I just can't see how Sinner could be a good game. I love From games but if they made one that was just bosses with no levels to explore I'd be highly sceptical, if they'd also outsourced it to some knock off devs then I'd have to give it a miss. The fact that you get weaker as the game progresses is the rotten cherry on the shitty cake.
Hit the nail on the head with a sledgehammer there, bang on (but fair) criticism of the company.
Don't know why people are so against the idea, for me the perfect Fallout or Elder Scrolls would be a game designed for a single player but with the option to have co-op players drop in to fight alongside you.
Forget PVP unless it's a bespoke arena mode and just let people play with their friends if they wish to do so. If not then it's the same game but solo. What's not to like?
Can they right the ship? They'll need to wipe out bugs and performance issues first and I don't have much confidence in them to do that. With a SP game yeah to an extent but I don't know if they can fix this game on a technical level.
After that it's a case of pouring resources into the game and producing quality extra content and DLC on the reg. That's something they could do in theory but it's a huge task considering how bare bones the game is.
This article would have a great point if you could only kill women in the game...seeing as that's not the case it's the kind of BS that sets feminism back because it makes them look like fools and turns people against their cause, because naturally there's a backlash whenever people talk rubbish and state it as fact.
I'd usually think that, new game modes and quests etc, but I can't see them ever sorting out the technical issues. They eventually managed to make Skyrim playable after a couple of patches but this is online and a different ball game.
The nukes looked alright especially the initial explosion, not so much the cloud, but who cares what they look like if they crash the server.
Something sad about Arthur ken dolling it. Not exactly sexy that's for sure.
I counted 22 times, which is about 20 more times than necessary seeing as we know what game they're talking about from the article title.
Or as they would have put it:
I counted 22 times that Fallout 76 was mentioned, which is about 20 more mentions of Fallout 76 than necessary seeing as we know what game (Fallout 76) they're talking about from the article title, which is of course Fallout 76.
It's ok I'll wait.
I'm immensely skeptical about this game but I love FF7 and hope it does it justice. It just seems like the development process has been too fractured and drawn out for that to happen but I'd be very happy to be proven wrong.
Still can't believe they're going to wheel this ancient engine out for ES6. I hope they change their mind about that if this game gets savaged for technical issues.
This game is going to be fantastic. If they can make the quests interesting and fit in half decent shooting and driving mechanics it'll be a great game. If they can surpass that and everything I've seen says they will do then it'll be something really special.
People being nice in an online game? It won't last.
I don't think it looks much good as it is but often games like this are bare bones at the start and after a couple of years have a lot more going on as well as having the launch issues ironed out. It is Bethesda so who knows on that one.
More interesting quests would be what's needed by the sounds of it. Escort this, shoot that. Meh. It's the stories and characters you uncover from exploration that make Fallout a great series.
Is an esports coach like Cartman's mum in the WoW episode?
I haven't played either yet although I will be getting both, but it seems very clear to me from what I've read on here and elsewhere that out of RDR2 and GOW people have enjoyed GOW a lot more, and isn't that what's most important?
I agree that on the whole they are a good company and you do get great value for money, I've enjoyed all their games so far.
However I've enjoyed them despite the engine and not because of it. I can't understand how someone who likes their games wouldn't want to see what they could do with a modern game engine. ES6 could be a launch game for the PS5 and we'll be playing it on an engine developed for a 2002 game. You can polish a turd as carefully as you...
Come off it, there's a bit of a difference between not changing your engine for every game and not changing it since 2002.
I'm sure it is cheaper for them. Good for them. Not good for the consumer.
The one player in the world with no technical issues, apparently. It probably would be an ok game in that case.