SuntannedDuck2

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.

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.

@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.

@nessisonett I agree. To me it seems like backwards compatibility is for us gamers in some ways to shut us up, but companies still want money so go eh a new audience/mainstream will hear about it/see it and buy it right if we post news/upgrade it.

Or those nostalgic for a barely old game because of course they will double dip right? Sigh. People are simple sometimes.

I get having money but they made 2 games, assisted with other Indies and want money for their first game again?

Unless they refine other things a visual upgrade. Pass. No matter what TVs/Monitors people have upgraded to or FPS increase or 'ray tracing' it's a nice bonus but necessary to buy the game again for then just an update no pass.

Like for them to mess around with the technologies but it could be worse implementation and by that possibility is it worth it for bad ray tracing and resolution/FPS increase? Of course ray tracing and other aspects being optional if they implement it as such. IF. Most if not all do offer the turning off of ray tracing but you never know it is a dev decision and I don't know how many of the remasters are anyway so I can't really make an assumption on if it's forced or not.

@TheFakulty It could help but budget to pay voice actors, the charm and goal they intended like Banjo this was intended like or other Indies with no voice acting and just animal/other noises.

I mean there is a reason not just for nostalgia but why people loved the Lego games with visual animation communicated jokes then voice acting.

They could have a narrator (at least 1 voice) like Biomutant did but I guess it just didn't suit the game.

Remaster? Why? PS4/Xbox One looks good already. Backwards compatibility is for gamers in the know. Remasters are for idiots that don't understand anything but buy the game, no matter how cheap.

There are enough Banjo/Mario 64 clones at this point I'm sick to death of seeing. Play those instead.

Edit having read the Nintendo Life one as well: Camera/controls refined sure but I mean is that saying much just for the Switch version or all versions I mean modern videos games I find character weight sucks yet they will never change it so like I have much care there.

Edit 2: More tonics and other nonsense. They were cool but 'necessary' no. This is just 'DLC' to force people to upgrade or buy the game again. They will be minor and worthless. JUST OFFER DLC AND BE DONE WITH IT. I don't care for DLC and just get the definitive edition IF I care enough but I don't usually buy them. I did Gear Club Unlimited 2 because it was on the cart and it was cheap but otherwise I'd buy the definitive if it's the only edition I see. Otherwise standard edition as the content doesn't matter to me most times anyways.

Or they could just add them via an update but NO WE HAVE TO MAKE MORE MONEY WHEN OFFERING THIS UNLIKE THE PAST UPDATES. Seriously developers, balance your money wanting to content offering/fixes ratio it's getting ridiculous.

Edit 3: Soundtrack. Lol. Sigh. I hate orchestral soundtracks. I'd take a more electronic soundtracks over orchestral. The original was fair. I don't hate instruments of the regular sort then electronic sampling it's just orchestras don't get me inter4ested. SOME if done well sure but most are forgettable to me I can't appreciate them beacuse they conversion or the straight soundtrack to me blurs together or the notes and instruments just don't mix well for what they are going for, sound like some other movie score and I think of that instead of it's own OST or mix well with what the original intended.

Yes yes it's the 'best' version and all that but it's obviously done for money reasons, not because they actually care to give us the definitive version. They will remaster it years later again not just go look look FPS increase, resolution for later TVs/Monitors, ray tracing test bed for us and so on.

The Last of Us Part 1 I get the improvements between Remastered and it even if year gap, cheaper and still functional enough but here there is no excuse it adds NOTHING new. XD Sure benefits but 'necessary' it depends for each person.

It is purely money for them, it gets them in the news, nothing more.

Did I enjoy the Yooka games of course I did it's not like i don't respect Playtonic. I bought them both. But it doesn't mean I don't think the business practice is dodgey. I get they need the money but seriously. Not something smaller even in the mean time.

Like sure a resolution/frame rate change, but other benefits eh.

I mean as screens change sure they may look 'worse' but on a smaller screen they don't at all so technically they aren't outdated it's just as people upgrade to larger TV/Monitors. So is it 'bad' not even close. XD It's perception rather than on some levels just different of detail the screen will present it as. But then again I've run it on 1080p TVs. In 1400/4K sure it will look better but otherwise the cartoony artstyle still hides a fair amount. Probably not in others but I mean that's the case with many games no matter what generation no matter AV or HDMi cables, no matter the 480p to 4K setting people set their console to in the settings and what textures are there, lighting, shadows and other details.

I don't expect they will refine animations or pacing or other details. Most if not any do that in remasters they just push visuals, audio, engine tweaks and other stuff. Not the core game design.

I get they need MONEY but I mean that's what they get for releasing 2 games, helping other Indies and establishing other things. But a remaster. I'm sorry but other than 'messaging' and another release for a wider audience that didn't come across it years ago as many new releases do is end up in the news or on the shelf then copies moved to other places unsold this remaster is a total waste of time.

I'm not buying this. I'm happy with my copies. For a new audience that hasn't experienced it, it is a good time I won't deny that.

I wasn't going oh it's expanding levels and eh not as good as Banjo or is a Banjo clone. Yeah and people were happy with the DK clone sequel so get over yourselves. I was fine with both games and what they offered for the time. I haven't finished either because the 3D one I got stuck less so then Banjo itself I might add. The sequel I just have to get around many of the collectibles and difficulty for later levels/taking my time with it.

But they are totally fine games. I just suck at games made by any Rare staff (Yooka or otherwise) the design just has me not finish them and get stuck at times but still have good ideas and appeal in them.

If people buy it for 'nostalgia' of a barely old game then lol this is why customers are dumb, this is why nostalgia Indies suck in my opinion. Eh ideas of racing or platformers with barely exciting ideas, too safe, yet others in 5th or 6th gen competed way better of varied ideas not popular surface level and in term boring games so many years in.

To say it supports 8K TVs is something but I mean you could just say it's HDMI 2.1 compatible or any other detail same as they could say it's HDMI 1.4a for 3D TVs. But they push 8K instead as a factor. It depends what the packaging box says in fine print or on their website about the 8K factor then customer expectations of oh software will have it right?

I mean Okami was in 4K I think for the HD versions but scaled down. But games vary in their specs and in a way any game could be higher resolution if the game isn't heavy detailed. It just depends on how scaling works and how intense it is and so on to offer stable products.

I'd agree with the commentor below that it's likely 8K TV supported but I mean I can hook up any screen with a Component/Composite or any other connector that has it they don't brag about Component or HDMI support on the PS3 box or 360 box or Wii U or any other console with say AV then RF or otherwise do they? It would just be a footnote usually right?

Did the Dreamcast brag about VGA out even though it's the only console that ever offered the feature?

It is early so maybe later in the gen (even though early 1080p to better implementation and texture work was a thing on PS3 like GT HD Concept, Ridge Racer 7, Lair and others with fair textures and 1080p but compared to later gen 1280 or 1920 x 1080p or other resolutions I mean some like Forspoken it made sense why they went with 1400p at whatever it did and 1080p 30FPS big games that did compared to 720p 60fps or 30fps also at that yeah I'm not surprised how few big games did it or cut it back to 720p then the Indies at of course 1080p or 900p or whatever the case or well known Indies at the time) because most people don't have 8K TVs or Monitors but I mean if devs offer it then with content of movies/games will get people to buy them. Problem is yes they are too expensive still yet they push the hardware (certain technologies) quite a bit or unintentionally because they are still getting used to the hardware to adapt their engines to it.

We may see Indies offer it. But AAA unless they lower some features I don't see it happening.

8K movies like the 4K Xbox One S, it's probably likely. 8K will happen eventually but when who knows. Will we see 8K with ray tracing I doubt it but looking at GT HD Concept yesterday as GT4 engine, less fanciness of GT5/GT5 Prologue it says a lot how some games can look without a lot of visual extras added on. That being also 1080p then 1080i of the 576i doubled.

So 8K with less extra would be interesting to see but I doubt it with how much devs won't likely do that and how much motion blur or other features get added where for effect or performance or artistic, some benefit some make the game sluggish and that was a playable PS3 tech demo so like it counts much but it does make a point they could do that with games offer less visual features and meet 8K these big games.

I questioned it for GT Sport's offline patch or so and the PSVR branding. I can understand why it wasn't that hard as arcade mode is offline but still. Liveries are gone (don't think advertised feature but I can't remember), no offline for that, it could be but they gutted the whole thing not just the uploading the whole menu. It doesn't mention it on my PSVR copy but then again the online description on many games have their limited time or whatever details probably listed and those aren't false advertising even if in fine print then the 'online mode detail here' in the advertising portion of a box art's back or the rating with the 'online details change' at least in my region descriptors.

We had PS3/360 1080p games, not matter the 1280 x 1080 or 1920 x 1080 or otherwise. So why advertise if no one is willing to achieve it.

Shows they are still trying which is a sign besides the smaller ones to get the IP some support. I didn't care for a Metroidvania

Playing Fenix is fine but I mean it's a less tedious Ubisoft open world so I'm enjoying it. Then again avoiding Ubisoft's online services to play Fenix. Might do the same with the demo for the Metroidvania out of curiosity but not that into it. Played other Metroidvanias and aren't my thing.

I did buy up Two Thrones PS2 and Forgotten Sands Wii (absolutely love it near the end or 3/4 mark) haven't seen a copy of the 1st & 3rd in the trilogy yet.

I'm interested in this remake but depends how it goes.

I bought up Red Steel 1 & 2, and have more interest in their older games then current ones so Prince of Persia Sands of Time remake will do it hopefully.

Playing TDU2 has been an interesting experience. I'm not exactly interested. I haven't cared to check out Solar Crown but there has only been so much on it anyway

I'm interested as a looking in at what it can offer but I'm not into modern racing game open worlds or many open worlds as it is. Prefer circuit racers and those have been tolerable to trash.

Had more fun researching mechanics in older racing games when they ACTUALLY tried, something the genre lacks to offer these days for it's licenses and basic mode/class offering to do the work (where Wreckfest says hi and offers fake cars and more fun ideas, still not as good as Flatout or others but still enjoyable enough but compared to everything nowadays it sticks out in a good way) so dull I even niche ones like the one coming to Switch I forget the title and it's basic classes/modes wow how can I get so excited.........

GT/NFS I mean in what way would it be GT? Would it be the tuning? Or other elements? NFS or other open world common series sure but GT I don't see the comparison.

Also the racing spectrum was way wider (Push writers), I know it was I've been researched it and it's why racing fans go back to them challenge runs or in general

Nowadays it's so limited (so a GT/NFS comparison seemed weird to me than NFS and others or just TDU or TD prior as if GT/NFS are still big IPs so 'that's a fair comparison' lol) and that's without even including annual F1, WRC or MotoGP that's just the few dirt bike/Quads, real/fake cars or bike games and few from them.

There is only a handful and Indies vary of great to nostalgia bait trash with nothing new to add to the table.

Him saying to get expectations in check is one thing but if the industry thinks besides Indies we LOVE the same IPs, sequels, DLC trends their dead from the feet up. Were seeking something else yet they waste us gamers time.

I go in open minded with no expectations ever because I have only like 1 game at best or none I care about each year from these events and everything else is from other Indies or AAs I already know about from articles not part of these events or on the shelf so this event highlights games I don't actually care about and articles offer me what I always know about, didn't or want then these all in 1 place type events do. XD What excitement.

For those needing a space to show off their games it makes total sense but many get forgotten, too many get revealed and many look similar over time and blend together.

Like other than seeing Bokeh aka Splitter head or others (not in it as not the horror level I can stomach) others I probably wouldn't care for anyway.

So if I care to see studios get trailers out as a industry on looker more than genuinely products I care about buying that says a lot.

The only thing to praise is if the transitions/time spent with Devs/publisher
figures telling us things are worth it, don't drag on and more it's why I don't mind waiting then skipping the segments I don't care about. Otherwise couldn't care less.

Geoff knows us as well as himself he is only interested in certain games. Big or small.

The event makes sense but most games are not as exciting as they were years ago of experimental design or varied stand out experiences let alone BETTER MARKETING then formulaic marketing insert here

That's not even counting more out there E3 or other stages. Or if the events were eh the games were still good or the games were bad but still good stage events.

So the event has a place but the sponsors, the games, the interviews and eh trailers fall flat for exciting.

This is why we aren't excited every year is eh Indies fitting a trend with like 20+ of a similar game/setting, some stand out Indies of course, odd 'new' IPs or spin offs from or sequels from AA and we get eh AAA so why 'have more trailers' for what we ALREADY KNOW ABOUT THERE IS NOTHING EXCITING JUST THE NEXT CGI TRAILER IN THE REVEAL OR ANNOUNCEMENT, STORY, GAMEPLAY,, LAUNCH, etc. process we all know at this point so why should we care.

@Jaxx420 In terms of selling well no but I mean Splitterhead will be at Summer Game Fest and well is by ex Siren/Gravity Rush staff.

Claphands was Everybody's Golf/Tennis games.

No idea about the others.

They did have a large output but yes they were smaller games that only a small percentage of the PS audience cares about and that shows in low sales yes we know that besides our appreciation of their work.

@IntrepidWombat other than many of us probably being a fan of the Spyro/Ratchet/Crash/Sly/Jak and more.

That or the trailer was better presented then the others maybe being just well cinematics or a 'trailer' but no gameplay just showing off or so eh gameplay in comparison which says a lot about current era marketing many of us are sick to death of seeing compared to years ago better marketing but weirder or edgier/awkward E3 wording when I rewatched the 2003/2004 ones recently. The Astrobot trailer threw me off at first as I thought it was open world like Splatoon 3 made me think but nope it's a good expansion to the ideas in the other games.

People know Path of Exile and care or don't it's on PS5 as free to play Diablo like.

Remakes/ports they have their minds made up on.

Not as many well known or big games which some people have their mind on but for the Push Square audience (those that comment at least) I think they make it clear compared to others expecting bigger many of us have our small games interests and set our expectations right. Or waiting for other things and many of the live service titles or certain others like some souls type games aren't for us.

The games looked fine. Concord was what it was of you either knew it was multiplayer but not 5v5 Overwatch format. Or didn't know a thing and did or didn't see the logo trailer and know anything and go what is this and see a Guardians of the galaxy style group story trailer then multiplayer and go oh that's what this is.

I assumed a Titanfall 1 style story multiplayer game or a dungeon crawler in space but nope a 5v5........ To me it lacks imagination too safe for a multiplayer game.

Then again Foamstars had barely any ideas and I had more fun coming up with modes and mechanics for it then touching the game never. My imagination went places the game didn't. Multiplayer games seem kind of disappointing if that's what type of angle they are going for. At least that's how I saw it can't say for everyone else.

VR those that care do, those that don't don't/didn't move the needle on one maybe.

I think the references or just hey we want to see more creative titles then the consistency approach Sont is going for of their other titles.

Especially with Japan or London Studios gone that and like Hi Fi Rush many of us seek those types of colourful but fun gameplay focused games besides sometimes a story game.

I mean to me I've seen tons of generic or rip off platformers or old school racing games in the Indie space. I am alone on this but they look more generic then Astro does.

It could be a game to play with their kids too?

Besides that a sequel that isn't the other IPs they keep pushing sequels for too.

Or just some 1dt party, any first party maybe? That's also a possibility.

Or the Monster Hunter/Dynasty warriors games are only a certain type of audience and only a few on Push Square care about them. Or the others were forgettable, a bit intriguing (Nikke) or bad. Just guessing here I don't know the PlayStation or Push Square audience that well.

The Monster Hunter trailer didn't look great and the Cutscene conversation scene looked awful to me.

The delay on the attacks from the monster seemed odd of its AI and the rest seemed pretty minimal. It going open world is cool but that trailer is very basic things to show off appeal for such a series as Monster Hunter it looks simple.

Something Indie like special maybe even but AAA quality is enough for people too I guess.

For me it's just well since Nintendo offers the Astro or Japan Studios like magic and variety and Sony sort of pushed away from that definitely seeking some Astro or Media Molecule type project when the rest personally don't interest me or IPs with direction changes I didn't like such as GT7, God of war or Rift Apart. Ratchet had a dramatic change that was praised yet we got a formulaic, scripted, game that the PS3 entry does better and was praised. They don't listen to their audience happy with a dramatic gameplay change and fair story to focus on remaking levels worse and just story telling they want to focus on and even then it was mentoring/making us feel old and multiverse when the gameplay is from 2007 or 2013 entries. Wow how fun.

@Drago201 I think it's a case of unless it has something cool to show to add to its formula people have played one, know what to expect and move on. Those games have their appeal but I find are a tough sell. To me the smaller arenas and in and out nature ones were more fun then the main larger scale DW approach but that's just me.

The setting/time period and characters it depends if people care either.

To me I got more into the smaller scale ones like Senran Kagura (not just for its fan service and to make an example of the smaller arena ones I'm referring to) or thought Malicious (forget the name but something like that and as a non fan service example) more arena ones with a boss but still cutscenes and waves of mindless groups type to build up abilities then the larger scale ones of Dynasty Warriors.

I don't hate DW combat I think it works, killing enemies is fine but the conquering, the cutscenes and enemies to defeat formula only goes so far for me and many others in the way DW or its corssovers do it.

Also the IP crossover ones I think do a fair job with the unique to those universes type approach. Like to me the Zelda one having bombs and other items kind of helped not just because it was Zelda of oh the characters but the gameplay fit as well. I care about gameplay and I found mechanic types added more besides the core DW formula.

I mean the more open old world approach of what 8 or 9 or 10 I forget was something of a step in a direction for the series besides mission regions set accordingly but the formula only does so much for people.

Like it's cool to get another one but just my two cents on why I think people didn't care for it not that they are bad games.

@RadioHedgeFund it does it not only surprised me but also says at least for the Push Square audience how tone deaf Sony are (making sure I type that right).

Probably like Hi Fi Rush these companies think we all are at least in the certain gamer space and many of us that read articles and keep up to date are a stereotype when it shows we are anything but and not all an average person interested in another money maker for them.

Like sure we all enjoy the big games but sometimes we need something different and refreshing or a break from the next big game.

Played Astor that came out earlier before the State of Play and after it ended went back to it. It had no pre order, just a trailer, just a date then paid a fair price for it. A great charming Indie that seemed family friendly fair adventure, straightforward dialogue but charming world and hack n slash but basic gameplay.

The fact Astro is so high for people makes me happy.

Do Sony think all us old fans just go nope only mature games or only particular types and forget the more creative games we seek what a stereotype. XD Many of us love these types of games PS1/2 era or not or probably to play with their kids which is totally understandable. Or enjoy it for themselves.

Just like many adult enjoy Nintendo games not just families.

The remake/ports are fair but you either really care, didn't like the trailers or don't care at all. I fit the don't care at all.

VR support is nice to see but they don't interest me. It was still cool to see a Skydance game there though.

The Asian (assuming not just Japanese and were some Chinese or Korean) games were good but eh not my thing compared to other Japanese or Korean games right now.

Nikke but console audience type game is fair but no idea how good it will do and not my thing but has appeal won't deny that. Like the alchemy RPGs or shop dungeon crawlers there is appeal for a fantasy dress up game to have more for a console audience in whatever way it attempts to do that like other mobile to console type breaking out and not just a simple mible to console port they have the money and understanding of a console audience which is good unlike some companies that missed the memo.

I'll enjoy my Kingdom Under Fire on 360 of Korean games right now and whatever else Japan has cooking on the AA front not AAA. As long as it isn't Foamstars under developed or Diofield also under developed.

Monster Hunter that trailer. It was ok.... The Cutscene looking moment looked like a PS3 game or trying to replicate FF16 in the tone/set pieces way too hard which is just sad. Not a great trailer the series is better than that trailer showcased.

Concord is a Guardians of the Galaxy style group story trailer with hot sauce and charm, but I knew it was multiplayer already during the logo trailer period so I wasn't surprised by that aspect but Overwatch clone how direct of a trailer and gameplay reveal. XD Wow can tell Jim approved it it's blatantly hilarious. Tone deaf marketing or some directors needing the most direct competitor with no imagination but inspiration here and here. Like tell me why I should care.

I am not a multiplayer type but at least try harder than this it's hilarious and multiplayer gaming has just gotten more disappointing over the years of respect.

So even with multiplayer cont zt I was still surprised how hilarious it was of a reveal. The story but was great. I expected Titanfall 1 approach of multiplayer story or a 5 characters team up dungeon crawling not a 5v5 Overwatch clone like wow how imaginative or publisher pushing. One of them has less imagination and only talent to replicate on publisher terms or the Devs are that lazy of ideas. I think Sony but I wouldn't be surprised.

Astro had me with a Splatoon 3 kind of wow a open world but nope it's not. Splatoon 3 I expected a desert open world so when the singleplayer wasn't that I went wait what.

Astro showed more so I was thankful it wasn't but still some.trailers don't bait us like that seriously.

@Jay767 They do need variety yes it's why I appreciated the variety of PS1-3/PSP/Vita and am playing the ones I missed out on. Same with the many OG/360 Xbox third parties or 1st party I missed out on. To me I'm more on Switch or retro even more then on current gen. I use all 3 even if been a primarily PS then Xbox then Nintendo the least (filled in that gap over time) but have become more retro on all platforms or Switch these days. So I have no console loyalty mindset at all.

The problem is this multiplayer game isn't distant enough from it's blatant competition it's after here.

The trailer made you think hmm ok, those during the logo reveal knew it was a multiplayer game but not in what way it was. So a Guardians of the Galaxy style characters trailer with some charm even if a bit lacking in the imagination in some areas.

To an Overwatch clone makes me go oh.... it's got an Overwatch style trailer so it works but the problem is the game design or the trailer and they just don't match up at all.

I thought maybe a Titanfall 1 multilplayer but story approach going hmm that'd be an angle it could be, or something with 5 heroes doing some dungeon crawling but in space, but nope it's just a more sci-fi Apex 3x3 but instead 5x5 or whatever Overwatch does for teams I guess I don't know.

I say Foamstars and went foam and they under utilise it. I had 5+ ideas and they made a game with 2 recycled modes from other games but with slight tweaks. Where is a reverse foam maze, a foam building contest, surfboard modes, traps, chemicals to be good or bad mixes with the foam. I came up with those during the launch trailer. XD

That's more effort though up then the whole game. So the fact I can outhink (not saying I'm better I'm just saying creatively thinking outside the box on what it could offer and showing the gaps they didn't feel is my problem with the industry and some games lacking factors).

When we get blatant games it makes me question the talent or money hungry nature that's why I get disappointed even if I'm not going to play any of them.

There is inspiration and there is lack of trying to compete because laziness or so direct it's hilarious (I've seen good, I've seen passable, I've seen shovelware and I've seen copy cat blatant of platformers and old school racing so rip off-ish I'm surprised they can get away with it and aren't fan games and yet they lack anything original. Just we did the bare minimum of these popular games inspirations level of LAZY, no new spin just blatant.

That or they do have differences of world/characters and such sure but the mechanics are so pathetically repetitive and 1 new idea, wow 1 whole new idea. Coming up with ideas is hard yes, but trying to stand out has been pushed to the way side so much yet I can go back 20 years ago and see the competition being broader and better not blatant and lazy from Indies not just AAA/AA, it's direct competition not fair competition with actually 'trying' they don't try anymore, a bunch of visuals/characters/worlds or map design is ok that's unique and ripping off the rest of abilities, modes and other factors is as well apparently).

That's how pathetic the industry is for generic games. Too close to be called creative because they aren't. Then again many Square publish (not Square developed I notice the quality differences) were very underwhelming to me. Valkyrie Elysium was good but Diofield was weaker then Sega's Valkyria Chronciles has more depth then and others were just poor in qualities.

So it has the look and style but it is under the hook a competitor to something. That's MY issue with games these days is the visuals and character means nothing if the game design is what I care about and is very blatant and I'm not a multiplayer person but if I see fair game design ideas I will still praise it even if I won't play it. This had abilities and maps/roles that look so obvious and like any other game in the space...... That's kind of sad. When they talk up some good people that's a claim. When they present a direct competitor you ask questions. You see trend following similiarities of gameplay and movie characters vibe it goes for your imagination mind goes your ok with that or wow how unimaginiative of design they came up with was that Sony's decision or are these people THAT talented they can directly compete but not have a good enough imagination to make it stand out better then that. That's my problem with the industry is safe games not just in game design but in other aspects to be even more unconvincing.

I'm not playing ANY of the PlayStation big IPs anyways. Astro appealed, whatever Media Molecule does next. Japan/London studios dead. So to me I have a I don't care for team blue as much and team green well I'm not playing theirs either but if 1 oddity pops up I would. Technically Hi Fi Rush would be that but it's not physical and well like buying it supports the studio now anyway.

Looked at Astor which launched before the State of Play and it was more exciting of an Indie. It's not much but was more interested in it as a Zelda, Darksiders type game that good enough for kids but also aspects I like in those games. Yet I'll also play some obstacle course puzzle game on PSP where my new favourite puzzle games are or others.

While seeing Gravity Trickster as a Kula World clone which is cool but also kind of disappointing but it sticks out a lot when most are Bejeweled/Candy Crush or Tetris clones and I see Match Masters for the 1000th time and I hate match 3/block falling puzzle games yeah the advertising tolerance goes way down when the algorithms won't bugger off but you can't tell the algorithm to get stuffed and leave me alone. XD

@Serpenterror While we were told it was a multiplayer game (wasn't clear then in what way) anyway during the logo reveal last year for those that didn't know/didn't see that or didn't hear about that detail yeah it was disappointing for newcomers with this trailer or just knowing and going OH it's an Overwatch clone then some other type of multiplayer game.

But a fancy trailer. Is it false advertising (trailer can be whatever they want but it's still misleading) I don't know because if Blizzard can do it Firewalk can too........... I don't know on that.

The trailer was clear of an Overwatch competitor but with Guardians of the Galaxy flare. Wow pathetically unimaginative their team is just going trend hard, what lacking imagination you have to have to do that I'm sorry.

That aside the trailer was good yes, it had charm but for a NON STORU FOCUSED GAME in a typical singleplayer sense or a Titanfall 1 multiplayer campaign sense I think it's misrepresenting the product.

Even then I find the game to be just recycling/copy catting. I didn't see any abilities or modes that were unique to it to stand out. How disappointing.

Then again I had more ideas for Foamstars then the game itself launched with of 2 modes done to death yet I had more fun coming up with uses for foam/modes then I did not playing the game ever because the game lacked depth or good ideas.

This seems the same, copy cat for money and skin swapped. I won't deny they don't have talent or they can replicate the formula sure or the characters/some differences are there but from the footage alone I couldn't tell you it looking any different then it's blatant competitor. Such multiplayer talent imagination that isn't there.

@kirkn thank you. Yeah I need to cut down on them I know. I'm working on it. Long comments aren't a great look but I get too many thoughts. Can't help it.

Concord story trailer for multiplayer game we already knew. Hate when they do that. Also Guardians of the Galaxy style seriously the imagination is gone there for trends and similarities. XD best in the industry to a new studio with old good talent is it different for the genre sure, the gameplay no but characters somewhat but in general NO lol. Creative minds indeed how much did the team have or Sony wanted because imagination lacking big time here. Good trailer eh multiplayer trend.

Hot sauce not in the gameplay and eh done to death abilities though.

If Titanfall 1 story multiplayer that's cool if not why bother.

Astro had me thinking of the Splatoon 3 trailer with the desert trailer giving illusion of an open world vibe but it wasn't so yay.

The recycling was a bit eh but most new is good. Also references hit and miss of them doing that as it seems a bit eh also reminds us of BETTER PlayStation eras yet the current either sits well with you or like me not playing any of them and just Astro isn't enough to sell me on a PS5 I need at least 5-10 games and I haven't seen many third party to care about either.

Remakes/ports don't care for.

PSVR2 games that may sell the headset but not my type of games.

The Asian games were good but some blended together with other games already out.

The setting and combat seem formulaic by now and not exciting to pick between other games.

Nikki as a console experience is kind of cool but not my thing

Only Astro appeals to me.

Monster Hunter as an open world is cool. Some delays on the creatures were odd. The darker talking segment looked like Final Fantasy 16 type direction or some PS3 game wasn't really into that moment for a cutscene type of look.

An ok State of Play. As usual nothing for me.

I'd give it a what 5-7/10 for variety and quality, transitions were good between trailers and what was said but if I was to be brutal as in nothing but 1 game I care about which at least 1 is enough yeah nah I'd say a 2/10 as well nothing here for me and Astro while good PSVR 2 mode or not even. There is nothing here for me really.

@Frmknst first ever? Even besides TOCA/R racing for circuit ones.

NFS open world games (most of the series I only play the circuit non open world ones so research which aren't) has had stories & cutscenes for years. It's clones. I'm not an NFS fans or expert it's just been a thing since I'd heard about them.

Better told ones among the open world racing genre yes I agree with you there but first nope it's been a thing for 20+ years now in the racing genre open world or circuit racing. They are just rare or only done by certain studios most go for the cards/gameplay.

Even F1 has some 'ok' stories or good management moment cutscenes. They are something. The latest was a pretty eh story but either way.

I mean to me I have problems with the genre too but at the same time generic games with cars in some.case yes or bad progression among other things and good to annoying RPG/car uses in events.

I mean sometimes yeah but look past 'cars' and what you do with them in games and it has been done it just varies. I think of cars as characters to play as just without the dialogue. If there is a story sure but sometimes playing a character without dialogue and getting on with the gameplay, no branding, just scenarios is good enough.

No platformer story is good but I get people care about them even if the gameplay is way stronger then the stories.

But for those that seek story/messages like other genres yeah I understand that the genre doesn't have many or many GOOD stories told in it nor many writers for it to attempt many very well either.

Racing game stories are nothing new underdog or climbing the ranks of street racing or other possibilities like action ones.

That or recreating historic moments as vigettes.

Stuntman being movies that play out the player drives in and it shows them at the end (Driver spin off).

Or even Driver being a driving open world not a GTA clone.

Driver San Francisco has a great story and game mechanic to jump between cars.

@Totheteeth Maybe. I've probably seen other big ones on other posts or equally on Pure Xbox as well in other articles.

I can cut it down, just struggle to sometimes. My bad rambling.

I've reached the YouTube comments character limit before probably 5 times and had to add on to a reply to keep going or just end it in the one comment. Not if Push Square or other news platforms have one.

I know not a worthy achievement. XD But cool to do.

Then again either saying something simple or wow cool and small talk responding and leaving.

Not my style so yeah big comments from me happens sometimes.

How else to make points? If it isn't a YouTube video it's a long comment/script/essay not a tweet/text saying barely anything.

Or I guess (10+) tweets in 1 post them broken up..

Some titles appeal, others don't.

I mean Microsoft went after console because it was a thread to PC. People move over to PC for various reasons.

Yet Microsoft almost still treat their console like a PC yet they have been at it longer than Google yet have similar oh everything we do will apply logic and I'm like wait what did you learn nothing? Besides the audience appeal to certain games issue.

Some of us are fine with our back compat or old consoles but most want current only so us collectors pick up the old.

PC hasn't been an issue for PS5 games it's just you either like them or hate them or upgrade to PC if you REALLY care for those IPs I guess or don't mind waiting.

I don't see a point though but I have no interest in their current games direction anyway the game design bored me I have what Asobi/Astro left, if Media Molecule has another game. I got nothing left with the brand at this point and third parties have been not for me either.

I had partial PS4 fun but no interest in PS5 at all VR/Portal would have been but they disappointed, the studios I cared about are dead.

Sony can try the trophies and PSN data but PC gamers have 10+ launchers to deal with or just Steam or GOG if they want DRM free and certain titles. They know what types of games and what storefronts to deal with.

I think they know competition well and what they seek.

Or just buy Indies/AA if they don't care about AAA. Which you an easily do on console.

@MFTWrecks That's how many people may play them is their dream cars but to me tweaking the cars, swapping them based on drive train, tires, pit stops, shortcuts, going between tracks, reverse layouts make it more challenging then normal variations. The little details make racing games fun besides just go fast the video game. The terrain/elevation, the corners and the other details are fun enough for some of us. Or a nemesis system.

I get why people play kart racers is the characters and weapons but some of us see real cars in simcade as characters (we don't need cars to have eyes life more than an object or be a human/animal to care) and the tracks challenges in their design as part of the fun.

Sure kart racers/scifi racers with weapons or nitro/turbo or speed pads can seem better than real cars and the arcadey/sim format. I mean arcade racers have their benefits of unrealistic driving with real cars. I mean Split Second and Blur having kart racing like elements with real cars didn't sell well but have cult followings for a reason is it's not about the lap times or favourite cars it's about the gameplay and putting a spin then just brand selling over and over again.

When fake tracks are more fun then REAL ones to me that's also why is how they make driving fun not wow real life tracks/cars that you see everywhere and couldn't care less about over time (at least for me that is, same reason I don't care for open worlds with city recreations, unless it's a playground it's a holiday destination and I don't play holiday destinations I play games for being games).

8th gen+ made racing games are worse not to mention seeing more annual ones or less racing games to the few we see nowadays and the odd ones appearing.

I mean Inertia Drift, Horizon Chase Turbo, Distance, Art of Rally are Indie examples that prove it's more than 'being fast'. More so then nostaglia copy cats with nothing unique like Sega Rally, Outrun, Micro Machines or Virtua Racing clones I've seen.

Not all of us racing game fans are sports minded of teams or favourite cars we do want progression or mechanics arcade or simcade, like the 5th-6th gen days and when the progression sucks we get disappointed. It's why many streamers/Youtubers play older racing games is the better mechanics/progression instead of tires there work well on the roads 'realistically' XD like couldn't care less about realism.

Like sponsors, drag racing, gymkhana cone layouts, pink slips to bet cars, the Driver San Francisco car swapping move similar to Battlefield 2 Modern Combat to hop between people around the map which was awesome (why wouldn't we want that in other racing games oh right brand selling and realism), management system, region system (Forza stopped but Ride 4 had and improved on), a car builder (not cosmetics I mean RPG like part customisation to customise builds so like character creator but for stats not just looks) or more don't sound like much but they made a difference.

I mean if character creators are just visual then the gear happens in the rest of the games and not stats for the brain, intestines or whatever for say a survival game or an RPG a car doing it makes sense.

I mean TOCA had it's what like 10-20 classes but they all felt different besides the tracks, besides the side challenges. I only enjoyed the side challenges in Forza Motorsport 6 because the tours/career was so boring of 'racing' not cones, gates, speeds, things to use a car with. It's like swinging with Spiderman in the rings is ways to use a character's abilities kind of thing. Yet 5 & 7 sprinkled them differently.

I had more fun with WRC 3 on 360/PS3 because of the mode/event types, going through many gates and balancing what I had to do between them even in the combo ones with 2-3 modes rules in 1 event was fun) that's the stuff I find fun in annual racing license games even though I usually play non annual ones, that and difficulty of modern ones are pro level kind of focus so I can't play current gen ones. Threw me off Ride 4 and MotoGP16/Rossi the game, unplayable for me the AI and the physics. I couldn't care less about the teams/cars. So in a way I probably played it like a Dirt game then an annual racing game.

The RPG elements to mod/tune a car same as a build in an RPG or how you use them with the progression or different event types to me is why I buy them besides if the game physics wise is tolerable.

The restrictions of car parts to add barriers for the player to strategize. It's like saying you can only use an axe, sword, mace, shield, fists or so in an arena event like say the Ratchet games had of limited gun or wrench challenges.

Like cone gates, kudos (stylish driving points), like speed limits to reach, like touge (hillclimb drifting), hillclimbs aka stuff we barely ever see anymore because only 'common' events show up these days.

Not all of us want licensed cars/tracks, track times and candy car rewards. Some of us want fun and see the cars as characters to use not brand selling or livery customisation.

Raycevick's video on why racing games suck among other youtubers say similar problem many of us racing game fans have of progression, content, focus on game development and play older racing games these days and find gems then care about current ones with aspects we don't like because of the business model in an iRacing to buy each track/car or boring roulettes and progression like GT7.

Some players do buy into what you are saying but some of us do want as much as other games in other genres offer yet we don't see it because esports or Forza Horizon 5 levels of stagnant laziness in content handling among other things.

The racing game coming to Switch soon. https://www.vgchartz.com/article/458379/hot-lap-racing-announced-for-switch-and-pc/ (couldn't find the Nintendo Life more newer article)

Has wow classes and licenses but basic event types is why I'm 'interested' to get something like a Grid Autosport on Switch but because it's so boring with lazy event types/progression I'm mad they wasted their budget on licenses then an interesting game design focus instead.

Could be cool but I mean ex Forza Horizon devs I mean sure good luck to them. If they were ex Bizarre Creations staff or other staff from other places even. I just want to see other ideas, not just recycle competition.

More festival stories, NFS style or otherwise pass. Yes you can tell I barely play or ever cared for these games. I prefer circuit/point to point it's why I didn't mind old NFS 2 or Gear Club Unlimited 2 besides the typical Wreckfest arcade no licenses circuit racing or the big GT 1-6 or Forza Motorsport 1-4 while 5-7 were passable or terrible.

I'd love even more touge/hillclimbs as haven't seen those since Grid 2008/Tokyo Extreme Racer or Forza Motorsport 4. If they are in open world racers I haven't seen them but I feel those games replace those modes in circuit based games and that sucks.

Besides Forza Horizon is so big yet so terrible yet people don't care it's brand name at this point more than content that's good so ex devs making a competitor will it overcome things. Pffft no. They can try but how many people care.

Same with Sims competitor in progress. Sims 4 is so big yet so bad yet people don't move on due to comfort even if it's badly mishandled and a competitor can do a good job with better ideas. Fingers crossed.

But do you know what I ACTUALLY WANT. Not an open world but a Project Gotham Racing successor, cities or other locations. None of this open world missions and more nonsense give me city layouts again and good event types.

Most of the time it ends up being just Point A to B or drifting or this and that. I don't want to 'drive' on a menu/level select around recreations of the world couldn't care less. Stop with the holiday destination nonsense.

Give players/customers an actual good game with varied modes and a menu, GOOD custom track designs with the locations, will we see the walk-able dealership or garage again, no. Geometry Wars is fine on it's own with 3 on current platforms anyways.

Burnout Paradise was fair but even then I tolerated my enjoyment besides the destination races, the takedowns/stunts events were good.

Horizon I just don't care for at all I got bored really quickly.

Tomb Raider in 2013+ hub form like Borderlands or something else of the different regions but interconnected tunnels/barriers was fair but an open world wasn't hard to see coming from there it had the open world format kind of already there just not as large scale of 'empty space' but missions/icons on the map design was already there any way so it's just a larger jump just not that different of design.

To me cutting out the holiday destination feel or 'emptiness' of these open world racers I just want menus and to jump into custom tracks.

Kind of like how I find MotoGP3 the best why because 20 custom tracks for it's challenges/multiplayer fun then the typical tracks in each season that appear that are 'fine' but to me who cares you see some there some not per game due to licenses/season appearance, wow so what there is like 100s of games or the same repeats anyways. Or GP16/Rossi the game with it's rally/dirt bike side content.

Giving players something different would be nice then ANOTHER open world racer, because the main 3 or so are "FINE" but something different would be nice every once in a while.

No, ok thanks developers/industry this is why it sucks is competition is so boring and the slight differences between games isn't exciting anymore. They are too safe and too we did this different but still made it 90% the same game.

Wow how imaginative, not.

Games used to have bolder ideas in their competition, no TOCA both PS1/2 trilogies or Gran Turismo 3 or Sega GT or Tokyo Extreme Racer or Burnout, these days they are so carbon copy it's boring and unexciting differences added to games anymore I can't barely tell the difference and the differences are just so who cares. Maybe some subtle benefits but not enough to sell a whole game on and no the location/setting doesn't count. It is marketable worthy but in my eyes are just the same boring maps set in some place more visually difference with all the landmarks, but is at the end of the day a boring open world map with buildings/spaces for trees and other gaps in it. A boring map.

Gaming when broken down yes shouldn't be said as so but it's because they are so boring that I can't not see them as nothing more than 'game format insert here aka open world in this case'. Because they are boring. The missions are boring, the maps are boring to play in. Holiday destination recreations of places in the world is boring. The layouts for point to point are boring as ever that's why the tightness of the cities in PGR were so good.

I mean I'm strict on open worlds because the maps aren't playground fun enough (it's why I only like about 2-3, that being hub ones or actual open worlds) and want have no interesting in the 'to be fancy' and boring or the missions suck. Just wow do this and that, fight these. BORING.

Give us something fun with abilities oh wait most games have basic human characters that are so boring to play as they have nothing special to make me want to play as them, their dialogue is boring, the world they play/live in is boring or boring apocalypse animals with no animal exciting moves (Biomutant, it has animal quirks but I mean no dig, no swim, no flight but we have a glider, we have 4 leg sprinting and peeing on checkpoints, what a joke). Pathetic.

I don't expect super humans but when many of them ARE the best characters for missions (Infamous Second Son finding cameras or spray painting was more fun then the boring fight enemies, do outposts talk to these people missions of the main story/other side missions pass, I beat the story/did 90% of it I just didn't catch the other people side missions and it had no dynamic elements yet the first game did wow good/bad points dynamically or scripted and boring of point counts like come on).

In Spiderman 2018 or others case are so boring only the lab puzzles or 3 side missions are fun because ground pound, laser avoidance and radar turning is FUN. The whole game sucks because nothing you do in it is using your abilities just boring stuff ANY OTHER CHARACTER CAN DO or any BORING HUMAN CHARACTER WITH NO INTERESTING ABILITIES CAN DO. Why would I want to play that.

I play games for interactivity not a movie/dialogue/visual appealing session. I find cars as characters fun, cars as dream cars are boring and that's why I hate open world racers or GT/Forza circuit entries that throw candy car rewards at players the progression sucks and the goals are boring.

I don't play games to roleplay as myself and go wow I would love to not use a grapple hook because never used one before. Games need interesting interactivity/abilities yet they push saving a cat from a tree or getting them your shopping levels of boring tasks. I'd love to pick up some garbage and give it between others. AKA basic RPG quests. They aren't fun.

100+ layouts of custom circuits and small to big circuits I never got bored and well the progression besides that, I hated 4 with the calendar/eh format so only played the arcade mode of that game really then the career. Same reason I hate Forza Motorsport 3 & 4 the boring calendar format when the event selection was much better when I chose what to do not get hand holded even if done fairly well of variety it jumps the player between of choices. People that want that got that, people that don't get to jump around the event list but still get the perks of the reward cars just none of the trophies/achievements.

Astro yay. No VR, not even a mode. Why make the headset for. Indies can't support it forever come on.

If it's open world then no thanks. Just make fair levels and a few good ideas and I'm happy. Everything else on PS5 has been boring to me. Astro/Asobi are the only ones left beside Media Molecule for me as Japan/London studios are dead and the rest are clear of their directions and I'm not interested in any of them anymore. Got Nintendo 1st party instead for that variety and Xbox has variety but it's not appealing to me really at all either.

3rd party Indies/AA on PS4/Xbox One/Switch it is and retro otherwise future.

Knack 3 would be good I liked 1 & 2, good God of War that wasn't 2018 (I beat the story of 2018 I hated it). Nostalgia/spoofs in a new Astrobot, before it was fine to celebrate or show off things in Playroom the first time but we don't need it all time.

I'm sick of nostalgia pushing as it is I just want quality gameplay and yet I barely find it anymore unless it's retro or passable in modern games.

There is people that treat gaming as multiplayer or arcades of old, games with ideas easy to understand of real life, or cool creatures/worlds on a simple enough magical level or just well popular because streamers play it not always REALISTIC AND GRIPPING STORY and there is story telling or people not understanding paint or other cues we do of level design.

I enjoyed Uncharted not because of the tone or story as the main factor but the gameplay. It was an action adventure movie but at the same time the puzzles/gunplay even if gunplay and fist fights had changes that quality of life was nice and the stories were fair experiences even if some for visual showcases like 3 were a bit eh. They were fun, I had no issues playing Golden Abyss other than the getting used to the Vita still besides many other games I've played that use it's features and enjoyed. But didn't play 4 or Lost Legacy.

But otherwise to me the pacing, the puzzles, combat and more of the Last of Us just isn't for me. To me other survival horror games were better and the story/drama and goals just doesn't grab me at all. The enemies are fair but the enemy patterns and environments I didn't care to play in.

I mean do these programmers, animations, artists, etc. forget that what average people play is party games like a board game/cards like appeal (or just digital versions simply) or they want other stuff. Not always wow an adventure but sometimes just some slice of life drama not always a journey to get revenge or do this and that.

Maybe a city builder/life sim, maybe a puzzle game, a survival game. Like how thick are they sometimes of their audience bubble and mainstream perception bubbles to get people interested.

Many in these companies forget that oh right what do average people think of games/how they treat them and what they are playing, what about games they change for an audience and that audience may not even be interested, pick up on such cues we gamers understand without even playing said genre but still know. So why not survival games, interactive drama with no combat or other things.

But they can't they want their userbase sales too so they are still happy and play it.

It's like LA Noire it has to have combat or other elements their audience knows them for right or their audience won't play it. XD Even if the other parts are probably fair detective work systems or other aspects.

What a comment for the article/sub description of 'mainstream perception', why would I play their next game or find it pushes mainstream perception of games. No thanks.

Also the tv show already did in a way anyways. What more could be said. That or if people 'want' to play games instead of just watching because they don't want to control something/pause it all the time.

I don't care for anything they are making right now, visuals fine, gameplay/rest not for me of these types of games so pass.

"We will focus on story and boring gameplay" cool thanks. I get the visuals, but story, what about other things. Make the worlds/level design/gameplay/moveset/anything else more 'fun' first. I may focus on story for tv shows but then again I do also the cinematography/animation too.

Ray tracing for mechanics sure but just puddles/glass building and cupboards with glass no thanks. Lighting/shadow mechanics though I'd be interested.

Even give me some Under The Skin arcade/party fun or other mechanics than story. It has not much story yet it's music is catchy and stealing coins/disguising is fun and it's cellshaded/holds up well yet Capcom does nothing with it. Some fun games are sent out to die yet are more memorable to me than most stories. Because of their game design. Even PN03 for it's different aiming style then what the future was after that game came out and besides it's rushed development. It's mechanics I still remember even if the level design was copy paste in most of it and the main character's animations/design even if barely any voice acting at all just text and gameplay.

To me locations and the mechanics gameplay wise stick out to me more than dialogue does. I don't always care for quotes either. I'd rather play a puzzle game with no story even to just have fun challenging myself with the levels or mechanics.

I mean I'm enjoying Another Code for the puzzles the story is fine but if I care more for Steam World Heist 2 because of the gameplay and the story/dialogue/characters/world are just as charming as the first then yeah why not but still gameplay first. What else do I care about this year Indie 3D platformers with hack n slash elements then the usual 90s 5th gen repetition I keep seeing and passing by because the 5th gen of that era the gems ignored are more exciting to me than the Indies making Mario/Banjo/Spyro/Crash/Sonic clones all the time and their goals/levels or movesets are just so boring.

When I find Indie puzzle games more fun then many other Indies even, some are fair but some not as much (nostalgia Platformer/Racing, or repetitive setting shooters because no one cared for a fantasy one like Aveum/Atomic Heart besides the issues yes so we see stagnation of mechanics and settings making so many games set in wars that are repetitive.

I get more out of Battlefield 2 Modern Combat's swap mechanic around the whole map or Driver San Fransisco jumping cars from driver to driver then I care about most other things in those games because the mechanics are so cool and never get boring the rest is just a bonus if the gameplay is so good).

Or a racing game without a story if the locations/physics, progression of 'modes' not 'repeating the same basic modes for generations now' and the cars are fun to drive, not realistic, but fun. No tire model calculations garbage I don't care. No dream cars they can be anything hot hatch I couldn't care less about lifestyle/cost or if they won Le Man for said years. Fun. Though recreating moments in history is fun sometimes.

When some enemy AI is so boring I'd like to see more focus on say a robot that learns, unlearns it's own moves and copies other enemies or the player so further than just a Dark Link/equivalent enemy.

We don't need AI we need "AI" I mean if Roller Coaster Tycoon 1 & 2 can have umbrellas during rain trigger or other little details we don't need AI we need just different models of characters and colours/other possibilities of states of characters injured or other things going on. The gun bench in Last of Us was fair and the animations there were ok. Why not more like that just some realistic or some just charming details that are gameified. Why not.

We don't need AI this and that just creative little details in games or smarter staff trained well than taking too long to make things or other problems. We sometimes see them but I find some are in particular areas we don't see, others other spins on skill trees or other stuff and others just don't feel like it enough and lack that little detail flare I'd like to see in games again.

Or say in shooters more interesting animations then the set positions. I want to see THAT or just better gameplay ideas not the most simplest and overdone desigh that's so wow we walk, we talk, we do dialogue moments, eh quests, go to places and they may be ok mountains/jungles or wherever or boring city recreations when I didn't sign up for a holiday destination or a journey of an ok story at best that makes me just want the tropes to get going.

Not 'be emotional on command and have these other things in the game to break it up' because I just ignore the dialogue and messages/moments and just play or I just don't care for the gameplay enough and want to move on/not play because the structure of the writing doesn't make me cry, smile or be on the edge of my seat it makes me bored out of my mind I get the messages move on games/movies/tv shows I am already sick of your formats try harder. Put a better spin on them or find someone else who can write them more interestingly.

Or just stop copying movies and actually do better. Some games are inspired by movies and they still work as games, not 'look how blatant our movie/tv show attempts are because we REALLY want to be a movie' wow I really needed games to be that way. XD

Clearly when the inspiration on a lower scale for story influence it was better than the high scale look at us movie experiences we do see. The subtly didn't ruin the games back years ago.

A creative twist to the world/concept is enough to make me interested, pushing a message/story down my throat won't make me interested. I signed up for a video game playground to play in to be 'FUN'.

When Diofield Chronciles had up to chapter 4 fair ideas, then the second half is the most boring story/repetitive gameplay that doesn't change and the level design isn't enough. Yeah I appreciated Valkyria Chronicles more and more why because the classes, the levels have a unique goals and it's always challenging me. Diofield is repetitive as ever. Gameplay over story if the gameplay goes no where after it's last idea in Chapter 4 yet the same oh wow kill them, get the chest, do it in a time limit. Yeah and I had more interesting goals in the other, bomb parachutes to certain vehicles, bosses, verticality to deal with, other objects/restrictions of characters. So many differences each mission. Grinding takes time but even still.

If I find things like Inside Out (whether I cared for the dialogue/drama or not the concept was still intriguing the whole way through) or other Pixar films or Aardman or some older ads that aren't dull and aren't as simple a Youtuber (not a knock against them but just saying comparable to that quality in a Youtube skit) can make it because of the camera tricks or the skit like but more serious dialogue and doesn't need a big actor to do it/the message sticks out too much then why not make them more compelling and less corporate (PG Tips Tea ads, then and now)

(rather than the boring wow it's a family with problems and some creature they are on when the creature was more exciting then the boring family drama Disney Interactive, when a kid would care about the creature, when I care about the creature more than your boring dialogue/bringing up the message at least 3 times and whatever breaks of other things to talk about it's a boring movie I have no interest in hearing about it over and over.

Your not Pixar, even if Elemental was 'ok and again it's world was more compelling then the characters for me' but the things they did in the worlds were kind of cool in an animation sense even if the story itself was passable but I still didn't care for it).

Or say the Doctor Who Silence in the Library episodes or others are interesting to me because of the concepts at play, enough is going on, I'm not bored, I'm constantly thinking about the concepts of the world and the dialogue. Not a easy to understand story and whatever messaging in God of War 2018+ or others there is a reason why the tension, the pacing, the location, the spun up ideas are compelling not some boring family drama and action every so often I couldn't care less about.

Horizon's story was interesting but the gameplay bored me to death. I got into Infamous Second Son because of the side content, the main story was passable but the missions were so basic and not fun I almost didn't want to beat the game and just drop it after the side content was more fun, more playground like more fitting of the character to me as well then the story action were. Besides that I find well 1 had dynamic elements and good and bad points on a more dull level of game design in Second Son really annoyed me.

No need for super humans/animals just interactivity or goals that are FUN. Fun movesets, fun level design. I mean FOamstars I had ideas for foam, they repeat 2 modes from other multiplayer games in a slightly different way. Yet a sufrboard mix of modes, foam building contest, reverse maze to clean up the foam, traps, chemical mixing and more is more exciting then wow a business model and boring gameplay ideas, YAY! Something many Square 'published' smaller titles I had issues with as well Diofield or their remakes. Yet Valkyrie Elysium I enjoyed beacuse it had just enough fair ideas to it besides it's formula and more refined then other Soleil titles.

I mean Ratchet felt like Tools of Destruction from 2007 (and had many of it's levels remade and made more dull then the OG being more fun of level design and things to do in them) with scripted rifts (Blizar was a good level but that was it) and a God of War mentor style story because fans are older and they are talking to their alternate dimension forms that never meet/learned what they did and we need to feel emotion. Uh no pass. I don't need the crude humour of the OG era I am fine not seeing that but even the Future saga prior titles had better stories and even then the gameplay was better.

Crack in Time has moons with challenges/other things to do, the ship level select of the sectors, the arena, the new modding system that's better then the Raritanium of Tools, Nexus and 2016 they keep pushing onto us, like come on (too much for them to develop I assume and laziness, that's why the Buzz Blades are still in the games, 2007 to 2021 like seriously they are that lazy to come up with a new disk blade gun/other weapon of it's type, lazy, Combuster sure but at least they made new pistols later).

It's funny how the big game for PS3 it was and the one that actually put the series on a different direction is praised for it's story and probably many by it's gameplay yet Rift Apart goes backwards and 'subtly' pulls from that game while taking from everything else. Yet Tools of Destruction takes from 2 & 3 but also has fair new additions but does it better in 2007 then Rift Apart did in 2021. Design differences matter and what they take from.

Gran Turismo 7 is just hilarious of what they think car clubs are like, and is level gating of GT5 but worse and Forza Motorsport 6 roulette system. Besides it's own ok but confusing track select for events I found that confusing at first. I got more satisfaction from Tokyo Extreme Racer series and mechanics wise great design to witness of talking to other characters that way or Sega GT sponsors or the car builder/Pure ATV builder.

We have Vision GT but no car builder. Why? Also B Spec gone, great...... or whatever GT Sophy even was I still don't know it confuses me. Also the dealership cutscene then PGR2 having a dealership you want to walk around just for the sake of it besides quicker menus and it had Geometry Wars versions from PGR2-4 then well to other platforms afterwards. XD

I mean give me just more gameplay focused games please. There is enough IPs and story writing but if the gameplay is boring why should I bother. When third parties offer ok ideas but boring movesets or boring modes. The last thing I want is a story and the most boring movesets ever let alone setpieces.

If the gameplay is good I care for the story, if the gameplay is boring I'm not going to pay any attention to the story/world I am if the gameplay/level design and the goals for them pick up or not if they don't why should I bother.

Spec Ops The Line has it's moments of fair gameplay but it's story telling yes I played it for that but it's cut setpieces or the dynamic moments made me really enjoy it compared to scripted games of today.

I do play visual novels but even if I don't find them immersive as the dialogue is just so not convincing so how other people do they must be desperate. XD I find the dialogue charming at least but to laugh at usually besides the odd ones with good mechanics like Love Plus/Quintuplets of stats and day to day goals, like some others with interactivity elements to them detective or dialogue minigames or something.

I'm interested but from the Ratchet Going Mobile or God of War Betrayal to the Vita PS Mobile era they killed off in 2015 and we got PS Allstars Island or others.

To now with WipEout Rush (would have competed better on consoles then an idle game that flopped because GT4 B Spec or other manager games are just better than WipEout Rush was.

There is tons of mobile racing games but not good enough for Sony to offer a revival of sci-fi racers on console and Redout was made by ex WipEout staff. Fast Racing series, or in a different direction Inertial Drift, Distance many in that sort of arcade flashy way as well like come on), Fate GO (yes Sony gets Fate GO money) and Sackboy Run unless that was earlier and more I mean sure. The quality needs to be there.

I'm never into mobile games to me the closest I cared for was experimenting with a few on Windows Phone 8.1 and these days PS Minis on Vita or PS3 that are still up so trialing there, early emu I discovered, some close to flash games. Because they were 2010 era mobile style not business models of now types.

Like many things these days are completely different with mobile and not compelling. Flash games sure. Handheld games sure. But current mobile pass the compelling ideas of console games just aren't there.

Haven't thought about Care Bears for years. I vaguely remember it. A worthy return hmm. Maybe. Is it an IP that needs to exist no idea. Does it appeal to young kids well or whatever changes to make it relevant no idea.

Could be decent, could be bad.

Millennial always made me think 2000s, Windows ME made sense for that reason and well it means 1000 which is why the Numeral M and C 100, etc.

So seeing it as 80s/90s when 1997+ is Z and Alpha is 2010 when I always thought it was 2012. Also Millennial and Y then Z or iGen like what oh wow the iPhone I mean sure but many of us never experienced that Apple product heck I think of PDAs or Pocket PCs before I think of the iPhone. XD Then Alpha.

I didn't get a tablet till 2012 with the Surface. Tablets existed before the iPad but like many people cared what Microsoft did with tablets or the earliest of Samsung Tablets either. Like Pocket PCs too expensive, too heavily used in businesses or tech enthusiasts not for the average person (or the social lifestyle marketing was too good later on to appeal to them which I never cared for) and most people didn't even notice.

Why did it go from Baby Boomers (which makes sense for the time period) to X then Y, Z. It's like programing with i and J I get it but it's just silly. Why not C onwards? Or something else. At least Alpha makes sense for starting that onwards.

https://www.parents.com/parenting/better-parenting/style/generation-names-and-years-a-cheat-sheet-for-parents/#toc-millennial-generation-or-generation-y-born-19811996

@Medic_alert Same conclusion a family member who is playing it said and think they are half way through after probably 4 hours.

It looks good but they find it was a step down in other areas in the same ways you did. I can see where they were coming from.

It does happen when some studios get a hit or some particular ideas and sometimes the original was just good enough it didn't need a sequel. Some ideas do go too far to be similar, different, different audience, simpler when the balance before was better or they went too simple than the difficulty or presentation of themes/worlds/other details of the original

Honestly it's probably a good thing all their older games never got sequels they are great one offs as they are and I enjoyed them a lot.

I never played Hellblade it's not for me but I respect what it did whenever I saw people analyse it or the same person who isn't into the 2nd but loved the 1st explained the differences to me.

They were an Indie/small team studio about A or AA. I get the PS/Nintendo audiences appreciate different games it's why I think Project Spark made less sense than Dreams or Game Builder Garage or Mario Maker/other making your own levels and creative type games. I get a game being on 1 platform then multiple and fanbases going great can't experience it I totally get that.

So when it's limited it can be annoying.

Also especially if others have a different impression than those given the game to review and part of a sister website.

I care for gameplay first but not hour count. I do for say a Gameboy game and collector prices but PS1-5 nope. Sure I don't in a sense but not to extent of others expecting an open world or a horror/cinematic game. If it has filler the content has to be worth it. To me I've had fun or just enough 'I'm glad this is shorter' with many games.

I buy up PS3/360/Wii games for $5, play the campaign and move on. That and Indies or AAs on modern platforms. It's not Gameboy prices or length anymore. It's not however much tech in an N64 cart so it's similar prices to nowadays but back then and however much content you got. So being a collector, being away of prices, platforms, why they are where they are.

I mean it's like complaining about oh no OG Xbox games like KOTOR or others were there but not on PS2 well yeah because PC to Xbox was easier. We have similar architecture/specs on both PS5/Xbox Series but whether the APIs, or a custom engine/UE or Unity or whatever and the studio's own custom tools, whatever the budget of the game is and how much time they took making changes because games are not perfect they do get set back they aren't all you know what lets be 100% focused because that's not how it works. Designs and directions change a lot. No product/project of art is always the same. Look at prototypes and what gets cut. What old games trailers look like.

Watch New Game the anime or Mythic Quest Raven's Banquet or a game dev documentary/interview.

I just use any consoles but I also do my research on a studio, their past games, their team size especially helps with the budget besides who the publisher is, even if I don't play any of them. I just become knowledgeable for the sake of it and can recommend a game to someone else.

Think about it from the studio's point of view (which most people don't). People can want whatever value they want of 5 hrs+ for this game (and know their past games play time, content and goals of story, gameplay, graphics and more are all very different but similar enough) or to play it but it doesn't matter if the situation is what it is of money, them being alive to make a product, split or anything releasing at all.

Black 2006 has great quality and production value for a shooter with the talent behind the Burnout series yet oh it has no multiplayer but it also was focused, it has the quality of PS3/360 on PS2/OG Xbox of blur and particles and explosions. It has difficulty setting goals kind of but not the same as Perfect Dark. Different games have different priorities.

Not every game is an Uncharted with multiplayer, with speedrunning trophies/modes, or secrets. Hellblade 1 & 2 are very different games.

They got bought by Microsoft like Double Fine (crowdfunding many times) they needed the money, they looked for studios with a mix of offerings of types of games for variety as well as just big live services. The mo cap, the UE5, the direction they wanted to go. If they changed their minds hundreds of times that eats up a budget for sure.

So people can go oh it took this long and it's this much but I mean sometimes it's making changes, sometimes it's well at other studios but either way more a oh it takes that time to model a character, maybe a week. For racing games that's a month to many months for that amount of polygons, photos, sounds, interior view and more. Many details people overlook is time, talent, changes and what tools they are using and have to get used to (which one doing basic tasks taking 2 weeks then shorter look to the old Fallout dev's video on that and also how they did meetings back in the day to nowadays and young staff going wait what but old guard know their stuff and know how to communicate even if it sounds like yelling it's still productive to break down a project).

Who played their older games or knew of them before Hellblade, a certain percentage. Who played Bleeding Edge? Who played their OG Xbox Ninja party game? Disney Infinity 3.0 content? Hmm. Hellblade 2 while it isn't the same as their others because the story and graphics are a particular jump then their others with more gameplay focus on combat or puzzles while this game is about the story with different goals of combat/puzzles it is just different it doesn't make it a lesser game.

But I mean Gamepass exists. It's a team that tried to recreate what made the first so good but it just doesn't reach that. I mean UE5, the mo cap and more are so good but the combat/puzzles/dialogue isn't better than the first.

The length doesn't bother me. I've played their PS3/360 era games. Not Hellblade 1 I know enough about it from a family member and from videos. I know it's quality.

I saw the trailers/articles, I didn't their dev logs on Youtube or any ads Microsoft had maybe presented.

I think the studio may or may not survive but for the studio size they are (which is context), they could do well with it. It's artsy but kind of for a different audience I think with how simpler it is than the first game. I think Microsoft had some influence there for accessibility or they took feedback from the first game too far.

They aren't a 1 person Bright Memory Infinite 2 hr game for $30 but they also aren't a typical Indie either. That's different from other Indies games, or even 3D platformers made by 1 person or other people. I don't think much of Clive n Wrench but it's impressive for 1 person besides the jank. Same with others I hate nostaglic Indies and want them to be more than copy paste (racing are copy paste, 3D platformers more so end up as just too similar and not original enough from their inspirations when the gens they are inspired by had more original third party ideas then the popular they take inspiration from and the Indie games themselves are of actually good ideas being ok but not exciting in the slightest to me compared to the others by talented studios then Indies with inspiration not not as many ideas or know how yes I know I have to consider that but I mean Palworld versus Nightinggale or No Man's Sky very different survival games yet 2 by veteran devs, Palworld being not that but very inspired by other games).

They are like Double Fine they make niche games and are a certain team size. Context is key yet many people miss that and those that do know what's stands.

Ninja Theory are a great studio but the tweet and this game with not the best but still memorable marketing it's hard to know what to say.

@RainbowGazelle Same here. While I dropped off over time (only Indies and AAs these days) to buy a Vita 2017, Wii U 2018, 3DS 2020, Switch 2021 I did still pick up Knack 2, Gravity Rush, Dreams (got last guardian later like months ago with Mario Tennis 3DS as the last 3DS game or so in Gamestop/EB in my area had) but more and more the direction threw me off.

I've enjoyed my gaps of Nintendo I missed and Xbox One I used more (mostly OG Xbox/360 but still the Xbox One games I missed as I barely used my Xbox One) than I thought while collecting for PS4/Xbox One and older consoles.

I'm not against them pushing for what works or casual audiences but I mean gamers are only so loyal until there is nothing for them to 'break up with the other titles' or anything they want if it's 'only those titles and they have no interest so why should they convert or be happy their favourite IPs changed for this new audience or are stagnating on ideas' but every little bit counts of money, apparently not to them with creative projects.

They will hit a ceiling of an audience (besides the TV/movie draw in or PC) and they go oh we get money from people still using our platform for multiplayer or Indies well what if we do go elsewhere.

With Bokeh's Splitterhead coming soon and Claphands doing the sports game on Switch among other things and many creative experiences elsewhere but the ones we look to disappearing big business is just getting more and more formuliac and sad.

I mean PS3 IPs I didn't like from 3rd parties got sequels on PS4 and I have skipped them all. If they didn't work for me then why would I force myself to play what I already had interest in. It's like they want us to do that even though it's for audiences that already exist and word spreading for big IP. Yep sure.

@Topov81 I agree. Just Dance and others have a good spin on music games and music/party games work well if done right for a casual audience or the odd hardcore gamer fine with playing them. I'm not into them but I had my SingStar PS2/early 3 experiences or Eye Toy. Not so much PS4 other than collecting such games/researching them.

As eh as Everybody 1-2 Switch is I mean it and Playlink have a lot in common for a 10 year gap and even then Wii/Switch Nintendo has been pushing many casual games. So it's odd to see Sony sort of pull back on them as some still enjoy a party game or too not just always on their phones. Or a board game (physical or digital versions) or cards or something.

Singstar Celebrations was for PS4 after the PS2/3 bundles (or the online focus of songs in the PS3 era ones I think I only got the first PS3 Singstar game I didn't know about others till finding them in a retro game store, I haven't bought them as the music doesn't interest me in them but still I was surprised how many Eye Toy, Singstar or Buzz games existed the more I saw or the more I looked into the games part of that brand) but I only know about it from a bargain bin of Playlink games (the smartphone party games for casuals on PS4 around 2014/2015 or so) and even then I never heard of it till doing research.

I think Sony just gave up after a while and went for PSVR or just what they are doing now is just games of the sort nowadays and going well that will work with PC releases why try with casuals it seems when they can just do so with their major releases on PS5 and make them approachable/accessible and tv shows/movies to get people experiencing the IPs that way and have a few move to PS5 I guess?

A great studio. I don't own Buzz but I do Eye Toy (always had the camera even though sold and re-bought the Eye Toy games), always kept Singstar (don't play it anymore and one of my mics is broken) for PS2 and only 1 PS3 entry I've seen other PS3 ones but not interest.

I am not into casual games as much, there is a few and more so Rhythm Heaven or WarioWare from Nintendo as I like the microgame spin they offer of those games, the few times I've liked party games actually.

But I find a charm in EyeToy or SingStar. I mean DDR, Just Dance and more I never got into and don't want to. I have no interest in the songs in them but they suit a casual audience but after Celebrations on PS4 which I never knew existed till finding in a bargain bin along with other Playlink games.

Ah PSVR one games they offered yep what a time.

I saw copies of Singstar Celebration for PS4 (don't own) under the Playlink brand the smartphone co-op or competitive party games and I own 4 Playlink games, got the apps and trialed them out solo with 2 phones. I think Hidden Agenda by the Until Dawn/Dark Picture studio is really cool.

Some casual approaches made sense, whether they did well no idea as I never heard about them only from physical games did I ever come across them. Digital unlike as I think they got delisted.

I never played the Getaway but I respected it and Blood and Truth felt like a more linear but continuation of the ideas they had in it. RIP that PS3 Getaway game that got cancelled.

Experimental studios die RIP Japan umbrella of studios and London.

In terms of other countries it makes sense or casual gamers not seeing a need to.

But me nah I just don't find games of the current gen compelling, the gameplay isn't impressing me and I don't care for graphics/ray tracing or performance enhancements. For understanding tech sure or reading gaming news but I mean I still care about dual screen phones or old and new console gimmicks or retro game hidden gems I never owned/knew about because of their ideas then I do current gen being a purchase.

I don't care about GTA 6 at all or other trends these days. So that's not a reason for me not upgrading.

To me the problem is just compelling ideas in games to make me upgrade. If Sony kills off the creative studios and games I actually would upgrade for. I don't care for most trends this gen. Not into souls, not into current racing games, nostaglia Indies suck at making stand outs then clones with the most blatant copy paste design as 90s popular games but nothing to set them apart. Sequels/remakes and some I am buying but only the remakes not sequels to game I have no interest in.

2016+ most care about PS4 to me it was 2013/2014 those IPs besides Knack 2, Gravity Rush 2 of 2017 and Dreams of 2020. Order 1886 was eh, Last of Us not my thing, Uncharted 4/Lost Legacy I didn't play but watched others play. I played 1-3/Golden Abyss no care for the others. Ratchet 2016/GT Sport were bad. God of War 2018 I beat the story hated it. Horizon I played 20 hours and dropped it. Infamous Second Son I beat side/story but felt the dynamic good and bad of 1 was better and I'm still at the intro of 1. XD Others trying to remember. To me the current Sony direction is pretty half and half of none for me right now. Song of the Deep was fair from Insomniac for a PS4/Xbox One metroidvania and I'm not into Metroidvanias or Roguelikes.

I mean the Dualsense is 'fine' but I have Impulse Triggers of Xbox One 2013+ games of the 'few' that use it. I have tried Dualsense and it's tension/haptics are fine. I tried it with the Stellar Blade demo and it reminded me what it's like. I have no Switch HD Rumble games yet. The vibration in Azure Gunvolt 1 & 2 for PS4 was fair of vibration stages. Gyro in PS5 games is nice but some still barely offer it.

Hey Gravity Trickster is a PS4 Kula World on PS1 kind of game..... What do I need to upgrade for. It's an ok game. Just surprised still games or some Indies going slow between platforms in some cases that's all.

Why would I spend $500 to trade a PS4 in, $700 normally. That and just an OS I hate that's like Switch or Xbox Series that on Xbox One X/VCR I already hate. I prefer the Wii U and PS4 folders/design layout more. I can use the quite console feature on an Xbox One why would I PS5 buy that for $700 for a quite setting. The enhancements sure but I don't care. Base PS4 and loading times don't bother me.

Stranger of Paradise on Xbox One X, loads quick, Biomutant on Xbox One X runs badly it's why I questioned it running on Switch. Stranger of Paradise running better than even the 50% then loaded of FEAR 2 on PS3 in just as short of time. So to me it's down to good programming yet we see a lot of bad programming. FF7 Rebirth to me seeing the load times with teleporting same region versus new regions. It's how I'd expect it to be not 'everywhere each teleport of fast travel' is horrendous programming. XD

Granted Stranger of Paradise is linear small areas so it's not the same but even still. Valkyrie Elysium is the same and I mean Soleil do what they do and Wanted Dead is like Devils Third from it's design similarities to it's loading times. Part of it is the games I seek but the other part is engines adapting to consoles and getting a product out but the other is just nothing compelling of software at all and eh peripherals I usually would care for but their execution is so bad.

2020 period of people playing games sure. I saw people buying PS4s for Fortnite around then or earlier. Or Minecraft on PS3 or so. I even if I don't care got more interested in 3DS games leaving my EB/Gamestop and buying more retro games for 5-7th gen consoles or buying consoles I didn't own than 8th+ gen games/consoles and many I did disappointed.

So consoles or games from casuals or just the 2020 situation over now of people inside as much. Unless you see like 100s of Match Masters ads and want to tell Google to go away with their ads when I hate Tetris/Bejeweled style puzzle games there is a reason my favourites are obstacle course ones on PSP instead.

The IPs they do push don't interest me and haven't since the PS4 era that's why 2017-2021 I bought a Vita 2017, Wii U 2018, 3DS 2020 and Switch 2021 that's how boring the PS4 was for me and the Xbox One sat there or got backwards compatible 360 games instead besides a few exclusive Xbox One games but more so 2020+ when the PS5/Series were out already. So just Knack 2 and Gravity Rush 2 or Dreams wasn't doing much.

GT Sport I bought 2 years before the server closure why would I not pay pre-owned prices for a game design I didn't like. I was there at the service ending and offline for wiki reasons and to understand the game design to get a bit of experience with the game enough to beat the career mode and offline modes otherwise I didn't care for it.

I get the oh multiplayer casuals and such but me a hardcore that hasn't upgraded. Well it's because I literally haven't seen anything to make me upgrade.

With Switch I went ok Bayonetta 3, Prime 4 and a bunch of third parties besides well Pikmin 4, Bayonetta Origins (I have enjoyed) which Bayo 3/Pikmin 4 sucked. Astral Chain I need to get back into. So third parties have been my main experience on Switch racing, platformers, tactics mostly at the moment. Splatoon 2 was like the best 2017 singleplayer platformer shooter game I played in 2024. Another Code Recollection is passable of a remake of 2 games combined then separated.

I'll get to Fire Emblem or others eventually but otherwise. Eh Switch has been ok even besides what I think of the well it's just PSP/Nomad/Pocket PC docking and eh IR but fine gyro and split joycons or better than Vita/3DS profile soloness to be more fair and well it's a handheld so it's fine. But I still prefer Wii U more.

Rift Apart doing a non scripted but hardware push when Crack in Time on a PS3 HDD did it better and yet Rift Apart is almost comparable it's hilarious. Give me dynamic boss battles or moments come on. Blizar was a good level but I quit before I played it. Watching 2 let's plays made me go yeah it's a good level, the remade levels were worse then Tools of Destruction they came from with better design. XD

From Rift Apart to GT7 I was done. 2017+ PS4 IPs I was done but GT7 I am done.

Sure Dreams being fair to Knack 2 & Gravity Rush 2, Blood and Truth (being titles I did enjoy on PS4) to just more studios I care about gone why should I upgrade? There isn't anything for me on PS5/Series X.

That aside other than 3rd parties with ok ideas in them most are just pathetic. Too safe, taking their time to adapt to the hardware, who cares 4K/other aspects. Give me gameplay oh wait they have to TREND FOLLOW compete with boring game design and worlds.

Why should i upgrade if we see formulaic titles, eh engine changes, PS3/4 design 2 console gens later that's seriously boring and hilarious to see be repeated over and over for casuals buy safe games due to too high of budgets no one asked for and console gamer loyal sales.

That or nostalgia Indies (not to mix with good Indies actually making good games) making generic clones of 90s games with nothing mechanically exciting to set them apart just repeats, when the actual 5th gen have stand out design. Why should I bother if the Nostalgia Indies (not the Indies actually putting effort in which there are many) are no different in safe design as AAA or AA in some cases. It's pathetic.

I get engines to adapt to PS5. I get the ray tracing (I don't care about puddles, modern glass buildings or lighting in a cupboard with a glass door, give me actually gameplay reasons to care about ray tracing or else make it baked in I don't care about some boring realistic lighting, boring licenses in games, pushing tv/movies for money and performance hits make the performance better and better games)/other pushes.

But gameplay wise I've never been so unexcited to upgrade since I didn't want to upgrade from 1.6.4 to 1.7.10 in Minecraft as I hated and still do (but did upgrade and stopped at 1.17, and even then 1.12.2 I wanted to give up if it wasn't for Rift/Fabric as other modloaders appearing) the biome algorithm being so bad and further updates being boring as ever too.

I've had more fun researching failed consoles from all over gaming's past and hidden gems of mechanically more exciting of PS1-3/PSP/Vita, OG Xbox/360 or N64 to Switch (mostly Wii/DS to Switch of pickups the rest is researching) games then I have the boring experience of PS4 I've had.

I find the odd PS4 games but even the Indies are pretty eh, the AA are 'fine' but AAA it's been eh sequels I have no interest in or remakes.

Square's titles of 2022/2023 made me want to buy them but they flopped so like it matters. Some fair hack n slashes of Valkyrie Elysium/Strangers of Paradise or Tactics of Front Mission/Tactics Ogre or Diofield even if Diofield is the most after chapter 4 boring game I've ever played for eh story and nothing interesting going on. If it was a Valkyria Chronicles games well it out beats it because each objective keeps changing. Diofield nah it's too busy story pushing and boring gameplay with the grass, wind and flowers blowing and relaxing to have anything worth while to offer. I platinumed it which was easy but still boring and pointless difficulty curve.

Some games are 'fine' but even then I only got a few Smart delivery games like Demon Turf, Project Cars 3 or Strangers of Paradise on Xbox One or PS4/5 only games like Valkyrie Elyisum or other multiplats on PS4 or Switch or Xbox One because well nothing new gen has impressed me it's just safe gameplay design. Why should I upgrade?

Even then many I found exciting flop because they had other factors people care about so they flop. I still buy them or family bought them as they use the PS5 but they just flopped.

Balan I enjoyed for $20, no way I was paying full price I knew it would flop. Forspoken/Aveum family bought but I mean they flopped. I thought the setting and ideas in Aveum weren't the best but I mean it's better than Indies trying to be better different setting COD. Pass. I mean something interesting in the shooter space but nope 5-7th gen shooters on either of the 3 platforms because well current gen they aren't offering it they flop too much. Forspoken has issues but I mean the magic system seemed cool to me and actual verticallity of platforms was nice but it was still an ok world/story. But it had other issues so people made it flop. I get the Sweet Baby issue or the dialogue or otherwise but I mean I hated the dialogue in Sunset Overdrive, came back and it was my favourite open world besides Gravity Rush Remastered so. Game design appeal there.

That doesn't give me confidence to upgrade if games are so safe why should I let alone casual or hardcore gaming audiences have made it clear the direction games have gone and me as 1 person won't help sales even if I did upgrade, let alone no interest in PSVR2/Portal (access to them as family bought them but they too were disappointed in them) so what do I have to get excited over.

Was the remaster that bad? Otherwise eh.

I'd put Knack 1 & 2 there for my list and put 2018/Ragnarok at the bottom as they aren't for me I beat 2018 story but I didn't like it. I played it more than I did 20 hours of Horizon then dropped off.

In terms of preferred eh. I mean story wise the PSP one with Krato's brother was cool but gameplay wise probably the main series. The PSP ones are fair titles though.

Ascension is fine but even for a prequel I find some of it's gameplay a bit confusing I got confused on the chain for a fair few times then got past it but get easily killed because it's been a while since played it.

But otherwise yeah not bad list I guess.

Been playing many God of War style hack n slash/character action games like Beowulf, Conan PS3 or Dante's Inferno so got a feel for it still and the differences those have of ideas to the formula. That and the DMC series besides the reboot I beat and not getting confused with DMC1 & 2 but didn't have issues with RE1 on PS Classic so I don't know why I got confused playing DMC 1 & 2 early on.

The Madden timeline no you can't. 14 just had to be 14 25th Anniversary but nope.

Like MotoGP16 they had to change the title for marketing.

The time continuum will break. I can't wait till the 30th anniversary year breaks it again.

Y2Madden must stop.

That nonsense bad joke and possible Scott the Woz Christmas special aside.

It is odd. I get oh the next one but 25 to 15 must have been confusing somewhat right?

Or oh not 360/PS3 one or databases with years being annoying thanks EA.

Also the FIFA change made me think it was all their sports licences but wasn't.

I've wanted Clone Wars 2002 to be available for a while now. I haven't come across an Xbox copy yet.

Otherwise eh anything big or small whatever is possible to make supported.

Or just PSP versions.

Well at least the physical is still happening but yeah sadness. The Switch release I assume will because they still want sales for all the games they planned to go multiplatform and that's understandable to follow through on them.

The games do deserve support/other audiences but if we see safe games and the creative ones not sell well sigh casual audiences and only us gamers willing to support these just aren't enough.

@themightyant I would too but then again, Japan Studios (I know many under 1 umbrella so that's why Claphands and Bokeh or whoever went elsewhere or quit gaming). London Studio, Media Molecule, Pixel Opus.

Other than Asobi being the last of them I don't trust Sony and anything creative projects like those.

It's all what we see now. Sackboy/Ratchet are what they are but we see more of other IPs for a reason.

Party like it's 2024 were still waiting or for a new IP if their pull away but still partering with Microsoft.

That looks like a mask so I think Crash. Where is Spyro?

Where is some modern Spyro ideas? Well time to play more niche 5th gen platformers and no I don't mean nostalgia inspired Indies inspired by Spyro or others. No thanks. Sick to death of them being so repetitive that's why the niche platformers with ideas no one cares to look at because less repetition and nostalgia milk easy sales games.

@Mythologue The games are but the Lego sets themselves range to many other IPs including games not just the tv shows/films/comics or of course your Lego City, Ninjago and others of Lego originals.

Same with Megablocks Halo sets.

I don't remember a Horizon Lego set (probably is but even then I wouldn't be surprised if they make Lego models anyways.

Not all Star Wars models were finalised by the time Lego Star Wars the first game came out. You notice with some models for GBA (not just hardware limitations it was also the case I think in differences of the first game to Complete Saga models I think) or others too what ones were or weren't updated or had a reference to go off of but that's doesn't matter so much now).