You were never going to see another Sunset Overdrive game anyways. It flopped. 1.6 million units for an AAA game that was advertised as much as it was is abysmal. Which is why Insomniac finally formalized their long running relationship with Sony. It was obvious that there wasn't an audience for their games on other platforms and so they only stood to gain from the merger.
Sony has owned Spiderman since 1998, and in that time there has been constant Spiderman games for all platforms. Pretty much all of them flopped.
Except they never announced Sunset Overdrive 2 for Xbox. It's an entirely different situation. Bethesda feels bad about the issue because they announced Starfield for Playstation and players on that platform have expected to be able to play it for years.
'Where is the Bloodborne sequel? Where is Demon’s Souls 2?'
You do realize Sony doesn't own FromSoftware, right? They own the IPs in question, but they can't force them to make a sequel.
>Rogue Galaxy 2? The Order 1886 sequel?
Both were critical and commercial flops. Why would Sony make a sequel for franchises the bulk of their players had no interest in?
Personally, I don't really care. Bethesda titles have always been an afterthought on Playstation and have ran like shit on the platform. Their focus has always been on PC and Xbox. That being said, making a title that was previously announced as multiplatform years ago exclusive is bad form.
This is the same site that gave Cyberpunk an 8/10. They aren't exactly on top of things.
Thing is, in the interview he says that the contract they made with Activision made sure that couldn't happen. The problem was that Bungie's execs were more interested in money than anything else, and willingly went along with what Activision wanted.
Destiny was originally supposed to be a third person fantasy game. However, early on in development Bungie realized they had no idea how to make one, and defaulted back to what they did know.
Except his interview shows the actual problem was with Bungie's execs, and not with Activision. They weren't required by any measure to let Activision have any say, but they choose to go along with it probably because it meant more money for them. Plus, given how the game has gone since they separated, it's pretty obvious that the biggest problem with Bungie and Destiny is Bungie itself.
It's $20 more, not double. On top of that, you people act like nothing has changed graphically between the 3DS games and SwSh. This is why people call you childish.
Except people have been calling out the shitty translations for months since the interview came out.
Except they never actually claimed that, and it was just a shitty translation of a Famitsu interview spread around by the community. You're getting outraged over nothing. It's kind of sad.
Except there was no 'lie'. The claim was ripped from a badly translated Famitsu interview, and they were talking about how new models and animations had to be made for the Dynamax forms, which every single Pokemon in the game has.
Annnd I couldn't care less. The reality is that only the super hardcore crowd cares about this, and most players buy a new Pokemon game to actually play with new Pokemon. Why waste time and effort pulling forward hundreds of models 90% of players aren't even going to use?
The writer is forgetting when talking about upgrades....that consoles are doing the same thing now. Pay $500 for the PS5, then 2 or 3 years later pay out another $500 if you want your graphics to keep getting better because optimization stopped being a thing this gen, and rather than pushing the limits of a console further and further like they did with the 360/PS3, they just scale it up on the newer hardware.
As for price...You could build a PC that more or less matched t...
It's blatantly false. Pretty much every 'competitor' with Steam in the past has had the same problem. They don't offer anything that would make customers consider switching. They don't offer better features, service, or prices. In fact, they are usually much worse in pretty much every way.
Epic is following the same path. Their store is terrible, they have horrible security and customer service, and despite taking much less of a cut than Steam and promi...
Dude...That's crap. The stuff we've seen from Sword and Shield looks significantly better than anything from the 3DS games.
If you don't see the difference between this model
https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/ne...
and that
2428d ago 6 agree9 disagreeView comment
Pretty much sums up my biggest issue with it. I found a lot of the criticism to be overblown, but the base gameplay is just...boring. The guns don't really have any impact and I didn't really find them satisfying to use, the abilities are better but they have too many cooldowns. Throw in a total lack of enemy variety and shitty AI and it's just meh.
From my experience they followed the same formula that made the original so boring to me while adding some new bells and whistles. You have a HQ that needs to be repaired with people who have to be recruited to get everything running smoothly again. Then you have to take care of comically evil factions, who I found to be even more ridiculous than those found in the original.
The cost of game development has skyrocketed over the last two generations. Big AAA titles at the beginning of the PS3/360 era cost around 20-30 million dollars to make. By the end of it, development costs had almost doubled if not tripled in some cases. Nowadays, it isn't uncommon for big AAA games to go well over the 100 million dollar mark with some getting near 200 million. Developers and publishers offset the rising costs with shit like MTX. Given that PS exclusives like R&C don&...