MicHaeL

I don't think mouse-control for 3rd-person games is ideal at all. - This coming from someone who was always on PC since the '90s and forced everything to work with keys and mouse, until I just gave up with the stubbornness and realized many games are just designed to work with a gamepad since they're usually developed for consoles. - And for quite some years now I've actually hoped a game would work best on a gamepad, as it's just much more comfortable, and leave keys and mouse for the fast shooters or strategy and management games. - Sure, the aiming is often "jank", but for a lot of these games it's simplified enough, often with lock-on mechanics, that it (precision) doesn't matter.

Just saying, the "Switch 2 mouse-functionality" argument is pointless for a game like this, in my view. - Also, using that thing as a mouse seems downright awful, especially for big games like this. - Using it for a mini-game type segment, OK, but for hours on end, exploring open worlds and such... Yea, no.

The "multiverse" has just been used as an excuse for nostalgia-bait. Sure, in one way it's an interesting concept, doing all those cross-overs, which people geek out about (a bit too hard, in my opinion), but once they found the idea of "what if we just bring the old actors back", which sure is clever, it's obviously to reach a greater audience and just sell more tickets, not to tell a good story.

And again, I think fans were way too giddy about the idea of "bringing everyone together". I much rather have a story focused on like "singular" versions of characters, not messing around with all these goofy encounters of "You're me from another dimension??" And whatever. It's interesting on paper, but depicting that in like a "real life" kind of setting just makes it weird. - That's also why I already lost interest as soon as they tried "The Avengers" for the first time, to be honest... I just doesn't really work for me, it's too goofy. - I get Iron Man on his own, kinda like Spider-Man or Batman on their own, even Hulk as this tragic science-casualty and similarly with the Fantastic Four in that sense. I also really liked Ant-Man's own movie. - But all this multi-verse and inter-dimensional nonsense... Sorry, not for me.

Besides, it's all for kids now. I felt embarrassed catching myself in my twenties sitting in a theater watching 'Iron Man 3' with little kids down the row. I was like "something is not right here". - I will stick to Daredevil and The Batman. Hopefully "Blade" will have the right tone.

These movies explode on streaming because people didn't deem it worth going to a theater for and then jump on it on a streaming-platform out of curiosity, especially if it was considered bad. - I would like to see the statistics on retention, like how far into it people even get or whether they just skip through it. Cause people don't have the attention-span or patience anymore to begin with, let alone for something that's mediocre at best. Although, of course plenty of people just sit through it regardless for some shallow entertainment. (Not that "Uncharted" is "deep", but it has heart.)

This was just another Sony-production that didn't need to exist. I don't even think the "Last of Us"-show by HBO should exist, but that's out of principle. - Sony needs to stop making these Temu-level productions of which you can tell from the trailer are bad. It's like those "not Venom" flicks, which are just so halfassed in terms of capturing the essence of the source-material and basically "in name only".

And as for "Uncharted", which I love, it was a case of too little too late anyway. They missed their opportunity to just go with the likes of Nathan Fillion back in the day (who I know they probably didn't see enough "star-power" in to bet big money on), before that fan-made short even happened and some other fan-casting ideas that were pretty good. He could even work today, even though he's older, he's also slimmed down again after being quite chonk for a while, and the physicality for the action might still not be a problem. - Even the original actress for Elena could have worked for Elena.

Also getting Greg Edmonson for the soundtrack would've been perfect, also in a weird nerdy nod to 'Firefly'. But they would sooner go with Henry Jackman who did the fourth game.

None of that is going to happen of course. Supposedly they're working on a sequel since 2024 and it's either going to happen or get canceled like that "not Tomb Raider" flick, which is on that same kind of level

What Steam should actually do is make estimates of Early Access time binding (with some margin for error). - This guy has been "working on" his Game Maker style game since like 2016/2017 or so. - I get that making creative stuff just takes time, but he has clearly used it as a vehicle to be the "inspirational" streamer, cause he knows there's more money in that. - It's an example of how people exploit Early Access and almost nobody talks about this. - The only reason he gets away with it is, first of all, because "he's a small developer", but also because he, again, pretends to work on it, so it seems legitimate. - It just reminds me of that 'Family Guy' bit where Stewie asks Brain "How's that book you've been working on, hmmm??". - It's not going anywhere.

I don't get it (his popularity). - But while he's likely a millionaire, does he keep dressing like a bum to appear as if he's poor (and sit in some attic like he still lives with his parents) so that people who don't know any better will go "awh, he look so sad, I'll donate some money to this poor streamer" or what?...

I mean like, guy is 35 years old, get out once in a while, at least to a barber. But I guess these dudes are actual sweaty no-lifers and probably want to retire early to do nothing at all, or everything.

Man, this game is only going to be ready in like 4 years from now. - I really like the first game and all, but I feel like I made a mistake jumping in before "1.0", because it took away all the intrigue by the time that version arrived. I really stopped caring. - Early Access, while sometimes a necessity for ambitious projects, which helps for player-experience as well, is detrimental to this type of game that's about the experience of a world, at least if you participate. So I don't anymore, at least rarely, and it disappointed me that the initial announcement for this one was for Early Access with the plan to keep working on it for years. - The Steam Early Access notes even say 2-3 years, which I will consider to become 4 years, which is another stage of my life. - I'll see it when it's done and I don't really care what happens behind the scenes until then. This game does not exist to me until it's just a whole product.

F'in WHO??...

And WHO cares??...

Oh, some dude playing games live or something?... Isn't this "THE BEST WAR GAMES" and not "PERSON WHO PLAYS GAMES RANT"?... - Or is it "GAMER ANT"?...

And I see he was talking politics. Sooo... He's a political commentator?... And you're covering this because... It's on a "gaming platform"?... What's the deal??... Who cares???...

I hope they will have fleshed out vehicles and driving. I mean, it's "Grand Theft AUTO", not "Grand Theft Gunplay" or "Grand Theft Cutscene". - But I suppose "Grand Theft Auto" turned into "GTA" (as a thing or brand on its own), just like "Call of Duty" became "CoD" and "Need For Speed" became "NFS". - Just shells of their original essence.

^ There will definitely be technical issues. - They had even expanded the support for "Valhalla" to a so-called extra year, making it two years of post-launch support, rather than the supposed one. - While they also worked on features and expansions, it really NEEDED it.

It might be a little different for "Shadows". Then again, considering they had already delayed it, it might still not be completely sound. - I really think they won't be done polishing it for quite a while after release. - I've also ordered it (for the statue and such), but I think I will hold out until late-Spring early-Summer for playing it.

I have it installed here and it's nearly 171GB, actually. - People keep referring to "CoD" with its 100GB or whatever, but nobody talks about "AC"-games. XD

But it did indeed start at well under 100, perhaps not as little as 50, though it might have been, perhaps like 55. I don't remember. - But it quickly bloated to like 75 and on to 100-125, all the way to 170, probably because of "Ragnarok" and such expansions.

Another one of those "Who tf is this??" Castings and adaptations.

Also: "in the video game, Abby needed to look like that because her gameplay had to differ from Ellie’s. Abby’s mechanics were closer to Joel’s, and this was essential to justify her strength and fighting style."

So they adapted the character to what the character was doing in the world/story of the game, yet it won't be the same in the show, so the character won't be doing the same things (or she'd have to be built the same according to the logic of how they developed the character for the game), and thus not be the same character, is what I can make from this.

In the end, the show doesn't matter, the games, which are the originals, do. - I my view, it's just as pointless as the "Uncharted" movie

It's not really about "Warner" in general, it really depends on what Warner asks which studio to do. - For example, as you probably know, the "Suicide Squad" game was forced to be a "live service" rather than just a story-driven game from the studio that did the "Batman Arkham" games. - In this case, it's Monolith, who did stuff like the FEAR, Condemned, and more significantly the Middle-Earth games, which were all pretty much successful (though they had some lesser titles here and there).

Monolith also has the right to use the Nemesis-system that people love from the Middle-Earth games, which could be used for this Wonder Woman game as well.

In any case, it's a matter of Warner, the higher-ups that is, letting the studio just make a videogameass videogame, and not force it into something to just squeeze money out of people. It's unlikely it would be a live-service, even if they might have wanted it like with the "Suicide Squad" game, especially now it backfired so hard on them they might not like the idea of it happening again. - But also because it's Monolith, even though they also got Rocksteady to do something they shouldn't, I feel like it might be much more along the lines of the Middle-Earth games, which were a while ago and they might want another one like that.