I'd imagine the more heroes you release, the more diminishing returns you would get in terms of differing/creative abilities vs those abilities being fun/practical vs game balance.
@xiricon: well, it's been over a month and yes, I'm still playing - practically everyday, despite it's issues. I actually find myself coming back to Anthem whenever I try to play Division 2.
1.) it's not "apologetics," it's rational thinking.
2.) I don't need to convince anyone of anything. Play it or don't play it - I don't care either way.
3.) You aren't "forced" to do anything...
XP is the most easily obtainable "resource" in the game. It is also the only resource that is actually capped naturally anyway, since once you hit max lvl, there is no need further need for it. And stop acting like freeplay is the only place to get it... and I never said it wasn't restrictive. My reply was simply point out that nothing is forced on you, it isn't the "end of the world," like people are acting and you can get xp from other means.
I see it as a restrictive move, but essentially a non-issue.
The xp cap doesn't remove the freedom from freeplay... it's not like it blocks you from content... you can continue to do whatever you want. You will still get loot, you can still farm mats, you can still explore, complete challenges, do world events and the small "dungeons" throughout the map. It literally removes no freedom of freeplay and there is nothing linear about it, with or without the cap.
For arguments sake, let's say the game didn't have an xp/progression system, but it was still open-world and allowed for exploration, world events, loot, completing challenges, etc. This isn't a bizarre concept, as other games do this type of thing. Would you play a game like that? Would it bother you? Now add in the xp and the potential earning cap, and now it's a problem?
First off, it really puts focus on why a person is playing, since it seems it's apparently not for the content or even for earning xp, but for earning xp in a specific way as they see fit. Mind you, we're talking only xp - not loot or mats or anything else.
And second, no one is "forcing" you to do anything. You can still do all the world events you like, there is just an apparent xp cap once you do 3 in a row. You still get loot, you can still complete challenges and farm crafting mats, the game doesn't "force" you to return to base, it's just the xp being capped, which is the easiest thing to gain in the game.
@JustPlainLucas: All those words and yet you have proved nothing... Subjective consensus on subjective media, doesn't lead to any worthwhile conclusion. You talk about consensus, but it's hardly in a scientific context, yet you act as though it is. Game reviews aren't set in a controlled environment. There are numerous possible variables at play that can influence why critics/players give the scores they give, that have nothing to do with the actual quality of the game, so not only are they subjective, they may not even be genuine. They may even be outright dishonest.
At this point, you apparently aren't even thinking for yourself, instead using the review scores of others to "prove" your point. You still haven't even established your definition of "quality." Depending on how you define it, a game can be of poor quality, yet still be a fantastic game and receive a good review score, which puts yet another kink in the review score argument for determining the quality of games.
And what does any of this even have to do with the statement I commented on:
"I'll stop making jokes about the Xbox when the Xbox stops being a joke."
So once xbox starts getting better overall review scores for their games, regardless if you like the games or not, then Xbox isn't a "joke" anymore? So if all the games on both systems remained the same, and PS4 games retained their review scores, except xbox games received the same or higher scores, is PS4 the joke now? It's like you're putting more worth in the review scores the games get, rather than the games themselves. It's like you don't have to enjoy or even play the games, just as long as they get a higher number...
As I said, "quality" means different things to different people, and if you're just going to argue review scores, then there's no point in having a discussion, since you have whittled down the definition of "quality" to nothing more than numbers on a page - it's lost all context.
And I'm not dismissing or simplifying anything when I they offer different games. I said that, because they do. PS4's first party games are largely single player, story-driven, action-adventure games, with little to no emphasis on MP. Xbox on the other hand, offers MP-focused games, mainly shooters, but even Forza has a large focus on MP play. They cater to different demographics, because they are different types of games.
And finally, I'm not arguing that xbox has better games or PS4 has worse games - I really don't care. I have little to interest in console exclusives as a whole. The reason for the discussion is to refute your asinine notion that you can "prove" one console has higher quality games over another. If you want to use mob mentality, sure, go for it, but that doesn't actually prove anything. You are the one that brought up "scientific observation." I don't see anything very scientific about any of this.
@JustPlainLucas: Can you even taste food with all the bullshit that comes out of your mouth....
Games, like all media or art, are subjective by nature. You cannot objectively "quantify the number of quality first party exclusives for each console," because "quality" comes down to personal preference as to what equates to being "quality." Quality in what regard?
Units sold? Doesn't equate to quality Review scores? They themselves are subjective
The only aspect where you could even being to objectively conclude that one group of games are of higher quality than another, is with technical merit, but that is largely irrelevant to the context of what is meant when saying one console has higher quality games over another. If that is your argument, than how enjoyable a game is, is rendered moot in place of things like performance analysis and production value, and even then, you'd have to cite evidence that factually proves the argument in your favor.
Neither Xbox or PS4 has higher quality games over the other. They simply have different games. The only thing PS4's game library objectively has over xbox, is quantity - There are more games available to play. As to whether they are higher quality games? I'd love to see you factually prove this.
There is no form of scientific observation on the face of the planet, that can confirm that something innately subjective, is objectively better or worse than another.
@JustPlainLucas: So until xbox is up to your arbitrary standards? Seriously, you are approaching an entirely subjective situation, and then asserting your stance, which in itself, is subjective....
H0RSE's comments