I came across a video. It was called The Problem with First Party PlayStation Exclusives. The Video is Embedded below.

I'd like you to watch it and Give your opinion. Is the creator of this video right or wrong? If he is right, do you care?

NOTE: (I did not make this video and I am not affiliated in any way with the person who did. This thread was created to invoke discussion and nothing more)

Now I've said it before and I'll say it again. I do not play video games for the challenge. I play them for the stories and character development.

This is why in a game series I not only read the novels that release alongside the games. But the graphic novels and comics that are based inside the games universe. That's why I'm drawn to Sony and its content. And I tend to shy away from first person shooters. But I’ll elaborate below.

I don't agree with this video. God of War has an extensive back story that spans across 7 titles. And in order for the series to evolve not only did the story have to, but the way you play the story had to as well.

That's why they had to explore the surroundings of the Norse Setting. Because a chance for exploration wasn't given to us in any of the seven prior God of War games.

But what this user didn't take into account is the fact that even though there are places to explore in this new God of War game, it's still going to be quite linear. When compared to the open sandboxes that were used to seeing in video games. So if his only problem with the new game is the fact that the camera drop down behind KRATOS. I'm not seeing the issue.

Now another gripe the narrator has is that Sony seems to be releasing narrative heavy games primarily in third person. Which happens to be my favorite type of game. However there is a reason why you can’t put extensive character development or heavy narrative in first person shooters.

The first reason is risk. It's quite sad to say that if one did exist that had the good shooting mechanics you're used to seeing in a first person shooter but was also narrative heavy it would not do as good as the yearly call of duty, battlefield shove the gun up the enemies ass game that comes out. Because people don't want lulls in the action. And it would probably be written off as boring. Saying goodbye to any possibility of a sequel.

The reason why narrative heavy first person shooters are few and far between is because the Majority of people who play first person shooter's couldn't give two shits about the narrative in those type of games in the first place.They care more about a shooting mechanics, nailing Headshots, and Big ass explosions.

Also the only thing you see of the character you're playing in a first person shooter is their fucking hands. How in the hell are you supposed to gain a deeper understanding or feel for the character that you are playing when all you see is their mother fucking hands?

You can't. But if that's your preference then so be it.

The narrator's third gripe was that Horizon: Zero Dawn looked and played too much like other PS4 exclusive's that had already come out. He did mention how different it was compared to Killzone. But completely glossed over that fact because it played similar to other third person Adventure games because the protagonist had a bow and arrow.

And she upgraded her arsenal. To think that a surprise like Horizon: Zero Dawn could be tarnished just because it's played in the third person. This guy overlooked what could be a modern-day masterpiece for the fact that it feels just too familiar.

Now to this narrators credit he is right. There are at least 6 or 7 games coming out between now and the end of 2018 that are PlayStation Exclusives and 3rd person. But what he fails to understand is that their stories, their settings, their character development and tone will be what sets them apart from each other.

This narrator claims that he doesn't see the risk involved with Sony's current exclusives. But what do you call a developer extensively known for a dystopian first person shooters series. Releasing a third person action adventure game in a lush open world that's heavy on narrative. And to have it actually succeed. If not a great reward for a project that was all risk.

Or an independent studio who has developed what they are calling an independent AAA game. I've certainly never played one before.

So as far as I can tell there are two ways Days Gone, Detroit: Become Human, God of War, HellBlade, The Last of Us 2, Uncharted: Lost Legacy will be similar. They're in 3rd person. And they're going to be Great Fucking Games.

What say you?

Watch_Dogs 2 is a very shallow game

Since I haven't seen it anywhere else. I thought I would write something about it. I can't for the life of me understand why people think that the story in Watch_Dogs 2 is better than the first Watch_Dogs.

After playing both of them consecutively, playing the bad blood DLC and reading the book as well. I can tell you that this is by far the shallowest story when it comes to the series. Just about every mission played within the story feels like a group of teenagers or at the very least young adults who were lashing out at the system for the sake of lashing out at the system.

Good intentions aside. I couldn't even bring myself to kill any of the security in the buildings Marcus infiltrates. Because they were just doing their jobs and Marcus is the one who's Breaking into the building.

And I didn't like the idea of going in to a level, using a machine gun on every person in that level, and then having him celebrate in the cut scene about how good a job he did. That goes into a bigger problem, not only with this game. But other games particularly UBisoft games and gamers in general. As to why people like arrogant jerks as protagonists.

As opposed to a protagonist who is Stoic and do the same deeds for more honorable purposes. Which will be making a separate posting about. It wasn't until Horatio was killed. That I actually felt The story go to A deeper place.

But within a few missions you get some sort of justice for your fallen friend. And then he's almost completely forgotten about. I felt no deeper reason other than to create chaos within a system that was unfair.

It seems like the back-story that set Marcus Holloway on his path is more interesting than the story within the game itself. According to the wiki and according to the story in the game he's accused of a hi tech burglary he didn't commit. And he takes the fight to the people who accuse him and reveals their corruption.

Aiden Pearce's story was a story of failure. The Merlaut job, his nieces Death, and the fracturing of his family.

Redemption and finding a new path for his skill and techniques. Becoming the Vigilante known as the Fox. And solving the mystery as to why he and his family was targeted. There was so much written into that story.

And the ending was phenomenal. You fight your way to lucky Quinn. Only to realize he's behind bulletproof glass in a panic room. And you stop his heart by shutting down his pacemaker.

Then you find Damien Brenks. And have a Mexican standoff between Aiden, Damien and Jordi Chin. who would've made a much better protagonist in a sequel then Marcus Holloway.

How does Watch_Dogs 2 end? Spoilers you go in to bloom facility you Hack it. You come out and the bad guy just gets arrested by the police. After Marcus and Raymond Kenny Mock him.

The police run by somebody who was public enemy number one just mere hours before, to arrest the Antagonist.

An Antagonist who turned out to be nothing more than a yuppie, douche bag, tech Mogul. Who was by no means better than any of the Antagonists in the first Watch_Dogs. Not lucky Quinn not Damien Brenks and certainly not Iraq.

While the Dedsec hackers motivations were good. Their presence within the story makes it that much more hollow. The backup you had in the first Watch_Dogs game was Clara Lille.

And hers is the story of redemption as well. She was the one who tracked Aidan Pierce and Damien Brenks after The Merlaut job. And by doing so made him and his family a Target.

Whereas Marcus Holloways back up is just a group of teenagers/young adults who's reasons for doing what they're doing are as shallow as Marcus.

And the Dedsec that was painted in the first Watch_Dogs, I was under the impression they were going to be a more infamous group of hackers. What did they turn out to be? Exactly what Iraq said that they were.

A bunch of millennial 1%ers. At least the girl was. I never got the feeling that any of his crew ever tasted true desperation.

The next Watch_Dogs I hope Doesn’t play to millennials as much. It’s a trend that has been Blatant. It was in this Game and in the two Assassin's Creed: Last Descendant Novels that were just released.

They’re Not interesting. And they never will be.