They gave best RPG to Witcher 3 DLC over Dark Souls 3... that shows the quality of their selections.
So you're fine with them making up random stuff for the 4th game in a series? Yes 2&3 were also generic, but they didn't feel forced. How on earth does UC4 have the best storytelling? It does nothing better than the others to earn that statement. For example: I understand introducing a grappling hook, but why have it introduced when he was a kid? That's a huge plot hole, as that would have been helpful many times in previous games.
To add to the story woes,...
The story felt forced and made up specifically for the game, the brother wasn't mentioned at all in 1-3. Very generic story. Before I beat it, I was talking with someone who had beat it, and he was saying how great the story was. I had barely played it, and I told him what I thought was going to happen in the story. I got it exactly right.
The story was so generic I could almost predict exactly what was going to happen. No Chloe and Cutter was slightly disappointing also.
Gears 4, Uncharted 4, Recore, Quantum Break, No Man's Sky, Deus Ex, Probably Final Fantasy XV. Ugh every game ends up disappointing these days.
EA's the one you should be complaining to, Don't they have a requirement for all their games to have some form of multiplayer?
AAA is related to the budget towards the game, not the scores it receives.
Yeah Gamespot sucks. But the scores are slightly disappointing, all the trailers showed it was going to be one of the best games in recent years.
I agree with the last two points. We'll have to see how everyone else scores FFXV to determine if this is a troll review.
I thought Infinite was good, and that video didn't really prove anything.
You can pick apart almost every game in existence, and make them look worse than they are. I could do the same with the first Bioshock. Sometimes you have to take games for what they are, even if they aren't as good as other games in their series.
Since you're clearly trying to ruin the game for others, how about you tell us some of your favourite games for us to ruin? ...
They don't really feel that similar to me. Uncharted is full on linear, which makes good action and flow. Tomb Raider has open hubs and RPG elements. Too similar? I think there's room for both.
I haven't played much ROTR, but the 2013 reboot was rubbish to me. Clunky controls, underdeveloped RPG stuff, boring hubs. But it certainly felt different enough to Uncharted.
I'd take an H3 Anniversary over just about any game released these days.
That certainly showed it off better.
I don't see much of a difference honestly... I didn't see the HQ and LQ signs at first, and I was debating which was which.
Martial arts? More like the worst boxing ever. That was so disappointing.
But for it to be the difference between that one being considered a rip-off, and this one to be good value? Doesn't seem right to me.
I get that the campaign's supposed to be good, but 4 hours doesn't add much to the replay value.
I don't get it, people bashed the hell out of the first Titanfall for being online only. But now that the new one has a 4 hour story... it's suddenly all good?
You could tell the game was broken beyond repair just by playing the beta. Trash
Ratchet was good, but I want more pure platformers. The first Jak is a good example, and it still holds up well to this day.
Because they are charging for map packs, this is wrong. They could have had them as cool unlockables... But nope, they charge for them. Not to mention they're practically pay to win, which is unacceptable no matter the game.
Guys, I'm not saying it's exclusive to Xbox One. It isn't. The whole point is that it doesn't matter if you call it an exclusive, it's still only on one console, so it has the same purpose of one.
Who's gonna buy a PC for Gears 4? No one. They'll buy an X1. All this cross play means is PC owners can now buy these games. And perhaps some people would want both systems, and enjoy that a few games work on both.
Indeed, literally no one was asking for this.