Anthem: Bioware's next Mass Effect-like IP

[Krille]

Costs too much for something that will never be used (TTS is what the law is looking for, and blind people USUALLY don't play videogames, specially action shooters).

Just dumb ass EU pushed laws that apply accessibility laws to everything and everyone with 0 understanding of needs/demands.

[Onikaroshi]

Just dumb ass EU pushed laws that apply accessibility laws to everything and everyone with 0 understanding of needs/demands.

Don't know what the EU has to do with this since it's an FCC/US law.

[yasiru]

If fairly priced then yes.

Not like Fallout 76 which charges £12 in atoms for a bloody sign.

- - - Updated - - -



Oh I agree. People are taking these prices as final and imo they shouldn't be.

It's very rare I give either of these 2 companies the benefit of the doubt but I will do so. If they are still £15/$20 or w/e then well....

You say you agree yet in a previous post you were the one saying people would be upset if prices went live they way they are now, which seems to imply you think those skins were $20 like the youtubers who were totally guessing. Not trying to sound insulting but it apppears you are contradicting yourself, unless I'm missing something?

[Krille]

Don't know what the EU has to do with this since it's an FCC/US law.

Because it's even worse in the EU and they have to comply with those laws too.

[yasiru]

*grinding not compulsory as we have a cash shop ready to speed you through the levels and game. (if you dont own a credit card, feel free to steal your parents credit card when they are busy making your meals)

Good grief, another one complaining while being completely un-informed.......sigh

[Krille]

Good grief, another one complaining while being completely un-informed.......sigh

Are you surprised? It's funny how people single out publishers for being greedy when they're all companies made to maximize profit. Get real boooys.

[quras]

Things I, at the very least wasn't upset about:
- Controls seem meh, not bad, but nothing special... I enjoyed shooting more than using the skills.
- Graphics are decent, especially outside of the shit fort.

Things I don't like:
- Everything about the menus/map/etc., was terrible... What were they thinking? Its all so clunky, cluttered, and non-intuitive...
- Loading screen to customize your gear? Come on...
- Speaking of loading screens, shit got old fast when there was a loading screen for every other hole in the wall your flew through in the world.
- The settings don't seem to kick in until after all the splash screens/initial load... So I had to take my headphones off when I start the game every single time because its SO FUCKING LOUD and there is no way to skip any of that bullshit.
- Walking around the fort was awful. The whole time I was in the demo I just did not want to be there ever.
- The salvage/crafting menu/system was terrible and slow as fuck.
- No option to switch which shoulder you look over in a third person shooter? What year is it? Permanently makes hugging a corner on your right and shooting left impossible... Which is insane since avoiding damage is just as important as dishing it out, I would assume even more so as the difficulty goes up.
- The world felt empty as fudge.
- Harvesting nodes... You have to stop and hold the harvest button or attack the node, which is no problem... But then you have to wait for it to do a little animation and throw the materials out on the ground and then walk over it to pick it up? WHY? Why not just put it in our fucking inventory after we harvest it, its like someone went through this game and made as many obtuse decisions for every little thing they could possibly find...
- The hitscan or whatever for some skills is huge, way too big... Like another playing standing 10 feet in front of me, but also 10 feet to my right or left would somehow get hit with my skills and block them... Or look at this screen shot... Where my reticle is, if I shoot my missile, it detonates instantly against the rock to my right, despite it being perfectly clear in front of me.
- The AI is atrocious... Almost no aggressiveness, you can basically always run away and recharge your shield and they will slowly follow you, if they follow you at all, meaning there is almost no pressure ever. Every enemy I encountered could be cheesed to avoid their damage... Hell every single melee enemy seems to break entirely if you just jump up on top of something and camp there... They just stand down on the ground and facetank your damage, unable to do anything to you... I don't know if this improves later with difficulty, like making them able to climb or teleport to you or something? But if it doesn't that's just sad, it basically makes every enemy of that type irrelevant. Even the lesser ash titans on that one mission where you fight three of them... I just hopped up on the ledge and they all three just stood below me doing nothing until occasionally casting one of their abilities which could be avoided entirely, making them no threat whatsoever... And this was on hard, solo...

Things I will withold judgment on until release:
- Performance seemed pretty bad. I have a 6600k (OC'd to 4.5) + 1080 Ti and at 1440p with all settings maxed the game was running like shit. I turned one or two things down one notch and it ran slightly better without losing much visual fidelity... But I regularly dipped below 60fps, rarely even as low as the 40s (in the ass fort). Though to be fair, the game seemed to run a lot better with more consistent fps outside in the actual game than it did in the garbage terrible fort.
- Game crashed multiple times for me.

That speaks for me as well. I felt the same way on this post.

Just to add my own conclusion for the weekend. Game looked great. The rest was really mediocre from story to gameplay to weapons to AI. It looked great but nothing else was "wallet opening" material.

Are you surprised? It's funny how people single out publishers for being greedy when they're all companies made to maximize profit. Get real boooys.

Most don't mind companies making money. However, they do mind how they go about doing it. There is a difference.

[Krille]

Most don't mind companies making money. However, they do mind how they go about doing it. There is a difference.

Well of course, but whats the harm in charging for cosmetics? Do we hear the same outrage about Hearthstone, FIFA or insert -asian RPG- when it comes to pure p2w? LoL, Dota 2 and CSGO have been doing this for 10 years.

[MrPaladinGuy]

Well, I'm an idiot. Until earlier this evening I thought the demo was console only, then I found out it wasn't. I had the demo ready to go a few hours ago then decided to watch Netflix and eat before trying it, now the demo's unavailable.

[Ballistic]

Well of course, but whats the harm in charging for cosmetics? Do we hear the same outrage about Hearthstone, FIFA or insert -asian RPG- when it comes to pure p2w? LoL, Dota 2 and CSGO have been doing this for 10 years.

Most of the games you mentioned are f2p, so no harm for these companies make money out of cosmetics, point to me any Asian RPG that has p2w element succeeded in the western market.

[nekobaka]

Sounds like a cop out to me. The PC version should at least have a chat window and interface for typing. Too bad the game is made for consoles then ported. Don't get me wrong here, I think the game looks and plays amazing. I'm just getting REAL tired of losing basic functionality because games have to be dumbed down for consoles and their crippled controller-only interface.

It's legit, but from the get go the devs had no intent of introducing it along with many other features until community called for it. Personally biggest worry with the dev team being more reactive to community in arguably key areas and features that should of been standard based on what the competition is doing. Good and all to build good will with community to "listen" to them while shit in thinking ahead for themselves in where they want to take the game. Personally too much BS PR attempts of building good. Transparency only goes so far. In the end it is just excesses and one only gets so many.

[Onvious]

my biggest problem is loading screens. i dont link them much. but we have them even for inventory, this is just bad.

[Khelek]

I played the demo and found the combat satisfactory and the visuals quite nice. I will freely admit the looter shooter is not my cup of tea. I have no clue why people would want to grind the same shit over and over for boring repetitive rewards, but if that is your thing (and I know some people love it) this might be for you.

A major issue exists in the fact that this is, at its heart, a pretty cash grab and nothing more. It is entirely built for micro-transaction monetization schemes on top of its full AAA price tag. It was designed and built to mimic Borderlands in gameplay and, originally, was to utilize an Overwatch style loot box system (which has been thankfully redesigned after the recent backlash against loot boxes). It is a game chasing the latest trends.


I just wish Bioware hadn't abandoned the types of games that built their brand. I would be so much more enthused about this game (multiplayer included) if it had balanced a single player narrative of even mediocre quality (by Bioware standards) to go along with the multiplayer side of things. If I could play through a solid single player game and get a feel for things, I would be much more likely to jump into the multiplayer afterwards. Well, more likely than the multiplayer of Mass Effect 3 or DA:I.

The market is saturated with pretty shooters at the moment (Overwatch, PUBG, Fortnight, etc.), while people have been waiting for the next strong single player game to fill the void left after the Witcher III. That used to be Bioware's bread and butter.

[Onikaroshi]

next strong single player game to fill the void left after the Witcher III.

To say that there hasn't been a good single player game since Witcher III is a bit disingenuous, hell to call witcher III by such high standards for most people is. It's a good game, but it's not great, it amounts to a walking simulator and fetch quest for the most part of it. It suffers from a lot of issues that most open world games suffer from, bloat that does nothing more then extend time.

I'd much rather have a fun Multiplayer game like Anthem, or Division 2, or the like to kill time with friends and keep single player to quick, action packed games like DMC5 or atmospheric horror style like RE2.

[Khelek]

To say that there hasn't been a good single player game since Witcher III is a bit disingenuous, hell to call witcher III by such high standards for most people is. It's a good game, but it's not great, it amounts to a walking simulator and fetch quest for the most part of it. It suffers from a lot of issues that most open world games suffer from, bloat that does nothing more then extend time.

I'd much rather have a fun Multiplayer game like Anthem, or Division 2, or the like to kill time with friends and keep single player to quick, action packed games like DMC5 or atmospheric horror style like RE2.

Personally, I am not a huge Witcher fan. The first 2 were terrible and the third was solid if vastly overrated, but they were light years beyond the Division (which I greatly disliked). Anthem is completely functional at its core and I wouldn't blame anyone for buying and enjoying it. Hell, I enjoyed the demo. I just don't see it having any lasting impact.

If this was the start of a strong narrative that was to be expanded in the future, I could forgive a lot. Imagine this game had such a narrative and promised to sell regular expansions to continue it. I know I would play through the story than mess around in the multiplayer until the next part came out. Bioware could rinse and repeat all while keeping players engaged and purchasing their micro transactions.

Bioware's brand was built on such narratives. I can understand them wanting to jump on the multiplayer loot box bandwagon, but they should have put their own spin on it rather than chasing trends. This trend chasing has hurt many companies such as Blizzard and Bioware lately when they should, with their resources and acclaim, be trend setters or at the very least put their own mark on the games genres they are copying.

[Mirishka]

I played the demo and found the combat satisfactory and the visuals quite nice. I will freely admit the looter shooter is not my cup of tea. I have no clue why people would want to grind the same shit over and over for boring repetitive rewards, but if that is your thing (and I know some people love it) this might be for you.

A major issue exists in the fact that this is, at its heart, a pretty cash grab and nothing more. It is entirely built for micro-transaction monetization schemes on top of its full AAA price tag. It was designed and built to mimic Borderlands in gameplay and, originally, was to utilize an Overwatch style loot box system (which has been thankfully redesigned after the recent backlash against loot boxes). It is a game chasing the latest trends.


I just wish Bioware hadn't abandoned the types of games that built their brand. I would be so much more enthused about this game (multiplayer included) if it had balanced a single player narrative of even mediocre quality (by Bioware standards) to go along with the multiplayer side of things. If I could play through a solid single player game and get a feel for things, I would be much more likely to jump into the multiplayer afterwards. Well, more likely than the multiplayer of Mass Effect 3 or DA:I.

The market is saturated with pretty shooters at the moment (Overwatch, PUBG, Fortnight, etc.), while people have been waiting for the next strong single player game to fill the void left after the Witcher III. That used to be Bioware's bread and butter.

Ugh, where to begin with this.

For starters Bioware haven't abandoned their classic style of games. For all its flaws Andromeda was structurally, exactly a Mass Effect game. Primarily SP, choice-driven, romance/companions/etc. And the next Dragon Age will be as well - they even clarified that the 'live service' talk that was making the rounds for that game simply referred to more story-based content post launch.

Regarding Anthem, the entire campaign/story mode can be played in singleplayer, along with a lot of additional missions/content. The MP-only content is Freeplay and Strongholds. And Bioware has said all along that the microtransactions will be purely cosmetic - and while the real money pricing has some people up in arms, you can earn a currency for them in game as well.

Also I don't get your trends comment, if Anthem was a game about chasing 'the latest trends' it would be yet another garbage Battle Royale knockoff.

People are searching for the next great SP game to fill a post-Witcher 3 void? Were you living under a rock when RE7, God of War, Horizon Zero Dawn, Spiderman PS4, Assassin's Creed Origins/Odyssey, RE2 Remake, or a little indie game you might have heard of called Red Dead Redemption 2 released? Hell, Odyssey in particular is practically a Bioware game in all but brand.

The past few years have been an embarrassment of riches for strong SP games.

[Lex Icon]

the microtransaction whining is just silly.. especially when it comes from content creators like bellular & heels that make a living off covering games that has all of that + even more.

WoW sells hats for 10 bucks,mounts for 20+, full game price expansions & charge 15-30+ for things like name change,race change(which they're pushing with the allied races) & faction change. and on top of that it has a sub. but you may argue that you can pay for that with gold now... yeah well that's the same thing Anthem is doing.

same deal with most of the bigger online titles.
but since it's EA let's pull out the pitchforks because apparently we've been buying every single game they've published lately and gotten burned every time.

naga please!

[Ophenia]

WoW sells hats for 10 bucks,mounts for 20+, full game price expansions & charge 15-30+ for things like name change,race change(which they're pushing with the allied races) & faction change. and on top of that it has a sub. but you may argue that you can pay for that with gold now... yeah well that's the same thing Anthem is doing.

Anthem is not even doing that. Because buying stuff with Gold in WoW still "gives" Blizzard (more) money as someone has to purchase tokens first.
While if you buy cosmetics with the in-game currency in Anthem, EA/Bioware doesn't get anything (beyond the fact you're actually playing).

[Lex Icon]

Anthem is not even doing that. Because buying stuff with Gold in WoW still "gives" Blizzard (more) money as someone has to purchase tokens first.
While if you buy cosmetics with the in-game currency in Anthem, EA/Bioware doesn't get anything (beyond the fact you're actually playing).

ah yeah you're right.

[Lahis]

the microtransaction whining is just silly.. especially when it comes from content creators like bellular & heels that make a living off covering games that has all of that + even more.

WoW sells hats for 10 bucks,mounts for 20+, full game price expansions & charge 15-30+ for things like name change,race change(which they're pushing with the allied races) & faction change. and on top of that it has a sub. but you may argue that you can pay for that with gold now... yeah well that's the same thing Anthem is doing.

same deal with most of the bigger online titles.
but since it's EA let's pull out the pitchforks because apparently we've been buying every single game they've published lately and gotten burned every time.

naga please!

You think they don't critisize WoW for the store mounts?

They do, because the store is bullshit.