Reading the FAQ and all the regions that are fully localized are just english speaking places. Is this some new kind of shady shit to mean that the game only has english VA available?
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
State of Decay 2 |OT| Not a zAAAmbie game
- Thread starter Zeta Ori
- Start date
Wasn't really interested in this, but as there aren't too many games out this month that interest me, I'll take a look at this!
As far as I'm aware no. You can request they locate a certain resource for you but not send them off.
Thankx for the info. What a mess, I hope UL can fix this in the Steam version.
Last edited:
Is there a review thread yet?
Here's our review -
https://gaminglyf.com/reviews/2018-05-17-review-state-of-decay-2/
Spoiler - We had a ton of fun with it, despite the bugs. A rough diamond. Feel free to ask any questions about the game and I'll do my best to help answer them!
Here's our review -
https://gaminglyf.com/reviews/2018-05-17-review-state-of-decay-2/
Spoiler - We had a ton of fun with it, despite the bugs. A rough diamond. Feel free to ask any questions about the game and I'll do my best to help answer them!
Last edited:
69. But yeah no surprise based on the previews. But the reviews are certainly mixed, seems to be love it or hate it.
Middling reviews so far, no surprise considering the 1st one had a fuck ton of jank as well.
Still excited!
Still excited!
70 on opencritic http://opencritic.com/game/5803/state-of-decay-2
Kinda what I expected coming from State of Decay 1. some people are gonna stand the jank others will be fine with it or even love it.
If you played and liked 1 tho this is like a must play. Great game imo to lead fans into E3.
edit: Still dont understand how in Opencritic a 70 is "fair", feel like a 70 is good. 8 great etc etc
Kinda what I expected coming from State of Decay 1. some people are gonna stand the jank others will be fine with it or even love it.
If you played and liked 1 tho this is like a must play. Great game imo to lead fans into E3.
edit: Still dont understand how in Opencritic a 70 is "fair", feel like a 70 is good. 8 great etc etc
I think it's fair to say that Eurogamer didn't like it...
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...-open-world-loot-em-up-with-catastrophic-bugs
Avoid.
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/...-open-world-loot-em-up-with-catastrophic-bugs
Avoid.
It baffles the hell out of me that Microsoft didn't delay the game again until the bugs had been ironed out by Undead. Yes, smallish team, 5 years in development, delayed already, etc etc - but an unfinished game is an unfinished game.
Yeah just read that review. Not a bunch of happy campers.
Does sound like it's pretty bad on the bugs tho
MS has so few releases lined up right now, they really should have pushed this a month to allow time to fix more bugs. After the underwhelming Sea of Thieves, they really needed this one to hit. I mean Sony has dropped SotC Remastered, God of War, and soon, Detroit: Become Human so far in 2018, while MS has dropped Sea of Thieves and State of Decay 2; both of which seem like they could have used more time.
I found it mostly enjoyable due to the strong RPG systems, but the hoarding can become a slog, and the bugs can be very annoying. The small ones with falling zombies or open doors you have to open again are managable. But mission objectives failing to appear (forcing you to give up and giving you a moral hit), cars getting stuck on the tiniest of rocks (fun when you just filled them up and repaired them) or npc's you want to talk too running away from you indefinitely are a real pain in the ass.
It's fun, and no doubt. Still, I can't help but feel disappointed precisely because the core systems could translate into a fantastic game all around, and that's not the case.
Anyway, my review (7.5) is here: https://wccftech.com/review/state-of-decay-2-rough-yet-fun/
Ya we are of complete disagreement there thats for sure. Each to their own though
I really wonder why games like this, which are generally seen as fun, get hit so hard in reviews for bugs and "jank" but games like Elder Scrolls, etc which are notoriously full of bugs and jank get glossed over and praised regardless of those issues?
Anyways, seems like from the reviews if you enjoyed the first one this one will be just as fun. I know I found the first one to be the best "survive in a zombie apocalypse" game out there.
Anyways, seems like from the reviews if you enjoyed the first one this one will be just as fun. I know I found the first one to be the best "survive in a zombie apocalypse" game out there.
I don't mind a few bugs and jank if it's not killing my savegame or characters.
Thanks god we're living in a world with constant patch support and since they supported the first one back then so heavenly with patches and content, I have no doubt that they will do the same here.
Full support from me.
Thanks god we're living in a world with constant patch support and since they supported the first one back then so heavenly with patches and content, I have no doubt that they will do the same here.
Full support from me.
i know it isn't only for that in some reviews, but it just seems in general when it comes to more budgeted games like this the bugs and other issues cost them more in reviews then big AAA games like TES, which seems to get a pass for the same type of issues. Seems to me like it'd make more sense to be the other way around, where a limited budget game should be more forgiveable for having bugs compared to a huge high budget AAA game should be held to a higher standard in that aspect, since they can more easily afford QA and a budget for more polishing and developers to handle that.
Oh okay. I get our point
But I think every dev should be held for the same standard. Indy devs have smaller world compared to AAA games.
Both yes and no.
It's hard to keep a team of 10 to the same standard as a team of 100, but price is also a factor in this or at least should be.
Also there's been huge patches already with bug fixes and such so the reviews might not completely line up with the release product.
So far reading the OpenCritics the scores mostly confuse me from some people, but on the bright side more or less all of them say the game is fun.
Nope I don't recall.
I have no problem playing games in English (as a matter of fact I always prefer original V.A) but I do play games with my son and some french V.A would have been mostly welcome, especially considering the game has a higher budget and is a MS exclusive.
EDIT : To me feels like MS don't give a fuck about this gen anymore, sentiment echoed with reviewers and other insiders. It's cool that they're gearing towards next gen but I really wonder what's the incentive of picking up a more powerful console if they don't have worthwhile games to shine on it.
Last edited:
I always though it was fully backed by MS so budget should not be an issue? Or is some third party exclusive like Persona or Yakuza
I think reviews are mostly fair. If you love the first one you will love SoD2.
I guess I hoped for much bigger jump in quality.
Indie studios with a limited team size/budget can't afford the same luxuries that a huge AAA studio can have.
They have budget constraints, time constraints from the publisher, the lack of manpower compared to a bigger studio, etc.
They can't work on QA/Polish and bug fixing as long as a studio like say, Ubisoft/Bethesda/Rockstar which can pretty much take as much time as they feel comfortable with to polish and iron out their game before release.
They have milestones and a launch window that's beholden to them by a publisher that's paying them the money to make said game and not nearly as much wiggle room in regards to those things.
MS is the publisher but Undead Labs is still an indie studio (not owned by MS) so no, they aren't just going to give them an unlimted budget or time to finish it.
A lot of big games from AAA studios are generally owned by the publisher (Ubisoft, EA, Bethesda, etc) and have proven track records/franchises under their belt so their parent company can give them a lot more freedom in terms of budget/time to develop their games.
When it comes to an indie studio the reins are held much more tightly by those same publishers (at least from things I've read in the past).
I ran into the exact same bugs. The worst for me is making it unable to finish my playthrough, my legacy goals aren't showing up.
But the game is just so damn fun regularly despite its buggy issues. I really enjoyed my time with it and will be sinking 10s more hours in for sure. I debated on how hard to knock it for the bugs but at the end of the day I had a blast with it.