Played it on PC and it’s really cool, although I was hesitant at first considering it looks a bit like those cookie cutter role based rpgs that just want to rent a spot in your wallet.
Horizon Zero Dawn Remastered features over 10 hours of re-recorded conversation, mocap and countless graphical improvements that bring the game to the same visual fidelity as its critically acclaimed sequel Horizon Forbidden West. […] The story’s many compelling characters have been upgraded, bringing them in line with current generation advances in character models and rendering. The audio experience in Horizon Zero Dawn Remastered has been significantly enhanced. We’ve completely revamped the sound mix, now supporting PS5 Tempest 3D Audio Tech2 for higher-order ambisonics and Atmos rendering for an immersive soundscape. Our sound design has also seen major improvements, with hundreds of improvements both in-game and in the cinematics.
[…] We’ve integrated custom haptics for the DualSense controller throughout the game, providing tactile feedback that heightens immersion. Additionally, we’ve introduced a new optional accessibility feature that utilizes sound and haptic feedback to notify players of interactable elements, such as pickups, that were previously only indicated visually.
[…] The PC version (Account for PlayStation Network required on PC) on Windows includes the PlayStation overlay with Trophy support and has its own set of features, such as support for ultra-wide resolutions and the latest performance enhancing technologies like NVIDIA DLSS 3 and AMD FSR 3.1 with frame generation. […]
Many of the accessibility features that were first introduced in Horizon Forbidden West have been included for this Remastered version as well; remappable controls, haptic cues, and various assist toggles will enable all players to fully enjoy the game.
For those that have already played it, we’ve made sure that your old save games will work; […]
For existing owners of Horizon Zero Dawn (PS4, PC) and/or Horizon Zero Dawn Complete Edition (PS4, PS5, PC): you can upgrade to the digital version of Horizon Zero Dawn Remastered for $9.99 on both PlayStation 5 console and on PC (via Steam or Epic Game Store). This includes fans who added the game to their libraries during PlayStation’s Play At Home initiative.
Owners of the Horizon Zero Dawn PS4 game disc can access this offer by inserting the game disc into their PS5 console (and will need to keep the disc inserted each time to play the game).
[…]PS4 game disc owners who buy the PS5 Digital Edition disc-free console will not be able to access the upgrade offer. For new fans, the game can be purchased for $49.99 on PlayStation Store, Steam, or Epic Game Store. You will receive the Horizon Zero Dawn Complete Edition.
Emphasis is mine.
This is just a glorified update, not a remaster. For the most part, it’s a cashgrab and I would be hard pressed to justify the full price point they are asking for this thing. At least they are offering the update at a discount for existing customers.
But it’s hilarious that the existing customers who bought the game physically and then bought their new flagship console apparently are not entitled to the discount. I don’t understand if Sony just doesn’t care about the PS5 Pro and its users, or they think that people will buy the console + external disc tray for this?
Oh, and now the game requires a PSN account on PC as well, and they only mentioned Steam and Epic Store despite the game being also released on GoG.
Can’t justify a gaming PC when PS4 pro was pretty cheap
The console itself is cheap, sure. But the games are much more expensive, and the monthly subscription will add up over time. Although if you’re only playing single player, that may not be an issue. I’d be surprised if you can even get past the boot screen on a PS5 without being connected to the internet and logged in.
Can’t wait to finally make the jump though!
It’s never been cheaper or easier to make the transition with the Steam Deck!
Somebody else also said it but the steam deck is amazing. Mid level pc performance that can handle almost all new games, and you can use a dock and have it set up just like a console. I use mine all yhe time with bluetooth ps4 controllers. Much bigger games library+being able to emulate so many older consoles makes it a no brainer i think.
PSN account is free, you probably already have one if you owned one of the last 3 PlayStation consoles. There are paid add-ons if you want the multiplayer or the gamepass like subscription.
Edit
What’s with all the downvotes, it’s literally an answer to the question. You fellas mad I didn’t editorialize the information with personal opinions?
They’re referring to Sony’s stance that all their PC releases should require you to have and sign-in to a PSN account. That’s separate to PS+, you don’t need to pay a sub.
A lot of publishers include this requirement on their PC releases, regardless of whether they’re single-player or multiplayer, and I think a lot of people are fed up with having to have so many different accounts.
Starting with this one, it’s a requirement on PC, yes. Hopefully they do away with it due to lost sales, but they’re still at least pretending that they’re somehow going to convert PC players into console players.
I don’t think that’s their goal at all. Otherwise we wouldn’t see any sequels released on PC, that would be a much better strategy for converting players to console. The only reason publishers require their own logins in games, at least for single-player titles, is data collection. Data is very valuable.
Yeah, I think the strategy is so terrible that they can’t believe it, but they’ve publicly stated that’s the goal. I’m not sure what data they’d get out of it that they don’t get out of Steam achievements, but more likely it’s to brag about how many “active PSN users” they have, using a misleading number. Still, all I see when I see that requirement is online DRM.
As mentioned (via Tom Warren) by [Playstation co-CEO Hermen] Hulst in the interview, Sony wants to tempt PC players to purchase and play sequels to single-player narrative games on a PlayStation console.
I was so excited for Cities: Skylines II, and it is a shell of the former game. So many systems seem to fake the economy, and it also feels impossible to make your city fail.
Waiting until I see evidence of a good game post-release before I board any kind of hype train.
It was definitely possible to tank a city in Skylines 1. That said, it’s also not the most challenging game.
But with Skylines II, I can’t even tank one when I try. Hundreds of thousands in the red? The game throws free money at you in the form of “government subsidies” to compensate. And they cannot be disabled. Absolute shit show.
The subsidies have never saved me from failing before, they only make me fail slower (if that makes sense). It might just be something I’m experiencing though.
Yeah, I’ve heard of people having a different experience (the economy just never picking up enough to succeed) – I think both are indicative of a borked simulation.
For me, I can even be completely in the black, with 100k+ income, and I’ll still be getting hundreds of grand in subsidies. Ruins any challenge.
I have a pretty large city, but something is wrong with my tax calculations? I have one industry pumping out 150x the taxes of everything else combine. Just a blanket of $5m from lumber an in-game hour, next best is Metals at $45k a day.
Doesn’t surprise me, if you read their forums there are a ton of folks reporting issues either being outright ignored or told that the game-breaking bug they found is “as designed”.
I mean, usually they’re already active as soon as the game starts, so I don’t really think it could be considered that way. Ideally I’d just like to be able to turn them off, which I think would provide some challenge to the budget.
I feel like whenever i “tanked” a city in cities skylines, it was because of some awkwardness in the traffic system that comes about from chaos theory rather than anything city builderey, just not really about that.
In CS 1 I purposely poisoned the entire city and it took a remarkably long time for that to have any real repercussions and can be immediately and cheaply fixed. Like you can tank a city, but it takes a concerted effort. If you just keep building roads and painting RCI the game just kinda plays itself.
I still haven’t bought that, and looks like I won’t be for a while at least, maybe never if it doesn’t pan out. I was so excited for Victoria 3 but reading the reviews they indicate that it’s also a shell of the former game. Waiting until the game is fully released before letting in any hype has served me well lately.
Vic3 certainly isn’t a shell of Vic2. It’s a considerably more complex and interesting game.
There are however some frustrating and obtuse mechanics, particularly related to warfare. It’s not even that bad once you get into it properly, but as a new player it’s definitely a bit frustrating and it’s definitely different from what players were used to from Vic2.
Ah, that’s good to hear! I myself haven’t played Victoria 2, I’ve played EU4, CK2 and CK3 a lot and was really excited about focusing on economy and population rather than map painting in Vic3. I saw the lackluster reviews on release and beyond and assumed it just missed the mark like so many sequels do. I’ll check it out some more. Thanks for your input!
I recommend watching some YouTubers playing the game (not reviewing them). One Proud Bavarian has some fun playthroughs, and Laith is one I quite like too. Those videos give good impressions of what the game is like I think.
I checked out one proud bavarian and some beginner’s guide videos to see what the gameplay is actually about and ended up buying it. Thanks for taking the time to respond, I might’ve slept on this title otherwise.
This game looks absolutely incredible. I’m not going to pre-order under any circumstances (been there, done that with these guys, lmao) but I firmly believe HG are capable of sticking the landing if they try, and if it’s all it’s cracked up to be at launch I’ll be playing the shit out of it.
Nobody really expects RPG's to be as big and deep as BG3, they just want a complete game that works without shitty microtransactions everywhere and always online for no reason. Plus, having interesting characters and storylines, quests that can be solved in more than one way, and gameplay that's actually formed by taking player feedback and listening to it is what people reacted well to, among other things. Baldur's Gate 3 doesn't even have Denuvo!
If there's one thing that I hope competitors learn from Larian and BG3, it's that respecting your players and giving them what they want leads to success. Similar to Elden Ring and from software, like that video mentioned. Now compare BG3 to Diablo 4 and Immortal, or the upcoming Starfield and you'll see why people love it. It's not about specs or scope, it's about designing a game to be actually FUN.
It's not about specs or scope, it's about designing a game to be actually FUN.
This is the key point that these publishers and studios are trying to avoid.
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on designing microtransaction psychologically manipulative money sinks (dark designs)?
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on creating addiction in the player-base so that they keep playing the game (and spending money)?
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on bullshit DLC (not actual new content)?
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on bullshit to satisfy shareholders?
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on shit the devs don't want, but executives do?
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on bullshit padding for marketing purposes?
How much of most AAA budgets are spent on bullshit DRM?
And keep in mind, by budgets here, I mean both the dollar amount AND time spent by devs that could be spent elsewhere (which is part of the dollar amount since salaries, but I wanted to make it clear that time spent is also important).
Some of the absolute best games in the industry have literally none of that, and people still want to play and buy them years after release because gasp they're actually fun, but these publishers and devs don't want to compare to those, because they WANT the industry to be a bunch of "GAAS" bullshit that's basically a vacuum pushed into people's wallets, cause hey, if it worked for Candy Crush....
yeah I dunno, the bike boost animation looked a bit jank. Couple that with the empty desert and the implications for the game design and I’m officially worried about Prime 4.
Well, it’s not like I plan on getting a Switch 2 anytime soon anyway, so there’s that.
I think it’s a fun novelty, but locking the actual software behind the Online+ Expansion pack instead of including it with the (no doubt expensive) accessory is a bit crap.
youtube.com
Ważne