@tyasia0 "I wouldn't give it a score. I would just say they failed to do what they needed to do. The goal was to show a new console which they did but then they failed at showing why people should buy it. And I feel like they failed in a most ironic way that should have been obvious to them. They are trying to prove that X can do all these fancy graphics but then they show low poly indie games. It should have been obvious that was the wrong thing to show. And it's not that the ga...
That sounds like a fair and balanced response to me. So I guess that MS has a lot of home work to get done after this year's E3 is over.
I got the part about the lack of first party offering (s), and I agree with that to 100%. However, I don't agree with the statements that the show was 100% crap, because that's a far stretch for sure.
@Gaming_Cousin "Bethesda was the worst"
- That I can agree on, then EA (imo).
I honestly thought that they had learned something from the last time that they brought up the paid mods part, but no...
I don't know if you watched the comments for each Youtube video, but the fans trashed pretty much every single video (the salt was all over the place, and rightfully so).
That's Jim's OP, not mine ;) I would say that it's a 3/5 show at least (I'm a PC gamer, Jim is a Xbox user). So, what grade would you give MS E3 event?
@Gaming_Cousin "It was a bad show"
- So, what grade would you give it then? 2/5?
That I can agree on. So that was a poor move by MS for sure.
If MS's show was bad, then I'm curious to know what they thought about EA's and Bethesda's show (which imo, sucked pretty darn hard).
It's a +2,000 word long post, and yet you whine about the choice of the headline? Poor job? Really now? I'm not even a Xbox user, and still I got quite excited about the stuff that they show cased. So what would be a fair score then? 3/5, 2/5?
@Void000 "Cleve has been promising it for years, only to have it pushed back for micro-issues. I doubt this will ever see the light of day."
- Oh dear...That I had no idea about :S Christ, and here I thought that I would get to play the game during my vacation.
Really? So the 2017-07-07 release won't happen? :S
I sure hope not, because I (and others) have been waiting forever for a new Metroid game with Samus Aran in the lead.
@Eldyraen "Yeah, I didn't even think zelda the first time I saw it (haven't owned a Nintendo console since GC until Switch so my Zelda comparisons are older) but reading reviews just made that sort of comparison a simple way to understand what it could be even if it's not the whole picture. Sort of like when Torchlight came out and people called it a Diablo like game. It's close enough to get some idea what to expect if you never heard of the new title before."
@Testfire "I flipped myself, a couple months before launch I trashed it and Nintendo, my comment history reflects that. I could not be happier though, the portability aspect FOR ME is the best thing."
- I just felt like, what could I even do with it? Because I already own an iPad and iPhone. So at the time, I didn't feel like the Switch was my cup of tea. However, over time I change my mind about it. I know right? That was a good move by Nintendo with no doubt...
People refer to the game as a "Zelda-clone", but that doesn't really do the game fair. As you could call pretty much every FPS game ever made for a Wolf 3D or Doom clone (I think you get my point). Nevertheless, yes, Oceanhorn does indeed remind me a lot about Wind Waker, but it's still a game that stands on its own legs with its own unique set of features and content.
True, it might even be a consol seller as well ;) (fun fact, Sharn just sold his PSVR just so that he could buy a Switch + Zelda :P).
I think it was a matter of how much money per sold unit they would get, but I could be wrong.
Not as far as I can tell. I also believe that they delayed their show with several hours :S