I watched a YouTube review of this game and literally took about 9 minutes for anything to happen in the footage. Dude was just walking forward through some rocks. Did some odd puzzle that took 5 seconds. Then walked some more. Fought three dudes. Then started walking again.
Another scene Senua was just walking behind some guy that was limping for several minutes. Then I turned the video off because I saw all I needed to lmao.
Of course there are people that are going to like it. Whenever someone says a game is good/bad it should be obvious that the person understands another human may enjoy it. But there has to be some sort of general way of describing something. Some sort of baseline from which we weigh a games success or failure in it being a game.
From what I saw but haven't played, it looks awful. Then again I found the first game to be boring too.
@fraga500: Yea it's lousy. But I think in general consumers have shown that they aren't interested in anything other than the "best" games. Whether that's graphics, how "cool" it is, how much social media attention it gets or whatever other factor.
Not that smaller titles or games that don't fit mass market appeal don't have a place. But I think studios and publishers need to get their costs under control. It's just not worth it to spend several tens of millions on a game just to get a million in sales.
And not hating on any game devs because I can't make anything at all. But there are solo devs or small groups of people that make games that sell enough to support them. Maybe having 100 devs, two outsourced companies and all this other bloat just isn't viable in today's saturated market.
noodles227's comments