That's what they doing currently. Dragon age was semi open world. I'd almost call it open world.
Wii u was a lot better than the wii. Less focus on motion controls and I actually enjoyed the gamepad. And you don't need powerful hardware to make good games.
not in my house.
This is a silly argument that can be contered with another silly statement.
I just got into starbound a 2d indie game and it's my favourite game I've played for a long while. Better in my opinion than triple As.
It doesn't need to be best graphics and presentation for you to have a blast.
Super meat boy, bro force are crazy fun. Games like gravity rush are awesome and your missing out.
I'd argue PlayStation and Nintendo. Nintendo has the classics. You can't call yourself a gamer without playing Zelda or Mario.
Though like you said Nintendo is my second pick. But in my opinion a needed second pick. Especially now that their mostly done with silly motion controls.
Don't like season passes don't buy them. There's nothing wrong with it. It's just out of convience for those that want all the dlc in the future without hassle.
I prefer to go through the extra time to purchase each pack individually even if it's more money.
So it's only a lose if you hate season passes but than for some reason keep buying them
Gravity rush 2 is a sleeper hit. Nioh and Nier both look to appeal to more people.
Nioh is comming off the souls hype so no question it was going to be popular.
I wonder if botts every now how terribly botty they are?
Like could anyone fall for something so obvious. Obviously people do as people still do this. Jesus Christ bless those peoples souls
It's no versitile than any other engine probably. Some people think the engine makes the game. It's the artists and programmers that make the game. The engine just makes it easier to develop. Because of build in things in them. Some older engines don't have all of the built in features as the newer or more popular ones.
@kevnb which is why their changing their core gameplay?
The foundation actually changed more than people thought. It used to be you could stick on one planet. The foundation doubled the minerals and made lots of biome and system specific elements. Meaning already it went from "stick to a good planet or system", to "now you have to explore the galaxy to get all upgrades for things"
To me this made the core a lot better. Playing on survi...
Doesn't mean a game bombed in reviews and players doesn't mean the game can't be enjoyed.
I've yet to play a game I didn't enjoy on some level.
That why their improving it?
id rather then make the base game funner than worry about multiplayer
Ummm okay? Their are great mobile games out their. Don't need to generalize. Nintendo has also been making sure their mobile games have quality.
Or maybe your just playing the lifeless open world games?
Open mission was great. They sacrificed story for gameplay. I complely don't mind that sense mgs story's always was confusing.
You can look at mgs4. 3-4 had a open deseign
@edmix I'd disagree fallout 3 was a thirty hour game after doing everything possible. Fallout new Vegas was way better in every way.
Neither appeal to you? Or you don't want to branch out from what your comfortable with?
Yea no if you watched pewdiepie you'd realize the media took something out of context and blotted it up