@nightriff: Persona 5 doesn't really seem like a game that needs to bother with showing anything at E3. Maybe it gets a mention during the Sony press conference, but I don't see it having a big showing.
To be honest, I'd kinda say the same thing about Civ VI. The Civ games (and similar big 4X strategy games) tend to show better when press gets to play for an extended amount of time on their own, and time isn't something press people at E3 have in any excess.
EDIT: I see that Sparky is counting any game reveals from the past month or whereabouts, so I guess maybe my feedback is pointless.
Even though programming is my job, I do like games that try to employ that same logic and framework. This game just seems a bit too clunky though.
If you're looking for programming style logic puzzles, I'd recommend Human Resource Machine (which is in a bundle on Humble Bundle with about 24 hours remaining) or TIS-100. HRM is a bit easy if you have any exposure to programming, but I found TIS-100 to be pretty challenging, especially when trying to find optimal robust solutions.
You're right I didn't argue against your point. Because you are right. My point is though, that what applies to Aurion also applies to The Witcher 3. The Witcher 3 is only possible because they could publish it themselves. You can't truly believe a big, risk averse western publisher that's scared of bad press and rep would greenlight the only big all white game of the last ten years, right? Just like they wouldn't publish Aurion, as you said.
I maintain that arguments about diversity apply to both games the same way.
What are you even talking about here. Witcher 2 was regarded as a financial success, of course a publisher would jump at the chance to publish Witcher 3. You`re vastly overestimating how much a publisher cares about `bad press` when there`s money to be made. Oh, and Atari published the first Witcher game.
Both The Witcher 2 and The Witcher 3 also had co-publishing deals with WB Games (in the US) and Bandai Namco (in Europe), so the point about a publisher being scared away by a lack of diversity is just totally incorrect. As further evidence of that point, see most other games from the past few decades.
I mean they seem like cool guys and I wish nothing but the best for them with this project, but man, not the best way to demo your game at all.
Yeah. Clearly they're very excited and nervous about showing off the game and it does seem cool. Unfortunately, I think they got a bit caught up in their own excitement and really glossed over the basics, so you're left with a lot of people in these comments, like myself, that don't really understand how the game works or how much of a game it even is.
This looks potentially interesting as a big fan of the Burnout team and crash mode, but something about the way it was presented in this video almost made it look like a fake game someone would be playing in the background of a movie or TV show: you press a button, a bunch of stuff explodes and random score bonuses pop up on the screen, and then the ball kinda automatically goes in the hole or something?
I can understand why you'd want to show off the destruction by having an experienced player demo the game, but it made everything look so effortless that it didn't even look like it was a game.
And just a side note as someone that also likes real golf games, they're really not that complicated.
chaser324's comments