Both looks good, what they shown of scalebound wasn't what people wanted to see though. I think that the main character of Scalebound is a tool for a narrative purpose.

Gears 4 looks great as for Scalebound I can't comment on that.

i disagree scalebound looks amazing, gears 4 not so much

Big Xbox hater here.

Gears of War just looks like Gears of War, so I dont care about it.

Scalebound looks.... somewhat promising. On the same level as Days Gone if you ask me; could be good or bad.

Quality matters more to me, and when you say consistently release good hack and slash games, it has to be consistent, not three out of four in the last three years. That's inconsistency.

Okami was developed by Clover Studio. Viewtiful Joe was developed by Team Viewtiful. Neither are Platinum games.

Bayonetta 2 was a big oversight on my part, I agree to that. But still the general level of quality of their games is well below the other developers.

I do however agree that Ninja Theory has made a very small amount of games, but they will release Hellblade this year, so let's see how it is.

I am playing UC4 and I really do not see that much differernce within the gamplay.  Besides destrutable cover what is really different from UC4 than 1 - 3.

If quality matters more to you, that's fine. I'm not trying to convince you that Platinum is better than either SM or NT. What I'm simply saying is that Platinum is the only developer that consistently develops good hack and slash games, and when your two counter examples have barely been involved in the genre at all over the past half decade, it doesn't really hold up to the point I'm making. I'm not concerned with arguing who the better developer is, or which one you should like more.

And no, my statement does not mean that they have to reach some kind of quota for minimum quality of games released. As long as they are consistently releasing good games (as I would argue three good games over a course of a three year period is), then it does not matter how many bad or even terrible games they release. There is a difference between stating that a company releases good games consistently, and that the quality of the games they release is consistent. All I am stating is that Platinum can routinely be relied upon for a good hack and slash game. I'm not arguing that they don't release bad games, and I'm not arguing that every game they release will be good. I'm not even arguing that the majority of the games they release will be good (though I do believe that's the case). I'm simply saying that they are constantly involved in the hack and slash industry, and that they can be counted on to produce good hack and slash games routinely. If you disagree with the underlined, then feel free to debate it. Anything else, and your points are off topic and not related to what I'm saying.

Anyway, a few minor points;

Platinum Studios was Clover Studios. Clover Studios was a second party developer working for Capcom until 2006, when they were disbanded. At that point, basically the entire team went together to form Platinum Studios. And Clover was at least partially responsible for Viewitful Joe's development, if memory serves.

I don't need to play it to know what kind of game it is, just like I don't need to ride a horse to know that it's a mammal.

I'm really surprised to hear you say that. You're always so positive about MS games.

If you think Gears is subpar I'd love to know what cover shooters you're playing. Because you implying its worse than what you typically play. Maybe "subpar" was a poor word choice?

There is some truth to this. I think we can all agree we avoid some games based on genre and gameplay.

However, I also feel opinions sometimes change depending on the platform of a game. Hence, I think you would play Uncharted 4 if it was a Wii U game.