I know. The only reason why I list Bend as the most likely candidate is because Days Gone's success as an IP is still up in the air, and they're the only only studio besides Naughty Dog with any history with the franchise.
I have to agree here. This game was almost perfect and so ahead of it's time. The only real flaw was it was extremely short for a Zelda title. I'm still sad we never got that rumored Fierce Deity game.
Naughty Dog never handed anything over. They never owned the Crash IP; they simply made it. The IP was owned by Vivendi Universal, who was later bought out by Activision, hence why Activision now owns the name. Naughty Dog is a property of Sony.
To be fair, Golden Abyss was a solid game, especially seeing as it was portable. Just sucks it didn't have any kind of multiplayer, and a pretty crappy ending. The rest of the package was good though.
If they do more Uncharted, the only studio that could potentially continue it is Sony Bend. Guerilla is working on Horizon as a franchise, and should stick to that, Sucker Punch is doing their new IP and should stick to it, Santa Monica is doing God of War, and I don't think Supermassive has the resources. Honestly, if ND has no intention on doing more after LL, then that should be it. The franchise had an awesome run and it's time for ND to move on to 100% TLoU 2 focus, as well as a ...
I'm detecting sarcasm, but the first Knack was actually a pretty solid platformer, and the second one looks fun too.
Destiny is basically the World of Warcraft of PS/ XB. If you can't see why it's shitty to have spent all that time grinding and playing to get those exotics, then you're not even a Destiny player and your opinion is irrelevant. I'm perfectly fine with Destiny 2 being a full priced $60, but just abandoning the first one all together completely kills the game's whole concept. This isnt CoD or BF where dumping your unlocks after a year or two is just natural because it's ...
No. No it doesn't. Destiny's characters were built around the armor and weapons that player spends countless hours collecting. This is just Bungie being money grubbing hacks and screwing over the players that spent all that time and money on the first Destiny. If they transferred weapons and armor over, and then said you had to reach a certain level before you could use them, that'd be perfectly reasonable, but no. They're throwing a big ol' F U to their player base. So as...
Probably for the same reason that Nintendo is getting away with selling 1-2 Switch for $50, even though it crap quality warrants it being free. Nintendo thinks we're all idiotic slaves and we're supposed to be honored just to be able to buy their product, so why they do all this nickel and dime-ing for a cheap faulty tablet.
Can't say you're wrong, but I find that hard to believe. Horizon's story was insanely deep and the ending opened the sequel up to a lot of possibilities as to where things can go from here on out.
Unfortunately I couldn't play the Witcher 3 for very long because the game's really crappy combat system really pushed me out of the experience. It felt like I was a sloth trying to play whack-a-mole. Everything else about it seemed pretty damn good though.
On Horizon's front, the combat was pretty much perfect, and the open world just so lush, detailed, and beautiful. The machines are incredible just to look and really fun to fight.
In this...
The only problem with bringing Zelda into Switch debates is that it's not a game that requires Switch. You can still play Zelda and get the same experience on the Wii U, albeit at a slightly lower resolution. If people keep using Zelda to defend Switch until Mario comes out, then the console isn't going to have any opportunity to stand on its own, and it will surely go the way of the Wii U once the Zelda hype goes away.
I mean yeah... by no means do I even remotely care about Switch, but this is an unfair comparison. I don't believe Switch is going nearly the same level of an amazing library that PS4 will have by the time both end their life cycles, but it's still crappy to compare a launch lineup to a 3+ year one.
Uncharted 4 deserved it, beyond the shadow of a doubt. Phenomenal game.
While I don't believe the device is going to sell nearly as well as PS4, I don't think it's fair to pawn it off as a failure for any reason yet. It has appeal, and I see no reason why it can't at least outsell Wii U and GC. Nintendo just has to get some real support for it.
I think it's pretty safe to say the game will get a large expansion just like Blood and Wine. As far as when, it's way too soon to ask.
Knowing that's what the game is for becomes difficult when Nintendo is charging $50 for it. $50 is too close to the asking price of a brand new AAA title; not a good price for what is supposed to be Switch's version of Wii Sports. This game should have been bundled with the console. Nintendo is just being a bunch of cheapskates as usual.
I kindof hope it will fail because it could mean Nintendo finally going third party. They'd make serious bank by putting their titles on PlayStation and Xbox.
That's no good. I just finished the game and didn't encounter a single glitch on my entire play through.
@Neco Because Sony was the publishing partner with Vivendi Universal. Naughty Dog was simply contracted to develope it. Take Insomniac for example; they make Ratchet & Clank, Resistance, and Spider-Man, but they don't own any of those IP's; Sony does. They can't take those games and put them on other hardware. Notice how if you look at the classic PS1 Crash game cases, they have Sony's publishing stamp. Arguably, Sony still partially owns the original 5 Crash games, which ...