Horizon: Forbidden West

hyperseven said:
Does it? Reviewers cannot afford to give bad reviews from major publishers in fear of being blacklisted from future early access thus losing revenue and viewership.
Click to expand...

Just don't go to any of the big sites. I'll watch the ACG review and see what he thinks.
 
silvagti said:
The pricing for HFW is only reasonable-ish because you can buy the PS4 version and get the free upgrade which makes it ~£50 most places. Something like GT7 for example on PS5 is £60-70 everywhere retail at the moment. Rumours that you may be able to upgrade from the PS4 version of that to ps5 for ~£10 though but that's not going to save you anything as it's ~£50 on PS4.

Most of the places selling the PS5 version are charging the full £70 and don't seem interested in offering anything off the RRP! I think it's very hard to argue against the fact that there's clearly a lot of price gouging going on when it comes to PS5 games!
Click to expand...

Yes - but it only needs one retailer to be discounting and everyone can buy from them.
GT7 is only £59.50 at Currys (again they are offering 15% off on a pre-order). You can still get £70 of PSN credit for £62.

Plenty of people want games at release - and there are ways of saving money and still getting it release day. There are those that didn't buy games at release before and the additional £10 means they definitely wont be doing so still - it's just that group seem to be all rather vocal about things. Whereas those with disposable income and who treat gaming as a hobby, can see the value £60 gives them on a game.
There are those that will see £60 a great investment for the time they sill get from the game, there are others who know they will be able to get a vast majority of their outlay back if they buy early, play and then resell - before eventually buying it again in a couple of years time.
 
There's a good write up on Ars Technica now.

I have bought consoles in the past to play some games. Halo 3 on the XBox and Zelda on the Switch but I guess I'll have to be sensible this time and wait for the PC version. Definitely one of my favourite games in recent times.
 
Gah, I shouldn't have read that Eurogamer review. It's sown seeds of doubt in my mind. But seeing as I loved the first one, I'm sure more of the same will be very welcome anyway.
 
ic1male said:
Gah, I shouldn't have read that Eurogamer review. It's sown seeds of doubt in my mind. But seeing as I loved the first one, I'm sure more of the same will be very welcome anyway.
Click to expand...

They didn't highly rate the first one either. I mean let's face it. It didn't really do anything new did it
 
I'm sure people who enjoyed the first will enjoy this. Seems more of the same but prettier which for a lot of people is absolutely fine.
 
Backing up my PS4 Pro tonight and slapping a 2TB ssd in there so I can get snappier load times. Can’t wait for Friday!

Currently replaying the game on the PC and had forgotten how good the lore was about The Old Ones.
 
Noxia said:
They didn't highly rate the first one either. I mean let's face it. It didn't really do anything new did it
Click to expand...

This. Yet it was a fantastic game. Worthabuy destroyed the game, yet it’s become one of my favourites and a very popular title. I’d happily have more of the same, an evolution of the original is fine by me.
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure what you can do "new" with open world games at this point in the industry before it simply isn't openworld anymore.

First was great, great characters, mystery, surroundings, enemy design, sci-fi mixed with old etc.

Compared that with Valhalla...100 hours in and you want to slit your wrists knowing you've got another 50 more to go. I totally agreed with Skill Up's review of it, great open world game but needed to be 30 to 50 hours tops, not the 150 plus it became. Why can't Ubisoft figure this out?
 
Ali195 said:
Compared that with Valhalla...100 hours in and you want to slit your wrists knowing you've got another 50 more to go. I totally agreed with Skill Up's review of it, great open world game but needed to be 30 to 50 hours tops, not the 150 plus it became. Why can't Ubisoft figure this out?
Click to expand...

I gave up on Valhalla. I'd sunk 50 hours in, done all of the main quests but the last one and tons of side missions and I was still well below the level required to do the last mission. That's bad game design. I personally think doing all the main missions should put you at a high enough level to complete the game.
 
Anyone know if there will be a Day1 update? I hardly play on the PS4 anymore (probably going to change now) so I don’t know what games are like at release.

I have clown grade internet speed at home as it is hence why I nabbed a physical copy for £51.
 
Kainz said:
Anyone know if there will be a Day1 update? I hardly play on the PS4 anymore (probably going to change now) so I don’t know what games are like at release.

I have clown grade internet speed at home as it is.
Click to expand...
Yes - quite a large one.
I've not read through all the reviews - fear the game being spoilt.
However one reviewer said they played and reviewed the game as it was and then found the Day 1 patch cleared up the vast majority of the issues/bugs he'd seen.
 
biron_w said:
I gave up on Valhalla. I'd sunk 50 hours in, done all of the main quests but the last one and tons of side missions and I was still well below the level required to do the last mission. That's bad game design. I personally think doing all the main missions should put you at a high enough level to complete the game.
Click to expand...
Think I was around 30 levels too short of the last mission in Valhalla. Went back and did some side quests to up my level. Think I was still 10-15 lower but managed it. Yeah horrible ending to a game that I spent 90+ hours with. They nailed the levelling in Origins and Odyssey but totally messed it up in Valhalla.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom