Originally Posted by
Dodece
I don't believe in denigrating others to self validate oneself. While some may have been less then articulate about their reasons. In a nutshell their complaint was this. They were looking at this game to be a better substitute for a game they were already playing, and they were disappointed that it wasn't going to be. It is actually quite flattering that they gave this game a chance. Especially when it isn't coming onto the market with a established pedigree.
As for the points of contention. Yes the characters are generic. They are the very definition of the term. The Ego abilities, the perks, the pursuits, and differences in gear. Just aren't creating enough room for individualization. They are weak, limited, case specific, and just don't seem designed to stack well. While balance is always a issue. Obtaining that through over simplification can actually do more harm then good. We will know in a couple months if that is the case. A lot of games in the genre have failed, because character building was too generic. For players to foster a sense of accomplishment.
I wouldn't say this game is like Borderlands at all. The loot tables, and weapon variability are actually tropes of this genre that were incorporated by that games developer into another genre. I was playing games with colored loot over ten years ago. It just isn't actually all that new, and the ego system is nowhere as complex as what Borderlands offered. If anything mechanically speaking this game is more like Halo.
As for the whole grouping thing. I really don't see the point of the complaint. Instances were built specifically for four players, and if it is the over world you are talking about. Then the loot is context specific, and has nothing to do with group size. If you want to converse with more then four players. Then just invite them to group chat on Live.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
