I'm arrogant because I found legitimate problems with the game? YOU are the one taking offense at MY opinion, dude.
Just because a lot of people like something doesn't mean it's objectively great. A lot of people like Call of Duty and League of Legends and those games are trash. A lot of people liked the Transformer movies when they came out but that doesn't make them the new Citizen Kane.
I really don't get the hype surrounding the Witcher 3. It's pretty-looking and the dialogue is great, but other than that the game is sorely lacking.
The combat is repetitive and the controls are terribly unresponsive. Geralt moves like he's on ice. The number of enemy types can be counted on one hand. As with most open-world games, there is no level design, making encounters dull. There isn't much of anything to interact with in the environment except for the...
The VGAs are mostly for the journalists and advertisers, and most game journalists are casuals. It's no surprise a game like The Witcher 3 that focuses on explicit story/dialogue over gameplay won. Hell they gave Dragon Age: Inqusition GOTY last year (though EA probably paid for it) and that game was garbage.
Not to mention I suspect a lot of the awards went to people who were able to attend, and it's unlikely anyone from FromSoft was willing to fly over for a silly ...
The thing is nobody knows ANYTHING about how these episodes are going to be split up or priced, and everyone is just jumping to the worst conclusions. Clickbait articles are not helping. People need to calm down, until we know more there isn't any reason to set up a quarantine and burn the house down over a little unexpected news.
But it's not open world... The game is made up of levels stitched together.
It just doesn't feel like Halo anymore. Say what you want about 2's story but the Bungie games were more like somewhat grounded sci-fi war stories and 4 + 5 just feel like they are swiftly heading towards the Michael Bay direction, trying to catch the Call of Duty audience.
Halo 4's entire plot was pointless besides giving an excuse to "kill off" Cortana. The Didact, despite being some supreme ancient evil, didn't do anything and was quickly dealt wi...
Well that explains why the second trilogy feels like a bad fanfic.
I'm already tired of every game with swords being compared to Souls games.
Coddling like this is exactly why we have generations of people who are terrified of failure and are unable to learn from it.
It's okay to let a kid lose every once in a while. Otherwise they'll never aspire to get better or learn from their mistakes.
Little Timmy will be just fine.
"Unwilling to commit the time to play" is an alright argument for vanilla, but we've gone FOUR expansions since then. For a new player to catch up now, they need to grind out a few HUNDRED-THOUSAND gold, or spend hundreds of dollars on packs.
Losing 10/10 games because everyone has cards that are infinitely better than yours is NEVER fun. What kind of idiot is going to have fun getting curb-stomped over and over again?
"The games you want won't make money that's why we're not listening to you. Wait, why did the Wii U flop so bad?!"
"TEAM, UNITE UP!"
Oh, Platinum.
It best be a budget title; the game was pretty short and without the gamepad novelty the gameplay probably won't hold up too well.
Guy I never even said anything about PS4, Ubisoft, EA, or any of the crap you're talking about. All I said was that that game looks disappointing considering how long we've been waiting for a new Starfox.
Also your response gives away that you're underaged... Do yourself a favor and spend less time on the internet, there are better ways to spend your childhood. Not even saying this condescendingly, I know what it's like to grow up a raving fanboy.
Not gonna lie I looked at your post history and you're either 8, a shill, or seriously need help, dude.
Misleading title, it's just an unsourced rumor.
We did want a new Starfox. Instead they're giving us... old Starfox. We asked for a new game and they're giving us Starfox 64 with elements of Starfox 2 mashed in.
Honestly the graphics aren't that bad, what's really disappointing is the enemy design. They all look so uninspired it's ridiculous. The one boss they showed is just a giant polygon that shoots things at you, and those spider enemies that are basically big red buttons with legs...
No, I'm completely serious. Why would changing Link into a girl for a new Zelda game be better than having Zelda as the adventurer?
It seems like everyone gets a hard-on from taking away already-established male characters and turning them into girls instead of improving the female characters we already have.
There already is a female Link. Her name is Zelda.
Seriously I don't understand why we need genderbent characters when we have perfectly serviceable characters that could fit the role already available.
It's basically saying that the only way to have a strong female character is to turn a male character female, which is just not true.
To be fair Q's specials are almost identical to Balrog's who is coming soon after release.
Maybe we'll see him with a revamped moveset in the second wave of extra characters, seeing as we're getting other SF3 veterans like Urien and Alex in the first wave.