PlayStation 5

Finished Everyone has Gone to Rapture.

Absolutely beautiful game that had me revisit a side of England that I very much miss, and England as a whole.

Yes its a walking simulator in the purest sense with no gameplay at all but beautifully told, rendered, and wrapped up all in four to five hours.

Small indie games like these have been my thing as of recent due to time constraints and more for tiny pockets of escape from a hectic month.

Highly recommend it.

Firenze wrote:buy a PS5 special edition for something, like GOW2 or whatever, never actually owned one because I usually get a console at launch

The only known special edition version of the PS5 right now, is this 24k gold one

Arquitecto wrote:Finished Everyone has Gone to Rapture.

Absolutely beautiful game that had me revisit a side of England that I very much miss, and England as a whole.

Yes its a walking simulator in the purest sense with no gameplay at all but beautifully told, rendered, and wrapped up all in four to five hours.

Small indie games like these have been my thing as of recent due to time constraints and more for tiny pockets of escape from a hectic month.

Highly recommend it.

Had to read it twice to see if this was satire.

Fair enough though

Thimmy wrote:

Firenze wrote:buy a PS5 special edition for something, like GOW2 or whatever, never actually owned one because I usually get a console at launch

The only known special edition version of the PS5 right now, is this 24k gold one

Will be bought by someone from the middle east 100000%

RealGunner wrote:

Arquitecto wrote:Finished Everyone has Gone to Rapture.

Absolutely beautiful game that had me revisit a side of England that I very much miss, and England as a whole.

Yes its a walking simulator in the purest sense with no gameplay at all but beautifully told, rendered, and wrapped up all in four to five hours.

Small indie games like these have been my thing as of recent due to time constraints and more for tiny pockets of escape from a hectic month.

Highly recommend it.

Had to read it twice to see if this was satire.

Fair enough though

Wait why because you didn't like it or the lack of gameplay?

Gold PS5

Absolutely tasteless if bought already Gold can be gaudy in any situation, as it is.

Arquitecto wrote:

RealGunner wrote:

Arquitecto wrote:Finished Everyone has Gone to Rapture.

Absolutely beautiful game that had me revisit a side of England that I very much miss, and England as a whole.

Yes its a walking simulator in the purest sense with no gameplay at all but beautifully told, rendered, and wrapped up all in four to five hours.

Small indie games like these have been my thing as of recent due to time constraints and more for tiny pockets of escape from a hectic month.

Highly recommend it.

Had to read it twice to see if this was satire.

Fair enough though

Wait why because you didn't like it or the lack of gameplay?

It's one of the worst games I have ever played. Not really a game though tbf. I had to take a year off from gaming after that.

Its huge problem was you literally could not run.

The way I play games reflects why I like it.

Slow trods on roach through the countryside in Witcher.

Playing Grand Theft Auto like a real life pedestrian at times.

Admiring water physics, creating picturesque shots, preferring reality over arcade always.

As a whole British devs are just the most original Ive come to notice.


But it captured the village side of England perfectly and I cannot state enough how brilliantly unique the isles as a whole, are.

I appreciate both realism and a more arcadey style of games. It really depends on the game. I used to wish FIFA was more realistic, but after witnessing EA’s countless attempts at making great strides in realism through individual installments, that opinion has changed completely.

For me, FIFA is the most fun when it’s arcadey at it’s core. They’re not willing to invest the time and resources required to create a satisfactory, realistic game, so they might as well stop trying, in my opinion. Ideally, they would find a balance between realism and nonsensical fun, but I think they’ve mostly failed where they’ve specifically focused on making a game feel more true to reality, and it’s been detrimental to the overall entertainment value. Crowd chants, upgraded graphics, those subtle improvements are what they do best, in terms of creating a feeling of realism in FIFA.

I don’t play any shooters these days, but it’s always baffled me why CoD didn’t just stick to their original recipe of creating fast paced, arcadey games that were popular. Their downfall started when they increased the size and complexity of their maps, and their effort to rectify that through adding sci-fi elements, absolutely didn’t make things better.

Meanwhile, Battlefield, who were known for doing realism better, went in the opposite direction with smaller maps, more frequent engagements and arcadey elements. It makes you wonder if the guys who run these companies have any clue what they’re doing. All of these franchises should’ve just stuck to what they did best, instead of trying to improve upon what their rivals clearly are better and more established at.

I couldn't disagree more regarding FIFA and realism tbh.

It looks realistic but it doesn't play realistic at all, it's arcadey as hell.

The game is super fast, massively geared towards wing play abuse and it's passing feels like ping pong sim.

I also hated Rapture. Games in the genre like Ethan Carter, Edith Finch, Oxenfree, Unfinished Swan, Brothers, have actual gameplay, usually with clever puzzles and set pieces and they are all great games thanks to it. Dear Esther, Rapture and Gone Home are exactly what everyone who has a negative perception of "walking sims" think it is, you just walk and press X at certain points.

Opinions differ though, glad Arq liked it. It is quite liked by a lot of people. I just don't like how you could literally just watch the whole thing on Youtube and nothing would change. I have the same feeling with visual novels. I wish I researched more before getting to it. Steins;Gate was my first experience and yes, great story but I was kicking myself for actually buying it with money when I could have watched the whole thing on Youtube.

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:I couldn't disagree more regarding FIFA and realism tbh.

It looks realistic but it doesn't play realistic at all, it's arcadey as hell.

The game is super fast, massively geared towards wing play abuse and it's passing feels like ping pong sim.

That’s the point I was trying to make. They made attempts at making the game appear more realistic, and it just made the game worse. They even patched some of their updates, as a result of mass complaints.

I remember that Art Morte was a big fan of how they slowed down everything in FIFA 16 and made every player feel like a snail. That’s not realism, to me. It’s a half-assed attempt at creating an illusion of realism, and that’s all they can do since they release a new game every year, and don’t have the time and resources to spare, to create a truly realistic, football simulator. Instead, we get gimmicks and redundant features that are hit or miss. They’re already succeeding at making the atmosphere more realistic, by updating the sound, graphics and animations. When they attempt to go a atepxfurther than that, they fuck up, more often than not.

Looks like they’re adding more realistic, close control dribbling to FIFA 21. Why does it feel like they advertised the exact same thing 5 years ago? I won’t be surprised if FIFA 22 re-introduces driven passes under a different name. I suppose those features are better than nothing, but it seems to me that they don’t have a very good grasp of what type of tweaks and updates are needed to make the game actually appear more like real life football, so they should just stick to what they’re familiar with and improve on that instead - in my humble opinion.

God knows, there are tons of perfectly functional and popular features and mechanisms they’ve left to collect dust, in favor of these gimmicky additions that supposedly make the experience more realistic. Bottom line, either they stop the futile attempts at tricking consumers into thinking every new iteration adds a substantial amount of realism through these silly features, or they take the time they need to actually update the game. Of course, the latter isn’t... realistic

Because they're bad at implementing it, realism doesn't inherently need to be bad.

Take PES for example, it's definitely a slower game but they know how to implement it so when the game quickens you really feel it. Counter attacks actually feel rewarding because when they happen you notice the difference in game speed.

Not to mention most players feel unique to their traits which is something FIFA still fails spectacularly at implementing outside a few exceptions.

Although one thing PES has never done (except when it's bad) is use Realism at the expense of actual fun but use it to enhance the fun.

Something FIFA fails at again and again, i haven't actually played a PES in like 2 or 3 years but unless something changed this is how it usually is.

Sounds like to me you have a problem with badly implemented realism than realism itself.

Thimmy wrote:

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:I couldn't disagree more regarding FIFA and realism tbh.

It looks realistic but it doesn't play realistic at all, it's arcadey as hell.

The game is super fast, massively geared towards wing play abuse and it's passing feels like ping pong sim.

That’s the point I was trying to make. They made attempts at making the game appear more realistic, and it just made the game worse. They even patched some of their updates, as a result of mass complaints.

I remember that Art Morte was a big fan of how they slowed down everything in FIFA 16 and made every player feel like a snail. That’s not realism, to me. It’s a half-assed attempt at creating an illusion of realism, and that’s all they can do since they release a new game every year, and don’t have the time and resources to spare, to create a truly realistic, football simulator. Instead, we get gimmicks and redundant features that are hit or miss. They’re already succeeding at making the atmosphere more realistic, by updating the sound, graphics and animations. When they attempt to go a atepxfurther than that, they fuck up, more often than not.

I did enjoy FIFA 16 as far as I remember. High level FIFA nowadays looks like a joke, win the ball and break forward at lightning speed every time, playing a great pass after great pass. Midfield is completely ignored.

FIFA has long since ran into the wall of max potential, though. For several years now it hasn't been about improving the game, it's been about changing little things here and there to somehow justify selling a new game every year. 100% of the gameplay changes in the PS4 / XBox 1 era could have been implemented at any point in the last 5 years. It's all about making a slightly different game nowadays rather than improving the previous one. I also doubt that the new consoles are going to change this, because it's probably more down to the input device now than computing power. There's a limit to how much stuff you can do controls wise and better hardware performance isn't going to change that.

Thimmy and Mole both have good points.

Realism is not about pace but more so replicating reality onto gaming.

FIFA was rather hamfisted at that initially but the reason people seem to prefer less of it is because arcade is a more streamlined form of locomotion whereas Ive always preferred FIFA now more than ever than PES, to which just feels soulless due to its lack of presentation and licence.


Graphics being my number one priority for games stems from how I like to see a game as realistic as possible but implemented well, to borrow from Mole.

I just find them more immersive and have me think more per say rather than the cognitive mash that its counterpart can be.

M99 wrote:I also hated Rapture. Games in the genre like Ethan Carter, Edith Finch, Oxenfree, Unfinished Swan, Brothers, have actual gameplay, usually with clever puzzles and set pieces and they are all great games thanks to it. Dear Esther, Rapture and Gone Home are exactly what everyone who has a negative perception of "walking sims" think it is, you just walk and press X at certain points.

Opinions differ though, glad Arq liked it. It is quite liked by a lot of people. I just don't like how you could literally just watch the whole thing on Youtube and nothing would change. I have the same feeling with visual novels. I wish I researched more before getting to it. Steins;Gate was my first experience and yes, great story but I was kicking myself for actually buying it with money when I could have watched the whole thing on Youtube.

I agree with all of that, but the problem with Rapture was that it tried to create this huge mystery (first part of the game is actually exciting because you think the game is going to take you on a mystery solving journey) however all it ended up being was you crawl from one place to another watching and hearing generic stories and then you wait and wait and wait until the end for the big reveal.. but it just ends.

I guess they weren't kidding when they said Everybody's Gone to the Rapture...

Thimmy wrote:

Great Leader Sprucenuce wrote:I couldn't disagree more regarding FIFA and realism tbh.

It looks realistic but it doesn't play realistic at all, it's arcadey as hell.

The game is super fast, massively geared towards wing play abuse and it's passing feels like ping pong sim.

That’s the point I was trying to make. They made attempts at making the game appear more realistic, and it just made the game worse. They even patched some of their updates, as a result of mass complaints.

I remember that Art Morte was a big fan of how they slowed down everything in FIFA 16 and made every player feel like a snail. That’s not realism, to me. It’s a half-assed attempt at creating an illusion of realism, and that’s all they can do since they release a new game every year, and don’t have the time and resources to spare, to create a truly realistic, football simulator. Instead, we get gimmicks and redundant features that are hit or miss. They’re already succeeding at making the atmosphere more realistic, by updating the sound, graphics and animations. When they attempt to go a a step further than that, they fuck up, more often than not.

Absolutely this. No one actually wanted realism. Realism =/= fun. In their attempt on making the GAME as close as to REAL football, they ruined everything which made the game actually fun to play.

This is why Fifa 15 is the last great fifa.

M99 wrote:I also hated Rapture. Games in the genre like Ethan Carter, Edith Finch, Oxenfree, Unfinished Swan, Brothers, have actual gameplay, usually with clever puzzles and set pieces and they are all great games thanks to it. Dear Esther, Rapture and Gone Home are exactly what everyone who has a negative perception of "walking sims" think it is, you just walk and press X at certain points.

Opinions differ though, glad Arq liked it. It is quite liked by a lot of people. I just don't like how you could literally just watch the whole thing on Youtube and nothing would change. I have the same feeling with visual novels. I wish I researched more before getting to it. Steins;Gate was my first experience and yes, great story but I was kicking myself for actually buying it with money when I could have watched the whole thing on Youtube.

Bear in mind these indie walking sim games are made for a certain market.

And those are mostly millennials who have less time then ever with their careers and kids on field.

So most people in such form or new gamers prefer something short, straightforward and more like an interactive film.


Rapture's only problem was that it had no run button, which was fine for me as it forced you to soak in the detail though I get the problem.


Walking Sims as mentioned above I see more as interactive films.

Plus loved it since I miss England a whole lot and adore its rural side.

Going to run through Dear Esther, Edith Finch etc.

Arquitecto wrote:

M99 wrote:I also hated Rapture. Games in the genre like Ethan Carter, Edith Finch, Oxenfree, Unfinished Swan, Brothers, have actual gameplay, usually with clever puzzles and set pieces and they are all great games thanks to it. Dear Esther, Rapture and Gone Home are exactly what everyone who has a negative perception of "walking sims" think it is, you just walk and press X at certain points.

Opinions differ though, glad Arq liked it. It is quite liked by a lot of people. I just don't like how you could literally just watch the whole thing on Youtube and nothing would change. I have the same feeling with visual novels. I wish I researched more before getting to it. Steins;Gate was my first experience and yes, great story but I was kicking myself for actually buying it with money when I could have watched the whole thing on Youtube.

Bear in mind these indie walking sim games are made for a certain market.

And those are mostly millennials who have less time then ever with their careers and kids on field.

So most people in such form or new gamers prefer something short, straightforward and more like an interactive film.


Rapture's only problem was that it had no run button, which was fine for me as it forced you to soak in the detail though I get the problem.


Walking Sims as mentioned above I see more as interactive films.

Plus loved it since I miss England a whole lot and adore its rural side.

Going to run through Dear Esther, Edith Finch etc.

Play Detroit: Become Human if you like interactive movies, not a walking simulator though.

I imagine Arq would enjoy playing The Wolf Among us, which I already mentioned in the general games thread. It's more interactive than a typical walking simulator, and it's not a very time-consuming game. Should be available at bargain bin prices by now, and it's a pretty unique and entertaining experience, I think.

No I like those type of non-linear games but there is no freedom of movement in them per say comparatively to first person walking sims.

The feel of a lonely walk through a mysterious yet beautiful environment just gets to me.

I sincerely hope PS5 let alone VR gets its own type in that so it can actually be beyond a flat screen, for me.

Arquitecto wrote:No I like those type of non-linear games but there is no freedom of movement in them per say comparatively to first person walking sims.

The feel of a lonely walk through a mysterious yet beautiful environment just gets to me.

I sincerely hope PS5 let alone VR gets its own type in that so it can actually be beyond a flat screen, for me.

The boldened part is exactly why I think you'd like The Wolf Among Us. It's not the aesthetically most beautiful game, but the mystery of the universe they created, appealed to me. I also appreciate the mature theme in a game that's based around fairy tale characters. There's something charming about it. More people should play it.

Will definitely check it out then my friend, on my list already.

Marvel's Spider-Man: Remastered for PS5 brings a web of changes... including a new face model for Peter Parker. pic.twitter.com/6IiXAIIopi

— IGN (@IGN) September 30, 2020

Is there a black version? The white looks awful tbh.