So why not just ignore the story?
So because the base game is no longer available, that means its going Free-to-play? That's a mighty big assumption to make.
The point that irks me though, what happens when 2-3 years down the line gamers that buy this device end up buying a 4K television? They'll end up needing to purchase a new console to go with it just to reap the real benefits of that TV, because your PS4 Slim will be outdated. It's just a bit odd for a company that in the past has been very forward thinking (almost to a fault).
@Eonjay I updated the article to clarify what I meant clearly - not to satisfy your self-approved nonsense.
I also note you haven't answered my posts points
Aiming for a lower price-point doesn't mean the console isn't above critique for its lack of foresight. Sony is pushing 4K Blu-Rays, streaming content and TV's - yet the console that will probably sell the highest volumes moving forward won't work optimally with these.
Does that sound like a logical well thought out plan? Of course it doesn't. Sometimes the lowest pricepoint isn't the best.
Hardware dedicated 4K upscaling produces better results than relying on TV's to do it, in particular with games. Given Sony's strong commitment to 4K, not putting it in the console in any form is awkward and undermines the point of the 4K ecosystem they're building. But of course we can't critique that because pointing out Sony's lack of long-term thinking upsets their fans....
Can all these questions come with salad?
But seriously, if we can't be critical of a game that's worthy of it, there's not much point in us being here.
I'd imagine they'd also want Skylanders Crash to sell well too. The problem is it puts fans between a rock and hard place.
The problem is that if the Skylanders set doesn't sell well, Activision could turn around and point to that as reason why Crash isn't worth the investment.
I just it a real shame they've not shown anything of the remakes yet.
Co-op zombies even!
Or lists that are 20 pages long and have 2 sentences.
Given how ridiculously delayed SC has been and how much money it's taken, I would expect it to be much better. Terrible article title
It looks so clunky....
Indeed but when you price a game at AAA levels, people will compare it to those experiences. And have certain expectations when entering.
True. I just think a lot of the negative reaction could have been curtailed if they'd marketed and priced it more to reflect the status of the game.
Given how much hype it had, it wouldn't surprise me if the decision was made on the back of that.
To be fair until a week before launch, I'd argue no one really knew what made the game tick. If nothing else, Murray and the team at Hello Games didn't sell the features of the game or set the narrative very well. I hope it's something they build on for their next project.
I fully respect the work Hello Games put in. It's just the way the mechanics don't gel to create a cohesive experience that trips people up. The worst part of the game (that I've played) is when combat comes into the equation.
I respectfully disagree.
When I wrote the "No Man’s Sky Shouldn’t Have Been A Full-Price Game" piece it was because I was playing the game and after about 15-20 hours, I'd come to the feeling that it should have been priced closer to Journey. This is because I felt the experience was comparable and that was a point I wanted to articulate in my article. I do that by discussing the points that made me reach that conclusion; which includes the negative aspects. ...