Jump to content
IGNORED

Dying Light 2


Nespresso
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Harsin said:

 

'Rippling with systems and overwhelming in size' - he might mean that as high praise but its having the opposite effect on me.

 

I would have been all over this in the 360 era, but it does bring on a certain feeling of dread nowadays at the prospect of hoovering up icons off a map.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without wanting to dunk on Dying Light 2 specifically, I sometimes wonder why the 'open world' model has become so popular?

 

Value for money? Is it really value for money spending hundreds of hours doing the same things over and over again and gradually ticking things off a checklist? When you strip them down, these games are skinner boxes (and therin lies the compulsion to play I guess).

 

And the game only gets going after 10-12 hours! Some of the best (single player) games I have ever played are shorter than that!

 

I think it's a wrong turn for gaming anyway. Give me a tightly focused game with no flab (say 10-15 hours) any day.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s all very well having lovely looking locales and all the whizzy textures, but the character’ are animated like Mr Ben on a bad day and speak with all the vocal quality of a crap porn actor, I’m failing to see any reason why this should get any money at all.

 

Shrink the size, spend money on getting stuff good.

 

Fucking awful looking in parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand why they made it bigger. The original’s continued success was in no small part down to the level editor and ability to play user creations on consoles. Catering to people who want the 15 hour experience isn’t going to be their focus. 
 

They are quite CDPR-like in terms of long term support and acting on player feedback. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everything about this is screaming wait a few months and pick it up for £20 if the bugs have been ironed out and performance has improved, especially when pretty much guaranteed bangers Elden Ring and Horizon are a couple of weeks away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Len said:

Right, so who's going to be the rllmuk guinea pig then?

 

Bagsy not me.

 

Does it matter lol? The forum hivemind will unanimously decide on an outcome to stick with anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reviews are all over the place.

 

 

I remember when this was unveiled they talked a lot about the massive effects the choices you make would have on the game but reviews don't seem to mention that much so I'm guessing that got massively reduced.

 

Getting the feeling this will be another cyberpunk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Varsity said:

 

Does it matter lol? The forum hivemind will unanimously decide on an outcome to stick with anyway.

 

I'm feeling rebellious?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, deerokus said:

Reviews are all over the place.

 

 

I remember when this was unveiled they talked a lot about the massive effects the choices you make would have on the game but reviews don't seem to mention that much so I'm guessing that got massively reduced.

 

Getting the feeling this will be another cyberpunk.

 

I hope not. Thoroughly enjoyed the original so I hope this can give as much entertainment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, deerokus said:

I remember when this was unveiled they talked a lot about the massive effects the choices you make would have on the game but reviews don't seem to mention that much so I'm guessing that got massively reduced.

 

Yep, from what I read that aspect is pretty underbaked and doesn't affect that much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, Alan Stock said:

 

Yep, from what I read that aspect is pretty underbaked and doesn't affect that much.


Prob cos’ the guy they were banking on for that system got outed as a sex creep fairly early in development.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet another open world disappointment then.

 

Metro Game Central 7/10 - A lot of busywork and repetitive missions, and while the combat is good the enemies are rarely very interesting. Weak script and unremarkable art design. Undercooked stealth and lots of bugs.

 

Ars Technica - No, I don’t want to play Dying Light 2 for 500 hours.

 

I just think these lower tier developers should refine their games and edit their templates more critically. Not everything needs to be open world and sprawling. Dying Light would have worked just as well with a structure like, say, The Warriors by Rockstar. Open enough to give the player some freedom, but linear and controlled enough to polish and shape the experience into something slick and memorable. Releasing flabby, buggy and janky games is so self defeating. Day one buyers are let down and the developers get stuck in a loop of patching and fixing stuff that probably wasn't very important anyway. We see this cycle all the time, it's just depressing and pointless.

 

Miyazaki please save us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think cranky fortysomething videogame purists are this game's market. It'll sell well and be enjoyed enough by people who just want a violent open world to dive into.

 

There'll likely be a huge number of people who get more joy from this game than Elden Ring and Horizon. My call is it's gonna have the Days Gone effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems a 7/10 means utter shite if the internet is anything to go by. 

 

Hmm. 

 

That 7/10 original game sold 17 million copies. And that's a 2019 figure. 

 

People loved it. People will love this no doubt. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ox1973 said:

Without wanting to dunk on Dying Light 2 specifically, I sometimes wonder why the 'open world' model has become so popular?

 

Value for money? Is it really value for money spending hundreds of hours doing the same things over and over again and gradually ticking things off a checklist? When you strip them down, these games are skinner boxes (and therin lies the compulsion to play I guess).

 

And the game only gets going after 10-12 hours! Some of the best (single player) games I have ever played are shorter than that!

 

I think it's a wrong turn for gaming anyway. Give me a tightly focused game with no flab (say 10-15 hours) any day.

 

 

 

All games are a checklist though. You do the same thing in most games?

At least with an open world you get exactly that...a world. Which adds immersion. And thats great. Anyway open world games have ALWAYS been popular.

 

Its not a new thing. Turbo Esprit, Sydicate, Starsliger, Midwinter, Mario 64, Rachet and Clank - they're all pretty much that really. Even if its a hub world its still somewhat open.

 

But you have the lilkes lof FF7 Intergrade or Unchartered if you want to take a more linear path within that.

 

Gaming is about fun and you can have a lot of fun in any open world game. We've actualy had a ton of linear games if you've followed gaming since its conception so its just an evolution. And a natural one.

 

But even so there have never been more retro or linear games out there so its not like others arn't being catered for.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ry said:

Seems a 7/10 means utter shite if the internet is anything to go by.

That's of course true but also I firmly believe that games shouldn't get such high scores if they're that buggy. Why should reviewers imagine the bugs aren't there or will hopefully be patched out in 6 months time? I say review it as is and deduct points for being a bug fest. Put the pressure on publishers and devs not to release something half finished with a vague promise of patches that may or may not help.

 

If the bugs make it a 4/10 experience, give it 4/10. Even if without the bugs it would be a 10/10 game. You can note in the review that it's potentially great if they ever patch it - but you give it the score it deserves at that point in time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is there a point at which these massive day 1 patches, apart from the inconvenience of downloading them, mean that the review scores the games attract are worse than they might be? To a point where they start impacting sales? Or do reviewers just look through the bugs on the assumption that they're getting fixed? It must be impossible to do a decent job of assessing the game if the patch is big enough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.