I can't say that I'm surprised that they screwed up fallout 76 and anthem, both were projects created because someone else made lots of money making these sorts of games. If they really cared about the products they would never release the two games in this sort of shape.
The shame is that its people at the bottom of the food chain that lose their jobs because people at the top push these products out way too early.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
OK! Great! Now, BioWare just have to make an anthem expansion and call it Anthem 2, charge $60 again, and they will get a new 8.5 rating. Just like Destiny!
LOL?! What?!
Yep. That's how you do it! In fact! The division is already doing that right now!
Oh the hypocrisy!
Except ... they have announced that there will be free story updates. If you are going to hate on it at least be objective and factual.
yeah, it looks more and more like MHW, but I already play monster hunter, so I guess I will pass lol
I can't say that I'm surprised that they screwed up fallout 76 and anthem, both were projects created because someone else made lots of money making these sorts of games. If they really cared about the products they would never release the two games in this sort of shape.
The shame is that its people at the bottom of the food chain that lose their jobs because people at the top push these products out way too early.
Exactly. Neither FO76 for Bethesda nor Anthem for Bioware are games in their respective wheelhouses but rather "me too" games.
Nothing wrong with trying to do something new as long as it's an actual new idea that others haven't already done or at least a clone that is a lot better than what you're cloning.
Can't say that about FO76 or Anthem.
"Social media gives legions of idiots the right to speak when they once only spoke at a bar after a glass of wine, without harming the community ... but now they have the same right to speak as a Nobel Prize winner. It's the invasion of the idiots”
― Umberto Eco
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?” ― CD PROJEKT RED
I feel strongly that live service games are the future. I think that as MTX become more and more prevalent and accepted that game devs are going to want you to play there game forever so you keep spending money on the cash shop. I am just hoping that someone actually releases a working live service game instead of pushing out one that is half baked and fixing it later.
Fallout 76 is a much better game than it was at release. Sure you will find people complaining on reddit and what not about some things but for the most part I have had a good time with it since hoping back in a week ago. I would easily give it 8.5 as of now. Anthem will no doubt do the same. However, if I am right a live service games are the future than they need to push out a quality product from the beginning.
BTW I don't think Anthem will get the chance to be better. EA is hoping this game sells 6-7 million copies in 6 weeks. That is not going to happen. I would suspect if it sold anything less than 4 million we will see Bioware move on to something else on EA's request.
Live service games are part of the future. But player time is still a limiting factor, even more than player money. There is a saturation point, as every live service inherently eats into every other live service's continued revenue, until less successful ones die and are replaced.
Ultimately, the traditional one-and-done game is not going anywhere. It's a stable core of the gaming market that fills in the niches that live services cannot. They might be monetized with more dlc, but that also isn't inherently a bad thing (and I'd argue that some games like Smash Bros., Mario Party, Fire Emblem Warriors, and almost every fighting game ever would benefit from extensive paid dlc).
Dunkey is a genius he summed up everything in one video.
[[ DEAD ]] - Funny - I deleted my account on the site using the cancel account button. Forum user is separate and still exists with no way of deleting it. Delete it admins. Do it, this ends now.
I wonder how Anthem’s very mixed reception is going to impact the promised 6.0 update/expansion for SWTOR
Problems - maybe - if it totally bombs. The forecasts they provided (for Anthem) in their quarterly results though were very "conservative". So probably not.
Unlike Destiny this is made by EA (rather than paying Bungee), using EA's own internal engine (rather than paying royalties on Unreal say), (largely) sold by EA (rather than paying Steam getting a cut).
The end result: it costs less. They can break even selling fewer units. Not every game needs to be a blockbuster or else the studio closes scenario.
Not in the least. The review and the score are right in line with every other review out there. Professional reviews at Metacritic sit at 23 reviewers with an aggregate score of 61 while 577 users have it at 3.7.
In the end, every review, no matter what site you visit or what sector you're reading reviews about, are just one person's opinion about something. Yours happens to be different but it is neither more nor less valid than the writer here on this site. It's just different.
I love how @Hashbrick said it earlier in this thread:
Can we as a community stop being little bitches about everything and anything and just take a review for what it is?
It's a review, it's immediately opinion based. Just like any site, pcgamer or otherwise there is one person behind said review. Also the fact that Athem across the board is getting low scores shows this review falls in line with the others. It's not wildly different, it's not a 10/10, it's not a conspiracy. Take it for what it is, another person's opinion based on a scoring system. That is what it is and that is all it ever was.
If you took reviews seriously, then you'd scan other sites to weigh your own opinion not just focus on one. Drop the pitchforks people.
I'm glad I hit the nail on the head, but this community lately honestly has been disgusting. More toxic than good. I actually fear for your guys mental health @SBFord and all the staff. When you constantly post and get nothing but slander and "your opinion is shit" and have to explain why you posted what you posted.
That's when the spiral starts, you feel unappreciated and it becomes a love/hate relationship. You no longer put in your all, you no longer care, because why does it even matter, you just going to get people bitching about it anyway.
There's two part to this and I'm not speaking for the community, I'm no representative, but I am rallying and pleading for respect.
We as a community are not respecting the staff. It's ok to not like a column or disagree with a top10 or disagree with a sponsored article, whatever have you.
The staff is doing their part, they are posting the latest news, articles, sponsors, reviews, etc. The community however is not, the role we play is to have engaging discussion. Does engaging discussion happen? Absolutely! Is it more rare these days? Absolutely! Try to go through a thread without one person calling out the Staff for whatever the reason.
I find it sad that the Staff have to comment and justify what they posted, as if you the user is entitled to only what they want to see and hear. SBFord doesn't take shit and she will call out anyone that tries to, but she shouldn't have to deal with it in the first place.
Don't make this site like Twitter, don't make this site a cess pool of toxicity.
I went off track of what this discussion is suppose to be about: An Athem Review. But jesus christ this needed to be said and off my chest. It has got so bad lately it's been making me sick.
If you feel the need to constantly call out the staff, guess what genius!?!? THIS SITE ISN'T FOR YOU! MOVE ON!
*drops the mic*
tHis SitE iSn'T fOr YoU!
Whatever you say, guy. Eliminate the numerical scoring, and it will solve this problem. If you are going to use a scoring system, it should be consistent through out the site regardless of the reviewer.
Aeander pointed out something that alot of people in the community agree with. FO 76 got a pass on all of their gamebreaking bugs, and then the review for anthem states the bugs are inexcusable.
Not in the least. The review and the score are right in line with every other review out there. Professional reviews at Metacritic sit at 23 reviewers with an aggregate score of 61 while 577 users have it at 3.7.
In the end, every review, no matter what site you visit or what sector you're reading reviews about, are just one person's opinion about something. Yours happens to be different but it is neither more nor less valid than the writer here on this site. It's just different.
I love how @Hashbrick said it earlier in this thread:
Can we as a community stop being little bitches about everything and anything and just take a review for what it is?
It's a review, it's immediately opinion based. Just like any site, pcgamer or otherwise there is one person behind said review. Also the fact that Athem across the board is getting low scores shows this review falls in line with the others. It's not wildly different, it's not a 10/10, it's not a conspiracy. Take it for what it is, another person's opinion based on a scoring system. That is what it is and that is all it ever was.
If you took reviews seriously, then you'd scan other sites to weigh your own opinion not just focus on one. Drop the pitchforks people.
I'm glad I hit the nail on the head, but this community lately honestly has been disgusting. More toxic than good. I actually fear for your guys mental health @SBFord and all the staff. When you constantly post and get nothing but slander and "your opinion is shit" and have to explain why you posted what you posted.
That's when the spiral starts, you feel unappreciated and it becomes a love/hate relationship. You no longer put in your all, you no longer care, because why does it even matter, you just going to get people bitching about it anyway.
There's two part to this and I'm not speaking for the community, I'm no representative, but I am rallying and pleading for respect.
We as a community are not respecting the staff. It's ok to not like a column or disagree with a top10 or disagree with a sponsored article, whatever have you.
The staff is doing their part, they are posting the latest news, articles, sponsors, reviews, etc. The community however is not, the role we play is to have engaging discussion. Does engaging discussion happen? Absolutely! Is it more rare these days? Absolutely! Try to go through a thread without one person calling out the Staff for whatever the reason.
I find it sad that the Staff have to comment and justify what they posted, as if you the user is entitled to only what they want to see and hear. SBFord doesn't take shit and she will call out anyone that tries to, but she shouldn't have to deal with it in the first place.
Don't make this site like Twitter, don't make this site a cess pool of toxicity.
I went off track of what this discussion is suppose to be about: An Athem Review. But jesus christ this needed to be said and off my chest. It has got so bad lately it's been making me sick.
If you feel the need to constantly call out the staff, guess what genius!?!? THIS SITE ISN'T FOR YOU! MOVE ON!
*drops the mic*
tHis SitE iSn'T fOr YoU!
Whatever you say, guy. Eliminate the numerical scoring, and it will solve this problem. If you are going to use a scoring system, it should be consistent through out the site regardless of the reviewer.
Aeander pointed out something that alot of people in the community agree with. FO 76 got a pass on all of their gamebreaking bugs, and then the review for anthem states the bugs are inexcusable.
That's the thing. I don't have a problem with MMORPG staff. They're great, intelligent people.
The real problem is that community criticism is being taken for toxicity. No, Haskbrick. We aren't being toxic, and your backlash against the backlash isn't helping.
Differences in opinion between reviewers are to be expected, but you're still aggregating those opinions under one roof. It's the editor's job to ensure that some semblance of criteria consistency is applied between the disparate freelance writers that submit to them.
This isn't IGN which has to present itself as coherent and professional through hundreds of reviews every year. Reviews here aren't especially frequent anymore, and we should expect better than having a direct contradiction between two different reviews mere months apart.
Are the bugs excusable or aren't they? Because from my perspective, this site pillaried one game for its bugs, while spending 90% of a multi-page review painting a lovely metaphor of teenage adolescence for a far worse game to excuse far worse bugs.
I am sick to death of Bethesda Game Studios, one of the worst, laziest, most inept developers in the entire industry, being given a free pass that no other developer enjoys. I vocally predicted even back then that if EA had even a fraction of the bugs and launch issues that Bethesda did, they'd be torn to shreds. And I was right, as usual.
Anthem is rated lower than Fallout 76. And with the con of "inexcusable level of bugs" after you literally spent all of THAT shitshow's review excusing a far greater level of bugs. Is that a joke?
Be consistent if you want to be taken seriously. Because right now, I can't and don't take this site seriously as a review platform.
Two different reviewers, two different games, two different opinions.
Same website, same feature review that represents the site, same weird inconsistencies, same excuse.
That's just because most readers want to be fed what they want to hear so they can leverage that in their arguments to win the imaginary war about whatever they're arguing over.
It's not about the scores and being "fed", it's about having several different reviewers and no context or accountability to a standard that is set. What's the point in having FEATURED RATING SCORES to debate over?
Jimbo rated something a 6
Ed rated something a 9.5
Ralph rated something else a 5.5
Sally rated something a 7
MMORPG.com says "Wasn't us! It was them, and they were different guys, and uuuuh the games are kinda different too"
You can't blame people for seeing one rating featured, then another rating featured and them trying to resolve how or why the platform rated them that way when there were similar gripes across both.
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
Its official release date is today but already the early access people from Origin access have done all the content and have a full kit of legendary stuff...so whats the point? I cant see this having any longevity and its sad as I was really looking forward to this.
what do you guys expect. its an FPS trying to be an MMO at the same time (i said trying btw) FPS RPGs are going to be riddled with issues cuz they are trying to join two genre's that havent historically gone together. its very hard to cater to mainstream FPS fans and also gamers who want a traditional MMO experience with tons of content. its basically trying to cater to gamers who like to be put in a shoebox whacking each other with sticks and also games who play d&d tabletop. you won't be able to satisfy those gamers with the wannabe/faux "MMOFPS" stuff we are seeing nowadays.
IMPORTANT: Please keep all replies to my posts about GAMING. Please no negative or backhanded comments directed at me personally. If you are going to post a reply that includes how you feel about me, please don't bother replying & just ignore my post instead. I'm on this forum to talk about GAMING. Thank you.
I've been playing this for about a week now and I don't think I'll be purchasing it for good once my month of premium access expires. The combat is top notch and I really enjoy playing each of the javelins but the rest of the game is kind of a let down. The story, while good, isn't what I've come to expect from Bioware esp. since the dialogue "choices" don't seem to have any influence in game at all. It often feels like a real chore to play when I'm not on a mission as traveling around the fort to talk to the different characters takes too much time away from actually playing the game. The UI and lack of info regarding your stats is also a huge negative. If they can fix things up in the next few months I come back and purchase it but until then I'm glad I only spent $20 with Origin access instead of $80 to buy it outright.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
I would like to see a different system, ive said in that in the past. Im starting to think it should be a scale, like recommend for, maybe for and pass for lol. Then your listing a type of game people can gravitate toward, "oh its more for people who like to grind, im out" or "its more group focused, im interested" thing. Ive noticed a lot of people skip the entire review to see the valid points and just look at the numbers and what the reviewer has as a sum of pros and cons. It could be the best reviewer ever, has 5 pages of thoughts and people will look at the 5 pros and 5 cons from those 5 pages and see the overall score.
I would like to see a different system, ive said in that in the past. Im starting to think it should be a scale, like recommend for, maybe for and pass for lol. Then your listing a type of game people can gravitate toward, "oh its more for people who like to grind, im out" or "its more group focused, im interested" thing. Ive noticed a lot of people skip the entire review to see the valid points and just look at the numbers and what the reviewer has as a sum of pros and cons. It could be the best reviewer ever, has 5 pages of thoughts and people will look at the 5 pros and 5 cons from those 5 pages and see the overall score.
Honestly, I am really enjoying the game. I think from a gameplay standpoint its rather fun; however, from a technical, balance, QoL, and content standpoint it really falls short. Starting contracts/quickplay missions is about 50/50 on getting a match that actually works. Most abilities (for storm at least) are imbalanced and there are objectively "better" skills to use than others (Burning Orb, Frost Shards, Lightning Bolt, and Ice Storm are objectively better than any of the others). Loot drops (specifically inscriptions) range from utterly useless to absolutely mandatory in GM2+; however, the former is far more common than the latter.
While I do enjoy the game, I wouldn't give it more than a 7.5 myself.
I will coin a phrase from Angry joe that sums up every single streamer i watched playing this..
"This game feels like i am playing it just to get through it and not because i enjoy it"
Then to support what i am seeing,the game lost an enormous amount of audience inside of twitch within a few days after launch.
What bothers me is the lack of thought people are putting into their purchases,it is supporting a BAD side of the industry.if you are just playing to get through it because you bought it,is that really a good reason?
Then i have to ask WHY did people buy it in the first place,because it was a new game?
Straight to the point,the numbers tell me that a VERY high majority of gamer's don't know wtf they are buying but for those 2-3 days will tell us how great that game is until they leave of course.
I did not see one single sign that Anthem was going to be good during the marketing phase and after release i still did not see one sign the game is good.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
I can't say that I'm surprised that they screwed up fallout 76 and anthem, both were projects created because someone else made lots of money making these sorts of games. If they really cared about the products they would never release the two games in this sort of shape.
The shame is that its people at the bottom of the food chain that lose their jobs because people at the top push these products out way too early.
Exactly. Neither FO76 for Bethesda nor Anthem for Bioware are games in their respective wheelhouses but rather "me too" games.
Nothing wrong with trying to do something new as long as it's an actual new idea that others haven't already done or at least a clone that is a lot better than what you're cloning.
Can't say that about FO76 or Anthem.
Anthem could be the "better clone" though (in my opinion), with a few moves:
1. Eliminate and reduce loading screens and time spent outside of the Javelin as much as humanly possible.
2. Get creative with the weapons (seriously, the point about relics reversing waterfalls and such begs the question, "Why didn't they do anything cool like that with the weaponry?"), continue adding Javelins/weapons/items continuously as part of a content drip that can be considered at least average for the genre.
3. A short list of essentially QoL stuff, including player feedback improvements with regards to javelin stats and radar/map and some UI improvements.
If they melt away that garbage stuff, the moment-to-moment gameplay in the Javelins seem way more fun (to me) than Destiny. Bioware has already been more daring in how much emphasis they put on the difference between the suits than Destiny 2 or Division do their archetypes. They just seemed so damned determined to take you away from that in the most cumbersome ways with this release.
I just see another game that isn't an MMORPG or even MMO. Nothing massive about 4 player co-op title. What defines an MMO has been stretched so completely over the years. I look at the emails I get from this site and sometimes they are filled with relevent MMO and MMORPG news. Other times they are filled with a heap of games that do not qualify.
At least in this case EA itself said Anthem is NOT an MMO. However, they also tried to say it was something else. Something new and different. We all know that is a lie, as this particular format is shared with other titles.
Whatever. I ain't touching anything from EA anymore. Bioware is nothing more than something they use for brand recognition.
I will coin a phrase from Angry joe that sums up every single streamer i watched playing this..
"This game feels like i am playing it just to get through it and not because i enjoy it"
Then to support what i am seeing,the game lost an enormous amount of audience inside of twitch within a few days after launch.
What bothers me is the lack of thought people are putting into their purchases,it is supporting a BAD side of the industry.if you are just playing to get through it because you bought it,is that really a good reason?
Then i have to ask WHY did people buy it in the first place,because it was a new game?
Straight to the point,the numbers tell me that a VERY high majority of gamer's don't know wtf they are buying but for those 2-3 days will tell us how great that game is until they leave of course.
I did not see one single sign that Anthem was going to be good during the marketing phase and after release i still did not see one sign the game is good.
Another signature opinion from Wiz formed from other people's opinions.
This forum needs a 'Transcended actually playing any games" rank just for you, buddy.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
It would really suck to be the guy posting a review on a game. The arm chair bandits come out in droves to bash the hell out of you. Then the well versed folks joust in their comments to up their post count and be part of something. Why do it? Thanks for the review . I do appreciate the time you took out to post that.
Anthem is rated lower than Fallout 76. And with the con of "inexcusable level of bugs" after you literally spent all of THAT shitshow's review excusing a far greater level of bugs. Is that a joke?
Be consistent if you want to be taken seriously. Because right now, I can't and don't take this site seriously as a review platform.
Two different reviewers, two different games, two different opinions.
Same website, same feature review that represents the site, same weird inconsistencies, same excuse.
That's just because most readers want to be fed what they want to hear so they can leverage that in their arguments to win the imaginary war about whatever they're arguing over.
It's not about the scores and being "fed", it's about having several different reviewers and no context or accountability to a standard that is set. What's the point in having FEATURED RATING SCORES to debate over?
Jimbo rated something a 6
Ed rated something a 9.5
Ralph rated something else a 5.5
Sally rated something a 7
MMORPG.com says "Wasn't us! It was them, and they were different guys, and uuuuh the games are kinda different too"
You can't blame people for seeing one rating featured, then another rating featured and them trying to resolve how or why the platform rated them that way when there were similar gripes across both.
You expect a consistent grading standard where it's been explained time and again that one doesn't exist and isn't even promoted.
Different writers here have different tastes and opinions about gaming. This site has a lot of different contributors. Many have some wildly differing opinions on games and gaming. My 8 is my own. Do you want Mike B's 8 or do you want Bill Murphy to tell Mike B what an 8 is then always get Bill's 8? Why not just only read his reviews.
I read reviews here precisely because they're not consistent. The only thing a number tells me is what that person thinks of a game, not how good the game actually is.... to me.
I expect a platform to own its featured number ratings + accompanying Pros/Cons that go with it not plausible deniability when the viewership brings up another previous rating and asks why or compares.
If that's the case remove the f#$%ing number ratings and let the article writings stand on their own.
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
crap game, dunno how EA is going to explain it to their shareholders that Bioware did it again lol
After the catastrophe that was Mass Effect: Andromeda, they created another one called Anthem!
If this isn't enough proof that Bioware is done and over with.... I don't know what is.
It's pretty much guaranteed that EA will start doing the same with Bioware, like Activision just recently did with Blizzard.
I mean... seriously! After that many years of development and this is what they were able to deliver?
We can say a lot about Bungie's Destiny 1 release, but it was a 1000 times better, butter smooth gameplay, fun and addictive like hell and almost zero issues other than some exploits (albeit a little funny like with the notorious loot cave).
Bioware just can't create a good game anymore. All the good and competent people are long gone.
I was entertained by ME:A, but then I waited a while and bought it as a better game for much cheaper.
For the moment at least, that seems like the lesson to be learned, here.
Anthem is rated lower than Fallout 76. And with the con of "inexcusable level of bugs" after you literally spent all of THAT shitshow's review excusing a far greater level of bugs. Is that a joke?
Be consistent if you want to be taken seriously. Because right now, I can't and don't take this site seriously as a review platform.
Two different reviewers, two different games, two different opinions.
Same website, same feature review that represents the site, same weird inconsistencies, same excuse.
Comments
The shame is that its people at the bottom of the food chain that lose their jobs because people at the top push these products out way too early.
Nothing wrong with trying to do something new as long as it's an actual new idea that others haven't already done or at least a clone that is a lot better than what you're cloning.
Can't say that about FO76 or Anthem.
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
Ultimately, the traditional one-and-done game is not going anywhere. It's a stable core of the gaming market that fills in the niches that live services cannot. They might be monetized with more dlc, but that also isn't inherently a bad thing (and I'd argue that some games like Smash Bros., Mario Party, Fire Emblem Warriors, and almost every fighting game ever would benefit from extensive paid dlc).
Unlike Destiny this is made by EA (rather than paying Bungee), using EA's own internal engine (rather than paying royalties on Unreal say), (largely) sold by EA (rather than paying Steam getting a cut).
The end result: it costs less. They can break even selling fewer units. Not every game needs to be a blockbuster or else the studio closes scenario.
tHis SitE iSn'T fOr YoU!
Whatever you say, guy. Eliminate the numerical scoring, and it will solve this problem. If you are going to use a scoring system, it should be consistent through out the site regardless of the reviewer.
Aeander pointed out something that alot of people in the community agree with. FO 76 got a pass on all of their gamebreaking bugs, and then the review for anthem states the bugs are inexcusable.
The real problem is that community criticism is being taken for toxicity. No, Haskbrick. We aren't being toxic, and your backlash against the backlash isn't helping.
Differences in opinion between reviewers are to be expected, but you're still aggregating those opinions under one roof. It's the editor's job to ensure that some semblance of criteria consistency is applied between the disparate freelance writers that submit to them.
This isn't IGN which has to present itself as coherent and professional through hundreds of reviews every year. Reviews here aren't especially frequent anymore, and we should expect better than having a direct contradiction between two different reviews mere months apart.
Are the bugs excusable or aren't they? Because from my perspective, this site pillaried one game for its bugs, while spending 90% of a multi-page review painting a lovely metaphor of teenage adolescence for a far worse game to excuse far worse bugs.
I am sick to death of Bethesda Game Studios, one of the worst, laziest, most inept developers in the entire industry, being given a free pass that no other developer enjoys. I vocally predicted even back then that if EA had even a fraction of the bugs and launch issues that Bethesda did, they'd be torn to shreds. And I was right, as usual.
- Jimbo rated something a 6
- Ed rated something a 9.5
- Ralph rated something else a 5.5
- Sally rated something a 7
MMORPG.com says "Wasn't us! It was them, and they were different guys, and uuuuh the games are kinda different too"You can't blame people for seeing one rating featured, then another rating featured and them trying to resolve how or why the platform rated them that way when there were similar gripes across both.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
I give this post a 6.5/10
While I do enjoy the game, I wouldn't give it more than a 7.5 myself.
"This game feels like i am playing it just to get through it and not because i enjoy it"
Then to support what i am seeing,the game lost an enormous amount of audience inside of twitch within a few days after launch.
What bothers me is the lack of thought people are putting into their purchases,it is supporting a BAD side of the industry.if you are just playing to get through it because you bought it,is that really a good reason?
Then i have to ask WHY did people buy it in the first place,because it was a new game?
Straight to the point,the numbers tell me that a VERY high majority of gamer's don't know wtf they are buying but for those 2-3 days will tell us how great that game is until they leave of course.
I did not see one single sign that Anthem was going to be good during the marketing phase and after release i still did not see one sign the game is good.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
1. Eliminate and reduce loading screens and time spent outside of the Javelin as much as humanly possible.
2. Get creative with the weapons (seriously, the point about relics reversing waterfalls and such begs the question, "Why didn't they do anything cool like that with the weaponry?"), continue adding Javelins/weapons/items continuously as part of a content drip that can be considered at least average for the genre.
3. A short list of essentially QoL stuff, including player feedback improvements with regards to javelin stats and radar/map and some UI improvements.
If they melt away that garbage stuff, the moment-to-moment gameplay in the Javelins seem way more fun (to me) than Destiny. Bioware has already been more daring in how much emphasis they put on the difference between the suits than Destiny 2 or Division do their archetypes. They just seemed so damned determined to take you away from that in the most cumbersome ways with this release.
At least in this case EA itself said Anthem is NOT an MMO. However, they also tried to say it was something else. Something new and different. We all know that is a lie, as this particular format is shared with other titles.
Whatever. I ain't touching anything from EA anymore. Bioware is nothing more than something they use for brand recognition.
This forum needs a 'Transcended actually playing any games" rank just for you, buddy.
If that's the case remove the f#$%ing number ratings and let the article writings stand on their own.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
I was entertained by ME:A, but then I waited a while and bought it as a better game for much cheaper.
For the moment at least, that seems like the lesson to be learned, here.
Is a man not entitled to the herp of his derp?
Remember, I live in a world where juggalos and yugioh players are real things.
u mad?