Persona 5 and Royal is a bad example as both of those games are good and different enough to justify paying twice. The correct example is SMT V and VV.
I disagree. I love both of them, but I gotta say P5 is only fun once. It is way too dialogue heavy for a 80h game to replay and literally every side activity is boring on a repeated playthrough, hence I’d never have gotten to the actual Royal story content if I had played all of P5 initially. Yes, I could skip through most of it, but at that point I’m only playing a worse SMT with way too many interruptions and would potentially skip some changed stuff. SMT V on the other hand I see myself replaying anyways, should there be enough new stuff I’ll go for VV. It’s just pure gameplay goodness.
I played through P5 & P5R and enjoyed both times. I’d probably go back to play it again some days because I feel like there is still more to see. I have played through SMT V once and I felt like I have already got everything. Couldn’t even bother finishing all 3 endings because the branching point is so late and so lazy. SMT V has some fun game play but it feels incomplete overall.
I feel like you're technically right, but it's funny, I don't like SMT because I play Persona for that dialogue, so I'd replay a Persona game once every few years and pick all different S-Links, but I feel like desiring pure gameplay goodness and thinking about Persona at all is sort of antithetical to what makes Persona different from other games.
in that Persona feels more like it has dungeons and battling strictly to provide contrast and variety from the dialogue and not because it's worth it in its own right.
I agree. My copy came yesterday and the PS5 is really holding this game back. The PC version can’t come soon enough. It also stinks that the first PC version will almost certainly end up being on Epic before steam.
It also stinks that the first PC version will almost certainly end up being on Epic before steam.
Square is super inconsistent with this stuff, that it’s pretty hard to tell what’s going to be an Epic Exclusive and what’s not. I do hope there’s not going to be a second exclusivity period, before it’s coming to Steam though.
It sure sounds like the money spent on those deals makes less and less sense, so I'll bet we see less of them going forward. Already the exclusivity period for this game is down to only about 3 months.
I reallllly hope we don’t have to finish the story to jump into the DLC. After an almost 200 hour first playthrough I thought “oh man I want to do this again!” I got a quarter way through NG+ and put the game down and didn’t get around to finishing it.
I loved Elden ring as a concept, I think it was an extremely interesting twist on the formula. However for replayability I feel like it suffered heavily. The vast open world takes a long time to get through (mainly if you’re really trying to beeline directly from point A to B.) And if you need specific items or materials I feel like having to replay the various tombs /mini dungeons would be more chore like than fun.
I only came to this realization after playing demon souls and bloodborne for the first time recently. There’s very little filler a person would need to go through when replaying those older fromsoft titles. I’m so torn though because I really liked exploring in Elden Ring.
I totally agree about Bloodborne (and Dark Souls) being much more ‘closed in.’ I feel like Elden Ring’s map should be 40% smaller as most of these open areas are completely pointless. There are typically zero items other than the environmental materials or random animals outside of central areas like buildings/towns/boss areas. Why even create all this extra space if there’s no need to go there (which you only find out after wasting your time looking around)?
I think my favorite map layout has been the original Dark Souls. There are numerous paths leading out from the Firelink Shrine meaning you can still explore without all the pointless fluff.
I’m gonna guess here, but I bet the DLC will be after an endgame boss in an optional area. Quickest way to access it (and potentially get demolished) is to do the PVP storyline. Vague I know but I don’t want to spoil too much for anyone going blind
Ohhhh after seeing the trailer I bet you any money you’re right. I guess the one nice thing is that area also is good for farming exp. So if you are needing to access it quick it might not be so bad…
Honestly since the original artist(s) left, I wasn’t interested in a follow-up anyway. A second disco Elysium without the same art and story direction would have little to no relation to the game that came before.
Honestly, it's refreshing to see someone actually brainstorm solutions to these problems rather than just telling people to get mad. It's a long shot but a legal win in any major market could see business practices start to change. Like when the EU revamped its privacy laws and suddenly every website gives you the option to reject some of their tracking cookies. Or whatever the impact of China's new regulations on spending in games actually ends up being. It's worth the effort at the very least.
The graphics look amazing as they did with RDR2, but unless there’s something truly innovative about the open world’s gameplay (like for example persistent, story unessential NPCs or a more dynamic relationship between the player and police) I don’t see a reason to be hyped about this game.
They do, although their additions up until now have been about more content: more vehicles, more space, more detail, more activities, more granularity
I want to know what’s specifically going to be better or more interesting. I’m honestly happy replaying RDR and GTA V or finally finishing GTA IV and RDR2 because those are all fantastic games.
True. It’s just after all this time between releases, I don’t know, I was just expecting better. For anyone who has been foaming at the mouth over Online, this one’s been a decade in the making. Or however long since they decided to not bother with singleplayer content additions.
Everyone playing the newest Call of Duty has been foaming at the mouth for something new as well. Buying the newest game is not going to manifest something new. In fact, quite the opposite. If more of the same generates them more money with less cost, they will 100% do that.
“Standing on the shoulders of giants” is a saying in science. We build on the work that came before.
Same with Rockstar. Go back and play GTA III, Vice City, and San Andreas.
You really feel how these were built on the same engine/platform and how each game kinda just feels like the game they made while making the other game. If you look at the timelines San Andreas came quickly after Vice City (by modern standards at least). Imagine if they didn’t upgrade and reuse assets? If everything was to be built from scratch.
True but those games came out at a time when they were releasing a game every year or so and there were often still reworks to most of the assets they reused. This is a game that’s coming after a decade of money grubbing. They aren’t a plucky little upstart anymore.
There was an article on here a little while ago that said games are getting so massive that a 10 - 12 year development cycle is not only unexpected, but should become the norm soon
My backlog is so large, I’m definitely going to die before getting through it.
Don’t call it that, man! games are an escape, a leisure activity. Not some work assignment you need to compulsively finish. It’s OK if you don’t play everything there is. 🙂
Lol I know it sounds like I’m treating it like a job, but it’s more like wanting to travel the world but knowing I’m not going to have time in my life to see everything (which is both a metaphor, and also a thing I would actually like to do that competes for time lol).
We have to prioritize some experiences in life over other experiences we also want to have, and that’s just how it is. So if they could just stop making new things for a while, that would really make my job easier 😝.
I get that. I’m excited for it too. My point is 80k views but 2.1 m likes. How could 2.1 m people like it when it hasn’t even been viewed 100k times yet? As soon as you load the page it’s a view, so at least 2.1m people would have had to open the video to like it.
Exactly, thank you. I get what the massive appeal to the game is. I’ve played all the GTAs (yes I’m old), but something is fucky if it has that many updoots and not even 100k views (at the time).
Views don’t update in real time but likes do. Always happens with big videos like this. It’s something to do with YouTube reconciling the view counts across multiple servers, which gets very difficult with large numbers. It’s a bit easier for them to create a stable like count when each user can only like it once, so they’re essentially adding that user to a list and then counting the length of the list.
Rockstar has done nothing but actual in-game footage for trailers since like GTA3. So, yeah, that shit is fucking insane. Doesn’t even look like a PS5 could run it.
They must have magicians working for them or something. I guess that’s the advantage of using a completely tailor made engine created with unlimited funding, rather than using Unreal or something.
I believe only the local Co-op was removed though? And the optimizations made for XSS were beneficial to all other platforms as well as they stated, and the game runs now much better on PC and PS5
The optimizations would have been done eventually anyways and Xbox had policies that they had to bend just to have the game on their systems.
People can say the game is coming, but that doesn’t mean it’s happening, it’s already been an issue and will be a continuing issue going forward. The console just isn’t that powerful.
If the game does release, it won’t be the same game as the X, not a chance.
I doubt they would do the optimizations at the same degree, because they wouldn't need to. It was working fine on the PS5 already, it was already a success on PC. Why bother much?
They have done plenty of other optimizations already. So why would you think that? Of your logic was remotely true not any optimizations would have been done since it’s a waste.
Clearly they aren’t that type of company (every company does continuing optimizations FFS LMFAO), so don’t make shit up to try and make a point.
It's worth remembering that the business model always affects the game design. 6th gen consoles were arguably the most "pure", since obtuse games with strategy guide and hint hotline revenue streams were just about dead thanks to free GameFAQs, and DLC had yet to be introduced. Still, their incentives were to cheaply make as much "value" as they could, which meant churning out levels so that they could put a higher number on the back of the box for how much content you got for your $50 (a little over $80 in today's money). They also knew there was a good chance people would rent the game and decide to buy it off of that experience, so the best content was typically front-loaded, and then you'd get a lot of padded levels in the later parts of the game. It was rare that I would finish games back then, because often times a game would start strong and then end up filling big rooms, that look a whole lot like earlier big rooms, with trash mobs repeating the same simple loop over and over.
The only thing the charity has done with the money donated has been to pay for it’s own expenses. The rest has just been sitting in an account somewhere. No grants or anything have been made with the money so far.
How can it have expenses at all if it’s just a bank account held by the guy’s brother? Why does it need to be a charity or exist at all if they’re just donating the money to another group, why be a middle man?
This whole thing reeks, imo.
Edit: Duh, stupid of me. The charity streams and website cost money. Still stinks. How does that add up to 11k expenses one year and 29k expenses another year. How does that make any sense?
youtube.com
Ważne