Horizon Forbidden West

Hershy said:
Please be February, please be February, please be February.
Click to expand...

I'd be (pleasantly) surprised if it releases in Feb. I imagine Sony will drop their official announcement soon and they usually announce ports at least a few month a head of launch. March-May perhaps. Hopefully it launches in a better state than the first game did.
 
Despite liking Zero Dawn when it came out, I feel zero excitement for this. To me HZD aged like milk instead of fine wine. People call Starfield mile wide, puddle deep, but HZD was much wider and shallower. It successfully distracted people (including me) with its visuals from how bad the pacing is, and how empty and devoid of meaningful content its open world was. Plus it was more woke than a sensitivity seminar.
 
M76 said:
Despite liking Zero Dawn when it came out, I feel zero excitement for this. To me HZD aged like milk instead of fine wine. People call Starfield mile wide, puddle deep, but HZD was much wider and shallower. It successfully distracted people (including me) with its visuals from how bad the pacing is, and how empty and devoid of meaningful content its open world was. Plus it was more woke than a sensitivity seminar.
Click to expand...
At least there aren't loading screens every 5 inches? I bought hzd awhile back but have yet to play it :ROFLMAO:.
 
M76 said:
Despite liking Zero Dawn when it came out, I feel zero excitement for this. To me HZD aged like milk instead of fine wine. People call Starfield mile wide, puddle deep, but HZD was much wider and shallower. It successfully distracted people (including me) with its visuals from how bad the pacing is, and how empty and devoid of meaningful content its open world was. Plus it was more woke than a sensitivity seminar.
Click to expand...
I just played the main quest line (from memory anyway). In open world games I rarely bother doing anything outside of main and significant side quest lines (for games like Mass Effect, Cyberpunk etc). Open world content just feels like fetch quest filler stuff. I don't have muhc time to game anyway so I value quality over quantity. Looking forward to Forbidden West. Curious how it will run on a 3080.
 
M76 said:
Despite liking Zero Dawn when it came out, I feel zero excitement for this. To me HZD aged like milk instead of fine wine. People call Starfield mile wide, puddle deep, but HZD was much wider and shallower. It successfully distracted people (including me) with its visuals from how bad the pacing is, and how empty and devoid of meaningful content its open world was. Plus it was more woke than a sensitivity seminar.
Click to expand...
I honestly enjoyed all of HZD, including all the side quests and unlocking hidden secrets about the story. It honestly got me back into gaming again. Forbidden West is okay. Graphically it's utterly amazing. But the story was pretty atrocious, especially the ending. And they dialed up the woke to 11 this time. I still haven't played the DLC. Don't get me wrong, I had a great time playing Forbidden West, but the story wasn't as good as I hoped it'd be. Also, whereas HZD had a perfect ending that didn't particularly need a sequel, they purposely made the ending an annoying cliffhanger in HFW. It's still worth playing, IMO, but I wanted more.
 
grambo said:
I just played the main quest line (from memory anyway). In open world games I rarely bother doing anything outside of main and significant side quest lines (for games like Mass Effect, Cyberpunk etc). Open world content just feels like fetch quest filler stuff. I don't have muhc time to game anyway so I value quality over quantity. Looking forward to Forbidden West. Curious how it will run on a 3080.
Click to expand...
Not all open world games are made equal, and HZD is living proof of that. I did one side mission in it and my freaking reward was a lootbox. FFS, at least make it an unique item, not a totally random thing. Not that there are any number of meaningful side missions in the game anyway. To me Mass Effect and Cyberpunk 2077 are ten times the games HZD is. That's how much more I value them. In hindsight HZD was definitely not quality over quantity. It's concentrated exposition dumps of story connected by long repetitive segments of hunting machines for resources while walking from A to B. At first I enjoyed the hunts, but after a while doing the same encounters in different places started to seem like chores.
 
M76 said:
Despite liking Zero Dawn when it came out, I feel zero excitement for this. To me HZD aged like milk instead of fine wine. People call Starfield mile wide, puddle deep, but HZD was much wider and shallower. It successfully distracted people (including me) with its visuals from how bad the pacing is, and how empty and devoid of meaningful content its open world was. Plus it was more woke than a sensitivity seminar.
Click to expand...

I don't recall many side missions. It was mostly story missions, which I found to be good. I also liked the story delivery. I too got a annoyed with the resource collecting and it was way too feminist and SJW-like for the setting. Otherwise I quite enjoyed it.

Although Mass Effect 1-3 and Cyberpunk had good side missions I would argue they aren't really side missions. Particularly in ME2. They all contain vital story information and it really isn't optional.
 
Flogger23m said:
I don't recall many side missions.
Click to expand...
Because there really weren't any. Which made the open world even more pointless.
Flogger23m said:
It was mostly story missions, which I found to be good. I also liked the story delivery.
Click to expand...
I didn't like the nothing happens for hours with the story then dump 10.000 lines of exposition on you in the forms of recordings within the span of 10 minutes at all.
The story itself was interesting, the delivery for the most part awful.
Flogger23m said:
I too got a annoyed with the resource collecting and it was way too feminist and SJW-like for the setting. Otherwise I quite enjoyed it.
Click to expand...
I enjoyed it too, but looking back now the game's flaws are even more apparent. I'm not afraid to criticize games even if I enjoyed them.
Flogger23m said:
Although Mass Effect 1-3 and Cyberpunk had good side missions I would argue they aren't really side missions. Particularly in ME2. They all contain vital story information and it really isn't optional.
Click to expand...
ME2 was basically built on side missions, instead of one big overarching main quest, which was great. However Cyberpunk not having side missions is just plain incorrect, there is a shit ton of them. There are at least 50 gigs alone, not to mention the other side missions.
 
M76 said:
Because there really weren't any. Which made the open world even more pointless.
Click to expand...

I don't mind that. In most games side missions make the game less enjoyable.

M76 said:
I didn't like the nothing happens for hours with the story then dump 10.000 lines of exposition on you in the forms of recordings within the span of 10 minutes at all.
The story itself was interesting, the delivery for the most part awful.
Click to expand...

That wasn't my experience at all.

M76 said:
ME2 was basically built on side missions, instead of one big overarching main quest, which was great.
Click to expand...

Which is why I say they aren't really side missions. They're essentially required. The contain around half of the story content, and if you don't play them you essentially lock yourself out of endings. There is no reason to not play them, they are not optional. Not playing the side missions in ME2 would be like playing a game halfway through and then stopping.

M76 said:
However Cyberpunk not having side missions is just plain incorrect, there is a shit ton of them. There are at least 50 gigs alone, not to mention the other side missions.
Click to expand...

The side gigs are proper side missions. The actual side missions are essentially like ME2. They're not really optional as they contain too much vital story information. If you skip the side missions in these games, you're more or less skipping the main story, IMO.
 
Last edited:
Flogger23m said:
I don't mind that. In most games side missions make the game less enjoyable.
Click to expand...
I mean how is that even possible? How can having something that you can ignore make the game worse vs. not having them at all?
Flogger23m said:
The side gigs are proper side missions. The actual side missions are essentially like ME2. They're not really optional as they contain too much vital story information.
Click to expand...
I think you are misunderstanding the concept. Side missions are side missions because they don't directly tie into the main story, not because they exist in a complete vacuum. In fact if they exist completely detached from everything else that makes them worse.

You don't want to miss out on them because they might unlock additional dialogue or story forks down the line, that's what makes them good, worthwhile side missions in the first place. Even doing gigs can unlock options for main story missions later in CP2077. But still they are completely 100% optional, you can get the end credits without doing any of them, that's what makes them side missions.

Same for ME2, you want to do them all at least once to see how they alter the story, but there are only so many that you actually need to get to the end. In fact if you want to do them all in a single playthrough you have to go out of your way.

When I first play through a game I always do what makes sense in the context of the situation, and most usually that means skipping some side content. If I can do everything on my first playthrough that means the game lacks depth or immersion and has no potential for re-plays. For example in Cyberpunk 2077 there are so many options, there is no way to experience them all in a single campaign. Even in ME2 there are choices that define what options will be open to you later.
 
M76 said:
I mean how is that even possible? How can having something that you can ignore make the game worse vs. not having them at all?
Click to expand...

Honestly, very few games have truly optional side missions. They either:

1) Contain vital story information. It would be like skipping a chapter in a book to not play them.

2) Are more or less required to properly level up your character and unlock gameplay variety. If you don't do them, you will have an unnecessarily difficult time or the gameplay experience will be very monotonous.

The amount of games I've played where side missions are truly optional are so few and far between.

M76 said:
You don't want to miss out on them because they might unlock additional dialogue or story forks down the line, that's what makes them good, worthwhile side missions in the first place. Even doing gigs can unlock options for main story missions later in CP2077. But still they are completely 100% optional, you can get the end credits without doing any of them, that's what makes them side missions.
Click to expand...

Which is my point. Is it even optional? It would be like playing a linear game, and stopping halfway through. In both instances, you're not getting all of the vital story.

M76 said:
Same for ME2, you want to do them all at least once to see how they alter the story, but there are only so many that you actually need to get to the end. In fact if you want to do them all in a single playthrough you have to go out of your way.
Click to expand...

The problem with ME2 is about half the story content is a "side mission". And you more or less need to do them all. Your actions in these missions have little impact. But you are essentially forced into a bad ending if you don't play them.

M76 said:
When I first play through a game I always do what makes sense in the context of the situation, and most usually that means skipping some side content. If I can do everything on my first playthrough that means the game lacks depth or immersion and has no potential for re-plays. For example in Cyberpunk 2077 there are so many options, there is no way to experience them all in a single campaign. Even in ME2 there are choices that define what options will be open to you later.
Click to expand...

Cyberpunk does have some true side missions (the side gigs). And in Phantom Liberty these are actually well done, and should be used as a model for other developers on how to design missions. They had unique stories and voice lines, some moral dilemmas, but were not necessary to the main story. But the "marked side missions" were essential to the story, IMO.


Generally when games have too many side quests them fall onto the two points I mentioned above. Generally many of the games I play would have been better with most side quests removed and instead replaced with a few more story missions. Side missions generally kill the flow and pacing as well. Not falling into the mentioned issues above is quite difficult and I would say a good 80% or more of games fail to implement them right.
 
Flogger23m said:
Honestly, very few games have truly optional side missions. They either:

1) Contain vital story information. It would be like skipping a chapter in a book to not play them.

2) Are more or less required to properly level up your character and unlock gameplay variety. If you don't do them, you will have an unnecessarily difficult time or the gameplay experience will be very monotonous.

The amount of games I've played where side missions are truly optional are so few and far between.
Click to expand...
If you want side missions to don't benefit the character development or the story at all. Then what is even the point of having them?
The only defining metric side missions have is that they are optional for completing the game full stop, no need to mystify it any further.
In most games doing all side missions in a single campaign and leveling to the max actually makes the endgame extremely easy. Games are not designed with the assumption that the player will do all the side content.
Flogger23m said:
Which is my point. Is it even optional? It would be like playing a linear game, and stopping halfway through. In both instances, you're not getting all of the vital story.
Click to expand...
But it's not vital story, it is additional fan service that would not exist without the side missions. It is what makes them worthwhile.
If a game has good side missions I agree that they should not be missed, but that doesn't mean they are not still optional.
Flogger23m said:
The problem with ME2 is about half the story content is a "side mission". And you more or less need to do them all. Your actions in these missions have little impact. But you are essentially forced into a bad ending if you don't play them.
Click to expand...
The only way you get the worst ending is if you don't do any of the optional upgrades and choose the bad specialist for every role at the end. To get the most out of the game you need to have experienced the less than flawless ending(s) as well. Just cheesing the game to get the best possible outcome is not that fun compared to just sticking to your decisions even if it turns out that there are better ways.
Flogger23m said:
Cyberpunk does have some true side missions (the side gigs). And in Phantom Liberty these are actually well done, and should be used as a model for other developers on how to design missions. They had unique stories and voice lines, some moral dilemmas, but were not necessary to the main story. But the "marked side missions" were essential to the story, IMO.
Click to expand...
Just as the gigs the side missions are not necessary either to complete the game. There were side missions I didn't even know existed until my second or third playthrough of the game. And as I've mentioned doing gigs also opens up alternative options for some main story missions, so they are not completely in a vacuum either.
Flogger23m said:
Generally when games have too many side quests them fall onto the two points I mentioned above. Generally many of the games I play would have been better with most side quests removed and instead replaced with a few more story missions. Side missions generally kill the flow and pacing as well. Not falling into the mentioned issues above is quite difficult and I would say a good 80% or more of games fail to implement them right.
Click to expand...
Pacing side missions is entirely up to the player. If you chose to do all side content at once, then you can't blame the game for pacing, it is your fault. It is entirely up to you to pace yourself and only do one or two side gigs between main story missions, or do them all at once as soon as they open up to you. It's like you want the game to hold your hands by drip feeding side missions to you. I believe that's worse, it removes freedom to do as you please.

I wish more games were like Mass Effect 2, where the line between side and main story missions is not that clearly defined. I think it would be terrible if all the great side missions were just incorporated into unskippable main story missions in Cyberpunk 2077.
 
polonyc2 said:
no official date yet...my guess has always been February...should be soon...March the latest?
Click to expand...
February 18 will be the 2-year anniversary of the PS5 release, so I'm also expecting it around then. If it's that close, though, it's odd to not have heard a peep about it directly from Sony or Guerrilla Games yet.
 
M76 said:
If you want side missions to don't benefit the character development or the story at all. Then what is even the point of having them?
Click to expand...

They should have some relevance, but should not have vital story information. If they do, then they are main missions and should be incorporated in such a way.

M76 said:
The only defining metric side missions have is that they are optional for completing the game full stop, no need to mystify it any further.
Click to expand...

But that has little to do with good implementation.

M76 said:
In most games doing all side missions in a single campaign and leveling to the max actually makes the endgame extremely easy.
Click to expand...

And that is another downside of side missions, or at least excessive ones.

M76 said:
Games are not designed with the assumption that the player will do all the side content.
Click to expand...

Why would a game include content if not meant to be used? That is poor planning and design.

M76 said:
But it's not vital story, it is additional fan service that would not exist without the side missions. It is what makes them worthwhile.
Click to expand...

For ME2 I disagree. The side missions were vital to the story.

M76 said:
If a game has good side missions I agree that they should not be missed, but that doesn't mean they are not still optional.

The only way you get the worst ending is if you don't do any of the optional upgrades and choose the bad specialist for every role at the end. To get the most out of the game you need to have experienced the less than flawless ending(s) as well. Just cheesing the game to get the best possible outcome is not that fun compared to just sticking to your decisions even if it turns out that there are better ways.
Click to expand...

The whole ending sequence of ME2 wasn't exactly great, from both design, how endings are chosen, to the end game battle. It had the weakest story of the original trilogy. It still excelled in delivery, cinematics and whatnot.

M76 said:
Pacing side missions is entirely up to the player.
Click to expand...

It is up to the developer. If 70% of the game is side missions, they're doing something wrong. Side content should not be the majority of your game. It should be a small portion of it. If your game devolves into hours of side quests per 1 hour of proper mission time then that is a design problem.

M76 said:
It is entirely up to you to pace yourself and only do one or two side gigs between main story missions, or do them all at once as soon as they open up to you.
Click to expand...

That is up to the developers. If the ratio of side missions is higher than that of story missions (which it often is in modern games), then something went wrong in development.

M76 said:
I wish more games were like Mass Effect 2, where the line between side and main story missions is not that clearly defined. I think it would be terrible if all the great side missions were just incorporated into unskippable main story missions in Cyberpunk 2077.
Click to expand...

The problem is the side missions are essentially the main story missions in ME2. They're side mission in name only. Skipping a side mission would be like deciding to stop playing the game when you have 4 more missions left. You're just cutting out the story and calling it quits. You're not getting any real options or choices, just an illusion of choice:

Experience the full story or not experience the full story.


If you choose to not experience the full story, you're not doing anything different than quitting the game halfway through.
 
Derangel said:
While I don’t enjoy the story in this as much as the original, I hope it’s a good port. I might be tempted to double-dip (once it’s on sale) to give it another shot.
Click to expand...
It's Nixxes, who has a good track record, and already has a history of support for the base game. Iron Galaxy is the one to be wary of.
 
2 years after the console release...not too bad...I wonder what the system requirements will be...I doubt we'll see any ray-tracing

if Shadow of the Erdtree doesn't come out in Feb/March then I might just replay Horizon Zero Dawn PC and then jump right into Forbidden West...Zero Dawn got repetitive towards the end and I didn't love the expansion (it was more of the same in a snow setting) but overall it was an excellent game...once you get to the point where every enemy becomes easy to take down the challenge was gone and I got a bit burnt out
 
polonyc2 said:
2 years after the console release...not too bad...I wonder what the system requirements will be...I doubt we'll see any ray-tracing

if Shadow of the Erdtree doesn't come out in Feb/March then I might just replay Horizon Zero Dawn PC and then jump right into Forbidden West...Zero Dawn got repetitive towards the end and I didn't love the expansion (it was more of the same in a snow setting) but overall it was an excellent game...once you get to the point where every enemy becomes easy to take down the challenge was gone and I got a bit burnt out
Click to expand...
The Frozen Wilds is literally bow-souls on ultra hard (reference to Remnant being described as gun-souls :p). You're gonna be a dodge-roll tactician by the time you finish. Those Fire/Frostclaws and Scorchers are no joke. Also theres a Rockbreaker boss in there as well that will put you to the test. The base game is ezpz even on ultra-hard compared to the xpac, to the point I think it's a little overtuned tbh. The fights seem to drag a bit.
 
horse said:
The Frozen Wilds is literally bow-souls on ultra hard (reference to Remnant being described as gun-souls :p). You're gonna be a dodge-roll tactician by the time you finish. Those Fire/Frostclaws and Scorchers are no joke. Also theres a Rockbreaker boss in there as well that will put you to the test. The base game is ezpz even on ultra-hard compared to the xpac, to the point I think it's a little overtuned tbh. The fights seem to drag a bit.
Click to expand...

Rockbreaker was only in the DLC?...I thought I remember it being in the base game...either way you should be over-leveled by the time you start the DLC so it wasn't as bad as some of the early base game enemies
 
^No they're in the base game aswell. There's only one in the xpac, but it's way harder than any of the others.
 
Horizon Forbidden West Complete Edition PC specifications revealed

https://blog.playstation.com/2024/0...tion-pc-specifications-revealed-out-march-21/

HFW.png
 

Attachments

  • HFW-2.png
    HFW-2.png
    3.1 MB · Views: 0
Pre-ordered.

Every game I want to play or am currently playing will be put on the back burner. This is the game I've been waiting for and I am hoping it won't disappoint on PC. With the system specs I have I'll be able to play on high without an issue.
 
Hershy said:
I’m shamelessly bumping the thread for no reason, apart from how excited I am to play this game. 5 more sleeps and it’s mine!
Click to expand...
Stoked about it too, just bummed DD2 and this come out on the same day. Dragons Dogma takes precedence for me 😭
 
I still haven't decided which game to play first- Dragon's Dogma 2 or Forbidden West PC...I want to play Forbidden West but I think Dragon's Dogma 2 is going to end up being the better game
 
Last edited:
polonyc2 said:
I still haven't decided which game to play- Dragon's Dogma 2 or Forbidden West PC...I want to play Forbidden West but I think Dragon's Dogma 2 is going to end up being the better game
Click to expand...
I also think Dragon’s Dogma 2 will be something really special, which is why I’m ‘saving it’ for the summmer.
 
Hershy said:
I also think Dragon’s Dogma 2 will be something really special, which is why I’m ‘saving it’ for the summmer.
Click to expand...

for me I need to knock out games like Dragon's Dogma 2, Forbidden West and Ghost of Tsushima before the summer as that's when my most anticipated game gets released- the Elden Ring expansion: Shadow of the Erdtree (June 20)
 
Of course, Shadow of the Erdtree… for some weird reason I keep forgetting about it.
 
polonyc2 said:
***I still haven't decided which game to play first****- Dragon's Dogma 2 or Forbidden West PC...I want to play Forbidden West but I think Dragon's Dogma 2 is going to end up being the better game
Click to expand...

This is always a nice problem to have. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top