To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/BellularNews. You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription. Sponsored by Brilliant.
Well, what would I expect from a sequel? Getting better where it fell short. And for Hellblade1 this was game play. So anyone playing the sequel did not expect it to become a prettier walking simulator, people expected better combat, a more diverse play experience. Sadly, they didn't deliver at all, made the game nearly twice as expensive while reducing the play time to less than three fourths. So yeah, people are not happy about it and those people haven't even bought it at all.
Exactly. I don't have any issues with the first game being short or "not having not enough game-play", etc, but I still fail to see how Senua's story can be continued without either undermining arc of the first game or completely shifting story, which would warrant a new main character.
Exactly, it was a 'must avoid' when the first game came out, why tf did they think they needed a sequel, especially if it was gonna be majority cutscenes and minimal gameplay? Did they want to make the game or just tick the box named 'make a sequel'?
how is it any different from your average Sony interactive movie like GoW and TOLU? I don't have any issue with those types of games or Sony in general, but I do have an issue with the double standards
@@dragonriderabens9761 Those games have five times the gameplay, at least, that Hellblade 2 has. It is time for that meme to be put to pasture, it was stupid when it was made and it is stupider now.
well persona is niche, because no other bigger company bothers to copy the game formula. hellblade is mainstream leaning, until the mainstream actually thinks about the kinds of games they want that hellblade isn't.
One reviewer said you are literally pushing only forward on the stick for 40 minutes before any other prompt pops up; the fidelity looks nice, but really need more interactivity in an interactive medium
I think that even Heavy Rain, which was advertised to be more of a movie than a game, had more interactivity, and that was almost 15 years ago. Talk about progress.
I made a joke about how Microsoft is going to rip apart this studio like a gorilla holding a kitten and there were so many people defending this game. It doesn't matter if a future project has been greenlit. Companies can lie and your unironically stupid if you believe them at face value.
@@vbun4662 i had seen videos of kitten bitch slapping crocodiles, so not a good analogy, but cats are op so they would probably win against a gorilla too
Well from what I gathered from my friends; those who wanted to play it bought a month of gamepass for 1/5 the price of the game instead. Gamepass does to games what streaming is doing to movies. No one went to watch the Fall Guy movie and less than 3 weeks after release, it was available on demand for a fraction of a single movie ticket's price.
@@reedk2402 If you're paying for Gamepass and not finding a game to play feels like a first world problem considering on the diverse games that it offers.
same tired excuses to prop up media that just isn't good or worth the money, look at how many people bought pal world or Hi-FI rush or Yakuza: Like a Dragon or the masterchief collection or sea of thives or SLAY THE SPIRE and i could go on as for cinemas they did that to themselves why would i want to go to a overpriced place to sit in horrid seats with a sticky floor that has a screen thats just to big? i dont they should sell the movies for a premium on streaming sites this aint the 1950's anymore we aint forced to go to those trash places to watch stuff
This might be a bad take, but I feel like games like Hellblade would be better off as a movie. They clearly have the style, story and vibe down, and they don't focus on gameplay, so why does Hellblade have to be a game? Wouldn't it make more sense to make a movie and just tell an awesome story? And of course lower the price. 50 dollars is a biiiiiit steep for such a short experience.
I do not believe so. The very last 'scene' in Hellblade 1 is something that struck me really hard and wouldn't be possible without player participating in it. They may or may not have succeeded, you be the judge, but I believe that Ninja at least tried to blend cinematic and gameplay experience into something new and immersive. And that's something that I really appreciate.
It's all about marketing. People were just mad because they were misled into believing this game was something it's not. Games can be anything as long as everyone can be honest.
but even then, these number are on steam, and the critic number on steam was also below 3 000. of those, more than 10% didnt like it. so even the ones that were sure to like it at that price point that bought the game around launch, still 10% of them didnt like it at all.
this game is the equivalent of a niche art film made with the budget and production values of a mass appeal blockbuster. i am all for trying something avant garde and unique but obviously it would make sense to target an art style / fidelity level that is feasible on a budget commensurate with the relatively small number of people who care about playing it. a good game should still be effective with a more stylized, less detailed presentation. and if it's not, it's time to focus on building a better gameplay experience.
Indika, an Indy game of similar length to Senua's Saga: Hellblade 2 and made in Unreal is a far better experience and that doesn't even have combat. The greatness about Indika is the art style, the avant-garde nature of it and the quirkiness but with an Indy/AA budget. Yet nobody is talking about it because AAA is what the majority of people get to see first, due to marketing. High Fidelity absolutely isn't required for a game like HBII.
I mean the first one had a budget if 10 mil, and their aim was to make a AA on a shoestring. The budget for 2 is estimated 50 - 100 million for that much of an increase for a samey experience but minus the originality from the 1st game, yeah the math don't math.
slowly the gaming audience is realizing that graphics and cinematic direction is not all that impressive. especially with games like these taking so long and requiring large budgets which the hardcore playerbase might think is ruining the productivity of the gaming industry. the illusion of these grand AAA games is starting to be seen through.
I'd argue everyone already knew this just based off the most popular games both played and viewed. It's just a loud minority that scream graphics mean everything.
@@TheForever206 It honestly depends on the game. Some titles work well with simple graphics and FX... while some benefit tremendously from pushing things to the max, graphically. Minecraft or Terraria and No Man's Sky or Dragon's Dogma 2 come to mind as good examples of good popular games at both ends of the scale.
@@SimuLord what even is Hellblade? It's hardly a game, in the traditional sense of gaming. It isn't a movie caliber medium either. What is it then, an interactive and atmospheric walking sim? To me it feels like short story in a book that's full of short stories. Somewhat memorable, but nothing all that special ultimately.
@@mrdee2454 it’s so good. I really loved the final chapter with Hugo’s disembodied voice just speaking to Amisia. That ending scene in the modern hospital makes me excited for the potential sequel.
@@mahmoodrezamaboodi599 I play play station for the last 25 years and that’s not changing. Much better games and back catalog of classic JRPGs over here and single player narrative driven adventures.
What Nintendo US CEO said a few years ago: "games don't compete only within the game sector but the entire entertainment industry." 50€ for 5 hours, no matter the masterpiece, is a pretty bad ratio.
I mean, honestly, thinking about it like that, it costs $20 to go to a theater or buy a blu ray of a movie that's 2 hours. The math actually adds up there. That said, I still agree with you. Math or not, it does feel like a bad ratio.
games compete with themselves, every good game can still be played, even if launched 20 years ago. newer isnt always better, nad there's a limit of what marketing can do to drive sales a huge wall is on he horizon, huge budget has to be justifiable
i say its worth its price, but also its average note. its a very good game and if you fall into its niche, you will find it excellent, but you have probably more chances that it will bore you for half the play time.
I bought it thinking it would be a full length game, then I saw reviews saying it took 5-6 hours tops and refunded it in time and got it from the game pass. Little did I know that after the 1.5 hour mark I initially played the game took a nosedive in quality. It honestly peaked at the first Draugar fight (which was an insanely amazing cinematic experience), but I expected the combat to develop over time... or anything really. Genuinely sad because as simplistic as it was in the first game, it still had cool design where you could make different attack chains depending on your input, and you could.... fight more than 1 enemy at a time, why they decided to downgrade this hard is beyond me.
@@om58499 Yes, the combat in the first game is great! You can fight multiple enemies and you also have more moves. The voices in your head actually scream at you when an enemy is about to attack you from behind. It was beautiful. Now we have this stupid sequel that IMO is a huge step back in almost every aspect(except visuals, because visuals are everything in a game right?)
In interview I've read that "it was in service for the story". I.e. everything streamlined to get exactly to director's vision. I think dumbing down combat allows for exceptional fidelity of the animations. Of course having only 1 Senua with 1 loadout is massive simplification. Then if it's 1v1 and ground is blurred out you don't stumble, get blocked at obstacle, have terrain height differences. Cut all of that, put great team to work and you can have something visually very close to "interactive movie". But of course, I'd also prefer less video fidelity and have something more to do during combat than QTE.
Combat is NOT the same from 1 to 2. 1 has combos, total player control. 2 basically triggers a mini cut scene making it feel like all combat is a series of QTE’s
I was put off by Ninja Theory banging on about how H2 is all about the story, maaan, and all the gameplay is just there to, like, serve the story, and we want to capture all the performance to really tell the story, bla bla bla story. They end up sounding like frustrated wannabe film makers like David Cage.
at the very least David Cage actually compensates the price of his game by making them animated visual novels depending on what you make the characters do in the game. Visual novels are an underrated medium in gaming, but they sell because they usually have multiple branching stories.
Eh, some people like story. Honestly hearing that has the opposite effect on me. Only I haven't played the original yet... also it's launched at a much higher price point than I almost ever bite at, let alone for a five hour game.
I'm fine with story games. I'm fine with walking simulators. I don't want my game thats all about story to have a halfassed combat system that I have to slog through. I'd rather there be no combat or they really try to make combat fun.
People on social media often say that they want shorter games, but us who regularly engage in discussion centered around gaming have to realize that we are in the minority. The gaming market is LARGE and most people who play videogames aren't too wealthy, especially the farther away we go from Europe, North America and Oceania. So people will absolutely do some form of the dollar/hour calculation. I am wealthy, so I can afford whatever game I want, but I don't fault people at all for gravitating towards games that give them a lot of content, even if that content is often just filler.
Thank you, if this game wasn't on gamepass I wouldn't even think about it, a month of gamepass here is 1/10th the price of this game. But since it's there I can play it fine and will do so after I finish the first.
I worked with Ninja Theory on a game over a decade ago and they weren’t very good at communicating. They planned a bunch of button fiesta sequences without telling anyone until they made all the assets and were like we need all this UI support and it was past Alpha. All their work wasted because they didn’t speak up months before. I’m not surprised they’re bombing these guys are idiots
I’m not being strong armed into utilising Microsoft’s capricious storefront/service by price gouging. I’d rather pay for a game upfront and play it in whatever timeframe I choose. Microsoft have grossly underestimated my sense of contrarianism
@@lucasLSDYou're saying that paying for one game someone can enjoy again and again is a worse value than a streaming service you'll hardly use for with a recurring fee for as long as you live? I'm surprised at how little you value your money.
@@rainbowbunchie8237Terrible argument, you have a library of hundreds of games with the pass. If you don’t play them and just let the subscription run that’s literally YOUR FAULT lol
@@Mr.Byrnes Most of them are crap, I see little point in paying a recurring fee for years to play at most two games. :) I'll stick to buying individual titles, and not through macrohard's terrible store front.
the studio knew man. the studios little message before launch told us everything we needed to know. also the numbers don’t even matter tbh, it’s how many people signed up to gamepass to play it and how long they did, those are the only metrics that matter for sub services.
Bellular says everyone has changed but I challenge that idea. Jewler didna daggerfall retrospect and quoted a old gaming artical around dagger fall and in the artical it said, "Gamers are not looking for interactivite movies. Games are looking for good game play." I honestly dont think that statement changed about gamers in tue 90's to today. I remember when the movie was the reward to completing something. Not a forced video you have to watch.
Yeah. People _say_ they want story and visuals and stuff, but I think that is just an easy thing to _say_. I maintain that story _actively_ makes a game _worse_ . You can have a little around the edges, but if you start "telling" a story, it starts affecting the game and that hurts game-play. I might be somewhat unique, but this is why I have _no_ interest in Belluilars game. It's a narrative something or other; can't remember, they lost me at "narrative".
@@pokermitten9795 yep, and I lost interest in baldurs gate 3 because there is so little gameplay. I probably would lose interest in baldurs gate 2 if it came out today. I had more time and patience back then.
Gameplay and story can and should work together. However, for some reason in most games they are in unrelated planes of existence. In most games story barely starts, jumps between random events, never really ends and arguably exists mostly to create dissonance than anything else. Kind of like many hbo and netflix series of late. Many praise as generational masterpieces games which has both decent story and decent gameplay, even if the still don't work together. Also, Daggerfall is a bad example, despite my undying love for it. It's has arguably more story than many 'story-focused' games, it just does not hold you nailed down to it on every turn and it's also lacks in gameplay design and finished system in most places. Idk, Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain, Cultic, Frostpunk and Disco Elysium would have been much more interesting examples to discuss relationships between story, gameplay and what players (and different types of players) might want. PS. For games like BG3 dialogs and choices are not passive cut-scenes, but a type of gameplay which also affects other aspect of the gameplay including which types of threats you will have to deal with. Can't say if I like how it's done in BG3, didn't get to it yet.
This is all an individual take I love dialogue heavy or just a game that’s a story like wolf among us or Detroit The outer worlds, fallout Hell even this type of game As long as the story is rich I really don’t care Cuz I like it when a game pulls me into its universe with its unique characters and world building. But I also love gameplay But I am open to play games that just tell a story. For me senua isn’t a failure But it also isn’t a success It’s just another addition to the amount of games you play for the story and that’s okay. But I will agree if you are going to have combat in your game it only makes sense to upgrade the second game or just improve in areas that your first game severely lacked. So I can also understand that side of the spectrum.
It's not supposed to cost anything, remember? Game Pass is a subscription service and who on Xbox wants to actually pay for anything? Why tip your waiter? That's what PlayStation encouraged YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR while Xbox instead, because they're greedy, promoted the same of their consumers and it backfired so what can they do? But big names to clean up their mistakes. They bought Activision and then broke promises they made to get through the hoops..... Under oath everyone seems to bring up as though they think there's any real honor in this world, and the United States FTC were the only ones to call Microsofts bluff and hold them accountable, but society just laughed at them and said they were wasting American tax dollars. Euros gave up and the UK was starting to see the scam and tried to make the move but it was too late so, no honor left...... And now Xbox is going after Steam to retire Gabe Newell and see if he's a sellout as well. Only time will tell
I think another interesting factor to consider is how active a genre/vibe of game will be played in a 24 hour period. Like for instance, people leave idle/clicker games running in the background for hours, and an idle game with 1/4 of the players as another game, will still probably have a higher active player count, simply due to the play style of idle games. I wonder how much this applies to this situation. Perhaps more intense/darker vibes zap more mental energy out of your average player, than a game like Hi-Fi rush, or vice versa, causing the player to spend less time on one.
Considering the intro of Helblade one was such a sensory assault that I noped out of even watching a let's play, this could certainly be a factor. I doubt many would want to spend five hours straight fully immersed in poor Senua's head.
This game is definitely not worth the money they're asking for it. You can buy some good 5-10 indie games that are more fulfilling then this 5hr semi-movie.
@@dragonriderabens9761 Everyone shits on those games too for basically being movie games. A lot of people are just getting fed up with buying a videogame and getting 5 hours of cutscenes for every 2 of gameplay.
Hellblade was a niche game; I never played it looks like a walking simulator. Hellblade II is a niche game; I never played it looks like a walking simulator. So the reviews make sense, the people that like that niche bought it and liked it, no one else did and didn't not like it. The thing that doesn't make sense is using a _niche_ game as a "launch" title. Factorio is a fantastic game, but it is a niche game, and would fail if used in the same way.
Because it's a top of the line narrative game that pushed the enveloppe with graphical presentation, audio, storytelling and facial expressions in what was fundamentally an indie title and gained praise from the whole industry for their achievement. It's not so much about "launch" but rather about "prestige". This is something that was explicitly requested by Msoft. "On Tuesday May 7, Matt Booty, the head of Xbox Game Studios, told four Bethesda studios they were being shuttered. One day later, May 8, he said in a town hall meeting that Xbox “need[s] smaller games that give prestige and awards.”"
@@ToyokaX why can’t games be different or niche? Some people like playing a game and dying hundreds of times. Others might like this. I don’t see an issue
@@Enigmalakebecause it a xbox game i not joking this game is more of the same as the first one but less combat and about the same game time but people love the first one but not this with it being a xbox game the only huge change
yeah, if hi-fi rush with its whopping 26,000 steam reviews on a AA budget isn't enough to save tango gameworks. i'm worried for ninja theory unless if the mainstream REALLY is interested in playing Hellblade 2
it's not about hours, it's about what's done with the runtime and the game doesn't do much with it other than be a minimally interactive tech demo. i paid full price for Metroid Dread and it was well worth it despite being not that much longer than HB2 AND it's much more replayable
Portal 1 only takes a couple of hours your first run, and can be done quicker. However, it and portal 2 are both incredible games that I've replayed numerous times. Nearly the entire experience is actual gameplay as well. They're also both $9.99 and often heavily discounted. I've gotten thousands and thousands of hours out of the Orange Box bundle, still cheaper than Hellblade 2.
@@pokermitten9795 There has been plenty of game bundles out there. My point was that even buying a bundle of games was cheaper and provided more content than Hellblade 2. That was also just an addition at the end to everything else that I was saying.
As a consumer, why would I invest into Microsoft IP's now? I bought hi-fi rush and that studio is now gone. going by Microsoft's previous behaviour they're likely to shut this studio too.
Thing is, this was literally a matter of timing. If HiFi was Coming out now and Hellblade had been released in say december, it would have been Ninja who died and Tango who lived. All the good moves Xbox had made needed time to pay off, which they had since they were not expensive to Microsoft. That changed when Xbox spent 70 BILLION CASH. When the time came for Xbox to be pressured by Microsoft to MAKE LINE GO UP NOW, they didnt have anything to immediately show. So any studio that did not have a game coming out or already well into development went to the chopping block. Arkane was throwing good money after bad fixing an unfixable turd, Tango had only an early pitch for HiFi2 and wasnt actively making anything, the smaller support studios were on standby, there's your cut studios. Xbox made the stupid mistake of making themselves too expensive when everything they did plays the long game and REQUIRES that Microsoft is patient with them to work. If you spend 70 billion cash, the patience runs out. Buying Activion was a terrible idea if you actually cared about what Xbox had been doing up to that point. Either Phil profits from the purchase somehow, or he's a dum dum, or he wants to throw away the so far good gameplan they had and go for AAA slop.
Graphics do not make a game, they are the polish to finish a game, there are plenty of n64 and original xbox games I'll will happily play over some modern titles, because back then only so much effort could be put into graphics, your story and game play had to pick up the slack
I mean it's on gamepass, I still don't know how MS makes money on it, but I'll abuse it until it enshitifies. During that time I probably won't be buying games that are on the service.
@durrclips746 it’s 34 million. The big question is whether that’s enough to make up for the money you lose by getting fewer hard sales. Especially since there are so many subscription services everywhere these days, and more and more people are unsubscribing from those they don’t use much. And gamepass has kinda peaked and the cool new stuff they got recently got less and less cool compared to what are before.
@@durrclips746 Now split that amongst all of the studios, corporate offices, datacenters, and other operating costs for XBox as the operating costs for Gamepass. It might be marginally profitable, but it isn't as profitable as Microsoft wants it to be. Expect to see a major price hike in the next year or two for all tiers.
@@LMPGames Just do what EA Access did and have a more expensive tier for the newest releases. But nobody will admit that it was good because EA did it.
The problem is not that it is a single player game, the problem is that it is a short game that focus on looking pretty in a time when many have less money to spend on games. Gamers will during these times go for what gives them the most bang for their bucks, and 5-6h just is not that much bang no matter how pretty it looks.
When it comes to game length vs cost, the target length I look for in a single player game is 8-30 hours. That's ideal to me. Some games are so long it makes me not want to play them. But 5 hours for $50, it would need to have a really interesting NG+ feature that would make me want to play through it numerous times. I could see playing Hellblade 2 via game pass, but not purchasing it for $50. At a certain point during planning the decision to make a short, but high fidelity game is going to create an awkward situation where you need a high price to afford the assets, but the short run time, something that Miles Morales game struggled with, can turn a lot of players away. The problem is a game like Hellblade 2 specifically NEEDS that fidelity for the sake of conveying character acting. So they're just kinda stuck.
I played the shit outta bleeding edge. Was a super fun game. Had the primary issue of all team based games these days where eight out of ten games were completely one sided, but was still a good chunk of fun.
I absolutely loved Hellblade 1, one of my fabourite titles from the generation. When they announced a sequel all I could think was "Why?". The main hook of the game was the character arch which was completely done by the end of the first game
I played Hellblade 1 (years after release and after a big steam sell); I was just confused when the ads started coming for Hellblade 2, it felt like they were trying to sell it as general AAA ... which it is not
Cinematic walking simulator games can be nice but Microsoft needs to understand that you can't make that kind of game on a bloated triple A budget and expect it to pull in big numbers at full price. I get the devs love telling stories but the recent God of War titles also told amazing stories while still managing to be full fat gaming experiences.
To be fair, I really really dislike the new God of war games. The original trilogy were action-packed non-stop big Epic battles. The new games are dad simulators with a few fights and cutscenes that are nowhere near the scale of the original games.
13:27 this is the entire reason the loss of E-3 was such a blow to the gaming industry, you didnt have to hunt for information on upcoming games, the industry had one big platform to get the info out, i genuinely wish to see it return
The funny thing for me is 2 years ago I was being spammed with hellblade 2 adds. But I found out the game released through an X-defient video while the content creator was rambling about the game he was planning to play.
I wouldn't call it "shorter" games, the better term is "less bloated" games. For example Baldurs Gate 3 is not a short game but most people have a positive view on the game, just because it respect the gamers time, same with Elden Ring (but in a different way obviously). Extreme big and long games like Assassin's Creed Valhalla are the opposite. An extreme bloated game with a lot of boring grind and lot of nothingness just to keep the players in the game and a cash shop explicit build to sell the player the possibility to skip some of the meaningless grind. I don't think most players want "shorter" games they just want games that respect their time and don't try to squeeze any cent that maybe left out of you.
15:35 I don't care about Spooderman or God of Boy; I want to play Genshin, Wuthering Waves, Zenless Zone, and all those big and small Asian games that are on pretty much EVERY platform except XBox (and Nintendo, but they do what they do), isn't that why they made that Japanese division for? to bring more games from the region to the platform?
When i played Hellblade it confused me how utterly lacking it was. Critics praised the game to the moon and back but in the end it was more akin to a walking simulator than a game. In the end my question is why none of the critics mentioned the utter lack of gameplay. Were all those critics Metal gear solid fans? It was false advertisement marketing Hallblade as a computer game in my eyes. Just sell walking sims as movies that need ocasional controller input.
The problem is I do want shorter titles, in-between the massive ones. If I have spent 100 hours on a game, I would much rather have a shorter title to play in one session and get a brand-new experience. But I just paid £50 for a 100-hour game, is a hard-hard sell to get me to spend £40 on an 8-hour game. So I of course wait for it to dip below £10. There are just too many games these days and not enough money flowing for them all to be successful.
1) The price is too high for what it is. 2) Whilst the graphics are nice, the gameplay has taken a backseat compared to the first. And shocking concept, games are about gameplay, especially for £50. Combat is overly simple compared to the first, no multi AI fights, no sectioned boss fights. No real boss variety. You get two giants who are not real, and an old Viking. 3) Puzzles - the puzzle structure is roughly the same. But, the first game gave purpose to those puzzles. The revealed the area you were walking into and the boss you were going to fight. There was also agency to complete certain area's otherwise you died. The second game you just kind of do them to move through a section to get to the other side. 4) Boss fights. HB1 - you actually fought bosses. HB2 - for 2 out of the three "bosses" you run to a spot and either hide/hold on to a thing and then run again. At the end you get a cutscene. The final boss is the same as every other fight in the game, singular against 1 enemy. In HB1 the final boss was an absolute clusterfuck of all AI fought to that point which grew in ever increasing numbers. 5) Environment variety - HB2 is beach, rock area, cave, rocky area, beach, wood, village. Whilst it looks pretty its all very samey. HB1 each area was distinctly different. HB2 has no valley of hands, tree of the dead, no Viking hall, dungeon in the mountain, the blind passage or bridge to Hella. 6) The fury's - Senua interacts with her furies in the first game. In the second she largely ignored them. They also speak over a lot of the dialogue in the second game. 7) Her father is back for some reason. HB1 has so much more packed into it in 7 hours that make it worth playing multiple times. HB2 is, as many have said, a walking simulator with a story attached. Its a tech demo at best for unreal engine 5 and I'm hoping they do a CDPR and release the final game at some point in the next few years.
The issue isn't that hellblade 2 is 5 hours. The issue is its 5 hours and the narrative is extremely uninspired, the characters are shallow, and the ending is way too abrupt. If your going to basically give me an interactive movie due to the lack of gameplay, which for the record im ok with, you need to have a compelling story and characters that are relatively deep. Hellblade 2 did not deliver on that front and in my opinion the only good thing about it is its graphics. That is why its "failing."
The biggest issue with HB2 is that it’s not engaging at all when it comes to the interactive medium. The criticisms of PS first party games having a lot of walking sections is 100% valid, however, you then get engaging combat and for some (Spider-Man) traversal. HB2 doesn’t need to most in depth combat. However. The fact that you hold up for more than 10 mins is not engaging. And unfortunately, neither are the puzzles. The story is designed for more if s movie experience, which means little of what you do is actually fun. Slapped on stealth is usually not fun, but a whole stealth sequence which also developed the story, would have added some diversity as well as actual thinking from the player. “Should I go there “, “when should I go”, “how long can I stay in this spot”. But at no point in the game, traversal, puzzle or combat, do you really think.
Everything I've seen in reviews from critics I trust points to the game being a step backward from the first rather than progressing on what it built. Add in the short time, the overwhelming cutscene focus over gameplay, and a story that isn't making any reaches like the first did, it just seems adequate at best asking for too much for the base price.
Bought it on Steam to support Ninja Theory but haven't had the chance to play it yet. That said, people who are way more discerning about how they spend their money on games aren't likely to look on the price tag to game hours with a game that you can only basically play once. You can make the best stake in the world, if you charge $400/oz for it, most are going to buy cheaper steaks and not give yours the time of day; just those with money to burn will. This is why I don't like the "experience over cost" argument. There are tons of games that could give you the same experience for less than half the cost of Hellblade 2. You have to compete in your space on pricing and Hellblade, as a series, isn't AAA material. It shouldn't have a AAA price or cost tag because it isn't going to do AAA sales. I would argue that allowing the development to drag on this long and allowing the focus to be on visuals and not adding in compelling gameplay was a horrible decision by Ninja Theory and their XBox management team. Hopefully this doesn't result in Ninja Theory being shutdown or being made into a support development studio, but I don't trust Microsoft/XBox at all after Tango and Arkane Austin.
I think a point to be noted about the low playtime recorded is that previously, when sales were the main performance indicator, one could reasonably use that as a defence. But now that Game Pass model uses "time consumed" as the main metric by which Xbox games are measured as successful, the playtime figures are a resounding failure for Hellblade - through no fault of its own. It's not that type of game. I can't see MS not reneging on their promise to support Ninja Theory through the rough patches if they've treated Arkane and Tango so poorly, unless there's some powerful nepotism going on at Xbox HQ. Both things feel like a sad state of affairs.
I think it's fine for a gamepass game. It didn't promise things that it didn't deliver, maybe except for playtime. Kinda surprised that Steam is so positive, I don't think that it's worth 50 bucks. I guess they knew what they were getting.
0:12 simple; it hit it's max potential market cap for people it appealed to, sure the first one was an experience but just that, nothing more, nothing less. The positive reviews and from what people said it plays pretty much the same.
I have played about 30 minutes of Hellblade 2 and I can already tell it's just what I wanted from a sequel and Hellblade is my favorite game of all time. Originally I thought it would be best left as 1 game and Senua's tragedy left as implications, but now I do feel the sequel is worthwhile.
I think people need to stop thinking about value in terms of dollar amounts, because if we all really did that, we'd be playing only free to play games and nothing else.
On short games: yes, I do want shorter games. I also do not want to spend 50€ on them. So don't go for high fidelity, marketing-heavy, money burning budgets. You won't be able to price your game at a point your audience will buy. Your gameplay-light, emotionally resonant short narrative experience will work just as well if it looks like Oxenfree, A Short Hike, or The Pale Beyond.
Don’t forget that only people who buy the game can leave reviews on Steam. Part of the consequences of people being more careful with their money and looking at independent YT reviewers rather than game journo shills is that people are less likely to buy a game they probably won’t like. This is why some games that sound mid to your average player have good reviews.
AAah, the Context! Microsoft and every studio under it is now on trial. There are general loyal XBox and Ninja Theory fans, but Tango and Arkane Austin had its own isolated admirers. Hellblade is quite different from the games that appealed to Tango and AA fans.
50$ for 5 hours of movie? Miss me with that bullshit. Fot that price I can buy 10 indie games and enjoy each for 5 hours. And gameplay is probably gonna be better too 😂 On more serious note if you want to make those cinematic almost movie like games you either need to go the small team, low budget path when you then price it for like 20-30$ tops. Or you can go the AAA path where you have massive team working on 10-30 hours of cinematic experience in Sony style. This middle ground approach that Hellbalde 2 took was doomed to fail.
I think the price is just a deal breaker for a lot of people. If it wasn't such expensive graphics, they could probably have sold a lot more. Seems like a lot of studios are running themselves bankrupt off graphics
People dont say NTheory have changed, the major point of contension, is that NT has not expand of their previous game. Having expand their studios, their resources and a long long long time of dev, for that...6+ years for less than 5 hours of gameplay. Its not an achievment on whatever metric you measure it, funn factor, gamedesign, gameplay, level design...all is mediocre exept graphism fidelity but its a corridor.
It's not just cost to hour ratio, it's the quality of GAMEPLAY in that cost to hour ratio. If your game is 5-7 hours and gameplay is like 70% Walking, 20% Puzzles, 10% Combat. Not to mention the cutscenes that eat into that total gameplay time. Then your game is just not worth the $50, and it doesn't matter how "Cinematic" and "graphically impressive" it is. Where if it's a shorter and linear game like Hi-Fi Rush, where the gameplay is the majority of the run time and is really fun, then cost to hour in that situation is worth it. Not every game needs to be a 100+ Hours with Uber Garphics, but every game... neeeds GAMEplay to be fun. You can tell a cinematic story but need to remember the gameplay part as well. That's the thing it feels like most Triple A Games don't understand these days. Games like Lethal Company, Palworld, and some of the other more recent viral games are not visually impressive, they don't have insane cinematic stories... They're just fun. Anyway I don't know how much they spent in the like 5-7 Making this game but I'm pretty sure this is a mega-loss and if Xbox killed Tango for an actually profitable and successful game than this is probably the end of Ninja Theory.
This critique IMO completely misses the point of both videogames as an artistic medium as well as the joy of having variety. You don't always want an all-you-eat buffet, sometimes you want something exquisite which some could deem as pretentious or overpriced. At the end of the day, what you pay for is gaming EXPERIENCES. Sometimes that experience is simple satisfying fun (great gameplay mechanics/loop, RPG progression, build combinations, amazing multiplayer - which is a category onto itself tbf -, etc.), sometimes its something different, like being offered a new perspective (Outer Wilds) or being immersed in a specific story (TLOU2). "Fun" is a) subjective b) one of several metrics. Some games can actually be legit "unfun" to play but, via their interactivity, tell a story that arguably couldn't be told in the same way otherwise. There's many games that are short but are memorable. One of the ones that comes to mind is GRIS, which is mechanically a simplified platformer but with gorgeous art direction and a profound story, and is one of the best things that has appeared in the medium IMO. It lasts like 3 hours long but I still think about it to this day, more than other games like For Honor, where I've probably sunk thousands. This whole notion of "gameplay fun/hour" is like measuring overall food quality in terms raw calories. Also, wouldn't be surprised that the high Steam price is just to encourage new GamePass subs.
The reviews are in sync to the degree that they are because the people that wanted more of Senua's story got more of Senua's story. They didn't deviate from the original experience by trying to expand on things in a way people didn't want. They delivered a game that was roughly 1 to 1 with the experience of the first game with better graphical fidelity. I will fight and die on the hill that the combat of the second game is basically 1 to 1 with the first game, except of what are likely technical limitations due to the motion captured elements of the combat that led to them making linear one on one fights. And I don't recall Microsoft pushing this as the next big AAA thing. Any and all of these complaints from the comments here and loud corners of the internet are people imposing their own unreal expectations on the game.
Sometimes it's okay to just have a game where you play and finish in one or two sittings, and just get a unique experience. I didn't play it, but I can appreciate it for what it is. Not everything needs to be a vast open world. I love a good linear story every once in awhile. I got hellblade ads on HBO max btw. Might buy the game on sale, but won't pay full price for it.
I can accept every type of game, I wish there was enough space for all of them... But if a studio that prioritizes cinematic feel to gameplay crashes and burns I won't be sad.
I never played the first one, but heard great things about it. When I saw that the sequel is about five to seven hours long, and it's priced at seventy dollars, I immediately lost interest in both. I might pick them up for cheap down the road to check them out but there is no way in hell I'm paying full game price for something that short. I paid forty bucks for Helldivers II and I'm still dumping hours into it.
I always liked the first game, but in all honesty i had expectation that the game would be more in exploring the world that it barely show in the first game. But being more or less the same game really bum me out, second my pc cannot run this game and i dont have an xbox. I always thought they could have expanded more or senua abilities, she only gets that time stop thing. I guess my gamer brain though they were gonna make her like a god of something by the end of it since so much mythical nord stuff is involve in the games.
People often say you shouldn't equate a games play length with value for money, but $70 AUD is way too much for a 5-6 hour game, at least this was discounted, 'The Order: 1886' was still $100 on the PS store, and that was about the same length as this game.
That game is not 100 buck. 😂😂😂 stop lying. And that game goes on sale for 10 buck. AND the order actually has gameplay unlike hold left stick up for 40 mins.
@@kg888 I'm not lying, you just misinterpreted what I was saying. Even though it was only 5-6 hours long they were still selling for $100. I'm not saying that it's still selling current day for $100. On release at EB Games and on the PS Store it was selling for $99.95.
I think it's a shame with Hellblade as it is probably decent for what it is but at the price it is for what is essentially a 5 hour only walking sim.... yeah that is a tough sell to me. I will grab it once it goes on heavy discount just to check out the graphics
The number of people who claimed to be looking forward to this game seemed indicative of a mass formation psychosis. Nothing about the original was remotely interesting, so the idea that the sequel was expected to be "even better" was ridiculous.
![I.N "HALLUCINATION" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/n5B5q1Hwt_U/mqdefault.jpg)
To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/BellularNews. You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription. Sponsored by Brilliant.
The game is niche focus not mainstream. And maybe 50 dollars is a lot. $30 to $40 could work
I always skip your adverts. I just wanted to let you know that.
@@gigachadbodypillow614 Ditto.
Stop censoring me.
Well, what would I expect from a sequel? Getting better where it fell short. And for Hellblade1 this was game play. So anyone playing the sequel did not expect it to become a prettier walking simulator, people expected better combat, a more diverse play experience. Sadly, they didn't deliver at all, made the game nearly twice as expensive while reducing the play time to less than three fourths. So yeah, people are not happy about it and those people haven't even bought it at all.
Just me thinking that hellblade never needed a sequel... The character had her arc by the end of the first game it felt like the story was done
Exactly. I don't have any issues with the first game being short or "not having not enough game-play", etc, but I still fail to see how Senua's story can be continued without either undermining arc of the first game or completely shifting story, which would warrant a new main character.
Exactly, it was a 'must avoid' when the first game came out, why tf did they think they needed a sequel, especially if it was gonna be majority cutscenes and minimal gameplay? Did they want to make the game or just tick the box named 'make a sequel'?
The game is niche focus not mainstream. And maybe 50 dollars is a lot. $30 to $40 could work
how is it any different from your average Sony interactive movie like GoW and TOLU?
I don't have any issue with those types of games or Sony in general, but I do have an issue with the double standards
@@dragonriderabens9761 Those games have five times the gameplay, at least, that Hellblade 2 has. It is time for that meme to be put to pasture, it was stupid when it was made and it is stupider now.
After playing the first one, which was cool...but I wouldn't pay more than 20 or 25. Graphics are nice but its just unreal or whatever.
well persona is niche, because no other bigger company bothers to copy the game formula. hellblade is mainstream leaning, until the mainstream actually thinks about the kinds of games they want that hellblade isn't.
i canceled gampass because of this. they refunded me half
One reviewer said you are literally pushing only forward on the stick for 40 minutes before any other prompt pops up; the fidelity looks nice, but really need more interactivity in an interactive medium
I think that even Heavy Rain, which was advertised to be more of a movie than a game, had more interactivity, and that was almost 15 years ago. Talk about progress.
I made a joke about how Microsoft is going to rip apart this studio like a gorilla holding a kitten and there were so many people defending this game.
It doesn't matter if a future project has been greenlit. Companies can lie and your unironically stupid if you believe them at face value.
I just think that analogy is insulting to gorillas, those gentle giants. Now if you had said a crocodile and a kitten-
xbox ceo funding shit games
my unironically unironically what?
@@vbun4662crocs are superior than monkee
@@vbun4662 i had seen videos of kitten bitch slapping crocodiles, so not a good analogy, but cats are op so they would probably win against a gorilla too
Well from what I gathered from my friends; those who wanted to play it bought a month of gamepass for 1/5 the price of the game instead.
Gamepass does to games what streaming is doing to movies. No one went to watch the Fall Guy movie and less than 3 weeks after release, it was available on demand for a fraction of a single movie ticket's price.
Ya but that’s kinda the point. How many people did that? Now how many forget to cancel or find something good that makes them decide to keep going.
@@reedk2402 If you're paying for Gamepass and not finding a game to play feels like a first world problem considering on the diverse games that it offers.
Hi-Fi Rush and other games also were on Gamepass but had more peak players. Says a lot.
same tired excuses to prop up media that just isn't good or worth the money, look at how many people bought pal world or Hi-FI rush or Yakuza: Like a Dragon or the masterchief collection or sea of thives or SLAY THE SPIRE and i could go on
as for cinemas they did that to themselves why would i want to go to a overpriced place to sit in horrid seats with a sticky floor that has a screen thats just to big? i dont they should sell the movies for a premium on streaming sites this aint the 1950's anymore we aint forced to go to those trash places to watch stuff
This might be a bad take, but I feel like games like Hellblade would be better off as a movie. They clearly have the style, story and vibe down, and they don't focus on gameplay, so why does Hellblade have to be a game? Wouldn't it make more sense to make a movie and just tell an awesome story? And of course lower the price. 50 dollars is a biiiiiit steep for such a short experience.
Thank you. so many games coming out that obviously want to be a movie.
I do not believe so. The very last 'scene' in Hellblade 1 is something that struck me really hard and wouldn't be possible without player participating in it. They may or may not have succeeded, you be the judge, but I believe that Ninja at least tried to blend cinematic and gameplay experience into something new and immersive. And that's something that I really appreciate.
It's all about marketing. People were just mad because they were misled into believing this game was something it's not. Games can be anything as long as everyone can be honest.
I disagree.
Hellblade 1 is one of my favourite games of all time, and I firmly believe the story could not be told as effectively if it was a movie.
@@renmcmanusthis has the same energy as people hating fat Thor when you had champion weightlifters saying that's peak muscle.
Isn't hellbade 2 only like 5 hours? That isn't very long to generate a lot of player overlap that would lead to higher player numbers
but even then, these number are on steam, and the critic number on steam was also below 3 000. of those, more than 10% didnt like it. so even the ones that were sure to like it at that price point that bought the game around launch, still 10% of them didnt like it at all.
i yes im sure thats why the devs are talking like there company is going to shut down, they just have to many sales!
this game is the equivalent of a niche art film made with the budget and production values of a mass appeal blockbuster. i am all for trying something avant garde and unique but obviously it would make sense to target an art style / fidelity level that is feasible on a budget commensurate with the relatively small number of people who care about playing it. a good game should still be effective with a more stylized, less detailed presentation. and if it's not, it's time to focus on building a better gameplay experience.
Indika, an Indy game of similar length to Senua's Saga: Hellblade 2 and made in Unreal is a far better experience and that doesn't even have combat. The greatness about Indika is the art style, the avant-garde nature of it and the quirkiness but with an Indy/AA budget. Yet nobody is talking about it because AAA is what the majority of people get to see first, due to marketing.
High Fidelity absolutely isn't required for a game like HBII.
It being an unneeded sequel is also doesn't give it art points
I mean the first one had a budget if 10 mil, and their aim was to make a AA on a shoestring. The budget for 2 is estimated 50 - 100 million for that much of an increase for a samey experience but minus the originality from the 1st game, yeah the math don't math.
in the end
if you want to see it a profit, it still a product
@@SlyLoris1 diminishing retuns
well, the money was gobled somewhee
slowly the gaming audience is realizing that graphics and cinematic direction is not all that impressive. especially with games like these taking so long and requiring large budgets which the hardcore playerbase might think is ruining the productivity of the gaming industry. the illusion of these grand AAA games is starting to be seen through.
I'd argue everyone already knew this just based off the most popular games both played and viewed. It's just a loud minority that scream graphics mean everything.
@@TheForever206 yeah.... i just hope that loud minority actually shuts up because most game companies don't listen to good opinions anyways
@@TheForever206 It honestly depends on the game. Some titles work well with simple graphics and FX... while some benefit tremendously from pushing things to the max, graphically. Minecraft or Terraria and No Man's Sky or Dragon's Dogma 2 come to mind as good examples of good popular games at both ends of the scale.
@@SimuLord what even is Hellblade? It's hardly a game, in the traditional sense of gaming. It isn't a movie caliber medium either. What is it then, an interactive and atmospheric walking sim? To me it feels like short story in a book that's full of short stories. Somewhat memorable, but nothing all that special ultimately.
I prefer A Plague Tale Requirm over it. 3 times longer and half the development time and still looks absolutely fantastic.
That was my GOTY, loved every minute of it.
@@mrdee2454 it’s so good. I really loved the final chapter with Hugo’s disembodied voice just speaking to Amisia. That ending scene in the modern hospital makes me excited for the potential sequel.
And it plays like a game should.
You do things. The dialogue is coherent. There is an objective. There are characters.
you can play and love both of them on gamepass for only 15 dollars a month 😂
@@mahmoodrezamaboodi599 I play play station for the last 25 years and that’s not changing. Much better games and back catalog of classic JRPGs over here and single player narrative driven adventures.
What Nintendo US CEO said a few years ago: "games don't compete only within the game sector but the entire entertainment industry." 50€ for 5 hours, no matter the masterpiece, is a pretty bad ratio.
I mean, honestly, thinking about it like that, it costs $20 to go to a theater or buy a blu ray of a movie that's 2 hours. The math actually adds up there. That said, I still agree with you. Math or not, it does feel like a bad ratio.
games compete with themselves, every good game can still be played, even if launched 20 years ago.
newer isnt always better, nad there's a limit of what marketing can do to drive sales
a huge wall is on he horizon, huge budget has to be justifiable
This game should be 30 dollars, tops.
More like 20
You can play it on gamepass alongside so many other awesome games for only 15 dollars 😂
and yet when Sony puts out the same thing, you'll gladly pay $70
the double standards are real
@@dragonriderabens9761 That makes it sound like everyone is like that, which is not true.
i say its worth its price, but also its average note. its a very good game and if you fall into its niche, you will find it excellent, but you have probably more chances that it will bore you for half the play time.
I bought it thinking it would be a full length game, then I saw reviews saying it took 5-6 hours tops and refunded it in time and got it from the game pass. Little did I know that after the 1.5 hour mark I initially played the game took a nosedive in quality. It honestly peaked at the first Draugar fight (which was an insanely amazing cinematic experience), but I expected the combat to develop over time... or anything really.
Genuinely sad because as simplistic as it was in the first game, it still had cool design where you could make different attack chains depending on your input, and you could.... fight more than 1 enemy at a time, why they decided to downgrade this hard is beyond me.
You try the first game i heard that have more combat
@@om58499 Yes, the combat in the first game is great! You can fight multiple enemies and you also have more moves. The voices in your head actually scream at you when an enemy is about to attack you from behind. It was beautiful.
Now we have this stupid sequel that IMO is a huge step back in almost every aspect(except visuals, because visuals are everything in a game right?)
In interview I've read that "it was in service for the story". I.e. everything streamlined to get exactly to director's vision. I think dumbing down combat allows for exceptional fidelity of the animations. Of course having only 1 Senua with 1 loadout is massive simplification. Then if it's 1v1 and ground is blurred out you don't stumble, get blocked at obstacle, have terrain height differences. Cut all of that, put great team to work and you can have something visually very close to "interactive movie".
But of course, I'd also prefer less video fidelity and have something more to do during combat than QTE.
Combat still feels incredibly intense to me. Love it
so many studios have "no plans" to close the day before they are shut, its not their decision
Combat is NOT the same from 1 to 2. 1 has combos, total player control. 2 basically triggers a mini cut scene making it feel like all combat is a series of QTE’s
Just from what I seen from ads it looks like they went for a God of War Ragnarok type gameplay
I was put off by Ninja Theory banging on about how H2 is all about the story, maaan, and all the gameplay is just there to, like, serve the story, and we want to capture all the performance to really tell the story, bla bla bla story. They end up sounding like frustrated wannabe film makers like David Cage.
at the very least David Cage actually compensates the price of his game by making them animated visual novels depending on what you make the characters do in the game. Visual novels are an underrated medium in gaming, but they sell because they usually have multiple branching stories.
Eh, some people like story. Honestly hearing that has the opposite effect on me. Only I haven't played the original yet... also it's launched at a much higher price point than I almost ever bite at, let alone for a five hour game.
I'm fine with story games. I'm fine with walking simulators. I don't want my game thats all about story to have a halfassed combat system that I have to slog through. I'd rather there be no combat or they really try to make combat fun.
@@Zectifin 😂😂😂
I already have conversations with myself and hear voices in my head. I don't need to live a crazy game to experience crazy. I'm already there.
People on social media often say that they want shorter games, but us who regularly engage in discussion centered around gaming have to realize that we are in the minority. The gaming market is LARGE and most people who play videogames aren't too wealthy, especially the farther away we go from Europe, North America and Oceania. So people will absolutely do some form of the dollar/hour calculation. I am wealthy, so I can afford whatever game I want, but I don't fault people at all for gravitating towards games that give them a lot of content, even if that content is often just filler.
Thank you, if this game wasn't on gamepass I wouldn't even think about it, a month of gamepass here is 1/10th the price of this game. But since it's there I can play it fine and will do so after I finish the first.
I don't want shorter games, I want games that are both actually worth playing and have some girth to it.
I worked with Ninja Theory on a game over a decade ago and they weren’t very good at communicating. They planned a bunch of button fiesta sequences without telling anyone until they made all the assets and were like we need all this UI support and it was past Alpha. All their work wasted because they didn’t speak up months before. I’m not surprised they’re bombing these guys are idiots
Three letters:
D. E. I.
That's the only reason they're still banging around.
But why would people buy it on steam when it's on game pass? Games like this were MADE for the service.
I’m not being strong armed into utilising Microsoft’s capricious storefront/service by price gouging.
I’d rather pay for a game upfront and play it in whatever timeframe I choose.
Microsoft have grossly underestimated my sense of contrarianism
@@simonlarge2052 I'm just surprised how little you value your money.
@@lucasLSDYou're saying that paying for one game someone can enjoy again and again is a worse value than a streaming service you'll hardly use for with a recurring fee for as long as you live?
I'm surprised at how little you value your money.
@@rainbowbunchie8237Terrible argument, you have a library of hundreds of games with the pass. If you don’t play them and just let the subscription run that’s literally YOUR FAULT lol
@@Mr.Byrnes Most of them are crap, I see little point in paying a recurring fee for years to play at most two games. :)
I'll stick to buying individual titles, and not through macrohard's terrible store front.
the studio knew man. the studios little message before launch told us everything we needed to know. also the numbers don’t even matter tbh, it’s how many people signed up to gamepass to play it and how long they did, those are the only metrics that matter for sub services.
Bellular says everyone has changed but I challenge that idea. Jewler didna daggerfall retrospect and quoted a old gaming artical around dagger fall and in the artical it said, "Gamers are not looking for interactivite movies. Games are looking for good game play."
I honestly dont think that statement changed about gamers in tue 90's to today. I remember when the movie was the reward to completing something. Not a forced video you have to watch.
Yeah. People _say_ they want story and visuals and stuff, but I think that is just an easy thing to _say_.
I maintain that story _actively_ makes a game _worse_ . You can have a little around the edges, but if you start "telling" a story, it starts affecting the game and that hurts game-play.
I might be somewhat unique, but this is why I have _no_ interest in Belluilars game. It's a narrative something or other; can't remember, they lost me at "narrative".
@@dtkedtyjrtyjBaldurs Gate 3 gameplay isn't actually that good. It's all about story and presentation.
@@pokermitten9795 yep, and I lost interest in baldurs gate 3 because there is so little gameplay.
I probably would lose interest in baldurs gate 2 if it came out today. I had more time and patience back then.
Gameplay and story can and should work together. However, for some reason in most games they are in unrelated planes of existence. In most games story barely starts, jumps between random events, never really ends and arguably exists mostly to create dissonance than anything else. Kind of like many hbo and netflix series of late. Many praise as generational masterpieces games which has both decent story and decent gameplay, even if the still don't work together.
Also, Daggerfall is a bad example, despite my undying love for it. It's has arguably more story than many 'story-focused' games, it just does not hold you nailed down to it on every turn and it's also lacks in gameplay design and finished system in most places.
Idk, Blood Omen: Legacy of Kain, Cultic, Frostpunk and Disco Elysium would have been much more interesting examples to discuss relationships between story, gameplay and what players (and different types of players) might want.
PS. For games like BG3 dialogs and choices are not passive cut-scenes, but a type of gameplay which also affects other aspect of the gameplay including which types of threats you will have to deal with. Can't say if I like how it's done in BG3, didn't get to it yet.
This is all an individual take
I love dialogue heavy or just a game that’s a story like wolf among us or Detroit
The outer worlds, fallout
Hell even this type of game
As long as the story is rich I really don’t care
Cuz I like it when a game pulls me into its universe with its unique characters and world building.
But I also love gameplay
But I am open to play games that just tell a story.
For me senua isn’t a failure
But it also isn’t a success
It’s just another addition to the amount of games you play for the story and that’s okay.
But I will agree if you are going to have combat in your game it only makes sense to upgrade the second game or just improve in areas that your first game severely lacked.
So I can also understand that side of the spectrum.
A movie shouldn't cost $50
But it’s a playable movie 🤫
@@Thenextday8just like TLOU 🤣
@@Thenextday8yea but a movie (in your own home) costs a few dollars in this day and age. Interactive version is 50$? No way.
you haven't been to imax in the last decade huh lmao shits like $30+ a person but agree w the sentiment
It's not supposed to cost anything, remember? Game Pass is a subscription service and who on Xbox wants to actually pay for anything? Why tip your waiter? That's what PlayStation encouraged YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR while Xbox instead, because they're greedy, promoted the same of their consumers and it backfired so what can they do? But big names to clean up their mistakes. They bought Activision and then broke promises they made to get through the hoops..... Under oath everyone seems to bring up as though they think there's any real honor in this world, and the United States FTC were the only ones to call Microsofts bluff and hold them accountable, but society just laughed at them and said they were wasting American tax dollars. Euros gave up and the UK was starting to see the scam and tried to make the move but it was too late so, no honor left...... And now Xbox is going after Steam to retire Gabe Newell and see if he's a sellout as well. Only time will tell
I think another interesting factor to consider is how active a genre/vibe of game will be played in a 24 hour period.
Like for instance, people leave idle/clicker games running in the background for hours, and an idle game with 1/4 of the players as another game, will still probably have a higher active player count, simply due to the play style of idle games.
I wonder how much this applies to this situation.
Perhaps more intense/darker vibes zap more mental energy out of your average player, than a game like Hi-Fi rush, or vice versa, causing the player to spend less time on one.
Considering the intro of Helblade one was such a sensory assault that I noped out of even watching a let's play, this could certainly be a factor. I doubt many would want to spend five hours straight fully immersed in poor Senua's head.
I don’t know why AAA developers keep forgetting people care more about gameplay than graphics.
I didn't even know that Hellblade 2 even released.
i dont believe you. every event they announced this. and everytime im like why is this game being hyped even youtubers hyping this
@@darugdawg2453I've been seeing so many ads for the game.
@@darugdawg2453 algorithms are different for everyone
Okay, maybe they weren't tuning into every gaming event. I've seen ZERO ads for this game, outside of those game events. Not surprised it flopped
@@darugdawg2453😂😂😂 nope
$50 for 5 hours that's a worse proposition than Homeworld 3's $70 for 13 hours, easy pass on both counts.
Agreed.
People expect a certain level of interaction from games, they might as well call it a visual novel instead, or just make a movie.
I'm wondering if hellblade had so little publicity because they didn't wanna show how little the game changed.
This game is definitely not worth the money they're asking for it.
You can buy some good 5-10 indie games that are more fulfilling then this 5hr semi-movie.
"5hr semi-movie"
you mean like TOLU?
Or the rebooted GoW?
the double standards are real
@@dragonriderabens9761 as someone who played all those games these are not comparable, hellblade is much much shorter with far less gameplay elements
@@dragonriderabens9761 Everyone shits on those games too for basically being movie games. A lot of people are just getting fed up with buying a videogame and getting 5 hours of cutscenes for every 2 of gameplay.
@@dragonriderabens9761 Great list of games I didn't mention, never bought and have no interest in playing, not even pirated
@@dragonriderabens9761 Even David Cage "games" have more gameplay than this lmao cope harder.
Hellblade was a niche game; I never played it looks like a walking simulator.
Hellblade II is a niche game; I never played it looks like a walking simulator.
So the reviews make sense, the people that like that niche bought it and liked it, no one else did and didn't not like it.
The thing that doesn't make sense is using a _niche_ game as a "launch" title.
Factorio is a fantastic game, but it is a niche game, and would fail if used in the same way.
Because it's a top of the line narrative game that pushed the enveloppe with graphical presentation, audio, storytelling and facial expressions in what was fundamentally an indie title and gained praise from the whole industry for their achievement.
It's not so much about "launch" but rather about "prestige". This is something that was explicitly requested by Msoft.
"On Tuesday May 7, Matt Booty, the head of Xbox Game Studios, told four Bethesda studios they were being shuttered. One day later, May 8, he said in a town hall meeting that Xbox “need[s] smaller games that give prestige and awards.”"
Movie walking simulator, 5 hours of gameplay, 6 years of development.
Fail…Watch interviews. Actual dev didn’t start until 2021
5 hours of **"game"**, 3 hours are cutscene, 2 hours are gameplay.
@@ToyokaX why can’t games be different or niche? Some people like playing a game and dying hundreds of times. Others might like this. I don’t see an issue
@@Enigmalakebecause it a xbox game i not joking this game is more of the same as the first one but less combat and about the same game time but people love the first one but not this with it being a xbox game the only huge change
They can be a different niche all they wont. But niche doesnt pay the bills if publisher doesnt get the money needed to keep it going.@Enigmalake
yeah, if hi-fi rush with its whopping 26,000 steam reviews on a AA budget isn't enough to save tango gameworks. i'm worried for ninja theory unless if the mainstream REALLY is interested in playing Hellblade 2
i canceled gamepass because of this game. what a waste of subscription. they refunded half of what i paid
5 years of development with over 500 devs, AA budget but on a higher end
I didn't even know it was out...
it's not about hours, it's about what's done with the runtime and the game doesn't do much with it other than be a minimally interactive tech demo. i paid full price for Metroid Dread and it was well worth it despite being not that much longer than HB2 AND it's much more replayable
Have you played HB2?
Portal 1 only takes a couple of hours your first run, and can be done quicker. However, it and portal 2 are both incredible games that I've replayed numerous times.
Nearly the entire experience is actual gameplay as well.
They're also both $9.99 and often heavily discounted.
I've gotten thousands and thousands of hours out of the Orange Box bundle, still cheaper than Hellblade 2.
@arbitrary_thoughts it's a good example but also a bad example because there hasn't been anything like the orange box since.
@@pokermitten9795 There has been plenty of game bundles out there. My point was that even buying a bundle of games was cheaper and provided more content than Hellblade 2.
That was also just an addition at the end to everything else that I was saying.
As a consumer, why would I invest into Microsoft IP's now? I bought hi-fi rush and that studio is now gone. going by Microsoft's previous behaviour they're likely to shut this studio too.
Thing is, this was literally a matter of timing. If HiFi was Coming out now and Hellblade had been released in say december, it would have been Ninja who died and Tango who lived.
All the good moves Xbox had made needed time to pay off, which they had since they were not expensive to Microsoft. That changed when Xbox spent 70 BILLION CASH. When the time came for Xbox to be pressured by Microsoft to MAKE LINE GO UP NOW, they didnt have anything to immediately show. So any studio that did not have a game coming out or already well into development went to the chopping block. Arkane was throwing good money after bad fixing an unfixable turd, Tango had only an early pitch for HiFi2 and wasnt actively making anything, the smaller support studios were on standby, there's your cut studios. Xbox made the stupid mistake of making themselves too expensive when everything they did plays the long game and REQUIRES that Microsoft is patient with them to work. If you spend 70 billion cash, the patience runs out. Buying Activion was a terrible idea if you actually cared about what Xbox had been doing up to that point. Either Phil profits from the purchase somehow, or he's a dum dum, or he wants to throw away the so far good gameplan they had and go for AAA slop.
proves that insane graphics don't mean anything if the game is not fun or interesting to play
Graphics do not make a game, they are the polish to finish a game, there are plenty of n64 and original xbox games I'll will happily play over some modern titles, because back then only so much effort could be put into graphics, your story and game play had to pick up the slack
I mean it's on gamepass, I still don't know how MS makes money on it, but I'll abuse it until it enshitifies. During that time I probably won't be buying games that are on the service.
It doesn't make money, but because xbox promised it's investors infinite growth we will find that out during the bankruptcy procedings.
You don't understand how 40,000,000 x $15 every month = money?
@durrclips746 it’s 34 million. The big question is whether that’s enough to make up for the money you lose by getting fewer hard sales. Especially since there are so many subscription services everywhere these days, and more and more people are unsubscribing from those they don’t use much. And gamepass has kinda peaked and the cool new stuff they got recently got less and less cool compared to what are before.
@@durrclips746 Now split that amongst all of the studios, corporate offices, datacenters, and other operating costs for XBox as the operating costs for Gamepass. It might be marginally profitable, but it isn't as profitable as Microsoft wants it to be. Expect to see a major price hike in the next year or two for all tiers.
@@LMPGames Just do what EA Access did and have a more expensive tier for the newest releases. But nobody will admit that it was good because EA did it.
$50 game about 5 hours of gameplay
Worked on it for about 4 to 5 years
Thats $10 an hour and one hour of work done every year on your game crazy
The problem is not that it is a single player game, the problem is that it is a short game that focus on looking pretty in a time when many have less money to spend on games. Gamers will during these times go for what gives them the most bang for their bucks, and 5-6h just is not that much bang no matter how pretty it looks.
These big companies need to sponsor more youtubers if they want to be seen, most of us are done with traditional media.
When it comes to game length vs cost, the target length I look for in a single player game is 8-30 hours. That's ideal to me. Some games are so long it makes me not want to play them. But 5 hours for $50, it would need to have a really interesting NG+ feature that would make me want to play through it numerous times. I could see playing Hellblade 2 via game pass, but not purchasing it for $50. At a certain point during planning the decision to make a short, but high fidelity game is going to create an awkward situation where you need a high price to afford the assets, but the short run time, something that Miles Morales game struggled with, can turn a lot of players away. The problem is a game like Hellblade 2 specifically NEEDS that fidelity for the sake of conveying character acting. So they're just kinda stuck.
It's a 5 hour tech demo
I played the shit outta bleeding edge. Was a super fun game. Had the primary issue of all team based games these days where eight out of ten games were completely one sided, but was still a good chunk of fun.
I bet alot of those high review scores were pity reviews due to the recent layoffs at Microsoft. If it came out 6 months ago it would review worse
I absolutely loved Hellblade 1, one of my fabourite titles from the generation. When they announced a sequel all I could think was "Why?". The main hook of the game was the character arch which was completely done by the end of the first game
I played Hellblade 1 (years after release and after a big steam sell); I was just confused when the ads started coming for Hellblade 2, it felt like they were trying to sell it as general AAA ... which it is not
70 ? Pounds for 6 hours , how is that pro consumer?
50 pounds. Which is pretty bad for a game, though I personally really don’t like hard counting hours for value per hour.
6 hours of watching an animated 3d movie. Some people have way too much money to throw away.
@@zerg0s Still compares badly with Horizon : Forbidden West. Same price, worse steam reviews.
Some sounds issues during the video (feels like a change of mic)
Cinematic walking simulator games can be nice but Microsoft needs to understand that you can't make that kind of game on a bloated triple A budget and expect it to pull in big numbers at full price. I get the devs love telling stories but the recent God of War titles also told amazing stories while still managing to be full fat gaming experiences.
It makes no sense to just make smaller games trying to get 60 bucks once the first iteration was successful - I hope they learn sooner than later
To be fair, I really really dislike the new God of war games. The original trilogy were action-packed non-stop big Epic battles. The new games are dad simulators with a few fights and cutscenes that are nowhere near the scale of the original games.
The colors getting more saturated as the trips starts kicking in is a nice touch
50 dollars for a five hour game is very bad. There is barely any replayability and it feels like it would have been better as a movie.
Devs, publishers and everybody can absolutely F off with a 5 hour run time.
13:27 this is the entire reason the loss of E-3 was such a blow to the gaming industry, you didnt have to hunt for information on upcoming games, the industry had one big platform to get the info out, i genuinely wish to see it return
The funny thing for me is 2 years ago I was being spammed with hellblade 2 adds. But I found out the game released through an X-defient video while the content creator was rambling about the game he was planning to play.
I wouldn't call it "shorter" games, the better term is "less bloated" games.
For example Baldurs Gate 3 is not a short game but most people have a positive view on the game, just because it respect the gamers time, same with Elden Ring (but in a different way obviously).
Extreme big and long games like Assassin's Creed Valhalla are the opposite. An extreme bloated game with a lot of boring grind and lot of nothingness just to keep the players in the game and a cash shop explicit build to sell the player the possibility to skip some of the meaningless grind.
I don't think most players want "shorter" games they just want games that respect their time and don't try to squeeze any cent that maybe left out of you.
15:35 I don't care about Spooderman or God of Boy; I want to play Genshin, Wuthering Waves, Zenless Zone, and all those big and small Asian games that are on pretty much EVERY platform except XBox (and Nintendo, but they do what they do), isn't that why they made that Japanese division for? to bring more games from the region to the platform?
I'll take a $10 8-bit indie over a $50-$70 AAA any day.
When i played Hellblade it confused me how utterly lacking it was. Critics praised the game to the moon and back but in the end it was more akin to a walking simulator than a game.
In the end my question is why none of the critics mentioned the utter lack of gameplay. Were all those critics Metal gear solid fans? It was false advertisement marketing Hallblade as a computer game in my eyes. Just sell walking sims as movies that need ocasional controller input.
The problem is I do want shorter titles, in-between the massive ones. If I have spent 100 hours on a game, I would much rather have a shorter title to play in one session and get a brand-new experience. But I just paid £50 for a 100-hour game, is a hard-hard sell to get me to spend £40 on an 8-hour game. So I of course wait for it to dip below £10. There are just too many games these days and not enough money flowing for them all to be successful.
I knew about it for a while, because Heilung are on the soundtrack, so coz watch their music videos, Hellblade started appearing on suggestions
Only one song and some ambience... Wardruna contributed several to the AC Valhalla soundtrack. :(
1) The price is too high for what it is.
2) Whilst the graphics are nice, the gameplay has taken a backseat compared to the first. And shocking concept, games are about gameplay, especially for £50. Combat is overly simple compared to the first, no multi AI fights, no sectioned boss fights. No real boss variety. You get two giants who are not real, and an old Viking.
3) Puzzles - the puzzle structure is roughly the same. But, the first game gave purpose to those puzzles. The revealed the area you were walking into and the boss you were going to fight. There was also agency to complete certain area's otherwise you died. The second game you just kind of do them to move through a section to get to the other side.
4) Boss fights. HB1 - you actually fought bosses. HB2 - for 2 out of the three "bosses" you run to a spot and either hide/hold on to a thing and then run again. At the end you get a cutscene. The final boss is the same as every other fight in the game, singular against 1 enemy. In HB1 the final boss was an absolute clusterfuck of all AI fought to that point which grew in ever increasing numbers.
5) Environment variety - HB2 is beach, rock area, cave, rocky area, beach, wood, village. Whilst it looks pretty its all very samey. HB1 each area was distinctly different. HB2 has no valley of hands, tree of the dead, no Viking hall, dungeon in the mountain, the blind passage or bridge to Hella.
6) The fury's - Senua interacts with her furies in the first game. In the second she largely ignored them. They also speak over a lot of the dialogue in the second game.
7) Her father is back for some reason.
HB1 has so much more packed into it in 7 hours that make it worth playing multiple times. HB2 is, as many have said, a walking simulator with a story attached. Its a tech demo at best for unreal engine 5 and I'm hoping they do a CDPR and release the final game at some point in the next few years.
"Hold Forward until stuff happens"
The issue isn't that hellblade 2 is 5 hours. The issue is its 5 hours and the narrative is extremely uninspired, the characters are shallow, and the ending is way too abrupt. If your going to basically give me an interactive movie due to the lack of gameplay, which for the record im ok with, you need to have a compelling story and characters that are relatively deep. Hellblade 2 did not deliver on that front and in my opinion the only good thing about it is its graphics. That is why its "failing."
The biggest issue with HB2 is that it’s not engaging at all when it comes to the interactive medium.
The criticisms of PS first party games having a lot of walking sections is 100% valid, however, you then get engaging combat and for some (Spider-Man) traversal.
HB2 doesn’t need to most in depth combat. However. The fact that you hold up for more than 10 mins is not engaging.
And unfortunately, neither are the puzzles.
The story is designed for more if s movie experience, which means little of what you do is actually fun.
Slapped on stealth is usually not fun, but a whole stealth sequence which also developed the story, would have added some diversity as well as actual thinking from the player. “Should I go there “, “when should I go”, “how long can I stay in this spot”.
But at no point in the game, traversal, puzzle or combat, do you really think.
Everything I've seen in reviews from critics I trust points to the game being a step backward from the first rather than progressing on what it built. Add in the short time, the overwhelming cutscene focus over gameplay, and a story that isn't making any reaches like the first did, it just seems adequate at best asking for too much for the base price.
Bought it on Steam to support Ninja Theory but haven't had the chance to play it yet. That said, people who are way more discerning about how they spend their money on games aren't likely to look on the price tag to game hours with a game that you can only basically play once. You can make the best stake in the world, if you charge $400/oz for it, most are going to buy cheaper steaks and not give yours the time of day; just those with money to burn will.
This is why I don't like the "experience over cost" argument. There are tons of games that could give you the same experience for less than half the cost of Hellblade 2. You have to compete in your space on pricing and Hellblade, as a series, isn't AAA material. It shouldn't have a AAA price or cost tag because it isn't going to do AAA sales. I would argue that allowing the development to drag on this long and allowing the focus to be on visuals and not adding in compelling gameplay was a horrible decision by Ninja Theory and their XBox management team.
Hopefully this doesn't result in Ninja Theory being shutdown or being made into a support development studio, but I don't trust Microsoft/XBox at all after Tango and Arkane Austin.
I think a point to be noted about the low playtime recorded is that previously, when sales were the main performance indicator, one could reasonably use that as a defence. But now that Game Pass model uses "time consumed" as the main metric by which Xbox games are measured as successful, the playtime figures are a resounding failure for Hellblade - through no fault of its own. It's not that type of game. I can't see MS not reneging on their promise to support Ninja Theory through the rough patches if they've treated Arkane and Tango so poorly, unless there's some powerful nepotism going on at Xbox HQ. Both things feel like a sad state of affairs.
So they made a "cinematic " game
I think it's fine for a gamepass game. It didn't promise things that it didn't deliver, maybe except for playtime. Kinda surprised that Steam is so positive, I don't think that it's worth 50 bucks. I guess they knew what they were getting.
First Hellblade is also under 10 hours.
@@purnalvid1627 It was also 30$. Doesn't really matter, the problem is that a dev claimed that it longer in an interview.
A cinematic walking simulator is not a game.
The fact that is such a short game despite having so much money incomparison from the past just makes no sense.
0:12 simple; it hit it's max potential market cap for people it appealed to, sure the first one was an experience but just that, nothing more, nothing less. The positive reviews and from what people said it plays pretty much the same.
I have played about 30 minutes of Hellblade 2 and I can already tell it's just what I wanted from a sequel and Hellblade is my favorite game of all time. Originally I thought it would be best left as 1 game and Senua's tragedy left as implications, but now I do feel the sequel is worthwhile.
15:00 - I get an ad like THAT, and I will avoid whatever that ad is pushing. Is MS trying to kill this game?
I think people need to stop thinking about value in terms of dollar amounts, because if we all really did that, we'd be playing only free to play games and nothing else.
You can't stream the game twitch on. Xbox. This was first game too.
Well, I guess I was right when I speculated that the game will be visual and auditory feast with not much substance beyond that.
On short games: yes, I do want shorter games. I also do not want to spend 50€ on them.
So don't go for high fidelity, marketing-heavy, money burning budgets. You won't be able to price your game at a point your audience will buy.
Your gameplay-light, emotionally resonant short narrative experience will work just as well if it looks like Oxenfree, A Short Hike, or The Pale Beyond.
I loved the first Hellbalae. Loved it. But watching streams and videos of Hellblade 2, I for sure, would not pay $50 for it.
Don’t forget that only people who buy the game can leave reviews on Steam. Part of the consequences of people being more careful with their money and looking at independent YT reviewers rather than game journo shills is that people are less likely to buy a game they probably won’t like. This is why some games that sound mid to your average player have good reviews.
AAah, the Context! Microsoft and every studio under it is now on trial.
There are general loyal XBox and Ninja Theory fans, but Tango and Arkane Austin had its own isolated admirers.
Hellblade is quite different from the games that appealed to Tango and AA fans.
50$ for 5 hours of movie? Miss me with that bullshit. Fot that price I can buy 10 indie games and enjoy each for 5 hours. And gameplay is probably gonna be better too 😂
On more serious note if you want to make those cinematic almost movie like games you either need to go the small team, low budget path when you then price it for like 20-30$ tops. Or you can go the AAA path where you have massive team working on 10-30 hours of cinematic experience in Sony style. This middle ground approach that Hellbalde 2 took was doomed to fail.
I think the price is just a deal breaker for a lot of people. If it wasn't such expensive graphics, they could probably have sold a lot more. Seems like a lot of studios are running themselves bankrupt off graphics
Last time checked it had 2600 stream reviews thats a huge fail , for a AAA game.. GOT has 14000 came out shortly before
1$ per hour of game play is the rule I use to determine if the game has value or not. If I spend 80$, I expect 80+ hours of gameplay.
People dont say NTheory have changed, the major point of contension, is that NT has not expand of their previous game. Having expand their studios, their resources and a long long long time of dev, for that...6+ years for less than 5 hours of gameplay.
Its not an achievment on whatever metric you measure it, funn factor, gamedesign, gameplay, level design...all is mediocre exept graphism fidelity but its a corridor.
Budget gameplay with AAA graphics.
Its terrible. You're better off watching it on youtube.
It's not just cost to hour ratio, it's the quality of GAMEPLAY in that cost to hour ratio. If your game is 5-7 hours and gameplay is like 70% Walking, 20% Puzzles, 10% Combat. Not to mention the cutscenes that eat into that total gameplay time. Then your game is just not worth the $50, and it doesn't matter how "Cinematic" and "graphically impressive" it is. Where if it's a shorter and linear game like Hi-Fi Rush, where the gameplay is the majority of the run time and is really fun, then cost to hour in that situation is worth it. Not every game needs to be a 100+ Hours with Uber Garphics, but every game... neeeds GAMEplay to be fun. You can tell a cinematic story but need to remember the gameplay part as well. That's the thing it feels like most Triple A Games don't understand these days. Games like Lethal Company, Palworld, and some of the other more recent viral games are not visually impressive, they don't have insane cinematic stories... They're just fun. Anyway I don't know how much they spent in the like 5-7 Making this game but I'm pretty sure this is a mega-loss and if Xbox killed Tango for an actually profitable and successful game than this is probably the end of Ninja Theory.
This critique IMO completely misses the point of both videogames as an artistic medium as well as the joy of having variety.
You don't always want an all-you-eat buffet, sometimes you want something exquisite which some could deem as pretentious or overpriced.
At the end of the day, what you pay for is gaming EXPERIENCES.
Sometimes that experience is simple satisfying fun (great gameplay mechanics/loop, RPG progression, build combinations, amazing multiplayer - which is a category onto itself tbf -, etc.), sometimes its something different, like being offered a new perspective (Outer Wilds) or being immersed in a specific story (TLOU2).
"Fun" is a) subjective b) one of several metrics. Some games can actually be legit "unfun" to play but, via their interactivity, tell a story that arguably couldn't be told in the same way otherwise. There's many games that are short but are memorable.
One of the ones that comes to mind is GRIS, which is mechanically a simplified platformer but with gorgeous art direction and a profound story, and is one of the best things that has appeared in the medium IMO. It lasts like 3 hours long but I still think about it to this day, more than other games like For Honor, where I've probably sunk thousands.
This whole notion of "gameplay fun/hour" is like measuring overall food quality in terms raw calories.
Also, wouldn't be surprised that the high Steam price is just to encourage new GamePass subs.
The reviews are in sync to the degree that they are because the people that wanted more of Senua's story got more of Senua's story. They didn't deviate from the original experience by trying to expand on things in a way people didn't want. They delivered a game that was roughly 1 to 1 with the experience of the first game with better graphical fidelity. I will fight and die on the hill that the combat of the second game is basically 1 to 1 with the first game, except of what are likely technical limitations due to the motion captured elements of the combat that led to them making linear one on one fights.
And I don't recall Microsoft pushing this as the next big AAA thing. Any and all of these complaints from the comments here and loud corners of the internet are people imposing their own unreal expectations on the game.
Sometimes it's okay to just have a game where you play and finish in one or two sittings, and just get a unique experience. I didn't play it, but I can appreciate it for what it is. Not everything needs to be a vast open world. I love a good linear story every once in awhile. I got hellblade ads on HBO max btw. Might buy the game on sale, but won't pay full price for it.
I can accept every type of game, I wish there was enough space for all of them... But if a studio that prioritizes cinematic feel to gameplay crashes and burns I won't be sad.
I never played the first one, but heard great things about it. When I saw that the sequel is about five to seven hours long, and it's priced at seventy dollars, I immediately lost interest in both. I might pick them up for cheap down the road to check them out but there is no way in hell I'm paying full game price for something that short. I paid forty bucks for Helldivers II and I'm still dumping hours into it.
I always liked the first game, but in all honesty i had expectation that the game would be more in exploring the world that it barely show in the first game.
But being more or less the same game really bum me out, second my pc cannot run this game and i dont have an xbox.
I always thought they could have expanded more or senua abilities, she only gets that time stop thing. I guess my gamer brain though they were gonna make her like a god of something by the end of it since so much mythical nord stuff is involve in the games.
People often say you shouldn't equate a games play length with value for money, but $70 AUD is way too much for a 5-6 hour game, at least this was discounted, 'The Order: 1886' was still $100 on the PS store, and that was about the same length as this game.
That game is not 100 buck. 😂😂😂 stop lying. And that game goes on sale for 10 buck. AND the order actually has gameplay unlike hold left stick up for 40 mins.
@@kg888 I'm not lying, you just misinterpreted what I was saying. Even though it was only 5-6 hours long they were still selling for $100. I'm not saying that it's still selling current day for $100. On release at EB Games and on the PS Store it was selling for $99.95.
I think it's a shame with Hellblade as it is probably decent for what it is but at the price it is for what is essentially a 5 hour only walking sim.... yeah that is a tough sell to me. I will grab it once it goes on heavy discount just to check out the graphics
The number of people who claimed to be looking forward to this game seemed indicative of a mass formation psychosis. Nothing about the original was remotely interesting, so the idea that the sequel was expected to be "even better" was ridiculous.
I actually had quite a bit of fun with bleeding edge. And in my opinion Enslaved Odyssey to the West is Ninja theory's best game.