@Barighm: I teach English as a foreign language & I was actually covering possible vs definite statements about the future today. When he says, "our timeline is in perpetuity", that's a definite statement. If he was just hoping, he would have said, "we plan to keep it going forever", or even "we will". He even says he's not being ironic.

My point is that NMS made a lot of promises they didn't deliver on - Sean Murray said there would be features at launch that simply weren't there. Pete Hines is making a promise he can't possibly deliver on, forever is a long time. But even promising the game would be around for his whole lifetime is something I very much doubt he can deliver on. Servers are expensive, platforms become antiquated, people move on. Even if this game is a success (unlike Evolve which shut its servers down in 3 years, do you really think people will still be playing in 20 years? 40?

The only alternative is that we all know he's lying, he knows we know he's lying, we just expect hype to include lies now. When he says he's not being ironic, we know it means nothing. When he says a game is going to have a feature, we assume he just hopes it will. When he says the game has multiplayer, he means if they get around to it. If that's the case, why do we even listen to a word he says?

Skyrim is a great single player game. It doesn't require online servers. It doesn't require other players being online to be fun. What a terrible comparison.

We've all seen games that have died, servers that have shut down. This kind of hyperbole doesn't help anyone - it's a No Man's Sky promise. Maybe I should buy this game so I can sue them in 20 years time when they decide it's no longer financially viable to keep the servers running.

@jbreez00: It's worrying when you can empathise with someone who kills hundreds of people. Why would you want to?

At least from some of the early press, it sounds like this game is all about Lara going down a dark road, maybe getting a little too bloodthirsty. I believe that's what causes some of the tension between her & Jonah. I think maybe we're supposed to judge her a bit, it's good that a game is willing to take a more critical look at the "heroes" who have no problem with killing dozens of people to get to their goals.

I don't know how well they pull it off but in theory, I'm down for a Jungian exploration of Lara's shadow-self.

Wow, that's a pretty harsh review but Edmond does a good job of justifying the score with everything he says.

I was hoping to play this game with the visual hints turned off (especially since they look so obnoxious this time) but that inconsistent stealth system makes it seem like it might be frustrating.

AAA games aren't really worth buying on launch these days anyway. Hopefully they'll fix a few bugs, balance the combat a bit & add some more content over the coming weeks & months. I've enjoyed this series but I think I can wait a while for this one.

@yangwenli1: Have you played Warframe? Try that & tell me it's slow paced.

@italiano72: Tacked on third person is usually pretty bad. Characters look like they're hovering across the floor, wiggling their legs. I'd prefer they start form scratch & make it properly third person - I'd be willing to wait.

@tidus_ff: You can level up stats but it looks like the outcome is shown to you rather than being a dice roll. i.e. you have Hacking 1/5 - you can't do it as opposed to you have a 20% chance of doing it.

I wouldn't cast any judgements about story & character development yet, it's early days & they probably don't want to show too much. Witcher 3 had great dialogue & the conversation system worked well, even if the procedural system was a bit weird sometimes. I do worry about the walk-away thing they've got going on here but it seems like part of the whole first person perspective which I also hate.

@mistervulpes: I wish Dishonored had third person. At least Deus Ex shifts perspective when you hug a wall. You have no way of knowing where your body is in Dishonored - the only solution is to make the guards half blind - that's bad stealth design in my opinion.

@ahmetxca: You will learn to know your character like the back of your hand. Mostly because you will spend the whole game looking at your character's hands.

Fallout doesn't have to be isometric but first person was definitely worse for me.

Does being distracted by the first person perspective for literally every moment of gameplay count as immersion?

There's so much I want to love but that first person thing is awful 100% of the time. I'm not even kidding. Sure, there's some HUD stuff that you could "only do in first person" but that doesn't mean it's worth it. You could easily make the same point that to always see the emotions on your character's face, you could only do it in second person - while maybe an interesting feature, certainly not worth never being able to see in front of you.

The shooting may be better in first person (although, I'd still argue that shooting can be done incredibly well in third) but the movement is just not good. The slide mechanic would work much better if you could see your body, wall hanging would be better if you could see your body in relation to the environment.

I'd love to talk about the NPCs, the pathing, the interactions... I'd love to talk about the city design, the shops the lighting the fashion... I'd love to be able to appreciate all the good stuff CDPR have done but that first person perspective really ruins it for me. I get the same feeling with Fallout or Skyrim - every moment is just less good than it could be. I want to love this but I end up feeling kinda sad.