Fair to see such a magazine but I'd take that title literally, and their team is probably fair but I saw more imagination and creativity in Media Molecule or past Japan Studios teams then I did Asobi sorry. They did fair but their games just didn't hit me the same way the others did.
Not nostalgia, I don't do nostaglia, I mean quality or how they executed ideas, just didn't' interest me at all to want to play them.
Echoes of the End by an Icelandic team or AA Japanese devs (barely many Indies, in the puzzle/adventure genres they are great, in other genres I might as well give up their ideas are so weak and infuriating it makes me never want to fund them ever as they will keep not putting their potential into it and make safe nostalgic games, so why would I want to fund nostalgia when I want them to put their spin not learn nothing but copy and paste or 'can't do things to cover up their skill levels, they make weak games and think it's ok, it's not, coming from someone that has bought fair games or shovelware and seeing things in them, but when they are 'that' safe that's when I hate them not when it's clear what angles they tried and are coming along well, doing their thing is good, too much reference material is not a good thing, but that's hard to communicate if people are 0 or 100 and why even bother explaining that) or other AAA/AA from around the world in the past, impressed me more in old games on old consoles with fine to awkward controls and I still had more fun with their level design/movesets then I did anything modern gen or even studios like Asobi that do show what's possible but just aren't interesting to me. Astro is a great IP but I've never really enjoyed what they made.
Devs deserve any interviews to explain what they do, people are interested, but I'd rather hear what others have to say personally.
Even the Namco interview I saw from another outlet I was like yep typical nonsense and saying nothing.
Sure a head staff member will say that but I wasn't impressed.
Actual devs 'sometimes' can say more, it varies of course but even then sometimes it comes off as 'we have passion' but I'm like I'm not seeing it. Oh your passion is this way, and I'm like yeah pass. As sometimes people make similar things to others and I'm like oh, well that's disappointing if the execution is the same and not really that exciting in how they showed it in games, in OSTs in anything it's all just samey and I just find them boring. It's why I can find people boring why I go my own path is because of how repetitive people can be.
It's like when I see a Mario game, some of them are really good in their execution of things, and other times I'm like yeah ok whatever. Or when I see the other Mario universe character games and their different movesets I'm happy to see it, I don't have to care about the character I care about movesets/level design, gameplay, a character can have no personality and I will still play it, when I see boring execution of Mario sports games, platformers, whatever. I have no interest in any of them other then a few, but if their execution is pulled back which many of them are these days how lazy some are in ideas then yeah I'm going to call them out on it.
Part 3:
PSVR2 is fair but it's also just sad, Indies are doing ok but even the feel can be more backwards/backtracking PSVR1 efforts or Wii/Move balancing buttons/motion, it makes me laugh at devs or the 'it has to be rea/approachable', push motion too far. Sigh. Think outside the box/what you did like PS1/2 or NES/SNES game logic, but no pretend new to gaming/veterans too stuck in I grew up/realistic only & it makes me mad.
Sigh 'oh it's only good for cockpits', excuses. Sony is too lazy to scale projects down (push to Namco/never use those IPs as not big profits, why build up an audience, sigh), like many companies.
Astro is the only creative team left besides Media Molecule.
Emu studio are doing good but licenses, sigh.
Others fit their design & strategy while still standing out with their talents. I hate most of their current lineup because I don't find the game design appealing, story/graphics is not motivating.
Game design is boring, peripherals are a disappointment. Console is ugly. UI is fine, welcome hub is fair & other info for it won't deny that, though I have seen it on mobile, Windows 11 which I am new to & hate it's design issues.
Regardless of game devs and the 2020 situation, game design/gameplay has been boring for years, accessibility is fine but you can scale movesets and level design accordingly, but they don't and it makes me so bored of games.
Echoes of the end made me impressed (not because it's oh old ideas, it's that it offers them in different ways, I don't want copy paste old game design for nostalgia, I want game design that uses movesets and level design or humans/animals/cars in interesting ways, they can program/animate whatever they want and many don't and that's why I get annoyed) like Kena at a first dev's attempt and how they made it modern but scaled well old ideas or new ideas. Most devs or leadership are so weak and annoying.
Xbox's spy game before Gears 4, great ideas, no we have to scale it down and dumb it down. Thanks leadership, you suck.
So I play old games, enjoy old control schemes, enjoy old UI design that isn't bland. It's not nostalgia, it's better design lost for safe and worse design.
The business models of PS+ changes have been fair, better then NSO for back compat I don't have to sub to PS+ and I get the digital releases and I'm happy. I like the flexibility they offer there.
So are they all bad 'no' not at all, underwhelming yes, there is good in there and it's a solid default console for anyone absolutely, but I am just not interested in the games, the controller features are 'fine' but so were Impulse triggers, so were vibration scaling in visual novels or Inti Creates platformers besides Nier doing the halves on the touchpad on PS4 as well. AA Japanese devs impressed me with the controller more then Sony studios did.
Jim wasted Bend/Bluepoint's time and that was just sad.
Destruction Allstars could have been better. Foamstars could have been better. So many could be reworked in better ways of modes, audience appeal, etc. but nope they made subpar/worse games with weak ideas and lack of understanding of audience with weak modes and business model first.
Data over understanding people.
If I want to be harsh 1/10, more fair, 5/10, it's solid for people into the things the PS5 offers 7/10 to 8/10.
Part 2:
I research/listen to the business side more then I care about PS5. Refuse to use/buy own. Used it, still no interest or Series X (Xbox One had 2020+ parts of & hate). Quick resume is fine. TV TV TV of 2013-2017 functionality like Windows 8 was better for app/game dual app scaling, what Wii U/Vita couldn't do wish could.
Switch I got for Vita ports, niche Nintendo IPs & HD handheld was ok. It was fine for new gen experiences if games didn't come to PS4/Xbox one too, didn't care how ran, was happy to play regardless, fair ports of old games by Limited Run/Bright Memory Infinite.
But IR was boringly used, ok ideas but not great, Wii experiences were bad due to lack of IR for cursor so we had to have IR pointed the other way & bad cursor instead. Switch is ok at continuing docks/cables to the TV like past devices but it too was very boring.
Don't use a PC for gaming/troubleshooting unless want to, don't care for power, I care about game mechanics/level design, not trends badly refining compared to past trends & holiday destinations as excuses for level design.
Enhancements are fair, the DVDs to Ultra Blu-ray is nice, streaming feature, apps not as much as Xbox but both Nintendo/Sony don't need to either so it's fine.
The console design is as awkward as PS4 was so eh. Ugly/bad to position. Sure no touch button thankfully but moving the HDMI cable back in is annoying, but it's still an awkward design with the stand. Flower pot/ugly art piece console. Xbox Series is a rectangular prism fair air flow, PS5 airflow/design is eh.
PS4 UI was way better, PS3 had limits after PSX/PSP UI, got used to groups after Wii U/PS4 folders limits of binding games, I filter so many things in Switch groups, I assume PS5 uses that feature well? (never used or seen) that Xbox introduced that PS/Switch both took notice & that's fine. I use them a lot on Switch then Xbox One.
Sure i like the quiet Xbox feature on PS5. But they aren't reasons for me to care about the PS5 at all.
I beat Space Marine 2, it was a 1.5 in game design, a .5 entry of changes and didn't impress me at all.
Rift Apart felt less fun than prior entries. Even Echoes of the End got to the Ratchet Nexus style bits, loved the water rising/lowing of Ratchet 2002/2016, I can play that game and go wow these old school ideas used just enough, move on, combat that's modern and not that appealing but does the job and the dialogue is fair. Best linear game I've seen on PS5. While played and finished Alice Madness Returns and that was the best PS3 era game with game mechanics/level design and artstyle/themes i played all year. Besides Singularity.
Peripherals existing, great to see them still making them. The execution of them, very poor. Portal can be accessible but does it have resolution/connection scaling no, Wifi5 isn't that bad I'm fine with that access some reasons may have if no wifi6 or 7 or whatever interference or whatever, but no dual screen, unacceptable. The marketing is. OK. But I'm also sick and tired of devices taking 10+ years for audiences to be old enough to embrace tech and companies dumb it down so much. It's infuriating. I referenced so much towards the Steam Machine to anything PS/Xbox/Nintendo have done for 10 years to many situations in a conversation yesterday. It surprised me.
Why build up what Vita/Phones/Tablets or even PSVR can do of the dual screen use cases to just dump it. Very disappointing.
Echoes of the End is good, Tides of Annihilation looks fair. Diofield was ok. Valkyrie Elysium was fun (both got on PS4). WRC23/24, Ride 5 I'll wait. Darksiders 4 don't sound great. Wreckfest 2/Wrecreation aren't either.PS5 is eh. PS4 & under got more games/appealing elements & old gen versions appeal. I'd buy a failed console library, quality over volume. Rhythm Heaven Groove Switch 1 for sure.
Very poor. Disappointing (wanted to be fair, could say awful), abysmal game design/features/functionality, not exciting at all to play, research but boring execution, didn't like 8th gen, to make that clear. Don't care for PS5, PS6. It's not power/price, it's execution/experience.
For people interested/solid console I'd say 8/10 for features (gaming, disks, streaming, etc., fair UI, and more), default console, power to price ratio benefits and more I see reason in it, for being fair 5/10, for uninterested 1-3/10. I am only playing PS4 games, or should i say only Switch, PS4 if I care and mostly PS3/360 and under.
Back compat/remasters/updates is fair & tech to experiment but if games suck, dev ideas are weak, don't care about options anyway. Options are a good thing, not if all terrible. Yotei (flashback areas were limited and disappoint the rest is a good game in a format I wasn't into anyway but does those parts well even if the wolf skill tree/no commands of stance was disappointing)/Rift Apart didn't show the SSD in smart ways. Ratchet 2009 did PS3 HDD better (games load smarter of defeat to respawn/chapter starts, FF7 Rebirth did, but most games are still pathetic at programming loading techniques) & Rift Apart does those parts well, the new parts it does abysmally.
Physical lessening is sad but happens. Digital doesn't mean I limit my platforms and library, I treat digital how i do physical, play whatever for reasons I see to use them. I am not digital loyal at all.
I still collect/find trendy, or niche old era games with more fun game design, I didn't like the PS3/360 hits that lead to PS4/Xbox One game design. Never did, never have. So yeah I'm playing what's left behind good game design dismissed for holiday destination/historical places, or cinematic worlds when I don't find that immersive.
I get immersed in gameplay/movesets/level design/mechanics. Not boring locations and boring characters. That 'personality' doesn't interest me. Human beings don't interest me either. Why would I want to play as some human, animal/car that's boring to use them in this world.
Same reason I can play empty games like Minecraft (wait for Hytale on PC) and not care about dungeons but in other genres treat something differently based on it's core, strengths, potential.
Wishlist/filters could be on PS4, same with quiet PS5/Xbox One/Series but nope has to be PS5 because excuses.
I have 'access' to a PS5/Series X I don't use them. Others around me do but I've never been so uninterested in either of the 2 consoles either. Switch 2 is early but still don't' care for it. Can hold out with Switch 1. Switch 1 had enough factors despite how ok. 2017 got Vita, 2018 a Wii U, 2020 a 3DS, 2021 a Switch. PS4/Xbox One games were just not appealing & features I liked got cut so reasons to pull away.
To see what I missed out on and because 8th gen game design was not for me at all. Still isn't.
Remasters/updates were fair for devs to experiment I guess.... Back compat/emulation has been fair.
If story telling, maybe, if artstyles sure. The dodge/real time elements at times even if compared to any other games with a dodge or any others like a Paper Mario inputs approach I mean it's not like E33 wasn't that surprising, I mean there is a reason I'd compare it to why racing games refuse to have a blocking/defence option is 'it's unsportsmanlike' or it would be blocking passing options but I don't care. I'd be open to B Spec in GT7 offering it or opponents, I mean as a player I can do it all the time to the CPU opponents if I know I'm not a match for them and it's not sportsmanlike.
To me it may be a good game but it didn't impress me that much on the surface at least.
If gameplay maybe but even Conception did the quad angle combat and seen nothing do it since, while I can compare Eternal Sonata to Neptunia or others.
I can compare Atelier or Persona or others with their turn based approach and minor differences as many turn based games do continue.
We have real time RPGs in different forms by Tales, Final Fantasy and more.
Whichever ones or what each inspires or otherwise I guess.
I'm only playing the AAs so from a few years ago so what do I know about JRPGs really these days not a lot.
But whether the structure or the gameplay or the amount of cutscene variations or the presentation, characterisation, scale of the world and whatever else sure.
But to me gameplay is my motivation and if a lot of JRPGs in the big space haven't then I don't care what their world scale is, it won't interest me regardless.
Even if most play them for story or artstyle or quirks or whatever other reasons or are ok with the gameplay many keep having.
If they can I'll be impressed, streaming it just isn't fun. It will take time but I'm interested. Otherwise been happy with getting PS3 games the second hand market way, the odd PS1/PS2/PSP offered on with my digital purchase not subscription to PS+.
Don't even have streaming PS+ in my region anyway, do Xbox Cloud but that's about it.
Part 2: Emulate to test them, know that peripherals have limits and even fan emulator devs don't bother as it's some work to get going, sad but understandable and most players don't care either, which is also sad, so that limits what gets supported or not as it is. Might as well get the hardware and play it if it's cheap and niche and worth my time for game design and understand the hardware most ignore and discover what makes it great then most people focusing on the surface and 'well known' and other talk. When I don't care about talk, I care about creativity made design no matter how unpolished it's still got something charming about it I want to play and furthers my interest in what games can be or are and lost.
Which is understandable but even big companies are lazy. Was happy to see Battle Engine Aquila, never thought would be offer, got the Bloodrayne games. Thank you Ziggurat. Rogue Trooper was surprised to see too. When is Psi Ops? When is many others?
When is PSP Puzzle games Crush, Mercury, Voodoo Dice, Cube, I got a few of these physical finally but researched years ago now?
When is Scaler Behaviour Entertainment/Global Star etc. Where is Dr Muto Warner Bros/Midway? Where is Blinx 2 Microsoft?
Where is Wetrex N64 on NSO? Space Station Silicon Valley? To many others. The 3rd parties I actually care about on N64.
I can point to those or even more niche, but again licensing, lack of effort to reverse engineer for understandable reasons, whatever source builds, money to make from it, etc. Good ideas get left behind for profit and 'if they want to risk take' to smaller companies willing to and I'm glad when they do/can and don't just ignore the IPs I actually want to play not their surface level games with design not really appealing to me as a lot of what I am looking for has been left behind instead.
For if they want to (not big scale every project to look good) and these other studios can I'm all for it.
Seeing a Namco interview made me mad too. Yeah because some of their games have gotten a revival/remake, but even then, wow their classics are still 'this amount of times the classic re-released' then doing more with it. But it would be too big scale, too niche then building it up because why bother to do that. It's just a cycle. Legend of Druaga could be anything but nope it's just recycled all the time.
I've been fine with their learning or their options offer via these official versions.
Or some niche games getting support or whatever engines they are willing to work with as some games use particular engines and approaches or use of the hardware and players don't understand that and want their mainstream favourites.
I always put my thoughts in Mystic Ryan's video similar to this and going a bit further so I already was glad this was revealed but also called out the BS as well.
If they do PS3 sure, but I mean oh PS1 and PS2, as if players or these studios barely look at PSP, Wii and other libraries.
I had more games I've collected or wanted over the years most collectors would overlook and most people in general overlook, I look at them and am wowed more and more while everyone else has higher expectations or looks at the surface.
I don't believe most of this nonsense.
Licensing, I do, impact they have, what a loud of garbage. This is why I seek game design, movesets, level design, mechanics, not superficial nonsense.
It's why games suck now, weak minded companies or developers, Indie to AA/AAA and elsewhere with their weak design and accessible or 'empty' excuses for core design of games. I refuse to buy such underdevelopment 'modern excuse' garbage.
There is a reason I will emulate or collect it physical.
Part 2: I haven't cared for COD in years anyway and this makes it easier to still ignore them and play PS3 era shooters with fun mechanics left behind and PS2 era CODs I haven't finished yet. Try the other Battlefields or finish Medal of Honor games.
Otherwise modern shooters are pretty boring and the story driven ones flopped or we have ot wait on still so..... I might as well finish the remaining PS2/3 era shooters left behind with cool ideas and otherwise continue to play other genres like i am.
Got my COD Wii/Wii U fix to try them out so not much else.
1.Found God of War Norse series bosses boring so to me the Greek era scale was way better. Bosses don't interest me a lot with fighting versus strategy that's engaging or more interesting attacks so they could be 'scale' interesting but fights themselves boring to play.
2.People seem to forget how Unreal Tournament and even old Star Wars Battlefront was. You can make good multiplayer based campaign and have story. But people don't they have 'this is how an IP is' and that's it. But I play more games for gameplay design so I am going to talk about it from that angle and explore more.
I get yes people want a story, or they want more particular level design/production value in such a way, but it seems they want to make the campaign just bot based multiplayer prep and that is kind of sad yes.
Then again this is the series that took too long to offer poppable tires for vehicles in any mode yet that should be a no brainer, but then again even movies don't do that as why do stunts like that I guess or CGI it. Smart soldiers think about their options, but animators or others don't go that far for a reason, they don't want to ruin things or can't be bothered or don't think outside the box of strategies for combat and it shows.
Then again most people seem to forget animations/programming anything is possible, yet they follow real rules and that's why games are boring and game design is so safe and bland.
People into singleplayer aren't into multiplayer or bot matches unless they actually care to. So to me yeah I'd put even Declassified over this as while they were short they were still singleplayer missions with enough to them with the same flow as a campaign regardless of the moments being short, sped up of QTEs and what was needed.
The marketing sigh. The first trailer was good, the rest have been so bad. Some very Advanced Warfare EB Games comparable (ok), to even worse. Activision has the worst marketing for this game it's hilarious.
I will say the silliness I don't mind, so many are serious I can't be bothered sometimes and the tone/gameplay is so bland.
Doesn't change that COD is still safe gameplay but it's something at least in tone.
The modes seem fair, nothing amazing but I mean AW felt limited and people said it was better then Ghosts and I was like what? I get people mean in how they feel or progression or whatever but even then having more modes versus less modes or whatever the case of maps always confused me.
The amount here seems fair but I haven't really liked multiplayer map design as to me they have less gimmicks and feel very safe, maybe they are good, but to my extent they seem very boring but look nice or fit general flow but seem never interactive and are set piece lacking and forgettable to me. Just wow like this location. Ok. No interesting docks with shipping containers moving, they just 'have shipping containers' or whatever. Everything is so static and bland. Whether the player navigates them, camps or pulls a lever. None of it is there. It's just bland and lifeless.
Carry over of weapons is a nice touch.
Zombies/multiplayer seem pretty standard, or not covered deep enough in the review.
I respect the review saying it's silly, as to me I appreciate it more then going oh it's not movie like/dramatic enough and I'd be like oh ok I'm done reading this review then. But nope it's a good review and I kept reading.
Also if it's still very 'online for every mode' for DRM then yeah I respect mentioning that too.
@stocko Fair enough. Never watched the shows but know of them. I enjoy a good anime game or visual novel and such so what it seems to offer is fine.
Like I said i go more for Virtua Tennis or others. Even Mario sports games cut back it's fun court level design ideas. Mario Tennis went from lets have interesting elements to the courts to lets be just tennis and mario characters and save dev time because who cares about those other exciting things and just focus on the basics of the sport and character marketability or being a sports game to offer.
So why should I bother then?
I'll take a look at footage. But I don't see it as much other then flashy effects but I don't know how the movesets are for sure other then to match the IPs they are.
All I see is fair soccer/football, odd QTE moments like you got with the old Hockey/NHL games which is fair, fair cutscenes to show off more particular catches of the ball and that's about it. That's fair 'polish' but it's not level design engaging at all to me. It's still 'we have to have keep the core of soccer' here. I get it's an anime IP so I can't be that particular on it and what it has but even still.
It must be either hard for me to explain what I mean or people forget what old games use to add because priorities went elsewhere, imagination or cut corners as much as possible as devs know players don't care, while players like me do and end up buying less games.
No clue on special moves, just typical soccer courts/stadiums, it fits, but not my thing. I need more. Some effects but mostly seem as typical as having heat or illusion of speed effects in a racing game, not a lot, it's fair in a cartoony way but even then doesn't add much. I don't see much moves here, but again how much is it tied to real soccer or the rules of the source material. I think more on what can be programmed or animated, not reality and rules. But most things do so I have to think about that.
Even then Cosmic Smash is a breakout clone as Space Squash or whatever and it's still fun despite how awkward the stick was or animations are for core moves.
Virtua Tennis I haven't cared for the main modes when picking them up.
I can compare racing games with particular progression or event variety with different rules and even in the modern era only GT7 offers that, everything else has less and focuses on other things instead so I play more older ones with more modes/event types instead or more engaging progression quirks to them.
@Flaming_Kaiser Agreed. I was sad that if you mess up NPCs or something you take so long to get back to that level of good/bad, it's so dumb. Oh I happened to be bad a few times to see what the game can do, here is an entire level or less you need to regain because we want to punish you? What kind of garbage excuse is that and the auto saving I think as well.
It's strictly good and strictly bad and regaining it is a pain because the good points or bad points increase rate is so slow. It's so badly offered. Or the amount they take away or what skills you lose access to. It's so dumb.
They have changed with with Tsushima/Yotei and some of it makes sense and I went why not just commands (fair stances rather then too much focus, type commands, or is 'automated NPCs that aren't very good as doing what you want them to do so why would we give players subtle control over them', maybe even offer a better bonding system or other factors, versus what they offered, the way of modern gaming these days I guess, I don't know, skill trees being the excuse of everything doesn't give me much interest in them at all it's why I hate them so much is why they get used not smartly get used) for the wolf not useless skill tree pushing but whatever, that's just me. Then again Outer Worlds and Bethesda titles do follow old skills direction of RPGs so they differ of course in what they are used for.
Back on topic: I would have wanted a mix of oh good/bad powers but no it's restrictive.
Even then it's so point based and not like 'Mass Effect or Infamous 1' with the 'act on this in time' kind of approach which wasn't much but felt it had more purpose to it then a points system and being heavily restrictive or pointless and ruining your story progression to bounce back. That's not appealing to the player it's just punishing them and making them want to give up a grind of points.
At least the missions in Sunset Overdrive/Infamous PS4 era was fun, or else I would have given up. Beat both PS4 era Infamous games but still.
It's too much 'we only scripted so much' or we have to be scripted to fit in with Sony or other devs expectations these days and I'm like well that's just silly. It's why I find some scripted things just a joke rather then balancing. It's why I don't like certain modern game design is the scripting ruins it rather then being fair balance of scripting to balance things.
It's why I can compare GT7 or FM6 to PGR2 or other racing games of how they do progression in their games, I think the former are terrible and the latter did it fair for it's restrictive progression, but then PGR3 had to be 'so open ended' for a certain audience as 'all modes' were, not just 1 mode that suited the strictness more so that was also on the devs going too far with it but I didn't mind as it was still flexible enough with it's strictness to not bother me or the core was better too.
Compared to say other action adventure games with fair motivation in the game to play it or fair strictness I'm ok with varies, while others I'm not.
But in a way that's punishing they ended up with which is annoying rather then a good excuse for balancing they could claim it as.
So they are pulling a 3DO (though was a console blueprint) then. But instead of DVD player makers that don't make games, they have a storefront Valve and want PC like prices and want money and think people will still pay it (or not cut the controller off the price or whatever) or know it's a niche device or people have set uses for it. So it's fine.
It's just questionable is all. I've worked it out but there is a reason Switch/Series S fit and work out the price point and games, Valve doesn't want to do that and the spec has capable for 1400p but even the 8GB should have been 12 or 16GB or something for RAM.
Other components seem fair enough but even still.
If they go 'oh the price is that way because of other services we don't offer but you can use it for', then that's just ridiculous.
Besides Keys for PC games, or if avoid Steam and go with other launchers, cloud services, users don't get the Steam controller and use their Xbox/PlayStation/Nintendo controllers or even Guitar Hero/others with it. Whatever the case.
Then I mean sure but even still. What the user chooses versus price point is very hmm to question here.
Regardless of the new VR headset and controller, and just focusing on the console.
Or what storage or other things the user can add or won't mess around with and also the 'standard' they want to set like Steam Deck did for hardware configuration like consoles do.
I myself go console for their gimmicks software/hardware or controllers and games are so eh in game design these days i care so little about them these days. So to me most hardware doesn't interest me, the business side does as everything else is so eh. I keep my PC and phone for other stuff or emu testing not major gaming I do on consoles if they make appealing games/consoles not generic experiences I don't want and just ignore most of despite branching out to all genres at this point. It's up to devs and their eh game design.
I think the series has the universe that's engaging, I don't care for the games as it's not my type of gameplay formula of interest but i respect it more then the other Sony cinematic ones new or existing and converted that's for sure.
The setting/tech and tribal is fair for a lot of things. But even still.
I won't deny it has had enough remasters at this point even if Last of Us got more.
Horizon got what complete edition and play at home offering to then the performance update to the new remaster. Tsushima got it's directors cut and that's it. Last of Us got milked way more then any of these. Days Gone didn't get much but a performance boost I think that's it.
With how much Sony pushes the IP into conversation sure but that's just how much people are sick of that I think or compare it to the Last of Us and think it's the same milking when it's not.
Sony pushes it yet it's clear audiences or critics care more for other IPs, I care less for those and not much about Horizon at all. But I prefer what it does try to do more then the other personality wise or story lore wise. The gameplay to all these IPs bores me to no end like many mission based action adventure games or open worlds, I just find them boring, repetitive and the use of the characters is too safe. I've played better.
Echoes of the end may be linear but it brings back the PS2/PS3 era design I wanted. I buy PS2/PS3 shooters for that reason, Ratchet has just pushed story and the gameplay felt shoved in rather then adding to it, so the multiplayer mobile game dumbing the game down and not using gadgets or anything interesting just shoved it in even further to dumb down the IP.
Others just make accessible games with generic human/animals movesets, and push story/graphics, so playing as human movesets as an animal it's just boring. Animals can't be used for story/visual variety if anthromorphic or as animals like Goose game/Stray it's just boring. You can't tell me animal platformers didn't show great movesets in the past and dumbing it down was a great idea to 'feel like that animal' no it doesn't.
Nothing happens, the world is static and I just don't care for them. Spiderman even with all the movesets of such a character as a superhero did nothing for me due to how it's executed, movesets had no impact on the world just 'combat options' wow how exciting (1 ground pound quest, that's it, barely remember how to use the move after did that side quest too, so memorable and I liked that side quest and the laser grid one, 2 out of the whole game), or the missions/outposts boring me due to how eh they were executed, so safe, multiple waves, not memorable, not enough distinction at all, or compared to Sunset Overdrive's design which was may more engaging of regular or platforming missions/tower defence and more. They are different games yet one did open world design may more exciting for their first open world compared to Spiderman and these others are just so formulaic open world design or basic movesets I can't be bothered to play them.
Fitting the 'themes or context sure' but that's about it. Gameplay wise they are forgettable or not engaging at all. Like elves/dwarves then varied creatures or 'cars are only used for driving' not anything else more exciting to use them for or were too lazy to offer additional rules/event variety, sigh.
@Gunga Well that's why I felt Forza Motorsport 6's roulettes dumb or the tour structure. Even then weight mods only did effect me, other mods did nothing so that system was pointless to in that game. Why give players high spec cars if they can't use them for the campaign just arcade mode or something. It's just pointless due to the career mode structure. If people want free driving/arcade mode access by all means. Or sport mode runs (waiting for access to it in GT7 compared to GT Sport also doesn't help 7's case there even compared to other 'multiplayer unlocks after period of time or accessible immediately from the menu design of other games).
PGR2 was restrictive and players wanting freedom complained as all modes are restrictive, arcade and career per classes (I thought it was handled better then both modern examples or even Ride 4 which i thought was ok for the angle it wanted to capture but didn't do it that well).
PGR3 makes it so open ended instead to combat that audience type to cater to them so I always remember the PGR2 dev quote. Rather then offering a restrictive career mode option as devs don't do that they focus on a core design instead. Same as they don't offer different puzzles per difficulty/type of players (not meaning optional hard ones for collectibles types in games I mean in general or a skip button if they have one).
GT7 doesn't offer much fancy early on in roulettes either from my playing of the game so far. Regardless of the obvious credit rewards offered, I don't care as I don't need them but even still. I've strategized what I wanted anyway no matter how many they gave me.
Invitations suggestions or sure access to more cars, but if the player can barely progress and use those cars, why would anyone care about more credits other then to access things early when the point is to highlight different ranges of cars and their history.
The narrative and dev design versus the marketing team is so backwards it makes no sense.
If players want a game to race their nostaglic cars or supercars sure but their is having a thrill and getting a customer's money and actually being able to use them in the game due to how restrictive GT7's career mode is compared to even past entries more open ended design.
I got an F1 car in GT3 at 15%, in my current playthrough I struggle to get one due to the roulettes there. It's been a fun replay of the game for me working around those.
I mean if they want to attract people who seek cheat modes or fancy things or end game first or just 'play whenever and have fun' sure but the game isn't designed that way.
Even gating split screen/sport mode after a few hours is a bit odd. Challenges sure, but to me the scaling even compared to GT5's level system just made me confused why they designed it that way.
Not my type of game but I was impresse by screenshots and regardless of a licensed anime game. It seemed fair.
I assume like Captain Tsubasa was decent too?
No clue but they seem fair games.
If no Street or other types out there or much quality for some arcadey sports games or not into Bloodbowl or fantasy takes on sport then I guess anime licensed IP sports ones do the job.
Never cared for sports anime, ever, even sports festivals I hate those episodes. Cultural ones i can kind of get behind but even still. I don't look forward to them. Scenery change sure or culture sure but I care so much about dialogue I just don't care.
I'm more into arcadey sports games but even then things like Cosmic Smash or the arcadey minigames in Virtua Tennis series, that's more my thing.
Not like racing games were I do enjoy the side modes/event variety to use cars in situations but usually the main racing is fair but these days I hate how mundane racing games are in the core feel I need the side modes to be interesting and they never add anyway. They make subpar products.
Same as why I find fantasy games boring reusing dwarves/elves all the time then their own new creature designs.
Or using animals for some story telling but their movesetse are humanlike so why bother making them animals just for story telling it's boring.
I mean it's no 3DO blueprint and DVD makers putting high prices as they don't make the games.
But it's also specs that are about Series S or Switch 2 or bit better then those in some cases but not in many others.
So it's not 'great' but it's decent.
Steam makes enough money as it is and games vary in prices so the storefront is viable but the console and niche audience who knows. We will have to see.
Games struggling with that 8GB though is a tough thing, 1400p sure, 4K it's pushing it there no matter the settings or overall game design.
@blah01 Does the library have groups? Or whatever they are called on PS5?
I got used to Wii U/PS4/3DS/Vita folders but I have used the groups (started on Xbox One) and used them a bit on Xbox One, but used them to the limit on Switch 1, no idea how PS5 uses them and neither do people I talk to that use PS5 regularly.
I have access to all the consoles just use PS4/Xbox One/Switch 1 and older more.
I do think a toggle for 'strict folders' would be nice for those that liked them on PS4/Wii U/3DS/Vita instead of the groups approach they use now for any filtering and the list of games.
Then again manuals or digital website redirects are hit and miss these days of existing. Sigh miss those I used them on occasion those PDFs with hit and miss details as good or as bad as some glossaries, tutorials and more that devs still miss the point of multiple button actions, or other clarity.
To me I wasn't a fan of these groups but the more I used them and went 'huh I can put multiple of the same game in different groups and filter whatever I want' the more I got into using them.
On Xbox One I just went with the more 'OG Xbox back compat' '360 back compat', 'Xbox One games', 'apps', more general not a lot to it type categories/filtering'.
But to me I went more the 'what is on this SD card', 'order i bought my digital games', 'demos', 'what year they released' '(or original year released)' or 'what age rating', 'what genre', 'remake/remaster/port', 'from this console originally before ported' or 'generations they fit' or 'codes used in physical editions', and all sorts of stuff.
So why I was more into the 'folder and no need to filter just put them there' and I don't like 'recently played', 'title', 'longest/shortest hour count order' and I think the filtering for platforms can be annoying of recent and prefer my folders on PS4 to the PS5, Xbox One/Series share the same besides feature differences and Switch of last played order before the library/groups design, the rest missing of filters I would like to see.
Just got filtering interested/crazy about using them to really see what I could use them for. But that's just me.
Well I did, but shouldn't have the highest edition a month ago or so with the 1.5Mill credits. So increasing it seems a bit ridiculous. Why bother now for new owners of the game? Is it that much a motivation? To me it wasn't. I am not a GT7 fan but I like some ideas having played it now then not for years, I waited late for GT Sport as well and did the wiki work for the offline update changes. I still care about the series more then I do Ratchet or God of War these days.
I don't even use the 1.5Mill credits anyway, I still am playing the game safe and as if I never had them, I never use the GT3, GT4P and GT4 license test or credit transfer as I don't care to. Same applies here.
I wanted the OST app and the songs offered were ok but not my thing. I wanted to see if it was a USB app (Kandagawa Jet GIrls or Senran Kaugra Peach Beach Splash) or a music player app (Death End Re:quest Z and GT7), I have both for different games (compared to games with a music player menu in the main menu) that's why I was interested. The rest was a 'bonus' credits or bonus avatars, I didn't even care for those at all.
I even have a video idea to cover digital artbooks/OST or USB apps or bonus disks just because why not when physical ones are usually covered instead not digital and wanted to make those the factor of the video more then the physical artbooks I have or bonus disks for Halo 2, the comic/pre-order disk of Splintercell Conviction or NFS Carbon on 360. Not idea if I want to do anything about it. Got all of those cheap. Not so my Disgaea 6 and 7 Deluxe physicals with the artbooks so small for the Switch releases for example. Anyway back on topic.
So for newcomers sure, and I suck at My First GT's last time trial (99% of the demo otherwise) so I can't transfer those cars over as that's the end game feature of that demo just like GT Concept 2001/2 or GT4P back to GT3 and GT4 compared to GT PSP car transfer for arcade mode for GT5 which doesn't require progression.
So otherwise I'm playing the game like I got the standard edition and been fine getting credits, getting low roulettes and a car I already owned as a reward and playing the game normally.
I haven't dipped below the 1.5mill as I am playing carefully, I always do when playing these games just encase, but strategise when replaying GT2 to 4 different ways with different cars all the time. Challenges I set myself or casual playthroughs to different events then prior playthroughs.
@Dalamar To Push Square staff maybe or Sucker Punch. I guess it's past the days of Killswitch inspiration Gears/Uncharted for cover systems (even if 24 The Game a PS2 2006 game by Guerilla Cambridge that also worked on Primal or Little Big Planet PSP, Rigs PSVR and such) also had a cover system.
Or Alfa Romeo Racing Italiano inspiring Grid 2008/Forza Motorsport 3 for rewind and cutting the RPG features and 1 to 5 rewinds limit for free rewinds. I can make many other comparisons for 'those' but won't so on topic of other games that take that 'unique' extent of such a feature.
Biomutant did it years earlier and ran on PS4/Xbox One/Switch, probably some other games I'm forgetting.
Forgot Titanfall 2 did the 2 states level that was really good.
I had played Minecraft adventure maps that did that teleport here, teleport there for dimension jumping or teleporting awkwardly up stairs for puzzle maps.
Ratchet did multiple states of levels in Crack in Time in 2009 on PS3 with a HDD and various skybox colours/same reasons in battle, aftermath of a battle, fixed safe aftermath changed time with (it had 2 of these 1 with a battle, another plant a seed so it grows in the future to access the villain having a meeting with that planet's people), before Rift Apart did Blizar as closer to that sort of idea and then the more 'throw you through a bunch of areas briefly' additions that I wasn't a fan of. The side areas were ok for collectibles and more platforming. Which Spyro 3 had side areas for missions that couldn't have all level assets fits in the same space so had to be spaced out, even besides the less detailed stuff in the sky (swimming in the air glitch, this was to make the level of detail technique works).
Zelda Link to the Past was the reason I thought of the old/young for Yotei, as it has a light/dark world. I didn't expect the same scale but something more fitting for Yotei to offer what she remembers and what has changed. Would have been interesting for story telling or mystery or gameplay, but only ended up smaller scaled for story it seems.
Played Alice Madness Returns on PS3 with the playable flashbacks at the start of chapters before the main Wonderland levels.
Other games have had cutscenes of it then, some have playable cutscene areas.
Even Rift Apart/Spyro 3 had side areas for collecitbles or missions/minigames loaded in different from the main ones. It's nothing new to me.
I assumed it would be old/young versions (light/dark world from Zelda Link to the Past, or any others with 2 or more worlds or 2 versions for differences to convey in story or gameplay depending on the region size necessary) with different context and differences to uncover for side missions or something not just playable cutscene flashback areas, I get the scale that would take but it felt underdeveloped to me and it shows it was restructured to fit more what they wanted or could manage and I get that.
I don't know if I was expecting Darksiders 2 levels of 4 hubs and both later 2 were so scaled down, but the major 2 were sizeable.
Well, well well, seems I was right in thinking they "could have" been more and people went, oh your wrong. Yeah funny that. I know it was I tied it more to the SSD but my point was gameplay or how limiting the scenes were that I was confused why, I am not interested in side areas for cutscenes but more gameplay purpose. Rift Aparts were fair even if didn't think much of them for secrets. Spyro 3 made them enough per minigames as their own areas compared to the main level but even then different scale of hardware/expectations back then too.
Biomutant did them and they were alright for their limited purpose for flashbacks too but they didn't do much for me either.
I don't know if I was expecting Darksiders 2 levels of 4 hubs and both later 2 were so scaled down, but the major 2 were sizeable.
Or flashbacks in a lot of linear games either playable cutscenes or just cutscenes).
I don't blame them it makes sense the time to implement it or how texture/terrain swapping, giving a lot of purpose to the flashback areas with characters and things to do and so on, I was even surprised Lego Batman had 6 chapters not just 3, so having 2 versions and however much coverage I don't play them as that's 2 open worlds right there to offer, would have been a lot so they did just playable cutscenes in particular areas but it is disappointing use of the SSD and potential or enough ideas to offer, it's a large scale thing that.
I would have loved to see a light/dark world being an old/young approach for Yotei with area differences approach.
For my region I've seen the consoles prices that bit higher but still $600/700 range and the discounts still didn't impress me.
Here they seem more reasonable for these currencies.
$20 discount on the Dualsense is hilarious for a controller worth as much as games, sure the tech in it but even still for how much games use the features eh even if it is the TV remote default device (not saying the PS5 TV remote).
Nothing big enough for me. Indies were hit and miss and just 'happened to release in 2025'.
2024/2025 were forgettable to me, so I have nothing to say.
Echoes of the End was fun of the water rising or moving objects, 'safe skill trees', but good puzzles/pacing of combat, puzzles and talking scenes, but even then as much as it worked out with it's Enhanced Edition.
What because fans can make a better Concord? Oh Sony's ownership, so on and so on factors.
If a case of in the code there is DRM or other detection systems of things sure. Or whatever other factors can be the case here, but even still.
Hey did Sony forget that Gearbox had fans focus on their dead live service or whatever else it was. Yeah some studios/publishers should take notes. XD
Not everyone wants to make money on something, they saw something in the IP, the studios let it go or failed to appeal.
Lots of games still don't have private servers or revival projects. Sure mostly due to skilled people out there and how many there are or time those people have but even still.
Some people see potential in things or see an audience there. Fans know it better then companies do at this point. Companies want control over servers, a narrative and IP. Fans don't care about any of that and see a thing that can be made better or offered to an audience, they don't always care about money.
It's all down to mentality, it's why I find gaming hilarious these days, they make them accessible but also pushed me away by their nostalgia or their big business or whatever, all Indies/AAA/AA, just make me laugh. They don't have to cater to me of course but there is a reason I give my cues in surveys, new article comment sections. I can't say what I want in games enough. It's better feedback then nothing. At least for garbage gameplay the past few years or balancing it for audiences.
I literally talked to 2 Indie devs in the Clive and Wrench discord and gave ideas for their games, I was respectful and gave my perspective and what other audiences perspectives are and still give them freedom to make what they want, suggestions help, it's if they care enough to use them. I care, but if they want to sit in nostalgia and make weak products, by all means. I'm not buying them.
@RadioHedgeFund Well with the amount of mobile gamers that I've seen buy a PS4 for Fornite or others in EB Games yes. Or at a point in time i did.
We hardcore can be very picky.
I think expanding the market has potential, same as tv shows/movies, comics/novels, merch, etc.
But I think Horizon looks more good approach to the series with this mobile game, same with Call of the Wild did too it fit VR and nausea balancing well.
The Ratchet mobile game looks like the surface level and lacks. The J2ME entries were good. Before The Nexus was an ok endless runner. They have potential I just see them being very eh if done wrong.
I thought WIpEout Rush was worse then other manager games or even Gran Turismo B Spec functionality. Or too many sci-fi racers or arcade racers on mobile competing.
But I mean even Lucid made Destruction Allstars with Twisted Metal like genre approach but make it for young people who never played them or doesn't care for vehicles, so I mean some console/mobile devs don't learn and put minimal thought into what audiences want. Not like old Lucid staff or Playground staff weren't working on Blur and it has a cult following but again it's angle was a bit hmm at the time.
I mean the Ratchet one needs gadgets or more to move around the map. just the Rift Apart wall running wall is 'ok' but still not much. It isn't fully Overwatch with too many separate characters, but even others that aren't that format lack.
I mean I get why Battlefield doesn't have the swap around the soldiers around the map feature like 2 Modern Combat on console had and more destruction/theming/setting focus but that ability was just great in that game for modes and use cases.
I mean not like prior Ratchet multiplayer didn't offer things temporary or as long as held them for weapons/gadgets so I mean there is a lot the IP can do but it seems to offer the bare minimum and I think it's lacking. Gameplay depth is enough to carry people for skins I guess, but so many multiplayer games look empty to me at least but what do I know people don't care about gameplay more themes/settings/graphics/story or 'decent gameplay' or accessible gameplay as far as I can tell.
I get why when playing Echoes of the End why games don't always have much puzzles or magic and superpowers but even still to me good movesets on that scale or platforming or other attacks and good pacing to me is what makes me care for games yet so many are just generic human/animal movesets in generic worlds and think their dialogue/brand and otherwise holds up, puzzles could be scaled for difficulty but too much dev time so aren't.
I probably put more thought into games and ideas I think could work then need to but I mean it makes an impact.
I thought Foamstars was too 'copy paste or remixed modes' and had more ideas to separate it from Splatoon and make it just about foam for modes and movesets then it had originality or substance but like it matters. Devs don't care, players don't care. They think the formula wins so do that and put no effort into it. Why make it stand out that's just stupid, when it matters immensely, not like it wasn't clear over 20 years or anything. XD
I seek potential in games I don't care about as ideas are still possible for them regardless. Most people don't care.
@Dogbreath Well when generic mobile games that fit formulas win by 'ad shoved in face' or 'appealing enough of themes/settings and such' yeah, companies 'try too hard' and miss how casuals or hardcore approach mobile.
@Dampsponge Well even Vita/PS Mobile tried but yeah. I think the J2ME cellphone games were better.
To me the Xperia Play was fair, or Ngage. Fair attempts, but the structure of those games, the phone designs, how much support. It varies. People's expectations vary, 'hearing about it' (as many Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft console or otherwise approaches of features take years or the 'right audience or new people' to be interested, so it varies what is presented and the angle it appeals too).
They are 'trying' but I still think they are a weak approach this time of gameplay or character personality/world design and more, just 'send the IP out there, we win, these devs know the formula' when they could be 'better' but don't look like they care at all.
They feel and look like another studio 'trying but not getting the IP well enough'.
Even if some like Sly Thieves in Time weren't perfect it and others like it have more understanding of the IPs then others.
Still better then Forza Street or others. Wow a match 3 puzzle game and upgrades/cosmetics for cars (can work but it feels weak), wow a reskinned drag racer. Those have to be hilariously 'we don't care' efforts I've seen.
Halo Spartan mobile games were probably as good as Killzone Liberation on PSP.
It has potential it just depends how they handle it. Sony can't rely on the console forever, but they need to understand all platforms audiences better. Or 'how an IP can be handled, not just 'we have a brand, use it, throw it out there' which i hate seeing companies do.
Horizon I think has a lot of potential and looks good from that reveal.
Ratchet's new mobile game looks cheap (I don't mean artstyole either I mean gameplay and lack of depth, it's just not good enough, it looks like the WipEout Rush level of lack of care for the IP) even compared to the prior mobile games. It's 'fit a formula' and lacks the depth the series has, it feels like a surface level look at the IP and that's disappointing.
I mean cellphone J2ME had some good ones.
Vita/early Smartphone era was alright of mobile games. This time around I don't know.
Fate GO works, Sackboy Run is old or not I forget. Most of them seem hit and miss to fit mobile or use the IP in a smart way.
They can do better, I'm fine with expanding markets if they put the effort in. Problem is most don't and put the least amount of effort in and that's why I think they are pretty bad.
@SeaDaVie I mean even besides the quality 1st party (not my interest but I get why they do).
But I mean it's not like Xbox back compat, more app access then Switch/PS4/5 combined (Windows store), CD support (app to download so might as well have a PS3/360, older or CD player or CD support in a DVD/Blu-ray player at that point), Quick Resume, Impulse triggers.
We all know no one cares about those (joke and serious with this).
I consider them features and benefits but to most people they don't matter and we know how the 1st party on Xbox are anyway.
Or if they have a Series S or cloud access via a phone, TV compatible with it and more then they likely do at this point.
If they like the box they do for their reasons but yes it's clear otherwise.
Unless it's brand loyalty yes most people go to PS5 as a good default console, features they may like the other doesn't have, PlayStation is in more regions then Xbox and other factors I'm probably missing.
So yeah if people are sick of Xbox I'd believe it the same way many are saying about moving to PC as well yet forget the price, troubleshooting and more they like to downplay for 'power' as if PC users aren't stupid and know what it requires. XD
@AhmadSumadi Seen retailer bundles with it, they seemed fair for the price months ago half the year ago compared to other discounted prices for PS5s.
They should try put other colourerd plates or controllers or games to bundle.
I mean if Nintendo can put Mario Kart (even Gameboy games with Pokemon 3DS systems, Sony would never do that with like a Ratchet Rift Apart and Size Matters bundle or something or God of War 3 and one of the Norso games or Horizon duology bundle or any other angles) to many bundles let alone other games, why does Sony hold off, who knows, they already put digital codes in bundles or collectors editions anyway. It is weird they don't go as hard on it for Helldivers or others (unless I just haven't seen any) or other live service games to attach them with or other bundles with their existing games.
Even Sega didn't shy away from Sonic Movie collectibles bundled with games to get rid of them. Some companies are just willing to go to certain lengths I guess.
Glad I'm a substance person, wow that looks bland.
What superficial things to want a bundle for.
I bet collectors really care about those things and not the Fortnite audience or those that don't have a PS5 yet. Sigh.
They are trying but this is still a bit sad.
There are better bundles, games, digital codes, and more they could make happen here, or plate colours/designs. But nope. They take the silliest route. Can't wait for the Fortnite PS6 when everyone has the game already so why buy a whole console bundle for it when they can just buy a PS6 and still redownload it. XD
@Oram77 I mean to me I think the world scale for story telling is excellent of potential they can fit it into, characters and world setup is good, the gameplay is 'typical' open world action adventure RPG but I see the appeal for sure more then the other Sony cinematic IPs direction alternatives at least.
Guerilla/Sucker Punch do impress me how they handle things. The others are good just didn't appeal to me.
But even then when I look at gameplay for Killzone isn't wasn't much either, even Mercenary had a shop, wow how amazing is that. But it's heavy feel and atmosphere, nothing like it but yes, sales are sales.
But yeah I guess the atmosphere or another shooter competitor but even I know playing trilogies or 1 or 2 offs of PS3 era shooters, I love many of them for their ideas many games 'don't offer these days' and I get why their great ideas or that trend is over and all that.
Not like many great story based shooters these days. Immortals of Aveum was.... fine but I get why people don't care for it, I was fine with it and Forspoken for different reasons then most people though. Bioshock 4 is coming along.
Borderlands is doing well even if 3 was hmm but Tiny Tina/4 are fair games.
Ports of games, other exciting IP.
COD/BF are always there. Yeah, depending for story based shooters hmm.
For multiplayer we already know why that is of live service games or garbage multiplayer ones no doubt.
After Titanfall 2's campaign I gave up on story based shooters of the modern era to focus on old ones I missed out on for PS2/3 era and such, I don't go for Doom clones/Boomer shooters really, or the odd ports like Call of Juarez 4th entry on Switch I think it fine of it's PS3/360 digital origins.
XIII is hit and miss depending on platform and it being fixed, for a PS2 era shooter.
Decent Indie ones that aren't multiplayer.
It's clear why but I mean, it's clear why we don't see their PS3 multiplayer only Warhawk, Socom Confrontation, MAG or even games like Starhawk having building and 3rd person shooting either. They just don't compete the same way.
But at the same time we got Destruction Allstars a Twisted Metal format Fornite looking artstyle game... a genre or format with ok ideas but an audience who had not played one or cared.... yeah Sony's ideas or even Lucid's don't make a lot of sense. They learnt nothing from Blur (or whatever of Lucid/Playground games employees from Bizarre Creations).
RIP The Club as well, ah modern shooting gallery format shooter. Niches like you never stood a chance but glad it existed.
Didn't think they were going to go to PS6 immediately anyway regardless of how long Horizon 3 takes, but sure, with 2 or 3 years left till PS6 or whatever happens of PS5 games and PS4 games and cut offs of old systems and all this stuff collectors pay attention to, why not I guess. Would it be a PS6 launch title like it was Horizon 1 was for PS4 Pro? Maybe. Who knows.
Sony will give them enough time to make it. I wasn't questioning it. XD
@Leinad7 Even Sunset Overdrive to me had more Insomniac feel in it, despite being pre Spiderman open world formula following ideas in game design, the tower defence to me was more fun then generic outposts, the moveset based side missions alongside the other story based quests. To me that game made me appreciate what they can do in an open world as someone not into open worlds, same with Gravity Rush, same with Infamous Second Son how they go about things, but I'm 10+ years outdated on open worlds so what do I know.
But even this game feels soulless or gave off Full Frontal Assault vibes and even that has more depth then this mobile game to me. It's just Rift Apart ideas but a trend following formula and more empty. So a mobile game in 2025 basically.
The problem is yes, Resistance 2 (2 weapons and regenerating health, while 3 gave back the weapon wheel, health packs and added the Ratchet leveling system, aka when they try, they try, when they don't it's annoying), Ratchet All 4 One, Fuse or Spiderman have this 'follow trends' angle about them and they put me off (I liked Fuse, hated Ratchet All 4 One in how it did it).
But my Rift Apart take doesn't fit others in how they did Crack in Time aspects and that 'different formula' or put the series back on track while still wanting to have some of it from past entries (even Tools of Destruction has it's better balance of new and 2 & 3 in it), I wasn't a fan but I get why people enjoy it.
Spiderman 2018 had moments for me with it's lab puzzles, 2-3 side missions, but compared to Sunset Overdrive, it was their first at the trend but it had way more fun factor, sure it's dialogue is hit or miss and not as witty as Ratchet PS2 era is, but seems like it wants to, or I guess even compared to Outer Worlds or Journey to the Savage Planet, then the trend following approach.
I mean Song of the Deep was 'fine' but who played it? Their 2D Metroidvania from 2016, first Gamestop published game too.
Comparable to what Pentiment these days or any of the Sony 1st party roguelike, chronology and other updates or DLC they tried that are cool but to me only do so much for 'experimenting' and just still feel like 'we have to jump at this trend' then 'exciting' to see there.
@Robocod At least we got 'some games' even if the PSP entries.
But I like PSP/PS2/Wii versions of games gameplay wise so I'm a weirdo like that then PS3 versions. But for cases like these yeah the PS2 versions for sure. Even if the engine is awkward sometimes but they did Jak series PS3, Vita, PS4 so they clearly can work with awkward engines if they want to.
I think Sony doesn't know whether to go the PS3 ones all regions (yet they have them for PS3 streaming which not all regions have) even though offer the PS2 ones shouldn't be that bad then work in the PS3/Vita trophies.
I get annoyed anytime i see people (idiot collectors that don't know any better) 'oh the PS3 version of these games needed bonuses' uh you people do realise they had Goodies/Extra menus with interviews, epilogue, ads and concept art so unless they wanted the Idol Minds/Mass Media interviews why bother.
@ZeroSum Ride 4's progression system is restrictive (good idea bad execution at least in me comparing it to Forza Motorsport 1 and 2 in around about way) and it's AI is very bad, even on very easy not just it's awkward physics/handling. Ride 1 to 3 are way more approachable even with getting the hang of them. I struggled with RIde 1 regardless of having the 360 copy but I still got enough out of it. 2 on Xbox One and 3 same thing on PS4.
Load times are eh for all of the games (regardless of 360 version of Ride 1 to compare) but the whole series is on PS4 and get cheap digital/physical so they aren't hard to get into, but they are more approachable and playable then 4.
No clue for 5 as not looked into it but it is a current gen era game I have had my eye on but not going to till right timing, same with WRC23/24.
Even RIMS I tried and felt even worse then Ride 4. It's way too hardcore sim or RPG like scaling that's way too far off or something.
Even MotoGP16 or MXGP3 to me give off the RIde 4 effect in physics or playability.
I knew when playing MotoGP16 which I got on purpose for the dirt bikes/rally cars to go 'lets see how playable these all are and compare them, I enjoy additional content angles regardless of it being based around a particular driver' and you know what, the MotoGP bikes played worse then the dirt bikes/rally cars. Glad I got that one first to compare them. XD Which Milestone has done cars and dirt bikes before so even compared to those I think they were fine.
I've been exploring older entries of these on older consoles, I'm not a bike fan but you notice a lot of physics/handling and modes and how different they are for sure compared to nowadays.
I mean it's great to see but Milestone did better car games in the PS2 era or even different ones like V8 Superstars duology for PS3.
Offering off-road bikes is 'fine' but even MotoGP16 had them and MXGP or Monster Energy both series Milestone makes, so is it really that surprising. Even auto cross bikes or whatever were in Ride 3 I think. So them trying is fine but did they pull out the big guns no. XD
But Ride 4 had a great restrictive region system idea (in theory, and to expand in my opinion off of Forza Motorsport 1 and 2's car region design) but bad AI so the progression was a joke and even PGR2 has better class restriction but track selection and playability.
MXGP3 is just bad like their MotoGP efforts at least for what I look for in them of 'playable' sim or arcade feel or structure. I've played better looking into MX vs ATV older entries, Reflex was a blast, Pure PS3/360 was a blast. Tourist Trophy is fun to play on and off of GT4 bikes.
Ride 2 was clear of it's Forza Motorsport 6 inspirations in UI and cutscenes, sigh.
Ride 3 was fair.
So if they did good with 6 sure, but I barely know what 5 does.
Heck Gravel was probably the last Milestone game I cared about enough to play to the end and get it cheap again later to replay through on PS4 then my Xbox One physical copy. That's rare for me with modern games let alone racing games and my stance on them.
Ride 5 I haven't bothered as I don't know what it offers due to how badly youtube videos always show the bikes, I want to see the menu and progression, this is why I either buy games cheap or 'try' my best to find what the menus look like for modes/events/progression as players are incompetent on doing so.
Even WRC23/24 I don't know for sure, even the car builder was confusing, but so was Milestone's Apex/Racing Evoluzione till I worked it out/got a copy physical now then videos.
MotoGP games to me are unplayable or not as fun (not the sim/physics/bike fan type of course so I'm not the target audience likely) compared to the older era ones I've bought up and played a season and moved on and metacritic reviewed 6, 8 and 9/10 (but enjoyed some of their past ideas of management in 9/10 yes bad physics but I don't care, or MotoGP3's 20 fake tracks, or other games challenges).
Nothing has beaten WRC3 PS3/360 for me in career mode, that thing was paced so well and good event variety. Loved it. Tried 5 to 9 and they are 'alright' in that area.
So this is an iRacing, RFactor, Auto Mobellista and other esports or other design wannabe competitor in structure, car/track access, modern game design eh UI, and probably subpar physics, and mostly multiplayer design with eh bots. Easy pass thanks. XD
To me this isn't competing with GT7. There is a reason i cared more for Project Cars 3, it's not good after Need For Speed Shift 2 and 1 was the best of that approach but I still wanted to play them more. I didn't complain how bad PC3 is for 'physics' because it was clear it was a different structure/audience game. I have all Project Cars games, and they do a fair job for what they are going for.
But even WRC3 PS3/360 or Dirt 3 was more fun with their careers then Dirt 5 in event structure/pacing alone or side objectives like Driver Club, not physics I didn't care about at all.
To me GT7 has very few cars I find enjoyable to drive compared to past games physics, but I mean it 'works' and if people like it sure. AI for GT games was always hit and miss anyway too. Other racing games ,vary, sometimes sneak to the front types, others spin out, others so broken, it varies what personality to slot cars to other personality or reading how you play they offer or hit you for no reason they want to make the AI for these types of games.
iRacing, Project Motor Racing, Assetto Corsa Competizione, RFactor and others have their content layouts, are broken or suit sim fans in what they want and BeamNG or others are just playgrounds for people like a Garry's Mod.
This is competing with other 3rd parties on the market so to me that's just not a fair comparison.
To those it's probably fine enough but it's not a GT competitor and none of them are on the grounds GT offers a lot of different audiences then just the sim racing audience these others do.
Why because in physics and UI sure, but in modes/events.
Lots, there is a reason i bought GT7, find some like Wreckfest fair but not great (not for physics, 2 modes when Flatout had 3 a slingshot your driver events, Jucied 2 has 3 drift events and 1 PS2 multiplayer one, along with other interesting ones, most games can dream offering mode/event variety nowadays, I don't mean classes/discipline in rally or others, I mean just rules to come up with), same with Grid Legends, had fun with it platinumed it even.
And why Forza Motorsport 2023 has a cool grid credit payout scale and that's the coolest thing I think about that game, the rest is super safe.
GT offers the driving missions, license tests, circuit experience and regular races. Sure the 7th entry has a different framework for it, you may like or not but the series has since GT1 had spot races, GT2 expanded more to manufacture ones that were randomly generated tracks, HP limits for entry
GT3 refined the access to events strategy, but had more repetitive events but it does what it can.
GT4 had driving missions and coffee breaks GT4 Prologue set up well and I prefer the Prologue ones to the final game ones.
5, 6, Sport and 7 do their part of adding more licenses, or modes/event and scenarios.
All these others if you want competitors in the iRacing or Asetto Corsa Competizone and more sure
But even Ride as a Forza inspired bike game did had it's multiple event types.
Forza 2023 has no bowling, no sprint (1 lap magic) and other things. The showcases or side events were fun.
GT has tuning strategy and event variety. Which is why I can hate GT7 but it has enough for audiences like me.
@get2sammyb It's interesting to seem them try their IPs on mobile then just 'another Sony mobile game we never hear about and don't know how their mobile stuff is going'. I had more mode ideas for Foamstars then it had modes, I don't have much hope with this game no matter the 'mode numbers' the mode execution is the main factor how 'safe or slightly remixed' they are. Sigh.
But after WipEout Rush I'm not sure what to think. That game could have been way better as a manager game, even GT B Spec is better then it was. Let alone other scifi racers or other arcade racers, or managers on mobile. It had no chance and WipEout fans got better on PSP/Vita even if Pure/Pulse content had been remixed to HD, HD Fury, 2048 and Omega Collection to rub that in further sigh.
I don't hate the idea of Ratchet mobile games, Before the Nexus was 'something' for a Jungle Run clone of 2012/2013, the J2ME cellphone games were good games, but this lacks so much depth of gadgets or interactivity in the map design.
Missions, modes, co-op or PVP.
The artstyle is fine but eh.
I think they can do more but it's so made for skins and insert IP and I think it can do better. But it won't. Or recycle a few Rift Apart elements here and there.
This could be just a reskin of Crash Rumble or like Forza Street was a reskin and an excuse. I'm not that impressed.
I like the idea I'm totally fine with them expanding how they are using an IP on mobile or offering multiplayer, I hate the execution. It lacks depth, like many modern games do and that's why modern gaming bores me so much. Frequent updates and skins for the bare minimum to me is the worst kind of game.
@Haruki_NLI Agreed immediately thought of Federation Force or Crash Rumble. I didn't hate Federation Force but enjoyed it in a different way. Blast Ball was just not worth it at all either. It also lacked I've played car soccer in GTI Club or even other types of modes in other games more fun then those did. XD
Even Full Frontal Assault/QForce at least was tower defence (not great Vita port) but had fair co-op or competitive goals, not 'insert characters' with a focus on skins multiplayer.
Even Ratchet 3/Deadlocked fans know what they wanted in multiplayer i assume.
I myself see lacking gadget or other level design depth. Oh the wall running things from Rift Apart. Where is the yellow rifts evade move thing? Or many others. The maps just look barren and basic.
It will likely have few modes too.
Ratchet on mobile via the cellphone method, campaigns on the go with multiplayer aka Size Matters or Full Frontal Assault approaches we can count for but depth, I don't know about this one.
@Anti-Matter Seeing as that was a party game and this is a 'safe multiplayer game' with recycling Rift Apart elements. I'm all for them trying but to me this lacks depth.
You would assume (even besides WipEout Rush or a better manager game approach for that game not just the IP it was tied to when they got 2048 or Pulse which are better games on the go).
I don't hate this game but I have questions.
Even PS Move Heroes had 'moments' not great but had moments of fun to it. Not just 'insert characters' excuses we can see it as.
So many multiplayer games lack depth in map design, modes and more, all for quicker updates and other things to focus on with no need for depth but the bare minimum and I always find that sad.
Push skins and even basic movesets then more engaging ones (even for games that aren't hero shooters so maps have to account for them but in ones that don't there is no excuse in moveset/map design being so bland other then 'personality' but not playing in them just looks) can do more and Ratchet games have their gadgets and more but 'just wall running'. Where is the gadgets to vertically get to higher areas or interact with things.
Interactivity and using weapons/gadgets makes Ratchet fun for me and this just gives off generic in many ways.
As eh as the Move minigames were they still fit the games even if were a bit 'Eye Toy Minigames collection repetitive with so few ideas' for Move in a way of fitting categories a lot.
I praised ironsight for the moving elevator/bridge in it's shipping dock map.
That's how boring I find many modern multiplayer games. Same with singleplayer games pushing story and graphics and the movesets bore me to no end and have 'skill trees' but it's all stats, not level design based gear just weapons and modifications I don't care for.
Even Battlefield 2 Modern Combat I get why the swap characters around the map feature isn't back but I'd play a modern game with that, performance being ruined and all. XD Challenges to use it with, campaign missions, etc. that it did in the past. It's the little things of game mechanics, levels feeling more alive (not just in looks or birds/ships flying by or grass assets) or interesting of strategy or interactivity I find games lack today for the 'bare minimum' of controls/things to do in games.
Part 2:
Ratchet fits for kids/families or us old people so it's hard for them to appeal to us all yes, so even with Rift Apart it's messaging was clear in story not just game design even then I was annoyed at how weak it wanted Crack in Time/Tools or Nexus or 2016 design and I was like this thing sucks so bad because they couldn't tell what to make, cater to many audiences and I get that but even still. If they have Ratchet around for Sony sure, but if not just give up on it and move on. They have experimented enough with the IP.
But even still.
This just isn't exciting use of the IP at all, but when are they and these mobile studios?
Also the 'rangers' did Insomniac learn nothing. Why do we need that angle at all? Not like anyone wouldn't like I don't know anything of characters battling, not oh they have to be part of this force. Why do we need it? It didn't add depth it just added characters and aspects we didn't care for or weren't used well.
Also Ratchet 3's rangers were better for jokes, tone and useful or not as robots and the tyranoid strength scaling to old/next levels with them, then the generic ones in 2016 and their use cases.
Just make it something else of an angle, Ratchet, Clank, new characters, I don't want this 'we added Angela' or have skins of characters, I never used them in past games because it's not worth it. This is like Metroid fans and Federation Force. I don't hate Federation Force despite the game it is, but i get why fans don't like them.
But do we HAVE to have the rangers angle here. Why?
1.Not against Ratchet on mobile, but WHY this way. Also it's just QForce/Full Frontal Assault or Crash Rumble. No it's a multiplayer shooter?Did anyone actually think for more then 2 seconds, no, clearly.
2.Did Insomniac or Sony forget we HATE 2016 or other things.
3.Did Sony forget how WipEout Rush turned out? Are they sure they want to risk this? While Before The Nexus was 'fine'.
Also trying with kids again is fine but I think they do it in the wrong ways. Regardless of us old fans looking at the series our way of course.
Some like Going Mobile on cellphones, we freaked out about Clone Home being acquired and archived.
Wait wait, so this is the new Sony Concord? Sony really are hitting the bottom of the barrel decisions here. Talk about limiting mechanics (gadgets) for a series based around them. Cough But like Destruction Allstars, Lucid/Sony learnt nothing, a game mode not for that audience (I thought it's ideas were fair but still lacking) and artstyle not for that audience. Talk about brain dead.
The artstyle is 'fine' for mobile, kind of looks like the comics in a way, kind of not. Or very 'soft'. It's not bad.
But what are the game modes? Probably barely offering any/depth anyway to focus on skins and other garbage, no thanks.
Also to me this seems very 'Rift Apart aspects recycled but not in exciting ways for multiplayer, the bare minimum & different artstyle' but it doesn't have any good missions for co-op or anything they could have made this game for to be interesting or fit the series at all. Just 'IP insert here' the worst kind you can make Sony/Insomniac, mobile developer here. Sigh
Ok use of weapons (recycling the ones I can't stand most likely) but where is the gadgets? They could have made fair missions or fair things to activate to navigate the maps? Too early in the trailers to show those (I doubt it with how 'accessible' and bare minimum games are for those things these days, it's why movesets are boring) for co-op or effort to use gadgets in team capture the flag or other objective ones.
But this is just basic combat and ok maps, not great. It needs more.
It's very 'we want to get updates out & not put a lot of depth to it' and that's sad. I'm not a fan of that game design at all. Kids deserve better in games instead they get slop.
Even Foamstars remixed 2 modes in other games and i had more mode ideas then they put effort into the game. XD
This mobile game for Ratchet could be more but it's understandable why it exists and how 'basic or accessible' it will be.
I don't care for multiplayer but even still, I respect smart multiplayer design.
Even then if 'were' for old fans, I assume they want Ratchet 3 or Deadlocked multiplayer, that's been clear for years. But no. or is it and it's unclear from the trailer? Even then, why the Qwark decoy or otherwise. Do we need those design, references or placement of characters because they don't know where to put them? It's just weird.
I may warm up to this (still not for me but it's fine to exist of course) but I just have questions, that's all. Why they went for this.
We get generic multiplayer design (not against tower defence even if this doesn't look it looking at it again) or modern game design, some people asked for but even still.
Well how much is EA going to allow or restrict, that's always been the case from the start it's why the game leadership wise is the direction it is, that was clear why it took so long and what is in the structure it is compared to prior Skate games (as much as I understand and not played much of Skate 3 I got cheap randomly), and how much is it the target audience while the other skating game alternatives have their benefits and audiences as well.
@McSavage Agreed, even FM 2023 as particular as it is the credit payout grid position to me was a great idea. That's one thing I think GT7 or any past entries could have learnt from.
Even the GT1, 2 and 5 quick access menus or tune menus. GT7 has tire swaps but that's it and I was like what, why?
MX vs ATV games have grid position and more slots if you do better in prior events/heats.
Other games also like you mentioned have better grid position/qualifying in them I think. Even TOCA did with it's practice/qualify/race approach of the PS2 trilogy, not so PS1 trilogy I think (Grid doesn't).
Physics eh I don't like realistic physics, if it's playable I"m happy but I don't 'need it' personally.
But lacking modes or event variety also is why I find modern racing games boring too, many 3rd parties are clear why and I find them boring.
But I'm not the target audience probably of many racing games either. Too gameplay/gamer focused then 'simulating' or relating or reliving or other things people want in their games as car fans.
But then again a lot of arcade racers have eh progression/event types too so eh.
I hate real world physics even if used to how to control my own car.
I myself prefer the GT formula of tuning/content as the other games I don't care for it as much and Forza the PI system was pointless and discount were pointless as I barely if ever tune a car as there is no need to. GT you are forced to in some cases or be car smart about it (fun strategy not just people that like to tinker). I can play any entry and not need the PP system as guidance (but any hardcore fan doesn't while other players would).
I myself in PGR4 (not the same but still), FM3 and 4 or even Project Cars or F1 or others. I never cared for the calendar system. It's realistic but I always found it didn't add much and to me it's a more 'shows less' menu then GT does of just a list and I can pick whatever I want, redo one and I'm there.
With calendar once reattempting or the championship approach or all these others just make things less fleixble, but are realistic or fit you in a tour or whatever.
Which as I hated FM6 tour approach and never use FM3 or 4's and just the event list yeah that's my flexibility for racing games (or even as restrictive as PGR2 per class but still good track selection choice not forced per tour like FM6 was great)
I thought the Ride 4/Project Motor Racing (not played) region idea (that FM1 & 2 kind of started but did nothing with so those took their own direction with it) was cool but still found Ride 4 AI so bad and the game too bad of it's restrictive nature so eh.
I wish we got more car builders. I get why people swap engines and such, but Sega GT Dreamcast or Pure PS3/360 (ATVs) did it in a way I found fun enough.
Not tried whatever WRC23 or so had. But even Apex/Racing Evoluzione confused me but was clear after how it handled it.
@RiverGenie I can see reason in that more so yeah. I forget Sophy is on PS5.
I always think of it as B Spec but it is more then that. Heck B Spec in GT4 to me was better then 5 and 6 was a part player controllable part computer player while 5 was just a computer player and real time with 'suggestions' and it sucked.
But my driving style differs too and the lack of defending was clear from the GT Sport sportmanship videos why that won't happen and the AI is as dumb of clean driving or overtaking as it is even when it learns when to do so or starts out in any prior B Spec iterations.
So Sophy's extent I kind of understand has it's capabilities and I get the computing power or not supporting both platforms and sticking to one platform is totally fine.
@UltimateOtaku91 It's not a mainstream device and that's clear. This won't be perfect, they are doing it in a round about way and it could be better yes (I won't deny other strategies could be used yes but they are doing it the way they are and see something in it).
I mean sure there is tv series/movies on Steam, but who cares?
Sony/Microsoft know what they put into their consoles and it shows, from gaming, streaming, and all the functionality we get.
For some people I talk to they are interested or had wanted something to fit the current Steam Machine idea for a while now it's just good to see it finally happen.
Even the Deck, to the translation layers, to the other factors, to Linux, it's fair for 'that' audience and users not having to use Windows or other aspects but even then it is not perfect and we all know that.
I don't see it as competition just an option. Not the 'best' option but 'an option'. For a certain audience interested enough in the idea.
Not everyone needs a Playdate or Evercade or others after all.
This is just another attempt at the Steam Machine 10+ years later, sure 1400p and ok specs, adding standards like Steam Deck did for game compatibility.
It's not to compete as a 4th player in the console wars.
If people want an easy standard device then working out specs, this device does it and that's a welcome thing to see in the PC space for some users, tech savvy or not.
It will take time no doubt.
I mean Valve could go more expensive but why bother to compete that way anyway. If it flops why waste a lot of money and not get enough return on it. Make attempts as they go.
People want the end result and best thing ever but a company can always see reason in that.
Or companies have another angle like the other devices I mentioned.
Or I guess other PC handhelds that are offering the specs, or other features to controllers, etc.
Or people get too competitive/sports team like and want console wars when that's just not practical for a business.
For what Valve is going for I think it's a fair step. It will take a while but it's interesting to see them attempt it then just a be storefront forever as they know more can be done and it shows.
Heck the new VR headset with Foveated Streaming (I mean the dongle wasn't Wii U local and more middle man wifi dongle so sure like anything else, Steam Link included) or Android sideloading was exciting but even still.
Comments 1,907
Re: Gaming Journal A Profound Waste of Time Features Astro Bot in Gorgeous New Issue
Fair to see such a magazine but I'd take that title literally, and their team is probably fair but I saw more imagination and creativity in Media Molecule or past Japan Studios teams then I did Asobi sorry. They did fair but their games just didn't hit me the same way the others did.
Not nostalgia, I don't do nostaglia, I mean quality or how they executed ideas, just didn't' interest me at all to want to play them.
Echoes of the End by an Icelandic team or AA Japanese devs (barely many Indies, in the puzzle/adventure genres they are great, in other genres I might as well give up their ideas are so weak and infuriating it makes me never want to fund them ever as they will keep not putting their potential into it and make safe nostalgic games, so why would I want to fund nostalgia when I want them to put their spin not learn nothing but copy and paste or 'can't do things to cover up their skill levels, they make weak games and think it's ok, it's not, coming from someone that has bought fair games or shovelware and seeing things in them, but when they are 'that' safe that's when I hate them not when it's clear what angles they tried and are coming along well, doing their thing is good, too much reference material is not a good thing, but that's hard to communicate if people are 0 or 100 and why even bother explaining that) or other AAA/AA from around the world in the past, impressed me more in old games on old consoles with fine to awkward controls and I still had more fun with their level design/movesets then I did anything modern gen or even studios like Asobi that do show what's possible but just aren't interesting to me. Astro is a great IP but I've never really enjoyed what they made.
Devs deserve any interviews to explain what they do, people are interested, but I'd rather hear what others have to say personally.
Even the Namco interview I saw from another outlet I was like yep typical nonsense and saying nothing.
Sure a head staff member will say that but I wasn't impressed.
Actual devs 'sometimes' can say more, it varies of course but even then sometimes it comes off as 'we have passion' but I'm like I'm not seeing it. Oh your passion is this way, and I'm like yeah pass. As sometimes people make similar things to others and I'm like oh, well that's disappointing if the execution is the same and not really that exciting in how they showed it in games, in OSTs in anything it's all just samey and I just find them boring. It's why I can find people boring why I go my own path is because of how repetitive people can be.
It's like when I see a Mario game, some of them are really good in their execution of things, and other times I'm like yeah ok whatever. Or when I see the other Mario universe character games and their different movesets I'm happy to see it, I don't have to care about the character I care about movesets/level design, gameplay, a character can have no personality and I will still play it, when I see boring execution of Mario sports games, platformers, whatever. I have no interest in any of them other then a few, but if their execution is pulled back which many of them are these days how lazy some are in ideas then yeah I'm going to call them out on it.
Re: Poll: Five Years of PS5 - How Would You Rate Sony's Console?
Part 3:
PSVR2 is fair but it's also just sad, Indies are doing ok but even the feel can be more backwards/backtracking PSVR1 efforts or Wii/Move balancing buttons/motion, it makes me laugh at devs or the 'it has to be rea/approachable', push motion too far. Sigh. Think outside the box/what you did like PS1/2 or NES/SNES game logic, but no pretend new to gaming/veterans too stuck in I grew up/realistic only & it makes me mad.
Sigh 'oh it's only good for cockpits', excuses. Sony is too lazy to scale projects down (push to Namco/never use those IPs as not big profits, why build up an audience, sigh), like many companies.
Astro is the only creative team left besides Media Molecule.
Emu studio are doing good but licenses, sigh.
Others fit their design & strategy while still standing out with their talents. I hate most of their current lineup because I don't find the game design appealing, story/graphics is not motivating.
Game design is boring, peripherals are a disappointment. Console is ugly. UI is fine, welcome hub is fair & other info for it won't deny that, though I have seen it on mobile, Windows 11 which I am new to & hate it's design issues.
Regardless of game devs and the 2020 situation, game design/gameplay has been boring for years, accessibility is fine but you can scale movesets and level design accordingly, but they don't and it makes me so bored of games.
Echoes of the end made me impressed (not because it's oh old ideas, it's that it offers them in different ways, I don't want copy paste old game design for nostalgia, I want game design that uses movesets and level design or humans/animals/cars in interesting ways, they can program/animate whatever they want and many don't and that's why I get annoyed) like Kena at a first dev's attempt and how they made it modern but scaled well old ideas or new ideas. Most devs or leadership are so weak and annoying.
Xbox's spy game before Gears 4, great ideas, no we have to scale it down and dumb it down. Thanks leadership, you suck.
So I play old games, enjoy old control schemes, enjoy old UI design that isn't bland. It's not nostalgia, it's better design lost for safe and worse design.
The business models of PS+ changes have been fair, better then NSO for back compat I don't have to sub to PS+ and I get the digital releases and I'm happy. I like the flexibility they offer there.
So are they all bad 'no' not at all, underwhelming yes, there is good in there and it's a solid default console for anyone absolutely, but I am just not interested in the games, the controller features are 'fine' but so were Impulse triggers, so were vibration scaling in visual novels or Inti Creates platformers besides Nier doing the halves on the touchpad on PS4 as well. AA Japanese devs impressed me with the controller more then Sony studios did.
Jim wasted Bend/Bluepoint's time and that was just sad.
Destruction Allstars could have been better. Foamstars could have been better. So many could be reworked in better ways of modes, audience appeal, etc. but nope they made subpar/worse games with weak ideas and lack of understanding of audience with weak modes and business model first.
Data over understanding people.
If I want to be harsh 1/10, more fair, 5/10, it's solid for people into the things the PS5 offers 7/10 to 8/10.
Re: Poll: Five Years of PS5 - How Would You Rate Sony's Console?
Part 2:
I research/listen to the business side more then I care about PS5. Refuse to use/buy own. Used it, still no interest or Series X (Xbox One had 2020+ parts of & hate). Quick resume is fine. TV TV TV of 2013-2017 functionality like Windows 8 was better for app/game dual app scaling, what Wii U/Vita couldn't do wish could.
Switch I got for Vita ports, niche Nintendo IPs & HD handheld was ok. It was fine for new gen experiences if games didn't come to PS4/Xbox one too, didn't care how ran, was happy to play regardless, fair ports of old games by Limited Run/Bright Memory Infinite.
But IR was boringly used, ok ideas but not great, Wii experiences were bad due to lack of IR for cursor so we had to have IR pointed the other way & bad cursor instead. Switch is ok at continuing docks/cables to the TV like past devices but it too was very boring.
Don't use a PC for gaming/troubleshooting unless want to, don't care for power, I care about game mechanics/level design, not trends badly refining compared to past trends & holiday destinations as excuses for level design.
Enhancements are fair, the DVDs to Ultra Blu-ray is nice, streaming feature, apps not as much as Xbox but both Nintendo/Sony don't need to either so it's fine.
The console design is as awkward as PS4 was so eh. Ugly/bad to position. Sure no touch button thankfully but moving the HDMI cable back in is annoying, but it's still an awkward design with the stand. Flower pot/ugly art piece console. Xbox Series is a rectangular prism fair air flow, PS5 airflow/design is eh.
PS4 UI was way better, PS3 had limits after PSX/PSP UI, got used to groups after Wii U/PS4 folders limits of binding games, I filter so many things in Switch groups, I assume PS5 uses that feature well? (never used or seen) that Xbox introduced that PS/Switch both took notice & that's fine. I use them a lot on Switch then Xbox One.
Sure i like the quiet Xbox feature on PS5. But they aren't reasons for me to care about the PS5 at all.
I beat Space Marine 2, it was a 1.5 in game design, a .5 entry of changes and didn't impress me at all.
Rift Apart felt less fun than prior entries. Even Echoes of the End got to the Ratchet Nexus style bits, loved the water rising/lowing of Ratchet 2002/2016, I can play that game and go wow these old school ideas used just enough, move on, combat that's modern and not that appealing but does the job and the dialogue is fair. Best linear game I've seen on PS5. While played and finished Alice Madness Returns and that was the best PS3 era game with game mechanics/level design and artstyle/themes i played all year. Besides Singularity.
Peripherals existing, great to see them still making them. The execution of them, very poor. Portal can be accessible but does it have resolution/connection scaling no, Wifi5 isn't that bad I'm fine with that access some reasons may have if no wifi6 or 7 or whatever interference or whatever, but no dual screen, unacceptable. The marketing is. OK. But I'm also sick and tired of devices taking 10+ years for audiences to be old enough to embrace tech and companies dumb it down so much. It's infuriating. I referenced so much towards the Steam Machine to anything PS/Xbox/Nintendo have done for 10 years to many situations in a conversation yesterday. It surprised me.
Why build up what Vita/Phones/Tablets or even PSVR can do of the dual screen use cases to just dump it. Very disappointing.
Re: Poll: Five Years of PS5 - How Would You Rate Sony's Console?
Echoes of the End is good, Tides of Annihilation looks fair. Diofield was ok. Valkyrie Elysium was fun (both got on PS4). WRC23/24, Ride 5 I'll wait. Darksiders 4 don't sound great. Wreckfest 2/Wrecreation aren't either.PS5 is eh. PS4 & under got more games/appealing elements & old gen versions appeal. I'd buy a failed console library, quality over volume. Rhythm Heaven Groove Switch 1 for sure.
Very poor. Disappointing (wanted to be fair, could say awful), abysmal game design/features/functionality, not exciting at all to play, research but boring execution, didn't like 8th gen, to make that clear. Don't care for PS5, PS6. It's not power/price, it's execution/experience.
For people interested/solid console I'd say 8/10 for features (gaming, disks, streaming, etc., fair UI, and more), default console, power to price ratio benefits and more I see reason in it, for being fair 5/10, for uninterested 1-3/10. I am only playing PS4 games, or should i say only Switch, PS4 if I care and mostly PS3/360 and under.
Back compat/remasters/updates is fair & tech to experiment but if games suck, dev ideas are weak, don't care about options anyway. Options are a good thing, not if all terrible. Yotei (flashback areas were limited and disappoint the rest is a good game in a format I wasn't into anyway but does those parts well even if the wolf skill tree/no commands of stance was disappointing)/Rift Apart didn't show the SSD in smart ways. Ratchet 2009 did PS3 HDD better (games load smarter of defeat to respawn/chapter starts, FF7 Rebirth did, but most games are still pathetic at programming loading techniques) & Rift Apart does those parts well, the new parts it does abysmally.
Physical lessening is sad but happens. Digital doesn't mean I limit my platforms and library, I treat digital how i do physical, play whatever for reasons I see to use them. I am not digital loyal at all.
I still collect/find trendy, or niche old era games with more fun game design, I didn't like the PS3/360 hits that lead to PS4/Xbox One game design. Never did, never have. So yeah I'm playing what's left behind good game design dismissed for holiday destination/historical places, or cinematic worlds when I don't find that immersive.
I get immersed in gameplay/movesets/level design/mechanics. Not boring locations and boring characters. That 'personality' doesn't interest me. Human beings don't interest me either. Why would I want to play as some human, animal/car that's boring to use them in this world.
Same reason I can play empty games like Minecraft (wait for Hytale on PC) and not care about dungeons but in other genres treat something differently based on it's core, strengths, potential.
Wishlist/filters could be on PS4, same with quiet PS5/Xbox One/Series but nope has to be PS5 because excuses.
I have 'access' to a PS5/Series X I don't use them. Others around me do but I've never been so uninterested in either of the 2 consoles either. Switch 2 is early but still don't' care for it. Can hold out with Switch 1. Switch 1 had enough factors despite how ok. 2017 got Vita, 2018 a Wii U, 2020 a 3DS, 2021 a Switch. PS4/Xbox One games were just not appealing & features I liked got cut so reasons to pull away.
To see what I missed out on and because 8th gen game design was not for me at all. Still isn't.
Remasters/updates were fair for devs to experiment I guess.... Back compat/emulation has been fair.
Re: Persona, Metaphor Director Says JRPGs Are on the Brink of a New Era
If story telling, maybe, if artstyles sure. The dodge/real time elements at times even if compared to any other games with a dodge or any others like a Paper Mario inputs approach I mean it's not like E33 wasn't that surprising, I mean there is a reason I'd compare it to why racing games refuse to have a blocking/defence option is 'it's unsportsmanlike' or it would be blocking passing options but I don't care. I'd be open to B Spec in GT7 offering it or opponents, I mean as a player I can do it all the time to the CPU opponents if I know I'm not a match for them and it's not sportsmanlike.
To me it may be a good game but it didn't impress me that much on the surface at least.
If gameplay maybe but even Conception did the quad angle combat and seen nothing do it since, while I can compare Eternal Sonata to Neptunia or others.
I can compare Atelier or Persona or others with their turn based approach and minor differences as many turn based games do continue.
We have real time RPGs in different forms by Tales, Final Fantasy and more.
Whichever ones or what each inspires or otherwise I guess.
I'm only playing the AAs so from a few years ago so what do I know about JRPGs really these days not a lot.
But whether the structure or the gameplay or the amount of cutscene variations or the presentation, characterisation, scale of the world and whatever else sure.
But to me gameplay is my motivation and if a lot of JRPGs in the big space haven't then I don't care what their world scale is, it won't interest me regardless.
Even if most play them for story or artstyle or quirks or whatever other reasons or are ok with the gameplay many keep having.
Re: 'We Believe It's Feasible': Emulation Studio Working on PS3 Support for Modern Consoles
If they can I'll be impressed, streaming it just isn't fun. It will take time but I'm interested. Otherwise been happy with getting PS3 games the second hand market way, the odd PS1/PS2/PSP offered on with my digital purchase not subscription to PS+.
Don't even have streaming PS+ in my region anyway, do Xbox Cloud but that's about it.
Re: 'Financial Viability Is a Big Deal': Emulation Studio on Why More Retro Games Aren't Coming to PS Plus Premium
Part 2:
Emulate to test them, know that peripherals have limits and even fan emulator devs don't bother as it's some work to get going, sad but understandable and most players don't care either, which is also sad, so that limits what gets supported or not as it is. Might as well get the hardware and play it if it's cheap and niche and worth my time for game design and understand the hardware most ignore and discover what makes it great then most people focusing on the surface and 'well known' and other talk. When I don't care about talk, I care about creativity made design no matter how unpolished it's still got something charming about it I want to play and furthers my interest in what games can be or are and lost.
Re: 'Financial Viability Is a Big Deal': Emulation Studio on Why More Retro Games Aren't Coming to PS Plus Premium
Which is understandable but even big companies are lazy. Was happy to see Battle Engine Aquila, never thought would be offer, got the Bloodrayne games. Thank you Ziggurat. Rogue Trooper was surprised to see too. When is Psi Ops? When is many others?
When is PSP Puzzle games Crush, Mercury, Voodoo Dice, Cube, I got a few of these physical finally but researched years ago now?
When is Scaler Behaviour Entertainment/Global Star etc. Where is Dr Muto Warner Bros/Midway? Where is Blinx 2 Microsoft?
Where is Wetrex N64 on NSO? Space Station Silicon Valley? To many others. The 3rd parties I actually care about on N64.
I can point to those or even more niche, but again licensing, lack of effort to reverse engineer for understandable reasons, whatever source builds, money to make from it, etc. Good ideas get left behind for profit and 'if they want to risk take' to smaller companies willing to and I'm glad when they do/can and don't just ignore the IPs I actually want to play not their surface level games with design not really appealing to me as a lot of what I am looking for has been left behind instead.
For if they want to (not big scale every project to look good) and these other studios can I'm all for it.
Seeing a Namco interview made me mad too. Yeah because some of their games have gotten a revival/remake, but even then, wow their classics are still 'this amount of times the classic re-released' then doing more with it. But it would be too big scale, too niche then building it up because why bother to do that. It's just a cycle. Legend of Druaga could be anything but nope it's just recycled all the time.
I've been fine with their learning or their options offer via these official versions.
Or some niche games getting support or whatever engines they are willing to work with as some games use particular engines and approaches or use of the hardware and players don't understand that and want their mainstream favourites.
I always put my thoughts in Mystic Ryan's video similar to this and going a bit further so I already was glad this was revealed but also called out the BS as well.
If they do PS3 sure, but I mean oh PS1 and PS2, as if players or these studios barely look at PSP, Wii and other libraries.
I had more games I've collected or wanted over the years most collectors would overlook and most people in general overlook, I look at them and am wowed more and more while everyone else has higher expectations or looks at the surface.
I don't believe most of this nonsense.
Licensing, I do, impact they have, what a loud of garbage. This is why I seek game design, movesets, level design, mechanics, not superficial nonsense.
It's why games suck now, weak minded companies or developers, Indie to AA/AAA and elsewhere with their weak design and accessible or 'empty' excuses for core design of games. I refuse to buy such underdevelopment 'modern excuse' garbage.
There is a reason I will emulate or collect it physical.
Re: Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 (PS5) - The Most Absurd Game in Series History
Part 2:
I haven't cared for COD in years anyway and this makes it easier to still ignore them and play PS3 era shooters with fun mechanics left behind and PS2 era CODs I haven't finished yet. Try the other Battlefields or finish Medal of Honor games.
Otherwise modern shooters are pretty boring and the story driven ones flopped or we have ot wait on still so..... I might as well finish the remaining PS2/3 era shooters left behind with cool ideas and otherwise continue to play other genres like i am.
Got my COD Wii/Wii U fix to try them out so not much else.
Re: Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 (PS5) - The Most Absurd Game in Series History
1.Found God of War Norse series bosses boring so to me the Greek era scale was way better. Bosses don't interest me a lot with fighting versus strategy that's engaging or more interesting attacks so they could be 'scale' interesting but fights themselves boring to play.
2.People seem to forget how Unreal Tournament and even old Star Wars Battlefront was. You can make good multiplayer based campaign and have story. But people don't they have 'this is how an IP is' and that's it. But I play more games for gameplay design so I am going to talk about it from that angle and explore more.
I get yes people want a story, or they want more particular level design/production value in such a way, but it seems they want to make the campaign just bot based multiplayer prep and that is kind of sad yes.
Then again this is the series that took too long to offer poppable tires for vehicles in any mode yet that should be a no brainer, but then again even movies don't do that as why do stunts like that I guess or CGI it. Smart soldiers think about their options, but animators or others don't go that far for a reason, they don't want to ruin things or can't be bothered or don't think outside the box of strategies for combat and it shows.
Then again most people seem to forget animations/programming anything is possible, yet they follow real rules and that's why games are boring and game design is so safe and bland.
People into singleplayer aren't into multiplayer or bot matches unless they actually care to. So to me yeah I'd put even Declassified over this as while they were short they were still singleplayer missions with enough to them with the same flow as a campaign regardless of the moments being short, sped up of QTEs and what was needed.
The marketing sigh. The first trailer was good, the rest have been so bad. Some very Advanced Warfare EB Games comparable (ok), to even worse. Activision has the worst marketing for this game it's hilarious.
I will say the silliness I don't mind, so many are serious I can't be bothered sometimes and the tone/gameplay is so bland.
Doesn't change that COD is still safe gameplay but it's something at least in tone.
The modes seem fair, nothing amazing but I mean AW felt limited and people said it was better then Ghosts and I was like what? I get people mean in how they feel or progression or whatever but even then having more modes versus less modes or whatever the case of maps always confused me.
The amount here seems fair but I haven't really liked multiplayer map design as to me they have less gimmicks and feel very safe, maybe they are good, but to my extent they seem very boring but look nice or fit general flow but seem never interactive and are set piece lacking and forgettable to me. Just wow like this location. Ok. No interesting docks with shipping containers moving, they just 'have shipping containers' or whatever. Everything is so static and bland. Whether the player navigates them, camps or pulls a lever. None of it is there. It's just bland and lifeless.
Carry over of weapons is a nice touch.
Zombies/multiplayer seem pretty standard, or not covered deep enough in the review.
I respect the review saying it's silly, as to me I appreciate it more then going oh it's not movie like/dramatic enough and I'd be like oh ok I'm done reading this review then. But nope it's a good review and I kept reading.
Also if it's still very 'online for every mode' for DRM then yeah I respect mentioning that too.
Re: It Only Has One Review, But Inazuma Eleven PS5, PS4 Is a Hit
@stocko Fair enough. Never watched the shows but know of them. I enjoy a good anime game or visual novel and such so what it seems to offer is fine.
Like I said i go more for Virtua Tennis or others. Even Mario sports games cut back it's fun court level design ideas. Mario Tennis went from lets have interesting elements to the courts to lets be just tennis and mario characters and save dev time because who cares about those other exciting things and just focus on the basics of the sport and character marketability or being a sports game to offer.
So why should I bother then?
I'll take a look at footage. But I don't see it as much other then flashy effects but I don't know how the movesets are for sure other then to match the IPs they are.
All I see is fair soccer/football, odd QTE moments like you got with the old Hockey/NHL games which is fair, fair cutscenes to show off more particular catches of the ball and that's about it. That's fair 'polish' but it's not level design engaging at all to me. It's still 'we have to have keep the core of soccer' here. I get it's an anime IP so I can't be that particular on it and what it has but even still.
It must be either hard for me to explain what I mean or people forget what old games use to add because priorities went elsewhere, imagination or cut corners as much as possible as devs know players don't care, while players like me do and end up buying less games.
No clue on special moves, just typical soccer courts/stadiums, it fits, but not my thing. I need more. Some effects but mostly seem as typical as having heat or illusion of speed effects in a racing game, not a lot, it's fair in a cartoony way but even then doesn't add much. I don't see much moves here, but again how much is it tied to real soccer or the rules of the source material. I think more on what can be programmed or animated, not reality and rules. But most things do so I have to think about that.
Even then Cosmic Smash is a breakout clone as Space Squash or whatever and it's still fun despite how awkward the stick was or animations are for core moves.
Virtua Tennis I haven't cared for the main modes when picking them up.
I can compare racing games with particular progression or event variety with different rules and even in the modern era only GT7 offers that, everything else has less and focuses on other things instead so I play more older ones with more modes/event types instead or more engaging progression quirks to them.
Re: The Outer Worlds 2 (PS5) - Mechanically Fantastic RPG Struggles to Be Memorable
@Flaming_Kaiser Agreed. I was sad that if you mess up NPCs or something you take so long to get back to that level of good/bad, it's so dumb. Oh I happened to be bad a few times to see what the game can do, here is an entire level or less you need to regain because we want to punish you? What kind of garbage excuse is that and the auto saving I think as well.
It's strictly good and strictly bad and regaining it is a pain because the good points or bad points increase rate is so slow. It's so badly offered. Or the amount they take away or what skills you lose access to. It's so dumb.
They have changed with with Tsushima/Yotei and some of it makes sense and I went why not just commands (fair stances rather then too much focus, type commands, or is 'automated NPCs that aren't very good as doing what you want them to do so why would we give players subtle control over them', maybe even offer a better bonding system or other factors, versus what they offered, the way of modern gaming these days I guess, I don't know, skill trees being the excuse of everything doesn't give me much interest in them at all it's why I hate them so much is why they get used not smartly get used) for the wolf not useless skill tree pushing but whatever, that's just me. Then again Outer Worlds and Bethesda titles do follow old skills direction of RPGs so they differ of course in what they are used for.
Back on topic: I would have wanted a mix of oh good/bad powers but no it's restrictive.
Even then it's so point based and not like 'Mass Effect or Infamous 1' with the 'act on this in time' kind of approach which wasn't much but felt it had more purpose to it then a points system and being heavily restrictive or pointless and ruining your story progression to bounce back. That's not appealing to the player it's just punishing them and making them want to give up a grind of points.
At least the missions in Sunset Overdrive/Infamous PS4 era was fun, or else I would have given up. Beat both PS4 era Infamous games but still.
It's too much 'we only scripted so much' or we have to be scripted to fit in with Sony or other devs expectations these days and I'm like well that's just silly. It's why I find some scripted things just a joke rather then balancing. It's why I don't like certain modern game design is the scripting ruins it rather then being fair balance of scripting to balance things.
It's why I can compare GT7 or FM6 to PGR2 or other racing games of how they do progression in their games, I think the former are terrible and the latter did it fair for it's restrictive progression, but then PGR3 had to be 'so open ended' for a certain audience as 'all modes' were, not just 1 mode that suited the strictness more so that was also on the devs going too far with it but I didn't mind as it was still flexible enough with it's strictness to not bother me or the core was better too.
Compared to say other action adventure games with fair motivation in the game to play it or fair strictness I'm ok with varies, while others I'm not.
But in a way that's punishing they ended up with which is annoying rather then a good excuse for balancing they could claim it as.
Re: Valve Won't Subsidise Steam Machine, Expected to Be Pricier Than More Powerful PS5
So they are pulling a 3DO (though was a console blueprint) then. But instead of DVD player makers that don't make games, they have a storefront Valve and want PC like prices and want money and think people will still pay it (or not cut the controller off the price or whatever) or know it's a niche device or people have set uses for it. So it's fine.
It's just questionable is all. I've worked it out but there is a reason Switch/Series S fit and work out the price point and games, Valve doesn't want to do that and the spec has capable for 1400p but even the 8GB should have been 12 or 16GB or something for RAM.
Other components seem fair enough but even still.
If they go 'oh the price is that way because of other services we don't offer but you can use it for', then that's just ridiculous.
Besides Keys for PC games, or if avoid Steam and go with other launchers, cloud services, users don't get the Steam controller and use their Xbox/PlayStation/Nintendo controllers or even Guitar Hero/others with it. Whatever the case.
Then I mean sure but even still. What the user chooses versus price point is very hmm to question here.
Regardless of the new VR headset and controller, and just focusing on the console.
Or what storage or other things the user can add or won't mess around with and also the 'standard' they want to set like Steam Deck did for hardware configuration like consoles do.
I myself go console for their gimmicks software/hardware or controllers and games are so eh in game design these days i care so little about them these days. So to me most hardware doesn't interest me, the business side does as everything else is so eh. I keep my PC and phone for other stuff or emu testing not major gaming I do on consoles if they make appealing games/consoles not generic experiences I don't want and just ignore most of despite branching out to all genres at this point. It's up to devs and their eh game design.
Re: Horizon Sales Update Cements It As One of Sony's Strongest Franchises
I think the series has the universe that's engaging, I don't care for the games as it's not my type of gameplay formula of interest but i respect it more then the other Sony cinematic ones new or existing and converted that's for sure.
The setting/tech and tribal is fair for a lot of things. But even still.
I won't deny it has had enough remasters at this point even if Last of Us got more.
Horizon got what complete edition and play at home offering to then the performance update to the new remaster. Tsushima got it's directors cut and that's it. Last of Us got milked way more then any of these. Days Gone didn't get much but a performance boost I think that's it.
With how much Sony pushes the IP into conversation sure but that's just how much people are sick of that I think or compare it to the Last of Us and think it's the same milking when it's not.
Sony pushes it yet it's clear audiences or critics care more for other IPs, I care less for those and not much about Horizon at all. But I prefer what it does try to do more then the other personality wise or story lore wise. The gameplay to all these IPs bores me to no end like many mission based action adventure games or open worlds, I just find them boring, repetitive and the use of the characters is too safe. I've played better.
Echoes of the end may be linear but it brings back the PS2/PS3 era design I wanted. I buy PS2/PS3 shooters for that reason, Ratchet has just pushed story and the gameplay felt shoved in rather then adding to it, so the multiplayer mobile game dumbing the game down and not using gadgets or anything interesting just shoved it in even further to dumb down the IP.
Others just make accessible games with generic human/animals movesets, and push story/graphics, so playing as human movesets as an animal it's just boring. Animals can't be used for story/visual variety if anthromorphic or as animals like Goose game/Stray it's just boring. You can't tell me animal platformers didn't show great movesets in the past and dumbing it down was a great idea to 'feel like that animal' no it doesn't.
Nothing happens, the world is static and I just don't care for them. Spiderman even with all the movesets of such a character as a superhero did nothing for me due to how it's executed, movesets had no impact on the world just 'combat options' wow how exciting (1 ground pound quest, that's it, barely remember how to use the move after did that side quest too, so memorable and I liked that side quest and the laser grid one, 2 out of the whole game), or the missions/outposts boring me due to how eh they were executed, so safe, multiple waves, not memorable, not enough distinction at all, or compared to Sunset Overdrive's design which was may more engaging of regular or platforming missions/tower defence and more. They are different games yet one did open world design may more exciting for their first open world compared to Spiderman and these others are just so formulaic open world design or basic movesets I can't be bothered to play them.
Fitting the 'themes or context sure' but that's about it. Gameplay wise they are forgettable or not engaging at all. Like elves/dwarves then varied creatures or 'cars are only used for driving' not anything else more exciting to use them for or were too lazy to offer additional rules/event variety, sigh.
The theme/setting doesn't motivate me.
Re: Gran Turismo 7's New Bonus Credits Offer Feels Cruel for Current Players
@Gunga Well that's why I felt Forza Motorsport 6's roulettes dumb or the tour structure. Even then weight mods only did effect me, other mods did nothing so that system was pointless to in that game. Why give players high spec cars if they can't use them for the campaign just arcade mode or something. It's just pointless due to the career mode structure. If people want free driving/arcade mode access by all means. Or sport mode runs (waiting for access to it in GT7 compared to GT Sport also doesn't help 7's case there even compared to other 'multiplayer unlocks after period of time or accessible immediately from the menu design of other games).
PGR2 was restrictive and players wanting freedom complained as all modes are restrictive, arcade and career per classes (I thought it was handled better then both modern examples or even Ride 4 which i thought was ok for the angle it wanted to capture but didn't do it that well).
PGR3 makes it so open ended instead to combat that audience type to cater to them so I always remember the PGR2 dev quote. Rather then offering a restrictive career mode option as devs don't do that they focus on a core design instead. Same as they don't offer different puzzles per difficulty/type of players (not meaning optional hard ones for collectibles types in games I mean in general or a skip button if they have one).
GT7 doesn't offer much fancy early on in roulettes either from my playing of the game so far. Regardless of the obvious credit rewards offered, I don't care as I don't need them but even still. I've strategized what I wanted anyway no matter how many they gave me.
Invitations suggestions or sure access to more cars, but if the player can barely progress and use those cars, why would anyone care about more credits other then to access things early when the point is to highlight different ranges of cars and their history.
The narrative and dev design versus the marketing team is so backwards it makes no sense.
If players want a game to race their nostaglic cars or supercars sure but their is having a thrill and getting a customer's money and actually being able to use them in the game due to how restrictive GT7's career mode is compared to even past entries more open ended design.
I got an F1 car in GT3 at 15%, in my current playthrough I struggle to get one due to the roulettes there. It's been a fun replay of the game for me working around those.
I mean if they want to attract people who seek cheat modes or fancy things or end game first or just 'play whenever and have fun' sure but the game isn't designed that way.
Even gating split screen/sport mode after a few hours is a bit odd. Challenges sure, but to me the scaling even compared to GT5's level system just made me confused why they designed it that way.
Re: It Only Has One Review, But Inazuma Eleven PS5, PS4 Is a Hit
Not my type of game but I was impresse by screenshots and regardless of a licensed anime game. It seemed fair.
I assume like Captain Tsubasa was decent too?
No clue but they seem fair games.
If no Street or other types out there or much quality for some arcadey sports games or not into Bloodbowl or fantasy takes on sport then I guess anime licensed IP sports ones do the job.
Never cared for sports anime, ever, even sports festivals I hate those episodes. Cultural ones i can kind of get behind but even still. I don't look forward to them. Scenery change sure or culture sure but I care so much about dialogue I just don't care.
I'm more into arcadey sports games but even then things like Cosmic Smash or the arcadey minigames in Virtua Tennis series, that's more my thing.
Not like racing games were I do enjoy the side modes/event variety to use cars in situations but usually the main racing is fair but these days I hate how mundane racing games are in the core feel I need the side modes to be interesting and they never add anyway. They make subpar products.
Same as why I find fantasy games boring reusing dwarves/elves all the time then their own new creature designs.
Or using animals for some story telling but their movesetse are humanlike so why bother making them animals just for story telling it's boring.
Re: Valve's Steam Machine May Not Be As Affordable As a PS5
I mean it's no 3DO blueprint and DVD makers putting high prices as they don't make the games.
But it's also specs that are about Series S or Switch 2 or bit better then those in some cases but not in many others.
So it's not 'great' but it's decent.
Steam makes enough money as it is and games vary in prices so the storefront is viable but the console and niche audience who knows. We will have to see.
Games struggling with that 8GB though is a tough thing, 1400p sure, 4K it's pushing it there no matter the settings or overall game design.
Re: PS5 Welcome Hub Update Adds New Stat Tracking, Backgrounds
@blah01 Does the library have groups? Or whatever they are called on PS5?
I got used to Wii U/PS4/3DS/Vita folders but I have used the groups (started on Xbox One) and used them a bit on Xbox One, but used them to the limit on Switch 1, no idea how PS5 uses them and neither do people I talk to that use PS5 regularly.
I have access to all the consoles just use PS4/Xbox One/Switch 1 and older more.
I do think a toggle for 'strict folders' would be nice for those that liked them on PS4/Wii U/3DS/Vita instead of the groups approach they use now for any filtering and the list of games.
Then again manuals or digital website redirects are hit and miss these days of existing. Sigh miss those I used them on occasion those PDFs with hit and miss details as good or as bad as some glossaries, tutorials and more that devs still miss the point of multiple button actions, or other clarity.
To me I wasn't a fan of these groups but the more I used them and went 'huh I can put multiple of the same game in different groups and filter whatever I want' the more I got into using them.
On Xbox One I just went with the more 'OG Xbox back compat' '360 back compat', 'Xbox One games', 'apps', more general not a lot to it type categories/filtering'.
But to me I went more the 'what is on this SD card', 'order i bought my digital games', 'demos', 'what year they released' '(or original year released)' or 'what age rating', 'what genre', 'remake/remaster/port', 'from this console originally before ported' or 'generations they fit' or 'codes used in physical editions', and all sorts of stuff.
So why I was more into the 'folder and no need to filter just put them there' and I don't like 'recently played', 'title', 'longest/shortest hour count order' and I think the filtering for platforms can be annoying of recent and prefer my folders on PS4 to the PS5, Xbox One/Series share the same besides feature differences and Switch of last played order before the library/groups design, the rest missing of filters I would like to see.
Just got filtering interested/crazy about using them to really see what I could use them for. But that's just me.
Re: Gran Turismo 7's New Bonus Credits Offer Feels Cruel for Current Players
Well I did, but shouldn't have the highest edition a month ago or so with the 1.5Mill credits. So increasing it seems a bit ridiculous. Why bother now for new owners of the game? Is it that much a motivation? To me it wasn't. I am not a GT7 fan but I like some ideas having played it now then not for years, I waited late for GT Sport as well and did the wiki work for the offline update changes. I still care about the series more then I do Ratchet or God of War these days.
I don't even use the 1.5Mill credits anyway, I still am playing the game safe and as if I never had them, I never use the GT3, GT4P and GT4 license test or credit transfer as I don't care to. Same applies here.
I wanted the OST app and the songs offered were ok but not my thing. I wanted to see if it was a USB app (Kandagawa Jet GIrls or Senran Kaugra Peach Beach Splash) or a music player app (Death End Re:quest Z and GT7), I have both for different games (compared to games with a music player menu in the main menu) that's why I was interested. The rest was a 'bonus' credits or bonus avatars, I didn't even care for those at all.
I even have a video idea to cover digital artbooks/OST or USB apps or bonus disks just because why not when physical ones are usually covered instead not digital and wanted to make those the factor of the video more then the physical artbooks I have or bonus disks for Halo 2, the comic/pre-order disk of Splintercell Conviction or NFS Carbon on 360. Not idea if I want to do anything about it. Got all of those cheap. Not so my Disgaea 6 and 7 Deluxe physicals with the artbooks so small for the Switch releases for example. Anyway back on topic.
So for newcomers sure, and I suck at My First GT's last time trial (99% of the demo otherwise) so I can't transfer those cars over as that's the end game feature of that demo just like GT Concept 2001/2 or GT4P back to GT3 and GT4 compared to GT PSP car transfer for arcade mode for GT5 which doesn't require progression.
So otherwise I'm playing the game like I got the standard edition and been fine getting credits, getting low roulettes and a car I already owned as a reward and playing the game normally.
I haven't dipped below the 1.5mill as I am playing carefully, I always do when playing these games just encase, but strategise when replaying GT2 to 4 different ways with different cars all the time. Challenges I set myself or casual playthroughs to different events then prior playthroughs.
Re: One of Ghost of Yotei's Most Unique Features Was Meant to Be Much Bigger
@Dalamar To Push Square staff maybe or Sucker Punch. I guess it's past the days of Killswitch inspiration Gears/Uncharted for cover systems (even if 24 The Game a PS2 2006 game by Guerilla Cambridge that also worked on Primal or Little Big Planet PSP, Rigs PSVR and such) also had a cover system.
Or Alfa Romeo Racing Italiano inspiring Grid 2008/Forza Motorsport 3 for rewind and cutting the RPG features and 1 to 5 rewinds limit for free rewinds. I can make many other comparisons for 'those' but won't so on topic of other games that take that 'unique' extent of such a feature.
Biomutant did it years earlier and ran on PS4/Xbox One/Switch, probably some other games I'm forgetting.
Forgot Titanfall 2 did the 2 states level that was really good.
I had played Minecraft adventure maps that did that teleport here, teleport there for dimension jumping or teleporting awkwardly up stairs for puzzle maps.
Ratchet did multiple states of levels in Crack in Time in 2009 on PS3 with a HDD and various skybox colours/same reasons in battle, aftermath of a battle, fixed safe aftermath changed time with (it had 2 of these 1 with a battle, another plant a seed so it grows in the future to access the villain having a meeting with that planet's people), before Rift Apart did Blizar as closer to that sort of idea and then the more 'throw you through a bunch of areas briefly' additions that I wasn't a fan of. The side areas were ok for collectibles and more platforming. Which Spyro 3 had side areas for missions that couldn't have all level assets fits in the same space so had to be spaced out, even besides the less detailed stuff in the sky (swimming in the air glitch, this was to make the level of detail technique works).
Zelda Link to the Past was the reason I thought of the old/young for Yotei, as it has a light/dark world. I didn't expect the same scale but something more fitting for Yotei to offer what she remembers and what has changed. Would have been interesting for story telling or mystery or gameplay, but only ended up smaller scaled for story it seems.
Played Alice Madness Returns on PS3 with the playable flashbacks at the start of chapters before the main Wonderland levels.
Other games have had cutscenes of it then, some have playable cutscene areas.
Even Rift Apart/Spyro 3 had side areas for collecitbles or missions/minigames loaded in different from the main ones. It's nothing new to me.
I assumed it would be old/young versions (light/dark world from Zelda Link to the Past, or any others with 2 or more worlds or 2 versions for differences to convey in story or gameplay depending on the region size necessary) with different context and differences to uncover for side missions or something not just playable cutscene flashback areas, I get the scale that would take but it felt underdeveloped to me and it shows it was restructured to fit more what they wanted or could manage and I get that.
I don't know if I was expecting Darksiders 2 levels of 4 hubs and both later 2 were so scaled down, but the major 2 were sizeable.
Re: One of Ghost of Yotei's Most Unique Features Was Meant to Be Much Bigger
Well, well well, seems I was right in thinking they "could have" been more and people went, oh your wrong. Yeah funny that. I know it was I tied it more to the SSD but my point was gameplay or how limiting the scenes were that I was confused why, I am not interested in side areas for cutscenes but more gameplay purpose. Rift Aparts were fair even if didn't think much of them for secrets. Spyro 3 made them enough per minigames as their own areas compared to the main level but even then different scale of hardware/expectations back then too.
Biomutant did them and they were alright for their limited purpose for flashbacks too but they didn't do much for me either.
I don't know if I was expecting Darksiders 2 levels of 4 hubs and both later 2 were so scaled down, but the major 2 were sizeable.
Or flashbacks in a lot of linear games either playable cutscenes or just cutscenes).
I don't blame them it makes sense the time to implement it or how texture/terrain swapping, giving a lot of purpose to the flashback areas with characters and things to do and so on, I was even surprised Lego Batman had 6 chapters not just 3, so having 2 versions and however much coverage I don't play them as that's 2 open worlds right there to offer, would have been a lot so they did just playable cutscenes in particular areas but it is disappointing use of the SSD and potential or enough ideas to offer, it's a large scale thing that.
I would have loved to see a light/dark world being an old/young approach for Yotei with area differences approach.
Re: PS Store's Enormous Black Friday Sale Set to Go Live 21st November
I've got those I have my eye on from the prior sale up to 22nd. So to me I haven't bothered with this current one.
Not much and even on Switch eshop not much either I care for in that Black Friday sale or discounted values are still too low.
Re: $100 Off PS5 Consoles, PSVR2 for Black Friday 2025
For my region I've seen the consoles prices that bit higher but still $600/700 range and the discounts still didn't impress me.
Here they seem more reasonable for these currencies.
$20 discount on the Dualsense is hilarious for a controller worth as much as games, sure the tech in it but even still for how much games use the features eh even if it is the TV remote default device (not saying the PS5 TV remote).
Re: Talking Point: The Game Awards 2025 Nominations Announced - Who Are Your Winners?
Nothing big enough for me. Indies were hit and miss and just 'happened to release in 2025'.
2024/2025 were forgettable to me, so I have nothing to say.
Echoes of the End was fun of the water rising or moving objects, 'safe skill trees', but good puzzles/pacing of combat, puzzles and talking scenes, but even then as much as it worked out with it's Enhanced Edition.
Re: Sony Trying to Silence Concord Revival Project After Fans Brought PS5, PC Disaster Back
What because fans can make a better Concord? Oh Sony's ownership, so on and so on factors.
If a case of in the code there is DRM or other detection systems of things sure. Or whatever other factors can be the case here, but even still.
Hey did Sony forget that Gearbox had fans focus on their dead live service or whatever else it was. Yeah some studios/publishers should take notes. XD
Not everyone wants to make money on something, they saw something in the IP, the studios let it go or failed to appeal.
Lots of games still don't have private servers or revival projects. Sure mostly due to skilled people out there and how many there are or time those people have but even still.
Some people see potential in things or see an audience there. Fans know it better then companies do at this point. Companies want control over servers, a narrative and IP. Fans don't care about any of that and see a thing that can be made better or offered to an audience, they don't always care about money.
It's all down to mentality, it's why I find gaming hilarious these days, they make them accessible but also pushed me away by their nostalgia or their big business or whatever, all Indies/AAA/AA, just make me laugh. They don't have to cater to me of course but there is a reason I give my cues in surveys, new article comment sections. I can't say what I want in games enough. It's better feedback then nothing. At least for garbage gameplay the past few years or balancing it for audiences.
I literally talked to 2 Indie devs in the Clive and Wrench discord and gave ideas for their games, I was respectful and gave my perspective and what other audiences perspectives are and still give them freedom to make what they want, suggestions help, it's if they care enough to use them. I care, but if they want to sit in nostalgia and make weak products, by all means. I'm not buying them.
Re: Talking Point: Will PlayStation's Mobile Push Be a Success or a Flop?
@RadioHedgeFund Well with the amount of mobile gamers that I've seen buy a PS4 for Fornite or others in EB Games yes. Or at a point in time i did.
We hardcore can be very picky.
I think expanding the market has potential, same as tv shows/movies, comics/novels, merch, etc.
But I think Horizon looks more good approach to the series with this mobile game, same with Call of the Wild did too it fit VR and nausea balancing well.
The Ratchet mobile game looks like the surface level and lacks. The J2ME entries were good. Before The Nexus was an ok endless runner. They have potential I just see them being very eh if done wrong.
I thought WIpEout Rush was worse then other manager games or even Gran Turismo B Spec functionality. Or too many sci-fi racers or arcade racers on mobile competing.
But I mean even Lucid made Destruction Allstars with Twisted Metal like genre approach but make it for young people who never played them or doesn't care for vehicles, so I mean some console/mobile devs don't learn and put minimal thought into what audiences want. Not like old Lucid staff or Playground staff weren't working on Blur and it has a cult following but again it's angle was a bit hmm at the time.
I mean the Ratchet one needs gadgets or more to move around the map. just the Rift Apart wall running wall is 'ok' but still not much. It isn't fully Overwatch with too many separate characters, but even others that aren't that format lack.
I mean I get why Battlefield doesn't have the swap around the soldiers around the map feature like 2 Modern Combat on console had and more destruction/theming/setting focus but that ability was just great in that game for modes and use cases.
I mean not like prior Ratchet multiplayer didn't offer things temporary or as long as held them for weapons/gadgets so I mean there is a lot the IP can do but it seems to offer the bare minimum and I think it's lacking. Gameplay depth is enough to carry people for skins I guess, but so many multiplayer games look empty to me at least but what do I know people don't care about gameplay more themes/settings/graphics/story or 'decent gameplay' or accessible gameplay as far as I can tell.
I get why when playing Echoes of the End why games don't always have much puzzles or magic and superpowers but even still to me good movesets on that scale or platforming or other attacks and good pacing to me is what makes me care for games yet so many are just generic human/animal movesets in generic worlds and think their dialogue/brand and otherwise holds up, puzzles could be scaled for difficulty but too much dev time so aren't.
I probably put more thought into games and ideas I think could work then need to but I mean it makes an impact.
I thought Foamstars was too 'copy paste or remixed modes' and had more ideas to separate it from Splatoon and make it just about foam for modes and movesets then it had originality or substance but like it matters. Devs don't care, players don't care. They think the formula wins so do that and put no effort into it. Why make it stand out that's just stupid, when it matters immensely, not like it wasn't clear over 20 years or anything. XD
I seek potential in games I don't care about as ideas are still possible for them regardless. Most people don't care.
Re: Talking Point: Will PlayStation's Mobile Push Be a Success or a Flop?
@Dogbreath Well when generic mobile games that fit formulas win by 'ad shoved in face' or 'appealing enough of themes/settings and such' yeah, companies 'try too hard' and miss how casuals or hardcore approach mobile.
It's just hilarious.
Re: Talking Point: Will PlayStation's Mobile Push Be a Success or a Flop?
@Dampsponge Well even Vita/PS Mobile tried but yeah. I think the J2ME cellphone games were better.
To me the Xperia Play was fair, or Ngage. Fair attempts, but the structure of those games, the phone designs, how much support. It varies. People's expectations vary, 'hearing about it' (as many Nintendo, Sony, Microsoft console or otherwise approaches of features take years or the 'right audience or new people' to be interested, so it varies what is presented and the angle it appeals too).
They are 'trying' but I still think they are a weak approach this time of gameplay or character personality/world design and more, just 'send the IP out there, we win, these devs know the formula' when they could be 'better' but don't look like they care at all.
They feel and look like another studio 'trying but not getting the IP well enough'.
Even if some like Sly Thieves in Time weren't perfect it and others like it have more understanding of the IPs then others.
Still better then Forza Street or others. Wow a match 3 puzzle game and upgrades/cosmetics for cars (can work but it feels weak), wow a reskinned drag racer. Those have to be hilariously 'we don't care' efforts I've seen.
Halo Spartan mobile games were probably as good as Killzone Liberation on PSP.
Re: Talking Point: Will PlayStation's Mobile Push Be a Success or a Flop?
It has potential it just depends how they handle it. Sony can't rely on the console forever, but they need to understand all platforms audiences better. Or 'how an IP can be handled, not just 'we have a brand, use it, throw it out there' which i hate seeing companies do.
Horizon I think has a lot of potential and looks good from that reveal.
Ratchet's new mobile game looks cheap (I don't mean artstyole either I mean gameplay and lack of depth, it's just not good enough, it looks like the WipEout Rush level of lack of care for the IP) even compared to the prior mobile games. It's 'fit a formula' and lacks the depth the series has, it feels like a surface level look at the IP and that's disappointing.
I mean cellphone J2ME had some good ones.
Vita/early Smartphone era was alright of mobile games. This time around I don't know.
Fate GO works, Sackboy Run is old or not I forget. Most of them seem hit and miss to fit mobile or use the IP in a smart way.
They can do better, I'm fine with expanding markets if they put the effort in. Problem is most don't and put the least amount of effort in and that's why I think they are pretty bad.
Re: Sony Targeting Big Holiday Sales with New PS5 Fortnite Bundle, Includes Exclusive Cosmetics
@SeaDaVie I mean even besides the quality 1st party (not my interest but I get why they do).
But I mean it's not like Xbox back compat, more app access then Switch/PS4/5 combined (Windows store), CD support (app to download so might as well have a PS3/360, older or CD player or CD support in a DVD/Blu-ray player at that point), Quick Resume, Impulse triggers.
We all know no one cares about those (joke and serious with this).
I consider them features and benefits but to most people they don't matter and we know how the 1st party on Xbox are anyway.
Or if they have a Series S or cloud access via a phone, TV compatible with it and more then they likely do at this point.
If they like the box they do for their reasons but yes it's clear otherwise.
Unless it's brand loyalty yes most people go to PS5 as a good default console, features they may like the other doesn't have, PlayStation is in more regions then Xbox and other factors I'm probably missing.
So yeah if people are sick of Xbox I'd believe it the same way many are saying about moving to PC as well yet forget the price, troubleshooting and more they like to downplay for 'power' as if PC users aren't stupid and know what it requires. XD
Re: Sony Targeting Big Holiday Sales with New PS5 Fortnite Bundle, Includes Exclusive Cosmetics
@AhmadSumadi Seen retailer bundles with it, they seemed fair for the price months ago half the year ago compared to other discounted prices for PS5s.
They should try put other colourerd plates or controllers or games to bundle.
I mean if Nintendo can put Mario Kart (even Gameboy games with Pokemon 3DS systems, Sony would never do that with like a Ratchet Rift Apart and Size Matters bundle or something or God of War 3 and one of the Norso games or Horizon duology bundle or any other angles) to many bundles let alone other games, why does Sony hold off, who knows, they already put digital codes in bundles or collectors editions anyway. It is weird they don't go as hard on it for Helldivers or others (unless I just haven't seen any) or other live service games to attach them with or other bundles with their existing games.
Even Sega didn't shy away from Sonic Movie collectibles bundled with games to get rid of them. Some companies are just willing to go to certain lengths I guess.
Re: Sony Targeting Big Holiday Sales with New PS5 Fortnite Bundle, Includes Exclusive Cosmetics
Glad I'm a substance person, wow that looks bland.
What superficial things to want a bundle for.
I bet collectors really care about those things and not the Fortnite audience or those that don't have a PS5 yet. Sigh.
They are trying but this is still a bit sad.
There are better bundles, games, digital codes, and more they could make happen here, or plate colours/designs. But nope. They take the silliest route. Can't wait for the Fortnite PS6 when everyone has the game already so why buy a whole console bundle for it when they can just buy a PS6 and still redownload it. XD
Re: Horizon Dev Guerrilla Won't Abandon PS5, Has 'More' Games Coming
@Oram77 I mean to me I think the world scale for story telling is excellent of potential they can fit it into, characters and world setup is good, the gameplay is 'typical' open world action adventure RPG but I see the appeal for sure more then the other Sony cinematic IPs direction alternatives at least.
Guerilla/Sucker Punch do impress me how they handle things. The others are good just didn't appeal to me.
But even then when I look at gameplay for Killzone isn't wasn't much either, even Mercenary had a shop, wow how amazing is that. But it's heavy feel and atmosphere, nothing like it but yes, sales are sales.
But yeah I guess the atmosphere or another shooter competitor but even I know playing trilogies or 1 or 2 offs of PS3 era shooters, I love many of them for their ideas many games 'don't offer these days' and I get why their great ideas or that trend is over and all that.
Not like many great story based shooters these days. Immortals of Aveum was.... fine but I get why people don't care for it, I was fine with it and Forspoken for different reasons then most people though. Bioshock 4 is coming along.
Borderlands is doing well even if 3 was hmm but Tiny Tina/4 are fair games.
Ports of games, other exciting IP.
COD/BF are always there. Yeah, depending for story based shooters hmm.
For multiplayer we already know why that is of live service games or garbage multiplayer ones no doubt.
After Titanfall 2's campaign I gave up on story based shooters of the modern era to focus on old ones I missed out on for PS2/3 era and such, I don't go for Doom clones/Boomer shooters really, or the odd ports like Call of Juarez 4th entry on Switch I think it fine of it's PS3/360 digital origins.
XIII is hit and miss depending on platform and it being fixed, for a PS2 era shooter.
Decent Indie ones that aren't multiplayer.
It's clear why but I mean, it's clear why we don't see their PS3 multiplayer only Warhawk, Socom Confrontation, MAG or even games like Starhawk having building and 3rd person shooting either. They just don't compete the same way.
But at the same time we got Destruction Allstars a Twisted Metal format Fornite looking artstyle game... a genre or format with ok ideas but an audience who had not played one or cared.... yeah Sony's ideas or even Lucid's don't make a lot of sense. They learnt nothing from Blur (or whatever of Lucid/Playground games employees from Bizarre Creations).
RIP The Club as well, ah modern shooting gallery format shooter. Niches like you never stood a chance but glad it existed.
Re: Horizon Dev Guerrilla Won't Abandon PS5, Has 'More' Games Coming
Didn't think they were going to go to PS6 immediately anyway regardless of how long Horizon 3 takes, but sure, with 2 or 3 years left till PS6 or whatever happens of PS5 games and PS4 games and cut offs of old systems and all this stuff collectors pay attention to, why not I guess. Would it be a PS6 launch title like it was Horizon 1 was for PS4 Pro? Maybe. Who knows.
Sony will give them enough time to make it. I wasn't questioning it. XD
Re: New Ratchet & Clank Game Announced, But Not for the Platform You Want
@Leinad7 Even Sunset Overdrive to me had more Insomniac feel in it, despite being pre Spiderman open world formula following ideas in game design, the tower defence to me was more fun then generic outposts, the moveset based side missions alongside the other story based quests. To me that game made me appreciate what they can do in an open world as someone not into open worlds, same with Gravity Rush, same with Infamous Second Son how they go about things, but I'm 10+ years outdated on open worlds so what do I know.
But even this game feels soulless or gave off Full Frontal Assault vibes and even that has more depth then this mobile game to me. It's just Rift Apart ideas but a trend following formula and more empty. So a mobile game in 2025 basically.
The problem is yes, Resistance 2 (2 weapons and regenerating health, while 3 gave back the weapon wheel, health packs and added the Ratchet leveling system, aka when they try, they try, when they don't it's annoying), Ratchet All 4 One, Fuse or Spiderman have this 'follow trends' angle about them and they put me off (I liked Fuse, hated Ratchet All 4 One in how it did it).
But my Rift Apart take doesn't fit others in how they did Crack in Time aspects and that 'different formula' or put the series back on track while still wanting to have some of it from past entries (even Tools of Destruction has it's better balance of new and 2 & 3 in it), I wasn't a fan but I get why people enjoy it.
Spiderman 2018 had moments for me with it's lab puzzles, 2-3 side missions, but compared to Sunset Overdrive, it was their first at the trend but it had way more fun factor, sure it's dialogue is hit or miss and not as witty as Ratchet PS2 era is, but seems like it wants to, or I guess even compared to Outer Worlds or Journey to the Savage Planet, then the trend following approach.
I mean Song of the Deep was 'fine' but who played it? Their 2D Metroidvania from 2016, first Gamestop published game too.
Comparable to what Pentiment these days or any of the Sony 1st party roguelike, chronology and other updates or DLC they tried that are cool but to me only do so much for 'experimenting' and just still feel like 'we have to jump at this trend' then 'exciting' to see there.
Re: New Ratchet & Clank Game Announced, But Not for the Platform You Want
@Robocod At least we got 'some games' even if the PSP entries.
But I like PSP/PS2/Wii versions of games gameplay wise so I'm a weirdo like that then PS3 versions. But for cases like these yeah the PS2 versions for sure. Even if the engine is awkward sometimes but they did Jak series PS3, Vita, PS4 so they clearly can work with awkward engines if they want to.
I think Sony doesn't know whether to go the PS3 ones all regions (yet they have them for PS3 streaming which not all regions have) even though offer the PS2 ones shouldn't be that bad then work in the PS3/Vita trophies.
I get annoyed anytime i see people (idiot collectors that don't know any better) 'oh the PS3 version of these games needed bonuses' uh you people do realise they had Goodies/Extra menus with interviews, epilogue, ads and concept art so unless they wanted the Idol Minds/Mass Media interviews why bother.
Re: Sony Flexes Its Almighty Marketing Muscle with PS5 Promos Around the World
Fair advertising strategy. Not much to say about it.
Re: Somehow, We're Already on the Sixth Game in Milestone's RIDE Series
@ZeroSum Ride 4's progression system is restrictive (good idea bad execution at least in me comparing it to Forza Motorsport 1 and 2 in around about way) and it's AI is very bad, even on very easy not just it's awkward physics/handling. Ride 1 to 3 are way more approachable even with getting the hang of them. I struggled with RIde 1 regardless of having the 360 copy but I still got enough out of it. 2 on Xbox One and 3 same thing on PS4.
Load times are eh for all of the games (regardless of 360 version of Ride 1 to compare) but the whole series is on PS4 and get cheap digital/physical so they aren't hard to get into, but they are more approachable and playable then 4.
No clue for 5 as not looked into it but it is a current gen era game I have had my eye on but not going to till right timing, same with WRC23/24.
Even RIMS I tried and felt even worse then Ride 4. It's way too hardcore sim or RPG like scaling that's way too far off or something.
Even MotoGP16 or MXGP3 to me give off the RIde 4 effect in physics or playability.
I knew when playing MotoGP16 which I got on purpose for the dirt bikes/rally cars to go 'lets see how playable these all are and compare them, I enjoy additional content angles regardless of it being based around a particular driver' and you know what, the MotoGP bikes played worse then the dirt bikes/rally cars. Glad I got that one first to compare them. XD Which Milestone has done cars and dirt bikes before so even compared to those I think they were fine.
I've been exploring older entries of these on older consoles, I'm not a bike fan but you notice a lot of physics/handling and modes and how different they are for sure compared to nowadays.
Re: Somehow, We're Already on the Sixth Game in Milestone's RIDE Series
I mean it's great to see but Milestone did better car games in the PS2 era or even different ones like V8 Superstars duology for PS3.
Offering off-road bikes is 'fine' but even MotoGP16 had them and MXGP or Monster Energy both series Milestone makes, so is it really that surprising. Even auto cross bikes or whatever were in Ride 3 I think. So them trying is fine but did they pull out the big guns no. XD
But Ride 4 had a great restrictive region system idea (in theory, and to expand in my opinion off of Forza Motorsport 1 and 2's car region design) but bad AI so the progression was a joke and even PGR2 has better class restriction but track selection and playability.
MXGP3 is just bad like their MotoGP efforts at least for what I look for in them of 'playable' sim or arcade feel or structure. I've played better looking into MX vs ATV older entries, Reflex was a blast, Pure PS3/360 was a blast. Tourist Trophy is fun to play on and off of GT4 bikes.
Ride 2 was clear of it's Forza Motorsport 6 inspirations in UI and cutscenes, sigh.
Ride 3 was fair.
So if they did good with 6 sure, but I barely know what 5 does.
Heck Gravel was probably the last Milestone game I cared about enough to play to the end and get it cheap again later to replay through on PS4 then my Xbox One physical copy. That's rare for me with modern games let alone racing games and my stance on them.
Ride 5 I haven't bothered as I don't know what it offers due to how badly youtube videos always show the bikes, I want to see the menu and progression, this is why I either buy games cheap or 'try' my best to find what the menus look like for modes/events/progression as players are incompetent on doing so.
Even WRC23/24 I don't know for sure, even the car builder was confusing, but so was Milestone's Apex/Racing Evoluzione till I worked it out/got a copy physical now then videos.
MotoGP games to me are unplayable or not as fun (not the sim/physics/bike fan type of course so I'm not the target audience likely) compared to the older era ones I've bought up and played a season and moved on and metacritic reviewed 6, 8 and 9/10 (but enjoyed some of their past ideas of management in 9/10 yes bad physics but I don't care, or MotoGP3's 20 fake tracks, or other games challenges).
Nothing has beaten WRC3 PS3/360 for me in career mode, that thing was paced so well and good event variety. Loved it. Tried 5 to 9 and they are 'alright' in that area.
Re: Horizon MMO Uses AI 'Extensively' in Development, Says NCSOFT
If used well sure, but most times it isn't.
Also it's a mobile games (mobile games can be good they just chose not to be) so subpar game design incoming.
What a waste of the IP which has more depth then this project had thought put into it.
Re: Mini Review: Rennsport (PS5) - A Sim Racer That Just Can't Match the Competition
So this is an iRacing, RFactor, Auto Mobellista and other esports or other design wannabe competitor in structure, car/track access, modern game design eh UI, and probably subpar physics, and mostly multiplayer design with eh bots. Easy pass thanks. XD
To me this isn't competing with GT7. There is a reason i cared more for Project Cars 3, it's not good after Need For Speed Shift 2 and 1 was the best of that approach but I still wanted to play them more. I didn't complain how bad PC3 is for 'physics' because it was clear it was a different structure/audience game. I have all Project Cars games, and they do a fair job for what they are going for.
But even WRC3 PS3/360 or Dirt 3 was more fun with their careers then Dirt 5 in event structure/pacing alone or side objectives like Driver Club, not physics I didn't care about at all.
To me GT7 has very few cars I find enjoyable to drive compared to past games physics, but I mean it 'works' and if people like it sure. AI for GT games was always hit and miss anyway too. Other racing games ,vary, sometimes sneak to the front types, others spin out, others so broken, it varies what personality to slot cars to other personality or reading how you play they offer or hit you for no reason they want to make the AI for these types of games.
iRacing, Project Motor Racing, Assetto Corsa Competizione, RFactor and others have their content layouts, are broken or suit sim fans in what they want and BeamNG or others are just playgrounds for people like a Garry's Mod.
This is competing with other 3rd parties on the market so to me that's just not a fair comparison.
To those it's probably fine enough but it's not a GT competitor and none of them are on the grounds GT offers a lot of different audiences then just the sim racing audience these others do.
Why because in physics and UI sure, but in modes/events.
Lots, there is a reason i bought GT7, find some like Wreckfest fair but not great (not for physics, 2 modes when Flatout had 3 a slingshot your driver events, Jucied 2 has 3 drift events and 1 PS2 multiplayer one, along with other interesting ones, most games can dream offering mode/event variety nowadays, I don't mean classes/discipline in rally or others, I mean just rules to come up with), same with Grid Legends, had fun with it platinumed it even.
And why Forza Motorsport 2023 has a cool grid credit payout scale and that's the coolest thing I think about that game, the rest is super safe.
GT offers the driving missions, license tests, circuit experience and regular races. Sure the 7th entry has a different framework for it, you may like or not but the series has since GT1 had spot races, GT2 expanded more to manufacture ones that were randomly generated tracks, HP limits for entry
GT3 refined the access to events strategy, but had more repetitive events but it does what it can.
GT4 had driving missions and coffee breaks GT4 Prologue set up well and I prefer the Prologue ones to the final game ones.
5, 6, Sport and 7 do their part of adding more licenses, or modes/event and scenarios.
All these others if you want competitors in the iRacing or Asetto Corsa Competizone and more sure
But even Ride as a Forza inspired bike game did had it's multiple event types.
Forza 2023 has no bowling, no sprint (1 lap magic) and other things. The showcases or side events were fun.
GT has tuning strategy and event variety. Which is why I can hate GT7 but it has enough for audiences like me.
Re: New Ratchet & Clank Game Announced, But Not for the Platform You Want
@get2sammyb It's interesting to seem them try their IPs on mobile then just 'another Sony mobile game we never hear about and don't know how their mobile stuff is going'. I had more mode ideas for Foamstars then it had modes, I don't have much hope with this game no matter the 'mode numbers' the mode execution is the main factor how 'safe or slightly remixed' they are. Sigh.
But after WipEout Rush I'm not sure what to think. That game could have been way better as a manager game, even GT B Spec is better then it was. Let alone other scifi racers or other arcade racers, or managers on mobile. It had no chance and WipEout fans got better on PSP/Vita even if Pure/Pulse content had been remixed to HD, HD Fury, 2048 and Omega Collection to rub that in further sigh.
I don't hate the idea of Ratchet mobile games, Before the Nexus was 'something' for a Jungle Run clone of 2012/2013, the J2ME cellphone games were good games, but this lacks so much depth of gadgets or interactivity in the map design.
Missions, modes, co-op or PVP.
The artstyle is fine but eh.
I think they can do more but it's so made for skins and insert IP and I think it can do better. But it won't. Or recycle a few Rift Apart elements here and there.
This could be just a reskin of Crash Rumble or like Forza Street was a reskin and an excuse. I'm not that impressed.
I like the idea I'm totally fine with them expanding how they are using an IP on mobile or offering multiplayer, I hate the execution. It lacks depth, like many modern games do and that's why modern gaming bores me so much. Frequent updates and skins for the bare minimum to me is the worst kind of game.
Re: New Ratchet & Clank Game Announced, But Not for the Platform You Want
@Haruki_NLI Agreed immediately thought of Federation Force or Crash Rumble. I didn't hate Federation Force but enjoyed it in a different way. Blast Ball was just not worth it at all either. It also lacked I've played car soccer in GTI Club or even other types of modes in other games more fun then those did. XD
Even Full Frontal Assault/QForce at least was tower defence (not great Vita port) but had fair co-op or competitive goals, not 'insert characters' with a focus on skins multiplayer.
Even Ratchet 3/Deadlocked fans know what they wanted in multiplayer i assume.
I myself see lacking gadget or other level design depth. Oh the wall running things from Rift Apart. Where is the yellow rifts evade move thing? Or many others. The maps just look barren and basic.
It will likely have few modes too.
Ratchet on mobile via the cellphone method, campaigns on the go with multiplayer aka Size Matters or Full Frontal Assault approaches we can count for but depth, I don't know about this one.
Re: New Ratchet & Clank Game Announced, But Not for the Platform You Want
@Anti-Matter Seeing as that was a party game and this is a 'safe multiplayer game' with recycling Rift Apart elements. I'm all for them trying but to me this lacks depth.
You would assume (even besides WipEout Rush or a better manager game approach for that game not just the IP it was tied to when they got 2048 or Pulse which are better games on the go).
I don't hate this game but I have questions.
Even PS Move Heroes had 'moments' not great but had moments of fun to it. Not just 'insert characters' excuses we can see it as.
So many multiplayer games lack depth in map design, modes and more, all for quicker updates and other things to focus on with no need for depth but the bare minimum and I always find that sad.
Push skins and even basic movesets then more engaging ones (even for games that aren't hero shooters so maps have to account for them but in ones that don't there is no excuse in moveset/map design being so bland other then 'personality' but not playing in them just looks) can do more and Ratchet games have their gadgets and more but 'just wall running'. Where is the gadgets to vertically get to higher areas or interact with things.
Interactivity and using weapons/gadgets makes Ratchet fun for me and this just gives off generic in many ways.
As eh as the Move minigames were they still fit the games even if were a bit 'Eye Toy Minigames collection repetitive with so few ideas' for Move in a way of fitting categories a lot.
I praised ironsight for the moving elevator/bridge in it's shipping dock map.
That's how boring I find many modern multiplayer games. Same with singleplayer games pushing story and graphics and the movesets bore me to no end and have 'skill trees' but it's all stats, not level design based gear just weapons and modifications I don't care for.
Even Battlefield 2 Modern Combat I get why the swap characters around the map feature isn't back but I'd play a modern game with that, performance being ruined and all. XD Challenges to use it with, campaign missions, etc. that it did in the past. It's the little things of game mechanics, levels feeling more alive (not just in looks or birds/ships flying by or grass assets) or interesting of strategy or interactivity I find games lack today for the 'bare minimum' of controls/things to do in games.
Re: New Ratchet & Clank Game Announced, But Not for the Platform You Want
Part 2:
Ratchet fits for kids/families or us old people so it's hard for them to appeal to us all yes, so even with Rift Apart it's messaging was clear in story not just game design even then I was annoyed at how weak it wanted Crack in Time/Tools or Nexus or 2016 design and I was like this thing sucks so bad because they couldn't tell what to make, cater to many audiences and I get that but even still. If they have Ratchet around for Sony sure, but if not just give up on it and move on. They have experimented enough with the IP.
But even still.
This just isn't exciting use of the IP at all, but when are they and these mobile studios?
Also the 'rangers' did Insomniac learn nothing. Why do we need that angle at all? Not like anyone wouldn't like I don't know anything of characters battling, not oh they have to be part of this force. Why do we need it? It didn't add depth it just added characters and aspects we didn't care for or weren't used well.
Also Ratchet 3's rangers were better for jokes, tone and useful or not as robots and the tyranoid strength scaling to old/next levels with them, then the generic ones in 2016 and their use cases.
Just make it something else of an angle, Ratchet, Clank, new characters, I don't want this 'we added Angela' or have skins of characters, I never used them in past games because it's not worth it. This is like Metroid fans and Federation Force. I don't hate Federation Force despite the game it is, but i get why fans don't like them.
But do we HAVE to have the rangers angle here. Why?
Re: New Ratchet & Clank Game Announced, But Not for the Platform You Want
1.Not against Ratchet on mobile, but WHY this way. Also it's just QForce/Full Frontal Assault or Crash Rumble. No it's a multiplayer shooter?Did anyone actually think for more then 2 seconds, no, clearly.
2.Did Insomniac or Sony forget we HATE 2016 or other things.
3.Did Sony forget how WipEout Rush turned out? Are they sure they want to risk this? While Before The Nexus was 'fine'.
Also trying with kids again is fine but I think they do it in the wrong ways. Regardless of us old fans looking at the series our way of course.
Some like Going Mobile on cellphones, we freaked out about Clone Home being acquired and archived.
Wait wait, so this is the new Sony Concord? Sony really are hitting the bottom of the barrel decisions here. Talk about limiting mechanics (gadgets) for a series based around them. Cough But like Destruction Allstars, Lucid/Sony learnt nothing, a game mode not for that audience (I thought it's ideas were fair but still lacking) and artstyle not for that audience. Talk about brain dead.
The artstyle is 'fine' for mobile, kind of looks like the comics in a way, kind of not. Or very 'soft'. It's not bad.
But what are the game modes? Probably barely offering any/depth anyway to focus on skins and other garbage, no thanks.
Also to me this seems very 'Rift Apart aspects recycled but not in exciting ways for multiplayer, the bare minimum & different artstyle' but it doesn't have any good missions for co-op or anything they could have made this game for to be interesting or fit the series at all. Just 'IP insert here' the worst kind you can make Sony/Insomniac, mobile developer here. Sigh
Ok use of weapons (recycling the ones I can't stand most likely) but where is the gadgets? They could have made fair missions or fair things to activate to navigate the maps? Too early in the trailers to show those (I doubt it with how 'accessible' and bare minimum games are for those things these days, it's why movesets are boring) for co-op or effort to use gadgets in team capture the flag or other objective ones.
But this is just basic combat and ok maps, not great. It needs more.
It's very 'we want to get updates out & not put a lot of depth to it' and that's sad. I'm not a fan of that game design at all. Kids deserve better in games instead they get slop.
Even Foamstars remixed 2 modes in other games and i had more mode ideas then they put effort into the game. XD
This mobile game for Ratchet could be more but it's understandable why it exists and how 'basic or accessible' it will be.
I don't care for multiplayer but even still, I respect smart multiplayer design.
Even then if 'were' for old fans, I assume they want Ratchet 3 or Deadlocked multiplayer, that's been clear for years. But no. or is it and it's unclear from the trailer? Even then, why the Qwark decoy or otherwise. Do we need those design, references or placement of characters because they don't know where to put them? It's just weird.
I may warm up to this (still not for me but it's fine to exist of course) but I just have questions, that's all. Why they went for this.
We get generic multiplayer design (not against tower defence even if this doesn't look it looking at it again) or modern game design, some people asked for but even still.
Re: 'We All Want Skate to Be Great': Skate Dev Pledges Improvements After Early Access Launch Issues
Well how much is EA going to allow or restrict, that's always been the case from the start it's why the game leadership wise is the direction it is, that was clear why it took so long and what is in the structure it is compared to prior Skate games (as much as I understand and not played much of Skate 3 I got cheap randomly), and how much is it the target audience while the other skating game alternatives have their benefits and audiences as well.
Re: Gran Turismo 7 Gets First Paid DLC in the Power Pack, Out 4th December
@McSavage Agreed, even FM 2023 as particular as it is the credit payout grid position to me was a great idea. That's one thing I think GT7 or any past entries could have learnt from.
Even the GT1, 2 and 5 quick access menus or tune menus. GT7 has tire swaps but that's it and I was like what, why?
MX vs ATV games have grid position and more slots if you do better in prior events/heats.
Other games also like you mentioned have better grid position/qualifying in them I think. Even TOCA did with it's practice/qualify/race approach of the PS2 trilogy, not so PS1 trilogy I think (Grid doesn't).
Physics eh I don't like realistic physics, if it's playable I"m happy but I don't 'need it' personally.
But lacking modes or event variety also is why I find modern racing games boring too, many 3rd parties are clear why and I find them boring.
But I'm not the target audience probably of many racing games either. Too gameplay/gamer focused then 'simulating' or relating or reliving or other things people want in their games as car fans.
But then again a lot of arcade racers have eh progression/event types too so eh.
I hate real world physics even if used to how to control my own car.
I myself prefer the GT formula of tuning/content as the other games I don't care for it as much and Forza the PI system was pointless and discount were pointless as I barely if ever tune a car as there is no need to. GT you are forced to in some cases or be car smart about it (fun strategy not just people that like to tinker). I can play any entry and not need the PP system as guidance (but any hardcore fan doesn't while other players would).
I myself in PGR4 (not the same but still), FM3 and 4 or even Project Cars or F1 or others. I never cared for the calendar system. It's realistic but I always found it didn't add much and to me it's a more 'shows less' menu then GT does of just a list and I can pick whatever I want, redo one and I'm there.
With calendar once reattempting or the championship approach or all these others just make things less fleixble, but are realistic or fit you in a tour or whatever.
Which as I hated FM6 tour approach and never use FM3 or 4's and just the event list yeah that's my flexibility for racing games (or even as restrictive as PGR2 per class but still good track selection choice not forced per tour like FM6 was great)
I thought the Ride 4/Project Motor Racing (not played) region idea (that FM1 & 2 kind of started but did nothing with so those took their own direction with it) was cool but still found Ride 4 AI so bad and the game too bad of it's restrictive nature so eh.
I wish we got more car builders. I get why people swap engines and such, but Sega GT Dreamcast or Pure PS3/360 (ATVs) did it in a way I found fun enough.
Not tried whatever WRC23 or so had. But even Apex/Racing Evoluzione confused me but was clear after how it handled it.
Re: Gran Turismo 7 Gets First Paid DLC in the Power Pack, Out 4th December
@RiverGenie I can see reason in that more so yeah. I forget Sophy is on PS5.
I always think of it as B Spec but it is more then that. Heck B Spec in GT4 to me was better then 5 and 6 was a part player controllable part computer player while 5 was just a computer player and real time with 'suggestions' and it sucked.
But my driving style differs too and the lack of defending was clear from the GT Sport sportmanship videos why that won't happen and the AI is as dumb of clean driving or overtaking as it is even when it learns when to do so or starts out in any prior B Spec iterations.
So Sophy's extent I kind of understand has it's capabilities and I get the computing power or not supporting both platforms and sticking to one platform is totally fine.
Re: PS5 Is the Second Fastest Selling PlayStation Ever in the US, Despite Price Hikes and Production Issues
@UltimateOtaku91 It's not a mainstream device and that's clear. This won't be perfect, they are doing it in a round about way and it could be better yes (I won't deny other strategies could be used yes but they are doing it the way they are and see something in it).
I mean sure there is tv series/movies on Steam, but who cares?
Sony/Microsoft know what they put into their consoles and it shows, from gaming, streaming, and all the functionality we get.
For some people I talk to they are interested or had wanted something to fit the current Steam Machine idea for a while now it's just good to see it finally happen.
Even the Deck, to the translation layers, to the other factors, to Linux, it's fair for 'that' audience and users not having to use Windows or other aspects but even then it is not perfect and we all know that.
I don't see it as competition just an option. Not the 'best' option but 'an option'. For a certain audience interested enough in the idea.
Not everyone needs a Playdate or Evercade or others after all.
This is just another attempt at the Steam Machine 10+ years later, sure 1400p and ok specs, adding standards like Steam Deck did for game compatibility.
It's not to compete as a 4th player in the console wars.
If people want an easy standard device then working out specs, this device does it and that's a welcome thing to see in the PC space for some users, tech savvy or not.
It will take time no doubt.
I mean Valve could go more expensive but why bother to compete that way anyway. If it flops why waste a lot of money and not get enough return on it. Make attempts as they go.
People want the end result and best thing ever but a company can always see reason in that.
Or companies have another angle like the other devices I mentioned.
Or I guess other PC handhelds that are offering the specs, or other features to controllers, etc.
Or people get too competitive/sports team like and want console wars when that's just not practical for a business.
For what Valve is going for I think it's a fair step. It will take a while but it's interesting to see them attempt it then just a be storefront forever as they know more can be done and it shows.
Heck the new VR headset with Foveated Streaming (I mean the dongle wasn't Wii U local and more middle man wifi dongle so sure like anything else, Steam Link included) or Android sideloading was exciting but even still.
My expectations are low but still excited.