Avowed
Zed Feb 14 @ 4:54pm
2
1
This game is the definition of 5/10.
Painfully mediocre game. Not that being completely average is a bad thing, but it is when it has the price tag of $90, and $120 to play it 4 days early. Being average when it had hundreds of people working on the game for hundreds of thousands of hours, with millions of dollars in the budget.
This game should be like, $20, but it cost them an actual fortune to make it, so that'll never be the case.
Do not buy this game if you are tight on money and expecting a great game.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 33 comments
Minneyar Feb 14 @ 5:09pm 
3
I think it's pretty weird for your opinion of a game you haven't played to be based entirely around how much it costs, but ok.
goodgame Feb 14 @ 5:16pm 
2
This is the result of microsoft netflixisation of video games becoming as dull , flat, boring, homogeneized in their budget and as boring and identity less as it gets.

The game has no character, barely any personnality, no combat grit , impact, nor feedback, dull and boring npc dialogues that extend for way too long and make you want to sleep.

This game is under mediocrity standards.
zaratan4o Feb 14 @ 5:22pm 
Tbh the optimization is pretty atrocious so not sure if I'd give it a 5/10 even.

Really bad low res pixelated textures and effects. Low quality assets. Can barely keep 75~ FPS and that's with DLSS on lol (maxed out, with RT, @1080p). Disabled RT and lowered settings to high. Slightly increased FPS, slightly. Visually, no real difference it seemed.

Disable DLSS? It's like 50-70FPS in high settings with no RT. While looking quite bad. 10-15 year old games that look vastly better and run 10 time better.

I can play Cyberpunk 2077 with path tracing enabled, practically maxed out, and stick to 60~ fps. While looking vastly better. (and CP77 is not amazingly optimized or anything)

Not gonna start on everything else (tho I'm still early on, but it's not good)
Last edited by zaratan4o; Feb 14 @ 5:23pm
Originally posted by Minneyar:
I think it's pretty weird for your opinion of a game you haven't played to be based entirely around how much it costs, but ok.
hows that weird, if i look at a 20 dollar burger at a restaurant im gonna say thats probably not worth my money
djcarey Feb 14 @ 5:41pm 
You're a definition of 5/10
Bullion Feb 14 @ 5:45pm 
Originally posted by zaratan4o:
Tbh the optimization is pretty atrocious so not sure if I'd give it a 5/10 even.

Really bad low res pixelated textures and effects. Low quality assets. Can barely keep 75~ FPS and that's with DLSS on lol (maxed out, with RT, @1080p). Disabled RT and lowered settings to high. Slightly increased FPS, slightly. Visually, no real difference it seemed.

Disable DLSS? It's like 50-70FPS in high settings with no RT. While looking quite bad. 10-15 year old games that look vastly better and run 10 time better.

I can play Cyberpunk 2077 with path tracing enabled, practically maxed out, and stick to 60~ fps. While looking vastly better. (and CP77 is not amazingly optimized or anything)

Not gonna start on everything else (tho I'm still early on, but it's not good)
Digital Foundry were quite positive, though lower end CPUs are a bottleneck which seems consistent with other UE5 games

https://youtu.be/YAyhpRHKhXk?si=Qh2ztrdwrof24NlJ
Originally posted by Zed:
Being average when it had hundreds of people working on the game
Obsidian as a whole has about a hundred employees. They were working on this alongside TOW II.
This game should be like, $20, but it cost them an actual fortune to make it, so that'll never be the case.
Let me guess, you're taking time out from your highly successful multinational business empire to come here and share the benefit of your fiscal wisdom with us mere mortals?

Originally posted by goodgame:
This is the result of microsoft netflixisation of video games becoming as dull , flat, boring, homogeneized in their budget and as boring and identity less as it gets.
Not really. The game is rather obviously an Obsidian title. Painfully so at points. Similarly it does a pretty good job of capturing the aesthetics and feel of Deadfire, which again is a bit of a two edged sword, particularly for those who played through Deadfire.
Zed Feb 14 @ 6:14pm 
Originally posted by archonsod:
Originally posted by Zed:
Being average when it had hundreds of people working on the game
Obsidian as a whole has about a hundred employees. They were working on this alongside TOW II.
This game should be like, $20, but it cost them an actual fortune to make it, so that'll never be the case.
Let me guess, you're taking time out from your highly successful multinational business empire to come here and share the benefit of your fiscal wisdom with us mere mortals?

Originally posted by goodgame:
This is the result of microsoft netflixisation of video games becoming as dull , flat, boring, homogeneized in their budget and as boring and identity less as it gets.
Not really. The game is rather obviously an Obsidian title. Painfully so at points. Similarly it does a pretty good job of capturing the aesthetics and feel of Deadfire, which again is a bit of a two edged sword, particularly for those who played through Deadfire.
I'm giving my opinion as a consumer. Not sure why that upsets you so much. Are you a shareholder, by chance?
It's at least 7.5/10
Microshaft needs to feed Welfare Pass. To make a WP game, you need a quantity over quality approach, games that are bad to mediocre but take a decent amount of time to complete. So Starfield and Avowed. Expect more of the same from the studios under MS umbrella.
Originally posted by Zed:
Originally posted by Grubbs008:

Bad Form.
Why? I wouldn't want someone else to risk $120 on something they might not even like, why would I do it to myself?
I routinely pirate games to test them out if they don't have a beta available, and then purchase them if I actually like them. Should be standard, really.

I don't normally condone sailing the high sees but I can see why someone would do it with absolute trash like this.
Did anyone expect any different? The Outer Worlds was a case study on mediocrity. This game really doesn't do much to surpass that.
Regicide Feb 14 @ 7:58pm 
Ehh I'm having fun with it. worth 90 bucks? Not at all so far at least. It's worth sale price at best at this point. I keep getting crashes every hour or so of playtime. It feels like parts of the world are missing as well. Cipher's are just non existent at the point of the story im in. I hope they flesh the world out a bit more because it feels like its missing a lot from the pillars games.

Bottom line: is it fun? Yes. Could you wait to play it once the initial 10% sale or whatever it is happens? Absolutely yes.

For those worried about Woke stuff, I have not noticed anything since I started playing though I only currently have 5 or so hours invested. Literally the only "woke" thing I've encountered is there is an option to select "He" "She" "They" in character creator but I honestly don't consider that to be "woke."
I agree. It's a solid B game. It's passable, but it's not anything great.
Originally posted by Anticitizen 1:
Microshaft needs to feed Welfare Pass. To make a WP game, you need a quantity over quality approach, games that are bad to mediocre but take a decent amount of time to complete. So Starfield and Avowed. Expect more of the same from the studios under MS umbrella.

Oh look a pay piggy. squeal pay piggy squeal.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 33 comments
Per page: 1530 50

Date Posted: Feb 14 @ 4:54pm
Posts: 33