By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - Horizon: Zero Dawn may be the best new IP this generation

Tagged games:

 

Horizon

Da new IP king! 127 37.69%
 
Great new IP 107 31.75%
 
Good new IP 52 15.43%
 
Average new IP 36 10.68%
 
Bad new IP 0 0%
 
Horrible new IP 9 2.67%
 
Go back to Killzone! 6 1.78%
 
Total:337
SWORDF1SH on 14 June 2016
AnthonyW86 said:
SWORDF1SH said:

No disrespect but most of your post you talked nonsense. Bloodborne is a new IP, FACT. Spin offs can be new IPs to but what was spun off Dark Souls to make this a spin off. What relation do they have do they have other than being a typical From Software game? Different name, different settings different characters and has a gothic victorian compared to the medieval look of dark Souls. 

 

Should we start calling all of platinum games spin-offs because most of there games have similar gameplay mechanics? Is Uncharted a spin-off to Tomb Raider? Theirs a lot of shooters out there that play very similar to each other, Do they spin off from each other? 

 

Like I said, I can see why some will call it a spiritual successor, but that's the best link you'll find between Bloodborne and Dark Souls.

Black Flags also has a different setting, different characters and a exotic carribean look compared to the American Civil War look of AC 3. Fact is it has mostly the same gameplay elements as other AC games, just like Bloodborne does with other Souls games(gameplay differences in Black Flag are bigger actually). Again only difference between these two examples is the name. Same can be said for so many others like COD, GTA etc. Everyone knows Bloodborne is just a slightly altered Souls game because Sony wanted an exclusive from From Software and the weren't willing to give up Dark Souls 3 for that. That's why it had to be a different IP and name, but that doesn't make it an entirely new franchise or game. Otherwise the game would probably have been called Blood Souls, because a developer would never pass the oppertunity to use an established brand name. Just look at a game like COD: Infinite Warfare, you can barely even call that a COD game but they are not going to pass on a brand like that.

Can somebody fucking shoot me!



Around the Network
SamLeheny on 14 June 2016

With the worst name;D
Nah, I'm looking forward to it all the same.



SWORDF1SH on 14 June 2016
BraLoD said:
SWORDF1SH said:

Can somebody fucking shoot me!

*raises hand*

Lol I just knew it would be you.

Sorry for derailing your thread a little. 



AnthonyW86 on 14 June 2016
SWORDF1SH said:
AnthonyW86 said:

Black Flags also has a different setting, different characters and a exotic carribean look compared to the American Civil War look of AC 3. Fact is it has mostly the same gameplay elements as other AC games, just like Bloodborne does with other Souls games(gameplay differences in Black Flag are bigger actually). Again only difference between these two examples is the name. Same can be said for so many others like COD, GTA etc. Everyone knows Bloodborne is just a slightly altered Souls game because Sony wanted an exclusive from From Software and the weren't willing to give up Dark Souls 3 for that. That's why it had to be a different IP and name, but that doesn't make it an entirely new franchise or game. Otherwise the game would probably have been called Blood Souls, because a developer would never pass the oppertunity to use an established brand name. Just look at a game like COD: Infinite Warfare, you can barely even call that a COD game but they are not going to pass on a brand like that.

Can somebody fucking shoot me!

Every single thing i said in that post is correct, but this is going no where. If you like you can start a poll and ask people if Bloodborne belongs in a list of completely new games that this generation has brought but i think you can guess the results.

Anyway by you're definition the new Red Dead game will probably be the best new IP this generation, so you can forget about Bloodborne. Let's say it's called Red Dead Revenge: New name=New IP=Completely new and different franchise apparently. I just hope no other developer picks up on this trick otherwise we will only get rebranded games from now on.

You can respond to this if you like but i won't reply so your choice, no hard feelings.

Edit: Just remembered that by this definition Rocket League applies for this list, so no Horizon is not the best new IP this gen. Probably should have responded with that right away sorry. :-p



Johnw1104 on 14 June 2016

I mean now that I think about it the only new IP i've liked this gen is Splatoon, so that's very possible depending on how it turns out.



Around the Network
SWORDF1SH on 14 June 2016
BraLoD said:
SWORDF1SH said:

Lol I just knew it would be you.

Sorry for derailing your thread a little. 

You are giving me points, don't worry, go on!

Am I not get my point across properly or am I the retarded one? 



mjk45 on 14 June 2016
patronmacabre said:
Overwatch and Bloodborne are also new IPs, though -- and those are demonstrably the best new IPs this generation.

But yeah, the game looks good. I am personally iffy on Guerrilla Games as a developer. They clearly seem to have aspirations to be a top-tier Sony studio like Naughty Dog and Santa Monica, but we have yet to see whether they can successfully carry out the execution. While I am hesitant about Horizon, the gameplay they showed was very promising. I saw a lot of Elder Scrolls, Monster Hunter, and Zelda influences.

The game reminded me of turok ,not from a story sense but from having a protaganist with a bow and mech dino's.



Research shows Video games  help make you smarter, so why am I an idiot

SWORDF1SH on 14 June 2016
BraLoD said:
SWORDF1SH said:

Am I not get my point across properly or am I the retarded one? 

Discussing AC4:BF is a new IP is very pointless, it's not only an AC game, but also one of mainline ones, even numbered.
Seems like you guys are discussing more opinions over subjective views of different takes on series entries and spiritual sucessors, which will make some stuff sound right even if it's objectively wrong, as calling AC4:BF a new IP, it's objectively wrong, but you could added on that, but if you two aren't having the same conversation and each is taking it from a different way, it's utterly pointless, for both sides, even as if you are going for an objectively right side, if that's not what is being discussed, then being right won't solve the discussion, so just let it go.

I absolutely get that and also stated that. People are entitled to there opinions but arguing facts do my nut in. 



AnthonyW86 on 14 June 2016
BraLoD said:
SWORDF1SH said:

Am I not get my point across properly or am I the retarded one? 

Discussing AC4:BF is a new IP is very pointless, it's not only an AC game, but also one of mainline ones, even numbered.
Seems like you guys are discussing more opinions over subjective views of different takes on series entries and spiritual sucessors, which will make some stuff sound right even if it's objectively wrong, as calling AC4:BF a new IP, it's objectively wrong, but you could added on that, but if you two aren't having the same conversation and each is taking it from a different way, it's utterly pointless, for both sides, even as if you are going for an objectively right side, if that's not what is being discussed, then being right won't solve the discussion, so just let it go.

AC:BF was just an example(though maybe not the best one) of a game in a series that introduced new gameplay elements, however even if named completely different it would still clearly be an AC game. I was just explaining that Bloodborne is very in line with the Souls games, and you clearly stated in the OP that those don't count just like The Last Guardian. But i guess he didn't take the time to read that.

I'm also hyped for Horizon btw so didn't want to derail you're thread there sorry. :-p



SWORDF1SH on 14 June 2016
BraLoD said:

Just to get your thoughts, you're a clever lad.

Do you agree with these statements. And are they objective statements. 

Bloodborne is a new IP

The new GoW is part of the GoW IP

AC:BF is part of the AC IP

This statement contradicts itself ' That's why it had to be a different IP and name, but that doesn't make it an entirely new franchise or game.'

Gameplay had nothing to do with what games are covered by that IP

 

Do you agree with these subjective statements? 

Rocket League is a spiritual successor to SRPBC.

Bloodborne isn't a spin-off but could be seen as a spiritual successor to Dark Souls 

 

There's were my points in the posts, more so the objective statements.