tokilamockingbrd said:
Johnw1104 said:
It's receiving points for the unique nature of the game too... Really, it just sounds like a stale, boring game.
This is just the latest reminder (that we seem to require every couple of years) that procedurally generated scale is no replacement for quality, designed content.
I was super excited at the time of announcement, but the presentations were the spitting image of those of Spore. This really does look like Spore 2.0 |
the key point in you post is where you say it "sounds" like a stale boring game. You have not played it and thus are parrating something you have heard.
I have about 12-14 hours in it, and 2 nights in a row I had to force myself off because sleep and all and work next day.
The game could be boring if the concept of exploring is boring to you. So yes, it could be boring for you. But you dont know that. But it is not a boring game. I find GTA 5 to be very boring, I know that I am in the minority on that so I do not go around declaring that GTA 5 is a boring game.
I did not preorder, saw the initial reviews, but read what they said, and I was like, ya that is exactly said the game was gonna be and they delievered. As far as user reviews on meta.... I cannot believe anyone would actually take those worth a grain of salt. It was already reported that an Xbox community raided it with bad reviews... this happens with everygame, I simple ignore meta user. If I want to hear a non "professional" reviewers opinion I go on amazon and look for verified purchases.
|
I have read many reviews now and watched plenty of gameplay footage in an attempt to talk myself into buying the game. I've played enough games over the years of this sort to know exactly what to expect based on what I've read and seen.
Really, I'm someone who loves exploration more than just about anything in games. I'm also fine with grind and really, really, really enjoy building. I've spent endless hours just recently in ARK, for instance.
The difference is there has to be some sense of purpose or achievement to it. Usually, games are smaller but compensate with a fleshed out world full of living characters and environments. In those instances where there's not much of that, sharing the experience with others (such as in ARK) achieves a similar sense of being part of a larger world.
This, however, doesn't have that. All this game has is scale. It's boring, vacuous space, with procedurally generated lifeforms and environments that are clearly just that. The encountered sentient life are about as well developed as those in your cheapest MMO's, there's no way to share the experience with friends (which might have redeemed this some in my mind), and perhaps worst of all, the actual gameplay is exceedingly limited. In the end, it's just a grind of a game as you jump from one bland world to the next, struggling to find the artist's personal touch on anything you come across.
I know exactly what kind of experience I'd have with this game. For the first five hours I'd be drawn in by the fresh experience, but the bland and repetitive nature of the game would quickly turn me off to it. I can't see myself liking it for more than 10 hours.
Much like Spore, this is a game I had enormous hope for, but both focused more on scale than content as both a focus and a selling point. The problem with the procedurally-generated approach is that things must be kept simple, and that's the clear end result of this game. Multiplayer capabilities may have overcome that deficiency, but without that this is just a massive package with little gameplay and no soul.
I'll probably pick it up from Steam in their next summer sale when it's $15 or something, but this is no full price game imo. If it wasn't getting points for being "unique" much like Spore did I imagine it'd be averaging closer to 50.
