Arkane PREY - Arkane's immersive coffee cup transformation sim - now with Mooncrash roguelike mode DLC

[Latelistener]

Ooh, then I guess Steam version actually will get Denuvo removed?

I've read some reports on Steam that it was never properly implemented in Prey and I can be launched offline. Maybe they won't even bother.

Also, Lords of the Fallen came out on GOG a couple of years ago and it still has Denuvo on Steam. Maybe they're making some kind of DRM-free exclusivity deals with CDP.

 

[Krilmar]

Tempted to buy it on GOG as well, in the hopes for a sequel. Went totally blind into Prey, bought it on a whim and it became my favorite non-rpg game from the past 5 years. A very nice surprise in this time and age.

 

[Metro]

Squeenix won't remove Denuvo on Scamkind Derpvided despite releasing on GoG. Doubt Bethesderp does any better with Prey. Really an insult.

 

[gurugeorge]

If anyone out there hasn't played this yet, snap up that GOG offer, it's a good game. If you were ever a fan of the first System Shock, the general feel of it is very much like that.

 

[DalekFlay]

Squeenix won't remove Denuvo on Scamkind Derpvided despite releasing on GoG. Doubt Bethesderp does any better with Prey. Really an insult.

You sure Bethesda didn't already? They removed it from Dishonored 2 and Rage 2.

 

[kangaxx]

I've been meaning to replay this, it's one of my favourite games released in the past few years.

Always wish it had sold better to encourage more studios to take on the "immersive sim" genre. I still think that meme-worthy IGN review fucked it over on launch. Unbelievably, people actually listen to those retards and by the time he corrected his review the damage was done.

 

[JDR13]

I've been meaning to replay this, it's one of my favourite games released in the past few years.

Always wish it had sold better to encourage more studios to take on the "immersive sim" genre. I still think that meme-worthy IGN review fucked it over on launch. Unbelievably, people actually listen to those retards and by the time he corrected his review the damage was done.

I agree. It really is a great game if you're in it for the atmosphere.

My only beef is that it gets a little too easy after a certain point. The problem is that Neuromods are too easy to obtain, and they really should have put less of them in the game.

 

[AW8]

I still think that meme-worthy IGN review fucked it over on launch. Unbelievably, people actually listen to those retards and by the time he corrected his review the damage was done.

I was going to ask for a TL;DR but the review was a mercilessly short video. I don't see the problem, it was apparently a technical mess with savefiles being corrupted and he gave it an honest review in light of that. The real problem is the review culture that gives out dishonest 10/10's despite technical issues, making this one stand out.

 

[kangaxx]

He gave it 3 out of 10 due to a very hard-to-replicate bug that affected his save file, and not many others experienced this from memory. If he were a professional he'd have delayed his review by a day or two and contacted the studio to get it fixed.

Most of the retards who read IGN will just look at the score and skip it if it's that bad. Definitely would have hurt sales.

 

[kangaxx]

My only beef is that it gets a little too easy after a certain point. The problem is that Neuromods are too easy to obtain, and they really should have put less of them in the game.

This is true, and the game acknowledges how over-levelled you are by the endgame by saying "Lol, here are some irritating Mk 4 respawning drones to deal with". It's pretty weak, but at least you can stop them respawning if there are enough boxes near the replicator.

 

[AW8]

He gave it 3 out of 10 due to a very hard-to-replicate bug that affected his save file, and not many others experienced this from memory.

Yes, and he brought up that game-breaking bug. Imagine experiencing a game-breaking bug and not taking it into account when scoring a game.

Speaking of scoring, it is of course a retarded practice as this shows. Remove the number and the review speaks of a game he finds good, but cannot recommend at this point due to him experiencing recurrent game-breaking bugs. An honest and informative take.

If he were a professional he'd have delayed his review by a day or two

I'm sure his boss would find that very professional as well.

and contacted the studio to get it fixed.

He did contact Arkane, they sent him a new savefile, and he kept experiencing the same problems.

Most of the retards who read IGN will just look at the score and skip it if it's that bad. Definitely would have hurt sales.

Of course anything under 8/10 hurts sales, that's why you have this whole dishonest review culture where reviewers are pressured into shilling for games. Most of the time they're just an extended PR arm instead of actually reviewing the game.

 

[kangaxx]

I just can't put myself on the same side as the reviewer. The game wasn't a "technical mess" as you said in a post above. This guy suffered an almost unreplicable bug and it's pretty widely acknowledged from what I've seen that he jumped the gun a bit.

Mention the bug, of course. Perhaps he should have published the review text but withheld the score until later.

 

[AW8]

I didn't experience any bugs when I played the game a year after release, but it was definitely a technical mess for him on review day, even after help from Arkane. Every reviewer should take whether technical issues stopped them from completing the game or not into consideration when making their review. Since this seems to have been a one in a million (I haven't read/seen any other reviews, nor do I intend to) this should be evident if no other reviewer brings up the same technical problems.

Changing their format just for one review really starts to smell like corruption. At that point, might as well slap an 8/10 on it and pretend you finished it without problems.

 

[JDR13]

Speaking of scoring, it is of course a retarded practice as this shows. Remove the number and the review speaks of a game he finds good, but cannot recommend at this point due to him experiencing recurrent game-breaking bugs. An honest and informative take.

A 3/10 wasn't even close to being an honest and informative take. I played it right around release and didn't experience any glitches or bugs. There might have been 1 patch at that point iirc, but there's no way a single patch took it from a "technical mess" to the game I played.

 

[<3sRichardSimmons]

I remember back when games journalists in an office/mag would all play a game on different rigs, and one person would be assigned to write the review. It facilitated critical discourse between the reviewer and his colleagues and also helped inform on the technical state of the game, since some 5-10 people were playing it on different setups. Oh well. The times they are a changing stupid.

 

[kangaxx]

I remember when games journalists liked games!

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[AW8]

A 3/10 wasn't even close to being an honest and informative take.

Did you even read what you quoted? I literally said scoring is a retarded practice and that if you remove it, you have an honest and informative take where he says mostly positive things about the game but cannot recommend it due to corruptions and crashes. You wouldn't get any of that from just looking at a meaningless number.

I played it right around release and didn't experience any glitches or bugs. There might have been 1 patch at that point iirc, but there's no way a single patch took it from a "technical mess" to the game I played.

Your experience isn't his. I completed Pillars of Eternity without any major bugs, while a friend of mine had to stop playing mid-game because his save file(s?) got corrupted. Were you to ask the two of us of the technical state of the game, you'd get two vastly different answers.

 

[JDR13]

A 3/10 wasn't even close to being an honest and informative take.

Did you even read what you quoted? I literally said scoring is a retarded practice and that if you remove it, you have an honest and informative take where he says mostly positive things about the game but cannot recommend it due to corruptions and crashes. You wouldn't get any of that from just looking at a meaningless number.

Which is exactly why his score was disingenuous. Many people don't bother to read the full review, they just look at the score. As a reviewer, he knows this. His numerical score should have been more in line with what he wrote.

I played it right around release and didn't experience any glitches or bugs. There might have been 1 patch at that point iirc, but there's no way a single patch took it from a "technical mess" to the game I played.

Your experience isn't his. I completed Pillars of Eternity without any major bugs, while a friend of mine had to stop playing mid-game because his save file(s?) got corrupted. Were you to ask the two of us of the technical state of the game, you'd get two vastly different answers.

Mine and the vast majority as well. It's almost as if he had some kind of unique experience that no one else shared.

 

[AW8]

Which is exactly why his score was disingenuous. Many people don't bother to read the full review, they just look at the score. As a reviewer, he knows this. His numerical score should have been more in line with what he wrote.

If anything, the numerical score should be zero since he couldn't even complete the game. Shows you how pointless the number is. He gave it a 4, which is at the middle of the scale. And as we know, anything less than 7/10 is basically treated the same score. It's a joke!

 

[JDR13]

Which is exactly why his score was disingenuous. Many people don't bother to read the full review, they just look at the score. As a reviewer, he knows this. His numerical score should have been more in line with what he wrote.

If anything, the numerical score should be zero since he couldn't even complete the game. Shows you how pointless the number is. He gave it a 4, which is at the middle of the scale. And as we know, anything less than 7/10 is basically treated the same score. It's a joke!

Well, I agree that the scoring system on many sites is a joke. His updated review scored it an 8/10 though, so I'm glad he took the time to give it another go after his issue was solved. I'd score it an 8.5 myself, but I think 8.0 is fair.

I looked at a few of his other reviews, and I mostly agreed with what I saw. I noticed he gave The Outer Worlds an 8.5 though which I thought was interesting.

 

[udm]

I just played the Mooncrash DLC. Wasn't too impressed, and stopped after one try as the black woman. I loved the main campaign where nearly everything was crafted meticulously, but the "get this MacGuffin to get to the next MacGuffin" nature of Mooncrash felt out of place, more like a mod than an expansion. Also, lol @ the Indian accents.

New features like specific injuries and weapon degradation were welcome though, and I might just rerun the OC someday to experience them.

 

[<3sRichardSimmons]

Mooncrash is great. Joan is the worst character though.

 

[Ivan]

I just played the Mooncrash DLC. Wasn't too impressed, and stopped after one try as the black woman. I loved the main campaign where nearly everything was crafted meticulously, but the "get this MacGuffin to get to the next MacGuffin" nature of Mooncrash felt out of place, more like a mod than an expansion. Also, lol @ the Indian accents.

New features like specific injuries and weapon degradation were welcome though, and I might just rerun the OC someday to experience them.

Keep giving it more runs so you can experience how the remixing works. It took a few runs for me to become charmed by it.

 

[duke nukem]

Speaking of scoring, it is of course a retarded practice as this shows. Remove the number and the review speaks of a game he finds good, but cannot recommend at this point due to him experiencing recurrent game-breaking bugs. An honest and informative take.

A 3/10 wasn't even close to being an honest and informative take. I played it right around release and didn't experience any glitches or bugs. There might have been 1 patch at that point iirc, but there's no way a single patch took it from a "technical mess" to the game I played.

Disagree. Even pewdiepie thought this game was boring and shit. So if he dislikes prey, then its objectively shitty game. Also Jim Sterling didnt like this game.

Writing is shit, enemies are boring, easy, too linear,boring guns, autistic recycling system to artificially boost gameplay time and pointless inventory tetris. I like inventory tetris in games, but because almost every object is the same size in this game you dont need to do it at all, unlike in resident evil 4 or ss2.