While combat and gameplay is the most important aspect to me, story and characters are right behind it. I understand what you mean but take RPG’s like the upcoming Wasteland 3 or The Outer Worlds, you’ll die plenty of times but that doesn’t mean that should impact the story and characters. The Witcher III is amazing and I died a lot of times but that in no way, shape or form hurts the story or the experience.
At soon to be 42, games MUST be more than just fun. If all I cared about was fun, I would try out Fall Guys. After combat/gameplay, you have to give me at least a good or better story in order for me to stay invested and want to keep playing the game unless it’s a game where the story isn’t the main or secondary focal point. A game like Remnant: From the Ashes for example has a good story at best. It’s serviceable and gets the job done but it’s the combat and gameplay that I enjoy the most.
For a game like Gears 5 for example, the combat and gameplay is great but you need to give me a great story and characters as well which for the most part, they did.
To each their own and all that but at 42, simply have to give me more than just fun because even the worst game of all time can be fun but that doesn’t make that game good or worth investing my money or time into playing. I played all the “fun” games when I was a kid and teenager but as an adult, you simply have to give me more than just fun.
But again, to each their own. Play what you want and ignore what you don’t.
And when was the last time rareware made a game like that? With strong single player but also mp.
Oh, yeah, before the kinect era, more than a decade ago.
And Grounded is a very promising game, I have had much more fun with that than I anticipated… I don’t play early access games normally, but here I am chopping down dandelions and running from spiders… so much fun with a friend.
You said it yourself, dying doesn’t impact the story. And that’s a problem! Because it should! It’s something we as the player experienced and saw and we just have to pretend we didn’t. It makes no sense.
I feel the exact opposite. When I was young, I cared so much about story in games. I felt games had to prove their legitimacy. Now, I now longer give a fuck about that. I got older and realized they’re really, really terrible at that stuff, so I’d rather they lean into what I can’t get out of movies and TV.
You said a game must give you a good story to make it worth your time, but only 1% of them do. Pretty much just Gone Home.
P.S. Play Fall Guys, it’s better than The Witcher.
It is an absolutely great game, and the reason I hope there is gonna be many more passion projects like that in the future. You don’t always need a huge game to be able to have something absolutely amazing.
Rare makes what Rare wants to make. And this is a very good thing. If they don’t want to make single player AAA games then you won’t get them. Their studio structure is probably also better suited to gameplay first experiences (and it really always was).
So what should Phil do? Order them to cancel Everwild and make a Kameo 2? Good luck with that.
Agree. Hopefully it stops once the consoles are out, people can play whatever they want on whatever box they want and stop coming on the internet to tell the industry its doomed.
Rareware is the best studio Microsoft might ever have.
They used to be what naughty dog is for Sony in the nintendo era.
Not only that, they were one of the only few studios that ever reached a metascore of 97.
Keeping them making online games is wasting the smart minds of rareware.
I just want to know what makes rareware unable to make another perfect dark, why even create a new studio only for it.
You have great minds in rare like Gregg Mayles, the creator of banjo, and you keep him by making sea of thieves?
Yes it’s a good game, but rareware is without any doubt, the best xbox studio, seeing them making only online games is not ok.
