Bruce

MindsEye trailers promised something new. Turns out--so far--trailers were the only good thing. Trailers made by another studio? The game has admirable production values. However, as you say, the gameplay is 100% 20 years old. This makes me wonder if anyone had any passion to do anything new at all. If not--that's a bad sign.

Devs, I have two comments. One, WE HAVE TO SEE SCRATCH'S FACE IN THE NEXT, TRAILER. This is really crucial. Second, the camera is TOO FAR OUT, pulled back too far too much of the time. Look at the Crash Bandicoot to see the limits of how small the playable character can be. The Crash game by Bob's Toys may be the best guide of all.

"Too sterile" is a useful description. When Skyrim came out, we were all excited; the level of realism in a playable game was new. In 2024-'25, the Skyrim level of realism is obnoxiously sterile compared Uncharted 4 and UE5 games. Starfield felt like playing a game from 20 years ago without upping the charm to make the sterility bearable.

I have the same response to Obsidian's Avowed (2025) especially the very first trailer which really felt like gameplay and color palette from 20 years ago.

How about Dragon Age: Veilguard? While I bought it new and like it, compared to Baldur's Gate 3, I believe it too is like playing a game from 20 years ago in too many ways for too many players.

While Starfield is new IP, I think the games I criticize above all suffer from mid-career laziness; and, lack of any passionate vision.

For solutions to the criticisms above see the Feb and March 2025 Gamemakers podcasts by Joseph Kim.

My opinion is all three of the latest TR Square-Enix-Crystal trilogy are among the top ten videogames ever made anywhere.

I do also like the very first two games. They have a completely different appeal.

Between the earliest games and the Square-Enix-Crystal trilogy, game quality was erratic at best. Add alike if you agree:)