I just bought the remaster of Ark (Yeah I’m a consumer whore, I know). It looks fantastic, incredible visuals but I’m not sure if the frame rate matches with how good it looks.
I don't know, I had fun playing it, and I really like the build your own weapon aspect of it. The story definitely needed a rework though. The ending left the whole series on a bit of a sour note imo.
Played through coop recently with a friend who’s also a series fan. The game is a bloated disaster. Too many reused assets, useless mechanics and a real icky feeling that all EA games have that they were designed by committee.
It’s a fun game, but completely missed the tone of the first two games. If you consider it a shooter with Dead Space mechanics and gameplay then it’s just a lot of fun, not a serious Dead Space game.
I enjoyed DS3 for what it was. The lore went surprisingly deep and the story was fun, although the love triangle was too distracting and the co-op partner was pretty much absent from the story if you weren’t playing with another player.
It was yet another game that tried to stray from its roots to chase the CoD golden goose. That generation was full of them (I remember being extremely disappointed by Resident Evil 6 and Ace Combat Assault Horizon). Dead Space 3 was, IMO, the game that managed to strike some semblance of balance between its two souls, at least compared to all those other COD copycats. Of course, that doesn’t mean that it was a great game, or even a good game, but I appreciated it for what it was.
I don’t care how fast it sells - I’m not an investor. I care about whether it’s going to blow my balls off with how awesome it is. How many copies it sells on day one is more a function of marketing than quality.
The problem is, we must care if the game is to have any sequels, follow-ups, or lasting legacy. If the game is awesome, but doesn’t sell well, then it probably won’t get sequels, and will be forgotten to everyone except Wikipedia & Moby Games over enough time.
We don’t have to care though, paying attention to the sales numbers doesn’t affect them. The game sells or it doesn’t, and you are only going to affect that number by one.
Hey if a company making lots of money excites you, more power to you. But, of all the things one could get excited for about a game, this seems like pure spin. Is it fun? Revolutionary? Iteratively better than it’s precessor?
Diablo 4 sold like hotcakes and it is certainly not any of the above, so I’m pretty skeptical about the usefulness of this particular data point. But again, if this is what excites you about the game then have at it.
Yeah, just like the original rate change, I can’t imagine who would think this was a good excuse, or that it makes them look better at all. Now, not only was it a really bad idea, it was done on a whim as well.
eurogamer.net
Aktywne