Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9679420" data-attributes="member: 18">Christ Microsoft must have given them a lot of money - very AAA production values and huge difference to what they were showing a . I'll be very interested to see how the time-travel elements actually work out. I noticed they stuck to a pretty small cast of NPCs in the trailer - that could be just because it's early days or maybe they're keeping it compact so the time travel can be significant?Liked the music, that's for sure!I mean, either you don't play shooters much, or you're being a bit silly on purpose. Third-person shooters are rare as hen's teeth to start with, so never generic, and this is a Mass Effect-style RPG, not a "shooter". I feel like you're making my point for me re: stretching to dismiss it.Again, it's not a "shooter" any more than the ME series, Cyberpunk 2077, and so on are (by the same logic, BG3 is a "turn-based strategy game" and BG2 is a "Real-time strategy game"). Also presumably not re: "saved money"? I can't imagine they didn't consider making their own IP - that's generally the more profitable way to go - for them to have chosen to go with The Expanse must have been on the basis that they'd make significantly more money that way - and they probably will, because most expanse fans are not purists who object to basic videogame tropes like "one character takes out a whole bunch of guys". As supporting evidence I would point to pretty much every "game based on a book/movie/show" where it's genuinely rare for the main character in the game to not kill at least 10x as many enemies as the "real" character would, sometimes much more than that. Players don't generally complain about this.</blockquote>

Verification