Not a fan of giving remasters such high scores it just encourages more milking of old games which should be offered to us free or if not make new games.
Looks a hell of a lot better than The Order at least.
It's had a couple of trailers at E3 and is a half price game from an indie dev and that is about the total amount of hype it has gotten. All other media has been by Undead Labs themselves and fans of the game. There has been no hype whatsoever for this game from MS but it's fans are very vocal as they enjoyed it a great deal.
Now expectations from non-fans has been high because of the console wars and fanboy reasons but that is it.
If it's anything like the first game it will be a great game. From all the gameplay I have seen (and they dropped a lot recently) it looks better in every way. May be a marmite game though (love it or hate it) as there is a lot of player and base management involved much like XCOM and it isn't the straightforward 3rd person shooter with a story which a lot of people who never played the first tend to think it is.
The only thing they could improve in my eyes from the last game is a better story. The old McGuffin that grants you immortality is so overused in fiction and legend that it failed to capture my imagination in any way. Gameplay, tombs and the hub based open worlds were great though and I didn't think there were too many cut scenes rather the story they were telling wasn't that interesting (racing against evil secret society that wants immortality device to do bad stuff with characters ...
Good luck Coalition, half the comments here say make it more like the original and the other half are saying it needs to be completely new and different. This is the same conversation for every game that becomes a series. The last game was very good and I enjoyed it, played it a bit safe but that is what I would expect for a new team to the series. For the next game they need to stretch their legs and try more new things sure but the series doesn't need a total reboot or made into a compl...
I know the malaria, cliffs and auto spawning was a pain in FC2 but at least it wasn't holding your hand and it was trying to be different. I think FC3, 4, Primal and 5 are so cookie cutter in their design. They aren't "bad" games as I have played them all and got some enjoyment but the sense of difference and originality has died on the Ubisoft alter. After AC Origins I was hoping for a big re design of the FC series but was disappointed.
If you haven't played on one then no it wouldn't appear to be worth it but if you have and also have a good 4K HDR TV there is no going back. It really is night and day for enhanced games compared to the S.
Good to read a different view on this game as the pile on is full force on this game from sites like NG4.
Who actually paid full price for this? I played it using the free Gamepass 2 week trail or if for some reason you didn't get that it is still only $10 on Gamepass. People are making out that it was full price and that was it, people need to do some research. I thought it was a great deal as it cost me no money and $10 would have been a great deal as well but $60 yeah not so much..
The writers argument is that GaaS like Gamepass rely on game longevity to make more profit as single player games are usually play once and then move on so if you are into multiplayer games at a low price you will keep subscribed to Gamepass and MS will in the long run make more money. Now this argument relies on 2 things the first is that games like SoT's are actually good games that people want to keep playing and the answer to that is unknowable until they have been out a month or 2, t...
Most sensible comment here
I have given up on the Far Cry series, they are always the same except in different locations. I thought this one might be different but it doesn't sound like it. Will wait for reviews to confirm but looks like I will be saving my money for something more original.
Bad Mojo by a long way but after that would be games like Firewatch, What Remains of Edith Finch, Rime, Inside, Candleman.Very few if any AAA's will do it because you have usually murdered a truck load of people who had nothing to do with the initial tragedy by the time you come to a poignant bit so it's all a bit hypocritical
Depends. If it's something like EA Access, Game Pass, episodic games like Hitman or Telltale games or cloud streaming services done right and at a good price then I am all for it. If it is cosmetic MT's I don't care, if it is MT's that change gameplay, random lootboxes or MMO's that gouge I hate them. To blindly say you hate games as a service doesn't help, I try to look at it objectively not emotionally..
There are a lot of comments here saying no it isn't because of the lack of games which is debatable but outside of what the article is about. The article is actually about whether it is worth the upgrade from the S or if you want an Xbox is the X worth the extra money. Any comments should be about what the X offers over the S and whether it is worth the price, any other discussion is irrelevant and makes me suspect it is just pure fan boy hatred of a console they don't like rather tha...
They are fine if they are cosmetic but if they affect gameplay in any way they are not - simple.
I can forgive graphics and performance I mean Evil Within 2 for instance has pretty bad graphics and performance but is still a fun game to play but I can't forgive terrible gameplay and from what I've seen online the gameplay for DW9 is terrible,
This is becoming like the @metoo movement, famous guys treat women terribly and then all men who dare to even make eye contact with a female are lumped in with them.
My line in the sand is are MT's changing how the game is played, cosmetics don't change how quickly or how well you play the game so they are alright by me. Slippery slope arguments don't make sense, you have to draw a line in the sand or even selling DLC would be a problem for you or even selling a game for ...
Terrible predictions from Gamespot it's like they have no idea, where's the new Fable?