Yeah, I'm not sure why Phantom Liberty is in the running at all. Maybe because the 2.0 update was such a significant upgrade to the base game that they're classifying it as a new entry? I'm not really sure what else they're thinking.
I’m not going to lie, I can’t remember the last time I had so much fun playing a shooter as I did playing Cyberpunk after the 2.0 patch and Phantom liberty DLC.
It became one of my top games of all time, and despite having finished it and trying to force myself to play something else, I’m itching to redownload it so I can get back to night city.
It took a while but I don’t think it should be excluded from the list just because of its original shortcomings. The game’s come a long way and it’s absolutely a contender for game of the year.
That was me just letting my emotions for the game get the better of me. The best and only award it could have won is the Best Ongoing Game award, which it won at TGA.
It’s good to see CDPR finally get back into gaming’s good graces and I’m sure they’ve learned their lesson as the public and critics were far, far more harsh for the release of Cyberpunk 2077, than they were for Witcher 3. Time will tell what state Witcher 4 and Cyberpunk 2077 II release in!
Then they should go back in time and release the current version instead of the original. Phantom liberty is an expansion, 2.0 is a patch, neither is a game.
Yeah, true. It was good of them to get recognised but they really shouldn’t be considered for anything beyond the award they won at TGA (Best Ongoing Game)
The Game Awards also treated it like a game. I think it’s giving it special treatment. Some DLCs like Freedom Cry were available without owning the base game, but that’s not even the case here.
Yeah it was pretty sad. They should either separate out the reveals from the awards. Or just make the event longer. I totally get why they’ll do reveals though. It makes the event more exciting and more eyes on the stream, but they should give the developers their due.
Yeah, I didn’t last thirty minutes into the show. It’s just ads, bad jokes, and more ads. It doesn’t celebrate games, it celebrates capitalism and I just don’t care.
All valid points and it is perhaps for the best that E3 just ended rather than continuing on as a shadow of its former self. Still, I hope something emerges that fills the void E3 left behind, even if I don't think that is likely. Summer Games Fest is fine, but it's still a far cry from what E3 used to be and all the scattered streams and announcements don't really capture that concentrated excitement you had back when E3 was at its peak.
Presently it seems to be the Game Awards, but that to me feels less complete than E3 was but I can’t really put my finger on why. I guess E3 was usually more than just game trailers (although that was the majority). A lot of them were big demos so you could really get into a game before release.
I watched the Game Awards for this year a few days ago and a majority of them were just 30 second teasers really. I miss the 45 minute live game & hardware demos. Remember Reggie playing a Wii? That stuff was always awesome.
Best example I can think of was the 2018 E3 Cyberpunk 48 minute walkthrough. Even if Cyberpunk was a big disappointment in the end, that trailer was fucking amazing to see.
I love the Arkham series, but there is so much else to play it's not hard to wait 3-5 years after for it to be released on GOG with all the unnecessary live service features removed.
So much to play that’s free nonetheless. If I’m going to get screwed by live service nonsense, it’s gonna be a game like Fortnite or the upcoming Skate or even Genshin Impact, not a full-priced title. All this means to me is that they just announced that there’s no reason to buy at launch, like with Shadow of War from ages ago with now-removed singleplayer loot boxes.
Shadow of War from ages ago with now-removed singleplayer loot boxes.
Ha, I forgot about that one! Same as will likely happen with this game, I ended up skipping Shadow of War until it released on GOG with rubbish + Denuvo removed.
The “timeline” was a big debate in the Zelda fandom/community for a long time until the Hyrule Historia book introduced an “official timeline” that featured a split three-way timeline centered around Ocarina of Time as the source of the split. That was released after Skyward Sword. Breath of the Wild had some discussion about where it fits but wasn’t really seen as too big a deal, then Tears of the Kingdom all but straight up ignored the “timeline” and introduced a new “canon” founding of the Kingdom of Hyrule, which while I’ve long stopped paying attention to the fandom, I could imagine the timeline debate starting all over again. TLDR: some people take video game lore really seriously.
As a proud owner of that wonderful book, I get it. But people need to chill; trying to stick to a chronology, an IP almost 40 years old, seriously? That shit would prevent the series to reinvent itself. I think it’s for the best if we all forget about that. It was nice for a while, tho.
I can assure you, some people care way too much for what it is lol. I’ve definitely seen anger about how TotK’s lore was a slight to the fans or whatever. It’s insane that anyone thinks a coherent series chronology is a thing but some people really want it to be true ig
This seems fine. I don’t understand the desire to have an overarching chronology anyway. It’s pretty clear each game is its own world with little connection to the other series beyond recycling some of the same concepts.
It makes more sense lore-wise to just think of them as entirely separate universes with some direct sequels. Majora’s Mask is a direct sequel that takes place in a canonically different dimension anyway so they already introduced the concept.
It’s interesting in the same way people pieced together a story for all of the Pixar movies. But they are just fan theories that are kinda interesting.
The majority if the reason it’s significant is that Nintendo MADE it significant, by releasing that “official” timeline tying all the gamrs together. Then, the made BotW with a whole bunch of direct and indirect references to this timeline, and events in previous games. Then TotK threw pretty much all of that in the garbage.
Which makes perfect sense - none of the previous producers have. Mostly, they’ve just used their stock characters and locations, and made a game that they thought would be fun out of them. There’s a couple of games that qualify as ‘direct sequels’ (Ocarina -> Majora’s, Wind Waker -> Hourglass) but even then, it doesn’t benefit you much to have played the preceding one. Would be weird to try and twist the games into a chronology that strikes me mostly as ‘fanon’ anyway.
Nintendo did try that, though, and mixed it around again whenever they felt like it. “New research uncovered that…” blah blah. Better off if they don’t bother anymore.
That would make a ton of sense as the legend (beat Ganon) is the same but details and setting change
But I couldn’t help chuckle at mental image of some grandpa telling his kid the legend (the tears of the kingdom version) of making a weaponzied hover bike torturing koroks
That would make a ton of sense as the legend (beat Ganon) is the same but details and setting change
But I couldn’t help chuckle at mental image of some grandpa telling his kid the legend (the tears of the kingdom version) of making a weaponzied hover bike torturing koroks
ign.com
Aktywne