I have no interest in 'unbelievable player counts'. If anything, I want player counts to be reeled back in to 24 vs 24 or 32 vs 32, so maps can be normal BF sized again, and you as a lone soldier can actually feel like you're making a difference in a match.
These devs seem to keep thinking bigger is better, and they just keep expanding, while losing what made us love Battlefield in the first place ....
We just want well-balanced classes, cool ...
Pretty sure I'd have as much fun (or more, because patches/updates) with Ratchet and Clank when I buy it for 20 bucks 18 months from now, as I would if I'd buy it Day 1.
Currently just making my way through my backlog. Once a local store has PS5 in stock and I come across it, I'll pick it up, but no real rush otherwise to get it.
Not waiting for a 'Pro' version cause that could be years away, but I'd like to wait on a version with a different color scheme, perhaps a bigger SSD included, and maybe a game bundled in.
With new games priced at 70 bucks (70 Euro even in Holland), I'm in no rush to pick any of them up at launch anyway.
Same. I just wait for Complete Editions. Just bought MK11 Ultimate this week for 25 bucks. Great game, great purchase, but never would have bought it barebones.
Really hope IF they release a remake, they'll include an option for the Japanese voices this time.
The question is very simple; Do you trust Sony/Playstation to treat you and your purchases respectfully?
For me, the answer a few years ago, was yes. Now, I'm not so sure. More expensive games, dropping stores (PS3/Vita), dropping some big talented studios like bricks, etc.
Also, I'm still extremely bitter about how they treated Driveclub and the studio behind it.
Even Everybody's Golf's studio will now be gone to Apple ...
It just wasn't FUN for me to play. I play Battlefield for the Conquest, but the maps were just a bit too large, the squads were a bit too large, and worst of all, matches just take up far too much time, so where normally you get 2-3 matches in an hour, here the big Conquest matches could last 40+ minutes, maybe longer, and that's a big investment of time when you're just not having a lot of fun or on a mediocre team or map.
It just never really clicked for me. ...
Well, if you're gonna adjust for inflation, you also have to realize that $60 20 years ago bought you a whole lot more than $75 buys you now. The value of your money has gone down, because costs (rent, food, mobility, education, healthcare, etc etc) has gone up way more than your income, so for most folks, your disposable income is now less than it would have been 20 years ago.
In short, you got way more bang for your buck back then. More coffee, more donuts, more comic...
Would love to see this team doing a TMNT beat 'm up (side-scrolling). Their character models and move-sets for the 4 turtles were fantastic.
I wish Dirt 5 was anything close to Motorstorm and the amazing Driveclub, but sadly I really didn't like it. It basically took the worst parts of the Dirt series (the Xtreme stuff), dropped the great stuff (the actual arcade Rally racing), and depth-wise it's almost like a mobile game. Drive on some easy tracks, get some points, unlock the next uninspired wide track, etc.
It doesn't even have replays, which is just beyond ridiculous, TBH.
If we're talking Remakes, might I suggest Chrono Trigger ... ? Preferably with a cell-shaded style which will do justice to the original and Toriyama's look.
@Boing; Not sure about other countries, but here in Holland the XBO Series X (and probably S) has been consistently sold out and thus unavailable since launch.
1943 was perfection, but sadly only 3 proper maps. Battlefield 3 was okay, Battlefield 4 was a bit better, and they kinda lost what Battlefield was all about with the newer games.
I really don't want that many players in a match. It's too much, the role and thus importance you can play will be too small, thus insignificant, the maps will have to be too big to fit all those folks in, so there will be an even bigger reliance on vehicles, and matches will mostly last too long again.
It's just too big, too much, too long, and in the end you'll have half-empty servers and not too much later you'll have empty servers. Nobody is gonna in...
Battlefield keeps trying to be more like Call of Duty or Battle Royale games, while I just want Battlefield to be like Battlefield; medium-sized maps, conquest game-mode (5 flags), and teams which are 24 vs 24, perhaps 32 vs 32.
Really wish Sega would release a new Virtua Tennis. We haven't had any decent tennis game this gen, sadly. Doesn't even need real world players, as far as I'm concerned. Hell, I'd prefer fictional characters and locations.
I'd settle for a remaster double-pack of Burnout 3 and SSX3. Throw in NBA Street v3 if they want to be cute.
Call it The FrEAsome.
Best racing game last gen for me, without a doubt, is Driveclub. Perfect controls where you always feel in control, while challenging times and opponents to beat. It just always feels FUN to play, even when you don't win. It also has the best track-design, and the graphics are STILL mind-blowing.
The article mentions Dirt 5. I liked some of the older Dirt games, but Dirt 5 sadly ditched the whole rally aspect completely. To top it off, it doesn't even have replays, ...
Such a shame these are the inferior Sigma games, instead of Black and 2.
Some games can take 60-80+ hours to go through, and if you’d force a reviewer to quickly rush through that to meet a close deadline, that demand in itself would also affect the experience and thus the score.
I worked at a gaming magazine many years ago, and I believe the requirement back then was 8-10 hours for writing a review. Obviously you’d want reviewers to finish a game but it’s just not a very realistic demand for many games, plus for most games you can form an objec...