pokoko said:
LudicrousSpeed said:

Please quote where I said you made any comparison, lol. The comparison was being made before you or I posted. I commented on that comparison. You replied to that comment. Hope that helps.

I've already said the game has too little content and too high a price. Not sure how any of this qualifies as apologizing for the game, but I'm not surprised to see another retort with zero substance. Also not surprised to see another post without any kind of source for your claims, confirming to me you're talking purely out of your butt.

Feel free to reply when you come up with an answer as to how a game like Sea of Thieves can have as much content as a game that is designed to randomly generate endless amounts of content because it's focused entirely around exploration, I'm just going to ignore anything else. Your reply to me focused entirely on the sizes of the studios making these games, not the genres the games are in or what the games are about, which is silly. So explain how you would give Sea of Thieves endless content. You'd have to include vast, endless randomly generated islands in a vast, endless ocean. How would that work with people playing on the same server? How would you get to these endless amounts of randomly generated islands in the endless ocean? A twelve hour sailing expedition perhaps? Sounds exhilarating. Oops, there I go being logical again. I mean, apologizing again. I'll be on pins and needles waiting to see how Sea of Thieves would work with endless randomly generated content. Personally I'd rather have well designed and balanced islands and forts as opposed to unlimited islands with random quality not worth sailing to but that's just me.

Stop with the "endless amount of content" excuse.  That's just ignorant and looks ridiculous on your part when the main complaint about NMS is that there is nothing to do.  Procedurally generated doesn't mean endless content, it means recycled assets.  Both games suffer from a lack of meaningful content and you know that.  You're just trying to bullshit your way out of your first comment that somehow a single player game should have more content than a multiplayer game (lol), which is just nonsense.

Your post, for context--"I would hope NMS had more content, it was a single player game, despite what Sean said it would be. Imagine if SoT had no multiplayer, lol."  And, no, you didn't quote anyone.

All you are doing is deflecting and it looks so silly and childish.  My comment was that Rare should have been able to provide a hell of a lot more content than they did and that a comparison with an indie studio does not cast them in a favorable light no matter how you spin it.  If it's going to be compared to something, then it should be compared to WoW or that Star Wars MMO, where it gets absolutely pulverized.

And please, please stop suggesting that Microsoft can't adequately fund a first party game.  That's nonsense.

Hmm, I have my suspicions that these same people weren't so lenient on NMS.  Also, if this is MS's vision of GAAS, then count me out.  I'll make sure to support Sony and Nintendo for as long as they stick to traditional gaming.