Forspoken - Gameplay Trailer
- Thread starter HiddenX
- Start date
SpoonFULL
SasqWatch
Another by the numbers Horizon, Spider-man, Assassin's Creed .... (enter other graphical AAA without rpg components and interactivity).
I wonder if her abilities include an abrasive personality, terrible driving skills, and a horrible NY accent.
Horizon was actually really good, and I hear the sequel is even better. Not sure what you mean about not having RPG components. Have you played it?
Looks fun. I actually got a pre-order of this free with my new gfx card.
This also reminds me that I haven't played Horizon Zero Dawn yet, though I bought it months ago.
This also reminds me that I haven't played Horizon Zero Dawn yet, though I bought it months ago.
SpoonFULL
SasqWatch
I played little of Horizon Zero Dawn on PS4, but my son completed it, Spiderman, Shadow of War, Batman Arkham series .. etc while I watched. All have similar structure and repetitive (but cinematic) combat, with linear gameplay, towers to liberate/unlock, limited or without choices and consequences, limited to or with no choice of combat approach (no simulation or immersive simulation as they call them) .. etc.
Competent and fun of course, but by the numbers with no innovation. Once you play few of them you notice a repeated pattern.
Well, that doesn't really describe HZD. The gameplay is certainly not linear, and there are usually multiple ways to approach combat. In fact, I'm not sure that describes any of those games.
I agree that none of them are exactly innovative, but how many games are nowadays?
D
DArtagnan
Guest
I found HZD quite overrated, personally - but I wouldn't call it linear.
Forced myself through it - and would rate it around 7/10. Probably the same rating for HFW.
Combat is repetitive for sure, - at least it was to me. But there's a ton of impressive looking enemies that you bring down through hot-spot targeting.
To me, they sort of blended together after a while - but it's a looker.
Combat against human NPCs is pretty abysmal.
I found the story in the first game better than the one in the second game. I'd say that's the best part of HZD.
Forbidden West was a bit of a letdown for me (ultimately, as I was impressed at first), as I found the expanded skill system and arsenal poorly thought out and implemented.
It was also extremely saturated in samey Ubisoft-type activities.
I remain firm in my opinion that Ubisoft games tend to be better at Ubisoft gameplay than most of these reskinned clones.
Same goes for Tsushima, Spiderman, Arkham City/Knight and so forth.
But to each his own.
It seems that a lot of people actually really enjoy the Ubisoft formula - as long as it's not a game made by Ubisoft.
Forced myself through it - and would rate it around 7/10. Probably the same rating for HFW.
Combat is repetitive for sure, - at least it was to me. But there's a ton of impressive looking enemies that you bring down through hot-spot targeting.
To me, they sort of blended together after a while - but it's a looker.
Combat against human NPCs is pretty abysmal.
I found the story in the first game better than the one in the second game. I'd say that's the best part of HZD.
Forbidden West was a bit of a letdown for me (ultimately, as I was impressed at first), as I found the expanded skill system and arsenal poorly thought out and implemented.
It was also extremely saturated in samey Ubisoft-type activities.
I remain firm in my opinion that Ubisoft games tend to be better at Ubisoft gameplay than most of these reskinned clones.
Same goes for Tsushima, Spiderman, Arkham City/Knight and so forth.
But to each his own.
It seems that a lot of people actually really enjoy the Ubisoft formula - as long as it's not a game made by Ubisoft.
I'm not a fan of the Ubisoft formula in general, but whether or not I like something that uses it has nothing to do with who developed it. Of course I can't speak for others.
I've played all of Ubi's game except for Far Cry 6, and found the vast majority of them to be underwhelming. I did like Far Cry 5 and New Dawn, but those are the only games in that series I enjoyed enough to finish. Of the AC games, only Odyssey really appealed to me, and I got bored with The Division 1&2 fairly quickly.
I'm currently playing Dying Light 2, and the worst aspect of it, to me, is that it uses a similar formula.
I've played all of Ubi's game except for Far Cry 6, and found the vast majority of them to be underwhelming. I did like Far Cry 5 and New Dawn, but those are the only games in that series I enjoyed enough to finish. Of the AC games, only Odyssey really appealed to me, and I got bored with The Division 1&2 fairly quickly.
I'm currently playing Dying Light 2, and the worst aspect of it, to me, is that it uses a similar formula.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
I'm not saying it's true for everyone
Just that it seems to be trendy to dislike Ubisoft - and trendy to like Ubisoft-type games that aren't Ubisoft games.
I could be wrong, but that's the trend I'm noticing.
As for Dying Light 2, yeah - that's pretty underwhelming.
I wouldn't say it's the formula but the execution.
For instance, I think Valhalla does most things in a vastly superior way - except for the horror theme.
Best part of DL2 (for me) would be the exploration at night - it's just too bad it's so cut/paste in terms of layout and level design. Progression also feels like you're unlocking things you should have already had - rather than expanding your arsenal properly.
On that note, I'm playing AC: Syndicate at the moment - and I'm continuously surprised at how much better I like it than, say, Spiderman. Apart from the setting and tone, both games are remarkably similar.
Just that it seems to be trendy to dislike Ubisoft - and trendy to like Ubisoft-type games that aren't Ubisoft games.
I could be wrong, but that's the trend I'm noticing.
As for Dying Light 2, yeah - that's pretty underwhelming.
I wouldn't say it's the formula but the execution.
For instance, I think Valhalla does most things in a vastly superior way - except for the horror theme.
Best part of DL2 (for me) would be the exploration at night - it's just too bad it's so cut/paste in terms of layout and level design. Progression also feels like you're unlocking things you should have already had - rather than expanding your arsenal properly.
On that note, I'm playing AC: Syndicate at the moment - and I'm continuously surprised at how much better I like it than, say, Spiderman. Apart from the setting and tone, both games are remarkably similar.
I can't say I've ever noticed any sort of trend like that.
People either like the formula or they don't. I tend to think that if someone happens to like a game using that formula more than an Ubisoft game it's probably because they just genuinely like that game more. Setting, etc.
As for DL2, yes, it's very copy/paste. It's a shame too because the level design is really great otherwise. I love the way the city is laid out, but then you enter buildings and 90% of them look pretty much the same inside.
I'm still enjoying it, but DL1 is better.
People either like the formula or they don't. I tend to think that if someone happens to like a game using that formula more than an Ubisoft game it's probably because they just genuinely like that game more. Setting, etc.
As for DL2, yes, it's very copy/paste. It's a shame too because the level design is really great otherwise. I love the way the city is laid out, but then you enter buildings and 90% of them look pretty much the same inside.
I'm still enjoying it, but DL1 is better.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
I can't say why people bash Ubisoft games and praise games that use the same formula. I just find it curious.
The notion that people just either like or dislike an entire formula is a little too simplistic for me, and doesn't seem to tell us much about nuance.
Two good examples would be SkillUP and ACG (both established youtube "journalists"). They both bash new Ubisoft games endlessly - and then lavish praise on Ubisoft-type games that have different settings or premises. Which would be fine, if they hadn't previously pointed out the exact same repetitive structure as a negative in one game - which is suddenly not a negative.
I think there are many reasons why people appear inconsistent - including being predisposed to dislike Ubisoft games. Also, just the fact that people often are very inconsistent - and have trouble identifying the reasons for what they actually like or dislike.
If you think people can't be predisposed to like or dislike a game before playing it, then we certainly disagree
I know it's possible for a fact, because I've been guilty of that myself on many occasions.
As for DL2, yeah - I'd agree that the city is pretty cool.
I actually think I enjoyed DL2 a little more, as I found DL1 very bland overall.
I wouldn't necessarily call them Ubisoft-type games - as I tend to consider third-person perspective a requisite for that, mostly because of the focus on animations and combat functionality.
But there's no doubt there are many similarities.
Oh, I'm not saying it doesn't happen, I just disagree that it's a trend.I can't say why people bash Ubisoft games and praise games that use the same formula. I just find it curious.
The notion that people just either like or dislike an entire formula is a little too simplistic for me, and doesn't seem to tell us much about nuance.
Two good examples would be SkillUP and ACG (both established youtube "journalists"). They both bash new Ubisoft games endlessly - and then lavish praise on Ubisoft-type games that have different settings or premises. Which would be fine, if they hadn't previously pointed out the exact same repetitive structure as a negative in one game - which is suddenly not a negative.
I think there are many reasons why people appear inconsistent - including being predisposed to dislike Ubisoft games. Also, just the fact that people often are very inconsistent - and have trouble identifying the reasons for what they actually like or dislike.
If you think people can't be predisposed to like or dislike a game before playing it, then we certainly disagree
It takes more than a couple of game journalists to make something a trend.
Do you have something more tangible to show that it's a widespread thing like you seem to be suggesting? Like sales numbers, etc?
D
DArtagnan
Guest
Let's see.
1. Spend an inordinate amount of time digging up examples of people bashing Ubisoft games - and then examples of the very same people praising Ubisoft-type games.
2. Accept that JDR doesn't see the trend and that he won't be so easily persuaded.
I think 2 makes more sense in every way I can come up with - not least of which the amount of success people usually have with changing the mind of JDR
Also, sales numbers? What?
I'm talking about people bashing games and praising other games. I would never equate the shit people say with what they actually do.
I suspect a lot of the people who bash Ubisoft games secretly enjoy them and play them a lot more than their words would suggest
Yes, you're basing your "hunch" on the fact that you've seen some people on the internet bashing Ubisoft games and praising similar games.
However, that completly ignores the fact that there are probably other aspects they liked about those games that have nothing to do with the formula.
For example, TW3 uses a similar formula and lots of people like that game who don't like Ubisoft games. Does that lend credence to what you're saying? I'm guessing in your mind it probably does since your logic here only seems to be that if a game uses that similar formula with the map/icons/UI then it's completely unfair if someone likes that game but doesn't like Ubisoft games.
Except that I've never once seen someone say "Man, I really like TW3 because of the map/icons/UI!" In fact, it's generally the exact opposite. Most people don't seem to like that part of the game. They like the TW3 because of the writing, the characters, and the setting not because of the map formula. To a lot of people, Ubisoft doesn't have anything that matches up with TW3 in those areas.
That's just one example of course. My point is that people are liking those games more because there's something that appeals to them that isn't in the Ubisoft games they've played. To suggest it's only because of an irrational hate of Ubisoft is, quite frankly, pretty dumb. Especially when the numbers don't support such a phenomenon.
Again, I'm talking about the majority here. I'm not saying there aren't any weirdos out there that dislike Ubisoft just because they're Ubisoft.
However, that completly ignores the fact that there are probably other aspects they liked about those games that have nothing to do with the formula.
For example, TW3 uses a similar formula and lots of people like that game who don't like Ubisoft games. Does that lend credence to what you're saying? I'm guessing in your mind it probably does since your logic here only seems to be that if a game uses that similar formula with the map/icons/UI then it's completely unfair if someone likes that game but doesn't like Ubisoft games.
Except that I've never once seen someone say "Man, I really like TW3 because of the map/icons/UI!" In fact, it's generally the exact opposite. Most people don't seem to like that part of the game. They like the TW3 because of the writing, the characters, and the setting not because of the map formula. To a lot of people, Ubisoft doesn't have anything that matches up with TW3 in those areas.
That's just one example of course. My point is that people are liking those games more because there's something that appeals to them that isn't in the Ubisoft games they've played. To suggest it's only because of an irrational hate of Ubisoft is, quite frankly, pretty dumb. Especially when the numbers don't support such a phenomenon.
Again, I'm talking about the majority here. I'm not saying there aren't any weirdos out there that dislike Ubisoft just because they're Ubisoft.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
I don't know what has gotten you so riled up over such a small thing.
You seem to infer a whole bunch of things that I haven't even touched upon. Like I've said anything about people being "unfair" - and what's true in "my mind" based on very little.
I said appearing to be inconsistent. People are highly inconsistent in general, I find - that's hardly a surprise.
People are also very often predisposed to like or dislike something. Need I bring up joxer and games with "respawns"?
It's fully possible for this trend to co-exist with people genuinely disliking Ubisoft games and genuinely liking Ubisoft-type games. It could even be true for every person I've observed saying the things I'm talking about.
I doubt it, but I actually can't know.
As for you telling yourself you know why people like what they like - that's not something I can just accept, as you would have no way of knowing that.
Anyway, I think I pointed out that I'm ok with you not seeing the same trend. I also think this particular exchange has run its course from a utilitarian point of view
You seem to infer a whole bunch of things that I haven't even touched upon. Like I've said anything about people being "unfair" - and what's true in "my mind" based on very little.
I said appearing to be inconsistent. People are highly inconsistent in general, I find - that's hardly a surprise.
People are also very often predisposed to like or dislike something. Need I bring up joxer and games with "respawns"?
It's fully possible for this trend to co-exist with people genuinely disliking Ubisoft games and genuinely liking Ubisoft-type games. It could even be true for every person I've observed saying the things I'm talking about.
I doubt it, but I actually can't know.
As for you telling yourself you know why people like what they like - that's not something I can just accept, as you would have no way of knowing that.
Anyway, I think I pointed out that I'm ok with you not seeing the same trend. I also think this particular exchange has run its course from a utilitarian point of view
Eh? I'm just giving my view on the theory. Not sure what seemed riled up about that.
People are definitely inconsistent with what they like and dislike, but I think that's natural. A lot it probably has to do with timing and the mood they're in. I myself have flip-flopped on games I've liked/disliked.
Of course I realize that's not what you mean though. You're talking about bias. I just don't agree that there's a widespread bias against Ubisoft.
People are definitely inconsistent with what they like and dislike, but I think that's natural. A lot it probably has to do with timing and the mood they're in. I myself have flip-flopped on games I've liked/disliked.
Of course I realize that's not what you mean though. You're talking about bias. I just don't agree that there's a widespread bias against Ubisoft.
D
DArtagnan
Guest
That's fair enough.
Good that you're not upset, as it wasn't personal or meant as a comment directed towards anyone in particular.
I think there is a widespread bias for many, many things. Ubisoft would be a drop in the ocean.
I could say the same about Bethsoft and others, too.
That doesn't mean it's true. I could be delusional - and I'm ready to accept that.
Sometimes, I honestly prefer to think that's the case!
Good that you're not upset, as it wasn't personal or meant as a comment directed towards anyone in particular.
I think there is a widespread bias for many, many things. Ubisoft would be a drop in the ocean.
I could say the same about Bethsoft and others, too.
That doesn't mean it's true. I could be delusional - and I'm ready to accept that.
Sometimes, I honestly prefer to think that's the case!
No, I don't think you're delusional. We probably just have different views of what qualifies as widespread. I've zero doubt that there are people who dislike certain games and/or developers just for the sake of it, but I tend to think they are a small minority.