Elden ring distances itself from other souls like games by being open world, but you don't list a lot of open world games, and the ones you list are are quite different. Skyrim isn't know for a good combat system, and third person combat is not even close to a souls game. you mention the combat system but that doesn't change the fact that it's a vastly different game
The witcher 3 has a third person combat system, but it's not known for having a good combat system either. Zelda might have better third person combat, the lore is completely different, a souls game is gritty and dark.
You do list a number of interesting titles though, and that certainly makes it an interesting video, but if I'd had to pick a title that is close to elden ring that isn't a fromsoft game, I would have said dragon's dogma, and kingdoms of amulur should frankly be on this list as well.
@mogan: I already did that with games like dying light for instance, people were happy they didn't have to wait. It kinda baffles me that most professional reviewers today aren't able to do this.
@jhawk: game mechanics don't change that much during a game, it's how people reviewed games in the past, now they are scared shitless because of the comments, but that's because you're being overly subjective.
A good game reviewer looks at how well implemented the mechanics are, how much production values there are in graphics, sound and music.
your personal opinion should have little impact of the review, of course it helps if you got a pool of game reviewers to put the people with an aqcuired taste for a certain gamestyle on the review.
you people really need to grow a spine with this review in progress bs, I can review a game in like 2 hours, and still score games more objectively than most of the reviewers here
@commander: Arcade games didn't have a £54.99 entry point nor was it a randomized element preying on gambling habits.
Even if this were the case, it would amount to whataboutism.
It's either delusional or willfully ignorant to deny EA cast morality aside in the name of profit, irregardless of the human cost.
Further, a reviewers job is to inform the consumer, not benefit the Publisher nor themselves through the Publisher.
you don't pay for ultimate team, this is the whole fifa package, that means seasons, online and offline, story mode, career, pro clubs, and ultimate team, it's a seperate mode within the game.
It isn't the same as gambling, since selling your players for real money is difficult, and the luck is a lot worse than with real gambling games. You can also earn lootboxes (packs) through playing.
It is an extremely successfull system, for the player and for the company and it's also teh reason why hardly any fifa ultimate team player complains about packs (lootboxes). After all you can just play seasons which doesn't contain lootboxes.
It's because they implemented it other games that people started complaining, since this kind of system just doesn't work very well for other games.
Fifa packs already exist since 2009, you only heard about lootboxes in 2018, that's almost 10 years later.
@bbq_R0ADK1LL: "I think most reviewers have gotten tired of talking about it."
i.e. normalize
lol lootboxes are copied from this, but in this game it works, it others it doesn't. You also don't have to get into this mode if you don't want to, it is an added mode that made the game even more popular than it already was.
You complaining about lootboxes in fifa ultimate team, is like complaining some people spend money in the arcade back in the eighties and nineties. It is the nature of the game. But actually you don't even have to spend money, you still need to buy the game though.
commander's comments