It's one of those typical games that I tried because the entire world was lyrical about it, including grown adults. Figured I gave it a shot (as a grown adult myself) and it was indeed during the time we had fuck all to do. Didn't like the game at all and frankly didn't see the appeal of it either, it's fine if people enjoy that kind of gameplay, but it was the most bland and "do your daily chores"-game I've ever played. It's baffling how something so stale was regarded so highly.
There are no bad takes, they're personal preference. Not everyone likes the same game or genre.
I know people who play Football Manager and Diablo religiously. While I enjoyed Odyssey for a while. Also tons of people still play Mario Kart 8, it's a fun game for the right audience (not me).
Sounds similar to people trying to get me into alcohol, never liked it much, but everyone always keeps pushing it as if I need to "learn" to drink it.
Fucking no. It's disgusting. I like my occasional light alcohol drink but I ain't chug down litres and piss it, and my money, away because it's "cool".
Seems like a bit of a reach in wishful thinking lol
Nobody is going to spend that time on a 'fixed' version of the movie, let alone have access to everything needed to even do this. It's more likely that someone will make a fan-made movie with audio from the original.
It's just your typical meme-movie that nobody really asked for, they gather a bunch of classic game tropes and shove it into a movie and then max out on publicity like "Haha look, so funny and recognizable Minecraft stuff. Are we right, fellow kids? We totally get you!".
They probably could've gotten away with it if they just used 3D characters like the Mario movie too and it would've worked fine for younger audiences. It probably still will work fine for younger audiences but it feels so terribly forced.
All they would probably need to do is replace the main cast with digital game characters, or at least something that's rendered so they at least blend in a lot better.
It almost seems like the Sonic movie thing, where they first released a trailer that was so awful they had to change Sonic to look much better. I'm still not sure if it was a very expensive marketing move or not.
From what I read it was over 8 years in development, it should've been well beyond a rework, or maybe even a couple, already.
I'm almost certain that Sony, as any boss, was quite done with the whole fiasco and just said "fuck it, let's go" and just see what happens. It probably wasn't worth the time and effort to keep putting resources into a project going nowhere.
To be honest I never found the procedural generation in No Man's Sky good either.
It's a better game by far, but once you have been exploring a few systems you often start finding repetitive content there as well. But there's definitely more variety than Starfield and it's mostly seamless too. And NMS came out about 7 years before Starfield.
I think the biggest issue is Bethesda clinging on to their engine for dear life like it's their precious baby, and they're keeping it on life-support with minimal updates.
I don't really feel like you can compare the two games. Starfield was a big scope with mostly procedurally generated content with a few handcrafted areas, which resulted in very repetitive content since they simply didn't make enough variety in content. I feel like the procedural part and the ship and base building parts took a lot of resources away from other gameplay features, like a more interesting story or more engaing gameplay.
It also doesn't help that Starfield still runs on an extremely outdated engine. Even if they updated it, there are still ridiculous limitations that shouldn't even exist in this day and age. Just looking at Star Wars Outlaws gives a good impression how seamless stuff could've been in Starfield. Yet even entering a small shop or your ship requires a loading screen.
And on top of that the game just runs like absolute garbage on the old engine. When Todd Howard just answered with "just buy an RTX4000 card" it spoke volumes about the lack of optimisation that came with that game.
That last part is probably gonna be the biggest obstacle for Elder Scrolls 6, but having a handcrafted world will probably let them get away from a complete failure of a game already. Another obstacle might be to write an interesting story and characters, I frankly can't remember anything from what I played in Starfield, it was generally just boring and Bethesda probably gambled on the open-world exploration experience offsetting that.
Also Bethesda needs to stop relying on mods saving the game for them, many basic functions are missing and I found myself often needing mods to have an even acceptable experience, especially with Fallout 4 and Starfield. It's probably why Skyrim is still so popular, because there is that massive collection of mods out there.
Oh man I remember Planetside 2 launch being so insanely laggy and buggy lol
At some point we threw grenades on a giant pile because they just never went off, or sometimes just disappeared as soon as we threw them.
I don't think the devs ever tested that huge influx of players anywhere in the pre-launch stage. It's hard to predict some things that will go different from testing to live, but man it seems so obvious with large multiplayer titles.
Even WoW still struggled with this, servers becoming laggy and unresponsive even, it's been better last 2 expansion launches but it's still not great. And they had over 15 years of data to go on too.
You're quite literally contradicting yourself. Saying that it's nothing to do with the game, then proceed to claim people complaing because it's a shitty experience.
Prices have been rising in the gaming industry all together, you can't blame Ubisoft alone for this. And the experience has been fun to me, as well as others.
The term "beta" has been abused for so long that it's become meaningless in terms of what it actually is supposed to be. It's just a paid demo and/or early access.
Just look at WoW, they had a "beta" for like 2 or 3 months, and a paid early access package. Adding insult to injury they started patching/nerfing stuff like a day after early access. It's annoying as fuck that they have many months of "testing" and then fail to fix the blatant issues until it hits live servers and even after the early access period. Everything screams like "should've bought the beta and early access, huh?". Paid stuff like betas and early access are just money grabs, and people fall for it. So next expansion will probably be an even longer early access period, or more bonuses.
As for CoD looking like a collection of brainrot operators, weapons and themes, I think they are just trying to figure out ways to keep CoD relevant without releasing actual identical games every time, even if it just means changing the theme. And people are still buying it, so why would they stop.
Why?