@samyar_hemmati: A computer told them that pretending to be woke makes more money. So now they pretend to be woke. But not if it's going to cost money.
After MK9 they've just been making the combat more and more needlessly complicated, seemingly just for the sake of it. Sometimes in ways that are more luck-based than skill-based. Infinitely more depth isn't necessarily what gamers want.
@Barighm: You're not convincing me that it's not fresh. Again, it's an open-world (or “more open” then, if you insist) horror game. Again, that's very rare, and that does make it fresh, because you do play it differently than other horror games, (whether the controls are typical or not) and coupled with the difficulty which unlike almost all other open games, actually makes the resource management matter. In 20 years you can count the decent AAA games that did that, on your fingers. I never said that you said it WASN'T well executed or polished, but since you brought up Silent Hill (which hasn't had a good entry in 20 years) games like Downpour are exactly the reason I mentioned “well-executed”. That game was a mess. An intriguing, unique mess, maybe, but a mess. The first Evil Within was by no means “tight”, but it was very memorable, and gave back to you what you put in, unbeknownst to most players, And those types of games do far better in the long-term than the short-term. The second improved in almost every way (except possibly fear factor, but that was deliberate) and showcased Tango's competence as a AAA studio.
naryanrobinson's comments