GG Weekly Videogame News 
eurogamer.net news
SupremeAC
pcgamer.com news
robio
Display:
Order by:
eurogamer.net news
SupremeAC
pcgamer.com news
robio
The quests are littered with busywork and are frequently very lazily conceived. Elements of the world are clearly shoehorned in as crude puzzle or fetch mechanics. Enemies are repetitive, but use level scaling so you never feel like you're making progress. But bosses aren't scaled, so skipping the sidequests comprised entirely of these things only makes it more of a grind because you will become underleveled, leading not to an inability to progress, but instead make battles drag on in a more tedious manner because you do so little damage.
I'm sure, to a degree, some of this is on the fact that I'm unwilling to deep dive into all the minutia of builds, shops, and treasure hunting. You can choose your skills in many different ways, but it's very hard to follow what impact any of these things do, especially given the feedback only comes in the midst of chaotic fights. Shops have upgrade mechanics that are not explained so I just ignore them. And there are hidden treasure chests throughout different areas that I have no interest in stopping in the middle of quests to wander around until I find what I'm supposed to do to be able to reach it, as for the first chunk of the game, many of them you can't reach until later. But ultimately the goal of this would be to be done with combat more quickly, which isn't a rousing endorsement for a game centred on combat.
It's not without merit. Pacing is otherwise good if you're not caught up on not wanting to do some of the side quests. There's heart and whimsy to the world and characters. But it may be a game best played with difficult on the lowest setting not out of an abundance of challenge, but so you move through the game faster.
---
Tell me to get back to rewriting this site so it's not horrible on mobile-----
Jim Ryan forced Yoshida out?
Former PlayStation boss Shuhei Yoshida reveals that the PS3 lost Sony one billion dollars - but fortunately the company's TVs were selling well enough to offset the loss. You've got to diversify your income, folks.
In an interview with GamesBeat, Yoshida talks about the troubles that faced the PS3. "The second year of the original PlayStation was very hard," Yoshida remembers. "I was very concerned. PS3 was another hard time. At the time I was part of management, so I could see the financials. We were losing a billion dollars. I thought PlayStation was finished."
Even for a company as big as Sony, a billion dollars back in the mid-2000s was a hefty chunk of change. "But luckily, at that time Sony’s flatscreen TVs were hugely popular," Yoshida says. "The TV group was making enough money to cover the losses from the PS3 and we were able to survive. But that was the most difficult time."
Sony and Microsoft both bankroll PlayStation and Xbox, and both companies do a lot more than just make video games, so it's nice to see that they'll sometimes cover the gaming division's losses rather than just lay off thousands of people.
Another tough time for the PS3 was the PSN outage, Yoshida notes. I remember that. It was horrible having to actually do homework instead of playing Call of Duty with my friends. We did all get a couple of free games from Sony as an apology, though.
"It lasted months," Yoshida remembers. "It’s unbelievable how hard that was internally."
Point is, if Sony wasn't as caught up with the PS3 release, they still could have had one big final year for the PS2, and would have found themselves in a better position for the PS3.
Microsoft subsidised Xbox for years too.
I can't imagine a life without videogames.
However, if PS1 never existed, Sega likkely would've have been lot more successful too.
I dont know how people can game on PC tbh, unless it's hooked up to the main tv in the living room.That's how I play PC games. Most people prefer a desk setup, though.
Speaking of GameStop, I drove by my local one last night and they are closed for good. End of an era, I suppose since more people are going all digital.
The only specialized game retailer closed here about a year ago. There's also only one big toy store brand left. Regular stores don't carry games here save for a few local exceptions, so if you want to buy physical games in a brick and mortar store, the one brand of toy stores basically has a monopoly.
Yes, I meant sitting at a desk with monitor, mouse and keyboard.But this game needs a f-ing map.
It's not too confusing but there's no map whatsoever and each area links together in weird ways.
There are critical items to find and places you can't do something till you have a specific item.
It's a bit stupid not to have a map and I've reached the point where it's becoming mild annoying.
Makes me remember old games that had no in game map, but a real paper map in the game box.
I have two GameStops left within about a 10 mile radius of me. One of them is now in our mall, that more or less switched over to being a community center, and I don't think I've seen a person inside the store in a year. Not a real surprise though, because it doesn't seem like they ever have any games. It's almost like a Funko Pop and t-shirt store now.
Interestingly though, there are three retro/ mom and pop video game stores within that same radius. It's kind of funny how game stores have come full circle in that regard.
I really wanted to get Donkey Kong from gsmestop because I was gonna trade in games for about $45 worth of credit.
Heh, I didn't know you could trade in games at a Funko Pop store.
---
Tell me to get back to rewriting this site so it's not horrible on mobileThe outage is directly responsible for me playing Little Big planet and getting into that. I don't think I ever would have purchased it on my own, but Sony was pretty generous and as part of their apology they gave us all two games. I picked that and Infamous. That was definitely worth it for 60 days without online gaming.