hans_maulwurf

Instinctively I'd say play 2 first, if you're really commited to playing them all. Pre-sequel has a bunch of small things (I'd definitely call them improvements), that make it a little harder to go back to 2 afterwards: the butt-stomp, low gravity that goes hand in hand with more verticality in the levels, a better waypoint system, the best (one might say the only good) vehicle in the series, non-mute main characters.

Not in any particular order, though Hitman is probably at the top:

Hitman

Life is Strange

Watch Dogs 2

Night in the Woods

Quantum Break

Rise of the Tomb Raider

Kingdom Come: Deliverance

Tales from the Borderlands

Deus Ex: Mankind Divided

P4 Dancing all Night

For the rumoured asking price I definitely am. Not interested in the mp anyway, though it'd be a bummer if the spec-ops stuff would also be completely left out. I just finished the mw1 remaster like a week ago, and while the gameplay felt somewhat dated at times, I was pretty impressed with how good it looked, and I still had fun with it.

So what are peoples opinions here about 0 with regards to beast in the east? I watched the entirety of that and thus playing it myself hasn't really been a priority. But then it feels weird that I might end up having played every game in the main line series with the exception of what a lot of people call the best one (so far I played 3, 4, 5 plus kiwami and I'm most definitely gonna play kiwami 2 and 6). Should I still play 0 myself? Did they miss much side content/any really good side stuff?

I personally don't think the actual story beats in those games matter all that much. They always put in so many twists and turns that - up until the very end - most reveals end up feeling meaningless for me because it's pretty much a given that there'll be another thing that probably nullifys a big thing that happened earlier. Hell, I'm more surpised in these games when a character who supposedly died is actually dead. I think the games strong suit are the characters themselves and the really different, slow paced dialogue scenes that are kind of the opposite of the snappy hollywood style. And the world building and how they effortlessly manage to make all the tonal shifts between dramatic, tense, goofy and heartfelt work so well.

I'm glad they are bringing this over. Now I think all that's missing is the turn of the century one that came out in the early ps4 days?! That looked really cool too, certainly a more interesting spin-off than the zombie thing.

I'd say maybe actually do try angel of darkness? I played several hours of that game after reading about a fan mod/patch project on eurogamer a few years ago, and while I didn't finish it, I kinda enjoyed parts of it. It was still real clunky and with weird tank controls and whatnot. But I actually liked the setting, and while there was not so much an open world it at least had a hub world element to it. Plus dialogue choices I think? Very weird, certainly not great, but interesting. Probably the best time I had with a pre-2013 TR.

Damn, this game is sooo buggy. Crash bugs, graphical glitches, busted scripting, broken animations, it's all there. In a variety and overabundance I've personally never experienced in any other game. Plus a really nonsensical save system that will sometimes save several times during a random side mission but not after finishing a major main quest.

But I still love it and can't stop playing it. I was expecting more a hardcore survival game with some rpg elements, but it's really a pretty traditional western rpg with some survival elements. Love me an rpg where I can talk myself out of most situations. Combat does not beat what MnB does imo, but its ok. Love, love, love the no fantasy historical setting.

@bollard: I don't want to belabor this point endlessly and I'm obviously not an economist or anyone with a deeper understanding of how business works. But I just can't believe that the supposedly 85 Mio. (according to gamespot via wikipedia) shipped copies of the game only equate to about 300 Mio. in revenue. There has to be some caveat to how these numbers of 78% of revenue through gta online content are correctly interpreted. 1.4 billion in general doesn't seem like a lot for this kind of crazy succesful game.

@minipato: I'm sure the loot box backlash caught many a dev off guard and R* might very well be one of them. But yeah, in this case I doubt there is a singular reason for the delay and it's more a general (not very unexpected) case of "we need more time".

@williamhenry said:

Why would they, though? GTA V mp became that cash cow and it didn't even launch with the game and then was forever broken.

Also, has everyone forgotten about "The Benz"? The big online proponent at R* who got fired by the Housers, the story guys from R*?

I'm not saying it would be unreasonable to delay it for the mp (though it would be allegedly only PART of the mp, which again makes it less likely to me). But R* is kinda making it's own rules, and they can because they have been wildly succesful doing so. It is safe to assume that RDR2 will be a massive game and that seems like a much more likely justification for a delay than just "they are adding another mp mode".

@bollard: Are there actual numbers out there for that? Like, I don't doubt they are making crazy money off of that, but they also sold an unbelievable amount of copies across two generations of consoles. And it's a game that barely ever seems to get any discounts beyond half price, too, even during steam sales.

Not knowing anything about the credibility of this, the "delay to include a new online mode" thing sounds not very likely at all to me considering how they put out the online stuff for gta v. Online shit not being done at release (or even way after that) has neither stopped them to release a game nor hurt them in the past.