IcaroRibeiro said:
Was you the guy was saying current gen games were boring and didn't take any risks or innovation? I've found a very strange take, but it makes sense if you didn't played anything substantial PS5 has to offer |
never said they were boring, just that they lack risk and play far too safe. If Nintendo did SMOdyssey 2 as the mainline Mario for NSW2, for instance, I would be up in arms unless they really did a lot to change things up. (Though notice, I specifically mentioned launching on NSW2. No issue if it releases for NSW, with NSW2 getting its next-gen vrsn of Mario.)
GoW:R, HFB, and SM2 did not do a substantial amount different from GoW, HZD, and SM respectively, and it must be emphasized that yes, this is based entirely from what I have heard and seen from gameplay, the community, etc
I’m sure they’re all great games (I have purchased all of them for a reason), though I feel it shouldn’t be a bold assertion to claim that these franchises are not evolving in a satisfactory way from PS4 -> PS5. It’s like how many will judge NSMB series of games: I don’t believe one needs to play this series in order to see that they are very safe titles. So, to that, I offer the following question: Is it necessary to have played the game you’re talking abt in order to have *broad* beliefs in it? And let’s be clear: I’m not writing up scathing reviews on these first-party Sony experiences, I am simply critiquing them *for what they represent*, which is more-of-the-same, play-it-by-the-numbers. Yes, they are (rightfully) critically revered, and I’d imagine extremely fun to!…but they are also sequels which play it waaaay to similarly to their predecessor.
btw lots of Nintendo analogies here b/c, again, that’s where I’m most informed. Shouldn’t discredit what I say here.
(I feel like we’re getting off-topic here…PM?)
Last edited by firebush03 - on 25 October 2024
