Really, REALLY cautious due to no reviews yet

[EnStorEn]

Lack of content is what I fear most. Enemy types seem rather few, everyone who played the game keeps mentioning VERY limited mission objectives and proceduraly generated maps have a tendency to just be soulless lumps of terrain.

[♥ Beepy ♥]

Well.... the opinion of anyone from IGN (or anyone else) being held in any regard is quite questionable to begin with. As they are the absolute LAST people I'd trust to give an unbiased and thorough review.

The game isn't out yet so the reviews that *actually matter* (aka the players), are going to be a bit delayed. You'll have reviews and streams to watch in the next 10 hours. I'd wait for those instead of buying into any publication.

[EnStorEn]

Originally posted by <3 Beepy <3:

Well.... the opinion of anyone from IGN being held in any regard is quite questionable to begin with. As they are the absolute LAST people I'd trust to give an unbiased and thorough review.

The game isn't out yet so the reviews that *actually matter* (aka the players), are going to be a bit delayed. You'll have reviews and streams to watch in the next 10 hours. I'd wait for those instead of buying into any publication.

Nobody has mentioned IGN... There are several journalist who have played it and they pretty much all say the same thing.

[Saltzpyre]

Review embargos until release date seem to be pretty common these days. it usually isn't a great sign, but in this specific case, there is plenty of gameplay footage and people that HAVE legit played it that all say it's pretty well optimized and hella fun so it might be safe.

[EnStorEn]

Originally posted by Saltzpyre:

Review embargos until release date seem to be pretty common these days. it usually isn't a great sign, but in this specific case, there is plenty of gameplay footage and people that HAVE legit played it that all say it's pretty well optimized and hella fun so it might be safe.

Well I think it will be fun, but the question is if it will remain fun after the initial 10 hours. Honestly embargoes usually means the game is mediocre; if the devs were confident early reviews would essentially be free marketing.

[FatBud]

Sony could enforce review embargo for their own reasons, it's not a new practice for them.

[♥ Beepy ♥]

Originally posted by EnStorEn:

Nobody has mentioned IGN... There are several journalist who have played it and they pretty much all say the same thing.

Yes, and to quote IGN's review directly:

"I’m a bit concerned at the moment that it won’t have enough content to go the distance long term, with only two enemy factions (so far as we know), procedurally generated levels that can feel a bit one-note, and no real live-service roadmap at launch..."

It falls right in line with your post's claims of there being limited content. Which is why I said, ignore publications (lumping them all together because they're all garbage anyways) and focus on actual player reviews when they get posted.

[EnStorEn]

Originally posted by FatBud:

Sony could enforce review embargo for their own reasons, it's not a new practice for them.

Plenty of SONY games have had early reviews. If anything it makes me think SONY has little confidence in the game

[Willow]

I mean the original has stayed fun for years on the same formula. So....

[+Tooterfish]

I just hope this doesn’t become the trend moving forward, seems to be happening a lot more lately than it used to.

[EnStorEn]

Originally posted by <3 Beepy <3:

Originally posted by EnStorEn:

Nobody has mentioned IGN... There are several journalist who have played it and they pretty much all say the same thing.

Yes, and to quote IGN's review directly:

"I’m a bit concerned at the moment that it won’t have enough content to go the distance long term, with only two enemy factions (so far as we know), procedurally generated levels that can feel a bit one-note, and no real live-service roadmap at launch..."

It falls right in line with your post's claims of there being limited content. Which is why I said, ignore publications and focus on actual player reviews when they get posted.

AND AGAIN, I am not refering to IGN but MULTIPLE other journalists. Journalists that are far more trustworthy than IGN. Are you obsessed with IGN or something? Yeah, they said the same thing as other journalists. That doesn't magically make the issue void. Are you schizo or something?

[Jerran]

so its like the first game then and it was awesome

[♥ Beepy ♥]

Originally posted by EnStorEn:

AND AGAIN, I am not refering to IGN but MULTIPLE other journalists. Journalists that are far more trustworthy than IGN. Are you obsessed with IGN or something? Yeah, they said the same thing as other journalists. That doesn't magically make the issue void. Are you schizo or something?

First off, people have absolutely zero reason to believe a word that reviewers say. Good, bad or otherwise, because they all have this habit of publishing BS, regardless of who's writing the review. That is an established FACT.

Second, basing your decisions off of said publications doom-saying is absolutely nonsensical, which is why I explicitly suggested that you should *wait* to read *player reviews* before making up your mind.

Also, being called a "schizo" is hysterical! When not a single thing I said is even remotely related to multiple personalities. But crack on!

[Roy]

Originally posted by EnStorEn:

~everyone who played the game keeps mentioning VERY limited mission objectives and proceduraly generated maps have a tendency to just be soulless lumps of terrain.

This could be said about the first game too though, i wouldn't mind "few" enemies as long as there are 3 factions with their own distinct enemies and playstyles.

Hell, even Halo 1 to 3 had enemies repeating throughout the entire campaigns and those games are still a blast to (re)play because every encounter with the same enemies feels different.

The maps of HD1 didn't tell much of a story but they didn't feel soulless to me either, hopefully the same can be said about this.

Lets hope the criticism is exaggerated, we'll see for ourselves tomorrow.

[EnStorEn]

Originally posted by Roy:

Originally posted by EnStorEn:

~everyone who played the game keeps mentioning VERY limited mission objectives and proceduraly generated maps have a tendency to just be soulless lumps of terrain.

This could be said about the first game too though, i wouldn't mind "few" enemies as long as there are 3 factions with their own distinct enemies and playstyles.

Hell, even Halo 1 to 3 had enemies repeating throughout the entire campaigns and those games are still a blast to (re)play because every encounter with the same enemies feels different.

The maps of HD1 didn't tell much of a story but they didn't feel soulless to me either, hopefully the same can be said about this.

Lets hope the criticism is exaggerated, we'll see for ourselves tomorrow.

HD1 was for me a pick-up game when I had friends over. If this game basically does nothing new then I would see it as a failure.

[EnStorEn]

Originally posted by vIoLeNt G:

Originally posted by EnStorEn:

You are legit mentally ill. Schizophrenia has nothing with multiple personalities, so GJ proving you don't have a clue about that. You are behaving EXACTLY like a schizo since you keep talking as if I have referred to IGN, which I never have. You seem to be reading or hearing voices about IGN in your head - which is a pretty typical symptom of schizophrenia.

First off, he was helping and giving a friendly reply and all i see is you attacking him because he not saying what you want him to, very mature..

Back on topic, if you are that worried, wait for the reviews to surface.. thats all we can say

"First off, he was helping and giving a friendly reply "
He literally started claiming I was referring to IGN and that it was dumb since IGN are reputable. So what he actually did was: Lie and tried to gaslight me. So ♥♥♥♥ off.