I liked Doom's smaller scale and pacing and felt Eternal went overboard on things and was markedly less enjoyable.

With that in mind, where does one think I'd rank Dark Ages?

As may have said before me, Remedy would be a banner PS Studios acquisition. They'd likely help strengthen the portfolio beyond their singular output as long as they were allowed to do as they please.

@Splat If you needed to rely on the map in Control, you weren't paying attention.

Also, in a game about traversing a weird, unknowable, deeply liminal building... where is the fun in relying on the map?

I say this as a designer who hates ***** interfaces. But Control's was, as I interpreted it, an aesthetic choice. It added to the ambiance and feeling of unease prevalent throughout - and key to - the experience.

@Robocod I dunno what gave you the impression D4 can't be played solo. It is 100% solo-able.

@aj21009 Yeah, I already have it on my phone. It's perfect for that format. It's one of those "mobile" games that make me defend them. Some games truly are great for mobile devices and prove it's the game/designer, not the platform that defines what is a "hardcore" game.

Balatro is great, but it's very much a "phone" game to me. Not something I'd sit down at my PS5 to play. But obviously, it's a great game for those that haven't gotten it yet.

I'm personally able to take Boltgun off my buy list now, so it's still a great month to me

@UltimateOtaku91 Which, again, is not a release date.

@PlatinumMikey A year is not a release date.

How can anyone consider it a delay? Rockstar never committed to a release date. The fact news coverage is treating this as a negative when NO ONE had confirmation of a release date before this and NOT a positive that we now got a release date confirmation is really odd to me.

I really like me some Borderlands (I fell out of love due to 3 - but Tiny Tina's was solid af). It's always bothered me that the entire storyline is based around a group of vault hunters - Tiny Tina's even had 2 allies talking to you the whole game as if they were there with you - and yet they've never explored the idea of making it a true squad-based game.

Why have they not crafted a story (and gameplay systems) that fleshed out all the 4 main vault hunters by having them in-game with you at all times? Build out some crew management controls a la Mass Effect or Dragonage and let me move allies around the battlefield and utilize everyone's skills and whatnot. That would be such an incredible change of pace and allow for a much deeper characterization of the player characters.

PLUS, the game is "built for co-op." Okay, that's cool, but not everyone can play with 3 friends at all times. Why not bring that zaniness to all players who want it? (I think retaining the option to play in a "classic" solo mode would be needed.)

THAT'S the biggest change I want to see them bring to the series. It'd completely shake things up for solo players but deliver the experience they're designing the whole game for, anyhow.

Besides that, I think what they showed looks reeeal good. Definitely more interested in this than I thought I'd be.

@AdamNovice Not when I played. It's built around 4-person co-op. As it says in the trailer, "play with bots" just means you're playing levels with AI teammates.

And the "campaign" is just a progression of levels. It's not a real story mode campaign like, say, Call of Duty.

@Blauwe_Chimay It's a mixture of tower defense and shooter (with a light feeling of MOBA to me). You and your teammates plop defense down and fight off waves of other toys. But the core mechanics were really ill-conceived imo and it resulted in a ton of frustrating games that just weren't fun.

I've had this on Switch since it came out and while it's a competent shooter, it's simply a really awful tower defense game. The mechanics just don't lend themselves to a fun time.

Maybe it's been improved since I last played, but there were core flaws in its design that made it really difficult to enjoy as a MOBA/tower defense/shooter fan. I figured it was right up my alley (love the aesthetic and general idea!) but it fell short in basically every regard.

One of my proudest platinums, for sure. Incredible game.

This looks like it was made for me and me alone. I am so excited for it.

I really wish Respawn would be allowed to push the envelope with Titanfall. Apex Legends just isn't it, imo.

The TF2 multiplayer was SO GOOD at making you feel like a small piece of a large scale conflict. Why are they not exploring more of that in the multiplayer space?

I honestly think something like a Titanfall: Warfare or something where the matches played almost akin to a MOBA (think Battleborn with mechs) or Battlefield's Rush mode would be BONKERS cool. You'd have the tight grunt skirmishes on the ground, building up to all out mania when Titans started being called in, at which point the battles would shift to mech on mech bananzas. Make it all about the push and pull of the battle over large spaces and... my goodness. I'd never play another shooter.

Looked more like a trailer for an anime than a game. Maybe they should try showing some game in their, uh, game trailer.

@Ward_ting I mean, I have never enjoyed a turn-based game whatsoever. I'm not sure "slightly more active turn-based" is worth it to me.

I wish, but I have never enjoyed turn-based games.

@B0udoir No, and defending the game with your anecdotal experience doesn't change the fact it's glitchy as hell on PS5 and has been for a while. There are loads of people who had issues with the cutscenes as I describe amongst other issues.

Sadly, it's not well optimized for the platform and if the dev can't support its game, it's not worth me supporting them imo. Not my problem nor yours.

@Lowdefal I can't forgive that stuff. It's every cutscene, every camera transition... Dropped frames, asset loading weirdness, etc. It's annoying and rips me out of things, especially since the game has so much dialog and mini cutscenes to go through. It's hard to ignore when nearly half the game literally highlights the least stable part of the package.

Actively playing it and it is a slog with all the visual glitches on PS5. Which sucks cause it's decent fun but all the glitches add up to a really subpar experience.

Between BG3 and this, I really wish I liked turn-based games.

@GoatFace04 It definitely didn't help that they didn't optimize the controls for controllers are launch and ended up with arguably the worst-feeling shooter ever designed. They shot themselves in the foot so hard with that game.

So was this show complete crap? I see literally no outlet posting any of the reveals. Must not have been good.

@Deadlyblack What's wild is that they sort of created the extraction shooter idea with Division's Dark Zone, if you think about it. And they have competent (if not great) multiplayer experiences in some of their shooters (like Ghost Recon), but instead of doing anything interesting and ahead of the curve, they waste millions of dollars and man loads of man hours just to show up late to the party.

They could have made a Division BR ages ago. Make it about regular people traversing an area and collecting loot and taking down NPCs for special "Division" tier gear. Matches would play out with great shooting and cover mechanics, and awesome sci-fi gear. It'd be like a BR with super powers, more or less. Plus, The Division's general TPS mechanics are some of the best in the business (if not the outright best), and the engine is pretty great.

They could have done something interesting in that space but they completely lack creative vision.

One of the most enjoyable things about BR games imo is that everyone is on an even playing field and that loot is randomized. I never once got truly deep into a BR game with hero shooter mechanics because of how awful they are at balance.

I think Apex got carried by the feel that Respawn brings to FPS games. They overcame the busted nature of hero balance, but only for so long.

It would be EXTREMELY on-brand for Ubisoft to be so damn late to the genre, though. Instead of creating ANYTHING new and exciting, they'll just copy someone else's homework, but do it worse and behind schedule.

And they wonder why they're failing so damn hard right now.

@Klone Those are two systems that don't really address a single point I raised, but thanks?

There's no way this approaches even Outlaws' sales numbers. Releasing this but not being able to put out a Mandalorian title is WILD to me.

The only thing that has me worried is the meta progression. I love the idea of an extraction shooter, but the brutal nature of not retaining ANYTHING when you fail is probably a huge part of why the genre has remained extremely niche.

I would have thought that, seeing that, and knowing how important player retention is, that Bungie would have done something to address that. Simply putting a colorful sci-fi coat of paint on a brutal gameplay loop is not necessarily how you grow a huge audience and push into untapped markets. It's like they're relying solely on their name/pedigree which... isn't as rosy as they probably think. What brings this game down may be the combined hubris of Bungie and Sony.

I would LOVE to see there be some sort of meta progression added, whether its a fraction of XP brought back to push some numbers higher or SOMETHING to make up for what will inevitably feel - to some - like an unfair or unforgiving round. No one truly likes wasting their time playing a game. If these matches truly result in next to nothing that pushes your account/character forward, than it means most players in-match will walk away frustrated. And there's a very small number of people who are okay with that long term. It'll be interesting to see how it FEELS to come close but fail, and whether they try and address that aspect of the game at all.

I think this looks dope. To each their own.

@Boxmonkey Same happened to me when I tried playing the one Warhammer arpg. I immediately uninstalled it. Never played a second of it.

It makes sense functionally when you are unlocking a feature like cross-save (like this will do in Marathon or that you see in Fortnite and many cross-atform shooters). But when a game functionally does not allow you to play AT ALL without creating a whole other account? F that noise.

Maybe Ubisoft didn't get ***** on because you could skip it and still play?

This makes sense, as Ubisoft has no clue how or why Siege is actually as popular as it is. So why try and make a sequel when they're incapable of recreating its magic?

I love the aesthetics for this so much I know I need to try it. I also really think the console space could use a solid extraction shooter. I REALLY hope they nail this and that they've learned from Destiny.

I am interested in this game because of its aesthetic. I hope they can nail a worthwhile extraction shooter for consoles.

They simply priced me out of consideration. I'm not going anywhere CLOSE to an $80 game. ***** THAT noise.

Too bad it's not very good. Lol

I mean, these weren't exactly heavy hitting franchises in today's day and age. It ALWAYS baffled me why these particular titles were chosen as the titles for Microsoft's proof of strategy. What did they expect? Did they think PS5 players were chomping at the bit for Penitent? (Was anyone, statistically speaking?)

You want to push units, then give PS gamers stuff they truly hunger for, the stuff that says, "Oh, wow. Xbox is taking this seriously." Give gamers Halo, Gears of War, and Forza. Those are the big IPs. Period.

If all they hand over are the titles Microsoft themselves don't put huge support behind, then why would PS gamers think they're getting anything of value?

You can vote with your wallet, surely, but you have to understand there were never many gamers in the market willing to open their wallet for these particular titles to begin with. It's like if Sony did this and the first games they ported were Patapon and The Order. It's a tepid release lineup and anyone saying otherwise is fooling themselves. A game can be critically well-received and still not have a place in the market. That's reality. Until we see Master Chief and Marcus Fenix on the PS Store, this will be half-assed/lackluster at best.

The fact they're releasing years-old titles at full price is another huge factor that they're not getting enough flack for.

I don't think people know what kind of game it is. Is it open world? What little they showed appeared to be supremely on-rails. That doesn't excite me as much, personally.

Any lack of buzz is on them for not being able to explain themselves.

@Absymbel Wait, for real? That game was awesome. This is even more exciting for me than before.

@Titntin Returnal was great, but the RNG elements for some of the trophies and stuff made it an absolute slog at times. I'm so proud of that Platinum, but MAN was it harder than it needed to be at times.

I love me some roguelites, and Housemarque rarely misses in my eyes, PLUS Returnal was an absolute banger of a game. My interest in this is higher than almost everything else PS Studios are developing.

I'm much more intrigued by Hyper Light Breaker, myself. But the art is definitely beautiful.

@nomither6 I stand by the fact that the gamelay of that series, had it been tied to something like military or scifi, would have proven massively more popular. It was so so SO tight and satisfying. But players saw the PvZ skin and wrote it off.

You take that moment to moment gameplay, the classes, the shooter feel and slap a different coat of paint on it and you'd have a perennial heavy hitter in the TPS space.

The most egregious thing is that it was a poor bastardization of two memes at once.

I only managed about 30 minutes in Steel Rising. I thought it played terribly.

I liked Outriders enough to finish it. Had some fun. The general mechanics were solid.

I could see them tackling any of Sony's dormant shooter franchises, really.

I must be the odd man out here, because did I not only hear of this game, I downloaded and played it.

The art style always intrigued me so I kept an eye on it. When it dropped, I was excited and gave it a few rounds. Even got a friend to try it.

The issue was it just wasn't very good. It was a CS clone decades too late. What it brought to the genre was basically what I'd call a tangible in-game second life by way of the little clone/disc thing you could toss around. That was it. It did nothing else.

And the game wasn't well designed for that critical gameplay element. They severely limited where your little disc thing could place your spectre (or whatever they called it). You couldn't put it on walls or weird places to create the sort of dynamic scenarios and matches you'd need to stand out and have "oh *****" moments that created positive word of mouth and, most importantly, a fun time.

It was as basic as you could imagine. You'd just stash your little extra life in a corner until you died or wanted to change where you were on the map. It wasn't cool. It was meh.

But... BUT! You certainly could buy extremely over-priced skins! There was a battlepass! And premium currency aplenty! It was VERY clearly a cash grab first and foremost.

THAT'S the problem with GaaS. They aren't good GAMES first. They are, above all else, designed as pipelines from the dev to a player's wallet. Then they slap a game over top that is almost always not remotely unique nor better than half a dozen games you've played before.

GaaS simply don't stand out right now. Fun multiplayer games can make it. But they need to be cohesive, fun, unique and well made. A lot of these failed GaaS titles fail that sniff test and players can tell.

People don't want a Fortnite clone when Fortnite exists. They don't want a CS clone when CS exists. They need something that makes them go, "Wow, that looks fun." They don't want, "Wow, that skin is only $20."

There's some nuance to be had regarding certain failures, but that's usually the biggest issue that goes unsaid.

I can't wait for this. I've had my eye on it since its first reveal. I've been tempted by the PC release since it released, but I don't like getting tired of a game before it's even at its best. EA just isn't for me.

Makes me feel like a little kid at the window of a candy store, though... I see the goodies and other people enjoying them, but I'm not allowed in the store. Lol

One of the elements of Titanfall multiplayer that I adored that doesn't get a lot of attention is how it made you feel a part of a bigger conflict by integrating NPC combatants into the battlefield. I wish more shooters did that.

My dream game would be something like Battleborn (I know!), but made by a team like Respawn who had slightly better shooting and movement mechanics. I think they'd rock the hell out of an FPS MOBA, which some of TF's modes felt somewhat akin to.

Have players in a heated battle, real and AI combatants all over, pushing back and forth, capturing objectives (of various degrees)... then once a certain power level was reached, they could call in big game-changing elements like vehicles or Titans.

In-match, players would accrue upgrades unto themselves and their team that could shift the tides back and forth. Really recreate that sense of a skirmish on the front lines being fought tooth and nail.

It'd be like a MOBA mixed with a roguelike mixed with an FPS or something... I dunno. Dream game right there.