1) Please watch the short 20-second video I captured in my review demonstrating the abysmal facial animations before claiming that they're "very good". Some of them are decent, others are absolute dogshit.
As it was also mentioned and you ignored was that a lot of people really don't care about facial animations as much when it comes to FPSs. The gun-play, opponents and settings are usually the most important part for a FPS. Usually the story and character interaction is minimal and doesn't impact the game play that much. Mass Effect is different because there are tons of dialog in which you have to stare at everyone while they are talking and some of their reactions are part of what sells the story. The reason for the outrage was because of the ME:A animations and that they were actually worse than the original Mass Effect game done back in 2007.
Compared with Prey 2006 (you know the other game in this IP, which you all seem to think is irrelevant for some reason) had one of the best combat loops I've ever seen, when you died, things only got MORE intense.
You do realize that you wrote in your review an entire paragraph about how much you liked this part of Prey 2006 to justify your hate of a game you were supposed
to be giving an unbiased
view of right? A good
reviewer comes to every game open-minded regardless of it's history or
their opinion of it's previous iterations.
The original Prey did a LOT of A) cool things and B) new things. Just because YOU didn't personally think it was amazing, doesn't give you the right to disregard the cult-like heritage of this franchise.
This is hilarious because you are literally saying that no one has a right to their opinion (except you of course). Alot of people think that Minecraft is the greatest game that's ever been. I've never played nor ever wanted to play Minecraft and can openly say that I belive the game to be too boring for me to ever enjoy (I don't like building things in games). The reason i'm allowed to say this is because of something called the First Amendment of the United States Constitution (you may want to look it up some time?).
I have no idea how the 11-year old Prey franchise is Dead, but the 13-year old Half-Life franchise is alive and well and worth defending to the last breath?
Like I said before, which again, you choose to ignore; Half-life made a big impact on gaming, Prey 2006 did not. You get extra points for all the drama that you inject into all your posts as well, good job there. Example: "...defending to the last breath"
Do you think it's fine if they reboot the franchise, call it "FireFly" and make it a Victorian-era costume drama with no cowboys, spaceships, aliens, and instead of being action-packed with a consistently engaging storyline, it's replaced with 4-hour episodes of people reading dead characters letters and scrounging for scrap?
Again, to use your own example, 'Firefly' made a huge impact on it's audience and thus the love for the show and the probable backlash if they did what you suggested. Prey 2006 apparently didn't make that kind of impact (atleast from the consensus in this thread). I played the demo and, from what I remember, found it to be nothing special? The biggest
thing I remember about the game was the development hell that the game went through just to be made.
So you're saying that games with interesting characters, lore, world-building, fun game mechanics, satisfying puzzles, introduction to new ways to interact in a 3D space, inventive death loops, gravity puzzles, wall-walking, portals, and mind-fuckery turning a rock into a planet to explore is all dead? Says who? you?
Nope, you've totally missed the point again. That's not what he said at all. He was talking about the fact that when they changed Fallout to 1st person it upset a lot of people but the fact was, the isometric format of the previous games was dead. Fallout is being used in this argument because even though the format changed from the original, a ton of people still enjoyed the game very much. The point being that even though this Prey didn't have all the cool stuff that the original had there are people that are liking the game for what it is. The fact that you can't seem to get past this issue is your problem, not the rest of the people who are enjoying it or the people who are reading your review to figure out if they should buy the game or not.
point for you not liking this game is because the name is Prey (this you actually said yourself). If you write reviews as biased as this one you will never be taken seriously. Your responsibility as a game reviewer is to deliver an honest evaluation of game play, graphics, sound, and (sometimes) story. If you can't keep your personal bias out of the final score of a game then you shouldn't be reviewing games, period. Also, I suggest you grow some thicker skin because if you continue to review games you're always going to get hate comments regardless of the score you give any of them.