kcarnes9051

Finished the game a week ago. It was fun enough. Saw plenty of side boob already. Yawn. Sold it to GameStop for credit to put toward a Pro. No interest in playing further dress up.

I don’t mind long games so long as they’re not filled with repetitive fetch quests and generic scenarios and dialogue. Side quests should have impact and feel substantial, and they should flesh out the story in meaningful ways. Helping someone find their cat or some flowers is hella lame. Quests shouldn’t feel repetitive like running through a checklist. Every region shouldn’t have the exact same tower activities and the like. It gets boring fast breaks immersion. Find ways to vary mechanics and objectives to keep things fresh.

@Tomato_Goose Unless you're comparing the differences on a 65" Tv the differences in detail aren't really going to be noticeable. Most people aren't watching the YouTube videos on this site on a large TV screen. So if your request to see comparisons was fulfilled you still wouldn't notice much of a difference if you're looking at them on a small screen.

@Absymbel Yikes, those prices are ridiculous. It just seems like a miscalculated decision from the beginning, and they’ve tried to make up for it by forcing the physical ultimate edition on top of keeping the price as if it’s a new game. Or maybe that’s been the strategy all along. None of us can really run the numbers of it to know if it would have actually been better for the consumer and the developers simultaneously had they released the physical from the beginning. Regardless, the outcome feels manipulative.

I would have bought the base game at release if it was released physically. Now that the the game has released physically it’s $80 with DLC and I can’t get a standalone version like people could when the digital version was released. This rubs me the wrong way. I don’t like this weird release method and it’s off-putting. It’s been so long now I can wait a little bit longer for a used copy of the physical edition. Even though I’m eager to play it, my excitement has died down, and there’s plenty of other games to play until I can get it cheaper.

I love being able to see my head phone and control battery charge levels at a glance, and being able to position that widget so it’s first. That’s my primary use case. Accessing storage via its widget is also more convenient than menu hopping.

Is there any word whether game load times will be further improved at all for games? They’re already great on the PS5 but I appreciate any time save and it could push me over the edge for getting the Pro.

@NEStalgia Let's not forget about both Spider-Man leads, and we might as well throw in Wolverine. Also, while Kojima Productions isn't a Sony first party studio, both Death Stranding Games are exclusives, and should be counted if we're counting Stellar Blade.

Astrobot is fairly gender neutral, but I wouldn't be surprised if most everyone refers to Astro as a he. But that's a bit of a stretch.

The number of male and female protagonists start to look pretty balanced when you include those (maybe not Astro), as well as Ratchet, since there's not indication that he's been replaced or abandoned.

Clearly, we're in a cultural moment where studios want to feature women since they haven't had the spotlight quite as much as men. Sure, the pendulum could swing a bit more toward women for a while, or appear that way, but I wouldn't exactly call this a trend toward a matriarchy. It's more a trend toward balance.

FF needs to go back to the roots that made it successful and cater to its most dedicated fans, much in the way that BG3 and ER stayed true to its fan base. Iterate on turn-based combat. Fantasian shows new interesting wrinkles can be added to the genre. Ditch the hyper-realistic j-pop boy band aesthetic, and lean into animation using Yoshitaka Amano’s drawing as inspiration for the art style. Finally bring us into the world that Amano envisions in the cover art and character drawings.

I’ve never attempted to convince you that a PS5 Pro is a must buy so there was never a suggestion that I’d want you to agree to that, lol.

There would be no condition under which a PS5 Pro would ever be a must buy because it’s not a necessity. It is a want. So that is also a false premise.

I didn’t ignore your previous post. I incorporated another quote by you to clarify the point I was trying to make. You’ve made statements that amount to saying or imply that there is no reason to buy the PS5 Pro and/or there’s no reason for it to exist. You dragged everyone else into your opinion by saying we don’t know of any new Sony games coming therefore there’s no reason to get the Pro. You’re using “We” to bolster your opinion. But it’s based on a false premise that new Sony games are the reason to buy a PS5. Third party games, 2nd party games, exclusives, and old games will all benefit to certain degrees. So, no, there is no obligation to list new Sony games to justify the existence of a Pro model.

There are indeed reasons to buy a PS5 Pro, as I’ve stated. You just personally do not value those reasons.

Let me put this to you another way. Just because you personally don’t want something does that mean it shouldn’t exist? For example, if you don’t like celery and don’t value its attributes, should nobody buy celery and should celery not be offered in stores despite other people liking celery?

Is there no reason for celery?

Is there no reason for a PS5 Pro?

Yes, there are reasons. You just don’t value those reasons.

@Nexozi We're getting tangled in the weeds here in rhetoric so let me back up and retry.

You said in a different comment: "I'm saying that currently there is no reason that I know of for a PS5 Pro."

Yes, there are reasons, which I listed. You know these reasons, and you must know that other people want these reasons. You just don't care about them enough to warrant buying one yourself. But those reasons do in fact exist in this reality.

Do you understand how your "We" statement is an extension of an attitude that you're framing your opinion as determining whether a PS5 Pro should exist?

Because limiting the reasons for buying a Pro to needing new Sony games is a false premise.

@Nexozi I want it for any game Sony puts out and for all past games Sony has put out and for any past or future game put out from 3rd parties for the best performance possible within the Playstation ecosystem. Other people want it for the same reason. I don't need to tell you any specific game. You keep asking for reasons. The reason have been given. If you don't like those reasons then the system isn't for you. You don't need to be convinced, and you don't need to convince other people that there is no reason for the PS5 Pro. And you certainly shouldn't be speaking for other people when saying, "I said there's no games coming that WE know of that make it a must buy". You are not WE.

@Nexozi No, there's no game that YOU know of that will make it worth it for YOU. You're speaking for other people.

@Nexozi Don’t replace your PS5 then. I’ve simply listed the likely improvements and that some people want these improvements. Going from 30 fps to 60 fps with 4K via PSSR and raytracing is significant enough for some folks. That’s why the PS5 will exist. For those players that want those things. Not you. And that’s fine.

@Nexozi Faster frame rates in quality mode, even faster load times, better ray-tracing support, better draw distance, brute forcing some of these aspects for games that don't receive specific updates. All of these things could be improved on with a pro model. You may not need or want these things but some people do.

If Astrobot is the new evolution I’m not so sure about it. The gameplay and production value seem great. But the presentation just feels like one big advertisement. Sure you can call it a celebration. But it feels self-congratulatory and shallow. Mario and Zelda inhabit their own worlds. Astro literally flies a PS5 around and collects PlayStation memorabilia. I don’t play PS games or get excited about them because they’re part of a brand. I play them because PS makes great games that feel organic. Making the branding THE GAME feels off putting and artificial. The world of Astrobot, like I said, feels like a world in an advertisement even if it’s a celebration. It feels like a reflection of the corporate world that games come from and the hubris of Sony since dominating the previous generation.

@Quintumply Thanks for the insight!

@Quintumply playroom was a fun little demo for the PS5 but I found it ridiculously easy. Does this game up the challenge much?

Even though I've never played the game, I kind of like this detail. Will heighten the dread anticipation.

That said, while the movie looks good, I'm not loving that they've shown so much, especially what appear to be pretty obvious kills. Unless the previews are pulling some heavy misdirections, like the Asian woman somehow surviving the chest buster.

I will never understand how Eli Roth keeps getting work. His movies are absolute trash every time. When I heard he was director, the terrible trailers made sense.

Fine but flashy action game. Terrible FF game. Nothing outside visual references felt like FF. If you’re going to go real-time action you’ve got to find ways to bring forward meaningful gameplay elements from previous installments to capture the spirit of the series. The worst, most mundane fetch quests imaginable hampered the game further.

This is pretty much what I assumed he meant in the original statement, anyway. People latch onto one sentence and make controversy out of rambling stream of consciousness statements. It’s silly.

@PuppetMaster You not mentioning me isn't a problem. There is a reply button under your comment and I'm free to click on it. You tagging me isn't a requirement for me to reply to you. People acting in bad faith are always the first to start complaining about others pushing back on their statements. I like this site and I appreciate this article. I'm not going to let console war ridiculousness drown out the actual intent of this article or allow it to dissuade future articles like this. That is why I'm replying to you. If you're going to come in with an accusatory hot take disparaging content that others appreciate and want to see—expect a reply.

@PuppetMaster if you post to a public forum, especially making accusations about someone’s intentions negatively, you are fair game for replies and should expect pushback. If you’re questioning why you’re getting replies and don’t want them then don’t engage in online comments. But by all means, keep banging the console war drum and believing that this author is just trying to rage-bait readers.

@AverageGamer Fair enough. You’re correct, full development started after Ninja Theory was bought out. Are we really going to debate the likelihood that it would have come to PS had Microsoft not absorbed the developer? Whether or not it was ever a possibility, which I argue it would have been since the original was a PS timed exclusive, the point here is that many PS players have wanted to play it on PS since it was announced, since, you know, they played the original on PS. That’s the reason why this is relevant to a portion of the PS community. That’s my point.

@PuppetMaster This game has cutting edge graphics. This has been known about this title literally years. It’s no surprise that it would be leading the pack in graphical fidelity and realism. If that is true, which it likely is, then the author’s statement is 100% accurate. And, again, it sucks we don’t get the visual feast here on PS. That’s true. I’m bummed. The author is bummed. The author wrote this article to express that sentiment. That’s all.

You’re weirdly reactionary about a PS site claiming that an XBox game has better graphics than any PS game. The only ones making this about console wars are the ones telling, “look rage bait console war headline.” Maybe it’s just simply true that this game that happens to be on Xbox has the best console graphics. It’s really nothing to get up in arms about. But it is a bummer we were supposed to get it.

"Soapbox: Once a PS4 Console Exclusive, PS5 Players Are Missing a Visual Stunner in Hellblade 2"

Truths:

1) It once was a PS4 exclusive.

2) PS5 players are missing out on a visual stunner.

We can argue over what visual stunner means here, but otherwise this is objectively a pretty straightforward truthful headline without spin or inflammatory rhetoric.

The headline doesn't even mention Xbox.

But sure. Console war. Lol.

As someone who played the first game, I read this as a lament from another player who also played the first game who is bummed that this game, which was supposed to be on PS5, isn't playable on PS. That's all this is. And it's nutty ya'll read it any other way.

@MFTWrecks Because the first game was on Playstation and it has a fanbase within the PS community. That is why it's being talked about here. Were you not aware that this is a sequel to a game that was on Playstation, and that this sequel was originally supposed to be on Playstation? This is no way shape or form out of the realm of topics to be talked about here.

@PuppetMaster There's nothing rage baiting about this article, lol. If you had played the first on PS and are a fan then you'd understand where this article is coming from, as many of us were anticipating it before it became Xbox only. It's got cutting edge visuals. From a gaming technology standpoint, and for a game that was once going to be on PS and has a fanbase here, this article is entirely relevant to that part of the PS community for which this site serves. It indeed sucks that this game isn't on PS. That's all this article says. Nothing rage bait about it.

@PsBoxSwitchOwner This was a title anticipated by many who played the first on PS4. I don't read Xbox sites, so I'm glad to hear word of it now here so I can gauge if I might want to check it out elsewhere or wait for it to hopefully one day come to Playstation. This may not be relevant news to you, but it is to those who played the first on Playstation. There is no console war going on in this article. The first game was on PS. The sequel was going to be, too, until it wasn't. That's a shame because it's a visual stunner. That's all true and that's all this article says.

Just adding to the voices surrounding physical releases, I really wanted to buy physical at release but decided to wait for a sale since digital only. Still haven’t bought it yet.

@Kraven @danzoEX Probably inspired story-wise in complexity and thematically, as in post-apocalyptic. It's about a kind of average boy who gets whisked away on an adventure to strange lands, which is sort of like Chrono Trigger when you get whisked away through time to different time periods. I heard some audio effects that were also reminiscent of early RPG games, like the slashing of the sword and the sparkling stars. Seems the characters will be traveling to different planets, so it'll be a grand adventure much like CT and FF7 that'll get more expansive as you play. There will likely be other nods, like what looks to be a hover bike mini game of sorts, and you'll be able to navigate the stars in a sort of over-world map in a ship like you'd navigate in the airship in FF7 or the time machine in CT to get around. It's also turn-based, which is kind of a JRPG calling card. They're obviously putting their own spin on things with the side scrolling, but there's definite inspiration there from the games mentioned.

@JalapenoSpiceLife Go play older final fantasy games and tell me that grinding hasn’t always been a part of gaming. It’s not just a modern thing.

@GuttyYZ probably to be implemented in older RPGs that are super grindy. So they’re already designed. Also some people like the grind. Other people don’t. So for modern games that are grindy, they have a certain audience. Auto-grind could bring in new players and increase sales.

This generation I cared most about loading times and they knocked that out of the park. Wish we could get consistent 60 fps, as well, but that was secondary to having my time wasted by slow loading.

@morogan112 It's releasing simultaneously on all platforms. So clues over on Xbox are also clues for Playstation. So it is Playstation news.

They'll eventually learn that gaming subscription services just do not operate the same as streaming television services. The average gamer does not have the time to consume the numerous games on a service in the same way consumers consume television shows because each game takes at least 10 hours if not 30, 40, 50. That's like 1-5+ seasons of television per game. And that's not even taking into account games you can sink 100s of hours into. The average gamer is going to play maybe 2 or 3 games to completion realistically in a year on a service. After you've used these services for a year or two, you soon start to realize that despite the nearly endless value available, it's not very realistic to take advantage of even a fraction of it. And it's very possible to outright own the games you play for about the same price if you're savvy and patient and work through your backlog. Except you own them which has more value than temporary access. And if you buy physical you can resell them. The math just works differently compared to other online subscription-based media. I have both PS+ Extra and Game Pass that I stream on my Samsung Tv via an app. Both work great and have lots of games, obviously. But I'm currently working through like 5 other great games I bought for bargain bin prices physically for cheaper than those yearly subscriptions. So those subscriptions aren't really getting used. That's fine because I have the money, but I'm less inclined to renew because I don't really need to. All of this goes without mentioning the development side issues that arise when games become devalued to fit the subscription model, as illustrated in this article. It gives the sense that not only is the subscription model built on a shaky foundation financially, but the true value proposition to gamers starts to melt away the longer you have the service.

There are MacBook Airs and MacBook Pros that exist at the same time. And, yet, everything that can run on a pro can likewise run on an Air. This is no different. If there's a performance boost in the PS5 Pro a certain segment of the market will purchase it just as a certain market buys MacBook Pros, and they'll be happy about it. If Sony produces the right amount at the right price they'll make money. Good for them. If you personally don't see a need for it, that is completely irrelevant.

@Weez “That naively forcing demographics into studios catering to these preferences based on a myopic interpretation of equality is negative sum”

Again, another strawman! Where in my 50 messages have I suggested FORCING game studios toward catering to certain preferences?

I think you’ve made some MASSIVE assumptions.

Pointing out a problem does not equal suggesting solutions to a problem.

@Weez “You understand that individual contentedness drops off a cliff when cultural forces steer people away from the proximate baseline, right?”

Yes, individual contentedness also dropped off a cliff when black kids were let into white schools. I guess, if you only take (edit: racist) white people’s contentedness into account.

@Weez “I really don't understand this obsession with ignoring evolutionary and biological factors,”

Again, another straw man. I’ve never ignored biological factors. I absolutely 100% understand that there are biological reasons why the sexes might have preference toward different interests.

My point is the culture skews what the sexes have access to and can discourage participation in what otherwise could be interests.

If culture doesn’t affect interest and statistical representation than why has participation in women’s sports increased by 850% since the 1970s? Could it have anything to do with cultural shifts in giving women greater access to sports, normalizing women playing sports, advocating female role models in sports, etc. No, none of these cultural changes had any effect on the 850% percent increase in women in sports? Should we actually rely on the 1970s statistics because that’s actually the real level of interest women have in sports?

@SgtTruth As a huge Soulsborne fan, I also love the idea of accessibility while keeping the brutal option. I would love a slightly easier Soulslike game option that has crazy, cool fantasy lore that’s not a complete riddle with killer boss fights and eerie, majestic gothic or medieval atmosphere. Combat should still require intentionality, just not so punishing. As much as I love a challenge, sometimes you want a similar experiences that feels breezier as a palette cleanser. It does feel like that’s the general idea for this game, but open-world and realism is not as appealing, at least for me. Linearity with some branching options is fine. Not interested in filler side quests and boring NPCs giving me menial tasks. Hopefully the boss fights are dope.

@Weez Here's an interesting way to frame this:

In 2019 women made up 5% of the esport scene.

And yet women make up roughly 20% of the US military.

Even the US Marine Corp is 10% women.

Women would much rather risk dying than play esports.

So either biologically women just prefer the option of possible death over esports.

OR

Call me crazy! There are cultural issues at play.

EDIT: Let's also note, that the percentage of women in the US military would likely be higher if they could compete with men physically at the same level.

Research shows that women can be just as skill at video games and progress just as fast. There's no reason why women can't be just as good at esports.

So there is no physical barrier for women as there is in the military, which makes the comparison even more striking.

@Weez Gender is a cultural issue. Sex is a biological one. You’re trying to minimize this just to sex, and that is, again, a straw man. If you’re trying to say culture does not have an effect on gender we’re gonna have to wade into an even thornier issue.

All you have to do is look at cultures across the world and across time to see that gender norms around clothing changes. Culture affects gender.

Bravo, for game studios catering to women in AAA games successfully. Could it be there’s a larger market there? Time will tell.

Here’s an interesting question for you. Do you think that women have more encouragement to play sports than they do to play esports.

I would argue there is a greater degree of cultural encouragement for women to play sports. Especially with school programs that target men and women fairly equally.

And, yet, there was a time when people thought women didn’t like sports or couldn’t even play sports.

Women in engagement has only grown over time.

But there is very little encouragement to play esports. And there is an awful lot of hostility to those to join in the male dominated sphere of esports.

The statistics show that women don’t play esports very much.

If you took statistics of women playing sports in the 60s you’d get a pretty low percentage, too. Just different cultural barriers in the way.

But to say that women wouldn’t play esports much just because the current statistics say they aren’t would be a fallacy.

Could just be the environment isn’t ripe for women to feel comfortable playing esports.

I recall a time when men actively used to chase women and tear their numbers off when attempting to run in marathons.

Kind of reminds me of harassment in esports.

@Weez When the industry isn’t catering to female interests in AAA gaming you simply can’t know if they’d show up or not. When female gamers face tidal waves of harassment from men in FPS and esports communities you can’t know if they’d show up. When women are not as targeted for advertisements for gaming, you can’t know if they wouldn’t show up. If women are not as cultured toward gaming as boys are, you can’t know if they’d show up.

There are all kinds of barriers that dissuade women from playing video games besides just “girls don’t like big AAA games as much by nature”.

You are not taking these factors into account.

Just because a business decided to target women and failed before other cultural elements had time to catch to make women feel comfortable within that market does not mean that women inherently are adverse to engaging in that space.

You don’t open a door to someone, call them a ***** and expect them to walk through it.

I have no straw man. You’re just throwing your straw man in the air and catching it.

@Weez You lot seem to be confused about the point I’m making. I’m not attacking this game or this genre of game with sexy women. I like these games. I’m talking about the broader industry. And while, yes, I have no problem with this game or the contained depictions, it does fit within broader industry trends. These trends have improved for women’s participation, but I contend that there are still issues in the industry.

It’s like eating candy bars. Eating one is fine every now and then. Eating 5 every day for 50 years might kill you. Scaling it back to just 1 candy bar a day and eating veggies, while an improvement, still might not be good for you health.

Do you understand the difference between individual examples and broad trends?