Sony Announces New PS4 Game "Horizon: Zero Dawn"; Post-Apoc Redhead Cavewoman vs Robo-Dinos - Polidicks

[QUOTE=fragger0;47978641]I've not defended the game against you once... I didn't even mention anything about the game to you at all. I've just said that your definition of 'next gen gameplay' was laughable and proved his point that no one can articulate what they actually expect.[/QUOTE] Is saying what isn't interesting completely for null though? I don't understand that. It sounds like you're just saying "Stop complaining! Make a better game if you think it's so bad" and that's not how criticism works. You don't need to simultaneously condemn and innovate if you're going to critique things.

[QUOTE=Take_Opal;47976780]Kind of my point.[/QUOTE] So? What's wrong with that? Not every game needs be groundbreaking amazing never before done things. A game can just be a fun action game.

And I have iterated on what I want from new games: New games. I don't want amalgamations of hot triple-A trends with new art styles, I want games to take risks and try weird things - which we are getting, but Horizon is not one of those games. Horizon looks like it's going to be a perfectly tame rollercoaster ride with a big budget that plateaus in the realm of chases and explosions and offers very little. And to be honest, this game's art style and story seem pretty similar to Enslaved: Odyssey to the West which was a beautiful game. [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=simkas;47978695]So? What's wrong with that? Not every game needs be groundbreaking amazing never before done things. A game can just be a fun action game.[/QUOTE] Absolutely, just don't think this game's gonna be anything but padding in a library of hopefully really cool games.

[QUOTE=Take_Opal;47978708]And I have iterated on what I want from new games: New games. I don't want amalgamations of hot triple-A trends with new art styles, I want games to take risks and try weird things - which we are getting, but Horizon is not one of those games. Horizon looks like it's going to be a perfectly tame rollercoaster ride with a big budget that plateaus in the realm of chases and explosions and offers very little. And to be honest, this game's art style and story seem pretty similar to Enslaved: Odyssey to the West which was a beautiful game. [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] Absolutely, just don't think this game's gonna be anything but padding in a library of hopefully really cool games.[/QUOTE] The problem is that you are dismissing a game when we don't know much about besides a short trailer. You can't just say it's not innovative just from hearing the description, there are plenty of things that could make or break this game, like the overall story for instance.

I dunno dude, all you have to go off is what they showed you and speculation. I'm not making gigantic leaps of logic here, it could be good but it could be bad. I think it doesn't look great from the gameplay I saw and I don't think there's anything wrong with that other than I'm not optimistic which I guess is an okay attitude to have when everyone agrees with you but any other time...

[QUOTE=Take_Opal;47978680]Is saying what isn't interesting completely for null though? I don't understand that. It sounds like you're just saying "Stop complaining! Make a better game if you think it's so bad"[/QUOTE] Nope, I'm literally not defending this game at all (I don't even know anywhere enough about it too), stop relating it back to this individual game because I'm talking about your ideas of what 'next gen gameplay' is. [QUOTE=Take_Opal;47978680] and that's not how criticism works. You don't need to simultaneously condemn and innovate if you're going to critique things.[/QUOTE] Uhh... yes it is. It's like watching a film and doing a review, you're critiquing and saying what could have been done better, you don't just say you didn't like it because it's 'not pulp fiction' because it's the same genre. You can't claim to want 'next gen gameplay' if you don't actually know what you think it is...

I like the look of this but it really sucks that it's an exclusive, 30fps and controller only is a real turn off for me with action games like this.

[QUOTE=fragger0;47978795] Uhh... yes it is. It's like watching a film and doing a review, you're critiquing and saying what could have been done better, you don't just say you didn't like it because it's 'not pulp fiction' because it's the same genre. You can't claim to want 'next gen gameplay' if you don't actually know what you think it is...[/QUOTE] Yes you literally can do that. People do it all the time, that's criticism. I really don't think it's necessary to provide a design document to support my opinion that a game looks kind of generic to me. Sure, you can call it easy criticism, but it's still criticism.

[QUOTE=fragger0;47978795] Uhh... yes it is. It's like watching a film and doing a review, you're critiquing and saying what could have been done better, you don't just say you didn't like it because it's 'not pulp fiction' because it's the same genre. You can't claim to want 'next gen gameplay' if you don't actually know what you think it is...[/QUOTE] Alright, I don't agree with this guy but you can criticize something without offering a solution, saying you can't is just downright stupid.

[QUOTE=Rossy167;47978881]Alright, I don't agree with this guy but you can criticize something without offering a solution, saying you can't is just downright stupid.[/QUOTE] You cant criticise something and back up those views with the response that it's 'not tomb raider' or something else, because you could say that about anything. I'm highlighting that he's saying he doesn't like something because it's not next gen gameplay, but even he doesn't know what he means by 'next gen gameplay', that's all. You can say something is shit without backing it up because thats a personal opinion, but when you're specifically saying that somethings bad for not having 'next gen gameplay' but you can't even explain what that is, that's stupid...

[QUOTE=fragger0;47979082]You cant criticise something and back up those views with the response that it's 'not tomb raider' or something else, because you could say that about anything. I'm highlighting that he's saying he doesn't like something because it's not next gen gameplay, but even he doesn't know what he means by 'next gen gameplay', that's all. You can say something is shit without backing it up because thats a personal opinion, but when you're specifically saying that somethings bad for not having 'next gen gameplay' but you can't even explain what that is, that's stupid...[/QUOTE] I never once said 'next gen gameplay' I said this game looks boring. I didn't say this game wasn't anything other than uninteresting and derivative of known franchises and popular trends. I explained why this game looks boring to me AND I explained why I think it is derivative. You picked up that buzz-phrase from someone else applying it to my words, that wasn't me. I don't think this game needs to be cutting-edge, I just think it should be something other than what Sony already has plenty of which is high-budget, hyper-realistic action games.

[QUOTE=Take_Opal;47979138]I never once said 'next gen gameplay' I said this game looks boring. I didn't say this game wasn't anything other than uninteresting and derivative of known franchises and popular trends. I explained why this game looks boring to me AND I explained why I think it is derivative. You picked up that buzz-phrase from someone else applying it to my words, that wasn't me. I don't think this game needs to be cutting-edge, I just think it should be something other than what Sony already has plenty of which is high-budget, [b]hyper-realistic action games.[/b][/QUOTE] I don't usually pick apart something like this but the fact that you're describing the caveman vs robot dinosaurs hunting game as hyper-realistic cracks me up. :v: [editline]16th June 2015[/editline] That being said I think the game looks like it could be a lot of fun, assuming it's not a grindfest like Monster Hunter feels like sometimes.

I mean the aesthetics of course, but that does sound silly.

[QUOTE=Take_Opal;47979138]I never once said 'next gen gameplay' I said this game looks boring. I didn't say this game wasn't anything other than uninteresting and derivative of known franchises and popular trends. I explained why this game looks boring to me AND I explained why I think it is derivative. You picked up that buzz-phrase from someone else applying it to my words, that wasn't me. I don't think this game needs to be cutting-edge, I just think it should be something other than what Sony already has plenty of which is high-budget, hyper-realistic action games.[/QUOTE] I mentioned next gen gameplay because you made a post in response to someone using it (not the other way round) explaining what you thought it was, thats all. Hyper-realistic? Did we watch the same trailer? I just think it's silly to criticise a game on the assumption that you've correctly predicted exactly what it's going to be like when we know basically nothing about it. You're entitled to criticise and I'm entitled to think the criticisms are unfounded, lets just leave it at that. I'll shut up now.

[QUOTE=fragger0;47979247] I'll shut up now.[/QUOTE] Please do.

[QUOTE=CrimsonChin;47976841]What would you want them to add to the gameplay? I always see people wishing for the elusive Next Gen Gameplay™ but nobody can seem to articulate what it is.[/QUOTE] I don't have a list of expected features or anything, but I would like to see a game with such an inventive setting have equally inventive gameplay. I've played enough third-person action games that yet another giant robot boss fight doesn't grab my attention. If it does what it does really well I might be interested, but it's competing with all the other third-person action titles already in my library.

[QUOTE=Take_Opal;47979330]Please do.[/QUOTE] You should join him.

[QUOTE=catbarf;47979411]I don't have a list of expected features or anything, but I would like to see a game with such an inventive setting have equally inventive gameplay. I've played enough third-person action games that yet another giant robot boss fight doesn't grab my attention. If it does what it does really well I might be interested, but it's competing with all the other third-person action titles already in my library.[/QUOTE] I don't disagree at all, but I'm not really sure what we really want anymore. We don't want repetitive games, but we're also not a group that takes that many risks on things and we readily criticize so much stuff from so many angles, I can imagine it's hard to figure out what an approach is that'll actually satisfy us, as gamers. We'll see where a game like this goes, but in the meantime, shouldn't we at least give them a chance so that publishers don't see us going "AHHH NEW IP" and respond with "REHASH OLD IP" even if we're not really saying that at all?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47981835]I don't disagree at all, but I'm not really sure what we really want anymore. We don't want repetitive games, but we're also not a group that takes that many risks on things and we readily criticize so much stuff from so many angles, I can imagine it's hard to figure out what an approach is that'll actually satisfy us, as gamers. We'll see where a game like this goes, but in the meantime, shouldn't we at least give them a chance so that publishers don't see us going "AHHH NEW IP" and respond with "REHASH OLD IP" even if we're not really saying that at all?[/QUOTE] Yeah this is never so simple. I don't know if the answer is to criticize less though. But there are certainly good things about this game being made, and the game in general.

[QUOTE=Take_Opal;47981997]Yeah this is never so simple. I don't know if the answer is to criticize less though. But there are certainly good things about this game being made, and the game in general.[/QUOTE] Earlier you said to criticize you don't need to have a better idea(i'm paraphrasing) and you're right, you don't, and I agree, but it isn't simple. Publishers will look at public reaction to things like this, that's what they do. If they see that a new IP isn't interesting to people, it's not going to be a signal to them "This gameplay is boring" it's a signal that they shouldn't invest so much money into a new IP and should play it safe. But we shouldn't just go "Well this is new, it's going to be good" because that's just bad consumerism so we have to find a reasonable balance so that the people who effectively run gaming, listen.

I don't get why you guys are all against Opal. Gameplay-wise the game looks super-generic.

[QUOTE=matt000024;47982237]I don't get why you guys are all against Opal. Gameplay-wise the game looks super-generic.[/QUOTE] We saw less than 10 minutes of it. I'm not going to pretend I can make a sound judgement on how it's going to be with that.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;47982381]We saw less than 10 minutes of it. I'm not going to pretend I can make a sound judgement on how it's going to be with that.[/QUOTE] Well, yeah, but the gameplay footage is meant to deliberately represent the game or at least the vision the developers are going for. I remember the E3 Watch_Dogs trailer showed off the hacking mechanic, which is the core gameplay, and it really made it distinct from GTA which would otherwise be the closest comparison. Meanwhile this video shows a boss fight that could have just as easily been from a Metal Gear or God of War game. If they're choosing to show off their game by depicting typical dodge-the-missiles-and-shoot-the-weak-spot gameplay, I don't think it's out of line to say that it's looking pretty generic. I'd like to be pleasantly surprised and find that this isn't representative of the final game, but I think that explanation is a lot less likely than that it's a generic third-person action game with a cool art style.

This game reminds me of Monster Hunter but more short and action packed. The mechanical t-rex reminded me of Deviljho. Even had the graceful ballerina twirl and everything.

I want to see more and I hope this game's good, but that demo was so generic. It plays just like all the other third-person quasi-stealth action/shooter games we've seen over the last few years (Last of Us, Assassins Creed, Shadow of Mordor, Tomb Raider, Uncharted, etc.). Like Killzone, it looks like Guerrilla isn't doing enough to differentiate it's games from all the others on the market.

[QUOTE=Last or First;47976251]The introduction of this game to the company board: "So, let's make a game where cavemen hunt robotic dinosaurs." "Why?" "Why what?" "Why are there robotic dinosaurs?" "Who cares? It's cavemen hunting [I]robotic dinosaurs[/i]." "Funded."[/QUOTE] I'd guess the story is like, humanity reached a point where it was able to create robotic dinossaurs, or something like that, then something happened that killed most of humanity, then the remaining people essentially restarted from the very beggining, with a few differences in evolution of "stuff" I guess. Looks kind of interesting, but what's with all the talking?

Why are the cavemen hunting the machines? Why did the machines mimic grazing animals? Where does their metal come from, how do they create new machines?

[QUOTE=Killuah;47991703]Why are the cavemen hunting the machines? Why did the machines mimic grazing animals? Where does their metal come from, how do they create new machines?[/QUOTE] Cavemen seem to be hunting the machine for parts to create weapons and I assume they use those canisters for food or fuel. Probably one of the things you aren't supposed to look to far into. It's cool, who cares why. Metal is probably salvaged from the cities, I imagine the robots have a way of reproducing. Automated factories or something.

[QUOTE=Killuah;47991703]Why are the cavemen hunting the machines? Why did the machines mimic grazing animals? Where does their metal come from, how do they create new machines?[/QUOTE] The less I know the more interesting it is for me. Those are questions I would hope to answer by exploring the game world, and not watching the reveal trailer.

I know people keep calling the gameplay generic but then they give no ideas about how the gameplay could be. Please explain to me how to make the gameplay not generic because just about every type of gameplay is generic by your standards. What usually happens when they make new gameplay features? Gimmicks. And then the game is FILLED with gimmicks and it no longer becomes fun to play because they run those features into the ground.