Not wanting Ubisoft games play like borefest means hating on game?I don't really think wanting a game not to look like mud and holding a developer with massive resources and direct access to the platform's hardware to a higher standard, means hating it.
I’m not graphic whore, I couldn’t give rats ass if it’s has high tech graphics or not, if that was the case I should have loved Horizon but damn I hated that game and no amount of graphics made the experience any better.
I played many games that had technical shortcoming like Bloodborne, Nier and Drakengard 3 and it didn't stop me enjoying the crap out of thoes game. I will never going skip or wait for sales over such petty reason.Holding a first-party developer with Nintendo's not-insignificant resources and several years of development under its belt to a higher standard and requiring that they are capable to produce good graphics on their own platform doesn't mean being a "graphic whore."
It means not settling and finding excuses for an evidently sub-par aspect of a product they ask full price for.
This is one of my favorite games, but it's made by a small indie team with very limited resources, so the fact that it looks very outdated is forgivable. Nintendo, not so much. I have over 1000 hours in this. Call me a "graphic whore" again.
The fuse ability alone looks like an absolute nightmare to program and playtest.
Seamless sky ground transition.Holding a first-party developer with Nintendo's not-insignificant resources and several years of development under its belt to a higher standard and requiring that they are capable to produce good graphics on their own platform doesn't mean being a "graphic whore."
It means not settling and finding excuses for an evidently sub-par aspect of a product they ask full price for.
This is one of my favorite games, but it's made by a small indie team with very limited resources, so the fact that it looks very outdated is forgivable. Nintendo, not so much. I have over 1000 hours in this. Call me a "graphic whore" again.
I personally value different things in my games and Tears of the Kingdom for me absolutely delivering on that high standard that I personally value the most.
Games like Xenoblade 3 is absolutely gorgeous but that game is not open world and is no where near as interactive as BotW and Xenoblade games runs on much lower resolution.
Didn’t Insomniac do just that with Miles Morales? And I’m assuming they will with Spider-Man 2 as well? (or is it confirmed to be in a different city?)
How many games not only have an open world but also the same amount of systems running on top of each other? Other games of course, have rain fire ect. but BOTW was one of the only games that let you play with so many systems at the sandbox level. In horizon you can only climb the yellow marks. Even Elden ring has systems like cold heat ect, but it feels primitive in the sense that I cant set an entire field on fire, or melt a huge block of ice. And they are still finding out things to do in the game until this day! I'm starting to doubt if some of you even played the 1st game, because It sounds like you missed the sandbox nature of it.Come on. The Switch can do open-world games that look a *ton* better. Not just a little. A ton.
Yes. The Switch is a weak machine (a problem of Nintendo's own making, so it's hardly a justification), but let's not pretend that there aren't several developers who have done a better job at utilizing its resources.
I hear some believe Nintendo invented crafting. Every feature that has been done for years (or decades) immediately becomes an innovation for some when Zelda does it
No, only Xenoblade X was open world, Xenoblade 1, 2 and 3 have divided sections that needs load when you get to each area, similar to DQXI, only difference is Xenoblade map had much bigger map than DQXI.What?
ALL Xenoblade games are open-world, ever since Xenoblade 1 on the flipping Wii.
oh well well, welcome back my boy
Really? Because the last trailer was just that, for me. However... this gameplay demonstration put into context a lot of what I saw in that trailer, so I am back on board.
For sure, and I suppose Hyrule has been changed up quite a bit in a TotK.
I put 200+ hours for each game and I can tell you Xenoblade 1,2 and 3 are not open world, they have big maps but they are not seamless, only Xenoblade X is open world.
What?
ALL Xenoblade games are open-world, ever since Xenoblade 1 on the flipping Wii.
If only people scrambled to find excuses for all games as they do for Nintendo, Metacritic wouldn't have games under 9.
He also said that if they’d go through all the changes they’ve made I’d take forever so there’s that.
I'm start to think you dont understand what open world is.
I'm start to think you dont understand what open world is.
Do you see that dead Uraya in background? You cant go top of that area.
Meanwhile in BotW you go to that volcano on foot without any loading.
I only feel that way because they only showed off a lot of tools which would be fun for sandbox play, and that's cool, but at this point the same map isn't very fun to explore when there's little to no reward. Hopefully they've changed things up a bit.
Finally you gave some examples, thank you. And for sure, I really enjoyed Spider-Man. Can't wait for the sequel.
in Xenoablade 3 you see mechonis sword in distance but you can't got there on foot without loading.
