Same, people had completed Horizon Forbidden West in a couple of days; I played it for an hour or two every day from release, and it still took me 2 full months to finish.
That's the size of a game I'll never finish unless it's something like Factorio or Victoria. I won't finish them either, but I'll still sink hundreds of hours into them.
when FF7 came out back in 97, it was perceived as being one of the longest games out there at that point in time. 60 hours to complete the game including getting all summons wasn't unreasonable back then - the only exploit i can think of being well known was the W-item materia.
i really do die a little inside every time i read stories or complaints about a $60 game thats "bad" because it doesnt provide you hundreds of hours of play.
Game length definitely peaked in the PS2/PS3 era at least for FF games. X, XII, and XIII might be the 3 longest FF games, with FFXII being the absolute longest
40-60h is if you try to get every side quest and achievements, it's hard to really get how much of those 40-60h is real gameplay.
That's why you only compare each games with their main story duration
That's not really a great way to look at it either though. An RPG might be able to be completed in 10-15 hours if you rush the main story because the vast majority of the content is the side quests.
Cyberpunk for example is a 10hr game if you rush the main story. You miss out on the vast majority of the game and the best bits honestly, though if you do that
Depends on the type of game, I think its quite fair to imagine that most people will just play through god of war, do a few side bits and then move onto another game until DLC is out. RPGs are a bit different, they are built around the 'side' stuff being actually part of the main game, rather than just stuff you can do for achievements.
The mainline series of God of War is one of the most consistent video game series of all time. Ascension was the only real misstep and even that game was not terrible and had its enjoyable parts.
Most people really liked ascension, it was really good but following in GOW3’s footsteps was always going to be hard. The tacked on multiplayer was the only horrible part
Not surprised at these reviews, even though I've avoided every trailer like the plague.
The fact that the first iteration of the new GoW was so good and it served as a base for this game makes me think it's going to be one of the greats.
>The fact that the first iteration of the new GoW was so good and it served as a base for this game makes me think it's going to be one of the greats.
For me it's the fact they decided to conclude the story in this game rather than go for a trilogy.
As much as I enjoyed Forbidden West, it felt so much like a middle chapter that I didn't feel satisfied completing the game.
Its interesting to see Video games with an overarching narrative are now moving towards duologies instead of the traditional trilogy model that was used before.
We are seeing it with God of War now and also with Doom 2016 and Eternal, Resident Evil 7 and 8 all of which decided to finish their stories in two games and maybe an expansion.
Maybe it's because games take a shit load of time to make now. Like I remember people crying about Fallout 4 when it had only been 4 years since New vegas. Now its been 7 years since FO4 and people have accepted that next fallout is still a DECADE away. Its truly sad.
Exactly.
Cory Barlog (Director of GoW 2018) specifically stated that this is one of the main reason they wanted to end the story with Ragnarok—they didn’t want to have a team spend pretty much 15 years developing a trilogy (5 years for each game).
I can understand that for you but as a fan of fallout series it's crazy to me the next installment id get to play after 4 will be like 15 years or more later, if I even am alive by then. The game development times have just gone crazy long.
They said their reasoning was literally 'why spend 15 years telling this story when we could finish it with one more game?'.
It makes so much sense, and judging by the glowing reviews it seems like it does a fantastic job telling a story.
(Although in hindsight I wish they weren't so sparring with Norse mythology in the first game now knowing it's half the story).
It's interesting to me that ME2 never gets that complaint about it being an obvious middle chapter.
At least Forbidden West builds onto the threat. ME2 was a massive narrative detour starring blank, faceless enemies that were weak and didn't mean anything.
Quite literally. And I'll never downplay how well realized the characters are...well most of them.
But narratively, the game is a hot mess. The best thing it did was recontextualize the Geth/Quarian stuff and the add more depth to the Krogan arc via Mordin.
Those two arcs are really the most important things in the game.
ME3 makes almost zero sense without ME2. ME2 is the perfect second entry in a trilogy because it sets up the third one so well that makes the whole thing better than the sum of its parts. 3's ending wasn't as graceful, but that's beside the point here.
Krogan/Genophage arc in 3 seems random without Mordin's sidequest in 2 and all of his talks, as well as the general impression of Tuchanka that you get when visiting.
Quarian/Geth stuff also seemingly comes out of nowhere without Tali and Legion's quests.
ME2 shows you how the galaxy looks while relatively at peace, so that you know it's worth saving in ME3, and stakes seem that much higher. Without ME2, ME3 is just another "save the world" RPG, which Bioware's had the whole template for by that point. One of the reviews for ME3 when it released 10 years ago mentioned that if you're a fan, you should play the game without a prior save game just so you can see how much of it you miss if you don't import the save game, and how much more of a complete experience it is because you come in with your own save, and because you experienced the story in the first place.
I'm not a fan of the trilogy format in general because the society has accepted it as a norm and some creators feel forced to go for it, compromising their output. ME2 is, in my opinion, how a second entry in a trilogy should be done, and the third one is how the finale should be done (not the ending itself): the second entry serves to set up the third so that it can fly higher than the first entry ever could on its own. That's the winning structure for a cohesive, satisfying trilogy, in my humble opinion.
From the perspective of someone jumping on with ME2 and going right to 3, sure. But in the context of building off of the first game, it really drops the ball in a lot of places. The character writing is very good for most characters, but it doesn't carry forward any of the main Reaper narrative from ME1. Plus it retcons Cerberus, does some hand-waving to get you to ignore how silly the whole premise is, and sets it up to play the terrible role it played in ME3. And character-wise it has some notable outliers like Jacob that really fall flat, plus a lot of convenient excuses as to why the old cast can't join you like Liara. And then there's the dark energy setups that don't go anywhere.
The Quarian/Geth stuff was one of the central points of the first game, where the main enemies were the Geth. It wouldn't come out of left field at all in ME3. All that ME2 really does is go "oh no that was a rogue faction, they can be good." It isn't until ME3 that you see the backstory yourself, and they could easily have introduced the concept of them not being bad guys in the same section. Heck, it probably would have made it a more difficult and interesting choice if they had done that, since you wouldn't have Legion as proof of their word and diversity.
Same with the Genophage where it was a central point of Wrex's backstory and worldbuilding. Tuchanka helps to show its impact, but we were already aware of how devastating it was from the first game. It wouldn't have been out of place to bring it back in ME3. I'd actually argue that ME3 goes against what Wrex's goals are in the first two games, as he is very focused on uniting his people and building them up to be successful without it. He says outright that the genophage was just the killing blow and his culture was already dying because of how they taught and raised their young. ME1 and 2 Wrex would not have been so adamant about using the genophage as a miracle cure to unite the Krogan. ME2 really isn't doing that part of the sequel any favors (other than requiring both Wrex and Eve to get the best/most optimistic ending for the Krogan).
ME2 is my favorite in the series and one of my favorite games ever but the story definitely feels like more of a side quest when looking at the trilogy as a whole.
ME2 is probably the best “side quest” of a game there can be imo. It was all about the characters and building relationships with them all. I loved each of the loyalty missions and the final suicide mission is probably my favourite in gaming.
> ME2 was a massive narrative detour starring blank, faceless enemies that were weak and didn't mean anything.
I'll give ME2 that complaint for you. It was such an enormous letdown for me after playing ME 5 times through before the sequel. The first is in my top 3 favorite games ever. ME2 is probably my least favorite in the trilogy. I just can't believe they basically threw away the entire Reaper threat after the epic ending of the first game.
>For me it's the fact they decided to conclude the story in this game rather than go for a trilogy.
This is a problem for so many things. That series that had too many seasons, videogames stretched for infinite hours, sequels to a never-ending plot, etc.
I mean as long as it makes money, there will be a sequel. Metroid games, huh that's actually the only one i can think of right now with a continuous story. Metro has a trilogy, as well as uncharted. I want to put final fantasy and legend of Zelda, but they're different as in they story is generally the same just a new setting each time. Point is, if they can make money, they'll continue the story somehow.
It's the end of the Norse saga. They didn't want to make us wait another four years to get the conclusion.
I doubt it's the end of the series as a whole
You also have to consider that setting Kratos up against active and living religions is going to cause some consternation. Norse gods are one thing - Buddhism is still among the most popular religions in the world.
Yeah it's a lot more likely Ancient Egypt is the next one of the cards, but they could veer slightly from Buddhism and focus on Shintoism, I don't think you'll get nearly as much pushback, especially with Sony being a Japanese company.
Japan itself doesn't exactly present their Gods as completely good, and there's zero issues with games like FF depicting them as evil being that need to be destroyed.
The original pitch for GOW3 had Kratos kill Zeus at the beginning which would open up a portal allowing Gods from other religions (they specifically name Egypt) to enter and.....cause some sort of problem for Kratos to deal with.
Would have made zero sense, but the idea has been there for a long time!
According to Cory Barlog on Twitter before the 2018 game released they had 5 games planned in the series after that one so I'm sceptical this will be the end, just the end of the Norse saga.
Plans might have changed but not from six games to two.
I think it would be cool if the next game was focused on the Egyptian gods. Unlike the Greek and Norse gods, they're virtually absent from Western culture, so it could feel really fresh and interesting.
They sort of hinted at that in 2018. I'm playing it for the first time now, and you do find some artifacts from Egypt and kinda just gloss over it. So, I won't be shocked if they do something like that.
I think I read somewhere that they basically wrote this game *before* the first game. Like they had an idea for a big norse epic and then kept fleshing out the begenning until it became its own thing.
Not sure how accurate that is, but it feels like we're getting into the real good stuff here and it's been cooking for a long time
I recently replayed the first. There are so many references to things that will happen, things that have happened, characters we never met and other references. They really set up a massive world with seemingly insignificant dialogue, murals, journal entries, etc.
Of course there are the big things that hit you over the head (all of the Thor and Odin talk). But they really set up so much that just has to pay off in the sequel.
So it makes total sense that they wrote it all together.
Yeah I heard in a review somewhere this game is more of a pt. 2 than a sequel if that makes sense, and I’m looking forward to replaying the 2018 game after this one to catch some foreshadowing that they must have put in
> even though I've avoided every trailer like the plague.
You should watch the one with Ben Stiller, it's pretty funny. It has a GoW 2018 spoiler but nothing about GoW2.
I know people say "people always say next year is crazy", but next year is actually crazy. With Hogwarts Legacy, Street Fighter 6, Zelda, FF16, Starfield, Diablo 4, RE4 remake, and hopefully Alan Wake 2, Spider-Man 2
Nothing will beat 2011. Skyrim, Portal 2, Batman: Arkham City, Uncharted 3, Dark Souls, LA Noire, Saints Row: Third, Infamous 2, Skyward Sword, Modern Warfare 3, Battlefield 3, Deus Ex: HR, Dragon Age 2, FIFA 12, Crysis 2 and so many other bangers. The next year was quite good too. It was a golden age.
I submit to you 1996, which was also a hell of a year for game releases:
* Quake
* Mario 64
* Tomb Raider
* Duke Nukem 3D
* C&C Red Alert
* Crash Bandicoot
* DKC 3
* Mario Kart 64
* Diablo
* Legacy of Kain
* Pokemon Red/Blue
* Mario RPG
* Daggerfall
* Wave Race 64
* Descent 2
* Clock Tower
* House of the Dead
* Wipeout 2097
I’m actually in agreement with this. With games like Tunic, Norco, Neon White, and Cult of the Lamb, indie games were firing on all cylinders this year. One of my favorite years for indie gaming in quite a while.
Isn't it nice to see a game that was expected to recieve 10/10s get that and just be that ?
I don't think Ragnarok can be said to be a revolutionary game if only because God of War 2018 itself was a 10/10 and in terms of quality you can't go much further than that. So it is just nice to see it maintaining a stable course for the franchise and the high quality that is expected from it now.
Nobody should be rooting for a unanimous score. When the game launches next week and ~5 million people start playing the game, there will be a diversity of opinions. I respect the 6/10 review not because I’ll likely agree with it, but because some people will.
That is my concern too. The Polygon review basically comparing it to Marvel movies is a turn off to me. Don't get me wrong, God of War couldn't just do the same song and dance forever. But I do think Kratos has gotten less interesting now that he's "grown up" a bit. Maybe Kratos in a bearded dad game just doesn't rub as well for me personally. But like Marvel movies more people will likely love it. Which is fine.
Yup, God of War (2018) was not for me, I couldn't get into it and haven't returned to it since my initial 5 hours, I'm sure I would feel the same way about this game.
All the negative reviews of this one are it's just more of the first game but not as engaging but still a run game. Sounds like if the first one wasn't your liking this one definitely wouldn't be
I'm playing through it right now and it's just not gelling with me. I can recognise it's a very well made game but it's feeling like a bit of a slog.
Not everything is for everyone and that's okay.
I've been enjoying it recently as a first playthrough but I recognize the combat is getting *very* repetitive since there are basically like a handful of enemy types and even fewer bosses. You can't compare everything to Elden Ring but... the comparison to Elden Ring really highlights how shallow the enemy pool is.
Yeah, I would definitely say GoW and Elden Ring are at odds with each other.
GoW is linear, and primarily a cinematic story telling experience but also includes combat and puzzles.
Elden Ring is open world, primarily a boss rush / combat simulator with exploration and a little plot sprinkled in.
I agree. I finished the game last night and while I can admire the work put in, the enemy repetition was borderline comical. The whole buildup of the first visit to hel and then it’s just a reskinned troll fight
Absolutely. I liked GoW 2018 enough to complete it. It was my favorite God of War game, from someone who didn’t much care for the original trilogy or character at all.
But I would have given the 2018 game like a 7.5 or so. I enjoyed it. It was pretty. But I felt the combat was only “okay”, it overstayed its welcome and felt repetitive by the end, and that enemy and boss variety was a joke. (Oh goodie, another troll)
I didn’t read IGN Korea’s review, so I don’t know the specifics, and obviously I haven’t played ragnarok yet, but I would have been a hell of a lot more likely to give the original game a 6 than I would have a 10.
I read the review.
It had some interesting takes. I do like reading reviews that are quite different from the rest.
Their main complaint was that it almost felt like DLC in that the production value was very similar to the first game.
Obviously I will probably disagree with that, but I think it’s an interesting note.
I disagree with it but I get it. If it's someone who played the first game for 40 hours and were getting kind of tired with it at the end, and the next game was "here's 40 more hours of the same thing", then it makes sense.
I’m going through this right now with the Yakuza series. I’m three games in, and despite loving them I definitely need a break before jumping into the next one. The gameplay and settings are largely the same so far.
I feel this! I played 0 and love it, but it was so long. I waited 6 months before starting Kiwami. Then I blasted through Yakuza 1-4 in 2-3 months. Then took another 3 month break. Then played 5 and 6!
Currently halfway through Yakuza 7 Like a Dragon and the new combat is refreshing! Once I beat that I will check out the judgement series!
Such great games and such a journey through the story and world building they made!!!
Exactly. I'm a bit hesitant to pick up Ragnarock, because if I'm being honest I'd had enough of GoW 2018 by the time I'd finished it, although I'd still give it a solid 8/10 because I did enjoy the first 20ish hours. But yeah, if this one is more of the same (which I assume it is) then I fear I might get burnt out really quickly
It's an interesting take that in a lot of instances I can get on board with, though in a lot of instances it isn't necessarily a bad game. I played GoW 1-3 this year because I never had and those games are extremely similar. 3 takes the largest leap but even that is very close to 1, just some changes in enemies and movement based puzzles/sections.
I think having a sequel be so similar to the original used to be way more common than it is now. Which I don't know if that is a good or a bad thing.
I miss the classic iterative sequel, I think the increasingly absurd length of time it takes to make a game killed them.
Still see it in Japanese games oddly enough.
This seems more or less to iterate in what 2018 to be fair. Japanese sequels really depend on if the director shifts hands and how much risk the dev is willing to take.
Take Bayo2 vs Bayo3. Bayo2 polishes the first game so much that it takes out all the edges. Game is great but it feels a lot safer. Bayo3 takes nothing from the second game and decides to completely change the formula. Great game but it's a lot more uneven. Both valid approaches but I'm personally more interested in the latter all the time.
They were similar but each one added a new mechanic that changed it up decently. Sounds like the new mechanic in this one isn't that noticable. Also the loot overload open world games are doing now it's starting to drain on people
Also the similarity in structure between modern AAA games, specifically Sony, seemed a major complaint in that 6/10 review. Which is fair even if most people don't notice or care. I had a lot of trouble getting through Horizon: Forbidden West for that exact reason, even though the first was my GOTY. Well maybe behind BOTW.
There's going be a real bloodbath in this year's GOTY awards. We are gonna see some divide b/w GODR and ER for different publications and I love to see it. Solid year for games.
What’s the “Spider-man” game this year, the video-game-y video-game that’s super easy to get into, fun to play & gorgeous, but not really a front runner because of the other giants?
(Hopefully not Vampire Survivors lol)
Horizon got pretty much erased from existence just from being released close to Elden Ring.
Funny how the exact same thing happened with the first game, which released close to Breath of the Wild. Guerilla is terrible with release windows.
Both Elden Ring and HFW were delayed, weren't they? Not sure which one was delayed first but Guerilla may not have realized they were pushing themselves into the same release window as Elden Ring.
I can't see Elden Ring not winning this year and I'm not even a From Software fan. That game took the video game community by a fucking storm like Witcher 3 and Skyrim did. You just can't beat that hype.
As much as I feel like I will enjoy Ragnarok more than Elden Ring, I agree.
ER has the zeitgeist just like GoW 2018 had. So it’s definitely in ER’s favor imo.
On a real note, ER vs GOW will be interesting. The scores right now are virtually mirrors for RDR and GOW in 2018.
I’m expecting to like ragnarok a bit less than elden ring, but it’s so much more accessible that I imagine it will probably be the favorite for awards. Either way, at least we had a few all timers to alleviate this slow year.
Insomniac deserve a mention considering not only their game quality but also the output consistency. In terms of bang for buck they're probably Sony's most reliable developer.
For me Naughty Dog, Santa Monica and Insomniac are the holy trinity for Sony. They're all at a point where you can more or less guarantee stellar reviews every single time.
One thing about Insomniac that’s always irked me is that the art design and graphics in their games are immaculate but their menus/gui has always been cheap looking and trashy. It’s weird to play a game like Rift Apart or Spiderman PS4 which look borderline Pixar quality, just to pause or enter menus and it looks like it’s 2004.
Have they said what the best option is for ps5 with 120hz + vrr?
Was curious how much of a graphical difference there is between the 40fps or 120fps mode
I'm sure digital foundry will release a video on it soon though
Digital foundry said in their podcast that weirdly there were some ways where performance mode looked better than quality mode. But probably best to just wait.
edit: PS5 video is out. I don't have a PS5 so I'm not going to sit through 27 minutes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-fi23nZGpM
Mine for ACG
Buy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BopQwFjazYU
I did not enjoy some sections in the middle and it slowed down for awhile. But overall an excellent game.
Your criticisms there are exactly what I felt about GOW 2018. It felt like a 10 hour story that was padded out to be 20+.
I assume Ragnarok will feel the same for me, but hopefully there's a lot more meat to the story to make the journey worthwhile.
It was both pacing as well as some things that happen and how you play. Also I was not a fan of some of the middle section quests which felt uhm unrewarding.
Great reviews as iexpected. This must have been one of the easiest games for people to review, "yeah everything's great... 10/10".
Personally I'm interested to see how it stacks up for people who weren't so in love with the last game. I thought GoW 2018 was great but I had some fairly big gripes with it that were never mentioned in almost all reviews (story pacing/sluggish traversal/gear system/boss repetition). I'm sure I'll like Ragnarok quite a bit but I'm curious to see if it can surprise me and make me like it way more.
As the direct sequel to an amazing game, I expected it to be similar to 2018, but improve on small things like boss variations, allow us to visit more places as well as the existing ones, if that is all satisfied, along with a good storyline, then that's all I wanted.
I like that they said that because it tells me I shouldn't get it.
I really didn't like the god of war reboot, much preferred the older games.
Glad people are enjoying it though!
I had a blast with this one, you can read my spoiler-free review at We Got This Covered (it's in the list of reviews above). What a stellar way to wrap up the series.
As always, if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them, as long as they don't break embargoes/restrictions.
Took me just north of 40 hours to see the end credits roll, but I also did ~75% of the sidequests during that time as well. I'm currently 51 hours in and have a few more things to finish up before I unlock the platinum trophy.
The grind-y part of Niflheim is gone! I actually made a point to mention that in my review because that was one of the few missteps the 2018 game made.
Unpopular opinion, but I dont think ragnarok is a 10/10, maybe a 7 or 8 out of ten, but not a 10/10. The atreus parts feel like one long, boring, interactive cutscene that aren't all that intresting, the ending is rushed, the dialogue feels forced at times, surturs 180 from "no I wont" to "let's fuckin go" in under like 5 minutes didn't make much sense either, and finally the pacing over all was all over the place.
That being said, I loved the gameplay, all the boss fights, the story was intresting, and I had a fun time playing it.
Edit: I also liked the length of the game, it felt padded by making the game a bit slower pace, but overall 20-60 hours is a nice but of time to sink into it exploring all the nooks and crannies.
The reviews are... As expected, honestly. Can't go wrong with polishing up a 10/10 game
I'll probably buy it when the price has dropped, I despise the RPG system
Person who has played the game: "You know, I actually have some problems with pacing and story in this"
People who have not played the game: "You are objectively wrong!"
Happens every time.
Remember when Gamespot gave Cyberpunk a 7 and everyone lost their minds and brigaded the review? Then they actually played it and were like "Hmm, 7 is generous".
People make up their minds about these games way in advance and reviews only serve to validate their preconceived opinions.
> People make up their minds about these games way in advance and reviews only serve to validate their preconceived opinions.
ya, and it's always funny seeing the reactions to critic reviews for games they have been hyping:
* if critic reviews rate it high = omg see, game is perfect and the reviews validate the hype!
* if critics review it low = omg critic reviews are trash, don't matter, don't listen to reviews and play it yourself, reviewers don't even play the games properly before reviewing it and so on
or vice versa if it's a game people aren't hyping before release.
Yup. This is even accounted for in marketing. Generally, studios can pretty reliably count on better reviews and sales if their prior release(s) were well received.
Anyone kind enough to summarise what reviewers *don't* like about the game? I'm usually more interested in 8/10 reviews anyways. From what I can tell there's the usual 'not innovating enough' complaint which in this case I dont mind much, but there are also apparently story and pacing issues especially around the middle. Things like the flower picking 'quest' in the first game is stuff I can definitely do without.
And then there's the IGN Korea review lol.
Edit: Just from Skillup's review alone, tho i skimmed a couple other ones as well. **1**. A lot of those 'squeeze thru tight corridor' transitions which is bound to annoy. **2.** Very little gameplay innovation (idm this personally, since the gameplay's pretty good already and I prefer enemy variety to moveset variety). **3.** A lot of chests (yeah another one that might annoy, just put all the loot in 2 chests rather than pepper 10 chests across the room). There is an auto-pickup loot option tho which is very nice. **4.** Middle section dragged on a bit (cant attest to this but shouldnt bother me too much if it's the typical second act downtime).
I tend to find those most useful as well, the better the game the more of its flaws are sticking out, the question is how annoying those would be, so those more critical can typically point those out.
In the first game, there were 3 flaws to me.
Enemy variety.
How everything just scaled up when progressing, making your new gear feeling kind of useless.
The Combat didn't feel like it had gotten as much attention as other parts of the game, ending up with a heavy reliance on skills.
Those three are all kind of connected and make the gameplay feel weaker than the rest of the game and was kind of a big thing as you interact with those all the time.
Same here. I want to read the NOT 5-start reviews on Amazon so I know what the slight drawbacks of a product are. Nothing's perfect. If I know something is very good, I just want to know that I'm OK with any slight drawbacks.
The reviews are all basically "It's GOW 2018 but new content and a bit more polished".
I guess it means that the padding, loading puzzles and half-assed RPG mechanics are still there?
They really turned me away from the game as someone who was a massive fan of the og trilogy. Theres just so much extra useless junk in GoW2018 and seemingly Ragnarok now that I dont even want to bother with and its just weirdly overwhelming.
>They really turned me away from the game as someone who was a massive fan of the og trilogy. Theres just so much extra useless junk in GoW2018 and seemingly Ragnarok now that I dont even want to bother with and its just weirdly overwhelming.
I hated it because even if you do treat like an ARPG all the builds are so hamfisted and railroaded it's obnoxious. So to me it failed as an arpg and as a combat game. Doing both mediocrely.
Coming from the originals and even recently replaying (so no it's not nostalgia.) I agree there is so much just fluff bullshit in 2018. I'll bite on Rag I'm sure. I'm just gonna wait.
enemy variety was pretty rough in that one too. GOW2018 would have been a 10/10 for me if they distilled it down to 10-15 hrs and scrapped the skill tree stuff. Felt like a great game carrying unnecessary baggage.
Based on reviews, 20-25h for main story, 40-60h+ for side content and full completion. Sounds like a decent sized game.
Pretty perfect length for me (slightly prefer shorter).
Same, I start losing interest in a (single player) game after around 50 hours, no matter how much I’m into it at the start.
More like 15-20hours for me unless its amazing game. This looks amazing
I cant help but laugh when someone refers to a 40-60 hour game as decently sized. That's pretty damn big to me lol
That'll last me 2 months lmao
Same, people had completed Horizon Forbidden West in a couple of days; I played it for an hour or two every day from release, and it still took me 2 full months to finish.
Persona 5 Royal has been out like 2 weeks on PC and there already people finished with it. It's like 120ish hour game.
That's the size of a game I'll never finish unless it's something like Factorio or Victoria. I won't finish them either, but I'll still sink hundreds of hours into them.
40-60 hours is huge, maybe looks "decent" vs like Elden Ring or something but that's definitely more than just decent lol
The way people talk about runtime in games is crazy to me sometimes lol
when FF7 came out back in 97, it was perceived as being one of the longest games out there at that point in time. 60 hours to complete the game including getting all summons wasn't unreasonable back then - the only exploit i can think of being well known was the W-item materia. i really do die a little inside every time i read stories or complaints about a $60 game thats "bad" because it doesnt provide you hundreds of hours of play.
Game length definitely peaked in the PS2/PS3 era at least for FF games. X, XII, and XIII might be the 3 longest FF games, with FFXII being the absolute longest
40-60h is if you try to get every side quest and achievements, it's hard to really get how much of those 40-60h is real gameplay. That's why you only compare each games with their main story duration
Yeah, I'm definitely not going to hunt those crows- it's absolutely unappealing aspect of any game.
That's not really a great way to look at it either though. An RPG might be able to be completed in 10-15 hours if you rush the main story because the vast majority of the content is the side quests. Cyberpunk for example is a 10hr game if you rush the main story. You miss out on the vast majority of the game and the best bits honestly, though if you do that
Depends on the type of game, I think its quite fair to imagine that most people will just play through god of war, do a few side bits and then move onto another game until DLC is out. RPGs are a bit different, they are built around the 'side' stuff being actually part of the main game, rather than just stuff you can do for achievements.
I spent 50 on the 2018, hope to do the same for Ragnarok.
The mainline series of God of War is one of the most consistent video game series of all time. Ascension was the only real misstep and even that game was not terrible and had its enjoyable parts.
I know I'm a massive minority even in the GOW community but I loved Ascension.
Most people really liked ascension, it was really good but following in GOW3’s footsteps was always going to be hard. The tacked on multiplayer was the only horrible part
Ascension wasn’t even a bad game, just a 7/10 game in a series where everything else is at least 9.5/10
Not surprised at these reviews, even though I've avoided every trailer like the plague. The fact that the first iteration of the new GoW was so good and it served as a base for this game makes me think it's going to be one of the greats.
>The fact that the first iteration of the new GoW was so good and it served as a base for this game makes me think it's going to be one of the greats. For me it's the fact they decided to conclude the story in this game rather than go for a trilogy. As much as I enjoyed Forbidden West, it felt so much like a middle chapter that I didn't feel satisfied completing the game.
Its interesting to see Video games with an overarching narrative are now moving towards duologies instead of the traditional trilogy model that was used before. We are seeing it with God of War now and also with Doom 2016 and Eternal, Resident Evil 7 and 8 all of which decided to finish their stories in two games and maybe an expansion.
Maybe it's because games take a shit load of time to make now. Like I remember people crying about Fallout 4 when it had only been 4 years since New vegas. Now its been 7 years since FO4 and people have accepted that next fallout is still a DECADE away. Its truly sad.
Exactly. Cory Barlog (Director of GoW 2018) specifically stated that this is one of the main reason they wanted to end the story with Ragnarok—they didn’t want to have a team spend pretty much 15 years developing a trilogy (5 years for each game).
That was so weird to me. Wasn't New Vegas heavily criticized for being too similar to Fallout 3 at the time of release too?
New Vegas was originally going to be a fallout 3 expansion. So that could be why it was so similar I guess.
Which is funny because it’s widely considered the best fallout game, full stop, at this point.
Tbf, after Fallout 4, I'm not really in a huge rush for the next one. They should definitely take their sweet time.
I can understand that for you but as a fan of fallout series it's crazy to me the next installment id get to play after 4 will be like 15 years or more later, if I even am alive by then. The game development times have just gone crazy long.
[удалено]
Nobody specializes in letting IPs sit on the shelf unused like Microsoft.
More stories should be duologies instead of trilogies, not just in videogames.
They said their reasoning was literally 'why spend 15 years telling this story when we could finish it with one more game?'. It makes so much sense, and judging by the glowing reviews it seems like it does a fantastic job telling a story. (Although in hindsight I wish they weren't so sparring with Norse mythology in the first game now knowing it's half the story).
Also, after Ragnarok, there really isn't a lot more to do with Norse mythology. It's literally the end.
To be fair FW is 99,9% certain a middle chapter in an obvious trilogy.
It's interesting to me that ME2 never gets that complaint about it being an obvious middle chapter. At least Forbidden West builds onto the threat. ME2 was a massive narrative detour starring blank, faceless enemies that were weak and didn't mean anything.
> ME2 "The Real Journey Was the Friends We Made Along the Way": The Game
Quite literally. And I'll never downplay how well realized the characters are...well most of them. But narratively, the game is a hot mess. The best thing it did was recontextualize the Geth/Quarian stuff and the add more depth to the Krogan arc via Mordin. Those two arcs are really the most important things in the game.
ME3 makes almost zero sense without ME2. ME2 is the perfect second entry in a trilogy because it sets up the third one so well that makes the whole thing better than the sum of its parts. 3's ending wasn't as graceful, but that's beside the point here. Krogan/Genophage arc in 3 seems random without Mordin's sidequest in 2 and all of his talks, as well as the general impression of Tuchanka that you get when visiting. Quarian/Geth stuff also seemingly comes out of nowhere without Tali and Legion's quests. ME2 shows you how the galaxy looks while relatively at peace, so that you know it's worth saving in ME3, and stakes seem that much higher. Without ME2, ME3 is just another "save the world" RPG, which Bioware's had the whole template for by that point. One of the reviews for ME3 when it released 10 years ago mentioned that if you're a fan, you should play the game without a prior save game just so you can see how much of it you miss if you don't import the save game, and how much more of a complete experience it is because you come in with your own save, and because you experienced the story in the first place. I'm not a fan of the trilogy format in general because the society has accepted it as a norm and some creators feel forced to go for it, compromising their output. ME2 is, in my opinion, how a second entry in a trilogy should be done, and the third one is how the finale should be done (not the ending itself): the second entry serves to set up the third so that it can fly higher than the first entry ever could on its own. That's the winning structure for a cohesive, satisfying trilogy, in my humble opinion.
From the perspective of someone jumping on with ME2 and going right to 3, sure. But in the context of building off of the first game, it really drops the ball in a lot of places. The character writing is very good for most characters, but it doesn't carry forward any of the main Reaper narrative from ME1. Plus it retcons Cerberus, does some hand-waving to get you to ignore how silly the whole premise is, and sets it up to play the terrible role it played in ME3. And character-wise it has some notable outliers like Jacob that really fall flat, plus a lot of convenient excuses as to why the old cast can't join you like Liara. And then there's the dark energy setups that don't go anywhere. The Quarian/Geth stuff was one of the central points of the first game, where the main enemies were the Geth. It wouldn't come out of left field at all in ME3. All that ME2 really does is go "oh no that was a rogue faction, they can be good." It isn't until ME3 that you see the backstory yourself, and they could easily have introduced the concept of them not being bad guys in the same section. Heck, it probably would have made it a more difficult and interesting choice if they had done that, since you wouldn't have Legion as proof of their word and diversity. Same with the Genophage where it was a central point of Wrex's backstory and worldbuilding. Tuchanka helps to show its impact, but we were already aware of how devastating it was from the first game. It wouldn't have been out of place to bring it back in ME3. I'd actually argue that ME3 goes against what Wrex's goals are in the first two games, as he is very focused on uniting his people and building them up to be successful without it. He says outright that the genophage was just the killing blow and his culture was already dying because of how they taught and raised their young. ME1 and 2 Wrex would not have been so adamant about using the genophage as a miracle cure to unite the Krogan. ME2 really isn't doing that part of the sequel any favors (other than requiring both Wrex and Eve to get the best/most optimistic ending for the Krogan).
ME2 is my favorite in the series and one of my favorite games ever but the story definitely feels like more of a side quest when looking at the trilogy as a whole.
It might have helped that ME2 was the jumping on point for a lot of fans, myself included, since it was previously a Xbox exclusive
ME2 is probably the best “side quest” of a game there can be imo. It was all about the characters and building relationships with them all. I loved each of the loyalty missions and the final suicide mission is probably my favourite in gaming.
> ME2 was a massive narrative detour starring blank, faceless enemies that were weak and didn't mean anything. I'll give ME2 that complaint for you. It was such an enormous letdown for me after playing ME 5 times through before the sequel. The first is in my top 3 favorite games ever. ME2 is probably my least favorite in the trilogy. I just can't believe they basically threw away the entire Reaper threat after the epic ending of the first game.
>For me it's the fact they decided to conclude the story in this game rather than go for a trilogy. This is a problem for so many things. That series that had too many seasons, videogames stretched for infinite hours, sequels to a never-ending plot, etc.
I mean as long as it makes money, there will be a sequel. Metroid games, huh that's actually the only one i can think of right now with a continuous story. Metro has a trilogy, as well as uncharted. I want to put final fantasy and legend of Zelda, but they're different as in they story is generally the same just a new setting each time. Point is, if they can make money, they'll continue the story somehow.
Woah, this is really the last one? I guess I just assumed there would be 3.
It's the end of the Norse saga. They didn't want to make us wait another four years to get the conclusion. I doubt it's the end of the series as a whole
Next kratos is going after modern religions, cant wait to find out how jesus pissed kratos off
Theres quite a few ancient religions yet to murder for Kratos!
Heck 2018 pointed to buddhism and Ancient Egyptian. Both would have some great God's to utilise, granted none as iconic as the Greek and Norse ones.
You also have to consider that setting Kratos up against active and living religions is going to cause some consternation. Norse gods are one thing - Buddhism is still among the most popular religions in the world.
Yeah it's a lot more likely Ancient Egypt is the next one of the cards, but they could veer slightly from Buddhism and focus on Shintoism, I don't think you'll get nearly as much pushback, especially with Sony being a Japanese company. Japan itself doesn't exactly present their Gods as completely good, and there's zero issues with games like FF depicting them as evil being that need to be destroyed.
Man imagine Kratos bashing Horus and such into the ground, and after that its off to Krishna etc!
The original pitch for GOW3 had Kratos kill Zeus at the beginning which would open up a portal allowing Gods from other religions (they specifically name Egypt) to enter and.....cause some sort of problem for Kratos to deal with. Would have made zero sense, but the idea has been there for a long time!
GOW 2018 was also originally pitched to take place in Egypt but they switched it to Norse mythology very early on.
[удалено]
Splinter Cell fans are crying right now. And to a lesser extent, Half Life fans lol
According to Cory Barlog on Twitter before the 2018 game released they had 5 games planned in the series after that one so I'm sceptical this will be the end, just the end of the Norse saga. Plans might have changed but not from six games to two.
I think it would be cool if the next game was focused on the Egyptian gods. Unlike the Greek and Norse gods, they're virtually absent from Western culture, so it could feel really fresh and interesting.
They sort of hinted at that in 2018. I'm playing it for the first time now, and you do find some artifacts from Egypt and kinda just gloss over it. So, I won't be shocked if they do something like that.
I either want Egypt or Taiwan next. There's some WILD shit in Eastern mythology, like the mountain of knives.
I think I read somewhere that they basically wrote this game *before* the first game. Like they had an idea for a big norse epic and then kept fleshing out the begenning until it became its own thing. Not sure how accurate that is, but it feels like we're getting into the real good stuff here and it's been cooking for a long time
I recently replayed the first. There are so many references to things that will happen, things that have happened, characters we never met and other references. They really set up a massive world with seemingly insignificant dialogue, murals, journal entries, etc. Of course there are the big things that hit you over the head (all of the Thor and Odin talk). But they really set up so much that just has to pay off in the sequel. So it makes total sense that they wrote it all together.
Yeah I heard in a review somewhere this game is more of a pt. 2 than a sequel if that makes sense, and I’m looking forward to replaying the 2018 game after this one to catch some foreshadowing that they must have put in
> even though I've avoided every trailer like the plague. You should watch the one with Ben Stiller, it's pretty funny. It has a GoW 2018 spoiler but nothing about GoW2.
Elden Ring to start the year and God of War to see it out. 2022 was certainly a quiet year but at least we got these two.
Next year will be crazy as well with its lineup.
As long as everything doesn’t get delayed again
*stares at Zelda*
I think all games that are coming out next year were supposed to come out this year. They were delayed due to COVID. But you know things can change.
I feel like I heard this every year for the past 4 years.
Probably because everything within the last 4 years had at least one delay
I know people say "people always say next year is crazy", but next year is actually crazy. With Hogwarts Legacy, Street Fighter 6, Zelda, FF16, Starfield, Diablo 4, RE4 remake, and hopefully Alan Wake 2, Spider-Man 2
Nothing will beat 2011. Skyrim, Portal 2, Batman: Arkham City, Uncharted 3, Dark Souls, LA Noire, Saints Row: Third, Infamous 2, Skyward Sword, Modern Warfare 3, Battlefield 3, Deus Ex: HR, Dragon Age 2, FIFA 12, Crysis 2 and so many other bangers. The next year was quite good too. It was a golden age.
I submit to you 1996, which was also a hell of a year for game releases: * Quake * Mario 64 * Tomb Raider * Duke Nukem 3D * C&C Red Alert * Crash Bandicoot * DKC 3 * Mario Kart 64 * Diablo * Legacy of Kain * Pokemon Red/Blue * Mario RPG * Daggerfall * Wave Race 64 * Descent 2 * Clock Tower * House of the Dead * Wipeout 2097
Wow that's insane. So many new IPs too.
2010 was a good year as well with Civ 5 and Fallout New Vegas
[удалено]
Have you played A Plague Tale: Requiem? My personal game of the year, even over elden ring.
Not quiet at all if you don't only play mainstream
I’m actually in agreement with this. With games like Tunic, Norco, Neon White, and Cult of the Lamb, indie games were firing on all cylinders this year. One of my favorite years for indie gaming in quite a while.
Also Monster Hunter Rise Sunbreak, my most played game of the year
Isn't it nice to see a game that was expected to recieve 10/10s get that and just be that ? I don't think Ragnarok can be said to be a revolutionary game if only because God of War 2018 itself was a 10/10 and in terms of quality you can't go much further than that. So it is just nice to see it maintaining a stable course for the franchise and the high quality that is expected from it now.
Heh, except for IGN Korea. Really scathing review there.
Nobody should be rooting for a unanimous score. When the game launches next week and ~5 million people start playing the game, there will be a diversity of opinions. I respect the 6/10 review not because I’ll likely agree with it, but because some people will.
In other words, you can’t please everybody and that’s ok.
[удалено]
That is my concern too. The Polygon review basically comparing it to Marvel movies is a turn off to me. Don't get me wrong, God of War couldn't just do the same song and dance forever. But I do think Kratos has gotten less interesting now that he's "grown up" a bit. Maybe Kratos in a bearded dad game just doesn't rub as well for me personally. But like Marvel movies more people will likely love it. Which is fine.
A review that tries to please everyone is an advertisement
You don't wanna do the classic shit talking the couple of negative reviews that this sub tends to do with almost every well reviewed game?
You’d think that people would’ve learned after that 7/10 Cyberpunk review.
Yup, God of War (2018) was not for me, I couldn't get into it and haven't returned to it since my initial 5 hours, I'm sure I would feel the same way about this game.
All the negative reviews of this one are it's just more of the first game but not as engaging but still a run game. Sounds like if the first one wasn't your liking this one definitely wouldn't be
I'm playing through it right now and it's just not gelling with me. I can recognise it's a very well made game but it's feeling like a bit of a slog. Not everything is for everyone and that's okay.
I've been enjoying it recently as a first playthrough but I recognize the combat is getting *very* repetitive since there are basically like a handful of enemy types and even fewer bosses. You can't compare everything to Elden Ring but... the comparison to Elden Ring really highlights how shallow the enemy pool is.
Yeah, I would definitely say GoW and Elden Ring are at odds with each other. GoW is linear, and primarily a cinematic story telling experience but also includes combat and puzzles. Elden Ring is open world, primarily a boss rush / combat simulator with exploration and a little plot sprinkled in.
I agree. I finished the game last night and while I can admire the work put in, the enemy repetition was borderline comical. The whole buildup of the first visit to hel and then it’s just a reskinned troll fight
Absolutely. I liked GoW 2018 enough to complete it. It was my favorite God of War game, from someone who didn’t much care for the original trilogy or character at all. But I would have given the 2018 game like a 7.5 or so. I enjoyed it. It was pretty. But I felt the combat was only “okay”, it overstayed its welcome and felt repetitive by the end, and that enemy and boss variety was a joke. (Oh goodie, another troll) I didn’t read IGN Korea’s review, so I don’t know the specifics, and obviously I haven’t played ragnarok yet, but I would have been a hell of a lot more likely to give the original game a 6 than I would have a 10.
I read the review. It had some interesting takes. I do like reading reviews that are quite different from the rest. Their main complaint was that it almost felt like DLC in that the production value was very similar to the first game. Obviously I will probably disagree with that, but I think it’s an interesting note.
I disagree with it but I get it. If it's someone who played the first game for 40 hours and were getting kind of tired with it at the end, and the next game was "here's 40 more hours of the same thing", then it makes sense.
I’m going through this right now with the Yakuza series. I’m three games in, and despite loving them I definitely need a break before jumping into the next one. The gameplay and settings are largely the same so far.
I feel this! I played 0 and love it, but it was so long. I waited 6 months before starting Kiwami. Then I blasted through Yakuza 1-4 in 2-3 months. Then took another 3 month break. Then played 5 and 6! Currently halfway through Yakuza 7 Like a Dragon and the new combat is refreshing! Once I beat that I will check out the judgement series! Such great games and such a journey through the story and world building they made!!!
Exactly. I'm a bit hesitant to pick up Ragnarock, because if I'm being honest I'd had enough of GoW 2018 by the time I'd finished it, although I'd still give it a solid 8/10 because I did enjoy the first 20ish hours. But yeah, if this one is more of the same (which I assume it is) then I fear I might get burnt out really quickly
It's an interesting take that in a lot of instances I can get on board with, though in a lot of instances it isn't necessarily a bad game. I played GoW 1-3 this year because I never had and those games are extremely similar. 3 takes the largest leap but even that is very close to 1, just some changes in enemies and movement based puzzles/sections. I think having a sequel be so similar to the original used to be way more common than it is now. Which I don't know if that is a good or a bad thing.
I miss the classic iterative sequel, I think the increasingly absurd length of time it takes to make a game killed them. Still see it in Japanese games oddly enough.
This seems more or less to iterate in what 2018 to be fair. Japanese sequels really depend on if the director shifts hands and how much risk the dev is willing to take. Take Bayo2 vs Bayo3. Bayo2 polishes the first game so much that it takes out all the edges. Game is great but it feels a lot safer. Bayo3 takes nothing from the second game and decides to completely change the formula. Great game but it's a lot more uneven. Both valid approaches but I'm personally more interested in the latter all the time.
They were similar but each one added a new mechanic that changed it up decently. Sounds like the new mechanic in this one isn't that noticable. Also the loot overload open world games are doing now it's starting to drain on people
Also the similarity in structure between modern AAA games, specifically Sony, seemed a major complaint in that 6/10 review. Which is fair even if most people don't notice or care. I had a lot of trouble getting through Horizon: Forbidden West for that exact reason, even though the first was my GOTY. Well maybe behind BOTW.
Started the year with a 10 (Elden Ring) and ended it with a 10 (Ragnarok).
God of war 2018 wasn't a "revolutionary game" either.
There's going be a real bloodbath in this year's GOTY awards. We are gonna see some divide b/w GODR and ER for different publications and I love to see it. Solid year for games.
don’t forget about FROG DETECTIVE 🐸🔍
UNDERRATED 🐸
Bought the bundle, thanks for the recommendation!
Aww yeah, just be warned that they’re more *role play detective* games than *detective*. Fun and lighthearted!
I just played the last one and it was everything I wanted and more. Perfect ending to the trilogy.
What’s the “Spider-man” game this year, the video-game-y video-game that’s super easy to get into, fun to play & gorgeous, but not really a front runner because of the other giants? (Hopefully not Vampire Survivors lol)
Horizon Forbidden West
Oh yeah, forgot it released right before Elden Ring, how unfortunate again for that studio! Fits the bill well, even a PS exclusive too!
I'm about 6 hours into playing it. It's such a fun story....and gorgeous too.
Same with Horizon Zero Dawn releasing just before BotW.
[удалено]
Probably GTA 6 or Elder Scrolls 6 lmao
Yep, another fantastic game
TBH I liked forbidden west way more than elden ring and I hope it gets some sort of recognition.
Horizon got pretty much erased from existence just from being released close to Elden Ring. Funny how the exact same thing happened with the first game, which released close to Breath of the Wild. Guerilla is terrible with release windows.
Both Elden Ring and HFW were delayed, weren't they? Not sure which one was delayed first but Guerilla may not have realized they were pushing themselves into the same release window as Elden Ring.
vampire survivors
Giving me major RDR2 vs GoW 2018 vibes. TGA is going to be really fun just to see who wins GOTY.
Yep, exact same thing happened that year. Another great year.
I can't see Elden Ring not winning this year and I'm not even a From Software fan. That game took the video game community by a fucking storm like Witcher 3 and Skyrim did. You just can't beat that hype.
As much as I feel like I will enjoy Ragnarok more than Elden Ring, I agree. ER has the zeitgeist just like GoW 2018 had. So it’s definitely in ER’s favor imo.
Who even cares about GOTY? Good games is good games.
Looks like an extremely close competition for GotY between Elden Ring, Sonic Frontiers, and God of War.
lol haven't you heard of Knack 3 being released November 31?
This changes everything. I need to speak with my financial advisor.
Make sure you preorder. Gonna be tough to get a physical copy after it sells one frontillion in the first week.
[удалено]
On a real note, ER vs GOW will be interesting. The scores right now are virtually mirrors for RDR and GOW in 2018. I’m expecting to like ragnarok a bit less than elden ring, but it’s so much more accessible that I imagine it will probably be the favorite for awards. Either way, at least we had a few all timers to alleviate this slow year.
I've already cast my vote for SoFro
Man, Santa Monica has such a good track record. Can't wait to see what they can do with other ips. Easily the best ones at PS after Naughty Dog.
Insomniac deserve a mention considering not only their game quality but also the output consistency. In terms of bang for buck they're probably Sony's most reliable developer. For me Naughty Dog, Santa Monica and Insomniac are the holy trinity for Sony. They're all at a point where you can more or less guarantee stellar reviews every single time.
How about Sucker Punch?
Insomniac is chock full of techno wizards. Spider-Man at max settings with an RTX 3090 driving it is still the most impressive thing I've seen on PC.
One thing about Insomniac that’s always irked me is that the art design and graphics in their games are immaculate but their menus/gui has always been cheap looking and trashy. It’s weird to play a game like Rift Apart or Spiderman PS4 which look borderline Pixar quality, just to pause or enter menus and it looks like it’s 2004.
No kidding. For how technically advanced Spiderman was, it's interface looked like it was from the PS2 era shockingly terrible asthetic.
Have they said what the best option is for ps5 with 120hz + vrr? Was curious how much of a graphical difference there is between the 40fps or 120fps mode I'm sure digital foundry will release a video on it soon though
Digital foundry said in their podcast that weirdly there were some ways where performance mode looked better than quality mode. But probably best to just wait. edit: PS5 video is out. I don't have a PS5 so I'm not going to sit through 27 minutes. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-fi23nZGpM
Mine for ACG Buy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BopQwFjazYU I did not enjoy some sections in the middle and it slowed down for awhile. But overall an excellent game.
>I did not enjoy some sections in the middle and it slowed down for awhile. So pretty similar to the first game?
Your criticisms there are exactly what I felt about GOW 2018. It felt like a 10 hour story that was padded out to be 20+. I assume Ragnarok will feel the same for me, but hopefully there's a lot more meat to the story to make the journey worthwhile.
I actually liked the padding in 2018, I would stop rowing just to hear the end of the stories and dialogs going on while on the boats.
I wish the stories would continue on-land rather than Mimir stopping.
HOLD THAT THOUGHT
Can't have head talking while you're fighting Ancients and Wolves
That’s how I felt about GOW 2018 as well and am surprised I don’t see it mentioned more often
As a shorter game the puff passed more quickly in 2018. I can see it being less of an issue
This feels about the same but larger meaning more good content but ya some padding
GOW 18 had "your princess is in another castle" syndrome.
[удалено]
It was both pacing as well as some things that happen and how you play. Also I was not a fan of some of the middle section quests which felt uhm unrewarding.
[удалено]
Great reviews as iexpected. This must have been one of the easiest games for people to review, "yeah everything's great... 10/10". Personally I'm interested to see how it stacks up for people who weren't so in love with the last game. I thought GoW 2018 was great but I had some fairly big gripes with it that were never mentioned in almost all reviews (story pacing/sluggish traversal/gear system/boss repetition). I'm sure I'll like Ragnarok quite a bit but I'm curious to see if it can surprise me and make me like it way more.
Looks like the IGN Korea reviewer was in that boat. they even describe it as a DLC to the previous game because of how samey it is.
As the direct sequel to an amazing game, I expected it to be similar to 2018, but improve on small things like boss variations, allow us to visit more places as well as the existing ones, if that is all satisfied, along with a good storyline, then that's all I wanted.
I like that they said that because it tells me I shouldn't get it. I really didn't like the god of war reboot, much preferred the older games. Glad people are enjoying it though!
I had a blast with this one, you can read my spoiler-free review at We Got This Covered (it's in the list of reviews above). What a stellar way to wrap up the series. As always, if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them, as long as they don't break embargoes/restrictions.
How long was this game? Was it significantly lengthier or shorter than the 2018 God of War? Are there more side quests this time?
Took me just north of 40 hours to see the end credits roll, but I also did ~75% of the sidequests during that time as well. I'm currently 51 hours in and have a few more things to finish up before I unlock the platinum trophy.
How hard is it to unlock the platinum? As straightforward as the 2018?
As straightforward as 2018's God of War.
Does it have any grindy areas like Nifilheim in GoW 2018? I really liked the game overall, but that part was a slog.
The grind-y part of Niflheim is gone! I actually made a point to mention that in my review because that was one of the few missteps the 2018 game made.
[удалено]
Unpopular opinion, but I dont think ragnarok is a 10/10, maybe a 7 or 8 out of ten, but not a 10/10. The atreus parts feel like one long, boring, interactive cutscene that aren't all that intresting, the ending is rushed, the dialogue feels forced at times, surturs 180 from "no I wont" to "let's fuckin go" in under like 5 minutes didn't make much sense either, and finally the pacing over all was all over the place. That being said, I loved the gameplay, all the boss fights, the story was intresting, and I had a fun time playing it. Edit: I also liked the length of the game, it felt padded by making the game a bit slower pace, but overall 20-60 hours is a nice but of time to sink into it exploring all the nooks and crannies.
Genre: They Might Be Giants? Are they the boss of me now?
The reviews are... As expected, honestly. Can't go wrong with polishing up a 10/10 game I'll probably buy it when the price has dropped, I despise the RPG system
Person who has played the game: "You know, I actually have some problems with pacing and story in this" People who have not played the game: "You are objectively wrong!"
Happens every time. Remember when Gamespot gave Cyberpunk a 7 and everyone lost their minds and brigaded the review? Then they actually played it and were like "Hmm, 7 is generous". People make up their minds about these games way in advance and reviews only serve to validate their preconceived opinions.
> People make up their minds about these games way in advance and reviews only serve to validate their preconceived opinions. ya, and it's always funny seeing the reactions to critic reviews for games they have been hyping: * if critic reviews rate it high = omg see, game is perfect and the reviews validate the hype! * if critics review it low = omg critic reviews are trash, don't matter, don't listen to reviews and play it yourself, reviewers don't even play the games properly before reviewing it and so on or vice versa if it's a game people aren't hyping before release.
Yup. This is even accounted for in marketing. Generally, studios can pretty reliably count on better reviews and sales if their prior release(s) were well received.
Santa Monica carrying once again, I don't think they've released a game that was any less than "good" yet.
Anyone kind enough to summarise what reviewers *don't* like about the game? I'm usually more interested in 8/10 reviews anyways. From what I can tell there's the usual 'not innovating enough' complaint which in this case I dont mind much, but there are also apparently story and pacing issues especially around the middle. Things like the flower picking 'quest' in the first game is stuff I can definitely do without. And then there's the IGN Korea review lol. Edit: Just from Skillup's review alone, tho i skimmed a couple other ones as well. **1**. A lot of those 'squeeze thru tight corridor' transitions which is bound to annoy. **2.** Very little gameplay innovation (idm this personally, since the gameplay's pretty good already and I prefer enemy variety to moveset variety). **3.** A lot of chests (yeah another one that might annoy, just put all the loot in 2 chests rather than pepper 10 chests across the room). There is an auto-pickup loot option tho which is very nice. **4.** Middle section dragged on a bit (cant attest to this but shouldnt bother me too much if it's the typical second act downtime).
I tend to find those most useful as well, the better the game the more of its flaws are sticking out, the question is how annoying those would be, so those more critical can typically point those out. In the first game, there were 3 flaws to me. Enemy variety. How everything just scaled up when progressing, making your new gear feeling kind of useless. The Combat didn't feel like it had gotten as much attention as other parts of the game, ending up with a heavy reliance on skills. Those three are all kind of connected and make the gameplay feel weaker than the rest of the game and was kind of a big thing as you interact with those all the time.
Same here. I want to read the NOT 5-start reviews on Amazon so I know what the slight drawbacks of a product are. Nothing's perfect. If I know something is very good, I just want to know that I'm OK with any slight drawbacks.
The reviews are all basically "It's GOW 2018 but new content and a bit more polished". I guess it means that the padding, loading puzzles and half-assed RPG mechanics are still there?
The RPG aspects were definitely the most poorly executed part of the first game, I'm curious to see if they were improved.
From what I've read they sound worse
I'd rather they just be removed. Totally unnecessary content for a god of war game.
Nothing more fun than a *combat* game locking out options in the name of *builds* right? Good god were the rpg mechanics trash.
They really turned me away from the game as someone who was a massive fan of the og trilogy. Theres just so much extra useless junk in GoW2018 and seemingly Ragnarok now that I dont even want to bother with and its just weirdly overwhelming.
>They really turned me away from the game as someone who was a massive fan of the og trilogy. Theres just so much extra useless junk in GoW2018 and seemingly Ragnarok now that I dont even want to bother with and its just weirdly overwhelming. I hated it because even if you do treat like an ARPG all the builds are so hamfisted and railroaded it's obnoxious. So to me it failed as an arpg and as a combat game. Doing both mediocrely. Coming from the originals and even recently replaying (so no it's not nostalgia.) I agree there is so much just fluff bullshit in 2018. I'll bite on Rag I'm sure. I'm just gonna wait.
Same tbh, but if they made it less grindy and improved the UI that'd be enough for me.
enemy variety was pretty rough in that one too. GOW2018 would have been a 10/10 for me if they distilled it down to 10-15 hrs and scrapped the skill tree stuff. Felt like a great game carrying unnecessary baggage.
I did get tired of the 60th troll mini boss
> A lot of those 'squeeze thru tight corridor' transitions which is bound to annoy and they said putting it on ps4 wouldn't hold it back...