Came to say the exact same thing.

And given the number of similar responses, it appears there is a real desire for the IP's return. Given the success of "Control" (which played on many of the same ideas) I'm surprised the franchise has been ignored for so long.

Are you listening, publishers? Don't let that "Blairs Witch" game be the last we saw of Spook House and the Stranger!

I really wonder how EA's new strategy will play out.

On the one hand, sportsball fans are fanatic about their video-games. There's a reason that FIFA and Madden are some of the biggest sources of revenue for EA. The people who play those games really love those games, and are not only happy to keep buying it year-after-year, but will pay through the nose for all the micro-transactions EA sells alongside those games.

On the other hand, for all that it's a scummy, immoral organization, the FIFA brand is very powerful, and being able to play with actual teams and players is a huge part of fantasy footie. Lacking the association with FIFA (even if EA does manage to wrangle a few teams, stadiums and players) is going to greatly diminish the value of the game.

Freeing themselves from the expense of licensing the FIFA brand will save EA a bundle, sure. But will it outweigh the revenue lost by disappointed players? And when FIFA finally licenses their name to some other publisher, will EA be able to compete? It will be interesting to see.

There are two things I take away from this update:

Gaming Journalism Website: Sorry for not checking up on the facts before we posted our story, everyone, but thanks for all the ad-imprints you sent our way.

Rockstar: Everyone is excited about a potential sequel to LA Noir, so let's definitely not do it!

Sorry Capcom, but your shenanigans with DRM, your over-reliance on MTX and rehashing old games, and your 'mods=piracy' stance have cost you any future sales from me. There are better developers who make better games on which I can spend my cash.

Capcom: because we've never owned a franchise that we won't milk for all its worth.

The first half of the trailer makes me think Valve missed a huge opportunity making a Half Life RTS game. You know, back when real-time strategy games were still cool.

GameStop still exists?

I mean, as a place that sells games and not as a memestock? I can't remember the last time I saw one, much less entered the store. And it's been even longer since I bought anything from there. Do people still buy games there? Why?

Burrito of Peace wrote on Jun 10, 2024, 14:03:
I hope State of Decay 3 is good. The constituent parts are all there but SoD 2 didn't manage to congeal them all in a way that made for a truly compelling experience.

I agree. SOD2 felt more like a mission pack to the original game than an entirely new experience. It was a disappointing second outing. And the first game -while an awful lot of fun and full of potential- was flawed to begin with.

Unfortunately, the sheer forgettableness of all the characters -one of the biggest weaknesses of the first two games- seems to be a core feature of this sequel too. Which seems odd, since the trailer seems to want to make us think this will be a game filled with pathos and drama, and that's hard to do when the characters are only differentiated by their stats.

But I'll keep a hopeful eye on this game. Maybe this third attempt will finally be everything I hoped for from this franchise.

I sure hope they revamped the gameplay for the new Mechwarrior game. Especially the awful AI in MW5: Mercenaries.

I really wish anybody but Ubisoft had been given this title. Because -pretty as Outlaws is- it looks as hollow as any of their other open-world games; an experience that is superficially pleasing but lacks a satisfying progression. A game where the gameplay is grindy and repetitive, with awful storytelling and uninteresting characters. Maybe Outlaws won't be all I fear. I really hope it won't; I'm a sucker for a good Star Wars game. But Ubisoft's reputation -and the trailer above- do little to reassure me.

(and don't even get me started on how Ubisoft makes their single-player games dependent on always online connections that they shut down at whim and steal your games away from you. Even IF the game was great, still I'd hesitate to buy it from them).

MacLeod wrote on Jun 9, 2024, 18:00:
So is Doom Guy being a Space Marine completely out the window now? What about the lore of his rabbit being killed?

It's still intact, I believe. From what I recall, the "Doom Slayer" originally arrived in the fantasy world, in strange armor, battered and blooded as if from a war, and amnesiac; the implication was that he was the original "Doom Guy" teleported to a new realm after the end of the second game. His supreme (perhaps supernaturally endowed) fighting abilities had him rise to prominence from prisoner to war-leader. This new game apparently is telling that part of the story.

So, yes, the death of Daisy remains canon.

Wow. That game looks so... generic.

And where are the voxels?

Suicide Squad: The Movie had a budget of only $185 million. Just to put the sheer insanity of the game's cost into comparison.

Do we really need -or want- games with such a huge budget? So many games I play these days are made on a shoestring budget by Indies that I find incredibly satisfying; the AAA games that cost tens or hundreds of millions of dollars don't justify their cost with gameplay or presentation that in anyway matches their price tag.

Scale it down, developers.

Original Doom + Brutal Mod is all I need. The solid gameplay of the first game and the over-the-top gore of the mod keep the game fun even thirty years on (but skip the mod's campaign mode)

Doom 3 was fine, but it wasn't Doom. It was atmospheric survival horror (if a bit heavy on monster closets) and I enjoyed it most after the first game, but it feels the least Doomy of the bunch. Even the DoomRPG felt more in tune with the game's style than Doom 3.

I didn't hate the new Dooms but I don't love them either. The push-forward and pinata enemy mechanics just don't jibe with my preferred game-style. I mostly played the games for (of all things!) the story. Although that end-boss in the expansion pack can DIAF.

Shock wrote on Apr 23, 2024, 17:23:
What possible value could the Infogrames name have? Will anyone old enough to remember it actually have a positive association?

I think it's less that Infogrames has a specifically positive association to it, and more the fact that they've poisoned the Atari brand. "Look, we're Infogrames; you can trust that our games aren't crap, not like whomever it was that released Days of Doom or Qomp2."

Burrito of Peace wrote on Apr 17, 2024, 11:55:
AC peaked with Black Flag. Everything since then has been huge maps stuffed with pointless "activities" to pad out the game length with no meaningful improvement to the core experience.

To be fair, padding out the giant map with pointless activities has been a core part of the Assassins Creed series since the first game. That one had you doing timed races and collecting flags from the start.

When it comes to cleaning my laptop, I always refer to Clean The Fan for instruction. Catchy and surprisingly accurate.

eRe4s3r wrote on Mar 27, 2024, 18:22:
Is Callisto Protocol worth getting nowadays then?

For what it's worth, I think so. But know what you're getting: it's a "Dead Space" clone. It's not original, and it hasn't quite the degree of polish. It's an okay game, not a great one. It won't wow you. It might sometimes annoy you. But - especially if you love the genre - you'll have fun with it.

Oh, thank god it isn't CRYPTO-currency support. That's what first ran through my head when I read the headline... but apparently even that is still one bridge too far for ActiBlizz.

Well, this probably explains the weird problems I was having with 7Zip outputting corrupted archives (and some unusual game crashes). Testing to see if the proposed fixes work...