Glad you liked it! This column will be posted every Thursday.
Yea! I'm the EIC now and we're in the middle of a big revival effort. Moving our coverage away from just AAA stuff to doing a lot of indie coverage, new shows and we've merged Gameumentary's documentary content over into Escapist as well.
Lots of cool stuff on the way.
@-Foxtrot
State of Decay was always supposed to have multiplayer. They wanted to make Class3 (State of Decay) and then a persistent world MMO with the next State of Decay. Class3 was supposed to be a prelude of sorts to this larger MMO type game.
Crackdown, if I remember correctly, also had coop (maybe it was Crackdown 2) all I remember is getting my friend to the top of the agency tower just to kick him off the top because the ragdoll physics were hilari...
@-Foxtrot,
Nah, I don't really have time for clickbait when I'm working on documentaries and doing content that's actually worth a damn instead of spending my time commenting here.
Not sure why I bothered to comment in the first place, really, just every article I see you comment in you're basically negative about everything for one reason or another.
I don't get it. If you're so cynical about games...why do you even bother playing them. Sheesh. Can't something just be cool or interesting?
@Rainslacker
I get why someone would see it as clickbait, but it wasn't. He literally says, “It’s a weird thing to say that leaving Naughty Dog was one of the greatest things to happen in my career."
Here's the original title.
The Last of Us Director Says Leaving Naughty Dog Was “Greatest Thing” to Happen to his Career
If you misconstrue that as clickbait, then you don't know what the definition of cl...
@TheKingKratos,
How is it flaming the fanboys lol. The story is about a positive thing on this guys' career. You just took it as a negative because you assumed from the title it was negative and that got you to click on it.
That's all I was saying lol, people here read a title and just assume a story is negative and then call it clickbait. The title got you interested to click on the story, so it did it's job. The story gives the rest of his quote context by actually giving out the full statement that was made. Nothing wrong with it, but people here already have their preconceived notions about what's negative and what's positive. There's literally a quotable statement in the title, not sure ...
Nothing really misleading in the title, just need to read the article to get the context behind the quote.
What? Jeez, what a ridiculous article, also there's spoilers unmarked in there so be careful.
This reminds me a lot about Night in the Woods. Definitely interested in checking it out.
Horizon didn't need to be a major system seller for Sony. They have a larger install base already, all they need to do is keep creating great looking games and more people will pick up the console.
Microsoft needs to start doing the same to increase sales of their platform. I don't prefer one over the other. If I didn't own an Xbox One and Microsoft showed off a great looking game that I really wanted to play, I'd buy an Xbox. Same for PS4. Same for Switch.
...
Hm? Why couldn't they have both? Horizon: Zero Dawn was a major seller for Sony, and a big reason people have been flocking to the PS4 is because of those system-seller exclusives they can't get anywhere else.
It's clarified in the article that there's no mainline Halo entry this year.
That was my intention :)
@Thorstein
Really have no clue what you're going on about. Did you even read the article?
I criticized Stapleton's intentions of using a score to signal a technical issue with Prey, when their own breakdown of the number doesn't even align with what his review said about the game, which was also his defense of using the score. The article isn't about critics being criticized, like at all...I'm not even really defending critics with the...
How is it coming off as whiny that I'm asking people actually read the context of the article rather than just make an irrelevant statement off of the title?
The summary was used as an introduction to tell readers the relevance of the topic, as it should be, otherwise it might as well be a TL;DR and nobody would read it anyways.
Good thing the article isn't about that :) It's about people's unrealistic expectations of reviewers and how scores dilute what people write.
Also reached out to Chirstopher about this, to which I got a reply that they're "curating" content on their own now, so the approval process from users is pretty much meaningless right now and they're not updating guidelines to reflect what's acceptable and what's not.
At this point, given up trying to communicate with them in any capacity. It's never helpful and usually antagonistic no matter how you approach it.
Also they&...