I'll just say again- I love RDR2, despite disliking the last game and GTAV. People are entitled to their own opinions, I just feel like the vitriol Jeff brings to the table with that game is so unwarranted given how little he actually played it. Dan at least has seen a much larger chunk of it, so I'm more willing to give his arguments more merit.
I'm fine with the fact that Jeff and I seem to have wildly different tastes in games, but it's just a bummer to me that a lot of people didn't find the enjoyment in it that I did.
"But it gets good 15/30/200 hours in!!!" is just about the lamest, most bootlicker attitude you can have, my dude. It was a shit argument when people used it to defend FF13 and it's a shit argument now.
Nobody should have to slog through dozens of hours of tedium and fiddly controls just to justify their opinion. Games are meant to be fun, if Jeff didn't find it fun then that's that. His opinion is no less valid than yours just because you sank more hours into it.
All in all it really doesn't sound like you think everyone is entitled to their own opinions when you bend over backwards to try and discredit the ones you don't agree with.
My own farts have never not stunk to me. I don't see how anyone could actually think theirs don't smell bad.
See, that's the thing. My farts smell fucking awful to me, but there's still a perverse pleasure in it - like, "Woah the air I push out of my ass smells that bad? Hell yeah."
Man, the crew are so disconnected from what's actually going on in the VR space. I realize they aren't that interested in it on a personal level, but these sweeping generalizations about the PC ecosystems being stagnant are just the complete opposite of what I'm seeing.
I imagine their initial forays into it with VRodeo probably coloured their judgement -- most of the launch games were complete garbage -- but I really wish they would do a deeper dive into it. Echo Combat was just released, Stormland is coming out pretty soon, Oculus is starting to consolidate their mobile and PC divisions with the release of a standalone headset, pics of Valve's new headset were just leaked a few weeks back, The Samsung Odyssey+ just came out and completely removes the need for external sensors, and there are lots of really great indie games that aren't just minigame collections.
Compared to the PSVR which has like 3 full, actual releases (Tetris Effect, RE7 and AstroBot) and is using tech that's nearly 2 generations old, I'm kind of baffled they see that as the more compelling option.
Am I the only one who thinks the praise for Astro Bot is completely baffling? It seems totally fine, but it doesn't really do anything that Lucky's Tale didn't: it's just prettier.
It also seems absolutely insane to me that anybody would make the argument for the PSVR being a better value than its PC-based cousins; the hardware is nearly 2 generations old at this point, the tracking is complete dogshit, the PS4 is seriously struggling to render a lot of those games at an acceptable resolution, and it's restricted by Sony's walled-garden so homebrew apps are off the table.
On a less aggro note, I'm not sure how far Jeff dug into Beat Saber beyond the VRodeo but the mod support actually is pretty seamless. You don't need to use the website to download songs, you can browse and download them straight from the main menu once you install Beat Saver.
Wow, that campaign looks really terrible. Slow-walking corridor exposition, cutscene, small stealth sequence, cutscene, 2 minutes of a turret section (in complete silence with no musical cues), cutscene, another turret section, cutscene... Shit's straight out of 2008.
That said, nobody in their right mind buys Battlefield for the singleplayer so I'm not too bothered. The multiplayer seems great, and with the removal of 3D spotting I think they finally pulled me back.
The progression complaint seems crazy to me. That's like the best thing about what they're doing here.
Buy the game. Play the game. Have fun with the game.
You want more cards? Buy more cards. Or don't.
The lack of some arbitrary account level to grind for is honestly a breath of fresh air to me. I can't say enough nice things about it.
The only concern is how "necessary" buying more packs is. But it's a CCG so that's honestly a baked in concern to the whole genre. Know what your getting into. You gotta buy packs of Magic cards if you play Magic.
The expert mode buy in things seems insane too but being optional... Sure whatever. I hate to say "Magic the Gathering" again but it is what it is. Seems like a digital version of going to a Friday Night Magic event to play draft with strangers. That kind of thing has an inherent buy in.
I think this looked cool as hell and I hope Valve ports it to not PC. Is that crazy in 2018? I'm out of touch with Valve. A 20 dollar card game with fun looking mechanics, I'd be super down :D
100% agreed. Ever since CoD4, account-wide progression has been the cop-out way to artificially extend the life of a game by giving players some arbitrary meta goal to grind instead of actually engaging with the gameplay in any meaningful capacity. Shit's a poison, and it's why even after nearly 3000 hours of Dota I haven't even bothered to calibrate my rank.
There are definitely some issues with the way certain things are set up in Artifact, but kudos to Valve for having enough faith in their game to not bog it down with extraneous bullshit.
@cjduke: Well said. Let's completely ignore this game's connection to the Fallout IP for a moment and judge it on its own merits, as a multiplayer survival crafting sandbox. It's still a pretty bad one of those, and everything it's trying to do in that context has already been done better by a dozen other games. PVP? Rust already does that exceptionally well. Co-op quests, dungeons, boss creatures, and environmental storytelling? Conan: Exiles, The Forest, and ARK: Survival Evolved have some very excellent PVE content. And it's not even worth mentioning all the games that have a better crafting/building system, because I'd pretty much just be listing off the entire list of Early Access games.
Even the smaller, low-budget, janky forays into the genre have managed to present a more interesting, cohesive package than this game - Reign of Kings, Life is Feudal, etc.
With all that said, I guess I'm just not really sure why this game needed to exist. It's not doing anything particularly new or interesting, doesn't make any real attempt to refine the few mechanics it does do competently, and overall just feels like a cynical cashgrab meant to capitalize on the Fallout name. If this game had come out 4 years ago I can almost guarantee it would be a MOBA, and if development had started a little later it would be yet another attempt at riding the Battle Royale hype train.
Three0neFive's comments