Ronnie

Hooray!

They're the exact same style of game, from the same developer, releasing on the same day, and because I think it makes more sense to have one thread to talk about both. Not every game needs to hold your hand through a deep narrative-based storyline. This game is designed to keep things vague and have you use your own imagination. The sense of mystery without explanation or context is what creates the incredible atmosphere. Nor does every game where you jump around need complex platforming challenges. Inside is about puzzle-solving using platforming. It's not a platformer with puzzle solving added in. As for no dialogue, so what? A real shame you found the gameplay boring though, but the many, many awards and perfect scores this game got from critics suggests it's anything but to a lot of people. Edit: also, what's wrong with a 4 hour game? Not every game needs to be 10+ hours

It was a nice little nostalgia trip coming so soon after 3D World, but it would be a bit out of place now. The Odyssey levels seem to have a lot more thought put in anyway.

I can kind of understand what they're thinking in replacing the 3D World levels, I always felt they were a bit of an odd one out in that game, and there wouldn't be much context for players who hadn't played that game.

Because

Both releasing next week on Switch https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-06-20-limbo-inside-launch-on-nintendo-switch-next-week Limbo is great, but Inside is a masterpiece. Easily one of the best games to come out of the last few years.

I don't think that's an all new book sadly. It looks like the Bonus book from the original, with 4 or 5 Odyssey-based levels. The patterns for the pages suggest that's the case, unfortunately!

The camera angle used in those two shots doesn't really reflect gameplay to be honest, the background is a lot less noticeable when you're actually playing.

Wow, the cauldrons are literally identical to the vaults in Mass Effect Andromeda. Even down to the triangular sliding doorways! Weird.

Started playing this a few days ago. Enjoying it a fair bit overall but it's quite jarring going back to it after playing God of War, it makes Horizon feel quite dated even though it was only a year old. What's surprising is how little I'm invested into exploring the world itself, it looks pretty for sure but I just find it quite a boring place. Breath of the Wild had me stopping every few minutes to take in the sights and it made me want to explore every corner of the world, this I couldn't really care less, as long as I'm hunting the next checkbox to tick off a list. The level design here feels a little uninspired. I usually like to take my time and enjoy the sights of games, but this just feels quite boring and I'm just running through everything. Loving the combat though, at least against the machines. Very enjoyable taking down a Sawtooth. Human wise I find it strange how an arrow to the head doesn't kill him, and I often have to hit him 5 times for him to finally go down. The personality they've tried to cellotape onto Aloy feels a little weird to be honest. I can't say the conversations or story moments are particularly enthralling. Good performances though. Visuals are nice, if a little over-sharp sometimes. Sound design is good. Music... is there any? The loot system... they give you so much I don't bother reading what I'm picking up anymore. So yeah, so far, great fun but apart from the combat, nothing particularly amazing or memorable as of yet.

I think that attitude is a reflection of gamers generally, sadly enough. Everything is looked at with skepticism. If it's not comments like "don't believe their lies" at anything Ubisoft show off, or the OTT hatred shown towards EA, mentions of M$ etc, everyone complains about anything. It just feels like a very toxic industry sometimes, from the community side of things I mean. Trouble with Reggie, is Nintendo of Japan hold all the power and make all the big decisions, not NOA, so he's a in tough spot. Whereas Phil Spencer is in charge of Xbox

No excuse for releasing broken or incomplete games, but I don't mind DLC done right. It's a necessary evil if the cost of games will continue to stay the same price every gen, even though they cost 10x more to make than back in the NES days.

So it seems EA (or was it Bioware themselves) did an even more horrible job of showing off this game than we thought. The demos at E3 had loads of character stuff included, not just the action. This is a really good interview from Eurogamer, that should put a lot of people's minds at ease https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2018-06-11-the-big-bioware-interview-the-response-to-anthem-and-the-future-of-mass-effect

Mario Tennis, Rabbids DLC, Bomb Chicken (suspect that'll be the next big indie hit), Captain Toad, Octopath, Mega Man X, Overcooked, Okami (never played it), Megaman 11, Starlink, Pokemon and Smash for me, plus whatever else gets announced

I'll wait till they share details on modes before saying if I'm interested or not. All they talked about at E3 was the characters and items

Never played Deus Ex, nor any of the Metroid Primes. I just find the perspective to be quite unsettling, I don't like melee combat or bad guys coming up behind you in FPSs, it just freaks me out. Third person at least I'm more of an observer to the action. Also movement in first person games tends to give me a headache. The Witness was pretty much unplayable for me because of this.

Not saying it hasn't worked before, just responding to the Goldeneye jab.

Goldeneye was a first person shooter. Cyberpunk is an RPG.

Apparently this is a 40+ hour campaign, with another 20 or 30 of sidequests. Huge game!

That's basically the reason. I've seen plenty of people abandon plans to play it on Switch because of this, so mission accomplished as far as Sony "For the players" is concerned.

From best to worst for me: 1. Microsoft: Tons of games, lots of exclusives, big reveals, very few bits that dragged and a tease about next gen. Easily the best conference. 2. Ubisoft: Tons of games. Tons of variety, hitting every genre, something for everyone. Nice presentation flow to it. 3. Bethesda: Good showing even if they took 15 minutes to actually show gameplay. Disappointing how it was just logo reveals for Doom Eternal, Youngblood, Starfield and Elder Scrolls 4. Nintendo: They would have done well to rename this a Smash Bros Direct and set expectations going in. Terrible lack of reveals other than Smash and a couple of others. It would be 100% Nintendo to have a Direct in two weeks time and show off more stuff. 5. Sony: The same games we've been seeing for years now. We'll probably see most of them again next year too. I'm sure they'll be great, but as a conference, boring. The format was an utter disaster. One note in terms of genres as usual. 6. EA: Horrible conference format, it felt a mess. From the Respawn reveal to the C&C demo, just bad. Even Anthem their big game was poorly presented. The Madden champion on stage was utterly pointless. 7. Square Enix: This really didn't need a conference, though I appreciated their move to a Direct style format. I wish/think more of the above will be going that route in future. Sony especially.

The devs respond to the first person backlash

Third year in a row

Yeah of course I'll certainly be keeping an eye on it, I'm sure it'll be fantastic even if it's not for me. Hopefully seeing gameplay might change my mind

It sounds like much like Shovel Knight and Stardew Valley, the game is worth a lot more than the price tag