weigh down (not physically but could) the player in a way. Other setups make sense. To me just effects is very overdone but it won't happen what I think it's too particular of design and too time consuming.
So in Mass Effect/Dragon Age the attacks or healing or otherwise to pause and select is fine or however different it is this time is fine but most times don't see a need to use it as much if their attacks/support moves don't do much.
Let alone tactical in other games other than turn based ones focus on that. So playing tactics games I sometimes use support but most enemies vary so much per level or region I barely use the support moves so I never find a need for them as the effects to hinder don't do enough to justify them if strong enough and just grind or use other level design options (like geo panel in Disgaea).
Re: Scathing Star Wars Outlaws PS5 Previews Unfavourably Compare Gameplay to PS Vita's Uncharted: Golden Abyss
It's something Star Wars hasn't done before and still gives off 1313 vibes not a lot but still. It takes the loading approach of space travel from No Man's Sky regions/sectors for planets so that's good then Starfield being too much loading. If the things to do vary then sure but yes there is a reason I care about playgrounds not theme park/holiday destination open worlds. Meaning I don't buy many because their movesets or missions are so boring.
But a Uncharted GA/Vita comparison. What does that even mean. It's a good game. I never had issues with prequels, spinoffs or using the gimmicks of the handheld. It wasn't fluff. I get the Ubisoft formula or tech demo or whatever other logic that's a bit much but that's why I seek gameplay not personality/roleplaying/world/graphics/story I only do as a secondary or Spec Ops The Line because it's themes were a fair justification because it's gameplay was fine but it's got ok points of arcade entertainment than real. Most if not all video game stories do things.... I don't care for them.
That and I guess while not into minigame/mission based platformers it does come from that side for me. Which is why open worlds don't appeal to me a lot, hubs sure but hub sized levels in platformers to hub/open world games it's like what am I actually getting excited about. Typical setpieces, not as fun platforming or level design that varied because it's so walkable not fun verticality or events taken place because we HAVE to have NPCs and have to have straightforward environments.
To me Fenix Rising made it clear to me besides their other open worlds i don't play (only care for their linear older games Rayman, Prince of Persia, their older shooters or hub based ones of Red Steel 2) compared to a Jak 2/3, Infamous Second Son, Gravity Rush, Sunset Overdrive is how they do the open world missions/side content balance and the movesets or vehicles.
I mean I'm not interested in this game but if people want a SW GTA then who expects that level of interactivity. I mean if were talking any weapons dropped or just places to go, or be whatever SW alien (so maybe even Renegade Squadron customisation) or other things I mean they can put many things in games but who knows. I mean Skull and Bones we all know that the devs wanted authenticity yet the devs too interested in their world to remember people wanted a game. There is trying to differentiate it and getting to into their own project and what they like as fans of the ships/period they are going for of setting.
Gameplay suffers when not focused on yet we see it a lot in games. My mindset on gameplay is very strict but I mean with how boring games are these days of personality/roleplaying or just not enough level design or tricks it's all just RPG like in the boring combat or level design sense it's why I find so many games boring. So 'outdated' or 'modern' design happens but the modern design is so lacking interactivity I get bored.
I want to 'play' in the world, not feel like someone passing through for the sake of it because they string things but it isn't fun. Linear made me appreciate how balanced they are. Open worlds have more gaps of travelling yet also a lot of things to do but I don't find any of those stops 'FUN' as say puzzles, boring structures, eh combat encounters and boring quests of talking and RPG level benefits. Forget spraying walls in Infamous or other minigame style missions just boring adventure style missions I don't even remember the dialogue because the characters are boring and doing it because have to or because it's there. I don't want to do things for characters and the reward of gear is boring versus gear of interacting with the world to do a puzzle (platforming logic for me) not always combat with more stats that are slowly growing that's not exciting to me.
I get the Watch Dogs Legion comparisons but at the same time even if the characters or world wasn't much at least the idea was cool even if so 'open' it wasn't strict enough of using characters as I think it could have. Heck GTA5 has the personality but I just don't get the controls. I've had more fun with other games with crime themes due to the gameplay. I don't care about the satire/world of GTA never appealed to me.
Then again when people want cinematic games we get basic movesets, formulaic animations and typical AI. It's why Unrecord was so impressive of more fluent animations even if hard to make out how accurate it was.
I don't expect that to happen this gen at all AI/animations being less typical. Give me a robot enemy that loses or gains abilities from others in a hive network way or copies your moves more than just a Dark Link or the going back against you of Pitfall the Lost Expedition when they use your gear and your an animal spirit.
But when Indies disappoint with movesets (depends where you look in some genres, some just focus on world/the hits of the past then actually good ideas, others do amazing jobs with playing off the old or their new ideas entirely, it varies, Platformer/racing Indies suck but puzzle, metroidvania/roguelikes have had some good ideas).
AAA do and games I didn't care about do I mean what else am I to expect. I think this game will be fine but what do people want.
I get the Ubisoft business model yes, but the gameplay I mean I notice the little things.
Even Rise of the Ronin the little details I noticed in gameplay/menus or scenarios I thought were cool but no one talks about them. They stood out to me besides the story and decisions to make/scenario. Minor but still something.
(the problem I find is so many devs want the worlds/dialogue and the roleplaying to be the factor but the gameplay isn't exciting me at all it's why I seek out 20 year old games and compare to modern is what has or hasn't been done, what would be fresh again, what ideas I see with an experimental mindset which is why my Foamstars/Biomutant thoughts of lacking ideas or the dumbed down Kitty in the Big City of wow cuteness over gameplay depth) but I still didn't want to play it. They aren't my type of game. But because I have someone that does play these types of games I get a sense of what is going on in them with each of the details in them as a gameplay person not a world/characters story first type. If the movesets and level design are good I care but otherwise the world is secondary to me of personality.
Re: Hands On: Metaphor: ReFantazio Is Already a Contender for RPG of the Year
I don't get the appeal at all. It looks fine, I still don't get it.
They aren't my type of game usually (I do like to still look at other games just encase to know what's out there) but at the same time other than Atlus fans having it good I mean good for them. Shrugs. I enjoyed Catherine so I understand their quality but their others games weren't my thing.
Re: Dragon Age: Dreadwolf Now Dragon Age: The Veilguard, Full Gameplay Reveal Next Week
@Oh_fiddlesticks Agreed. Mass Effect got the treatment. Got a friend who has been waiting for a remaster. Already binged the series and DLCs years ago and wants them so they don't have to keep the 360 around.
Re: Dragon Age: Dreadwolf Now Dragon Age: The Veilguard, Full Gameplay Reveal Next Week
Dreadwolf was a better name, some interesting details. Hope it goes well.
Then again Gods and Monsters. That naming aside. I mean so many things have Monster in it so I find that a bit hard to believe too.
Dragon Age it's in the gauge/time to engage.
Re: Sony's New PS5, PC Shooter Concord Confirmed as a $40 Game
@pharos_haven It is how they go about it and WHAT they do offer of genre, worlds, camera angle, less story focused or otherwise but yes.
I think Concord has a place but it's how they do it. How distinctive of multiplayer ideas it is. As if Rocker Arena (forget if it did well). But I guess audiences don't care and some high end staff don't get games well enough either such as Suicide Squad. Make something like this and that logic that don't understand games and don't even play the reference just what they see. XD
I think some PS3 era SP/MP could be cool but is a lot of work and why we see separate ones but combo ones have less to fail on as if the solo mode works it still is enough of a success/some more sales then the limited of both separate audiences.
I'm fine with Sony branching out, but I haven't care for much they make anyway these days so to me I just look at what they offer like I do researching any games I don't care about but just understanding them, caring about the industry rather than a 'how dare they not cater to me' some people give off. XD
I mean to me racing games make it clear to me they want to sell their licenses that offer decent modes/event types so why should I play some of them if the progression/mechanics are dull. I don't buy those games for the cars/teams. They can be a factor but they need more than that annual ones or non-annual or just dirt bikes/rally/etc that's a easy distinction of things.
That and even if many of us aren't the target audience. I myself am not either. I think it's how 'directly' they try to compete. That's the first thing that puts me off games even nostalgia marketing Indies with too close of a product. I'm just going to be like why even bother, offer at least something a bit distinctive in there.
Sony can seek story driven and multiplayer (or other offerings as well that they haven't which I can see why people want Astro or to prove a point too, I'm all for an Astro game) but it's how they go about it. I'm playing neither but it doesn't mean some of us don't have perspective or still look at what every side is doing.
I had some many ideas for Foamstars during it's period yet it lacked content. Was it so hard to offer a surfboard mode (not just a move), a Foam reversal option to remove the foam covering the map, traps, chemical or other foam combinations via power ups or just obstacles on the map. That was off the top of my head back then and still now. Same as animal traits for Biomutant to make navigation more fun, it sets up the start of the game to be more fun then wait until the vehicle missions, use swimming then a jet ski access later. Dig, flight, etc. Something literally 5th platformers gave me inspiration of, not even because they offered them moves it's just experimental design, making me think of such things. I mean if Splatoon has a solid ink to platform, reload and shoot, with 2 offering gun grappling and other things and was the best puzzle platformer with guns for a solo campaign I'd played in 2024 a 2017 game then just too much combat other games offer there is a reason why I was so surprised to go wow this offered something I was seeking. "HOW THEY GO ABOUT IT', WHAT THEY OFFER point.
Like we can easily break down the horror, open world, RPG or any other gameplay factors they all have, besides the cinematic story and third person camera and all that. But enough distinction I find is what some games lack. How direct they are of competition that why else would I care to play it let alone free to play or buy it cheap later.
I bought the Square published games that didn't sell well because they had genres I was interested in (I would usually care about such games in old gens to see what those left behind IPs were anyway). I saw some cool hack n slash, tactics games with fair worlds, I saw some lack depth and focus on other elements too much and suffer in quality, I still had a fair time with them, they varied of sometimes other publishers, in some games case themselves. The polish or marketing or cheap price I paid but still the 'new' price. But I'm not most people either in my gameplay focused purchases when people seek other aspects and that's totally fine. So many flops are games I really cared about and I still bought regardless of failing because they still interested, whether my purchase helped or not (Balan, Aveum as examples). I mean sure other shooters exist but to me Aveum compared to a SWAT or Atomic Heart or old age war setting was nice to see a magic shooter regardless of the 720p, the loot system and everything else even as a gameplay first type the setting/feel was good enough for me.
With just 'complaining' it's too much noise. With better responses than 'this is bad', 'this is good', the 'we want more of this for them to try, or revive or another solution' is what some people will say but finding them and also taking them seriously is another thing entirely.
Problem is they end up as long comments or only touch on certain details. Or if Youtube videos may or may not cover the topics well enough depending on the depth the creator points at such details, comparisons or just general.
Also as a hardcore audience (Push, Twitter, Reddit, etc.) our voices are very different across many platforms or our mentality if we use all platforms as well or broaden our game design/genre interests but still look at what is being done in the industry, versus the mainstream.
Re: Sony's New PS5, PC Shooter Concord Confirmed as a $40 Game
$40 is a fair price but I mean did they learn nothing from Destruction Allstars? I mean I know it's a different audience and appeal for that game and well vehicle games have a smaller audience and most people don't care for them but I mean $40 when their competitors are free to play.
Sony are just wasting their time. They clearly forget who they are marketing to and why their competitors are free to play and $40 plus the rest, oh sorry free to play change in the next month, they clearly don't know that their audience knows what access they seek.
Then again Foamstars lacked depth that made me laugh and come up with my own ideas. This will try to compete, others in the space will still exist, this will die in a few months. They change the price. It maybe has a chance but too little too late. Unless it has a good feel or good maps or content drops who cares honestly. XD I'm not a multiplayer person but it's not hard to read the room about multiplayer and handling it well if even my singleplayer 'this could benefit from this' or seeing what ideas multiplayer have over the years can contribute of worth content.
I mean if I see skating games or platforming or shooters and go this for moveset or level design or otherwise makes for good content then why wouldn't it be good in multiplayer games when how you play matters then some story trailer or a story multiplayer game approach.
Re: Rumour: LEGO Horizon Adventures Is a PS5, PC Game from Day One, Reveal at Summer Game Fest Tomorrow
If still true oh no Ratchet and Sackboy or Astro sell to smaller audiences. If it's a unique game sure, if it's a retelling of the 2017 game it's a joke product. I only cared about the story and even then I got so bored I quit the first game. 20 hours in. half way through the game as most things I understood about the game I didn't find fun enough.
I have no issue with games varying, or many cartoony, family friendly games. But pushing an IP this far is just annoying. Like I said, oh no our other IPs that fit that type didn't sell well. Well that's the audience problem (mainstream more than gamers) and the studio problem. I mean I haven't bought Sackboy, it's an OK Mario 3D World game, I will buy it eventually but it's too expensive. WipEout Rush I wouldn't support a worse B Spec/idle game experience. Give us a better manager game or WipEout game then I'd play it. They could have ported 2048 but no. They did to Omega Collection and changed music and things what other excuses can they make.
I did buy Ratchet (half and half contributed so less disappointment in the purchase) and it was trash and didn't succeed on what Crack in Time offered yet this game wants me to have a mentor multiverse story with trash ToD remade levels then ToD's better designed levels.
ToD/Crack elements in it yet it can't even do that right because Insomniac are lazy or their ideas have changed and weren't appealing at all. I get the budget and lacking sales but even still. They made a safe game and it still sold badly. No wonder Ratchets got shorter they put too much into other areas or change their minds too often or can't achieve what expectations they COULD offer of tech yet the PS3 game from 2009 on an HDD is more impressive and DOESN'T have marketing that's BS or are Marvel game forced future.
I get it Sony but seriously. XD Come on. A tv series is fair, merch sure but a Lego tie in and a Lego game because big IP that's teen rated yet also is Immortals Fenix Rising and that doesn't need a Lego game to lower it's themes or art style or light hearted writing. Age ratings don't count sure but it makes a point of how particular some things scale and HOW to present it to people. Even then with Immortals I'm finding it 'fine' but some 'do the story first' do halt the fun factor.
I mean it's not like many young girls didn't play Horizon let alone other people. We don't need this.