Seems like an unpopular opinion but I actually like the Far Cry formula. It’s the same gameplay loop with different maps and weapons and that’s all I really ask for because I know what I’m getting is something that I know I enjoyed and will enjoy. I don’t play Far Cry to experience some innovative gameplay, there’s other games I look to for that.
I already wasn’t a fan of the changes to Far Cry 6 and these changes don’t seem like a Far Cry game anymore so I’m a bit disappointed if these are true.
There’s literally dozens of us! I for one loved far cry 5. 6 I really didn’t like because of the whole home built attachments/guns stuff since I’m a gun nerd and love using real guns and sights in games. Definitely not crazy about this news.
The biggest thing I didn’t like about 6 was not being able to get into the final boss’s city by air, even after he was dead. Felt really limiting and like the game wasn’t finished.
What it really comes down to is that this type of “safe” game design where you rehash the same game over and over again for 20 years thing used to make a shitload of money, that’s why they all do it, and now it doesn’t. Or at least, they’re discovering that there’s a mathematical maximum amount of times you can rehash something without innovating. And not doing that is too huge a pivot for a huge lumbering company like Ubsioft to make on a reasonable timescale.
This is what’s supposed to happen though. When not enough people buy games to make them profitable, the games have to change, or Ubisoft goes under. Either is fine.
And I feel like half of that 20 years was based on FOMO. “I better get the next Assassin’s Creed or I’ll miss out”, and then it’s all the same crap but they still sold a million of them. People do eventually wise up to FOMO.
Miss out on what? Unity was a buggy mess on launch, skip, the British one was a snorefest. By the time of the reboots, Ghost of Tsushima, Elden Ring and BotW already came out
Now if ubisoft could go under too. I’m still pissed the splinter cell games are such a shit show on PC and they have the neck to ask for full price with the bugs and multiplayer being disabled. They can get fucked
Considering how luke-warm Inquisition was and how terrible Andromenda was, I really don’t understand how people expect a good game from a company that hasn’t delivered a really good game in over 10 years.
I fully expect the next Dragon Age to be classic EA garbage, same as the next Mass Effect. Though I of course wouldn’t mind being proven wrong.
I think Inquisition is actually Bioware's second best selling game, and EA only sees money. So I'm afraid that's what we can expect from Dreadwolf: another Inquisition, or even something more watered-down to cater to wider audiences.
I actually liked Anthem and Andromeda. Had a lot of fun with them, if I’m being honest.
Granted, I played them after many patches quite a while after release back when EA Play was called Origin Access, so I didn’t exactly “buy” them specifically. Opinion might be different if I did, and probably would be if I played them on release.
Still, I enjoyed them for what they were. I guess I just wasn’t waiting in anticipation for their release or with any hype that could end up disappointing me, so I didn’t have to deal with unmet expectations.
I also enjoyed Andromeda but I just can’t get myself to replay it. I replayed the Trilogy multiple times but I just couldn’t replay Andromeda, it felt like a chore.
Andromeda was just way too bloated. I liked Andromeda, but they need to have cut all the “find three macguffins scattered randomly on the map” quests, merged the desert planets (did we really need Eos AND Elaaden?), and done another round of editing to the story.
I watched a random YouTube video where the person hated Andromeda but decided to give it another chance and ONLY do the main and loyalty missions, and he said it was like light and day, how much better it was. They bloated the game so they could have more for the sake of more, and it paid for it.
Apparently, it greatly improved the pace and gave the story a sense of urgency. I figure if you cut out so the faff, it makes Andromeda about the same length as ME1, which is the length it honestly should have been.
I feel like I’m the only one excited for this game. Every post about it is getting shit on for absolutely stupid reasons. We have 4 low res screenshots and no videos of gameplay with a few details on the gameplay loop. This is what icefrog was working on for years when he stopped working on DotA 2, the man damn near created the entire moba genre, he’s taking liberties with the gameplay and incorporating overwatch gameplay with moba mechanics that sounds like it’s handled in a more meaningful way instead of just copy/paste mechanics from other mobas and move the camera to 3rd person like smite. As someone who’s older and loves mobas but struggles to keep up with the pace of them, this game sounds like it will be right up my alley and for the record I love the art style, fuck me right?
I'm right here with you, friend! I'm pumped as hell for a new Valve team game, and I didn't know Icefrog was behind this. Guaranteed gold, so let's let the man cook
I don’t mean any offense, but if you’re saying traditional mobas are too fast paced for you, how do you expect to keep up in a moba style arena shooter? I’ve got tons of experience in both Dota and overwatch and without a doubt, overwatch is so much more taxing. As I get older, I’ve had to stray away from shooters altogether because I simply can’t operate fast enough, yet I still have no issues with the most hectic Dota teamfights. It doesn’t seem to be in the same ballpark to me
They’re a decade and a half late on this. We were still playing as Altair when everyone said this would be a great ninja game mechanics wise. Now they’re finally doing it but Ubisoft is a shadow of the studio they used to be quality-wise.
I haven’t bought anything from them in almost 10 years and have no intention to since it’s been the same bad game over and over with just more cosmetic stores and micro transactions galore.
I’ve decided amongst this push to $80 games that even $70 is too rich for me. With very few exceptions, the only launch games I will allow myself to buy will be the $40-50 ones. Otherwise I will just wait until the $70+ ones that interest me to get there on their own. If i lose the urge to play them in the meantime, oh well. Money saved.
There are just sooooo many great games out there at much better prices.
I've had a similar response.I was kinda ready to accept the new price but then they started pushing an even higher price so I got an opposite reaction where stars would have to align for me to care about any game over 60 and even 60 is pushing my willingness to pay.
I think the only thing that might get me to go over the $60 line is if a publisher takes a chance on a franchise/concept I’d like to see more of, which these days is rare.
I think it very tone deaf with regards to how their trying to up the prices of games, which I think is BS, and increasing the price of accessories, and locking things behind subscriptions.
Very much so a Blizzard, “don’t you have phones?” Type of situation.
If you’re working on your credit score… Go for it!
I was able to get an Xbox Series X and made on-time monthly payments for it over 2 years. It opened a new line of credit and regular automatic payments toward it did wonders for my credit score.
insider-gaming.com
Ważne