daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Game crashed twice in a row at the same point when I first started playing the Hulk section of the game. I was playing it on Gamepass and didn't care all that much, so that's when I checked out.
I'd like to know how much impact Marvel had on the game. I read they were picky about cosmetics, which makes some sense, but I'm wondering if they had more control over the overall premise of the game. Specifically, the game has you play as a pre-existing character. You can be Thor or Kamala or Bow Person, but that's not the same as playing a Build Your Own character like in City of Heroes or something.
The game had other issues, something similar to Anthem in that the endgame content didn't really exist, but I wonder if letting people have a character that was more 'theirs' would have helped matters some.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
The games 3 biggest problems in my eyes were- Really boring, unsatisfying combat + generic and forgettable enemies, horrible character designs, and terrible economy and armor system.
They did overhaul the shitty UI from launch so that would have been #4
Eh, I've never liked the custom characters in known superhero settings. The main appeal of these games is in playing as Spider-Man or Hulk or whatever.
Having to use Custom Generic Magic Sword User in Midnight Suns is my least favourite thing about that game.
The beta had loads of reported issues, none of which were fixed for launch.
Captain America was neither a strong hero or a tech hero so he couldn't get any of the loot behind doors.
Combat was flat, movement through the levels had huge disparities between characters. Single player would swap you to characters you hadn't leveled or geared at all and expect you to be fine.
Only one enemy type.
It was just a huge mess of a game as a service.
Also I really liked Anthem, so this didn't have some huge bar to clear.
It did get better and I spent some time playing it for free with some friends, but man, Marvel Heroes died for this game.
I think from a gameplay perspective, allowing you to play as a superhero is like water and having gear/leveling mechanics is like oil, so it takes a skilled hand to mix them together and not get crap. Avengers failed and it looks like Suicide Squad will likely fail as well.
Eh I think the gameplay looks wayy more fun in SS than avengers just off the trailer. The Squad is also a bunch of mercs so it's not surprising they'd use guns and gear since most of them actually don't have much in the way of super powers
Eh I think the gameplay looks wayy more fun in SS than avengers just off the trailer. The Squad is also a bunch of mercs so it's not surprising they'd use guns and gear since most of them actually don't have much in the way of super powers
Is there a point of someone like Captain Boomerang if you're just gonna hand him an Uzi?
I guess Avenger shows making a competent "character action" game with a million characters is real tough, a shooter where everyone is basically the same is probably much safer, but that's not what draws people to superheroes/supervillains.
Eh I think the gameplay looks wayy more fun in SS than avengers just off the trailer. The Squad is also a bunch of mercs so it's not surprising they'd use guns and gear since most of them actually don't have much in the way of super powers
Is there a point of someone like Captain Boomerang if you're just gonna hand him an Uzi?
I guess Avenger shows making a competent "character action" game with a million characters is real tough, a shooter where everyone is basically the same is probably much safer, but that's not what draws people to superheroes/supervillains.
I mean, they've got King Shark yet no real ability to go full landshark. It's weird.
They've shown off a single gameplay trailer, plus we don't know what kinda dlc they'll add. I'm firmly in the wait and see camp. I trust Rocksteady.
I don't know why you'd automatically trust them in this genre, though. Crystal Dynamics made good games outside of Avengers. Bioware made good games outside of Anthem. They don't have any multiplayer or live service experience, and those additions will weaken the things they ARE good at.
They've shown off a single gameplay trailer, plus we don't know what kinda dlc they'll add. I'm firmly in the wait and see camp. I trust Rocksteady.
It was, what, 10 minutes of gameplay? Plenty of time to include at least a glimpse landsharking if it was in there. If they somehow did include landsharking in the game but not in that trailer, that's a massive unforced error (especially considering the negative reaction). Also, DLC is way, way too late for landsharking.
They've shown off a single gameplay trailer, plus we don't know what kinda dlc they'll add. I'm firmly in the wait and see camp. I trust Rocksteady.
I don't know why you'd automatically trust them in this genre, though. Crystal Dynamics made good games outside of Avengers. Bioware made good games outside of Anthem. They don't have any multiplayer or live service experience, and those additions will weaken the things they ARE good at.
They made 3 of the best hero games of all time, I'm willing to cut some slack considering how many hours I've sunk in challenge rooms alone
They've shown off a single gameplay trailer, plus we don't know what kinda dlc they'll add. I'm firmly in the wait and see camp. I trust Rocksteady.
It was, what, 10 minutes of gameplay? Plenty of time to include at least a glimpse landsharking if it was in there. If they somehow did include landsharking in the game but not in that trailer, that's a massive unforced error (especially considering the negative reaction). Also, DLC is way, way too late for landsharking.
10 minutes of a 20-40 hour game really ain't much tbh
I'll say it again, I called Avengers sucking and Gotham Knights sucking, I'm not getting the same vibe from SS at all but hey, no accounting for taste
They've shown off a single gameplay trailer, plus we don't know what kinda dlc they'll add. I'm firmly in the wait and see camp. I trust Rocksteady.
I don't know why you'd automatically trust them in this genre, though. Crystal Dynamics made good games outside of Avengers. Bioware made good games outside of Anthem. They don't have any multiplayer or live service experience, and those additions will weaken the things they ARE good at.
They made 3 of the best hero games of all time, I'm willing to cut some slack considering how many hours I've sunk in challenge rooms alone
They've shown off a single gameplay trailer, plus we don't know what kinda dlc they'll add. I'm firmly in the wait and see camp. I trust Rocksteady.
It was, what, 10 minutes of gameplay? Plenty of time to include at least a glimpse landsharking if it was in there. If they somehow did include landsharking in the game but not in that trailer, that's a massive unforced error (especially considering the negative reaction). Also, DLC is way, way too late for landsharking.
10 minutes of a 20-40 hour game really ain't much tbh
I'll say it again, I called Avengers sucking and Gotham Knights sucking, I'm not getting the same vibe from SS at all but hey, no accounting for taste
The part of Arkham Knight that absolutely just sucked was the addition of just more content. Kill 10 patrols in the Batmobile. Do 10 APC chases. Do 10 of this copy and paste task. Good news, live service SS game will be 90% of those tasks, you will finish the stuff they put actual thought and effort into the first week.
Again, cool you got a review copy, can't wait to play it myself
That's just how live service games work, even the ones that people like. If you are picturing fighting wave 3 out of 4 of Brianiac Drones three weeks after launch and it sounds super fun, then you probably will have fun.
I honestly think you're looking through a pretty narrow lens here, Live service games covers a wide breadth of content these days. From No Man's Sky to GTA Online the term has evolved to describe any game with a consistent content drip for years to come. Assuming it's just gonna be another Destiny or Warframe is pretty telling I think.
I honestly think you're looking through a pretty narrow lens here, Live service games covers a wide breadth of content these days. From No Man's Sky to GTA Online the term has evolved to describe any game with a consistent content drip for years to come. Assuming it's just gonna be another Destiny or Warframe is pretty telling I think.
I mean... do you think Rocksteady has the content depth of Rockstar in them? If so, why didn't they do that in their most recent project? I'm comparing to those projects because... that's what this is. There is literally no reason to compare this game to a spaceship MMO instead of... other shooters with powers that are using live service elements to try to hook players.
So you get to selectively choose which type of live service game you think this will be and deride it based on that assumption, very cool. I'm the one saying hey, play it (or wait for reviews) and find out. Saying "it's live service so that means X Y Z" but then saying "well it can't be like live service A B C because reasons!" is moving the goalposts
I'm saying the content drip could be more characters, more story content, there's tons of opportunities there but you assume it'll be just another grind-a-thon and honestly, nothing I've seen just yet suggests that
So you get to selectively choose which type of live service game you think this will be and deride it based on that assumption, very cool. I'm the one saying hey, play it (or wait for reviews) and find out. Saying "it's live service so that means X Y Z" but then saying "well it can't be like live service A B C because reasons!" is moving the goalposts
I'm saying the content drip could be more characters, more story content, there's tons of opportunities there but you assume it'll be just another grind-a-thon and honestly, nothing I've seen just yet suggests that
Story content takes a really long time to make. I absolutely believe that they could add new missions to the quality of the ones in the game (this is giving them the assumption that the main story missions will be good, they won't necessarily be), but we're talking months of time in between each time they do that (bare minimum) with the vast majority of your time playing the game being "clear waves to unlock new or different gear." More characters is realistic, but what Avengers shows is that that doesn't really add any life to things unless the game is baseline fun to play no matter what. All of my commentary is based on: games in this genre, what this dev has been capable of doing so far, how long this kind of content takes to make, the budget they realistically have access to, etc. Your comments seem to be "But, what if?" and I don't really get it.
Good thing they delayed the game, helps them get a headstart on post launch content 😉
Destiny has 4 seasons a year and story content dripfed for 6 weeks after each season drops. If you do it right, you can have minimal gaps between content.
Shadow of War: pretty good once they gutted all the shitty parts
Back 4 Blood: pretty good gameplay buried under confusing design choices and bad character design
Multiversus: afaik people are pretty positive on this game? I know they retired it for a bit to "refocus" but I thought people liked it
I've never heard of that last one hopefully it isn't made by some transphobe or something
Good thing they delayed the game, helps them get a headstart on post launch content 😉
Destiny has 4 seasons a year and story content dripfed for 6 weeks after each season drops. If you do it right, you can have minimal gaps between content.
Saying this as someone who played Destiny for 7+ years... Destiny is 100% clearing waves for new drops. There is strikingly different content in Destiny in the form of Exotic missions, Dungeons, and Raids, but I would say perhaps 70% of your time spent in-game is on stuff like "play the seasonal event where you clear waves long enough to unlock a brief story scene, possibly in the form of a written lore card with no graphics or VA" or "Get your weekly pinnacle drops by doing the same strike missions or clearing waves on the most recent planet's wave clearing arena" or etc. Part of the thing that burned me out from keeping up with Destiny is that I feel they really fell off maintaining the repetitive things to keep them feeling fresh. Gambit? No new maps in years. Crucible? Essentially the same. Strikes? Reducing their impact in a bunch of ways, to the absolute joke of ONE new strike in a $50 expansion. Yeah... that'll last a year. Same thing with holidays, they would have a really fun idea at the start, then just do that one idea every year with zero changes (or just delete it entirely, like the Halloween Forest). Probably the reason for all this? They couldn't keep up at that level for long, these kinds of games just aren't feasible without a monster budget or many support teams.
Will SS have content as neat as those standout examples Destiny has (raids, etc)? My intuition is no, but that is a case where saying wait and see is fair at least. Will it have a story so interesting that periodic lore drops could feasibly count as a reward? I feel like no, not at all. If Destiny can do it (it can't actually, as proved by recent developments to that game), then why should we count on a game from a team with no relevant experiences, backed by a HORRIBLE publisher?
Even Avengers got a raid, and that game flopped hard. I think you're making a lot of assumptions and well, I'll happily admit if I'm wrong. I think it looks wayy better than most live service titles but also, I'm the guy who fires up Crackdown 1 from time to time just to play with the parkour and combat again. I'm easy to please.
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Shadow of War: pretty good once they gutted all the shitty parts
Back 4 Blood: pretty good gameplay buried under confusing design choices and bad character design
Multiversus: afaik people are pretty positive on this game? I know they retired it for a bit to "refocus" but I thought people liked it
I've never heard of that last one hopefully it isn't made by some transphobe or something
It gives a transphobe money. The game director was an abusive asshole until fired/quit
Even Avengers got a raid, and that game flopped hard. I think you're making a lot of assumptions and well, I'll happily admit if I'm wrong. I think it looks wayy better than most live service titles but also, I'm the guy who fires up Crackdown 1 from time to time just to play with the parkour and combat again. I'm easy to please.
I did say a ways back, and perhaps it was missed or ignored, that if you do LIKE clearing Brianiac waves, the game will probably be perfectly fun to you. It's going to feel bad if you want to stick around for the service part of the game but you like the side cases from Arkham with plot and twists and unique gameplay (crime scenes) as your favorite thing, not score chasing in combat rooms.
Shadow of War: pretty good once they gutted all the shitty parts
Back 4 Blood: pretty good gameplay buried under confusing design choices and bad character design
Multiversus: afaik people are pretty positive on this game? I know they retired it for a bit to "refocus" but I thought people liked it
I've never heard of that last one hopefully it isn't made by some transphobe or something
You say "pretty good once they gutted all the shitty parts". I say "thought adding the shitty parts was a good idea in the first place".
Multiverses lost 99% of its players, and is currently saying "Thanks for all the money you dumped into this trash fire, we will not be giving any refunds". "Refocus" is a generous word for slamming hard onto their face and slinking back for reconstructive surgery.
"The sausage of Green Earth explodes with flavor like the cannon of culinary delight."
Even Avengers got a raid, and that game flopped hard. I think you're making a lot of assumptions and well, I'll happily admit if I'm wrong. I think it looks wayy better than most live service titles but also, I'm the guy who fires up Crackdown 1 from time to time just to play with the parkour and combat again. I'm easy to please.
I did say a ways back, and perhaps it was missed or ignored, that if you do LIKE clearing Brianiac waves, the game will probably be perfectly fun to you. It's going to feel bad if you want to stick around for the service part of the game but you like the side cases from Arkham with plot and twists and unique gameplay (crime scenes) as your favorite thing, not score chasing in combat rooms.
I can guarantee more people liked the combat rooms for that game lol
Shadow of War: pretty good once they gutted all the shitty parts
Back 4 Blood: pretty good gameplay buried under confusing design choices and bad character design
Multiversus: afaik people are pretty positive on this game? I know they retired it for a bit to "refocus" but I thought people liked it
I've never heard of that last one hopefully it isn't made by some transphobe or something
You say "pretty good once they gutted all the shitty parts". I say "thought adding the shitty parts was a good idea in the first place".
Multiverses lost 99% of its players, and is currently saying "Thanks for all the money you dumped into this trash fire, we will not be giving any refunds". "Refocus" is a generous word for slamming hard onto their face and slinking back for reconstructive surgery.
That sucks to hear about MV, seems like it had a strong launch.
But playing any game at launch is a dice roll in modern times. I'm glad I waited on Shadow of War because it's quite pleasant now.
Posts
I'd like to know how much impact Marvel had on the game. I read they were picky about cosmetics, which makes some sense, but I'm wondering if they had more control over the overall premise of the game. Specifically, the game has you play as a pre-existing character. You can be Thor or Kamala or Bow Person, but that's not the same as playing a Build Your Own character like in City of Heroes or something.
The game had other issues, something similar to Anthem in that the endgame content didn't really exist, but I wonder if letting people have a character that was more 'theirs' would have helped matters some.
They did overhaul the shitty UI from launch so that would have been #4
Having to use Custom Generic Magic Sword User in Midnight Suns is my least favourite thing about that game.
The beta had loads of reported issues, none of which were fixed for launch.
Captain America was neither a strong hero or a tech hero so he couldn't get any of the loot behind doors.
Combat was flat, movement through the levels had huge disparities between characters. Single player would swap you to characters you hadn't leveled or geared at all and expect you to be fine.
Only one enemy type.
It was just a huge mess of a game as a service.
Also I really liked Anthem, so this didn't have some huge bar to clear.
It did get better and I spent some time playing it for free with some friends, but man, Marvel Heroes died for this game.
Is there a point of someone like Captain Boomerang if you're just gonna hand him an Uzi?
I guess Avenger shows making a competent "character action" game with a million characters is real tough, a shooter where everyone is basically the same is probably much safer, but that's not what draws people to superheroes/supervillains.
I mean, they've got King Shark yet no real ability to go full landshark. It's weird.
I mean, if there was landsharking, they would have shown it. Because landsharking is awesome.
I don't know why you'd automatically trust them in this genre, though. Crystal Dynamics made good games outside of Avengers. Bioware made good games outside of Anthem. They don't have any multiplayer or live service experience, and those additions will weaken the things they ARE good at.
It was, what, 10 minutes of gameplay? Plenty of time to include at least a glimpse landsharking if it was in there. If they somehow did include landsharking in the game but not in that trailer, that's a massive unforced error (especially considering the negative reaction). Also, DLC is way, way too late for landsharking.
They made 3 of the best hero games of all time, I'm willing to cut some slack considering how many hours I've sunk in challenge rooms alone
10 minutes of a 20-40 hour game really ain't much tbh
I'll say it again, I called Avengers sucking and Gotham Knights sucking, I'm not getting the same vibe from SS at all but hey, no accounting for taste
The part of Arkham Knight that absolutely just sucked was the addition of just more content. Kill 10 patrols in the Batmobile. Do 10 APC chases. Do 10 of this copy and paste task. Good news, live service SS game will be 90% of those tasks, you will finish the stuff they put actual thought and effort into the first week.
That's just how live service games work, even the ones that people like. If you are picturing fighting wave 3 out of 4 of Brianiac Drones three weeks after launch and it sounds super fun, then you probably will have fun.
I mean... do you think Rocksteady has the content depth of Rockstar in them? If so, why didn't they do that in their most recent project? I'm comparing to those projects because... that's what this is. There is literally no reason to compare this game to a spaceship MMO instead of... other shooters with powers that are using live service elements to try to hook players.
I'm saying the content drip could be more characters, more story content, there's tons of opportunities there but you assume it'll be just another grind-a-thon and honestly, nothing I've seen just yet suggests that
Story content takes a really long time to make. I absolutely believe that they could add new missions to the quality of the ones in the game (this is giving them the assumption that the main story missions will be good, they won't necessarily be), but we're talking months of time in between each time they do that (bare minimum) with the vast majority of your time playing the game being "clear waves to unlock new or different gear." More characters is realistic, but what Avengers shows is that that doesn't really add any life to things unless the game is baseline fun to play no matter what. All of my commentary is based on: games in this genre, what this dev has been capable of doing so far, how long this kind of content takes to make, the budget they realistically have access to, etc. Your comments seem to be "But, what if?" and I don't really get it.
Destiny has 4 seasons a year and story content dripfed for 6 weeks after each season drops. If you do it right, you can have minimal gaps between content.
Warner Bros. Interactive.
You may remember them from such games like:
-Shadow of War
-Back 4 Blood
-Multiverses
-Hogwart's Legacy (depending how you want to stand on that giant can of worms)
This company has not earned this level of trust.
Back 4 Blood: pretty good gameplay buried under confusing design choices and bad character design
Multiversus: afaik people are pretty positive on this game? I know they retired it for a bit to "refocus" but I thought people liked it
I've never heard of that last one hopefully it isn't made by some transphobe or something
Saying this as someone who played Destiny for 7+ years... Destiny is 100% clearing waves for new drops. There is strikingly different content in Destiny in the form of Exotic missions, Dungeons, and Raids, but I would say perhaps 70% of your time spent in-game is on stuff like "play the seasonal event where you clear waves long enough to unlock a brief story scene, possibly in the form of a written lore card with no graphics or VA" or "Get your weekly pinnacle drops by doing the same strike missions or clearing waves on the most recent planet's wave clearing arena" or etc. Part of the thing that burned me out from keeping up with Destiny is that I feel they really fell off maintaining the repetitive things to keep them feeling fresh. Gambit? No new maps in years. Crucible? Essentially the same. Strikes? Reducing their impact in a bunch of ways, to the absolute joke of ONE new strike in a $50 expansion. Yeah... that'll last a year. Same thing with holidays, they would have a really fun idea at the start, then just do that one idea every year with zero changes (or just delete it entirely, like the Halloween Forest). Probably the reason for all this? They couldn't keep up at that level for long, these kinds of games just aren't feasible without a monster budget or many support teams.
Will SS have content as neat as those standout examples Destiny has (raids, etc)? My intuition is no, but that is a case where saying wait and see is fair at least. Will it have a story so interesting that periodic lore drops could feasibly count as a reward? I feel like no, not at all. If Destiny can do it (it can't actually, as proved by recent developments to that game), then why should we count on a game from a team with no relevant experiences, backed by a HORRIBLE publisher?
It gives a transphobe money. The game director was an abusive asshole until fired/quit
I did say a ways back, and perhaps it was missed or ignored, that if you do LIKE clearing Brianiac waves, the game will probably be perfectly fun to you. It's going to feel bad if you want to stick around for the service part of the game but you like the side cases from Arkham with plot and twists and unique gameplay (crime scenes) as your favorite thing, not score chasing in combat rooms.
You say "pretty good once they gutted all the shitty parts". I say "thought adding the shitty parts was a good idea in the first place".
Multiverses lost 99% of its players, and is currently saying "Thanks for all the money you dumped into this trash fire, we will not be giving any refunds". "Refocus" is a generous word for slamming hard onto their face and slinking back for reconstructive surgery.
I can guarantee more people liked the combat rooms for that game lol
That sucks to hear about MV, seems like it had a strong launch.
But playing any game at launch is a dice roll in modern times. I'm glad I waited on Shadow of War because it's quite pleasant now.