Felt like the usual 1 year exclusive Sony keeps doing.
Pretty sure this is also coming to PC like the other Xbox titles.
I guess so, I played it a little later down the line.
I don't think launching asynchronously is an issue though. Being able to play a game a little later seems very different from not being able to play a game at all. With that said, I think in an ideal world, you want this type of game to be hardware agnostic. I would argue that, for several reasons...
a) If your intentions to promote social change are genuine, then you should inherently want your game to be reached by as many as possible. Sometimes it's not possible for logistical reasons, but I don't think wherever possible the idea of getting this type of game to as many people as possible should prevail
b) These types of games, those that focus in on very sensitive and personal human phenomena, I think they have a lot of power with people. They may not sell all that well, but I think the people that they do resonate with become very personally attached by them, and then to see the sequel to that experience used as a bargaining chip in a console war... it just feels, tacky perhaps? I'd feel the same way if we had a sequel to That Dragon Cancer promoting a new hardware launch.
I'll play this on the next XBOX, but I'd prefer it be released as widely as possible.
That's one hell of a trailer O.o Also, that is some damn-impressive facial capture/lipsyncing, even if it's pre-rendered and not in real time.
lolI guess so, I played it a little later down the line.
I don't think launching asynchronously is an issue though. Being able to play a game a little later seems very different from not being able to play a game at all. With that said, I think in an ideal world, you want this type of game to be hardware agnostic. I would argue that, for several reasons...
a) If your intentions to promote social change are genuine, then you should inherently want your game to be reached by as many as possible. Sometimes it's not possible for logistical reasons, but I don't think wherever possible the idea of getting this type of game to as many people as possible should prevail
b) These types of games, those that focus in on very sensitive and personal human phenomena, I think they have a lot of power with people. They may not sell all that well, but I think the people that they do resonate with become very personally attached by them, and then to see the sequel to that experience used as a bargaining chip in a console war... it just feels, tacky perhaps? I'd feel the same way if we had a sequel to That Dragon Cancer promoting a new hardware launch.
I'll play this on the next XBOX, but I'd prefer it be released as widely as possible.
Pretty much exactly my thoughts...This goes against everything Hellblade stood for.
Hellblade was made with the goal of representing mental health issues. The Monsters, the horrors, the nightmares, all of them fantasies created by Senua's mind and because of her condition. The game was made to be unsettling, to tell its audience that the monsters are not real.
What I see in front of myself is Ninja Theory ditching all that, treating those fantasies as a real thing, and making a game world out of it; prioritizing franchising rather than their message of promoting mental health awareness.
The biggest problem is bringing back Senua. She's become an icon for mental health awareness. We know her background, some reasons on why she's suffering from mental issues, how she got to the point in the story of the game, and how that story concludes.
There were no fights with monsters; there were no real fights happening at all. All of it was happening in Senua's head.
Another viking action game, or even another Hellblade game would've been okay, but bringing Senua back, considering the story of the first game, only shows that Ninja Theory is capitalizing on her popularity and disregarding everything they worked for in the first game.
mario, sonic, crash, and senuaGuess we can now officially say Senua is one of the mascots/faces of Xbox.
I guess so, I played it a little later down the line.
I don't think launching asynchronously is an issue though. Being able to play a game a little later seems very different from not being able to play a game at all. With that said, I think in an ideal world, you want this type of game to be hardware agnostic. I would argue that, for several reasons...
a) If your intentions to promote social change are genuine, then you should inherently want your game to be reached by as many as possible. Sometimes it's not possible for logistical reasons, but I don't think wherever possible the idea of getting this type of game to as many people as possible should prevail
b) These types of games, those that focus in on very sensitive and personal human phenomena, I think they have a lot of power with people. They may not sell all that well, but I think the people that they do resonate with become very personally attached by them, and then to see the sequel to that experience used as a bargaining chip in a console war... it just feels, tacky perhaps? I'd feel the same way if we had a sequel to That Dragon Cancer promoting a new hardware launch.
I'll play this on the next XBOX, but I'd prefer it be released as widely as possible.
Naughty Dog uses facial capture data to hand animate character faces, taking liberties in constructing facial expressions depending on what is directed. It's done in post. What Ninja Theory does is different - they have a mounted camera that embeds the live performance - their actual face - straight into UE4's Sequencer Editor tool used for cutscenes. It's crazy.
I thought initially it was someone else, not her. Why did NT go thos route? Hellblade is one of my fav games because of the themes it explored. I'm so incredibly disappointed.This goes against everything Hellblade stood for.
Hellblade was made with the goal of representing mental health issues. The Monsters, the horrors, the nightmares, all of them fantasies created by Senua's mind and because of her condition. The game was made to be unsettling, to tell its audience that the monsters are not real.
What I see in front of myself is Ninja Theory ditching all that, treating those fantasies as a real thing, and making a game world out of it; prioritizing franchising rather than their message of promoting mental health awareness.
The biggest problem is bringing back Senua. She's become an icon for mental health awareness. We know her background, some reasons on why she's suffering from mental issues, how she got to the point in the story of the game, and how that story concludes.
There were no fights with monsters; there were no real fights happening at all. All of it was happening in Senua's head.
Another viking action game, or even another Hellblade game would've been okay, but bringing Senua back, considering the story of the first game, only shows that Ninja Theory is capitalizing on her popularity and disregarding everything they worked for in the first game.
The original teaser trailer for the first game also indicated nothing about mental health issues being the subject of the game.This goes against everything Hellblade stood for.
Hellblade was made with the goal of representing mental health issues. The Monsters, the horrors, the nightmares, all of them fantasies created by Senua's mind and because of her condition. The game was made to be unsettling, to tell its audience that the monsters are not real.
What I see in front of myself is Ninja Theory ditching all that, treating those fantasies as a real thing, and making a game world out of it; prioritizing franchising rather than their message of promoting mental health awareness.
The biggest problem is bringing back Senua. She's become an icon for mental health awareness. We know her background, some reasons on why she's suffering from mental issues, how she got to the point in the story of the game, and how that story concludes.
There were no fights with monsters; there were no real fights happening at all. All of it was happening in Senua's head.
Another viking action game, or even another Hellblade game would've been okay, but bringing Senua back, considering the story of the first game, only shows that Ninja Theory is capitalizing on her popularity and disregarding everything they worked for in the first game.
What you're describing isn't an ND specific thing. Ninja Theory's animators go in and edit the data as well after it's captured. EVERY game studio utilizing that technology does. What NT did was research a method that could provide really good results before the nitty gritty.Naughty Dog uses facial capture data to hand animate character faces. Taking liberties in animating facial features depending on what is directed. It's done in post. What Ninja Theory does is different - they have a mounted camera that embeds the live performance straight into UE4's Sequencer Editor tool used for cutscenes. It's crazy
Don't think you put enough thought into why people are critiquing the idea of a sequel to Hellblade,Game gets a sequel and is a singleplayer game published by MS. Comments here: This is just a cashgrab, or why is this even a sequel ...
Ah well. MS always loses
...Which doesn't mean the gameplay will look like that. A lot of games this gen have gorgeous cutscenes that make the in-game gameplay look far less detailed in comparison. When you're only rendering what's in the cutscene and not the world around it, you can focus entirely on just those models, which allows for more detail than you'd see in actual gameplay. More detail, more animation.
While I definitely get the concern I think it would be best until we know or hear more about the title rather than making harsh declarative statements. I also think that there's also a lot more room for Hellblade to delve into mental health as a whole and while the monsters aren't real in some cases, they can be very real in others and I don't think a game about learning to deal with the real monsters would be all that bad either. But again, it depends on how the whole project shakes out. Maybe they're using the increased budget to really fulfil a vision of the first game that they couldn't really execute on with its circumstances. There's a lot of room to do interesting and cool stuff.This goes against everything Hellblade stood for.
Hellblade was made with the goal of representing mental health issues. The Monsters, the horrors, the nightmares, all of them fantasies created by Senua's mind and because of her condition. The game was made to be unsettling, to tell its audience that the monsters are not real.
What I see in front of myself is Ninja Theory ditching all that, treating those fantasies as a real thing, and making a game world out of it; prioritizing franchising rather than their message of promoting mental health awareness.
The biggest problem is bringing back Senua. She's become an icon for mental health awareness. We know her background, some reasons on why she's suffering from mental issues, how she got to the point in the story of the game, and how that story concludes.
There were no fights with monsters; there were no real fights happening at all. All of it was happening in Senua's head.
Another viking action game, or even another Hellblade game would've been okay, but bringing Senua back, considering the story of the first game, only shows that Ninja Theory is capitalizing on her popularity and disregarding everything they worked for in the first game.
...Which doesn't mean the gameplay will look like that. A lot of games this gen have gorgeous cutscenes that make the in-game gameplay look far less detailed in comparison. When you're only rendering what's in the cutscene and not the world around it, you can focus entirely on just those models, which allows for more detail than you'd see in actual gameplay.
This will launch on Xbox consoles, PCs and any mobile device trough Xcloud... this will be way more accessible than the first one tho?
This goes against everything Hellblade stood for.
Hellblade was made with the goal of representing mental health issues. The Monsters, the horrors, the nightmares, all of them fantasies created by Senua's mind and because of her condition. The game was made to be unsettling, to tell its audience that the monsters are not real.
What I see in front of myself is Ninja Theory ditching all that, treating those fantasies as a real thing, and making a game world out of it; prioritizing franchising rather than their message of promoting mental health awareness.
The biggest problem is bringing back Senua. She's become an icon for mental health awareness. We know her background, some reasons on why she's suffering from mental issues, how she got to the point in the story of the game, and how that story concludes.
There were no fights with monsters; there were no real fights happening at all. All of it was happening in Senua's head.
Another viking action game, or even another Hellblade game would've been okay, but bringing Senua back, considering the story of the first game, only shows that Ninja Theory is capitalizing on her popularity and disregarding everything they worked for in the first game.
...Which doesn't mean the gameplay will look like that. A lot of games this gen have gorgeous cutscenes that make the in-game gameplay look far less detailed in comparison. When you're only rendering what's in the cutscene and not the world around it, you can focus entirely on just those models, which allows for more detail than you'd see in actual gameplay.
You should play the game first before coming to such conclusions.This goes against everything Hellblade stood for.
Hellblade was made with the goal of representing mental health issues. The Monsters, the horrors, the nightmares, all of them fantasies created by Senua's mind and because of her condition. The game was made to be unsettling, to tell its audience that the monsters are not real.
What I see in front of myself is Ninja Theory ditching all that, treating those fantasies as a real thing, and making a game world out of it; prioritizing franchising rather than their message of promoting mental health awareness.
The biggest problem is bringing back Senua. She's become an icon for mental health awareness. We know her background, some reasons on why she's suffering from mental issues, how she got to the point in the story of the game, and how that story concludes.
There were no fights with monsters; there were no real fights happening at all. All of it was happening in Senua's head.
Another viking action game, or even another Hellblade game would've been okay, but bringing Senua back, considering the story of the first game, only shows that Ninja Theory is capitalizing on her popularity and disregarding everything they worked for in the first game.
This goes against everything Hellblade stood for.
Hellblade was made with the goal of representing mental health issues. The Monsters, the horrors, the nightmares, all of them fantasies created by Senua's mind and because of her condition. The game was made to be unsettling, to tell its audience that the monsters are not real.
What I see in front of myself is Ninja Theory ditching all that, treating those fantasies as a real thing, and making a game world out of it; prioritizing franchising rather than their message of promoting mental health awareness.
The biggest problem is bringing back Senua. She's become an icon for mental health awareness. We know her background, some reasons on why she's suffering from mental issues, how she got to the point in the story of the game, and how that story concludes.
There were no fights with monsters; there were no real fights happening at all. All of it was happening in Senua's head.
Another viking action game, or even another Hellblade game would've been okay, but bringing Senua back, considering the story of the first game, only shows that Ninja Theory is capitalizing on her popularity and disregarding everything they worked for in the first game.
I guess so, I played it a little later down the line.
I don't think launching asynchronously is an issue though. Being able to play a game a little later seems very different from not being able to play a game at all. With that said, I think in an ideal world, you want this type of game to be hardware agnostic. I would argue that, for several reasons...
a) If your intentions to promote social change are genuine, then you should inherently want your game to be reached by as many as possible. Sometimes it's not possible for logistical reasons, but I don't think wherever possible the idea of getting this type of game to as many people as possible should prevail
b) These types of games, those that focus in on very sensitive and personal human phenomena, I think they have a lot of power with people. They may not sell all that well, but I think the people that they do resonate with become very personally attached by them, and then to see the sequel to that experience used as a bargaining chip in a console war... it just feels, tacky perhaps? I'd feel the same way if we had a sequel to That Dragon Cancer promoting a new hardware launch.
I'll play this on the next XBOX, but I'd prefer it be released as widely as possible.
It was. Shame it came so early. They could have closed on this.
But I need to get my spicy hot take in!Friends, we don't even know what the game is about. It was just a reveal and engine trailer.
Ninja Theory usually does this. Even back in Heavenly Sword's cutscenes, there was usually some kind of over-acted shouting or screaming to heighten the "emotion" in the scene. It got kind of annoying after awhile lol.Gotta be honest that trailer just pissed me off with seeing her face look so fucking dumb doing that shouting.
This is word for word exactly what I think about this trailer. I saw the doc they did, and the years of mental health counsel they got to get all the elements of hellblade just right, and for the life of me I cannot see where they could go to further the themes they so brilliantly did in hellblade one, or even what themes they can go for now taking into accountthe senua we saw at the end of hellblade one.This goes against everything Hellblade stood for.
Hellblade was made with the goal of representing mental health issues. The Monsters, the horrors, the nightmares, all of them fantasies created by Senua's mind and because of her condition. The game was made to be unsettling, to tell its audience that the monsters are not real.
What I see in front of myself is Ninja Theory ditching all that, treating those fantasies as a real thing, and making a game world out of it; prioritizing franchising rather than their message of promoting mental health awareness.
The biggest problem is bringing back Senua. She's become an icon for mental health awareness. We know her background, some reasons on why she's suffering from mental issues, how she got to the point in the story of the game, and how that story concludes.
There were no fights with monsters; there were no real fights happening at all. All of it was happening in Senua's head.
Another viking action game, or even another Hellblade game would've been okay, but bringing Senua back, considering the story of the first game, only shows that Ninja Theory is capitalizing on her popularity and disregarding everything they worked for in the first game.
That's true. Being on xCloud should help accessibility, but it's worth noting that we don't really know what those services are going to look like, or how good they're going to be. If Stadia is anything to go by, then cloud gaming is still quite far removed from being an good way to play a game for most people.
I agree with this wholeheartedly. This is what I was worried about when they were acquired, that Hellblade would be designed to entertain, rather than for social change. It misses the point.
With that said, I'm open to being wrong. We've only seen a brief trailer, the game may be very different but the tone of what we've seen definitely seems to miss the mark.