I don’t necessarily think title is the issue. Some of the biggest name games out there use pretty basic words: “God of War”, “The Last of Us”. They definitely lose some attention by being a brand new IP without much of a “signature feel” to them, like giant mechs, zombies, or princess magic.
“God of War” and “The Last of Us” are both incredible titles. They consist of simple words, immediately signal what the game is about, and have a poetic ring to them.
Just looked at Steam reviews and apparently it’s another shitty launch that doesn’t run on anything other than the best cpu and gpu combos, so they can’t even promise good graphics lol
And an EA account. And agreement to a 3rd party EULA with EA. For a single player game. That’s some real “we’re gonna sell you microtransactions later” energy out of a 60 dollar release.
Gee, certainly had nothing to do with it releasing while BG3 is still all-engrossing and the queen of the looter shooter, Warframe, had its convention yesterday and pulled in over 200k people into the main livestream yesterday, as well as having events all week.
I wouldn’t blame BG3. The FPS and CRPG markets generally aren’t that closely related. I’m finding all the BG3 clips people post online interesting, but I’m certainly more interested in a good singleplayer FPS. “Good” being key.
No one was really predicting Baldur’s Gate would blow up THIS much, honestly. And besides, what could they do? Delay it any amount and you get close to something that IS predictably going to explode: Starfield.
Damn, I haven’t played Warframe in years (and never will again, 5000h is enough), but it’s good to hear it’s going strong. It’s an incredible game that at the time of my quitting just needed some clear direction.
This game (Immortals of Aveum) already had a lot of controversy when they announced the PC minimum requirements, including an RTX 2080. People knew something wasn’t right there (optimization seemed poor, game was made with “upscaling in mind” - aka “we didn’t do anything to optimize this other than adding FSR2/DLSS, good luck”). Releases and it’s worse than expected with mediocre graphical features and horrible performance, generic cookie cutter garbage.
Honestly performance is a big selling factor for PC games for me. I was more interested in Immortals than Armored Core 6 pre launch, but Armored Core apparently runs great on steam deck and will be a good experience on any PC I own, while I’m not sure Immortals would run acceptably on my main PC.
I've literally never heard about it until this post.
Looking at the reviews seems like a shame as the only complaints are the hardware limitations. Still won't be getting it until I finish (at least some of) my backlog.
Same, although maybe it was targeted more at console players and fans of fps games. I looked it up just now and it looks well made, and also interesting. Finger guns and lots of movement, etc. Something went very wrong to get low numbers on this.
Not surprising, but disappointing. The premise was interesting (first person magic shooter) but the execution was tepid. The presentation / atmosphere, the generic graphics, the dopey dialogue, the lack of an interesting story. A lot of the success of games like Halo is how the world sucks you in with its atmosphere and storyline, I think developers really underestimate how much that matters in a single player game. Cinematogrophy is important, the feel of an experience is more than the simple gameplay of moving a character around and pushing buttons.
The first two halo games were masterpieces in world building and suspense in gameplay. When the flood is first introduced your on the edge of your seat it’s on par with the best horror games ever made.
Even Halo 3, for all its faults (“to war” immediately springs to mind), kept everything largely within the world-building of the previous two games, and it made the whole trilogy feel super cohesive and immersive when played back to back.
Halo was one of the first console fps games that got the controls right. Before Halo, FPS games were only really good on the PC (though some console ones like Goldeneye and PD were good despite bad controls). Mouse and keyboard are still supreme, but Halo’s one stick looks one stick moves scheme brought consoles out of that awkward to control range.
Moving around effectively in Goldeneye or PD was an art. In Halo, like PC games, it was natural.
Went to the steam page. I had no idea what this game was. Never heard of it and the title doesn’t really do anything for me. So, a minus there. Reviews: Mixed. Minus there. The hero is named Jack and it’s high fantasy. That is the most generic name. Minus there. He looks like every other cookie cutter generic white guy main character. The only time he looks different than a movie star clone is the last second of the trailer. Nothing positive there. The hip hop music with high fantasy is not a good mix, IMO. It’s published by EA. Minus there. The dialog is very “I’m so edgy with my quips.” Minus there.
The villain designs are pretty good. The cinematic trailer is well done.
Reviews say it’s really demanding on hardware. Minus there.
Tons of negatives, a few neutrals, one or two positives. Yeah, this ain’t worth it.
I didn’t know this existed until I saw the Nextlander guys playing it, and even then I didn’t catch the name of the game.
Zero marketing means that unless the game is absolutely amazing, there will be no word of mouth and no buzz, leading to no one noticing the game at all.
RockPaperShotgun did a performance analysis on this - long story short, a 30xx card will be good for about medium settings, a 40xx for high, and really a 4090 for ultra. According to the Steam hardware survey, that’s about one-in-five PC gamers that could start this up if they wanted to; a few percent can run it with all the flashy graphics. Combine the hardware exclusivity and the distinctly ‘meh’ reviews, get some seriously low player numbers.
It is funny to see the consumer pov change I guess. Back when crysis 1 released everyones PCs could barely play it too and the shooting gameplay wasn’t anything really ground breaking either. Yet it’s remembered very fondly today. This game kinda does the same thing 15 years later and everyone’s like ‘hard pass’.
A bit after release, it was either the developers or the publisher who called it a mistake to limit their sales to those who could run Crysis. It might have been when they were talking about WARHEAD being more accessible.
Except this engine is going to be used by every other developer, so it won’t be special. I’m guess other UE5 games will run better and look better while also being more fun.
It’s actually pretty fun. The combat feels fun enough shooting spells from your hands. The world is pretty cool. Gina Torres was fantastic to see.
There are two showstoppers though. The PC performance is horrid, with a 3070 on pretty low settings with DLSS I’m still getting horrible framerates at points. The other issue is at $60-70 its a very high ask for such a short/simple game. I went the route of buying a month of EA play plus or whatever for $15 to play through it. If it was released at $30-40 might have felt a bit more fair for what it is.
I didn’t see any marketing for it until release personally, and with the mixed/negative reviews my expectations were low. So going in with that perspective, and enjoying my playtime overall was a nice surprise.
steamdb.info
Najstarsze