![]() ![]() To make it feel less tiny, player transportation options were nerfed across the board, so as to create some form of artifical depth to the game. But I will bet a lot of chips this is to compensate for the smaller map. ![]() I can only speculate as to "why" I do know know for certain. And the most egresious offense: They completely knee-capped the Booster tank, it is no longer either practical, nor fun to use. I even really, honestly feel like walking on land is slower. Seatruck Modules beyond 2nd w/ Horsepower upgrade. Height, width, depth, it's less on every angle. Below Zero makes me feel like King of the aquarium and ruler of my domain. Subnautica made me feel tiny, insignificant, a speck of dust in the way cosmic order of things. There is very little space to actually move around. Because on top of everything being less, smaller, shallower, the limited space we DO have is clustered up with caves, tunnels, debris, terrain, rocks, ice burgs. And with so much land mass, both land we can traverse upon, and land mass in the form of impassable terrain, on top of a smaller map that is more shallow, there is even LESS "accesssable" volume of water to swim around than it even appears. The map is also more shallow, never going as deep as the first game. Let me list off these things for myself and others: I do not pity them for "chosing this hill to die on" It knew vast portions if not majority of its community and player fanbase were against such things and choose to go forward and ahead with it anyway. It disappointed, knowing what we wanted, but instead gave us what it wanted us to have. So, Below Zero did not just disappoint while trying its best to give us what we wanted. They were in fact, made well aware of them the e n t i r e time. They weren't "blind-sided" by any of the criticism or complaints. It was in Early Access, and had access to the entire communities feedback, through every step of the process. Below Zero does not break any new ground or try to do anything that hasn't been attempted before, and done, better, with more success.Īnd it wasn't striking out blindly, on its own. They already proved proof-of-concept for underwater survival exploration with Subnautica, and survival games, voiced protagonists, and stories, none of which are new or unique. It didn't break new ground, because it rode in on Subnautica's coattails, stood on its shoulders, and hoisted up by its praises, mechanics, solid gameplay loop, and established built-in fanbase and community. ![]() It didn't blindly strike out on its own path only to find itself met with a terrible fate. It wasn't boldly going where no one had gone before. I can tell you the reasons for me, personally, that drag Below Zero into the category of "very, very bad"īecause you see, it isn't like Below Zero disappointed or didn't impress through any innocent fault of its own. Well, you may have better luck asking those questions on the Below Zero forum, but what I can do for ya, at least, is to answer your question myself here. I adored Hellsing for what it was in all its glory and for all its flaws. How's it going? Are you a fan of the original Hellsing, the Ultimate, or both? =) I haven't seen the reboot, can't say if it's good or bad, but then again never interested in it. Whenever i ask why BZ is so "very very bad" i get silence and the negative reviews aren't any insightful either. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |