Cloudman said:
Tachikoma said:
Cloudman said:
Wow, you went beyond and did a bad list! You have some high standards too. But I love you for mentioning Fragile Dreams and RE0. I loved those games : )
|
Not really, its just, theres a big difference between a game being a good, and a game making you go WOW, for example, there were lots of good games on the n64, 3ds and vita, but nothing that made me think "wow".
Though im a games developer, so my standards are skewed more towards technical wows than general plot/gameplay wows.
|
Oh wow, that`s awesome! Didn`t know you were a dev. Yeah, you`re right. Just cuz a game isn`t "Wow!" doesn`t mean it`s bad. My mistake. Though why did you write it as "Wow, it`s bad!"?
|
again from a technical standpoint, very few games actually cut the mustard as far as utilizing hardware fully goes, even today, i consider most games technically bad because of corners cut, poor optimization and bad design choices.
Virtually all ps2 kingdom hearts games for example, have horribly optimized geometry handling on their engines and waste a great deal of power doing calc for geometry you cannot actually see, power they could have put to better use by enriching the games world, or stabailizing the performance of what they had.
hence why destiny beta is in wow, but not destiny.
Good engine, nice execution but the end product is lazy and stinks of rushing to get it out the door, whats the point of developing such an engine then using it to create a glorified hub world to hock DLC? and i say this as someone thats put over 300 hours into the game.
I like the game, but as far as wowing me goes, it's far from it.
For Fatal Frame V, my issue is, while the game does explore a few new design ideas, it for the most part sticks to lazy design choices of old, but more importantly, i actually dont really think its a good game, i consider it mediocre.
