The first season of Daredevil was the best with a tightly woven narrative, solid acting and some of the best fighting choreography I've seen in a superhero show. I didn't have much of an issue and kind liked that her superpowers were more subtle and it had the elements of a different genre, which was what caused some viewers to be turned off by it. I liked where they were going with Luke Cage, but Mike Colter's stiff acting and stale delivery bothered me - it felt like he was reciting lines of dialogue from a written page at times and not having natural feel of dialogue between different people. I was at least able to get through Iron Fist unlike some but understand the complaints, he seemed to deliver every line of dialogue as if everything is urgent and just as important as other lines; kind of like how 'Breaking News' is meaningless with the 24 hours television news cycle. But my main issue was the choreography was unconvincing and poorly executed by Finn and the stunt doubles. Connie seemed to have more control in her executed of the fighting style than Danny Rand when Rand intensively studied it and became the Iron Fist for crying out loud. After watching the whole season, I felt that Matt Murdoch's fighting was more of a threat to his enemies than the immortal Iron Fist, when you think it should definitely be the other way around. So my main concern is, how is the execution of their fight choreography going to look when they are fighting side by side?
@metallinatus: I actually agree. But would've liked him to have been a replacement for Hsien-Ko if they were to have 3 Darkstalkers characters as they did previously.
I know all video game companies are corporate to some extend and need to make money but jesus.... I don't like that this game feels and looks overly corporate with Disney/Marvel trying to have a complete monopoly over Marvel characters that aren't the written comics. After all, they cancelled their Disney Infinity series to pursue launching games like this. So what we'll likely get (which is becoming more apparent the closer to launch) is an overly polished, dumb-down, play-it-safe with no risks, entry to the MvC series.
UMvC3 was such a good game, that they needed to take more risks, keeping at minimum keeping the classic main characters from the Marvel canon (which would obviously include characters from X-Men) and expanding into lesser known properties.
Also, on the Capcom side, I would've liked to see Felicia and Trish return and use other Street Fighter characters than the most well-known ones.
@khjsaw: I definitely understand what you mean. Especially having read the books preceding the story and seeing characters and places mentioned in them was great and diverse. However, I think it was more of a matter of story that led to what you didn't like as much about the world in the Witcher 3; following the Witcher 2, Nilfgaard expanded and laid waste to those northern kingdoms as the plot showed us, so what we have left is small leftover villages, only what remains of those lower kingdoms and is a ghost of it's former self (Roche only has a small band of men and women who want to restore that glory it had during Foltest's reign). And so besides the small villages left of Velen, we're mainly just left with the northern kingdom of Redania with it's two urban centers and surrounding small villages. I thought Skellige was done well with it's own seafaring culture that separated it from the mainland, as well as the duchy of Touissant which still stood on its own in Southern Nilfgaard. But in the end that what I liked most about these games - they were story driven.
Side note: I do wish they explored the Brokilon forest somewhere in one of the games and would've taken us to where the Ofieri came from in the north. I think that would've lent it to more diverse and 'memorable' locale. Maybe in the future, if there is one.
I know they said they wouldn't do it. But I think The Witcher, and Witcher 2 solidly remastered/remade and sold as a trilogy would wrap things up nicely. (likely on the next generation of consoles). The graphics and gameplay drastically improved from 1 to 2 to 3. So I think since they practically perfected their work of art and created a solid engine in the process would be worth the time and investment. Also they created a great closed story within the trilogy and didn't blow the end like Mass Effect. I was impressed how the Witcher trilogy built and improved on the ending of the 7 Witcher Books (well, 8 now that Sapkowski recently wrote Season of Storms). We tend to cherish things when they come to an end and have a real ending (i.e. recent Dark Souls trilogy). A Witcher 4 would kind of ruin that and feel superfluous.
It still sucks as a decision to leave 4K Blu Ray support off of the PS4 Pro, however, it may have been a smart business decision since Sony already makes 4K Blu Ray players separate from its console. It might've hurt its 4K Blu Ray player sales. While Microsoft doesn't have the benefit of a separate selection of 4K Blu Ray players.
Given the much talked about fact that game developers release games with unfinished content and glitches galore, this seems like a game that would get an 8 by July or August. It's just disappointing when this year so far great games have come out at release and surprised us (Nioh, Horizon: Zero Dawn, NieR: Automata and the elephant in the room, Zelda: Breath of the Wild). Hopefully, with these results, EA/BioWare are more focused on Dragon Age 4 and it'll be a great magnum opus, but my expectations will be tampered way down. Sounds like they need to tweak their approach to content, glitches, character animations, story, and their game formula or they'll fall behind fast. Knowing me, I'll still buy this game since I'm already so invested in this universe, but it sure would've been nice for the game to live up to or exceed the hype and expectations.
The only reason I'd get an Xbox One is to get an S if I get a 4K TV to play 4K Blu Rays. I had one initially, but all the games I wanted to play were coming out on PS4 (Bloodborne, Uncharted series, Nioh, Horizon: Zero Dawn, King of Fighters XIV, Street Fighter V, The Last Guardian, Last of Us, Last of Us 2, and more). Also, when I had an Xbox One, I had trouble finding friends to play multiplayer with - whereas once I got my PS4, I instantly had 30 friends that I knew and have loved being able to connect and play with them. Since I traded it in, I've only learned of 3 or 4 friends that play Xbox. Microsoft had a lot of great exclusives for the Xbox and Xbox 360. But it seems lacking on Xbox One, and the exclusives that do come out seem to be mediocre at best (with the exception of Ori and the Blind Forest). And so pros (4K Blu Ray player, backwards compatibility, good indie titles) were outweighed by the cons (lack of more quality exclusives, 4K gaming on Pro (at least until project scorpio), multiplayer with people I know, and more, that I get on PS4). If they would up the quality exclusives (besides racing games - I'm not much of a racing gamer (e.g. Forza series), I'll definitely consider also buying an Xbox One. But right now I've got more than enough games on PS4 to keep me busy for the next year or 2, and that's without considering all the exclusives and games coming out just this year on PS4.
Oh good, I'll start playing the game again. I got too annoyed with the bugs, especially the ones interfering with my progress so I stopped until a patch would come out.
Rwmgamer85's comments