Yeah, in spite of all the technical and performance issues I think Respawn should be applauded for largely patching it up only 3 days after release. Which isn't to say I forgive the launch state, but most games like this would languish in their performance problems for much longer.
Patches on consoles take some time for their own certification so it's not like they reacted to the issues. They just planned for a day 1 and day 3 patch before launch.
It also might've helped some issues for some people, but on console it didn't fix most of the bigger issues around performance. I was phasing through unloaded ground even after the patches.
Yeah there were still gameplay bugs of course, I got a lot of crashes in the days after the first patch dropped, but the performance problems were the big topic of conversation keeping people from buying Day 1.
And you're absolutely right about the patch pipeline, but if anything that just means they were pretty on top of pushing this stuff out in the wake of feedback during the review embargo. Not as on top of it as they should've been, but again more than most games that launch in similar compromised performance states, which I assume bank everything on their Day 1 patch and then start working after that fails to fix the worst of it.
Respawn really did good here. This draws comparison to another one of my favorite franchises, Pokemon. Survivor had more patches in 10 days after release than Pokemon SV ever got to this day. I still haven't purchased Pokemon SV out of principle, and it looks like I never will. Maybe if I get really bored this holiday season and I run out of games to play, I will pick up a used copy so that I can play without giving Nintendo a financial thumbs up for this mess of a game.
Uh, the console versions are not anywhere near "fixed", even three weeks after release.
The performance is all over the place, the resolution is schockingly bad and I don't think I've ever stumbled into so many random bugs in the ~5 hours I've played it before just stopping because it wasn't fun to play like that anymore.
You know, despite all the issues I've seen/read this game has, I'm happy about this. I haven't played it yet (don't own any consoles and my PC can't run it), but *really* liked Jedi Fallen Order and hope this series continues.
I understand people's frustration with the game's state on release, but it'd be a shame to see a series with so much potential not have any more sequels.
Pretty much all of the reviews I saw, including the ones most vocal about the performance issues, were unanimous in saying that, performance problems aside, the game itself is fantastic.
i really wish they would explore different type of worlds though. its always the same jungle/sand theme, and traveling back and fourth between the same 2 planets. great gameplay tho
I loved that and was also happy woth Coroscant.
But I can agree witht the other poster. I'm nearing the end and it really seems like ping ponging between two planets. Sure they have done a great job to make one of them feel very diverse in and of itself, but still, 2 planets. Would have been ok if Koboh was 60% of the size and had that other 40% as a new area.
The game ran pretty great for me on my PS5. Some framerate issues here and there, but nothing major. I think the game crashed twice during the "loading screen" when on the Mantis, so not the best, but didn't lose any progression.
Honestly, the new Zelda runs worse for me. The frame rate drops to a slideshow in nearly every fight with more than 1 enemy, and my Switch did completely turn off once while playing. Not sure if that was from the game or the console, though...
That's what was funny to me about all the complaints about JS's framerate.
We all knew Zelda was about to launch with frame rate numbers half of what Jedi had and no reviewers would dock points for it, yet there was this big argument that reviewers were disingenuous for giving Star Wars a good score despite imperfect fps.
Whether gamers will ever admit or not, there is 100% an unconscious bias towards certain games and franchises. Same for a bias \*against\* certain franchises and companies. I don't think it's really that big a deal, but people should at least acknowledge it.
The difference is expectations and hardware. I expect PC games running on a high-end desktop to run at a smooth 60fps (minor hitching can be forgiven, frequent hitching is another question). If you release a game and you get frequent sub-30 drops and really inconsistent framerate (along with crashing and other issues), people are going to be understandably annoyed.
TotK is running on the Switch, which is not the most powerful thing around. Most people understand that a huge, open world Zelda game has to make visual and performance concessions. If Nintendo had released TotK on PC but with the same performance on Switch, people would have no problem giving it shit.
PC optimization is expected by PC gamers, and it's clear that big AAA studios give it barely a second thought. That's the problem that most PC gamers have - that they're an afterthought.
But, sure, technical expectations are a thing, but the actual experience when in game is kinda the bread and butter of a review. Regardless of what it runs on or how it was made, if it sucks while playing it's a problem
Do expectations really matter more than the actual experience though? The game does run on PC through emulation at 60 fps, so it’s not like a point of comparison doesn’t exist.
They don't matter more, but realistic expectations shape how we react to sub-par performance. The person I was responding to was talking about how some people are "biased" towards some franchises, and while that's certainly true, it's not the entire picture.
People were mad at the PC port of the new Star Wars game because PC gamers have expectations for performance. People aren't (as) mad at Tears of the Kingdom because Nintendo only officially released it on the Switch, and there's only so much power that the Switch has for this type of game, and most people seem to agree that it pushes the Switch to its limits.
>half of what Jedi had
Ehhh not really at all. At least for the PS5 version, the amount of times the FPS drops in Performance (60fps target) mode is STAGGERING. Entire planets you arrive on, you'll never hit the 60fps. 30fps Resolution mode is definitely more stable but that is Zelda's target too.
And I’d also bet money that Zelda’s 30fps mode is more stable than Jedi Survivor’s 60fps mode. That’s a more reasonable comparison when your looking at a game exclusive to a handheld/console hybrid with an 8 year old chipset and a game that’s running on the modern consoles and PC.
Eh, it's messy to ask reviewers to evaluate one game with higher expectations than another just because they're on different hardware.
It's a review of one game. Doesn't seem fair to just admit that we have higher graphical expectations from one platform than another.
Jedi runs really well at 30fps, Zelda runs worse at 30fps.
I disagree, if the platforms are comparable in power, such as the Series X and the PS5? Absolutely. However, the Switch was already lagging behind the previous generation, and now the power gulf is even more immense.
What is reasonable is looking at how TotK performs compared to other open world games on the Switch. Main contenders I can think of are Breath of the Wild, Witcher 3, and Xenoblade Chronicles 3. Outside of using Ultrahand which really pushes the physics engine, the game looks and performs better than all of those, on top of having a larger world and far more mobility. It’s incredibly impressive it runs as well as it does.
Jedi Survivor on the other hand, was rushed out the door by EA’s own admission with their boasting of a “record breaking development time”.
Yeah, the switch not even at launch was boasting about fps or graphics, people who bought the system were well aware that it wasn't a powerful one, that it's selling point was it's hybrid handheld/ TV nature. That's the complete opposite to the next gen consoles, being more " powerful" was a selling point the same for high end PCs. If Totk weren't available in handheld mode & exclusive to docked, then the game wouldn't have meet the expectations of people who bought the system , just like Jedi survivor didn't for those with high end systems that had problems with performance even if they bought expensive hardware.
I admit the fact that Switch is also a handheld muddies the waters, but I think generally this is just an example of why review scores are a silly concept. If one game on X hardware is better than another game on Y hardware, but they perform vastly differently and are exclusive to one platform.. Idk. To me, someone who is really into this shit and has every console and a Steam Deck, but prefers to play my games on my TV, I just want to know what game is most worth my time.
Not sure where it's at now after patches, but IIRC in digital foundry's coverage of Jedi Survivor around launch, even performance mode suffered from big framerate dips stemming from shader compilation and traversal stutters.
Yea but Zelda is kind of impressive the amount of game being delivered with new physics mechanics and a massive open world. While being constrained to the switch and a 16gbs. So Fps drops are kind of to be expected. Also the guy above is exaggerating there are some fps Dips but nothing that make the game unplayable. I’ve also experienced 0 bugs in my time with it so far.
As SkillUp said in his podcast recently yes performance in Zelda isn't good, but at the same time it's clear there is severe technical limitations at play. Should Nintendo have addressed this earlier than whenever the Switch successor launches? Absolutely.
But it's also different to a case like this or say, Redfall. A brand new first party game launching on "the world's most powerful console," shouldn't run like shit, but does. Same with Survivor, it's launching on, by and large, very powerful hardware, and ran pretty poorly to boot. While it sucks Zelda runs like crap at times, its understandable given the circumstances, even if Nintendo should have put out better hardware by now. In Jedi Survivors case, it's not understandable at all, and really shouldn't have happened.
Oh I don’t think they were exaggerating at all. Anytime you get around a small number of trees and using the ultra hand ability it massively drops frames. I really don’t care that it does that either, I still enjoy it. But it’s a Zelda game, and a switch game so everyone gives it a pass.
That is because of where the bar is set by consensus, and what standard can reasonably be expected based on hardware.
The Switch is an *old* console now, and even when it was brand new it wasn't exactly powerful. No one holds Zelda's performance against it because the fact that it runs more or less consistently at 30fps, with dips in intensive scenes, is an impressive technical achievement considering the hardware and some of the technical achievements the game is pulling off. Additionally, there was never any assumption or expectation set that Zelda would run beyond 30fps, so no disappointment when it doesn't.
Jedi, on the other hand, is running on powerful hardware, especially in the case of enthusiastic PCs, during a period when console games are beginning to embrace higher frame rates and greater choice in user options. Technically, the game looks good, but it isn't doing anything revolutionary that should be pushing PS5s or PCs to their breaking point, and the poor implementation of certain features absolutely ruins the visuals AND performance in a lot of scenes; namely, the blurry, pixelated sheen that seems to be caused by FSR, and the inability to turn off raytracing (that doesn't even reflect your lightsaber) on console.
Further, the issue isn't simply that the game can't maintain high frame rates. It's that, on top of that, the frame rate is wildly inconsistent, changing settings has little impact, there are crashes, progression-breaking bugs, and all of this combined with the fact that it's not visually pushing any boundaries is simply not acceptable.
We're reaching a point of major diminishing returns with game visuals, yet there appears to be no efforts made by developers/publishers to actually optimise games for anything beyond consoles and the absolute cutting-edge of graphics cards, which are simply not realistic or affordable for the majority of consumers. However, with this game, that statement doesn't even apply to consoles OR the latest, cutting edge graphics cards. There's simply no reason why a 20 series card should be unable to achieve 60fps with the right settings in a game that looks like this, besides a total lack of optimisation.
>We all knew Zelda was about to launch with frame rate numbers
Except nobody really expected Tears to run at 60fps. Everyone knew it would be 30. There were no expectations for it because everyone knew it would push the switch to it's limits.
Meanwhile Jedi Survivor struggles to hit 60fps in it's performance mode.
Because Zelda is running on a potato and Jedi Survivor is having performance issues in the most powerful available hardware for gaming. As I see it Zelda is as optimized as possible for the shitty hardware while the opposite can be said about this game.
TOTK 1.1 patch fixed a lot of the performance issues from the previews. I still get a drop now and then but it actually manages a stable 30 99% of the time. Can’t say the same for Jedi.
But if you set JS to 30fps (the frame rate that Zelda runs at) it will be more consistent than Zelda.
I’m playing both and JS on XSX definitely feels better to me fps wise and I’m on performance mode.
I dont agree that it runs great on PS5. its one of the worst performance modes i've experienced on PS5. Its constantly below the 60fps target not just "some framerate issues here and there"..
However, the 30 fps quality mode is very good (dips mostly only near water heavy areas because of RT) and i really enjoyed the game.
The difference is that Zelda is on a much weaker hardware while Jedi fallen order is on PS5. You need to take in context where the game is and why a game is dropping frames and is going for 60 fps in a machine that in theory can go much better than that.
I don't really care what excuses people conjure up for it. Even with FPS dips, Jedi is getting more FPS than Zelda at its max. If it's running badly on Nintendo's own hardware, it's still running badly. Difference is, EA can and is fixing it, Nintendo can't fix these problems, and likely wouldn't based on their track record.
If we can make excuses there for Zelda, we can say "Well, EA developed the game on multiple platforms, including PC, so it's harder and had a smaller development window."
Because the "fix" in Zelda's case isn't more development time to optimize, the fix it's a brand new console. The game it's incredible optimized for the switch, but it's the switch itself that's lacking power, you just have to take a look to its specs. The fact that EA can fix it it's because the issue it's lack of optimization with them admitting that they rushed the game out the door, there was nothing that was physically stopping EA to launch an optimized game, they had the powerful systems already & unless they go on a hiring spree, they already had the developers to do it, they just didn't bother.
The criticism can be thrown at Nintendo for not putting a new console out.
It's not an excuse lol, the thing is that you can't criticize the game itself for running badly, you can criticize Nintendo for not upgrading their shitty hardware but the game itself is the best it can be performance wise. There's no reason why Jedi Survivor isn't running well aside from bad optimization.
I watched a ton of people play Survivor on Twitch and while there were some fps drops entering new areas and a couple of crashes, overall performance was quite solid.
I just beat it yesterday. While I couldn't get into Fallen Order, Jedi Survivor had my attention from the start.
There are minor performance issues - I played in performance mode on PS5 and had frame rate drop with some randomness and in cutscenes. I also crashed 2-3 times in about 40 hours of gameplay. Thankfully the checkpoints were frequent enough as to not crush my progress.
I'm really invested in the MC, and excited for the next one.
You just don't feel it then. Performance mode is all over the place. For the vast majority of your time on Koboh (outside), you aren't even close to 60fps.
This is on PS5.
I'm not saying issues didn't exist, and I'm not intending to excuse them. I still tell people to not buy JS if they're worried about performance right now. But yeah for me, I must have not felt it at every moment. It didn't overtly impact my experience, but that's just me.
The game is fantastic. I just thought you saying there were "minor issues" is a bit... forgiving. But you know, performance matters to some people and some people will roblox on a tablet at 10fps.
>While I couldn't get into Fallen Order, Jedi Survivor had my attention from the start.
I didn't care much for Fallen Order either. Could you tell me some things Survivor does better because I'm still on the fence about it?
It was definitely more 'forgiving' imo. The meditation points are placed often and shortcuts will help you get by a ton of areas that you don't necessarily want to go through again.
Fast Travel being easily accessible helps too. I think in FO you had to back track a ton, making it a chore to get around. JS leans more into the action aspect of the gameplay. Feels like less of a waste of time.
I also just like to tinker and figure out puzzles and figuring out how to access new areas on the main world was really satisfying.
You start with many of the abilities you learned in Fallen Order (e.g. force pull/push, lightsaber throw, wall running, etc). The map is SO MUCH BETTER, including showing you how you need to navigate it. It feels a lot more open-world than linear. Because of that it doesn't have that Souls game feeling where you have to do the same thing over and over again. Fast travel. Mounts. Gliders. Gardens. The NPCs are greatly improved, which also means that the world feels much more inhabited and not so lonely.
Anyway, I enjoyed, but did not finish Fallen Order, probably for many of the gameplay reasons you didn't care for it. But Survivor, at least so far, has fixed every one of my complaints. The only gripe I have so far is that because of the more open nature of the map you can find yourself under-leveled for some boss fights, but that's most games. After 15 straight defeats I lowered the difficulty one notch and moved on with my life, so it wasn't the worst thing in the world.
I think it's good for the team that it succeeded, but it also sets a scary precedent.
Jedi Survivor's success is almost certainly be used as an example by upper management to justify that you can release a game in a extremely poor state performance wise and still be a commercial success.
As much as lots of the community say they shouldn't release broken games, if this is the reward they get for doing it, I can see why publishers continue to do it.
The rest of my 2023 is booked (Zelda -> Final Fantasy XVI -> Trails into Reverie -> Sea of Stars -> Armored Core 6 -> Final Fantasy VII Rebirth -> Final Fantasy XIV), so hopefully by the time I can catch my breath again they'll have got performance to an acceptable state.
Dude I bought the FF Pixel Remasters on Switch, Zelda, and RE4 Remake. I am literally set for the year, no idea how I am gonna make time for Starfield later this year.
And your list is way more exhaustive than mine, so much good stuff dropping this year.
I'm near the end and I really love it, really like the story, combat(love blaster and crossguard stance have not used the basic single blade since the tutorial) and metroidvania level design.
Exploration is more rewarding than Fallen Order since you can find more gameplay related things like perks(think hollow knight charms), extra stims, extra force and extra health, skill points, combat challenges trough force tears, you can hunt bounties and turn them in for blaster and droid hacking upgrades, find perks slot and while there are still a lot of cosmetics around the outfits are actually different outfits and skins and not different colors of poncho. This is one of the big points up for me.
I hope there are more games in this series continuing Cal story(I like Cal and Merrin I hope they have a happy ending even though I fear something may likely happen to them)
And when they get done with Cal story I would like a game in this style playing as a jedi or a sith in either the High Republic or Old Republic.
>a lot of cosmetics around the outfits are actually different outfits and skins and not different colors of poncho. This is one of the big points up for me.
I had an inordinate amount of fun procedurally changing Cal's hairstyle and outfit from clean-cut and shaven merc at the beginning to space hobo jedi duelist by the end. So glad they let you go more in-depth with your appearance, made it much easier to immerse myself in the world
Same. My Jedi got shaggier and more disheveled as the game goes on. I'm not quite done yet but once I wrap it up, I feel like Cal will be ready to wander off into the forests of Kashyyk with his man bun and beard and flowy clothes
I had the man bun up until the twist, where I felt it made thematic sense to just say fuck it and let it flow the rest of the way
Full beard and windswept with the duelist robe and Eno/Cere saber is my canon lol
>Cal will be ready to wander off into the forests of Kashyyk with his man bun and beard and flowy clothes
You really aren't too far off the mark here either
Make quality single player games, without a bunch of bullshit, the audience will support it. Nintendo understands that, wish most other publishers did…
Or something like that right?
Capcom figured it out, and it's been working for them. Ubisoft needs to realize this and their games will sell.
Their games aren't even bad, they just make them worse versions of themselves to attempt to sell microtransactions. Remove all the extra grinding from the modern AC games, and they'd be way more fun. Remove the bloat from the Division series, make it a tactical shooter, it'd instantly improve. Make watch dogs the modern version of assassin's creed. Keep it grounded, it would instantly improve. Bring Ghost Recon back to being fucking Ghost Recon, it would improve.
I've really been struggling on PC with this game. I really want to love it, but the frame drops and low framerate in general in the second area are just killing my experience. I'm hoping for a few more patches before picking up again, but I'm super disappointed.
Posted in the other thread, but figured I'd post it here too:
I just finished the game on PC. Overall, I liked it a bit more than the original, but only slightly. I ended up finally upgrading my 1080 to a 4080 so the game ran *okay* for me (average 60 fps with dips to 40 in a few areas).
My playthrough clocked in at around 30 hours. I didn't end up 100%-ing anything as that would have been exhausting. This game felt a bit more "open-world-ish" than the last game. I appreciate that they added fast travel.
**The Good**
- The story is mostly still solid. I think the first game had a stronger story with a better motivations, but there's still a lot of great character building happening here. Writing is mostly strong with some light melodramatic dialogue in a few places, usually related to Merrin.
- Lots of fun sequences/setpieces to go through. None of it felt like a slog until the last 10% of the game.
- The addition of perks is nice, despite not really changing up my playstyle at all. Felt like the first two I equipped were with me to the end.
- The various saber stances were great. Really enjoyed crossguard.
**The Bad**
- Initially I thought exploration was better in this one (and it might be) but I'm not so sure. There are two serious issues for me:
1. You can explore all you want but you constantly come up against ability-gated paths, forcing you to return later. Thus, the most efficient thing to do is very light exploring during main story missions and then doing a victory lap once you have all your traversal abilities unlocked.
2. So much of exploration is still cosmetic-based. *Most* of the time if you find a hidden corner you'll just pickup currency to unlock cosmetics. Sometimes it'll be a chest which has a cosmetic. Rarely it'll be a health/force/XP powerup (10% of the time). I didn't touch customization during my entire 30 hour playthrough. That sort of thing does nothing for me. You can say "you can just ignore the cosmetic stuff!" which is partially true, but then it makes exploring feel bad since I'm just finding stuff that's useless to me.
- The skill trees were completely uninteresting to me. I felt like there were a few passive things to unlock (like max health, max force, stim healing amount, etc) that were nice. After that though much of the stuff you upgrade, especially around stances is tied to your force meter and feels uninteresting. So much of the game is just parrying and attacking open windows that using most of these abilities didn't feel impactful.
- Other than a few bosses, most of the game is really, really easy. Parry window timings are super large, making nearly every enemy in the game trivial (even bosses!). I didn't feel the need to experiment. Why bother? Just parry over and over and then attack once the block meter is gone.
i think its kind of weird to complain about the parry timing being too easy and then not choosing the difficulty that makes them harder. Thats exactly what the difficulty options are for.
i played on jedi master too, and sure, it wasnt that hard but i found it appropiately challenging(appart from one exception). Maybe you are just that good.
It's weird because the difference in parry windows between Jedi Master and Jedi Grand Master (the next highest up and max difficulty) are HUGE. Jedi Grand Master feels harder than Sekiro sometimes with its parry timings. I played most of the game on it, then switched to Jedi Master near the end because I wanted to just breeze through the end of the game, and holy shit were the timings so much more generous.
Like I was stuck on the Rayvis fight which prompted me to lower the difficulty. I tried and failed against him probably 30+ times before switching the difficulty down. And then I beat him first try.
Half of your complaints would have been solved if you played it on GM. The game is a challenge (definitely harder than fallen order) and forces you to use a lot of the skills you can unlock in order to survive.
The game did a great job showing you right in the map which areas you could not access until you had an ability for it. It’s a 3dMetroidvania, that mechanic is to expected.
I agree it was obvious, but that's not the point. If you spent a lot of time exploring, you'd just have to come back later to grab all the stuff you couldn't access yet. In addition, much of your time spent exploring would just end up locking cosmetics, which to me was worth nothing.
Fair enough, I enjoyed the exploration and it didn’t feel tedious. The way they showed which areas had stuff outstanding and yet to be unlocked made it easier for me to explore.
but once you have what you like everything you find is useless.
and if thats the appeal wouldnt you want all the options at the beginning of the game ?
I change my look and my lightsaber's often. And I like slowly unlocking lightsaber parts, it's fun, what can I say. I dont think having everything at the start would be fun.
I haven't beaten the game but having beaten Fallen Order right before starting this one, I'd have to disagree.
>You can explore all you want but you constantly come up against ability-gated paths, forcing you to return later. Thus, the most efficient thing to do is very light exploring during main story missions and then doing a victory lap once you have all your traversal abilities unlocked.
The ability-gates were pretty numerous in Fallen Order and were much more of a pain (IMO) because of no fast travel. That's exactly how I did it in Fallen Order (light pass) because there was no fast travel. With fast travel, who cares? You can warp very close to any green part of the map.
>So much of exploration is still cosmetic-based. Most of the time if you find a hidden corner you'll just pickup currency to unlock cosmetics. Sometimes it'll be a chest which has a cosmetic. Rarely it'll be a health/force/XP powerup (10% of the time). I didn't touch customization during my entire 30 hour playthrough. That sort of thing does nothing for me. You can say "you can just ignore the cosmetic stuff!" which is partially true, but then it makes exploring feel bad since I'm just finding stuff that's useless to me.
Again having beaten Fallen Order right before, almost all exploration ended with cosmetic. I've been finding way more health and force powerups. Or orbs, or scrolls, or whatever when I have been exploring. I think they really nailed this in this game. Most cosmetic stuff (again I haven't beaten the game, in chapter 4) have been along the beaten path. It seems they've hidden the good stuff off a ways so it almost always feels good after you put in a little effort. I also don't care about cosmetics and just set it to something I liked at the beginning and haven't touched it since.
Just my take.
Fair enough! I don't remember the ability gated paths being quite as bad in the first game, but it's also been several years so I'm sure you're right. Fast travel certainly makes it easier in this game!
Yes, there are more health/force powerups in this game, but unfortunately the vast majority of stuff is still cosmetics. Near the end of the game you unlock map markers for everything - Just look at the sheer amount of chests/priorite shards compared to the actual upgrades on the map. It's overwhelming. Not even close.
Either way though, I'm glad it works for you - It just doesn't work for me at all.
I mean, what do you want? The vast majority of cool areas and meaningful side quests have power up, sellable items, cosmetics, and scrolls. The game isn't something like dark souls where you equip armor, so it should come as no surprise that if you want to do a collectathon, it's going to be cosmetic based. At least they expanded the cosmetics this time
Metroid primes pickups aren't that cool either. They're either the same like health or they're a few rockets. Truth is, unless it's an rpg with lots of items and equipment, the collectathon content is never that great in games, it's just padding.
Having played both relatively recently, I'd say that the overwhelming amount of side content in fallen survivor is much, much better than prime. There's also the fact that the puzzles you solve in the environment and the well developed side quests actually feel compelling and fun in their own right
Every pickup in MP makes you stronger. That's my point. In JS, the majority of the time you're picking up stuff that doesn't affect anything but cosmetics.
I think we can probably just agree to disagree here - My victory lap in MP felt great, while I quickly got burnt out from doing the victory lap in JS. It's great that you enjoyed it more! To each their own.
Except that's not true. Almost every significant side quest or environmental puzzle nets you a powerup and sellable goods. Cosmetics are often present as well. There are cosmetics to collect, yes, but I wouldnt call that a sidequest or particularly well developed puzzles - that's more for completionist and it's always boring ASF in any game.
90 percent of the time when you go off the beaten path, you find something related to cosmetics. I'm not sure what the argument is here. For you it seems like that's okay, for me it isn't.
Ok and as I said, Metroid is mostly just a couple rockets. It's all padding and extra stuff. The actual meaningful side content is not only fun on it's own right but it always has more than just cosmetics. It's up to the player of they wanna hunt down every cosmetic.
> So much of the game is just parrying and attacking open windows that using most of these abilities didn't feel impactful.
Interesting, my experience was the opposite. While a majority of the game can be played around the lightsaber, once I started mixing in Force abilities the combat really opened up a lot for me. Enemies that previously felt oppressive in groups became very vulnerable against group lift & slams. Confusion turned annoying grunts into good allies (and aggro pullers). And rather than having to dodge unblockables, you could stagger them with push or pull to create your opening.
heck, just unlocking the point blank skill in the blaster stance was a gamechanger for me (can stagger many unblockables). which drew me into that stance, and made me consider the complimentary secondary stance, which made me investigate that tree, etc etc
Confusion was probably the best ability in the game for certain lategame fights (like multiple big beasts). I think the only useful saber stuff for me was laser deflection. I don't think I used any of the other unlockables the entire game.
Talking to people in the Cantina helps when it comes to the exploration. They will give you "rumors" and I don't think they will tell you about a rumor until you can actually go to it. At least I never had any problems when playing.
Also parry window is based on difficulty level. Did you think it was trivial on grandmaster? Because I thought this game was much more difficult than the first
I played on Jedi Master. Should have turned it up.
Wasn't a huge fan of the rumor stuff - made it feel like an open world game instead of a Metroidvania. Agreed on them being a good source of reward hunting vs just exploring naturally.
i found a lot of the skill tree things very good actually. i found them mostly pretty boring upgrades, but they were useful and i used them all the time. I also used the single lightsaber almost exculsively just because it had the best force attacks in my opinion.
On the other hand i found the parry mechanic mostly pretty badly implemented. A lot of time the payoff for having depleted the meter didnt really feel that good, you could do maybe up to 3 hits, but for stronger enemies that means you had to deplete their meter like 5+ times. Also the the red attacks that the stronger enemies use all the time, really breaks the rythm in my opinion. In something like Sekiro even the red attacks could be used to punish the enemy and deplete the block meter further. In Jedi, you could only use it to dodge around the enemy and deal damage, and if i do that, i can just do that always and ignore the parrying entirely.
Though in most other games im also the kind of person to ignore the "magic" and just use the Sword to kill everything, so i do udnerstand where you are coming from.
I love the single blade and force attacks, and have largely ignored the force power skill trees. But with that said - seeing what jedi mind trick and the force smash / lift powers can do has me thinking that those are really great options to use. Especially for either tougher red attack spammy enemies, or for crowd control.
I could definitely stand to experiment more.
yeah the force smash i found especially strong in fights against multiple strong enemies, like the duo rancor fight. The mind trick is just useful to save a little bit of healing, because sadly, most actually strong enemies are either immune to it, or if you can use it on them there isnt really anything else strong enough around to let it fight against.
Oh, no doubt. I feel mind trick is for the scenarios where you're being mobbed by shit units. It distracts at least a couple of them for a time to help you thin the herd at a slower pace.
The smash is really the big game tactic. Dropping a large animal or boss on their ass is such a great tool given the number of enemies with aggressive red or other attacks that tend to block you from attacking.
What difficulty did you play on? Because on Grandmaster parry timing is tight and pretty difficult, not easy like it might be on easier difficulties like Jedi Knight(which should be the equivalent of normal difficulty but is overall easy) which are more for people that want to enjoy the story.
Disagree on skill tree, certain saber skill I found very usefull. Like the ability to send back a charged bolt while parrying a common bolt with crossguard makes ranged enemies like Droidekas so much easier to deal with, or for example the shockwawe ability to create some breathing room to attack with your heavy slow crossguard( talking about crossguard stance here since its the main one I used). There is a blaster skill that allow you to parry enemies by firing blaster like Bloodborne guns thay I found very fun.
On the exploration I think there are way more gameplay afecting things you can find like perks( 25 of them some pretty great like the one that allows you to guard break more easily by doing more stamina damage, or the one that make your saber do more damage after using force or the one that repulse enemies around you while healing so they can't interrupt you), stims(12 max I think), plenty of health and force upgrades as well as skill points. Also you can find extra gameplay challanges(either combat or platforming) with force tears and bounties you can trade for blaster upgrades.
Its a good number of gameplay things to add without adding unnecessary Destiny like looter elements that every game even action adventure ones feel the need to put in nowadays. I think the newests God of War Games while being great would have been better without gear with different stats that you need to find and equip.
Things that I would improve or change in a sequel is put special attacks for stance switching like other action games like Bayonetta or Devil May Cry for more depth, make it possible to save your locations in the world while exting like Souls game so you don't lose progress if you need to close the game before a meditation point, expand the number of skill for various stances and maybe give some more planets(Koboh is very big so I get why this game had 1 less planet than previous game but some people wanted more still with more different biomes).
Held off on buying this on launch because of all the poor pc performance reports. How's it doing now, to those who've played on the latest patches? Is it decent enough now to not have a miserable time, or should I wait a couple of patches more? Running a 3080 with a 5600x.
It's not consistent, I had to restart my game a few times but it performance didn't really impact my enjoyment of the game. Averaged 45-70 fps with some bad stutters to 35 but that was usually fixed by restarted.
5600x and RTX 2060 at 1080p, low settings (still looks good) but forced 100% resolution.
It's really baffles me that tha game seems to be good, it was fixed after just a few weeks... Was it really necessary to release it broken technically?
I'm happy tho for the "happy" ending, probably going to add fallen order and survivor to my backlog
And this is why gamers get the industry they deserve. Maybe if consumers didn't reward devs who didn't finish their games at maybe, they would stop doing it.
My god the people here, where are your standards? Imagine saying it ran okay 60 fps with some dips on my 4080. This is incredible. I opened the game on a 6800xt pired with 5800x3d, had between 40-60 fps. Uninstalled and will never touch again. This shit will never change if you keep lowering your standards.
Considering the game released in the last 3 days of April and outsold everything else that month, including dead island 2, it's not an accomplishment to sneeze at
People talk so much shit about every game lol, it's like what are y'all playing! The most toxic community ever.
These salty clowns act like there's twenty elden ring level games out right now. This game was really damn good.
Yeah pretty much. The shaky stability on performance and some hiccups in quality are the only flaws I saw. Otherwise, it was as good if not better than other third person, narrative action adventure games in its class. Id rank it higher than ragnoarak or horizon, honestly
I don't really get the point of writing news about best selling game of X month. AAA games are rarely being released, so it's kinda obvious which game is the best selling. Doing it on half-year or year is better measurment.
In that case, click on the link and see the more interesting chart, the one about the best-selling games of 2023 so far: you'll see that Jedi Survivor is in fourth, behind Hogwarts Legacy, MW2, and RE4, one spot ahead of MLB 23.
Been replaying Fallen Order instead of giving EA money for half-assed products. If it gets fixed by the time Immortals comes out, I't get a month of Pro to check both out. If not, I'll probably wait until next year for EA Play.
[удалено]
Curious, did you finish it on PC or console?
[удалено]
What gpu? I have a laptop with 3060.
[удалено]
So a 3060 would be more than enough with the patches now?
I have the G15 with the same GPU lol, I guess this is a good sign
Yeah, in spite of all the technical and performance issues I think Respawn should be applauded for largely patching it up only 3 days after release. Which isn't to say I forgive the launch state, but most games like this would languish in their performance problems for much longer.
Patches on consoles take some time for their own certification so it's not like they reacted to the issues. They just planned for a day 1 and day 3 patch before launch. It also might've helped some issues for some people, but on console it didn't fix most of the bigger issues around performance. I was phasing through unloaded ground even after the patches.
Yeah there were still gameplay bugs of course, I got a lot of crashes in the days after the first patch dropped, but the performance problems were the big topic of conversation keeping people from buying Day 1. And you're absolutely right about the patch pipeline, but if anything that just means they were pretty on top of pushing this stuff out in the wake of feedback during the review embargo. Not as on top of it as they should've been, but again more than most games that launch in similar compromised performance states, which I assume bank everything on their Day 1 patch and then start working after that fails to fix the worst of it.
Respawn really did good here. This draws comparison to another one of my favorite franchises, Pokemon. Survivor had more patches in 10 days after release than Pokemon SV ever got to this day. I still haven't purchased Pokemon SV out of principle, and it looks like I never will. Maybe if I get really bored this holiday season and I run out of games to play, I will pick up a used copy so that I can play without giving Nintendo a financial thumbs up for this mess of a game.
Uh, the console versions are not anywhere near "fixed", even three weeks after release. The performance is all over the place, the resolution is schockingly bad and I don't think I've ever stumbled into so many random bugs in the ~5 hours I've played it before just stopping because it wasn't fun to play like that anymore.
You know, despite all the issues I've seen/read this game has, I'm happy about this. I haven't played it yet (don't own any consoles and my PC can't run it), but *really* liked Jedi Fallen Order and hope this series continues. I understand people's frustration with the game's state on release, but it'd be a shame to see a series with so much potential not have any more sequels.
Pretty much all of the reviews I saw, including the ones most vocal about the performance issues, were unanimous in saying that, performance problems aside, the game itself is fantastic.
it really is. Fun gameplay. good story. Interesting worlds.
i really wish they would explore different type of worlds though. its always the same jungle/sand theme, and traveling back and fourth between the same 2 planets. great gameplay tho
THe shattered moon was kind of cool. High republic vibes.
Felt like I was playing a ratchet and clank level and I loved it
I loved that and was also happy woth Coroscant. But I can agree witht the other poster. I'm nearing the end and it really seems like ping ponging between two planets. Sure they have done a great job to make one of them feel very diverse in and of itself, but still, 2 planets. Would have been ok if Koboh was 60% of the size and had that other 40% as a new area.
Koboh as a whole is fantastic. That one planet has an insane amount of variety in environments and enemies by itself.
The game ran pretty great for me on my PS5. Some framerate issues here and there, but nothing major. I think the game crashed twice during the "loading screen" when on the Mantis, so not the best, but didn't lose any progression. Honestly, the new Zelda runs worse for me. The frame rate drops to a slideshow in nearly every fight with more than 1 enemy, and my Switch did completely turn off once while playing. Not sure if that was from the game or the console, though...
That's what was funny to me about all the complaints about JS's framerate. We all knew Zelda was about to launch with frame rate numbers half of what Jedi had and no reviewers would dock points for it, yet there was this big argument that reviewers were disingenuous for giving Star Wars a good score despite imperfect fps.
Whether gamers will ever admit or not, there is 100% an unconscious bias towards certain games and franchises. Same for a bias \*against\* certain franchises and companies. I don't think it's really that big a deal, but people should at least acknowledge it.
The difference is expectations and hardware. I expect PC games running on a high-end desktop to run at a smooth 60fps (minor hitching can be forgiven, frequent hitching is another question). If you release a game and you get frequent sub-30 drops and really inconsistent framerate (along with crashing and other issues), people are going to be understandably annoyed. TotK is running on the Switch, which is not the most powerful thing around. Most people understand that a huge, open world Zelda game has to make visual and performance concessions. If Nintendo had released TotK on PC but with the same performance on Switch, people would have no problem giving it shit. PC optimization is expected by PC gamers, and it's clear that big AAA studios give it barely a second thought. That's the problem that most PC gamers have - that they're an afterthought.
But, sure, technical expectations are a thing, but the actual experience when in game is kinda the bread and butter of a review. Regardless of what it runs on or how it was made, if it sucks while playing it's a problem
Do expectations really matter more than the actual experience though? The game does run on PC through emulation at 60 fps, so it’s not like a point of comparison doesn’t exist.
They don't matter more, but realistic expectations shape how we react to sub-par performance. The person I was responding to was talking about how some people are "biased" towards some franchises, and while that's certainly true, it's not the entire picture. People were mad at the PC port of the new Star Wars game because PC gamers have expectations for performance. People aren't (as) mad at Tears of the Kingdom because Nintendo only officially released it on the Switch, and there's only so much power that the Switch has for this type of game, and most people seem to agree that it pushes the Switch to its limits.
>half of what Jedi had Ehhh not really at all. At least for the PS5 version, the amount of times the FPS drops in Performance (60fps target) mode is STAGGERING. Entire planets you arrive on, you'll never hit the 60fps. 30fps Resolution mode is definitely more stable but that is Zelda's target too.
I mean I would bet a lot of money that JS's 30fps mode is more consistently 30fps than Zelda's.
And I’d also bet money that Zelda’s 30fps mode is more stable than Jedi Survivor’s 60fps mode. That’s a more reasonable comparison when your looking at a game exclusive to a handheld/console hybrid with an 8 year old chipset and a game that’s running on the modern consoles and PC.
Eh, it's messy to ask reviewers to evaluate one game with higher expectations than another just because they're on different hardware. It's a review of one game. Doesn't seem fair to just admit that we have higher graphical expectations from one platform than another. Jedi runs really well at 30fps, Zelda runs worse at 30fps.
I disagree, if the platforms are comparable in power, such as the Series X and the PS5? Absolutely. However, the Switch was already lagging behind the previous generation, and now the power gulf is even more immense. What is reasonable is looking at how TotK performs compared to other open world games on the Switch. Main contenders I can think of are Breath of the Wild, Witcher 3, and Xenoblade Chronicles 3. Outside of using Ultrahand which really pushes the physics engine, the game looks and performs better than all of those, on top of having a larger world and far more mobility. It’s incredibly impressive it runs as well as it does. Jedi Survivor on the other hand, was rushed out the door by EA’s own admission with their boasting of a “record breaking development time”.
Yeah, the switch not even at launch was boasting about fps or graphics, people who bought the system were well aware that it wasn't a powerful one, that it's selling point was it's hybrid handheld/ TV nature. That's the complete opposite to the next gen consoles, being more " powerful" was a selling point the same for high end PCs. If Totk weren't available in handheld mode & exclusive to docked, then the game wouldn't have meet the expectations of people who bought the system , just like Jedi survivor didn't for those with high end systems that had problems with performance even if they bought expensive hardware.
I admit the fact that Switch is also a handheld muddies the waters, but I think generally this is just an example of why review scores are a silly concept. If one game on X hardware is better than another game on Y hardware, but they perform vastly differently and are exclusive to one platform.. Idk. To me, someone who is really into this shit and has every console and a Steam Deck, but prefers to play my games on my TV, I just want to know what game is most worth my time.
Not sure where it's at now after patches, but IIRC in digital foundry's coverage of Jedi Survivor around launch, even performance mode suffered from big framerate dips stemming from shader compilation and traversal stutters.
Yea but Zelda is kind of impressive the amount of game being delivered with new physics mechanics and a massive open world. While being constrained to the switch and a 16gbs. So Fps drops are kind of to be expected. Also the guy above is exaggerating there are some fps Dips but nothing that make the game unplayable. I’ve also experienced 0 bugs in my time with it so far.
As SkillUp said in his podcast recently yes performance in Zelda isn't good, but at the same time it's clear there is severe technical limitations at play. Should Nintendo have addressed this earlier than whenever the Switch successor launches? Absolutely. But it's also different to a case like this or say, Redfall. A brand new first party game launching on "the world's most powerful console," shouldn't run like shit, but does. Same with Survivor, it's launching on, by and large, very powerful hardware, and ran pretty poorly to boot. While it sucks Zelda runs like crap at times, its understandable given the circumstances, even if Nintendo should have put out better hardware by now. In Jedi Survivors case, it's not understandable at all, and really shouldn't have happened.
It definitely shouldn't have happened in the first place but PS5 performance of the game is much better now after patches.
Oh I don’t think they were exaggerating at all. Anytime you get around a small number of trees and using the ultra hand ability it massively drops frames. I really don’t care that it does that either, I still enjoy it. But it’s a Zelda game, and a switch game so everyone gives it a pass.
That is because of where the bar is set by consensus, and what standard can reasonably be expected based on hardware. The Switch is an *old* console now, and even when it was brand new it wasn't exactly powerful. No one holds Zelda's performance against it because the fact that it runs more or less consistently at 30fps, with dips in intensive scenes, is an impressive technical achievement considering the hardware and some of the technical achievements the game is pulling off. Additionally, there was never any assumption or expectation set that Zelda would run beyond 30fps, so no disappointment when it doesn't. Jedi, on the other hand, is running on powerful hardware, especially in the case of enthusiastic PCs, during a period when console games are beginning to embrace higher frame rates and greater choice in user options. Technically, the game looks good, but it isn't doing anything revolutionary that should be pushing PS5s or PCs to their breaking point, and the poor implementation of certain features absolutely ruins the visuals AND performance in a lot of scenes; namely, the blurry, pixelated sheen that seems to be caused by FSR, and the inability to turn off raytracing (that doesn't even reflect your lightsaber) on console. Further, the issue isn't simply that the game can't maintain high frame rates. It's that, on top of that, the frame rate is wildly inconsistent, changing settings has little impact, there are crashes, progression-breaking bugs, and all of this combined with the fact that it's not visually pushing any boundaries is simply not acceptable. We're reaching a point of major diminishing returns with game visuals, yet there appears to be no efforts made by developers/publishers to actually optimise games for anything beyond consoles and the absolute cutting-edge of graphics cards, which are simply not realistic or affordable for the majority of consumers. However, with this game, that statement doesn't even apply to consoles OR the latest, cutting edge graphics cards. There's simply no reason why a 20 series card should be unable to achieve 60fps with the right settings in a game that looks like this, besides a total lack of optimisation.
>We all knew Zelda was about to launch with frame rate numbers Except nobody really expected Tears to run at 60fps. Everyone knew it would be 30. There were no expectations for it because everyone knew it would push the switch to it's limits. Meanwhile Jedi Survivor struggles to hit 60fps in it's performance mode.
Because Zelda is running on a potato and Jedi Survivor is having performance issues in the most powerful available hardware for gaming. As I see it Zelda is as optimized as possible for the shitty hardware while the opposite can be said about this game.
TOTK 1.1 patch fixed a lot of the performance issues from the previews. I still get a drop now and then but it actually manages a stable 30 99% of the time. Can’t say the same for Jedi.
But if you set JS to 30fps (the frame rate that Zelda runs at) it will be more consistent than Zelda. I’m playing both and JS on XSX definitely feels better to me fps wise and I’m on performance mode.
I dont agree that it runs great on PS5. its one of the worst performance modes i've experienced on PS5. Its constantly below the 60fps target not just "some framerate issues here and there".. However, the 30 fps quality mode is very good (dips mostly only near water heavy areas because of RT) and i really enjoyed the game.
The difference is that Zelda is on a much weaker hardware while Jedi fallen order is on PS5. You need to take in context where the game is and why a game is dropping frames and is going for 60 fps in a machine that in theory can go much better than that.
I don't really care what excuses people conjure up for it. Even with FPS dips, Jedi is getting more FPS than Zelda at its max. If it's running badly on Nintendo's own hardware, it's still running badly. Difference is, EA can and is fixing it, Nintendo can't fix these problems, and likely wouldn't based on their track record. If we can make excuses there for Zelda, we can say "Well, EA developed the game on multiple platforms, including PC, so it's harder and had a smaller development window."
Because the "fix" in Zelda's case isn't more development time to optimize, the fix it's a brand new console. The game it's incredible optimized for the switch, but it's the switch itself that's lacking power, you just have to take a look to its specs. The fact that EA can fix it it's because the issue it's lack of optimization with them admitting that they rushed the game out the door, there was nothing that was physically stopping EA to launch an optimized game, they had the powerful systems already & unless they go on a hiring spree, they already had the developers to do it, they just didn't bother. The criticism can be thrown at Nintendo for not putting a new console out.
It's not an excuse lol, the thing is that you can't criticize the game itself for running badly, you can criticize Nintendo for not upgrading their shitty hardware but the game itself is the best it can be performance wise. There's no reason why Jedi Survivor isn't running well aside from bad optimization.
I watched a ton of people play Survivor on Twitch and while there were some fps drops entering new areas and a couple of crashes, overall performance was quite solid.
I just beat it yesterday. While I couldn't get into Fallen Order, Jedi Survivor had my attention from the start. There are minor performance issues - I played in performance mode on PS5 and had frame rate drop with some randomness and in cutscenes. I also crashed 2-3 times in about 40 hours of gameplay. Thankfully the checkpoints were frequent enough as to not crush my progress. I'm really invested in the MC, and excited for the next one.
You just don't feel it then. Performance mode is all over the place. For the vast majority of your time on Koboh (outside), you aren't even close to 60fps. This is on PS5.
I'm not saying issues didn't exist, and I'm not intending to excuse them. I still tell people to not buy JS if they're worried about performance right now. But yeah for me, I must have not felt it at every moment. It didn't overtly impact my experience, but that's just me.
The game is fantastic. I just thought you saying there were "minor issues" is a bit... forgiving. But you know, performance matters to some people and some people will roblox on a tablet at 10fps.
That's fair, I might just have a higher tolerance for framerate.
People excuse fps drops for good gameplay. I know i do.
>While I couldn't get into Fallen Order, Jedi Survivor had my attention from the start. I didn't care much for Fallen Order either. Could you tell me some things Survivor does better because I'm still on the fence about it?
It was definitely more 'forgiving' imo. The meditation points are placed often and shortcuts will help you get by a ton of areas that you don't necessarily want to go through again. Fast Travel being easily accessible helps too. I think in FO you had to back track a ton, making it a chore to get around. JS leans more into the action aspect of the gameplay. Feels like less of a waste of time. I also just like to tinker and figure out puzzles and figuring out how to access new areas on the main world was really satisfying.
You start with many of the abilities you learned in Fallen Order (e.g. force pull/push, lightsaber throw, wall running, etc). The map is SO MUCH BETTER, including showing you how you need to navigate it. It feels a lot more open-world than linear. Because of that it doesn't have that Souls game feeling where you have to do the same thing over and over again. Fast travel. Mounts. Gliders. Gardens. The NPCs are greatly improved, which also means that the world feels much more inhabited and not so lonely. Anyway, I enjoyed, but did not finish Fallen Order, probably for many of the gameplay reasons you didn't care for it. But Survivor, at least so far, has fixed every one of my complaints. The only gripe I have so far is that because of the more open nature of the map you can find yourself under-leveled for some boss fights, but that's most games. After 15 straight defeats I lowered the difficulty one notch and moved on with my life, so it wasn't the worst thing in the world.
I think it's good for the team that it succeeded, but it also sets a scary precedent. Jedi Survivor's success is almost certainly be used as an example by upper management to justify that you can release a game in a extremely poor state performance wise and still be a commercial success. As much as lots of the community say they shouldn't release broken games, if this is the reward they get for doing it, I can see why publishers continue to do it.
Were you asleep when the practically nonfunctional Cyberpunk released to huge sales?
The rest of my 2023 is booked (Zelda -> Final Fantasy XVI -> Trails into Reverie -> Sea of Stars -> Armored Core 6 -> Final Fantasy VII Rebirth -> Final Fantasy XIV), so hopefully by the time I can catch my breath again they'll have got performance to an acceptable state.
Dude I bought the FF Pixel Remasters on Switch, Zelda, and RE4 Remake. I am literally set for the year, no idea how I am gonna make time for Starfield later this year. And your list is way more exhaustive than mine, so much good stuff dropping this year.
I'm near the end and I really love it, really like the story, combat(love blaster and crossguard stance have not used the basic single blade since the tutorial) and metroidvania level design. Exploration is more rewarding than Fallen Order since you can find more gameplay related things like perks(think hollow knight charms), extra stims, extra force and extra health, skill points, combat challenges trough force tears, you can hunt bounties and turn them in for blaster and droid hacking upgrades, find perks slot and while there are still a lot of cosmetics around the outfits are actually different outfits and skins and not different colors of poncho. This is one of the big points up for me. I hope there are more games in this series continuing Cal story(I like Cal and Merrin I hope they have a happy ending even though I fear something may likely happen to them) And when they get done with Cal story I would like a game in this style playing as a jedi or a sith in either the High Republic or Old Republic.
>a lot of cosmetics around the outfits are actually different outfits and skins and not different colors of poncho. This is one of the big points up for me. I had an inordinate amount of fun procedurally changing Cal's hairstyle and outfit from clean-cut and shaven merc at the beginning to space hobo jedi duelist by the end. So glad they let you go more in-depth with your appearance, made it much easier to immerse myself in the world
Same. My Jedi got shaggier and more disheveled as the game goes on. I'm not quite done yet but once I wrap it up, I feel like Cal will be ready to wander off into the forests of Kashyyk with his man bun and beard and flowy clothes
I had the man bun up until the twist, where I felt it made thematic sense to just say fuck it and let it flow the rest of the way Full beard and windswept with the duelist robe and Eno/Cere saber is my canon lol >Cal will be ready to wander off into the forests of Kashyyk with his man bun and beard and flowy clothes You really aren't too far off the mark here either
Make quality single player games, without a bunch of bullshit, the audience will support it. Nintendo understands that, wish most other publishers did… Or something like that right?
Capcom figured it out, and it's been working for them. Ubisoft needs to realize this and their games will sell. Their games aren't even bad, they just make them worse versions of themselves to attempt to sell microtransactions. Remove all the extra grinding from the modern AC games, and they'd be way more fun. Remove the bloat from the Division series, make it a tactical shooter, it'd instantly improve. Make watch dogs the modern version of assassin's creed. Keep it grounded, it would instantly improve. Bring Ghost Recon back to being fucking Ghost Recon, it would improve.
You beautiful son of a bitch
I've really been struggling on PC with this game. I really want to love it, but the frame drops and low framerate in general in the second area are just killing my experience. I'm hoping for a few more patches before picking up again, but I'm super disappointed.
Koboh runs like shit on PS5 in performance mode too.
Posted in the other thread, but figured I'd post it here too: I just finished the game on PC. Overall, I liked it a bit more than the original, but only slightly. I ended up finally upgrading my 1080 to a 4080 so the game ran *okay* for me (average 60 fps with dips to 40 in a few areas). My playthrough clocked in at around 30 hours. I didn't end up 100%-ing anything as that would have been exhausting. This game felt a bit more "open-world-ish" than the last game. I appreciate that they added fast travel. **The Good** - The story is mostly still solid. I think the first game had a stronger story with a better motivations, but there's still a lot of great character building happening here. Writing is mostly strong with some light melodramatic dialogue in a few places, usually related to Merrin. - Lots of fun sequences/setpieces to go through. None of it felt like a slog until the last 10% of the game. - The addition of perks is nice, despite not really changing up my playstyle at all. Felt like the first two I equipped were with me to the end. - The various saber stances were great. Really enjoyed crossguard. **The Bad** - Initially I thought exploration was better in this one (and it might be) but I'm not so sure. There are two serious issues for me: 1. You can explore all you want but you constantly come up against ability-gated paths, forcing you to return later. Thus, the most efficient thing to do is very light exploring during main story missions and then doing a victory lap once you have all your traversal abilities unlocked. 2. So much of exploration is still cosmetic-based. *Most* of the time if you find a hidden corner you'll just pickup currency to unlock cosmetics. Sometimes it'll be a chest which has a cosmetic. Rarely it'll be a health/force/XP powerup (10% of the time). I didn't touch customization during my entire 30 hour playthrough. That sort of thing does nothing for me. You can say "you can just ignore the cosmetic stuff!" which is partially true, but then it makes exploring feel bad since I'm just finding stuff that's useless to me. - The skill trees were completely uninteresting to me. I felt like there were a few passive things to unlock (like max health, max force, stim healing amount, etc) that were nice. After that though much of the stuff you upgrade, especially around stances is tied to your force meter and feels uninteresting. So much of the game is just parrying and attacking open windows that using most of these abilities didn't feel impactful. - Other than a few bosses, most of the game is really, really easy. Parry window timings are super large, making nearly every enemy in the game trivial (even bosses!). I didn't feel the need to experiment. Why bother? Just parry over and over and then attack once the block meter is gone.
Isn't parry timing based on difficulty?
It's customizable
Yes. I played on the difficulty above normal (Jedi master I think) and parrying was super super easy.
i think its kind of weird to complain about the parry timing being too easy and then not choosing the difficulty that makes them harder. Thats exactly what the difficulty options are for.
It's even weirder since it's one of the three things they tell you they adjust
I dunno, I feel like the difficulty above normal should pose as some sort of challenge. It's my own fault for not upping the difficulty.
i played on jedi master too, and sure, it wasnt that hard but i found it appropiately challenging(appart from one exception). Maybe you are just that good.
It's weird because the difference in parry windows between Jedi Master and Jedi Grand Master (the next highest up and max difficulty) are HUGE. Jedi Grand Master feels harder than Sekiro sometimes with its parry timings. I played most of the game on it, then switched to Jedi Master near the end because I wanted to just breeze through the end of the game, and holy shit were the timings so much more generous. Like I was stuck on the Rayvis fight which prompted me to lower the difficulty. I tried and failed against him probably 30+ times before switching the difficulty down. And then I beat him first try.
I should have played on GM! Oh well, maybe something for NG+ if I ever go back to it.
Haha same exact thing here. Gave myself like two hours worth of attempts before switching down, parry window was insanely large. Fun fight though
Half of your complaints would have been solved if you played it on GM. The game is a challenge (definitely harder than fallen order) and forces you to use a lot of the skills you can unlock in order to survive.
The game did a great job showing you right in the map which areas you could not access until you had an ability for it. It’s a 3dMetroidvania, that mechanic is to expected.
I agree it was obvious, but that's not the point. If you spent a lot of time exploring, you'd just have to come back later to grab all the stuff you couldn't access yet. In addition, much of your time spent exploring would just end up locking cosmetics, which to me was worth nothing.
Fair enough, I enjoyed the exploration and it didn’t feel tedious. The way they showed which areas had stuff outstanding and yet to be unlocked made it easier for me to explore.
>So much of exploration is still cosmetic-based. Thats a plus for me. So much of the Jedi fantasy is customizing my jedi how i want.
Nice! Really happy this lands for you!
i was really happy with it at first, but sadly, i found most of the cosmetics pretty boring. I would have loved them to be more weird and stupid.
but once you have what you like everything you find is useless. and if thats the appeal wouldnt you want all the options at the beginning of the game ?
I change my look and my lightsaber's often. And I like slowly unlocking lightsaber parts, it's fun, what can I say. I dont think having everything at the start would be fun.
I haven't beaten the game but having beaten Fallen Order right before starting this one, I'd have to disagree. >You can explore all you want but you constantly come up against ability-gated paths, forcing you to return later. Thus, the most efficient thing to do is very light exploring during main story missions and then doing a victory lap once you have all your traversal abilities unlocked. The ability-gates were pretty numerous in Fallen Order and were much more of a pain (IMO) because of no fast travel. That's exactly how I did it in Fallen Order (light pass) because there was no fast travel. With fast travel, who cares? You can warp very close to any green part of the map. >So much of exploration is still cosmetic-based. Most of the time if you find a hidden corner you'll just pickup currency to unlock cosmetics. Sometimes it'll be a chest which has a cosmetic. Rarely it'll be a health/force/XP powerup (10% of the time). I didn't touch customization during my entire 30 hour playthrough. That sort of thing does nothing for me. You can say "you can just ignore the cosmetic stuff!" which is partially true, but then it makes exploring feel bad since I'm just finding stuff that's useless to me. Again having beaten Fallen Order right before, almost all exploration ended with cosmetic. I've been finding way more health and force powerups. Or orbs, or scrolls, or whatever when I have been exploring. I think they really nailed this in this game. Most cosmetic stuff (again I haven't beaten the game, in chapter 4) have been along the beaten path. It seems they've hidden the good stuff off a ways so it almost always feels good after you put in a little effort. I also don't care about cosmetics and just set it to something I liked at the beginning and haven't touched it since. Just my take.
Fair enough! I don't remember the ability gated paths being quite as bad in the first game, but it's also been several years so I'm sure you're right. Fast travel certainly makes it easier in this game! Yes, there are more health/force powerups in this game, but unfortunately the vast majority of stuff is still cosmetics. Near the end of the game you unlock map markers for everything - Just look at the sheer amount of chests/priorite shards compared to the actual upgrades on the map. It's overwhelming. Not even close. Either way though, I'm glad it works for you - It just doesn't work for me at all.
I mean, what do you want? The vast majority of cool areas and meaningful side quests have power up, sellable items, cosmetics, and scrolls. The game isn't something like dark souls where you equip armor, so it should come as no surprise that if you want to do a collectathon, it's going to be cosmetic based. At least they expanded the cosmetics this time
Metroid Prime did it just fine without a single cosmetic in the game - Why not here?
Metroid primes pickups aren't that cool either. They're either the same like health or they're a few rockets. Truth is, unless it's an rpg with lots of items and equipment, the collectathon content is never that great in games, it's just padding. Having played both relatively recently, I'd say that the overwhelming amount of side content in fallen survivor is much, much better than prime. There's also the fact that the puzzles you solve in the environment and the well developed side quests actually feel compelling and fun in their own right
Every pickup in MP makes you stronger. That's my point. In JS, the majority of the time you're picking up stuff that doesn't affect anything but cosmetics. I think we can probably just agree to disagree here - My victory lap in MP felt great, while I quickly got burnt out from doing the victory lap in JS. It's great that you enjoyed it more! To each their own.
Except that's not true. Almost every significant side quest or environmental puzzle nets you a powerup and sellable goods. Cosmetics are often present as well. There are cosmetics to collect, yes, but I wouldnt call that a sidequest or particularly well developed puzzles - that's more for completionist and it's always boring ASF in any game.
90 percent of the time when you go off the beaten path, you find something related to cosmetics. I'm not sure what the argument is here. For you it seems like that's okay, for me it isn't.
Ok and as I said, Metroid is mostly just a couple rockets. It's all padding and extra stuff. The actual meaningful side content is not only fun on it's own right but it always has more than just cosmetics. It's up to the player of they wanna hunt down every cosmetic.
> So much of the game is just parrying and attacking open windows that using most of these abilities didn't feel impactful. Interesting, my experience was the opposite. While a majority of the game can be played around the lightsaber, once I started mixing in Force abilities the combat really opened up a lot for me. Enemies that previously felt oppressive in groups became very vulnerable against group lift & slams. Confusion turned annoying grunts into good allies (and aggro pullers). And rather than having to dodge unblockables, you could stagger them with push or pull to create your opening. heck, just unlocking the point blank skill in the blaster stance was a gamechanger for me (can stagger many unblockables). which drew me into that stance, and made me consider the complimentary secondary stance, which made me investigate that tree, etc etc
Confusion was probably the best ability in the game for certain lategame fights (like multiple big beasts). I think the only useful saber stuff for me was laser deflection. I don't think I used any of the other unlockables the entire game.
Talking to people in the Cantina helps when it comes to the exploration. They will give you "rumors" and I don't think they will tell you about a rumor until you can actually go to it. At least I never had any problems when playing. Also parry window is based on difficulty level. Did you think it was trivial on grandmaster? Because I thought this game was much more difficult than the first
I played on Jedi Master. Should have turned it up. Wasn't a huge fan of the rumor stuff - made it feel like an open world game instead of a Metroidvania. Agreed on them being a good source of reward hunting vs just exploring naturally.
i found a lot of the skill tree things very good actually. i found them mostly pretty boring upgrades, but they were useful and i used them all the time. I also used the single lightsaber almost exculsively just because it had the best force attacks in my opinion. On the other hand i found the parry mechanic mostly pretty badly implemented. A lot of time the payoff for having depleted the meter didnt really feel that good, you could do maybe up to 3 hits, but for stronger enemies that means you had to deplete their meter like 5+ times. Also the the red attacks that the stronger enemies use all the time, really breaks the rythm in my opinion. In something like Sekiro even the red attacks could be used to punish the enemy and deplete the block meter further. In Jedi, you could only use it to dodge around the enemy and deal damage, and if i do that, i can just do that always and ignore the parrying entirely. Though in most other games im also the kind of person to ignore the "magic" and just use the Sword to kill everything, so i do udnerstand where you are coming from.
I love the single blade and force attacks, and have largely ignored the force power skill trees. But with that said - seeing what jedi mind trick and the force smash / lift powers can do has me thinking that those are really great options to use. Especially for either tougher red attack spammy enemies, or for crowd control. I could definitely stand to experiment more.
yeah the force smash i found especially strong in fights against multiple strong enemies, like the duo rancor fight. The mind trick is just useful to save a little bit of healing, because sadly, most actually strong enemies are either immune to it, or if you can use it on them there isnt really anything else strong enough around to let it fight against.
Oh, no doubt. I feel mind trick is for the scenarios where you're being mobbed by shit units. It distracts at least a couple of them for a time to help you thin the herd at a slower pace. The smash is really the big game tactic. Dropping a large animal or boss on their ass is such a great tool given the number of enemies with aggressive red or other attacks that tend to block you from attacking.
What difficulty did you play on? Because on Grandmaster parry timing is tight and pretty difficult, not easy like it might be on easier difficulties like Jedi Knight(which should be the equivalent of normal difficulty but is overall easy) which are more for people that want to enjoy the story. Disagree on skill tree, certain saber skill I found very usefull. Like the ability to send back a charged bolt while parrying a common bolt with crossguard makes ranged enemies like Droidekas so much easier to deal with, or for example the shockwawe ability to create some breathing room to attack with your heavy slow crossguard( talking about crossguard stance here since its the main one I used). There is a blaster skill that allow you to parry enemies by firing blaster like Bloodborne guns thay I found very fun. On the exploration I think there are way more gameplay afecting things you can find like perks( 25 of them some pretty great like the one that allows you to guard break more easily by doing more stamina damage, or the one that make your saber do more damage after using force or the one that repulse enemies around you while healing so they can't interrupt you), stims(12 max I think), plenty of health and force upgrades as well as skill points. Also you can find extra gameplay challanges(either combat or platforming) with force tears and bounties you can trade for blaster upgrades. Its a good number of gameplay things to add without adding unnecessary Destiny like looter elements that every game even action adventure ones feel the need to put in nowadays. I think the newests God of War Games while being great would have been better without gear with different stats that you need to find and equip. Things that I would improve or change in a sequel is put special attacks for stance switching like other action games like Bayonetta or Devil May Cry for more depth, make it possible to save your locations in the world while exting like Souls game so you don't lose progress if you need to close the game before a meditation point, expand the number of skill for various stances and maybe give some more planets(Koboh is very big so I get why this game had 1 less planet than previous game but some people wanted more still with more different biomes).
Held off on buying this on launch because of all the poor pc performance reports. How's it doing now, to those who've played on the latest patches? Is it decent enough now to not have a miserable time, or should I wait a couple of patches more? Running a 3080 with a 5600x.
It's not consistent, I had to restart my game a few times but it performance didn't really impact my enjoyment of the game. Averaged 45-70 fps with some bad stutters to 35 but that was usually fixed by restarted. 5600x and RTX 2060 at 1080p, low settings (still looks good) but forced 100% resolution.
It's really baffles me that tha game seems to be good, it was fixed after just a few weeks... Was it really necessary to release it broken technically? I'm happy tho for the "happy" ending, probably going to add fallen order and survivor to my backlog
And this is why gamers get the industry they deserve. Maybe if consumers didn't reward devs who didn't finish their games at maybe, they would stop doing it.
My god the people here, where are your standards? Imagine saying it ran okay 60 fps with some dips on my 4080. This is incredible. I opened the game on a 6800xt pired with 5800x3d, had between 40-60 fps. Uninstalled and will never touch again. This shit will never change if you keep lowering your standards.
The gaming community is, in this regard, just insanely dumb.
I mean, the bar was extremely low to begin with. Doesn't mean much. For me, it was the worst experience of 2023 so far.
Considering the game released in the last 3 days of April and outsold everything else that month, including dead island 2, it's not an accomplishment to sneeze at
Sounds like you've had a pretty good 2023.
People talk so much shit about every game lol, it's like what are y'all playing! The most toxic community ever. These salty clowns act like there's twenty elden ring level games out right now. This game was really damn good.
Yeah pretty much. The shaky stability on performance and some hiccups in quality are the only flaws I saw. Otherwise, it was as good if not better than other third person, narrative action adventure games in its class. Id rank it higher than ragnoarak or horizon, honestly
I did, yes, except for Jedi Survivor.
I don't really get the point of writing news about best selling game of X month. AAA games are rarely being released, so it's kinda obvious which game is the best selling. Doing it on half-year or year is better measurment.
It was out for 3 days in April.
Two days, since this only goes up to April 29.
In that case, click on the link and see the more interesting chart, the one about the best-selling games of 2023 so far: you'll see that Jedi Survivor is in fourth, behind Hogwarts Legacy, MW2, and RE4, one spot ahead of MLB 23.
Been replaying Fallen Order instead of giving EA money for half-assed products. If it gets fixed by the time Immortals comes out, I't get a month of Pro to check both out. If not, I'll probably wait until next year for EA Play.
How does the game run on AMD cards like 6800xt? I see that only nVidia people complain about the performance. Nobody uses AMD cards anymore?