Daweii

97/100 on Metacritic based on 37 reviews of the PS5 version.

97/100 on Opencritic based on 95 reviews of all versions.

It is harder to get a high score on Opencritic as they lump all platforms in as one. The game has to be good and fully playable on all platforms or the aggregate score will be damaged by those other platforms. It keeps developers in check, if they want a high score they need to treat all platforms with respect which is good. A 97 on Opencritic makes it one of the greatest games ever made. 

I can't wait to dive in. I was sold 100% after the network test, I just want to throw hundreds of hours at the full game now. 

I was expecting more changes, but Gerrard sees them every day in training so I trust his selection here. 

I am glad to see Watkins dropped though. He's a good player, he just needs to find that fight and ambition that got him to this club in the first place. Hopefully the shock of being benched is the catalyst for that.  

11 minutes ago, villa4europe said:

Forbidden West review embargo is up today, getting mostly 9s with a few 8s

A lot of the more impartial reviews describe a game that improves on Zero Dawn in some aspects, is worse in other aspects and leaves a lot of things unchanged.

Based on the reviews I've read it seems like a solid 8/10 game which is good. 

5 minutes ago, BleedClaretAndBlue said:

He’s so good that when he concedes 3 times and plays distinctly average like he did against Leeds, it comes as a big shock to me. Back to normal today hopefully.

Back to normal for a lot of our players hopefully.

Martinez didn't play great against Leeds, but he definitely wasn't helped by Konsa, Mings and Luiz who are his main line of defence.

That Leeds game was just bad all round outside of Buendia, Coutinho and Ramsey bossing it in attack.

Currently playing Sifu. It's as brilliant as it is difficult and it's very very difficult.

That half told me that Ramsey is smart enough to be on the same wavelength as Coutinho, but Watkins isn't and may never be.

I'm struggling to see what Watkins offers while he's playing like this. He's making terrible runs that no one wants to pick out, he's lazy off the ball and his only saving grace is he makes space, which is great but I'd prefer him to play smarter. 

If someone watched us for the first time and I asked them who our striker was they'd say it was Ramsey. Watkins has been invisible for months now. 

1 minute ago, LondonLax said:

This thread is sounding way too cocky for my liking

We're gonna win 6-0 

Bloodborne PSX was a ton of fun.

I can't say too much about it because the creator changed a lot. Some of the changes were to keep it PS1 accurate, while other changes were the creators own creative liberty at play.

That said I am thankful for the changes because if this was a 1:1 recreation just in PS1 visuals I'd have finished it in 30 minutes. Instead because of the changes, the new areas and more it took about 4 hours to see everything. 

I fully advise that people download this if you have a chance. 

Link to the download if anyone is interested; BloodbornePSX by LWMedia (itch.io)

Quote

PlayStation: Bungie deal is about multiplatform, live-service games
Sony Interactive Entertainment head Jim Ryan says we should expect more acquisitions

PlayStation's acquisition of Bungie may not result in exclusive PS5 games, but it will allow the platform holder to significant accelerate its ability to make online, live-service games across different platforms.

In an interview with GamesIndustry.biz, Sony Interactive Entertainment CEO Jim Ryan says that Destiny 2 and future Bungie games will continue to be published on other platforms, including rival consoles. The advantages Bungie offers Sony is in its ability to make huge, multiplatform, live-service online games, which is something the wider organisation is eager to learn from.

"The first thing to say unequivocally is that Bungie will stay an independent, multiplatform studio and publisher. Pete [Parsons, CEO] and I have spoken about many things over recent months, and this was one of the first, and actually easiest and most straightforward, conclusions we reached together. Everybody wants the extremely large Destiny 2 community, whatever platform they're on, to be able to continue to enjoy their Destiny 2 experiences. And that approach will apply to future Bungie releases. That is unequivocal...

More at the source; PlayStation: Bungie deal is about multiplatform, live-service games | GamesIndustry.biz

I am curious to see how this goes. In the end it increases their revenue so Sony will benefit in that regard. I certainly didn't have Sony buying Bungie and keeping them multiplatform on my bingo card for this year. 

2 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Sony have bought Bungie. $3.6bn.

A lot of money given Sony are allowing Bungie to remain a multiplatform studio. 

I'm not advocating for exclusives, I think consolidation hurts more people than it pleases when we're talking studios that made multiplatform games in the past, but $3.6 billion just to uphold the status quo is a lot of money. 

I'm curious what Sony stand to benefit from this. 

PS. Posting the tweets that confirm Bungie's remaining multiplatform status. 

Can we sign someone please, I'm bored. 

Just now, Keyblade said:

Alison red reduced to yellow so Coutinho now off

Given how dirty this game has been so far, that might be for the best. Coutinho getting minutes on the pitch doesn't mean much if a player from Ecuador puts him out of action for 3 months. 

What the **** is going on in this match?!? 

Chambers has also played as a DM at stages in his career.

People may not rate him much as the last line of defence, but a mildly decent CB might be a decent option at DM if Bentancur doesn't happen.

It would also free up Luiz to play further up the pitch while we wait for Nakamba to return from injury. 

I don't know enough about this player to say much. I'm just happy to see Villa in the market for players from clubs like Barcelona and Juventus. He might wind up being shit, but just a few seasons ago we were in the Championship and in need of a god run of wins to even make the Playoffs. Our rise has been meteoric and it's hard to believe sometimes. 

1 hour ago, Ingram85 said:

No TES VI anytime soon then, still in pre production according to reports. I reckon it won’t be out until 2025/26.

Skyrim was out tail end of 2011. Which would put 15 years or so between releases. We’ve had 10 Zelda games since Skyrim released. 

 

Todd Howard has talked about the development process at Bethesda in the past.

They don't start full production until the current project has shipped, while full production takes about 24 months. So we're probably looking at a 12/12/24 release date for Elder Scrolls 6. 

Starfield is an outlier in this sense because Bethesda had to redevelop Creation Engine from scratch to facilitate space flight and whatever else. Elder Scrolls 6 won't need to do that which means its time in full development will likely be their standard 24 months. 

24 years old? I was told the transfer policy had changed to signing old players that are past it like Digne... I don't know what to believe anymore. 

Everton didn't allow us to play how we wanted to play.

It was a gritty game and we overcame a side that were boosted by the loss of Rafa.

Many of us expected this to be a hard game, it was a hard game, but we won.

Lets set our sights to Leeds now. 

1 hour ago, hogso said:

If game pass was on PlayStation, the only point in having an xbox would be backwards compatibility for physical copies of legacy xbox games, right? Playstation owners would be the big winners there. 

PlayStation gamers would be the big winners depending what Game Pass on PlayStation looks like.

Game Pass on PC, Xbox and Cloud has parity for the most part outside certain games that are Xbox only, or PC only. That said this parity is due to Xbox and Windows both being Microsoft platforms.

We don't know what Game Pass looks like on PlayStation. Do they get all Xbox games? Do they get them on a delay? Do they only get the likes of Call of Duty and Elder Scrolls 6, with the rest remaining Xbox exclusive? There are so many questions and I am sure Microsoft don't even know the answer to them currently. 

That said, I think Game Pass is being used to keep games exclusive. Sony are unlikely to let Game Pass onto PlayStation which means Microsoft's "desire" to keep Call of Duty on PlayStation will likely fall through as planned.

I read it the same way @PieFacE 

Phil Spencer did a similar thing with the Bethesda deal. He was very open about honoring the Deathloop/Ghostwire timed exclusivity agreements, but the moment the acquisition closed he immediately cleared up the rest. If I recall it was something to the effect of, "All future games from Zenimax and Bethesda will only be playable on platforms with Game Pass". 

I feel he's doing the same thing here. He tried to use Elder Scrolls as leverage to get Game Pass on PlayStation, but Sony weren't taking the bait. This is him trying again with an even bigger franchise. 

Microsoft will likely see any losses from making Call of Duty exclusive as marketing costs for Game Pass.

They did the same cost-benefit analysis with Bethesda, which is why all future Bethesda games once Ghostwire Tokyo launches will never be on PlayStation again. 

I mean Skyrim sold over 30 million units and while near enough 50% of those were on PC, there is a decent percentage of the remaining 50% that were on PlayStation, but Microsoft are banking on people buying Xbox's, or buying Game Pass for their PC to play Elder Scrolls 6.

That said Warzone is going nowhere. Microsoft have been very clear that games which already exist and are live on other platforms will not be pulled. ESO, Fallout 76, Warzone and anything else like that will remain on PlayStation. 

Where PlayStation is likely going to feel the hurt once the deal closes, and marketing deals end on certain games is the lack of mainline Call of Duty, Crash Bandicoot, Spyro The Dragon, Diablo 4 and Overwatch 2 etc. I think all of those will become exclusive. Microsoft are not paying $68.7 billion to keep the status quo. 

Ultimately I don't think much changes for Sony/PlayStation though. Yes, if Call of Duty goes exclusive which is a very real possibility, then they will have to cope with their revenue being quite a bit lower for a while, but Microsoft owning Bethesda and Activision Blizzard isn't enough to tank PlayStation. There is still Capcom, Square Enix, Ubisoft, EA, Sega, Take-Two and Bandai Namco to pick up the slack. There are plenty of AAA publishers left to keep PlayStation gamers satiated in between the big AAA blockbusters from PlayStation Studios. The concern ultimately is that Microsoft will go on to buy more AAA publishers, especially given how relaxed the FTC are with regards to mergers and acquisitions.

16 hours ago, phily85 said:

I dont really follow the industry, are they going to be able to keep the prices the same with gamepass .

with these huge outlays are they really going to be able to keep it at this value?

I think the prices will stay the same as Game Pass is in the growth phase of its life and you hinder growth with price increases. 

Also Microsoft are making $15 billion profit every quarter so they are happy to be supporting its growth financially. The end goal for Game Pass is to be the Netflix of gaming with 150+ million subs to play the latest and greatest games on day one. 

I think the price will stay the same, and I think Microsoft will continue to buy studios. I have a feeling that the Hitman devs, IO Interactive are on their radar and I wouldn't be surprised if Microsoft scoop up another publisher, maybe Ubisoft, but Microsoft are going to continue to drive value while not raising the cost. If we see price increases it'll likely be when Game Pass is at 100+ million subs, which won't be for a while yet I imagine. Game Pass just hit 25 million subs which is impressive, it's faster growth than I think Microsoft were expecting, but unless that growth is exponential then it's gonna take a while to even hit 100 million. 

Xbox have stated they will continue to support existing communities going forward.

That said they also said the same when they bought Zenimax/Bethesda. Xbox essentially meant that they would support games already on PlayStation like Fallout 76, Elder Scrolls Online and any other previously released game still getting updates, but as we know everything else is now Xbox exclusive. 

So I wouldn't be surprised to see CoD: Vanguard to continue to get support for the rest of this year and beyond, but aside from that everything is up in the air. The next Call of Duty might be multiplatform solely because it has been in development for over 2 years already, plus we don't know when the deal will be finalised. Xbox cannot tell Activision Blizzard what to do until Xbox officially own them, so Modern Warfare 2 (2022) might be multiplatform, but anything 2023 and beyond is probably exclusive until proven otherwise.