The "Zero Dawn" portion of the title makes sense after you play it, so I think it's fine.
In general, I feel two things about game/console names:
1) They are often dumb.
2) It doesn't actually matter. If a game gets a following, it will become a household name.
X-box? Terrible, nondescriptive. PlayStation? Sounds like something your grandparents would call it (if they didn't refer to the brand name of Nintendo).
Wii? This means nothing. It sold like crazy. Names don't actually matter.
The "Mass Effect" series is named after the fictional technobabble that allows FTL travel in that universe. It's a name that, like Horizon Zero Dawn, is justified within the game itself.
Same with "Dragon Age," too. Any game that takes place 40 years before Origins or 60 years after Inquisition would have to carry a different name, because the name refers to that particular century in the history of that world.
D&D has seen a resurgence in recent years, but yeah, this is weird. Some of these games (like older versions of D&D) just don't appeal to modern gaming sensibilities, even a primarily console gamer with a non-gaming laptop could play these, and these games have been available for cheap for a long time on Steam and GoG.
Not only that, there are also a number of newer, pretty good isometric party-based games on PC and console these days (in no particular order): Pillars of Eternity, Shadowrun, Tides of Numenera, Divinity, most recently Pathfinder Kingmaker.
If someone checks these out and enjoys them, that's great! More people playing more games is good! It's just that, yeah, I'm with you all on asking who is this for?
@hoodcommando: Oh...that is disappointing, to say the least. I prestiged a couple times in the first game. Didn't play much of the second game's multiplayer, but LOVED the story. This replacing a potential Titanfall 3 is extremely disappointing.
Even EA hasn't pulled all of its pre-Origin games from Steam. When you look worse than EA, that's a failure of epic proportions.
You know, this may not count as actual irony, but it is at least irony-adjacent to consider that the company that threw its weight around to open up true cross-platform play on a huge scale is doing this sort of thing.
I think this is great. I've come to seriously dislike real time with pausing in these games. Most recently, Pathfinder: Kingmaker was the game that made me realize this is just a bad system. I'm really liking Divinity: Original Sin 2 and that style of turn-based combat. My issue with real time with pause combat is that characters are moving and attacking at the same time, which makes setting up AoE spells and flanking maneuvers extremely difficult--so difficult, in some cases, as to make those tactics useless.
If they've done the work to rebalance the game while giving the player the choice of gameplay systems, that is an awesome way to support player choice.
@monkeyking1969: I picked up Tau Zero during a sale late last year, and just listened to it over the past few days. It had the worst audiobook narration I've ever heard. The story itself was really interesting, though, even if the characters weren't written all that well. It's the first Poul Anderson that I've read. Have you read any more of his stuff?